thirst
87 percent of all murderers in prison are male? Why?[size=75]
(Don’t ask kevinconman. He will tell you it is probably a woman’s fault.)[/size]
hmmm. kevbo might have a point.
Why shouldn’t men murder? It is in our primitive animalistic instincts to do so, just as it is in a females animalistic instincts to protect, nurture and flaunt.
Humans kill for basic primal reasons, passionate Emotions. Feral insanity temporary or permanent, Territorial, domination.
Most murderers are males. Males of most species kill more than the female. Unless hunting for food.
Females generally kill to protect what they perceive as their territory, be it a mate/possible mate or their way of life.
Males kill kill more for primal domination emotions, hierarchical needs.
Kris,
Is this also true in the animal kingdom or is it just a human condition? Because there are no animal prisons, I am sure the studies aren’t even done, but I would be curious.
Odd that women are more emotional creatures and yet murder less. The dominance of women is a curious thing because they do carry the bigger stick when the lights go out. Sorry for the pun.
lady Bessy,
I think first off, you have to look at your perspective.
Primal hostility in animals is predicated upon the basic survival imperative.
Humans make “violence” something else. Part of the cognition fallacy that we use to perpetuate the idea that as forward seeing, biped, upright hominids, we are “outside” or “above” nature.
Territorialism and genetic domination are built into the human animal in the exact same fashion as any other predatory natural individual entity. We must kill to survive: for our territory, for our mate, for our offspring, for our resources.
But, as it always is, we have bastardised the process with cognition. We have made the primal male a “less than” standard, because we believe in the fallacy that human societies have to be different than the others in the natural world.
We now have created a paradox, at the most fundamental level, whereby the male that is built as a predator, is a social anathema, a pariah. But still that will not, and cannot, stop the instinct. So we create terms like “murder” and “violence” to further support the belief that somehow we are different from the rest of nature, and this not only stigmatises the natural instinct into being something “aberrant”, but compounds the confusion.
Would you use your car to try to remodel your house? Or is that misuse of a tool? Misuse of a tool invariably ends in chaos.
Men are made to be tools of destruction, which is an act of cleansing, which maintains natural balance of the system, (i.e. overpopulation of the species is one side effect of imbalance). This is why I will continue to believe that men are made for war, not politics and diplomacy. Wrong tool for the wrong job.
We are made to kill, and it isn’t a matter of socially stigmatised morality. It is a fact of nature. Some have learned to face the fact.
Assuming that there being more men in prison for murder than women implies correctly that men murder more than women …
… I would be interested in knowing the gender of the victims.
Though there may be more men than women murdered, my guess is that the percentage of men murderers is much higher than the percentage of men murder victims.
Men are stronger than women. Given a life-or-death struggle between men and women, the man is usually going to win.
So we really can’t say that men are more prone to murder than women are.
At least we can’t if we look at the incidence of murderous abortion, as that murder (though situationally sometimes not illegal) remains murder always nevertheless, and, such murder is collusively done by women.
But even then, we may be missing a man’s role in murderous abortion.
When a man tells the woman to abortingly murder her offspring because he won’t support her in the child-raising process and he will “leave her” if she doesn’t commit abortion, he is threatening her emotionally and economically. He is using his strength to overpower her into doing something wrong.
Such is an historic dynamic between men and women.
Men, ever since they first “clubbed” the woman over the head and drug her by the hair back to their cave, have been threateningly overpowering women, sometimes thereby coercing women to behave badly and against their nature.
Such has created a culture of this behavior endemic to male female relationships … a culture we are in the process of dissolving.
Mas is right. But, in laymans terms. Female emotions tend to protect life where male is dominate. A female will protect an infant from another species from being killed by her own species male or other female.
A male will normally not even notice the infant.
Females are not convicted of murder as much. Normal female murderers are dismissed or aquitted. Females murder more for self defense or what can be construed as self defense.
Juries and courts give females much more leniency than males because females are,Oh hell I hate this , , considered the weaker sex and more prone to kill to protect.,such damn gender bias, but true. It is easier for a lawyer to defend a female murderer than a male murderer. The Average murderer I should say. Once it starts getting freaky forget it.
Oh and in answer to your question Bessy, yea its true. Murder and killing are primal. Oddly enough, Animals can murder for no apparent sound logical reason too. They can kill the animal they were just friendly with for no logical reason that we can see or sense or perceive or know. The higher the intelligence the more likely this is going to happen.
Feral insanity is what I have started calling it. It is recorded more and more now. I have not figured out wether it is occuring more or that it is just being recorded more. I don’t have a great deal of time to do the research.
JH,
It wasn’t my opinion. It is a fact.
Mas,
As always, an interesting perspective. But made to kill? I think your correlation to the animal kingdom was really interesting because humans forget the basic need, add guilt, add the justice system etc etc. and nothing is quite so natural anymore. Does that mean that we just hit our neighbor with a big stick? Probabaly not. But it is an interesting perspective. I am still struck with the phrase “made to kill.” Could you tell me, do you mean emotionally?
I remember hearing about a book called “The Gift of Fear” where the author maintains that humans have learned to ignore their basic visceral instincts thus overthinking the sick feeling when a murderer gets on the elevator them. Instead of “listening” to their primal fear, they overthink, justify, make excuses, and make the wrong choice - staying on the elevator and getting mugged or murdered. We have evolved past animals - pity…
A dog would attack the bastard.
Kriswest,
Now THIS is true, and quite unfair. The fairer, innocent-looking doe-eyed sweetheart with a Squeeky Fromm attitude gets off. Scary.
Is there any truth to men feeling more repressed with their emotions as boys? I could see this as a reason for the pressure cooker personality later… Just a thought.
Just a side issue, Why are serial killers almost always white males?
