What really separates you from the copycats?

Many have been arrested before it could happen, many have actually done it.
You are quick to judge them, you are quick to ridicule them, but how are you much different? Is it more than just actions that separate you and them?
Of course you tell yourself that you are simply interested in the massacre from a psychological perspective. But this massacre is done, it's been researched to death, there is nothing new to learn about it or to come of it, it's 18 years old for God's sake, and you keep coming back because you are "interested for psychological reasons"?. Give me a break.
You are an admirer, you are a follower, you just haven't slipped through the filtering system to commit mass murder.
So don't look down upon them, be grateful for whatever it is you have in your life that has kept you on this side of the filter.

lol , interesting post. Strangely I somewhat agree. I've always been interested in how serial killers and mass murderers think, what makes them different than me. Serial killers of course for the most part are a way different breed than mass murderers.

Mass murderers I do understand, I think just like them, I just haven't been broken by society. Some people adjust, learn to become cowed by society and what it says you have to be and some never do and it just festers inside of them until one day they break. I haven't broke but I do realize that I'm only doing what I do (work, sleep, eat, work, sleep, eat) because that's what society has told me I am supposed to do, my inner being knows that this isn't true and I'm extremely unhappy with life. Someday I may just leave society and live life as it's supposed to be, or just end it, whichever is most appropriate.

So yeah I can relate quite a bit and I graduated in '96 so Columbine happened when I was younger and still angst filled. I was bullied quite a bit and never really fit in any particular group, was a loner. So yeah I get it. Eric and Dylan lashed out at society and society noticed but did not change. Bullying is still rampant and some aren't equipped to handle it and will retaliate, I don't blame them.

To be honest at the risk of being ostracized or mocked. I think a lot of mass murderers just see the world for what it really is, sure some are a bit off, but their general gist is correct. Elliot Rodger was right in some ways, a lot of women do gravitate to "Jock" type guys or assholes in general, I've seen it all my life, do I hate women, nah, but I see his point of view. Add extreme anxiety and a anti-social disorder and there you go. Dylan and Eric were right, society is brutal, you don't fit into what everyone wants you to be your the bad guy. People suck and most are selfish and will use you until there's nothing left. No one listens, no one listened to Eric and Dylan. All it would take was someone to really talk to them and to get to know them but that's too much work. Their own parents didn't even take the time to know their children, to busy running around doing what society demands of them.

I don't see the world the way most people do, I see it as broken and brutal. That's why this interests me mostly is because they saw the world for what it was too.

But don't worry people, I keep doing my job and keep paying bills and feeding my dogs, little busy bee in the hive of naivety.

Brilliant response; thank you.

This is an interesting post. Especially considering Lanza was on the old forum and now that EGSAndrew guy that was on here (I can't recall his real name).

I can relate as many of their emotional issues also applied and apply to me. Depression, social anxiety, mental instability at times....

nothing. nothing at all. uhh... don't misinterpret that...

It is perfectly possible to have an interest in the Columbine tragedy for reasons that have nothing to do with admiring Errogant and Dyldo. There's the historical perspective and how we got from 1999 to now. There's the eerie haunting effect of the numerous artifacts surrounding the case. There's the interest in why Eric and Dylan snapped and others didn't.

You are partially correct, of course--It is true that I am in no position to fault people for being haunted for the rest of their lives by their own high school bullying, which surely describes lots of the posters here--I myself am still angry about things that happened when I was 11. And the case HAS been researched to death. Posts here have slowed to a trickle for probably precisely that reason. But I *can* look down on what Eryan and Dyl-dyl did, because I never flipped out and decided to blow away people I didn't even know because of my lame redneck dump of a high school. If you don't actually commit a crime, you are better than someone who did.

Lunkhead McGrath wrote:

Errogant and Dyldo

Lunkhead McGrath wrote:

Eryan and Dyl-dyl

Not gonna lie that killed me.

I agree that Columbine is old news and has been researched to the point that there is nothing new, People should focus on more recent and modern problems and events like VT and Newtown which still have questions unanswered.

There's a lot new. Just in the past year, we saw a video of Eric and Dylan moving the bombs into the cafeteria, something the FBI missed for 18 years.

TheyAllFloatDownHere wrote:

I agree that Columbine is old news and has been researched to the point that there is nothing new, People should focus on more recent and modern problems and events like VT and Newtown which still have questions unanswered.

Eh, yeah but sometimes the time period has a lot to do with why someone is interested in a certain event. Like stated above there's an eerie feeling surrounding Columbine that makes it stand out from the others, and I think some of it has to do with the time period it happened in and the fact that mass shootings weren't as common of an occurance as they are today.

Its like someone being interested in the Manson murders - even Older news - and most people interested in it weren't even alive yet when it happened, but that's another case that has an eerie feeling surrounding it and I can understand why it's fascinating to people. There's plenty of older historical cases that people are still interested in even though all the info on them is available (technically VT is old news now having passed the 10 year mark). It doesn't mean they're not also into more current events.

For me Columbine is a weird part of history that I can actually relate to, b/c I was in high school at the time and remember what it was like back then compared to how things are now. Its just a weird, nostalgic interest to me I guess.

Lunkhead Mcgrath wrote:

It is perfectly possible to have an interest in the Columbine tragedy for reasons that have nothing to do with admiring Errogant and Dyldo. There's the historical perspective and how we got from 1999 to now. There's the eerie haunting effect of the numerous artifacts surrounding the case. There's the interest in why Eric and Dylan snapped and others didn't.

You are partially correct, of course--It is true that I am in no position to fault people for being haunted for the rest of their lives by their own high school bullying, which surely describes lots of the posters here--I myself am still angry about things that happened when I was 11. And the case HAS been researched to death. Posts here have slowed to a trickle for probably precisely that reason. But I *can* look down on what Eryan and Dyl-dyl did, because I never flipped out and decided to blow away people I didn't even know because of my lame redneck dump of a high school. If you don't actually commit a crime, you are better than someone who did.

Perfect response and,

Lunkhead Mcgrath wrote:

Errogant

thanks for the laugh dude.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

Eh, yeah but sometimes the time period has a lot to do with why someone is interested in a certain event. Like stated above there's an eerie feeling surrounding Columbine that makes it stand out from the others, and I think some of it has to do with the time period it happened in and the fact that mass shootings weren't as common of an occurance as they are today.

Its like someone being interested in the Manson murders - even Older news - and most people interested in it weren't even alive yet when it happened, but that's another case that has an eerie feeling surrounding it and I can understand why it's fascinating to people. There's plenty of older historical cases that people are still interested in even though all the info on them is available (technically VT is old news now having passed the 10 year mark). It doesn't mean they're not also into more current events.

For me Columbine is a weird part of history that I can actually relate to, b/c I was in high school at the time and remember what it was like back then compared to how things are now. Its just a weird, nostalgic interest to me I guess.

