The Experience of Gender Role Conflict in School Shooters: A Qualitative Study Polly Marston, PhD University of Connecticut, 2019 Abstract School shootings are becoming familiar events in America. School children live in a world where they fear violence and practice active shooter drills even during kindergarten. With no signs of the violence abating, it is of critical importance for the public to understand why these attacks are occurring. The purpose of this study is to examine the writings of school shooters for the presence of masculine ideologies and gender role conflict. Using the qualitative directed content analysis methodology, gender role conflict theory, and a feminist theoretical perspective, the writings of seven school shooters were analyzed. Little research attention has been paid to the sex and gender roles of the shooters. School shooters are almost universally boys exhibiting what can be defined as gendered behavior. This study examined the patterns of gender role conflict in school shooters’ lives. The findings found the presence of masculine ideology and distorted gender role schemas, three of the four outlined patterns of gender role conflict, and gender role devaluations, restrictions, and violations in their writings. The results provided evidence that the shooters in the sample wrote about gender role conflict and the resulting stress it caused in their lives. The limitations of the study and implications are discussed. The Experience of Gender Role Conflict in School Shooters: A Qualitative Study Polly Hannah Marston B.S. University of Connecticut, 1994 M.S. Wheelock College, 1996 6th Year Certificate University of Connecticut, 2005 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Connecticut 2019 APPROVAL PAGE Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation The Experience of Gender Role Conflict in School Shooters: A Qualitative Study Presented by Polly Hannah Marston, M.S. Major Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ James O’Neil, PhD Associate Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ Melissa Bray, PhD Associate Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ Clewiston Challenger, PhD University of Connecticut 2019 ii Acknowledgements This is a paper that I believed would never be finished. The idea of completing this is almost overwhelming. I am grateful to be writing these words. There are not enough words to express my gratitude for my advisor James O’Neil, PhD. I sat across from him when he said “Finishing this is part of your recovery” and although I did not know what he meant, I now see what he means. I would like to thank the generosity and encouragement of my committee, Melissa Bray, PhD., and Clewiston Challenger, PhD. They gave their invaluable time and encouragement, both of which I desperately needed. I am originally born to parents who never finished high school and delivered to another set who showered me with books. At the end of this, I recall all of them and I firmly believe this is what they all would have wanted for me. I would like to express my deep appreciation to my parents Peter and Gem Marston who did not let me quit the countless times I threw in the towel. I cried and they came. I doubted and they came. I celebrated and they came. I would also like to thank my children Ruth Burke and Edward Koyama, who offer me endless inspiration. My brother Patrick Marston and his husband Michael Brunt became my biggest cheerleaders and I often needed their enthusiasm. My sister Penny Marston arrived with unconditional encouragement and wine and I am very grateful for her. I would like to express my formal gratitude to my friend and volunteer research assistant Madi Clark, who appeared out of the blue. She helped me organize and format and basically saved the day when this document became completely unwieldy and overwhelming. I would not have completed this paper without her help. iii Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: Introduction………………………………………...…………………………1 CHAPTER TWO: Review of the Literature……………………………..……………………….5 Feminist Theory……………………………………………………………………….….5 Social Construction of Gender…………………………………………………………...8 History of School Shooters………………………………………………………….…...11 Research on School Shooters………………………………………………………...….12 Gender Role Conflict Terminology………………………………………………….......17 Empirical Research on Men’s and Boy’s Gender Role Conflict…………………….......22 Assessing Unconscious Gender Role Conflict…………………………………………..24 CHAPTER THREE: Methodology…………………………..……………………………….....27 Research Design and Methodology………………………………………………….….27 Sampling Method and Size…………………………………………………………...…30 Description of Attackers Included in the Review…………………………………...…..31 Data Collection……………………………………………………………………....