Venting So sick of suicide censorship everywhere

[LivingToLong]

I was once told that if you wanted to ctb that you weren't thinking straight. I suggested that suicide was an entirely logical conclusion, depending on circumstances. The person I was speaking to wouldn't have it. I was able to coax them closer to accepting it with a series of 'what if' scenarios but they would not accept that an individual of healthy mind and body might want to die. It seemed almost offensive to them.

 

[cornflowerblue]

Suicide is very disturbing and forces people to confront that life is not always amazing and beautiful for everyone. I think this is why people try to sleep it under the rug. I think if humans exist in 100 years it will be a lot more common. Still hard to believe that gay marriage was illegal in the us like only 10 years ago. Homosexuality literally was and still is taboo around the world. In some places you can be killed for it. So yeah .... We have a long way to go in general. Suicide will definitely be 'closeted' for a LONG while

Edit: I know these struggles are in no way the same however they are issues of exercising personal freedom that is affected by public opinion and law

Human beings can't handle the idea that sometimes the "bad guy" has the best life and the "good guy" is screwed over and can't get better. People are more religious in third world countries and places with terrible conditions because that way they can have hope and push through by believing that even if "it gets better" isn't true in this lifetime, it will be true for their eternal afterlife.

 

[YukiFox]

Firstly, there's a legal system reason. In theory, one of the obligations of any state (Or at least of democratic ones) is to preserve the life of their citizens. So, any kind of conduct that violates that principle of life, will be prosecuted, including suicide, because the life of a citizen "Must" be guaranteed.
Secondly, that censorship it's from the pro-life, western social contract, influenced by Christianity. Even on secular times most of the people prefers to motivate others to appreciate life, whatever are the circumstances of the person.
Thirdly, death it's still a taboo. The media and the collective opinion sells to us that kill ourselves it's an undesirable action.
I'm hopeless for a change to society and make suicide less reprehensible. The psychiatry will not give up their common agreement about the people who take their lives.

 

[cornflowerblue]

Firstly, there's a legal system reason. In theory, one of the obligations of any state (Or at least of democratic ones) is to preserve the life of their citizens. So, any kind of conduct that violates that principle of life, will be prosecuted, including suicide, because the life of a citizen "Must" be guaranteed.
Secondly, that censorship it's from the pro-life, western social contract, influenced by Christianity. Even on secular times most of the people prefers to motivate others to appreciate life, whatever are the circumstances of the person.
Thirdly, death it's still a taboo. The media and the collective opinion sells to us that kill ourselves it's an undesirable action.
I'm hopeless for a change to society and make suicide less reprehensible. The psychiatry will not give up their common agreement about the people who take their lives.

There is a shift within medicine to accept ctb for the elderly and terminally ill, and that's increasing as we continue to invent things that prolong life duration without improving quality. Ctb for the mentally ill is a different story though because despite people saying that mental pain is as real as physical pain, they still see it as different or less severe. Even in places where euthanasia is not legal, it is and has always been legal to remove feeding tubes or air tubes (therefore causing death) or for palliative patients to get a painkiller dose that eases their pain but also kills them.

 

[throwaway123]

There's a popular online blog started by a social worker therapist about why she opposes suicide. It's not surprising that a professional who makes money counseling the suicidal opposes suicide. But her blog's comment section is many years old and 95% or more of the many, many, many commenters are people describing how miserable their lives are and why, therefore, they are pro-suicide. The stories are heartbreaking. The therapist/social worker comments sometimes, but despite having a PhD in her field, she gives the most vacuous responses full of false assumptions, irrelevant personal values, and irritating platitudes. Again, nothing new to anyone who's ever announced publicly they're suicidal.

