Because of my ocd-tendencies I have to read every Sunday New York Times book review cover-to-cover which means that right now I am reading one from November 2013. In it I found a review of Michael Kimmel’s book “Angry White Men” which sounds very interesting and of course made me think of the recent terrible killings that took place in Isla Vista, CA. This is the sentence from the review I find myself dwelling upon the most:
“But Kimmel also strains a little too hard for a tidy sociological explanation, arguing mightily (and pointlessly) against the idea that these attackers were singularly deranged or psychotic. Like the suicide bombers he compares them to, one can be both uniquely psychologically vulnerable, a total outlier, and yet tuned in to a broader cultural trend.”On the one hand I agree with the statement. On the other hand (and this probably means I should read the book!) the second sentence seems to be an equally “tidy” explanation of what happened and a way of shutting down the conversation that perhaps need to be had regarding these outliers as well as the broader cultural trends. I'm also wondering what role the (social) media plays here in the promotion and/or creation of these trends.