TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,145
I may be preaching to the choir here with regards to this and while there has been analogies (the party and hotel examples) with regards to being trapped in sentience, this one will focus on a slightly different aspect. Before I begin, I will give a brief premise of what this thread, article is going to be about. So over the years I've realized the mentality of pro-lifers and anti-choicers even when it comes to 'stand-by' methods, meaning that one isn't going to imminently or impulsively CTB, and yet they are not satisfied with that (no surprise of course). They (the pro-lifers and anti-choicers) would rather people have no means to CTB, thus keeping people trapped without a way out, and allow circumstances to run their course. In other words, as long as one doesn't have the means (especially reliable ones) to CTB, they are perfectly fine with that.
How does this relate to the previous example analogies such as the party and the hotel room analogy? It is similar to those analogies when describing about CTB being an escape being denied to people with regards to stand-by methods meaning that the person has the means and can go easily, even if the person isn't immediately checking out (leaving the hotel room or stuff). For some people, having a means to exit is a huge relief as mentioned in a famous quote by George Sterling:
The quote by Sterling can be likened to the fact that prison (life and sentience itself) becomes more bearable (home and tolerance) when one has the key (method or means) [to escape] it. As a personal anecdote, I remember back in late 2018 and throughout 2019 (originally I was going to CTB and was desperate), when I had my own means of CTB'ing even if I didn't CTB in 2019, I had the sense of purpose and courage as well as peace that I never really felt in most of my life because I know on the drop of a hat, I could CTB if things become unbearable for me. Of course, nobody outside of SaSu knew about this at that time and I only kept it within me and SaSu since I had a feeling that pro-lifers and anti-choicers want to further remove any means to CTB even if there wasn't any imminent risk or threat, just any means or so. They are simply not comfortable with people having a means to escape one's own suffering by one's own hands, but I digress…
So back to the hotel and party analogy. I have a similar example I could give in terms of what I mean by this.
The hotel room analogy/big rave party (extended):
Suppose that one is in a hotel room, and while the guest (oneself) is in the hotel room, one isn't imminently wanting to escape or leave the room (yet). However, there may come a time where one may decide to want to leave the hotel room for any reason or if the hotel room starts to become unbearable for any reason. However, just the guest having a means to escape the room (tools to break the window or what not, or even get past the guards barricading the door to escape), it upsets the gatekeepers (the guard, the staff of the prison, etc.). The gatekeepers want to prevent ANY potential means, even preemptively so that way the guest will have no means to escape the room, even if the guest isn't imminently or immediately going to go outside anytime soon. Sometimes the guest is able to hide their own tools of escape successfully and in secrecy, but other times, they get discovered by the nosy, busybody hotel maid cleaning out the room and confiscating or destroying the means of escape. This could be a rope to rappel the tall 10-story room safely, or even a way of getting past the door by knowing the loopholes and gaps in the guard's watch, etc. Whatever the means of escape or not, these gatekeepers want to ensure that the guest(s) do NOT have a means to escape, prevent the guest from escaping on their own terms, and also ensure that those who try will fail, or suffer immensely (no rope to rappel and scale down the 10-story window, making it a risky jump or so). These gatekeepers would be more than pleased to have guests suffer and then only when the flames are too high or the prison is too unbearable, would they (perhaps, maybe..) allow the guest to escape, but under their own terms. Similarly, the rave party could be also analogous to that of the hotel room analogy. The only difference would be bouncers and drunker party-goers who act like crabs in a bucket.
In conclusion, this analogy, albeit exaggerated, illustrates the truth about day to day sentience and existence such that many gatekeepers (pro-lifers, anti-choicers alike) go to such great lengths to prevent escape, even if one isn't imminently going to escape by preemptively cutting off the means (method) to escape unwanted suffering. It isn't about just preventing CTB, but proactively preventing people from even having a peace of mind by having a way out. Personally, I believe that if pro-lifers and anti-choicers did not go to such great lengths to prevent CTB, including being proactively preventative and limiting methods, people may even be less likely to feel trapped and thus, less likely to attempt CTB out of desperation or impulsivity. But alas, many pro-lifers do that because they feel like they don't like having to confront their own fears of their own mortality and want to take away the option for everyone, which only shows their insecurity and discomfort over a fear of death. Essentially, they are just projecting their own insecurities onto everyone else, which is why we have people who end up going underground and hiding one's own true intentions for that very reason. I partly included my anecdotal story from 2019 since I've experienced what it felt like to have a means of escape (CTB) readily available and I'm proof that having a means of escape (even if one doesn't immediately take it) does bring some level of solace and peace that otherwise wouldn't have been.
