Male suicide: a question of value

Publisher’s note: This article is published here under a pseudonym. It was written by a mainstream journalist who encountered significant push back and refusals when he tried to have it published in more mainstream channels. Thus he turned to us here, where the facts matter more than the narrative. PE

The Seattle Times released an article earlier this year explaining that the suicide rate for teenage girls has skyrocketed: 524 died by suicide in 2015, a 200 percent increase from 2007. The article is filled with questions on the state of modern teenage life and hypotheses on the rise of teenage female suicide. Within the article, whispered at the end of a paragraph for passing context, is a far more startling statistic: 1,537 teenage boys died by suicide that same year.

Males in the U.S. die by suicide so much more than females that the rate is an astounding 3.5 to 1, or 78 percent of all suicides. That equates to once every 15 minutes. The “gender paradox in suicidal behavior” has been the case as far back as records go — and though there are variations from country to country, this disparity is also present throughout the world. Men and boys of all cultures kill themselves more than women and girls.

Yet the professional response to this is one of neutrality. The website for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) has comparative graphs of suicide by state, age, and even race, yet none for gender. There is no mention of gender beyond the 3.5 statistic, and no section discussing male suicide. Even in its opening video on the front page there are no men, save a few in the background of a crowd. There is similar sparse acknowledgement from the American Association of Suicidology (AAS) and the Suicide Prevention Resource Center (SPRC). The SPRC has an underdeveloped section about men in their “populations” tab.

Speaking with experts revealed a similar attitude. In a phone interview, Dr. Yeates Conwell of the University of Rochester Medical Center was asked by the author “if I wanted to lower the disparity in the U.S., what should I do?” His response was “I don’t know if I agree with that premise. The way we look at it is that there’s close to 45,000 deaths by suicide every year [in the U.S.], and the objective is to reduce that mortality.”

Doctor Jill Harkavy-Friedman, vice president of research at AFSP, expressed a similar attitude during a phone interview. Questions about the disparity were met with noncommittal responses: we are trying to keep all suicides down, and perhaps men should seek mental healthcare more.

This is not the medical community’s usual approach to a problem that affects a subgroup so heavily. Breast cancer, for example, is a gendered problem that is admitted as such. The American Cancer Society, breastcancer.org, and webmd.com/breast-cancer are explicitly female focused. We have charity drives and pink ribbons. The NFL launched the “A Crucial Catch” program in 2009, which raises about $1.9 million annually. The awareness programs are filled with celebration, panache, and a large viewership. There is no concomitant response for male suicide.

Males do have an organization or two around the globe. There is Movember, an Australian movement about men’s health issues (including suicide) whose growth to worldwide fame was driven by their public relations move of sporting a mustache every November for awareness. The Coalition Against Living Miserably, or CALM, is a British organization and the only significant one in the world whose prime directive is male suicide prevention. There is the quasi-joke site Man Therapy, which is more a slight against men than anything: they can only understand their feelings if wrapped in a package of leather boots and Clint Eastwood movies.

Why is there a reluctance to approach suicide in a gendered manner when nearly 80 percent of all suicide deaths are male? It may come from the murky explanations for the disparity itself, leaving experts wary of committing to something that may lead to further suicides if wrong.

Experts have no concrete theory, but they do have hypotheses. Males on average have a smaller social group over time, so they have less support when they need it. They see their doctors less, so are less likely to be flagged as having a physical or mental problem that could put them at risk. Males also use more guaranteed methods of suicide, such as firearms, whereas females most often choose overdosing.

The basis for these are social, in the form of gender roles that can easily paint unflattering stereotypes about men: emotionally simplistic tough-guys who bottle up their feelings until they one day use a “manly” method to inflict self-death instead of reaching for help. Toxic masculinity teaching men that they should rather die than allow themselves to be vulnerable in a therapist’s office. The problem with the data available is that there is no concerted, field-wide analysis of it, which leaves both medical professionals and laypeople open to creating any number of theories and narratives.

The male disparity in the U.S. is 3.5 to 1, however females attempt suicide three times more than males; a curious reverse of the ratio. Dr. Julie Cerel, president of AAS, has said that “men notoriously don’t seek help,” which is true for doctor’s visits, but its connotation of men being stubborn may be misleading. The reverse ratio for attempts may mean that at the moment when someone can reach for help or reach for suicide, it is females who reach for suicide far more — and who could be called the “stubborn” gender, if we feel we have to make the judgement Cerel seemed to be making. The Seattle Times article noted Professor James Mazza of the University of Washington as saying “males have higher rates of ADHD, substance abuse or anti-social behaviors that are easier to spot, so they might have a better chance of receiving help [for a depressive episode],” yet females are diagnosed with the suicide risk of depression twice as much — meaning their gendered risk factor is being caught and getting a  similar “chance of receiving help.”

Every theory can be easily filled with implicit blame, further encouraging the suicide prevention community from taking anything other than a neutral stance.