Yeah columbine is the driving force and inspiration for most future massacres as it was the first major attack but as you said about manson most people who follow the "True Crime" and tumblr community tend to overfocus on Manson, ramirez, columbine and a few other serial killers i feel there are so many other killers that havent been discussed or explored such as the Nightime killers,
Dnepropetrovsk maniacs or even the 2 men in china who nearly wiped two towns with grenades and assault rifles who were being hunted by the army during their spree,i feel that people should expand to undiscovered topics but hey if someone wants to research what they want its all up to them.

TheyAllFloatDownHere wrote:

i feel that people should expand to undiscovered topics

Ironic.

sitnwatchitburn wrote:

TheyAllFloatDownHere wrote:

i feel that people should expand to undiscovered topics

Ironic.

Dennis and Katerina are fairly known and in my view they were just two immature kids who shot a shotgun out of a window then shot themselves on stream for attention.

What separates us from the copy cats? Maybe being able to differentiate between fantasy and reality.

Eric & Dylan got caught up in a revenge fantasy and thought they could bring on WWIII or whatever by blowing up a high school. The copy cats just love to romanticize tragedy as most people in general do, I think. Most people just watch movies & read, they don't shoot up their schools or workplaces and think that will somehow make things better.

"Society, society, society"... People who think like Eric and Dylan and haven't evolved psychologically beyond that point only see the fault in others, never themselves. Every unfortunate occurrence, every inconvenience that happens to them is ALWAYS at the foot of someone else's hubris. It can't be because they have an unfriendly disposition or they preemptively judge others without giving them a chance or they're absolutely unwilling to take chances or try new things because of something that happened to them in the 8th grade. It can't be because they're an elitist about their interests and hobbies and can't suffer the plebs who've never heard of KMFDM. It can't be because they yearn for like-minded friends while spending all their waking hours indoors and staring into a screen.

I understand feeling anger when thinking about the slights of the past, and even being so annoyed and disgusted by certain people in your social circles that you wouldn't much care if something horrible happened to them. But what separates some people on the forum with "admirers", "followers" or "copycats" are their perspective. The way I see it, the person who maligns me has their own problems and isn't dealing with them very well, hence their inability to play well with others and be taken seriously. The people who cut me off in traffic or the coworkers who make indirect comments that irritate me won't remember them after a day or two, so why should I?

How does anger enrich me? Does resentment pay my bills? Can self-pity improve my personal life? Is the hatred of hundreds of strangers a good look on a woman halfway to 30 who graduated high school 7 years ago?

Just being real here... after 6 years in production I thoroughly hate my job. I don't like getting up and leaving the house in general. No one likes to pay bills. No one likes cleaning up other people's messes, or dealing with the short comings of others. No one likes to wait in a line or be put on hold or pay a fine. No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

Just my thoughts. Sorry for the small e-book.

dahlia_rose wrote:

Just being real here... after 6 years in production I thoroughly hate my job. I don't like getting up and leaving the house in general. No one likes to pay bills. No one likes cleaning up other people's messes, or dealing with the short comings of others. No one likes to wait in a line or be put on hold or pay a fine. No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

I don't have much to add here, but I am intrigued by your thoughts on society as an abstraction for E&D instead of an actual problem for them based in reality. Made me think.

dahlia_rose wrote:

"Society, society, society"... People who think like Eric and Dylan and haven't evolved psychologically beyond that point only see the fault in others, never themselves. Every unfortunate occurrence, every inconvenience that happens to them is ALWAYS at the foot of someone else's hubris. It can't be because they have an unfriendly disposition or they preemptively judge others without giving them a chance or they're absolutely unwilling to take chances or try new things because of something that happened to them in the 8th grade. It can't be because they're an elitist about their interests and hobbies and can't suffer the plebs who've never heard of KMFDM. It can't be because they yearn for like-minded friends while spending all their waking hours indoors and staring into a screen.

I understand feeling anger when thinking about the slights of the past, and even being so annoyed and disgusted by certain people in your social circles that you wouldn't much care if something horrible happened to them. But what separates some people on the forum with "admirers", "followers" or "copycats" are their perspective. The way I see it, the person who maligns me has their own problems and isn't dealing with them very well, hence their inability to play well with others and be taken seriously. The people who cut me off in traffic or the coworkers who make indirect comments that irritate me won't remember them after a day or two, so why should I?

How does anger enrich me? Does resentment pay my bills? Can self-pity improve my personal life? Is the hatred of hundreds of strangers a good look on a woman halfway to 30 who graduated high school 7 years ago?

Just being real here... after 6 years in production I thoroughly hate my job. I don't like getting up and leaving the house in general. No one likes to pay bills. No one likes cleaning up other people's messes, or dealing with the short comings of others. No one likes to wait in a line or be put on hold or pay a fine. No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

Just my thoughts. Sorry for the small e-book.

Nothing but sheer brilliance.
You have answered my question. Thank you!

[quote="Littlelo"]

dahlia_rose wrote:

No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

This is the part that makes no sense to me. People who disagree with society are at war with themselves? So transgenders disagree with how society treats them so they are at war with themselves... I see... anyone who has fought for change in this "society" they are only warring with themselves and need to accept that segregation is necessary, Women do not need rights because they are inferior. Am I misreading you here?

Acceptance of oneself doesn't stop people from bullying you from demeaning you because your different, sure you can be a pussy and put up with it let the world destroy you. I don't see how that helps anyone. You are under the impression that society can't be changed, I'm sorry you feel like that, must suck. But society has always changed or evolved, there are many events that have forced change.

Only takes one person to change society, in Eric and Dylans case it took two. They changed how police handle shooter situations, they changed how people view safety in general. Rosa Parks should have got up and obeyed because she can't change society, she's only one person, WTF was wrong with Rosa? Damn her.

limpfisch wrote:

You are an admirer, you are a follower, you just haven't slipped through the filtering system to commit mass murder.

I mean, isn't this a bit of a bold statement to make...insinuating that everyone on this forum is a step away from mass murder

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

dahlia_rose wrote:

No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

This is the part that makes no sense to me.  People who disagree with society are at war with themselves?  So transgenders disagree with how society treats them so they are at war with themselves...  I see... anyone who has fought for change in this "society" they are only warring with themselves and need to accept that segregation is necessary, Women do not need rights because they are inferior.  Am I misreading you here?

Acceptance of oneself doesn't stop people from bullying you from demeaning you because your different, sure you can be a pussy and put up with it let the world destroy you.  I don't see how that helps anyone.  You are under the impression that society can't be changed, I'm sorry you feel like that, must suck.  But society has always changed or evolved, there are many events that have forced change.

Only takes one person to change society, in Eric and Dylans case it took two.  They changed how police handle shooter situations, they changed how people view safety in general.  Rosa Parks should have got up and obeyed because she can't change society, she's only one person, WTF was wrong with Rosa?  Damn her.

