Why did 58% of funding for mens health, in the last budget, go to just one entity, Movember, whilst the smaller, hands-on, more effective services got nothing?
I'm late to the discussion, but this is the most important and disturbing article I've seen on feminism.
It’s a comprehensive and crushing 'victory' for feminists, in controlling the narrative, the 'statistics,' and the flow of millions in taxpayer dollars.
The bureaucrat’s response to Senator Whitten adds a touch of dark humor—LOL!
Huge credit to your brilliant illustrator for, once again, capturing the whole article in one image.
PSA as to the cure: A compassionate society is built on justice, not compassion. The late, great Barry Williams (LFA) had the solution over 50 years ago, also too the great Dr Jordan B. Peterson, 5 years ago, when he concluded "The Courts are tilted. 50-50 custody default is the appropriate default" - JBP (2021) So that's the cure but as to the infection I shall leave that to a great and thoughtful woman: “Everything you think of as ‘wokeness’ is simply an epiphenomenon of demographic feminisation." - Helen Andrews (2025). Suicide is a bitter harvest. We sow. We reap.
Suicide is not a health matter, it’s a personal choice. Recent research has shown that people (mostly men) who commit suicide are usually not even “depressed.”
Why not acknowledge that suicide is considered by many a solution, not a problem? It’s certainly not a place for doctors (and pseudo-doctors) to meddle. They are no more equipped to involve themselves than are bus drivers.
This self-appointed men’s advocate would drag men into the clutches of the mental health industry where men who want to kill themselves have not asked to be. If you tell any doctor that you are considering suicide you will be detained and deprived of all rights. Will that improve your desire to live?
Respecting the right to end one’s life is the most difficult thing for many people.
We all now know you are a troll, a fellow atheist or an immature tunnel-visioned idiot.
Suicide is the deliberate killing of a human being.
Killing a human being is either murder, manslaughter, accidental or an amoral act due to the balance of the mind being disturbed.
Most of us hold that the acts of human beings are either virtuous, morally indifferent or evil according to absolute standards and are subject to judgement.
The bullet-point list is called the Commandments, issued to humanity as a clear sure-and-certain guide to behaviour towards our creator and our fellow human beings.
The Commandments were issued to creatures who are all endowed with the freedom to choose all varieties of available actions, free will. The message is that free will is not being taken away while making it clear that actions will have consequences.
Here's an idea, Nicky. Do us all a favor and bugger off.
Better yet, just block everyone as it's obviously your juvenile response to being exposed as an obtuse prat. It would be the quickest solution for us all.
Your mommy certainly succeeded in turning you into an egotistical little monster with her false and limitless praise, didn't she? Was that her intention? Perhaps she needs to evict you finally so that you can go forth into the world and experience some reality instead of dwelling in her basement at 25 fantasizing over euthanizing unwilling victims?
We have to ask, are you are trying to establish yourself up as a one man eugenics shop that will launch itself by eliminating the most vulnerable members of society?
If this is even remotely true, we should have you flagged as a person of interest for the authorities.
You clearly have some serious psychological problems.
"Why not acknowledge that suicide is considered by many a solution, not a problem?"
It may well be a solution. And it may well be executed (no pun intended) during an absence of present depression. But that does not mean it is not the result of long term depression.
This writer has suffered and survived, issues raised by Bettina, which would kill many of us.
Of course, there are deeply unhappy people who commit suicide. I prefer to not medicalize such a circumstance as “depression,” which I think often masks the life conditions that make a person that miserable. There are usually legitimate reasons for suffering.
Whatever the reason, if the unhappy person seeks help, that’s fine. If he eventually makes the decision to end his life, nobody should prevent him from doing so. Suasion, yes; coercion, no.
One of the horrible consequences of the drug war is that people who want to commit suicide have no access to barbiturates and so resort to firearms, which are more violent and traumatizing to people who cared about the person.
