Male Suicide: Why are Men Leaving? Part I

feminist-governments-are-silent

John Davis[1]

Part I
Gender Cleansing

 

“No man is an Iland. . . .

Any mans death diminishes me,

For I am involved in Mankinde;

And therefore, never send to know

For whom the bell tolls;

It tolls for thee.”   – John Donne (1541)

 

 

This is the Author’s first in a series of articles on male suicide.

Unnoticed, in our gynocentric world, the rate of men taking their own lives has dramatically accelerated in the last half of a century.

Suicide is now the single most common cause of death for active duty service men; there are now over 38,000 suicides in the U.S. each year, and, of those 38,000, 30,400 victims are male; 83 men commit suicide every day; men commit suicide at 4 times the rate of women.[2] The rate of men being afflicted more than women has been increasing in the past 14 years, and, the rate at which men commit suicide, more than women, has been skyrocketing in the past ten years.[3]

Feminism routinely accuses men, and our culture, of “patriarchal conspiracies” to oppress women. Perhaps it is appropriate to view the current epidemic in male suicides in a light that demonstrates a similar knowing and wilfull effort to oppress men by denying them the health care, and other relief, needed to prevent suicide. The concept of a deliberate (or at least a socially accepted) effort to reduce the number of men in our culture is no less probable than the feminist accusation of a “patriarchal conspiracy.”

The fact that these tragic suicides of Men goes unnoticed in the media provides us with a strong indicator of the cause of men leaving us through suicide.

 

Why Are Men Committing Suicide?

Most people, and institutions in our culture just don’t care that men are committing suicide. Our culture has become so misandrist (hateful of men), and so gynocentric (centered on pleasing women) that institutional misandry in universities, government, religion and the media compels us to ignore the fact that men, as a group, are suffering tremendously in our culture from gender oppression.

This “gender oppression” arose from relentless feminist influence on our institutions over the past 50 years. At first, that feminist influence appeared benign. Feminism pretended for five decades to be a movement towards “equality” between men and women. Feminism, however, was a disguised movement to provide women with massive privileges, at the expense of men. This has led to an almost habitual discrimination against men in our culture, and in our institutions. This discrimination and hatred of men is only recently coming to light. The extent of this discrimination against men has become so extreme, that only now can we begin to get a glimpse of the design of how our institutions are knowingly, and purposefully, trying to use “passive-aggressive”[4] means of eliminating men in larger and larger numbers.

 

Health Funding Denied for Suicidal Men

For clarity, let’s look at an example, of male oppression, for clarity. Under the influence of the feminist lobby, the U.S. Congress appropriates $500,000,000 (Five Hundred Million Dollars) each year to Planned Parenthood. Although Planned Parenthood renders some token services to men, (in order to have the illusion of gender fairness), the vast majority of Planned Parenthood’s budget is earmarked specifically for “women’s health.” Which is why modern feminists protest loudly at any attempts to cut Planned Parenthood’s budget as “an attack on women’s health” (not men’s health), or, they protest that a cut in Planned Parenthood’s budget is “part of the war on women.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D. MA) is the leading spokeswoman proclaiming (and admitting) that the half billion dollars spent on Planned Parenthood is primarily for the benefit of Women’s Health (but not inclusive of men’s health issues).

A vote today to defund Planned Parenthood is not a vote to defund abortions. It’s a vote to defund cancer screenings, and birth control, and basic healthcare for millions of women.

She continues,

Let’s be really clear about something: The Republican scheme to defund Planned Parenthood is not some sort of surprised response to a highly-edited video. Nope. The Republican vote to defund Planned Parenthood is just one more piece of a deliberate, methodical, orchestrated, right-wing attack on women’s rights. And I’m sick and tired of it. Women everywhere are sick and tired of it. The American people are sick and tired of it. — Elizabeth Warren[5]

As benign as Planned Parenthood may be, in providing health services for women, why is there no counterbalancing funding to provide critical health services for men – especially for men who are suffering from clinical depression and suicidal tendencies? “Reproductive health services” are important, but aren’t neglected life saving health services for men, who are on the brink of suicide, at least as important? Is this gender inequality something that is acceptable? Or, is this gender inequality something that may be insidious, intentional, and part of a war on men and masculinity? Is it part of a plan of “gender cleansing?”

Gender cleansing is a feminist term that refers to artificial adjustments to the ratio of males and females in populations. Although feminists typically apply the term “gender cleansing” only to a reduction in females in populations, we can draw a parallel for government and cultural actions, and lack of action, to apply “gender cleansing” to efforts to reduce the number of men in populations.

Is feminism Driving Gender Cleansing of Men?

Sen. Warren and her followers are ardent feminists. Does that mean that they are seeking “equality” between men and women, or, does that mean they have declared war on men and masculinity? Our corporate controlled media has, for decades, portrayed feminism as a benign movement for equality between men and women. However, an examination of the true roots of feminism shows that it may very well be an intentional war on men, and masculinity; it may very well be a deadly war in which the objective is to cleanse our modern industrialized populations of both men, and masculinity.

 

“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at 10% of the human race.” Sally Miller Gearhart (First Wave Feminist Leader)

 

One way to advance a war against men, and masculinity, is to promote the death of men through suicide, and passively-aggressively denying aid to men who are suicidal. Denying government funding toward male suicide prevention, and, fostering gynocentric programs that, arguably, are partly the cause of men committing suicide, may very well be an intentional plan on the part of feminist lobbies, (and the politicians, industries and media who gain from serving gynocentric powers).