I don't think the OP is suggesting that society is always right and should never be challenged. I think they are hinting at the daily chores that come with being a member of society that Eric and Dylan were so angry about. Bullying is not something that should be accepted, just as racism and other similar things should not be. But neither of them were up against anything that they could not have handled. They had friends and family who cared about them. They were two weeks from graduating and leaving the school/people that caused them unhappiness. At the time of the massacre they had severely impaired reasoning and views of reality which led them to believe society was at fault and killing people was necessary.

astrospace92 wrote:

limpfisch wrote:

You are an admirer, you are a follower, you just haven't slipped through the filtering system to commit mass murder.

I mean, isn't this a bit of a bold statement to make...insinuating that everyone on this forum is a step away from mass murder

"You guys are just like me! Secretly you also want to murder people!"

Littlelo wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

dahlia_rose wrote:

No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

This is the part that makes no sense to me.  People who disagree with society are at war with themselves?  So transgenders disagree with how society treats them so they are at war with themselves...  I see... anyone who has fought for change in this "society" they are only warring with themselves and need to accept that segregation is necessary, Women do not need rights because they are inferior.  Am I misreading you here?

Acceptance of oneself doesn't stop people from bullying you from demeaning you because your different, sure you can be a pussy and put up with it let the world destroy you.  I don't see how that helps anyone.  You are under the impression that society can't be changed, I'm sorry you feel like that, must suck.  But society has always changed or evolved, there are many events that have forced change.

Only takes one person to change society, in Eric and Dylans case it took two.  They changed how police handle shooter situations, they changed how people view safety in general.  Rosa Parks should have got up and obeyed because she can't change society, she's only one person, WTF was wrong with Rosa?  Damn her.

I don't think the OP is suggesting that society is always right and should never be challenged. I think they are hinting at the daily chores that come with being a member of society that Eric and Dylan were so angry about. Bullying is not something that should be accepted, just as racism and other similar things should not be. But neither of them were up against anything that they could not have handled. They had friends and family who cared about them. They were two weeks from graduating and leaving the school/people that caused them unhappiness. At the time of the massacre they had severely impaired reasoning and views of reality which led them to believe society was at fault and killing people was necessary.

I like this. This is all very true. Eric and Dylan really did not experience anything that was out of the ordinary. They were pretty darn well average. Teenagers get in trouble, they can feel alienated and ugly, they can be depressed etc. In a month their lives would have changed significantly. But instead of holding out for a better future the two of them crumbled under the pressure of their own lives.

Some people don't see monotony as a future.

Also graduating doesn't necessarily equate happiness in E&D's case, that was a possibility but going from wanting to commit suicide for years to being happy cause you graduated would not solve the problems Dylan would encounter in College, which would have been much worse for him than High School.. All graduating does is change this into a college shooting.

silentprocess wrote:

Some people don't see monotony as a future.  

Also graduating doesn't necessarily equate happiness in E&D's case, that was a possibility but going from wanting to commit suicide for years to being happy cause you graduated would not solve the problems Dylan would encounter in College, which would have been much worse for him than High School..  All graduating does is change this into a college shooting.

I agree that Dylan's depression would not have ended at graduation. I would like to think that moving to college, starting over in a new town, having freedom, and being away from Eric may have helped his mental state. But as Sue describes (in her book) how she perceived his mental illness to be at the time, he was not thinking or acting logically. So you could be right, but we will never really know.

Littlelo wrote:

I agree that Dylan's depression would not have ended at graduation. I would like to think that moving to college, starting over in a new town, having freedom, and being away from Eric may have helped his mental state. But as Sue describes (in her book) how she perceived his mental illness to be at the time, he was not thinking or acting logically. So you could be right, but we will never really know.

True that! I should amend what I said actually, I think Dylan would have eventually committed suicide regardless. I think Eric would have ended up dead or in prison regardless. I just personally think these two were ill-fated regardless of what happened. Some people are just doomed from the beginning.

Just my thoughts though, who knows. Where can I look for these alternate futures? I think I need an Infinity Stone, BRB gonna look for Thanos.

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

I agree that Dylan's depression would not have ended at graduation. I would like to think that moving to college, starting over in a new town, having freedom, and being away from Eric may have helped his mental state. But as Sue describes (in her book) how she perceived his mental illness to be at the time, he was not thinking or acting logically. So you could be right, but we will never really know.

True that!  I should amend what I said actually, I think Dylan would have eventually committed suicide regardless.  I think Eric would have ended up dead or in prison regardless.  I just personally think these two were ill-fated regardless of what happened.  Some people are just doomed from the beginning.  

Just my thoughts though, who knows.  Where can I look for these alternate futures?  I think I need an Infinity Stone, BRB gonna look for Thanos.

Follow-up question: do you think if Sue and Tom found evidence early on (1997-1998) that Dylan was depressed, they would have suggested he try medication? If so, would counseling and medication have worked for him? We know not all teens who are suicidal are lost causes...could he have been helped?

Littlelo wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

I agree that Dylan's depression would not have ended at graduation. I would like to think that moving to college, starting over in a new town, having freedom, and being away from Eric may have helped his mental state. But as Sue describes (in her book) how she perceived his mental illness to be at the time, he was not thinking or acting logically. So you could be right, but we will never really know.

True that!  I should amend what I said actually, I think Dylan would have eventually committed suicide regardless.  I think Eric would have ended up dead or in prison regardless.  I just personally think these two were ill-fated regardless of what happened.  Some people are just doomed from the beginning.  

Just my thoughts though, who knows.  Where can I look for these alternate futures?  I think I need an Infinity Stone, BRB gonna look for Thanos.

Follow-up question: do you think if Sue and Tom found evidence early on (1997-1998) that Dylan was depressed, they would have suggested he try medication? If so, would counseling and medication have worked for him? We know not all teens who are suicidal are lost causes...could he have been helped?

I know this wasn't to me....but my opinion is that he could have been helped. I think he was scared to ask for help. He had tried St Johns wort on his own. I think if they could have found the right meds or therapy he could have been helped. A change of scenery could have helped too.

Lizpuff wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

I agree that Dylan's depression would not have ended at graduation. I would like to think that moving to college, starting over in a new town, having freedom, and being away from Eric may have helped his mental state. But as Sue describes (in her book) how she perceived his mental illness to be at the time, he was not thinking or acting logically. So you could be right, but we will never really know.

True that!  I should amend what I said actually, I think Dylan would have eventually committed suicide regardless.  I think Eric would have ended up dead or in prison regardless.  I just personally think these two were ill-fated regardless of what happened.  Some people are just doomed from the beginning.  

Just my thoughts though, who knows.  Where can I look for these alternate futures?  I think I need an Infinity Stone, BRB gonna look for Thanos.

Follow-up question: do you think if Sue and Tom found evidence early on (1997-1998) that Dylan was depressed, they would have suggested he try medication? If so, would counseling and medication have worked for him? We know not all teens who are suicidal are lost causes...could he have been helped?

