Why Men Kill themselves

[uumlau]

My response was that these things you label as negative are facets of larger things which are good and valuable. That you are so focused on these things in isolation just indicates to me that you've missed that bigger picture.

Connection, vulnerability, expressiveness and any number of archetypically feminine things are valuable enough that its worthwhile to open the door to the things you described. I'm ok with those downsides to have the immense good that they are connected to.

I'd also point out that I wasnt advocating either/or. Masculine and feminine work together to balance each other out, which is why we need to value the role of both. Belligerence, dominance, bloody mindedness and cruelty are just as negative as the traits you've mentioned but are still valued because of their masculine connontation.

Good points overall.

And while it sounds a bit like regarding real life as some sort of role playing game, human traits tend to have both positive qualities and negative qualities. In general, you don't get the good without the bad. Moreover, with self-awareness, the bad turns out not to be all that bad in some respects, and the good isn't always that good/appropriate.

 

[Yama]

No, I'm giving examples of how each person has different needs, in case of men and women they have different roles, different nature, and of course different needs

The different "roles/natures" of men and women are not inherent. They are the result of socialization, differ depending on cultural context, and don't justify gender-based inequalities.



As to the rest of this thread:

Equality doesn't just mean empowering and encouraging women, it also means gender equality for men. Why shouldn't it be okay for me to be a stay at home dad? Why should I be looked down upon or ridiculed if that's what I want to do, just because I'm a guy? Why shouldn't it be okay for a woman to care more about focusing on her career than raising a family? It goes both ways, and it seems to me that many people have a hard time understanding this.

 

[uumlau]

The different "roles/natures" of men and women are not inherent. They are the result of socialization, differ depending on cultural context, and don't justify gender-based inequalities.

So how do you apply this reasoning to trans people? Are they "born differently" and therefore need to be the opposite sex, or are they "socialized" into believing that they ought to be the opposite sex?

As to the rest of this thread:

Equality doesn't just mean empowering and encouraging women, it also means gender equality for men. Why shouldn't it be okay for me to be a stay at home dad? Why should I be looked down upon or ridiculed if that's what I want to do, just because I'm a guy? Why shouldn't it be okay for a woman to care more about focusing on her career than raising a family? It goes both ways, and it seems to me that many people have a hard time understanding this.

Agreed, in general principle. The main problem is that culture doesn't work like that. Even with a culture that says it is OK to be a stay-at-home dad, you have to find an individual who is willing to put you up as a stay-at-home dad. Culturally, that's going to be rather difficult, as such individuals will tend to be rare, at least for the next generation or so.

 

[Yama]

So how do you apply this reasoning to trans people? Are they "born differently" and therefore need to be the opposite sex, or are they "socialized" into believing that they ought to be the opposite sex?

Nice question, as I, myself, am transgender. I don't have the answers to why I feel the way I do. If I did, I'd be a hero. The only thing I can say for sure is that I didn't chose to be this way. If it were a choice, I'd choose not to be trans because it's easier and people don't hate you simply for existing. Id be interested in hearing what others think on this, though.

Agreed, in general principle. The main problem is that culture doesn't work like that. Even with a culture that says it is OK to be a stay-at-home dad, you have to find an individual who is willing to put you up as a stay-at-home dad. Culturally, that's going to be rather difficult, as such individuals will tend to be rare, at least for the next generation or so.

Indeed. And these sorts of changes don't happen overnight. And of course there will always be exceptions.

 

[SD45T-2]

Yes, this is true. Males have a much higher prevalence of completed suicide than females, but the literature indicates that there's no real statistical difference in suicide planning or even attempts between the genders. Interestingly, women supposedly experience depression much more than men of the same age, but I can't help but assume that reporting plays a huge role here. Men are much less likely to report or seek help for mental health issues than women. Anecdotally, I hear a lot more stories about male suicides coming as a total surprise to their friends and family, like the story [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] mentioned about his friend.

