< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

Why are suicide rates up 30% in the United States?

 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3905
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
11 June 2018 10:54
 
nonverbal - 11 June 2018 08:25 AM
bbearren - 11 June 2018 07:48 AM

Why are suicide rates up 30% in the United States?

Because more people are committing suicide.  If this is truly a deterministic universe without any possibility of free will, this is neither a realistic question nor can there be a realistic answer, unless you happen to be Laplace’s demon.  A suicide that can be prevented was not going to be a suicide in the first place.

I knew two suicides, the two also were very close friends.  The first suicide used a shotgun.  A couple of years later, the second used an overdose of heroin.  None of their friends considered either of them to be in any way suicidal.  Neither had ever expressed suicidal thoughts, at least not to any of their other friends.  Who can know what they might have discussed amongst themselves?  Neither of them left a note.

Regarding the second person, if he or she left no note, how did you know it was suicide and not an accidental overdose?

Location and other circumstances.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5291
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
11 June 2018 11:04
 
hannahtoo - 11 June 2018 09:24 AM
EN - 11 June 2018 07:17 AM

If a person feels that there is no hope of a situation getting better, I can see that leading to suicide. It may be, in fact, that there is no hope (excluding from this conversation any issue about religious faith), such as in the case of terminal or irreversible illness.  In that case, suicide can be seen to be a rational decision, IMHO.

If a person is depressed due to a long-term, miserable life situation (apart from illness) that is unlikely to get better, would suicide still be a rational choice?

There are some important distinctions. The tendency toward suicide is not one thing. There are cases when external circumstances motivate people to take their own lives but there are also people who have a persistent and seemingly inherent impulse toward self destruction that isn’t based on any apparent success or failure in other affairs. There are also sudden psychotic breaks that seem to be pure accidents of brain chemistry. Many suicides appear to be some combination. This is why I’m wary of the impulse to explain the event away. So much is hidden from view. So much of our internal experience is opaque. Survivors want an explanation for closure but this psychological need is quite different, I think from the kind of careful investigation that actually yields meaningful explanations.

 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21959
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
11 June 2018 11:23
 
hannahtoo - 11 June 2018 09:24 AM
EN - 11 June 2018 07:17 AM

If a person feels that there is no hope of a situation getting better, I can see that leading to suicide. It may be, in fact, that there is no hope (excluding from this conversation any issue about religious faith), such as in the case of terminal or irreversible illness.  In that case, suicide can be seen to be a rational decision, IMHO.

If a person is depressed due to a long-term, miserable life situation (apart from illness) that is unlikely to get better, would suicide still be a rational choice?

Possibly. Depends on if the depression drove the decision or if it was a thought-out process.  In any event, if there is actual hopelessness, it could be rational.  A miserable life situation might, on the other hand, be susceptible to change, while a terminal disease is generally not.

 
bigredfutbol
 
Avatar
 
 
bigredfutbol
Total Posts:  5614
Joined  05-04-2006
 
 
 
11 June 2018 18:04
 
hannahtoo - 10 June 2018 07:42 PM

I just finished watching Anthony Bourdain’s new segment on Berlin.  It was all about the dark, decadent side of the city.  Interesting.  I guess we’ll never know if such subjects played a part in taking him down to a bad place.  He ended the show quoting Samuel Beckett, in reference to Berlin’s history:

“You must go on, I can’t go on, I’ll go on.”

The quote has more poignancy in light of his death.

My wife and I watched that; you are so right. That last line was quite powerful knowing what came next.

Two of my dearest friends committed suicide in the past few years. The first was one of my best friends ever, and her death lit a slow fuse of grief and regret which I really believe ultimately led to my so-called “mid-life crisis” two years later.

