Read on Twitter
Imagine, for a moment, that you lived in a world where the phrase “murder” was seldom used.
Instead, people referred to the act of killing someone not with the name of the act itself, but a motivation which may or may not have been the root cause.
Instead, people referred to the act of killing someone not with the name of the act itself, but a motivation which may or may not have been the root cause.
This is sometimes done in the real world, usually by calling murderers one of a few ableist slurs: however, for this thread I’ll be using the more precise phrase “homocidal ideation”
Imagine now that people often speak warily of “homocidal ideationists”
People arrested for killing someone are called “convicted homocidal ideationists” by the news
People arrested for killing someone are called “convicted homocidal ideationists” by the news
Of course, you can’t really know if a murderer has homocidal ideation or not; plenty of murderers have other motivations
but it *is* difficult to argue that a murderer may not have had homicidal ideation even if it’s correct
but it *is* difficult to argue that a murderer may not have had homicidal ideation even if it’s correct
Furthermore; nobody would care if you pointed out that the vast majority of people with homocidal ideation don’t actually kill someone
“We’re claiming that all murderers are homicidal ideationists, not the other way around” they say, before warning everyone of the danger of homocidal ideationists
Then imagine, one day, you confide to a friend that you’ve actually been having violent thoughts
And perhaps your friend betrays your trust in them, or perhaps someone overheard you. However it happens, it gets leaked that *you’re* a homocidal ideationist!
And perhaps your friend betrays your trust in them, or perhaps someone overheard you. However it happens, it gets leaked that *you’re* a homocidal ideationist!
When people first hear that, they immediately take it to mean that you’ve actually killed someone. You try to explain that you haven’t, and while a few accept that explanation, many don’t
“All homicidal ideationists are murderers” they say, “and besides, wanting to murder someone is bad, even if you don’t actually do it!”
You try to explain that that’s not true at all, and in fact having violent thoughts isn’t even the same as actually wanting to commit violence, but none of them are willing to listen
Of course, people with disabilities that cause homicidal ideation are equally shamed
Of course, people with disabilities that cause homicidal ideation are equally shamed
You begin to ponder on why everyone believes this, and you come to a realization: the way people think is molded by the language they use
If you’re like me, you probably think of language as something to put our thoughts into to communicate them
If you’re like me, you probably think of language as something to put our thoughts into to communicate them
Surely then, our thoughts would decide our language, right?
But often times the reverse is true: we actually mold our thoughts to fit into our language.
People have used “homicidal ideation” to be equivalent to “murderer” so often, that it’s changed the way they think
But often times the reverse is true: we actually mold our thoughts to fit into our language.
People have used “homicidal ideation” to be equivalent to “murderer” so often, that it’s changed the way they think
Surely having homocidal ideation must be as bad as being a murderer, because if it wasn’t then we wouldn’t be constantly be complaining of homicidal ideationists, now would we?
This mode of thought only broadens over time. Anyone who thinks about violence *is* violent.
This mode of thought only broadens over time. Anyone who thinks about violence *is* violent.
Even people with violent intrusive thoughts are branded as homicidal ideationists. In fact, some people will even blame violence on *victims* of said violence, because having flashbacks from PTSD is *still* thinking about violence, now isn’t?
And then one day, you see someone claiming that everyone who plays violent video games is a homicidal ideationist
“This is ridiculous!” You think, “they’re just using scary-sounding buzzwords to make it sound like gamers are murderers”
And so you start to argue
“This is ridiculous!” You think, “they’re just using scary-sounding buzzwords to make it sound like gamers are murderers”
And so you start to argue
People present you with a few arguments
Some will tell you that these games “normalize homicidal ideation”
Unfortunately, they refuse to explain what they mean by this or provide any citations
Some will tell you that these games “normalize homicidal ideation”
Unfortunately, they refuse to explain what they mean by this or provide any citations
Additionally, they don’t seem to care at all when you show them the numerous studies proving that video games don’t cause violence in any capacity
Some say “in order to enjoy killing people, you must be a homicidal ideationist”
So you point that you’re *not* killing anyone - these are video game characters, not people!
So you point that you’re *not* killing anyone - these are video game characters, not people!
“Well, they’re still depicting people, so if you want to kill them, then you want to kill people” you’re told
As you argue more and more, something dawns on you: every time you try to draw the conversation to whether video games cause violence or not, these people deflect
As you argue more and more, something dawns on you: every time you try to draw the conversation to whether video games cause violence or not, these people deflect
To them, this isn’t about whether video games cause violence or not - enjoying violent video games is morally equivalent to committing murder
These people even manage to get violent video games and horror films to be legally equivalent to murder in some countries too!
These people even manage to get violent video games and horror films to be legally equivalent to murder in some countries too!
Now that you’re curiosity’s been piqued, you decide to do some research on actual homicidal ideationists, and you find that psychologists have spent decades researching therapeutic methods that would both help homicidal ideationist *and* decrease murder rates!
But for some reason, these aren’t being employed in most of the world. Why not?
Well, since homicidal ideationist are so universally hated, the optics of doing something that helps them are awful, so no political body would ever support it
Well, since homicidal ideationist are so universally hated, the optics of doing something that helps them are awful, so no political body would ever support it
Somehow, we’ve reached a point where the hatred for homicidal ideationists, originally fueled by falsely equivocating them to murderers, has actually prevented us from decreasing murder rates
In fact, stigmatizing homicidal ideation and any vaguely-related mental disabilities, increasing murder rates, censorship of artistic mediums, and blaming survivors of violence for their trauma have all arised from this misplaced hatred, which largely came from a linguistic quirk
And the more you think about it, the more you realize
A) There’s a lot of work to be done to solve all of the problems which this linguistic quirk has caused
B) All of these problems are really the same at their core, and none can be solved without tackling the others
A) There’s a lot of work to be done to solve all of the problems which this linguistic quirk has caused
B) All of these problems are really the same at their core, and none can be solved without tackling the others
Anyways, if you’ve read the thread to this point, I’m sure you realize what this is a thinly-veiled metaphor for, so rather than explaining that, I’m gonna end this thread here
