'There's a disconnect between wealth and wellbeing".

http://www.smh.com.au/national/young-women-and-middleaged-australians-drive-rise-in-national-suicide-rate-20160308-gnd6qy.html


Quote:

A steep rise in death by suicide among middle-aged Australians and young women has driven the national suicide rate to its highest level in 13 years. Australia's suicide rate rose to 12 per 100,000 people in 2014, according to Bureau of Statistics figures released on Tuesday – the highest level since 2001, when it reached 12.6 per 100,000. The suicide rate among those aged 55 to 64 years surged by 54 per cent in the 10 years to 2014, to 15.1 per 100,000. This rise was steeper among men in this age group – 58 per cent, compared to 50 per cent for women. The rate of suicide in women aged 15-24 jumped by 50 per cent over the same period to 6.3 per 100,000, compared to a 2 per cent increase for men. However, men made up three-quarters of the 362 suicides in the age group in 2014. Suicide was the leading cause of death for Australians aged 15 to 44, while the rate for men was nearly twice the rate for women. Director and chief scientist at the Black Dog Institute Helen Christensen said increased risky behaviour among young women could have contributed to the rise in suicide rate, although more research was needed to know. "Young girls are becoming more assertive and less risk-averse. They're drinking earlier, smoking earlier ... all those associated behaviours might lead to more impulsivity, which might lead to more risk-taking, more injury, more suicide risk," Professor Christensen said. Predictors of suicide were different for men and women, she said. "Men worry about money, supporting their families, being the breadwinner. Women worry about interpersonal problems, for example, family conflicts." Calls to crisis support service Lifeline reached a record high of 1 million last year, prompting Lifeline chief executive Pete Shmigel to describe Australia's suicide rates as a "national emergency". More than 60 per cent of callers to the service were women, mostly middle-aged women, and nearly 80 per cent of chat service users were women, mostly younger women. While this indicated women were more likely to reach out for help, the factors behind female suicide were not well understood, Mr Shmigel said. "[The numbers say] that people are getting to us too late," he said. "We made it OK to start talking about mental health, but we're still not giving people enough skills to become capable of preventing suicide." Lifeline has called on the government to double funding to suicide prevention. Alan Woodward, board director at Suicide Prevention Australia, linked the rise in suicide among middle-aged Australians to deteriorating quality of life, chronic health problems and age-based discrimination. People who had survived a mental health crisis would prove a critical resource in reducing Australia's suicide rate, he said. "We need to listen, understand and respond to the insights that people who have experienced suicide and crisis have shared with us." Hayley Purdon, who attempted to take her life at the age of 20, is among those who have survived such a crisis. She had experienced an eating disorder and depression during high school, and when she entered university her experience with anxiety grew worse. Ms Purdon, now 27, said the thoughts behind her suicide attempt were pressure to do well, competition between peers and a feeling she was not good enough. But she said suicidal thoughts and behaviours were often unique to the individual, and part of what made them so difficult to combat. Ms Purdon sought help from a psychologist. She says what kept her "fighting for so long" were connections with people, and the feeling she wasn't alone. "For me that was a big thing. I thought that it was just me and I was crazy. But it turns out I wasn't, and there were lots of people who go through the same thing." The bureau's figures also painted a grim picture of the mental health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, who were almost twice as likely to die by suicide than non-Indigenous people. Overall, heart disease remained the leading cause of death for Australians, the bureau figures show. But while the number of deaths from heart disease had fallen since 2004, the number of deaths from dementia – the second highest cause of death – had more than doubled since 2004. Death from dementia, including Alzheimer's disease, had become more common as the population aged, the bureau said. Life expectancy for Australians increased in 2014, reaching 80 years for men and 84 for women. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/young-women-and-middleaged-australians-drive-rise-in-national-suicide-rate-20160308-gnd6qy.html#ixzz42N8j9Hcf

This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite.

Humans are spiritual beings by nature.

They require water, food, shelter and spiritual nourishment for the soul.  The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality.
Hopefully, spirituality can make a comeback via the personal development and spiritual enlightenment movements and fill the aetheist void

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 1:54pm:

This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Humans are spiritual beings by nature. They require water, food, shelter and spiritual nourishment for the soul.  The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality. Hopefully, spirituality can make a comeback via the personal development and spiritual enlightenment movements and fill the aetheist void

Agreed.Material affluence has increased, narcissistic behaviour has increased. Youth have lost their moral value compass.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 1:54pm: This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Humans are spiritual beings by nature. They require water, food, shelter and spiritual nourishment for the soul.  The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality. Hopefully, spirituality can make a comeback via the personal development and spiritual enlightenment movements and fill the aetheist void Agreed.Material affluence has increased, narcissistic behaviour has increased. Youth have lost their moral value compass.

They won't find it in ian's house.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 2:15pm:

The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality.

Hypocrite!

The right is trashing the religion with the biggest following; Islam.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 1:54pm:

This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite.

