Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[BORK]

In 1999 at Deakin University suicide prevention social scientist Dr Chris Cantor and colleagues Baume and McTaggart researched Australian male suicides and found 42 a week suicide – 32 were in family separation – ages mainly between 24 and 34 years old – 21 were child support payers Or 74% are in family separation and 50% are child support payers.

Be interesting to see how much the suicide rates converge when accounting for people without kids only.

 

[BORK]

Have you ever noticed that when a newspaper reports on a suicide they never refer to it as such. But often reference Lifeline at the bottom.

It's downplayed for a reason. Whether that's a good reason, who knows. But it's not a conspiracy of silence aimed against men, despite what lunatics would have you believe.

I posted that not to do with the silence but your questioning whether it could be considered an epidemic. I do believe there should be much more discussion on what causes people to take their own life even if avoiding reporting on individual cases.

 

[I am Jack]

Be interesting to see how much the suicide rates converge when accounting for people without kids only.

I believe if both sides (male and females) worked together instead of always blame shifting, then we would get healthier debate, more research and clearer picture as to the extent of these issues. I don't think they'll be worked out in a hurry if this blame game keeps continuing. It is depressing, because the statistics you are after - possibly haven't even been done, because other issues get higher priority. Like domestic violence, which is also something that needs to be recognised as both a male and female based problem - one which should be worked out together, instead of just painting men as animals.

 

[Taylor]

I think the media sanitising of suicide is actually a result of the attitude that it is a cowards way out/ wasn't tough enough to cope/ selfish act etc etc. The resulting tarnishing of character for the person who took their own life is a huge worry for print media.

The newspaper could print that a person took their own life and the emotional family could sue them for defamation.

Society sucks when it comes to mental health, it's only now swinging around to accepting an open dialogue.

 

[Taylor]

So you want fairer, reasonable and a more equal family law system for men? That is fantastic news Taylor.

If there isn't justice for all then there is justice for none.

 

[BORK]

I believe if both sides (male and females) worked together instead of always blame shifting, then we would get healthier debate, more research and clearer picture as to the extent of these issues. I don't think they'll be worked out in a hurry if this blame game keeps continuing. It is depressing, because the statistics you are after - possibly haven't even been done, because other issues get higher priority. Like domestic violence, which is also something that needs to be recognised as both a male and female based problem - one which should be worked out together, instead of just painting men as animals.

https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
"Data on those who abuse children is limited in Australia."
What annoys me is when statistics in some areas are not made public because it may paint an inconvenient reality. A reality which would show the intellectual dishonesty of titles like this.
https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsi...ce-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022

If you actually read the plan it really has not much to do with children at all and they are almost used to gain wider support for the campaign(not that the campaign is not worthy of support, just the dishonest narrative in the name).

 

[Taylor]

https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
"Data on those who abuse children is limited in Australia."
What annoys me is when statistics in some areas are not made public because it may paint an inconvenient reality. A reality which would show the intellectual dishonesty of titles like this.
https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsi...ce-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022

If you actually read the plan it really has not much to do with children at all and they are almost used to gain wider support for the campaign(not that the campaign is not worthy of support, just the dishonest narrative in the name).

I heard a stat that said a third of girls would be sexually abused before they are adults, twenty percent of boys the same and 90% of these abusers are trusted people in their lives, 70% are family members.

How can we start a dialogue about that when it requires society to give up no the stranger danger message and look inward?

The same I think is the story with other forms of domestic violence.

This post is just to show that there are lots of elephants in the room at the moment.

 

[I am Jack]

https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
"Data on those who abuse children is limited in Australia."
What annoys me is when statistics in some areas are not made public because it may paint an inconvenient reality. A reality which would show the intellectual dishonesty of titles like this.
https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsi...ce-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022

If you actually read the plan it really has not much to do with children at all and they are almost used to gain wider support for the campaign(not that the campaign is not worthy of support, just the dishonest narrative in the name).

Yeah, you only have to look as far as the news today - and see the domestic violence lobby group pushing for 30 million from the government - to see this there is more to these campaigns than what meets the eye. You speak of an dishonest narrative, and I agree, I think where there is financial incentives for people to hide certain information (information that mightn't suit there agenda), then that information will continue to remain hidden. Or in the case of studies, they will simply take a back seat and not get done. It is interesting you highlight sexual abuse, that one is going to be an interesting debate if that ever hits the pages, I really don't know how they are going to spin that. Perhaps with this royal commission into sexual abuse at the moment, that can balance out there statistics enough to point the finger in the direction of the nearest bloke.