What makes me fume, though, is that this ... therapist actively censors comments that break no laws whatsoever whenever the commenter criticizes the therapist's viewpoint strongly enough. Recently, another blog owner commented on the site I'm talking about. She mentioned her struggles with gender identity--how painful it's been emotionally, how she's been in numerous treatments to no avail, how she's poor and barely surviving due to the widespread discrimination, and how she suffers gravely from isolation and loneliness. This blogger also criticized the therapist for her position that suicide is never, ever justifiable. That therapy is always appropriate and effective. The therapist replied by calling the other blogger insensitive and cruel for opposing others' access to suffering-ending therapy. Several other commenters respectfully chimed in, pointing out the therapist had misrepresented the other blogger's position as "no one should ever get therapy." The other blogger had said that some people's cases are so very bad that therapy is ineffective for THEM. Because the therapist couldn't "win" the argument against the other blogger and because other commenters supported the other blogger, the therapist then deleted the entire thread.

I wrote in to the therapist that her censorship was ineffective, anti-intellectual, and counter-productive. Her reply was essentially that suicidals cannot think clearly and so our arguments are invalid by definition. To think that this is the kind of reasoning that keeps suicide functionally illegal or painfully impractical for so many people the world doesn't want and who can't, therefore, afford to stay alive, and for whom life is extremely lonely and painful. I'm very grateful for sanctionedsuicide.com, but being relegated to hidden forums keeps our perspectives, experiences, values, and rational arguments out of the broader public political/legislative domain where we--our numbers--need to be to challenge the oppressive and unjust status quo. I'm so disillusioned and angry I can barely get out of bed.

Can you please give us a link to the blog?

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

I was once told that if you wanted to ctb that you weren't thinking straight. I suggested that suicide was an entirely logical conclusion, depending on circumstances. The person I was speaking to wouldn't have it. I was able to coax them closer to accepting it with a series of 'what if' scenarios but they would not accept that an individual of healthy mind and body might want to die. It seemed almost offensive to them.

One thing that deeply annoys me about that position is that when it happens to THEM, THEN they often change their mind. So long as they're content with life, so they reason, everyone else should be, too. But once they're in a bad enough situation, then it's, "Oh, I never thought I would..." Why do the rest of us have to wait until they have an epiphany to be able to do what WE want with ourselves?

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

Can you please give us a link to the blog?

Google Stacey Freedenthal

 

[TAW122]

There is a shift within medicine to accept ctb for the elderly and terminally ill, and that's increasing as we continue to invent things that prolong life duration without improving quality. Ctb for the mentally ill is a different story though because despite people saying that mental pain is as real as physical pain, they still see it as different or less severe. Even in places where euthanasia is not legal, it is and has always been legal to remove feeding tubes or air tubes (therefore causing death) or for palliative patients to get a painkiller dose that eases their pain but also kills them.

Hmm, well I do hope that more doctors and healthcare professionals at least passively and indirectly end people's suffering then. I know that while they are still pro-life, perhaps there is a way to justify cessation of treatment and medicine as well as easing the pain and death being a by-product rather than an active result. Speaking of that, I think that as long as death isn't caused directly but indirectly then it would be easier for them to come to terms with it.

One thing that deeply annoys me about that position is that when it happens to THEM, THEN they often change their mind. So long as they're content with life, so they reason, everyone else should be, too. But once they're in a bad enough situation, then it's, "Oh, I never thought I would..." Why do the rest of us have to wait until they have an epiphany to be able to do what WE want with ourselves?

I think it relates to the fact that most people don't appreciate anything while it's there until it is not there anymore. I don't recall exactly where I heard this saying, but somewhere out there.

 

[throwaway123]

Google Stacey Freedenthal

Wow, I read trough those comments and it's really amazing how people can put it into such good words.

especially this comment here:
"There are few things I staunchly believe in; one of these things is the unalienable right of any person to end their life when they see fit. The subjective, personal life of an individual is magnitudes greater in depth and complexity than anything else and it deserves absolute respect."

 

[Taylor]

To think that this is the kind of reasoning that keeps suicide functionally illegal or painfully impractical for so many people the world doesn't want and who can't, therefore, afford to stay alive, and for whom life is extremely lonely and painful. I'm very grateful for sanctionedsuicide.com, but being relegated to hidden forums keeps our perspectives, experiences, values, and rational arguments out of the broader public political/legislative domain where we--our numbers--need to be to challenge the oppressive and unjust status quo. I'm so disillusioned and angry I can barely get out of bed.

You have every right to be angry, I'm just as livid as you are on the topic and find it just as outrageous. I couldn't have said it any better myself. I would love to see the light shown on the true rationality of being pro choice, and erase the stigma behind it, instead of the pro lifers immediately brushing it off as irrational thinking and hiding behind the "mental illness" label, but just like the sensitive topic of abortion, it seems as though it will always be oppressed, simply because of the traditional viewpoint of society that it is "wrong", no matter how justified and rational your argument is. Then leaving the truly suffering and trapped with no other option than to attempt a violent means of terminating their life with a high rate of failure, in most cases leaving them in an even worse condition. It's absolutely infuriating.

 

[Taylor]

One thing that deeply annoys me about that position is that when it happens to THEM, THEN they often change their mind. So long as they're content with life, so they reason, everyone else should be, too. But once they're in a bad enough situation, then it's, "Oh, I never thought I would..." Why do the rest of us have to wait until they have an epiphany to be able to do what WE want with ourselves?

This!!! Omg. Hit the nail right on the head. I'm a prime example of this.

 

[Its911]

Guys don't you get it? These people are making money by keeping us alive, of course they want to deprive us from the right to die. It's money... Money it is.

In the middle ages you think anybody would care if someone commited suicide? I don't think so.

In the 21rst century you can make money out of everything, no matter how right or wrong it is.

That the reality.

Did you know that in the 1900s, when the ladys spandex was created. The original nylon was soo good a single pair would last a woman up too 10 years without breaking, however they destroyed the sample and created a lesser quality product to increment sales.

Today almost all PRIVATE RESEARCH is not in the intent of curing an illness it is only to find ways to treat certain symptoms. Hence virtually no cures are being developed in the 21st century just pills to create a dependency on big pharma product's.

Cure= $$
Dependency=$$$$$$$

Do the math, its harsh but its the world we live in today.

 

[throwaway123]

Did you know that in the 1900s, when the ladys spandex was created. The original nylon was soo good a single pair would last a woman up too 10 years without breaking, however they destroyed the sample and created a lesser quality product to increment sales.

Today almost all PRIVATE RESEARCH is not in the intent of curing an illness it is only to find ways to treat certain symptoms. Hence virtually no cures are being developed in the 21st century just pills to create a dependency on big pharma product's.

It's not like it's a big secret.

They admit it in the open and people just don't care.

 

[Its911]

It's not like it's a big secret.

They admit it in the open and people just don't care.

Thats the problem, people dont care about a cure for Cancer until they get it. They dont care about global warming until its 107f in Alaska and -42 in Cancun. We are a content and self devouring species our mentality doesnt change until we are faced with annihilation and by then its too late.

You think if one of these Big pharma CEO's gets Leukemia hes not going to be wishing he had develop a cure for it instead of lining his pocktes with silk...

 

[Welcumtotherealworld]

The most popular form of censorship is that hanging is extremely painful. When if done correctly it can actually be pleasurable. Those of you that have practiced partial and know the "pins and needles" feeling will know what I'm talking about.

 

[LivingToLong]

I sometimes think we only exist to be sold to. In some peoples eyes anyway. But then, I am watching adverts on the TV when I think that!

If you don't want the tiger to eat you, stay out of their cage? Life can be enjoyed by simply ignoring the shit that upsets you. Yes, it's perhaps burying your head in the sand but I figure I can't do anything about most things, I'm beaten (we're beaten), so it's better for my mental health if I don't concern myself.

Perhaps you can begin to see why I want to ctb? I'm tired, I know when I'm beaten and I've given up. I'm simply treading water these days.

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

Life can be enjoyed by simply ignoring the shit that upsets you. Yes, it's perhaps burying your head in the sand but I figure I can't do anything about most things, I'm beaten (we're beaten), so it's better for my mental health if I don't concern myself.

I try to ignore the shit that upsets me. I don't read/listen to the news much. I stay away from crowds. I take my car to travel across the US instead of flying... But some things, like the unrelenting loneliness, I can't ignore. When I was younger, loneliness felt like severe hypertension. I could feel my heart racing and my arteries hurt from the pressure... I know some people get used to being lonely. I guess they can ignore it. Me, it baked me into a hard, dry husk.

Sorry you're beaten too.

 

[LivingToLong]

But some things, like the unrelenting loneliness, I can't ignore.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I understand it too. I spoke perhaps too quickly, some things you can't ignore.

Loneliness is, for me, something I can tolerate. There's good and there's bad sides to it. Generally speaking, people can piss me off (or I piss them off) and upset me, then I begin to hate myself. So I often prefer to stay on my own, tolerating the loneliness, because it's the lesser of the two evils - I can just about manage my own head but I can't handle people upsetting me.

 

[Meretlein]

Google Stacey Freedenthal

I remember reading an article on her blog that basically said our lives are not our own.

 

[ron_g]

I wrote in to the therapist that her censorship was ineffective, anti-intellectual, and counter-productive. Her reply was essentially that suicidals cannot think clearly and so our arguments are invalid by definition.

This is not only a logical fallacy but in addition she's stigmatizing us, and in so doing pushing us further toward suicide. This is similar to epistemic injustice.

https://www.madinamerica.com/2018/04/psychiatric-diagnosis-epistemic-injustice/

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

I remember reading an article on her blog that basically said our lives are not our own.

Yup, that sounds like Stacey. Welcome to the 21st century's Western slavery.

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

This is not only a logical fallacy but in addition she's stigmatizing us, and in so doing pushing us further toward suicide. This is similar to epistemic injustice.

https://www.madinamerica.com/2018/04/psychiatric-diagnosis-epistemic-injustice/

Pro-lifers, like religious zealots, don't have to be philosophically or behaviorally consistent or empirically sound. Like the super-religious who can justify any assertion with "because God...," pro-lifers enjoy their (irrational) thesis' great popularity and, therefore, the appearance of inherent truth. If you can't even ask these people for objective evidence in support of their various medical and evaluative claims without them dismissing you as "crazy" out of hand, then there is, effectively, no serious debate. And that's exactly the way they want it.

 

[KatieW]

How many here thought ctb should be legalized before they were suicidal themselves? Please be honest. @FTL.Wanderer @Taylor

 

[DepressionsAHo]

Guys don't you get it? These people are making money by keeping us alive, of course they want to deprive us from the right to die. It's money... Money it is.

In the middle ages you think anybody would care if someone commited suicide? I don't think so.

In the 21rst century you can make money out of everything, no matter how right or wrong it is.

That the reality.

In one of my English classes for my college, I actually did a presentation on this. I adored my professor for allowing such a tabboo subject to be discussed free of reprecussions (I think I spelled that right). I used the song I'm sorry by Joyner Lucas, it gives the perspective of suicide by two different parties, one the suicidal, the other, the one left behind. It's an angry rap on his part understandably. I selected three lines from the song and discussed why they were illogical and not remotely valid. I also brought up the right to die movement. I hoped it would erupt into conversation but only one person asked questions :/ idk, maybe I brought a new perspective on the topic, maybe I didn't

 

[AnnihilatedAnna]

Arguing with pro-lifers is just so useless... they truly cannot imagine any other opinion than their own.

I dont think its trully about their opponion. If someone is happy and therefore a pro lifer, it can be impossible for them to see our point of vieuw as it might be for us to see theirs.

To be fair you are right, for some people (pro-lifers) it is impossible to consider someone elses oppinion. But ive met some pro lifers who got what i was saying and what i was feeling, but they still wanted me to live and get better because they believe i can.

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

How many here thought ctb should be legalized before they were suicidal themselves? Please be honest. @FTL.Wanderer @Taylor

I've been suicidal since I was nine so my own feelings have likely always biased my apprehension of legality. I appreciate your point, though. Maybe there's so much resistance to the broad legalization of euthanasia or assisted dying because so many people haven't seriously struggled with suicidality themselves.

 

[KatieW]

I've been suicidal since I was nine so my own feelings have likely always biased my apprehension of legality. I appreciate your point, though. Maybe there's so much resistance to the broad legalization of euthanasia or assisted dying because so many people haven't seriously struggled with suicidality themselves.

Many are passively resistant; it scarcely ever crosses their minds... save for the closely afflicted.

 

[KatieW]

@FTL.Wanderer I've suffered bpd since college 20s and didn't get properly hopeless and suicidal until a few years ago in my 30s. I think it's irrational to expect "healthies" to see our point of view given we are not entirely sure of our own viewpoint. My ctb determination is seasonal and my survival up to now is more chance than choice.
"Healthies" is a new cool vocabulary who invented it :)

 

[FTL.Wanderer]

@FTL.Wanderer I've suffered bpd since college 20s and didn't get properly hopeless and suicidal until a few years ago in my 30s. I think it's irrational to expect "healthies" to see our point of view given we are not entirely sure of our own viewpoint. My ctb determination is seasonal and my survival up to now is more chance than choice.
"Healthies" is a new cool vocabulary who invented it :)

I really respect your perspective and enjoy reading your posts. I hope I''m not offending by expressing a different opinion. I feel it is definitively rational for healthies (yes, nice word) to acknowledge our point of view. This is in keeping with an expanding global cultural perspective of relativism in judgment. There simply isn't any good objective reason life has to be accounted (a particular) value. More, life is objectively challenging in many ways for very many human beings. Yet more, publications in cognitive science agree that individuals' life experiences are so profoundly different despite surface similarities due to the complexity of individual neurology, cognition, and experience that little homology in person-to-person meaning (and value) can be expected. Add the growing global cultural ideology of personal freedom so many claim to subscribe to and it's rational, given all this, to recognize that some would simply reason drastically differently from others, wanting very different things. Including rejecting life. What strikes me as irrational is in an age of scientific objectivity clinging to antiquated quasi-religious notions of universal value that no scientist or even philosopher has ever demonstrated to exist.

Healthies, while they may not choose our choices for themselves, are very hard pressed to rationally justify their condemnation of our personal life evaluations without first providing an objectively sound reason for ascribing a particular value to life in general. To date, that I'm aware of, this is wholly lacking. And that so many of us actively support policies research clearly shows to be antagonistic to human life, many of these healthies' hypocrisy informing their judgment on suicide is blatant.

Sorry for the long reply. Again, I really hope I'm not being offensive.

 

[KatieW]

I really respect your perspective and enjoy reading your posts. I hope I''m not offending by expressing a different opinion. I feel it is definitively rational for healthies (yes, nice word) to acknowledge our point of view. This is in keeping with an expanding global cultural perspective of relativism in judgment. There simply isn't any good objective reason life has to be accounted (a particular) value. More, life is objectively challenging in many ways for very many human beings. Yet more, publications in cognitive science agree that individuals' life experiences are so profoundly different despite surface similarities due to the complexity of individual neurology, cognition, and experience that little homology in person-to-person meaning (and value) can be expected. Add the growing global cultural ideology of personal freedom so many claim to subscribe to and it's rational, given all this, to recognize that some would simply reason drastically differently from others, wanting very different things. Including rejecting life. What strikes me as irrational is in an age of scientific objectivity clinging to antiquated quasi-religious notions of universal value that no scientist or even philosopher has ever demonstrated to exist.

Healthies, while they may not choose our choices for themselves, are very hard pressed to rationally justify their condemnation of our personal life evaluations without first providing an objectively sound reason for ascribing a particular value to life in general. To date, that I'm aware of, this is wholly lacking. And that so many of us actively support policies research clearly shows to be antagonistic to human life, many of these healthies' hypocrisy informing their judgment on suicide is blatant.

Sorry for the long reply. Again, I really hope I'm not being offensive.

You're long reply is appreciated, thank you. I meant to argue based on realism. How is the world we live in besides our lofty wishes? Forget suicide, is gayism universally or even wholly accepted in the west? How many US or EU states have fully legalized homosexuality - marriage, child adoption - fully? Transsexuality? Healthies view suicide as just another low priority item at the bottom of the bucket - right there with veganism and animal rights.
And know @FTL.Wanderer I say all these with an open heart. As a suicidal transwoman I know a few things about closed minds, and feel like a hypocrite that views I past opposed are now welcome entirely on a fresh perspective. Struggling to come out while closeted, I thought less of the gay; when less desperate, wondered even less of the suicidal. See?