Venting Labeling someone 'impressionable'.

[Forever Sleep]

I've been watching some of the news clips (in horror,) about the guy who bombed the fertility clinic in California recently.

Obviously, I shouldn't really judge and, can't really know for sure. Still- his Dad described him as 'impressionable'. I think that phrase, along with 'vulnerable' is frequently applied to people who have suicided. Especially if they are young.

I just wonder how much truth there is to that- in general. It's not that I think it's impossible. I think lonely, desperate, angry people can be turned extremist by others.

Obviously, they go out looking for things to make their life make sense. I suspect that some people even think that happens on this site. That innocents are somehow lured in and convinced to end their life. (Not true- of course.)

I don't know. It just annoys me- if I'm honest. I get it- especially if their child ends up committing some attrocity. They don't want to believe their child was capable of that. They'd prefer to believe their mind was poisoned by others.

That even goes for suicide I think- they don't want to believe their loved one made the choice to abandon them to their grief. Obviously, that would be unlikely to be their prime motive but, it's a terrible consequence we accept if we do it.

It kind of does infuriate me though- because it's so belittling for a start. It seems to suggest we are in fact mentally incompetant. That we can't reason or make observations ourselves. That we would be totally unaware that a person with incredibly extreme views, so different from our own- was manipulating us. Really?

I don't know. Again, I guess it's possible. It's certainly possible when it comes to extremism and terrorism. Suicide though? I'm not so sure.

What we can see about this individual though. They seemed very intelligent, sure of their actions. Even borderline capable of manipulating others. Perhaps they were indoctrinated into extremism on some other site but, I don't know. They seemed to have come to their own views and (horrible) choices by themselves it appears to me.

It's definitely important to ascertain why criminals/ terrorists make the choices they do. But to just shove the blame onto others/ the internet I just think is too easy. Why do people go looking for such things in the first place? For a start.

I'm an anti-natalist myself. I hold some nihilistic views- more like absurdist really. But, I abhor cold blooded violence against others. It's just upsetting really because, these sorts of actions likely will be tied to our philosophies to make them seem extremist, violent and crazy when I imagine the vast majority of people are peaceful.

I just find it ironic too. Worse- it's borderline disgusting. For someone who supported anti-natalism- because it represents a reduction in suffering, what has he actually achieved? He's simply inflicted suffering on people and he's made the concepts of anti-natalism and nihilism appear extremist and crazy. I know we ought to show respect for the dead but sorry- not when they are willing to kill and maim in cold blood. Especially when the 'message' they were trying to get across fails absolutely.

It's like- I understand nihilism and even anti-natilism from a philosophical and moral standpoint but, that's all they're likely be in our lifetime. We can't effectively bring about the end of the world! (To end all life simultaneously and peacefully- no one mourns, no one suffers... Not saying I even support the hypothetical version but, I can wrap my head around it at least.) Even anti- natilism is deeply problematic were it to actually be enforced. It's a huge restriction of autonomy. I imagine it would lead to uprisings and mass violence.

All we can hope to do is share our reasoned out perspectives on life and hope that more people come around to this way of thinking. I think a lot are for various reasons. Both personal: They can't afford children. Caring: They worry about their child's future in this world. Environmental: They choose not to bring another consumer/ polluter here.

I don't think this will have done anything to really change people's own opinions though. Only to hate and fear those who hold the same views. That's my feeling. Sorry, had to get it off my chest. I really don't likely thinking about other people suffering.

 

[Apathy79]

You can read through all of his posts on here still. I did earlier. It doesn't reveal as much as I'd hoped. He mentioned being anti-natalist, which I suppose is why he chose this location, but he didn't seem into actually killing people, more exploring his chemicals, dying with them and making sure of it.

I feel like I've been here most days for the last few weeks and somehow missed this until today. Did it go right under the radar or did basically everyone here know about it?

 

[VoidButterfly]

Regarding the ethics question, I find it quite interesting he was so concerned with consent of the unborn and so evidently unconcerned with consent of the born. His attack seems inherently ideologically flawed to me, to target others like that.

With regards to being impressionable, I think it's a bit of a cop out for a couple of reasons but ultimately I do think there's some truth to it. First, I believe that everyone is impressionable, that's just how our species works. You have to be quite dim-witted and uncurious to not be someone who will be influenced by peers and your environment.

At the same time though, I'm not about to be convinced to kill on behalf of some horrific ideology because that's outside of what is morally acceptable to me. No amount of persuasion or environmental factors is going to turn me into a terrorist. I'm impressionable but that's not going to lead to violence. I think that younger people though (and those who mentally develop slower) with worse environments probably are more susceptible to being convinced of terrible things because their identities are less established and they are therefore more able to have their intellectual and ethical development moulded towards harm but fundamentally it is true that they do not believe that not doing harm is as important and that is ultimately a choice they've made even if they didn't have the best shot at coming to another choice.