What right to end ones life? Where is that a right? The damage left for family is beyond words. Assisted suicide i agree with you on but a choice? It's not a reasonable or rational choice. How would you know they are not depressed? Because they weren't on antidepressants?
You think families are less devastated by fatal car accidents?
What someone does with his body might seem irresponsible, but that it bothers others is no argument against suicide. We are not beholden to public opinion.
You are poorly informed about the impact of antidepressants, and very recently researchers reported that most people who commit suicide are not depressed.
Being a member of the Wallenda family was probably frequently distressing to loved ones as they dropped to their deaths, but no person has a claim on your body or your choices. Influence, sure, but we own ourselves.
Would you like to make a stronger argument than that suicide hurts feelings? How about smoking cigs, drinking booze, or becoming morbidly obese? Do we have the right to enjoy our vices or are we perpetually responsible to other people? Is your every action devoted to maximizing lifespan? Do you drive a motor vehicle?
You need to return after a lengthy break and reread your comments here. You are likely to be aghast at your thinking. At least I hope you will. You show an appalling lack of curiosity about what might drive anyone to this “solution,” as you call it.
As for what is worse for the family, a member dying in a car crash or by suicide, the answer should be clear.
I will add that in Canada, assisted suicide (ie, MAID) is being recommended to an ever-increasing range of people. Initially it was supposed to be only for people in the final stages of a terminal illness. Then quickly it became the "solution” to almost any problem. You can't pay next month's rent? Get MAID. You're feeling sad? Get MAID. You can't get the medical help you need? Get MAID. IIRC, MAID is one of the top two reasons for death in the country. There have been news stories of teenagers being approved for MAID because they were experiencing normal teen insecurities.
I bring this up because of a hunch that you don't see any problem with a society such as Canada's promoting suicide as a solution to almost any problem.
One has to scratch his head and wonder how you ended up thinking this way.
We are living in an age where there are people who are coaching young females into eating disorders or worsening anorexia nervosa, so it should come as no surprise that we encounter other people who advocate suicide and derogate people who attempt to minimise it.
So-called doctor-assisted suicide is homicide and I oppose it as firmly as I support the right to suicide. The only reason doctors are involved (except in rare cases) is because people who want to die have no access to appropriate drugs.
Who owns you if not you? What right does anyone have to prevent you from ending your life? Is it really possible to force someone to live if he or she wants to die? If not drugs than guns; if not guns then suicide by car; if not that then jumping from a tall building or drowning. The American home is teeming with chemicals that can be used for auto-homicide, and they are far more grisly than a bottle of barbiturates.
I support personal autonomy and oppose paternalism. There is no more fundamental right than to commit suicide. No matter how repressive the therapeutic state might become, it will never prevent people from ending their lives. If someone in emotional distress wants help, then by all means get it; but let there never be coercion by doctors, the state, or anyone else..
You missed my main point. If someone in their twenties decides to end it all through a program such as MAID, would you not be curious as to their primary motivation? What if you learned that the primary reason is their dissatisfaction with their looks? If you were their doctor, would you not recommend giving therapy a chance?
If we don't suggest alternative solutions to suicide we can expect mission creep where suicide is offered to anyone for any problem no matter how trivial.
I have no objections to an elderly adult upon discovering that they have Alzheimers being offered suicide as an option. It's when I hear about younger people having it recommended for relatively trivial problems that my alarm bells go off.
Regarding the open letter from Ben Vasiliou (CEO of The Man Cave), it's a good call for collaboration, and the recognition that men and boys face real challenges. But this letter treats men's and boys' issues primarily as a means to achieve other policy goals, rather than recognising the intrinsic worth and dignity of males.
For decades, boys and men have fallen behind in education, suffered higher rates of suicide, workplace deaths, homelessness, social isolation, family separation and premature death. These matter because males are human beings, not because helping them might advance gender equity or other objectives.
The letter remains heavily anchored to feminist assumptions and priorities. Many of the institutions, policies and narratives that contributed to the neglect of boys and men emerged from ideological frameworks that viewed males primarily through the lens of power, privilege and risk.
