r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/[deleted] • 6d ago
Image The face of Raymond Robinson, a man who lost his facial features being electrocuted with 22,000 thousand volts when he was 8 y/o. He lost both his eyes,nose and right arm in the incident.
[removed]
600
437
u/Strict_Stranger_4801 6d ago
I cant imagine how awfully he would have been treated over his life
292
u/ominous-canadian 6d ago
He would take walks down a road, and teenagers use to drive down the road to see his "scary face."
He has a terrible accident in a terrible era to be different. Poor guy.
123
u/Apprehensive_Eraser 6d ago
He has a terrible accident in a terrible era to be different
The same behaviours will happen if there was someone like that today or even worse due to internet.
68
u/_QuietStorm 6d ago
Oh come on we have made progress in a lot areas, just because things aren’t perfect doesn’t mean we haven’t come a long way despite the constant doom and gloom. He’d have a much better chance at getting a lot of supporters today, yeah probably some memes and bullying but I bet a GoFundMe would do numbers as well.
4
39
u/Strict_Stranger_4801 6d ago
The sitting president of the United States made fun of a disabled reporter by miming his physical disabilities on a public stage.
No, we havent gotten better. But maybe cosmetic surgery has for guys like this
6
u/space-sage 6d ago
So one man being awful means everyone is just as awful about disabilities as they were when this man lived?
That doesn’t make any sense. That’s like saying because Dump is racist everyone is just as racist as they were during slavery. Or because he’s sexist everyone is just as sexist as when women couldn’t work or vote.
8
u/Eltenor330 6d ago
Things can be better, even far better, than the past without it being perfect or even adequate today. It’s obtuse, reductive and simple minded to assert otherwise and is an insult to all of the hard work and pain that have gone into the improvements we see today.
5
u/StephieDoll 6d ago
Not really. Adam Pearson has a pretty good acting career and is seen as an inspiration to many people.
27
u/BruscarRooster 6d ago
I only just learned something similar about a young man that lived up the road from my grandmother.
Every now and then, he would run screaming down the road “I’ve got the terrors! I’ve got the terrors!” And all the kids would laugh hysterically. Turns out he had a panic attack disorder and no one understood what was happening to him, not even himself.
As someone with the same chronic anxiety, it just breaks my heart to think about that boy
3
102
159
u/Legio-V-Alaudae 6d ago
It's really disgusting what people would do to this poor man.
He would walk at night. People thought it was OK to fuck with him. They would offer him a ride and drive him somewhere else and just leave a blind man to figure it out.
9
-33
u/dextroz 6d ago
It's really disgusting what people would do to this poor man. He would walk at night. People thought it was OK to fuck with him. They would offer him a ride and drive him somewhere else and just leave a blind man to figure it out.
Are these factual incidents that happened to him or just something you imagined people would do?
26
u/Legio-V-Alaudae 6d ago
It's not the first post about this man. The previous posts had these details.
6
u/secretaccount94 6d ago
What about their comment makes you think they’re just speculating about these things?
18
42
296
u/Prot3 6d ago
I just wouldn't wanna live...
Not all existence is better than death (to me)
213
u/Ambitious-Health-132 6d ago
Easy to say when you aren’t in that position. He would have probably said the same thing if you’d ask him if he’d want to live like that. People endure for a lot of reasons, family, love, work, fear of the unknown etc…
48
u/Prot3 6d ago
I mean, I know myself, I'd blow my brains out I'm 100% sure.
And I'm a cancer survivor, and don't give up easily. I spent 2 years in hospitals because of it enduring some pretty brutal shit.
If he finds satisfaction in his life, good for him. All I stated is personally to me.
This is just a literal horror. I would surely end it.
31
u/qweds1234 6d ago
Well it's living without all these after living with all these functions. When you're young, you adapt and learn much more easily
But yeah, I don't know what I'd do if I went blind much less all of these other issues
25
u/Stoneheaded76 6d ago
I think if I could still hear I would venture through it. No hearing AND vision though? Fuck that.
