But Will It Make You Happy?

SHE had so much. A two-bedroom apartment. Two cars. Enough wedding china to serve two dozen people. Yet Tammy Strobel wasn’t happy. Working as a project manager with an investment management firm in Davis, Calif., and making about $40,000 a year, she was, as she put it, caught in the “work-spend treadmill.” So one day she stepped off.

Inspired by books and blog entries about living simply, Ms. Strobel and her husband, Logan Smith, both 31, began donating some of their belongings to charity. As the months passed, out went stacks of sweaters, shoes, books, pots and pans, even the television after a trial separation during which it was relegated to a closet. Eventually, they got rid of their cars, too. Emboldened by a Web site that challenges consumers to live with just 100 personal items, Ms. Strobel winnowed down her wardrobe and toiletries to precisely that number.

Her mother called her crazy.

Today, three years after Ms. Strobel and Mr. Smith began downsizing, they live in Portland, Ore., in a spare, 400-square-foot studio with a nice-sized kitchen. Mr. Smith is completing a doctorate in physiology; Ms. Strobel happily works from home as a Web designer and freelance writer. She owns four plates, three pairs of shoes and two pots. With Mr. Smith in his final weeks of school, Ms. Strobel’s income of about $24,000 a year covers their bills. They are still car-free but have bikes. One other thing they no longer have: $30,000 of debt.

Ms. Strobel’s mother is impressed. Now the couple have money to travel and to contribute to the education funds of nieces and nephews. And because their debt is paid off, Ms. Strobel works fewer hours, giving her time to be outdoors, and to volunteer, which she does about four hours a week for a nonprofit outreach program called Living Yoga. “The idea that you need to go bigger to be happy is false,” she says. “I really believe that the acquisition of material goods doesn’t bring about happiness.”

[…] New studies of consumption and happiness show, for instance, that people are happier when they spend money on experiences instead of material objects, when they relish what they plan to buy long before they buy it, and when they stop trying to outdo the Joneses.[…] One major finding is that spending money for an experience — concert tickets, French lessons, sushi-rolling classes, a hotel room in Monaco — produces longer-lasting satisfaction than spending money on plain old stuff. […] Using data from a study by the National Institute on Aging, Professor DeLeire compared the happiness derived from different levels of spending to the happiness people get from being married. (Studies have shown that marriage increases happiness.) “A $20,000 increase in spending on leisure was roughly equivalent to the happiness boost one gets from marriage,” he said, adding that spending on leisure activities appeared to make people less lonely and increased their interactions with others. […]

Current research suggests that, unlike consumption of material goods, spending on leisure and services typically strengthens social bonds, which in turn helps amplify happiness. (Academics are already in broad agreement that there is a strong correlation between the quality of people’s relationships and their happiness; hence, anything that promotes stronger social bonds has a good chance of making us feel all warm and fuzzy.) […]

One reason that paying for experiences gives us longer-lasting happiness is that we can reminisce about them, researchers say. That’s true for even the most middling of experiences. That trip to Rome during which you waited in endless lines, broke your camera and argued with your spouse will typically be airbrushed with “rosy recollection,” says Sonja Lyubomirsky, a psychology professor at the University of California, Riverside. […]

FOR the last four years, Roko Belic, a Los Angeles filmmaker, has been traveling the world making a documentary called “Happy”.  Since beginning work on the film, he has moved to a beach in Malibu from his house in the San Francisco suburbs.

San Francisco was nice, but he couldn’t surf there. “I moved to a trailer park,” says Mr. Belic, “which is the first real community that I’ve lived in in my life.” Now he surfs three or four times a week. “It definitely has made me happier,” he says. “The things we are trained to think make us happy, like having a new car every couple of years and buying the latest fashions, don’t make us happy.”

Mr. Belic says his documentary shows that “the one single trait that’s common among every single person who is happy is strong relationships.” Buying luxury goods, conversely, tends to be an endless cycle of one-upmanship, in which the neighbors have a fancy new car and — bingo! — now you want one, too, scholars say. […]Alternatively, spending money on an event, like camping or a wine tasting with friends, leaves people less likely to compare their experiences with those of others — and, therefore, happier.

The New York Times, August 7, 2010, By STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM

Some other superstitions about the number 13th

Life and death

Despite whatever terrors the numerical unknown held for their hunter-gatherer ancestors, ancient civilizations weren’t unanimous in their dread of 13. The Chinese regarded the number as lucky, some commentators note, as did the Egyptians in the time of the pharaohs.

