Sunday, December 25, 2011



"Hanukkah: a Response to Modern-Day Jew Controversies"

By Jordan "BluntJoey" Adorno

          Hanukkah - "The Festival of Lights", Chanukah (AKA Hebrew) - one of many traditional Jewish holidays, has somehow grown into a modern contention for Jews in America. The most fundamentalist Jews fear that Hanukkah is becoming much too assimilated with Christmas. They fear that the holiday, which is actually very minor theologically, has been commercially over-inflated to "compete" with Christians. In the last couple of centuries gifts have been integrated into Hanukkah, and that particular addition remains the most central controversy about the celebration. This is because in origination, the gifts addition was intended to solve the problem of Jewish children feeling left out when all their peers got Christmas presents. (Remember that at the turn of the 20th century around 96 % of America was Christian, compared to 2009, when 75 % of Americans identified as Christians in a national poll (CNN POLL: "America becoming less Christian, survey finds"). Nonetheless, I postulate that Jews still CAN continue the presents tradition in good faith, and in harmony with strictly their own religious principles, too!

      For starters, possibly the biggest criticism today about Christmas is that it has been commercially reduced to a national day of presents. Jesus, countless scrutinize, no longer is the focus of celebrating. (ex: Pope ushers in Christmas, decries commercialization, Phillip Pullella). It has reached the point that it's the absolute norm to see secularists, nonbelievers, Buddhists - anyone who doesn't have their own specific holiday to celebrate then, basically - celebrating Christmas as "a time for the family"; altogether, this has majorly contributed to the ever-increasing, overall  generalization  of the Christmas holiday, the practical expansion of its celebrators to include all  Americans, Christian or not. Good ol' St. Nick, in his popularized facade as "Santa Clause", brings presents down everyone's chimney midnight on Christmas Day with his flying sled of reindeer. He, rather than Jesus, has become the central figure associated with Christmas, the joy of it, even though the Santa Clause metamorphosis has no relevant meaning to the holiday (nor does it even much resemble the real Saint Nicholas as history knew him!). Hence, although Christmas is the most important Christian holiday, SUPPOSEDLY signifying the birthday of their [alleged] messiah (and that's its own twisted story, mind you), the relentless widespread commercialism behind it, that which reaches a market of, approximately, 90 % of Americans each year, has desensitized the day's true meaning.

      Now, in a stark contrast however, exchanging presents during Hanukkah does NOT pose anywhere near the volume of such dangerous risks or consequences, for — just as a countless many of these same "old-fashioned" Jews who frown upon the concept of kindly offering one another gifts on a mere ONE of the exceedingly long list of Jewish holidays would say (and likely by age 30 for their millionth-and-one time, too) — it was necessary to properly make fully explanatory the reinforced message of Hanukkah as NOT anywhere near as high up in religious importance as Christmas; and because of this key fact, unfortunately, likely more than the foremost half of the already very small Jewish demographic within Western (particularly US) Society, I soon learned, does not understand Hanukkah lacks the same humongous potential to cause an alarming irreligious breakaway or a careless disregard of their present spiritual status, that which Christmas had suffered more than ever these days, in being arguably Christianity's  most important holiday, the one which had subsequently made for a most powerful difference. It, yes, remained that that same denunciation, 'slap in the face' if you will, in a sudden rebelliousness fresh and new would very unlikely retain the proximity for Hanukkah to be the exact holiday which the given individual would seek out as the ideal chance to make his departure with a blast, disparaging from his old disingenuous, fake Christian facade that his parents had forced him into as being the "most opportune" social grace one could contain.

     There are several reasons for this. Firstly, Jews comprise less than 2 % of Americans ("Jewish Population of the United States, by State" , Jewish Virtual Library). Therefore, no commercialization phenomenon ever would ensue to the magnitude of Christmas - not even close. Secondly, a very crucial but not particularly well-known fact about Hanukkah is that although it falls around (often during) Christmas, it is actually far less significant religiously in comparison. Far less. In fact, Hanukkah is the one of very few Jewish holidays without any foundation to the Torah ( What Is Hanukkah?, Ariela Pelaia). It is commonly misconceived that Hanukkah is a big holiday because of its correlative timing with Christmas. In reality, that coincidence of dating is itself the lone explanation for why Hanukkah tends to get more attention than any other Jewish holiday. Neither of the High Holy Days - Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the most important religious events for a Jew every year - receive anywhere near  the exposure Hanukkah receives annually, simply because they don't fall in conjunction with a bigger more widespread holiday. Such is the basis to what some Jews flag as (and not without vociferous criticism, of course) the "Christianizing" of Hanukkah. According to such opponents, this is a transparently false promulgation of Jewish practice; most surely of all, their mutual concern is that Jews are somehow misrepresenting themselves and their heritage, a theory which is supported by the vast majority of non-Jewish America's continuous misconception that Hanukkah is a supremely important occasion. In reassertion of their frightful suggestion, these (mostly) fundamentalist Jew thinkers opposing this alleged "Christianizing" point out that while the secondary legend attached to Hanukkah is relatively common (the story of how a small amount of oil lasted for a miraculous eight days), the actual Hanukkah history is rarely recognizable to non-Jews.