How does this relate to the previous example analogies such as the party and the hotel room analogy? It is similar to those analogies when describing about CTB being an escape being denied to people with regards to stand-by methods meaning that the person has the means and can go easily, even if the person isn't immediately checking out (leaving the hotel room or stuff). For some people, having a means to exit is a huge relief as mentioned in a famous quote by George Sterling:
| A prison becomes a home when you have the key. |
The quote by Sterling can be likened to the fact that prison (life and sentience itself) becomes more bearable (home and tolerance) when one has the key (method or means) [to escape] it. As a personal anecdote, I remember back in late 2018 and throughout 2019 (originally I was going to CTB and was desperate), when I had my own means of CTB'ing even if I didn't CTB in 2019, I had the sense of purpose and courage as well as peace that I never really felt in most of my life because I know on the drop of a hat, I could CTB if things become unbearable for me. Of course, nobody outside of SaSu knew about this at that time and I only kept it within me and SaSu since I had a feeling that pro-lifers and anti-choicers want to further remove any means to CTB even if there wasn't any imminent risk or threat, just any means or so. They are simply not comfortable with people having a means to escape one's own suffering by one's own hands, but I digress…
So back to the hotel and party analogy. I have a similar example I could give in terms of what I mean by this.
The hotel room analogy/big rave party (extended):
Suppose that one is in a hotel room, and while the guest (oneself) is in the hotel room, one isn't imminently wanting to escape or leave the room (yet). However, there may come a time where one may decide to want to leave the hotel room for any reason or if the hotel room starts to become unbearable for any reason. However, just the guest having a means to escape the room (tools to break the window or what not, or even get past the guards barricading the door to escape), it upsets the gatekeepers (the guard, the staff of the prison, etc.). The gatekeepers want to prevent ANY potential means, even preemptively so that way the guest will have no means to escape the room, even if the guest isn't imminently or immediately going to go outside anytime soon. Sometimes the guest is able to hide their own tools of escape successfully and in secrecy, but other times, they get discovered by the nosy, busybody hotel maid cleaning out the room and confiscating or destroying the means of escape. This could be a rope to rappel the tall 10-story room safely, or even a way of getting past the door by knowing the loopholes and gaps in the guard's watch, etc. Whatever the means of escape or not, these gatekeepers want to ensure that the guest(s) do NOT have a means to escape, prevent the guest from escaping on their own terms, and also ensure that those who try will fail, or suffer immensely (no rope to rappel and scale down the 10-story window, making it a risky jump or so). These gatekeepers would be more than pleased to have guests suffer and then only when the flames are too high or the prison is too unbearable, would they (perhaps, maybe..) allow the guest to escape, but under their own terms. Similarly, the rave party could be also analogous to that of the hotel room analogy. The only difference would be bouncers and drunker party-goers who act like crabs in a bucket.
In conclusion, this analogy, albeit exaggerated, illustrates the truth about day to day sentience and existence such that many gatekeepers (pro-lifers, anti-choicers alike) go to such great lengths to prevent escape, even if one isn't imminently going to escape by preemptively cutting off the means (method) to escape unwanted suffering. It isn't about just preventing CTB, but proactively preventing people from even having a peace of mind by having a way out. Personally, I believe that if pro-lifers and anti-choicers did not go to such great lengths to prevent CTB, including being proactively preventative and limiting methods, people may even be less likely to feel trapped and thus, less likely to attempt CTB out of desperation or impulsivity. But alas, many pro-lifers do that because they feel like they don't like having to confront their own fears of their own mortality and want to take away the option for everyone, which only shows their insecurity and discomfort over a fear of death. Essentially, they are just projecting their own insecurities onto everyone else, which is why we have people who end up going underground and hiding one's own true intentions for that very reason. I partly included my anecdotal story from 2019 since I've experienced what it felt like to have a means of escape (CTB) readily available and I'm proof that having a means of escape (even if one doesn't immediately take it) does bring some level of solace and peace that otherwise wouldn't have been.
