Cutting

In 1985, when cutting first appeared, girls cutting themselves was something astonishing, something no one had heard of, that psychiatric interns had never heard of.

Now a significant minority of women cut themselves.  Hard to say how many, but probably a few percent. Not a substantial minority, but not a tiny minority either. Hot fertile age women.  Women with strong sexual needs and completely screwed up sex lives, usually sex lives screwed up by their own self destructive bad choices.  “Strong independent women” who are not in the least strong, and greatly fear independence. White women. Women totally raised in feminism.

As the epidemic grows, only now is the psychiatric industry coming up with a diagnostic category “Non suicidal self harm”  We did not have a word for cutting until recently, and psychiatrists are only now coming up with a word for it, and not a very apt word yet, for the category self harm is deliberately over inclusive, in order to avoid being exclusively female, including a great deal of what would be more aptly called “stupidity”, so that some males can be put in the same category. (The obvious difference being that after doing something very stupid once or twice, males usually stop doing that particular stupid thing.) It is politically disturbing to have a psychiatric category that is near one hundred percent female, so calling it what everyone calls it, “cutting”, is politically incorrect. Yes. Males sometimes, rarely, cut themselves. Discover it hurts like the blazes, then do not do it again.

If you google for “self harm”, the PC term, you don’t get information on cutting, but deceptive and malicious misinformation on cutting, misinformation intended to cause harm and suffering, and if you google “cutting” any page that comes up with words “self harm” in it is overwhelmingly likely to be malicious misinformation.
cutting

As it says in the Book of Genesis, women are psychologically maladapted to equality.

Think how much more comfortable she would be, how much more at peace she would be, how much saner she would be, how much happier she would be, if those were her owner’s whip marks.

Reading between the lines of girls making videos and posts about cutting themselves, they are saying to the numerous boys that pumped them and dumped them “Punish me, don’t ignore me.”

123 Responses to “Cutting”

  1. R. says:

    “In 1985, when cutting first appeared, girls cutting themselves was something astonishing, something no one had heard of, that psychiatric interns had never heard off.”

    I have to borrow Greg Cochran’s marvelous turn of phrase.

    You are utterly full of shit. It’s fountaining out of your every pore: your hair will never go gray.

    • jim says:

      OK, produce evidence of cutting in the psychiatric, institutional, teen problems, or prison literature before 1985.

      Or indeed, anywhere significantly earlier than 1985.

      • Zach says:

        Even so…

        You kind of qualified yourself with:

        “Think how much more comfortable she would be, how much more at peace she would be, how much saner she would be, how much happier she would be, if those were her owner’s whip marks.”

        Even you, I would think, knows that’s a bit silly. No?

        • jim says:

          Seems entirely obvious to me.

          Punishment would reassure her that her sins were expiated, that she was cared for, that she was loved, that her misdeeds mattered, that she mattered to someone, that someone wanted her to be good to him, that she mattered to someone more powerful than herself. Cutting attempts to provide this reassurance and fails.

          She is self administering the punishment that she needs – but self administration does not work. She needs to have the same punishment administered by a strong man.

    • peppermint says:

      also, they do it for attention from daddy school system and acknowledgement from their peers. If blessed are the meek, they shall inherit the earth, how much more blessed are those who injure themselves?

      But yeah, mostly for attention from the asshole bf who they might not say to their friends and the next guy was too controlling, but probably will say instead was acting like a little kid or playing mind games and messing with their headspace.

      • peppermint says:

        also, how many guys want a girl who cut herself? Girls don’t show off their scars to the next guy. It’s a more serious show of loyalty than an engagement ring.

        • Ron says:

          You obviously get laid with regularity. Those men who do not tend to have delusional views of female nature.

          I’ve also noticed that slutty women have a tendency to cover their bodies with disgusting tattoos such that they look like they have skin diseases, I’m trying to figure out what is the unconscious reason for that behavior.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        Anti-Christian!

      • jim says:

        also, they do it for attention from daddy school system and acknowledgement from their peers

        They talk about their peers and the school system – but they talk about their peers and the school system talking about their sex lives – and what their peers are allegedly telling them about their sex lives is obviously the truth – in fact it is so very true that I don’t think it is what their peers are saying, it is what the voices in their head are saying.

  2. bob k. mando says:

    i don’t know about “cutting” per se, but i know that some of the old serial murderers ( men ) were serious whack jobs into self harm.

    i forget the name, but after one of them died they autopsied him and found his nut sack full of needles. he liked to poke needles into his sexual organs, you see. occasionally lost them.

    and that faggot “sex researcher” down at IU Bloomington had a fetish for shoving a tooth brush up his urethra.

    slightly different in that what the men ( such as de Sade ) were doing is quite often direct stimulation ( even if very perverse and more oriented to pain than pleasure ) of the sexual organs whereas cutting your arm wouldn’t appear to have any direct sexual stimulation at all.

    • peppermint says:

      also, cuckstain monks would cut in their cells.

      Some mudslimes self-harm en masse on the streets, which is, of course, not the same thing.

    • jim says:

      They autopsied him and found his nut sack full of needles.

      That sort of thing is why the shrinks want to call it “self harm” (so as to include such male cases) and not “cutting” – because if they call it cutting, it is near one hundred percent female. Indeed it is one hundred percent female and one hundred percent after 1985 if we only count persistent cutting.

      They want a name that fails to cut reality at the joints, because if they were to use a name that cuts reality at the joints, it would be obvious that some women are profoundly unhappy with emancipation.

      • Steve Nemo says:

        I knew, let’s say, “a friend” — male — who engaged in cutting in high school for a few months in… come to think of it, right around 1985. Possibly 1984. By “cutting” I mean straight cuts on the skin, roughly an inch long, with a razor blade, through the epidermis. Permanent scars. Not generalized “self harm”; the cuts looked like those in the picture above.

        Apparently it wasn’t as painful as he expected.

        Not a pleasant memory.

        Where did you get 1985 from as a start date?

        • jim says:

          Personal recollection was some time in the eighties. The precise date of 1985 was the recollection of a psychiatrist that that was the first he had heard of it.

        • peppermint says:

          Betas will do anything to act like and thus get in the same room with women. They will take ballet, they will pretend to be a lesbian on the Internet, they will cut.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      The IU Bloomington fellow was Alfred Kinsey, of The Kinsey Report.

      Hollywood made a nice heroic what-a-great-guy bio-pic about him ~15 years ago, I believe just called “Kinsey”.

