Placo

Placo

Life and Death
Feb 14, 2024
725
I read the Wikipedia page regarding this forum and it says that even if it frames itself as a pro-choice site it is actually pro-suicide, the page at the moment is semi-protected so only those who are registered can edit it, in theory I am registered but I fear that if I edit it, an edit war could break out in which I would have the worst, the thing that makes me laugh is that Wikipedia itself has a page on suicide methods which until a few years ago didn't even have a message where it indicated resources for asking for help, now they put a writing before the beginning of the article that says "For information on methods of suicide intervention, see Suicide prevention.".

Here is the link for those interested in reading it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctioned_Suicide

And here the link to their page about suicide methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods

I've been here recently and honestly the air seems quite pro-choice to me, it's certainly an important resource given that nowhere else you can discuss methods, at least on the clear web, I read on that page that this forum was initially a subreddit, a subreddit that survived is r/suicidewatch but there it is not possible to talk about methods which in my opinion makes it a pro-life subreddit and not a pro-choice one like this forum, here there is both a section for methods and for recovery so I don't think you can do more neutral than that.

It is important that there is a forum like this since we boast so much about freedom in the West, freedom also means deciding what to do with your life, forcing people to live is dictatorial, as well as forcing them to commit suicide.

I am surprised to have found such a forum after so many years of being suicidal (although not always) and having only access to pro-life resources, this forum is considered as the heir of alt.suicide.holiday which is a Usenet newsgroup but which when I had started to be suicidal I thought it had been closed, now reading the Wikipedia page regarding it it seems that it has never been closed even if it seems it was not moderated and therefore had a high level of trolling, at this point I don't know whether to use the past or the present since according to the article it seems to still be there but I don't think I will visit it because this forum is undoubtedly better.

The article also says that the founders of this forum identify themselves with the ideology of the manosphere and have other forums where violence against women is downplayed or advocated, honestly this thing interests me relatively, as long as it is true, the important thing is that there is a good atmosphere within this forum, which is supportive both in helping someone to find ways to kill themselves (obviously without instigating) and in helping people to overcome suicidal thoughts if they wanted to, this makes it a superior resource to those where it is forbidden to discuss methods when suicide at least in the the West is now legal so it is not clear why this censorship should exist.

In reality I got an idea of why it exists and it is due to the fact that a person with mental disorders is considered as a person less capable of judgment than a healthy person, it seems quite obvious to me that having mental disorders makes it easier for a person to think about suicide, however, seems a bit dictatorial to me, so is suicide only okay if you don't have mental disorders? Or not even then?

I think the controversy also lies in the fact that at least in my country suicide itself is legal but aiding or inciting it is not, which makes it a fairly unique legislative issue, something I found a bit similar it is tobacco smoking which is legal for adults in my country and also a state monopoly but at the same time discouraged, or with cash winning games which can potentially be addictive and ruin you financially, also in this case they try to dissuade even if less than with tobacco but at the same time it is encouraged. One thing that surprises me is how easy they are with alcohol, at least in my country, when I read that it is considered a worse drug than heroin although there is obviously not universal agreement with this statement.

I apologize if I digressed a bit from the title but it started this flow of thought in me and I wanted to write it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
  • Informative
Reactions: weatherforecast, Forever Sleep, Cain.Wong and 5 others
hikikomorizombie

hikikomorizombie

Ouch
Jan 15, 2024
771
i don't get why being pro suicide is some abhorrent thing🧸regardless, SaSu certainly isn't, having an entire section dedicated to recovery. along w the big portion of users here that have a tendency towards encouraging ppl not to die, or @ the least, hinting @/suggesting alternatives to suicide. def a pro choice forum, through & through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EvisceratedJester, Praestat_Mori, Arachno and 4 others
Downdraft

Downdraft

I've felt better ngl
Feb 6, 2024
743
That article is ripped straight from Tantacrul's video. Some lines are quoted almost word by word, like the founders having questionable opinions about women.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Lammpz, EvisceratedJester, The Mute Viking and 3 others
sserafim

sserafim

brighter than the sun, that’s just me
Sep 13, 2023
9,013
That article is ripped straight from Tantacrul's video. Some lines are quoted almost word by word, like the founders having questionable opinions about women.
Tentacle strikes again
 
  • Yay!
Reactions: Forever Sleep, WhatDoesTheFoxSay?, R_N and 3 others
FuneralCry

FuneralCry

Just wanting some peace
Sep 24, 2020
38,307
In my opinion a pro-life wikipedia article is certainly best avoided no matter what, not a good source of information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sannti, sserafim and Enigma the orange
Placo

Placo

Life and Death
Feb 14, 2024
725
In my opinion a pro-life wikipedia article is certainly best avoided no matter what, not a good source of information.
Let's say that I don't have a negative opinion of Wikipedia but in this case it makes me laugh a little that they have this article considering that they have one where they list the various methods of suicide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sserafim
sserafim

sserafim

brighter than the sun, that’s just me
Sep 13, 2023
9,013
Let's say that I don't have a negative opinion of Wikipedia but in this case it makes me laugh a little that they have this article considering that they have one where they list the various methods of suicide.
When Wikipedia is a hypocrite:
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSpookyNameGuy
Tokugawa_Yoshinobu