The second was a guy I had lost touch with, sadly, although we had reconnected on Facebook. I kept meaning to put more time into talking and really “catching up” but that never happened. He left behind three kids. He was already separated from his wife (I think due to his mental breakdown, although I’ll never really know as I don’t really know her or any of their friends) and I guess I’ll never meet those kids. I sometimes think about writing a letter about their father as I knew him, and sending it to their Mom to leave it up to her when and/or if to share it with them. I met her a few times when they were dating so hopefully she’ll remember who I am.

It’s just a fucking tragedy. The sadness, regret, survivor’s guilt, the damage done to survivors—you learn to live with it, but the pain never fully goes away. It’s like a gaping hole in your life, and as time goes by you get better at stepping around it but it’s always there.

 
 
sojourner
 
Avatar
 
 
sojourner
Total Posts:  5970
Joined  09-11-2012
 
 
 
11 June 2018 18:57
 

I feel a bit of clarity reading these posts. I tend to feel kind of guilty in thinking that suicide is somehow unacceptable, that this represents a selfish impulse on my part - the idea that other people should finish out miserable - perhaps irreparably miserable - lives for my own peace of mind. Either my direct peace of mind, if I know them personally, or the peace of mind of the people in their lives.


I think perhaps the middle path between ‘suicide is a selfish act’ and ‘people should be free to do whatever they want with their own lives’ is the idea that something can be both ‘nobody’s fault’, and still a terrible tragedy that we should work to remedy. When someone dies of cancer, there is no blame, of course - but neither do we think “Why invest in cancer research? We should just make peace with everything that happens in this crazy world.” To my mind suicide is something like gouging out one’s eyes. Saying that whatever scenery is playing in one’s consciousness, it is too unbearable to witness and so the most humane thing to do is to do away with the ability to witness at all. I do think this should be cause for concern, investigation, and intervention. Perhaps a world without cancer is not possible, but we should still act as if our goal is a world without cancer (i.e., I don’t think we should ever say “Well, yeah, that person died of cancer, but so many others didn’t, let’s just let it be.”) I think the same is true of suicide - it is true that at this point in time, with the knowledge we have today, probably not every single person can be saved. Some people are truly too miserable or mentally ill or physically ill to go on - but I think we should act as if this is the goal.

 
 
MARTIN_UK
 
Avatar
 
 
MARTIN_UK
Total Posts:  4929
Joined  19-08-2010
 
 
 
12 June 2018 00:18
 
bigredfutbol - 11 June 2018 06:04 PM

...It’s just a fucking tragedy. The sadness, regret, survivor’s guilt, the damage done to survivors—you learn to live with it, but the pain never fully goes away. It’s like a gaping hole in your life, and as time goes by you get better at stepping around it but it’s always there.

This description nails it Kirk. A good friend of mine lost his wife and later his son both to suicide. The degree to which he is broken is visibly noticeable and never seems to fade, we all see the brave face he puts on for our benefit, but we all know he is just stepping around that hole. For him it is a very real fucking tragedy.

 

 
bigredfutbol
 
Avatar
 
 
bigredfutbol
Total Posts:  5614
Joined  05-04-2006
 
 
 
12 June 2018 05:57
 
MARTIN_UK - 12 June 2018 12:18 AM
bigredfutbol - 11 June 2018 06:04 PM

...It’s just a fucking tragedy. The sadness, regret, survivor’s guilt, the damage done to survivors—you learn to live with it, but the pain never fully goes away. It’s like a gaping hole in your life, and as time goes by you get better at stepping around it but it’s always there.

This description nails it Kirk. A good friend of mine lost his wife and later his son both to suicide. The degree to which he is broken is visibly noticeable and never seems to fade, we all see the brave face he puts on for our benefit, but we all know he is just stepping around that hole. For him it is a very real fucking tragedy.

 

I am so sorry to read that. It’s so disheartening because, really, all you can do is try to be supportive. You can’t undo the past or “fix” anything.