      Toothbrush up his urethra. Jeeze Louise.

      This is why I don’t even go to movies anymore. I’m just not up for all that psychological warfare. Now that I know it’s going on, I just don’t even want to show up for it in the first place, and I’m definitely not giving them my $12. That makes me either a coward, or just sensible.

    • I used to know a guy who confessed to me that he like taking a small knife in the shower and short stabbing himself in the stomach, causing an erection and ejaculation without him ever touching himself.

  3. bob k. mando says:

    yeah, Fish is who i was thinking of, thanks.

    and, of course, it was Kinsey and the urethra … sick fuck did a self circumcision …. with no anaesthesia. i think that definitely falls under “cutting”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey#Personal_habits

    what’s really disturbing is when you get into the private lives of a bunch of these pedo- / homo- positive “unbiased researchers” or advocates is how many of them you find out are really themselves pedo- / homo-philes justifying their own perversions.

  4. Alan J. Perrick says:

    “Jim”,

    It appears as disfigurement as a way to avoid sexual attention, not to gain it. If somebody is too poor to afford lots of tattoos and other primitive decorations in order to cover up natural beauty, this is a quick way to do it. Recall the negro tribesm who wear huge plates in their lips and ears. They say it’s to deter rapists. Well, welcome to the debased white equivalent…

    But you’re not entirely wrong, “Jim”. They do want rougher treatment, because as the ideologies that kept civilisation degrade further, primitive living therefore becomes more of a reality. This sort of spiky collar deterrent means that your average person treats women who scar themselves more for utility rather than as a target for seduction, which gives them to their perspective better direction and purpose.

    _Prov._xx._30.
    The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.

    The woman, imagining herself to be this sort of target for sexiness could indeed use some lashings, and it would disabuse her anything besides healing as fast as she could the marks on her back. This would sort out a lot of degenerates, I’m quite sure… Though, I do doubt the effectiveness on those African tribes.

    • jim says:

      A typical rant goes something like this “my father and my mother and all the cool girls say I am too fat and ugly to have boyfriend – that because I am fat and ugly a boyfriend will only hurt me.”

      Now obviously this is not what they told her, because she is not fat and not all that ugly. What they told her was that if she fucks boys out of her league, she will get pumped and dumped. And as the rant goes on it becomes evident that she has no boyfriend despite the fact, or because of the fact, that she has been banging like a dunny door in a high wind – that the prediction allegedly made by her parents and the cool girls has repeatedly come true, that she can’t have a boyfriend, and boys will only hurt her. And so she cuts herself.

      It is a substitute for the hand of ownership, that she transparently hungers for, and which our society will not give her.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        The way that the cuts or scars, more precisely, are so spread so evenly over the individual in the above photo. convinces me that it is done for visual effect. A deliberate “uglification” for deterrence.

        A.J.P.

        • jim says:

          You are frothing at the mouth crazy. Look how she is dressed and made up. She wants to be as pretty and sexy as possible.

    • jim says:

      It appears as disfigurement as a way to avoid sexual attention, not to gain it.

      These girls are extremely bitter that they do not have a boyfriend, that sex fails to lead to a boy taking possession of them, leading them, supervising them, taking care of them, and guiding them, that they do not feel the hand of male ownership.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        The men with less sexual appetite, whom she crudely surmises are inferior, and deserving of repulsion, won’t give her that sexual attention anymore so it does indeed free environment of this kind of clutter.

    • peppermint says:

      » women literally make themselves ugly on purpose

      Just like Atticus Finch said, eh?

      This is the kind of thing that only makes sense to cuckstains and atheist cuckstains.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        You’re screaming.
        [No, Peppermint is not screaming, but making valid points which you fail to answer]

        • peppermint says:

          listen, cuckstain, do you know how many billions of dollars women spend on making themselves pretty? Including the women who cut?

          Yes, you do.

          Do you see the woman highlighted in this blog post, her clothing and makeup?

          Yes, you do.

          Yet you
          (1) say she’s doing it to intentionally make herself ugly
          (2) tie it to nigger behavior THAT IS DONE TO MAKE THE NIGGER SOWS LOOK PRETTY
          (3) thereby tie it to (cuckstain) leftist talking points

          Your posts here are probably your most deluded posts on this blog.

          And the reason for this level of delusion is that you are a cuckstain and believe in the beatitudes.

          Blessed are the feminists, they will have niggers for stepchildren.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Is it possible to write something down without you screaming? You’re screaming
            [No commenter can scream on a blog. Accusing commenters of screaming is refusal to address their evidence and argument.]

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Freedom of speech is worth taking the time to point out when a commenter is screaming
            [it is physically impossible for a commenter to scream. You should address the commenter’s points. It is legitimate to say that you decline to address the points of someone who calls you a cuckstain, but calling you a cuckstain does not drown you out the way actual screaming does.]

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            You’ve become a screamer yourself, “Jim”. Freedom of speech is not negotiable. That includes freedom from others barging in and trying to prevent you from discussing with another person.
            [On this blog, no one can prevent you from discussing with another person, no one can shout you down]

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Jim”,

            It happens quite often with often plenty of gratuitous ad hominem if I post something that is found disagreeable. You’ve addressed complaints to this topic by saying that you won’t ban anyone because Mr Alexander did that and he found himself with no allies to the right. O.K., but actually people were complaining to you because they, we were getting shouted down. If you cannot see that some of the softer (softer for whatever reason) commentors wouldn’t approach a comment that had already been “screamed at”, perhaps afraid that they would get mired in an apparrent controversy, then you are perhaps learning something new now.

            Best regards,

            A.J.P.