A genuinely male-positive approach starts from a different premise: boys and men deserve advocacy, compassion, resources and policy attention in their own right. Masculinity isn't a problem to be managed. Fathers are not optional. Male suffering is not an inconvenience...
The next chapter shouldn't be about fitting men into someone else's agenda. It should be about finally taking men and boys seriously.
I have an example of a family court judge totally ignoring a father's mental health but writing that he was concerned that the wife would be unhappy if she only got 50% of the child's time. She was allowed to take the Australian boy to live in England. If the husband had won, the wife had sworn to stay at her good job and to live nearby in the same Australian city. The husband's specialised good job was such that no similar jobs existed anywhere near the city in England where the child would be living.
This judge even wrote that, given a custody win for the husband, the husband's offer to allow 50% of the child's time with the mother, showed that the husband couldn't cope with the child full time ! Btw, the husband's job allowed flexi time, for taking child to doctors or collecting early, but the mother's work hours were very rigid. Biased judge or what ? The judge had already written that both were good and capable parents. The husband fell into major depression with many thoughts of suicide.
Thank you, Bettina, for your continued great work.
To me, it seems like another dubious system for personal enrichment. Those who need help should receive it. But in the NDIS, in cases of domestic violence, and also in this system, there are participants who claim and accuse all sorts of things, while those who need help are ignored. I also question the qualifications of the decision-makers in all these cases.
Feminism is nothing but marxist ideology intended to ideologically subverted nations. There is no apology necessary for being a man. This is disgusting. Men in Australia! Move to a red state in America and be a man! Embrace who you were born to be.
Sorry- I keep watching more of that senate question time and I am shaking with fury. That bald bespectacled individual kept saying to Tyron Whitten that they take ALL suicide seriously in response to the question :why are men not specifically mentioned given they make up 75% of all suicides. So why then do we not take the exact same approach to domestic violence? Why is there a Minister For the Prevention of Violence to Women but no minster for men?
Well, I have posed this question to many politicians over the years and ALL of them immediately pivot to the fact that women make up the majority of victims.
So which approach is it? We care about all victims equally and are not too fussed about the breakdown of which demographic is most affected? Or do we focus all of our energy and money on the group most affected?
Well, I have the answer. In every societal issue which overwhelmingly negatively impacts men- homelessness, suicide, workplace deaths and fatalities in war, the government speaks in gender neutral terms. I have a Herald/Sun article about workplace deaths and I can tell you the word men was not mentioned once and it the article contained a number of paragraphs.
It spoke of Australians, workers, personnel and other terms which now escape me. It is very deliberate. No article on DV would ever refer to the victims as Australians or people. The gender of the victims is the entire focus of the articles.
Watch any ANZAC Day ceremony where we commemorate our fallen soldiers. One hundred thousand men gave their lives and a handful of women. Yet at every ceremony we pause and bow our heads in respect for the brave men AND women who gave their lives for this country. I seethe every time I hear it. There are often more females in uniform on the MCG than men! The women share the spotlight, when our boys did all the dying. They can't even give men that one day to stand alone and be recognized and thanked for their sacrifice.
I know decorum and a calm demeanor is considered important when speaking in Parliament but I am tired of watching the handful of senators who do care enough to ask questions about our corrupt, bigoted, feminist policies tip toe as though walking on eggshells when the answers to their questions are so shockingly deceitful and disdainful.
I'm afraid a little Jesus moment where a few tables are turned over and chairs upended would be a far more legitimate response to this rigged system.
My great grandfather and his four brothers enlisted for WWI after one of them was handed a white feather in Tasmania. Only two of the five returned.
That grandfather stopped attending the Melbourne marches after the feminist invasions in the early eighties. He already had what we now now call PTSD and the harridans screaming abuse in the faces of elderly veterans frightened him as much as the war. He managed to live another decade but rarely left his home.
