Moped rider
So how does previous context (I think it a little unreasonable to bas interpretation on subsequent context, given it has not been supplied at the time of interpretation) make a direct and unambiguous reply to a question, mean something completely different?Originally Posted by TheDemonLord
I did pick one, as I called out the the 'not added at my whim' part was not applying to you.
The Majestic Metal Wizard
If only it had something to do with what accusation was leveled against you, by me.
If only...
If only subsequent posts had shown this to be the correct Context.
If only...
Right, so first it's you have a Standard, then it's your Standard with an Exception, then it's your Standard, but this exception is mandated by some ethereal 'other' (that's not you), that you have no control over and are 100% definitely not implementing arbitrarily to avoid discussion.
Sounds a lot like backpedaling...
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
The Majestic Metal Wizard
Simply repeating yourself, without actually rebutting any of the points I've made - is making you look like a fool who is sticking his fingers in his ears and reduced to reciting Mantras of faith to ward off the evil spirits of reality.
There are numerous points that you raise and cite as 'FACT' - which I've not only not disagreed with (so why bother reposting?) but have in fact linked them to various ideological utterances - which bolster the point I'm making.
It's curious that you never actually address that last part. Almost like you know you're wrong...
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Forum whore
Took you a while to figure that one out.
Anorak
You don't have any points you just spout further opinionated unsubstantiated drivel.
i am posting facts that are the real time tested repeatable drivers of Teen suicide.
I keep posting them as you seem to need constant reminders of what is real and what is simply your opinion.
Everything i raised as a fact is a fact about suicide.
They are postd for the reason that they are facts, not your self-serving masturbation of what you think.
As for my last bit bolstering your view yeah right.
More female attempt suicide than men do.Not only that, the recidivist rate for females attempting suicide is far higher as well.
So logically it can’t clearly be the reason why they attempt it, there is must only effect the success rate then?
So exactly how can you say that due to radical feminism that somehow s men want to kill themselves more often than women do, because it certainly doesn't make them more prone to attempt suicide than women now does it?
Yet the whole basis of your claim is the reason for the difference in male and female suicide, is the raving of some feminists, few have ever heard of, let alone the victims, let alone reading or listened too, yet it is emasculating young men. making more men want to kill themselves than women.
Only issue for you is. The answer clearly is, this not the case at all. As more women attempt to kill themselves than men do.
Here is your chance why not post some facts that actually back up your opinion.
By, fact i dont mean cherry picked data.
#hint the fact that katspam is "stroking you on" should be the first clue.
Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken
The Majestic Metal Wizard
Except for all the 'Facts' you've posted, I've not disputed any of them - so why keep posting them?
What I have done is linked a number of them to Feminist talking points (you know - the thing you keep ignoring)
You say 'Yeah Right' - but curiously, you have yet to actually make a rebuttal.
Attempt, but not complete. More young Men kill themselves than Women.
Some Feminists? Considering one of them is referred to as 'The Mother of Modern Feminism' - this isn't the fringe ravings of someone, these are the statements and ideas of figureheads of the movement.
But even that is a misdirection, you don't need to know specifics about the people that came up with these ideas, in order to be aware of the existence of those Ideas. You've probably not heard of Chuck Schuldiner, nor Chris Barnes, nor Pete Sandoval - yet I'm going to suspect you are aware of the concept of 'Death Metal', I'd even go so far as to suggest that if you heard some, you'd be able to identify it as such.
As proof of this:
You've heard of The Guardian? You've heard of the terms "Patriarchy", "Toxic Masculinity", "Rape Culture" etc? You've heard of Affirmative Consent? These ideas come from a single source. They have entered into our social fabric, they have formed government policy, education policy, Adverts, changes to existing, beloved IP etc.
So yes, it is Emasculating to young men - young men who actually go out and kill themselves, as opposed to young women who only pretend to.
That presupposes that Men and Women are identical and react identically to the tenants of Feminism.
That's neither supported by Biology, Psychology or Sociology.
Why? You've already posted enough facts - a number of which can trace a causal link to Feminist Activism - which you have yet to actually address.
So, I'll back up my opinion with the Facts you, yourself provided, I've added in some relevant references to source material that you've yet to actually address - so how about you back up why this opinion is wrong?
And no, calling them 'Silly Bints' (as much as I agree with the characterization) and trying to play a sleight of hand that since the average person doesn't know about a specific person, they can't be aware of the ideas that said person popularised, that isn't going to cut it.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Anorak
Still no facts from you. i have challenged you to produce facts to back your opinion, again you have failed.