            • Michael says:

              First let me say, ASSUME makes an ass out of u and me. I’ve seen at least 2 people doing quite a good job at that. OP Jim and peppermint. Secondly, I’m going to share some of my story and I don’t care about hiding anything. I’m soon to be 47 and have had my share of experiences and don’t give a crap if you want to belittle or berate me, I’ve heard it all, and many times over. Also, Jim, you’re just as bad a these “shrinks” that you try to belittle. Most of them know shit about what they say, just like you. Now, I’m a male adult and am a recovering cutter. I know male and female cutters/recovering cutters. In fact, Elizabeth has been a very good friend of mine for over a year, we’ve both been there for each other at times when we’ve needed to talk to someone. We are what I would consider, good friends that look out for each other. I started cutting at the age of 12, yes, 1982. I cut until the age 38, that sounds like a lot more then just “cut once and never again” I cut not because I was gay, not because of anything sexual. I cut because I hurt emotionally. I went through shit as a child I don’t wish on anyone. At the ages of 7 through 11 I had to deal with watching my mother become a lesbian right before my eyes. Yes, that age. I was also sexually abused by an older man at the age 10. I have nothing against homosexuals, transgender, anything…but I think from 1977 through 1981, that would be hard for any child to go through. I went through my father beating me up at the age of 12 and making me clean up my own blood. I was thrown into a psychiatric hospital at the age of 13 because my father, stepmother, and grandparents ASSUMED I was strung out on drugs and alcohol. I didn’t touch anything until my late teens. I died, yes died, at the age of 20 and had I been found 10 minutes later, my post would not be here. My heart had stopped and they had to use a defibrillator on me. Nothing suicidal mind you, just a stupid young adult choice. So I hurt emotionally and would cut myself. This is how I saw it. The blood coming out of my cuts were the emotional pains leaving my body. Almost all of the cutters I know, did it for the same or similar reasons/results. That is male and female and there was absolutely nothing sexual about it and for the females, nothing to do with male domination or feeling the need to be “punished” by males. I’m currently approaching my 9th year of recovery and am DAMN proud of myself! Yes, there’s been times where I almost relapsed, but I’m still going strong! Anywho, I just wish that people would get off their lazy asses and talk to others who have been through this type of stuff before throwing lame ass assumptions around. Have a nice day!

              • jim says:

                Now, I’m a male adult and am a recovering cutter. I know male and female cutters/recovering cutters

                I just don’t believe you.

                If you were cutting in 1982, shrinks in 1985 would know there was such a thing as cutting. They did not.

                As far as shrinks knew, cutting did not exist in 1982, and to this day male cutting is rare, minor, inconsequential and trivial. If “recovering male cutters” existed there would be examples of cutters with excessive cut marks. Shrinks would love to find such a person, they would make a poster boy out of him. No such poster boy has been found. If you were “recovering cutter” while male and adult, you would be on posters.

                Cutting is recent, female, and sexual, and is a response to a change in the sexual market environment.

                • Michael says:

                  Oh and like you “know” ALL of the facts??? Like every other shrink in the world knows it all too? I think not. Get the fuck off your “I know everything there is to know about cutting horse” Because you can’t prove it to your disillusioned self, I must be lying??? Hahaha! I bet you think your shit don’t stink too, huh? And if your simple mind can’t get a grip on my FACTS…I’ll happily supply you with photos of my arms, my right hand, etc. in which you’ll see multiple scars, of course faded due to age so you’ll see these are NOT recent. See, I won’t hide behind bullshit, I will supply because I have NO reason to lie. You “know it all” fucktards stupify me…And female cutting is NOT all sexual. You just want to believe that because you want to think that will give you power over ALL female cutters. You have no power over the girl in the main photo. As Elizabeth stated, you have no power over her. And I’m sure if you want to continue your sexist bullshit spewing, I can finding plenty of other women that have or do cut, that you have no power over either. Such imbeciles like you…

                • jim says:

                  Ever since shrinks became aware of girls cutting themselves, in about 1986-1989, they have hungered and thirsted to make cutting a gender neutral ailment.

                  Without success.

                  So I am a mite suspicious when success shows up on my blog.

                • Dave says:

                  Cutting was not a thing in 1982, which doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. There was no Internet back then, so if something wasn’t listed in the DSM, written about in Psychology Today, or featured at the annual shrink conference, it basically didn’t exist. On the plus side, this meant cutters couldn’t attention-whore on-line and encourage others to cut.

                  Some things aren’t apparent until you look for them, like when Bill Casey told the CIA to look for signs that the Soviet Union was coming apart, and agents started noticing things they had previously overlooked.

                  “…and to this day male cutting is rare, minor, inconsequential and trivial.”

                  Everything men do to themselves is “minor, inconsequential and trivial” because, driven by instinct and culture, we race to the aid of the damsel in distress, while telling dudes to grow the fuck up.

                • jim says:

                  Everything men do to themselves is “minor, inconsequential and trivial” because, driven by instinct and culture, we race to the aid of the damsel in distress, while telling dudes to grow the fuck up.

                  Much truth in that. If a girl cuts herself, it is “oh you poor girl”. If a boy cuts himself, it is “grow a pair of testicles, dude”. Which provides an alternative to my explanation.

                • peppermint says:

                  Michael, congratulations on being so fucked up. Bonus, you got a cutter chick to make hopefully non-cutter babies with. Shadilay!

                  Cutting isn’t just a behavior for people with such horrible life histories as you. It’s also a specifically female behavior observed in females with much more normal life histories.

                  Don’t let that stop you from taking her all the way, though. You died and came back so you could continue your line.

                • Alfred says:

                  The problem with a lot of shrinks is that they are sensitive to the zeitgeist and the zeitgeist is all about victim culture. So modern psychiatry constantly addresses patients’ self-pity without addressing the underlying problems because addresing the underlying problems requires thoughtcrime.

                  Michael I believe there are males who cut themselves, if a lot less than women. However even if your biography is completely true I see no contradicton with Jim’s idea that women mostly self-harm because of bad ownership.

                • Koanic says:

                  A molested gamma male cutting is hardly evidence that cutting isn’t female. His interior-perspective psychological explanation of the mechanism dovetails with your exterior-perspective one. He simply lacks the self-awareness to identify the external cause. And perhaps you lack the empathy to care about the description of the internal process.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “What does that mean?”

            ‘What does that mean?’ Oh, I’m glad you asked.

            It means that because there isn’t interest in banning anyone at this blog, then when a screamer begins to prod or of course even scream at the words I’ve written, then I will definitely be putting up rhetorical walls.

            Being able to put up those rhetorical walls, is a vital skill to have by the way. If you can’t see a use for them, well that’s because you have the power to edit comments which may decrease your need for doing that _as_long_as_you_remain_here_at_this_blog_.

            If you have the inkling of an idea of doing more than that, then being able to construct rhetorical walls may indeed prove an invaluable skill to have. After all, the screaming anti-whites in the streets in the 1960s and such were able to overwhelm the pro-white establishment of the time and have created the establishment seen today in the time since…

            A.J.P.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            All screamers should be pointed out for what they’re doing.

            [No one is screaming. No one can scream in a blog comments. Screaming drowns out the opposition, prevents them from being heard. No one is preventing you from being heard.]

