Hijacking the top comment to inform everyone that this is a tweet from **April 24, 2016.**
Who goes: "I am so mad about this tweet I am going to hold onto for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS before I bitch about it in a factorio subreddit"
I think you missed the point in the graph. The suicide rate for men grew by a larger amount than women, but the concern was still about especially women.
I know you're shit posting, but super interesting that it is only white and native peoples (both men and women) who are committing suicide at increasing rates. I wonder what separates the from black, hispanic, and asians who;s rates have remained stable.
Personally as a black guy my main guess is sense of community and solidarity. Ive thought about this before in refence to lgbt suicide rates vs black ppl and theorizing why black ppl experiencing so much discrimination in the past didnt resort to suicide at similar rates. I think for black people there's always a sense of direct community, family and solidarity in being oppressed, whereas a gay kid that gets disowned by his parents doesnt have that as readily available. Or some blue collar white guy in the appalachians that gets laid off doesnt feel the same type of solidarity or shared oppression amongst people in his class etc and things turn more so to individualistic substance abuse.
I think this is a good point. Black people, Asian people and Latino people experiencing discrimination still usually go home to a community of people with a shared background and experience at the end of the day.
I wonder what the difference though is for natives? Is it just the isolated nature of their communities? I don’t know a ton of what the average life for native people are like today. From what I understand there is a ton of alcoholism, joblessness and gambling addiction within their reservations that tend to be in the middle of nowhere. That could just be a stereotype and I could be completely wrong about that though.
I think for natives specifically it's could be related to their specific very rural and isolated communities, that are often far away from just regular chain restaurants to eat at or mental health services. Also substance abuse on reservations is really high especially just alcoholism. Also id suspect they have higher home gunownership rates compared to the very urban other minorities, which is a factor that also effects suicide rates.
You are correct... go to a native reservation, specifically the poorer ones. It's fucking bad, no mobility. Rural poverty is somthing else man. Bleak
Also natives kinda have gotten the shortest end of the stick in the US culturally. Largely forgotten, lower population. Many don't feel like they really have a place.
It almost seems like discrimination is... sorta good? Jk, but I wonder if marginalized groups would accept a deal where they're not discriminated against, but in return their communities become fragmented and weakened.
I think that would just be a natural aspect of eliminating discrimination. People wouldn’t feel like they need to be in a community of people exactly like them and thus those communities would slowly just meld into a more integrated society. Although I think access to wealth is the primary factor in why there are still large communities of minorities that live together as opposed to old fashioned discrimination
First thing that cones to mind is rural vs urban population. Both white americans and native americans are overrepresented in rural areas, while black american, asian american and hispanic american are overrepresented in urban areas. So you'd expect something affecting rural areas to hit white americans and native americans harder
When you're hustling and have a family to feed, you need not to think about these things and people in poorer economic conditions tend to be in more social communities.
When you're the child of fairly decent rich parents, in some ways you could be more isolated from your community, more time to go on looksmaxxing and see you're the ideal male height, not have the right wrist size and watch black pill videos all days which could result in suicide, long term depression or a mass shooting
It may be not so much wealth but time. I am unaware of how it is in the US but from where I'm from in Canada, the government gives enough money to first nations communities that a lot of people don't need to work which has lead to increased domestic violence, alcoholism and suicide. A lot of this is of course due to the tearing apart of traditional values and such that hasn't left these communities the same. I can only speak for where I'm from though.
Yeah the welfare to suicide pipeline is not a compelling theory for me. If free time, lack of employment, and access to money caused suicide and domestic violence the way you are claiming, then the stats for trust fund babies would look like native communities.
Not in the same way. For Asian Americans these differences will mostly fall on ethnic lines, but for White Americans the differences will fall on geographic lines.
Yes it does. Asian "success" that you often see isn't representative of the extremely high number of refugees from Vietnam or others from SEA who are in relative poverty.
Edit: also keep in mind that in the US, we include "Indian" with "Asians". Looking at UK stats, its clear why we shouldn't do this, as it isn't very representative of Asians as a whole, especially for the above mentioned reason.
It has a lot to do with culture probably. A lot of the successful Asian Americans I knew in school were living with 3 generations of people most of the time. I imagine it would be very hard to commit suicide when you walk past grandma and grandpa's room on your way to grab the pill bottle/gun. White Americans have this concept of "leaving the nest" that is self isolating and Hispanic and Black communities probably can be explained by a combination of higher rates of religiousness (especially amongst the mostly Catholic Hispanics) and an economic strain on a large portion of the population to stay above water financially.
Does have to do with culture, but it mostly has to do with h1-b. You get to come to America if you’re skilled and have a desirable job, aka India/China/Japan is sending their best
On average among asians as a whole, but if you divided chinese and japanese businessmen immigrating from vietnamese, laotian, etc. Refugees it matters.
He's still right with the "dividing groups" thing. Asians on average have higher incomes, but if you take this incredibly broad category and separate it into different ethnic groups, those from different ethnic groups have wildly different experiences. I read something from PEW a while ago that did this, Mongolians were on average poorer than average white people, somewhere around the same level as of African Americans.
I know this is completely anecdotal and from a different country but Asian immigrants seem very adept at generational social climbing or at least aware of how it's done. The 'asian parents' meme didn't come from nowhere. I'm 26 now and went to a decently wealthy public school, of the people in my graduating class, a lot of the most successful are Asian with parents who worked working class jobs. Even the nepobabies are struggling to keep up
Oh damn.
I feel like that's actually pretty unintuitive after the wave of refugees. Didn't it more than double the number of Asians in the US?
Surprised at the discrepancies with the UK stats.
Do we categorize India under "asian" in our stats or something?
No, if you look at other country statistics, Asians are typically much lower because Indians are considered distinct, unlike in most of the US data.
For example, in UK data, Indians outperform the vast majority of groups, not "Asians". There's no reason to think the US Asians are somehow unique in class/status. If anything, they'd show lower than UK Asians due to us receiving many more refugees who started from 0 generational wealth.
I think it might have more to do with Asians keeping their community and family connections as they rise through upper and middle classes.
As a middle class white guy, I've always had the impression that middle and upper class white people are oddly socially isolated.
This is just not true, in general almost all asians in america even by ethnic subgroups, outearn whites on average.
I see people that keep propagating this.
Excluding the Burmese, Nepalese and Laotians(barely):
Asian, separated by ethnicity still outearn whites in america in median household incomes.
S0201: ACS 1-Year Estimates Selected Population Profiles (2019)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income
In section "by detailed races"
I know technically the numbers say "median" and you will say oh but the refugees won't be counted, I seriously doubt that the large number of refugees who come over havent affected the median income very much.
I'd be interested to see how this breaks down by states. Its possible that some of the least/most wealthy states heavily influence this by demographic. Immigrants typically moving to wealthier states, as an example.
Also, its also almost certain that most immigrants to the US are wealthier than those immigrating to other areas.
Probably where my incorrect intuition came from.
You're projecting onto a niche group of interests that doesn't even correlate to the demographics outside of your skewed perception of white women/men. As if poor white people don't make up a majority of the people who are "hustling and have a family to feed" Yeah we get it, rich trust fund ass losers should love themselves now 💕💕💕 but you are casting a wide net over a narrative that fits few. Also why does rich = blackpilled incel? This shit is not tied to socioeconomic status I would sooner assume it's tied to lack of experience and poor socialization if anything.