      In truth, the Hanukkah story begins a few thousands years ago with the Maccabees, a small community of Jews living beside the massive Greek civilization. The Greeks lived debauchery-filled lives which included most repulsively the recreational sexual abuse of young children! The Maccabees, though minor in number, courageously vowed to be nonconformists despite the threatening pressure from the Greeks. Subsequently, the conflict of culture erupted into a war between the Maccabees and the Greeks, but by an extraordinary miracle the Jews defeated the previously insurmountable Greek army.As written by a renowned Jewish writer, "Though much smaller than the Greek armies, Jewish forces, under the command of Judah Maccabee, ultimately triumphed" ("101 Things Everyone Should Know about Judaism", Richard D. Bank). Immediately after winning, the Jewish farmers wanted to celebrate Sukkot - the eight-day, Jewish "Festival of Harvest" following the High Holidays - which they had missed out on due to the war. However, it was ultimately decided that they couldn't just change the date to celebrate Sukkot, and thereby Hanukkah was instituted as a celebration of the won war and the restoration of Sukkot (hence why Hanukkah lasts eight days). To quote a highly venerated Rabbi, "When the Maccabees regained control of the Temple in Jerusalem in 168 BC, they held a celebration, not in recognition of any miracle, but in observance of the eight-day fall festival of Sukkot" (Congregation B'nai B'rith: "Hanukkah - The True Story", Rabbi Steve Cohen; The FULL BOOK OF MACCABEES, BIBLEGATEWAY.COM).

     And yet, each modern American Jew must ask of his or herself, why is it somehow nevertheless still extremely rare that the average non-Jewish American obtains any knowledge of that? Hmm...
      And in altogether smooth somewhat forthright "rite-of-passage" return to the self-proclaimed behalves of "anti-assimilation" American Jews' bestriding Chanukah celebrations and to whichever 'right' varying degree of unvarnished "appropriation" is sociable, that crucial notation itself is proof Hanukkah has become overly-romanticized by the consumers' sensationalism during Christmas. Everyone knows OF Hanukkah, but not anything about it other than the fact that there's a gift for each of the eight nights. But nevertheless, I challenge such contenders this: why - how (!) - have you allowed yourselves to give CHRISTMAS so much significance to your Jewish tradition??!! I, quite contrarily, procure an alternate perspective, but please preface note first that we as Jews (if we're good practicing ones, anyway) frequently attend synagogue and scrupulously fulfill countless Judaic holiday traditions all-throughout the year already; therefore, reasonably I hereby must also ask this of self-described "anti-assimilation" Jews: In what way, exactly, does the addition of present exchanging tarnish the already secular celebration of Hanukkah? And why even then, for that matter, does introducing presents absolutely HAVE to retain a perpetual basis to Christmas, as opposed to being just another perfectly JEWISH, albeit newer, Hanukkah tradition? Where the error in exchanging presents in the name of being Jews celebrating the miracle of Hanukkah? It certainly exists somewhere, there, no, right?

      Hint: THERE ISN'T ONE. Just enjoy Hanukkah those Hanukkah donuts, learning the real story behind, lighting the menorah, and feel the uncompromising freedom to innovate the JEWISH celebration by buying me lots of gifts!!!!!


Sunday, September 4, 2011

Top Reasons Casey Anthony WAS Guilty


Florida vs. Casey Anthony: The Miscarriage of Justice that was the Unconscionable Acquittal

By Jordan Miguel Adorno

   Introduction: Casey Anthony was originally arrested for her daughter's death on--to be very specifically noted--October 13, 2008. The victim's remains hadn't even been discovered. Why is this such an important distinction in the case against Casey Anthony? Well, the case's original first-degree murder indictment, which was secured by strong, reliable scientific data even despite the lack of a body, is a marvelous reminder of what is and isn't needed to convict someone of murder in the United States, hence:  a) A concrete cause of death is NOT required for prosecution so long as a homicidal manner of death is definitively determined; b) A body is not required for prosecution if extenuating evidence concretely proves a murder took place; c) A motive is absolutely NEVER required for prosecution in ANY criminal case, and hence shouldn't ever be expected in order to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; d) in Florida, if you were in the commission of a felony and someone dies, either intentionally or unintentionally, that is by statute first-degree murder. (FL Statute: 782.04 Murder.) Regardless, by the time I'm finished informing you of the facts, you'll have no doubt that this was no 'accident'.

    Nonetheless, we still cannot forgo mentioning, however, a long history of embarrassing cases within our justice system where, all together, a phenomenal sociological denial that a woman could kill her own child erroneously influenced juries. This precisely has led to much dysfunction within our system: countless biased juries with a deluded, entirely unrealistic demand to see a high-quality videotape actually showing the mother murdering her child have been sworn in (the kind of jury, specifically, that is weakly just blinded by ludicrous and irrational, simply UNFULFILLABLE expectations for "better/more" evidence, unobjective by their irrational refusal to accept clear-as-day motives for murder etc.). This societal phenomena - this insatiable yearning birthed from lack of education, and grown into ultimately unresolved denial - has been the cause of many a biased jury's absolutely unsupportable leniency (if not total refusal to render a 'Guilty' verdict for that matter) toward that especially cold-blooded kind of defendant who heartlessly kills her own offspring, no matter what's obvious to common sense's eyes. So, as your mind absorbs the crucial, ever-disturbing details of this particular case, no doubt you will easily begin to very assuredly conclude that the jury in Florida v. Casey Anthony was clearly bedeviled by this precise phenomena of ultra denial for the true, albeit disturbing, fact that a mother can indeed harm her child. 

