March 31, 2023 - 9:00am
There has been a great deal of speculation as to the motives of Audrey Hale, who shot dead six people — including three nine-year-old children — at a private Christian school in Nashville, Tennessee. Reporting on the shooting mentions a manifesto that might have revealed Hale, a biological woman who identified as a transgender man, had a motive tied to her gender identity. This has provoked questions as to why we don’t put violent online rhetoric from trans activists under the same scrutiny reserved for online speech from other groups.
One answer to this question, of course, is the cultural and political climate. But there’s a deeper problem here, too. If Hale’s online footprint or manifesto shows a connection to violent online speech, does that necessarily mean she was radicalised into committing an act of violence? It’s not as clear-cut as one might think.
I have long argued that even if some mass shooters mention broader social problems or a specific ideology, it would be wrong to view them like we might other ideologically motivated violence. A school shooting isn’t the same type of violent act as a suicide bombing perpetrated by an Islamist extremist, for example. It’s not that shooters are “radicalised”, it’s that they’re attracted to radical speech because it helps give shape to violent acts that may already be inevitable.
Research from the Violence Project backs this up. The report notes that “hate comes late along the pathway to violence,” cautioning that “so-called ‘motives’ can become labels used to explain away the problem of mass shootings.” The Violence Project found other similarities among mass shootings: most shooters have a history of adverse childhood experiences, and the shootings are often “intended as a final act”. They’re a form of suicide, not an act of terrorism as it’s typically defined.
What complicates this case is that the “violent rhetoric” which may have inspired Hale significantly differs from other types of violent online speech. Whereas white supremacism is taboo and exists only in particular subcultures, violent speech from the trans community has been normalised. Just look under any of J.K. Rowling’s tweets, and there are calls to commit acts of violence against her.
Then there’s the political climate around transgender identity. The topic is stifling: outside of explicitly Right-wing or “dissident” spaces, criticism is often treated as interchangeable with bigotry. Until relatively recently, even trans people weren’t spared from backlash if they, for example, spoke negatively about their own experiences with medical transition, or disagreed with some of the popular lines in transgender activist rhetoric. Detransitioners, too, were and often still are subject to harassment if they’re perceived as being too critical.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI’ve not been following this closely, but it strikes me that if Hale had not been ‘trans’, the fact she is female would be the biggest talking point. As far as I know, she is the first female to have perpetrated a mass shooting in the US in modern times. Such acts are associated with males, often young men. I’m wondering whether there’s a collective desire to hide Hale’s identity under a cloak to avoid confronting this.
I do think that your point is very interesting. I await further Unherd comments & articles. On a point of order: Brenda Ann Spencer, January 1979 Cleveland Elementary in San Diego. The murderer who reportedly said “I don’t like Mondays”.
As you say, it is an interesting point. Really, it’s the reporters you can’t trust because they take simple facts and put a spin on them to sell the story. It is correct to think about what has not been reported as well.
As you say, it is an interesting point. Really, it’s the reporters you can’t trust because they take simple facts and put a spin on them to sell the story. It is correct to think about what has not been reported as well.
Laurie Dann in Illinois ca. 1982 was the first modern school shooter. But, yeah, female is very rare.
Yes, and interesting how the worldwide media, so far, seems perfectly happy to “misgender” her (further enraging the trans community) rather than affirm her choice of gender, when they fall over themselves to call male murderers and rapists “women” on demand. Hypocritical misogynists!
I applaud your quarantining of ‘trans’ inside inverted commas.
My first thought was had she been taking testosterone as part of a transitioning program. Men have had lifetimes to become accustomed to it; these women not so much.
Exactly my thought… comment below
Exactly my thought… comment below
I do think that your point is very interesting. I await further Unherd comments & articles. On a point of order: Brenda Ann Spencer, January 1979 Cleveland Elementary in San Diego. The murderer who reportedly said “I don’t like Mondays”.
Laurie Dann in Illinois ca. 1982 was the first modern school shooter. But, yeah, female is very rare.
Yes, and interesting how the worldwide media, so far, seems perfectly happy to “misgender” her (further enraging the trans community) rather than affirm her choice of gender, when they fall over themselves to call male murderers and rapists “women” on demand. Hypocritical misogynists!
I applaud your quarantining of ‘trans’ inside inverted commas.
My first thought was had she been taking testosterone as part of a transitioning program. Men have had lifetimes to become accustomed to it; these women not so much.