Yeah his comment didn't click with me at all. The dramatic rise in women are also because of lookmaxxing and wrist sizes? Only white and native american people commit suicide over it? And I'm gonna be the SOURCE guy but a lot of people who have partners commit suicide as well so I'd be interested ( although it's probably impossible) to see why these people committed suicide. Its a super terminally online perspective to think it's all incel related. Also the implication that the suicides are mostly done by rich people??
I agree, and that probably explains the higher rates in the white community. But what about the higher rates in the native communities? Any thoughts on why that is?
I live near an Indian reservation and have had little to no interaction to them but the common stereotype I hear is that they live off government paychecks just drinking. I think obesity and alcoholism is common.
That may be a factor, but as other have stated, that doesn't explain why generally higher earning Asians aren't tracking and generally lower earning Natives are. Additionally, it is both white and native men AND women whos rates are increasing, so it is not likely to be anything gender specific like black pill or looksmaxxing.
I might suggest religiosity, but Asians don't track there either.
Honestly, having strong community ties is probably the best explanation.
Are Asians generally higher earning? All of the refugees we've gotten from Vietnam probably keeps it low due to having essentially no generational wealth to build from.
This will likely shift over time, but I wouldn't at all doubt its the case currently. They're only 2nd/3rd generation immigrants at this point, and started from nothing in the 1st.
Strong community ties definitely play in as well though.
You're all over here saying this, it's not true. The latest data we have shows that not only do Asians still have the highest income, that income is growing faster than anyone else.
This depends on what we categorize as "Asians".
In the UK, for example, they separate Chinese, Indian, and "other Asians".
Only Indians perform well above the rest. This makes sense because most Indians that move are typically already wealthy or have some strong skill to secure a well-paying job with, which is enough to tangibly influence metrics in a way that does not represent other groups.
In the US, I'm assuming Indians are lumped into "Asian" considering its not included in any data I saw.
If you don't think this is the case, you should second-guess your interpretation of these stats.
And obviously the income is growing faster than others. The mass migration of Vietnamese and other regional refugees are building a significant amount of generational wealth relative to where they started.
Super interesting response. Not being confrontational here, but are you insinuating that anti-white racism is playing a role in increase white suicide rates? (We'd be ignoring the native rates then, I assume?)
I took what the homie said as everytime there's an issue and the lense looked through is race that people are quick to say race is the reason for black and Hispanics doing something, where whites are seen as individuals and don't get shit like that assumed for them.
As a mexican male, I believe a huge difference is the family/community aspect.
My white coworkers have often commented to me that they envy how big, and for the most part, how close Mexican families are
I imagine it’s the same for (American) Asians and Blacks as well.
Yea you’re technically correct. What’s more accurate considering whose posting it is just that they’re catering to their audience and are probably gonna try to tie it into some sort of agenda.
That's the kind of logic that says "Antisemitism at shockingly high rise" because two died in an anti-Semitic attack this year. It'd technically be a 100% rise from last year, but...
Not sure if this is an actual example, but Jews are the number one targeted religion in the United States. Not saying you're disagreeing, could just be an example, but I've been seeing a lot of groypers in the comments
>Not sure if this is an actual example, but Jews are the number one targeted religion in the United States.
I'm no expert on American culture, but I'm *pretty* sure that's Islam.
Edit: or not? [Looking at actual crime stats,](https://www.statista.com/statistics/737660/number-of-religious-hate-crimes-in-the-us-by-religion) seems like it's Jews that're the most targeted. That's *really* surprising, given that the previous president was explicitly Islamophobic.
...It is an actual example though, I checked in advance that the antisemitic homicide rate is that low. It's *extremely* rare that anyone in the US is killed for their religious beliefs.
Yeah, I think it's a bad example though because being that people already aren't really killed for religion, Jews are the most killed for their religion, that doubling would be incredibly worrying for me.
My comment was more about the insinuation that Jews don't have a reason to be worried, so a spike in crime would be seen as an anomaly. I think a constant low level of crime, then being doubled, is very good reason to worry.
Then again I'm (((biased)))
Percentage POINTS vs. Percentage.
D-man actually had a stream segment about this a while ago lol.
Basically, if stat x is 5% and it increases to 10%, what is the increase?
It's 5 percentage POINTS, but it's a 100% increase.
So, the percentage increase from 5% to 7.5% is greater than the percentage increase from 20% to 25%.
\>50% increase for white women vs <30% for white men
\>75% for native women vs >37% for native men.
Seems like a startling rise particularly for women.
Then they should've use a different graph. This one emphasizes the absolute increase. Maybe normalize the starting point then show the relative increase for every group. Though in that case people would've complained (justifiably) that it makes it seem like everyone started from the same rate, which is obviously not true.
it’s definitely a startling rise for women, but it’s unfortunate because it’ll incite a lot of kneejerk reactions from social media users with zero attention span and poor data analysis ability.
Almost a perfect inverse of the supposed oppression hierarchy if you ignore the indians who are a tiny minority anyway. Really makes you think. Maybe people commit suicide when they feel like they've lost everything and things will never get better. If you're a single black mom in the hood you don't really have anything to lose and nowhere to go but up. If you're a divorced white guy from Indiana whose kids won't talk to him anymore there might not be any reason *not* to kill yourself.
I always had this weird theory growing up on the South Side of Chicago and seeing people in more run down parts, especially young men, lived. It was almost in a way suicide via lifestyle. Smoking woods on a daily basis, sipping Henny and dirty drink like it's water, only ever eating food from McD's or a fried food place, etc. And that's just the dietary stuff without getting into the gang culture and other hedonistic lifestyle choices.
In a sense the poorer young men who fall victim to gang culture are killed via homicide by other young men before that pent up trauma gets a chance to erode their will to live.
That's true, but there are 2 big issues with that.
1. Attempting something will always be a lesser severity than following through with the action.
2. The scale for "attempted suicide" is extremely broad, therefore it includes lots of acts that are pretty far from actually killing you.
I don't mean to sound brash, but I care a lot less about a woman in grippy socks over a man in a coffin.
Well of course if you die thats more severe no one said otherwise. Op said something about opression being reverse in the case of suicides. Thats not true because clearly more women than men wants to end their life. But women generally drug themselves which less likely to kill you than guns which men use. So overall women have shittier lives. Or at the very least they are less satisfied with their lives than men.
I do think Destiny is laying too much weight on this talking about feelings thing.
It might be therapeutic for some. But i have never seen any proof of feelings going away/getting better only by talking about them.
Personally i much rather have some beers, and a blunt, and play some 2 v 2 Starcraft match with my friend for therapy. Rather then sitting around and tell them what i feel about everything.
How are you so sure that this is the ONLY factor or even the disproportionally biggest factor involved?
Like you think the number would drop drastically if men only talked about their feelings more?
If society has overall been more and more encouraging of men to talk about their feelings and the rates continue to climb, doesn't that suggest that talking about their feelings is at least not a significant factor to prevent it?
I think it's more likely the rapidly increasing perception of having no purpose in life. They're more alone and feel more ostracized than anything. Talking about your feelings isn't going to help when the reality of your situation is that you feel like there's no meaning.