    Anyhow, with such pretexts in mention, let us explore the evidence that DID, regardless of the bamboozling jury verdict (to say the least!), prove the most important fact of all beyond a SHADOW OF A DOUBT: Casey Anthony alone, none other, had the means, mode, opportunity, and motive to murder Caylee Anthony, her innocent two-year-old daughter, on the night of June 16, 2008:

  1. Motive. Casey Anthony is a psychopathic narcissist who murdered her daughter in cold blood so that she could lead the good (child-free) life with her new boyfriend. (As a matter of fact, the very night she killed Caylee she went to Blockbuster casually with her then-boyfriend [we have video footage], who later confirmed that they had a very "romantic night" afterward, too!) In the thirty-one days where she did NOT report her child missing, instead making up events and people that never happened in order to keep her parents (who actually loved Caylee) unsuspecting, she partied nonstop all over Orlando, and even got a tattoo on her arm with the words 'the good life' in Italian. Does that sound like a grieving mother?!

    The above is a photo of the ''Bella Vita' tattoo which Casey Anthony got during the thirty-one days in which she concealed Caylee's death with pathological lies. Meaning of the tattoo: The Good life
  2.    Forensics in Casey Anthony's car. The science in the defendant's car is the most compelling evidence. As a matter of fact, the original first-degree murder indictment was based mostly on the extraordinary 'Hail Mary' strength of the forensics found inside her car (remember, the body had not yet been found): the death band of a mitochondrial hair belonging to Caylee (the victim); the impossibly strong, inexplicable scent of death picked up by cadaver dogs; air samples revealing human decomposition. It all fits to implicate one person - Casey Anthony!!                                   
  3.     The murder weapon is clear. Strong chloroform traces found within her car that were 10,000 times greater in amount than a normal LAB sample (something your everyday UNEMPLOYED high school dropout would never have in the first place) provide the murder weapon. At the sight of the body, very high levels of chloroform were correlatively also found, including a syringe (SMOKING GUN!). In addition, Caylee's mouth and nose were wrapped with several pieces of duct tape, which proves this was surely no accident.                                           
    Poor Caylee's remains; when the jury glimpsed a photo like this for the first time, the prosecutors were shocked by their dull glances.
  4. Medical Examiner's Report: 'Murder, NOT Accident!' The Defense claimed that the child actually drowned in the pool, and that no foul play was involved in Caylee's death. However, renowned medical examiner "Dr. G" clarified that the manner of death was clearly homicide, for reasons such as: the duct tape wrapped several times around the child's mouth and nose, the fact that Caylee had been bagged and thrown away like trash in a swamp, the presence of extremely high chloroform traces, the disturbing fact that the child "disappeared" but was suspiciously never reported missing by her mother, and that - in total discredit of Jose Biaz's outrageous claim that Caylee drowned in a pool - one-hundred percent of accidental child drownings in Florida led to parents calling 911.                             

    Featured above are the prosecutors in Florida versus Casey Anthony.

  5.   No other suspects can be implicated. Absolutely no one else had the means, mode, opportunity, or motive to kill Caylee. Everyone else in the family loved and missed Caylee, whereas Casey did nothing but party in the time Caylee was 'missing.' She took Caylee away from her parents' house in her car, the one in which Caylee's dead body was for sure. In addition to that, curiously, Casey changed her MySpace password to "timer55" after June 16th; fifty-five days after June 16, 2008 would have been the exact date of Caylee's third birthday! Coincidence? Hardly. Casey knew she'd have to figure something out by then, as she would not be able to excuse hiding Caylee from them any longer once her third birthday arrived.
  6.  Computer searches. Casey was the only person home who made the nefarious searches on the computer ('how to make chloroform'; ''neck breaking'; 'household weapons' etc.) This definitely shows premeditation, including the harbinger murder weapon of course. Also, although Cindy Anthony claimed it was she who was making the chloroform searches, her work records prove she was not at home when the searches were made, and that therefore beyond all doubt she perjured herself (and should have been charged for it, too!). 

     CRUCIAL--November 2012 Update: all-too-tellingly, the Orange County Police Department has now admitted they overlooked a computer search for 'foolproof suffocation methods' on June 16 - the very day Caylee supposedly went "missing" (source"Casey Anthony detectives overlooked Google search for "fool-proof" suffocation methods, sheriff says")!!! What a totally humiliating, not to mention absolutely UNACCEPTABLE, blunder on the police's part! Perhaps this key, unheard piece of evidence may have potentially made a difference and would have prevented the travesty that was the indefensible acquittal in this case... (Then again, however, was that jury EVER going to convict Casey Anthony?!) 

This photo depicts Casey Anthony during the thirty-one days in which she partied rather than report baby Caylee missing; only finally did Caylee's grandmother, Cindy Anthony, report Caylee's disappearance after catching Casey in her endless series of lies
7.           Casey Anthony's VERY Guilty Behavior: why didn't she ever report her kid missing!? For thirty-one days the woman lied to her parents about where Caylee was. A normal parent reports their child missing but she meanwhile was photographed all over Orlando partying it up. Casey Anthony, she ALONE was the last one seen with Caylee on June 16th, the date of the murder, when the two left the Anthony house that night after Casey got caught stealing from her own grandparents. Why did she tell pathological lie after lie to EVERYONE, including the police, especially since they specifically asked her, 'Was there an accident? Did your child drown in the pool?' These are certainly only the actions of someone with A LOT to hide, not those of an innocent 'victim', and obviously the abundance of compelling evidence in this case only reasserts that. Casey Anthony is the ONLY person in the overall scenario to ever be a suspect or to exhibit any kind of psychopathic, deceptive, concealing behavior, and was the only one in the family that didn't bother to watch Caylee's memorial service. (Yes, Casey was actually afforded that opportunity, but instead chose to be busily chatting up her lead attorney, Jose Baez, instead.)

