The problematic logical fallacy about the Stockholm syndrome

From the information I could gather, the whole “Stockholm syndrome” ( is a highly problematic and doubtful idea. There MIGHT BE an actual psychological confusion state that the Stockholm syndrome describes, although I’d be very careful about psychoanalytical mainstream like that.
But let’s just assume for now that it is a real thing.
Due to the way it is described (giving various possible reasons that lead to such a behavior) the problem with it is an ensuing popular logical fallacy where it is assumed that ALL cases of such behavior must be psychological confusion.
This is of course very convenient for authorities with a violence monopoly, because it conceils the symptoms of real social problems and suppresses the development of empathy. If for example a hostage-taker acts based on motivations that are generally regarded as honorable/noble, or even just tragic and without malicious core intent, then it would be most healthy, compassionate, virtuous, saint-like to harbor no resentment towards that person, and depending on the quality of character of the victim, even more or less severe harm inflicted to them could be tolerated.
Thus, the Stockholm syndrome theory’s (pop culture induced?) overshadowing of discussion about cases that do not constitute a case of the syndrome harms the advancement of society’s health and humankind’s spiritual evolution.