Great comment , Australia is still affected by the two world wars more so than you would think . Shame was used to control men then just as it is today , the white feather campaign from WW1 had a modern version ,the “white ribbon” campaign , a domestic violence “ awareness “ project demonising men and suggesting that ALL men were potential wife beaters or even murderers .
There was little if any loud protests from men ,,they just accepted it , nothing has changed since 1914 apparently .
Your family tragically lost three young men , the nation lost thousands, from a small population to start with , the loss of these men set Australia back decades , only to be repeated in WW2 .
Next time there’s a big war the men should stay home and women can go and fight , it must be their turn , they want equality don’t they ?
I notice too how the senator asking questions has to begin by assuring the committee he is in no way minimizing the suicide of women or other demographics by asking some questions about male suicide which just happens to make up 75% of the suicide statistics.
This is infuriating when the same politicians have only ever focused on female victims of domestic violence to the point where every government body, DV campaign and even the Minister's title carries the clear mission statement: For the prevention of violence against women.
Men make up a larger percentage of victims of DV than women do in suicide statistics, yet women feature prominently in any discussion of the issue of suicide while men have been entirely erased from any policy statement, funding or campaigning on domestic violence. No politician has ever apologized for this disgraceful travesty of justice. It is outrageous.
The same can be said for any other issue where men make up the vast majority of victims. men make up over 75% of the homeless yet women are front and centre in any advertisement, campaign or political statement as can be seen very shockingly in the poster stating One In four Homeless People are Women.
From 1999 to 2002, I was attempting to abandon my career as a research chemist, and return to Scotland. I'd dug my heels in regarding the sequestration of my work to support female quota 'scientists', and, as a result, the writing was on the wall for me. Our house was paid off, our kids were young enough, a better quality of life awaited. And, quitting would hurt my enemies who could no longer leech on my efforts.
My wife refused to see. Quote: "I don't know what the problem is. You're being paid anyway, aren't you?"
She had but one thought in her mind - to keep me on a straight and narrow, of her choosing.
First, she withdrew love and affection...then sex. Polite conversation was off the cards. Then, any conversation.
With her on my side, I could have fought my enemies forever. Instead, I fought until I could fight no longer. Eventually, I became depressed and suicidal.
If you want to read about it, the saga is recorded in 'The Anglerfish', under the pseudonym of Dan Murdoch. I can make it free on Kindle tomorrow.
Recently, I noted corroborative insight in a recent publication:
"I have yet to see a suicide attempt by a man with a good sex life." ('Sons of Feminism : Men Have Their Say" - edited by Janice Fiamengo)
Written by a son whose father committed suicide, the passage is on page 32 of 'Sons of Feminism'.
Like most men, nobody explained to you that you are first and foremost seen as a provider. Being a provider is what drives a lot of female love interest and even sexual desire, from what I can make out. I wish this were common knowledge. I wish such things were openly admitted and society shaped around biological reality.
I can't find my copy of Sons of Feminism at the moment. I must have passed over that quote when I read the book. It is very useful.
I wish you well and hope you are through feeling suicidal. You have a lot to offer other people. My one tip for anyone going through hell: keep going.
Excellent performance from Tyron Whitten; it's long been known that only Pauline Hanson and ON is addressing the anti-male bias in our institutions.
Whilst the Liberals are too gutless to change anything, it is Labor who deserves the most contempt. Any male who votes Labor is either stupid, or a simp.
Re N Norman:
Don't waste your time trying to reason with this kid. He will end up rage quitting and blocking you.
Why did 58% of funding for mens health, in the last budget, go to just one entity, Movember, whilst the smaller, hands-on, more effective services got nothing?
I'm late to the discussion, but this is the most important and disturbing article I've seen on feminism.
It’s a comprehensive and crushing 'victory' for feminists, in controlling the narrative, the 'statistics,' and the flow of millions in taxpayer dollars.
The bureaucrat’s response to Senator Whitten adds a touch of dark humor—LOL!