           Conclusion: The case against Casey Anthony is indeed circumstantial - I have absolutely no problem admitting that. And why? Because every single circumstance tied to the murder leads back to one person, and one person alone - Casey Anthony! There is not a glimmer of reasonable doubt existent here; not one other person is of reasonable (hence) suspect, not by a long shot. Some may choose to ignorantly presume that because the jury acquitted her that automatically means it was a weak case (and yet these same people will rave on about the "multitudes" of innocent people in prison - such hypocrisy in their philosophy, no doubt, eh?); but as a matter of fact, it is my unfailing recollection that BEFORE the trial everyone, including criminal attorneys of all walks of life, thought Casey Anthony was absolutely doomed. With everything said, I will bring us full circle and emphasize that the Prosecution's preponderance of compelling evidence all together illuminated one sickening, all-important conclusion: Casey Anthony callously murdered her two-year-old daughter, Caylee Anthony, in cold blood.  

     ...But very sadly, justice died when that jury shamefully allowed themselves to be lackluster in their duty, never even asking ONCE to review any of the evidentiary exhibits! Lazily caught up in the confusion of the Defense's aversion tactics, the jury - as made interpretable based upon their own frankly mortifying statements after the fact - clearly fell to the Defense's spell of lies and created "reasonable doubt" from extraneous details. In fact, within forty-five minutes ten of the jurors were happy to acquit, accordingly, and thereafter spent the next ten hours pressuring the other two, who happened to have been the only ones on that jury with college education. As more proof of how disingenuous the verdict was, Juror #3 even inadvertently confirmed that they disregarded the judge's instruction to take circumstantial evidence just as seriously as 'direct' evidence when she said as her excuse to acquit, "...The prosecution presented a strong circumstantial case, but ultimately it was circumstantial." Another juror had a cruise to get to, one said 'I could never judge another person', and the foreman himself came back days later saying how disgusted he was with the verdict which he helped render. 

     On a curious side-note, one conundrum that many people just can't seem to get past is, "But twelve people acquitted her! In their ignorance such people are unaware of thousands of cases where a defendant was convicted, the case was re-tried, and twelve people ACQUITTED this time. There are in addition myriads  of cases where the first time, the jury was hung 11-1 to acquit, the second time 11-1 to convict, and then finally justice wins the third time (and of course the point is no less sound even when be it that the legal sequence follows in vice-versa form instead). And plus, turning back to simple common sense, there will always be such a thing as a bad jury from time to time, particularly in cases where they chose to convict and the accused was later exonerated.  

     Indeed, the individual jurors who have spoken out lead informed individuals about the case (such as myself, and now yourselves as well) to single-handed valid conclusion: It was the Prosecution's all-crucial lack of a high-quality video recording of the crime's every moment--an outstandingly UNreasonable (and unfulfillable, as most murderers don't video-tape themselves doing it, obviously) 'need' to see themselves the mother killing her child in order to truly believe in her guilt; it was this unforeseen stagnant catalyst that led to the inconceivably unjust acquittal rendered. Yes, such error of ways freed a cold-blooded murderer and stole justice from innocent baby Caylee, a poor girl who never lived to enjoy her third birthday party. Incredible isn't it? How all in all, poor baby Caylee's life was less valuable than her selfish mother's desired to live 'the good life', that which never could have included her child.  




Friday, August 12, 2011

Statutory Rape



     "Statutory Rape: Desensitized in a Troubled Society"

               Statutory rape is an issue which has become too much of an unsettled "gray" area in an arguably lackadaisical court of public opinion. Face it, though yes, almost nobody would straightforwardly say, "I don't condemn/believe in 'statutory rape'", in a survey of any moderate-size group of individuals you'll likely hear at least one person share some disturbing views on the topic. And it's unacceptable but usually they're casually responded to, entertained equally even; in TRUTH however, it's just unconscionable how unpunished such compassionless words are so often left, especially when the brought-out opinions cling hard onto the railings of a wrongly moralized, considerable leniency train (to speak lightly). They defend, diplomat even for the sex offenders, granting them an egregious amount of leverage, repulsively suggesting sometimes that the age of consent should be FOURTEEN, or that it's somehow okay for a thirteen-year-old to date a twenty-year-old. Unbelievably, however, the commonest, ultimate generalized problem notwithstanding is the far too prevalent perspective that these sex offenders aren't 'really' offenders because the victims were asking for it.  Now, on the contrary any moral person should easily be able to recognize the obvious disgust in a grown adult pursing any kind of romance, sexual or not, with juveniles instead of adults like themselves.

     When I was fifteen/sixteen I had a crush on my history teacher. At the time I was TRUTHFULLY convinced one-hundred percent that I was in love with him. I would've, at that tender time, done anything to be intimate with him. Now as a grown adult I don't think I would have ever been the same if anything had actually happened; adolescents are generally stubborn about their wide range of emotions, particularly when it comes to crushing on others. Poisoned, the maniacally hormonal heart belonging to an under-grown teenager is much more susceptible than grown-ups' to an animal-like drive for impulse. There thus is absolutely no reason for an adult to ever try justifying illegal statutory 'relationships', nor should one ever view it as any bit appropriate to exercise a predatory pattern of attracted doodling with pubescent kids. 

