Portraying terrorists as failed heterosexuals suppresses analysis of political causes

Evidence

While “going Muslim” operates as an explanation for violence, in both cases, a root cause is identified as an additional explanation. In Lindh’s case, it is implicitly suggested that his liberal education is to blame for his involvement with terrorism. It was too open, too tolerant, too lax; it was a liberal education gone very wrong. In the case of Landon, it was symbolic castration that inspired him to look for an ideology that would legitimize his retaliation against female sexual rejection. Both the news and TV drama narratives contain a critique of liberal values and an enduring focus on sexuality. Sexual explanations, in other words, stand in for political explanations. The vast realm of political violence, whose complexity is already diminished through the use of the term terrorism, is now further depoliticized and portrayed as a mere cover for sexual problems. — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1043 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

In their explanations to the public for the criminal involvements of Lindh and Padilla, the media has made one thing explicit: both are converts to Islam. The media has focused on and sensationalized the stories of these two men, constructing a narrative that links violence, criminality, terrorism, and a delusional mental state to Islam; and more specifically, violence committed by Muslim converts is explained through an interlinked narrative of failed heterosexuality. Lindh and Padilla are not necessarily portrayed as homosexual; rather, their trajectory into terrorism is linked to failed heterosexual masculinity. And this supports the larger narrative that the causes of terrorism stem from sexual, as opposed to political, reasons. — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1095 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

It would be simplistic to base an argument about motivation on the premise that terrorism is solely a result of specific personality patterns or traits. As with all forms of political behavior, terrorism cannot be studied in isolation from its political and social context. The analysis of terrorism clearly deals with the intersection of psychological predispositions (which may be derived as much from prior experience and socialization as from psychological traits emerging from early childhood and infancy) and the external environment. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4086 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Terrorists are rarely psychopathological, and labeling them so evades political questions — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 4088; Gay rights were co-opted to legitimize the war on terror; Terrorism coverage explains Muslim converts’ violence via failed heterosexual masculinity (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• Sexual explanations substitute for political explanations of terrorism. #corroborates (0.95) — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1043
• Media linked Muslim converts’ violence to failed heterosexuality rather than political motives #exemplifies (0.92) — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1095
• Terrorism results from predispositions interacting with political context, not personality alone #complicates (0.78) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4086
• Terrorism lacks a single personality type but still draws on subconscious motives #complicates (0.74) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4091
• Propaganda campaigns link Islam to heterosexual family values and national security #complicates (0.72) — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1224