CJ Morgan & Fractelle,

Good points.

“There are times when stoicism is appropriate, war...

However, in day to day living such 'stoicism' can be a death sentence.”

“I think that there's no question that men in our society are generally socialised in ways ... This, of course, confers numerous advantages ...

However, I also think that this very conditioning also confers upon us numerous negatives ...”

It isn’t as simple as stoicism = emotional cripple and men just need to be taught to avoid it. As CJ pointed out being stoic can result in social advantages and presumably the corollary is failing to be stoic results in social disadvantages (presumably particularly for men). In addition it can provide other advantages in particular types of situations as Fractelle pointed out.

The current focus might not work as men may resist adopting social disadvantage. Perhaps remedying the problem might require education at a societal level. (Acknowledging of course that many already see the light as Foxy has demonstrated.) Such education would need to avoid being myopic and instead teach people to discriminate between when a stoic approach is productive and when it is counterproductive. In counterproductive situations the masculine image would need to be eroded.

Foxy’s experience raises a question in my mind. I once encountered a study on infertile men which indicated that their partners mainly become hostile after their infertility is diagnosed. If the relationship continues long enough things calm down apparently if a pregnancy results anyway or the couple use sperm donation or some other form of intervention. What if the partner’s reaction is not due to the infertility but instead is a manifestation of disrespect because the men get so upset that they break the taboo and fail to observe stoicism? For harmony the men might need to achieve the right match of partner’s perception and their degree of stoicism. If the partner considers stoicism masculine the cost of communication may be too high. If the partner values communication like Foxy stoicism would be counterproductive. If societal education resolved the perception issue this hypothetical dilemma would be moot.

I'll sidestep a couple of digs and concentrate on the core issue here.

From the time they are born we instill in the male, the manliness issue. We will,-with no derogatory intent, refer to 'little man', and in some cases where there has been a loss of the male parent in a household, we will say 'now you are the man of the house', sometimes to a child,-simply because he is male.

It is habit. And it is a bad habit. 'oh grow up and act like a man!', yet another.

There is pressure on the male child from very early on. it is never meant maliciously, but it teaches young males to be 'strong; to be men', and as such it comes with the unwritten 'rule' that to be so, one must not be weak = showing feelings = crying.

That experience for young males is what can cause huge problems for them in later life. Poor sods! (I mean that).

Romany, I know the feeling of having seen the material but not being able to lay hands on it. Thanks for the input regardless.

I also agree that cries for help are important but there seem's to be different issues at play compared to those who don't call a friend. Both are serious issues and both suggest that normal communication channels are not working well.

Ginx, well put. I suspect that the different characteristics are a mixture of genetic predisposition and socialisation. Somehow we need to equip kids better for a healthy mix.

R0bert

Dear Robert,

The following web-site may be of interest to posters:

http://www.mensconfraternity.org.au/?page=p8

It states that:

"One of the most frightening aspects of our modern world is the incredible rise in the rate of male suicide. Sadly it has been a topic which many, including both State and Federal politicians have found more convenient to ignore... the real reason for this huge rise in the cases of male suicide is the nature of men's roles in our changing society.

Men are being disenfranchised at every level. They are no longer needed as fathers or as providers for their family. They are no longer valued by employers. Men are seen as violators of human rights including the sole perpetrators of domestic violence, in short men have been made to carry the load of social reform in modern Australia.

Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Coroner's Office, and the Health Department of Western Australia show the male suicide rate in this state, between the ages of 39 to 55, has increased a massive 48%..."

And it goes on with more reasons...

It would be interesting to see what others thought of the article.

Foxy, I'm generally in agreement with what they have written. Family breakdown appears to be a significant factor in male suicide rates (different authors give different reasons).

I'm reluctant to go further with those issues on this thread because it could so easily divert us from what is for the most part a cooperative discussion which is building some understanding. There is plenty of space on other threads to follow those issues and I'm hoping this discussion will build some bridges to make those other discussions more productive.

We do seem to have a group of people on OLO now with differing opinions who are willing to treat each other with some respect and try to understand the others viewpoint. That is making me experience here that much better.

R0bert

“Does anyone know of any research to suggest why depression has increased? Or is it that it is just more reported?”

Just came to this thread and saw that no one else has commented on this question so will put in my bit for what it’s worth.

I definitely think it’s a condition that we are all more open about these days so people probably are reporting it more.

But my reading has also led me to believe that the incidence of depression is definitely on the rise and that there are several lifestyle factors contributing. One of course is the pressure and pace of modern western life and much relating to this factor has already been mentioned here.

Another contributing factor is one that most people scoff at initially because the relationship just seems too improbable but for many people there is a correlation between diet and depression.

A lot of people have a pancreas that doesn’t handle sugar properly. Because our modern western diet is high in sugar, more and more people with this inherent susceptibility are presenting with multiple symptoms, many of which are vague and difficult to specify, and one of these is cyclic and endogenous depression. It’s not so much the crushing relentless type of depression that doesn’t ease but the recurring variety that doesn’t always seem to be related to circumstance.

An estimated 60-70% of people suffering from depression have underlying hypoglycaemic disease, usually undiagnosed, as it's not a condition well understood by most conventional medical practitioners.

I'd lived with depression all my life until I learnt about this connection. It’s a lifetime condition but it can be managed very successfully and very naturally through the adoption of simple dietary and nutritional measures. I’m happy to explain further if anyone is interested though I’ve found from past experience that most aren’t!