Take Joker, for example, a DC Comic-based film. It portrays a character named Arthur Fleck, a thin, lonely, damaged man earning a living as a clown-for-hire called “Joker” living in a drab apartment with his mother. His alienation arise from social inequality, the decline of civility, political corruption, television, government bureaucracy, and a slew of other causes.
Joker is bullied by thieving poor kids and drunken rich guys. In his view, rich people are awful. Poor people are awful. Joker’s embrace of radical evil becomes a kind of integrity. He is goaded to the point of murder by the meanness of the world when he kills his supposed father and TV presenter on live TV.
The movie has been criticized for its supposed potential to inspire acts of real-life violence, bad faith, and hypersensitivity.
Is Joker justified to turn to his murderous instincts because society has been unfair to him? Are the bullies, the estranged father, and the sick, needy, mother to be blamed for Joker’s misery? To what extent can our trauma and life injustices be excuses for our decisions as adults?
In movies and fantasies, revenge is sweet and fairness is inspired. But I wonder what would have happened if a real-life clown murdered a famous show host on live TV? The court proceedings would have been the real trend.
Organically, having been traumatized does not automatically predispose someone towards traumatizing others. Some research argues that the vast majority of individuals meeting the diagnostic criteria for trauma-related stress disorders do not actively harm others, even when grappling with alcohol or drug dependence.
It is therefore safe to assume that the majority of individuals who have experienced trauma but do not develop a trauma-related stress disorder are at equally low (if not even lower) risks of causing harm.
The research however indicates that trauma can and is often an explanation for people’s behaviors and their reactions to certain realities, but does not ultimately influence decision-making.
If traumatic experiences do not determine when we decide to cheat and lie to our partners what does? This begs the millennia question: are humans inherently just bad?
On the other hand, how much acknowledgment should we give childhood trauma when assessing someone’s behavior? Should a woman’s feminist argument that patriarchy is harmful to society be associated with the fact that her father abused her? Should a man’s abusive tendencies be excused because his father was overly strict and his mother was absent?
In a mini Survey that SENS Magazine conducted, the majority of responders sympathized with adults whose lives continue to be affected by childhood trauma but dismissed it as a reason to be irresponsible.
“It would count if my partner communicated that he has a history of trauma and abuse, I would understand. But that can not define your relationship,” one respondent answered to the question: “Would you forgive your cheating partner if their reason was ‘childhood trauma”?
Others think that if it was a one-time mistake, their reason would soften the blow, especially in marriage when a lot is at stake, such as children.
None of this is to say that healing from trauma is an easy and simple process. Nor is it to negate the very real and damaging effects trauma can have on our ability to regulate our emotions and confront our problems. But we need to hold people accountable for their actions, and not excuse damaging behavior on the basis that a guilty party has experienced past trauma
As we continue working on becoming better versions of ourselves, let us maintain positive beliefs about the world, ourselves, and the inherent goodness of humanity.