Among the theories available for the disparity, a discerning form comes from Dr. Silvia Canetto of Colorado State University, who applies to suicidal behavior what is called “cultural scripts theory.” According to cultural scripts theory, we all have scripts written out by culture, characters to play and lines to read, that tell us what to value and why we are valuable. How cultural scripts theory fits in with the values of men and women can be shown in the one exception to the rule for the worldwide gender disparity in suicide: China.

In China females die by suicide at a rate of 3 to 1, concentrated in the rural areas. Women in rural China are the glue and workhorse of the family unit, expected to maintain care and keep the peace in households that are often multigenerational. The culture of China pressurizes this position. For example, when women are hospitalized due to mental illness, the average length of stay is more than 28 days, whereas for men it is more than 38. Dr. Su Zhonghua, vice president of Daizhuang Hospital, Jining Medical School, explained in a World Health Organization (WHO) article that “many female patients are [asked to be] discharged as soon as they show signs of recovering,” because they are needed at home. Add in a cultural script that supports suicide as a way to avoid shame and the widespread access to lethal means in rural China in the form of farming pesticides, and you have a lethal recipe: women who feel perpetually overworked, undervalued, and encouraged to die by suicide if they commit some social wrongdoing.

Perhaps, then, feeling valued is a key component to the problem. Is it easier for males to feel worthless than females? Do negative mental health factors build up or stay longer in males? Canetto’s research into the suicide rate of elderly men and women suggest that elderly men may be more rigid and narrow in their concept of what to value and what makes them valuable. Elderly men, for example, do not bounce back from their spouse dying or divorcing them as well as elderly women. They define their spouse as having value, and if that value vanishes, it is difficult for them to fill that void.

Harkavy-Friedman explained that “4.8 million people lost their jobs [in the recession] and they didn’t all kill themselves.” Even though mental illness is present in the majority of suicides, it is still the minority of people with mental illness who practice fatal and nonfatal suicidal behavior, and most people who suffer through extreme hardship do not become suicidal. Harkavy-Friedman suggested that there may be a separate “suicidal urge” that turns these risk factors dangerous. This may give further credence to the value idea within cultural scripts theory: it is not any specific factor or factors, it is these stressors reaching a mysterious tipping point that falls over into making someone feel valueless. A male rigidity in replacing values when the old ones are gone may be a component in the larger mysterious tipping point in males.

Whatever the reasons are for the gender disparity, there are only two areas to look at: nature and nurture. Research tends to focus on nurture. There is a body of research investigating biological causes, though it is somewhat underdeveloped. Conwell explained “I know people who have proposed to study the role of testosterone, for example, and its effects on suicide. I don’t know that that’s panned out. There is a body of neurobiological literature which says that altered neurotransmitter function, in particular serotonin, is a predisposition to impulsive and aggressive behavior. There may be gender-related differences in how that abnormality or imbalance in chemical messengers plays out in men.”

The long shadows of our bigoted past still haunt us in the present, threatening to birth new movements based on inaccurate interpretations of research. Cultural fears aside, however, is this an avenue worth pursuing?

Transgender people are much more likely to die by suicide if their chosen gender identity is shunned rather than accepted. The prevailing expert opinion is that transgender people are born that way, meaning there is a strong biological component. It would only do damage to suggest to transgender people that they can lower their suicide rate by going against biology and not reassigning their gender. If expert opinion is that transgender people’s brains differ in certain ways, do the brains of heteronormative men and women differ?

The answer is that they do. The gender disparity may be caused in part by biological drivers, compounded by cultural expectations that create additional pressures that are gender specific. Going back to Canetto’s research on the elderly: if, for example, males are biologically less flexible regarding value, the addition of the cultural expectation of the independent man who can hold his own only makes a difficult problem more complex and entangled. How biology and culture interact can be a crucial area of inquiry. It is important to note here that while research shows male and female brains differ, what that means is not understood enough to say anything definitive — if it means anything at all.

Cultural scripts theory still leaves out the value of value: whether what we currently tell people to value or not to value is a good idea or not, whether our cultural scripts are valuable or not. This must be answered before taking preventative steps, because we do not want to attempt to lower the gender disparity by telling males to stop performing a cultural script that we would be better off having (e.g., if you are pro-military and believe encouraging men to go to war and possibly coming back with the suicide risk factor of PTSD is worth the risk). The same issue is present in females who attempt suicide three times as much as men. Every cultural script has pros and cons, and it is a dangerous task discerning which outweighs the other.

The issue with addressing the gender disparity, as we are starting to see, is not necessarily that there is a lack of research; it is that to reduce male suicide, experts have to step outside of statistics and move into moral philosophy. Experts would have the job of taking the pen from biology and society and rewriting our cultural scripts — which if written wrong will literally kill people. And as we have seen with the enormous difficulties the “right to die” movement has faced in amicably ending the lives of those with terminal illness, presenting suicide and its risk factors in any way except blanket condemnation is met with swift resistance.