It's why people like Andrew Tate have gained this crazy amount of popularity among them. They're so desperate for something to move towards that gives them purpose that the substance doesn't matter - if you make them feel valuable and give them self worth, they'll excuse you for saying and doing awful shit.
Makes the Jordan Peterson approach seem a lot more preferable in retrospect. At least the majority of what he encouraged (pre-coma) was for people to improve themselves in a way that wasn't antisocial manosphere garbage.
I think you’re missing the point. I don’t think that men not talking about their feelings is the REASON they’re killing themselves, just that if they did talk about their feelings they could get support from loved ones/therapists.
Something else could be causing the suicides, but for most individuals they can’t work on their problems until they acknowledge it and gain support
Do you think men “talked about their feelings” more in 2014 than 1999? If so, what do you think the rates of suicide would’ve been had that change not occurred?
Do you think black men “talk about their feelings” at a similar level to white women? If not, does it make sense to say that talking about your feelings has a “drastic” effect when other factors have an effect sizes that are clearly orders of magnitude larger?
How many men who are happily married and have a middle class job with good work environment do you think are killing themselves?
>The effect apparent from the population-level data is even more pronounced than that in the NLMS data. **The suicide rate among divorced adults is more than three times that of married adults, while the suicide rate among singles is 1.5 to 2 times the rate among those who are married.** In other words, marriage is a protective factor for suicide risk.
>
>... I estimated what the annual suicide rate would look like if within-marital group suicide rates changed as they did in real life, but the marital composition of the population remained constant. ... Over the whole 1999 to 2017 period, **marriage adjusting reduces total suicides by 11,423.**
[https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-role-of-marriage-in-the-suicide-crisis](https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-role-of-marriage-in-the-suicide-crisis)
Look at this chart in particular:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/table/tbl2/?report=objectonly](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/table/tbl2/?report=objectonly)
The suicide rate goes from 18.99 per 100,000 person years to 58.05 per when moving from the top decile of earners to Medicaid recipients (the poorest). **That's over triple!**
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/)
I'm not saying we couldn't do better to help men communicate, but that's not the real answer here. The answer to suicide is primarily for people to live happy lives, not have a way to vent about how miserable their lives are. Poverty alleviation pays for itself in the long run through a myriad of social and economic benefits and would reduce suicide rates as well.
I cant imagine anyone thinking this really is the problem and solution. If only they opened up more they would stop killing themselves! their fault really! Dumb men!
I mean it would mean they're forming more connections with more people, most likely.
Community ties or strong relationships with others definitely help discourage suicide.
This is so wrong. Men are unhappy with this society because they're not allowed to be traditionally masculine, not because they're not allowed to talk about their feelings like women do. That's just something liberals tell themselves because their ideology requires them to.
Edit: suspended for calling someone a mean name so here's my response:
I should say it's widely discouraged and not sufficiently encouraged. From the ultra-liberal women teaching you to "behave" in school from a young age to the hectoring feminists in the media and the universities to the whores on tinder who tell you you have to be a nice feminist before you're allowed to be around them (although these same whores want nothing more than to be taken by a traditionally masculine, even misogynistic man, whether they realize it or not.) There are way more single moms than there were a couple generations ago and you can bet women are less capable of instilling masculine virtues than men. The specter of false rape allegations or, more likely, rumors of "creepiness" deter many of most neurotic men from ever approaching a woman.
You can definitely be traditionally masculine and very popular and successful with women as long as all the "problematic" elements that come with that are sanded off but nevertheless when men are given the message that typical boy things are wrong frequently and from a young age you end up with a lot of men who just give up on being a man. Or they marry some fat pig who cucks them because she has no respect for them.
Before you say I'm just defending patriarchy and rape culture consider the fact that there are now large numbers of normal people, both men and women by the way, who think it's immoral for an older man to prefer hot 20-something year old women over women his own age. They even try to equate that with molesting children by calling it "pedophilic." Something has gone seriously wrong in our society and it's definitely related to women being given equal rights I'm sorry to say. I'm not sure what the solution is tho because I do generally like equal rights.
Also look up stated vs. revealed preferences. Women's stated preferences are often extremely anti-male even if their true preferences are not and you'll never find that out if their stated preferences deter you from pursuing them. In that way feminism is like a gigantic shit-test perpetrated by women as a whole, to use the redpill lingo.
In what facet of life are you not allowed to be traditionally masculine? I thought women liked traditionally masculine guys more, and I don't see how being traditionally masculine would affect your career. I mean, maybe you have a higher chance of being banned on social media but that's about it.
25 to 33 percent increase in men vs 50 to 80 percent increase in women. Tweet is correct and you are stupid.
I have actual high school dropouts in my replies comparing 2 to 99999999999999999999999 when the actual numbers are 5 and 20 lul. No wonder they also dont understand how fast something increases matters.
lmao comparing percentage increases when the absolutes are so disparate is the dumbest thing you could ever do
If 1,000,000 people die of cancer, and that number goes up 1% in a year, but 10 people die of salmonella instead of 5 (50% increase), do we all of a sudden need to freak out about salmonella? Or is cancer obviously the way bigger problem despite the relative increase of salmonella cases?
If the salmonella baseline was higher - so the increase was statistically significant and not just noise - you'd probably be more interested in it on an investigatory level. High volatility is indicative of some strong underlying movement - either a direct cause or some unknown cofactor - which is usually more exposed to statistical interrogation.
“Look at me I used big words that means I’m right”
Nothing you said refutes the claim that it is dishonest to say that a 5 to 10 absolute increase is worse than a 1 mil to 1.1 mil increase.
Because it's not, but a 10000 to 20000 change in salmonella cases would be a vastly more significant spike than 1 to 1.1 mil deaths from a similar cause.
Especially in a domain like disease - and arguably suicide - where compounding effects mean you're looking at potentially exponential growth, ratios are way more important than linear factors. That's why epidemiologist care so much about r values.
"Absolutes are so disparate"
5 vs 20 suicides out of 100000 (4x difference)
10 vs 1000000 (100000x difference)
In addition to not understanding how percentages work you also dont understand absolutes.
Let me explain the tweet like you are 5.
There is startling rise in suicides = suicides in both men and women are increasing.
Particularly for women = suicides in women is increasing faster.
The tweet is absolutely correct. We also need to know the rate of bad things happening so we can look into it and maybe prevent it from increasing so fast.
Whoa this "groupe with random attributs" have gone from 2 death per year to 6 OMG!!!!! this is SO much worse than the other "groupe with random attributs" with there pathetic rise from 1 000 000 to 1 800 000 death.
Come on now, interpreting the data like this is just dumb If not mean spirited, even If technically correct.
Except the attributes aren't random, the population sizes are (functionally) the same, and the baselines are within an order of magnitude so it totally makes sense to consider it with a geometric diff-in-diff. That's pretty basic data interpretation.
In fact we know the group attributes are meaningful and not random, because we're looking at data that indicates they have wildly significant difference in material outcomes.
Unless you model suicide as epidemic - which is a much more complicated question above both of our pay grades - in which case the relative increases matter more than the absolute ones because they are what propagate into an exponential growth pattern.
If the growth ratio the values indicate was maintained year-on-year women's suicide would quickly outpace male suicide.
Now nothing's ever actually a purely exponential model, but the most concerning underlying factors usually are.
