Running head: VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 1

An Argument for Violence as Morally Neutral Construct

Jaharri D. Asten

Metropolitan State University

Abstract:
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 2

Originally, I viewed aggressive behavior as a tool necessary for successful negotiation.

At that time, resorting to violence seemed like a natural progression to ensure success.

Eventually, negative outcomes changed my perception of aggression as a useful tool. My

experiences lead me to condemn any type of unpleasant behavior. Consequently, I theorized both

violence and aggression should be avoided because they are negative and as such, they are

intrinsically evil. Eventually circumstances lead me to conclude survival and pacifism are

sometimes contraindicated. As a result, I abandoned pacifism in favor of survival. Although I

prefer diplomacy, I would engage in aggressive behavior in situations where it is required for the

defense of myself, my family and my property. Additionally, after some consideration of

therapeutic applications of violence, I hypothesize I may have an interest in the future but I am

currently satisfied with vicarious catharsis. Ultimately, my research has demonstrated the ethical

value of an act is not determined by the nature of the act, it is determined by both context and

perception.

An Argument for Violence as Morally Neutral Construct

VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 3

“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” wrote Kruglanski et al., (2014,

p.73) to describe the connection between morality and perception. Technically, these two

concepts are differentiated only by the perceptions that arise due to the contexts in which they

occur. This is the case in most situations; evil is not the intention of the perpetrator, it is the

perception of the victim (Glynn, 1991). By the same token, a behavior may seem warranted in

one context but unacceptable in another. This demonstrates the impact context can have when

forming a perception. Therefore the context and the perception are both determining factors

when applying a value judgement to an action. Throughout my life I have attempted to explain

the intrinsic nature of behavior that lies on the continuum between violence and aggression but

ultimately my experiences lead me to conclude the ethical nature of this type of behavior is

inextricably tied to the perception of the action and the context in which it occurred.

My first memory of violence was in the form of media, a tool used by The Nation of

Islam (The Nation) to propagate their ideas. The Nation is distinct from traditional Islam because

it was created in 1930 by Wallace Fard (also known as Master Wali Farrad Muhammad) as a

type of psychological refuge for African-Americans (Mamiya, 1982). It was designed to combat

racism with militant force and vigilante justice. They advocate for racial separation and demand

strict adherence to their modified Islamic beliefs which include abandoning everything: your

name, religion, diet, social group and even your family. When my parents became affiliated with

this group they changed my name from Jacqueline to Jaharri and placed me in a private school

created by the organization. They taught us martial arts and they used gruesome news stories,

personal testimonies and frightening movies to terrify the children while invoking rage in the

adolescents. Basically, the school was designed to take children and create a militia of dedicated

soldiers.
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 4

The motivation for terrorist activity has been tied to the quest for personal significance

(Forgas et al., 2011). This can manifest as an individual or group needing to prove they matter.

Humiliation and deprivation can exacerbate this need and the concept of revenge can serve as a

means for accomplishing the goal. Additionally, dehumanization of the out-group justifies

violence as a means to execute the revenge (Kruglanski et al., 2014). Our teachers scoured the

airwaves daily searching for atrocities in the news to support their ideology and justify their

extreme behavior. They told us peaceful protesters choose that path because they are weak and

afraid; they conditioned everyone to see extreme violence as the only way to combat racism

(personal communication, 1998). Although in favor of their ideology, my parents eventually

feared for my safety and wellbeing. As a result, when I was ten they removed me from this

school and placed me in a public school—in the Cherry Creek school district.

The radical views I learned made adjusting to life in a public school impossible. Initially,

I resisted the culture in this new environment. Instead, I decided to disseminate the radical ideas I

learned at my former school. As a natural born leader, I easily converted a large portion of the

African-American students to my belief system. I challenged the authority of my new teachers

incessantly and encouraged aggressive behavior in my peers. I refused to acknowledge students

outside my group of chosen individuals and eventually the increasing hostility lead to violence.