So experts abstain from addressing that side of the argument, instead providing the public with a list of risk factors floating in the medical aether: difficult access to mental health care, having a mental illness, early trauma, head injury, being overly stressed, access to lethal means (e.g., guns), and having a close relative that has died by suicide. The primary protective factors are social support and access to mental health care. They produce these lists and wait for other forces to write the novel of society.

The mental health community vehemently cares about suicide in general, and many have devoted their entire lives to saving both genders, but to highlight the higher suicide rate of males is to be viewed as off-message.

There is a clear gendered problem to suicide, thousands of men disproportionately killing themselves, and yet the suicide prevention community suggests “reducing the [total] mortality” and forwarding joke sites that belittle men. The AAS has a “suicide myths” section saying “Myth: only white males die by suicide… Fact: while some demographic factors contribute to a higher risk for suicide, it is important to remember that suicide does not discriminate.” Seventy-eight percent of all suicides complicates that statement.

Reading this article took about 15 minutes. And so another man goes, from being to nothingness.

If you or someone you know needs help, go to suicidepreventionlifeline.org or call 1-800-273-8255. For help outside of the U.S., find your country here.

Leave a comment

76 thoughts on “Male suicide: a question of value”

  1. You link to the British organization ‘Campaign Against Living Memorably’ (CALM), and state:

    “The Coalition Against Living Miserably, or CALM, is a British organization and the only significant one in the world whose prime directive is male suicide prevention.”

    You could not be more wrong about its “prime directive”. CALM is headed by the most vile radical feminist I’ve ever met, Jane Powell. For comparison, I once spent an evening in the company of Julie Bindel.

    The “prime directive” of CALM is not male suicide prevention, but the propagation of feminist narratives that male suicide is the consequence of ‘toxic masculinity’. I’ve been contacted by numerous men who called CALM at times of crisis, CALM’s advice was to reject “toxic masculinity” and seek support as women do, despite such support being all but non-existent for men.

    The one time I met Powell, a few years ago, I asked her what her staff would say to a man who was suicidal because he was being denied access to his children, his ex-wife having lied about him being a threat to her, or their child(ren). She glared angrily down at the table, and said nothing.

    Powell is just one of many radical feminists earning a living from male suffering and death. Damn them all.

    1. Thanks for the important info, Mike. I can’t tell you how many times I have hoped that I stumbled on to the exception to the feminist rule, only to find it was just a ruse.

        1. In the interest of fairness I have to say that Cassie Jaye started her film as a feminist, even if she didn’t end it that way.

    2. Nailed it Mike!

      This idea about men not seeking help or expressing their feelings because of “toxic masculinity” is absolute crap. Men are only allowed to express feminist approved emotions. A suicidal man that attempts to seek support because the family court and his ex took his kids away from him is SOL (shit out of luck).

    3. Mike I don’t know how you do it. You have looked in the face of sheer evil so many times; I don’t know how you keep your cool when you are sitting across the table from these disgusting pieces of filth.

    4. Mike – I found Jane Powell’s LinkedIn profile and it does say she left CALM in January 2017, but I take your point. That’s disappointing. CEO is now Simon Gunning. Maybe new leadership will change things?

  2. I applaud your focusing on male suicide. It takes some courage to do that. I would love to hear more about your rejections from the MSM. It has always amazed me that male suicide has not been given more than a peep from the majors.

    I think you might want to include gynocentrism in your take on male suicide. The global interest in the pain of women and the lack on interest in the pain of men is pretty obvious to even a casual observer. Please do continue to write on this topic. It is sad that it is so hidden.

    For some different ideas about this you might want to have a look at a report I wrote for the Maryland Commission for Men’s Health on this topic or have a look at a youtube video series here.

    Thanks for your voice in our efforts to call attention to the zany world of avoiding the pain of men.

  3. Great article! The bit about rural Chinese women was particularly interesting. That suggests the disparity is more nurture than nature.

        1. Interesting article, thanks. Elsewhere I read “China has 21% of the world’s population but 44% of the world’s total suicides and 56% of the world’s female suicides.”

          This anomaly in Chinese suicides vis the rest of the world has to be one of the most interesting facts I’ve seen. The article you posted also says, “There is, however, some evidence that women’s suicide rates in China are falling – and fast.”

          It concludes urbanization as the main reason for that reduction in female suicides, but I wager it has more to do with the Western import of feminist valorization of women that is fast seeping into the country, which can be witnessed in the younger women of China during the last 5 – 10 years. The question of social and familial value looks like a critical one.

        2. “here’s why”

          amazing that the telegraph thinks it knows the answer as to why, yet will keep quite about male suicide and the possible reasons why( I say possible because no one is willing to make a concrete causation as to why).

          Trust the telegraph “women section” to talk about suicide and focus predominately on china to fill its narrative on “what about the women” in suicide( note that I use the feminist attitude to male suicide but consider that suicide by any gender to be an issue).

