TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

"Men still represent four out of five suicides, but this is a major increase in women taking their own lives that needs urgent attention"

actingverystrangely

May 31, 2015
437 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/everyone-knew-but-no-one-did-anything-suicide-now-the-biggest-killer-of-teenage-girls/story-fniym874-1227376958477
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title "Men still represent four out of five suicides, but this is a major increase in women taking their own lives that needs urgent attention"
Author

actingverystrangely

Upvotes 437
Comments 101
Date May 31, 2015 8:22 AM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/37xu5p/men_still_represent_four_out_of_five_suicides_but/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/men-still-represent-four-out-of-five-suicides-but.978856
https://theredarchive.com/post/978856
Top posts by actingverystrangely

Man posts one star Google review of feminist-run cafe that charges men 18% 'man tax' premium.

1617 upvotes
June 13, 2018
/r/MensRights

A rare victory; Australian charity bows to public pressure and does not proceed with event featuring Clementine Ford

979 upvotes
May 14, 2018
/r/MensRights

Gillette handles sold at half price in a supermarket in Australia

478 upvotes
February 4, 2019
/r/MensRights

Analysis of a tantrum: Serena Williams

124 upvotes
September 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Photographs from today's March for Men in Melbourne

116 upvotes
August 25, 2018
/r/MensRights

False rape allegation? Well, err, state broadcaster doesn't actually use those terms, but...

115 upvotes
September 16, 2015
/r/MensRights

Intergenerational equity; "because women didn't have the vote for x years, men today should be punished". Straw man, fair, or bonkers?

81 upvotes
February 17, 2019
/r/MensRights

Feminist group claims "false cases of rape" (sic) are "as little as" five in a thousand cases.

73 upvotes
May 9, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]actingverystrangely[S] 78 points79 points80 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes, the article really does say this.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's mind blowing, makes you feel like you're living on mars.

[–]disposable-name 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, we're living on Venus.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

icwudt breh

[–]ARedthorn 133 points134 points135 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

TL/DR: increasing social pressure, to conform or excel, has driven women from representing 18% of all suicides to a staggering nearly 20% of all suicides. This increase happened rapidly, over the course of several years, and clearly points to a world rapidly becoming more hostile to women, and we need to do something about it before any more women die.

I like how they complain about how suicide is now ahead of maternal fatality as a cause of death for women worldwide. That's not because more women are killing themselves, darling- it's because fewer women are dying in childbirth than ever before, because they're getting better care worldwide. Complaining about this would be like complaining that curing cancer will make heart disease #1.

[–]bertreapot 72 points73 points74 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

this is hillarious, and goes to show just how unconcerned women are with men's issues.

"women represent 1/5 of suicides. this is a huge problem...for women."

yet they claim feminism covers men's issues, too.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 28 points29 points30 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I've seen similar claims for homelessness and prison populations.

[–]plainwalk 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And workplace deaths. A decade ago, there was a huge news blitz about how terrible it was that there had been a huge spike in the number of women being hurt or killed in the workplace from accidents in BC. They now accounted for 10% of all workplace accidents or deaths!

[–]SweetiePieJonas 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I remember similar articles after the housing crash, when it turned out that the relative increase in female deaths on the job was due to a decrease in male deaths from all the laid off construction workers.

[–]Mitthrawnuruodo1337 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

yet they claim feminism covers men's issues, too.

It does, it covers them up.

[–]garebear3 27 points28 points29 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

reminds me a an anecdote from one of the world wars (its late and i cant remember which). when the military implemented a mandate for helmets for the soldiers. as a result the number of head injuries skyrocketed. they couldnt explain it and seriouly considered removing the mandate, until someone decided to compare the before and after results of head injuries AND fatalities due to head trauma and found that the only reason that the number of head injuries were increasing was that the helmets were doing what they were designed to do: saving peoples lives.

it just goes to show how statistics can be misconstrued if you fail to consider all the information (willfully or not)

[–]letsgofknmental 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

your tl/dr is longer than your original statement...

