4 ms·
Killing unarmed people with a firearm should be emasculating. Just like in western flicks. If you have accepted for some reason that you are evil scumbag, then
by vlehto 11y ago
Killing unarmed people with a firearm should be emasculating. Just like in western flicks.
If you have accepted for some reason that you are evil scumbag, then that's it. Now you choose whether you are man scumbag or boy scumbag. School shooters are usually already somewhat isolated and they usually end up dead. They don't care getting isolated. They seem to care about posthumous fame.
I don't mind if masculine is not good. What I'm trying to say is that seemingly only surefire way to get the status of a man is violence. Inventing some other certain and positive way to get the status of a man would be great. But in the meantime it would seem like a good idea to make the "madman" status less certain.
>You won't appreciably reduce mass shootings by verbally stripping mass murderers of their manhood, rather than just calling them evil. Sorry.
You can't back that claim in any way. Sorry.
- newman111 11y agoKilling unarmed people is orthogonal to masculinity. In general, I think more sympathy with these mass murderers, from those not directly affected, would be a better idea than labeling them as "evil". While I would not make the same decisions, it's important to realize that the refusal to understand a person's POV contributes towards isolation. That's an important component we don't recognize.
- tomp 11y ago> Killing unarmed people with a firearm should be emasculating I'm sure that a lot of soldiers and drone operators feel more masculine after the kill.