Tokugawa_Yoshinobu

Arcanist
Sep 10, 2023
424
What do you expect from Wikipedia of all places? Now that is a shady site
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: sserafim and kawaiiphantom
kawaiiphantom

kawaiiphantom

I gently open the door
Feb 1, 2024
301
I agree completely, this site is definitely pro-choice. I've never seen anyone trying to coax another person into CTB or tell them to kill themself, or any of the other toxic misrepresentations that I've seen in the media about this community. Of course there are some instances of that I'm sure, but the vast majority of people are here to support & find comfort or to find methods to relieve their suffering. Nobody's going to talk you into committing suicide here. Before I started reading this forum last year I thought this place was horrible and full of sadistic people because of how articles and YouTube videos (Tantacrul) talk about it. But that's definitely not the case
 
  • Like
Reactions: MangoCandy, Lammpz, SoulCage and 5 others
-Link-

-Link-

Deep Breaths
Aug 25, 2018
552
This is the kind of topic that tests Wikipedia's philosophy of being a neutral source of information.

Labelling this site "pro-suicide" is along the same lines as labelling women's rights organizations as "pro-abortion".

Twisting facts to suit an agenda. Alternative facts, if you will.

Spurred by hyperbole and emotionality, neither of which really have a place on a site that professes itself an encyclopedia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoulCage, Praestat_Mori, wCvML2 and 2 others
druggedonsurvival

druggedonsurvival

Student
Feb 8, 2024
193
I took a look at the suicide methods article from Wikipedia. I just thought it was interesting (if we are to trust this graph; it looks like the information that was used to make it is from 2000) that overdoses are the most common form of suicide attempt despite having such a low rate of success. I guess it goes to show that most people (sadly) are uninformed as to the efficacy of different methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrainShower, Praestat_Mori and sserafim
Pluto

Pluto

Meowing to go out
Dec 27, 2020
3,992
If Wikipedia is so anti-suicide, I'm not sure why they need an article advertising an allegedly pro-suicide website.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forever Sleep, WhatDoesTheFoxSay?, sserafim and 2 others
Slow_Farewell

Slow_Farewell

Warlock
Dec 19, 2023
710
Sasu's pro-choice.
Sure, the posts can be triggering, and some just want to make you really really type something, but overall i've never come across anyone on any point or any reply at all, that encouraged people to get on with it, even if the tone of the post is really meant to trigger that response.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sserafim, BrainShower and Praestat_Mori
B

BlessedBeTheFlame

All things are nothing to me
Feb 2, 2024
149
Good. Suicide is the only solution, that should ever even be considered. If reality itself disagrees with suicide, then reality itself must be abandoned. That's fucking it.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: sadandlonely99, 4am, Placo and 2 others
Relic

Relic

Astral Corpse
Mar 6, 2021
564
And most of the world's organizations, including schools, consider Wikipedia not credible.
 
ringo99

ringo99

Arcanist
Apr 18, 2023
416
It was obviously written by a pro lifer. No surprises there. Mainstream media supports that stupid narrative
 
OrphicEnd

OrphicEnd

ㅤㅤ‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎
Aug 24, 2023
236
From what I saw, wiki rather explains that the site is perceived as pro-suicide without confirming it. In the history we can see that the phrase "encourages suicide" was removed for lack of a reliable source. Here again, unfortunately they rely a lot on press articles which are biased without ever asking those directly.
 
D

DeletedAccount0864

Student
Dec 17, 2023
199
Do you expect Wikipedia to present accurate, impartial information?
 
RadiantNumber

RadiantNumber

Member
Mar 2, 2024
76
If this is pro-suicide forum so Wikipedia is pro-suicide website? Cause they also have articles about suicide methods
 
anotherlastchance

anotherlastchance

Your never not you
Feb 3, 2024
94
While to be completely honest I found out about SaSu through Wikipedia
 
Pluto

Pluto

Meowing to go out
Dec 27, 2020
3,992
I was thinking about this. An unbiased encyclopedic phasing would be more like:

Critics allege the website's culture intentionally coerces depressed people towards suicide, while proponents argue that it provides a nonjudgemental space for uncensored discussion about suicidal ideation.

The fact that there is no section allowing the website's own response to allegations, yet they insist on having an article in the first place giving the website and 'SN' mass exposure, is the height of hypocrisy.
 
rora

rora

Member
Aug 18, 2023
29
I think the new obsession the society has of late, is life itself. Preserving, showcasing and gatekeeping life. Whether it be through media, internet or even in routine circumstances. We just value life too much. Like sure, do it for YOURSELF but I think we seriously need to take a collective step regarding how it's being imposed on others. Choice has become a luxury. Shameful.