Why are shooters male?

February 15, 2008 5:35 PM

Why does it appear that all the school/campus shooters are male?

It seems to me that whenever I read the news and there has been a recent shooting where many were either randomly shot to death or injured by a firearm, the perpetrator is male. Does this type of thing happen at the hands of women ever, or is this something that is only done by men and if so, can anybody tell me why?

posted by mamaraks to Human Relations (26 answers total)

The shooting that just took place in Louisiana was perpetrated by a woman.
posted by MegoSteve at 5:36 PM on February 15, 2008

Guesses:
1. Men are naturally more aggressive.
2. Men are less likely to see help for mental illness.
3. Men are not as good as women at expressing their feelings.
4. Men are more likely to have been indoctrinted into gun culture.
posted by hulahulagirl at 5:40 PM on February 15, 2008 [3 favorites]

Wikipedia article on school shootings lists:

Laurie Dann

and

Brenda Ann Spencer


So females have committed similar acts, but it is definitely no where near as common.
posted by defenestration at 5:44 PM on February 15, 2008

Roughly 9/10 homicides in the US are committed by men. School shooters might, in mentality and motivation, be a subset of that.
posted by ibmcginty at 5:55 PM on February 15, 2008

I think there's much less of a social support system for men. It's a lot more common for men to be isolated and antisocial, and it's generally more difficult for male friends to go to each other for emotional support than for women.
posted by pravit at 5:56 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

I think hulagirl probably has the right idea, but the "gun culture" isn't about random killing.
posted by gjc at 5:58 PM on February 15, 2008

Also, the suicide completion rate is four times higher for men than for women in the US. Many of these shootings are murder-suicides, so that's likely a factor.
posted by Metroid Baby at 6:04 PM on February 15, 2008

because as others have said, men kill others and themselves much, much more than women do. that's your answer. the rest is pop sociology.
posted by matteo at 6:11 PM on February 15, 2008

“Gun culture” isn't about random killing but it exalts familiarity with and proficiency in using guns and also in my experience gun culturists often express a great deal of enthusiasm about using them whether in self-defense, war, vigilantism, or otherwise. Some people I've known also regard the possession of guns as a measure in preparing for some action the bad guys are going to take eventually (whoever the bad guys may be in this particular person's worldview) the only possible response to which will be armed revolution. Gun culture has the same relevance here as enthusiasm about demolitions and explosives would have to someone like the Unabomber. I've known women who are into it but not as many and not to the same degree as men I've known.

I think an essential higher tendency to aggression is the basic answer to the OP's question, the same way that historically men have been much more involved in starting wars than women.
posted by XMLicious at 6:31 PM on February 15, 2008

I'm tempted to correct hulagirl:

1. Men are taught to be more aggressive, it's not completely natural.
3. Men are taught that it's not okay to express certain feelings.

But yes, reasons for these differences aside, I think this would play a large role in why such a large proportion of violent crime is committed by males.
posted by twirlypen at 6:36 PM on February 15, 2008 [2 favorites]

I don't think that men are more likely to be angry/lonely/aggressive than women, but it does seem accepted that they are more likely to turn that anger outwards while girls or women are more likely to be self-destructive.

My SO works with abused and troubled kids and says that it is a fairly common pattern. Certainly not true in all cases but common enough to be the norm.
posted by fshgrl at 6:40 PM on February 15, 2008

One note here, though - I don't think that the “gun culture” is covering just anyone who owns a gun or supports the 2^nd amendment, but primarily the people who have the kind of enthusiasms I mention above. I've met many hunters and ex-military people, for example, who are very proficient with firearms and who believe in the 2^nd amendment but whom I wouldn't regard as part of the gun culture that I think some of these school/campus/workplace shooters may be into.

twirlypen - I would disagree with you. Testosterone and other hormones that are more predominant in male physiology induce aggressive behavior in men and women. So in that sense men are naturally aggressive.
posted by XMLicious at 6:42 PM on February 15, 2008

Roughly 9/10 homicides in the US are committed by men.

Men are also about 4 times more likely to commit suicide, which this sort of thing is esentially a form of.
posted by Artw at 6:47 PM on February 15, 2008

...ah, Metroid got there first.
posted by Artw at 6:47 PM on February 15, 2008

Guns, testosterone and aggression (and the hot sauce trick!).
posted by misha at 6:51 PM on February 15, 2008

As others have said, men are more aggressive than women and kill themselves and others more often.