[–]ARedthorn 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

TL/DR for the article.

Paragraphs 2/3 were my comments.

[–]letsgofknmental 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ohh. yeah i guess i should've read it. but tldr i guess haha. i'll read it now.

[–]Wargame4life 35 points36 points37 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

let me play you the worlds smallest violin.

obviously each individual case is a tragedy regardless of gender, a woman killing herself is just as heartbreakingly sad as a man killing himself, but collectively as a "cause" based on gender it means nothing 1/5 is not more significant than 4/5

[–][deleted] 45 points46 points47 points 11 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

Male disposability defined lol. This reminds me of that Hilary Clinton quote on male death in wars. Pointing out women's suffering when the elephant in the room (men) is totally ignored.

[–]PM_ME_BETA_KEYS 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

What quote is that?

[–]Seebiscuit369 23 points24 points25 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

She said that women are the primary victims of war.

[–]whatyearisthisagain 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

To add, she said the reason is that the women lose their sons and husbands.

The solipsism in that quote is staggering. She literally feel like a woman experiencing loss is a greater tragedy, than a man experiencing death.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcVzfOmt4Tg

Look at all those deaths, and they are all men.

[–]zyk0s 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then we should do something about these female suicides. After all, they're leaving fathers, brothers and boyfriends really, really sad.

[–]SweetiePieJonas 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not only was she ignoring the male soldiers who die, are injured, suffer PTSD, etc., but also the men and boys who lose their fathers, brothers, and sons.

[–]whatyearisthisagain 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

also the men and boys who lose their fathers, brothers, and sons.

So true. It really underscores how little she thinks of men's emotions, and expect them to simply brush that off.

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

"Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children."

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a silly cunt.

[–]chinawinsworlds 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

"more frequently in today's warfare"

What the FUCK does she know what war in the past? I'll tell you right away, obviously NOTHING. Women were treated 100 times worse in times of war a 1000 years ago.

[–]IgnatiusBSamson -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

WWII and Vietnam beg to differ.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]IgnatiusBSamson -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Cool story brah, but that is an overgeneralization that does not address the particulars of history. For example: the weaponization of rape in WWII by the Soviets (fall of Berlin); Japanese (Rape of Nanking); and in Vietnam by U.S. soldiers (Tet Offensive).

Learn your history, you fucking idiot.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]IgnatiusBSamson 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

war never changes

Let's avoid quoting Fallout to try and legitimate our arguments. (Moron.)

There was never a war where innocents didn't get caught in crossfire.

Avoiding my point...

There was never a war where someone didn't rape or get raped.

Still avoiding my point...

war is hell.

Oh good, you've moved from Ron Perlman to Sherman. That's an upgrade I suppose.

That's what I know from my history books.

Oh I get it, you're 19.

Here is the evidence I am talking about, you sweet summer child: -Nanking

-Berlin

As you will see, WWII was a watershed moment in both the scale and methods of warmaking, which has never been seen before or since - hence refuting the OP's comment that war in the 20th century has gotten "less bad" for women. (It hasn't gotten better for men either, but that's not the point I was disputing.)

If all your history textbooks have taught you is that "war is bad, mmmkay?" then you haven't learned anything.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

There was a post on this sub a long time ago where the author of the article was expressing concern that the lifespan gap was closing. That is, the difference in lifespan between men and women is becoming smaller. Apparently, she considered it a problem that women aren't living that much longer than men as before. It's another example of how self-serving and narcissistic feminism really is.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (23 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] -17 points-16 points-15 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Men have been representing the highest demographic of suicides for a long time

True

now that female suicide has rised a tiny bit it's a big problem

Also true

This is fucking insane.

What?

[–]Penuno 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not sure what you're on about. The article indicates it only requires "urgent attention" when it happens with women. That's insane. Or merely bigoted and insensitive if you will.

[+][deleted] -14 points-13 points-12 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The article indicates it only requires "urgent attention" when it happens with women.

Where are you getting that?