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Jim”,

            Do you know that Mr Trump, whom you apparently admire the presence and bearing of, now says that during the debate he is compelled by his own principles to push back with insults of his own when he is insulted there? He says that despite advice that he should not attack back and should instead stand there and look more “presidential” he believes that he must not sit there and take it, and in fact “taking it” is what has made the United States into the failing system that it is today. Of course, instead of saying “little Marco” and “Lyin’ ‘Ted’ Cruz” as he does, he could very well point out how they are stopping him from making important points by screaming at him (about him getting money from his daddy, about him being a “con man”, it doesn’t matter the particulars, after all it’s only screaming).

            You might say that instead of doing so himself, he should just let the moderators stop the insults, because “everyone will get a chance to make his points at the debate”, “the moderators will stop it before it gets too off-topic” etc., etc. That sort of thing sounds very, very similar to what you’re saying now…

            Of course, Mr Trump may very well lose the race for office of presidency, but it won’t be because his or my similar instincts for back-and-forth arguing are bad, remember how he’s won the debates based on polls done after-ward…No he would probably lose due to the fact that he doesn’t have a flow of really effective ideas like those he might get from Mr Robert “Bob” Whitaker, though some Pro-Mantra Pro-Whites are trying to get those ideas to him. Anyhow, I digress…

            A.J.P.

            • jim says:

              Do you know that Mr Trump, whom you apparently admire the presence and bearing of, now says that during the debate he is compelled by his own principles to push back with insults of his own when he is insulted there?

              By all means push back.

              Reply to arguments that were combined with insults, with arguments combined with insults.

              But such methods of argument are not “screaming” and do not drown you out.

              Feel free to call Peppermint a little nazi transvestite.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Well, I really disagree that someone who is disrespectfully insulting you out of the blue should be given an pertinent argument in return.

            • jim says:

              So call her a little Nazi Transvestite. Or ignore her. But she is not trying to shut down your speech, or even able to shut down your speech.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Jim”,

            Do you really expect me to take what you’re saying seriously when you are so well known for editing the comments of mine that you don’t like? So much for a reasonable back and forth!

            • jim says:

              I will not permit a back and forth over “screaming”. I, and no one else, am responsible for commenter behavior. From time to time I rule certain discussions off topic, unproductive and waste of space, or lies that have been sufficiently repeated.

              You can, however, have a back and forth over “cutting”. You can even curse each other out. Repetitious cursing, however, will be deleted. Imaginative cursing is OK.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Jim”,

            If something is a working technique in dialogues with vicious and barbaric attackers, then they’d be doing the world a disservice by leaving those things behind when coming into this particular venue… I insist that everyone brings the best.

            A.J.P.

            • jim says:

              Accusing an impolite adversary of “screaming” is not your best. A lot of bad things can be truly said about Peppermint, but “screaming” is not one of them. It is an untruth. Repetitious untruths will be deleted.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Well, most bloggers aren’t Pro-Mantra, quite the opposite really.

            I will make no such promise regarding my activity at this blog, though I do feel glad that I’ve given you this opportunity to re-inforce your own convictions “Jim”.

            Best regards,

            A.J.P.

          • Mackus says:

            Jim!
            Next next time AJP accuses someone of screaming at him to drown his speech, why not replace text of his comment with:
            “AHHH!! BLAH!! BLAARGH!H!!! (AJPs voice is drown out by screams)”
            After all, he said it himself its impossible for him to write anything down due to all the screaming.
            🙂

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Trentian (derived from its original meeting) maneuvering from “Mackus”. Nobody should wonder why the Supreme Court of the United States has not a single Protestant Christian on it since this alien parasite is permitted uncontested access to the very highest eschelons of power in the white areas of the Americas… Everyone is such good Proddies these days.

            A.J.P.

            Ref.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Trent

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            [Alan attempts to comment, but his typing is drowned out by the screaming and no one can hear what he says]

    • Ichm says:

      But it’s done by women who utterly hanker for more attention, not less.

  5. Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

    This blog is terrible when it gets speculative.

    Other animals do self-destructive behaviors. In lab monkeys, it’s usually a response to isolation, certain drugs, or being raised/socialized in a lab environment. Seems reasonable that humans would be similar. Especially when the risk factors for cutting (childhood abuse, drug use, impulsivity, bad relationships) seem similar.

    Also, I’m pretty sure that human males cut themselves. Typically associated with emos and fags.

    >In 1985, when cutting first appeared, girls cutting themselves was something astonishing, something no one had heard of, that psychiatric interns had never heard of.
    [citation needed]

    Lastly, the psychological industry wants to label it “self-harm” so that they can expand their business. Everybody has harmed themselves at some point, and many people have harmed themselves routinely. So everybody must go see a shrink, and make the shrink rich. Here are some “disorders”. Based on the descriptions, I have two or three of these four disorders:

    >Social anxiety disorder (SAD), also known as social phobia, is an anxiety disorder characterized by a significant amount of fear in one or more social situations causing considerable distress and impaired ability to function in at least some parts of daily life.

    >Obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is a mental disorder where people feel the need to check things repeatedly, perform certain routines repeatedly, or have certain thoughts repeatedly. People are unable to control either the thoughts or the activities.

    >Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is an anxiety disorder characterized by excessive, uncontrollable and often irrational worry, that is, apprehensive expectation about events or activities

    >Major depressive disorder (MDD) (also known as clinical depression, major depression, unipolar depression, or unipolar disorder; or as recurrent depression in the case of repeated episodes) is a mental disorder characterized by a pervasive and persistent low mood that is accompanied by low self-esteem and by a loss of interest or pleasure in normally enjoyable activities.

    • jim says:

      Other animals do self-destructive behaviors. In lab monkeys, it’s usually a response to isolation, certain drugs, or being raised/socialized in a lab environment.

      You are using the sophomoric trick of invoking generalities to avoid specifics.

      Cutting is a very specific form of self harm committed by fertile age females with an active sex life but no real boyfriend who bitterly resent the lack of boyfriend – well, actually they often have far too many boyfriends. What they bitterly resent is the lack of the hand of ownership.

      Further, this is a new form of self harm, so rare before 1985 as to be unknown. Presumably it is a result of the emasculation and disempowerment of white males.

      • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

        >Cutting is a very specific form of self harm committed by fertile age females
        >this is a new form of self harm, so rare before 1985 as to be unknown
        [citation needed]

        You’re claiming things that I have never heard from a reputable source. Also, I’ve heard things about emo males cutting themselves.