Yeah, I agree about depression. I have no idea what things are like in Australia, but in the US the male/female suicide ratio is 3 to 1 and in the UK it's 4 to 1.

In the US there are now more suicides per year than traffic fatalities. But we're not even close to number one in the developed world. South Korea has that dubious honor.

 

[uumlau]

Nice question, as I, myself, am transgender. I don't have the answers to why I feel the way I do. If I did, I'd be a hero. The only thing I can say for sure is that I didn't chose to be this way. If it were a choice, I'd choose not to be trans because it's easier and people don't hate you simply for existing. Id be interested in hearing what others think on this, though.

My answer to the nature vs nurture debate has always been "both". A human being is a complex system. Asserting that all psychological traits are "socialized" is an extremely strong scientific claim, as it would involve actually proving that no psychological traits are innate (or, at least, not generated by socialization). Even narrowing this to the question of gender, it's still an extremely strong assertion to say it's all nurture.

Pseudoscientific polemics notwithstanding, science finds evidence for both nature and nurture, and the question isn't whether it's nature or nurture so much as it is "which traits are nature, which are nurture and which are a mix?" Most brain studies are like this, for example, where scientists discover that things are way more complex than they previously thought. While brains tend to have particular tendencies, the mind turns out to be VERY plastic, or at least way more plastic than we thought. The whole right/left brain thing has been mostly discredited - there or different things on the right and left, but apparently left-handed people have them switched, and various kinds of brain damage or drug use can push things all over the brain map.

So, I would say to you that the same way you feel that you are trans with no explanation (and a socialization explanation seems unlikely), that I feel as a guy that nothing socialized me to like girls and have masculine attitudes. Where I see socialization occurring is with regard to how society (mostly unconsciously) directs those masculine energies (and feminine energies w/r to women and m->f trans). No hard proof, here, of course, but I see these energies as kind of essential to human nature, strongly linked to testosterone levels, and you can't socialize away the energies, but you CAN socialize how those energies are expressed.

 

[geedoenfj]

The different "roles/natures" of men and women are not inherent. They are the result of socialization, differ depending on cultural context, and don't justify gender-based inequalities.

Are you saying that a husband and wife are like a man and his fellow? Men and women have different minds, different psychology, different physiology, different hormones etc. "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" I can give you a very simple and noticeable example of that..
When you observe kids with different genders, you'd definitely see how different they behave and how their interests are dissimilar from one another, and believe me kids are kids they don't buy what culture is telling them to behave, it's what they're naturally programmed to be, and in majority of cultures and historical times there always has been a separate roles for men and women, that's not a coincidence that's nature, why insisting on changing that? Instead of trying to turn men into women and vice versa, let's embrace what we're naturally are, and what makes the opposite sex attracted to us..

Equality doesn't just mean empowering and encouraging women, it also means gender equality for men. Why shouldn't it be okay for me to be a stay at home dad? Why should I be looked down upon or ridiculed if that's what I want to do, just because I'm a guy? Why shouldn't it be okay for a woman to care more about focusing on her career than raising a family? It goes both ways, and it seems to me that many people have a hard time understanding this.

These are their personal choices, but don't expect a guy to be socially accepted by others for this choice, and believe me no man can replace a mother in a kid's life, a man can never be as adequate as a mother in that matter.
And in my opinion if women keep spreading this mentality of not wanting to have a family, that would effect her and the society negatively on the long run, on a personal level because she'd realize how important it was to have a family and someone whom her life is important and valuable to, and on society level because if there's less women likely to have families, then there will be very little number of next generations and societies would substantially become extinct..