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because here's a 60 minute video in which the media discusses men's suicide rates: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9c_KttvQPU

[–]Penuno 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Duh. It says it explicitly in the frickin article.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It says that it requires urgent attention when it happens with women.

It doesn't say that it only requires urgent attention when it happens with women.

One is sensible and the other is sexist.

[–]Penuno 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Doh. Then why had this particular writer never before mentioned that it required urgent attention? Pretty simple, for this particular writer (and obviously many others) it only requires urgent attention when it happens to women. Otherwise they would have already made an appeal for attention. And yet they did not.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Gonna be honest. This is my last favorite argumentative tactic. Taking quotes and acting like you can't understand so you force the other person to clarify into an easier argument to refute. It's lazy because literally all you added to the discussion was "what?"

[+][deleted] -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Ok, then I'll explain why I picked those quotes out.

The person I replied to seems to be implying that there is some kind of incompatibility between the facts, or that one of them is untrue. I was simply separating the two facts and showing that they could both be true.

[–]jimmywiddle 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

except all you achieved was make yourself look obtuse.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Because I really care how I made myself look

On reddit

[–]jimmywiddle 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Clearly you don't thats why you seem to spend your time trolling everyone.

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

I'm not trolling. I genuinely believe that a sudden rise in suicide rates in a particular demographic is a serious problem for that demographic, regardless of whether the rates are higher elsewhere. Nobody is saying that other suicide rates are not an issue, they're just saying that this is an issue that ought to get some attention, and it is.

Lets take an analogy. If there was a rise in the crime rate in my little English village, we wouldn't just ignore it because the crime rate was nothing compared to that of Mexico City. We would investigate and attempt to solve the issue.

Similarly, if there was a rise in the suicide rate in women, we shouldn't just ignore it because the suicide rate is still nothing compared to that of Men. We should investigate and attempt to solve the issue.

As a man who has survived a suicide attempt I take this pretty seriously.

[–]jimmywiddle 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Similarly, if there was a rise in the suicide rate in women, we shouldn't just ignore it because the suicide rate is still nothing compared to that of Men. We should investigate and attempt to solve the issue.

Don't agree at all.

I am all for when discussing issues that affect both genders we shouldn't just try and fix it for the gender that has the higher percentage. Unfortunately not everyone plays by that rule which is why feminists repeatedly break it with all of their issues they focus on.

Thats why FGM is banned and MGM is still legal. Its why we have over 4500 shelters for female domestic violence victims and about 17 in the UK for men. And it affects many other issues as well....

However you are trying to state that regardless of the overwhelming majority of support, that women's problems get over mens, regardless of how much more government financial support women's issues get, regardless of the hundreds of independent trusts located all over the country to support only women's issues, regardless of the national campaigns and the sheer number of female orientated charities and support groups.

Regardless of all of that you are suggesting we should then (even in the areas where men are by far and away the major suffers such as suicide) who and have never really received any help what so ever, in your view should be sidelined and women should have an equal share of the focus, even when men have been screwed over in every other area.

I'm sorry buddy but fuck off.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm really sorry but I can't understand what you're saying here:

However you are trying to state that regardless of the overwhelming majority of support that women's problems get over mens, in terms of government financial support, in retards to trusts that are setup to fund and support them and by national campaigns and the sheer number of female orientated charities and support groups.

What am I trying to state? It seems like you were about to tell me what I was trying to state, and then as a small note mentioned that I held this view regardless of some support, and then you repeatedly told me the terms by which you define that support. Did you ever tell me what it was you think I'm trying to say?

Or here:

You are suggesting we should then (even in the areas where men are by far and away the major suffers) who and have never really received any help what so ever, in your view should be sidelined and women should have an equal share of the focus, even when men have been screwed over in every other area.

The grammar just isn't quite right. I'm no grammar nazi, but I absolutely cannot understand you.

I think that in this bit "in your view should be sidelined and women should have an equal share of the focus" you're telling me that I think women's and men's suicide rates deserve an equal amount of focus.