I'm not sure I'm creating a well formed opinion here. Somewhere between impressionable is definitely a thing, that it'll mean different things to different people at different stages of life, but ultimately it's not a complete abdication of responsibility I think.

 

[Pale_Rider]

He gives a full explanation here; ttps://files.catbox.moe/q9rssx.mp3


I think during the course of your life you will try to make sense of the world by seeing what others have concluded. Especially when we are young, and first going out into the world. So yeah I agree its condescending to call somebody "easily lead'.

 

[Forever Sleep]

You can read through all of his posts on here still. I did earlier. It doesn't reveal as much as I'd hoped. He mentioned being anti-natalist, which I suppose is why he chose this location, but he didn't seem into actually killing people, more exploring his chemicals, dying with them and making sure of it.

I feel like I've been here most days for the last few weeks and somehow missed this until today. Did it go right under the radar or did basically everyone here know about it?

I didn't realise who it was till a post on another thread made it clearer. I'm not sure I interacted with him at all. (Thankfully.)

No, I don't think he alluded to anything criminal here although, looking at posts now, he alluded to something he thought it best not to discuss at the end. Yes, it seemed like he considered a number of methods- as many people do.

I do vaguelly recall a very disturbing thread describing brutal abuse to women- even his would-be daughter. I think that was him. Truthfully- yeah- I read that and returned to it to debate whether it qualified reporting. I think I remember him adding some paragraph about it being work on a fictional story he was working on. Honestly, I try to stay off incel type hate rantings. I think either he must have cancelled it or, maybe someone more sensible/ brave complained or, mods saw it and took it down.

Really though- if that was him and he added that paragraph- as I remember- that's absolutely an awareness of morality and the need to cover up things that you know are wrong.

Yeah, I also found a post that praised anti-natilism because it meant a reduction of harm. I also found it interesting that he had a different stance on nihilism. The press is all over the nihilsm aspect. But he was saying, it wasn't so much that everything was meaningless. It was because pain was very real that nihilism appealed. So- why choose a murder/suicide method aimed to maim and kill? When it clearly won't do a thing to stop people procreating?

Some of what Pluto said in another thread rang a bell but, scanning through his posts, I couldn't find the reference so, maybe he deleted posts here and there. I don't know but, it's horrible really. I think the murder/ suicide method has to be the very worst.

 

[Pale_Rider]

I remember some of his comments, but was in a bad spot myself at the time, and decided to avoid interacting with him. You do see comments like that on the internet from time to time. You don't truly expect that person to go out, and commit an act of terrorism. Call it the "cant happen to me" syndrome.

 

[JesiBel]

I just read about the young man in the news. I won't defend him, I'll just say that the mind works in complicated ways. Such negative emotions can cloud our judgment and lead us to commit an atrocity. Like killing yourself and harming anyone close to you (using an explosive element)
It's a regrettable act, but I can't judge. Many of us still have control over ourselves, but who knows how we would react if we were in the throes of such a mental breakdown, filled with anger or resentment, and had such materials available. Perhaps being influenced by certain beliefs or positions would be even more possible. I don't know, it was his last desperate cry... his last message. Or he may have been brainwashed (sometimes it's easy to manipulate people in more vulnerable states of mind)

 

[Forever Sleep]

Regarding the ethics question, I find it quite interesting he was so concerned with consent of the unborn and so evidently unconcerned with consent of the born. His attack seems inherently ideologically flawed to me, to target others like that.

With regards to being impressionable, I think it's a bit of a cop out for a couple of reasons but ultimately I do think there's some truth to it. First, I believe that everyone is impressionable, that's just how our species works. You have to be quite dim-witted and uncurious to not be someone who will be influenced by peers and your environment.

At the same time though, I'm not about to be convinced to kill on behalf of some horrific ideology because that's outside of what is morally acceptable to me. No amount of persuasion or environmental factors is going to turn me into a terrorist. I'm impressionable but that's not going to lead to violence. I think that younger people though (and those who mentally develop slower) with worse environments probably are more susceptible to being convinced of terrible things because their identities are less established and they are therefore more able to have their intellectual and ethical development moulded towards harm but fundamentally it is true that they do not believe that not doing harm is as important and that is ultimately a choice they've made even if they didn't have the best shot at coming to another choice.

I'm not sure I'm creating a well formed opinion here. Somewhere between impressionable is definitely a thing, that it'll mean different things to different people at different stages of life, but ultimately it's not a complete abdication of responsibility I think.

That's a very fair point. We wouldn't learn at all if we weren't impressionable. We wouldn't follow the etablished rules even. I suppose it's largely our parents, schooling, peers that set in us a sense of morality or depravity I guess. It doesn't always follow that we'll abide or break the morals we were taught though.

Again, though, you can reform your own set of morals throughout life. Mine are in some ways, different to my parents. I suppose being impressionable can come in there. I think as we grow though, we are more influenced by our own emotional takes and experiences. I think we seek out things that align with our own beliefs. I suppose it could be argued those things could become more and more skewed but, I personally believe many people are sensitive to that.