 

[Yama]

I'm drunk but I'll try to make my responses coherent

Are you saying that a husband and wife are like a man and his fellow? Men and women have different minds, different psychology, different physiology, different hormones etc. "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" I can give you a very simple and noticeable example of that..
When you observe kids with different genders, you'd definitely see how different they behave and how their interests are dissimilar from one another, and believe me kids are kids they don't buy what culture is telling them to behave, it's what they're naturally programmed to be, and in majority of cultures and historical times there always has been a separate roles for men and women, that's not a coincidence that's nature, why insisting on changing that? Instead of trying to turn men into women and vice versa, let's embrace what we're naturally are, and what makes the opposite sex attracted to us..

I'm saying a husband and wife are equal. No our minds aren't really different. Women and men both have testosterone and estrogen, one just has more than the other, that's the only difference. Most of the differences arise through how we SOCIALIZE men and women to behave. Men are socialized to be tough and not have feelings and women are socialized to be nurturers and emotional and if you don't fit that "role" you're seen as weird. I literally saw a "men's" deodorant at the store that said "Men don't go to the doctor unless something breaks." That's socialization right there. Society literally teaching men that it's not okay to ask for help when they need it. To care about their health. Because that's "girly." Kids don't "buy" or not buy consciously, that's the point of socialization.

Why shouldn't it be okay for a man to be "girly" or a woman to be "manly" if that's what they naturally are like?? They should not be forced into a role that they don't fit. Women are not "naturally" caregivers and men are not "naturally" breadwinners. Those are social roles. In some societies those roles are even reversed. Also, not everyone cares about attracting the opposite sex. Or even attracting anyone at all. I wouldn't want to be with someone who wasn't okay with me as how I naturally am and wanted to force me into some sort of role based on what kind of junk I have or what society tells me I'm supposed to do.

So yes, let's let people embrace how they are naturally. If I'm a guy who naturally wants to be a caregiver, let me. If I'm a woman who cares more about careers than family, let me. Don't try to force people to be something they are not; people should not be limited because of their gender. That is the true "nature." Not some role society tells me I have to play.

These are their personal choices, but don't expect a guy to be socially accepted by others for this choice, and believe me no man can replace a mother in a kid's life, a man can never be as adequate as a mother in that matter.
And in my opinion if women keep spreading this mentality of not wanting to have a family, that would effect her and the society negatively on the long run, on a personal level because she'd realize how important it was to have a family and someone whom her life is important and valuable to, and on society level because if there's less women likely to have families, then there will be very little number of next generations and societies would substantially become extinct..

I don't agree with this. What about kids who aren't even raised by a mother? What about a kid raised by two dads? Why can't a stay at home dad be as good a parent as a "mom"? What about mothers who are abusive? Who's to say that a father can't be any good in a caregiver role?

And maybe it's society that needs to change, not women. Women don't have to want a family. Women don't have to want to be the primary caregiver. I'm very tired of society forcing gender roles onto people. Men and women are not different. They are both human. The only difference is in their genitalia and chromosomes.

Not all women want a family.

Not all women want a husband. Maybe they want a wife, or would prefer to have no partner.

Not all married women even want kids.

Not all women care about fitting into their gender role.

No, this does NOT mean families are going to go extinct. They haven't yet. And women haven't changed over the years. They're just being more vocal about inequality now.


I hope this post has as much clarity as I'm intending. I'm drunk and just trying to get my point across as quickly as possible.

 

[Yama]

And the reason men are killing themselves? Because of this exact scenario right here. Because they can't be free to be themselves. Because they have to fit into their limited little gender role. Because they "can't show emotion" because that's girly so they can't reach out and ask for help. Because asking for help isn't "manly." So they let it simmer and build up until they can't take it anymore and they kill themselves.

Because they can't take living like that anymore but there's nothing else they can do because gender roles are limiting. Not just to women, but to men too. The gender revolution is only half finished.

And I won't let anybody tell me that I can't be a trans man because I like stuffed animals and other men.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

So how do you apply this reasoning to trans people? Are they "born differently" and therefore need to be the opposite sex, or are they "socialized" into believing that they ought to be the opposite sex?