My favorite first cousin’s son-in-law lost both parents shortly after his marriage to her daughter; the father was a pilot and crashed his plane after having a mid-flight heart attack; a couple of years later the wife—who along with the son found the wreckage and the body—took her own life.

The son, from what my cousin has told me, is just going through the motions. He’s a father—the baby is the only joy that family has experienced in a while—and keeping going for his son and wife seem to be the only thing he’s capable of. He was paralyzed with grief—lost the family farm and all the equipment they had owned (he and his father had worked other farmer’s land for hire) in no small part because he simply stopped paying bills, let alone working.

He’s pulled out of it a bit, but I suspect he’ll never be whole. I don’t know the young man (they live way down in southwestern Kansas, quite a distance from my childhood home in eastern Nebraska, which I only visit for a few days every year or two) but my heart aches for him, his wife, and my cousin and her husband.

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
12 June 2018 06:33
 

I’m hesitant to say something so sociologically incorrect, but here goes. 

The examples above are about people who were beloved who committed suicide.  What about people who are not beloved?  Does anyone grieve that Adolf Hitler committed suicide? 

Suicide is a tragedy because it closes the door to what could have been.  If the most miserable, homeless, life-long drug addict decides to end it all, people feel a pang that maybe, somehow, he could have been lifted out of his hell and lived a happy life.  This compassion is an essential component of our psyche.  It enables human society to exist as something other than a brutal hierarchy.  Thus, our social services set up clean needle exchanges and supply first responders with Narcan.  In my town, the central library keeps Narcan on hand because drug users come into the library for shelter, and some have od’ed.  However, the debate continues as to how much a society can do, should do, for those who make poor decisions. 

I realize this is far from the discussion of Anthony Bourdain or the dear friends and family members people have mentioned above.  But my own mind took me to these thoughts because of the person I know who is so low, but also so stubborn in his delusions.  I struggle in discerning my part to play, my responsibility. 

We feel responsible for one another.  Relationships are the most rewarding aspects of our life here on earth.  We have to believe that, as long as there is life, there is hope.

[ Edited: 12 June 2018 06:35 by hannahtoo]
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3494
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
12 June 2018 09:11
 
hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 06:33 AM

...
I realize this is far from the discussion of Anthony Bourdain or the dear friends and family members people have mentioned above.  But my own mind took me to these thoughts because of the person I know who is so low, but also so stubborn in his delusions.  I struggle in discerning my part to play, my responsibility. 

We feel responsible for one another.  Relationships are the most rewarding aspects of our life here on earth.  We have to believe that, as long as there is life, there is hope.

Just as there are many causes and types of depression and mental illnesses, there are differences in how we can help and respond.  In the case of ‘situational’ depression, where the one we care about has been brought down by grief or other losses, we can be there to listen, to offer a shoulder to cry on, and to offer help where we can.  Sometimes to encourage or help them find professional help.  Of course, there are no guarantees, but we can only do what we can do.

However, with long-term depression and some types of mental illness, where the person is self-destructive and resists help, what can be done is more limited.  Just as one must accept that they can’t cure a loved one of cancer, there may be times when it must be accepted that there is only so much that can be done in regards to some mental illnesses.  I don’t mean to say to give up all hope, but only that it may not be fair to yourself to take it all on your shoulders.  Of course, there will be sadness at seeing a loved one’s suffering, but when a caregiver has done all that they can reasonably do, I think they should try to give themselves a break and not be hard on themselves for not being able to solve the unsolvable.

 
 
Quadrewple
 
Avatar
 
 
Quadrewple
Total Posts:  484
Joined  28-04-2017
 
 
 
12 June 2018 12:19
 

Some things to note:

1.  It is mostly men who (successfully) commit suicide.
2.  The opioid crisis may skew results, though I would argue if someone is doing potentially lethal amounts of opioids, they are committing suicide slowly.  The same underlying issues are there even if the choice is not deliberate.