        I searched “emo cutting” on google, and got a bunch of results that implied males cut themselves. In the first 10 results on google were three videos, two of which were males cutting themselves:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxaoV5EK3ik
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4zI0zS9LBg

        >Presumably it is a result of the emasculation and disempowerment of Racist males
        Life is not a comic book. Not everything fits into a simple narrative.

        • jim says:

          I searched “emo cutting” on google, and got a bunch of results that implied males cut themselves.

          Been there researched that. As I said in the article above, males cut themselves once, do not do it again. Girls cover themselves with cuts.

          As for “citation needed”, try digging up old references to cutting. You will not find them.

          The distinctive and obvious features of cutting is that fertile girls who have no boyfriend or husband, or far too many “boyfriends”, cut themselves. Girls who have no male supervision, leadership, and care cut themselves.

          Shrinks are maliciously doing everything possible to avoid the obvious, because obvious is so horribly politically incorrect.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >As for “citation needed”, try digging up old references to cutting.
            You assert some things. You provide no documentation to support your assertions.

            These assertions don’t fit with the things I’ve been told about emos. So I dismiss your assertions.

            I’m not going to try to dig up old references to cutting, until you provide some kind of evidence for your claims.

            Looking at google images for “emo cutting” or “emo cutting scars”, there seem to be some males doing routine cutting. Lots of scars.

            Also, if the cause of cutting were racist male disempowerment, why would it have started in 1985? Probably would have started at least by 1965, especially in liberal cities.

            • jim says:

              You assert some things. You provide no documentation to support your assertions.

              I am asserting from memory and anecdote – other people’s memory, which is no more and no less evidence than my own.

              If you don’t trust memory, go dig up old references to cutting. Search google books. You will not find references to cutting before 1985.

              With the passage of time, and the decline of the white male, the problem has become increasingly common and serious.

              Looking at google images for “emo cutting” or “emo cutting scars”, there seem to be some males doing routine cutting. Lots of scars.

              Not seeing them. Wherever I see lots of emo cutting scars on one body part, looks like a female body part.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >I am asserting from memory and anecdote
            The memory of some guy on the internet is not persuasive to me.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >Not seeing them. Wherever I see lots of emo cutting scars on one body part, looks like a female body part.
            The majority seem to be female.

            From the first 40 results of the google image search for “emo scars”

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/83/05/10/830510576cf6465c5319b508f7acdaea.jpg
            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/53/f6/41/53f641c10db78b939f2e00b73616588a.jpg
            http://www.centralmediaserver.com/KTVX/emosweb.jpg

        • peppermint says:

          » “emo” beta males cut themselves to show off, like cuckstain monks and mudslimes

          » let’s equate this with fertile age women doing it because life is not a comic book, equality has to be right sometimes

          equalists are always wrong when they open their mouths, because they’re only interested in talking when they have an exciting lie to tell. In this sense they’re kind of like trolls.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >“emo” beta males cut themselves to show off, like cuckstain monks and mudslimes
            I’m not sure about mudslimes. But emo culture seems very similar to monastic and early Christian culture. So that seems likely.

            >In this sense they’re kind of like trolls.
            Trolling is about making people angry. Trolls often tell the truth, because the truth is often infuriating.

      • Ichm says:

        You can’t know what they resent; you can know what you’d give them (“the hand of ownership”) thus you’d like them to want.

        With more detached observation, I think we may surmise the root of that behaviour (usually seen in females that are pumped-and-dumped as a result of failure to become calculating and hypocritical in their early 20s as they will become approaching their 30s) is the feeling that they be “worthless”.

        They don’t love to submit to the “powerful man” so much as they want to feel they have real worth because the successful man stays with them. Vanity is rather stronger of a motivator than submissiveness.
        Also, they want guidance rather than “firm hands”. And guidance is now being offered by sources of cunningly soft authority like social media, the education system, the bureaucracy.

        It’s not by chance all those “guides” are co-operatively targeting men. They want to replace them.

        Cutting is certainly a nearly-exclusively female behaviour. I see no point in making arguments over it being a 88% 98% 101% female behaviour.
        The meaning is, I think: I hate this body of mine, that by its not being good enough makes those adorable pumpers also dump (thus makes me worthless).

        Social media likes, career advance, and anything else are food for the appetite of being liked and wanted by the best (having high worth). That’s why social-media-liked career-advanced females may quite well be without a man.
        “I have travelled to 21 countries and 35 big cities so far — love you all!” is enough of a subsistute for a man.

        Surely this change in life habits needs to be digested, and for now, everyone (women especially) is unhaplier than ever.

        • jim says:

          > You can’t know what they resent; you can know what you’d give them (“the hand of ownership”) thus you’d like them to want.

          As in a shit test, you can know what they resent, because if you give them what they think they want, if you give them what they demand, they become more resentful, not less. If you give them the hand of ownership, they calm down and stop being resentful.

          I do give them the hand of ownership. It is what every fertile age woman wants. She fights it like a horse fights the bridle, yet she wants it. Women are not submissive, that is a male fantasy, but they do submit.

    • peppermint says:

      » risk factors for cutting (

      » childhood abuse,

      i.e. weak father unable to get girl to only give it up for a serious offer

      » drug use,

      i.e. girl willing to hang out with drug users

      » impulsivity,

      i.e. girl who acts out for attention because nonexistent/cuckstain father / cuckstain mother

      » bad relationships)

      yes, this is the factor Jim identified, which is related to the other factors you identified

      and your point is that Jim is right.

    • jim says:

      Especially when the risk factors for cutting (childhood abuse, drug use, impulsivity, bad relationships) seem similar.

      All of these risk factors were present before 1985

      “Childhood abuse” is code for “No father, needs male authority”, but shrinks are not allowed to say that.

      “Impulsivity, bad relationships” is code for “fucks guys out of her league, and they don’t call back”, but shrinks are not allowed to say that.

      What is new since 1985 is the further loss of male power and authority, the continuing emasculation of white males.

      • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

        >All of these risk factors were present before 1985
        You haven’t established that cutting started in 1985. You’ve just repeated it a lot.

        >“Impulsivity, bad relationships” is code for “fucks guys out of her league, and they don’t call back”, but shrinks are not allowed to say that.
        I doubt this. Impulsivity is probably not code for anything. and “bad relationships” is code for “she is a gigantic bitch to everyone”.

        I would guess that cutting a combination of high impulsivity, self-hatred, and low social status. A person (usually female) is frustrated with something, and angry at herself. She doesn’t have close friends, involved parents, or a husband/boyfriend to pressure her to stop the self-destructive behavior.

