Even the simplest of actions can arise from hidden competition. Imagine reaching for a cup. There are many ways of doing this, depending on where the cup is, whether you’re right- or left-handed, whether the handle is turned towards you, and so on. Your brain works through all of these possibilities at the same time, and they compete against one another until one wins out. Only after this neural battle does your arm start to move.
A new study suggests that these competitive processes affect even simple decisions, like which hand we use to pick up an object. Even though this is one of the most common decisions we ever make, it has rarely been studied. To remedy that, Flavio Oliveira from the University of California, Berkeley filmed the movements of volunteers as they reached for targets that had been projected onto a table in front of them.
In some trials, the volunteers (all right-handed) were told to only use their left or right hands. On others, they could choose for themselves. In the latter trials, they always used the nearest hand to pick up targets at the far edges of the table, but they used either hand for those near the middle. Their reaction times were slower when they had to choose which hand to use, and particularly if the target was near the centre of the table.
This much is expected, but it supports the idea that the brain is choosing between possible movements associated with each hand. At the centre of the table, when the choice is least clear, it takes longer to come down on one hand or the other.
Think of it as a roomful of people, all with different ideas about what to do, and all shouting out their personal suggestions. Their tenacity and volume are based on what they see. If the target is on the right of the table, those who favour a “reach-with-the-right-hand” plan start shouting more loudly, and drown out the “left-hand” crowd. If the table is in the middle, everyone on the room shouts equally loudly, and it’s harder to work out which group has the loudest voice.
Next, Oliveira performed the same experiment while using a magnetic pulse to temporarily disrupt specific parts of the volunteers’ brains. He focused on an area called the posterior parietal cortex or PPC, which plays an important role in planning our movements. If it’s damaged, people often find it difficult to reach for and grab at objects.
When Oliveira directed the pulse at the PPC on the left half of the brain (which largely influences the right hand), the volunteers were more likely to use their left hand to clutch at the targets. They were still strongly right-handed, but they used their left hand more than they normally would, especially for targets near the centre of the table. However, aiming the pulse at the right PPC had no effect, and neither did pulses at other parts of the brain.
By disrupting the left PPC, Oliveira also disrupted the movement plans associated with the right hand. In our imaginary room, the half of the crowd who were advocating for the right-hand strategy suddenly fell silent. With them out of play, the left-hand crew were all that remained and were more likely to win their shouting match.
It’s not clear why disrupting the right PPC (which largely influences the left hand) had no effect. But Oliveira thinks that for right-handed people, the preference for the right hand is so strong anyway that there’s little room for inducing any further bias over the left hand. It would, of course, be interesting to repeat the experiment with left-handed people to see if the reverse is true.
Oliveira says that our decisions and actions “can be viewed as a dynamic process in which many possible motor responses are competing at any one time, with the accumulation of evidence in favour of each candidate… continuously changing.”
Reference: PNAS http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1006223107
Image from David Ip
More on hands:
- Your brain sees your hands as short and fat
- A single genetic fault makes one hand mirror the other’s movements
- Brain treats tools as temporary body parts
- How wearing a cast affects sense of touch and brain activity
- Warm hands, warm heart – how physical and emotional warmth are linked
If the citation link isn’t working, read why here
8 Responses to “Every time you reach for something, there’s a squabbling match in your brain”
Leave a Reply
XHTML: You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>-->
About Not Exactly Rocket Science
Ed Yong is an award-winning British science writer. Not Exactly Rocket Science is his attempt to talk about the awe-inspiring, beautiful and quirky world of science to as many people as possible. He finds talking about himself in the third person strange and unsettling.
Some interviews with me
Some awards that I’ve won
Who my readers are: 2008, 2009 and 2010 editions
A complete list of posts from this blogContact me on edyong209[at]googlemail[dot]com
What others say
Do you want to be a science writer?