I know this wasn't to me....but my opinion is that he could have been helped.  I think he was scared to ask for help.  He had tried St Johns wort on his own.  I think if they could have found the right meds or therapy he could have been helped.  A change of scenery could have helped too.  

I was thinking about the St. John's wort as well. Not only does it show that Dylan was willing to try natural remedies for his depression, but had Sue noticed it in his medicine cabinet, it could have started a dialogue between Dylan and his parents regarding his mental health. I don't believe Sue would have seen that and just let it go.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] It's possible. I don't think it's likely though, that's just because I've been on medication since I was 16 in '94 and the medication made me much worse. On top of that the doctors keep switching me to different drugs every few months.. I won't go over the side effects, but I'm very lucky I survived being medicated.

Eric was on medication, did that make him worse, better? My trust for anything that messes with your mind is non-existent, lol. I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

I would say Dylan could have become more manic, could have become a little more evened out. But I don't think he would have survived.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] It's possible.  I don't think it's likely though, that's just because I've been on medication since I was 16 in '94 and the medication made me much worse.  On top of that the doctors keep switching me to different drugs every few months..  I won't go over the side effects, but I'm very lucky I survived being medicated.  

Eric was on medication, did that make him worse, better?  My trust for anything that messes with your mind is non-existent, lol.   I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

I would say Dylan could have become more manic, could have become a little more evened out.  But I don't think he would have survived.

I think it differs on a person to person and med to med basis. Eric for example tried a few different meds and it seemed they didnt work for him. He was also in therapy and although we dont have the records for that it seemed it didn't do anything to help him. If it was anything like diversion he probably lied his way thru it.

But for me, therapy and meds have worked wonders. I did try a few that did not work at all but the last med I was on worked extremely well. I have anxiety and severe depression. I also find therapy helps but I do need to make sure i am completely honest.

I go both ways thinking about Dylan. Parts of me think he could have been changed and other times I wonder if he would have gotten depressed even further. No way of knowing now but it does make me wonder

I agree with you on Dylan being capable of going both ways. Some people hide depression/anger/anxiety out of shame and (I believe) what society expects of you. Many, many people have anxiety, depression and other issues but we are expected to fit into society.

It's possible once Eric or Dylan was exposed for anger/depression they could have gotten worse. It's possible they would have internalized it more, which would have made it worse. Teens are a fickle thing. I was forced to go to counseling and other things, I lied my ass off so I would seem normal and not have to go anymore. When you learn that young it's super hard to turn that off, to open up. Especially when there is still a stigma around psychological problems.

silentprocess wrote:

I agree with you on Dylan being capable of going both ways.  Some people hide depression/anger/anxiety out of shame and (I believe) what society expects of you.  Many, many people have anxiety, depression and other issues but we are expected to fit into society.  

It's possible once Eric or Dylan was exposed for anger/depression they could have gotten worse.  It's possible they would have internalized it more, which would have made it worse.  Teens are a fickle thing.  I was forced to go to counseling and other things, I lied my ass off so I would seem normal and not have to go anymore.  When you learn that young it's super hard to turn that off, to open up.  Especially when there is still a stigma around psychological problems.

Thanks for sharing your personal experience; it helps me put things into perspective when trying to relate to them/put myself in their shoes. It also shows me that when I am trying to draw conclusions about alternate outcomes for Dylan, it's almost impossible. This was much deeper than teen angst.

silentprocess wrote:

Littlelo wrote:

dahlia_rose wrote:

No one likes being used or lied to. But when you really sit down and think about it, and I mean REALLY think about it - anyone who's always complaining about "society" is really at war with themselves. The acceptance of things one can't change comes only with the acceptance of the self. Neurotic individuals like Eric and Dylan couldn't cope with life's menial challenges because ultimately their problem was with themselves. "Society" is an abstraction, something that distanced E & D and those like them from how they really felt about themselves. Introspection and self-improvement were too painful for them, or just too tedious. The only vessel you have absolute control over is yourself. The world was never yours.

This is the part that makes no sense to me.  People who disagree with society are at war with themselves?  So transgenders disagree with how society treats them so they are at war with themselves...  I see... anyone who has fought for change in this "society" they are only warring with themselves and need to accept that segregation is necessary, Women do not need rights because they are inferior.  Am I misreading you here?

Acceptance of oneself doesn't stop people from bullying you from demeaning you because your different, sure you can be a pussy and put up with it let the world destroy you.  I don't see how that helps anyone.  You are under the impression that society can't be changed, I'm sorry you feel like that, must suck.  But society has always changed or evolved, there are many events that have forced change.

Only takes one person to change society, in Eric and Dylans case it took two.  They changed how police handle shooter situations, they changed how people view safety in general.  Rosa Parks should have got up and obeyed because she can't change society, she's only one person, WTF was wrong with Rosa?  Damn her.

Well, here comes my next bestseller...

This e-book is entitled "Yes, you misread me... a lot". I never said that people who disagree with the way society works are at war with themselves. I disagree with a lot of things about society. In my post I said that I hate my job after being there for 6 years. I also said I don't like having to get out and leave the house often (I'm very introverted). I did say that the INABILITY to deal with problems like resentment, annoyance with certain individuals, ect. is a reflection of one's own perception of themselves.

For example, Eric once grew angry at a girl who mistook KMFDM for a radio station. That tells me two things about Eric. One, that he was poorly socialized and two, that he couldn't accept a benign mistake because to him, no mistake was benign. All of HIS mistakes were unacceptable to him because they made him feel weak. Because he couldn't forgive his own mistakes, he lashed out at others for theirs. This kind of behavior alienated him from a large part of his peer group. He would later write that one of his major problems was "the fact that I have no self-esteem". Can't hold others in any esteem if you don't esteem yourself. Basic psychology.

I still stand by my belief that the use of "society" as a crutch of victimhood is an abstraction. What I mean by this is, firstly, YOU are a part of society. I am a part of society. We ARE ALL what makes society what it is. Society wouldn't exist without a group of people operating under it willingly, and you are also under this umbrella. Accepting what you cannot change - such as the fact that we live in an industrial, capitalist system that necessitates employment to keep a roof over our heads as an example - comes with the acceptance of yourself and the awareness that comes with that acceptance. What I meant by accepting yourself is the ability to distinguish the external world from the internal world that you inhabit and realize they are not the same. It means recognizing your own shortcomings and how that affects your life. It means recognizing the shortcomings of others and yourself only matter as much as you MAKE it matter. As I said before, the guy that cuts me off in traffic or the person who says something insensitive to me only has power over me if I give it to them. I am in control of how I feel. I control how I respond to unfavorable situations. I'm not a victim.

