How and why women Kill vs How and why men do!

MillieDynamite

Millie'sVastExpanse
Joined
Jun 5, 2021
Posts
9,222
How and why women Kill vs How and why men do!

How murders committed by women are, in descending order, for murder in general (that is, not serial killings).

Sharp objects to kill, suffocation, poisoning, bring up the bottom, shooting. Most often, the victim is dispatched in their home or their killer’s home.

How murders are committed by men, in descending order, for murder in general (same as above, not including serial murders).

Men more often use blunt objects or firearms to kill their victims, and surprisingly, poison is used by men more often than by women. But the stereotype, you scream, ain’t true!

As to the why…

In general, female killers, unlike their male counterparts, aren’t members of an aggressive, antisocial lifestyle. Generally, women were more reactive than men in their violent acts, much of the time killing someone they had previously been victimized by. Not necessarily the only motive, though. Shockingly, often, revenge wasn’t the motive at all but financial gain.

In addition, much of the time, both the victim and perpetrator were intoxicated.

When women kill for profit, you know, life insurance, the family wealth, it is either disguised as natural causes, an accident, or an act of violence by apparently someone outside the home or circle of friends. Hired killers may or may not be used.

The killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18). More than twice as many women were shot and killed by their husbands or intimate acquaintances than were murdered by strangers using guns, knives, or any other means. Although women comprise more than half the U.S. population, they committed only 14.7% of the homicides. Well, that we know of!

The killing of a child by either parent is an act of despair and desperation — a reaction to an intolerable situation. Most often, they are suffocated in their sleep.

It is believed women are more organized in their killings than men. If they are, it becomes harder to determine how many victims a woman might’ve killed. In fact, with certain poisons, it might never be proved a death was murder.

Okay, what do you folks think?
 
I have been doing research, obviously, on a story. In this, the bottom is used for the least used method, except when it is a snap by the wife when the husband's abusiveness becomes too much. A shotgun behind the ear while he is eating, decorating the meal and table with blood, bits of bone, and brain matter. @StillStunned, sit here and enjoy the coffee I've poured for you.
I think I'm regretting my little quip about us being in competition...

(No serious thoughts beyond this. Murder isn't my thing.)
 
Last edited:
You tell her you don't like her dress (hair, nails, shoes), you're toast.
 
Some of my research indicates these generalizations and the reasons for them.

The most common reason for murder committed by both sexes is either infidelity or money depending upon which study you read. Infidelity is both because the victim is unfaithful or because the killer is. There's also what I call murder by ego. That's the thought by the usually male killer that, "If I can't have her, nobody can."

Killer and victim know each other more often than not. That's why spouses and other family members are the first "persons of interest" for police. After that come more distant relatives and co-workers.

The person reporting the murder is also always a person of interest. Apparently the "reporter" believes that will direct suspicion from them. In actuality, it does just the opposite.

In general, men tend to murder by physical means, i.e. shooting, stabbing, beating, or by vehicle. It proves their "superiority" over the victim. They also want to be close to the victim in order to assure the victim is dead.

Women tend to use passive murder methods because they tend to be smaller in stature and they don't want to watch their victim die. Female killers use poison, arson, and in the case of the very young or elderly, neglect the victim or make the intentional choice to put the victim into a life-threatening situation and then just walk away.

Male killers kill because they can. Female killers kill because they see no other option.

I would suppose there are other studies that are more definitive.
 
How and why women Kill vs How and why men do!

How murders committed by women are, in descending order, for murder in general (that is, not serial killings).

Sharp objects to kill, suffocation, poisoning, bring up the bottom, shooting. Most often, the victim is dispatched in their home or their killer’s home.

How murders are committed by men, in descending order, for murder in general (same as above, not including serial murders).

Men more often use blunt objects or firearms to kill their victims, and surprisingly, poison is used by men more often than by women. But the stereotype, you scream, ain’t true!

As to the why…

In general, female killers, unlike their male counterparts, aren’t members of an aggressive, antisocial lifestyle. Generally, women were more reactive than men in their violent acts, much of the time killing someone they had previously been victimized by. Not necessarily the only motive, though. Shockingly, often, revenge wasn’t the motive at all but financial gain.