Not Exactly Rocket Science content
Recent Posts
- I’ve got your missing links right here (2nd October 2010)
- Travelling…
- A fossil penguin gets its colours
- Women make safer financial decisions when faced with sexual stereotypes
- Squirrels masturbate to avoid sexually transmitted infections
- Genetic flip produces two plants for the price of one
- Every time you reach for something, there’s a squabbling match in your brain
- I’ve got your missing links right here (25th September 2010)
Categories
Archives
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
Saturday, 2 October 2010
Every time you reach for something, there’s a squabbling match in your brain | Not Exactly Rocket Science | Discover Magazine
Squirrels masturbate to avoid sexually transmitted infections | Not Exactly Rocket Science | Discover Magazine
There’s a famous picture that has probably been burned into the retinas of anyone who spends a lot of time on the internet. It’s a squirrel, standing up, with a surprisingly huge pair of testicles dangling beneath him. That’s a Cape ground squirrel and the image isn’t a fake. Males have a scrotum that’s 20% of their body length (excluding the tail) and their penis is more than twice as long.
These mighty genitals suggest that sex, and sperm in particular, is a serious business for Cape ground squirrels. To get the best odds of fathering the next generation, they need to ensure that it’s their sperm that fertilises the female’s eggs and not those of rivals. So they make a lot of it; hence, the oversized testicles.
With sperm being so important, it’s odd that some Cape ground squirrels regularly waste theirs. Yet that’s exactly what Jane Waterman saw while studying wild squirrels in Namibia. Some of them would masturbate, apparently squandering their precious sperm. What does squirrel masturbation look like? Apparently, it’s rather acrobatic. I’ll let Waterman describe it herself:
“An oral masturbation was recorded when a male sat with head lowered and an erect penis in his mouth, being stimulated with both mouth (fellatio) and forepaws (masturbation), while the lower torso moved forward and backwards in thrusting motions, finally culminating in an apparent ejaculation, after which the male appeared to consume the ejaculate.”
Many mammals masturbate including humans, other primates, rodents, and more. In every case, the same question remains – why waste the sperm? The most obvious explanation is that it’s what males do when they’re horny, but unsuccessful with it. This is the loftily named “sexual outlet hypothesis”. If it’s right, masturbation isn’t adaptive – it’s just a side effect of the intense sexual arousal generated in species where males mate with many females.
An alternative is that masturbation is actually beneficial. By flushing old sperm from the male’s testicles, it gets a higher proportion of competitive or fertile sperm ready for the next potential mating.
But Waterman thinks that both of these hypotheses are wrong, at least when it comes to Cape ground squirrels. She should know; she spent around 2000 hours spying on the animals with a pair of binoculars, noting every interaction between them, and every sexual act among the local males.
This glut of data told her that males masturbate more often when females are ready for mating. But Waterman also found that dominant males were far more likely to masturbate than subordinates, and males who had actually had sex were more likely to do it than those in dry spells. That rules out the sexual outlet hypothesis, which predicts that subordinate males and those who were spurned by females would be the most frequent masturbators. The alternative “sperm quality” hypothesis doesn’t work either, for males masturbated more often after sex than before it. It’s clearly not an act of preparation.
Waterman considered, and ruled out, the possibility that masturbation is some sort of signal. It’s unlikely that the males are in some way displaying to future mates, because they were no more likely to do it when females were close. It’s equally unlikely that they’re sending messages to rivals, advertising the fact that they’ve just had sex. After all, Waterman found that one masturbating male did nothing to put off rivals from making advances on a female.
The final explanation is that masturbation is actually a form of self-medication. By cleaning their genitals, males reduce their odds of contracting a sexually transmitted infection. It’s a new hypothesis that Waterman herself put forward, but it’s the only one that actually fits with all of her data. If it’s true, you’d expect males to masturbate more frequently after sex than before it, which they do. You’d expect them to masturbate more frequently during the time of month when females are ready to mate, which they do. And finally, you’d expect their tendency to masturbate to increase as they get more sex, which it does.
A masturbating squirrel gets cleaner genitals in two ways – it scrubs the outside bit and flushes out the inside ones. Many other rodents will groom their genitals after sex and experiments with rats have shown that this does actually help to prevent infections. This might also explain the fact that some fruit bats practice fellatio during sex.
