General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Mass Shooter influenced by the "Men's Rights Movement" [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)There are a whole cadre of people who managed to acquire social skills well before teaching them to people who don't "get it" naturally became a thing. It was a more organic process but just because it was not formalized didn't mean that it did not exist. That's my point, in essence.
Back in the day, it may have been something as simple as a nun rapping a kid on the knuckles and telling 'em "You don't behave like that! Do THIS, not THAT--is that CLEAR?" Now, that's a bit of negative reinforcement but it's reinforcement nonetheless (FWIW I am not an advocate of negative reinforcement so let me make that clear, as well). It might have been a sibling saying "Nooo, sonny--don't do it that way, it will make the teacher mad -- you have to do it this way!!!" and "Sonny, make sure you say this to Granny, but never say THAT--it will hurt her feelings!"
Nowadays, children have FAR fewer siblings and thus they have fewer role models. Today, a family of three kids is "large." A half century ago, that was an average to small family, and a century ago, those kids were like ONLY children! Families of a half dozen kids were par for the course, and "Cheaper by the dozen" wasn't uncommon out on the farms.
Children also had fewer amusements and shorter childhoods back in the day. Today they have lots of amusements and a very long childhood that continues for some into the mid-twenties. They also have more distractions such as television and computers that isolate them.
In the old days children amused themselves and they did it "outside" in groups great and small, by and large. Siblings did not have an option but to care for the younger ones, the parents insisted on it. Nowadays children do not have a sibling or five who will drag them along with the group and show them, by repetition and example, how to behave. They also don't have the protection of an older sibling who will beat the living crap out of anyone who bullies them. Much of socialization used to be simply monkey see, monkey do, and kids who got a teacher who was sharp enough to perceive that this one or that one learned a bit differently was fortunate.
This is not one of those "Oh, the 'old days' were better" posts, but the fact is they weren't necessarily always as awful as some might think. Kids who were socialized, however so inarticulately and clumsily and amateurishly within their peer group, often turned out ok. Odds are they got more hours of "therapy," even if it was less focused and from peer "therapists," than children do today.
In sum, I am not dismissing socialization. I'm just suggesting that there's more than one way to get there. Schools today are so focused on teaching to tests that they sacrifice things like art, gym class, music and recess--all "play" activities where a lot of socialization is learned, not from teachers, so much, as peers.
The larger point, though, is I don't think "being on the spectrum" is what caused this guy to go on a murder rampage. If anything, I'd say his medical noncompliance/failure to stick to his antipsychotic protocol was what lit his fuse.