Last night, I went to bed ruminating on this headline from the Palm Beach Post: "Orlando shooter Omar Mateen was gay, former classmate says." This morning I awoke to this front-page headline from the New York Times: “Orlando Killer Exposes Gaps in Fighting ISIS-Inspired Acts.” And the digital front page of the Washington Post: “Orlando gunman had been on FBI watch list.”
What’s interesting is how much energy is being dedicated to ISIS and terrorism as the seed of the shooter's rage—to the exclusion of reports that he struggled with his sexuality. Yet, the evidence that he was a dedicated follower of any terrorist group is spotty at best.
Here's FBI director James Comey on Monday, noting that the shooter had little if any idea what he was talking about in terms of terrorist groups abroad when he contacted a 911 dispatcher.
“During the calls, he said he was doing this for the leader of [Islamic State], who he named and pledged loyalty to. But he also appeared to be claiming solidarity with the perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing and a Florida man who died as a suicide bomber in Syria for al Nusra front, a group in conflict with the so-called Islamic State,” Comey said.
And this morning the Washington Post weighed in with this story: "Omar Mateen may not have understood the difference between ISIS, al-Qaeda and Hezbollah.”
Not totally adding up, right? Here’s what does strike me, as an LGBT American: The gunman could fit the profile of a self-loathing gay gone terribly wrong. But before continuing, let me add a couple caveats: I did not know the shooter and so what follows are simply my observations as someone who is gay and has reported on the LGBT movement for more than a decade. Also, the shooter was clearly unstable—anyone who opens fire on a room full of innocent people is unstable—and that's a separate issue from being gay.
But what triggered the shooter seems to at least potentially have origins in a deep-seated resentment of himself and his sexual orientation based on societal pressures—or what we in the gay community refer to as “internalized homophobia.”
For instance, multiple reports now suggest the shooter visited the LGBT nightclub he targeted, Pulse, for years prior to the attack.
Chris Callen, a performer who'd worked at Pulse, told CNN he'd seen Mateen a couple times at the nightclub. Callen said he once introduced himself and Mateen was "very friendly" and that he seemed comfortable there. Mateen would regularly come to the club twice a month for a period of three years, he estimated.
Four regular patrons at Pulse also told the Orlando Sentinel they had seen Mateen there multiple times.
The shooter also used gay dating apps:
Kevin West, another regular at Pulse, told the Los Angeles Times that Mateen used gay dating apps on a regular basis and even messaged him on a gay dating app, Jack’d.
And a former classmate said the gunman had asked him out.
The classmate said that he, Mateen and other classmates would hang out, sometimes going to gay nightclubs, after classes at the Indian River Community College police academy. He said Mateen asked him out romantically.
“We went to a few gay bars with him, and I was not out at the time, so I declined his offer,” the former classmate said. He asked that his name not be used.
His father also adds a piece to the puzzle with actions that suggest he believes being gay is worthy of punishment.
In the video posted early Monday, Seddique Mateen says his son was well-educated and respectful to his parents, and that he was "not aware what motivated him to go into a gay club and kill 50 people."
The elder Mateen says he was saddened by his son's actions during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
He then adds: "God will punish those involved in homosexuality," saying it's, "not an issue that humans should deal with."
The shooter's father later walked back those comments in an interview with CBS and removed the Facebook video post, according to NPR.
The shooter's ex-wife also believed him to be struggling with his sexuality.
The ex-wife of Orlando mass killer Omar Mateen claimed Monday that she believed he was homosexual — as it was revealed that he frequented the gay nightclub where he staged the nation’s worst massacre in modern times.
Sitora Yusufiy, who was married to Mateen in 2009 for three months, made the shocking claim on Brazilian television station SBT Brazil.
Her fiancé, Marco Dias, speaking in Portuguese on her behalf, said Yusufiy believed that Mateen had “gay tendencies” and that his father had called him gay in front of her. Dias also claimed “the FBI asked her not to tell this to the American media.”
What this potentially adds up to is the profile of an unstable individual who had trouble coming to grips with his sexuality in the context of a family that believed homosexuality was sinful.
By his father's account, witnessing a gay kiss between two men made the gunman "very angry." If that is true, it would also fit the profile of someone who wasn't comfortable with his sexuality.
When Hillary Clinton addressed the tragedy Monday, she said:
The Orlando terrorist may be dead, but the virus that poisoned his mind remains very much alive. We must attack it with clear eyes, steady hands, unwavering determination and pride in our country and our values.
But in order to have “clear eyes,” we must be willing to look at every aspect of that “virus” without fixating on one causation—terrorism—to the exclusion of another—homophobia. And frankly, the one the media is fixated on doesn’t seem to have all that much grounding. It's all conjecture, of course. The gunman's ties to ISIS are as a much a re-creation based on corroborating evidence as are the accounts that he was gay, or had at least struggled with his sexual orientation.
But if we're going to examine the shooter's psychology in search of answers, we should be unabashed in looking at the whole picture. While one points us in the direction of an external enemy called "terrorism," the other points us toward an internal societal ill known as "homophobia." Both are worthy of exploration, especially as Americans are left to wonder, once again: How could this have happened?