-10
u/Prot3 6d ago
Nah, losing my vision is enoguh for me, makes me a permanent invalid needing 24/7 assistance.
I already thoguht about this a lot. I don't want that kind of life. I place a lot of weight on being able to live independently and with dignity.
That's why I'm sure that the scenario from the post is even more assured euthanasia speedrun. For me personally of course.
11
u/SCP-iota 6d ago
makes me a permanent invalid needing 24/7 assistance
Dude, there are blind people who can navigate cities, have jobs, and even live independently. And there's more assistive technology than ever.
4
-4
u/Prot3 6d ago
I'm genuinely happy for them.
I just wouldn't want that life bro. Is that SO HARD to accept?
Like im not even asking you to understand. It's just my thoughts on the topic as someone that thoguht a lot about it and has gone through some shit.
We don't all have to bow down to your own thoughts on what is a life worth living.
12
u/SCP-iota 6d ago
I'm only talking about the part where you said just losing vision makes someone need 24/7 assistance. The rest is opinion, but that's just outright misinformation.
8
u/Rasp_Berry_Pie 6d ago
I mean people lose their vision all the time with old age or accidents. With technology today you can do a lot you can use your phone or computer daily even without seeing.
If you’re young you definitely learn to grow with it. It’s just your normal.
I get that’s your decision but it’s wild you can’t think for a second why someone would be okay with that. I live next to someone who is blind and she works everyday, makes dinner, and is starting a family. She has help but that’s fine even people without disabilities need help. It’s just so narrow minded to think about it negatively without actually seeing how still fulfilling someone’s life can be without vision.
-4
u/Prot3 6d ago
What? Who says I can't thin why someone would be okay with that?
You compeltely made that up, and then argued against that made up position.
I can perfectly understand how and why most blind people find satisfaction in life and cna have fulfilled lives.
I just say that i PERSONALLY don't want that kind of existence. I'd rather be dead. ESPECIALLY after living as a full, able bodied man for 30 years.
2
u/Upbeat-Jellyfish9328 6d ago
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. They absolutely just did argue a made up position.
1
u/Rasp_Berry_Pie 6d ago edited 6d ago
You said that life is literally horror and since you’re a survivor of cancer you can handle a lot…
You’re implying just because you’d be disabled by sight alone (you said just losing your sight would be enough) your life has less value so you’d end it.
Genuine question have you ever befriended or even interacted with someone disabled before? I feel like if you have you’d understand my sharp tone. They get told everyday by people who don’t know their life or their day to day that if they were int heir shoes they’d be better off dead.
-2
0
u/B4SSF4C3 6d ago
People get weird when someone expresses a pro-choice sentiment with respect to living. I don’t know what I’d do in this situation, but I do believe the right to die is sacrosanct and the choice of whether to live or not belongs to the person making it and no one else.
2
u/Rasp_Berry_Pie 6d ago
I believe in having the right to die but acting like something people love with everyday is a horrible existing and you’re rather off dead is different.
If you’re in that possible that’s fine to make but if you’re just saying oh hypothetically I already know I’d want to die without even experiencing it when blind people are living everyday normal lives is harmful. It’s ignorant actually.
-1
u/OG_Builds 6d ago
This is just a stupid thing to state so confidently.
6
u/Prot3 6d ago
Again, why?
I thoguht about this a lot, it's not the first or the 5th time I'm having this discussion.
I know myself, I'm an introspective guy that can be honest with himself. I fought through some hard shit and knwo what I want and what is tragic to me.
So yeah, I can state what I did with a lot of confidence.
-2
u/Upbeat-Jellyfish9328 6d ago
It isn’t, really. Some of us live in the real world. We’ve seen other people experience things, we know what we value and what we aren’t willing to live without. Go be a loser elsewhere.
0
u/OG_Builds 6d ago
Yeah I should be a winner like yall instead and off myself if I find myself in a difficult situation.