I would argue that the male role in society has been undermined in many ways - but even if you don’t believe that, the popularity of the “MGTOW” movement and other “red pill” stuff among men shows that this is a widely held male perception.  It seems obvious that this perception would lead to a lack of enthusiasm for life, and that the perception is a problem whether or not you believe it is based on reality.

As for the rise in female suicides, I also believe the female role in society has been undermined to a similar extent as with males.  The thing that most fundamentally differs women from men is the ability to have children, and this is not encouraged to nearly the extent it once was.

The complex division of labor which used to exist between genders has been lessened significantly, and I think people are confused by that.  I think the psychology of both men and women is in dissonance with the messages sent to both genders about their roles (or lack thereof).  There is also a disconnect between the world previous generations grew up in this regard and and the reality which exists out there right now which leads to even more confusion among young people.

I would be interested to see the data on suicide for parents in the 15-34 age range - I suspect it would be far lower.  I think suicide becomes a much more difficult choice to make when you are leaving behind children, and being a parent takes up time and provides a very concrete meaning and responsibility, which leaves less time and energy for existential crisis.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

As for Anthony Bourdain, Joe Rogan had remarked on his podcast that AB had claimed to be the happiest he had ever been in his life in the few months before this suicide.  There is speculation his wife/girlfriend cheated on him.  Whether or not that was true, I could easily see someone riding the biggest wave of happiness they’d ever felt in their lives, and then for whatever reason, fell off the wave, and couldn’t handle returning to baseline (or much lower than baseline if some negative event precipitated the state of mind which led him to suicide).

The crazy thing with him is that he had enough money to do every single thing possible to try to increase his happiness.  He had money for the best therapists in the world, he had money for daily massages, for cryotherapy, for meditation retreats, for ayahuasca ceremonies, etc etc and he certainly had the intelligence to know these things were possible and efficacious.  I think he must have had some really severe emotional damage and/or guilt (whether deserved or not).  He may have fallen into the trap of constantly running from his past with his obsession with achievement (clearly a highly driven individual).  He used to be an addict, but apparently he was able to treat the symptom (addiction) but not the underlying cause (whatever that may be).

If you aren’t successful and have demons which you are capable and willing to hide, no one wants to be your friend, but at least they are not positively reinforcing a false image you project.  If you are successful and have demons which you are capable and willing to hide, everyone wants to be your friend, but deep down you know the extent of what you are hiding from them.  The latter situation leads to massive cognitive dissonance and isolation.

Perhaps he wasn’t able to handle the personality disintegration associated with long-term positive change which Dabrowski talks about in his fantastic book “Positive Disintegration.”  It is hard enough to deal with disintegration as a teenager and young adult - I would imagine the later in life one attempts this, and the more public one’s persona, the more difficult this process would be, as your self-image is that much more solidified and positively reinforced by others, and your brain is that much less adaptable.

All in all, I feel sorry for Anthony Bourdain, but I feel WAY more sorry for his daughter.  There are definitely people struggling with issues just as bad as his and worse who don’t have nearly the opportunities he does for recovery, who don’t have kids, and still choose to live on and fight another day.  It is simply a different story once you bring kids into the equation, and I think his suicide sends a very hopeless message to all those I referred to in the last sentence.

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
12 June 2018 14:44
 

I don’t see “undermining” of roles, male or female as a major problem.  What some call “undermining,” others see as broadening opportunities or giving choices.  Change can result in some confusion.  But it need not be overwhelming

In the past, men were expected to be the sole bread winners.  Yes, that could instill pride, if a man succeeded.  However, there never was a time when men were guaranteed an admiring wife and a successful job. Now another option is to marry a woman who helps financially support the couple and provide a more stable lifestyle than he could do on his own.  They can share responsibilities, however they choose.  That isn’t such a bad arrangement.  And for women, many have felt stifled by the expectation of domesticity.  Some prefer careers.  Child bearing is not the only measure of success.  Today, families can manage child care with different combos of daycare, extended family, and stay-at-home-parent options.  More flexible work schedules in many careers help out too. 