I’ve not been following this closely, but it strikes me that if Hale had not been ‘trans’, the fact she is female would be the biggest talking point. As far as I know, she is the first female to have perpetrated a mass shooting in the US in modern times. Such acts are associated with males, often young men. I’m wondering whether there’s a collective desire to hide Hale’s identity under a cloak to avoid confronting this.
The article highlights that the Violence Project draws attention to the fact that most shooters have a history of Adverse Childhood Experiences but given the statistics provided in the other link quoted below to the effect that 61% experience such ACEs it would perhaps be surprising if most shooters had not experienced ACEs and this is in fact wholly useless as a marker of future shooters or of any significance at all. The question remains why do a tiny proportion of those who experience ACEs that are commonplace go on to become shooters.
“About 61% of adults surveyed across 25 states reported they had experienced at least one type of ACE before age 18, and nearly 1 in 6 reported they had experienced four or more types of ACEs”
In many respects we are still at the stage in which as Shakespeare put it “there is no art to find the minds construction in the face”. We don’t know what tips some over to such random acts of violence. However, there is evidence that well publicised suicides can stimulate a a rash of similar suicides. The perhaps inevitable widespread publicity given to shootings must stimulate some unbalanced individuals to seek to make a similar mark with their troubled lives. Unfortunately in a free society we can’t limit the attention to shootings in the media.
Trans ideology is only one of the hysterical ideologies that stimulate irrational violence in a section of those infected with the ideology. What might be done to lower the number of shootings might be to ensure low level intimidation and violence by ideologues of all stripes are properly punished rather than giving a free pas to those ideologies that garner widespread support among those directing the institutions of law and order. The complacency regarding mostly peaceful protests by “minorities”, eco-enthusiasts and social justice warriors of all sort ultimately engenders a mindset that violence in support of a cause is an admirable thing rather than deeply taboo.
“The question remains why do a tiny proportion of those who experience ACEs that are commonplace go on to become shooters.”
That’s a useful question, Jeremy, and it raises another useful one. Dee argues that school shootings are significantly different from terrorist attacks such as those of ISIS. But do we actually know that terrorists have not had adverse childhood experiences like those of school shooters? I don’t know the answer to that question, but I do think that it’s worth asking despite what is now conventional wisdom among the experts. Consider the terrorists that Dee herself compares with the school shooters. Not every radical Muslim ends up as a terrorist, after all, but those who do might indeed have adverse childhood experiences in common with school shooters.
I am inclined to think that adverse childhood experiences are a bit of a red herring in as far as they seem too common to provide any useful marker to separate the peaceful ideologue from the violent ideologue.
I am inclined to think that adverse childhood experiences are a bit of a red herring in as far as they seem too common to provide any useful marker to separate the peaceful ideologue from the violent ideologue.
It’s not the ideologies or causes that are responsible for the violence. It is that these ideologies and causes attract violent people who want to physically lash out but need a ‘noble’ reason to justify it. What a glorious feeling it must be to them, punching in people’s faces or ruining their reputation all in the name of fighting ‘fa***ism’. In that way they can liken beating up old grannies to fighting n**is at the beaches of Normandy and get to be heroes in their own minds.
I think you are right that the violent ideologues are different from the peaceful ones in valuing the ideology as giving a “legitimate” excuse for their violent impulses. So long as there are people to justify and “explain” let alone glorify such violence rather than shame them such incidents will continue.
Radical Muslims who don’t commit acts of violence still believe in Jihad and are cheer leaders for those that do .
They violent ones who are prepared to die have two great consolations . Firstly they will be heroes to those who have the same ideology . Secondly they believe they will go to paradise and enjoy a more fulsome diet of sexual indulgence than that available to them on earth .
Radical Muslims who don’t commit acts of violence still believe in Jihad and are cheer leaders for those that do .
They violent ones who are prepared to die have two great consolations . Firstly they will be heroes to those who have the same ideology . Secondly they believe they will go to paradise and enjoy a more fulsome diet of sexual indulgence than that available to them on earth .
I think you are right that the violent ideologues are different from the peaceful ones in valuing the ideology as giving a “legitimate” excuse for their violent impulses. So long as there are people to justify and “explain” let alone glorify such violence rather than shame them such incidents will continue.
“The question remains why do a tiny proportion of those who experience ACEs that are commonplace go on to become shooters.”
