Sexist and dangerous Samaritans ad

This.

I would not be going anywhere near that man, whether or not there was a train track nearby. He exudes the sullen rage of a man who has just been kicked out by his girlfriend.

I think the ad might have worked better with a mix sex group ( say3 people) weighing up whether to approach lone male. So maybe two women, one man and then maybe the male going up perhaps with one woman’s encouragement. A male with women might look less threatening to lone man and wouldn’t have impacted the women’s safety and put the emphasis on women.

exactly this!

I think it’d be more realistic to say, “Are you ok?” than ask about coffee. And why is a female passenger portrayed as “saving” him rather than the high-viz male hovering uselessly in the background whose very job is to keep passengers safe?

How does anyone decide this man is disturbed/suicidal. Is nobody allowed to stand on a platform looking a bit pissed off without people "assuming" things about them?
He might be fed up that his train is delayed or maybe he's worried about an elderly parent. That doesn't make him suicidal!!

In terms of suicide rates, this is an area where the concept of intersectionality is actually useful, in young South Asian women suicide rate is seven times higher than that for males discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1445881/1/U593205Redacted.PDF

The logical course of action would be for the woman to approach the man in hi-vis to tell him of her concerns, then.

Exactly!
Not only that, but I think there needs to be a big campaign directed at men explaining that helping others would be good for their own mental health and depression prevention. Think of 'give'- one of the 5 ways to wellbeing. Beginning helping others a little if you don't already (and massive generalisation- nearly all women already do, many to the point of burnout) would help men to help each other and themselves.

Can you not see the person in the hi-vis vest in the background?

I think a bloke approaching might have been more powerful but I also think that a man who is suicidal might also perceive a male approaching them as a threat too. That's part of the problem. Women aren't perceived as a threat and that works in multiple ways. I do object to how this places the burden on women to resolve and I do think there are safety issues in just encouraging women to approach someone who might be in a mental health crisis for a variety of reasons (there are too many incidents of people being pushed onto the track never mind the suicidal element). Yes we all should be looking out for others but I also think it's a difficult point. And there is a lot to be said for talking to staff or other people on a platform before approaching a lone male.

How do you tell the difference between a potentially suicidal man and one who is thinking about pushing someone else under a train?

I think the problem is that of an independent organisation such as the Samaritans campaigning on a single issue, without perhaps considering everything in the round. Their role and purpose is suicide prevention, not preventing violence against women and girls.

Safeguarding risk as follows..

unknown bloke in a heightened state on the very very edge of a platform waiting for a train. Potentially impulsive and reactive bloke. Not known if drugs or alcohol involved. Not known if he will become physical if someone approaches.

lone woman

nothing is known about historic mental health, historic police involvement, historic dynamics with women. Does he carry weapons?

quiet train station, few people around.

inviting him for a drink would likely give the impression of a hook up

it would be safer for blokes or a couple to approach him. Alternatively a lone woman could notify a guard.

If we extrapolate further - why have they chosen a black woman? Are black women here to serve and placate white men - as has happened throughout history?

You don’t think a man approaching another man would have been more powerful message to men?

No, it’s cos they thought, ‘men are shit at all that, they’ll never do it. Let’s put it all on women instead.’

I see. So women analysing the intended and unintended outcomes and implications of an ad is now inhumane?

And yet it should have been analysed thoroughly before being made and released.

I think this advert is fine. There are many stories of suicides that have been thwarted because (often women) people have just stopped to talk.

I was worried about a guy last week on a train. I chatted to him because of this reason. All was well but I don’t want to think we should be telling women that they are unsafe talking to men in these situations. I don’t function with that kind of fear in my every day life (despite being assaulted several times, but those are rare incidents compared to the thousands of interactions I’ve had).

No she's right.

More women ATTEMPT suicide than men

But more men SUCCESSFULLY kill themselves.

This is because men and women tend to try and kill themselves in different ways, with men using more violent methods which leave less room for survival.

Are men only potentially dangerous at night then? Or are some men a potential danger no matter what time of day it is? How do we tell which ones those are?

You’ve looked really hard to find what you have. I don’t see any of what you’re suggesting.

This seems a strange advert to me .Surely its not up to a lone female to "help" someone who may be struggling ? Best to inform employee and let them deal with it

Yes, given many rail staff have been trained in suicide recognition / prevention, surely better dealt with under the existing, well-recognised 'see it, say it, sorted' umbrella i.e. 'see something risky or odd, alert staff'.

I understand that won't always work quickly enough - but if it's meant to be quick enough for a bomb...

But back to my risk assessment; once you know what risks the broad category of 'men behaving oddly' present, you're also better able to identify who the appropriate people to encourage engagement with them would be. Like, just a guess... similar age men.

I said attempt suicide. Read it properly