Huge credit to your brilliant illustrator for, once again, capturing the whole article in one image.
How can we start again? And truly recognise this sad problem. I think its like turning a super tanker around. Very difficult
I hope this man doesn't' commit suicide!!!
https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/trending/begged-for-it-man-blindsided-by-girlfriends-shocking-response-one-day-after-he-bought-her-a-5k-gift-for-her-birthday/news-story/b649c2101396d2f464db1e43dc00494a
PSA as to the cure: A compassionate society is built on justice, not compassion. The late, great Barry Williams (LFA) had the solution over 50 years ago, also too the great Dr Jordan B. Peterson, 5 years ago, when he concluded "The Courts are tilted. 50-50 custody default is the appropriate default" - JBP (2021) So that's the cure but as to the infection I shall leave that to a great and thoughtful woman: “Everything you think of as ‘wokeness’ is simply an epiphenomenon of demographic feminisation." - Helen Andrews (2025). Suicide is a bitter harvest. We sow. We reap.
Suicide is not a health matter, it’s a personal choice. Recent research has shown that people (mostly men) who commit suicide are usually not even “depressed.”
Why not acknowledge that suicide is considered by many a solution, not a problem? It’s certainly not a place for doctors (and pseudo-doctors) to meddle. They are no more equipped to involve themselves than are bus drivers.
This self-appointed men’s advocate would drag men into the clutches of the mental health industry where men who want to kill themselves have not asked to be. If you tell any doctor that you are considering suicide you will be detained and deprived of all rights. Will that improve your desire to live?
Respecting the right to end one’s life is the most difficult thing for many people.
We all now know you are a troll, a fellow atheist or an immature tunnel-visioned idiot.
Suicide is the deliberate killing of a human being.
Killing a human being is either murder, manslaughter, accidental or an amoral act due to the balance of the mind being disturbed.
Most of us hold that the acts of human beings are either virtuous, morally indifferent or evil according to absolute standards and are subject to judgement.
The bullet-point list is called the Commandments, issued to humanity as a clear sure-and-certain guide to behaviour towards our creator and our fellow human beings.
The Commandments were issued to creatures who are all endowed with the freedom to choose all varieties of available actions, free will. The message is that free will is not being taken away while making it clear that actions will have consequences.
Any lone individual who pretends to be plural has problems I can’t solve.
Mr Logic or Mr Data, ask for verification or refutation - whoops! I am being polysyllabic.
I am settling for troll. Anyone else?
Are you the guy who “trained in psychiatry”? That would explain everything. The derogation, the tendency to bully, the authoritarian tone….
If that's true, it would also explain you refer to yourself as "we." Voices.
Here's an idea, Nicky. Do us all a favor and bugger off.
Better yet, just block everyone as it's obviously your juvenile response to being exposed as an obtuse prat. It would be the quickest solution for us all.
Your mommy certainly succeeded in turning you into an egotistical little monster with her false and limitless praise, didn't she? Was that her intention? Perhaps she needs to evict you finally so that you can go forth into the world and experience some reality instead of dwelling in her basement at 25 fantasizing over euthanizing unwilling victims?
We have to ask, are you are trying to establish yourself up as a one man eugenics shop that will launch itself by eliminating the most vulnerable members of society?
If this is even remotely true, we should have you flagged as a person of interest for the authorities.
You clearly have some serious psychological problems.
"Why not acknowledge that suicide is considered by many a solution, not a problem?"
It may well be a solution. And it may well be executed (no pun intended) during an absence of present depression. But that does not mean it is not the result of long term depression.
This writer has suffered and survived, issues raised by Bettina, which would kill many of us.
Of course, there are deeply unhappy people who commit suicide. I prefer to not medicalize such a circumstance as “depression,” which I think often masks the life conditions that make a person that miserable. There are usually legitimate reasons for suffering.
Whatever the reason, if the unhappy person seeks help, that’s fine. If he eventually makes the decision to end his life, nobody should prevent him from doing so. Suasion, yes; coercion, no.