As far as I can tell, transsexuality has a neurological root that amounts to something a bit like a hardware-software incompatibility error. It might actually be similar to the rare condition in which a person feels that a limb does not belong to them and seeks to remove it.

But a confirmation of physiological sex, or even a neurological function of identifying the parts of it, do not directly lead to many useful conclusions about gender.

 

[SpankyMcFly]

My answer to the nature vs nurture debate has always been "both". A human being is a complex system. Asserting that all psychological traits are "socialized" is an extremely strong scientific claim, as it would involve actually proving that no psychological traits are innate (or, at least, not generated by socialization). Even narrowing this to the question of gender, it's still an extremely strong assertion to say it's all nurture.

Pseudoscientific polemics notwithstanding, science finds evidence for both nature and nurture, and the question isn't whether it's nature or nurture so much as it is "which traits are nature, which are nurture and which are a mix?" Most brain studies are like this, for example, where scientists discover that things are way more complex than they previously thought. While brains tend to have particular tendencies, the mind turns out to be VERY plastic, or at least way more plastic than we thought. The whole right/left brain thing has been mostly discredited - there or different things on the right and left, but apparently left-handed people have them switched, and various kinds of brain damage or drug use can push things all over the brain map.

So, I would say to you that the same way you feel that you are trans with no explanation (and a socialization explanation seems unlikely), that I feel as a guy that nothing socialized me to like girls and have masculine attitudes. Where I see socialization occurring is with regard to how society (mostly unconsciously) directs those masculine energies (and feminine energies w/r to women and m->f trans). No hard proof, here, of course, but I see these energies as kind of essential to human nature, strongly linked to testosterone levels, and you can't socialize away the energies, but you CAN socialize how those energies are expressed.

This sums up my thoughts well on nature vs. nurtue. Just like we thought IQ was first learned, then genetic and now a mix of both. I think further research into consciousness and how it relates to unconscious & subconscious cognition will not only put the final nail into the coffin of free will but move us closer to biodterminism.

 

[ceecee]

and believe me no man can replace a mother in a kid's life, a man can never be as adequate as a mother in that matter.

This is not true, at all.

 

[Lark]

The different "roles/natures" of men and women are not inherent. They are the result of socialization, differ depending on cultural context, and don't justify gender-based inequalities.



As to the rest of this thread:

Equality doesn't just mean empowering and encouraging women, it also means gender equality for men. Why shouldn't it be okay for me to be a stay at home dad? Why should I be looked down upon or ridiculed if that's what I want to do, just because I'm a guy? Why shouldn't it be okay for a woman to care more about focusing on her career than raising a family? It goes both ways, and it seems to me that many people have a hard time understanding this.

There's radical feminists who would disagree, the point ought to be that they should not result in subordination, exclusion or oppression surely.

I think that difference and innateness are valuable and the whole blank slate analysis of individuals is the consequence of well meaning error.

 

[Lark]

Yeah, I agree about depression. I have no idea what things are like in Australia, but in the US the male/female suicide ratio is 3 to 1 and in the UK it's 4 to 1.

In the US there are now more suicides per year than traffic fatalities. But we're not even close to number one in the developed world. South Korea has that dubious honor.

I think this is worthy of a closer examination all by itself, to be honest there's a lot of suicides within the UK that I've read about wondered was it death by misadventure or an out right murder cover up or some other sort of murder by design, for instance the blackmail/trolling killings of young people, one of which occured either this year or last in Northern Ireland were a young male was pressurised into providing photographs of himself online to someone he thought was a female but later turned out to be a man and was then tormented until he took his own life by a group of men.

A lot of the suicides in Northern Ireland are not really a consequence of the sorts of patterns of despair, depression and alienation which I think people would imagine a suicide to be, the kind of classical or archetypical "poetic" suicide (like that painting of the guy in the bath) but are a consequence of patterns of intimidation, pressure, harassment and torment, sometimes drugs are in the mix too, experimented with at a young and impressionable age, creating dependency issues, vulnerabilities and introducing those individuals to pretty shady, nasty community elements.

