When police and media refer to a biologically male mass shooter as female, they erase the most significant risk factor for such crimes: being male. This ideological choice undermines necessary conversations about male violence and alienation, hindering crime prevention efforts.

Related Insights

The consistent pattern of men committing mass violence is rooted in biological evolution. Men are wired for aggression and physical confrontation, a trait historically selected for by women seeking protectors. This is a biological reality, not a surprising social anomaly.

With three-quarters of mental health providers being women, the field may have a significant blind spot regarding male issues. This gender imbalance can make it difficult for men to feel seen and heard, creating a structural barrier to effective treatment that goes beyond social stigma and pushes them towards toxic online communities.

The political left often alienates young men by framing them as 'the problem,' while the far-right offers a regressive, misogynistic vision. This failure from both sides to constructively address the genuine challenges young men face leaves them vulnerable to extremist narratives that thrive in the resulting ideological vacuum.

Authoritarian regimes like Russia weaponize extreme examples of Western gender discourse, such as police calling male shooters 'female.' They use this to promote 'traditional values' diplomacy, portraying the West as perverse, which consolidates their soft power and hinders local LGBTQ+ rights.

The successful fight for women's equality has inadvertently created a blind spot for the growing problems facing men, such as higher suicide rates and lower college enrollment. This 'elite neglect' from the left has alienated male voters, who feel their problems are ignored or that they are seen as the problem.

Productive conversations about men's struggles are stifled by a societal "gag reflex." This is caused by the far-right co-opting the issue with regressive solutions and the far-left reframing it as men *being* the problem, leading to immediate accusations of misogyny.

The crisis among young men stems from a societal narrative that pathologizes their core biological impulses. Traits like aggression, dominance, and ambition, which are natural drivers, are now deemed toxic. This creates internal conflict and a sense of worthlessness, contributing to 'deaths of despair.'

The struggles and pathologies seen in young men are not just an isolated gender issue. They are a leading indicator that the broader societal belief in upward mobility—'we can all do well'—is eroding. This group is the first to react when reliable paths to success seem blocked.

From a young age, men are taught to see vulnerability as weakness. When faced with fear, a common coping mechanism is to transmute that emotion into rage, which is seen as a more acceptable expression of male strength.

The societal "gag reflex" against discussing men's struggles is rooted in the fact that early voices on the topic often conflated masculinity with coarseness and cruelty. This created a lasting, negative association that hinders productive conversation.

Labeling Male Shooters 'Female' Obscures Critical Criminological Risk Factors | RiffOn