One of the horrible consequences of the drug war is that people who want to commit suicide have no access to barbiturates and so resort to firearms, which are more violent and traumatizing to people who cared about the person.
https://archive.org/details/suicide-as-a-moral-issue-szasz
What right to end ones life? Where is that a right? The damage left for family is beyond words. Assisted suicide i agree with you on but a choice? It's not a reasonable or rational choice. How would you know they are not depressed? Because they weren't on antidepressants?
You think families are less devastated by fatal car accidents?
What someone does with his body might seem irresponsible, but that it bothers others is no argument against suicide. We are not beholden to public opinion.
You are poorly informed about the impact of antidepressants, and very recently researchers reported that most people who commit suicide are not depressed.
Being a member of the Wallenda family was probably frequently distressing to loved ones as they dropped to their deaths, but no person has a claim on your body or your choices. Influence, sure, but we own ourselves.
Would you like to make a stronger argument than that suicide hurts feelings? How about smoking cigs, drinking booze, or becoming morbidly obese? Do we have the right to enjoy our vices or are we perpetually responsible to other people? Is your every action devoted to maximizing lifespan? Do you drive a motor vehicle?
You need to return after a lengthy break and reread your comments here. You are likely to be aghast at your thinking. At least I hope you will. You show an appalling lack of curiosity about what might drive anyone to this “solution,” as you call it.
As for what is worse for the family, a member dying in a car crash or by suicide, the answer should be clear.
I will add that in Canada, assisted suicide (ie, MAID) is being recommended to an ever-increasing range of people. Initially it was supposed to be only for people in the final stages of a terminal illness. Then quickly it became the "solution” to almost any problem. You can't pay next month's rent? Get MAID. You're feeling sad? Get MAID. You can't get the medical help you need? Get MAID. IIRC, MAID is one of the top two reasons for death in the country. There have been news stories of teenagers being approved for MAID because they were experiencing normal teen insecurities.
I bring this up because of a hunch that you don't see any problem with a society such as Canada's promoting suicide as a solution to almost any problem.
One has to scratch his head and wonder how you ended up thinking this way.
We are living in an age where there are people who are coaching young females into eating disorders or worsening anorexia nervosa, so it should come as no surprise that we encounter other people who advocate suicide and derogate people who attempt to minimise it.
So-called doctor-assisted suicide is homicide and I oppose it as firmly as I support the right to suicide. The only reason doctors are involved (except in rare cases) is because people who want to die have no access to appropriate drugs.
Who owns you if not you? What right does anyone have to prevent you from ending your life? Is it really possible to force someone to live if he or she wants to die? If not drugs than guns; if not guns then suicide by car; if not that then jumping from a tall building or drowning. The American home is teeming with chemicals that can be used for auto-homicide, and they are far more grisly than a bottle of barbiturates.
I support personal autonomy and oppose paternalism. There is no more fundamental right than to commit suicide. No matter how repressive the therapeutic state might become, it will never prevent people from ending their lives. If someone in emotional distress wants help, then by all means get it; but let there never be coercion by doctors, the state, or anyone else..
You missed my main point. If someone in their twenties decides to end it all through a program such as MAID, would you not be curious as to their primary motivation? What if you learned that the primary reason is their dissatisfaction with their looks? If you were their doctor, would you not recommend giving therapy a chance?
If we don't suggest alternative solutions to suicide we can expect mission creep where suicide is offered to anyone for any problem no matter how trivial.
I have no objections to an elderly adult upon discovering that they have Alzheimers being offered suicide as an option. It's when I hear about younger people having it recommended for relatively trivial problems that my alarm bells go off.
Anyone can offer help, any adult can refuse it. Just as any adult can refuse life-saving medical care.
Regarding the open letter from Ben Vasiliou (CEO of The Man Cave), it's a good call for collaboration, and the recognition that men and boys face real challenges. But this letter treats men's and boys' issues primarily as a means to achieve other policy goals, rather than recognising the intrinsic worth and dignity of males.