This adds another tasty morsel to the banquet of ideas, don’t you think? 
.
.
“Statistically, the average serial killer is a white male from a lower to middle class background, usually in his twenties or thirties. Many were physically or emotionally abused by parents. Some were adopted. As children, fledgling serial killers often set fires, torture animals, and wet their beds (these red-flag behaviors are known as the “triad” of symptoms.) Brain injuries are common. Some are very intelligent and have shown great promise as successful professionals. They are also fascinated with the police and authority in general. They will either have attempted to become police themselves but were rejected, or worked as security guards, or had served in the military. Many, including John Gacy, the Hillside Stranglers, and Ted Bundy, will disguise themselves as law enforcement officials to gain access to their victims.”
Men murder because it is the most selfish thing a man can do. Women don’t murder as often because they pacify their selfish needs by tricking men into marriage. I had to say it…
Generally, there is a tendency to avoid spouting off about “emotional drive” and/or “emotional intelligence”. After the years of dealing with psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists; the whole lot of them can sink with lead anchors in my opinion. According to them, “everyone is a victim”. Bullshit.
From the perspective I am coming lady, not sure that the initial drive behind rage instinct is necessarily emotional. It may become justified by emotion after the fact. In the instances that my perspective is predicated upon, the sudden snap to violent action supercedes any cognitive process that I would tend to believe would have to be precursory of emotion.
For example, my lady was working for a specialised grocery store chain, back in the nineties. The first year, she insists that we go together to the Christmas party. Tried to make it clear, that it was a bad idea, there were a number of people who were already on my radar, and there was going to be alcohol and a few known hop heads.
Enter: “The Les”. He had a “thing” for the lady, and a real problem with pronouncing admiration for her breasts, gawking. Typical male behavior, just the attention directed into the wrong territory. A fellow from the martial arts school happened to work for the same company, so he and I were busy discussing martial interests, while the lady was on the dance floor with her workmates. There was no cognition or emotion in the instance. My eyes lock onto Les with his right index finger hooked inside the lady’s blouse. I don’t know what the distance was, or how many people separated us, but there was instantaneous rage, I was across the distance, I remember his hand coming up defensively, Ippon Seihonagi, and watching him hit the floor - all that before a measure of emotional pleasure started to become obvious.
Everything prior lacked thought. Pure instinct. My territory, my mate, my mate who provides children, and some genetically weak fuck that was crossing a territorial boundary with presumed impugnity.
Is that emotion? I have no idea. The only thing that is apparent in those situations, is the action preceeds appearance/known activity of thought.
I think after those instances, where we have learned to fume, and posture for victory/defeat, huddling over our territory, those things probably show emotion, especially as concerns validating the correctness of the actions.
Nah, mostly it looks like raw instinct.
I’m just going back to your original question, and I think everyone’s touched on this a little bit, but to answer it clearly :
87 percent of all murderers in prison are male, because :
Of the male’s instincts/primal/animal etc.
Female murderers are less likely to be convicted in our present system.
Female instincts are more for protect/nurture/etc.
Many things have been said here that relate to the issue, but I think the only way to try and find a ‘reason’ for a statistic is to take all of these things together.
Also I think that while females may have just as many murderous intentions as males, they are less likely to go through with it because of their different psychology.
there are two types of people. Ones who blame others(homicidal), ones who repress it inward (suicidal).
Imagine the chip on someones shoulder that would drive them to blowing up in fits of rage. Or even the chip on someones shoulder that would give you the demeanor and attitude that would drive people to hate you.
I was watching an interesting doco on the first convicted female serial killer and part of the reason it took so long to catch her was law enforcement assumed that it would be a male perpetrator. They went on to argue that many of the unsolved murders might well be committed by women. I can believe this argument and a certain bias in finding deviance only in the place you look for it…though we should recognise that while this bias probably exist - it probably does so for a reason.
“Tricking men?” You really believe men are so simple minded as to be “tricked” into making a legally binding commitment? That’s like saying a women was “tricked” into going to bed. If both parties are adults and of sound mind, they are responsible for their choices. Enough of the victimology.
Men, statistics show, are less able to just sit with feelings that are painful, feelings of shame and hurt and fear, for instance, than are women.
When they can’t just sit with them, they get impatiently irritated, angry, because those feelings won’t go away, they just linger to cause pain.
Men have been shown to have a lower tolerance of pain than women have. Men agonize over a little kidney stone – if men gave birth our race would have died out eons ago.
Men, culturally, hormonally, genetically – whatever – have also been observed to be more inclined to taking action than women.
Since men have an historically inculcated reinforcement for violence via hunting and the military, men may call upon that collective unconscious “training” to aggressively defend their turf and attack “invaders” during consciously difficult times.
Couple all that with their overpowering drive to seek and find and “mate” with “anyone” just to spread their genetic seed, it would appear that men are simply prone to go off “half cocked” whereas women aren’t simply because women not only naturally give GREAT consideration to the “five minutes of pleasure, nine months of PAIN” axiomatic transferrable concept that men understandably wouldn’t give a second thought to, women simply lack the aparatus with which to go off “half ____ed”.
When everything is taken into account, it’s understandable that men would be more likely to murder than women.
Another reason why the death penalty should be abolished – it’s simply biasedly unfair to punish men so cruelly for something so many of them have been programmed to do, a programming that has had the beneficial effect forever of legitimately defending we women and our children from historic real predators (both animal and human) to thus keep our species and various family trees from extinction.
why do men kill?
to remove a threat, to eat, for fun.
According to your logic, we should behave according to our instincts whether legal or illegal. BTW, not all women have the nature to protect, nurture and flaunt; just as not not all men have the nature to murder.
In the West, since many have left their gender specified spheres of influence, this has changed. 