Nope

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2817-right-wing-governments-increase-suicide-rates/


Quote:

Right-wing governments may sap some people’s will to live and result in more suicides, conclude studies in Britain and Australia. The researchers speculate that losers are more likely to kill themselves in the individualistic, “winner-takes-all” societies favoured by right wing governments, because they are left to fend for themselves. Wide disparities in wealth also sharpen any sense of hopelessness, the researchers argue.

donincognito wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 4:09pm:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 1:54pm: This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Nope https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2817-right-wing-governments-increase-suicide-rates/ Quote: Right-wing governments may sap some people’s will to live and result in more suicides, conclude studies in Britain and Australia. The researchers speculate that losers are more likely to kill themselves in the individualistic, “winner-takes-all” societies favoured by right wing governments, because they are left to fend for themselves. Wide disparities in wealth also sharpen any sense of hopelessness, the researchers argue.

Fail. Despite the misleading headline, you missed the pertinent part of the article, try actually reading it next time.

Quote:

Shaw admits that attempts to connect the differences to ideologies are pure speculation.

Some interesting excerpts from the New Scientist article below:


Quote:

Shaw and her colleagues found that on average, suicide rates were 17 per cent higher when the Conservatives were in power, compared to the annual average of 103 suicides per million population when opposition parties held office. Richard Taylor and his team in the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney found similar trends over the past century in New South Wales. When Right-wing governments were in power, men were 17 per cent more likely and women 40 per cent more likely to commit suicide... A study published in July 2001 found that US Republicans are almost three times more likely to have nightmares than Democrats.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 4:17pm:

donincognito wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 4:09pm: aquascoot wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 1:54pm: This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Nope https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2817-right-wing-governments-increase-suicide-rates/ Quote: Right-wing governments may sap some people’s will to live and result in more suicides, conclude studies in Britain and Australia. The researchers speculate that losers are more likely to kill themselves in the individualistic, “winner-takes-all” societies favoured by right wing governments, because they are left to fend for themselves. Wide disparities in wealth also sharpen any sense of hopelessness, the researchers argue. Fail. Despite the misleading headline, you missed the pertinent part of the article, try actually reading it next time. [quote]Shaw admits that attempts to connect the differences to ideologies are pure speculation.

[/quote]




how mad would you have to be to commit suicide over any govt in this world today.. :D :D :D


barking mad.... thats all I can say..

fight the bastards...throw them out of their nice cushy little jobs... demand more from them..make them earn your vote...we are like whales being washed up on the shores.. then wait for someone else to save us.. ::) ::)

suicide rates up! is a sign of prosperity .. think they are always at their lowest during war time...

and dont forget we are getting more and more selfish.. its all about meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Svengali wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 4:26pm:

Some interesting excerpts from the New Scientist article below: Quote: Shaw and her colleagues found that on average, suicide rates were 17 per cent higher when the Conservatives were in power, compared to the annual average of 103 suicides per million population when opposition parties held office. Richard Taylor and his team in the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney found similar trends over the past century in New South Wales. When Right-wing governments were in power, men were 17 per cent more likely and women 40 per cent more likely to commit suicide... A study published in July 2001 found that US Republicans are almost three times more likely to have nightmares than Democrats.

Shaw admits that attempts to connect the differences to ideologies are pure speculation.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 4:44pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 4:26pm: Some interesting excerpts from the New Scientist article below: Quote: Shaw and her colleagues found that on average, suicide rates were 17 per cent higher when the Conservatives were in power, compared to the annual average of 103 suicides per million population when opposition parties held office. Richard Taylor and his team in the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney found similar trends over the past century in New South Wales. When Right-wing governments were in power, men were 17 per cent more likely and women 40 per cent more likely to commit suicide... A study published in July 2001 found that US Republicans are almost three times more likely to have nightmares than Democrats. Shaw admits that attempts to connect the differences to ideologies are pure speculation.

Speculation backed by evidence which would suggest further study.

Svengali wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 5:01pm:

ian wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 4:44pm: Svengali wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 4:26pm: Some interesting excerpts from the New Scientist article below: Quote: Shaw and her colleagues found that on average, suicide rates were 17 per cent higher when the Conservatives were in power, compared to the annual average of 103 suicides per million population when opposition parties held office. Richard Taylor and his team in the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney found similar trends over the past century in New South Wales. When Right-wing governments were in power, men were 17 per cent more likely and women 40 per cent more likely to commit suicide... A study published in July 2001 found that US Republicans are almost three times more likely to have nightmares than Democrats. Shaw admits that attempts to connect the differences to ideologies are pure speculation. Speculation backed by evidence which would suggest further study.

As Cods points out suicide rates are at their lowest in the worst  times. Hardly anyone committed suicide during WW2. I suggest the connection is a bit more complicated than a left or right wing government. The study is an apt example of junk science and not worth exploring further.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 5:22pm:

As Cods points out suicide rates are at their lowest in the worst  times. Hardly anyone committed suicide during WW2.

Well, no. He threw a brain fart up in the air and you seem to think it smells like roses. No supporting evidence at all.


Quote:

I suggest the connection is a bit more complicated than a left or right wing government. The study is an apt example of junk science and not worth exploring further.