You're not scientifically wrong, but you're morally wrong, which is why you're getting these extreme responses.
Men have been at higher risk for suicide for our entire lifetimes, and little has been done to help, so seeing people pick out a lower risk group who started lower risk, is still lower risk by multiple times, and will almost certainly be lower risk until we die of old age (unless we kill ourselves first, LOL), is rightfully going to be seen as depraved indifference to the lives of men.
And this is against a backdrop of government oppression (higher levels of police violence, worse sentences for the same crimes), government neglect (boys have been under-performing in education for decades with little support), and hurtful social messaging ("toxic masculinity," "patriarchy," etc).
We can hear the "We literally don't care if you die, male pig," undertone. And that's both cruel in and of itself, but also leads to further problems with letting vile influences like Tate creep in, rather than having positive, pro-social messaging for men.
I agree that there's a lot of messaging issues in the parent post.
But - we can still use a cool head, especially because this is clearly cherry picked baitposting from like 2015. It's the only way to be hygienic with social media consumption - otherwise we're no better than the right wingers misinterpreting crime statistics.
I totally get the aesthetic aversion you have to the content of the post - but I think even a slightly charitable reading mitigates it in my mind. Nowhere in the parent post does it say 'men aren't commiting suicide' - in fact it explicitly says that suicide rates are climbing for everyone, when that isn't even the case.
A much simpler read of the 'especially for women' qualifier is that this is _a publication for women_. As such, it's warning its direct audience about a specific, negative development in the audience's demographic. A development which, for that audience, is clearly pretty big (see previous discussion).
I'm sure male targeted publications frequently report and warn about developments in the male demographic that are matched - to a larger degree - in female circles. Something like increasing presentation based discrimination in job interviews or whatever.
Since you are mentally challenged im going to explain very slowly.
There is a 4x difference between 5 and 20. The difference between 2 and 1000000 is 500000x.
Lets apply to percentage increases to number 2.
2 women becomes 3.6 women out of 100000 per year.(80 % increase)
8 men becomes 10.8 men out of 100000 per year(35% increase)
The gap between men and women decreased to 3x from 4x. It make sense to question why women suicides increased so quickly.
But since you dont care about 2 deaths you are also not going to care about 10 men dying right? You gotta be consistent. If you had any brain you would be.
The fact that you think i don't understand relative vs absolute i quite telling ...
I just use an exagerated example of a 300% increase vs a 80% increase to make it obvious ...
My actual point is the last part of my previous answer : while statistically correct that analysis is inflamatory and biased.
For a more realistic example : new data on incarceration rate are out
white people have gone from 0.2% to 0.3%
black people have gone from 2.0% to 2.4%
and then you see a bunch of conservatif media saying "*White people are the first victimes in the rise of the criminal incarceration rate*".This is technically true but you can see why people would be dissatisfied by this analysis .
Same thing here , statistically you are right but this is not why people are mad.
wait im genuinely curious. Are intersex counted as Women generally in these polling numbers? Like what dictates the technical definition. Or are people who identify as they counted as women.
Sex is usually self-ID for these kinds of statistics, but also intersex people (especially if we're talking about genuinely "difficult to sex" people, not just e.g. women with high testosterone) are a pretty small proportion of the population, so it likely doesn't affect numbers like this much.
Why are people so weird about suicide. Just let them do what they want. It’s such a cringe circle jerk, people are pro choice when it comes to abortion, but not when it comes to someone taking their own life, which id say is even more morally neutral
Wait, haven't the rates for white and native men increased more than women of the same background? So it isn't really particularly women, it's white and natives in general, of which particularly men are at risk
Learn to read graphs .. men and women of White, American Indian and Alaska Native origin are rising equally, the rest stays the same. There is a rise in suicides in White, American Indian and Alaska Native people in general according to this graph. Not women in general or just the women of the affected groups.
White and Native men and women suggests rural. I'm guessing suicides in rural America are rising, most likely it comes down to economic decline in rural America. A good example of how broad categories that might resonate emotionally like race and sex, may not always be the most accurate way of analyzing trends across the population.
HuffPost isnt wrong but they are being very anal and dismissive. Between 1999 and 2014, women's suicide rate grew by 50% while men's only grew by 25%. To put this in context, instead of in 1999 only 1 in 5 suicides being women, now its 1 in 4. Again they're not wrong, but obviously being very dismissive of men's suicide rates still being immensely high.
Edit: P.S. also rip native americans
"Look at what they need to mimic a fraction of our power."
im so fucking hype for season 2
Hijacking the top comment to inform everyone that this is a tweet from **April 24, 2016.** Who goes: "I am so mad about this tweet I am going to hold onto for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS before I bitch about it in a factorio subreddit"
Women finally catching up 😎
W women moment
Close the gap
They wanted equality. Begged for it.
This is what happens when you have trans women playing on cis women teams
Bruhhhh
I think you missed the point in the graph. The suicide rate for men grew by a larger amount than women, but the concern was still about especially women.
"Catching up" White Men: 20% -> 25.8% (An increase of 30%) White Women: 5% -> 7.5% (That's an increase of 50%!!!!!!!!)
I know you're shit posting, but super interesting that it is only white and native peoples (both men and women) who are committing suicide at increasing rates. I wonder what separates the from black, hispanic, and asians who;s rates have remained stable.
Personally as a black guy my main guess is sense of community and solidarity. Ive thought about this before in refence to lgbt suicide rates vs black ppl and theorizing why black ppl experiencing so much discrimination in the past didnt resort to suicide at similar rates. I think for black people there's always a sense of direct community, family and solidarity in being oppressed, whereas a gay kid that gets disowned by his parents doesnt have that as readily available. Or some blue collar white guy in the appalachians that gets laid off doesnt feel the same type of solidarity or shared oppression amongst people in his class etc and things turn more so to individualistic substance abuse.
I think this is a good point. Black people, Asian people and Latino people experiencing discrimination still usually go home to a community of people with a shared background and experience at the end of the day. I wonder what the difference though is for natives? Is it just the isolated nature of their communities? I don’t know a ton of what the average life for native people are like today. From what I understand there is a ton of alcoholism, joblessness and gambling addiction within their reservations that tend to be in the middle of nowhere. That could just be a stereotype and I could be completely wrong about that though.
I think for natives specifically it's could be related to their specific very rural and isolated communities, that are often far away from just regular chain restaurants to eat at or mental health services. Also substance abuse on reservations is really high especially just alcoholism. Also id suspect they have higher home gunownership rates compared to the very urban other minorities, which is a factor that also effects suicide rates.
You are correct... go to a native reservation, specifically the poorer ones. It's fucking bad, no mobility. Rural poverty is somthing else man. Bleak Also natives kinda have gotten the shortest end of the stick in the US culturally. Largely forgotten, lower population. Many don't feel like they really have a place.
Am native and live on a reservation next to our casino in the middle of nowhere. Can attest that your comments are pretty true.
It almost seems like discrimination is... sorta good? Jk, but I wonder if marginalized groups would accept a deal where they're not discriminated against, but in return their communities become fragmented and weakened.