That’s a useful question, Jeremy, and it raises another useful one. Dee argues that school shootings are significantly different from terrorist attacks such as those of ISIS. But do we actually know that terrorists have not had adverse childhood experiences like those of school shooters? I don’t know the answer to that question, but I do think that it’s worth asking despite what is now conventional wisdom among the experts. Consider the terrorists that Dee herself compares with the school shooters. Not every radical Muslim ends up as a terrorist, after all, but those who do might indeed have adverse childhood experiences in common with school shooters.
It’s not the ideologies or causes that are responsible for the violence. It is that these ideologies and causes attract violent people who want to physically lash out but need a ‘noble’ reason to justify it. What a glorious feeling it must be to them, punching in people’s faces or ruining their reputation all in the name of fighting ‘fa***ism’. In that way they can liken beating up old grannies to fighting n**is at the beaches of Normandy and get to be heroes in their own minds.
The article highlights that the Violence Project draws attention to the fact that most shooters have a history of Adverse Childhood Experiences but given the statistics provided in the other link quoted below to the effect that 61% experience such ACEs it would perhaps be surprising if most shooters had not experienced ACEs and this is in fact wholly useless as a marker of future shooters or of any significance at all. The question remains why do a tiny proportion of those who experience ACEs that are commonplace go on to become shooters.
“About 61% of adults surveyed across 25 states reported they had experienced at least one type of ACE before age 18, and nearly 1 in 6 reported they had experienced four or more types of ACEs”
In many respects we are still at the stage in which as Shakespeare put it “there is no art to find the minds construction in the face”. We don’t know what tips some over to such random acts of violence. However, there is evidence that well publicised suicides can stimulate a a rash of similar suicides. The perhaps inevitable widespread publicity given to shootings must stimulate some unbalanced individuals to seek to make a similar mark with their troubled lives. Unfortunately in a free society we can’t limit the attention to shootings in the media.
Trans ideology is only one of the hysterical ideologies that stimulate irrational violence in a section of those infected with the ideology. What might be done to lower the number of shootings might be to ensure low level intimidation and violence by ideologues of all stripes are properly punished rather than giving a free pas to those ideologies that garner widespread support among those directing the institutions of law and order. The complacency regarding mostly peaceful protests by “minorities”, eco-enthusiasts and social justice warriors of all sort ultimately engenders a mindset that violence in support of a cause is an admirable thing rather than deeply taboo.
We can save a river of ink just by stating the obvious: we crank out sociopathic nuts these days like link sausages. Because they rarely have meaningful conversation with anyone, they tend to go undetected/ignored. Until they go blow up a school on the way to their cop-assisted suicides.
Does that work?
We can save a river of ink just by stating the obvious: we crank out sociopathic nuts these days like link sausages. Because they rarely have meaningful conversation with anyone, they tend to go undetected/ignored. Until they go blow up a school on the way to their cop-assisted suicides.
Does that work?
“If Hale’s online footprint or manifesto shows a connection to violent online speech, does that necessarily mean she was radicalised into committing an act of violence? It’s not as clear-cut as one might think.”
But it would be pretty good evidence of radicalization.
Which is probably why we haven’t seen the material.
“If Hale’s online footprint or manifesto shows a connection to violent online speech, does that necessarily mean she was radicalised into committing an act of violence? It’s not as clear-cut as one might think.”
But it would be pretty good evidence of radicalization.
Which is probably why we haven’t seen the material.
I have yet to hear anyone ask whether she had been given hormone treatment to “transition” and question whether homicidal ideation is listed as a “possible side effect” as it is for many antidepressants and antipsychotics. When kids get pumped full of pharmaceutical drugs rather than get the attention they crave, the outcomes are bleak.
I have yet to hear anyone ask whether she had been given hormone treatment to “transition” and question whether homicidal ideation is listed as a “possible side effect” as it is for many antidepressants and antipsychotics. When kids get pumped full of pharmaceutical drugs rather than get the attention they crave, the outcomes are bleak.
Simple answer to the headline question – no! It was a criminal act, which is not terrorism. In fact treating any criminal act as terrorism raises it up to something it ain’t – it’s just plain illegal and bad and a crime.
Bear in mind that the victims were targeted for their ideology.
Little children?
Little children?
It was 100% Terrorism!
Bear in mind that the victims were targeted for their ideology.
It was 100% Terrorism!