In terms of flushing out the genital tract, some studies have suggested that this is why human men feel the need to go to urinate after sex. Cape ground squirrels, however, are a desert species and conserve water by very rarely urinating. Masturbating may be the next best thing and indeed, by eating their ejaculates afterwards, the squirrels can prevent the needless loss of water.
Reference: Waterman, J. (2010). The Adaptive Function of Masturbation in a Promiscuous African Ground Squirrel PLoS ONE, 5 (9) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013060
Image by Hans Hillewaert
More on animal sex:
- Male water striders summon predators to blackmail females into having sex
- “I haven’t had sex for 40 million years. Should I worry?”
- Female birds breed better in captivity if they see sexy males
- Crayfish females lure males with urine, but then play hard to get
- Pocket science – sperm races
- Holy fellatio, Batman! Fruit bats use oral sex to prolong actual sex
If the citation link isn’t working, read why here
33 Responses to “Squirrels masturbate to avoid sexually transmitted infections”
- 1. Mike Haubrich Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:01 pmI think that this is an important study, but I can’t say why exactly. I think that we are coming closer to exonerating Joycelyn Elders.
- 2. David Dobbs Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:04 pmKeep this up and you’ll give masturbation a good name. Meanwhile, to an illustrious collection of terms for the act (waxing the bishop; snapping the carrot; polishing the porpoise; I could go on, believe me)’ you’ve brought a bright new addition:
“Nothing. Just doing some cleaning.”
- 3. Walter S. Andriuzzi Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:18 pm“[...] after which the male appeared to consume the ejaculate”. Eeew!
“In terms of flushing out the genital tract, some studies have suggested that this is why human men feel the need to go to urinate after sex”. Ah, how I hate that…- 4. Ed Yong Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:20 pm@David – True story: a few years ago, some friends and I noticed that virtually masturbation euphemisms take the form of “X-ing the Y”, where X is a verb and Y is a noun. As we tried to come up with new and amusing ones, a history documentary was playing in the background and the narrator said: “cripping the Nazi war machine.”
- 5. Ed Yong Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:21 pmAlso credit to John Rennie for what would have been a much better headline: “Squirrels: not just handling nuts for fun”
- 6. Left_Wing_Fox Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 7:27 pm@4: Oh my god… that’s going straight into the meme-stream.
- 7. Hannah Waters Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 8:03 pmI predict that there will be an animated gif within days
- 8. keon Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 8:08 pm@6: So, “generating the meme stream,” then?
- 9. Coturnix Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 8:33 pmkeon: ‘winning the thread’
- 10. Brian Too Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 8:47 pmMight I suggest “grooming the ground squirrel”?
- 11. Rose Says:
September 28th, 2010 at 11:48 pmWhy don’t they catch STIs from swallowing then? Many human STIs can be transmitted that way, though I guess it’s less likely than through typical sex.
- 12. DrugMonkey Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 12:44 amHow did you not link John Irving’s excellent book, “The Water Method Man” in this post?
- 13. Joe D Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 6:50 am“[...] after which the male appeared to consume the ejaculate”
Thanks for clarifying at this point that it was a *male* — it wasn’t clear from the previous sentences describing what this male was doing to its own penis. For some reason I’ve suddenly got stuck in my head the idea of Dan Brown writing natural history books…
- 14. Squirrely Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 8:00 amMaybe the aroma of the receptive female just raises the male’s libido. ‘Nads that big could support the continued ‘activity’.
- 15. Nacho Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 8:19 amIt puzzles me that she didn’t consider the more likely possibility that males just masturbate more after having sex because they’re hornier because of all the hormones they liberated during sex. Which makes me wonder the validity (and usefulness) of a sexual habits study which doesn’t involve taking blood and/or urine samples to analyze hormone levels. I guess research grants are way easier to get nowadays, even if your methodology is flawed, if your “study” has anything to do with the environment.
- 16. Ed Yong Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 9:22 amOoh fighting words! You’re assuming that Waterman submitted a grant saying “I want to study squirrel masturbation”. Actually, it seems clear from the paper that this is an opportunistic study. Waterman’s area is the evolution of animal sex lives and social behaviour. It seems what happened was that she was out in the field, studying the squirrels, noticed an odd behaviour, and decided to collect some data on it.