The fact that it is ambiguous means its worth exploring further.

donincognito wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 6:27pm:

ian wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 5:22pm: As Cods points out suicide rates are at their lowest in the worst  times. Hardly anyone committed suicide during WW2. Well, no. He threw a brain fart up in the air and you seem to think it smells like roses. No supporting evidence at all. Quote: I suggest the connection is a bit more complicated than a left or right wing government. The study is an apt example of junk science and not worth exploring further. The fact that it is ambiguous means its worth exploring further.

I recognise that childish argument. Hello Alevine.

ian wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 5:22pm:

Hardly anyone committed suicide during WW2.

An idle mind is the devil's playground. Perhaps more minds are idle when there are conservative governments.

Young people trapped at home with no job because middle aged couples are both working to pay off their third 'investment property'.


Boredom leads to drugs ... drugs lead to prostitution ... prostitution leads to isolation from family .... self-disgust .... university studies abandoned ... more drugs ...   

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 7:48am:

Young people trapped at home with no job because middle aged couples are both working to pay off their third 'investment property'. Boredom leads to drugs ... drugs lead to prostitution ... prostitution leads to isolation from family .... self-disgust .... university studies abandoned ... more drugs ...

Horses become anxious fearful nervous wrecks when not given firm confident no-nonsense alpha male leadership.

Humans are herd animals as well.

With many men being putz-shamed pussies with no confidence, no masculinity, an aura of self loathing, then,
by the law of "state transference" this mental state will permeate to their children.

With many women being angry, emotional , fearful  mainly because they do not have a rock solid, grounded male partner to absorb their emotional female energy,
then,
these emotions , by the law of state transference will permeate the mental state of their children.

With many teachers have lost control of the classroom due to the inability to understand the dynamics of authority, boundaries and confident leadership, then these emotions of uncertainty, fearfulness and anxiety will , by the law of state transference permeate the minds of children.

When we have mainly a leftard media telling megative neurotic stories , a hand wringing mentality and a cry baby victim narrative, then by the law of state transference, these emotions will permeate the children.


children in the presence of aquascoot see a dynamic confident role model
a woman who adores and worships her man and is super confident in her abilities
they are taught in private schools that worship success
they  do pony club and learn to be confident brave and resilient , rather then watch the crybabies in the media.


In this way, are mentally healthy children produced  ;) ;) ;) ;)

;D ;D ;D


Aquascoot - you're a hoot, but I believe you are way more right than wrong.

Teaching your woman to know her place in the home is essential to a happy family.

Back before the war, women knew how to treat their Man. Respect, courtesy, servitude, adoration, submission. A chef in the kitchen and a whore in bed. The perfect formula for a healthy and enduring marriage.

It was these fine qualities that saw minimal Domestic Violence, drug addiction, suicide, and divorce.

8-) 

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 8:43am:

;D ;D ;D Aquascoot - you're a hoot, but I believe you are way more right than wrong. Teaching your woman to know her place in the home is essential to a happy family. Back before the war, women knew how to treat their Man. Respect, courtesy, servitude, adoration, submission. A chef in the kitchen and a whore in bed. The perfect formula for a healthy and enduring marriage. It was these fine qualities that saw minimal Domestic Violence, drug addiction, suicide, and divorce. 8-)

Lefties think that this is aquascoot doing some sort of sneaky power grab .

The truth is , it takes a lot of effort and dammed hard work to be an alpha male.

The lefties who want to supplicate to women, abdicate their responsibilities to teach children lessons in life , over and over and over again are , in my humble opinion , doing this out of laziness.

it takes constant hard work and grinding it out to get your horse good. every second you are with it, you are teaching ti something (good or bad).
if you are lazy then usually bad.

Men need to "man up" and stop this nonsense with their children, teach them properly....they are more valuable then any horse !!!!!!

to be honest I think the INTERNET has more to do with it than anything else..


we have released a MONSTER an out of control MONSTER...

it is doing no end of unstoppable harm...

people lives  are being ruined...at least they think it is........its malicious and cruel...

no end of money or jail terms can undo what this MONSTER is doing...

a journalist in America has been awarded $73mil for a peeping tom taking film of her nude in her hotel room.. then putting it on cyberspace.....

she wont of course get anything like this money..

but it will never take away her dread of hotel rooms...or shame or horror of the exposure....


its a shocking weapon..... and far too many people will use it..without a care in the world..

The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist. 

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:36am:

All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.

Well isn't that convenient.

... wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient.

Better than this statement from Aqua

"This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite."

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:48am:

... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:46am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient. Better than this statement from Aqua "This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite."

So you just said it to be contrary, not because you thought it was correct.

Nice one.

... wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:50am:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:48am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:46am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient. Better than this statement from Aqua "This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite." So you just said it to be contrary, not because you thought it was correct. Nice one.

Mmm.. noooop... it mean to be contrary and correct. 

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:54am:

... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:50am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:48am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:46am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient. Better than this statement from Aqua "This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite." So you just said it to be contrary, not because you thought it was correct. Nice one. Mmm.. noooop... it mean to be contrary and correct.