          1. “amazing that the telegraph thinks it knows the answer…”
            You probably could have stopped right there. The Guardian with some frequency lists sources. That’s where the meat is when it occurs. Their interpretations are for public consumption. As you point out it is also in the “selection” of stories to present as news.

          2. As well, just because a story cites a source does not mean the source is accurate; especially with men’s issues. Lots and lots of outright lies are told and lots and lots of stupid people believe them anyway.

            But not me-

      1. Possibly an important note on China, From my understanding in 2011-ish China changed its laws to mean that the main property owner gets the nice end of divorce settlements and keeps the kids,
        Chinese custom means this will almost always be the man, as his family is expected to provide the new couple with a home.
        The is also the one child policy that means whilst men are still seen as family providers with all the pressure that implies they are a lot less disposable than in many other nations.
        I would be interested to see how gendered suicide maps out against regions that still have one child law and ones that do not?

          1. I know, right,
            You take a child that someone has deep genetic, pheromonal, hormonal, instinctual, psychological and social attachments to out of someone’s life and it has a negative effect on their mental wellbeing.
            Shocking I know!

          2. “Gosh, it would almost seem that one of the most common reasons for suicide might be the loss of one’s children.”

            you know.. you would think that many people might able to see such a reason, but even with bells, whistles and neon signs, some people have a a very serious reality filter..

          3. Hi Suzy. Three days ago I attended the third consecutive annual debate in the House of Commons on men’s issues. Plenty of discussion on male suicide but all attributed to men not talking about their problems – I.e. not acting like women – nothing on reactive depression brought on by e.g. lack of access to kids. But men have a second supporter in Jeremy Lefroy MP, a Tory Christian in common with Philip Davies.

            Hopefully you’ll make it to icmi18 in London? We’ll try to make your journey from Heathrow less stressful than last time!

          4. I was tired from traveling, but it was more fun than frustrating! I probably won’t be able to make it next year – too much going on around here and not enough time or money. The story of Life.

          5. I can’t agree with this strongly enough. Having experienced the loss of two daughters, I have spent too much time in some very dark places.

            I have never seen statistics relating the loss of one’s children to suicide, but there are statistics about another risk factor for suicide:

            “Rape has long-term emotional consequences that can lead to suicide.

            It is quite common for rape victims to suffer from depression. And untreated depression is the number one cause for suicide.

            About 33% of rape victims have suicidal thought.

            About 13% of rape victims will attempt suicide.”

            [http://www.suicide.org/rape-victims-prone-to-suicide.html]

            Now, if you were to present a parent with a choice, a terrible one, would they choose (selflessly) to be raped, or lose their children?

            Please refer to the above numbers.

          6. From my seat, you appear to be recognizing male on female rape and the damage that causes. You’ll get no debate on that here.

            To answer your question ” to be raped, or lose their children?” I’m confident I’ll survive and overcome rape(many have). Take my children, hell hath no furry because it is not only me who is violated. I’m sure many mothers would agree with this statement as well as fathers.

            Here is a question for you: We can go all over the net and find statistics and impact of rape on women, can you point me to the suicide stats for men who have both either or been raped or lost their children?

            See the empathy gap in your thinking?

          7. There are countless risk factors. Too bad nobody has thought to find out if the overwhelming correlation between suicide and loss of children is a relationship of causation. But it’s an overwhelmingly male issue, so why would they bother. Male suicide rates increased around the time no fault divorce came about; the “usual” wartime spike during Vietnam never dropped back to normal after the war. They still haven’t dropped.

        1. “main property owner gets the nice end of divorce settlements and keeps the kids,
          Chinese custom means this will almost always be the man, as his family is expected to provide the new couple with a home.”

          it may also have something to do with maintaining the family name which can be precarious in a country with a one child policy..

        2. I knew about this change in divorce regulations, and it was stated that it was intended to prevent “Westernised degenerate abuse of the regulations for gain” or some such slogan. Apparently some Beijing women were divorcing for money under flimsy pretexts and the State was unimpressed.

          As for China and statistics, I don’t think you’ll find many. They only recently began officially admitting that they had such things as suicide, murder and drug addiction.

          But give it a try – I suggest medical journal articles where spin is easily seen as a first resource.

          The Baron

  4. I don’t believe that women attempt suicide 3 times as much as men. I don’t even believe they attempt it half as much as men. I believe many women use feigned suicide attempts to garner sympathy, attention, help, and probably even to deter punishment for something.

    1. What you are describing is the “cry for help” suicide attempts. This has been common knowledge for decades. It is only in recent years that this has been spun into something that is as big a problem as actual completed suicide. The reason for this is because of attempts to bring attention to the disparity of male suicide.

      I have talked to idiots my age that have actually signed on to this bullshit. I’m like since when? Where were you during the 90’s when it was common knowledge in suicide prevention that taking pills and then calling 911, or being in a part of the house that you know that you will be discovered, was a cry for help (or attention)?