I don't think that. All I'm saying is an unexpected rise in a trend deserves to be looked into. I don't think anyone should be sidelined.

Also, is this really necessary? "I'm sorry buddy but fuck off."

I've only been polite with you. Lets have a discussion. I'm open to having my mind changed.

[–]Wordshark 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Lets take an analogy. If there was a rise in the crime rate in my little English village, we wouldn't just ignore it because the crime rate was nothing compared to that of Mexico City. We would investigate and attempt to solve the issue.

No, we're talking about two demographics in the same region; this isn't comparable to a "people are dying in Africa" argument. It's more like if the black part of town had been crime-ridden for years, and then a couple houses in the white side of town got robbed, and the local paper wrote an alarmed article about that.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There would be nothing wrong with that. If you lived in a part of town that usually had low crime rates, and then they unexpectedly started to rise, you would want your local paper to tell you about is. In doing so, they aren't telling you to ignore anything else.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Female suicide going up is a female problem.

That doesn't contradict anything about most suicides being male.

[–]K-Li 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem here is that the article uses the relative rate rather than the per capita rate. For example, consider 1000 men and 1000 women, observed over a lifetime. If 20 women and 80 men kill themselves from this group, then 20% of the suicides are female, and 80% are male. Then run the experiment again with a new population. Psychological science has advanced, and so this time, 19 women kill themselves, and 57 men kill themselves, then 25% of the suicides are female and 75% are male. Even though the actual numbers of women committing suicide had decreased, the author's article would describe this as an increase in the rate of women killing themselves, when the real change is that fewer men and fewer women died.

[–]Remerez 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

WISDOM!!!! The world is not getting worse, just the numbers.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]kragshot 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Loved that link, man.

One spelling nitpick...the word is "heretic" not "heratic."

But I'm sure that you were in semi-rant mode when you wrote that above. ;)

[–]jimmywiddle 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That forum appears to be full of retards... Thats why they don't want to question the narrative, because they lack the intellectual capacity to do so.

[–]germaneuser 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

AT Hayley Purdon’s high school, to her it appeared almost every girl was engaged in some form of self-harm or battling low self-esteem. “Everyone knew, but we didn’t know what to do,” she said.

This makes me really wonder. If "Everyone knew" and "it appeared almost every girl was engaged in some form of self-harm" what does that say about society's observations concerning men and young boys considering that 4-5 times the number of boys are killing themselves? The empathy gap and the disposable male rolled into one :(

[–]cardinal_cs 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Until almost all the low hanging fruit is tackled the gender gap in terms of lifespan will continue to decrease. For years men haven't done that well taking care of their health (for personal reasons, societal reasons, the fact that they don't get educated about their health, take big risks sometimes), but a lot of what has reduced the gap are things that public health, worker safety and consumer advocates have helped address. The truth is that a ton of men used to die at work, a ton of men died from smoking, or not going to the doctor, or from car crashes. Boys used to die at much higher rates, people make light of that, they didn't grow up with seatbelts, and they're fine, yeah, they are the 99%, I would never talk to the parents of the 1% that died from poorly made consumer products with such anecdotes, never.

All these numbers have gone down a lot in the last 4 decades, so the likelyhood of a man surviving into retirement years is much larger today than it used to be, and I find that to be a good thing. People shouldn't die, especially from easily addressed issues. There is still more to be done in those fronts, not to make bubbles around each person to keep them safe, but to address simple things in worker safety, public health, and consumer safety. Until all the easy to address things are done, you will see the gap decrease, it is just the way it is.

Similarly an effective suicide campaign in this country will further decrease the life expectancy gap, and that is a good thing. Never cheer for the death of people, just because those people aren't you, death affects not only the victim, but all those close to them.

Regardless of what anyone thinks, death almost always is the worst outcome for a victim, there is not going back to picking up the pieces and rebuilding from there, it is the end, and there is no going back.

Sorry if this is ranty, I guess I just don't like it when people make light of anyone's death including suicide. I think if one's been on the other side of that, one would not write such a thing as the author did here.