For decades, boys and men have fallen behind in education, suffered higher rates of suicide, workplace deaths, homelessness, social isolation, family separation and premature death. These matter because males are human beings, not because helping them might advance gender equity or other objectives.
The letter remains heavily anchored to feminist assumptions and priorities. Many of the institutions, policies and narratives that contributed to the neglect of boys and men emerged from ideological frameworks that viewed males primarily through the lens of power, privilege and risk.
A genuinely male-positive approach starts from a different premise: boys and men deserve advocacy, compassion, resources and policy attention in their own right. Masculinity isn't a problem to be managed. Fathers are not optional. Male suffering is not an inconvenience...
The next chapter shouldn't be about fitting men into someone else's agenda. It should be about finally taking men and boys seriously.
I have an example of a family court judge totally ignoring a father's mental health but writing that he was concerned that the wife would be unhappy if she only got 50% of the child's time. She was allowed to take the Australian boy to live in England. If the husband had won, the wife had sworn to stay at her good job and to live nearby in the same Australian city. The husband's specialised good job was such that no similar jobs existed anywhere near the city in England where the child would be living.
This judge even wrote that, given a custody win for the husband, the husband's offer to allow 50% of the child's time with the mother, showed that the husband couldn't cope with the child full time ! Btw, the husband's job allowed flexi time, for taking child to doctors or collecting early, but the mother's work hours were very rigid. Biased judge or what ? The judge had already written that both were good and capable parents. The husband fell into major depression with many thoughts of suicide.
Thank you, Bettina, for your continued great work.
To me, it seems like another dubious system for personal enrichment. Those who need help should receive it. But in the NDIS, in cases of domestic violence, and also in this system, there are participants who claim and accuse all sorts of things, while those who need help are ignored. I also question the qualifications of the decision-makers in all these cases.
Feminism is nothing but marxist ideology intended to ideologically subverted nations. There is no apology necessary for being a man. This is disgusting. Men in Australia! Move to a red state in America and be a man! Embrace who you were born to be.
we'd love to have you
Sorry- I keep watching more of that senate question time and I am shaking with fury. That bald bespectacled individual kept saying to Tyron Whitten that they take ALL suicide seriously in response to the question :why are men not specifically mentioned given they make up 75% of all suicides. So why then do we not take the exact same approach to domestic violence? Why is there a Minister For the Prevention of Violence to Women but no minster for men?
Well, I have posed this question to many politicians over the years and ALL of them immediately pivot to the fact that women make up the majority of victims.
So which approach is it? We care about all victims equally and are not too fussed about the breakdown of which demographic is most affected? Or do we focus all of our energy and money on the group most affected?
Well, I have the answer. In every societal issue which overwhelmingly negatively impacts men- homelessness, suicide, workplace deaths and fatalities in war, the government speaks in gender neutral terms. I have a Herald/Sun article about workplace deaths and I can tell you the word men was not mentioned once and it the article contained a number of paragraphs.
It spoke of Australians, workers, personnel and other terms which now escape me. It is very deliberate. No article on DV would ever refer to the victims as Australians or people. The gender of the victims is the entire focus of the articles.
Watch any ANZAC Day ceremony where we commemorate our fallen soldiers. One hundred thousand men gave their lives and a handful of women. Yet at every ceremony we pause and bow our heads in respect for the brave men AND women who gave their lives for this country. I seethe every time I hear it. There are often more females in uniform on the MCG than men! The women share the spotlight, when our boys did all the dying. They can't even give men that one day to stand alone and be recognized and thanked for their sacrifice.
I know decorum and a calm demeanor is considered important when speaking in Parliament but I am tired of watching the handful of senators who do care enough to ask questions about our corrupt, bigoted, feminist policies tip toe as though walking on eggshells when the answers to their questions are so shockingly deceitful and disdainful.
I'm afraid a little Jesus moment where a few tables are turned over and chairs upended would be a far more legitimate response to this rigged system.