Arresting and reversing the trends could only be a good thing but I'm not sure how that can be achieved, misdirection of the sort in the OP is unhelpful.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I actually think is brilliant so far. Threads I do start regarding this topics always end in porn

Yeah I was in a silly mood and there's a hint of sarcasm in that post

I'm actually quite surprised that this thread has remained very civil.

I really appreciate everyone's insightful comments, regardless of whether or not I agree

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

People, the matriarchy vs patriarchy tangent may be slightly off topic, but I'm curious what the term is for a society where there is neither, but rather a shared leadership and equal valuing of both feminine and masculine traits?

Egalitarian? Or is there another word?

Would such a society be better equipped to handle and more sensitive to the issue of suicide with both sexes?

 

[Virtual ghost]

At least try to take it as a joke.

 

[SpankyMcFly]

Here's my problem with Toxic Masculinity theory. It's usually defined and written about as something perpetuated in men by the big bad patriarchy. So here we go again with the implication that all of the worst aspects of masculinity are perpetuated by men. So it's supposedly the men at the top perpetuating and encouraging this behavior in the rest of men.

My thoughts are very similar. I'd add that when this kind of thinking is not challenged (by those that disagree) then it soon gains social value and low information people start to 'assume' it's true without doing their own research into the matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_cascade Wage gap is another good example of an availability cascade.

"An availability cascade is a self-reinforcing cycle that explains the development of certain kinds of collective beliefs. A novel idea or insight, usually one that seems to explain a complex process in a simple or straightforward manner, gains rapid currency in the popular discourse by its very simplicity and by its apparent insightfulness. Its rising popularity triggers a chain reaction within the social network: individuals adopt the new insight because other people within the network have adopted it, and on its face it seems plausible. The reason for this increased use and popularity of the new idea involves both the availability of the previously obscure term or idea, and the need of individuals using the term or idea to appear to be current with the stated beliefs and ideas of others, regardless of whether they in fact fully believe in the idea that they are expressing. Their need for social acceptance, and the apparent sophistication of the new insight, overwhelm their critical thinking."

It's almost borderline tinfoil hat stuff, when you think about it.

Borderline? You're too generous

 

[SpankyMcFly]

People, the matriarchy vs patriarchy tangent may be slightly off topic, but I'm curious what the term is for a society where there is neither, but rather a shared leadership and equal valuing of both feminine and masculine traits?

Egalitarian? Or is there another word?

Would such a society be better equipped to handle and more sensitive to the issue of suicide with both sexes?

Humanist

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

My thoughts are very similar. I'd add that when this kind of thinking is not challenged (by those that disagree) then it soon gains social value and low information people start to 'assume' it's true without doing their own research into the matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_cascade Wage gap is another good example of an availability cascade.

"An availability cascade is a self-reinforcing cycle that explains the development of certain kinds of collective beliefs. A novel idea or insight, usually one that seems to explain a complex process in a simple or straightforward manner, gains rapid currency in the popular discourse by its very simplicity and by its apparent insightfulness. Its rising popularity triggers a chain reaction within the social network: individuals adopt the new insight because other people within the network have adopted it, and on its face it seems plausible. The reason for this increased use and popularity of the new idea involves both the availability of the previously obscure term or idea, and the need of individuals using the term or idea to appear to be current with the stated beliefs and ideas of others, regardless of whether they in fact fully believe in the idea that they are expressing. Their need for social acceptance, and the apparent sophistication of the new insight, overwhelm their critical thinking."



Borderline? You're too generous

I'm getting sick and tired of hearing about the wage gap. It's so much more complicated than most people realize.

Despite my leftist leanings, it's frustrating that liberal and progressive politicians continue to drill the misconception into the public consciousness

Although I haven't really seen or heard Jill Stein mention it too much yet