- 17. Nacho Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 9:46 amMy snide remark wasn’t directed at the subject of her study (be it squirrel masturbation or squirrel sexual and social habits in general), but at what based on your article (I didn’t read the original paper) looks like just a paper where she shows some “unusual” behavior and her personal interpretation of what purpose it could serve, which sure sounds pretty un-scientific to me. I’m not saying to deny grants to people studying these kind of subjects, I’m just saying we’re way past the 19th century when it was enough to just observe and ponder, having so many state of the art tools and scientific equipment at our disposal.
- 18. Karen Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 9:51 am“Males do it simply to clean their genitals, reducing their odds of contracting a sexually transmitted infection.”
We have to be careful with wording about motivation in situations like this. The males probably do NOT do it ‘to clean their genitals’, but because it feels good/they feel compelled to do it/they ‘want’ to do it. That masturbation cleans their genitals is (at least according to Waterman’s hypothesis) why the behaviour has been maintained by natural selection.
Or I could be wrong; perhaps in their little squirrel brains, they’re thinking, ‘gosh, I feel a bit dirty down there, time to clean!’ But I doubt it. In the same way (most) humans don’t have sex ‘to pass on their genes’.
[I'm usually a bit wary about people who are quick to read motivation into descriptions of animal behaviour, but on consideration, I think this is a valid point. Have changed that bit to read "By cleaning their genitals, males reduce their odds of contracting a sexually transmitted infection." Thanks Karen. - Ed]
- 19. Chris Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 10:13 amSo do these squirrels have lust in their hearts?
- 20. Trev Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 11:55 amThis is yet another example of scientists “reaching” to make a conclusion they like. Next this researcher will hypothesize that frogs make their own natural condoms using mucus to avoid sexually transmitted disease.
We know after all that sexually transmitted disease is how the dinosaurs became extinct.
- 21. Trev Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 11:56 amOr she just likes watching them do it.
- 22. Mina Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 12:58 pmInteresting and, as always, engagingly written.
- 23. J Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 1:12 pmI hope the paper is actually science as opposed to the nonsense spouted herein. Just because cleaning genitals is the only reason Waterman could come up with that fit her data doesn’t mean it’s the only one possible.
Maybe dominant squirrels masturbate more often because that trait is linked with being dominant. Or maybe the other way around. Maybe it is also a signal to females. And I’m sure there are other reasons that I haven’t thought of in the 2 seconds I tried.
- 24. PalMD Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 2:44 pmI’d be curious to know more about the microbiology here. What STDs do squirrels get? Can frequent ejaculation really prevent them?
I don’t know of any human studies about masturbation changing the behavior of STDs (except that as a sole means of sexual gratification, it is very, very low risk).
- 25. Derek Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 2:52 pmSounds like a scientific retelling of an old semi-dirty joke.
Q: “So why did the male Cape Ground squirrel with head lowered and an erect penis in his mouth, stimulate with both mouth (fellatio) and forepaws (masturbation), while his lower torso moved forward and backwards in thrusting motions, finally culminating in an apparent ejaculation, after which the male appeared to consume the ejaculate.”
A: Because he can!
- 26. Dan Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 4:07 pmBest band name ever.
- 27. Karen Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 5:41 pmThanks, Ed. I’m wary too, which is why I made the point. People shouldn’t read motivation into descriptions of animal behaviour, but the thing is, they do, and so by using certain wordings over others, we can lead them away from the temptation.
P.S. Everytime I see ‘Cape ground squirrel’ I imagine one wearing a little super-hero cape.
- 28. mepsipax Says:
September 29th, 2010 at 6:09 pmAh, science can never accept because they can……but, if he has the balls to do that in public, let em. Bwahahahahahaha.
- 29. Marcwolf Says:
September 30th, 2010 at 2:44 amAt least science is being brave enought to accept that sex for animals is not all instinct and solely for reproduction.
For many years animal behavorists would have turned themselved into semantic and conceptial knots trying to justify such behaviour when possibly the simple explanation could be that the squirrel’s enjoy it. Pleasure in itself can be a very powerful motivating force.