     To be more specific, why on earth would an adult have a sexual urge to meddle with preteens and/or teenagers to begin with?! After all, such children are experiencing the beginning, most sexually vulnerable stages of their life! The intent behind these predators' actions is deplorable. Again, you see, we are inevitably returned to the question of why some adults would be ever prone to "falling" for  juveniles: in sum after all, adolescents, premature adulthood life, are underdeveloped physically, mentally, and sexually; moreover defined, teenage life is a ragingly hormonal, mentally-yet-stabled, constantly manic transition between childhood and adulthood. They're the inexplicable makeup to the complexest, frightfully vulnerable stage of human nature preliminary of adulthood...So one cannot stress enough the question, why do some adults have problems with lust resistances when it comes to juveniles?!  

     And seriously, let's not ever forget to go back and ask the plain-and-simple question which, if answered, would potentially clear-up the most mystifying tenant of all here: 'conflict essence'! Why would an older adult (especially a teacher, who knows better than most the lasting harm that will be caused) care to meddle romantically with teenagers, or in more sickening cases, preteens, in the very first place anyway?! At their completely tender rite of age, teenagers, it's quite mentionable to say,  should be highly unlikely to have much of anything to share in common. (Of course many of these twisted, sick pervs are psychologically immature to the extreme, though, which is a sure factor in the overall spectrum of things no doubt.) All in all notwithstanding, at the end of the day these statutory sex predators cannot justify their longing to be sexual with underage children, adolescent or not, in any way whatsoever. There's just no excuse, and certainly no viable reason for such behaviors. We as a society need to revitalize our stance of disapproval for these sex offenders, and see to it that we are firmer in taking measures to prevent statutory rape from happening everywhere from our homes, school, outside world... 


Friday, July 15, 2011

Bipolar Paper I wrote for Abnormal Psychology



    By Jordan Adorno          


     Bipolar Disorder is a severe mental disease that is characterized by extreme interchanges between mania and depression. In other words, people with this disorder (formerly called ‘manic depression’) are prone to various unhealthy behaviors and emotional instability. As a matter of fact, according to the National Institute of Mental Health, 5.7 million people, to be more specific, suffer from this illness, although many do not receive treatment (Bethesda, 2009). The single most substantial reason for this are the widespread stigmas about Bipolar Disorder, that it isn’t “real”, that it’s just shrinks’ latest “hoax”, that it’s just a fancy  name for people who have mood swings, that it can be willed away with “self-training” etc. Correctively speaking, however, Bipolar Disorder is a serious mental disease that according to the American Psychological Association, affects men and women in equal numbers, and has potential to be life-threatening without treatment (American Psychological Association, 2005).

Startlingly, according to Kevin Caruso, expert for Suicide Prevention, Awareness, and Support Online, between 25-50% of people with Bipolar Disorder attempt suicide in their lives (Caruso, 2009). Such a positive correlation truly dispels the misconception that Bipolar Disorder is nonexistent, and proves also that bipolar persons refusing professional assistance due to the widespread disinformation are at higher risk of suicide. Many more disturbing numbers are directly associated with Bipolar Disorder, which demonstrates the desperate need for society to understand the disorder and its natures - accurately! According to the APA’s empirical resources, Bipolar Disorder’s main points are as given: it can cause someone to spend days, weeks, maybe even months feeling indestructible, overambitious, ecstatic about their life, and then suddenly spiral them into an overwhelmingly depressed period full of self-doubt, witlessness, and lack of motivation, even to do normally enjoyable things. Basically, when an individual is in a manic or depressive state, they overall tend to exhibit the extreme degrees of either euphoria (manic) or miserableness (depressive). For instance, though a bipolar individual may seem relatively normal most of the time, a sad or tough experience can destabilize his or her mental processes by sending them into an overtaking depressive stage; likewise, a happy or self-satisfying event could trigger mania for an indeterminable duration, sending the given Bipolar individual into a “euphoria” that too often leads to self-damaging behaviors such as impulsiveness, money wasting, promiscuity, or even rash, life-changing decision making; ultimately, a lost sight on important matters is the typical endpoint at either end of the "mania" and "depression" scales.  Overall, when sufferers of Bipolar Disorder experience these manic or depressive stages, they are dangerously incapable of properly regulating their emotions (American Psychological Association, 2005). 

   Unbelievably, according to Psych Central’s Steve Bressert Ph.D., “Roughly 70% of manic episodes in bipolar disorder occur immediately before or after a depressive episode”; then, speaking on the durations of these episodes, Bressert makes very apparent, “Both the manic and depressive periods can be brief, from just a few hours to a few days, or longer, lasting up to several weeks or even months” (Bressert, 2010). Unfortunately, because of the stigma that Bipolar is a "woman" disease, society sometimes sees it as emasculating if men seek help for emotional instability. As such, the margin of men voluntarily seeking professional mental help is significantly less reported (Bressert, 2010). Since men and women are affected equally in numbers, equal concern should be felt and applied, but due to society teaching men to not express a need for emotional aid, too many Bipolar men remain untreated. Unsettlingly, the conventional Bipolar male is much more prone to becoming aggressive, violent, and even committing suicide (not to mention males are already four times likelier to successfully commit suicide at that), which is terrifying (Caruso, 2009). Needlessly said, it cannot be emphasized enough that it’s urgent that mental health stigmas come to an end - immediately!