To the ancient Egyptians, these sources tell us, life was a quest for spiritual ascension which unfolded in stages — twelve in this life and a thirteenth beyond, thought to be the eternal afterlife. The number 13 therefore symbolized death, not in terms of dust and decay but as a glorious and desirable transformation. Though Egyptian civilization perished, the symbolism conferred on the number 13 by its priesthood survived, we may speculate, only to be corrupted by subsequent cultures who came to associate 13 with a fear of death instead of a reverence for the afterlife.

Anathema

Still other sources speculate that the number 13 may have been purposely vilified by the founders of patriarchal religions in the early days of western civilization because it represented femininity. Thirteen had been revered in prehistoric goddess-worshiping cultures, we are told, because it corresponded to the number of lunar (menstrual) cycles in a year (13 x 28 = 364 days). The “Earth Mother of Laussel,” for example — a 27,000-year-old carving found near the Lascaux caves in France often cited as an icon of matriarchal spirituality — depicts a female figure holding a cresent-shaped horn bearing 13 notches. As the solar calendar triumphed over the lunar with the rise of male-dominated civilization, it is surmised, so did the “perfect” number 12 over the “imperfect” number 13, thereafter considered anathema.

On the other hand, one of the earliest concrete taboos associated with the number 13 — a taboo still observed by some superstitious folks today, apparently — is said to have originated in the East with the Hindus, who believed, for reasons I haven’t been able to ascertain, that it is always unlucky for 13 people to gather in one place — say, at dinner. Interestingly enough, precisely the same superstition has been attributed to the ancient Vikings (though I have also been told, for what it’s worth, that this and the accompanying mythographical explanation are apocryphal). The story has been laid down as follows:

And Loki makes thirteen

Twelve gods were invited to a banquet at Valhalla. Loki, the Evil One, god of mischief, had been left off the guest list but crashed the party, bringing the total number of attendees to 13. True to character, Loki raised hell by inciting Hod, the blind god of winter, to attack Balder the Good, who was a favorite of the gods. Hod took a spear of mistletoe offered by Loki and obediently hurled it at Balder, killing him instantly. All Valhalla grieved. And although one might take the moral of this story to be “Beware of uninvited guests bearing mistletoe,” the Norse themselves apparently concluded that 13 people at a dinner party is just plain bad luck.

As if to prove the point, the Bible tells us there were exactly 13 present at the Last Supper. One of the dinner guests — er, disciples — betrayed Jesus Christ, setting the stage for the Crucifixion.

Source: http://urbanlegends.about.com

Why Friday the 13th Is Unlucky

“Friday 13th is unlucky for some. The risk of hospital admission as a result of a transport accident may be increased by as much as 52 percent. Staying at home is recommended.”

Paraskevidekatriaphobics — people afflicted with a morbid, irrational fear of Friday the 13th — will be pricking up their ears about now, buoyed by seeming evidence that the source of their unholy terror may not be so irrational after all. But it’s unwise to take solace in a single scientific study, especially one so peculiar. I suspect these statistics have more to teach us about human psychology than the ill-fatedness of any particular date on the calendar.

Friday the 13th, ‘the most widespread superstition’

The sixth day of the week and the number 13 both have foreboding reputations said to date from ancient times, and their inevitable conjunction from one to three times a year (there happens to be only one such occurrence in 2011, in the month of May) portends more misfortune than some credulous minds can bear. According to some sources it’s the most widespread superstition in the United States today. Some people refuse to go to work on Friday the 13th; some won’t eat in restaurants; many wouldn’t think of setting a wedding on the date.

How many Americans at the beginning of the 21st century suffer from this condition? According to Dr. Donald Dossey, a psychotherapist specializing in the treatment of phobias (and coiner of the term paraskevidekatriaphobia, also spelled paraskavedekatriaphobia), the figure may be as high as 21 million. If he’s right, no fewer than eight percent of Americans remain in the grips of a very old superstition.

Exactly how old is difficult to say, because determining the origins of superstitions is an inexact science, at best. In fact, it’s mostly guesswork.

LEGEND HAS IT: If 13 people sit down to dinner together, one will die within the year. The Turks so disliked the number 13 that it was practically expunged from their vocabulary (Brewer, 1894). Many cities do not have a 13th Street or a 13th Avenue. Many buildings don’t have a 13th floor. If you have 13 letters in your name, you will have the devil’s luck (Jack the Ripper, Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Theodore Bundy and Albert De Salvo all have 13 letters in their names). There are 13 witches in a coven.