When men and women are given few options, as in the idealized good ol’ days, there is much stress in trying to conform by those who don’t fit.  Yes, now there is more role uncertainty, but more freedom. 

The American who has spent the most days in space is actually a female astronaut, Peggy Whitson (she is married with no children).  She was tasked to command the International Space Station twice.  And meanwhile Mr. Rogers spent a successful career working gently with children.

 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1900
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
12 June 2018 15:26
 
Quadrewple - 12 June 2018 12:19 PM

. . .

As for Anthony Bourdain, Joe Rogan had remarked on his podcast that AB had claimed to be the happiest he had ever been in his life in the few months before this suicide.  There is speculation his wife/girlfriend cheated on him.  Whether or not that was true, I could easily see someone riding the biggest wave of happiness they’d ever felt in their lives, and then for whatever reason, fell off the wave, and couldn’t handle returning to baseline (or much lower than baseline if some negative event precipitated the state of mind which led him to suicide).

The crazy thing with him is that he had enough money. . . .

I don’t think money helps people who have clinical depression. If a poorly presented or constructed airport hamburger could cause Bourdain to spiral into a formidable depression, perhaps obsession and other mental health failures put him over the edge when he noticed his young girlfriend’s wavering attention.

 

 
 
Quadrewple
 
Avatar
 
 
Quadrewple
Total Posts:  484
Joined  28-04-2017
 
 
 
12 June 2018 16:40
 
hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

I don’t see “undermining” of roles, male or female as a major problem.  What some call “undermining,” others see as broadening opportunities or giving choices.  Change can result in some confusion.  But it need not be overwhelming

 

I realize it doesn’t necessarily have to be overwhelming, but when you add complexity and choice into a situation, it necessarily determines that the those with the most complex and/or open minds are more adaptable to the new environment which results.  At some level, our disagreement on whether or not this added choice is overall a good thing relies on the projection of our own personality traits onto humanity at large, or at least our assessment of humanity at large, so there may not be much to discuss unless we go there.

Gender roles were more important than ever before birth control, in order to make sure children were taken care of.  Gender roles were important for concrete purposes.  Now that we have birth control AND legally enforced child support AND low infant mortality AND less scarcity than ever AND no fault divorce and alimony, the importance of gender roles is more subtle.

I’m arguing that gender roles, while not as important for concrete purposes as they once were, are as important as they ever were for psychological purposes.  So much of men’s competitiveness is around the ability to provide for and attract the most fertile female mate/s he can.  If women in society aren’t in need of a provider, you don’t see how that creates cognitive dissonance in males between his instinctual drives and the reality which exists?  If women are not primarily concerned with using their fertility to provide men with children, you don’t see how that creates cognitive dissonance in both sexes?  You don’t see how that could lead to nihilism, if it is left undiscussed, or worse, if these natural biological urges are discouraged by society at large?

Remember, it is mostly men who commit suicide - that is a consistent statistic across the globe, and it is nearly by a factor of 2.  The ratio of male to female suicide is MUCH higher in Europe and America than the global average.  If male suicide has nothing to do with gender roles, why is there this stark contrast in the areas which have most abandoned traditional gender roles?  I think that’s an obvious question to ask, and a difficult one to answer, which is why I’m bringing it up.

hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

In the past, men were expected to be the sole bread winners.  Yes, that could instill pride, if a man succeeded.  However, there never was a time when men were guaranteed an admiring wife and a successful job.