[–]IcarusBurning 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Wouldn't an evening-out of the percentages also cause the percentage of suicides committed by women to jump towards 50?

[–]baskandpurr[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup. If the number of females committing suicide stayed the same and the number of men went down that would cause of concern for the welfare of women. It's almost a joke, if only it was funny.

Hayley thinks girls now face more pressure than ever before.

Although they still kill themselves at only 25% the rate of men. The whole narrative of this is that women are unstable and society should do something to fix them. How would the author like society to rescue them from responsibility for their lives? Is this quietly suggesting they need a male to 'oppress' them by taking all the difficult parts of life away?

[–]InWadeTooDeep 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

An increase could definitely be more pertinent than higher rates, it means something has changed and that means something can probably be done about it.

[–]Niketi 27 points28 points29 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The change perhaps has something to do with more women assuming the traditional roles of men. Increases in "social pressure to conform or excel" sounds familiar. The world isn't becoming more hostile to women. The world has always been hostile, and more women would seem to be sharing the burden.

[–]InWadeTooDeep -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or it could have to do with estrogen pollution, we don't really know.

[–]Ayoc_Maiorce 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

True you do have a good point but we should not neglect the fact that 80% of all suicides are men and that is something to look into. No one seems to be asking the question, "what is causing such a high male suicide rate relative to women?"

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

No one seems to be asking the question, "what is causing such a high male suicide rate relative to women?"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/mens-health/11423068/Why-are-so-many-middle-aged-men-committing-suicide.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32231774

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/15/suicide-silence-depressed-men

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/02/20/suicide-men-305913.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2562871/Men-THREE-times-likely-commit-suicide-women-recession-blame.html

[–]jimmywiddle 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

No one of any importance or note is asking the question. Posting a list of sources which include the Daily Mail and the Guardian do not account for any serious discussion or serious questioning.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

If the Guardian doesn't account for serious discussion then what does? How about the BBC? They've already aired a story on this on the national news in Britain.

[–]jimmywiddle 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

The BBC has also repeatedly taken a pro-feminist stance on a lot of issues, if you ever watch the Big Questions that used to be on, on Sunday mornings they used to regularly take feminists side on that and invite as many on to the show as possible. With the presenter often laying in to men and telling them to man up when they were talking about issues but swooning over anything the token feminist was spouting on about.

The BBC has also deliberately invited crowds to debates that are pro-feminist (through detailed vetting and interviewing) before hand to make sure the feminists within the panel get more support during shows.

The BBC also did a show recently entitled "is Britain Sexist" which again only invited far left feminists to the show and anyone standing up and voicing reason or logic based arguments was mobbed and shouted down.

The BBC has also allowed sexual assault against male characters to be shown on its TV programs in a comedic fashion where as it shows female sexual assault very carefully with warnings and announcements.

So no I don't think the BBC is impartial or a reasonable source. If anything I would say they are quite openly biased.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Regardless of bias, doesn't a story getting nationally aired on the most watched news station in the country qualify as someone of importance asking the question, "what is causing such a high male suicide rate relative to women?"

If not, then what does?

[–]kragshot 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I think I understand where you are coming from. You are wondering why we are alarmed about the tone of this article when it is evident that suicide is a valid problem for both men and women, right? You are not getting why most of the men here are feeling insulted and disgusted about the tone of this particular article, right?

The problem that everyone here is trying to express is that women's suicide has always been an issue while men's suicide has either been ignored or only brought up as a problem that inconveniences women.

Read these articles about the controversy surrounding the suicide of Thomas James Ball to see how the suicide of a mentally ill man is described as "a weapon to hurt their victims.

http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/06/27/amanda-marcotte-on-the-thomas-ball-suicide-and-mra-haters/

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/a-war-on-women

http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-has-wikipedia-removed-thomas-ball.html

That string of articles you posted above are valid discussions...but here's the catch...none of them are more than a year old. The issue of male suicide has been a problem for far, far, more than that. It has only been because of MRM activity that the mainstream has even decided to look at the problem.