           Prevalently, serious symptoms of Bipolar Disorder begin to manifest during adolescence or early adult life, when people are most vulnerable to the exposure of emotional intensity, rash decisions, and risky behaviors. Once symptomatic, without treatment their unorthodox behaviors will continue throughout their adulthood and may exceed to much worse degrees. In corroboration of this alarming factor, Kevin Caruso stresses, “[E]arly diagnosis and treatment of Bipolar Disorder should be considered an urgent matter” (Caruso, 2009).  What’s so curious and frustrating is that treatment for Bipolar Disorder has been available at compelling success rates for several decades, the mood stabilizer Lithium having been the namely prototype. Indeed, a series of others medications work at impeccable success rates when taken consistently, leading Caruso to recommend, “Become familiar with the symptoms, and if symptoms are present, see a medical doctor and a therapist immediately. Do not delay. Bipolar disorder is highly treatable, so get help” (Caruso, 2009). Caruso's eloquent choice of words could not stress any greater how much of an emergency Bipolar manifestation should be to a newly-afflicted, most likely very young individual.

In corroboration, the APA states that about 99 % of psychological disorders are treatable, explaining, “Through therapy, people can learn coping techniques and problem solving skills to deal with depression and other mental health disorders” (American Psychological Association, 2005). Perhaps if our society didn't rampantly spread stigmatic ignorance regarding mental disease, the suicide rate of Bipolar individuals wouldn’t be egregiously high. So, to compel individuals down the route of seeking psychiatric assistance, a range of available resources importantly attempt, in and across the mainstream world, to educate on Bipolar Disorder. For example, preliminary facts about the disease, as well as directions on identifying the easily viewable symptoms, are commonly contained in fairly well-distributed pamphlets (such as at doctor's offices), television commercials and documentary specials, large online databases on mental illness (such as the APA's tremendous resource of empirical information), and countless books; respectively, all these resourceful methods of research provide long-proven explanations that specifically detail how biology and genetics, NOT environment, are the true roots at uncontrollable cause of the disorder. (And as such, each resource's advice on being aware of family history, not autobiographical events, help remove misplaced self-responsibility, and therefore make Bipolar sufferers less abashed about getting professional help.) 

And of course, uniformly the world's credible psychiatric practitioners offer widespread availability to their medical treatments that, if consistently regimented, can absolve Bipolar Disorder's everyday repercussions. In light of these publicized pontifications, it's thus strictly sad that, at least in the broadest general sense, there’s arguably still more substantial misunderstanding about Bipolar among the public than there is properly informed understanding. To succeed at the above goals to help Bipolar persons and their support systems, appreciating the firm distinctions during the adolescent period in life, when Bipolar symptoms are usually first triggered, precisely those that distinguish between a normal teenager and an emotionally impeded, abnormal teenager (of what is and isn’t of great alarm hence), is absolutely crucial. Many mental health deniers use adolescent mentality, PMS, and normal life difficulties to say Bipolar is a made-up disease. The contention has exacerbated into a social debate about whether Bipolar Disorder’s more often misdiagnosed or more often unreported and consequentially under-treated. Although exact numbers are of course unknown, the statistics we have surely remain but an under-representation of the true deviant numbers. Obviously it's only prudent to remember social rejection of psychiatry, rejection of diagnosis and treatment for Bipolar Disorder hence, retains to have an unnervingly high negative impact on the stats and numbers from the start (i.e. ‘Everyone has an illness nowadays’). But all biases aside, in truth the manic and depressive stages of Bipolar Disorder contradictorily disassociate from normal adolescent and young adult behaviors quite distinguishably. As said by the National Institutes of Health, “Bipolar disorder symptoms can result in damaged relationships, poor job or school performance, and even suicide [...] But bipolar disorder can be treated, and people with this illness can lead full and productive lives” (Bethesda, 2009). These treatments include daily dosages of mood stabilizers which psychiatrists can usually safely prescribe in relative immediacy, such as the mentioned prototype originally called "the miracle drug" - Lithium of course, Depakote, Lamictal, Seroquel, Wellbutrin, and so forth (on a long list of flexible options). Consistent cognitive-therapy sessions are also effective in combination with one's medication routine. Most of all though, it must be made inexplicable that these options are ALL preferable to sinking beneath the misconceived stigmas about Bipolar and refusing professional consultation for mental ailments (Bethesda, 2009).
From the beginning, admittedly, belief in the existence of a Bipolar “cure” is fallacious, for no single treatment method has accelerated to such status. With that in mind, many refuters look down upon patients who are willing to take medication for the rest of their lives. Though so popular a statement, it is totally foolhardy, like saying someone with diabetes should be looked down upon for staying on their medications.  Credibly, the National Institute of Health (and all other credible sources in the psychiatric field) posits succinctly, “Bipolar disorder usually lasts a lifetime. Episodes of mania and depression typically come back over time”; then, to account for people’s misunderstanding, “Between episodes, many people with bipolar disorder are free of symptoms, but some people may have [normalized] lingering symptoms” (Bethesda, 2009). Essentially overlying all the environmental contributions which can worsen or better the Bipolar situation, thus, is strong hereditary research which directly correlates the imbalances of Bipolar Disorder with the engineering of brain activity (especially in the hippocampus and amygdala), and therefore there’s no shame in taking medication for the rest of one's life, if necessary (Martin, 2006).

