[nosianu]

Regardless of the truthiness of that statement, that sentence at most makes him say something wrong. How on earth is that sentence making him a "PoS"??? At worst, he sees a tragic binary option where others see better and more. Some of his other public statements, sure, but this one?

[thinkingtoilet]

It's typical right wing "boys will be boys" mentality. Under no circumstance should boys or men be held accountable for their actions. The only options for boys with issues is to let them kill people or kill them. It's simply not possible the parents are doing something wrong or that we hold young men accountable. It contributes to how extremely fragile a scary percentage of young men are these days. Everything must revolve around them or violence is expected and understood. It's all this and much more from him.

[anonymars]

You are absolutely missing the point of what he is saying. Once your kid gets to a certain age, you are no longer able to control them. Regardless of the reason (nature vs nurture), if your kid starts going down a bad path, you the parent are unable to rein them in.

The context was that he watched his stepson get into drugs, and was unable to force him into rehab. If the son left, the parents could not coerce him into staying.

And so his son died of a drug overdose. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46604020)

So if you are in that position, and your kid gets into drugs, and there is nothing you can do about it, what would you do as a good parent?

Now apply the same thing to if you think your kid is becoming a danger to others.

His full statement was that if we collectively reject the premise of restricting someone's (the child in question) bodily autonomy (by committing them), the argument is the only two options that remain are to watch helplessly or kill your kid. Obviously he is not seriously advocating the latter any more than Jonathan Swift was truly advocating for eating them.

[nosianu]

> It's typical right wing "boys will be boys" mentality.

What on earth??? There is not a trace in that statement that fist that description! Stop making stuff up that is not there. The text is right in front of you, no need to invent words never said or written.

> Under no circumstance should boys or men be held accountable for their actions.

Even more insane. None of that is anywhere in that sentence, not even with an "interpretation".

In threads like these, some people are reacting to the shadows found in their own mind.

Why don't you just stick to the mentioned statement? "Adams opined that society leaves parents of troubled teenage boys with only two options: to either watch people die or murder their own son." Nothing you said can be found in there. That is all something you added ("interpreted" does not quite fit it when you hallucinate something new entirely into existence).

[thinkingtoilet]

I did. You just didn't like the correct response of me pointing out his typical right-wing views on men. I'm not interpreting anything. That's what is views are.