        >What is new since 1985 is the loss of male power and authority, the emasculation of Racist males.
        I’m pretty sure feminism and the civil rights movement happened long before 1985.

        • jim says:

          >“Impulsivity, bad relationships” is code for “fucks guys out of her league, and they don’t call back”, but shrinks are not allowed to say that.

          I doubt this. Impulsivity is probably not code for anything. and “bad relationships” is code for “she is a gigantic bitch to everyone”.

          Read the cutter’s rants. Don’t read psychiatric bafflegab about their rants. The psychiatric bafflegab is malicious lies intended to cause harm, to strike out against political incorrectness, to lash out and destroy, to destroy those people that are evidence of the psychiatrist’s wrong doing and complicity in crimes against man and nature.

          The cutters say family and authority and the cool girls are saying bad things – and the bad things that these people are saying is that the cutter does not deserve a proper boyfriend.

          It is most unlikely that family and authority and the cool girls are actually saying that the cutter does not deserve a proper boyfriend, but it is glaringly obvious that the cutter has not got a proper boy friend and feels she does not deserve a proper boyfriend.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            So, just to clarify, your hypothesis is that women cut themselves because they are trying to pretend that a man is punishing them? The connection between “I don’t deserve a boyfriend” and “I’m going to cut” is not obvious.

            I don’t doubt that cutting is associated with not having a boyfriend. And with not having friends. Any PC shrink would agree with that.

            >It is most unlikely that family and authority and the cool girls are actually saying that the cutter does not deserve a proper boyfriend
            Their family is probably not saying that. But the cool girls probably are. Cool girls are notoriously nasty and mean to uncool girls.

            • jim says:

              So, just to clarify, your hypothesis is that women cut themselves because they are trying to pretend that a man is punishing them?

              In the ancestral environment, she would be some man’s property. If neglected property, probably the man perceives her as behaving badly. Probably is behaving badly. So she pleads to the man, usually in a non verbal or pre verbal fashion “punish me physically, do not neglect me”

              This has happened to me often enough when I have ejected a woman. They passive aggressively seek a beating to remedy their sins, real and imaginary.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >So she pleads to the man, usually in a non verbal or pre verbal fashion “punish me physically, do not neglect me”
            A PC shrink would say something similar. They usually say that attempted suicide and misbehavior is a “cry for attention”.

            • jim says:

              They are lying and evil.

              Cutting is not a cry for attention. It is a cry for discipline, supervision, authority, and punishment, for discipline, authority, and punishment by a strong man.

              It is a cry for what psychiatrists call Domestic Partner Violence, but which used to be called discipline and authority.

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >Cutting is not a cry for attention. It is a cry for discipline, supervision, authority, and punishment
            I’m pretty sure these things go together. Can’t really have one without the other.

            • jim says:

              >Cutting is not a cry for attention. It is a cry for discipline, supervision, authority, and punishment

              I’m pretty sure these things go together. Can’t really have one without the other.

              Psychologists provide attention, without discipline, authority, or punishment.

              Only husbands and fathers can properly provide discipline, authority, and punishment, and they are these days forbidden to do so. Authority, discipline, and punishment being these days defined as Domestic Partner Abuse.

              In the ancestral environment, the environment of evolutionary adaptation, a female who was not under male authority was unlikely to reproduce successfully.

              Or, as it say in Genesis 3:16 “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

          • Richard Nixon's Ghost says:

            >Psychologists provide attention, without discipline, authority, or punishment.
            For thirty minutes each week, and in a very clinical, impersonal, environment. Very low-quality attention.

            I’m not sure we’re arguing about anything. The PC version is that it’s a “cry for attention”. Your version is that it’s a “cry for alpha male discipline, authority and punishment”. These seem to differ only in emphasis, not in substance.

            • jim says:

              The PC version is that it’s a “cry for attention”. Your version is that it’s a “cry for alpha male discipline, authority and punishment”. These seem to differ only in emphasis, not in substance

              Attention is mandatory. Discipline, authority, and punishment are forbidden.

              Big difference.

        • peppermint says:

          — “bad relationships” is code for “she is a gigantic bitch to everyone”.

          Your misreading shows you for a casual misogynist denying the harmful effects of rape culture.

  6. A Pint Thereof says:

    Have you heard of the theory of “morphic resonance”? It would explain and validate your hypothesis here, Jim.

    http://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/introduction

  7. Samson J. says:

    Jim, it’s interesting that cutting is normally associated with borderline personality disorder. What would be interesting is if you could show that BPD didn’t exist before 1985.

    • jim says:

      Borderline Personality disorder is ill defined and tells us more about psychiatrists than those that they diagnose.

      Stop looking at cutting through the psychiatric lens, when it is evidence that the values promulgated and sometimes coercively enforced by modern psychiatry are horribly wrong and incorrigibly evil. Because it is evidence of wrongdoing by the state and the psychiatric profession, as for example breaking up families and separating fathers from their children, psychiatrists are unable to look at it straight.

      • Ichm says:

        Official psychiatry is interested in power gaining, and in serving established power (with a strong nexus between the two pursuits).

        The same kind of people who said “homosexuality is a disease” or “Wives need a gold beating now and then” now say the opposite, with a consensus nearing 100% before and now.
        They can’t be taken seriously, nor their DSMs. It’s all instruments to feel important, and be important. They crave social recognition: nobody craving it can be in any relation with truth…

  8. Bo says:

    Five years of working as a troubleshooter in a child psych ward and Jim more or less nails it for me.

    We had boys from 10 to 16 and none cut more than once. The girls could be divided into two categories. Those with severely debilitating mental illness, and those with “discipline issues” who were dumped in a psych ward because no doctor was willing to diagnose them as a slut with no boundaries.

    The latter group ranged across different levels of attractiveness and were extremely sexually available to even the least talented alpha male.

    And yes. They would cut, and as the attending male authority figure on scene I can say without hesitation that in each case when I arrived they were in a particularly heightened state of arousal in anticipation of being restrained by one more burly men of a type which was clearly lacking in the home environment.

    But that’s just my five years in the thick of it. Make of it what you will.

  9. Mister Grumpus says:

    Do you think piercings/tattoos and blue/green/pink/etc. hair are in the same ballpark as cutting? Do they reveal similar psychology?

    • jim says:

      Not at all.

      One is a possibly unwise attempt at decoration, the other is a cry for punishment.