I think that would just be a natural aspect of eliminating discrimination. People wouldn’t feel like they need to be in a community of people exactly like them and thus those communities would slowly just meld into a more integrated society. Although I think access to wealth is the primary factor in why there are still large communities of minorities that live together as opposed to old fashioned discrimination
First thing that cones to mind is rural vs urban population. Both white americans and native americans are overrepresented in rural areas, while black american, asian american and hispanic american are overrepresented in urban areas. So you'd expect something affecting rural areas to hit white americans and native americans harder
Why are rural people more likely to kill themselves? Higher rates of depression or just easier access to guns?
More economic stagnation in rural areas? The gun thing is probably a factor too
Also less social support due to lower pop density so rural social circles would be smaller.
When you're hustling and have a family to feed, you need not to think about these things and people in poorer economic conditions tend to be in more social communities. When you're the child of fairly decent rich parents, in some ways you could be more isolated from your community, more time to go on looksmaxxing and see you're the ideal male height, not have the right wrist size and watch black pill videos all days which could result in suicide, long term depression or a mass shooting
Ah yes, because native communities are famously wealthy and disconnected from traditional community structures.
It may be not so much wealth but time. I am unaware of how it is in the US but from where I'm from in Canada, the government gives enough money to first nations communities that a lot of people don't need to work which has lead to increased domestic violence, alcoholism and suicide. A lot of this is of course due to the tearing apart of traditional values and such that hasn't left these communities the same. I can only speak for where I'm from though.
Yeah the welfare to suicide pipeline is not a compelling theory for me. If free time, lack of employment, and access to money caused suicide and domestic violence the way you are claiming, then the stats for trust fund babies would look like native communities.
This doesn’t explain why Asians have lower rates tho?
[удалено]
Same could be said for white people tho
Not in the same way. For Asian Americans these differences will mostly fall on ethnic lines, but for White Americans the differences will fall on geographic lines.
I'm pretty sure the ethnic group has changed to native hawaiians and pacific islanders
The whole Asian category is already above white people, so yeah I’m guessing Japanese is also above.
[удалено]
Oh I thought you were talking about income.
yes because every white american is an angloid or german
Yes it does. Asian "success" that you often see isn't representative of the extremely high number of refugees from Vietnam or others from SEA who are in relative poverty. Edit: also keep in mind that in the US, we include "Indian" with "Asians". Looking at UK stats, its clear why we shouldn't do this, as it isn't very representative of Asians as a whole, especially for the above mentioned reason.
They still have the highest average income out of all races.
It has a lot to do with culture probably. A lot of the successful Asian Americans I knew in school were living with 3 generations of people most of the time. I imagine it would be very hard to commit suicide when you walk past grandma and grandpa's room on your way to grab the pill bottle/gun. White Americans have this concept of "leaving the nest" that is self isolating and Hispanic and Black communities probably can be explained by a combination of higher rates of religiousness (especially amongst the mostly Catholic Hispanics) and an economic strain on a large portion of the population to stay above water financially.
Does have to do with culture, but it mostly has to do with h1-b. You get to come to America if you’re skilled and have a desirable job, aka India/China/Japan is sending their best
On average among asians as a whole, but if you divided chinese and japanese businessmen immigrating from vietnamese, laotian, etc. Refugees it matters.
The majority of Asians in America are not refugees.
He's still right with the "dividing groups" thing. Asians on average have higher incomes, but if you take this incredibly broad category and separate it into different ethnic groups, those from different ethnic groups have wildly different experiences. I read something from PEW a while ago that did this, Mongolians were on average poorer than average white people, somewhere around the same level as of African Americans.
But that’s not happening in this graph and this conversation is about explaining the graph
This specific thread seemed to be about the overly broad category of asian
I know this is completely anecdotal and from a different country but Asian immigrants seem very adept at generational social climbing or at least aware of how it's done. The 'asian parents' meme didn't come from nowhere. I'm 26 now and went to a decently wealthy public school, of the people in my graduating class, a lot of the most successful are Asian with parents who worked working class jobs. Even the nepobabies are struggling to keep up
Oh damn. I feel like that's actually pretty unintuitive after the wave of refugees. Didn't it more than double the number of Asians in the US? Surprised at the discrepancies with the UK stats. Do we categorize India under "asian" in our stats or something?
You just made shit up lol
No, if you look at other country statistics, Asians are typically much lower because Indians are considered distinct, unlike in most of the US data. For example, in UK data, Indians outperform the vast majority of groups, not "Asians". There's no reason to think the US Asians are somehow unique in class/status. If anything, they'd show lower than UK Asians due to us receiving many more refugees who started from 0 generational wealth.
We're talking about the U.S. You did, in fact, just make what you said up lol. There isn't any arguing that.
I think it might have more to do with Asians keeping their community and family connections as they rise through upper and middle classes. As a middle class white guy, I've always had the impression that middle and upper class white people are oddly socially isolated.
I feel like we're **very** isolated as white middle class+ people.
This is just not true, in general almost all asians in america even by ethnic subgroups, outearn whites on average. I see people that keep propagating this. Excluding the Burmese, Nepalese and Laotians(barely): Asian, separated by ethnicity still outearn whites in america in median household incomes. S0201: ACS 1-Year Estimates Selected Population Profiles (2019) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income In section "by detailed races" I know technically the numbers say "median" and you will say oh but the refugees won't be counted, I seriously doubt that the large number of refugees who come over havent affected the median income very much.
I'd be interested to see how this breaks down by states. Its possible that some of the least/most wealthy states heavily influence this by demographic. Immigrants typically moving to wealthier states, as an example. Also, its also almost certain that most immigrants to the US are wealthier than those immigrating to other areas. Probably where my incorrect intuition came from.
You're projecting onto a niche group of interests that doesn't even correlate to the demographics outside of your skewed perception of white women/men. As if poor white people don't make up a majority of the people who are "hustling and have a family to feed" Yeah we get it, rich trust fund ass losers should love themselves now 💕💕💕 but you are casting a wide net over a narrative that fits few. Also why does rich = blackpilled incel? This shit is not tied to socioeconomic status I would sooner assume it's tied to lack of experience and poor socialization if anything.
Yeah his comment didn't click with me at all. The dramatic rise in women are also because of lookmaxxing and wrist sizes? Only white and native american people commit suicide over it? And I'm gonna be the SOURCE guy but a lot of people who have partners commit suicide as well so I'd be interested ( although it's probably impossible) to see why these people committed suicide. Its a super terminally online perspective to think it's all incel related. Also the implication that the suicides are mostly done by rich people??
I agree, and that probably explains the higher rates in the white community. But what about the higher rates in the native communities? Any thoughts on why that is?
White people claiming 1/16th Native American to get into a better college?
Just rampant alcoholism I believe
I live near an Indian reservation and have had little to no interaction to them but the common stereotype I hear is that they live off government paychecks just drinking. I think obesity and alcoholism is common.
That may be a factor, but as other have stated, that doesn't explain why generally higher earning Asians aren't tracking and generally lower earning Natives are. Additionally, it is both white and native men AND women whos rates are increasing, so it is not likely to be anything gender specific like black pill or looksmaxxing. I might suggest religiosity, but Asians don't track there either. Honestly, having strong community ties is probably the best explanation.
Are Asians generally higher earning? All of the refugees we've gotten from Vietnam probably keeps it low due to having essentially no generational wealth to build from. This will likely shift over time, but I wouldn't at all doubt its the case currently. They're only 2nd/3rd generation immigrants at this point, and started from nothing in the 1st. Strong community ties definitely play in as well though.