Most of the animal kingdom masturbate or perform some form of non-reproductive sexual activity, and surprisingly we do not have a deluge of psychotic crazed critters running around with fur on their paws (well we do but that not a cause but more of an effect :>)I would be interested to find out from your observations how much same sex interaction is occuring amoungst the squirrels since likewise same sex activity has been documented in many species.
Take Care
Marc- 30. Dredge Slug Says:
October 1st, 2010 at 7:12 amI can’t believe that no one thought that squirrels, like humans, might masturbate because it feels good. You’d think that Jane Waterman never rubbed one out.
- 31. Sonya Says:
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:36 amDredge, everything that feels good evolved to feel good. The question is why.
- 32. 56 Says:
October 2nd, 2010 at 3:19 pmCyndi Lauper had it right- Squirrels just wanna have fun.
- 33. spacebat Says:
October 2nd, 2010 at 3:40 pmTheir motivation wouldn’t be a mystery to a male researcher. That would be the shortest scientific journal entry ever.
Leave a Reply
XHTML: You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>-->
About Not Exactly Rocket Science
Ed Yong is an award-winning British science writer. Not Exactly Rocket Science is his attempt to talk about the awe-inspiring, beautiful and quirky world of science to as many people as possible. He finds talking about himself in the third person strange and unsettling.
Some interviews with me
Some awards that I’ve won
Who my readers are: 2008, 2009 and 2010 editions
A complete list of posts from this blogContact me on edyong209[at]googlemail[dot]com
What others say
Do you want to be a science writer?
Not Exactly Rocket Science content
Recent Posts
- I’ve got your missing links right here (2nd October 2010)
- Travelling…
- A fossil penguin gets its colours
- Women make safer financial decisions when faced with sexual stereotypes
- Squirrels masturbate to avoid sexually transmitted infections
- Genetic flip produces two plants for the price of one
- Every time you reach for something, there’s a squabbling match in your brain
- I’ve got your missing links right here (25th September 2010)
Categories
Archives
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
David Beckham's 'car nearly hit at sons' school' by divorcing husband who made affair allegations | Mail Online
'Delusional' husband tried to force David Beckham's car off the road after falsely claiming wife had an affair with footballer
By Ben Todd and Sara Nathan
Last updated at 8:42 PM on 2nd October 2010David Beckham has been named in a court case over claims of an affair with a married mother of two.
The 35-year-old footballer was forced last night to deny having an illicit fling with Shery Shabani, a Hollywood jeweller to the stars.
Mrs Shabani, 33, said she was accused by her ‘jealous and ‘delusional’ husband Kambiz of having an affair with Beckham, whose three sons attend the same school as her own son and daughter.
Dressalikes: Victoria Beckham and Shery Shabhani in their shades
She claimed Beckham had told her that Mr Shabani, a 42-year-old lawyer, had tried to run the star off the road in his car outside the school in May.
She also alleged that her husband told police officers that she had slept with the former England captain after she called them out to a domestic dispute.
Beckham, who plays for LA Galaxy, was pictured wearing the exotic brunette’s ‘stackable’ onyx bracelets while shopping in June.
She in turn favours similar sunglasses and accessories to those used by Beckham’s wife Victoria.
A friend of the Beckhams said they were ‘acquaintances’ of Mrs Shabani as their children attend the same exclusive �14,000-a-year Hollywood school. Beckham is often seen on the school run with their three sons Brooklyn, 11, Romeo, eight, and five year-old Cruz.
Shery Shabaniher alleges her 'delusional' husband Kambiz became fixated on the idea that she was having an affair with David Beckham
The seedy accusations surfaced yesterday as part of Mrs Shabani’s application for a restraining order against her husband of 12 years. She is also seeking a divorce.
The slurs are the latest blow to hit the shell-shocked Beckhams, still reeling from untrue sex claims from Bosnian hooker Irma Nici.
More...
Defiant: David and Victoria Beckham ignored the furore and enjoyed a date out together, before arriving back home in Los Angeles, pictured above
Beckham is suing for nearly �16million in damages.
A spokesman for Beckham told the Daily Mail last night: ‘As with another recent story, this is another tale full of fantasy.’
