BIG BIG QUESTION Im really confused

[deleted]

It's easier to understand limitations when a person has a physical illness. For instance, we all know that diabetics can't have sugar spikes. We all know that blind people can't see. We all know someone with allergies (and unless we're trying to kill them off for their will money) we tend to avoid the foods and/or beverages they can't have when going out to eat or having a party. It's simple with physical limitations.

However, if you consider the same idea but related to an illness we can't actually SEE (or possibly understand), it's basically the same thing. To use your word, he's "crazy" and so he has mental limitations that prevent him from doing certain things - like reasoning appropriate social behavior around women or not killing some random guy just because the voices (or whatever is wired differently for him) tell him to.

This is why the word "crazy" is such a polarizing and stigmatizing "catch all" for anybody we deem to be not only oddly different than we are, but in some way "too far" in that direction. It's so prevalent that we've stopped considering all else to apply these labels quickly (and painfully) to others that don't fit our often myopic viewpoint of what is "normal" and what is not. Why is a homeless person talking to themselves fingerpainting with discarded condiments considered "crazy" but a super-rich, agoraphobic, well-bred person that fingerpaints with imported paints but just as "unartistic" and "ridiculous" not? Like all our other labels for others, it's just a social construct to keep people divided and fighting among ourselves.

------------------------
"Get busy living, or get busy dying." (Andy - The Shawshank Redemption)

I think the answer is yes, he got confused that this women didn't struggle, and defaulted to murder. This scene was almost comical, in the sort of way where you squint and pretend horrible, horrible things are funny.

__ __ __
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"--Pres. Merkin Muffley