The Devil’s Dozen

Although no one can say for sure when and why human beings first associated the number 13 with misfortune, the superstition is assumed to be quite old, and there exist any number of theories — most of which deserve to be treated with a healthy skepticism, please note — purporting to trace its origins to antiquity and beyond.

It has been proposed, for example, that fears surrounding the number 13 are as ancient as the act of counting. Primitive man had only his 10 fingers and two feet to represent units, this explanation goes, so he could count no higher than 12. What lay beyond that — 13 — was an impenetrable mystery to our prehistoric forebears, hence an object of superstition.

Which has an edifying ring to it, but one is left wondering: did primitive man not have toes?

Source: http://urbanlegends.about.com

Day of the Dead

The holiday focuses on gatherings of family and friends to pray for and remember friends and family members who have died. The celebration occurs on November 2 in connection with the Catholic holidays of All Saints’ Day (November 1) and All Souls’ Day (November 2). Traditions connected with the holiday include building private altars honoring the deceased using sugar skulls, marigolds, and the favorite foods and beverages of the departed and visiting graves with these as gifts. Due to occurring shortly after Halloween, the Day of the Dead is sometimes thought to be a similar holiday, although the two actually have little in common. The Day of the Dead is a time of celebration, where partying and eating is common.

Scholars trace the origins of the modern holiday to indigenous observances dating back thousands of years and to an Aztec festival dedicated to a goddess called Mictecacihuatl. In Brazil, Dia de Finados is a public holiday that many Brazilians celebrate by visiting cemeteries and churches. In Spain, there are festivals and parades, and, at the end of the day, people gather at cemeteries and pray for their dead loved ones. Similar observances occur elsewhere in Europe, and similarly themed celebrations appear in many Asian and African cultures.

The Day of the Dead celebrations in Mexico can be traced back to the indigenous cultures. Rituals celebrating the deaths of ancestors have been observed by these civilizations perhaps for as long as 2,500–3,000 years. In the pre-Hispanic era, it was common to keep skulls as trophies and display them during the rituals to symbolize death and rebirth.

The festival that became the modern Day of the Dead fell in the ninth month of the Aztec calendar, about the beginning of August, and was celebrated for an entire month. The festivities were dedicated to the god known as the “Lady of the Dead”, corresponding to the modern Catrina.

In most regions of Mexico, November 1 honors children and infants, whereas deceased adults are honored on November 2. This is indicated by generally referring to November 1 mainly as Día de los Inocentes (“Day of the Innocents”) but also as Día de los Angelitos (“Day of the Little Angels”) and November 2 as Día de los Muertos or Día de los Difuntos (“Day of the Dead”).

Bricklayer’s Accident (true story)

Dear Sir:

I am writing in response to your request for additional information in Block #3 of the accident reporting form. I put “Poor Planning” as the cause of my accident. You asked for a fuller explanation and I trust the following details will be sufficient. I am a bricklayer by trade. On the day of the accident, I was working alone on the roof of a new six-storey building. When I completed my work, I found that I had some bricks left over which when weighed later were found to weigh 240 lbs. Rather than carry the bricks down by hand, I decided to lower them in a barrel by using a pulley which was attached to the side of the building at the sixth floor. Securing the rope at ground level, I went up to the roof, swung the barrel out and loaded the bricks into it. Then I went down and untied the rope, holding it tightly to insure a slow descent of the 240 lbs of bricks. You will note on the accident reporting form that my weight is 135 lbs. Due to my surprise at being jerked off the ground so suddenly, I lost my presence of mind and forgot to let go off the rope. Needless to say, I proceeded at a rapid rate up the side of the building. In the vicinity of the third floor, I met the barrel which was now proceeding downward at an equally impressive speed. This explains the fractured skull, minor abrasions and the broken collarbone, as listed in Section 3, accident reporting form. Slowed only slightly, I continued my rapid ascent, not stopping until the fingers of my right hand were two knuckles deep into the pulley which I mentioned in Paragraph 2 of this correspondence. Fortunately by this time I had regained my presence of mind and was able to hold tightly to the rope, in spite of the excruciating pain I was now beginning to experience. At approximately the same time, however, the barrel of bricks hit the ground and the bottom fell out of the barrel. Now devoid of the weight of the bricks, the barrel weighed approximately 50 lbs. I refer you again to my weight. As you might imagine, I began a rapid descent down the side of the building. In the vicinity of the third floor, I met the barrel coming up. This accounts for the two fractured ankles, broken tooth and severe lacerations of my legs and lower body. Here my luck began to change slightly. The encounter with the barrel seemed to slow me enough to lessen my injuries when I fell into the pile of bricks and fortunately only three vertebrae were cracked. I am sorry to report, however, as I lay there on the pile of bricks, in pain, unable to move and watching the empty barrel six stories above me, I again lost my composure and presence of mind and let go off the rope.