When you mean to be contrary, you sacrifice correctness.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 9:04am:

Lefties think that this is aquascoot doing some sort of sneaky power grab .

If power came from a horses anus Aquascoot would rule the world.

... wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 12:01pm:

When you mean to be contrary, you sacrifice correctness.

No, this is wrong.

Oh, ok.  You've convinced me.

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:36am:

The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.

what are you on about.

The demise of the confident male as head of the family , which was the standard narrative for countless generations is ENTIRELY due to leftard feminism, moronic leftard loons like Whitlam with his quickee divorces and single mothers pensions , and a leftard media which teaches kids to be fearful of environemental disasters and to be in a constant frame of apologising to svengali for living on someone elses land (as broadcast in supplicating school assemblies every morning ...thanking the rightful owners of the land for your right to be here).

good grief,  kids are taught zero resilience, zero pride, zero ambition by lefties with zero confidence.

the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers.

Let old scoot in there to kick some heads and build some legitimate self esteem for these miserable quivering scared fearful anxious directionless scrubs that the system is churning out .

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 8:43am:

;D ;D ;D Aquascoot - you're a hoot, but I believe you are way more right than wrong. Teaching your woman to know her place in the home is essential to a happy family. Back before the war, women knew how to treat their Man. Respect, courtesy, servitude, adoration, submission. A chef in the kitchen and a whore in bed. The perfect formula for a healthy and enduring marriage. It was these fine qualities that saw minimal Domestic Violence, drug addiction, suicide, and divorce. 8-)

Well that's a preposterous load of horse crap.

Courtesy of Horse Boy.

... wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 12:01pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:54am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:50am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:48am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:46am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient. Better than this statement from Aqua "This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite." So you just said it to be contrary, not because you thought it was correct. Nice one. Mmm.. noooop... it mean to be contrary and correct.  When you mean to be contrary, you sacrifice correctness.

Not if your position is contrary to the inaccurate one.

Seriously, did you read that on a fortune cookie?

aquascoot wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 6:36pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  what are you on about. The demise of the confident male as head of the family , which was the standard narrative for countless generations is ENTIRELY due to leftard feminism, moronic leftard loons like Whitlam with his quickee divorces and single mothers pensions , and a leftard media which teaches kids to be fearful of environemental disasters and to be in a constant frame of apologising to svengali for living on someone elses land (as broadcast in supplicating school assemblies every morning ...thanking the rightful owners of the land for your right to be here). good grief,  kids are taught zero resilience, zero pride, zero ambition by lefties with zero confidence. the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers. Let old scoot in there to kick some heads and build some legitimate self esteem for these miserable quivering scared fearful anxious directionless scrubs that the system is churning out .

You're an anachronism. You a part of the problem.

Seriously, if I had anything to do with you personally, I would want to off myself. You are such a negative energy.

I gather you are not married, but I would bet you are divorced. No man would want to spend his days around you.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 6:36pm:

the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers.

Thank god for that. Otherwise sick demented perverts like Aquascoot would be terrorizing children.

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:36am:

The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.

The socialists and feminists have been attacking the nuclear family for decades. The socialists are still at it with Roz Ward recently setting up the Safe Schools program. It's long been part of socialism to think the nuclear family is a 'capitalist construct'. The feminists think it's a 'patriarchal construct' and therefore want to destroy it also.

Corporatism doesn't directly attack the family. One of its side effects is the erosion the family - but this is not its intention. Its intention is profit.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 1:54pm:

This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Humans are spiritual beings by nature. They require water, food, shelter and spiritual nourishment for the soul.  The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality. Hopefully, spirituality can make a comeback via the personal development and spiritual enlightenment movements and fill the aetheist void

There's a lot of truth there. The left own the cultural and moral Establishment, yet suicide is on the rise and the highest cause of death among 15-44 year olds. All this screeching for equality just doesn't work. Inequality has always been around and people have coped. Equality only became an issue some time around the Enlightenment (probably via Rousseau, the original neurotic lefty), before that religion dominated. Even the Pagan religions seem to have coped, even better if I may say so - look at the Ancient Greeks for example. The obsession with equality agitates people, puts them in perpetual anxiety mode, full of rancour and envy.
But there's more to the malaise than the obsession with equality. The relentless campaign, mostly by leftards, to deconstruct and destroy every tradition and custom that binds people together has wreaked a terrible toll. It's ripped the foundations away from people's lives - the very traditions, morals, values, principles that people lived by, lie dying, desecrated with leftard graffiti, ridiculed, scorned. How the hell are people supposed to feel 'at home' or have a purpose when leftards critique the hell out of everything?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 6:15am:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 1:54pm: This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite. Humans are spiritual beings by nature. They require water, food, shelter and spiritual nourishment for the soul.  The leftard elite have trashed religion which is the home of spirituality. Hopefully, spirituality can make a comeback via the personal development and spiritual enlightenment movements and fill the aetheist void There's a lot of truth there. The left own the cultural and moral Establishment, yet suicide is on the rise and the highest cause of death among 15-44 year olds. All this screeching for equality just doesn't work. Inequality has always been around and people have coped. Equality only became an issue some time around the Enlightenment (probably via Rousseau, the original neurotic lefty), before that religion dominated. Even the Pagan religions seem to have coped, even better if I may say so - look at the Ancient Greeks for example. The obsession with equality agitates people, puts them in perpetual anxiety mode, full of rancour and envy. But there's more to the malaise than the obsession with equality. The relentless campaign, mostly by leftards, to deconstruct and destroy every tradition and custom that binds people together has wreaked a terrible toll. It's ripped the foundations away from people's lives - the very traditions, morals, values, principles that people lived by, lie dying, desecrated with leftard graffiti, ridiculed, scorned. How the hell are people supposed to feel 'at home' or have a purpose when leftards critique the hell out of everything?