The popularly voiced solution to male suicide previously to our voicing concern about it has simply been to "man up."

The very title of this posted discussion comes directly from the article. It is blatantly asking the readers to dismiss the obvious larger numbers of male suicides in favor of doing something about the "now increased" number of female suicides.

That is what it appears to everyone else here is that you are arguing in favor of with what you are writing...and that flies in the face of any discussion of gender equity.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Thanks a lot for your comment. I guess the difference is this one sentence here:

It is blatantly asking the readers to dismiss the obvious larger numbers of male suicides in favor of doing something about the "now increased" number of female suicides.

I don't see it like that. I don't think anything has to be dismissed when we look into the increase in female suicides.

[–]kragshot 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's a matter of perception, I would gather.

But regardless of the fact; such a statement is very insensitive to people who have had to deal with male suicide (surviving victims and families of same).

[–]jimmywiddle 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, having a programme aired on a news channel does not represent anyone is listening at all.

Having the issue recognised by the government and having funding and a campaign setup to start tackling the issues is a starting point.

A news channel airing a small programme does not mean very much when we have at least 50 news channels out there and half of them are dishonest and pander heavily to one political party or another or clearly have one agenda or another.

Like kragshot says, we have been trying to raise the profile of this issue for a long time.

To then have someone swan in and claim we should all drop everything and run and help female suicide victims when men have been ignored for so long is ridiculous.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

To then have someone swan in and claim we should all drop everything

Who is saying that? Paying attention to something doesn't mean ignoring male suicides.

By this logic, any news story about anything that isn't male suicide is someone telling us to ignore male suicides in favour of another issue.

There is an issue with pandas going extinct. Paying attention to that does not mean ignoring male suicides.

There is an issue with government spying. Paying attention to that does not mean ignoring male suicides.

There is a rise in female suicides. Paying attention to that does not mean ignoring male suicides.

[–]jimmywiddle 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Jesus you must be new to this topic.

Mens Rights Advocates mainly focus on the areas where men are the most disadvantaged prioritising mens suffering in those areas to raise awareness for men to solve those problems for men because the government is failing to do anything about it.

Every other issue where men are not significantly disadvantaged (where its a 50/50 split and resources have been applied equally) then we tend to look at these issues in a "lets make it better for everyone" approach.

However you have picked a subject of suicide rates, where men are significantly more disadvantaged and then you have claimed that we should all be "paying attention to female suicide rates".

In a nutshell you are clearly in the wrong place if you think that, mens rights activists are going to "pay attention to female suicide rates" as you put it when men's rates are 5x as high and until recently have received virtually no awareness at all. Even now feminists are trying to railroad the subject by claiming that its actually women who have it worse and therefore it should be women that are focused on instead of men.

So if you want to go pay attention to female suicide rates, I am sure they would welcome you over at the /r/feminism where you can all "pay attention" together.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It has commonly been expressed in Men's Rights groups that if women killed themselves at the same rate as men, the media would be up in arms about it and people would call for solutions. Now you see how right you were.

[–]PJteleman 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Did I miss something? Four out of five suicides are men, and your alarm only goes off at the thought of an increase in FEMALE suicides? Are men just a disposable commodity to you? 80 out of 100 suicides are men and that alone does not set off an alarm for you? I'm curious, do you have any feelings about the 80 men that feel so hopeless and lost and trapped and so beaten down that they would take their own lives? I would have been much less offended had you stated or at least acknowledged the tragedy of the loss of so many to hopelessness, but your alarm is at the sudden rise in women's numbers. Please explain before I write you off as just another heartless man-hating bitch.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

News about women's suicides shouldn't be silenced or criticized for raising awareness about suicide. It should be criticized for not focusing on the larger problem.

[–]iNQpsMMlzAR9 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It should be criticized for not focusing on the larger problem.

Which is what's happening here.