The Mechanism of Power

We know dinosaurs only by their bones. The largest, most powerful animals to walk the earth are extinct. Their “arrogance of power” was of no use.

There is an irony here. If we had been their contemporaries, we would never have suspected that theirs would be such a sad and inglorious end. The stronger the better, we assume, in the struggle for existence. The more powerful a species is, the greater  should be its chances of survival.

But this did not prove to be true. Animals of much more fragile structure, whose bodies were weaker and smaller beyond comparison are still around. But dinosaurs are nothing more than memories of one of life’s experiments that failed.

The dinosaurs disappeared not because they were too weak, but because they were too strong. Their fantastic power came from a biological framework which was basically absurd, and the result was annihilation. Can you cure an insane person by making his body physically fit? Obviously not. This would add power to insanity, making it more insane still. The power generated by an irrational structure only tends to aggravate the very irrationality from which it springs. By adding power to the absurd one does not abolish it; on the contrary, it becomes still more hopelessly entangled in itself. Power is like a mathematical number inside a bracket. If the bracket is preceded by a minus sign, it is not possible to transform into a plus by making the number bigger and bigger. This simply increases its negativity.

Power is a simple potentializing factor. It can never go beyond the logic of the structure that generates it. This is why dinosaurs had to die. Their “arrogance of power” entrapped them in the very absurdity of their organic structure. They were thereby made incapable of responding in different ways to the new challenges their environment presented.

Our civilization is behaving just like the dinosaur. Underneath everything it does, one finds the ultimate certainty that there is no problem that cannot be solved by means of a little more power. It is not by accident that for years detergent makers have been advertising “stronger”, “faster”, “more concentrated” and improved formulas. They know that these values control our collective unconscious. What is stronger must be better. Love of power has become our obsession, and power itself our sole god.

(“Tomorrow’s child” Rubem Alves)

Top Ten Conspiracy Teories

01. The 9/11 Conspiracies

The evidence is overwhelming that the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were indeed the result of a conspiracy. There’s no doubt about it: A close (or even cursory) look at the evidence makes it clear that it was carefully planned and executed by conspirators. The question, of course, is who those conspirators were. Osama bin Laden and the crew of (mostly Saudi) hijackers were part of the conspiracy, but what about President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney? Did top Bush advisors, including Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld, either collaborate with bin Laden, or intentionally allow the attacks to happen? Put another way, was it an inside job? Conspiracy theorists believe so, and point to a catalog of supposed inconsistencies in the “official version” of the attacks. Many of the technical conspiracy claims were debunked by Popular Mechanics magazine in March 2005, while other claims are refuted by simple logic: If a hijacked airplane did not crash into the Pentagon, as is often claimed, then where is Flight 77 and its passengers? Are they with the Roswell aliens at Hangar 18? In many conspiracy theories, bureaucratic incompetence is often mistaken for conspiracy. Our government is so efficient, knowledgeable, and capable–so the reasoning goes–that it could not possibly have botched the job so badly in detecting the plot ahead of time or responding to the attacks. I find that hard to believe.

Top Ten Conspiracy Theories

02. Princess Diana’s Murder

Within hours of Princess Diana’s death on Aug. 31, 1997, in a Paris highway tunnel, conspiracy theories swirled. As was the case with the death of John F. Kennedy, the idea that such a beloved and high-profile figure could be killed so suddenly was a shock. This was especially true of Princess Diana; royalty die of old age, political intrigue, or eating too much rich food; they don’t get killed by a common drunk driver. Unlike many conspiracy theories, though, this one had a billionaire promoting it: Mohamed Al-Fayed, the father of Dodi Al-Fayed, who was killed along with Diana. Al-Fayed claims that the accident was in fact an assassination by British intelligence agencies, at the request of the Royal Family. Al-Fayed’s claims were examined and dismissed as baseless by a 2006 inquiry; the following year, at Diana’s inquest, the coroner stated that “The conspiracy theory advanced by Mohamed Al Fayed has been minutely examined and shown to be without any substance.” On April 7 of this year, the coroner’s jury concluded that Diana and Al-Fayed were unlawfully killed due to negligence by their drunken chauffer and pursuing paparazzi.