If Eric and Dylan accepted themselves, they would have cast off their notions of victimhood because they would've known that it was just an excuse to lash out at others for their own failings. But they didn't do that, because victimhood relieved them of personal responsibility. It's beyond easy to point the finger. It's painful to look in the mirror and acknowledge that you made CHOICES, and those choices had consequences. No one forced Eric and Dylan to break into that van. No one forced Eric and Dylan into their eventual suicide pact. They chose these things willingly. As Lizpuff said, they were weeks from graduation. They would never have to see those people again. Life would only be monotonous if they CHOSE monotony.

And I don't wanna open up a can of worms here, but you're the one that brought up transgenders, women and minorities so I'm going to address that as well. You just went full SJW. You never go full SJW.

Firstly, transgenders only account for 0.3% of the population. The media is treating transgenders like the last frontier of civil rights as if they're everyone's next door neighbor. Transgenders suffer from a very rare mental illness called gender dysphoria. Highly reputable medical studies have shown that the rate of suicidality among transgenders actually INCREASES after surgery. This isn't because of "suhsyuhteh", but because they have a MENTAL ILLNESS and they perceive themselves to be something they will never physiologically be - the opposite sex. This causes significant emotional and psychological distress that surgery cannot reliably relieve. However, there are transgenders that are living life to the fullest, either pre-op or post-op. If you want the links, I have the links.

I also never said that society can never change. I'm simply a realist and I know there are many things that I cannot single handedly dismantle in my lifetime for my own comfort.

We don't live in a segregated society. Why is something that ended over 50 years ago still something we need to rally against and tweet endlessly about our unity and solidarity? I never said women are inferior, either. There are NO laws today that keep women in the kitchen or blacks in their own restaurants, bathrooms or drinking fountains. You're fighting battles that were won over half a century ago.

It's also pretty fallacious to equate the societal impact of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat to a school massacre perpetrated by (ironically) two racist, "cis white males". You're defending a dead murderer who said "Bitch, make me a sandwich!" and "Blacks ARE different" and gays "ain't human". The cognitive dissonance is pretty astounding.

Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to thank [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for their responses to my post! You're very kind.

silentprocess wrote:

I agree with you on Dylan being capable of going both ways.  Some people hide depression/anger/anxiety out of shame and (I believe) what society expects of you.  Many, many people have anxiety, depression and other issues but we are expected to fit into society.  

It's possible once Eric or Dylan was exposed for anger/depression they could have gotten worse.  It's possible they would have internalized it more, which would have made it worse.  Teens are a fickle thing.  I was forced to go to counseling and other things, I lied my ass off so I would seem normal and not have to go anymore.  When you learn that young it's super hard to turn that off, to open up.  Especially when there is still a stigma around psychological problems.

I think Eric was one of those like you. I think being forced into therapy made him worse off. I don't think he was on the right meds and I think pushing him to take the meds and therapy was the worst thing they could have done for him. Eric was not in the right headspace for help imo. I don't think he was mature enough really. He was self internalizing and although he talked about wanting a better life he didn't want to admit that he was part of the reason (or most of the reason) he wasn't "normal" and he constantly degraded himself.

I do think Dylan was a very angry person as well. Which is why I wonder about him. I think back to my college experience away from home for the first time. I got severely depressed and thought of suicide for the first time. I was lonely in a place I had no one..... If Dylan was anything like that, things would have been way way worse for him. Away from Eric I doubt he would harm anyone, but I think in that case he would commit suicide for sure.
But on the other hand, for some a change of scenery helps. The warm weather, the sun, a new set of potential friends.... things could have gotten better. He had never really been away from Littleton and that group of people and ignoring the fact that his parents loved him, he sure thought they didn't care about him so perhaps being apart from them wouldn't have been a bad thing. That is just where my mind continues to wonder how he would have done away from Columbine

dahlia_rose wrote:

Well, here comes my next bestseller...

This e-book is entitled "Yes, you misread me... a lot". I never said that people who disagree with the way society works are at war with themselves. I disagree with a lot of things about society. In my post I said that I hate my job after being there for 6 years. I also said I don't like having to get out and leave the house often (I'm very introverted). I did say that the INABILITY to deal with problems like resentment, annoyance with certain individuals, ect. is a reflection of one's own perception of themselves.

For example, Eric once grew angry at a girl who mistook KMFDM for a radio station. That tells me two things about Eric. One, that he was poorly socialized and two, that he couldn't accept a benign mistake because to him, no mistake was benign. All of HIS mistakes were unacceptable to him because they made him feel weak. Because he couldn't forgive his own mistakes, he lashed out at others for theirs. This kind of behavior alienated him from a large part of his peer group. He would later write that one of his major problems was "the fact that I have no self-esteem". Can't hold others in any esteem if you don't esteem yourself. Basic psychology.

I still stand by my belief that the use of "society" as a crutch of victimhood is an abstraction. What I mean by this is, firstly, YOU are a part of society. I am a part of society. We ARE ALL what makes society what it is. Society wouldn't exist without a group of people operating under it willingly, and you are also under this umbrella. Accepting what you cannot change - such as the fact that we live in an industrial, capitalist system that necessitates employment to keep a roof over our heads as an example - comes with the acceptance of yourself and the awareness that comes with that acceptance. What I meant by accepting yourself is the ability to distinguish the external world from the internal world that you inhabit and realize they are not the same. It means recognizing your own shortcomings and how that affects your life. It means recognizing the shortcomings of others and yourself only matter as much as you MAKE it matter. As I said before, the guy that cuts me off in traffic or the person who says something insensitive to me only has power over me if I give it to them. I am in control of how I feel. I control how I respond to unfavorable situations. I'm not a victim.

If Eric and Dylan accepted themselves, they would have cast off their notions of victimhood because they would've known that it was just an excuse to lash out at others for their own failings. But they didn't do that, because victimhood relieved them of personal responsibility. It's beyond easy to point the finger. It's painful to look in the mirror and acknowledge that you made CHOICES, and those choices had consequences. No one forced Eric and Dylan to break into that van. No one forced Eric and Dylan into their eventual suicide pact. They chose these things willingly. As Lizpuff said, they were weeks from graduation. They would never have to see those people again. Life would only be monotonous if they CHOSE monotony.

And I don't wanna open up a can of worms here, but you're the one that brought up transgenders, women and minorities so I'm going to address that as well. You just went full SJW. You never go full SJW.

Firstly, transgenders only account for 0.3% of the population. The media is treating transgenders like the last frontier of civil rights as if they're everyone's next door neighbor. Transgenders suffer from a very rare mental illness called gender dysphoria. Highly reputable medical studies have shown that the rate of suicidality among transgenders actually INCREASES after surgery. This isn't because of "suhsyuhteh", but because they have a MENTAL ILLNESS and they perceive themselves to be something they will never physiologically be - the opposite sex. This causes significant emotional and psychological distress that surgery cannot reliably relieve. However, there are transgenders that are living life to the fullest, either pre-op or post-op. If you want the links, I have the links.

I also never said that society can never change. I'm simply a realist and I know there are many things that I cannot single handedly dismantle in my lifetime for my own comfort.