    2. I have made a point above that I saw that it was part of the domestic violence categorization to include suicide “attempts” and cries for help ( in order to control your partner) recently added.

      and I speak from personal experience of a partner who used to make such threats to herself and our child to control me, and it was my lawyer who recently pointed out the addition into the law.

  5. A welcome topic.

    The nature/innateness discussion run the risk of falling into the old double standard that (a) when men out-peform women it is because women are oppressed, but (b) where women do better it is because men are innately flawed. It is particularly galling to look for a nature-based explanation at the same time that our society is willfully blind to the environmental factors that would systematically drive men to suicide.

    In asking whether men are innately more suicidal, we should apply the same skepticism and reticence that is routine in evaluating, for example, the question whether women are inherently worse at science. At a minimum, this means focusing on *helping* men, rather than seeking a nature-based argument that lets us shrug off the problem.

    1. Whatever our innate nature we no longer live in a state of nature. Ethically to allow some class of humanity be killed or die by neglect is indefensible. Were it defensible there would be no A Voice for Men, Civil Rights Movement, American Revolution or Child Labor Law.

  6. I think on a very deep level society views male suicide as a good thing. Society sees the males at the bottom as weak and having bad genes. The death of males at the bottom is a biological mechanism to remove bad genes from the group. This way the group stays healthy and strong, capable of protecting the women.

    1. I emphatically disagree. The naked ape does not control its numbers by homicidal means and in the primitive state such practices may have doomed or fatally weakened the group that did. Grave sites of even the Neanderthal show gifts of flowers and tools when a tribe member was interred or placed in caves. That type of grave dressing at burial suggests a sense of loss for the tribe member. Richard Dawkins’ selfish gene is about persistence. In a social animal that means the persistence of the tribe/family group. If I perceive your usage of “a very deep level” correctly we are talking about unconscious tendencies of behavior biologically directed.

      Mankind was sexually selected as much as environmentally so. If the tenets of evo-psyche and evo-biological considerations are actually being addressed then men were adapted to their environment and selected by their mates. It is the environment that produced the robust male not to contest another robust male but to do double work providing for female and offspring. The female herself declined in size and strength less able than her male to meet, survive and exploit the physical environment that the male adapted to. That also reduced the burden on the male. Little things need less than larger ones: Great Dane vs. Chihuahua.

      Physically the male adapted to long distance running, sharper reflexes than the female, something near twice the physical strength and a resistance or tolerance to wet, cold and other physical environmental factors. Women, given that form factor selected primarily for other behaviors that suited their circumstance and offspring. Had the female selected for smaller, less robust specimens they would have died out when gathering resources. We know that the environment killed them as they do not show themselves today. The average size differential is present over the whole earth in every variant of the species.

      1. “The naked ape does not control its numbers by homicidal means and in the primitive state such practices may have doomed or fatally weakened the group that did.”
        Agreed, but this was not what I said.
        I was referring to the ‘genetic filter’ theory (The Woman Racket). I think this is part of the empathy gap.

        1. I upticked you because I think you make a good point, despite CeterisParibus’ decent reasoning. In modern human society, weak males are not needed. Widows and orphans do not starve when their breadwinner disappears. How many suicides are husbands and fathers anyway? And the tribe is not diminished one iota. There are no tribes as such, certainly not on a par with the Neanderthals. And are we sure that every single member of their culture was given an honourable funeral? Maybe it was only the important ones? Who knows? But today, with over 7 billion people on the planet, a few thousand fewer males are barely a minor blip. Otherwise why would there be so little concern at the male suicide level?

      2. MichaelZWilliamson

        The finding of flowers as a Neanderthal funerary offering has lately been challenged as erroneous. However, they did have funerary customs and apparent memorials.

        1. Even if the particular of flowers has been misinterpreted there were funerary arrangements discernible. The dead clansman was not garbage. Chimps just walk away from a corpse after a short while although kin or a chimp “friend” might linger. Chimp mothers have been photographed holding a dead infant for a few days before putting it down. Putting it down and walking away. In that I point to the difference between attachment and respect or perhaps reverence.

  7. Re. the nurture vs nature business:

    Used to was, a website — something like u of hawaii.edu, but it’s gone, now… — had a comparative graph of male vs female suicide for the young adult age group — 18-24? — with data from about 1900 to 2000. Quite striking. During the 19-teens, the differential was never higher than 1.5 to 1, male to female, touching down to 1.1 to 1 around 1922. From there it rose gradually into the late 60s, and then it took off, rising sharply to a 6 to 1 differential by 2000. Last I checked, it stood at 5.9 to 1, male to female.

    That don’ look like nature to me! So the question becomes: What— what on bloody Earth, I ask you— what, are we getting so very, very badly wrong!?

    Re. the attempted suicide rate differential:

    The question has been raised before— how’d ye even know for sure if the attempt was a genuine attempt to die and not a particularly theatrical demonstration of a problem? Moreover, I recall reading a take-apart of some research on the subject, a review which cast much doubt on the validity of the finding that women and girls attempt suicide at a greater rate than men and boys. But I can’t find the reference in my notes, alas.