And a friend insisted: ‘This is becoming a clear case of victimisation’, adding that Beckham was ‘not aware’ of Mrs Shabani’s claim that he told her of the incident on the road.
Jewellery designer Mrs Shabaniher is friends with the Beckhams, who are among the celebrities to have worn her designs
‘It’s a very odd situation. Obviously, David’s not complicit in this at all – and he’s only learned of it today. This is all false and there’s absolutely no suggestion that there is any truth in the husband’s claims of an affair between David and the woman. It’s all a bit bizarre to be honest.’
Mrs Shabani denies any affair in the court documents. As part of the restraining order application, she told a court that her husband raged at her: ‘I know why you’re upset, it’s your birthday and you didn’t get a text message from David Beckham!
‘Why don’t you ask him to send you a picture of his c**k for your birthday you whore!’
The documents were filed by Mrs Shabani on August 19 at Los Angeles County Superior Court, where she was granted the restraining order against her husband.
She wrote: ‘Beginning in 2010, Respondant (Mr Shabani) accused me of having an affair with Beckham, often in front of our children.
‘I have repeatedly told him that his accusation is untrue. In fact, Respondent’s ongoing allegations regarding Mr Beckham are part and parcel of Respondent’s delusional thought processes.’
‘Although Mr Beckham’s children go to the same school as our children,
Respondent’s allegations are untrue.
What she said: Excerpts from the legal documents
‘In May 2010, Mr Beckham told me that Respondent had gone to our children’s school and tried to drive Mr Beckham’s car off the road. Mr Beckham told me that Respondent (Mr Shabani) had gone to our children's school and tried to drive Mr Beckham's car off the road. Mr Beckham further advised me that his car had almost crashed as a result.’
She said it was on July 7 that, in front of their children, her husband accused her of being upset at not receiving a message from Beckham.
Court documents that have been submitted in the divorce case
Finally, she said that on August 17 – the night Mr and Mrs Shabani separated – her husband claimed to police officers called to the house that ‘I had ‘f***ed David Beckham’.
Among the reasons she cited for why she should be allowed a restraining
order, Mrs Shabani said the Respondent ‘falsely accused the Petitioner [Mrs Shabani] of having an extra-marital affair with a celebrity’.
Mrs Shabani started her business in 2003 and on her website, it states: ‘Shery’s pieces are favourites among the Hollywood elite, gracing the necks and wrists of A-list celebrities like Vanessa Williams and Heidi Klum.’
She told the U.S website RadarOnline
yesterday that her estranged husband’s claims of her alleged affair with Beckham were ‘absolutely not true’, adding: ‘This is a really nasty divorce, it was a domestic violence situation.
‘David Beckham is a nice guy. There is no relationship, nothing. This has nothing to do with David, this is my husband’s craziness.’
Legal suit: Irma Nici, the woman at the centre of allegations about David Beckham, who was recently served with a �16million writ by the outraged soccer ace
Share this article:
Add your commentsComments (94)
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below, or debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have been moderated in advance.
I still dont think he deserves all this rubbish
the press say about him and his wife,how do you think the kids feel.
- george, germany, 2/10/2010 6:33If you continually put yourself 'out there' posing in your very tight briefs on billboards, snogging your wife in lifts for the cameras etc etc, you will attract the attention of the crazies! Try a lower profile Beckham, you dont need the money, however you seem to need the attention, but that is a double edged sword.
- anon, uk, 02/10/2010 13:43
They'd be better off shunning the spotlight as a couple/family. It has been too much all these years ......and enough. Think of the children and go raise them in peace and away from the media glare.
- anon, eur, 02/10/2010 13:21
.
Trying to force David's car off the road could be a criminal offence. It all sounds so bizarre. Things could perhaps get worse if they as a couple/family do not keep a low profile.- dev, uk, 02/10/2010 13:17
Time the Beckhams gave up LA and headed back to blighty. Their dream life has just been getting more and more sour and malicious. I doubt if any of these stories is true. I'm no supporter of the Becks but I actually feel sorry for them and for ANYONE accused wrongly of something.
- jb, sussex, 02/10/2010 11:27
They want to live in la la land, they will have to deal with the inmates.