We don't live in a segregated society. Why is something that ended over 50 years ago still something we need to rally against and tweet endlessly about our unity and solidarity? I never said women are inferior, either. There are NO laws today that keep women in the kitchen or blacks in their own restaurants, bathrooms or drinking fountains. You're fighting battles that were won over half a century ago.

It's also pretty fallacious to equate the societal impact of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat to a school massacre perpetrated by (ironically) two racist, "cis white males". You're defending a dead murderer who said "Bitch, make me a sandwich!" and "Blacks ARE different" and gays "ain't human". The cognitive dissonance is pretty astounding.

Crazy stuff. Eric was offended easily by others because he was a narcissist, the root of narcissism is low self-esteem so I think we agree there.

The "society" thing, I'm not a part of society, there are many who are not. Whether you consider them a part of a "sub-society" or general outcasts, whatever. I don't perpetuate the lies society sows, I don't believe in much that society believes. Regardless of how you feel about society we are all victims of it even if we operate outside of it.

Dylan and Eric would have been just fine if they accepted themselves? How the heck do you know this? How do you know if they hadn't accepted themselves, Dylan accepted he wanted to die and he has the freedom to make that choice. Victimhood relieves personal responsibility in some cases, that's true. You claim there's no perpetrator, but isn't that in the eye of the beholder? I don't believe the vehicle break-in was the catalyst, it was brewing before that, so claiming that CHOICE and their reluctance to deal with it led to their eventual actions is not based in sound logic. From evidence you can only assume that is the case and only because Dylan stated something in regards to it.

In regards to the SJW bullshit, you claimed individuals could not change society and there are individuals that have. Your like a CNN talking head. Just because mass murder and "social justice" are different doesn't mean that they don't both change your society. The transgender thing was a point, not a stance, you misread as well. Glad you got the transgender thing all figured out though, all homosexual people = MENTALLY ILL, Got it.

It's perfectly reasonable to reference one societal change to another, regardless of origin. What does someones' belief about race have to do with societal changes? Nothing. You used the wrong term in regards to the comparison also it's not fallacious to compare two things that changed society regardless of impact one may have had over the other.

Eric and Dylan were just kids throwing around insults, look at Eric's friends in Michigan to see he was never racist. He was angry so he attacked everything not just other races. I knew teenagers who had friends of other races and they acted the same way, when they weren't around their friends they would use derogatory language about races. They weren't racist, they were doing what people are taught to do, change behavior to fit in.

You assume much about people, no clue what your cissing about, or how that matters. I defend free speech so your correct I do support dead murderers who said "Bitch, make me a sandwich!" and "Blacks ARE different" and gays "ain't human". I don't have to agree with people to believe they have a right to say such things. And honestly that bitch should have just made them a sandwich.

You missed a lot of points because you read what I type through the lens of your experiences, which are not my experiences. I may have also misread yours because of how I see things. That's ok because were different.

silentprocess wrote:

Crazy stuff.  Eric was offended easily by others because he was a narcissist, the root of narcissism is low self-esteem so I think we agree there.

The "society" thing, I'm not a part of society, there are many who are not.  Whether you consider them a part of a "sub-society" or general outcasts, whatever.  I don't perpetuate the lies society sows, I don't believe in much that society believes.  Regardless of how you feel about society we are all victims of it even if we operate outside of it.  

Dylan and Eric would have been just fine if they accepted themselves?  How the heck do you know this?  How do you know if they hadn't accepted themselves, Dylan accepted he wanted to die and he has the freedom to make that choice.  Victimhood relieves personal responsibility in some cases, that's true.  You claim there's no perpetrator, but isn't that in the eye of the beholder?  I don't believe the vehicle break-in was the catalyst, it was brewing before that, so claiming that CHOICE and their reluctance to deal with it led to their eventual actions is not based in sound logic.  From evidence you can only assume that is the case and only because Dylan stated something in regards to it.  

In regards to the SJW bullshit, you claimed individuals could not change society and there are individuals that have.  Your like a CNN talking head.  Just because mass murder and "social justice" are different doesn't mean that they don't both change your society.  The transgender thing was a point, not a stance, you misread as well.  Glad you got the transgender thing all figured out though, all homosexual people = MENTALLY ILL, Got it.

It's perfectly reasonable to reference one societal change to another, regardless of origin.  What does someones' belief about race have to do with societal changes?  Nothing. You used the wrong term in regards to the comparison also it's not fallacious to compare two things that changed society regardless of impact one may have had over the other.

Eric and Dylan were just kids throwing around insults, look at Eric's friends in Michigan to see he was never racist.  He was angry so he attacked everything not just other races.  I knew teenagers who had friends of other races and they acted the same way, when they weren't around their friends they would use derogatory language about races.  They weren't racist, they were doing what people are taught to do, change behavior to fit in.

You assume much about people, no clue what your cissing about, or how that matters.  I defend free speech so your correct I do support dead murderers who said "Bitch, make me a sandwich!" and "Blacks ARE different" and gays "ain't human".  I don't have to agree with people to believe they have a right to say such things.  And honestly that bitch should have just made them a sandwich.

You missed a lot of points because you read what I type through the lens of your experiences, which are not my experiences. I may have also misread yours because of how I see things. That's ok because were different.

At least we agree that we disagree. I bear you no ill will, but I wouldn't be me if I didn't freely express my thoughts.

In my view, if you live in a house, drive a car, or have a job, you are part of society. If you go grocery shopping, have a checking account, use technology, sleep in a bed, use indoor plumbing and interact with other human beings in a neighborhood, you are in society and therefore part of it. Society isn't a monolithic entity that operates in complete agreement with itself. It is comprised of individuals of different ethnic backgrounds, upbringings, aims and motivations. Unless you're living on an island or some remote area on a completely self-sufficient lifestyle like Tom Hanks in Castaway, you are a part of society. You don't have to believe what everyone else believes or act in accordance with someone else's lifestyle to live like everyone else does - surrounded by buildings, homes, churches, schools and whatnot.

If you don't believe that a victim mentality holds someone back from moving forward with their lives and experiencing true self-awareness, that's fine. I've already stated all I felt was relevant on the matter. I can't force you to see things the way I do.

Though I still think you're trying to put words in my mouth and insinuate that I am some sort of bigot like in your first post. You don't seem to grasp the idea that MOST individuals must accept things they cannot change. The average person isn't Rosa Parks - the average person works at a job they hate and has a dysfunctional family or romantic life in addition to their own internal issues, which are all things they must learn to grapple with in a healthy way if they're to enjoy life within reason. An important aspect of not feeling like shit all the time is accepting things that are simply too deeply rooted to change - like human nature. Please, if you have any suggestions on how to overthrow the modern, industrialized system we live in and usher in a new paradise that will end human conflict for all time, I'm all ears. Until then, we have to deal with assholes that gyp you in line, fees, taxes, autocorrect and Justin Bieber.