    As for guys succeeding in killing themselves more often, I figured out — long time back now, and not without some very grim, dark humor — that guys know that they’re expected to succeed, or die trying.

    Choke on that one if you will, but I suspect that there’s more’n a grain of galling truth in it.

      1. I look forward to the day that researchers make a distinction between attempted suicide, and attempted attention. Only then will we see the true picture come out.

        1. “between attempted suicide, and attempted attention.”

          I read somewhere that in the UK in the legal categorization of Domestic violence/abuse that the action of suicide threats attempts were to be considered a form of abuse, note attempts not actual successful suicide( and I say “successful” in the most sensitive manner possible even though it sounds like it a positive thing)

    1. sorry Bora, but the Samaritans are not so great either.
      I looked at them a few years ago and all their resources pages were all about resources for women and not a single one for men.
      Mike Buchanan from J4MB was aware of this issue as well and ( I believe) he had tried to talk to them about changing this.

      Yes now they may have added a few more resources for men, but I don’t believe that the organisation has had a major change in its attitudes, rather that it needs the funding( the same thing happened with women only shelters who lost some public funding because of their discrimination)

      You are right about CALM( jane powell I consider to be so clueless).

      … and as many have now discovered Polly Neate formerly the head of womens aids( men hater central) is now running shelter, so we can expect to see a reframing of the homeless issue from people to “women and others”.

      1. Thanks Rob. I have given up trying to meet up with Samaritans people. Most charities are run by women obsessed with female suffering only. It’s even true for prison charities which focus on the 5% of prisoners who are female, not the 95% who are male.

        The Samaritans have a campaign with posters of visibly distressed men, the text beneath the photos reading something like, “No matter what you’ve done…”

        1. maybe mike the solution is not to try to meet up with them then. They are like a party absconding on their obligations..

          Maybe a name and shame tactic ( along with several other guilty parties) instead.
          But thanks for trying to talk to them ( which is the very opposite of what they are supposed to do)

  8. What gets me is the following pattern I see again and again:
    1) A female commits suicide: “LET’S FIX THE PROBLEM THAT LED HER DOWN THAT PATH. EVEN ONE IS TOO MANY. WE WANT TO MAKE CHANGES SO THAT DOESN’T HAVE TO HAPPEN.”
    2) A male commits suicide: “Silly man. All he has to do is cry more. Then he could better cope with it. And live with it. P.S. No we don’t see anything else needs to be done so don’t talk about fixing anything.”.

  9. I am struggling to see anything within this article that should have made it so difficult to be accepted by the MSM. So perhaps the reason lies not within the article, but simply the subject matter. Tells a story on its own, does it not?

    But this is an immensely difficult problem. The only way we could ever know for sure why people kill themselves, is if we could ask them. But unless suicides leave detailed explanatory notes, and those notes are made available in some central database for specialists – and possibly others – to study, their reasons will remain in permanent darkness. But I have never heard of such a database.

    Instead we are left with theories, many of them based on the prejudices of the theorist. Not a good basis for anything. And since the statistics seem incapable of showing any significant and consistent decline, the only conclusion is that whatever is being done, if anything (and it seems to be patchy in the extreme) is not working. I would like to be optimistic that this depressing pattern will change, but I am not.

  10. Samantha Stephens

    Let’s simplify things.

    Women are valued for their humanity. Men are valued for their utility. Women are human beings. Men are human doings. If a man is suddenly, for whatever reason, unable to work, serve, provide, and protect he is of no value to women or society. Like any appliance that is no longer functioning he is disposed of. He realizes he is no longer of any “value” and commits suicide.

    The reason for the lack of acknowledgement of the staggeringly higher male suicide rate is very simple. Society needs disposable males. In order for civilization to survive and flourish men must continue to be a disposable, utilitarian appliance – for war, industry, and women.

    To acknowledge, publish, and demand help for seventy eight percent of all suicide victims who happen to be male is acknowledging the humanity of men and boys. Society does not want to admit their slaves, workhorses, walking ATM machines, and meal tickets just might be thinking, feeling human beings. To do so might require they be treated as such.

  11. Psychologically speaking, men are much weaker than women. According to psychological science, this explains why men´s suicide rates are higher everywhere, although it´s women who are raped, murdered, violated, discriminated and shamed.
    Mental health is very important.

    1. Samantha Stephens

      Wow you’ve been brainwashed and indoctrinated by feminist lies, hypocrisy, and hate to the very core of your being. I’ll bet you were at the very top of your gender studies class.
      …………Also, you’re just plain f@ck!ng stupid.

    2. You are statistically speaking the safest and most looked after demographic on the planet you brainless bimbette. But no you can’t let facts get in the way can you?

      All you can see through is your tunnel vision blinders. You are so clueless I can guarantee that you think all the roads, buildings, food, power, running water, cars, the female centered health care laws, all the creature comforts that you take for granted, just fell out of the sky. Let me tell you sweet cheeks, if anything that you said above were true, then you would be shut down in a heartbeat instead of being allowed to sit on your ass and bitch and moan.