too true and very sad.
they come from a position of low consciousness.
most rich rightards eventually work out that your attachment to wealth does not make you happy and then they are at ease.
leftards are attached to moral superiority. they are stuck in a thought bubble, like a mouse on a hamster wheel, always chasing their own beliefs and strengthening their beliefs til they are set in concrete.
they cannot change and they will not change.
For them, the penny cannot drop because they are stuck in the world of My thoughts, My ideas, My beleifs and there is no way out of that. it is a world of question begging and viscous cycles.
They wreak a terrible toll on society with this false attachment to their own narrative.
They need to read Tolle  ;)

To be fair to the leftard, the obsession with materialism began when natural philosophy (Hume) and scientific method (Bacon) gained popularity as ways of viewing the world. These weren't moral judgments on the world, but attempts at impartial observation. It reaches its peak in logical positivism. It's a dry way of looking at the world.

mothra wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:21pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:43am: ;D ;D ;D Aquascoot - you're a hoot, but I believe you are way more right than wrong. Teaching your woman to know her place in the home is essential to a happy family. Back before the war, women knew how to treat their Man. Respect, courtesy, servitude, adoration, submission. A chef in the kitchen and a whore in bed. The perfect formula for a healthy and enduring marriage. It was these fine qualities that saw minimal Domestic Violence, drug addiction, suicide, and divorce. 8-)  Well that's a preposterous load of horse crap. Courtesy of Horse Boy.

;D ;D ;D

Jennifer wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:41am:

Seriously, if I had anything to do with you personally, I would want to off myself. You are such a negative energy. I gather you are not married, but I would bet you are divorced. No man would want to spend his days around you.

There are a series of very good books by a guy called Reynolds called
He
She
We.

She is a very good self help book for a woman wanting to understand feminity and female energy.
Worth a read. Turn off Q and A and all those angry women and get in touch with your true nature, would be my "self help" advice for Mothra.
that one was free but she'll have to sign up as a client if she wants to recieve any more gems of advice.
50 % off as she is a hard case nooobie  ;)

aquascoot wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 6:36pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  what are you on about. The demise of the confident male as head of the family , which was the standard narrative for countless generations is ENTIRELY due to leftard feminism, moronic leftard loons like Whitlam with his quickee divorces and single mothers pensions , and a leftard media which teaches kids to be fearful of environemental disasters and to be in a constant frame of apologising to svengali for living on someone elses land (as broadcast in supplicating school assemblies every morning ...thanking the rightful owners of the land for your right to be here). good grief,  kids are taught zero resilience, zero pride, zero ambition by lefties with zero confidence. the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers. Let old scoot in there to kick some heads and build some legitimate self esteem for these miserable quivering scared fearful anxious directionless scrubs that the system is churning out .

I disagree entirely with you and cultural warrior.  Feminism was bought about inevitability after critical turning point of industrial revolution, and follows the gradually - but at times violent steps towards democracy from an old feudal system that was once in England.   For example, the peasants revolt bought about initial changes that allow the commons to vote - abit just men.  The passing over of those rights to woman and then the minorities were then just extensions.   And then modern feminism movement - is a further extension yet.    You will find that this quest for equality among individuals are supported by moderates of both sides of the politics. 

Secondly, feminism does not seek to remove male as confident head of family.  Rather, it seeks to give rise to two confident heads of the family, or as each individual family permits, if there have to be one head, then it can either male or female. 

One cannot say that feminism is entirely to blame for erosion of the nuclear family.  It is at its heart, just an ideology.  Rather, the real practical breakdown of nuclear family in modern decades are due to the changing economy of our society.  The deregulation of banking, the ever increasing and spirally cost of living, cost of housing, cost of health, and the media  driving ideology of independence --> had all directly and practically contributed to people working longer, studying longer, and as consequence less time for family.   That I think is the real problem.

