Jan. 9, 2015, 2:04 p.m. -  Jordan Tesluk

#!markdown If we stuck to such parameters, nobody would write anything found outside wikipedia. Some writing as actually creative, and some actually requires interpretations. Hyperbole, simile, and metaphor. These are common writing devices that do not flow from facts that are widely available. In this case, the criminal acts of one serve as an allegory for a wider pattern of behaviour among a broader group, and yes, liberties are taken in the telling of this tale. I make no apology for those that felt uncomfortable wandering outside the literary territory of fact books and use manuals. An article like this is in fact very clearly an opinion piece, but one that draws on societal themes and less bluntly-apparent and obvious minutia that comprise standard journalism. You can call it garbage if you like, but I suggest you are looking at it all wrong. As for the mental health suggestions that keep coming up. Now THAT is speculation, and does a true disservice to the mentally ill. The vast majority of mentally ill do not commit crimes. If a mental health issue is apparent, that is for court-appointed psychiatrists to decide, and I scratch my head as to why people seem to think it applies here. Perhaps because it seems ludicrous and obsessive for an individual to behave in such a manner? Such behaviour can certainly flow from personality disorders, but one should note that personality disorders are not only subject to debate (people may just be crazy mean, but not necessarily crazy), and do not generally comprise a defense to criminal act. In my opinion, the article could not wait. The media spotlight is on us and the issue now. The opportunity to recast identities and contest both the social and geographic terrain is only a short window. I realize that may seem somewhat abstract to many, but if the essence and themes of the issues I have stabbed at hold no toehold in reality, then I doubt the article would have provoked the response that it has.