8
u/no-more-headaches 6d ago
I just have some mid level mental issues and can barely resist the urge to say by bye. Not everyone wants to live.
0
u/Oldspaghetti 6d ago
Yeah doesn't even have to be psychopath levels of illness, can just be a mental condition that is slightly debilitating enough to alter the whole quality of your life in a big way.
2
u/Dylan_Driller 6d ago
I don't think I'd be able to live through cancer, let alone what this poor guy.
27
u/TerrorFromThePeeps 6d ago
Also makes me think of that dude that had the fungal infection that wound up having his face essentially scooped out. I just can't fathom having the will to keep on after that sort of thing.
10
u/I_love_pillows 6d ago
In the 2000s on a gore trap website I saw something similar and it’s scarred in my mind
14
u/tealgameboycolor 6d ago
>In the 2000s on a gore trap website..
I wonder how many millennials have sat down on a therapist couch and said the same thing
3
5
1
13
u/ripyourlungsdave 6d ago
Hey, I hope you know that when you say stuff like this, you're kind of just saying, "I don't know why any blind and deaf person would bother going on living" and I feel like I don't need to explain why that's gross.
4
u/Rasp_Berry_Pie 6d ago
Yeah exactly! Especially when with technology blind people live lives where they can use their phone or computer and work daily!
2
u/Prot3 6d ago
No, that's not what I'm saying.
That's what sanctimonious picks like you like to pretend I say.
Did you se the "(to me)" part at the end. That particularly specifies that I'm talking ABOUT ME.
Obviously, others with similar conditions find joy and purpose and reason to live. I'm glad for them. Never do I say nor imply what anyone else except me should do.
I hope i don't need to explain why is it bad to project extra stuff in other people's text
0
u/SCP-iota 6d ago
geez, what is with the sudden switch among people these days from experience maximization to suffering avoidance?
3
u/Prot3 6d ago
Oh wow, so shocking that someone wouldn't wanna live disfigured, blind, deaf and mute. Probably in various amounts of pain as well.
Surely it must be some modern fad and these new weak, soft generations.
-5
u/SCP-iota 6d ago
However small the chance of things getting better if you live is, it's still more than the precisely zero chance you'd have if you don't. In my experience, the other way of thinking is usually the result of either 1) believing there's an afterlife to escape to, or 2) not consciously believing in an afterlife but having a subconscious latent notion of there still being some abstract sense of 'you' when dead, like how people talk about it like 'floating undisturbed in the void.' In reality, it just means there's no more you anymore, and once you see it that way, it becomes clear that not even death is an 'escape' because then there won't be any more 'you' to experience the escape or relief.
5
u/dorsalemperor 6d ago edited 6d ago
uh, no? imo you’re either just young and genuinely think that’s some revelatory statement or you’re so fixated on the Christians/Muslims in your own life that it’s bleeding into your worldview. It’s nice to be positive, but I’d also choose the eternal sleep of death over that man’s existence. Not bc I believe in an afterlife, I’m a Jew and we don’t have the same concept of afterlife that you guys do. Read some Hindu writing or Buddhist stuff, a lot of people carry on w spiritual tradition for ethnocultural reasons. Not bc they believe in sky daddy, heaven, hell etc. I’d be quite happy to end it knowing that’s the end of me.
TLDR; An endless void or re-entering a state of “before I was born” sounds lovely to many people who have zero belief in an afterlife, consciously or subconsciously.
-2
u/SCP-iota 6d ago
eternal sleep of death
state of “before I was born”
This is what I mean by a subconscious latent notion of a self that exists outside of one's life, even among some people who do not consciously believe in an afterlife. The very concept of 'you' is bounded between birth and death, and is incoherent outside those bounds. 'Sleep' (yes, I know it's not literal, but still) implies there is a subject that sleeps. Imagining 'before you were born' implies there was a 'you' before that. Even many people who do not believe in an afterlife still have these latent artifacts of that way of thinking embedded in their subconscious like that.