You’re right, but at least a man knew what to aim for, and he was given very consistent messages throughout society on what he was supposed to aim for and WHY.  That is largely not the case now, and part of that is a failing of society to adapt in a healthy way to the post-birth control, post-feminist world.  We as a society are not putting nearly enough focus on how we’re supposed to adapt to this quasi post-evolutionary society…...the mainstream media and academia has a habit of just calling all the changes good, and tough luck if you’re having problems with the added complexity.  Whether or not you want some type of return to traditional gender roles is irrelevant to acknowledging the lack of communication of this basic truth.

hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

Now another option is to marry a woman who helps financially support the couple and provide a more stable lifestyle than he could do on his own.  They can share responsibilities, however they choose.  That isn’t such a bad arrangement.

Okay, but can we agree that suicide is ultimately acting out the following thought: “My life is not living up to the ideal which I have, and never will.”

If we can agree on that, then my question is, is what you just described a man’s ideal situation?  Don’t you think the ideal situation for many man is being able to provide a very stable lifestyle for himself AND his woman, who cooks meals, takes care of the house, and has hobbies/friends/part time work to keep her busy?  I already know not every man can achieve this and not every woman wants this, but that’s not my point.  Don’t you think the lack of gender roles has led to less women with those skills?  Don’t you think the lack of gender roles has led to less men with the skills they are valued for (fixing things, protecting women, etc)?

hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

And for women, many have felt stifled by the expectation of domesticity.  Some prefer careers.

I’m aware of that.  I think it’s worth pointing out that when I was a young child fantasizing about love, I never fantasized about a woman who had a great career - in fact I never imagined her working.  I fantasized about a beautiful young woman who I could show the world to and provide every thing I had for (not just money).

That mythology in my head was glorious, and the result of cultural programming throughout the centuries.  What is the mythology around a lack of gender roles that is compelling enough to get men to persevere through all the hardships of life?  I would argue it doesn’t exist, and it needs to exist for men to have something to aspire to.  The MGTOW movement provides men with what I see as a very depressing mythology (sleep around, make money for yourself, don’t have kids) - but it is clearly preferable to the mythology around a lack of gender roles to the guys who identify with it.  The old mythology that I grew up with is barely even viable at this point - marriage exposes men to financial rape and alimony, most women don’t have the traits/skills I’m looking for in a woman, and most women are spending their prime fertile years studying for degrees…..something which I really couldn’t care less whether or not a woman has.

The post-feminist mythology lauds gender equality as the highest virtue.  But do men really care if women make the same money as them?  Do women want to date men who make as much money or less than them or is their ideal to date men who make MORE than them?  In other words, is this mythology even in line with what women and men actually respond to in the real world?  Why are there all these super rich old moguls going out with supermodels?  It’s almost as if the actual male/female ideal doesn’t come close to resembling equality…..

hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

Child bearing is not the only measure of success.

But see, you’re talking about success - I’m talking about psychology.  I didn’t say the disintegration of gender roles led to a “lack of success,” I’m saying it has psychological pitfalls.

hannahtoo - 12 June 2018 02:44 PM

When men and women are given few options, as in the idealized good ol’ days, there is much stress in trying to conform by those who don’t fit.  Yes, now there is more role uncertainty, but more freedom.

Yes, but what are we as a society doing with that freedom?  Are women more satisfied with their lives now than when they accepted gender roles?

(The answer seems to be unequivocally NO by the way)  I’m really not idealizing the “good old days” - I’m simply pointing out the problems which currently exist which are not being addressed, and that it does not follow from the idea that men and women should be treated equally under the law that men and women should be aiming for and directed towards the same goals.

 
 
sojourner
 
Avatar
 
 
sojourner
Total Posts:  5970
Joined  09-11-2012
 
 
 
12 June 2018 19:14
 

Quadrewple, if you don’t mind my asking, do you have kids? Feel free to tell me it’s none of my damn business, of course, just wondering because I feel like you might have a slightly romanticized notion of traditional domestic life with kids. I also think it’s a fantasy to think that women could just focus on making themselves pretty, well coiffed good cooks and expect to easily find someone they’d want to be married to in 2018. People are getting married later if at all and the dating market is competitive these days - you may personally think a Donna Reed archetype is what men are looking for, but this is not the impression I get from my friends who are single women, especially the younger ones. (And if you don’t want to take my word for it, note that higher levels of education are associated with increased rates of marriage.)


