Mass School Shooting Sociology

The Societal Factors that Lead to Mass School Shootings
Conner Koe - 1330997
Sociology 1A03 – T24 (Tyler Alderson)
Wednesday, March 5th, 2014

Introduction
Although historically violence has always seemingly plagued education systems and their schools, the last 20 years has marked the emergence of a new form of violence occurring within these institutions, one which is far more deadly and cruel. The act of an individual or multiple individuals executing what is known as a rampage school shooting dates back to as early as the mid-1970s, but truly became a recognized phenomenon in the mid-1990s due to several unprecedented and shocking occurrences of these attacks (Rocque, 2012; Muschert, 2007; Wike & Fraser, 2009).
Cataclysmic events such as the massacres in Columbine in 1999, Virginia Tech in 2007, and most recently Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 have further propelled mass school shootings into the public eye. The arbitrary nature and velocity of these acts has left the public with many questions in which researchers hope to answer. The most common question being, by what means is an individual compelled to commit such a horrendous and disassociating act? Many researchers initially examined these occurrences solely on a microanalytical level, accrediting the causes of these mass school shootings to purely psychological influences, or only attempting to explain the developmental factors that could lead an individual to such an act (Henry, 2009). But in doing so, the researchers failed to acknowledge a complete discourse on the subject, and numerous macro-analytical and other outside factors were neglected. Though recently, a more extensive amount of research has been conducted on the subject welcoming other possible influences. This essay will analyze five current research studies focused on revealing a broader range of societal factors which can lead an individual to perpetrate a mass shooting at an educational institution. Beginning by examining the effects of aggrieved entitlement and masculinity, the essay will then go on to address the influence of victimization over a shooter, and follow with a report on the impacts of firearm accessibility in relation to school shootings. Lastly, the essay will offer a succinct excerpt on the sociological relevance and future direction for research on the subject.
The Effects of Masculinity and Aggrieved Entitlement
Research has brought to light the fact that mass school shootings are almost exclusively a male occurrence, with only a few rare exceptions of females ever being recorded (Henry, 2009; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). As such, researchers have naturally attributed the masculinity of an individual, or the lack thereof, as being a factor of major influence in such occurrences. Studies into the phenomenon highlight significant commonalities between the treatment of individual shooters, mainly being that they are repeatedly subject to physical/mental bullying, severe humiliation, and homophobic slurs (Henry, 2009; Rocque, 2012). This kind of treatment invokes a sense of emasculation in which the shooters feel they must combat in order to restore their male status. “Humiliation is emasculation: humiliate someone and you take away his manhood” (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010, pg. 454). Unfortunately, these individuals resort to violence as their method of restoration. This is also known as hegemonic masculinity, victimized individuals feel the need to ‘restore the self’ by inflicting destruction on others (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). Rocque (2012) further solidifies this, stating that school shooters use violence as a method of displaying their male dominance over others after their masculinity has been damaged or questioned.
Through a sense of aggrieved entitlement, research also points out shooters feel justified in perpetrating these acts of violence (Henry, 2009; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010; Rocque, 2012). After years of constant bullying, torment, and humiliation, these individuals come to the conclusion that vengeance through violence is the only appropriate action to prove or rescue their sense of masculinity and dominance. It is arguable that gender socialization is the greatest influence in the construction of these individuals’ false senses of manhood (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). Certain gender ideals socialize these individuals to believe violence is an appropriate test of masculinity, while marginalization causes them to seek a way to repair their manhood and concurrently punish those who have oppressed them. These individuals believe it to be in the definition and social norms of ‘being a man’ to compensate for their loss of masculinity when victimized. Hence, being emasculated causes these individuals to do what they believe any other masculine man would do in their specific situation, retaliate (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). It must also be acknowledged that shooters feel a sense of superiority in comparison to others (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010), further obscuring their sense of masculinity when being tormented and creating the desire to control.
Though it may be argued that not all individuals who have suffered emasculation have necessarily become homicidal, it is merely attributed as an influence for an individual to commit such an act. The apparent loss of masculinity in an individual can lead to destructive and fatal behaviour, which poses the question, why exactly are the shooters targeted by others as subjects of torment?