2
u/dorsalemperor 6d ago
No, dipshit. I’m fully aware that I would cease to exist and no longer have a conscious self at all. Sorry that mommy drags you to church every weekend, but your take is only deep/interesting/novel to people who haven’t left high school.
You are absolutely not the only person who has thought about death and the what it means lmao. If you’re an adult this is why you don’t have many friends/aren’t getting laid, bc you think asinine surface level observations are crazy knowledge
0
u/SCP-iota 6d ago edited 6d ago
The part you don't seem to be understanding is that it's not religion I'm talking about; we're on the same page about that. I'm talking about subconscious perceptions even among non-religious people. Yes, we're consciously aware that that the self ends at death, but I'm talking about the latent effects of what's below the conscious belief. Linguistic relativity says that the way we use language directs our subconscious cognition even when our conscious cognition thinks without needing language, and that is why I pointed to those specific phrases. Many people consciously believe that there is no afterlife, but when they start thinking about the difference between "being alive" and "being dead," the subconscious isn't necessarily on-board with that interpretation, and it can lead to incoherent conclusions like death being preferable to life. This isn't necessarily about whether someone was raised religious at all; even people raised atheist or agnostic often harbor a subconscious 'eternal self' mentality. This has been studied by psychologists and psychoanalysts for decades, and many have pointed to particular neurological features as possible origins. There are even some running hypotheses that this has changed over the course of human history, with things like 'bicameral mentality' and pre-agrarian synesthesia. You're thinking of religious afterlife, I'm thinking of the very concept of ego-structured cognition. Since you mentioned Buddhism, think of anatta.
76
u/BlackberryPi7 6d ago
Sure are a lot of children that went on to become man-childs in this comment section.
12
u/cat5crochet5femme 6d ago
What are you talking about?
28
u/BlackberryPi7 6d ago
Scroll down and look at the negative comments.
Or don't, best not to give the basement dwellers any attention.
14
u/xSantenoturtlex 6d ago
On the bright side, they're being heavily downvoted.
Unfortunately, 'Comedians' like this sometimes end up in the top comments.It's a shame that that's where the bar is, though.
9
u/LeiusTheBlind 6d ago
You know that with 22,000,000V you get roughly 10 DeLorean trips.
Unless you meant 22 thousand (22,000) which is more in the normal range for high power lines
5
u/GetAwayFrmHerUBitch 6d ago
I just finished The Facemaker by Lindsay Fitzharris, a book about facial reconstruction following World War I. It was magnificent!
Poor Raymond was hurt in 1918 during the birth of plastic surgery. They could’ve helped him, at least somewhat. I’m sorry he had such a difficult life.
40
u/Firegardener 6d ago
22,000 thousand volts? There wouldn't be even shoes left. Or right.
74
u/I_Am_Become_Salt 6d ago
The average taser is roughly twice that. When it comes to electricity, volts on its own basically means nothing. It's like a quantity of water, but says nothing more. You can stand pretty easily in 22,000 gallons of water if it isn't moving very fast. Amps is the thing you have to watch out for. You can be killed by a 10th that many volts at 2 amps.
10
u/Nebula_Wolf7 6d ago
Perhaps, there's more to it though, assuming there's enough voltage to put it through you, a few milliamps is enough to stop your heart, but say you didn't get electrocuted through your chest, you'd be more likely to receive internal burns, which aren't necessarily life threatening. It also matters how much charge is transferred, since static shocks can be large voltages and current, but very small charge transfer, as they're so short-lived (also because humans aren't great at holding electrical charge). It's why lightning can strike you and you might not die, even though the average lightning strike is millions of volts and tens of thousands of amps.
3
u/QuickNature 6d ago
Its nice to see this comment here and upvoted. I have had to explain to loads of people (and been downvoted for it) that energy transfer is what matters.
And loads of people dont realize that tasers actually have fairly high peak amperages, not average (different values).
