The frames discussed by Butler seem extremely powerful in diffusion our illusions of trauma, but should not be confused with a way to actually understand others’ trauma. Like the interpretive communities discussed by Sturken, we are always viewing events and issues through a frame. The way the frame through which we view is constructed is infinitely complex. Like in interpretive communities, we have multiple different sources informing the way we understand trauma events, our friends, family, leaders, teachers, media, and all of those have been influenced by others before them. We are influenced in innumerable ways as a part of our respective societies. Therefore, while it is eye opening and helpful to view issues through a different frame, as with the poetry written by Guantanamo detainees, we still lack understanding of the majority of factors that complicate the issue. For example, the stories show a much more human side to their suffering, instead of understanding it through the extremely convoluted frame that is the narrative of the War on Terror we have grown to understand (or I have as an American) over our lifetimes, we can strip away some of the most problematic ways in which we view these people. We don’t read the poems with the same narrative that these are bad guys who deserve what they get, a dehumanization spawned by an ends justify the means ideology. We can appreciate their suffering more, without the detainees being understood as ‘terrorists’ with the us versus them way of thinking. However, as Saal wrote, comparing trauma is very problematic, futile even. For how can we possibly understand these people, their view of the world has been forged over their lifetime, as have ours. There is no ‘we are all just humans’ for that would require a mutual reference point for humanity which does not exist.