…33 Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………...34 Pre-test or Pilot Study………………………………………………………………….36 Manifest Content……………………………………………………………………….37 Latent Content………………………………………………………………………….37 CHAPTER FOUR: Results…………………………………………………………………….40 Research Question 1……………………………………………...……………....…….41 Gender Role Conflict Correlate: Negative Attitudes towards Women………………...42 Gender Role Conflict Correlate: Bias against Racial Minorities……………………..44 iv Gender Role Conflict Correlate: Negative Attitudes towards Help Seeking………….45 Gender Role Conflict Correlate: Use of Alcohol and/or Drugs………………………47 Gender Role Conflict Correlate: Relationship with Fathers……………………....….48 Masculinity Ideology Correlates……………………………………………...49 Masculine Ideology Correlate: Overt Hostility and Aggression…………...…49 Masculine Ideology Correlate Expressed through Loneliness…………….….51 Distorted Gender Role Schemas………………………………………………...….....53 Distorted Gender Role Schema: Power………………………………….........53 Distorted Gender Role Schema: Intimacy………………………………...…..54 Distorted Gender Role Schema: Sexuality……………………………….…...56 Distorted Gender Role Schema: Success………………………………...…...57 Research Question 2……………………………………………………………….....58 Gender Role Conflict Regarding Success, Power and Competition………....58 Gender Role Conflict Restrictive Emotionality…………………....................61 Gender Role Conflict Restrictive Affectionate Behavior Between Men...........63 Gender Role Conflict Between Family and School/Work................................65 Research Question 3………………………………………………………………….66 Gender Role Devaluation of Self…………………………………………......67 Gender Role Devaluation of Others……………………….………………....69 Gender Role Devaluation by Others…………………………………….........71 Gender Role Restriction of Self………………………………………….........73 Gender Role Restriction of Others………………………………………........75 Gender Role Violation of Self…………………………………………………75 v Gender Role Violation of Others……………………………………………..76 Gender Role Violations by Others…………………………………………...79 CHAPTER FIVE: Discussion, Conclusion and Implications of the Study………………….82 Discussion of the Three Research Questions…..…………………………………....82 Discussion of the Specific Results……………………………………………………84 Success, Power, and Competition…………………………………………....84 Distorted Gender Role Schemas……………………………………………..85 Gender Role Correlates………………………………………………………85 Gender Role Devaluations, Restrictions, and Violations………………….....86 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………87 Gender Role Conflict and School Shooters………………………………….87 Lack of Social Support……………………………………………………….88 Hegemonic Masculinity and School Shooters……………………………………89 Mental Health and School Shooters……………………………………………….90 Implications of the Study and Recommendations…………………………….91 Limitations of the Research…………………………………………………………..93 Future Research on School Shooters…………………………………………….......95 References……………………………………………………………………………………97 Appendix A: IRB Letter……………………………………………………………………109 Appendix B: Coding Guide…………………………………………………………………111 Appendix C: Coding Definitions and Abbreviations……………………………………….112 Appendix D: Coding Instructions…………………………………………………………...113 Appendix E: Latent/Manifest Tables for Eric Hainstack……………………………………116 vi Appendix F: Latent/Manifest Tables for Dylan Klebold…………………………………….118 Appendix G: Latent/Manifest Tables for Eric Harris………………………………………...128 Appendix H: Latent/Manifest Tables for Kip Kinkel………………………………………...136 Appendix I: Latent/Manifest Tables for Elliott Rodger………………………………...…….139 Appendix J: Latent/Manifest Tables for Kimveer Gill………………………………………222 Appendix K: Latent/Manifest Tables for Gang Lu…………………………………………..228 vii CHAPTER 1: Introduction Statement of the Problem A school shooting is defined as an attack at an educational institution that involves a firearm (Vossekuil, Bryan et al., 2004). Although they are experienced worldwide, school shootings have been classified as a “uniquely American crisis” (Cox & Rich, 2018). Between the sentinel Columbine shooting of 1999 and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012, there were a total of 31 school shootings in the United States, while only 14 occurred in the rest of the world. Between 1999 and 2018, over 214,000 children were exposed to gun violence at 216 schools in 36 states and the District of Columbia and 141 of those children were killed and 284 were injured. By May of 2018 more people, children, and staff were killed in schools than were killed in military service (Cox and Rich, 2018). Early 2018 was a deadly time for school shootings with 13 shootings in k-12 settings that resulted in with 32 killed and 65 injured (Cox & Rich, 2018). The ultimate goal of studying school shooters is