World Cup Curiosities and Oddities

1950 – Scotland try not to qualify

With the home nations refusing to participate in the pre-war World Cups, FIFA were desperate for participation from the home of football. FIFA made the very generous offer that the winners of the Home International Championship of 1949-50 could play at the Brazil World Cup of 1950. They also allowed the tournament to remain intact with no home and away qualifiers, unlike the rest of Europe. Amazingly they also offered a place to the runners up! With the kind of foresight we’re so accustomed to in our football administrators, the secretary of the SFA, George Graham (no, not that one), declared that Scotland would only participate should they actually win the Home International Championships! Going into the deciding match between Scotland and England at Hampden both sides had won their previous two fixtures and thus a draw would suffice. Scotland would be declared joint champions (goal difference was a mere glint in the milkman’s eye in 1950), pride would be intact and the SFA could start buying buckets and spades for the Copacabana. Unsurprisingly, Scottish hubris was completely undone when Roy Bentley scored the only goal of the game in front of the obligatory 360,000 Hampden crowd to give England, (who had no qualms about going as runners up) a 1-0 victory, and the title. Scotland captain George Young desperately tried to persuade the SFA that they had made a monumental error, but to no avail. The committee were men of principle and their imbecilic decision stood. Two points arise from this. Firstly, maybe Graham was a man of vision. England were humiliated by the USA and came home after the group stage. Secondly, this was a splendid system of qualification and one that the home FA’s should campaign FIFA to reinstate. If it was good enough for 1950 (and 1954 as well, when Scotland did accept a place via the runners up spot), it must be good enough for 2010. Lord Triesman, contact Herr Blatter forthwith. It is surely inconceivable that some foreign desk Johnny could possibly refuse this request from the motherland. And from a Lord to boot!

1950 – Not Quite the All-American Hero

The man whose goal lead to one of the World Cup’s greatest shocks, the USA’s 1:0 victory over the then mighty England, was in actual fact from Haiti. Joe Gaetjens, born in Haiti with a Haitian mother and Belgian father, was only allowed to play for the Americans because he’d declared an intention to become an American citizen. However, after the World Cup he moved to France and played for Troyes before returning home to Haiti in 1954 without ever having gained U.S. citizenship. The story ends with a terrible twist though – he was arrested by the country’s secret police, the notorious Tontons Macoutes, in 1964 and is presumed to have been killed by one of their death squads.

1962 – Chile’s Special pre-Match Meals

Back in 1962 the host nation came up with the strange idea of replacing their usual pre-match meal with something that reflected their opposition. So before the opener against Switzerland they had cheese (presumably with holes in) and before their next game against Italy they polished off some spaghetti (obviously). With the idea serving them well (they beat the Swiss 2:1 and the Italians 2:0) they took it into the quarter final clash with the USSR. However, not fancying a big plate of cabbage, they opted for a few swift vodkas, and it did them no harm whatsoever as they triumphed again, 2:1. The semi-final against Brazil was a pre-match binge too far though, with the mighty Brazilians winning 4:2, the strong coffee proving to be a weak substitute for footballing excellence.

1974 – Cruyff’s Adidas Dilemma

Anyone watching a re-run of the 1974 World Cup might be forgiven for thinking that the sight of Johann Cruyff sporting an Adidas top with only two stripes was down to the grainy quality of 1970’s videos. It wasn’t. Cruyff had a lucrative deal with Puma and insisted that he wouldn’t play in a shirt advertising their big rivals famous three-stripe markings, so the Dutch FA had a special shirt made with only two stripes on it. Everyone was happy again. Except Adidas.

1978 – The 1000th Goal

The World Cup’s 1000th goal was scored during the 1978 tournament when under-rated Dutchman Robbie Rensenbrink opened the scoring after 34 minutes with a penalty in the epic game against Scotland in Mendoza.