In addition, much of the time, both the victim and perpetrator were intoxicated.

When women kill for profit, you know, life insurance, the family wealth, it is either disguised as natural causes, an accident, or an act of violence by apparently someone outside the home or circle of friends. Hired killers may or may not be used.

The killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18). More than twice as many women were shot and killed by their husbands or intimate acquaintances than were murdered by strangers using guns, knives, or any other means. Although women comprise more than half the U.S. population, they committed only 14.7% of the homicides. Well, that we know of!

The killing of a child by either parent is an act of despair and desperation — a reaction to an intolerable situation. Most often, they are suffocated in their sleep.

It is believed women are more organized in their killings than men. If they are, it becomes harder to determine how many victims a woman might’ve killed. In fact, with certain poisons, it might never be proved a death was murder.

Okay, what do you folks think?
I’ve thought for a long time you would be fun to grab a drink with. I might be reconsidering that thought, unless that would upset you. Then, we are on, so on. Um, if you want…😜
 
Some of my research indicates these generalizations and the reasons for them.

The most common reason for murder committed by both sexes is either infidelity or money depending upon which study you read. Infidelity is both because the victim is unfaithful or because the killer is. There's also what I call murder by ego. That's the thought by the usually male killer that, "If I can't have her, nobody can."

Killer and victim know each other more often than not. That's why spouses and other family members are the first "persons of interest" for police. After that come more distant relatives and co-workers.

The person reporting the murder is also always a person of interest. Apparently the "reporter" believes that will direct suspicion from them. In actuality, it does just the opposite.

In general, men tend to murder by physical means, i.e. shooting, stabbing, beating, or by vehicle. It proves their "superiority" over the victim. They also want to be close to the victim in order to assure the victim is dead.

Women tend to use passive murder methods because they tend to be smaller in stature and they don't want to watch their victim die. Female killers use poison, arson, and in the case of the very young or elderly, neglect the victim or make the intentional choice to put the victim into a life-threatening situation and then just walk away.

Male killers kill because they can. Female killers kill because they see no other option.

I would suppose there are other studies that are more definitive.
Actual facts don't support your conclusion.

When Women Kill Their Partners

SPOUSAL MURDER DEFENDANTS
In the report Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995), researchers Patrick A. Langan and John W. Dawson reported on their examination and analysis of 540 spouse homicide cases in the nation's seventy-five largest counties—59% of the killers were husbands and 41% were wives. Even though Langan and Dawson analyzed data from crimes and court decisions that took place more than a decade ago, they explained that "[The Bureau of Justice Statistics] knows from long experience with surveying courts that changes in case processing are quite gradual. The report's results are, therefore, likely to be applicable today."

Nearly all the wives used weapons—95% of female suspects used a gun or knife. Men used those weapons only 69% of the time. Not surprisingly, in view of their generally larger size, strength, and body weight, husbands are far more likely than wives to strangle or beat their spouses to death.
MEN, WOMEN, AND MURDER

To study the potential differences that distinguish homicides involving women as victims or offenders from those involving men, we analyzed Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports data on homicides that occurred in the United States between 1976 and 1987. Only cases that involved victims aged 15 years or older were included. Persons killed during law enforcement activity and cases in which the victim's gender was not recorded were excluded. A total of 215,273 homicides were studied, 77% of which involved male victims and 23% female victims. Although the overall risk of homicide for women was substantially lower than that of men (rate ratio [RR] = 0.27), their risk of being killed by a spouse or intimate acquaintance was higher (RR = 1.23). In contrast to men, the killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18). More than twice as many women were shot and killed by their husband or intimate acquaintance than were murdered by strangers using guns, knives, or any other means. Although women comprise more than half the U.S. population, they committed only 14.7% of the homicides noted during the study interval. In contrast to men, who killed nonintimate acquaintances, strangers, or victims of undetermined relationship in 80% of cases, women killed their spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a family member in 60% of cases. When men killed with a gun, they most commonly shot a stranger or a non-family acquaintance. When women killed with a gun, the victim was five times more likely to be their spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a member of their family than to be a stranger or a person of undetermined relationship.