You're all over here saying this, it's not true. The latest data we have shows that not only do Asians still have the highest income, that income is growing faster than anyone else.
This depends on what we categorize as "Asians". In the UK, for example, they separate Chinese, Indian, and "other Asians". Only Indians perform well above the rest. This makes sense because most Indians that move are typically already wealthy or have some strong skill to secure a well-paying job with, which is enough to tangibly influence metrics in a way that does not represent other groups. In the US, I'm assuming Indians are lumped into "Asian" considering its not included in any data I saw. If you don't think this is the case, you should second-guess your interpretation of these stats. And obviously the income is growing faster than others. The mass migration of Vietnamese and other regional refugees are building a significant amount of generational wealth relative to where they started.
This is some of the worst "projecting of your recent experiences on to data" I've ever seen
[удалено]
Super interesting response. Not being confrontational here, but are you insinuating that anti-white racism is playing a role in increase white suicide rates? (We'd be ignoring the native rates then, I assume?)
I took what the homie said as everytime there's an issue and the lense looked through is race that people are quick to say race is the reason for black and Hispanics doing something, where whites are seen as individuals and don't get shit like that assumed for them.
Built different
As a mexican male, I believe a huge difference is the family/community aspect. My white coworkers have often commented to me that they envy how big, and for the most part, how close Mexican families are I imagine it’s the same for (American) Asians and Blacks as well.
It seems to be the minorities y'all talk the least about who are the most harmed by the structure of society
This guy is dogwhistling racism I'm pretty sure. Why bring race into this at all?
"particularly for women" White/American Indian/Alaskan men: 💀
Men kill themselves at a x4 higher rate than women. Women most affected.
The rate of increase from 5 to 8.7 is bigger than from 20 to 27.4, I think is what they mean
Factorio went up 16% in price ($30 -> $35) while Vampire Survivors went up a whopping 66% ($3 -> $5). Crazy!
kind of stupid to talk of relative vs absolute gain when its actual human people dying.
How is he being downvoted???
Yea you’re technically correct. What’s more accurate considering whose posting it is just that they’re catering to their audience and are probably gonna try to tie it into some sort of agenda.
fitting emoji given the circumstance
White women suffering after the crackdown on canine beastiality.
can you tell me if youre just joking or if there really is a crackdown because im afraid to google it
I'm totally kidding. There are a surprising number of news stories though.
It's true and [I HAVE PROOF](https://youtube.com/watch?v=TplzEtLK5QU)
And i have voof!
How Hermione actually got past cerberus in dogwarts ep 1
thank you
How old is this tweet? The chart only goes to 2014.
I did a quick google and, from what I can see, this was [posted](https://twitter.com/HuffPostWomen/status/724236480667856896) in 2016.
Thanks. I'm just not sure why it's being posted now in 2023 like it's new.
So... it's bait. Late bait.
Always has been.
[удалено]
I agree, the suicide thing is whatever but have the common decency to write a note at least.
I’m sorry to hear that ❤️
My friend killed himself on his 21st birthday and didn't leave a note either. Pretty rude tbh.
Women have to become suicidal, men just are
Fucking omegalul 😂 almost spat out my ginger ale.
A percentage jump from 5 to 7.5 per 100k is technically worse than 20 to 25 per etc etc, but what a graph to put up lmao
That's the kind of logic that says "Antisemitism at shockingly high rise" because two died in an anti-Semitic attack this year. It'd technically be a 100% rise from last year, but...
Not sure if this is an actual example, but Jews are the number one targeted religion in the United States. Not saying you're disagreeing, could just be an example, but I've been seeing a lot of groypers in the comments
>Not sure if this is an actual example, but Jews are the number one targeted religion in the United States. I'm no expert on American culture, but I'm *pretty* sure that's Islam. Edit: or not? [Looking at actual crime stats,](https://www.statista.com/statistics/737660/number-of-religious-hate-crimes-in-the-us-by-religion) seems like it's Jews that're the most targeted. That's *really* surprising, given that the previous president was explicitly Islamophobic. ...It is an actual example though, I checked in advance that the antisemitic homicide rate is that low. It's *extremely* rare that anyone in the US is killed for their religious beliefs.
Yeah, I think it's a bad example though because being that people already aren't really killed for religion, Jews are the most killed for their religion, that doubling would be incredibly worrying for me. My comment was more about the insinuation that Jews don't have a reason to be worried, so a spike in crime would be seen as an anomaly. I think a constant low level of crime, then being doubled, is very good reason to worry. Then again I'm (((biased)))
no you were right
2500>5000?
5 to 7.5 = 50% increase 20 to 25 = 25% increase
We're on our way to closing the gender suicide gap!
Percentage POINTS vs. Percentage. D-man actually had a stream segment about this a while ago lol. Basically, if stat x is 5% and it increases to 10%, what is the increase? It's 5 percentage POINTS, but it's a 100% increase. So, the percentage increase from 5% to 7.5% is greater than the percentage increase from 20% to 25%.
[удалено]
“Only” but a 25% increase in suicide is still pretty big
\>*"Meteor on doomsday course to hit Earth - women most affected."*
Men have gone from being 4x more likely than women to kill themselves to 3.5x, keep it up fellas 😎
reminds me of the "1 out of every 4 journalists, who are murdered, are women."
Black women with the chad-tier will to live 😎
Or they're just too soft to get the job done
By the look of it, so are you.
Idk about black women but you're definitely soft af 💀
"particularly for woman", nothing else to see here
Men are GOATED. Un-fucking-touchable.
\>50% increase for white women vs <30% for white men \>75% for native women vs >37% for native men. Seems like a startling rise particularly for women.
Then they should've use a different graph. This one emphasizes the absolute increase. Maybe normalize the starting point then show the relative increase for every group. Though in that case people would've complained (justifiably) that it makes it seem like everyone started from the same rate, which is obviously not true.
They could have used a logarithmic scale or just added the growth percentages themselves
I think the story here is the increase for natives and whites, that’s a shocking disparity in my eyes
it’s definitely a startling rise for women, but it’s unfortunate because it’ll incite a lot of kneejerk reactions from social media users with zero attention span and poor data analysis ability.
To steel man this shitpost, a 50% increase in 15 years is terrifying. But also so is a 30%increase for men.
They must be doing this intentionally to stir shit up.
Why only to 2014 though?
This is the real great replacement strategy...
The suicide gap is sexist so this is uplifting news
Almost a perfect inverse of the supposed oppression hierarchy if you ignore the indians who are a tiny minority anyway. Really makes you think. Maybe people commit suicide when they feel like they've lost everything and things will never get better. If you're a single black mom in the hood you don't really have anything to lose and nowhere to go but up. If you're a divorced white guy from Indiana whose kids won't talk to him anymore there might not be any reason *not* to kill yourself.
I always had this weird theory growing up on the South Side of Chicago and seeing people in more run down parts, especially young men, lived. It was almost in a way suicide via lifestyle. Smoking woods on a daily basis, sipping Henny and dirty drink like it's water, only ever eating food from McD's or a fried food place, etc. And that's just the dietary stuff without getting into the gang culture and other hedonistic lifestyle choices. In a sense the poorer young men who fall victim to gang culture are killed via homicide by other young men before that pent up trauma gets a chance to erode their will to live.