1978 – More Oranje Controversy

Looking back on some of the controversial incidents that surrounded the Dutch team of 1978 it’s pretty impressive that they managed to eventually get it together and nearly win the thing… 1. After helping the national team qualify for the 1978 finals in Argentina Cruyff then promptly announced that he wouldn’t be attending the finals. Amongst the various theories for his absence were that he refused to play in a country that was now under the rule of a military dictatorship, that his wife had banned him from travelling to the tournament, and that he’d had enough of the financial and tactical disagreements that had come commonplace with the Dutch FA. 2. Whilst the loss of one of their top players may be considered unlucky, to lose two was downright careless. So when creative midfielder Wim van Hanegem legged it out of the pre-tournament training camp the Oranje fans back home wondered what on earth was going on. Another calssic dispute between a player and the Dutch FA saw the latter claiming that van Hanegem was tired from a tremendous season with AZ67, whilst the player claimed that it was over disagreements regarding money. Whatever the reason. the Dutch had just lost another creative force. 3. After Cruyff had pulled the old “I’m not wearing 3 stripes” trick back in 1974, you’d have thought both the Dutch FA and Adidas would have wised up to it. They hadn’t. This time not one, but two players refused to wear the trademark Adidas stripes, and so two special shirts were made for the Van de Kerkhof brothers. Cruyff may not have been there in person but it seemed he was still there in spirit.

1982 – One Rule for Diego…

As they’d done in previous World Cups, the Argentinian FA handed out shirts alphabetically to squad members, so Ossie Ardiles was handed number 1 despite being a midfielder, and defender Jose Van Tuyne was given number 22. However, under that system 21 year old prodigy Diego Maradona would have worn no. 12, so to keep him sweet he swapped with Estudiantes defender Patricio Hernandez so that he could appear in his favoured number 10.

1982 – West Germany 1:0 Austria – “de Nichtangriffspakt von Gijon”

Translating as the “non-aggression pact of Gijon”, this was the name given to the dubious final group match between the neighbouring countries, the result of which allowed both teams to go through on goal difference ahead of Algeria. Horst Hrubesch put the West Germans one up after ten minutes, followed by a scandalous 80 minutes of non-football. The situation arose as Algeria and Chile had played their final game the day previous, allowing the Germans and Austria to work out exactly what situation was required for both to progress.

1986 – One Rule for Diego… and Daniel. And Jorge.

When the Argentinian FA announced in 1986 that they would be doing a repeat of 1982 and ordering the shirt numbers alphabetically, apart from Diego Maradona who would swap again to number 10, Real Madrid striker Valdano and captain Daniel Passarella pulled rank and insisted on keeping their own numbers too, so Passarella kept his favoured number 6 and Valdano wore 11, rather than the number 21 that he was originally pencilled in for.

1994 – Everyone’s Happy, at last.

With the threat of multiple dummy’s being thrown out of multiple prams, the Argentinian FA at last reverted to a ‘sort it out yourself’ squad numbering system, and, depsite their being a number of players who hankered after the number 10 it’s safe to say that none of them suggested having a game of scissors-paper-stone with Mr Maradona for it. from: http://www.midfielddynamo.com/worldcup/curiosities.htm

Top Ten Conspiracy Theories

03. Subliminal Advertising

Ever been watching a movie and suddenly get the munchies? Or sitting on your sofa watching TV and suddenly get the irresistible urge to buy a new car? If so, you may be the victim of a subliminal advertising conspiracy! Proponents include Wilson Bryan Key (author of “Subliminal Seduction”) and Vance Packard (author of “The Hidden Persuaders”), both of whom claimed that subliminal (subconscious) messages in advertising were rampant and damaging. Though the books caused a public outcry and led to FCC hearings, much of both books have since been discredited, and several key “studies” of the effects of subliminal advertising were revealed to have been faked. In the 1980s, concern over subliminal messages spread to bands such as Styx and Judas Priest, with the latter band even being sued in 1990 for allegedly causing a teen’s suicide with subliminal messages (the case was dismissed). Subliminal mental processing does exist, and can be tested. But just because a person perceives something (a message or advertisement, for example) subconsciously means very little by itself. There is no inherent benefit of subliminal advertising over regular advertising, any more than there would be in seeing a flash of a commercial instead of the full twenty seconds. Getting a person to see something for a split-second is easy; filmmakers do it all the time (watch the last few frames in Hitchcock’s classic “Psycho”). Getting a person to buy or do something based on that split-second is another matter entirely. (The conspiracy was parodied in the 1980s television show Max Headroom, in which viewers were exploding after seeing subliminal messages)