How Women Kill
Screenshot 2025-02-03 151251.png

From Motive to Method, Women and Men Murder Very Differently

With adult victims, women's murdering habits were very different from those of men. For starters, men more often used blunt objects or firearms to kill their victims, while women more often used a sharp object to kill (although they more often used asphyxia when killing a child). Women generally appeared to be more reactive than men in their violent acts, much of the time killing someone they had previously been victimized by. More of the time, they killed someone they knew well, most often male — an intimate partner, a family member, or a male acquaintance — and almost always in their or the victim's home. In many cases, the victim was intoxicated, and the killer herself was most often under the influence of some drugs or alcohol.
 
I have been doing research, obviously, on a story. In this, the bottom is used for the least used method, except when it is a snap by the wife when the husband's abusiveness becomes too much. A shotgun behind the ear while he is eating, decorating the meal and table with blood, bits of bone, and brain matter. @StillStunned, sit here and enjoy the coffee I've poured for you.
I personally do not like to see murder in a story, no matter how well deserved. Let me rephrase, murder where the victim does not have the time to suffer and realize what is going on. I real life, a little gas on the man and lit match (The Burning Bed) can be appropriate. In many cases, a gun is used to shoot abusive assholes etc.

But in a story, you want retribution. You want to see the bad guy suffer a little and feel some regret for his actions. If nothing else, regretting his victim turned the tables and won.

Instead of gun behind the ear, go with a gut shot instead. Lower down can sever the spine if you want to let him survive. Otherwise he might live for a while and suffer. (depends on the caliber of the weapon). A shotgun too close will blow away too much and sever arteries.
 
Additional clarification: these are numbers for solved murders. To quote Dolores Claiborne, "An accident is sometimes an unhappy woman's best friend." If you talk to hospice care workers, you'd be amazed how many of them have had the experience of some 80-year-old grandma (or grandpa) confessing to having murdered their spouse and gotten away with it.

A successful, planned murder looks very different from one done in the heat of the moment.

I'd also note that the statistics you quoted are from after widespread no-fault divorce, meaning they came from a time when a woman didn't have to give a reason to get away from a man. Someone who's gotten used to hiding their injuries from neighbors who might try to help (and would most likely only make things worse pre-no-fault) is someone who has the knowledge to make a poisoning, arson, or "accident" look like an actual accident.

Also, according to the second set of statistics, women are more than six times(!) as likely to kill using poison as men.
 
Last edited:
When Women Kill Their Partners was written in 2018. Likewise, How Women Kill was written in 2018 and drawn from Stats from the prior year. From Motive to Method was based on studies in Sweden on their own killers (they have one the lowest murder rates in the world) between 1990 and 2010. There are no stats on who the murderer was or what their sex was on killings passed off as natural causes or accidents; there can't be they weren't murders officially. Again, unsolved murders (which doesn't mean they have a reasonable suspicion of who the killer was) don't have stats about the killers.

What I found worth of a raised eyebrow was the combined stabbing and beaten-to-death percentages, both having higher percentages in the female killer's column than men's.
Additional clarification: these are numbers for solved murders. To quote Dolores Claiborne, "An accident is sometimes an unhappy woman's best friend." If you talk to hospice care workers, you'd be amazed how many of them have had the experience of some 80-year-old grandma (or grandpa) confessing to having murdered their spouse and gotten away with it.

A successful, planned murder looks very different from one done in the heat of the moment.

I'd also note that the statistics you quoted are from after widespread no-fault divorce, meaning they came from a time when a woman didn't have to give a reason to get away from a man. Someone who's gotten used to hiding their injuries from neighbors who might try to help (and would most likely only make things worse pre-no-fault) is someone who has the knowledge to make a poisoning, arson, or "accident" look like an actual accident.

Also, according to the second set of statistics, women are more than six times(!) as likely to kill using poison as men.
 
Well, if there was going to be a thread doing to the erotic mood what the iceberg did to the Titanic, leave it to Millie to find it.

Wait! Wait! Millie, dear Millie, I said that with admiration!
 
I'd also note that the statistics you quoted are from after widespread no-fault divorce, meaning they came from a time when a woman didn't have to give a reason to get away from a man.

