Skip Navigation
Unpopular Opinion @lemmy.world PeepinGoodArgs @reddthat.com

Wanting to kill people (and/or going through with it) isn't indicative of a mental illness

I AM NOT ADVOCATING VIOLENCE NOR JUSTIFYING IT.

In the wake of the Onion's routine release of their "No Way To Prevent This" article, people like to blame the perpetrator's action on mental illness. That is, some sort of mental instability was the primary cause of a mass shooting. Logically, if that is true, then without that mental instability, the mass shooting wouldn't have happened, the person would have...done something else.

But this is bullshit.

There is a science behind why people commit violence. Why We Snap points out several "triggers":

  • Life-or Limb
  • Insult
  • Family
  • Environment
  • Mate
  • Order in society
  • Resources
  • Tribe
  • Stopped

It's completely reasonable to kill a person in self-defense. Almost no one denies this. That is the primary justification for the proliferation of guns in American society. This is not a mental illness.

At home, 72% of all murder-suicides involve an intimate partner; 94% of the victims of these murder suicides are female. There are a lot of reasons why men hurt and murder women, but fragile male egos that treat women as inferior and interpret their actions as insulting and as challenging to a man's masculinity is an entire trope. And yet, the gender essentialism of traditional masculinity isn't treated as mentally ill (or even just plain wrong).

Tucker Carlson was renowned for his supposed truth-telling about how the order of American society is being threatened by an invasion of immigrants. Trump did the same thing. A reasonable conclusion, then, is that the El Paso mass shooter was merely defending his beloved nation against this invasion of immigrants, whom he just so happens to hate because they threaten the order of society.

Similarly, the Nashville Christian academy shooter was trans. For many of us, transgenderism isn't a mental illness, and thus not a cause of excessive violence in and of itself. However, coupled with the antagonistic relationship between traditional Christianity and transgenderism, several of the triggers that don't assume mental illness make sense.

And, of course, tribe...oh boy! As American polarization increases among the electorate, the salience of tribes increases. Only like a week ago, GOP lawmakers that didn't support Jim Jordan's nomination for House Speaker were sent death threats over the phone. If you don't vote for their guy, they'll fuck you up! (But non-violently...listen to the clip). Being protective and supportive of people like you isn't considered a mental illlness.

Again, I don't believe any of this violence is justified, nor am I advocating for it. (I cannot stress that enough). My argument is that there are seemingly rational reasons to engage in violence in the moment. So, rather than scapegoating the mentally ill, maybe, just maybe, we should look to why it seemed like a rational decision for a mass shooter to kill a bunch of people. What was their motivation? What problem were they trying to solve? And why did excessive violence seem like a good way to solve the problem?

I believe this is a much better approach to any shooting or violence in general than the allowing an immediate pivot to mental illness as the causal factor.

35

You're viewing a single thread.

35 comments

  • There is violence inherent in the system all throughout it, and yet we treat an individual employing violence towards various ends -- any end, really -- as inherently "wrong" when under any critical observation that's obviously bullshit. The government can call upon the police to come and murder you for any number of things, perceived or real, right or wrong. And some of the things "we" as a society have decided are right or wrong have changed dramatically over time. And violence is not necessarily someone shoving a gun in your face -- somebody losing their job and income, say, because they are a member of some outside group (gay, trans, the wrong color, the wrong religion, speak the wrong language, etc.) can be just as detrimental to their lives as putting a bullet in them. It's just slower, and nobody writes headlines about it.

    The real factor is hate. Hate is everywhere in American society and we basically don't deal with it in any capacity whatsoever. It starts in gradeschool with all those bullies the administration does nothing about and just builds up from there. It's batshit insane to behave as if people faced by hate and aggression their entire lives from the government, their teachers, other members of society, politicians, megacorporations, the police, the talking heads on TV, etc., etc., etc. might eventually feel pushed to violence to ether defend themselves from or punish their perceived enemies.

    I agree with your assessment that implicitly painting all other non-violent people who have mental health issues with the same brush is also hugely detrimental. If "only" cracked people enacted violence we would never have wars. A quick glance at history (or the current news) will tell you all you need to know about that.

35 comments