Although I anticipated this outcome, I was shocked to discover my feelings in association with

the violence that ensued. Up to this point, my whole life was based on Malcom X’s idea that

goals should be accomplished “by any means necessary.” My former teachers told me violent

means are the most effective and that is why they should be used. Witnessing an assault at my

middle school changed my whole perspective on the subject. I was just randomly passing by—I

should have been in class—when I saw two of my peers jump a random boy because he was
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 5

white. When he fell, we made eye contact. After a moment, I could not bear the sight of it. I

really wanted to run away and pretend I never saw anything but I knew my words created these

actions. My conscience beckoned me; I had to make a decision: Watch him perish or defend

someone I am supposed to hate. I felt sickened by horror, or empathy, or fear; but I could not

leave him there. Not only did I save him, I vowed to avoid violence—at any cost—from that

moment forward. I realized the subscribers to The Nation were just as bad as the people they

hate. I decided I could achieve the same objectives through nonviolence and education.

This revelation lead to a conversion to Christianity and an adoption of pacifist views.

According to the Gospels, “nonviolence in thought and action is required of those who follow

Christ’s teaching,” (Kellenberger, 1987, p.142). I began reading the Bible incessantly attempting

to keep any of the negative thoughts out of my mind. I also tried to spread these views to others

by intervening in fights and instances of bullying. Every day I reminded myself, “blessed are the

peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God,” Matthew 5:9 (The Holy Bible: King

James Version, 2004). I researched methods of de-escalation and taught others to defend

themselves without resorting to violence, upholding the pacifist idea that “war is a truly evil

means to a good end; and truly evil means are not justified by good ends” (Kellenberger, 1987,

p.137). Like Jesus, Gandhi, Mother Teresa and so many others; I vowed to lead a life marked by

peace, altruism and morality.

In 2006, I was accepted into the University of Arizona. Even as a college student I

continued to aspire to moral perfection. I attended parties when I was invited because the only

way to lead people to righteousness is to walk among sinners. One night I decided to leave a

party early because sleeping seemed like a better use of time. A gentleman from the party

insisted I let him walk me home claiming college campuses are dangerous. When we arrived at
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 6

my dorm he basically tricked me into letting him in. Apparently this individual had been

planning to rape me for some time and was simply waiting for the opportunity. He was irate,

claiming I ignored him on a regular basis and he was not going to tolerate it anymore. From what

I remember he never said anything to me, so I asked him to elaborate. According to him, he was

around me all the time but I never noticed. He said, “I bet you notice me now.” I tried explaining

that it was unintentional but he did not care. I tried reasoning with him but he was lost in a

delusion. He explained he was in love with me and he did not intend to hurt me but he would not

be held responsible for the injuries that would result if I resisted.

According to a study in the American Journal of Psychiatry (as cited in Lehmann, 2001),

stalkers in the intimacy-seeking category desire a relationship with their victim regardless of her

wishes and become outraged by her indifference. In this study, 42 of 49 intimacy-seekers

suffered from delusions with half also suffering from a personality disorder, five had

schizophrenia and the last two were manic (Lehmann, 2001). This study seems to accurately

describe the behavior of the individual that raped me. At the time of the event, I was unable to

conceptualize his actions because he does not qualify as an outcast in any sense but I learned a

defining feature of borderline personality disorder is the tendency to overreact to rejection. This

occurs because they feel the negative emotions associated with ostracism even when they are

fairly included (Panfilis, Riva, Preti, Cabrino, & Marchesi, 2015). This gentleman could fall into

this category of mental illness because, in my opinion, his feelings of rejection were completely

in his head. After all, he was a good-looking guy and he lured me from a very exclusive party.

This situation was compounded by my dedication to pacifism. I wanted to run but his

warnings froze my feet. I knew I should fight but I simply could not do it. When my verbal de-

escalation tactics proved useless, I froze. In this state my only feasible defense was passive
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 7

resistance. Passive resistance is a great tactic in a battle of wills but in a physical battle the result

(at least for me) was substantial injuries with nothing gained. Outraged by the extent of these

injuries, my best friend offered to kill him for me. Once I realized she was serious, I warned

against legal ramifications but she claimed she was too beautiful to go to jail. She was beautiful:

perfect body, long strawberry-blond ringlets, bright green eyes, the cutest freckles and a smile

that could light the sky. She looked like a doll. Attempting to persuade me, she stated she would

seduce him and cry self-defense. It would be her word against a corpse (A. Kenzie, personal

communication, 2006).