For the record, transgenders can be any sexual orientation, including heterosexual. I said that the condition they suffer from, which is gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder, NOT homosexuality, is a mental illness. I don't care about being politically correct if it erodes my ability to speak the truth. Points, stances, statements, what have you - they're all synonyms for the word 'viewpoint'. That's all I'll say on that since it's not the focal point of the discussion nor the topic of the thread. We both want to talk about Eric and Dylan.

I didn't state at any time that Eric and Dylan were never wronged by their peers, but that it's a far cry from anything approaching an excuse for what they did. You also don't seem to want to face the facts when it comes to their prejudice, either. So Eric and Dylan singling out a black kid in the library and saying things like "There's a nigger over here" and "Look at that nigger's brains!" was just two guys having a good ol' laugh and exchanging insults to "fit in"? Who the hell were they trying to fit in with? There's no way you could possibly excuse that. They LITERALLY shot a black kid and called him a nigger before he died. They LAUGHED at him as he died. But that's fine. No racism here. SUHSYUHTEE strikes again! Please just call it what it is.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for the response.  I do agree with you that many if not most people are just cogs in the wheel of society.  I don't claim to be a part of that, but that's because how I view what is required of a person to be a participant in society differently than you.

I'm not saying your a bigot, some of my commentary was simply being snarky, which I know is hard to distinguish in text from someone you don't converse with regularly.  You are right that the average person isn't Rosa Parks but Rosa Parks was the average person.  It takes the right situation and the right timing to make a significant change in society.  I believe that's what happened with Columbine, it changed how mass shootings were covered by the media, it changed peoples perspective on people who do such things (everyone is compared to Columbine when a school shooting happens) and it forever and fundamentally changed how police operate.  I'm sure there's other things I'm missing at the moment.

I think that modern civilization is at a point where it will condemn itself, but if someone wanted to hurry it up it is very possible and easily done with a small group of people and some technical knowledge.  I'm no Timothy McVeigh...   Or...  Am I? ;)

Yeah the transgender shit was just me trying to prove a point, it didn't work as expected but I was attempting to show how a very small population can cause trouble for everyone everywhere, kinda like how mass shooters can do anything anywhere and cause chaos.  They both change how people act and react and there is societal awareness of these factors.  But yeah I know a lot would call that a stretch and I'm perfectly fine being done with it lol.

Just cause someone calls someone a nigger and shoots them doesn't mean they are racist to me.  I come from a very small town in the Midwest.  There were no other races but whites, it was common to say nigger there.  We didn't mean it in a racist tone, it was handed down from my grandparents mostly.  That's just what they were to us, but it wasn't malice, it was ignorance.  I'm not claiming they were ignorant, but I'm just trying to say that just because you say nigger doesn't mean you are attempting to demean someone, the definition of nigger is highly tied to your upbringing and surroundings in my opinion.  

Personally I think they saw someone different than them and focused on that individual.  Children tend to do that quite a bit.  Doesn't matter what it's for, all that matters is that they are different from them.  I think Eric and Dylan saw Isaiah and said "hey there's someone different" and decided to focus on them, it's not like they weren't taunting and mocking and insulting everyone else they killed.  What's the best way to taunt or insult a black person?  Nigger.  

Isaiah (sp?) just happened to be in the library while being black.

That's just how I view it, I know they uttered racist things in their rants, tapes and writings.  They even disparaged Jews when Dylan was of that persuasion.  Kids don't make sense, especially when they are angry, they lash out.  What is your opinion of this?

Edit: Corrections in grammar/spelling

I agree with what you said in regards to racism [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

While Eric especially had racist and sexist slurs in his writing and even sometimes daily speech I don't believe that was really what he believed. I think he was angry at society as a whole. That includes women and non Whites. I think a ton of it was for show.
As for Isaiah, I agree that most likely they were trying to scare everyone. To seem big and tough. What is the best way to do that? To use a word that most will never even think to utter. A word that most kids will never use an adult word if you will.

They wanted to torture and scare Isaiah before they killed him and they sure did it. If you read the 11k there was more than 1 black boy in the library that day. Either they didn't see the other or maybe they didn't care but in any case they said nothing to the other boy.

silentprocess wrote:

Just cause someone calls someone a nigger and shoots them doesn't mean they are racist to me.  I come from a very small town in the Midwest.  There were no other races but whites, it was common to say nigger there.  We didn't mean it in a racist tone, it was handed down from my grandparents mostly.  That's just what they were to us, but it wasn't malice, it was ignorance.  I'm not claiming they were ignorant, but I'm just trying to say that just because you say nigger doesn't mean you are attempting to demean someone, the definition of nigger is highly tied to your upbringing and surroundings in my opinion.  

Personally I think they saw someone different than them and focused on that individual.  Children tend to do that quite a bit.  Doesn't matter what it's for, all that matters is that they are different from them.  I think Eric and Dylan saw Isaiah and said "hey there's someone different" and decided to focus on them, it's not like they weren't taunting and mocking and insulting everyone else they killed.  What's the best way to taunt or insult a black person?  Nigger.  

Isaiah (sp?) just happened to be in the library while being black.

That's just how I view it, I know they uttered racist things in their rants, tapes and writings.  They even disparaged Jews when Dylan was of that persuasion.  Kids don't make sense, especially when they are angry, they lash out.  What is your opinion of this?

I can see your perspective, but only to a degree. Nigger is still nigger to me. I despise when it is used in any other way than as a joke that I can clearly distinguish as such. I grew up in the inner city with a predominantly minority population (Latinos, blacks and some Asians peppered in there). There were whites as well, of course, but it was mostly Latinos (I'm Latino myself). I can recall whites being referred to as gringos, crackers and honkeys though I'm certain it wasn't out of ignorance, but intentional racial insensitivity. If it happens one way, it sure as hell happens the other way around. While I still disagree with the notion that Eric and Dylan were only trying to scare Isaiah and they didn't really feel that way toward him, I understand that their state of mind made it convenient to hate just about everything from women, to sports, tv, work, school and the list goes on.

Ironically, our perspectives can tie together into my abstraction premise, that being that E&D didn't go through with the massacre because of blacks, Christians, gays, rednecks, women, teachers or cops, but they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea. They didn't want to be a part of society, but it was only one side of the coin. The self-destructive urge was a vital component and the massacre could not have occurred without it.

dahlia_rose wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Just cause someone calls someone a nigger and shoots them doesn't mean they are racist to me.  I come from a very small town in the Midwest.  There were no other races but whites, it was common to say nigger there.  We didn't mean it in a racist tone, it was handed down from my grandparents mostly.  That's just what they were to us, but it wasn't malice, it was ignorance.  I'm not claiming they were ignorant, but I'm just trying to say that just because you say nigger doesn't mean you are attempting to demean someone, the definition of nigger is highly tied to your upbringing and surroundings in my opinion.  

Personally I think they saw someone different than them and focused on that individual.  Children tend to do that quite a bit.  Doesn't matter what it's for, all that matters is that they are different from them.  I think Eric and Dylan saw Isaiah and said "hey there's someone different" and decided to focus on them, it's not like they weren't taunting and mocking and insulting everyone else they killed.  What's the best way to taunt or insult a black person?  Nigger.  

Isaiah (sp?) just happened to be in the library while being black.

That's just how I view it, I know they uttered racist things in their rants, tapes and writings.  They even disparaged Jews when Dylan was of that persuasion.  Kids don't make sense, especially when they are angry, they lash out.  What is your opinion of this?

I can see your perspective, but only to a degree. Nigger is still nigger to me. I despise when it is used in any other way than as a joke that I can clearly distinguish as such. I grew up in the inner city with a predominantly minority population (Latinos, blacks and some Asians peppered in there). There were whites as well, of course, but it was mostly Latinos (I'm Latino myself). I can recall whites being referred to as gringos, crackers and honkeys though I'm certain it wasn't out of ignorance, but intentional racial insensitivity. If it happens one way, it sure as hell happens the other way around. While I still disagree with the notion that Eric and Dylan were only trying to scare Isaiah and they didn't really feel that way toward him, I understand that their state of mind made it convenient to hate just about everything from women, to sports, tv, work, school and the list goes on.

Ironically, our perspectives can tie together into my abstraction premise, that being that E&D didn't go through with the massacre because of blacks, Christians, gays, rednecks, women, teachers or cops, but they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea. They didn't want to be a part of society, but it was only one side of the coin. The self-destructive urge was a vital component and the massacre could not have occurred without it.

The thing that makes me feel that it was only for scare and that they didn't actually fell that way was the fact that both boys (but especially Eric) constantly changed the way they thought. Look at what Eric wrote. One day he wrote he hated N*** and they should all die and then later he said he hated all racists and they should all die. Now maybe he did not consider himself a racist but I think he just hated everyone. I don't think it mattered what color you were to him he still hated you if you were like "society".

I guess I do have a problem when people come out and say that Columbine was racially motivated because the word that they used against Isaiah. Like I stated above Isaiah was not the only Black person there or person of color at all for that matter

dahlia_rose wrote:

Ironically, our perspectives can tie together into my abstraction premise, that being that E&D didn't go through with the massacre because of blacks, Christians, gays, rednecks, women, teachers or cops, but they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea. They didn't want to be a part of society, but it was only one side of the coin. The self-destructive urge was a vital component and the massacre could not have occurred without it.

I like this a lot and just wanted to repost it. I agree 100% with the "they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea."

Also, you verified that words differ depending on your experiences, environmental and upbringing. You have completely different life experiences from me and in a multi-cultural setting I would expect people to use those words with intent. Whereas a city that has always had an all white population can't imagine what other races are like and are highly influenced by media and your elders experiences. This doesn't relate well to Eric though since he grew up in a multi-cultural environment. But then again hatred knows no bounds. I have a brother that hates, he hates everything, he joined the KKK and then hated the people in the KKK because they couldn't agree on who to hate the most... Yeah... He's a drunk and he hates drunks... Self loathing makes you hate everything equally in my opinion, and I believe Eric was filled with hatred mostly for himself.

I hated myself when I was younger, I still don't 100% know why. I just wasn't happy with who I was. I understand what it's like, but I directed my hate solely at myself. Eric didn't do that, his hatred went outward and hiding his hatred without expression consumed him. You ever internalize something and never express it, something that bothers you? Let it fester and grow inside of you until it becomes all-consuming? I believe Eric did that.

I'm also curious if Eric had a definitive world view, did he believe in ethical nihilism? It appears to be one of the most persistent beliefs that comes up in his writings. I'm starting to lose direction in this post so I'll end it at that lol.

silentprocess wrote:

dahlia_rose wrote:

Ironically, our perspectives can tie together into my abstraction premise, that being that E&D didn't go through with the massacre because of blacks, Christians, gays, rednecks, women, teachers or cops, but they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea. They didn't want to be a part of society, but it was only one side of the coin. The self-destructive urge was a vital component and the massacre could not have occurred without it.

I like this a lot and just wanted to repost it.  I agree 100% with the "they were merely sacrifices at the altar of an idea."

I'm also curious if Eric had a definitive world view, did he believe in ethical nihilism?  It appears to be one of the most persistent beliefs that comes up in his writings.

Thank you. I don't know if Eric was an ethical nihilist but I'd lean toward the negative. The term quite frankly seems contradictory to me. You can't exactly believe all values are baseless and meaning is entirely subjective and in the same vein accept moral absolutes like "Murder is bad". I guess a nihilist can still find child or animal abuse repugnant, but if he feels that way is he really a nihilist after all? I just can't imagine someone holding two fundamentally parallel viewpoints at the same time. That would lead to a lot of friction in one's sense of identity and self. Then again, Dylan and Eric could have been grappling with these warring viewpoints and saw murder/suicide as a solution to the complexity and uncertainty of existence.

If someone like Ted Bundy identified as a nihilist, I would agree with him fully. Psychopaths are unique from almost all human beings on Earth in that they are literally incapable of feeling empathy. The regions of their their brain tasked with empathic responses is entirely non-functional. IMO someone who cannot feel empathy is in the perfect position to be a real nihilist, not someone like Eric who actually thought about how his decisions would affect his parents, whom he loved. I don't think Eric definitively knew who he was at that point in his life. He didn't allow himself to mature and adapt to post-teen experiences.

I was using this definition when I suggested ethical nihilist (Moral nihilism (also known as ethical nihilism) is the meta-ethical view that nothing is intrinsically moral or immoral. For example, a moral nihilist would say that killing someone, for whatever reason, is neither inherently right nor inherently wrong). Eric did refer to this quite often and one of his references is my signature.

Since nothing is really inherently right or wrong to do then natural selection is what gives the world order. IMHO that's why he focused on Natural Selection so much as well because it gave Eric order and it gave him his reason. Nothing is immoral so proving that he was superior and taking people out is Erics purpose. That reinforces both belief systems he may have had.

Eric paralleled Nietzsche in many ways and did read his works as well as Hobbes and he regurgitated much of what these two wrote about.

Just makes sense to me when I look at it this way.

lol @ this thread. I can research and talk about whatever the hell I want to talk about and i'm in complete control of my physical actions, there's nothing to be grateful for which "kept me on this side of the filter".

oh geez.

thedude11 wrote:

lol @ this thread. I can research and talk about whatever the hell I want to talk about and i'm in complete control of my physical actions, there's nothing to be grateful for which "kept me on this side of the filter".  

Exactly. The op needs to get off his high horse. Plus new info is being released every year about Columbine so of course, people are going to be interested even after 18 years.

you're the guy that snuck into Columbine with his girlfriend posing as a student and you claim that we have an unhealthy obsession with the case L-O-L. are you sure were the ones you should be worried about?

Exactly!