I’m not sure what’s up with this Milo Yiannopoulos catfish, but he brings up a point that may be completely deranged in his presentation but that still deserves to be discussed.
I might be a raging homo, but I still innately understand the male need to conquer, crush and win. Men need to express that dark, powerful part of themselves, or it can abruptly overflow. If it is suppressed, derided and ridiculed, it can show up without warning and with horrible consequences.
That’s why I’m so distressed that heterosexual men are being told, constantly, by the media and even in schools, that what they are is bad. This, I submit, is at least in part what’s driving the recent spate of shootings.
I think one thing that’s important to keep in mind when we think about these mass killers is that we can come up with various explanations that might tie them together, but unless they’re as true about other advanced industrialized nations as they are about our own, I don’t think the explanations will be convincing. There is no doubt in my mind that it’s hard to be a boy in this country right now and that our schools are so intent on getting them to behave that they’ve diagnosed being a boy as a mental disorder that requires multiple prescriptions.
I also don’t doubt that sexual frustration can become a lethal motivating force for both young males in our country and in Muslim countries where they often become the best recruits for martyrdom operations.
I also see a possible connection between autism, or the autism spectrum of mental disorders, and several of our recent shootings.
We can find some common motivations and medical conditions, but we still need to understand why these things result in mass shootings here and not everywhere.
What distinguishes our country is the prevalence of guns. A gun is what makes it possible for someone to translate their anger or frustration or hopelessness or simple psychosis into a huge bodycount.
Now, it isn’t just the guns, because as difficult as it can be to get a gun in Europe, it’s not by any means impossible. I’d argue that it’s both the guns and the attitude we have towards guns. In Europe, going out and getting a gun is a bit of an exotic idea. Here, guns are lying around everywhere for two year olds to pick and kill their parents and siblings.
It’s the latter condition that is more problematic than the former, because you can’t legislate about attitudes. At best, you can try to do this slowly over time through public health announcements, in the same kind of way that the government tries to get us to eat healthier and quit smoking.
Congress won’t let the federal government even research ways to reduce gun violence, so we also have a huge political problem.
If we seriously want to reduce gun violence, whether of the routine variety or the mass killing variety, we need to do some research. I don’t have any easy answers, but I know that the simple fact that we have guns lying around everywhere is the basic root of the problem. People are largely the same in every country and every culture, and they have the same mental health issues. So, if you’re serious about fixing the problem, you have to look at what’s unique about our country. I don’t think we’re unique in how we treat boys. I do think we’re unique in how we feel about guns.
There’s clearly something wrong with how we feel about guns and changing that has to be a part of the solution.
But if we want to work a little on getting back to letting boys be boys, that’s not a bad idea for completely unrelated reasons.
American Exceptualism?
As a boy my top “hero” was Deacon Jones. Yes, this suburban white kid wanted to be a large black man who through head slaps, violence and intimidation could literally force his will on a football game to turn it towards his wishes.
There are a few life lessons in that but it certainly is not a life strategy. And once off the field there are few opportunities to head slap my way to success without going to jail.
But if my heroes were Rambo, Dirty Harry or some fictionalized video game mass murderer it might be a different story. Not really because I had/have other influence that guide my moral compass.
Err… Exceptionalism
I liked your first choice and was gonna give you credit for creating a new word to describe the peculiar American condition that fetishizes guns and violence.
Thanks.
I guess I should also mention that I was also aware as a kid that Deacon Jones was a body guard for RFK when Bobby was assassinated by a gun.
I thought it was Rosie Greer (another big black guy, same defensive line for the Rams) and 1960 decathlon gold medalist Rafer Johnson (not quite as big) who were there in the kitchen as bodyguards that night (zero protection from the LAPD of course).
Both rather mild-mannered, soft-spoken types off the field. I forget which one eventually wrestled the gun out of Sirhan’s hand, but he had a helluva time doing it, strange given the strength of Rosie/Rafer and for a fellow as slightly built as Sirhan.
I liked Deacon’s cameo role in the goofy 1978 flick Heaven Can Wait, starring Warren Beatty as the Rams QB. Amusing scene where the comedic actor Charles Groden quietly feeds Deacon some made-up racist remarks Beatty’s character supposedly said about blacks, with predictable retaliatory results against Beatty on the practice field from the angry Deacon. Co-starring my favorite babe star of the era, Julie Christie ..
They were both there. Grier grabbed the gun.
Rosey also does needlepoint.
Strongly agree here but I want to add that while mental illnesses are the same culture may matter more than even you suspect.