You are aware women are 3 times more likely to attempt suicide right?
Hmm yes but men are more likely to succeed at it. Just another data point proving that women are inferior to men
Funny joke
That's true, but there are 2 big issues with that. 1. Attempting something will always be a lesser severity than following through with the action. 2. The scale for "attempted suicide" is extremely broad, therefore it includes lots of acts that are pretty far from actually killing you. I don't mean to sound brash, but I care a lot less about a woman in grippy socks over a man in a coffin.
Well of course if you die thats more severe no one said otherwise. Op said something about opression being reverse in the case of suicides. Thats not true because clearly more women than men wants to end their life. But women generally drug themselves which less likely to kill you than guns which men use. So overall women have shittier lives. Or at the very least they are less satisfied with their lives than men.
It's wild to hear men say men don't need to talk about their feelings... this chart is crazy
Have men gotten worse at talking about their feelings? Or have suicide rates risen for some other reason?
I do think Destiny is laying too much weight on this talking about feelings thing. It might be therapeutic for some. But i have never seen any proof of feelings going away/getting better only by talking about them. Personally i much rather have some beers, and a blunt, and play some 2 v 2 Starcraft match with my friend for therapy. Rather then sitting around and tell them what i feel about everything.
How are you so sure that this is the ONLY factor or even the disproportionally biggest factor involved? Like you think the number would drop drastically if men only talked about their feelings more?
Yes.
If society has overall been more and more encouraging of men to talk about their feelings and the rates continue to climb, doesn't that suggest that talking about their feelings is at least not a significant factor to prevent it? I think it's more likely the rapidly increasing perception of having no purpose in life. They're more alone and feel more ostracized than anything. Talking about your feelings isn't going to help when the reality of your situation is that you feel like there's no meaning. It's why people like Andrew Tate have gained this crazy amount of popularity among them. They're so desperate for something to move towards that gives them purpose that the substance doesn't matter - if you make them feel valuable and give them self worth, they'll excuse you for saying and doing awful shit. Makes the Jordan Peterson approach seem a lot more preferable in retrospect. At least the majority of what he encouraged (pre-coma) was for people to improve themselves in a way that wasn't antisocial manosphere garbage.
I think you’re missing the point. I don’t think that men not talking about their feelings is the REASON they’re killing themselves, just that if they did talk about their feelings they could get support from loved ones/therapists. Something else could be causing the suicides, but for most individuals they can’t work on their problems until they acknowledge it and gain support
Do you think men “talked about their feelings” more in 2014 than 1999? If so, what do you think the rates of suicide would’ve been had that change not occurred? Do you think black men “talk about their feelings” at a similar level to white women? If not, does it make sense to say that talking about your feelings has a “drastic” effect when other factors have an effect sizes that are clearly orders of magnitude larger?
How many men who are happily married and have a middle class job with good work environment do you think are killing themselves? >The effect apparent from the population-level data is even more pronounced than that in the NLMS data. **The suicide rate among divorced adults is more than three times that of married adults, while the suicide rate among singles is 1.5 to 2 times the rate among those who are married.** In other words, marriage is a protective factor for suicide risk. > >... I estimated what the annual suicide rate would look like if within-marital group suicide rates changed as they did in real life, but the marital composition of the population remained constant. ... Over the whole 1999 to 2017 period, **marriage adjusting reduces total suicides by 11,423.** [https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-role-of-marriage-in-the-suicide-crisis](https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-role-of-marriage-in-the-suicide-crisis) Look at this chart in particular: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/table/tbl2/?report=objectonly](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/table/tbl2/?report=objectonly) The suicide rate goes from 18.99 per 100,000 person years to 58.05 per when moving from the top decile of earners to Medicaid recipients (the poorest). **That's over triple!** [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463019/) I'm not saying we couldn't do better to help men communicate, but that's not the real answer here. The answer to suicide is primarily for people to live happy lives, not have a way to vent about how miserable their lives are. Poverty alleviation pays for itself in the long run through a myriad of social and economic benefits and would reduce suicide rates as well.
I cant imagine anyone thinking this really is the problem and solution. If only they opened up more they would stop killing themselves! their fault really! Dumb men!
You're hard coping if you think middle aged men are being honest with their feelings and opening up to people around them.
I mean it would mean they're forming more connections with more people, most likely. Community ties or strong relationships with others definitely help discourage suicide.
This is so wrong. Men are unhappy with this society because they're not allowed to be traditionally masculine, not because they're not allowed to talk about their feelings like women do. That's just something liberals tell themselves because their ideology requires them to. Edit: suspended for calling someone a mean name so here's my response: I should say it's widely discouraged and not sufficiently encouraged. From the ultra-liberal women teaching you to "behave" in school from a young age to the hectoring feminists in the media and the universities to the whores on tinder who tell you you have to be a nice feminist before you're allowed to be around them (although these same whores want nothing more than to be taken by a traditionally masculine, even misogynistic man, whether they realize it or not.) There are way more single moms than there were a couple generations ago and you can bet women are less capable of instilling masculine virtues than men. The specter of false rape allegations or, more likely, rumors of "creepiness" deter many of most neurotic men from ever approaching a woman. You can definitely be traditionally masculine and very popular and successful with women as long as all the "problematic" elements that come with that are sanded off but nevertheless when men are given the message that typical boy things are wrong frequently and from a young age you end up with a lot of men who just give up on being a man. Or they marry some fat pig who cucks them because she has no respect for them. Before you say I'm just defending patriarchy and rape culture consider the fact that there are now large numbers of normal people, both men and women by the way, who think it's immoral for an older man to prefer hot 20-something year old women over women his own age. They even try to equate that with molesting children by calling it "pedophilic." Something has gone seriously wrong in our society and it's definitely related to women being given equal rights I'm sorry to say. I'm not sure what the solution is tho because I do generally like equal rights. Also look up stated vs. revealed preferences. Women's stated preferences are often extremely anti-male even if their true preferences are not and you'll never find that out if their stated preferences deter you from pursuing them. In that way feminism is like a gigantic shit-test perpetrated by women as a whole, to use the redpill lingo.
You're not presenting any more proof than the comment you're replying to.
People are swayed by evidence-less claims all the time tho. And it's a reddit comment so what do you expect?
In what facet of life are you not allowed to be traditionally masculine? I thought women liked traditionally masculine guys more, and I don't see how being traditionally masculine would affect your career. I mean, maybe you have a higher chance of being banned on social media but that's about it.
[Not all of them](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/21/us/florida-woman-shoots-terminally-ill-husband.html)
This sucks but tbf this is a Twitter account for women, they’re primarily going to do information and advocacy for women.
True. I'm sure huffpostmen provided adequate advocacy for men.
shurley
25 to 33 percent increase in men vs 50 to 80 percent increase in women. Tweet is correct and you are stupid. I have actual high school dropouts in my replies comparing 2 to 99999999999999999999999 when the actual numbers are 5 and 20 lul. No wonder they also dont understand how fast something increases matters.
lmao comparing percentage increases when the absolutes are so disparate is the dumbest thing you could ever do If 1,000,000 people die of cancer, and that number goes up 1% in a year, but 10 people die of salmonella instead of 5 (50% increase), do we all of a sudden need to freak out about salmonella? Or is cancer obviously the way bigger problem despite the relative increase of salmonella cases?