- I wear a moustache for fun on weekdays, Ladies that Lunch but don't claim benefits in the UK, 02/10/2010 11:26
Ok, now, I REALLY do not envy Victoria Beckham's life. It is SO EXHAUSTING!!!!! Mother of 3 boys, running her fashion business, has to look good at all times and now has to fend all these "rumours" of her husband's "infidelities".- Noora, London, 02/10/2010 09:57
It could be that those complaining or talking about Victoria having to fend all these "rumours" of her husband's "infidelities". are the same ones who spend much of their time talking about just that or propagating the same "rumours" contributing to the source of the rumours and her EXHAUSTION lol
Perhaps focus on her ''fashion business' and not rumors or unproven stories or her personal life?- anon, anon, 02/10/2010 11:00
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Add your comment
Mother faces jail after telling son, 12, he had cancer in a bid to make money from donations | Mail Online
Mother 'drugged healthy son, 12, and shaved his head to convince him he was dying of cancer - to get money from well-wishers'
By Mail Foreign Service
Last updated at 2:15 AM on 1st October 2010A mother convinced her 12-year-old son he was dying from cancer in an attempt to get donations from well-wishers.
Carol Lynn Schnuphase drugged her son Christopher to make him look ill and even shaved his head and eyebrows in an effort to convince people the youngster was dying from leukaemia.
The 47-year-old spiked her son's meals with drugs to make him appear ill before contacting local businesses and church groups to raise funds for his treatment.
Deception: A television image of Carol Lynn Schnuphase, who convinced her son Christopher he was dying of cancer - and then asked local businesses for money
Investigators said Schnuphase was so convincing that she received more than $7,000 before her scam was discovered by her sister.
One her Facebook page, Schnuphase wrote: 'Christopher now knows he's dying.'
She later told relatives that he had succumbed to the illness.
But police in Roseville, Michigan, said the 12-year-boy is in perfect health.
Detectives who interviewed members of Schnuphase's own family said they genuinely thought the boy had cancer.
They only became suspicious when Schnuphase said her son had died and she had decided against a holding a funeral.
Healthy: A TV image of Christopher before his mother shaved his head and eyebrows to make him look as if he had undergone therapy to combat his 'cancer'
James Berlin, deputy chief of the Roseville Police, said Schnuphase maintained the deception over a period of several months.
Church groups held fundraising activities and Schnuphase canvassed local businesses for donations, which she said would pay for life-saving treatment.
'They were duped,' Deputy Berlin said. 'They felt they were helping out a mother and her son. People want to think the best of other people.'
Deputy Berlin said the boy did not know he was being used as part of a scam. He said his mother drugged him by putting opiates in his applesauce and other food.
By shaving his eyebrows and hair she was able to tell people that it had fallen out from chemotherapy treatment.
Schnuphase has been charged with child abuse and two counts of accepting money under false pretences and faces up to 14 years in jail.
Her son has been placed with foster parents.
Share this article:
The New York Times > Log In
Veteran's Family Denied WH Tour Because of Shorts
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 30, 2010
Filed at 5:30 p.m. ET
SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — The White House apologized Thursday for turning the family of a Medal of Honor recipient away from an exclusive tour last week because the late veteran's 10-year-old grandson was wearing shorts.
Vernon Baker, the last surviving black Medal of Honor winner from World War II, was buried Friday at Arlington National Cemetery after dying in July from complications of brain cancer at age 90. He belatedly received the military's top award from President Bill Clinton in 1997, after historians concluded he'd been wrongly denied because of his race.
On Saturday, his widow and grandson went to the White House for a special tour of the West Wing, which includes the Oval Office and rooms that are in use.
The staffer who was to lead the family wasn't sure whether 10-year-old Vernon Pawlik's attire — shorts and a T-shirt bearing a picture of the boy's grandfather — was considered appropriate, officials said. Another winner of the military's top award, Thomas Norris, also was turned away because he was not previously cleared for the tour.
Norris and the Baker family had turned down a previously arranged East Wing tour for the more exclusive visit to the West Wing.