Its a bit rich for people like you to cry foul about feminism and nuclear family breakdown, and yet on another thread, attacking weekend penalty rates and wages on another.  Make up your minds.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 6:49am:

mothra wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:21pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:43am: ;D ;D ;D Aquascoot - you're a hoot, but I believe you are way more right than wrong. Teaching your woman to know her place in the home is essential to a happy family. Back before the war, women knew how to treat their Man. Respect, courtesy, servitude, adoration, submission. A chef in the kitchen and a whore in bed. The perfect formula for a healthy and enduring marriage. It was these fine qualities that saw minimal Domestic Violence, drug addiction, suicide, and divorce. 8-)  Well that's a preposterous load of horse crap. Courtesy of Horse Boy. ;D ;D ;D

herb,  it amazes me women fail so badly at this dynamic.
i highlighted the ones  i agree with (i dont like submission and men should cook)
But a woman who really builds he man up will have a

CONFIDENT MAN

and what is the number one requirement to kill it at work and succeed in business

CONFIDENCE.

do you know why at a deep level women often shame and emmasculate their man, Herb ?

So he will be unattractive to other women.

If they can erode his confidence they can own him
Its Co Dependant and low consciousness.

A smart woman knows if she satisfies her man, he would never look elsewhere if he is a quality man.

this is high consciousness and , what Steven covey calls the Inter-dependant relationship, where you seek to build, not to tear down.

As culture warrior says, "tearing down" is the go to frame that leftards come from ;) ;)

mothra wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 11:24pm:

... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:01pm: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:54am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:50am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:48am: ... wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:46am: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  Well isn't that convenient. Better than this statement from Aqua "This is due to the socialist aetheist leftard intellectual elite." So you just said it to be contrary, not because you thought it was correct. Nice one. Mmm.. noooop... it mean to be contrary and correct.  When you mean to be contrary, you sacrifice correctness. Not if your position is contrary to the inaccurate one. Seriously, did you read that on a fortune cookie?

No, that's not right, and your post itself is an example of how a desire to be contrary leads one to say things that are just plain wrong.  If my post was written by anyone else, you would have just skipped it over, and you wouldn't have to be schooled.

Allow me to demonstrate with mathematics.

Person 1:  2 + 2 = 5

Contrarian:  No it's not, it's 0.2 (the opposite of 5)

Person 1s answer is inaccurate, but the contrarian is more invested in proving that person 1 is not just inaccurate, but as far from correct as possible (ie polar opposite), than they are about addressing the original question. 

This emotional response has led them to substitute the original question "what is 2+ 2" for "what is the opposite of my opponents answer", leading to an incredibly ridiculous answer.

So I repeat:  When you mean to be contrary you sacrifice accuracy.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 6:40am:

To be fair to the leftard, the obsession with materialism began when natural philosophy (Hume) and scientific method (Bacon) gained popularity as ways of viewing the world. These weren't moral judgments on the world, but attempts at impartial observation. It reaches its peak in logical positivism. It's a dry way of looking at the world.

thanks CW,  i'm a simple small businessman and hobby farmer but i love your intellect.
The blowflies from the left just go splat on the  windshield of your V8 turbo mercedes as you power through life.

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 8:32am:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 6:36pm: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  what are you on about. The demise of the confident male as head of the family , which was the standard narrative for countless generations is ENTIRELY due to leftard feminism, moronic leftard loons like Whitlam with his quickee divorces and single mothers pensions , and a leftard media which teaches kids to be fearful of environemental disasters and to be in a constant frame of apologising to svengali for living on someone elses land (as broadcast in supplicating school assemblies every morning ...thanking the rightful owners of the land for your right to be here). good grief,  kids are taught zero resilience, zero pride, zero ambition by lefties with zero confidence. the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers. Let old scoot in there to kick some heads and build some legitimate self esteem for these miserable quivering scared fearful anxious directionless scrubs that the system is churning out . I disagree entirely with you and cultural warrior.  Feminism was bought about inevitability after critical turning point of industrial revolution, and follows the gradually - but at times violent steps towards democracy from an old feudal system that was once in England.   For example, the peasants revolt bought about initial changes that allow the commons to vote - abit just men.  The passing over of those rights to woman and then the minorities were then just extensions.   And then modern feminism movement - is a further extension yet.    You will find that this quest for equality among individuals are supported by moderates of both sides of the politics.  Secondly, feminism does not seek to remove male as confident head of family.  Rather, it seeks to give rise to two confident heads of the family, or as each individual family permits, if there have to be one head, then it can either male or female.  One cannot say that feminism is entirely to blame for erosion of the nuclear family.  It is at its heart, just an ideology.  Rather, the real practical breakdown of nuclear family in modern decades are due to the changing economy of our society.  The deregulation of banking, the ever increasing and spirally cost of living, cost of housing, cost of health, and the media  driving ideology of independence --> had all directly and practically contributed to people working longer, studying longer, and as consequence less time for family.   That I think is the real problem. Its a bit rich for people like you to cry foul about feminism and nuclear family breakdown, and yet on another thread, attacking weekend penalty rates and wages on another.  Make up your minds.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.....

.. and what else is feminism based on but media driven 'independence'?  The media is full of endless stories of great women.... while Rome burns...

aquascoot wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 8:37am:

A smart woman knows if she satisfies her man, he would never look elsewhere if he is a quality man.

Exactly.

Wise Mother to Daughter on her Wedding Night:

"If you keep his belly full and his balls empty you'll have a long and happy marriage".

