3 ms·
That's extremely reductionist. We are human beings, not reproduction machines. The concept of "worth" is much more complex. I don't think a woman can simply bea
by bakhy 11y ago
That's extremely reductionist. We are human beings, not reproduction machines. The concept of "worth" is much more complex. I don't think a woman can simply bear children, and she's good.
I presume you were trying to make a point that this may be a "core" biological difference, which will always lead to a difference in suicide statistics between men and women. You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now. I believe it is high time for a male revolt against patriarchy, and that it might, even if you are right, at least reduce this problem.
- facepalm 11y ago"You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now" After hundreds of thousands of years of existance of humans you think it is too early to talk about that? I consider that ridiculous. You can not simply escape reality by crying "reductionism". Of course it is a statement of averages. Not every woman is fine, things can get in the way. But on average, woman will be considered to be valuable to society no matter what.
- bakhy 11y agoWhat are you talking about? :D I meant, given that we are right now facing this problem of high suicide rates among men, it is definitely too early and too defeatist to ascribe it to biological differences. (If that is what you were trying to say. As I already said, I'm not sure if I understood correctly what you were trying to say.) We have to look at our culture and at ways in which we can change this. Maybe in the end we won't make the problem go away completely, but we must try. That is what I meant.
- facepalm 11y agoI wasn't talking about male suicide specifically. But if you want, I think there should be a lot of data about that already, too.