RE: Why it's Not the Boys in the Above Picture Who Grow Up to be School Shooters
Not taking the two pictures literally...
I agree that the shooters will likely be from the pool of "outsiders" from the bottom photos. It won't be because they dress up and act like girls. It will be because they are mentally ill (as in, real psychological problems), socially awkward (not able to maintain healthy interpersonal relationships), and/or just not suitably adjusted to society/reality (are fed too much bullshit about what "normal" is or how everything/everyone is against them, etc.).
It's the maladjusted and mentally ill that commit these crimes.
There's nothing abnormal about kids playing with toy guns or even learning how to use actual firearms. Learning about these things or practicing with them to improve ones skills is nothing more than human nature...curiosity, knowledge, the ability to defend oneself, the will to survive. Acquiring skills for self-defense or using tools that you enjoy is nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to vilify.
If there were no guns, would people still blame bows and arrows for mass murders? Would it be scary to see young boys playing with toy swords or learning hand-to-hand combat? Would a slingshot cause panic in parents/adults? Of course not...at least not for normal, mentally-fit people.
For the panicked, the maladjusted, the deniers of reality, the feeble-minded or physically weak - this could be the scariest thing imaginable.
We should not cater to them and their irrational fears. It is not the irrational that ought to dictate behavior for the rest of us. Our reason, our ability to acquire, accumulate, and pass on inter-generational knowledge is what sets us apart from the irrational beasts of nature. Why do we allow those among us with short memories and illogical/contradictory views to tell the rest of us how we ought to act, knowing that they are indeed the ones who are oblivious, unreasonable, and wrong?
Mass murderers are mentally ill people. And they kill with whatever tools are available to them, whether it's a knife, a truck, a gun, bombs, chemical weapons, or the ability to control a nation's economics or food supply. They didn't become mass murderers because they played with toys. They became mass murderers by trying to live outside of reality - by learning that their world does not cater to their illogical whims and faulty beliefs. They became mass murderers because they rejected the world as it is and found no other way to understand this rejection...and, in fact, believe that the world has rejected them instead. (And it likely had, but it is their failure to adjust/cope with reality.)
The vilification of tools and those who use them (in a non-aggressive nature) only does one thing: It creates more distortions of reality...more irrational fears...more outsiders.
Eventually, it may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Vilify those who use guns. Make them feel unaccepted and abnormal. Make what is perfectly rational into behavior that is socially unacceptable. And then sit back and watch as these otherwise normal people are pushed to their mental breaking points because the truly mentally-ill and maladjusted are dictating social norms.
I mean...it's not like this doesn't already happen in a variety of ways. Is there any wonder why so many people are depressed? When human nature becomes taboo and people are made to feel disgusted with themselves or just can't figure out what's "wrong" with them (because there isn't anything wrong with them), what else can we expect than to see mass psychology completely break down?
Is this not basically the recorded history of mankind? And are we (in general) just not capable of recognizing it?
So are you saying that the United States Government's entire workforce is mentally ill? Surely you are just inept and unable to grasp the larger concepts at hand, because that would be pretty absurd to claim.
So your problem is with comprehension?
"It's the maladjusted and mentally ill that commit these crimes."
The United States enacts genocide, assists genocide, and kills its own people in an elaborate attempt to gain more money and power. So, are you saying that the US Government are all mentally ill? Yes or no?
Of course. All coercive governments are. Was that not clear?
Read my other posts in response to schatten, then get back to me. Thanks.
Yes.
The answer is "No". The problem with the question and the person whom I am responding to, is that they're scapegoating the "mentally ill" as the enemy and further persecuting a minority of people that deserve and require extra help from the rest of us. The point I am making here is that the culture war of which your original post is centered around is propaganda from the rich and powerful corporations and governments that are trying to keep us distracted while they commit atrocities around the globe.
"Mentally Ill" people are not the problem. We should all collectively focus our ire against the rich and powerful who run the world, and engaging in a pointless scapegoating culture war is exactly what they want to have happen.
I consider people in the government to be sociopaths. That’s classified as a mental illness, or am I wrong?
(I can be.)
It may or may not be classifiable as such, but it does more harm than good to scapegoat the "mentally ill" when 99% of the time they are just another marginalized group of people in need of help. You should create a new category called "evil sons a bitches" and put the corporate warlords and school shooters in there instead.
I actually get your point, and I think it’s a valid one. Upvoted for that reason.
Are you familiar with the Halls of Power theory? Perhaps the name has been muddied in my memory, but it was a theory popularized (and then suddenly silenced) a few years ago. It was a Social Psychology theory about how sociopaths are attracted to modern political power structures, perhaps ancient ones as well, and that there is a startling prevalence of sociopathy in government both from the nature of the job - forcing people to do things and to view a larger, less personal picture of how society runs - and from this natural attraction. For quick reading: https://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/#43818a754104
Tangential to this discussion, but perhaps of interest to you.
Are people who commit mass murder not mentally ill people?
I wouldn't put the blame on "evil corporations," but I would absolutely fault the coercive state and the many sociopaths who comprise it.
I'm not sure how your point and my point are actually different here. Coercive governments and the things that they promote as "normal" and "good for society" are mostly bullshit. This is precisely why we have sick/depressed societies. I am not blaming mentally ill people. I'm blaming the society that creates mental illness in people who would otherwise be normal, functional adults - if not for the lifetime of bullshit laws and politics, fueled by politicians' and bureaucrats' perverse views of morality and their ignorance of economics/human behavior.
I'm not blaming the mentally ill for being mentally ill. I'm simply stating that it takes a mentally ill person to commit mass murder, and then offering my opinion about why many of them are mentally ill in the first place.
I'm not sure what you're reading, but it's apparently not the same thing that I'm writing. Or it's just a problem with comprehension.
My problem is strictly with your usage of the term "mentally ill" because it's nothing more than a scapegoat and an excuse. There is no excuse for mass murder, it's just being evil. Saying that "murderers are mentally ill" plants the seed in peoples' minds that "mental illness = bad, murderer, scary", etc. which does much, much, much more harm than good, especially considering mentall illness affects most people, in America at least, throughout at least a small portion of their lives (depression, anxiety, for example). You should drop that they are "mentally ill" and focus on their specific issues that are causing the problems you perceive.
For example, if a politician votes to enact genocide, blame their corruption and greed for profit and power, not a "mental illness" that may not even exist in the first place. All that language does is divide people at the bottom.
I'm saying that it takes a mentally ill person to commit mass murder. I'm not saying that mentally ill people will become mass murderers. There is a difference.
Did I not do that in my original comment?
So, a politician that "votes to enact genocide" is not a mentally ill person?
Not at all. It's the ridiculous "Don't correctly identify them!" that is the problem. Politicians and their supporters who believe that it's perfectly acceptable to violently force non-aggressive individuals to do things against their will are, in fact, mentally ill people. They are the bullies and the murderers that you continue to blame for society's problems, are they not? Should we call them sane and normal instead, so as not to offend another person who may have some other form of mental illness?
This is absurd. I'm not going to pussy-foot around a word or a topic because of a comprehension issue. You may choose to do that, but it's not my thing. Words have meanings.