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 10:11am:

aquascoot wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 8:37am: A smart woman knows if she satisfies her man, he would never look elsewhere if he is a quality man. Exactly. Wise Mother to Daughter on her Wedding Night: "If you keep his belly full and his balls empty you'll have a long and happy marriage".

herb, thats not how David Daeda would have put it.
perhaps this

---

david does get slightly rediculous sometimes, though this stuff is truly lethal on feminine women

---

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 9:55am:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 8:32am: aquascoot wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 6:36pm: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 11:36am: The issue is the combination of lack of good role model and morphed body image in media.   And then it's break down of larger nuclear family.  All of them perpetrated by extreme right corporatism rather than the leftist.  what are you on about. The demise of the confident male as head of the family , which was the standard narrative for countless generations is ENTIRELY due to leftard feminism, moronic leftard loons like Whitlam with his quickee divorces and single mothers pensions , and a leftard media which teaches kids to be fearful of environemental disasters and to be in a constant frame of apologising to svengali for living on someone elses land (as broadcast in supplicating school assemblies every morning ...thanking the rightful owners of the land for your right to be here). good grief,  kids are taught zero resilience, zero pride, zero ambition by lefties with zero confidence. the whole education system is staffed with fearful anxious leftard female teachers and armies of hand wringing guidance officers. Let old scoot in there to kick some heads and build some legitimate self esteem for these miserable quivering scared fearful anxious directionless scrubs that the system is churning out . I disagree entirely with you and cultural warrior.  Feminism was bought about inevitability after critical turning point of industrial revolution, and follows the gradually - but at times violent steps towards democracy from an old feudal system that was once in England.   For example, the peasants revolt bought about initial changes that allow the commons to vote - abit just men.  The passing over of those rights to woman and then the minorities were then just extensions.   And then modern feminism movement - is a further extension yet.    You will find that this quest for equality among individuals are supported by moderates of both sides of the politics.  Secondly, feminism does not seek to remove male as confident head of family.  Rather, it seeks to give rise to two confident heads of the family, or as each individual family permits, if there have to be one head, then it can either male or female.  One cannot say that feminism is entirely to blame for erosion of the nuclear family.  It is at its heart, just an ideology.  Rather, the real practical breakdown of nuclear family in modern decades are due to the changing economy of our society.  The deregulation of banking, the ever increasing and spirally cost of living, cost of housing, cost of health, and the media  driving ideology of independence --> had all directly and practically contributed to people working longer, studying longer, and as consequence less time for family.   That I think is the real problem. Its a bit rich for people like you to cry foul about feminism and nuclear family breakdown, and yet on another thread, attacking weekend penalty rates and wages on another.  Make up your minds. A house divided against itself cannot stand..... .. and what else is feminism based on but media driven 'independence'?  The media is full of endless stories of great women.... while Rome burns...

A house is divided anyway, if one voice decide to suppress another.  In which case, any perceived 'happiness' is then an illusion. 

The media is an extension of modern corporatism, which emphasizing on ever increasing consumerism.   For as long as there is Television, success was marked by monetary value, the degree of sexual conquest, and above all as to how much an individual owns.   And on the contrary, achievements by great individuals like Mother Teresa goes UN-mentioned.   It is sad, when, I see peers of my age group knows more about gossips of ALF extra marital affairs than what is Fred Hollow foundation.   

That my friend, sums up the type of society we live in. 

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:12pm:

A house is divided anyway, if one voice decide to suppress another.

And this demonstrates the adversarial mindset we're encouraged to take.

Question - would you say the captain of a team "suppresses" their vice captain? 

Or, are both respected positions, both by each other, and the other team members?

... wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:25pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:12pm: A house is divided anyway, if one voice decide to suppress another. And this demonstrates the adversarial mindset we're encouraged to take. Question - would you say the captain of a team "suppresses" their vice captain?  Or, are both respected positions, both by each other, and the other team members?

I originally put forward the idea that a family unit can have more than one voices, like .... two voices - which is what you are stating now.   Grappler decided to argue that means the house is divided when there is more than two voices.   So I assumed, he meant, the voice of male by default should over-ride the female voice, otherwise, its divided. 

So I put forward the point that if you have a household with one voice, but that voice suppresses the other one, then what success or happiness there is are just an illusion. 

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:34pm:

... wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:25pm: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:12pm: A house is divided anyway, if one voice decide to suppress another. And this demonstrates the adversarial mindset we're encouraged to take. Question - would you say the captain of a team "suppresses" their vice captain?  Or, are both respected positions, both by each other, and the other team members? I originally put forward the idea that a family unit can have more than one voices, like .... two voices - which is what you are stating now.   Grappler decided to argue that means the house is divided when there is more than two voices.   So I assumed, he meant, the voice of male by default should over-ride the female voice, otherwise, its divided.  So I put forward the point that if you have a household with one voice, but that voice suppresses the other one, then what success or happiness there is are just an illusion.

Everyone has a voice, even the children, but only one voice can have the final word.

