[sarcasm]

That sounds like what a Russian propagandian would say.

If that’s not a word, it should be a word. Lets also rename the continent to Propagandia while we are at it.

This is the very definition of gas lighting.

Customers: “This is not what I paid for”

Colossal Order: “You’re so toxic”

They want high crime. Eat the rich.

Law has to be universally applied to all candidates.

Otherwise dems risk being kept from office.

Its the Great Filter theory, aliens would be historians potentially documenting the Great filter in action tbh. If they exist with the resources and interest to do so. Yet could humans even comprehend their existence, it could be just so incomprehensible we wouldnt even know what we couldnt even know. Hope that makes sense.

Maximum autism

Oh dear.

It’s a JavaScript joke.

1.6 million js frameworks have both been created and forgotten during this period.

Make that 1.6 million and 1.

Think about that for more than a half second.

You know ownership results in degradation of better teams.

Why would you think buying a liability will be good for the performing teams? Do you like seeing good teams suffer?

Blizzard should be dissolved. Let the IP die and talent can move onto other teams.

So what. It’s still valid Cons for the platform.

Stop making excuses for scamming one sided purchase agreements.

Considering they have bugger all cost with distribution points being hosted for free by service providers it’s an overpriced over glorified website with online payment processing. 30% cut is massively tax for very little

Steam cons

• You don’t own the games, they are leased, like Sony
• store costs to developers/publishers are insanely high for a digital distribution platform
• early access games have very high volume of abandonware

So more generalisations no studies no statistics, nothing of value to the conversation. More baseless claims and empty straw manning. Keep up the good work big oil.

So you have no evidence no study and no statistics to support your baseless claims and generalisations. I thought so.

A pathetic political wedge attempt.

Still waiting for that magical evidence on gun control results in suicide reduction.

Up next generalisations the new scientific method.

How very compassionate of you.

So that's your compassion? Ignore others around you hey. Makes sense.

because it makes it far easier to manipulate them

Oh this is hilarious, do tell, how I manipulate an entire countries statistics on suicide over time!

and get the opinions of an institute dedicated to suicide prevention

They're absolutely right, as a generalization. Does it stop the result when access was taken away specifically for Guns. The statistics clearly show means changed over time and did the rate reduce? No. That rope lobby is looking mighty dangerous now. You better get on the case.

women are just doing it for attention

Is that what I said? Don't worry, I don't just make baseless claims or tell you to just google something that doesn't exist. Suicide rate is 3 times higher for males, after all this is the topic with Guns.

higher rate of suicide among Australian males are that males tend to choose more lethal methods of suicide such as hanging (60% of male suicides), poisoning, including by car exhaust (11%), and firearms (8%). (Australian Psychological Society)

men have a greater tendency to not recognize or respond to their own negative emotions or distress, which may result in more chronic and severe emotional responses to adverse life events (Goldney et al., 2002)

Men are less inclined to communicate feelings of despair or hopelessness, and are more likely to present a stoic attitude towards misfortune (Howerton et al., 2007; Witte et al., 2012)

have fewer social connections (Denney et al 2009)

Differences in help seeking between men and women are additional contributing factors. Men tend not to seek help for emotional difficulties, often feeling that help-seeking is a weakness or failure and preferring to solve problems on their own, without being a burden on others (Emslie et al 2006)

That’s the opinion of a complete cunt,

Don't worry you do enough gas lighting and straw-manning for everyone. At this point its assured you're lobbying for big oil.

The gendering in the title has nothing to do with anything

Ill give you a hint, its in the title of OP's post.

you havent been nearly upset by people failing to laser focus on that adjective

no denying, suicide rate in the elderly is highest.

find a mountain of evidence without me spoonfeeding each result to you.

just google it

The fact that you’re insisting that means reduction doesn’t work

What happened when means reduction wed implemented for more common methods like jumping?

Nice straw-man.

factually inaccurate as everything else you’ve argued.

Yet I am the only one who has shown clear evidence to support it while your baseless opinion and generations continues to entertain.

Yes?

Oh look you’ve brought genitals into it here too,

Ill help you out since you cant read. The title of this post is:

"Suicide rates in the US are highest among elderly men, and most involve guns, CDC report says"

among elderly men

men

I’m not the one arguing against evidence based suicide prevention

The only "evidence" you have provided is baseless claims. The facts I have provided are clear an unambiguous. Banning guns in Australia made no difference to suicide.

To put it bluntly you seem like a bot rambling on without understanding the title of a post let alone content.

like they’re women’s fault

Good luck with that.

To preface for others, I have placed some of the more triggering parts of this discussion behind the spoiler tags so others reading can avoid the more sensitive part of these discussions.

I probably should have said “many suicides are an impulse”

You should not have over stated the minority. I understand, anything to further your political rhetoric.

It remains one of the most effective methods of suicide prevention

And yet the suicide statistics CLEARLY show it made NO difference for Australia, none.

Clearly you can't even be bothered reading the statistics, not a study, statistics. If you had bothered to read the statistics of means over time, it clearly shows the volume has only increased over 5 decades and the means has drastically changed. The change in access made, NO difference in the outcome.

So you’re saying that men have greater access to some kind of “means”.

That was a typo on my part which you can clearly see if you read the two sentences together. Not means; intent. Absolutely men have far more intent then women. Pick any study, the conclusion is the same: intent.

I’m the one advocating that we take steps to reduce the suicide rate, using repeatedly proven strategies.

repeatedly proven strategies.

That baseless claim at it again. Its statistics show the exact opposite.

pro-gun commenters that you seemingly agree with

No. I'm disagreeing with political bots like yourself "PoliticalAgiotator" wedging an agenda to benefit your politics. Its disingenuous garbage. I'm keeping my politics out of it, I find it weird how uncontrolled guns are in the US however I am not deluded by how little of an impact it has had here. It detracts from real discussion to address the real cause.

I even did it without bringing gender into it,

didn’t stop you from seeing the words “women” and “suicide” used in the same post and twisting it

The delusion is pretty bad for you. You have not read the post title, let alone the article or even the statistics I provided. Welcome to the conversation, or is that the point: to derail and not contribute.

Yep, I see the statistics

For some strange reason, I highly doubt you read anything at all.