Regarding a man’s ‘natural’ role as a provider - you yourself used the archetype of the rich mogul and the young supermodel. If the rich mogul is so programmed to be a devoted provider, where the hell is his first wife? All that reinforces is the stereotype that men are not particularly programmed for monogamy, which actually goes against the idea of traditional marriage.


As I’ve said before, I do agree with you in that I think modern life puts a lot of obstacles in the way of women (and men, to a lesser extent) who want to start a family during the years when nature designed us to reproduce. Do I think that quality of life for millions, probably billions, of people around the globe has been improved by doubling the workplace in many areas - doubling the number of innovators, inventors, bright people contributing to society and projects and various groups and so on? Absolutely. I think moving away from that would set us back a lot. That said, it is true that there has been limited innovation in helping young people to both have families and work. The answer generally seems to be that parents simply have to do double-duty now, and are often constantly exhausted as a result. I realize that workplace daycares and various other subsidies are expensive, but so is either: 1) Losing half your workforce or 2) Not having a younger generation. With the amount working women have contributed to the economy, I do wish it was more of a priority.

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
13 June 2018 07:20
 

Quad,
You thesis seems to be that too many men are suffering psychological pain due to indefinite gender roles, so women should limit themselves to being homemakers and mothers.  You state,

I fantasized about a beautiful young woman who I could show the world to and provide every thing I had for (not just money)...

...Don’t you think the ideal situation for many man is being able to provide a very stable lifestyle for himself AND his woman, who cooks meals, takes care of the house, and has hobbies/friends/part time work to keep her busy?

I believe that this seems to be an ideal for some men, but first, they are are modern, not hard-wired.  Second, they have changed for good reasons.  And third, the changes do not represent the actual reasons for most suicides.

1.  In primitive cultures, yes the women did most of the cooking and child-rearing, with the men venturing farther afield to hunt.  But the wives were not child-like with men as a benevolent dictators.  In most cultures, women had the essential roles of gathering wild food and tending crops.  Whole villages—men, women, and children—would participate in netting fish during a salmon run, or flushing and rounding up small game.  Bison were stampeded over a cliff, and everyone would work together to carve up the animals. 

2.  Human cultures are very diverse.  While some accorded equal dignity to men and women, others treated women as property. They had no rights outside of marriage.  Think of the Chinese women with bound feet.  The Irish women with 10+ children.  The strict Muslim women who could not leave the house alone or unveiled. The Medieval Welsh law that men could beat their wives with a stick as thick as their thumb and as long as their forearm.  Men who expect to be in control can become tyrants.  The only way to prevent these sort of abuses was to give women equal rights and birth control.

3.  No one is saying that Anthony Bourdain killed himself due to confusion of male/female roles.  Most likely it he had a life-long struggle with depression and drug abuse.  My bet is that a great many suicides have these same causes.  In any society, mental illness and substance abuse lead to terrible consequences. 

In summary, many people who have difficulties in life look outward, trying to assign blame.  These days, some men say, “Those **** feminists have screwed everything up!”  When actually, the same causes of despair have existed forever:  poverty, inter-personal strife, illness, loss, trauma.

Back in the ol’ days, grade school teachers were young unmarried women or older spinsters.  However, millennials were schooled by women teachers who had families.  They knew these women sometimes took time off when their sons were ill or when they attended their daughters’ graduations.  They watched teachers who were pregnant grow large, leave to give birth, and return sometime later.  As a consequence, they see a combo of working and motherhood as the natural course of life.  They don’t expect to be sole bread-winners, and they do expect to share responsibilities with a wife.

 

[ Edited: 13 June 2018 07:40 by hannahtoo]
 
 < 1 2 3 4 >