You claim there is links in the facts i have posted, yet you don't address them. In any logical maner
As i can be bothered with you anymore, i will lt the NZ mental health foundation spell it out for you.
As they seem to have more patience.
You remember how much we laugh each time Katspam claims he knows more tha experts.
One piece of Dawsons editorial also deverses special mention.A response to the newspaper editor who thinks feminism may cause male suicide
On Thursday Mark Dawson, the editor of the Wanganui Chronicle, published an editorial suggesting that ‘the growing empowerment of women’ is partly to blame for New Zealand’s high rate of male suicide. The Mental Health Foundation’s Sophia Graham responds.
Dear Mr Dawson,
I read your editorial ‘Tough topic we need to talk about’ with dismay. Many people responded with outrage to your speculation that male suicide is caused by female empowerment, and the Mental Health Foundation echoes the criticism you have received and strongly encourages you to issue an immediate retraction and apology. I note that NZME, publisher of your paper, has already removed your column from their website.
You wrote of the disproportionate number of men dying by suicide compared to women, suggesting: “one explanation for this disproportion may be the growing empowerment of women and their increasing role in society.”
“…Is it an unfortunate side effect that men feel less secure, less sure of their place in a world where they were once more dominant?”
Firstly, to answer your question, no, male suicides are not “an unfortunate side effect” of recent female empowerment. Male suicide rates have been significantly higher than female suicide rates since at least the 1920s. Many countries see a similar pattern. Suicide prevention research since the 1920s has found changes in male suicide rates are tied more closely to economic pressures than changing social roles.
Mr Dawson, your comments are not only wrong, they’re dangerous. We know many men still find it extremely difficult to ask for help when they’re going through a hard time. Alongside other agencies in New Zealand we work hard, every day, to encourage men not to let pride or fear prevent them from seeking and accepting the help they need. We all go through difficult times and we all deserve support.
Your editorial undermines this message and reinforces toxic stereotypes that contribute to men feeling they must soldier on and never show a sign of weakness.
I encourage you to reflect not only on the anger caused by your ill-informed words, but also the hurt. There are thousands of empowered women around New Zealand who have used their agency and education to work to support men from all walks of life to seek help and recover from challenges they face throughout their lives.
Among your readers will be countless women who live with the grief of suicide loss every day, who may have read your editorial and felt guilt or shame and perhaps wondered whether if they had just been a little less empowered and more dependent, their loved one might still be alive. This is a disgraceful message to send to these women. You owe each of them an apology.
Many people who have lost someone to suicide are left with questions that are difficult or impossible to answer. They seek desperately to understand why their loved one took their life and what could have prevented it. Contrary to your headline, your editorial shed no light on this issue for them but instead sought to place blame where none is warranted.
Additionally, you showed a marked lack of compassion toward women who live with depression, anxiety and other mental illnesses. Women experience almost twice the rates of psychological distress as men and are more than twice as likely to be hospitalised for intentional self-harm. The issue is not as black and white as you would have it appear. There are no winners here.
As an editor of a newspaper, you should know better. Journalists have an important role in shaping social attitudes to, and perceptions of, suicide. Your careless and dangerous words betrayed the trust your readers place in you as an editor and a leading voice in your community.
I acknowledge your editorial contained some valid and interesting remarks on the how the pressures men face can contribute to suicide. It’s a shame these were left unexplored.
There are a large number of organisations who would be willing to work with you to better understand the complexities of suicide and mental health in New Zealand, the Mental Health Foundation is among them. By talking to suicide prevention experts in your community or the Mental Health Foundation we could work together to support our shared goal of preventing suicide in New Zealand.
Sophia Graham communications and marketing manager at the Mental Health Foundation of New Zealand.https://thespinoff.co.nz/media/01-07...-male-suicide/
[suicide is] one area where women don’t want gender equality
Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken
The Majestic Metal Wizard
So you're ignoring the citations then, from Prominent Feminists.
Are you blind?
What an interesting Article - let's have a look to see the credentials of who wrote it:
https://www.mentalhealth.org.nz/home...ople/person/44
So, definitely no ideological bias there...Working for the MHF has allowed her to pursue her interests in social justice and mental health.
So, if she hates Maths - how can she properly and accurately analyze rates of change?She hates tomatoes. And maths.
Furthermore - I don't see any published papers or research done by her - it's almost like she's just regurgitating the Party Line, in accordance with her Feminist beliefs.