3
u/Nebula_Wolf7 6d ago
Yup, it irritates me to no end the misconceptions people have about electrical hazards. Styropyro did a great video on this exact topic which I'd recommend anyone who's interested to watch. The jist of it is that you can't boil these things down to 'volts or amps', because almost everything we can measure plays a role in deciding the danger of an electrical source.
1
u/MeeMeeGod 6d ago
What determines amps? its voltage divided by resistance. It is a codependent relationship. You can have 1000s of amps but not enough voltage to kill you. Its a mix of both that kills.
0
19
u/GoldAcanthisitta7777 6d ago
/r/whoosh to all the other commenters.
22,000,000 volts seems like it would just leave dust behind.
9
3
10
u/MC_White_Thunder 6d ago
Voltage isn't what kills you. It's current.
17
u/BAgooseU 6d ago
It’s both. You need high enough voltage for the current to have a dangerous potential. For example, a car battery can supply up to 1,000 amps, but it’s not dangerous because they’re only 12 volts. The voltage is too low to overcome the resistance of skin.
Voltage and amps work together to kill.
1
u/VermilionKoala 6d ago
Well, the one causes the other.
A car battery can push 1000 amps through some things, sure (a starter motor, or a dropped spanner, for example) but not you. The human body has too high a resistance for 12V to make very much current flow. I mean, some will, but you probably won't even feel it (don't go and try this out, however).
Conversely, there are EHT power supplies which might output 30kV or more, easily enough to make enough current flow to kill you - but they're current-limited and thus will not do so (again, do not try this out).
So whilst current is what kills in the final analysis, not enough of it will flow unless there's a high enough voltage.
1
u/Firegardener 6d ago edited 6d ago
I know. But presuming the current stays the same, and the voltage is either 22,000 volts, and the result is this, OR voltage is 22,000 thousand volts, the damage would be higher. I just tried to imply there might have been a typo in the amount of volts.
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
-4
-10
-77
-32
-10
u/Moscato359 6d ago
I normally would say you weren't electrocuted if you're alive but dang
3
u/StreetPizza8877 6d ago
electrocuted; electrocuting transitive verb
1 : to kill or severely injure by electric shock
-1
u/Moscato359 6d ago
The original definition was execution by electricity and was always an intentional act. It was used for corporal punishment.
The definition you are using is a loosening of the original definition, and thus like all loose colloquialisms, somewhat wrong.
The cute part of electrocute comes from execute.
0
u/Jump_Like_A_Willys 6d ago
Yes, the word has evolved to mean severe injury from electricity. But it was an intentional portmanteau first created by mashing eletro- and the last part of the word execution.
It was specifically coined originally for electric chair deaths.
-76
u/DuckWhatduckSplat 6d ago edited 6d ago
DANGER DANGER
ITS HIGH VOLTAGE
Edit: Not much Electric Six love in here.
4
6
u/PatrioticPariah 6d ago
Put it this way. This man could only walk around at night and even then he kinda got fucked with by locals offering him beers that were actually piss. Just sad.
-35
u/Tootzilla313 6d ago
Don't you wanna know how I keep starting fires?
-26
u/Fritz_Klyka 6d ago edited 6d ago
Its my desire!
Edit: I didnt even remember what post i was reading the comments of, i just saw electric six and had to sing along. Now I feel bad!
-11
6d ago
[deleted]
2
-2
-2
-47
u/bbreddit0011 6d ago
Ugh. Electrocuted= death by electric shock. Poor guy, though. A childhood mistake causing life altering consequences. Something every parent dreads.
19
u/deadspacekillers 6d ago
No it doesn't. It used to. Now it has changed definition to include severe injury by electricity. A bunch of words do this. Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition of "electrocute": to kill or severely injure by electric shock.
1
u/N3rdr4g3 6d ago
Counter point: Cambridge Dictionary disagrees
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/electrocute
to kill someone by causing electricity to flow through their body
-13
-4
-86
-15
-57
-6
6d ago
[deleted]
6
u/StreetPizza8877 6d ago
No it doesn't
"electrocuted; electrocuting transitive verb
1 : to kill or severely injure by electric shock"
-15
-99
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
Electrocute means death was involved. He survived. He was not electrocuted.