  10. Mister Grumpus says:

    Thanks for this. Cutting is such a confusing/crazy (to me) thing to do that even though I know it’s real, I immediately re-forget about it after hearing about it again (which isn’t often). But yes you must be right, that cutting is revealing something truly horrible about us as a state/culture, and not just horrible but horribly cowardly and dishonest. Even that’s a good start for me.

    Let me see if I’m understanding you further:

    Cutting for women is like pornography for me.

    I’m trying to conjure, solo, the experience of having a harem of appealing and worshipping fly-girls… and it doesn’t satisfy, because there’s nothing actually pro-creative going on.

    Likewise, cutting homegirls are trying to conjure, solo, the experience of being under corrective male attention and authority… and it doesn’t satisfy because there’s no actual man there, and thus obviously no actual provision and protection from one.

    That about right?

    • jim says:

      Likewise, cutting homegirls are trying to conjure, solo, the experience of being under corrective male attention and authority… and it doesn’t satisfy because there’s no actual man there, and thus obviously no actual provision and protection from one.

      Exactly so.

      In the ancestral environment, hard for a women to procreate except under male authority. If no father, and no husband, in for hard times.

  11. Greg says:

    “A number of articles appeared in the 1960s and 1970s describing a “wrist
    cutting” and “delicate self-cutting” syndrome (Crabtree, 1967; Graff and
    Mallin, 1967; Grunebaum and Klerman, 1967; Rinzler and Shapiro, 1968;
    Pao, 1969; Kafka, 1969; Asch, 1971; Novotny, 1972; Rosenthal et al., 1972;
    Waldenberg, 1972; Suk, 1974).”

    http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/bn/1990/572716.pdf

    • jim says:

      Your source document tells us “Cutting was considered to be a suicide attempt (we now know that most instances of cutting are not related to suicide)”

      Well we now know that today most incidents of cutting are not related to suicide, but it seems that according to your source, that is something we did not know before 1989 or so – that back then incidents of cutting were generally perceived as half hearted suicide attempts.

      Which shows us that modern type cutting was so rare as to be generally unknown to most psychiatric people back then. No one is likely to mistake the lady in the picture as attempting suicide, whereas someone going for his wrists, even lightly, may well be perceived, perhaps incorrectly, as playing at suicide.

  12. Greg says:

    I agree that modern type cutting is probably not something seen historically in “modern” numbers, however your impression that “delicate self-cutting” was completely new as of 1985 is probably false. Few early papers seem to be on the free web. Here’s the first page of a 1969 paper, and it’s interesting:

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1969.tb02071.x/abstract

    We learn that in a decade starting 1957, an institution in the US admitted 413 new patients, among those 32 “cutters”, of which 27 were “delicate cutters”. All of those were young (16 to 24) and most (but not all) were female.

    So here we have a source from 1969 describing cases going back to 1957, and literature going back to 1913. The demographic pattern of young and mostly female was clearly in evidence for “delicate cutters”.

    • jim says:

      Your 1967 source concludes that “delicate” self cutters are suicidal – are likely to attempt to slit their wrists, that delicate self cutting is apt to be a practice run for suicide. This does not sound much like modern cutting. Modern cutters tend to cut areas such as their bellies and thighs that are obviously unlikely to be practice runs for suicide.

      • Greg says:

        Actually, the source is explicit that none of their delicate cutters progressed to suicide. Sounds more like remaining cautious, from the mental health practitioner perspective.

        • jim says:

          They were delicately cutting their wrists – not delicately cutting their stomachs. It sounds like remaining cautious was plausibly justified.

          If these were modern type cutters, there were sufficiently few of them back then that only now are they retrospectively understood as modern type cutters.

          Here is another way to test the question.

          You can search google books by date and content.

          Searching for cutting and “self harm” from 1900 to 1984:
          https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=cutting+%22self+harm%22&tbs=,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan+1_2+1900,cd_max:Jan+31_2+1984&num=10
          No relevant hits

          Searching for cutting and “self harm” from 1986 to 2016:
          https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=cutting+%22self+harm%22&tbs=,cdr:1,cd_min:Feb+1_2+1986,cd_max:Jan+31_2+2016&num=10
          All relevant hits.

          This may well reflect psychiatrists of the time failing to perceive modern type cutters as a category distinct from attempted suicides.

          But modern type cutters are pretty obviously a category distinct from attempted suicides – as for example the girl pictured in this post. She has slashed herself everywhere except her wrists and throat.

          • Bo says:

            In my teen and adolescent years there was a common joke when a girl cut on herself. “Up the street, not across the road”. Meaning if you were serious about killing yourself you’d slash from the inside of the elbow to the palm, not across the wrist.

            It was common parlance, and a means to insult/reality-check girls who cut for attention while claiming to be suicidal.

            People who cut are not suicidal in the slightest. Many will tell you they cut to feel alive, not to become dead.

            In my experience most suicides by those without access to guns are committed by hanging or overdose, and even most of those are suspected to be attention seeking ploys that tragically went a little too far.

  13. Elizabeth says:

    First off, you really sound like you’re writing on a topic you know nothing about. Your sexist assumptions of her are false, she didn’t do that because of a boy. She was fucking abused by someone close to her for years so maybe fact check before you write an article on a fucking picture. Her name is Emily, I follow her on Facebook because she is a nice girl and she tries to advocate for mental health as she can while battling an eating disorder. The amount of bullying and straight up immature 12 year old insults she gets on every damn thing she posts is actually baffling. It seems to happen on every post. The reason she became known was because she posted a ‘selfie’ of herself, just a typical full body picture that happened to reveal SCARS, and as people of the Internet always do, they talk and share it around. Both good and bad responses and followers resulted.

    Here’s some insight from someone who has a few diagnosises (most serious is my depression, GAD which includes brain fog and constant feeling on edge, autoimmune arthritis); As a former self harmer, my cutting and other self harm “coping” skills were not caused by a lover. My depression was caused by my anxiety and stress levels, which became too much during the 3 years im which my mom and dad would argue with each other (mostly my dad screaming and saying ridiculous shit like you guys are, claiming my mom was cheating on him when it wasn’t true, but I love them both).. I had no where to go to have peace, I couldn’t leave the house, I could hear the fighting even if I went outside (lived 5 mi out of town). I cut because I felt like that would make me feel better, like how people smoke when they’re stressed. I felt like it put physical pain to the mental and psychological torment, and because I was in a severely depressed state the pain wasn’t as bad as if I would try it today). I was made fun by my brother for doing it, he was my best friend and he would call me “cutsy”. I was then later reported by a teacher, and from the pressure of those authority figures and doctors and family watching me I decided to just give it up very short after, but I still had gotten to a point where I tried to end my life in a way I won’t state. It’s been 5 years since and I have noticeable scars, and yes I do regret it. I still deal with chronic depression and others and feel passively suicidal but I’m lucky I didn’t get addicted or dependent to it. During this time though, I met my current partner and I am still with them today and we are moved in together and happy. You guys are really clueless and are only taking generalized and stereotypical stories. Being depressed killed my sex drive and it still does. I don’t know where you are all getting this information but it’s also fabricated. I’ll be showing this blog to her followers by the way c: I’ll get your hateful remarks known to her and you guys are going to piss a lot of people off. Not because you’re not PC, just because you guys are clueless and think you know it all from what looks like bad experiences yourself with the ladies.