My great grandfather and his four brothers enlisted for WWI after one of them was handed a white feather in Tasmania. Only two of the five returned.
That grandfather stopped attending the Melbourne marches after the feminist invasions in the early eighties. He already had what we now now call PTSD and the harridans screaming abuse in the faces of elderly veterans frightened him as much as the war. He managed to live another decade but rarely left his home.
Great comment , Australia is still affected by the two world wars more so than you would think . Shame was used to control men then just as it is today , the white feather campaign from WW1 had a modern version ,the “white ribbon” campaign , a domestic violence “ awareness “ project demonising men and suggesting that ALL men were potential wife beaters or even murderers .
There was little if any loud protests from men ,,they just accepted it , nothing has changed since 1914 apparently .
Your family tragically lost three young men , the nation lost thousands, from a small population to start with , the loss of these men set Australia back decades , only to be repeated in WW2 .
Next time there’s a big war the men should stay home and women can go and fight , it must be their turn , they want equality don’t they ?
I saw this first on Youtube - your social media reach is working!
I notice too how the senator asking questions has to begin by assuring the committee he is in no way minimizing the suicide of women or other demographics by asking some questions about male suicide which just happens to make up 75% of the suicide statistics.
This is infuriating when the same politicians have only ever focused on female victims of domestic violence to the point where every government body, DV campaign and even the Minister's title carries the clear mission statement: For the prevention of violence against women.
Men make up a larger percentage of victims of DV than women do in suicide statistics, yet women feature prominently in any discussion of the issue of suicide while men have been entirely erased from any policy statement, funding or campaigning on domestic violence. No politician has ever apologized for this disgraceful travesty of justice. It is outrageous.
The same can be said for any other issue where men make up the vast majority of victims. men make up over 75% of the homeless yet women are front and centre in any advertisement, campaign or political statement as can be seen very shockingly in the poster stating One In four Homeless People are Women.
The hypocrisy is appalling.
From 1999 to 2002, I was attempting to abandon my career as a research chemist, and return to Scotland. I'd dug my heels in regarding the sequestration of my work to support female quota 'scientists', and, as a result, the writing was on the wall for me. Our house was paid off, our kids were young enough, a better quality of life awaited. And, quitting would hurt my enemies who could no longer leech on my efforts.
My wife refused to see. Quote: "I don't know what the problem is. You're being paid anyway, aren't you?"
She had but one thought in her mind - to keep me on a straight and narrow, of her choosing.
First, she withdrew love and affection...then sex. Polite conversation was off the cards. Then, any conversation.
With her on my side, I could have fought my enemies forever. Instead, I fought until I could fight no longer. Eventually, I became depressed and suicidal.
If you want to read about it, the saga is recorded in 'The Anglerfish', under the pseudonym of Dan Murdoch. I can make it free on Kindle tomorrow.
Recently, I noted corroborative insight in a recent publication:
"I have yet to see a suicide attempt by a man with a good sex life." ('Sons of Feminism : Men Have Their Say" - edited by Janice Fiamengo)
Written by a son whose father committed suicide, the passage is on page 32 of 'Sons of Feminism'.
Thanks, Warren.
Like most men, nobody explained to you that you are first and foremost seen as a provider. Being a provider is what drives a lot of female love interest and even sexual desire, from what I can make out. I wish this were common knowledge. I wish such things were openly admitted and society shaped around biological reality.
I can't find my copy of Sons of Feminism at the moment. I must have passed over that quote when I read the book. It is very useful.
I wish you well and hope you are through feeling suicidal. You have a lot to offer other people. My one tip for anyone going through hell: keep going.
Excellent performance from Tyron Whitten; it's long been known that only Pauline Hanson and ON is addressing the anti-male bias in our institutions.
Whilst the Liberals are too gutless to change anything, it is Labor who deserves the most contempt. Any male who votes Labor is either stupid, or a simp.
Great comment, Chris.