1. Men are taught to be more aggressive, it's not completely natural.

Well, no, nothing is likely completely natural, but it is a simple fact that men have a lot more testosterone than women and that testosterone leads to aggression. This isn't cultural, it's biological.
posted by Justinian at 7:03 PM on February 15, 2008

Best answer: I remember the last Scientific American mind had a blurb about the difference between revenge in males and females. I'm a bit fuzzy on the specifics but the general idea was that if subject A feels slighted by subject B, then when subject B is subjected to pain, subject A can either empathize (feel pain - gotta love those mirror neurons) or feel pleasure. The ratio of pleasure/pain is heavily tilted towards males deriving much more pleasure in revenge than females; in other words, men, you, generally speaking, enjoy watching someone else suffer if you feel like they've slighted you.
posted by reebear at 8:44 PM on February 15, 2008 [1 favorite]

It's also worth noting that some of history's greatest poisoners have been women.

I tend to think that we go with the tools we know.
posted by tkolar at 8:46 PM on February 15, 2008

Check out Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings by Princeton sociologist Katherine Newman.
posted by The Straightener at 9:08 PM on February 15, 2008

Penn State Shooting, 1996, done by a woman.
posted by filmgeek at 10:18 PM on February 15, 2008

I hate to say this, but the whole evolution thing pretty much programmed us men to be killers if need be. Women can do it too, but for some reason, most societies historically have relied on men for the killing. Somehow, I suspect that that latent programming is at fault and men are more likely to see murder as a viable option to deal with whatever anger or other issue we are dealing with.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:25 PM on February 15, 2008

There are more men at the "extremes" of psychological and intellectual conditioning than women. That cuts both ways, of course; there are more male geniuses, but also more male sub-morons.

Men are also more likely to be socially isolated--almost all women have a small circle of friends and a male admirer or two, but there are many men who are completely cut off from friendship and romantic attachment.
posted by sonic meat machine at 10:57 PM on February 15, 2008

Men are also about 4 times more likely to commit suicide, which this sort of thing is esentially a form of.

Not always.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:54 AM on February 16, 2008

The Penn State shooting noted above was perpetrated by a woman my wife grew up with. They also had worked together at the local diner. My wife said that all though everyone knew she was a bit off, the expression of violence was new, though not entirely surprising. The fact that she was in the military also seemed to play a significant role. It was there she got involved with guns. But perhaps it's a chicken or egg thing. Did she join the military because of an attraction to violence or did the military create the interest in guns? Robbins hasn't divulged much in the way of a motive or a target. It's also worth noting that she had recently ended her marriage. She's said that she intended to commit suicide but then just started shooting across the lawn and has no idea why or any memory of it.

The shooting could have been a lot worse. She was stopped by a student who saw what was happening and decided to act. He jumped her while she was changing clips. She tried to stab him with a hunting knife she brought but ended up stabbing herself in the leg. He stayed with her until the police came and used his belt as a tourniquet on her thigh. He kind of redefined hero around here.
posted by Toekneesan at 8:07 AM on February 16, 2008 [1 favorite]

Hm. I am interested that there actually seem to be a few examples of female school shootings and such, and yet you never hear about them. I wonder if part of it isn't simply that people are less viscerally scared when it's a woman... Perhaps when a man with a gun enters the room, everyone freaks the fuck out and there is automatic pandemonium and things go to crap, but when a woman enters with a gun, a few people are kind of able to think something like, well, I could probably take her...

In that sense, the whole idea of the unlimited power of the shooter is taken down a notch, because people find it harder to see women as seriously powerful. They can be sexily powerful, like wearing high boots and carrying an automatic weapon, and they can secondarily powerful, part of a group, but a woman as the in-your-face drill instructor who'll make you shit your pants, or the seething lone gunman who'll destroy the entire school, is a lot harder for people to just immediately get. At some level, they'll notice, "but it's a girl!", and that could make a difference.

(Not that the other stuff isn't a major part of it, just thought perhaps the gender expectations extend even into the actual act, not just the setting up... Also, not saying the first reaction is more correct and the second one sexist, necessarily - it's more like people don't think to think "but it's just some guy" because he fits a certain role that they attribute automatic power to, rather than seriously assessing the situation on its own terms)
posted by mdn at 2:02 PM on February 16, 2008

Women prefer the personal on-hands experience of poisoning people they know.
posted by herbaliser at 4:29 PM on February 19, 2008