Take this forum for example. I've known of multiple members either leave the forum all together, move over into recovery or, take a break. Why? Because they could sense that the environment wasn't the best for them to be in. Because they were either starting to disagree or maybe just wanted to disagree with the more negative vibe.

I think maybe most people are pretty self aware of how their outside environment affects them. So- maybe I'm saying we are impressionable but, we're aware of being impressionable- if that makes sense? So therefore- it's still our own choice. Either follow the rabbit hole down or, not.

I suppose a dissatisfaction with life often leads to us questioning the status quo. eg. the religion we were possibly taught, eating meat, the expectations placed on us- including natilism, opinions on sex etc. Still, like you say- to be persuaded to kill is a massive leap!

I think terrorists acts are motivated by anger mostly. I suppose feeling angry makes us vulnerable because there must be a need to express it. Maybe not in this case but sometimes, I wonder if people even care about the cause. They just want to be violent.

I guess actually, if you've come from any semblance of morality- and taught that you don't kill, the justification to do so has to become immense. I suppose that's where extremism comes in. What preceeds the other though- the desire to be violent or, the desire to follow a cause, I'm not sure.

 

[Kali_Yuga13]

I don't see a lot of each chambering in SaSu and our membership incudes troubled people of various beliefs and dispositions considered extreme by the public at large . I assume the mods are doing a great job but I also I think it's the community.

In my own sleuthing around the motivations behind some public acts of violence, I'd say Discord is one of the leaders where people get nudged over the edge and take action. I haven't dived into this dude yet but from what I now he sounds like "dark" prison planet or a radical elfist. The whole "consent" thing if he actually used that word in relation to being born is leaned on by specific communities. I'd be interested to find his reddit name and see if that's where is pipeline to terrorism began.

 

[Apathy79]

Listening to that, it's basically a hodge podge of largely naïve memes you hear here, expressed by someone older who he's taken on as his guru (he posted one of his videos on here), and he's tried to find ways to rationalise and convince himself of the truth of it, mostly poorly but pridefully poorly so he wasn't going to entertain alternatives once he'd "worked it out". It ends up mostly an extended angry prideful delusion, concluding that essentially all parents need to die to avoid bringing more people into the world without consent, so bombing his fertility clinic.

Impressionable is a good description of him really. I guess it is an age thing, mixed with a certain predisposition to particular forms of brainwashing. He's found his obscure Youtube mentor who has helped him explain things he felt to some degree already, and then slowly shifted all his beliefs to align with whatever he said.

More generally I think everyone is impressionable to some degree, so it's a scale, and a scale largely determined by age. At birth, everyone is 100% impressionable, and as they get older it slowly gets less and less. It comes up in the context of extreme acts like terrorists/cults, which both partly describe him, but really applies much more broadly.

 

[Pale_Rider]

I don't see a lot of each chambering in SaSu and our membership incudes troubled people of various beliefs and dispositions considered extreme by the public at large . I assume the mods are doing a great job but I also I think it's the community.

In my own sleuthing around the motivations behind some public acts of violence, I'd say Discord is one of the leaders where people get nudged over the edge and take action. I haven't dived into this dude yet but from what I now he sounds like "dark" prison planet or a radical elfist. The whole "consent" thing if he actually used that word in relation to being born is leaned on by specific communities. I'd be interested to find his reddit name and see if that's where is pipeline to terrorism began.

ttps://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/reddit-bans-anti-natalists-palm-springs-explosion-rcna207677

"A Reddit spokesperson confirmed to NBC News that it had banned the r/Efilism subreddit "

I believe he used the same name as here.

 

[Kali_Yuga13]

"A Reddit spokesperson confirmed to NBC News that it had banned the r/Efilism subreddit "

Damn I'm good!

Feds - If you're reading this and interested in my profiling services, I start at 120k per year on a 3 year contract or 1K per diem with a 50K per case retainer with a 4 case per year lock in guarantee. *Rates subject to change based on market demand for my services and inflation.* Hit me up in my DMs.

 

[vitbar]

Personally I think people in general are vulnerable and impressionable like this, it's just the roles most people find themselves in aren't terrible. Behaviours get normalised, good ones and bad ones. The internet, and increasing isolation, has allowed for more specialised groups to form.

There have even been threads on this forum asking members if being on here makes them more likely to attempt. I can see it going either way, but normalisation of suicidal behaviours and related ideologies is as close as I can see to the "encouragement" we get accused of.

 

[alwaysalone]

Maybe impressionable isn't the right word per se. I know for a fact there are lost souls in this world who will do or say almost anything to feel included, special or powerful depending on their personal need. Personally I think when it's a younger person, there parents must have missed some signs. Whether it's was because they didn't want to see them or they truly just missed them I have no doubt the signs were there.