    • jim says:

      As a former self harmer, my cutting and other self harm “coping” skills were not caused by a lover.

      You don’t mention that you had a lover. If you had a lover who loved you sexually and was reliably around for you and giving you guidance and authority, that would falsify my story.

      If you had no sex life at all, if you were a virgin while cutting yourself, that would falsify my story.

      But if you had a shitty sex life with infrequent sex and no lover who was around for you and giving you guidance and authority, your diagnosis of what caused your cutting is the work of your hamster.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      If one of the dogs shown on Caesar Milan’s show could talk, this is that it would say.

    • Alan J. Perrick says:

      Gandhi had to walk to the sea to pick up salt, but these days a person can stick his hand out and catch the stuff falling from the sky.

      My goodness, “Elizabeth”!

      A.J.P.

  14. Elizabeth says:

    I actually was a virgin when I started it, sorry I can’t give a full biography out nor have the energy to. Well I guess I’m a dog ? You guys are more laughable than my sad existence. And that says something.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      What that meant Elizabeth, is that you clearly are very very anxious and clearly acting like you’re very very anxious but that you have no particular insight as to why you’re anxious and can no better articulate why you cut yourself than a Jack Russell Terrier could articulate why he destroys furniture.

      Caesar Milan’s show features hundreds of dogs, with dozens of different destructive behaviors but always with one cause. That cause is the same one that causes you to feel the same way.

      • Cavalier says:

        “Cesar Milan’s show features hundreds of dogs, with dozens of different destructive behaviors but always with one cause. That cause is the same one that causes you to feel the same way.”

        Lovely phrasing. Wonderful characterization. I also love… “If one of the dogs shown on Cesar Milan’s show could talk, this is what it would say.”

        Just glorious.

    • jim says:

      I actually was a virgin when I started it, sorry.

      But you ceased to be a virgin without acquiring a real boyfriend in the process.

      You are telling us that I am wrong because sex was not a big part of your life. But once you hit menarche, sex was a big part of your life, and all the bigger if no real boyfriend and very little real sex and dad not doing much fathering.

      Your parents doubtless screamed at each other before menarche, but I am pretty sure you did not cut yourself till after menarche.

    • Alan J. Perrick says:

      You’re proving my theory, in fact. It’s intentional uglification, to keep “thirsty” weirdos away. Would that societal mechanisms were still in place to keep the undesireable courters away without you resorting to such foul tactics, but alas…

      Just know that some also see the issue and are working on getting things back to normal. In fact, E., I don’t think it’s merely coincidental that you post here this week, and such an obvious paradigm shift has probably prompted your decision to do it.

  15. Kat. says:

    ok please don’t attack me now because I’m a girl and I self harm and I don’t think you’re right Jim or whatever your name is. Some women may cut because of lust or lack of sex but there are quite a few who are like me and have depression and this is our way out of it. This is just not okay. There are lots of males who self harm too, and if you paid attention enough, you would know that. This is just so sexist and racist too, I don’t know what the fuck is wrong with you…

    • jim says:

      You are talking psychiatric gobbledegook, not lived experience. “Self harm” is a psychiatric category that deliberately lumps unlike things together to obfuscate the wrongs done by the psychiatry industry, and “depression” is the too hard basket of psychiatric ailments. If someone is diagnosed as “depressed” she is actually diagnosed as “fucked up in the head but we don’t really understand why, or are not allowed to say why, and there is not much we can do about it”.

      Diagnosing someone as depressed is like diagnosing them as sick. It is the leftover category of mental illness.

  16. […] he covers Cutting. And the various ways it’s draped with […]

  17. William Johnson says:

    Okay as a male who self harms i would like to say this entire post is inaccurate. I cut because i want the pain on the inside to go away and cutting lets me focus on something other than my depression and hating myself and all that stuff. Ive been cutting for 1 year and even though i know its stupid i still do it. I have female friends who do it for the same reason. I have male friends who do it as well. All because the pain is a distraction from the shitty world we live in. (I also do it because i like seeing my blood but thats not as important)

    • jim says:

      I don’t believe you. Show pictures. And pictures of an obviously male body part – hairy, or enough of body showing to show sex. If you are a male who has been cutting for year, should have lots of marks. And write on the body part “Jim’s blog” or “William” so that we know it is you.

      “Self Harm” is psychiatric doubletalk. Normal people call it cutting. If you were a real cutter, you would call it cutting. Calling it “self harm” is political framing, academic terminology loaded to hide the differences between men and women.

      You are saying what psychiatrists say about cutting, not what cutters say about cutting.

  18. Sophia says:

    ‘Jim’ you are a disgusting person. Girls do not self harm because they want to be punished by a man. Saying “Think how much more comfortable she would be, how much more at peace she would be, how much saner she would be, how much happier she would be, if those were her owner’s whip marks.” She would not feel any better if they were made by her “owner”. Also no woman has an owner. She is in charge of herself and no one else is. I have self harmed since I was 10. I did it because I wanted to feel physical pain instead of all the emotional madness that goes on in my head. Not because I wanted attention from boys so they could punish me. And lots of boys self harm too. You should look into the facts before you spew shit on the internet.

    • jim says:

      Most self harming girls complain that other people tell them that they do not deserve a boyfriend, which is obviously not other people actually telling them this, but they themselves hearing it. Therefore, if boyfriend tells her that she deserves him, conditional on her obedience, good behavior, and learning how to make a sandwich, she will cheer up considerably. Also make him a sandwich.

  19. Just Josh says:

    Gonna give an honorable mention to tatts. My instinct tells me they realte to cutting. Similarly destructive (disfiguring), conspicuous, painful… But they can call it “body art.” Alievating the pain of even having to come up with a clever disorder for it

Leave a Reply