"This is an unfortunate misunderstanding," White House spokesman Adam Abrams said Thursday. "We would have loved to have hosted 10-year-old Vernon and his family at the White House and we have reached out to the Baker family and Lt. Norris to communicate our deep regret and invite them back to the White House."
A message left at the home of Baker's widow, Heidy, who was also on the tour, was not immediately returned.
In 1945, Baker rallied black troops after their white commander deserted and they captured a German stronghold in Italy, taking out three machine gun nests, two bunkers and an observation post. But he did not receive his award for more than half a century, and no black soldiers received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for battlefield valor, during that era. An Army study initiated in the early 1990s concluded Baker and several other men had been denied the award because of racism.
Six other black World War II veterans received medals posthumously at a 1997 White House ceremony where Baker got his medal.
Baker had lived since the 1980s in a valley near St. Maries, Idaho, about 50 miles east of Spokane, Wash.
The office of Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, is working with the Baker family to help them return to the White House, said press secretary Susan Wheeler.
"The senator was upset by the news," Wheeler said. "We want to make sure they are comfortable."
(This version CORRECTS Rewords 9th paragraph to reflect that Baker was alive when medals were awarded. Heidy is correct spelling of widow's first name.)
September 27th, 2010 at 3:34 pm
Now Ed, should I actually hear the voices yelling at each other, because my Dr feels we should try to control that with medication?
September 27th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Whoa whoa whoa. You can shut off somebody’s brain with a magnetic field? Where do I get that in handheld form? Life could be far more slapstick…
September 27th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
I thought this was known already? Haven’t psychologists already established that any time action is considered, the brain produces an array of possibilities and then inhibits most of them? I thought it was known as dampening or something similar.
Even radical and anti-social possibilities are produced. For instance, to extend the example given in the article, you might consider tipping the entire table over in order to get the cup. Then you discard that possibility, thinking “no, that might break the cup”, or any of a thousand other reasons not to do that. It all happens very quickly too and can operate under the threshold of perception.
September 27th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Yep, this sort of competitive decision-making is known (although more recently that you might imagine). The “new” bit is the relevance of hand choice.
But I don’t like news stories that only focus on the latest new bit. It’s not how science works. New discoveries sit on the shoulders of giants. In this case, yes, there’s a news hook (hand choice) but it also gave me a chance to talk about this aspect of decision-making that’s not well known to a general audience.
September 27th, 2010 at 11:23 pm
The left-handed suggestion is interesting; you’d think people who were ambidextrous (or some approximation of it) would be better. Much harder to find as research subjects, but in this case the effort is probably worth it given the difficulty of proving the findings. Of course, if you do get the same sidedness result for the more easily-found left handers, it strongly supports lateral specialization in the brain. Does anyone know whether that’s been shown for motor tasks, outside handedness? I can’t recall myself.
September 28th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
I’m about to reach for my cup of tea, and there’s now a 3rd set of voices in my head, whispering: “You’ve triggered the shouting-match again…”
September 28th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Ha! The price of knowledge!
September 29th, 2010 at 10:41 am
I feel obliged to point out that a lot of the ‘decision making’ has already taken place by the time a given reach is executed. For instance, the affordances of the object have already ruled out many (technically possible) reaches and constrained the decision space. Biases such as recent movement history then further constrain the space (several researchers have gotten interested in this recently, we cite some in Kent et al). On a longer time scale ‘use dependant learning’ creates reaching-to-grasp perception/action systems that do what you typically do, meaning many (technically possible) reaches aren’t ever actually options. The brain is only part of the system that ‘decides’ and it’s not at all clear that ‘decision’ is the correct description of what is actually a complex, time extended dynamic process.
Brian Too, the net result is that the space of possibilities, while still large for any given reach-to-grasp action, is not infinite or even likely to contain really unusual options, unless there’s genuine malfunction in the system. Just because a patient with frontal lobe damage might generate and fail to inhibit tipping the table doesn’t mean normal function requires inhibiting such an option.
Kent, SW; Wilson, AD; Plumb, MS; Williams, JH; Mon-Williams, M Immediate movement history influences reach-to-grasp action selection in children and adults. J Mot Behav, 41, 10-15, 2009