 Many people insist that mentally ill people can train themselves to control their symptoms. But as empowering as “self-training” sounds, the idea is a fallacy that rests without any professional psychiatric endorsement.  Bipolar Disorder is a complicated disease caused by chemical imbalances in the brain; even mainstream psychiatric treatments that have been proven efficacious are only effective while in the patient’s maintained use. Nothing in medical history has ever advised “individual willpower” to be the ultimate synthesis for Bipolar Disorder. This myth likely derives partly from the misconception that being Bipolar means having mood swings all day, and that one is symptomatic all the time. But credibly, as formerly mentioned, we know such hypotheses (if they warrant even that label) have been disproved empirically by the greatest experts in psychiatry. Thus, while it might appear that someone has been controlling their Bipolar on their “own”, the reality is they’re just not manic. The Bipolar individual’s exasperated emotional state is not adept to rationally handle even very often what are perfectly normal, everyday burdens - Plain and simple!
          But once one can accept this knowledge, observational determinations about a given individual's recurrence of mania and depression (with main regards to lengths and strengths) can make these extreme episodes of uncharacteristic emotional scatter - and the more moderate but still off-steadying "lingering" symptoms in-between episodes, too - more predictable and, consecutively, more manageable, too. Referencing further, Dr. Bressert explains the beginning state of mania, in itself which personifies the initial unfamiliarity of self, citing, “An early sign of manic-depressive illness may be hypomania - a state in which the person shows a high level of energy, excessive moodiness or irritability, and impulsive or reckless behavior. Hypomania may feel good to the person who experiences it. Thus, the individual often will deny that anything is wrong ... [A]s with nearly all mental disorder diagnoses, the symptoms of manic depression must cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning” (Bressert, 2010). These guideline pointers are usually very useful.

 Bipolar’s central involvement in school and work performance, when apparent, tends to cause the most damage. It can cause temporary depression, disregard, inattentiveness, and strain for long periods. Hypothetically, a teenager could lose academic zeal during a manic state even if they usually flourish in school, and likewise with their social interactions, too. Accordingly, these people get so overwhelmed by their newest unique, suffocating anomaly of emotive battling inside themselves, that they actually become rude, irritable, totally unpleasant to be around, childishly joyful (at inappropriate times, like as a contributor to hyperactivity in school). As a terribly unhelpful addition, uniformly these manic phases always (almost) include some alteration in their sleep pattern, which can just exacerbate the symptomatic misbehavior (Bethesda, 2009). Thus, the bipolar individual will have much difficulty living up (or anywhere close) to his or her maximal function. If mental health professionals were just in on a lucrative scam with the Bipolar phenomenon, then why the many warnings of what does not implement Bipolar? “Symptoms also cannot be the result of substance use or abuse (e.g., alcohol, drugs, medications) or caused by a general medical condition” (Bressert, 2010). Sometimes, yes, unavoidable flaws in the system blaze the fire in patient frustration, and consequentially root the cause of psychiatric misconceptions (mania and aside). Particularly, Bipolar receives that assorted negative backslash when mishandled as the disorder which is sociologically burdened to overcome people's DEEP sensitivities: Attention Deficit DisorderTricky indeed, the main problem is that Bipolar, in its earliest manifestation in adolescence or young adulthood, seems to also have an adverse affect on school and work performance. Complicating matters, though, it so happens that decreased performance in work/school is one main symptom of ADD, too. Unfortunately, an initial ADD mislabel leads Bipolar persons to dismiss their temporal seizures of depression and mania - not to mention the tertiary inattentiveness that made for their misdiagnosis to begin with - regardless of their excessive time spent in episodic suffering, due to society's generalized disbelief in ADD. Most adults with Bipolar are already way too used to emotional instability, so that factor, on top of the rampant stigma on ADD that is, makes for a clear-cut systematic misunderstanding of the psychiatry's basis. Regardless of these complexes of pride and denial, the fact still remains that during manic and depressive phases, the typical bipolar individual just CANNOT distinguish between what is emotional stability versus an unstable emotional state, and why? 

       Easy: when a Bipolar individual is spiraling through their sporadic phase of mania (which, one must remember, is essentially nothing short of an extreme emotional disturbance), a significant impairment of their judgment is in sequence, though surely self-unrealized. Touching upon this complex, Dr. Martin - a leading researcher on bipolar disorder in children - in explaining the importance of psychiatric consultation, makes very specific implications, like his worry that many parents especially lose faith in the mental health system if it “failed". Naming anti-depressants the greatest stigma of mental health, Dr. Martin explains, “Medications such as corticosteroids, medical conditions such as thyroid disease, and neurological diseases such as Parkinson’s syndrome may present with features of bipolar disorder. The diagnosis of bipolar disorder is made only when none of these conditions are present” (Martin, 2006). Truthful to this across the epidemic of Bipolar Disorder, patients can be easily misdiagnosed as suffering from ADHD (most commonly guessed incorrectly if the child is early in hyperactivity of excess), chronic depression (if bouts of high mania are not carefully brought upon by identity), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, even Borderline Personality Disorder (which attains some Bipolar-like traits). 