In the west certain mental illness often cause people to hear voices telling them to do violent things. According to a story I heard on NPR in the east those same voices are often perceived as the voices of ancestors or other benign presences and do not urge violence, and in fact can bring a measure of comfort.
That’s interesting.
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/july/voices-culture-luhrmann-071614.html
A very interesting development
Expressions of psychological illness, dis-ease, distress are most definitely culturally dependent.
Western culture today has become so publicly hyper-sexualized that it’s easy for non-socially adept individuals to view themselves as the only ones “not getting any” and to lash out with easily obtained lethal weapons. Added to that dynamic is that the male:female ratio is remaining +males until much later in life than in the past. That ratio is actually much higher than the US in many countries — 124 to 100 in KSA. No wonder its been exporting fundie religious terrorists.
Brief personal note- I grew up around firearms.
The culture has changed in my lifetime from sport shooting (hunting/target) to near exclusive antipersonnel designs and training. Why? Why have the police been militarized? Why SWAT and special ops been held up as new standards of bravery and competence as opposed to the steady, hard working Dad? Why do people spend thousands of dollars on training and run competitions what are like Delta Force drills?
We can theorize all we want.
The fact is a firearm is distant death. It is Zeus’s thunderbolt in the hands of the law abiding citizen and in the deranged outsider’s paw. It is power when many have seen their personal power diminish economically. If you feel helpless in the face of failing farms, factories, stores… then a little personal power can go along way.
As for the items themselves. Little has changed in basic design in the last 100 yrs. Think about that. Almost everything we contact has moved forward. AR15s/AK47s are based on much older principals. One of the most popular handguns was designed in 1911. If you want a revolver, practical designs from 1880’s. The only major innovation is polymer frame combined with striker firing (Glock is the main company and they scare the crap out of me).
But that is neither here nor there.
The reason we have a proliferation of military/antipersonnel firearms and training is that ONE political party has made it their cornerstone to promote the fear necessary that encourages that type of culture. From Reagan forward, “people are getting a free ride so you have to be ready to defend you own” The us vs Them dynamic. Crime, and its fear is just another reflection of powerlessness. And its works. Folks I know, for no tangible reason, have bought into the AR15 culture because of the above. Problem is, its expensive to shoot, so a couple of mags are fired, then placed in the closet. No real training or practice.
Its that attitude that has to be fought before you will make progress on guns; not the NRA. Forget them. They are the lobbying/PR firm for the firearm manufacturers and servants of the GOP. You don’t fight the K street offices, or the Madison Ave. ad guys.
But like other GOP policies, the people who spend those thousands of dollars are most likely the ones who can least afford it. I DO believe that the 2nd Amendment applies to most citizens and if they want to exercise it “lawfully”, then go ahead. If you argue against that, then you will lose and sound like the airheads who want to limit 1st Amendment rights on campuses based on “trigger words” (whatever the hell those are). Argue against the NEED and COST of pursuing that hobby. Do you really need that rifle, rails, sling, ballistic face shield to defend your canned peaches from the brown hoard? Wouldn’t that money be better spent on educating your child, fixing up your house, paying down debt?
One person at a time.
Also, get to know the people as opposed to stereotypes.
You will find that many do support progressive policies and are natural constituencies for Democratic positions.
Ridge
The idea that mass shootings come from a cultural repression of masculine urges to dominate is typical up-is-downism. It could much more persuasively be argued that the gun fetish in America is deeply linked to a normative view of masculinity as violent and dominating.
Our foreign policy is almost entirely conditioned by the premise that the US has the right and the power to dictate outcomes anywhere on the planet, and the duty to use murderous force to impose it’s will when necessary. I can’t think of anything farther away from the suppression of “dark” masculine power.
It’s pretty clear that a big reason why global-warming denialism spread so quickly on the right is that the idea of complex problems requiring collective action, i.e. cooperation, is anathema to the right wing ethos of violent domination of others. In other words, merely recognizing that we as a country face difficult problems that can’t be addressed through bombs or tax cuts is tantamount to a socialist plot…
Yeah, the whole question of masculinity is really kind of orthogonal to the question of why so many people get shot in this country. Mass shootings are one aspect of that question, but you can’t blame the suppression of dark masculinity when toddlers shoot each other.
It actually comes from the perpetual demand to “Don’t act like a girl.” or “Act like a man.”
link
Outside of rural areas and some older better-designed communities, where exactly can boys be boys?
Where can boys learn that other people matter?