[–]Deefry 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Snapshot

Sorry for the mobile link, I'm on the move.

[–]Cannon0006 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ಠ_ಠ

[–]Ithinknotttt 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dat narrative.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Could honestly give a hoot about any women's issue until Men's issues are at least taken seriously by the government and by extension the media. So keep Manning Up ladies and get the job done on the first try.

[–]mattatinternet 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

One does not negate the other.

We need to identify the factors that lead to suicide or attempted suicide in both men and women. We need to identify which factors overlap (i.e. affect both men and women) and which factors are unique to each gender, and then tailor prevention schemes to address the issues: one to support both men and women; one to support men through hardships unique to them; and one to support women through hardships unique to them. The former should work in conjunction with each of the latter.

Although the number of men committing or attempting to commit suicide far exceeds the number of women, that does not mean that urgent action is not required to help the increasing number of women driven to suicide. Nor does it mean that resources should be shifted shifted from male suicide prevention schemes to female suicide prevention schemes. Rather what this report suggests is that more resources should be provided to both a broad scheme to prevent suicide in general and more narrowly focused schemes to address both genders equally.

[–]jimmywiddle 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You mean like how that worked for domestic violence support ? Where based on the 50/50 split between male and female victims we now have 4500 shelters in the UK along with support services dedicated to women and oh yeah 17 dedicated to men.....

Yeah the "both" option you highlight worked out well for that one didn't it.

Or we could look at education where they cocked up a perfectly good system and tried to make it good for "both" and now we have a system that disadvantages boys who are falling behind in a lot of key subjects and dropping out of schools at an alarming rate.

Obviously we should aim to ultimately have it work for "both" but sometimes getting it right for the most suffering initially should be the priority.

[–]mattatinternet 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm simply pointing out what should happen, not what will happen.

[–]iNQpsMMlzAR9 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

One does not negate the other.

Who said it did?

[–]BruceCampbell123 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hayley believes there’s increasing pressure on girls to conform

That is so vague. Conform to what? There's dozens of social clicks in every high school around the world. Which one are we talking about? Which ones are the "bad" ones? What's so bad about conforming?

[–]Erociter 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure some feminists would think that increasing resources and attention to women's suicide rates, even as low as they are compared to that of men, will somehow benefit men in some way.

Feminism is a believer of the "Trickle Down" effect for helping men.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Giving Support to young girls takes nothing away from men. You've picked one line out of the article that makes it seem like it's anti-men when in reality it's simply trying to help young women with legitimate problems. This is the same problem we see wiyh so many people trying to shut down talks about men's issues by accusing them of misogyny.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I've had about 25 different feminists tell me women kill themselves more because of articles like this.

They even use male numbers to make it seem higher, and avoid admitting men kill themselves more.

You can say it isn't taking anything away, but it really is.

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So this article is bad because some people may misuse it?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes? they are bad she's flat out lying.

[–]wazzup987 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

where is the government aid for young men?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't speak for you but I'm in New Zealand and by far the largest mental health campaign of the last 10 years has been aimed at men.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0rxi-Uaf1w

The guy is John Kirwan. A massively popular rugby player known for being a very hard man during his time.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. It's the same argument women's groups use when female-against-male domestic violence is brought up. It's falsely construed as an attempt to minimize the importance of violence against women. It isn't.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm with you. In this article there is nothing that ostracizes, demonizes, or minimalizes men and mens rights, yet this thread is blowing up like crazy. This article is just about raising awareness to the growing numbers of teenage female suicide. I don't know why this is being construed as an attack on men and mens rights.

[–]letsgofknmental 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

fringe MRAs complain just as much and just as illogically as fringe feminists. the two really should respect each other a lot more than they do considering the fact that they're pretty much fueled by the same amount of butt-hurt bitterness.

[–]Backstrom 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not sure why you were downvoted for this. I thought the same.

[–]letsgofknmental -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

women actually attempt suicide significantly more often than men do. men are just more successful at it because they typically use ballsier (no pun intended) methods.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_suicide

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter