Certainly you can think of at least a few organizations tackling homelessness, untreated mental health disorders, substance use, relationship crises, disengagement from health services and conflicts with government institutions.
Seriously it’s a single study into another topic. That’s just how science works. I’ll never understand when people get mad that a study exists and that it is somehow unable to cover every possibility of a complex topic in a single study.
I’m not mad the study exists. It’s a useful finding. It’s the framing of the article I object to. It could just as easily be framed that mental health treatment for men at risk or incarceration improves outcomes and is more cost effective.
“Men should take medicine for their violence against women! That’s just how science works!” jesus christ will this ever stop already? It’s just a bunch of alienating dumb shit proposed by a bunch of stuck up assholes who thrive on sowing this exact division between people- “Who should we help- the homeless, or the women? YOU DECIDE!”, while they oppress everyone equally and extremely successfully.
What am I to take away from that title as a man? I should be medicated for something I already don’t do? It’s just a bunch of ragebait bullshit. If you are in favor of civil rights, you don’t profess the equality of only whatever specific group you happen to personally belong to, you are in favor of civil rights for all people. Anything else is just fucking ragebait to keep us occupied with who gets the most of the least.
Men should take medicine for their violence against women!
Cool so you didn’t actually read anything I said. That’s not what the study said at all. It found that in select groups of men the usage of an antidepressant can decrease the occurrence of domestic violence. If anything this is an advertisement for the treatment of men’s mental health.
What am I to take away from that title as a man?
Idk man maybe read the fucking article instead?
If you are in favor of civil rights, you don’t profess the equality of only whatever specific group you happen to personally belong to
I’m a man, and I do favor civil rights for all people.
If you took the time to read the article you’d see the test group was selected from people through courts and prisons. Participation was voluntary and no one is using these results to force medicate the entire male population.
The authors of the article and the publishing platform are NOT the people sowing this division or profiting off identity warfare.
The conversation is a platform where essentially all articles are written by scientists for a broader audience. They publish all sorts of scientific work, including several recent pieces on specifically male issues and masculinity. We know they aren’t optimizing for clicks because they don’t get many.
The authors here did a study on exactly the population you are most concerned about, selected by domestic violence. Surely you agree that men being prosecuted for spouse abuse have been failed by society; exactly the people who are falling through the cracks. Here we have scientists who are giving data and trying to find ways to help, and that’s who you want to blame for this political landscape? Really?
You can nitpick the framing, but I would blame funding agencies for that.
Yeah, this program takes people who are at high risk of reoffending violent crimes and are some of the most difficult criminals to feel sympathy for, and they treated them as human beings who might just be struggling with mental health issues rather than being ontologically evil. This is something that should reduce reoffense rates and may be key to helping these men live lives free not only from prisons, but from the miserable life of a domestic abuser and from their own destructive behaviors.
What a weird thing to take away from the article.
Certainly you can think of at least a few organizations tackling homelessness, untreated mental health disorders, substance use, relationship crises, disengagement from health services and conflicts with government institutions.
Seriously it’s a single study into another topic. That’s just how science works. I’ll never understand when people get mad that a study exists and that it is somehow unable to cover every possibility of a complex topic in a single study.
You sound more upset about it than he or she does. They’re just making a comment that has some truth to it in the context of broader men’s issues.
I’m not mad the study exists. It’s a useful finding. It’s the framing of the article I object to. It could just as easily be framed that mental health treatment for men at risk or incarceration improves outcomes and is more cost effective.
At risk of incarceration for what
Drugs, minor theft, any of the various excuses police use to lock up the homeless and those having a mental health crisis. Lots of options.
Why did you bring homelessness and mental health crises into this? This article has nothing to do with either
I literally posted a quote from the article where it talks about homelessness and untreated mental health.
“Men should take medicine for their violence against women! That’s just how science works!” jesus christ will this ever stop already? It’s just a bunch of alienating dumb shit proposed by a bunch of stuck up assholes who thrive on sowing this exact division between people- “Who should we help- the homeless, or the women? YOU DECIDE!”, while they oppress everyone equally and extremely successfully.
What am I to take away from that title as a man? I should be medicated for something I already don’t do? It’s just a bunch of ragebait bullshit. If you are in favor of civil rights, you don’t profess the equality of only whatever specific group you happen to personally belong to, you are in favor of civil rights for all people. Anything else is just fucking ragebait to keep us occupied with who gets the most of the least.
Cool so you didn’t actually read anything I said. That’s not what the study said at all. It found that in select groups of men the usage of an antidepressant can decrease the occurrence of domestic violence. If anything this is an advertisement for the treatment of men’s mental health.
Idk man maybe read the fucking article instead?
I’m a man, and I do favor civil rights for all people.
If you took the time to read the article you’d see the test group was selected from people through courts and prisons. Participation was voluntary and no one is using these results to force medicate the entire male population.
Maybe read the article next time?
The authors of the article and the publishing platform are NOT the people sowing this division or profiting off identity warfare.
The conversation is a platform where essentially all articles are written by scientists for a broader audience. They publish all sorts of scientific work, including several recent pieces on specifically male issues and masculinity. We know they aren’t optimizing for clicks because they don’t get many.
The authors here did a study on exactly the population you are most concerned about, selected by domestic violence. Surely you agree that men being prosecuted for spouse abuse have been failed by society; exactly the people who are falling through the cracks. Here we have scientists who are giving data and trying to find ways to help, and that’s who you want to blame for this political landscape? Really?
You can nitpick the framing, but I would blame funding agencies for that.
Yeah, this program takes people who are at high risk of reoffending violent crimes and are some of the most difficult criminals to feel sympathy for, and they treated them as human beings who might just be struggling with mental health issues rather than being ontologically evil. This is something that should reduce reoffense rates and may be key to helping these men live lives free not only from prisons, but from the miserable life of a domestic abuser and from their own destructive behaviors.