Simple answer to the headline question – no! It was a criminal act, which is not terrorism. In fact treating any criminal act as terrorism raises it up to something it ain’t – it’s just plain illegal and bad and a crime.
Perhaps the most important fact is that by far the majority if not all such mass shootings take place in the US. What is it that is so ‘rotten in the state’ (Shakespeare again) of America?
politics. Politics pervade everything.
Postmodern Liberals, rotten and depraved to the core.
politics. Politics pervade everything.
Postmodern Liberals, rotten and depraved to the core.
Perhaps the most important fact is that by far the majority if not all such mass shootings take place in the US. What is it that is so ‘rotten in the state’ (Shakespeare again) of America?
If only future homicidal sociopaths (FHS’s) wore a sign! If they all had, I dunno, purple hair, as a for instance. Or if their hair turned purple the very first time they thought about mass murder. Or maybe if people at the grocery store, when they scan the homicidal sociopath’s Cheerios, maybe the scanner could trigger an algorithm that would point to the AHS’s pending murder spree.
But none of that is possible.
It’s very much impossible, in fact.
So if you find me, standing in the middle of a massive cornfield, and you ask me, with some amazement and concern: how did you get here? Heck, the answer is simple: my path is as clear as the stomped stalks of corn that stretch all the way to the edge of field. We can mark every step, and see how each step links to the next, and so on. EZPZ, in fact.
But if you then take that stepwise diagram and conclude that THAT is the path to the center of cornfield and that as long as you monitor that specific path, then no one could arrive in the center of the field without your approval??? Well, then, you’ve made a huge error (while simultaneously allowing the filling of the cornfield).
Thus our ex-post-facto analysis of mass murder. Certainly we can find the killer’s notes; we can read her manifesto. We can trace her steps the day before and chart every single one of her social media interactions for the past year. We can interview her parents; analyze ever square inch of her room with a magnifying glass…and all we’ll ever know is that THAT was the path she took to get to the center of the cornfield.
In the end, it tells us nothing.
The problem, perhaps, is that the sociopathic/psychopathic urge to kill innocent strangers (children!!) in cold blood is beyond rational comprehension. Even tracing that cornfield path will only lead us to the point at which we assume, the homicidal leap occurred. Before she sat at the stoplight, that desire did not exist. And then it did. We’ll never know.
And even if, magically, we could know. It would tell us nothing about the cornfield, the next time.
There are clues beforehand in some cases. A history of antisocial or sociopathic behaviors, obsession with violence (violent video games, etc.), and perhaps other personality disorders. Certainly threats whether verbal or written/online. Some of the recent American mass shooters were clearly ticking time bombs that should have triggered “red flag” laws in states with them. But no amount of warnings by school psychologists, teachers, family, or others will be worth it if authorities fail to take them seriously.
There are clues beforehand in some cases. A history of antisocial or sociopathic behaviors, obsession with violence (violent video games, etc.), and perhaps other personality disorders. Certainly threats whether verbal or written/online. Some of the recent American mass shooters were clearly ticking time bombs that should have triggered “red flag” laws in states with them. But no amount of warnings by school psychologists, teachers, family, or others will be worth it if authorities fail to take them seriously.
If only future homicidal sociopaths (FHS’s) wore a sign! If they all had, I dunno, purple hair, as a for instance. Or if their hair turned purple the very first time they thought about mass murder. Or maybe if people at the grocery store, when they scan the homicidal sociopath’s Cheerios, maybe the scanner could trigger an algorithm that would point to the AHS’s pending murder spree.
But none of that is possible.
It’s very much impossible, in fact.
So if you find me, standing in the middle of a massive cornfield, and you ask me, with some amazement and concern: how did you get here? Heck, the answer is simple: my path is as clear as the stomped stalks of corn that stretch all the way to the edge of field. We can mark every step, and see how each step links to the next, and so on. EZPZ, in fact.
But if you then take that stepwise diagram and conclude that THAT is the path to the center of cornfield and that as long as you monitor that specific path, then no one could arrive in the center of the field without your approval??? Well, then, you’ve made a huge error (while simultaneously allowing the filling of the cornfield).
Thus our ex-post-facto analysis of mass murder. Certainly we can find the killer’s notes; we can read her manifesto. We can trace her steps the day before and chart every single one of her social media interactions for the past year. We can interview her parents; analyze ever square inch of her room with a magnifying glass…and all we’ll ever know is that THAT was the path she took to get to the center of the cornfield.