I could not allow her to engage in such evil on my behalf—it is immoral. She whole-

heartedly believed allowing him to live would be immoral. She claimed we have an obligation to

protect others from the pain we have known. She said an ethical action is the action that helps the

largest number of people. Filing a police report would be insufficient. She believed his social

status would prevent him from seeing the inside of a prison. Juries do not convict guys like him.

Even if they did, three to five years later he would once again be free to rape. On the other hand,

the scars from being raped last a lifetime. She could kill him and save countless others from

wounds that will not heal (A. Kenzie, personal communication, 2006). Although I knew her

points were valid, murder would not bring my virginity back; it would however weigh heavily on

my conscience. I decided to stick to my pacifist beliefs. Jesus proved a person does not have to

sin. Even when he was crucified he said, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do,”

Luke 23:34 (The Holy Bible: King James Version, 2004). I would not allow this incident to cause

me to sin. I continued to pray, asking God to help me find forgiveness and healing. I stood by my

condemnation of violence.
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 8

Eventually, my friends convinced me intoxication would be the best way to cope with my

grief. I tried to resist but the pain was blinding. It seemed like I became an alcoholic overnight.

Unconsciousness was my only refuge from the agony. Then, on Halloween in 2007, I took the

wrong drink from the wrong stranger and ended up getting kidnapped. As soon as I woke up they

tried to rape me. At that moment I finally realized—sometimes violence is the answer.

Ironically, the drug I was given to subdue me probably helped me in the end. When I

awoke I did not try to analyze the situation or determine the most suitable outcome; I

immediately decided I would fight to the death. Even though I realized fighting was useless and I

would never escape, I did not care. It was as if my body shifted to autopilot. I moved effortlessly

through the various fight or flight responses like a race car shifting gears. When they strangled

me, fighting was not helpful, so I fell limp. When they let go, I tried to run. When they caught

me, I started fighting again. Somehow, through all the chaos, an interview I watched as a child

came to mind. In it Muhammad Ali was explaining how to win a fight. He said something to the

effect of: Fights are not won with the body, they are won in the mind. He went on to describe the

scare tactics he uses to psych out the opponent before the fight begins. So, I started screaming

the craziest things I could think of. I described in detail how I would waste my afterlife

tormenting each of them until they joined me in the grave. I swore I would come back.

To my astonishment this actually worked. I sensed a slight shift in their energy. So I

continued shouting every crazy threat I could think of. Apparently my words cut deeper than my

nails—one individual began to panic and begged the others to silence me. The individual that

had the best grip stated he was afraid to let go of my hands because I tried to claw his face off.

Another individual suggested they cut their losses and kill me; I was clearly too crazy to control.

By this time, the first individual was practically having an anxiety attack; finally, he decided to
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 9

advocate for my release. To my surprise, they actually let go of me. I dashed away before anyone

could change their mind. As I ran barefoot down the frigid autumn streets, I realized the

importance of balance. Extreme views cannot be maintained because they are not applicable in

every situation. There are situations where violent behavior is detrimental but there are also

situations where engaging in violent behavior is beneficial or necessary.

There is one more point of contention. In The Fog of War, McNamara explains our duty

to society, he states “there is something beyond one’s self,” (Morris, director, 2003). Throughout

the movie he provides several examples of the application of this concept. McNamara believes a

good person cannot ignore a legitimate threat because the potential for destruction outweighs his

desire to avoid war. He has a responsibility to protect others and to accomplish that, sometimes

pre-emptive strikes are necessary. From this vantage point, in the aforementioned situation, I had

a responsibility to do more than escape. By simply running away, I allowed those individuals to

continue committing terrible crimes. Maybe my crazy best friend’s philosophy was legitimate

after all. Maybe killing one person, or a group of people, is ethical if it would save countless

others. After being kidnapped, I decided to completely abandon pacifism—not every life is

worth saving. In fights against rapists or terrorists I support taking any action required to

neutralize the threat.

Despite my beliefs, I would not personally engage in that type of violence. To fight, I

have to be provoked. As long as the “enemy” is not actively hurting me I probably will not do

anything except wish s/he would stop hurting people. For this reason, I fully support the military

and the police. Of course they are not perfect, but both organizations do a great job keeping US

safe in a manner that is far superior to my personal ability. Self-defense is great but a war cannot

be won with defense alone. As McNamara stated, “in order to do good, you may have to engage
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 10

in evil” (Morris, director, 2003). In my opinion, if killing is necessary to protect the group or to

neutralize a threat then it is ethical, beneficial and necessary.

Unfortunately, the memories created by all of my life experiences would not go away. I

tried prayer, meditation, substance abuse, therapy and psychiatric medication to no avail. Even

during sleep, my dreams betrayed me. According to Albert Ellis, events do not cause

psychological damage. The thoughts associated with an event causes anxiety. From Ellis the

concept of systematic desensitization was developed. This process is used to treat phobias by

gradually exposing the subject to the source of the anxiety—increasing the intensity each time.

Ideally, their response to the stimuli decreases each time (Field, Beeson, & Jones, 2015). By the

same token, Forgas et al. (2011) reported the incessant stream of violent images in the media

causes desensitization; with the internet offering the most intense levels of exposure. Over time,

the response to these images decreases until it becomes nonexistent. Eventually, viewers can

watch a massacre with no emotional response (Forgas et al., 2011). Based on this information, it

would theoretically be possible to use the media to systematically desensitize a person to violent

images to alleviate their anxiety. For example, repeated exposure to shorts containing

sadomasochism (S&M) might eventually ease the anxiety caused by the images that play in my

mind. This could be a potentially therapeutic use for violent behavior especially if it was used in

conjunction with stimulus pairing.

The S&M shorts (on Kink.com) conclude with a brief discussion between the actors. In

these discussions, I was shocked to learn the person playing the masochist does not do it because

they have the capacity to tolerate high levels of pain, they do it because they enjoy pain.

Furthermore, they (women especially) describe feelings of empowerment derived from their

capacity to “own the pain,” and feelings of excitement when they are presented with the
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 11

opportunity to reach new pain thresholds (Diamond, 2012). This further proves Ellis’s idea that

the beliefs associated with an event are more important than the actual event in determining the

impact the event has on the individual. This is especially true when considering the fact that

these short films include everything I experienced and more: From playful biting to violent

thrashings and electrocution, they have it all. This proves the pain does not cause anxiety—my

perception of the pain causes anxiety.

If utilized properly, these movies can promote behavior modification. Basically, I would

be attempting to change my biological response to pain. Surely this sounds farfetched but an

experiment by Icenhour et al. (2015) found the fear of pain, caused by chronic pain experiences,

can be extinguished. This was demonstrated behaviorally and proven with post-treatment brain

scans (Icenhour et al., 2015). Additionally, they found the fear of pain created anticipation which

worsened the patient's condition. So, although a person might believe anticipation prepares them

for future instances of pain, it actually worsens their outcome. Ultimately, this research

demonstrated developing adequate coping skills and eliminating fear is the most effective

approach in dealing with reoccurring pain. I am not advocating for the tolerance of abuse, I am

simply proposing a method for dealing with memories that cause pain. Perhaps in addition to

desensitization, these S&M skits and the corresponding interviews can help me reshape the way I

conceptualize pain by pairing painful stimuli with positive interpretations. If this worked, it

would be a really positive use for the expression of violent behavior.

Vicarious learning can be very effective but I also believe the actors in consensual violent

interactions receive benefits. According to Freud, aggressive urges are natural and sublimation is

the prosocial release of these urges (Cervone & Pervin, 2013). Activities including (but not

limited to) sports, fight clubs, dangerous employment and S&M all allow a cathartic release of
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 12

aggression in a prosocial context. Fight Club is one example of a movie that illustrates the

benefits of physically releasing aggressive energy, which include higher self-esteem, self-

actualization and feelings of increased personal significance (Fincher, director, 1999). On the

other hand, suppression of these natural urges can cause psychological distress and eventually

the energy will seep out in more antisocial ways. As a result, engaging in violent behavior in a

consensual context to release aggressive urges is not only beneficial, it’s necessary. Personally, if

I was going to engage in violent behavior for fun, the concept of S&M seems enticing:

Masochism because I love the concept—if you can conquer pain, theoretically you have no

weakness—and sadism because it looks like it would be cathartic. Other than those two ideas, I

highly doubt I would engage in violent behavior in a non-defensive context.

Throughout this essay, I have used several examples to illustrate both the catastrophic

and the beneficial implications associated with expressions of violence, thus proving my belief

that violence is neither good nor bad. Personally, self-defense is the only type of violence I am

comfortable with; however, I condone preventative measures and consensual extracurricular

violence. Additionally, I realize the moral implications of violent behavior is contingent upon

both the perspective and the context. As long as boundaries are respected and consent is given,

violence can be ethical, honorable, therapeutic, fun and/or entertaining.

References
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 13

Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2013). Personality: Theory and research (12th ed.). Hoboken, NJ:

John Wiley & Sons.

Diamond, S. (Writer). (2012, August 17). Brutal sex fantasy confession [Video file]. Retrieved

April 14, 2016, from www.kink.com/shoot/25045#

Field, T. A., Beeson, E. T., & Jones, L. K. (2015). The new ABCs: A practitioner's guide to

neuroscience-informed Cognitive-Behavior Therapy. Journal of Mental Health

Counseling, 37(3), 206-220. doi:10.17744/1040-2861-37.3.206

Fincher, D. (Director). (1999). Fight club [Motion picture on DVD]. USA.

Forgas, J. P., Kruglanski, A. W., & Williams, K. D. (2011). The psychology of social conflict

and aggression. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Glynn, F. J. (1991). What is evil? Cogito, 5, 36-41. doi:10.5840/cogito19915113

The Holy Bible: King James Version. (2004). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Icenhour, A., Kattoor, J., Benson, S., Boekstegers, A., Schlamann, M., Merz, C. J., . . .

Elsenbruch, S. (2015). Neural circuitry underlying effects of context on human pain-

related fear extinction in a renewal paradigm. Human Brain Mapping Hum. Brain Mapp.,

36(8), 3179-3193. doi:10.1002/hbm.22837

Kellenberger, J. (1987). A defense of pacifism. Faith and Philosophy, 4(2), 129-148.

doi:10.5840/faithphil19874219

Kruglanski, A. W., Gelfand, M. J., Bélanger, J. J., Sheveland, A., Hetiarachchi, M., &

Gunaratna, R. (2014). The psychology of radicalization and deradicalization: How

significance quest impacts violent extremism. Political Psychology, 35, 69-93.

doi:10.1111/pops.12163
VIOLENCE AS MORALLY NEUTRAL CONSTRUCT 14

Lehmann, C. (2001, June 15). Stalker classification aids diagnosis, treatment. Retrieved February

18, 2016, from http://0-

psychnews.psychiatryonline.org.skyline.ucdenver.edu/doi/full/10.1176/pn.36.12.0008a

Mamiya, L. H. (1982). From black Muslim to Bilalian: The evolution of a movement. Journal

for the Scientific Study of Religion, 21(2), 138. doi:10.2307/1385500

Morris, E. (Director). (2003). The fog of war: Eleven lessons from the life of Robert S.

McNamara [Motion picture on DVD]. USA.

Panfilis, C. D., Riva, P., Preti, E., Cabrino, C., & Marchesi, C. (2015). When social inclusion is

not enough: Implicit expectations of extreme inclusion in borderline personality disorder.

Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 6(4), 301-309.

doi:10.1037/per0000132