I'll simply point to the likes of JBP, who is most definitely an expert in this field, experts who you claim don't exist.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Anorak
The letter was written on behalf of he NZ Mental health foundation the person who wrote it happens to be woman
Are you seriously that out of touch with reality.
https://www.mentalhealth.org.nz/home...or-mark-dawson
Why would you think you would know more about suicide in NZ than the NZ mental health foundation does?
ps as well as liking twiight novels Sophia has a BA from the University of Auckland, majoring in psychology.
pps i notice still have yet to produce any facts just opinions.
Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken
The Majestic Metal Wizard
And yet, I never critiqued her, based on her Gender... So why did you bring it up?
I critiqued her by showing that her self-declared interests mean that on this issue, she is a biased source.
Read the letter itself, critically, Notice how it's heavily gendered - towards Women? I'll paraphrase:
Paragraph 7: "But all these Women are helping the poor men who can't help themselves"
Paragraph 8: "But your are hurting the feelings of Women who had someone kill themselves, these poor traumitised Women - because fuck those selfish Men who killed themselves, they don't deserve a shred of compassion or an editorial written about them"
Paragraph 10: "But Women attempt it more, so therefore we should only care about them, as opposed to the people who actually kill themselves more (and I'm going to ignore the fact this might be due to a biological predisposition towards being Neurotic because this doesn't align with my beliefs)"
Do I know more about Masculinity than a bunch of SJW Feminists? Absolutely.
And that's a demonstrable fact that they clearly don't understand how the Male Psyche works - how that if you try to repress healthy Male Behavior (Competitiveness, Sexual pursuit, righteous Aggression), you'll end up with a monster of your own creation.
See for example the results of Parents who raised their sons in a gender neutral way, only for their sons to grow up and embrace very traditionally masculine ideals (such as Hunting, taking up Martial arts, joining the Military etc.)
See also the resurgence of Facial hair in modern fashion (I'm looking at you, Hipsters)
See also the hyper-success of the Marvel Super Hero movies
These are all collective rebellions, in an effort to reclaim that which they've lost.
I'll say it again that Men have a paradox in terms of upbringing that is absent from Women: The ideal of what it means to be a Good man is best expressed in this chinese proverb:
The goal is to be the most competent, the most resilient and the most dangerous version of yourself you can be.Master and disciple walked side by side through a beautiful garden. The disciple suddenly stops and asks: Master, you talk about and preach to me the ways of peace. Yet I have learned from you deadly techniques of combat and the tactics of war. How do you reconcile the two? The master gracefully squats, chooses a flower and plucks it. My disciple: it is better to be a warrior tending to his garden than a gardener in a war.
And never have to use it.
But all datapoints that you will no-doubt dismiss aside - this I think is probably the best articulation of the issue
Except all those facts about the stated goals of Feminism and the outcome that said stated goals have had on society, goals, which you yourself have pointed to as a risk factor for Suicide.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Anorak
You are a fool.
The letter from the NZ Mental health foundation, the writers has a Degree in psychology.
As it on the NZ Mental health foundation website and letterhead and was an open letter to a newspaper publication an editorial the the newspaper removed no less, you can bet it was cleared by the foundation before the letter was sent.
Yet you of course think you know better.
You dont have neither the necessary degree of expertise or the objectivity or the qualifications to even begin critique the NZ mental health foundation.
Unless of course you wish to show us your previously unknown vast experience in dealing with mental health issues and suicides or your degree in psychology i would say your opinion is worthless baseless and infantile.
#again you have yet to produce any facts to back up your opinion.
PS
One piece of Dawsons editorial also deverses special mention.
Seems like he really thinks he knows what all women want.[suicide is] one area where women don’t want gender equality
DAVID MACK AGAINST WANGANUI CHRONICLE
CASE NUMBER:2463
COUNCIL MEETING:SEPTEMBER 2015
VERDICT:UPHELD
PUBLICATION:WANGANUI CHRONICLE
RULING CATEGORIES:ACCURACY
BALANCE, LACK OF
BIAS
UNFAIR COVERAGE
The editor, Mark Dawson, denied that the newspaper or its reporter on this story had any bias or agenda against David Mack. Nor did the fact that theChronicle was still owed money by Mr Mack have any influence on its reporting.
Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken
The Majestic Metal Wizard
*Psychology, you can't even cite your own sources correctly.
Indeed - how many people working at that organization do you think are die-hard conservatives? From her own statement - working at the organization has allowed her to pursue an interest in Social Justice - it's a reasonable conclusion to presuppose that the organization is aligned with Social Justice - and as such, aligned with certain intersectional feminist viewpoints.