In the end, it tells us nothing.
The problem, perhaps, is that the sociopathic/psychopathic urge to kill innocent strangers (children!!) in cold blood is beyond rational comprehension. Even tracing that cornfield path will only lead us to the point at which we assume, the homicidal leap occurred. Before she sat at the stoplight, that desire did not exist. And then it did. We’ll never know.
And even if, magically, we could know. It would tell us nothing about the cornfield, the next time.
“ It’s not that shooters are “radicalised”, it’s that they’re attracted to radical speech because it helps give shape to violent acts that may already be inevitable. ”
This was a particularly weak point in distinguishing mass shooters from “radicalised” terrorist. I’m quite sure that lots of terrorists are attracted to terrorist organisations because they have extreme violent personalities or to “give shape to violent acts that may be inevitable”(A strange and unsettling turn of phrase).
I also echo the sentiments of others that we need to see the manifesto.
“ It’s not that shooters are “radicalised”, it’s that they’re attracted to radical speech because it helps give shape to violent acts that may already be inevitable. ”
This was a particularly weak point in distinguishing mass shooters from “radicalised” terrorist. I’m quite sure that lots of terrorists are attracted to terrorist organisations because they have extreme violent personalities or to “give shape to violent acts that may be inevitable”(A strange and unsettling turn of phrase).
I also echo the sentiments of others that we need to see the manifesto.
One thing that that every one of these psycho child murderers have in common is a shared addiction to online violent gaming. Investigators haven’t found a hunting tag or even a measly fishing license in their possession, which leads me to conclude that these kids have no passion for the outdoor life, perhaps they lost connection with the real world.
She was 28, not a kid herself.
She clearly hadn’t grown up, though.
She clearly hadn’t grown up, though.
She was 28, not a kid herself.
One thing that that every one of these psycho child murderers have in common is a shared addiction to online violent gaming. Investigators haven’t found a hunting tag or even a measly fishing license in their possession, which leads me to conclude that these kids have no passion for the outdoor life, perhaps they lost connection with the real world.
Moved my comment to right place, but can’t delete this! oops
Moved my comment to right place, but can’t delete this! oops
well written!
well written!
The effects of male hormones on a body and brain not designed for them, ridiculously liberal gun laws, and a hatred of the homophobia of the American Christian Right that prevented her from being an openly and happily lesbian woman and drove her into the arms of ‘trans’ ideology.
None of it justifies shooting people, particularly children, but it seems pretty obvious.
I suspect you may have missed a trick in your rush to ay the blame on the right.
I read an interesting article earlier in the week to the effect that trans/identity material on the internet has captured large numbers of the recent school age generations
Trans ideology, let’s say Transism, is the fashion of the moment. Like all ‘isms’ it will go in and out of fashion.
can’t happen soon enough for the sake of children
can’t happen soon enough for the sake of children
I suspect you may have missed a trick in your rush to ay the blame on the right.
I read an interesting article earlier in the week to the effect that trans/identity material on the internet has captured large numbers of the recent school age generations
Trans ideology, let’s say Transism, is the fashion of the moment. Like all ‘isms’ it will go in and out of fashion.
The effects of male hormones on a body and brain not designed for them, ridiculously liberal gun laws, and a hatred of the homophobia of the American Christian Right that prevented her from being an openly and happily lesbian woman and drove her into the arms of ‘trans’ ideology.
None of it justifies shooting people, particularly children, but it seems pretty obvious.
Would somebody kindly explain to me how /why this gentleman is being so casually misgendered? He declared himself to be male and that’s that. But even the MSM so cruelly just ignore this as if self-declaration were not the end of the matter and as if there is a reality contrary to his declaration. It’s shocking.
“Gentleman”? Using that word for Audrey Hale is wrong on multiple levels.
Ray is being funny. What’s with all the down votes?
That part gave it away. Anyway, I thought it was funny. Up-vote from me.
“Gentleman”? Using that word for Audrey Hale is wrong on multiple levels.
Ray is being funny. What’s with all the down votes?
That part gave it away. Anyway, I thought it was funny. Up-vote from me.
Would somebody kindly explain to me how /why this gentleman is being so casually misgendered? He declared himself to be male and that’s that. But even the MSM so cruelly just ignore this as if self-declaration were not the end of the matter and as if there is a reality contrary to his declaration. It’s shocking.