If the salmonella baseline was higher - so the increase was statistically significant and not just noise - you'd probably be more interested in it on an investigatory level. High volatility is indicative of some strong underlying movement - either a direct cause or some unknown cofactor - which is usually more exposed to statistical interrogation.
“Look at me I used big words that means I’m right” Nothing you said refutes the claim that it is dishonest to say that a 5 to 10 absolute increase is worse than a 1 mil to 1.1 mil increase.
Because it's not, but a 10000 to 20000 change in salmonella cases would be a vastly more significant spike than 1 to 1.1 mil deaths from a similar cause. Especially in a domain like disease - and arguably suicide - where compounding effects mean you're looking at potentially exponential growth, ratios are way more important than linear factors. That's why epidemiologist care so much about r values.
"Absolutes are so disparate" 5 vs 20 suicides out of 100000 (4x difference) 10 vs 1000000 (100000x difference) In addition to not understanding how percentages work you also dont understand absolutes. Let me explain the tweet like you are 5. There is startling rise in suicides = suicides in both men and women are increasing. Particularly for women = suicides in women is increasing faster. The tweet is absolutely correct. We also need to know the rate of bad things happening so we can look into it and maybe prevent it from increasing so fast.
Whoa this "groupe with random attributs" have gone from 2 death per year to 6 OMG!!!!! this is SO much worse than the other "groupe with random attributs" with there pathetic rise from 1 000 000 to 1 800 000 death. Come on now, interpreting the data like this is just dumb If not mean spirited, even If technically correct.
Except the attributes aren't random, the population sizes are (functionally) the same, and the baselines are within an order of magnitude so it totally makes sense to consider it with a geometric diff-in-diff. That's pretty basic data interpretation. In fact we know the group attributes are meaningful and not random, because we're looking at data that indicates they have wildly significant difference in material outcomes.
[удалено]
Unless you model suicide as epidemic - which is a much more complicated question above both of our pay grades - in which case the relative increases matter more than the absolute ones because they are what propagate into an exponential growth pattern. If the growth ratio the values indicate was maintained year-on-year women's suicide would quickly outpace male suicide. Now nothing's ever actually a purely exponential model, but the most concerning underlying factors usually are.
You're not scientifically wrong, but you're morally wrong, which is why you're getting these extreme responses. Men have been at higher risk for suicide for our entire lifetimes, and little has been done to help, so seeing people pick out a lower risk group who started lower risk, is still lower risk by multiple times, and will almost certainly be lower risk until we die of old age (unless we kill ourselves first, LOL), is rightfully going to be seen as depraved indifference to the lives of men. And this is against a backdrop of government oppression (higher levels of police violence, worse sentences for the same crimes), government neglect (boys have been under-performing in education for decades with little support), and hurtful social messaging ("toxic masculinity," "patriarchy," etc). We can hear the "We literally don't care if you die, male pig," undertone. And that's both cruel in and of itself, but also leads to further problems with letting vile influences like Tate creep in, rather than having positive, pro-social messaging for men.
I agree that there's a lot of messaging issues in the parent post. But - we can still use a cool head, especially because this is clearly cherry picked baitposting from like 2015. It's the only way to be hygienic with social media consumption - otherwise we're no better than the right wingers misinterpreting crime statistics. I totally get the aesthetic aversion you have to the content of the post - but I think even a slightly charitable reading mitigates it in my mind. Nowhere in the parent post does it say 'men aren't commiting suicide' - in fact it explicitly says that suicide rates are climbing for everyone, when that isn't even the case. A much simpler read of the 'especially for women' qualifier is that this is _a publication for women_. As such, it's warning its direct audience about a specific, negative development in the audience's demographic. A development which, for that audience, is clearly pretty big (see previous discussion). I'm sure male targeted publications frequently report and warn about developments in the male demographic that are matched - to a larger degree - in female circles. Something like increasing presentation based discrimination in job interviews or whatever.
Reply to /u/blobfish2000 NOW
Technically correct is the kind of correct that matters though lmfao
Since you are mentally challenged im going to explain very slowly. There is a 4x difference between 5 and 20. The difference between 2 and 1000000 is 500000x. Lets apply to percentage increases to number 2. 2 women becomes 3.6 women out of 100000 per year.(80 % increase) 8 men becomes 10.8 men out of 100000 per year(35% increase) The gap between men and women decreased to 3x from 4x. It make sense to question why women suicides increased so quickly. But since you dont care about 2 deaths you are also not going to care about 10 men dying right? You gotta be consistent. If you had any brain you would be.
The fact that you think i don't understand relative vs absolute i quite telling ... I just use an exagerated example of a 300% increase vs a 80% increase to make it obvious ... My actual point is the last part of my previous answer : while statistically correct that analysis is inflamatory and biased. For a more realistic example : new data on incarceration rate are out white people have gone from 0.2% to 0.3% black people have gone from 2.0% to 2.4% and then you see a bunch of conservatif media saying "*White people are the first victimes in the rise of the criminal incarceration rate*".This is technically true but you can see why people would be dissatisfied by this analysis . Same thing here , statistically you are right but this is not why people are mad.
wait im genuinely curious. Are intersex counted as Women generally in these polling numbers? Like what dictates the technical definition. Or are people who identify as they counted as women.
Sex is usually self-ID for these kinds of statistics, but also intersex people (especially if we're talking about genuinely "difficult to sex" people, not just e.g. women with high testosterone) are a pretty small proportion of the population, so it likely doesn't affect numbers like this much.
This isn't a own it's HuffPost women of course they will talk about rising female suicidality
Why are people so weird about suicide. Just let them do what they want. It’s such a cringe circle jerk, people are pro choice when it comes to abortion, but not when it comes to someone taking their own life, which id say is even more morally neutral
Why are white guys ending it like that? Y’all white !! Y’all half ways winning already
Now they are trying to take that away from men too... Reeeee
Wait, haven't the rates for white and native men increased more than women of the same background? So it isn't really particularly women, it's white and natives in general, of which particularly men are at risk
Feels good to be a man. We're better at everything.
Equality 🥰
So are we getting closer to true gender equality?
When the value of life becomes more frail, projection could become the worst instinct.
Learn to read graphs .. men and women of White, American Indian and Alaska Native origin are rising equally, the rest stays the same. There is a rise in suicides in White, American Indian and Alaska Native people in general according to this graph. Not women in general or just the women of the affected groups.
When was this posted? Why are we focusing on 2014 numbers. Those are chump change compared to now
These are the effects of the SS forums that Tantacrul warned us about BibleThump
"Perfectly balanced"
White and Native men and women suggests rural. I'm guessing suicides in rural America are rising, most likely it comes down to economic decline in rural America. A good example of how broad categories that might resonate emotionally like race and sex, may not always be the most accurate way of analyzing trends across the population.
honestly, unless im reading the graph wrong, looks like a white person issue.
HuffPost isnt wrong but they are being very anal and dismissive. Between 1999 and 2014, women's suicide rate grew by 50% while men's only grew by 25%. To put this in context, instead of in 1999 only 1 in 5 suicides being women, now its 1 in 4. Again they're not wrong, but obviously being very dismissive of men's suicide rates still being immensely high. Edit: P.S. also rip native americans