      So you think being able to grunt out kids gets you a magical pass on everything? We have billions of people on the planet; we don’t live in small clans anymore. Like my friend Sam here said before, without men you would crawl into a hollow log and die.

      I know that you are banned but I sure hope you’re reading this.

      Oh and Happy Thanksgiving.

    3. Tea yo said: “In these terms, yes, women´s lives are more valuable. We create the children.”

      Well, technically no, you don’t. Men create them and women bake them for 9 months. Men are the creators, women the bakers.

      I couldn’t resist. lol

    4. MichaelZWilliamson

      So weak that we’re expected to know your mental state regarding sex, and if you’ve even smelled a beer and thus cannot consent, while an intoxicated male can not only consent, but can magically become the rapist after she changes her mind.

      You’re a great argument for burkas.

    5. Psychologically men are weaker than in women? Not in China they’re aren’t, and you can bet that those Chinese women are a lot stronger than out American whiners.
      And women create babies? Hardly. You must have skipped biology class entirely. And even if women are crucial to childbirth – they are – that is no guarantee whatever that the kid will live even the first six months. A woman living by herself, without any social network to help her, will probably die along with her child – starvation, predation… If she even gets that far. Pregnant humans are very high maintenance and so are the young.
      As for this business of this making women’s lives more valuable than men’s, I’ve already covered the critical role men and male groups play in child survival. Beyonds that women are far more replaceable in communities and always have been, if only because it had to be that way. Humans die in childbirth all the time. The natural death rate can be as high as 50% in every birth event. You don’t appear to address this at all, which is a measure of the amount of privilege you enjoy.
      Add to this the fact that the genetic history of Europe and most other places shows localization of male lineages versus much wider geographic uniformity of female lineages. This is because for thousands of generations survival hinged on access to tillable land, and it took male lineages to retain control of that. That meant that women married out, which meant that wives could come from any surrounding community of from completely outside the society even. In other words sons are irreplaceable and daughters-in-law are replaceable.

    6. ‘It´s always funny how some men are pathetically still trying to be seen as the victims (of what?), while doing nothing to stop men from raping, murdering, trafficking and shaming women everywhere around the globe. Because you don´t give a damn what your beloved men (toxic masculinity) do to women and children.’

      Hi Tea.

      My I propose a few solutions? Why not allow a person to trade sexual freedom in exchange for sexual protection under the law?

      Consent can be coerced. In fact, in recognition of the fact that a trauma survivor can sometimes more easily be coerced through even as subtle an act as begging or nagging (which thus makes him more vulnerable to repeated sexual abuse), and given how difficult sexual assault can be to prove, I’d actually support the right of a person to trade his sexual freedom in exchange for sexual protection under the law. This is still in the brainstorming stage, but I’ll give it a go: maybe a superior mind to mine can work on the details. Let’s say I could go to a passport office and, while applying to renew my passport, could sign a contract with the state making it a criminal offence for me to commit ‘unprotected fornication’ (and for anyone else to do so with me too), have the state stamp my signatory status into the passport and make it valid for the duration of the validity of the passport. That would mean that if a person coerces me into sex and I report it, a prosecutor would need to prove only that:
      1. we weren’t married to one another,
      2. a sexual act without protection occurred between us, and
      3. the accused freely willingly participated in the act.

      The punishment for ‘unprotected fornication’ might be a heavy fine that would double for each repetition of the offence. There would be no need to prove that the complainant was an unwilling participant. This would help to significantly lower the burden of proof (at least for ‘unprotected fornication’). If a person wants to avoid legal problems, he’d just have to ask to see the other person’s passport to see his status. If the other person refuses to show it, then the onus would be on the interested party to back off and look for someone else.

      I would also support allowing the passport applicant to sign an Abstinence Contract with the state (with the applicant’s contract status stamped into his passport) that would make fornication (to be broadly defined to include any sexual act between a person and another other than his spouse) a criminal offence punishable by a heavy fine that would double for each repetition of the offence. It would make it a criminal offence not only for the signatory to fornicate, but for anyone else to do so with the signatory too. To find a person guilty of fornication, a prosecutor would need to prove only that:
      1. we weren’t married to one another,
      2. a sexual act occurred between us, and
      3. the accused freely willingly participated in the act.

      There would be no need to prove lack of consent except to get a conviction for sexual assault of course. And again, if a person wants to avoid legal problems, it would be up to him to ask to see the passport or walk away.

      Such a law could solve the problem of trying to prove especially cases of coerced consent since once the contract is signed and stamped into the passport, consent would no longer be mine to give for as long as the passport remains valid. It would essentially fall under a category similar to statutory rape (except for the fact that the punishment would be limited to a heavy fine). The fact that a rapist could pay a heavy fine for fornication even if a prosecutor could not prove rape would serve as a far more effective deterrent than rape laws would since rape is just too difficult to prove in most cases.