About Masculinity, yes, I do - none of their theories have proved true in the real world. So on that basis alone - what reason do you have to assume that adherants of Social Justice know better?
Fine - let's take that as Holy Writ then, that experts in a field know more:
How do you explain JBP's conclusion then? Or Warren Farrell? Or Christina Hoff Sommers? Or Bertina Ardntt?
You repeatedly claim there are no experts who support this theory, yet you've repeatedly ignored the Experts that I've presented as supporting this.
Except the stated goals of Prominent Feminists that are tightly aligned with the facts that you cited. You still fail to address these.
No, it's an observation that where Women are perceived as getting less than Men, we get pussyhats, marches, global hashtags, ad nauseum talk show 'discussions' by several champagne socialists stating how awful and oppressive it is (despite clearly not being oppressed).
Yet...
When it's Men getting less than Women -There's a conspicuous silence.
There's constant calls for more Women on the Board, more Women politicians, etc. etc. with the stated reason that these are areas that are disproportionately occupied by Men and therefore something something Sexism something Muh Vagina something.
But curiously I've not seen the campaign for more Women garbage collectors or more Women Sewage workers.
The comment is to show that the call for Equality only ever goes one way.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Anorak
So far you have yet to offer any facts only your opinion
As for your attack on the NZ mental health Foundation their mandate is mental health not feminism.
By you starting that must be biased againdt your view is as hilarious as you failing to mention the writer had a degree psychology.Or was writing on half of the NZ mental Health foundation.
So in your mind because you allegedly have a penis, exactly that qualifies you higher than someone with a psychology degree and the entire NZ mental health foundation to what the causes are for suicide.
Your further self serving twaddle is just more proof you are the one with an axe to grind and a agenda.
I ignore your suposed experts as you have not produced anything, other than video no one will watch and a claim they support your view. Nothing else.
Does this tactic remind you of anyone, all you need to do is throw in a couple of beggings to vacuum your phallus and your metamorphosis will be complete.
The Dawson exert was part of his editorial about suicide you shaved ape
it was a barb at all women, out of line, pathetic, uncalled for and totally wrong.[suicide is] one area where women don’t want gender equality
Kinky is using a feather. Perverted is using the whole chicken
Moped rider
Of course it has to do with that, the things you said before and after, don't line up with the accusation you confirmed applied to me as well. This makes the accusation wrong, and since the statements before and after contradict it; they do not clarify it, since a yes can't be clarified to a no. How can you still dispute this? You're literally arguing against one of the basic underpinnings of rationality, that concepts such as agreement and disagreement exist and are not interchangeable.
It remains all of those things, you might even say I clarified it with the correct context
The Majestic Metal Wizard
Except for the Facts you've repeatedly Ignored.
Except where have I attacked them? The field they represent is well known to have a left-wing bias (There's a Fact for you) and the admission by their staff that it aligns with Social Justice means we are allowed to infer that the organizations holds certain intersectional Feminist ideals.
Which taints the rebuttal (considering the viewpoint espoused is in direct opposition to said ideals) furthermore, the multiple 'What about the Womens' in the article confirms this inference to be correct.
These are some Strawmen of Biblical proportions. No, what I'm saying is that the ideological viewpoint that has a clear majority in said organization has numerous theories (based on Intersectional Feminism - AKA Social Justice), None have been successful when policies based on those theories. Especially when it comes to Men and Masculinity.
Based on the failure of their predictive models - that qualifies me higher to talk about Masculinity.
Look who's been referencing what swings between my legs... Metamorphosis indeed...
If I was going to pull a Katman, I'd have linked to the entire 2 hour lecture, but instead I gave you the 6 minute clip that is entirely relevent to what we are discussing. Namely giving a demonstration of what the difference is between brow-beating someone and giving them the strength to proceed.
FYI - the person that asked the question, they are still alive today - so on that basis I ask you:
Who's a more credible expert when it comes to Suicide prevention?
What's double hilarious about this 'rebuttal' (which is nothing other than pure denialism) is that I deliberately didn't hit you up on an appeal to authority charge: I let you set the standard you were happy with, I then complied with the standard you set - but instead of honestly arguing the point, it's just pure dismissal.
It's your classic hypocritical double standard.
I know - hence why I explained the context.
Are you saying that Women are weak and can't handle getting their feeling hurt?
How very Sexist of you...
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks