MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Is it failure?

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 4:09 pm Sun 11th January 2015

This is NOT a post about suicide.

Japan’s fight to change suicide culture hurt by latest recession

“The economy plays a big role,” in the nation’s suicide rate, said Mafumi Usui, a psychology professor at Niigata Seiryo University. That compounds the problem in Japan, because “the notion lingers that taking your own life is something resolute and decisive, something that’s not wrong,” he said.

There’s a reason this caught my attention. Earlier in the day I had seen one of those social media statements that float around, that said surveys on fears put FAILURE as number one ahead of DEATH.

I have no idea of the truth of that statement, it may or may not be correct.

Putting this together:

We know that New Zealand’s suicide rate is comparatively low compared to Japan’s and even internationally.

We also know that New Zealand’s suicide rate used to be substantially lower but male suicide rates boomed out of control to four times that of female suicide, over recent decades.

In both cases above the common denominator may be failure rather than economy or effects of feminist society.

How important is succeeding to the emotional wellbeing of an individual.

What do you think?


  1. The underlying reason for the high suicides are the same: the ideology of feminism is deeply dishonest because it ignores the advantages which women enjoy. Women are financially supported by men, either directly by not working or working part-time, and using the men’s financial resources to support themselves and their children, or, by simply getting pregnant or discarding their partner, using the tax payer ( 2/3 men) to pay for this.

    Women therefore have a deep seated economic security, which enables them to be not only financially secure, but also socially and emotionally supported: since they have taken control of the ownership of children, they are automatically part of a family and societal support.

    For men it is the exact opposite: unless they can financially support a woman and her children, thy cannot be part of a family. In addition, the feminist divorce laws make it 85% probable they will lose custody of their children, and hence their family. In addition the compulsory child support plus alimony will make it far less likely that they can support a new woman, and thus their likelihood of a new family is sharply reduced.

    This equation is the fundamental driver of the despair of men at all times, but especially during recessions: they know if they lose their job they will lose everything.

    Unless men become aware of their marginalisation, and emancipate themselves this trend will continue.

    Comment by Joseph — Sun 11th January 2015 @ 4:59 pm

  2. I think the reaction to Rupert Murdoch’s recent suggestion that all Muslims bear responsibility for the recent bloodbath in France covers it.

    Campaigns like White Ribbon tell us that all men bear responsibility for intimate abuse. David Cunliffe apologised on behalf of all of us. Apparently we men are all responsible for rape, domestic violence and child-abuse – even though there is no shortage of female rapists, child-abusers and intimate-batterers.

    Yet to suggest, in any other context, that the innocent are guilty of the crimes of the few, is apparently an outrage – unless you are a man. Then the logic works in reverse.

    Pardon me, but I think I lost interest in the whole social justice argument.

    Comment by rc — Sun 11th January 2015 @ 8:29 pm

  3. Let’s look at the flip side to that. We don’t know what made that Muslim an extremist just as we don’t know what made that man violent.

    Collectively, we don’t want to be associated with the failure though, and those people are failures because …

    Is an individual Muslin rebelling against society any different to a man rebelling against the Feminist ideology in one woman?

    Another way of looking at Murdoch’s statement would be that the atrocity happened because the religion exists. He may hold the belief that the truly secular state shouldn’t tolerate any form of religion, just as some feminist extremists hold the few that men should no longer exist, only women.

    I am quite sure Muslims genuinely fear the rise of the secular/feminist West, they are watching what is happening no doubt. The two sides can only grow further apart as feminism develops, just as the gulf between men and women can only increase for the same reason.

    If Rome hadn’t developed and failed the way it did, the Christian and Muslim religions most probably wouldn’t exist.

    Opinions of divorce laws were enough to drive empire into civil war. The demands of women were a prominent feature in its inevitable collapse.

    That’s failure on a grand scale.

    Comment by Downunder — Sun 11th January 2015 @ 8:45 pm

  4. What also strikes me as interesting is the Family Courts tendency to not only ignore failure in woman but even endanger a child preferring to give custody to a mother rather than a father, when that option is available.

    A similar trend arises in the demands of feminists; that no woman should be allowed to fail as a mother regardless of the effect on the child.

    Her child, she gave birth to it, and regardless of her behaviour shouldn’t be required to suffer criticism or failure, so standards are lowered to meet the individual’s threshold.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 12th January 2015 @ 6:06 am

  5. @rc

    White Australian men now apologising for Rupert Murdoch

    Is an article run by the independent based on the Twitter response to Murdoch’s tweet.

    What I thought more interesting but I doubt any mainstream paper would pick up was the wild rant from self professed Sydney feminist Liz Shaw and her views on Islam.

    I think my point is pretty clear – being open to Islam and being blase about its entry into the western world could see devastating consequences for women and the gender rights we’re STILL fighting for …
    … the only way is to annihilate Islam. I don’t support death so I have no answer on how to kill off the religion but the religion needs to go.

    This I think relates to the comment Phil Watts made here:

    All authority is an illusion that we have been fooled into thinking is necessary or justified. No man or woman has the right to destroy the children’s right to 50/50 care. Only the truly arrogant think they know better than the biological parents and have the right to decide.

    Shaw’s comments are a rebellion against authority over her (or the collective us she uses to refer to women) but in this case she’s found that threat in religion rather than in men.

    In feminist thinking the father, although a biological parent is a threat to the authority of the mother, and in terms of what Phil says, the feminist mother becomes the truly arrogant one, being supported by the power of the court.

    The 50/50 concept doesn’t get any traction with feminists or the state for that matter because of the financial implications.

    It’s not hard to see why (from the historical timeframe in which they developed) both Islam and Christianity have women in the place they do, but they’re opposites with Islam enforcing control over women and Christianity promoting the Father and the authority of the father.

    I think there is a bit of a balancing act between authority and failure and authority has become a necessary consequence of society and civilised living.

    If there is a tipping point to failure it will have a lot to do with the lack of authority around women and the authority that the state puts within women, that comes about in the absence of any prescribed religious practises.

    You can see the mind-set clear enough with what comes out of the mouths of young women these days, and their influence on each other.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 12th January 2015 @ 9:03 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar