New article on SaSu

[WakingNightmare]

Noooo! You've got to live because- because you just do ok?!?
Meanwhile if you complain about your life people just want to throw pills at you and hope you go away

 

[Forever Sleep]

"Deciding to die can be a choice, yes, but what choice is any if it obliterates your chances to ever make another choice again?"

Exactly. It seems as if they're agreed that choice is a good thing. But, we didn't choose to be born. We were entered into a life with billions of choices. Maybe that works out ok for some people. But, do we all even want the ability to choose in the first place? For some, the concept of not existance. Not having the responsibility or expectation placed on us to choose sounds more prefarble.

After all, we might choose the wrong thing. We might choose the right thing that, still goes wrong. We might have made many thousands of choices that haven't rewarded us sufficiently (in our opinion.) What happens when we figure out that, no matter what choice we make, whatever thing we try, life doesn't improve for us?

These pro- lifers seem to have this idea that you only need to make a few 'right' choices and, things will improve. Things like therapy, medication, exercise, healthy living I expect. They don't seem to appreciate that not everyone responds well to those things. There are people here who have tried all those things. Some problems run far deeper than that though.

I'm not against trying things. I'm not against recovery. But, that needs to be a choice too. It really does because it takes so much effort. And, it doesn't always reward us.

Sometimes though, I just feel like they're a whole other species. I don't think it actually sinks in with them that some people really don't want any of the pressures surrounding life- including the ability to choose. Plus, choosing to try to battle and recover can be an extremely hard choice. Why do they even expect so much of people who don't have that strength now?

 

[thankyouforthis]

"Though some members talk of their reluctance to leave loved ones behind, there is an acute lack of appreciation for the pain their premature death could cause to others."

Man these people are so stuck up their own ass. Why would someone who is suffering and wanting to die live solely for their "loved ones" who are often times linked to their despair anyway? I personally hope my parents feel like shit once I ctb. And I could care less about people that really dgaf about me

This is also just straight-up not true. I mean not only are there those who blame their families and therefore have justification for not caring about hurting them (or maybe even think their families won't be hurt but will be indifferent or even secretly happy), but there are also way more than just "some" members talking about reluctance to leave their loved ones. I think not wanting to hurt or traumatize others is THE #1 most common reason I've encountered on this site for people who want to ctb not doing so. It comes up over and over again, across multiple conversations-- not just once or twice. This "acute lack of appreciation" line is a boldfaced lie.

 

[SilentSadness]

I hope they gained the clicks and money they were after with this laughably uninformed piece of fanfiction, because as we know these defamatory articles never amount to anything. So they start by repeating the same old lies about how the forum "encourages" suicide, but then it gets to the part about the student to wizard pipeline which is honestly hilarious to me. They have absolutely no clue about basic functionality of the site and yet they try to paint the most damning picture possible about it. Maybe they should have asked a member rather than speaking for us again, interviewing only suicide preventionists. After dismissing the recovery resources as "giving the impression of concern" and not including "traditional mental health services", they then start attacking the online safety act by saying it's not strong enough to "neutralise this suicide site". If you're advocating for the online safety act to be more extreme then you've already lost. To be honest this is the worst abomination of an anti-SS hitpiece I have ever seen to date.

 

[Aergia]

I don't know why people are so scared of this place being criticized (I'm prepared for "user reacted with " to blow up my inbox lol)

Like don't get me wrong people actually bothering users and tampering with the site by ddosing is scary

But there is no "safe space" on earth and if your ideology can't be criticized without everyone guarding up then it is an echo chamber.

People criticize the ethnics of 4chan, kiwifarms, lolcow, and reddit snark all the time yet they still exist. This site doesn't technically break American law so it's very likely that it'll stay up for a very, very long time.

The media will criticize and jump on any hate train it can bc it generates views and a discussion, the more you guys circulate the link and talk the more popular it'll become. 90% of people don't even know what this site is, even other suicidal people.

I don't know if it's fear—like you say, it's likely it'll stay up for a long time. And I agree that people should be able to criticise SS/pro-choice ideology. But it can be frustrating to see it misrepresented; for instance this line:

but people on this suicide forum egg on and celebrate death.

is just blatantly false. Anyone who did this would be banned—I've seen members banned for hinting at encouragement.

For those of us who consider this place a sanctuary of sorts, I imagine criticism of it in general could be upsetting.

aren't some of the mods here women? I've personally never seen any anti-women stuff on here, so kinda hoping this isn't true.

TLDR the forum founders (who did indeed also found the incel forum, etc.) relinquished ownership of SS years ago and some of the current mods (and even the admin) are indeed women.

 

[BRAINWORMS]

That is absolutely infuriating to read as someone who has made so many posts over the years about actively feeling so much fucking pain about what my death will do to my loved ones as well as actively trying to do everything in my power to minimize the pain that it will cause. How fucking disgusting of them to try and say we are "unappreciative" of the pain. I have stayed alive for years and years for my family. I have now been in consecutive inpatient treatment that has left me with nothing but worse mental health and trauma for my family. I have done research upon research to try and make the logistics of my death easier on my family so that they don't have to try and deal with those alongside the emotional pain it will bring. That is appalling to read.

My thoughts exactly. Also, how fucking dare this author be unappreciative of the pain that comes with feeling like your brain is on fire every waking moment.

 

[starboy2k]

Hey little miss Sophie Wilkinson, if you are somehow still lurking on this forum and if you are reading this I would like to say……..

•that article you wrote fucking sucks ass.

•you thought you ate that but you really didnt.

•shaming suicidal people into not being suicidal
never works.

•you're battle with existentialism is not a reason to take our voices away and undermine our DAILY feelings and emotions.

•you being "horrified" as a feminist seeing the phrase "my body, my choice" being used adjacently to "pro choice" ideology is not going to change the fact that there are women who can simultaneously fight for their reproductive rights AND want to permanently escape from a world that enthusiastically wants to take said rights away. People are always going to take words and phrases and use them in their own ways for better or worse. Cope harder ig.

•once again, your article sucks ass <3

 

[-Link-]

The words on the site's pages begin to play on my psyche; within a few days of first visiting it, I find myself questioning everything in my life and my place in it.

Suddenly, the reading of the site isn't just theoretical. These are seemingly normal people, with varied interests, typing out their gloom and doom. They aren't just moaning about specific personal problems but offering objective truths about the state of the world and just one biased viewpoint on these. Things are bad, I found myself thinking. What is the point? I wondered.

Ah HA! Finally, some progress.

In other words, Sophie Wilkinson (the freelance journalist who wrote the article) got a reality check. Too bad her answer was to step away and put her head back in the sand. But progress is progress.

Next, let's have the media start acknowledging that governments have a responsibility to address those "objective truths about the state of the world", and start asking (and answering) questions about what our leaders could (should) be doing to improve our collective way of life in a way that would make people less likely to bottom out so badly as to be seeking out a suicide forum in the first place.

For instance:

** Increasing funding to mental healthcare to address the complex nature of mental illness (complex cases require complex treatments).

** Giving patients more say in what treatments they engage and when (eg. an Acceptance & Commitment Therapy program shouldn't be gatekept by a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy program).

** More accessibility to address prohibitive costs, travel requirements, and long wait lists.

** Ensuring practitioners are well-trained in the techniques they're teaching and keeping up to date with the latest relevant research.

** Improving disability supports so that people can afford the time needed to engage treatment programs without also having to balance the strain of a 40-hour work week.

** Efforts to reduce stigma and encourage people to seek help at earlier (milder) stages instead of delaying until greater severity when there are more restrictive impacts on daily living.

** Educating the general public on the importance of a personal support system (family, friends) and on how to provide support to people engaging in mental health treatments.

** Awareness campaigns for employers and educational institutions to make these environments more conducive to maintaining good mental health.

** Making profit margins a secondary concern to innovation in research initiatives.

** Addressing deeper societal factors that lead to people developing mental illnesses in the first place (eg. socioeconomic inequality; systemic racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism).

Also, providing medically-supported assisted dying services to the non-terminally ill, including those with mental illness who have exhausted reasonable treatment options. This would allow people the opportunity to openly discuss life-or-death decisions with healthcare providers as well as family and friends, instead of making these decisions in lonely isolation.

The forum promotes a "recovery resources" list, but none include traditional mental health services or suicide helplines

The standard go-to answer is usually, "Just seek treatment," or, "Just call a helpline." This fails to account for the fact that by the time someone has reached our forum, they're no longer a simple, straightforward mental health case. Instead, their conditions now amount to severe and complex. And I'm not sure the average person appreciates just how much mental energy, time, and effort is required to engage mental health outpatient treatment in a meaningful way -- especially for a complex case -- let alone the logistical, financial, and long-term impacts of any inpatient stay. For a lot of us, it's just not practical (if accessible at all), especially when we face so many barriers in our current social climate.

Removing said barriers would require the media, our governments, and the general public to think deeper about suicide.

But they face their own barriers, don't they.

For the media, attacking this forum is a means of evoking an emotional response in the reader (consumer) which goes towards maintaining or increasing reader engagement. Addressing deeper societal issues tends to make for less-interesting news headlines and risks alienating readers of certain political philosophies.

For governments, laying the blame on us is an easy answer that alleviates the burden of their own culpability in suicide rates. Politicians naturally gravitate towards quick fixes that prop up their image for the next election cycle. Big-money lobbyists back campaigns and demand maximum returns within minimum time frames. The consequence, "Save a penny now at the expense of a dollar later." Much like the media, our governments thrive on emotional, quick-fix headlines.

For the general public, suicide tends to be a scary, unnerving topic. How deep can the average person stare into the darkness? And how much time and mental energy can they spend on these challenging, complex solutions when they're dealing with their own pressures and struggles in a world that begets shortsightedness?

So, we are left with quick-fix, low-cost, soundbite "solutions" in the manner of, "Shut down Sanctioned Suicide, and that'll be a job well done." If they ever pull it off, what a headline that'll make. Lots of clicks for the profit-driven media, opportunity for politicians to play off people's emotionality and reactivity, and a general public satisfied in their eagerness to buy into the idea that the world is now a safer place.

Meanwhile, what exactly would this actually change?

As if our suicidality would magically vanish in the forum's absence... No, we would simply just look elsewhere. And be assured, there would be an "elsewhere" -- right quick at that.

Because, let's say everyone ignores all of this and continues this tunnel-visioned crusade to get Sanctioned Suicide shut down. What happens next? As long as the above-mentioned deeper issues go unaddressed, the demand for suicide method information will remain (at best) stagnant. And another site under another name under different leadership would pop up within a matter of days, if not hours, hosted in a different locality with different governing laws. This is the realistic outcome in any situation where this site would be shut down. Their answer to this would be, "Then we'll shut down the next site too." But how much time, energy, and resources will it take to get the next one shut down? In the end, nobody wins. At best, people stay frustrated. At worst, people suffer unnecessary harm.

Shallow and fleeting at best is the benefit in shutting down Sanctioned Suicide. But there would be great benefit in addressing those larger issues and doing so in a way that goes beyond the superficial (shortcuts and bandaids are only effective if there is follow-up). Only, this would require governments, the media, and the general public to be patient and allow the necessary time it would take to start realizing those benefits. "Spend a penny now and save a dollar later." The headlines would be less exciting, and the upfront costs would appear deceivingly ugly. But the real-world effects would be substantial.

What needs to be done to stop them

Look.

You don't treat a brain tumour by focusing on the headache. This forum is only a symptom. Stop attacking the symptom. The symptom won't go away as long as the underlying problems are ignored. None of us woke up one day and randomly decided to join a suicide forum. Each one of us has a story involving a chain of events that led us here. This forum just happens to be the last stop in a series of problematic life events aggravated by various social factors, and it is shortsighted to be laying into us like this and laying all this blame upon us.

The powerlessness I felt in the face of this anguish could only be offset by the hope that this story might make some speck of difference to anyone's understanding of the dangers of this site.

The very people being vilified in news articles like this are the same people whose suicide stories will be written about in the future. What effect do you think these articles have on the members here? Do they encourage us to alter course and open up to family and friends, or do they reinforce our isolation and hesitation to open up to others? Does anyone care? You should care, indeed, because these same people are the loved ones you're going to be mourning, later.

A lot of mental health issues resemble a cycle. Not just a cycle of reinforcement, but sometimes a compounding cycle where the situation gets worse with each go-around. As part of treatment, one of the goals is to stop the cycle.

Here, we have another cycle going on: Media and governments demonize forum members -> forum members further isolate -> forum members die by suicide -> media and governments mourn deceased forum members -> media and governments demonize forum members -> etc. etc. etc.

What a turnaround it is to dehumanize, vilify, and belittle us in life... only to later mourn us as loving, caring human beings in death.

We are labelled as death-mongering, suicide-encouraging monsters who are too incompetent to know what's best for us. In reality, we are just people like anybody else, except we live our day-to-day lives in persistent unbearable suffering, often in silent isolation due a lack of adequate external supports and for how often we see it demonstrated to us (eg. this news article) that people are either unable or unwilling to even try to understand us.

We are your sons, your daughters, your children, your brothers, your sisters, your siblings, your mothers, your fathers, your parents, your partners, your friends... We could be upstairs listening to music in our bedroom above you. We could be sitting down with you at the dinner table tonight. You could be planning our upcoming birthday. You could be going out to a movie with us. You could be texting back-and-forth with us right this very minute. It is in our best interest, as well as yours, that you try to understand us from our perspective as members of this forum.

Think deeper. Do better. That is how you effect meaningful change.

 

[R. A.]

Ah HA! Finally, some progress.

In other words, Sophie Wilkinson (the freelance journalist who wrote the article) got a reality check. Too bad her answer was to step away and put her head back in the sand. But progress is progress.

Next, let's have the media start acknowledging that governments have a responsibility to address those "objective truths about the state of the world", and start asking (and answering) questions about what our leaders could (should) be doing to improve our collective way of life in a way that would make people less likely to bottom out so badly as to be seeking out a suicide forum in the first place.

For instance:

** Increasing funding to mental healthcare to address the complex nature of mental illness (complex cases require complex treatments).

** Giving patients more say in what treatments they engage and when (eg. an Acceptance & Commitment Therapy program shouldn't be gatekept by a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy program).

** More accessibility to address prohibitive costs, travel requirements, and long wait lists.

** Ensuring practitioners are well-trained in the techniques they're teaching and keeping up to date with the latest relevant research.

** Improving disability supports so that people can afford the time needed to engage treatment programs without also having to balance the strain of a 40-hour work week.

** Efforts to reduce stigma and encourage people to seek help at earlier (milder) stages instead of delaying until greater severity when there are more restrictive impacts on daily living.

** Educating the general public on the importance of a personal support system (family, friends) and on how to provide support to people engaging in mental health treatments.

** Awareness campaigns for employers and educational institutions to make these environments more conducive to maintaining good mental health.

** Making profit margins a secondary concern to innovation in research initiatives.

** Addressing deeper societal factors that lead to people developing mental illnesses in the first place (eg. socioeconomic inequality; systemic racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism).

Also, providing medically-supported assisted dying services to the non-terminally ill, including those with mental illness who have exhausted reasonable treatment options. This would allow people the opportunity to openly discuss life-or-death decisions with healthcare providers as well as family and friends, instead of making these decisions in lonely isolation.


The standard go-to answer is usually, "Just seek treatment," or, "Just call a helpline." This fails to account for the fact that by the time someone has reached our forum, they're no longer a simple, straightforward mental health case. Instead, their conditions now amount to severe and complex. And I'm not sure the average person appreciates just how much mental energy, time, and effort is required to engage mental health outpatient treatment in a meaningful way -- especially for a complex case -- let alone the logistical, financial, and long-term impacts of any inpatient stay. For a lot of us, it's just not practical (if accessible at all), especially when we face so many barriers in our current social climate.

Removing said barriers would require the media, our governments, and the general public to think deeper about suicide.

But they face their own barriers, don't they.

For the media, attacking this forum is a means of evoking an emotional response in the reader (consumer) which goes towards maintaining or increasing reader engagement. Addressing deeper societal issues tends to make for less-interesting news headlines and risks alienating readers of certain political philosophies.

For governments, laying the blame on us is an easy answer that alleviates the burden of their own culpability in suicide rates. Politicians naturally gravitate towards quick fixes that prop up their image for the next election cycle. Big-money lobbyists back campaigns and demand maximum returns within minimum time frames. The consequence, "Save a penny now at the expense of a dollar later." Much like the media, our governments thrive on emotional, quick-fix headlines.

For the general public, suicide tends to be a scary, unnerving topic. How deep can the average person stare into the darkness? And how much time and mental energy can they spend on these challenging, complex solutions when they're dealing with their own pressures and struggles in a world that begets shortsightedness?

So, we are left with quick-fix, low-cost, soundbite "solutions" in the manner of, "Shut down Sanctioned Suicide, and that'll be a job well done." If they ever pull it off, what a headline that'll make. Lots of clicks for the profit-driven media, opportunity for politicians to play off people's emotionality and reactivity, and a general public satisfied in their eagerness to buy into the idea that the world is now a safer place.

Meanwhile, what exactly would this actually change?

As if our suicidality would magically vanish in the forum's absence... No, we would simply just look elsewhere. And be assured, there would be an "elsewhere" -- right quick at that.

Because, let's say everyone ignores all of this and continues this tunnel-visioned crusade to get Sanctioned Suicide shut down. What happens next? As long as the above-mentioned deeper issues go unaddressed, the demand for suicide method information will remain (at best) stagnant. And another site under another name under different leadership would pop up within a matter of days, if not hours, hosted in a different locality with different governing laws. This is the realistic outcome in any situation where this site would be shut down. Their answer to this would be, "Then we'll shut down the next site too." But how much time, energy, and resources will it take to get the next one shut down? In the end, nobody wins. At best, people stay frustrated. At worst, people suffer unnecessary harm.

Shallow and fleeting at best is the benefit in shutting down Sanctioned Suicide. But there would be great benefit in addressing those larger issues and doing so in a way that goes beyond the superficial (shortcuts and bandaids are only effective if there is follow-up). Only, this would require governments, the media, and the general public to be patient and allow the necessary time it would take to start realizing those benefits. "Spend a penny now and save a dollar later." The headlines would be less exciting, and the upfront costs would appear deceivingly ugly. But the real-world effects would be substantial.


Look.

You don't treat a brain tumour by focusing on the headache. This forum is only a symptom. Stop attacking the symptom. The symptom won't go away as long as the underlying problems are ignored. None of us woke up one day and randomly decided to join a suicide forum. Each one of us has a story involving a chain of events that led us here. This forum just happens to be the last stop in a series of problematic life events aggravated by various social factors, and it is shortsighted to be laying into us like this and laying all this blame upon us.


The very people being vilified in news articles like this are the same people whose suicide stories will be written about in the future. What effect do you think these articles have on the members here? Do they encourage us to alter course and open up to family and friends, or do they reinforce our isolation and hesitation to open up to others? Does anyone care? You should care, indeed, because these same people are the loved ones you're going to be mourning, later.

A lot of mental health issues resemble a cycle. Not just a cycle of reinforcement, but sometimes a compounding cycle where the situation gets worse with each go-around. As part of treatment, one of the goals is to stop the cycle.

Here, we have another cycle going on: Media and governments demonize forum members -> forum members further isolate -> forum members die by suicide -> media and governments mourn deceased forum members -> media and governments demonize forum members -> etc. etc. etc.

What a turnaround it is to dehumanize, vilify, and belittle us in life... only to later mourn us as loving, caring human beings in death.

We are labelled as death-mongering, suicide-encouraging monsters who are too incompetent to know what's best for us. In reality, we are just people like anybody else, except we live our day-to-day lives in persistent unbearable suffering, often in silent isolation due a lack of adequate external supports and for how often we see it demonstrated to us (eg. this news article) that people are either unable or unwilling to even try to understand us.

We are your sons, your daughters, your children, your brothers, your sisters, your siblings, your mothers, your fathers, your parents, your partners, your friends... We could be upstairs listening to music in our bedroom above you. We could be sitting down with you at the dinner table tonight. You could be planning our upcoming birthday. You could be going out to a movie with us. You could be texting back-and-forth with us right this very minute. It is in our best interest, as well as yours, that you try to understand us from our perspective as members of this forum.

Think deeper. Do better. That is how you effect meaningful change.

Nah, it's easier to harp on tiny niche-ass websites that exists largely cause the people with power suck rather than taking the piss out of, oh, I don't know...the NHS, which literally was found by the UK gov't to have killed at least 1,700 people and up to over 22,000 IN A SINGLE YEAR - by medication error alone.

NHS medication errors contribute to as many as 22,000 deaths a year, major report shows

'The long lasting solution to this is a properly funded NHS with enough staff to deliver safe patient care,' NHS leaders say

www.independent.co.uk

Those 50 Brits who've died of suicide in the last 8 years who were members? Yeah that's a way way bigger problem teehee

 

[claracatchingthebus]

Many of us want out. We don't want to be drugged with sedatives or locked in rooms until we pretend that pills make us better, we are just tired of the fucking bullshit and pain! We have empathy for ourselves and each other. Many of us want death and we don't want a bunch of pro-life religious assholes drugging us and locking us up to take our choice away.

 

[FadingSnowFake]

Makes me sick. Don't think people like this journalist know anything about anything. May she find the comfort I have by being on this forum should life ever happen to her.

 

[R. A.]

" There's one dedicated to unemployment, another concerned with "looksmaxxing", where users discuss how to improve their appearances through unproven and subjective methods and, finally, the world's largest incel forum, where over 17,000 "involuntary celibates" discuss, according to research from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH),….. . The suicide forum is the only one of the four that allows women members"

Can anyone link me these other 3 forums? I had no idea this site (or its owners) were anti-women (if this is even true)…

aren't some of the mods here women? I've personally never seen any anti-women stuff on here, so kinda hoping this isn't true.

I dunno about the unemployment one, or if the other two still exist, but they did at one point and yeah the founders were in fact known incels.

Addressing the Origins of this Website and Other Information

March 14, 2018. That was the day that this community was founded. The same day that the /r/sanctionedsuicide and /r/truesanctionedsuicide subreddits were banned. We opened up this forum to be a refuge for those that have been affected by the those bans. Not too much planning went into it. At...

sanctioned-suicide.net

That post is so fucking old; most of the people around then are dead or gone and there's no link between any of them. Like you, people don't even know they exist. While there is some rank misogynist shit here sometimes, it is absolutely no worse than any other place on the internet. Reddit has a fucking MensRights sub for god's sake where every single post and comment is about how hard it is to be a (white) man having all your privileges rights taken away from you

 

[Archness]

You know it's bad when it says we need the online safety act, and more of it.

It's just the Keir Starmer approach to problems : Censor it and ignore it, and it should just go away.

Bad thing (Suicide) exists -> Sees it -> Censor -> Can't see it -> We've done it! It's GONE!

But that's just what happens in a shithole like the UK that's at this point run by a de-facto dictator and literally becoming 1984. Maybe there'd be less suicides if they didn't let that place deteriorate to a 2nd world country. But instead they blame sites that isn't even in their jurisdiction and act like more censorship would make the problem go away.

Y'know, maybe censoring sites like SaSu isn't sending the message you think it does. It's a site where Suicidal people openly talk to eachother even with taboo conversations, & censoring it just sends the message you don't want actuall conversation. People will end up isolating more when they see you're only interested in right answers and when things don't "Get Better", then they'd be at risk for breaking the narrative people want.

 

[lysergamide]

Holy shit, this the dumbest one yet LMAO. They say the site "rewards" us with titles, as if anyone notices or gives a shit about being a student or a wizard, etc.

"Deciding to die can be a choice, yes, but what choice is any if it obliterates your chances to ever make another choice again?"

HWAT DOES THIS MEAN??? It sounds like they just want to sound wise.

I CHOOSE TO NOTE MAKE CHOICES ANYMORE BABYYY!!!!!

 

[EternalShore]

I like how this one did a little bit of research and actually looked at the website instead of spouting out whatever stuff they heard from other articles and sources, which has become extremely common with other articles as of late~ :/ they even mentioned that we have a recovery section! :D altho, they clearly didn't notice the fact there are crisis numbers posted there~ altho, I really don't get their obsession with titles~ especially because of what you guys already mentioned about them~ xD

ngl, any of these "lay bystanders" are probably much better in actually getting a person to back down from sewer slide (or at least, from the riskier, more painful, more traumatizing, etc. methods) than any professional resources considering that they have true empathy and can be genuine without giving only pro-life view points~

oooo~ I love how they actually referenced other users than the founders and FuneralCry~ :) In order, locked*n*loaded, Cyagangy, dialogos, gothbird, TheEmptyVoid, jenson, Satori Komeiji, and failedmind all got indirect mentions! :3

Overall, I think this article did a much better job at portraying the site than any other article I'm aware of rn, even if it did so inaccurately (no mention of RainAndSadness), and it still talks about us as pro-sewerslide even tho it covers how we describe ourselves as pro-choice near the end~ but well, its large number of flaws are already covered by everyone else here~ xD

Addressing the Origins of this Website and Other Information

March 14, 2018. That was the day that this community was founded. The same day that the /r/sanctionedsuicide and /r/truesanctionedsuicide subreddits were banned. We opened up this forum to be a refuge for those that have been affected by the those bans. Not too much planning went into it. At...

sanctioned-suicide.net

That post is so fucking old; most of the people around then are dead or gone and there's no link between any of them.

hehe~ I knew about that post! :3 There was actually a major thing early on in this site's history where there was some controversy regarding the founders of this website hosting an incel forum~ It's why a few users continued to use Reddit substitutes for SS rather than swapping over to the website~

Reddit has a fucking MensRights sub for god's sake where every single post and comment is about how hard it is to be a (white) man having all your privileges rights taken away from you

the founder of r/SanctionedSuicide has posted in there~

aren't some of the mods here women? I've personally never seen any anti-women stuff on here, so kinda hoping this isn't true.

yes, some of the mods here are women, and misogyny and misandry are both banned~ In regards to the founders, one can have beliefs (good or bad) without applying them to everything one does (good or bad)~

 

[It'sMyLife]

Unfortunately the world will always have these egocentric types who will think they know what is best for others and usually, whether or not they realize it, believe the world would be a much better place if everyone was more like themselves. My wife's brother is exactly like this and he pisses me off like not many other people do. This woman who wrote this article is utterly incapable of putting herself in the mental/ emotional mindset of a suicidal person and frankly doesn't care because she's on a self righteous trajectory. There's a good chance she's got an advanced degree which only reinforces her belief that she knows what's best for others because how could she be wrong?! She would deny this vehemently of course. I'm fairly sure when she said that reading on this site started convincing her that her life was not good that she just flat out lied for the sake of dramatic effect but journalists exaggerate constantly. It feeds their egos and increases readership via sensationalism. It's standard operating procedure now. And besides, she's very happy and impressed with her life and status so how would reading on SS change her mind?! She's so special that she published an entire article about the site fir gods sake. She sounds rather narcissistic to me. They're not going to stop lying about SS now or ever

 

[LaVieEnRose]

Fuck this article. Why write these kinds of pieces anymore? They're not treading any new ground. Repeated attacks failed to curb membership (the opposite in fact) or shut the place down. Honestly I kinds wish people wouldn't share these things here. There is no shortage of critical content out there that can be easily sought out if we so chose.

Honestly I didn't read the entire thing because I don't need to be triggered unnecessarily. But ill talk about some of the quoted snippets.

"Deciding to die can be a choice, yes, but what choice is any if it obliterates your chances to ever make another choice again?""

Fundamentally misunderstands what is driving a lot of us.

Reminds me of a satirical type post. Something like "woman rides out crisis by living in the moment only finds that moment to be followed by many other such moments". Something like that. Didn't share it verbatim but you get the idea.

"Though some members talk of their reluctance to leave loved ones behind, there is an acute lack of appreciation for the pain their premature death could cause to others."

There is an acute lack of appreciation for what we go through. Not every death by suicide is necessarily all that premature in the specific context of the person.

I know mine would be "overdue" like a charcoal crispy chocolate cake.

"The forum promotes a "recovery resources" list, but none include traditional mental health services or suicide helplines, more often comprising disparate titbits of advice cobbled together by pro-suicide site members."

These pieces always make out the services and hotlines to be freaking magic. Traditional mental health services have failed many of is and helplines are more often than not anything but helpful. The net collective erudition and wisdom I've seen here dwarfs that I got from the things this author touts. Especially since the taboo on suicide very much exists in those spaces and is incredibly stifling. The people ostensibly trained in talking people down often sick balls at that.

"Tom had not shared his suicidal thoughts with those closest to him, who doubtless would have done whatever they could to try to keep him alive and alerted local healthcare services that could have potentially helped him."

Helped, harmed, what's the difference? Doesn't mean shit to them if it's the latter. People always encourage us to reach out but as far as my practical experience is concerned no one really wants to entertain those kinds of conversation.

"Normally, when I encounter a hateful internet troll, I tap on their profile and begin to get a gauge of who they are and work out, very quickly, what's led them to spread such harm online. But that wouldn't work on this forum; the anonymity of the site means I couldn't even use my research skills to alert local services to each member's misery."

That's creepy. Creepy creepy creepy (on top of the already creepy infiltration). What research skills is she even talking about? Also it wouldn't just alert people to our "misery" (which in my experience doesn't actually matter to those who operate in the system and there is endless freedom to act in ways that are contrary to the spirit of their position). It would exacerbate it you nosy cunt. Because if your research skills were as good as you thought they were you would know and understand this.

 

[The Final Solution]

Goddamn, I was wondering why SaSu was not popping up on Google's first results page, had to type the URL manually like a fucking caveman. It may have very well been this br*tish chucklefuck's fault. I will yet live to see the day when that entire shithole of an island sinks back into the ocean.

 

[claracatchingthebus]

You know it's bad when it says we need the online safety act, and more of it.

It's just the Keir Starmer approach to problems : Censor it and ignore it, and it should just go away.

Bad thing (Suicide) exists -> Sees it -> Censor -> Can't see it -> We've done it! It's GONE!

But that's just what happens in a shithole like the UK that's at this point run by a de-facto dictator and literally becoming 1984. Maybe there'd be less suicides if they didn't let that place deteriorate to a 2nd world country. But instead they blame sites that isn't even in their jurisdiction and act like more censorship would make the problem go away.

Y'know, maybe censoring sites like SaSu isn't sending the message you think it does. It's a site where Suicidal people openly talk to eachother even with taboo conversations, & censoring it just sends the message you don't want actuall conversation. People will end up isolating more when they see you're only interested in right answers and when things don't "Get Better", then they'd be at risk for breaking the narrative people want.

It's true.

In so many places there are people who are not full disabled, and not fully normal, and there's no in-between category for people to be partially in society. Either you are full disabled or you aren't. For many people who are sad or having medical issues, but not full disabled, it's extraordinarily difficult. There is no "get a job and work 2 days a week" option in society for many people. Society isn't geared towards damaged people who are slightly functional and sad.

For many of us, financial issues do play a role in this. For some of us, it's not financial and it's just treatment resistant depression and we've tried everything. When there is homelessness in the world, society is saying "you are not allowed to die, but you are allowed to be cold and miserable and poor" and when that happens, suicide prevention is only about control and subjugation.

For these journalists who write about "oh sanctioned suicide is so evil and bad," they NEVER write about how fucking evil society to people who are partly disabled, how it is economically so difficult to exist like that, and how many of us see the trajectory of pain and want to opt out before it gets worse. It definitely feels like the low-lying fruit to grab at. We don't know how to handle treatment resistant depression and capitalism poverty & varying degrees of disability can't easily be tackled because it's not politically feasible, but you know what readers love? Suicide is bad and a forum where the suicidal chat about misery MUST be stopped. Readers love that!

I was so infuriated with her article and this woman because the article is actually very accurate about a large number of things, and then it also gets things completely wrong.

So many of the young people on here who are in there late teens and 20s are really unhappy, they aren't able to find a significant other for whatever reason and they've tried, and they just believe they wouldn't be able, with all this sadness, to hold down a job and get some sort of normal life and be happy. They see the writing on the wall, many of them have been fighting it for a while.

Sanctioned suicide exists because of structural problems in society and treatment resistant depression and/or severe pain and severe illnesses. Many of us have absolutely nowhere where we can be honest about how we feel without potentially being locked up in treatment facilities. Although all such facilities are different, some of them are cold, some of them involve being naked or partly naked in front of others in suicide rooms, some involved forced drugs, forced drug screening, there is no privacy. Personally, when I was involuntarily held, I was held in a gown, I was at one point kept in a suicide prevention room with no books or tv or radio or anything for days, and there was nothing to do. There was a tiny window the psych techs could look through and the they would write down on their clipboad. With many hours of nothing to do, at one point I was briefly naked for a moment and looked up after a few minutes to see a psych tech lecherously looking in.

These places can be horrible, many of us suicidal types know it, have experienced it. Who can we talk to about how we feel without threat of pain, humiliation, and demeaning confinement?

This article also didn't mention how many of us have experienced really awful care and how it does affect how people respond.

So yes, it's incredibly frustrating. I don't know if I will end up committing suicide. I keep not doing it, but my life keeps getting worse. Half the reason I want to commit suicide so badly is I'm terrified of things getting worse and having absolutely no way of ending it. Articles like that article make me MORE afraid of forced interventions and loss of freedom and government control and wanting to act to end things sooner rather than later. I'm sure the survivors of the suicides feel horrible and miserable every day. We are all pretty miserable, most people on this site are not happy people. Society keeps assuming it's our obligation, we the depressed people, to not make the survivors miserable. But why is that? Because the truth is for many of us, if we are so sad we can't always work, we may end up homeless, and cold, and not always having enough food. Why should I keep going until it gets even worse? Why is it my obligation to make others feel okay when the reality is if I end up homeless, those people may actually not help me. Certainly society doesn't always help homeless people.

It's just such a pick the easy low hanging fruit that will please readers article that really does not do anything to address the problem. Many of us who are suicidal want to learn more about different methods. But even this site weren't here, everyone knows some methods. It's not like this site teaches us that suicide exists and that there are methods. Many of us come here because we finally, on this site, find people who understand. No one else understands. No one. I am constantly unhappy, always, I am constantly in pain, I have nothing to look forward to. No one understands that except people on SaSu. Some days, I feel pretty close to doing it, I could easily do it, and I have the tools at my disposal to end my life. I can't share that with ANYONE except people on SaSu without the fear of being stripped of my dignity literally, locked up in some cold room, and forced on pills.

I'm still really frustrated by this article. It makes us out to be monsters who are rooting for death and taking glee in the suffering survivors, and it's just totally not true and unfair. But bullshit sells.