      This could benefit even the falsely accused. In cases in which the prosecutor cannot prove even fornication itself (especially if fornication is defined as broadly as possible), the accused could more effectively protect his reputation than under the present system under which we all know that rape is extremely difficult to prove (and so under which an acquittal of a rape accusation means little in the court of public opinion).

      In exchange for signing the contract, the signatory could be guaranteed a right to an inquisitorial hearing and protection from rape-shield laws so as counterbalance the vulnerable position he’d put himself in to protect him from a false accusation.

      As a childhood and adulthood victim of past sexual abuse myself (though my parents know nothing of my childhood abuse and were in no way at fault for it), I can say that I would have happily traded much of my sexual freedom under the law in exchange for sexual protection. Of what use is sexual freedom in the law to a person who does not intend to exercise that freedom? To him, that freedom is a detriment because it reduces the sexual protection he enjoys under the law.

      I understand that some people place more importance on sexual freedom in the law over sexual protection; but why impose that choice on everyone? Why could a law not allow a person to trade a reasonable degree of sexual freedom in exchange for sexual protection if that’s what he wants?

      For those who think that only women would benefit from such a freedom, consider the following:
      ‘A total of 43 percent of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95 percent said a female acquaintance was the aggressor, according to a study published online in the APA journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity®.’
      http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/coerced-sex.aspx

      Unfortunately, ‘sex-positivists’ who want to decriminalize prostitution, pornography, and every other sexual act short of rape have taken over the feminist camp; and libertines seem to have taken over the MRA camp too (think pick-up artists). As a result, neither camp can truly represent the interests of victims of sexual abuse today. Given the high (and even epidemic) rates of sexual abuse in our society today, it would seem to me that, if neither of these camps can adequately represent the interest of victims of sexual abuse, then perhaps we need an abolitionist camp, but one that would welcome both male and female victims equally.

      Not only would a gender-inclusive abolitionist movement help to reduce the rate of sexual abuse and calm the sex wars in our society today, but it would help to reduce male suicide rates too.

        1. Hi Suzy.
          I’m already married, but thanks for the recommendation.
          I turned my back of feminism with a vengeance during the #metoo campaign. I supported it at first until the feminists took over and started shutting down any #metoo revealing a female aggressor. It got so bad that at least one woman who’d been raped by another woman put up a Youtube video criticizing this and many other women (including one who’d been raped by a man) put up videos accompanying their #metoo with #mentoo. Even women noticed it to the point of standing up for the men. It became clear to me then that the feminists saw the #metoo campaign as an opportunity to bash men but had no real interest in promoting any practical way to deter sexual abuse.
          That’s when I discovered the Men’s Rights Movement. I then started to explore it to see if it proposed any practical legislative or other deterrents against the abuse of boys and men (especially when we consider that research shows that those who are abused as boys face a higher risk of both being abused by and abusing others) but while welcoming all genders to the discussion and maybe exploring how to deter abuse of children and adults regardless of gender.
          I will give praise where it is due. It does appear that the men’s rights movement has brought attention to the need for men’s shelters, and I have no doubt that that will help to reduce suicide rates. It has also done a good job of bringing attention to discrepancies in custody cases and to how rape-shield laws as they presently stand make men vulnerable to false rape accusations. I have no doubt that these will help to reduce male suicide rates too. With that, maybe I was unfair in my previous post.
          That said, I do see a void in the promotion of practical legislative measures to deter potential sexual abusers from sexually abusing others, regardless of gender. In the previous post, I tried to brainstorm a practical solution that could better protect a person from sexual abuse without undermining another’s to a fair trial. In the hypothetical scenario that I could trade a reasonable degree of sexual freedom in exchange for more sexual protection under the law, and a woman hypothetically raped me, I would still need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she raped me and would enjoy no rape-shield protection. A defense could bring up the fact that I had a history of habitually making rape complaints for example. However, if the woman knew that she could not legally fornicate with a person in my situation, then the onus would be on her to ask to see my passport. If I refuse to show it, then the onus would be on her to move on. If she still chooses to rape me and I can’t prove that, then I might still be able to prove that she fornicated with me when she legally had no right to do so with or without my consent. If I could prove that, then she’d pay a fine for fornication. In other words, even if I should have lied about her having raped me, she would still be found guilty of something of which she would in fact have been proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt without being constrained by any rape-shield law. Such an idea would thus protect a rape victim and the falsely accused equally. That would help to deter rapes and so further reduce male suicide rates. There may be flaws in my idea, but I’m open to improvement: I have no copyright on it.

  12. Could the site consider making the articles pdf for download. Im a healthcare professional who would like to circulate this article and others like it.

  13. Martin Langevin

    I wonder how much male emotional, physical, and sexual abuse (whether in childhood, adulthood, or any combination of these) contributes to this. There exists a presumption that women don’t sexual abuse men.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *