It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

> There's no need for convoluted explanations.

I don't see how it's at all convoluted. If anything, it's too reductive.

Taboos, traditions, etc., don't need to exist because of a reason that's explicit. Sometimes, they do, but that doesn't explain the taboos that don't make obvious sense. A taboo can be more or less a form of "cultural neuron" that doesn't have an explicit purpose but incidentally changes the balance of the system towards something that society at a given time may benefit from without even knowing it. A religion featuring more ornate hats than others may have more true believers, or perhaps the other way around for all we know. If that's at least plausible, if not true, that wouldn't necessarily mean a reverend at one point decided to declare a certain kind of hat wearing because of the "good of the church."

The inverse can also be true. Take for instance the taboo of sexism. Makes sense, right? Given modern western principles, why should culture allow for discrimination based on sex? On the other hand, there's evidence that many women, regardless of their political positions, actually appreciate men who are "benevolently sexist." It's a phenomenon compelling enough that even Psychology Today, a publication heavily biased against anything unflattering to women, has reported on it more than once. By making sexism a taboo, and far more taboo as of late, society has raised the bar for just how confident a man has to be to attract a woman. We really don't need a study to demonstrate that, on average, women are attracted to confidence. An effect of making sexism taboo is it changes the signal to noise ratio, allowing women to better identify which men they'll actually be attracted to. Maybe there were some people arguing against sexism with this in mind, but I imagine they are an extreme minority. Most anti-sexists probably weren't thinking along those lines.

At least that taboo makes some reasonable sense in isolation, and even the fashion of religious garb can be made sense of, but what about a taboo that makes no sense? What about merely making a mouth-noise that comes out sounding like "shit?"

It makes little explicit sense that saying the word "shit" be a faux pas. You can say poop, doodie, scat, dung, and even crap, but shit is considered a curse word. It's really pretty stupid.

Except I would argue that having any form of taboo can have a positive effect, even if it barely makes sense. By having cultural limits of any kind, it puts the society on the same page and creates a mindset where individuals try to at least maintain some level of basic class as a mindset. Personally, I like saying the word shit, but adding virtually any variable to a chaotic system can have effects that weren't explicitly predicted.

Reads like ai

"they can be viewed as the 21st century expression of a culture-bound stress reaction of our post-modern society emphasizing the uniqueness of individuals and valuing their alleged exceptionality, thus promoting attention-seeking behaviours and aggravating the permanent identity crisis of modern man."

There is a tendency to reify aberrations and disorders and to identify with them because it gives you another way of attaining a feeling of (false) "uniqueness" and exceptionality, or a way of trying to manipulate people into showing you "compassion" or pity. It's a disease of our age. "The spectrum" seems to be a popular example. These are afflictions, not identities. They're nothing to be proud of when you have them, if you have them, nor are they things to be desired.

There may also be passive-aggressive motives. Personal autonomy and the absolute sovereignty of the individual and his desires are a superordinate value today. We chafe under any perceived constraint or restraint on our desires. What do some people do when they don't want to follow some rule they should, but fear opposing that rule overtly? They rebel through small, passive-aggressive ways. Imagine now you are faced with the internalized emotional compulsion or fear to behave or not behave a certain way that you don't want to submit to, but fear opposing or ignoring for whatever reason. Simulating tics could be an interior rebellion against that undesired compulsion. Repeat something often enough, and it becomes a habit.

(Curiously, I would attribute the very cause of this inner struggle to our disordered attitude toward desire and appetite in the first place where the tail is essentially wagging the dog. Putting reason before desire and submitting to the truth liberates a person from the capricious tyranny of appetite.)

Yes, according to WHO. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240003927

.