From first wave feminism to the present, feminism has accused men of actively conspiring to suppress women’s rights, keep women in subservient roles, deny women access to men’s “privileges,” and deny women “equal opportunities” in all areas of our culture. Yet, many people find it implausible that feminists, in conjunction with the self-seekers who support them for economic or political benefits, are deliberately orchestrating a means of eliminating men from our culture (much as a beehive purges itself of male bees just before winter).

As feminism has gained power in the corporate media, government, education and other institutions, it has succeeded in increasing the disposability of men. Men fought wars for human freedom; men labored at great personal cost to physically build our infrastructure; men devoted their lives to the development of arts, science and philosophies that serve humanity; men gave their lives to fight for decent wages, and decent working conditions, and they fought, at great expense to their health and longevity, to raise the standard of living for every human on the planet. Now that men have built modern civilization, they seem to be “irrelevant” to those who want to enjoy the benefits of that civilization without shouldering the burdens of its creation. If there is a deliberate tolerance of such policies, or, even an unaware indifference to such policies, it is sufficient to be one of the principal macro-causes of men committing suicide.

 

Misandry and Demonizing Men as a Cause of Suicide

Hatred of Men has become an obsession with feminism and the institutions (media, government and education) that support feminism. Hatred of Men (misandry) has risen in intensity over the past 50 years to the point of being considered an acceptable and encouraged aspect of our culture.[6] In the name of political correctness the organized and corporatized media in our culture has emphasized, relentlessly, in films, TV programming and advertising that men are little more than buffoons, or are nothing more than nuisances to those who are currently in power. In other words, our institutions frequently, if not routinely, seem to regard men as disposable.

This organized and deliberate campaign to demonize and demean men, their sexuality, their values, their history, and diminish every incentive that Men have to participate in our culture, can have no other effect than to demoralize Men, and, drive Men into despondency over their natural birthrights.

This organized campaign to demonize and demoralize Men, because of their animus[7] and gender differences, seems aimed (either recklessly or deliberately) at the most vulnerable among us. Suicide is rarely a matter of “choice” or a rational decision. Although Men in desperate circumstances have sometimes committed suicide as a rational act (suicide was common in warrior cultures such as the Samurai culture in Japan, and, among warriors in Ancient Rome), modern suicide by men is almost exclusively an act of hopelessness, despondency and despair that is part of clinical depression.

In future articles in this series we will explore some of the specifics of clinical depression as it affects Men, and, how misandry promotes clinical depression in men. We’ll also explore some of the aspects of our culture, and its open hatred of men, that causes men who are vulnerable to clinical depression to commit suicide. Finally, we’ll try in future articles to advance some solutions to the problem of Men leaving us through suicide.

 

About the Author:

Please visit John’s AMAZON author’s page at: http://www.amazon.com/John-Davis-BA-JD-LLM/e/B00O2JS3HW/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0

John Davis (1953 – ) was born in Cleveland, Ohio. He was educated at Case Western Reserve University (BA) (one of the top ten universities in the United States), Seattle University School of Law (JD), and, New York University School of Law (LL.M post-doctoral) (one of the top ten law schools in the United States). John is fluent in seven languages (including ancient Latin and Greek). He has travelled the world over, many times, and has represented clients, in his thirty five year career, such as the United States Government and the Federation of Russia.

He has been a prosecutor three times in his 35 year career. He has held positions such as Assistant Attorney General, United States Speaker, and Assistant District Attorney, Chief Wing JAG, U. S. Air Force Auxilliary, and Supreme Court Law Clerk.

For most of his career in civil law, John was a successful international lawyer, practicing in many nations around the world.

John has authored the following MRA books:

Female Sex Predators: A Crime Epidemic

Women Who Rape Men

False Accusations of Rape: Lynching in the 21st. Century

How to Avoid False accusations of Rape

Women of the Klan: Foundations of Modern Feminism

Rape Hysteria: Lying with Rape Statistics

 

[1] Bacheloris Artis, Case Western Reserve University 1975; Juris Doctor, Seattle University School of Law 1981; Legis Magister, New York University School of Law 1984.

[2] Suicide in America: Frequently Asked Questions (2015), National Institute of Mental Health. http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/suicide-faq/index.shtml

[3] Suicide Statistics, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (2016). https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

[4] Definition of passive-aggressive in English: passive-aggressive, adj., Of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials. Oxford English Dictionary, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/passive-aggressive

[5] 162 Cong. Rec. 124 (August 3, 2015) (statement of Sen. Elizabeth Warren) [[Pages S6215-S6228] https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/2015/8/3/senate-section/article/s6215-1

[6] See generally, Nathanson, Paul & Young, Katherine, Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2d. Ed., 2006; Nathanson, Paul & Young, Katherine, Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2006; Nathanson, Paul & Young, Katherine, Replacing Misandry: A Revolutionary History of Men, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2015.

[7] animus, animi, noun, L. declension: 2nd declension gender: masculine. Definitions: male air, male feelings, male heart, male intellect, male mind, male soul, male spirit, courage, character, pride.   Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1982.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s