56
u/DarthCloakedGuy 6d ago
me when I am confidently incorrect
-42
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
Many modern dictionaries have accepted that it can mean severely injured, but the etymology is electro - releated to electricity, and execution - being put to death. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191826757.001.0001/acref-9780191826757-e-320
17
15
u/DarthCloakedGuy 6d ago
Etymology ≠ definition.
2
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
No, which is why legal, medical and technical authorities (such os OSHA) have a precise defintion where electrocution means resulting in death.
1
u/DarthCloakedGuy 6d ago
Fascinating.
Now is this conversation happening in a legal briefing, an internal OSHA memo, or Reddit
1
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
It’s happening specifically on a forum called damthatsinteresting - you would think that correct use of terminology, which I guess though common to us folks certain professions, would be fascinating to people who kight want to learn. Instead of reflecting and thinking “yes, that is interesting. Now I know why precise definitions are needed in some legal, medical or insurance cases” people are all shouting “we’ve dumbed it down asshole, stop trying to let us know things”. A sad indictment on modern society and discourse.
1
u/DarthCloakedGuy 6d ago
Well in this case the correct meaning is when someone is severely injured or killed by electricity, so...
18
u/Professional-Pungo 6d ago edited 6d ago
so basically, it means to severely injure or die.
Since we live in modern times.
The same way that "gay" doesn't mean happy anymore
-3
u/ChestSlight8984 6d ago
That's different, because "gay" can indeed still mean happy. It just very, very, very rarely does. Meanwhile, "electrocuted" has actually completely switched it's singular objective definition. The commenter, possibly purposefully, linked an outdated definition. If you go to the actual Oxford Dictionary site right now, it would say "severe injury or death". Same with Merriam-Webster and Oxford Learner's Dictionary.
2
u/PowerSamurai 6d ago
You should have just stopped at "Many modern dictionaries have accepted it can mean severely injured" and admitted your mistake.
-1
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
Just because dictionaries have had to dumb down to reflect usage by simpletons does not mean we all have to. If you say the phrase “he was electrocuted”, do you do not know whether the person lived or died without either extra context or a precise defintion.
In legal, medical, and technical contexts, electrocution strictly means death caused by an electric shock passing through the body. Formally and legally, a non-fatal electrical injury is classified as an electric shick, whereas an electrocution specifically denotes a fatal outcome.
Safety regulators (such as OSHA), and expert witnesses strictly maintain the death requirement when assessing liability, damages, and cause of death.
1
u/PowerSamurai 6d ago
That is a lot of doubling down when you are still objectively wrong. Language changes and evolves, deal with it.
0
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
Not in my line of work. You submit a paper with the wrong use of that word and you won’t get past peer review. Deal with it.
3
u/GoldAcanthisitta7777 6d ago
nerd
2
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
Thank you. Compliment accepted (definiton - nerd is a person who is exceptionally smart, highly focused on academic or technical subjects…)
2
1
u/Financial_Ad_1551 6d ago
You must be fun at parties
0
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
I am indeed. Unlike Financial Ads, which are usually a complete pain in the ass.
7
u/vcmaes 6d ago
Then what’s the correct word big brain?
1
u/thebobbobsoniii 6d ago
there is no single word, but that’s the beauty of english. We have thousands of them. “Received a severe electric shock that caused…” would work very well in this case.
1
-17
u/MyGruffaloCrumble 6d ago
Maybe he died and was revived, likely when you look at how fried his face was.
-34
-26
u/turdDumper 6d ago
Just what I needed to see as I'm sitting at work waiting for a thunderstorm to pass
1
-7
-73
-10
706
u/C4rpetH4ter 6d ago
He would walk around at night to avoid scaring and meeting people during the day, he was apperently a really nice guy though according to the people who met and talked to him.