Victimization
It is sufficiently agreed across all five articles that victimization is a significant influence in the phenomenon of mass school shootings. All five articles also initially ask what exactly it is within these individuals that draw others to victimize them. Reports suggest that mass school shooters deviate from their surrounding cultural norms and are often perceived as ‘different’ – shy, bookish, and nerdy in appearance by their peers (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010; Wike & Fraser, 2009). This apparent difference in cultural norms is what causes the torment from others and is a result of cultural marginalisation (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). Wike & Fraser (2009) found that victimizations of these persons are not simply passive rejections or neglect from peers, but usually more vicious and cruel methods of bullying. Although, the passive treatments still contribute to feelings of isolationism and loneliness, which can further lead an individual to seek destruction of others which ties into the findings of Muschert (2007). Individuals suffer relentless bullying because they are perceived as different, and most often it is the sexual orientation of the shooter that is brutally attacked in these circumstances, putting their masculinity in to question, and thus, provoking violence. Wike & Fraser’s (2009) findings suggest that attacks on one’s sexuality (i.e. victimizing through homophobic slurs), can be the single most destructive agent to one’s masculinity depending on their cultural norms. Although, Rocque (2012), Kalish & Kimmel (2010), and Henry (2009) disagree, stating that victimization is too arbitrarily situational to deem one specific method as the most influential of all.
The sort of cruel victimization school shooters experience cause feelings of worthlessness and isolation in an individual, which then goes on to create a sense of desperation and extreme frustration (Henry, 2009). In some cases it is documented that school shooters were subject to physical and sexual abuse prior to their attacks on institutions (Henry, 2009). Out of 24 cases of mass school shootings with only a single perpetrator, Wike and Fraser (2009) found that 21 of these individuals had experienced severe harassment and marginalisation.
There are differentiating opinions between the researchers in regards to whether or not the influence of victimization is a direct or indirect cause of mass school shootings. Wike and Fraser (2009) do not denounce the impact victimization has on a shooter, but state that it is not a direct influence, rather, an opening to alienation and resentment, which they believe are the highest influences of school shootings. I believe the main issue regarding these findings is that victimization is completely situational and based around a cultural context. If an individual’s sexuality is questioned in a society that openly accepts all forms of sexuality is there still as much of an influence? It is obvious that several factors contribute to an individual’s desire to commit a mass shooting and to what degree is victimization a part of that desire?
Gun Culture and Accessibility Another congruently discussed influence within the articles is the impact of firearm accessibility. It is stated within the field of this phenomenon that access to firearms are a required condition for an attack to be considered a mass school shooting (Muschert, 2007). This is due to the essentiality of a weapon being needed to carry out the act. Though regardless of aggrieved entitlement, victimization, or any influences of that matter, only one element is necessary in order for a mass school shooting to take place, and that is access to a gun (Muschert, 2007). Any other contributing influence is meaningless unless an individual can gain access to a firearm. Henry (2009) clarifies this conclusion with his own findings, suggesting access to firearms is not a direct cause to any shooting; rather, he states that a weapon simply enables an individual to shoot. Research proposes that the ease of access in regards to firearms can heavily influence a potential shooter’s choice in whether or not they carry out the act. Kalish & Kimmel (2010) state, “The access to guns proves a crucial element of mass shooter’s trajectories, since without such availability, it is unlikely that these men would make the same decisions.” Based on their findings, Kalish & Kimmel (2010) also suggest that weapon accessibility is the transitioning step in the decision for an individual to either commit mass murder or simply commit suicide. It must also be addressed that it is not simply the accessibility of guns which influences mass school shootings, but also the culture surrounding the weapons. The articles looked to answer this, by asking how gun culture was propelled by media related violence. All five articles ubiquitously agree that media violence, (including music, television, video games, etc.) is a heavy proponent of school shootings, leading individuals to experience violent fantasies in which they eventually act out under certain contributing pretenses. There is also a general view of acceptance in various nations (most prominently the United States of America) which possess gun laws enabling citizens to purchase firearms if they meet a certain set of criteria (Wike & Fraser, 2009). As a result, gun availability becomes more rampant and accepting within the culture of such nations.

Sociological Relevance and Future Research Many of the theories and findings presented within this essay are heavily related to a sociological context. Social-control theory emphasizes the significance of childhood, and explains how without the proper development of social norms and values, an individual is more likely to deviate later on (Henry, 2009). It also explains how the inability to complete proper socialization can result in a lack of self-control. This is evident in the context of mass school shooters, as they are often viewed as deviants of social and cultural norms, and are often targeted because of this. Shooters also show an apparent lack of self-control in their reckless and violent actions (Muschert, 2007). Another related sociological theory of importance is the subculture theory. Subculture theory associates individuals belonging to countercultures as deviants of general society due to their differentiating norms and values (Henry, 2009). Mass school shooters would also fall under this category as many belong to countercultures rejecting normative views (Henry, 2009). In regards to future research, I will suggest that in order to gain a complete discourse on the matter of mass school shootings, multiple disciplines must be addressed and formulated together in unison.
Although a sociological perspective merits a great amount of insight into the subject of mass school shootings, other disciplines (such as: criminology, psychology, etc.) must be addressed to comprehend and provide a more critical analysis on every aspect of these occurrences. I will also suggest that in the future, micro and macro analytical processes must be conjoined in order to grasp a broader understanding of this phenomenon. In other words, methods such as individual mental illness (micro), and community influences (macro), must be looked at together in order to gain a greater understanding of these
situations.
Conclusion
In this essay I discussed several societal factors that lead an individual to commit a mass school shooting including masculinity and aggrieved entitlement, the effects of victimization, and gun culture and accessibility. I also discussed a sociological relevance to the subject and provided suggestions for future research and orientation. Altogether, the findings suggested that due to severe victimization, deviated individuals suffer a loss of masculinity, and socialization creates the need to exact vengeance through violent actions. Research suggests gun accessibility and culture enables, and empowers potential shooters with the ability to control others through violence, further fulfilling their loss of masculinity. Although, it must be recognized that every occurrence of this phenomenon is situational, and that certain influences may or may not be present always. Yet it is still of great importance to establish a foundation in which future studies may build onto in order to further develop a better understanding of the societal factors that lead to mass school shootings.

References
Muschert, G.
W. (2007). Research in school shootings. Sociology Compass, 1(1), 60-80.
Rocque, M. (2012). Exploring school rampage shootings: Research, theory, and policy. The Social Science Journal, 49(3), 304-313.
Wike, T. L., & Fraser, M. W. (2009). School shootings: Making sense of the senseless. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14(3), 162-169.
Kalish, R., & Kimmel, M. (2010). Suicide by mass murder: Masculinity, aggrieved entitlement, and rampage school shootings. Health Sociology Review, 19(4), 451- 464.
Henry, S. (2009). School violence beyond columbine: A complex problem in need of an interdisciplinary analysis. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9),
1246-1265.