If a vice captain works for the good of the team, their advice and counsel is respected and considered.  But if they work to undermine their captain and assume the head role for themselves, they destroy the team. 

... wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:41pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:34pm: ... wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:25pm: tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:12pm: A house is divided anyway, if one voice decide to suppress another. And this demonstrates the adversarial mindset we're encouraged to take. Question - would you say the captain of a team "suppresses" their vice captain?  Or, are both respected positions, both by each other, and the other team members? I originally put forward the idea that a family unit can have more than one voices, like .... two voices - which is what you are stating now.   Grappler decided to argue that means the house is divided when there is more than two voices.   So I assumed, he meant, the voice of male by default should over-ride the female voice, otherwise, its divided.  So I put forward the point that if you have a household with one voice, but that voice suppresses the other one, then what success or happiness there is are just an illusion.  Everyone has a voice, even the children, but only one voice can have the final word. If a vice captain works for the good of the team, their advice and counsel is respected and considered.  But if they work to undermine their captain and assume the head role for themselves, they destroy the team.

Family life have more dimensions than just a sporting team Honky.  Therefore, i believe it depends on the situation who makes the final decision.  For example: If the wife is a nurse, and the husband is an electrician.  Then naturally, the husband have the final say in what sort of cables needed to wire the house.   Vice versa the wife would have the final say on what type of dressing is better for superficial burns.   If there is disagreement on certain issues, then compromises need to be made.   You dont have to have a clear captain / vice captain to have a fully functional and loving family.

A  good captain (or leader in general) will often defer to those with superior expertise in a given area.  Think how many advisers a president or PM surround themselves with.

People who are not leaders seem to think leadership is made up of people shouting "this is the way it's gonna be OR ELSE!".  But an overbearing leader will lose their team as quickly and as surely as a weak, wishy washy one.  It's a highly nuanced balancing act, in an age when nuance has been sacrificed for sensationalism. 

... wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 1:01pm:

A  good captain (or leader in general) will often defer to those with superior expertise in a given area.  Think how many advisers a president or PM surround themselves with. People who are not leaders seem to think leadership is made up of people shouting "this is the way it's gonna be OR ELSE!".  But an overbearing leader will lose their team as quickly and as surely as a weak, wishy washy one.  It's a highly nuanced balancing act, in an age when nuance has been sacrificed for sensationalism.

exactly,  and most dumb guys would have no idea what you were talking about.
I hate to say it but Mothra is smarter then most guys.
(and thats saying something).
Now, being dumb and , by default, lazy, what is the solution for your average suburban chode?

Let the woman run things.
Lay about and try to get a few brownie points when you think that might result in boring unfulfilling sex.
She wont be turned on because (thanks to her and the sisterhood shaming the guy) he is just lousy at sex.
Watch boring tv  til her nagging drives you to do the bare minimum.
Provide a role model to your son of a beaten down loser.
Provide a role model to your daughter of a putz.
The mother is angry and irritable all the time and the whole thing is a disaster leading to the breakdown of the family unit.
Welcome to leftard domestic mediocre nirvanna  ;)

I don't think it's fair to call people dumb for not knowing something they've never been exposed to.  Half these young guys coming up got taught "how to be a man" by women, so of course they're going to be lost. 

What would classify them as dumb is if they don't do anything about it.  They can do everything right (according to the popular narrative) and it will burn them.  What makes them dumb is if they can't or won't learn from these lessons. 

tickleandrose wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 8:32am:

For example, the peasants revolt bought about initial changes that allow the commons to vote - abit just men.

Mothra tickleandrose, it should be made clear that initially the only men who could vote were those who owned land, and a certain size of land at that. The vast majority of men therefore did not vote because they weren't land owners of a certain size. The gap between all men getting the vote and all women getting it is approximately 30 years (this varies from Western country to Western country but it doesn't move much more than a decade or two either side). It is therefore a great myth that all men had voting rights for hundreds of years prior to women's suffrage.



Quote:

One cannot say that feminism is entirely to blame for erosion of the nuclear family.  It is at its heart, just an ideology.  Rather, the real practical breakdown of nuclear family in modern decades are due to the changing economy of our society.  The deregulation of banking, the ever increasing and spirally cost of living, cost of housing, cost of health, and the media  driving ideology of independence --> had all directly and practically contributed to people working longer, studying longer, and as consequence less time for family.   That I think is the real problem.

No. You have it back to front. In tough times it brings the family closer together because they need to rely on each other more. In economic prosperous times it can drive families apart because each member is not needed in the economic sense anymore. Think before the welfare state existed. Who did people rely on mainly to subsist? Their family. Extended families were often closer as well. This is still the case outside of prosperous countries.

But feminism doesn't get off the hook here. Economic factors driven by liberalism (individualism) are not direct attacks on the family. Family breakdown is an accidental by-product or side-effect of it. Feminism, particularly the second and third waves, directly attack the nuclear family because it's "patriarchal". The hatred of masculine drives and instincts by feminists has confused and muddled the point of the family all together. This is taught in all higher education, and has been since the 1960s, and it now looks like it's going to be taught to children as young as 7 under the Safe Schools program.