 

[I am Jack]

I heard a stat that said a third of girls would be sexually abused before they are adults, twenty percent of boys the same and 90% of these abusers are trusted people in their lives, 70% are family members.

How can we start a dialogue about that when it requires society to give up no the stranger danger message and look inward?

The same I think is the story with other forms of domestic violence.

This post is just to show that there are lots of elephants in the room at the moment.

Yeah, and I think it is more than that as well. There will have to be a serious discussion about what actually defines sexual abuse - and is the emotional abuse of young children classified as sexual abuse. If it is, then It will be a very difficult to get accurate numbers. Because the evidence for emotional abuse I can imagine would be hard to prove. But IMO it would still fall under the banner of sexual abuse.

 

[Taylor]

Yeah, and I think it is more than that as well. There will have to be a serious discussion about what actually defines sexual abuse - and is the emotional abuse of young children classified as sexual abuse. If it is, then It will be a very difficult to get accurate numbers. Because the evidence for emotional abuse I can imagine would be hard to prove. But IMO it would still fall under the banner of sexual abuse.

How do you mean emotional abuse including in sexual abuse?

 

[Santana]

So?


Why?

Why do you think? Fatherless children are more likely to suffer from depression and anxiety, to attempt and commit suicide, to be unemployed, to commit crime and be incarcerated, to suffer from alcohol and drug abuse, to be homeless or live in poverty, to under perform educationally and the list goes on.

This is kind of a social problem.

 

[I am Jack]

How do you mean emotional abuse including in sexual abuse?

The emotional abuse of children, and using children to gratify ones emotional state.
There are some out there that believe sexual abuse isn't just a physical thing - but it is also emotional.
Some individuals perhaps use their children to gratify themselves in unhealthy ways - on an emotional level.
The damage to children is mental as well as physical, that is all.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Why do you think? Fatherless children are more likely to suffer from depression and anxiety, to attempt and commit suicide, to be unemployed, to commit crime and be incarcerated, to suffer from alcohol and drug abuse, to be homeless or live in poverty, to under perform educationally and the list goes on.

This is kind of a social problem.

The key problem, as I understand it, is that children from fatherless homes are more likely to be poor. Poverty leads to the other problems you have listed.

 

[Chief]

I don't think there would be any surprise that a significant number of suicide attempts of both me and women stem from broken relationships.

Or that the seeds of a broken relationship and the seeds of a suicide might be related. Depression, drug use, financial strain and so on.

 

[clogged]

I posted that not to do with the silence but your questioning whether it could be considered an epidemic. I do believe there should be much more discussion on what causes people to take their own life even if avoiding reporting on individual cases.

How is it an epidemic? What is its transmission vector? Feminism?

 

[clogged]

Why do you think? Fatherless children are more likely to suffer from depression and anxiety, to attempt and commit suicide, to be unemployed, to commit crime and be incarcerated, to suffer from alcohol and drug abuse, to be homeless or live in poverty, to under perform educationally and the list goes on.

This is kind of a social problem.

Are broken homes a cause or the symptom?

 

[kfc1]

https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
"Data on those who abuse children is limited in Australia."
What annoys me is when statistics in some areas are not made public because it may paint an inconvenient reality. A reality which would show the intellectual dishonesty of titles like this.
https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsi...ce-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022

If you actually read the plan it really has not much to do with children at all and they are almost used to gain wider support for the campaign(not that the campaign is not worthy of support, just the dishonest narrative in the name).

The name says it all - "and their children", not "and children". It's a plan purely focused on violence against women.

 

[BORK]

How is it an epidemic? What is its transmission vector? Feminism?

Would purely depend on someones interpretation of whether something is widespread.

 

[clogged]

Would purely depend on someones interpretation of whether something is widespread.

That doesn't make it an epidemic

 

[BORK]

That doesn't make it an epidemic

Would that mean your interpretation of the number of deaths from domestic violence would not be consider it a national emergency?

 

[clogged]

Would that mean your interpretation of the number of deaths from domestic violence would not be consider it a national emergency?

I don't consider it a national emergency, no.

 

[Taylor]

Would that mean your interpretation of the number of deaths from domestic violence would not be consider it a national emergency?

I think you will find he was holding you to a non emotionally driven or dramatic definition of the word epidemic.

 

[Chief]

What is its transmission vector? Feminism?

Every 'male' problem is directly related to women getting favourable treatment. Stands to reason.

 

[kfc1]

Every 'female' problem is directly related to men getting favourable treatment. Stands to reason.

well yeah that's feminism's basic tenet

 

[Taylor]

Perhaps we can tear our entire culture down and start fresh?