     Indisputably, the unproven common belief that “willpower” alone is enough to handle Bipolar disorder isn't anything but the senseless makings of a phenomenal societal distrust toward the field of professional psychiatry;The stigma is only helped by countless more in-detail lies, which all together make psychiatric patients less prone, sometimes, to seek out professional mental health assistance. Lack of real change from effective treatment will only mean a lack of real improvement, which will always be the continuous result of transgressing more energy into the misconceived oxymoron about this “curability in self-willfulness” nonsense. Philosophically speaking, what's simplistically discernible from all this, arguably, is the dismal realization appointing blame on society itself for allowing dangerous misconceived thoughts to proceed growth (Martin, 2006). It should be evident by now that the further one searches into Bipolar's depth, the more confirmation there is debunking the misconceptions. At front-line is the officiated separation of Bipolar into types: within the illness separate categories of manic depression - “Bipolar I” and “Bipolar II” respectively - interactively are the best tool to touch surface on estimating and learning more about someone’s Bipolar, individual life tolls. Psych Central’s “An Introduction to Bipolar Disorder” carves distinction between the two types: “I” is distinguished as consistent of, “[The] presence of only one Manic Episode and no past Major Depressive Episodes”, and also clarifies that "I" is the worse of the two.  Pointedly, the researcher defines an important key factor, recurrence, "...[A]s either a change in polarity from depression or an interval of at least 2 months without manic symptoms” (Bressert, 2010). Disassociated, Type “I” patient are broadly susceptible to intense mania and will rarely disengage into an unfixed, extreme depressive phases; “II”, interestingly enough, is as a converse easier defined, characterized by, “Presence (or history) of one or more Major Depressive Episodes and at least one Hypomanic Episode. In addition, there has never been a Manic Episode or a Mixed Episode” (Bressert, 2010). (See below for further elaboration.)

   A ‘hypomanic episode’ pertains to symptoms common in adolescent vulnerability, to young persons’ mentality ever-development, except never seeming to leave. Henceforth, the connotation medically separating “II” is its deemed limitation, 'hypo'. Notwithstanding, in many times decreasing the extraordinary deal of confusion on the topic, innovating research increasingly spreads the two farther apart: Type I's mania (or depression) surpasses all emotional escalation thinkable, and evidences to demonstrate itself as obviously not at all self-controllable; in fact, any sane person unbiased about mental health would surely agree to that in witness of ‘Type 1’ Bipolar people intoxicated in their mania, after watching their maneuvers down highly destructive paths which terminate to harm both for themselves and others, too. Cursed to suffer the results of their overbearingly emotive self-wars, ‘Type 1’ cases are basically at the mercy of a top-notch genetic predisposition to Bipolar; this extenuating hereditary vulnerability - alone the substance which establishes the need for a 'Type 1' differentiation in the first place - premises the Type 'I' cases an essential distinction: specially excruciating manic phasesNonetheless, unfathomable as it sounds, even the most compellingly written description of the implacable Bipolar mania specified to "Type 1" - the best summation ever detailing it, that even had the highhanded substantiation of the world's best psychiatrists - could just touch the tip of the iceberg ... Well, maybe (Martin, 2006). So with that noteworthy comparison in mind, how can we continue and not cease our societal distrust in the field of psychiatry - how?! Has most the western world lost perspective on the focal frontier behind a progressive, transient humanity? Lost the timeless, omnipresent goal to heighten the quality of human life, to achieve harmoniously existing societies within a man's lifetime? Is pride, learned stubbornness, denial (each a unique entrapment in ignorance, bold I venture) too precious to dispose of for the sake of betterment? 

         In conclusion, we live in a day where we should be grateful to have access to resources which, thanks to each concretion of progress in psychiatry, serve the needs of mental health. Instead, millions of importunate opponents have, in their refutation toward the psychiatric field, caused nugatory, infamous widespread denial over the reality of our certain psychiatric illness in question, despite irrefutable proof that it exists from the mental sufferings of 5.7 million Americans: Bipolar Disorder has inherited a cyclonic phenomena of disbelievers who promote inaccurate misconceptions that are suffice to uproar the public! Bipolar Disorder, a disease doubtlessly more serious than most moderate forms of visible physical harm (i.e. broken legs, leg rashes, acne), is, in proficient extent, much too severe for disregarding. The torment that everyone with Bipolar Disorder uncontrollably is guaranteed because of a mere genetic chemical imbalance remains just egregious, and the millions afflicted mustn't face it untreated! Let’s save these very sick individuals who misfortunately have inherited Bipolar Disorder, not stigmatize it! After all, Bipolar Disorder's misleading media attention has already made it the victim of accelerated vilification, inadvertently having singled it out for emphatic defamation by opponents to the entire mental health field. At end, the collective ideal, singular goal worth having is transparent as ever: as a re-inspired America, altogether we must unite against the barricade stopping mentally ill people from seeking professional help. After all, accept it or not, Bipolar Disorder, just like every other psychiatric ailment, affects EVERYONE in some way. 



American Psychiatric Association. (2005). Let’s Talk Facts about Bipolar DisorderWashington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Bethesda, MD. (2009). Bipolar Disorder in Children and Teens. National Institute of Mental Health. Retrieved on July 8, 2011 from

Bressert PH.D, S. (2010). An Introduction to Bipolar Disorder. Psych Central. Retrieved on July 8, 2011, from

Caruso, K. (2009). Bipolar and Suicide. Suicide Prevention, Awareness, and Support. Retrieved on July 8, 2011, from  

Martin, B. (2006). Risk Factors for Bipolar Disorder. Psych Central. Retrieved on July 8, 2011, from