The masculine romanticism and sense of privilege easily gets out of hand in the demand for macho space.
The basic fact is that as a culture we need to stop with the idea tha people need to prove in some way that they are deserving of their gender, their identity, and their relationships by anything but straightforward, complicated human interactions.
One’s conquests of the opposite sex, one’s success at intimidation or fighting or any of the other “prove you’re a man” things don’t do that at all. It is just a form of shaming.
There is an interaction of culture, family, and individual going on here that is lethal and all the simple answers don’t fit. But we will never get to it as long as research is forbidden.
But one of the researchers of this issue makes some sense. The screen for gun ownership should be any record of misdemeanor assault. That gets not only at potential mass murderers but also other peer-on-peer or domestic violence. And the fact that a record prevents acquiring a firearm restrains someone until they have the maturity to understand the lethality of weapons.
A cultural measure that would quickly roll back this is to bring all US troops home and end the wars. And start working on the nonsense “warrior” cult that has evolved as a paramiltary tendency by those who would never volunteer for actual duty.
And then there are the family issues that have been exacerbated by a deliberately deflationary wage economy.
Good question. When I go into a store, and see a young man stocking shelves, I wonder what he thinks about things.
Part of it is our toxic economy. About 1950, we allowed the start of chain stores. Chains suck totally. Chains have converted a nation of shopkeepers into a nation of store clerks, and that leaves no outlet for male aggressiveness which is socially acceptable. In addition, sports leagues are declining. It’s hard to be a man today.
Milo Yiannopoulos is a worthless MRA troll of the worst of the slyme pit. He hates women a lot more than your average writer for Breitbart/NRO et al. If you followed the gamergate saga even a little bit you’d know to ignore anything he says. The only person who might be worse is Chrostian libertarian blogger Matt Walsh.
So based on what we know about Milo, it’s no surprise that he’d try and weasel a way to blame women/feminists etc.
I think several issues are in play:
Regarding your comments about Asperger’s and Autism.
First of all, we don’t know if they were actually diagnosed with Aspergers. For all we know the mom, who was apparently a nurse, self-diagnosed. We also don’t know for a fact that any of the others were on the autism spectrum.
Second of all, there is no basis for any connection to Asperger’s and autism and violence. What you are doing is stigmatizing people with mental health issues. There are plenty of other mental health disorders that could be at play here but the thing is, we don’t know.
Please do not give in to the right-wing nonsense that re-directs the conversation away from actual gun control and stigmatizes all people with mental health issues. Many people with mental health issues are victims of violent crime, not the perpetrators.
Well, as to stigmatizing mental illness, what utter bullshit. Mentally healthy people do not shoot others. Mentally ill people sometimes do.
What I REALLY object to is comments which reduce complex, multifaceted, difficult situations into a single, simplistic, bullshit cause.
Comments like yours.
Do not give in to the liberal meme of blaming everything on guns. Guns are a problem. However, as the NRA says, last week 100 million gun owners did not kill others.
And as to stigmatizing, you are doing exactly that. With the gun comments.
We need gun regulation. In this case, this guy obtained 13 guns LEGALLY. Since you are clearly a very clever and resourceful person, exactly how in today’s climate are you LEGISLATIVELY going to affect the ability of a person to obtain guns?
Sorry folks. This domestic mass murder thing is just a bug in the rug compared to the problems endemic to this country at the moment. It is a symptom, not the root problem. It is a symptom…among many…of an increasingly rapidly disintegrating system.
You want to stop the domestic mass murders? First you have to stop the thousands of times more numerous mass murders in which the U.S. is involved world-wide. And how do you stop that? You elect a president and congress that is not part and parcel of that ongoing crime, for starters.
What’s that you say?
Ain’t gonna happen?
Yup.
Like I said…sorry, folks.
Eventually this country is going to crash due to its own internal contradictions. The above-the-law corporate culture is not going to change. It controls the only possible “change” system for its own ends. And what are those ends? Maximum quarterly profit, nothing more and nothing less. How does one deal with a totally out-of-control vehicle? One waits for the crash and then cleans up and starts anew.
“Gun control?” Whaddayou, kiddin’ me or what? Kidding yourselves, really. There are already so many guns in circulation that rounding them all up would call for a totally totalitarian system of armed, forced entry into every nook and cranny of the country’s infrastructure. That “ain’t gonna happen.” Too expensive, just for starters. No quarterly profit, either.
Buckle up.
It’s gonna be a rough ride.
Bet on it.
AG