Unless I overlooked something, most of the datasets used in her quoted studies and statistics are 20-30 years old. I thought the no-fault overtake happened over the last ten years.
 
LOL, yeah, sure you did. I'm a big fan of revenge stories, not for cheating, but for wrongs that are painful. Rape... Killings of friends and loved ones... things that require an eye for an eye.
 
No, 2018 isn't ten years ago, let alone forty years ago. One FBI study was conducted in 1977, a single year. But most of what I've used is from this century.
LOL, yeah, sure you did. I'm a big fan of revenge stories, not for cheating, but for wrongs that are painful. Rape... Killings of friends and loved ones... things that require an eye for an eye.
 
I think they let this murderess out because no one would be dumb enough to marry her now!

Texas woman who ran over cheating husband is freed from prison. How would we classify vehicular homicide?

Clara Harris fought with the woman before striking her husband with her Mercedes-Benz and repeatedly running over his body. The couple's teenage daughter was in the car at the time.
What a classy dame!
 
Unless I overlooked something, most of the datasets used in her quoted studies and statistics are 20-30 years old. I thought the no-fault overtake happened over the last ten years.
No, no-fault is pretty old in the US. It’s state-by-state, but, for example, Texas had no-fault in place in 1969. What’s happened in the last ten years or so has been a massive backlash against no-fault, or at least a backlash that can be puffed up for political reasons. The “tradwife” crowd and certain sets of the MRA ilk hate it, and they’ve gotten a bigger megaphone starting in the mid-2010s for reasons better left to the politics board. As is often the case, some of their complaints are/were fair (division of property in TX was NUTS until a few years ago), but more often it was grievance for grievance’s sake.
 
Legal divorce with no-fault settlements doesn't mean no fault at all. But certainly, there is no justification for murdering your ex-partner. There may be compelling reasons, and perhaps the division of property is inequitable (in the eyes of one side or the other); however, that doesn't justify murder.

Now, a husband who beats his wife and ends up dead, I'm not too fussed about her not going to prison.
 
What I found worth of a raised eyebrow was the combined stabbing and beaten-to-death percentages, both having higher percentages in the female killer's column than men's.
That doesn’t surprise me too much, mostly because the gun homicide rate is way higher for men. Men are more likely to be gun owners, men who commit homicide are more likely to use guns, etc. Most homicides are… if not crimes of passion, then emotional. Spontaneous. People use what they have at hand.

To give a parallel example, one of the sharpest drops in suicide rates in the UK happened when stoves moved from coal gas (higher in carbon monoxide) to natural gas. Means reduction works. https://means-matter.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/saves-lives/
 
Murders committed by women with guns are only 32% (which is the highest percentage), but a woman beating a man to death is higher than the reverse, which amazes me. But, in truth, when you disable a big man with a bat, club, nightstick, or two-by-four, with a hard blow to the head or lower leg, you do what you want to them. And if he repeatedly beat the shit out of her, she's only returning the favor.
That doesn’t surprise me too much, mostly because the gun homicide rate is way higher for men. Men are more likely to be gun owners, men who commit homicide are more likely to use guns, etc. Most homicides are… if not crimes of passion, then emotional. Spontaneous. People use what they have at hand.

To give a parallel example, one of the sharpest drops in suicide rates in the UK happened when stoves moved from coal gas (higher in carbon monoxide) to natural gas. Means reduction works. https://means-matter.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/saves-lives/
 
Legal divorce with no-fault settlements doesn't mean no fault at all. But certainly, there is no justification for murdering your ex-partner. There may be compelling reasons, and perhaps the division of property is inequitable (in the eyes of one side or the other); however, that doesn't justify murder.

Now, a husband who beats his wife and ends up dead, I'm not too fussed about her not going to prison.
It’s important separate out “no-fault” and “community property,” even though many people (occasionally including myself) don’t.

No-fault means people can leave the marriage for any reason.

Community property means the assets of the marriage are split evenly (ish).

Many states that are one are also the other, and in some of those states (including several large ones like Texas), the reason for the split (outside of criminal behavior) either couldn’t or simply wouldn’t be factored in. The latter was often because judges ultimately rules on division of property based on their own personal prejudices with only a glance at guidelines.
 
Back
Top