Abstract
Murder-suicide (M-S) is a complex phenomenon that can involve a multifaceted set of interrelated biological and social factors. M-S is also sexed and gendered in that the perpetrators are most often male and their underpinning motives and actions link to masculinities in an array of diverse ways. With the overarching goal to describe connections between men, masculinities, and M-S, 296 newspaper articles describing 45 North American M-S cases were analyzed. The inductively derived findings revealed three themes: (a) domestic desperation, (b) workplace justice, and (c) school retaliation. Cases in the domestic desperation theme were characterized by the murder of a family member(s) and were often underpinned by men’s self-perceptions of failing to provide economic security. Workplace justice cases emerged from men’s grievances around paid-work, job insecurity, and perceptions of being bullied and/or marginalized by coworkers or supervisors. The school retaliation cases were strongly linked to “pay back” against individuals and/or society for the hardships endured by M-S perpetrators. Prevailing across the three themes was men’s loss of control in their lives, hopelessness, and marginalized masculine identities. Also evident were men’s alignments to hegemonic masculinities in reasserting one’s masculine self by protesting the perceived marginalization invoked on them. Overall, the findings give pause to consider the need for men-centered M-S prevention strategies to quell the catastrophic impacts of this long-standing but understudied men’s health issue.
Keywords
Ervin Lupoe was an ordinary 40-year-old family man who along with his wife worked as a medical technician at the Kaiser Permanente hospital in West Lost Angeles. He was struggling with a number of financial issues and a week after his wife and he both got fired from their job in January 2009, Lupoe killed his wife and five children before shooting and killing himself. His suicide note sent to a local television station depicted his act as a final escape for the whole family asserting “why leave our children in someone else’s hands.” (Mangan, 2009; Murderpedia, 2009; Press-Telegram Mobile Communications, 2009) On the morning of August 20, 1986, Patrick Henry Sherrill, a 44-year-old part-time postman arrived at the Edmond, Oklahoma, post office with his mail pouch filled with an arsenal of weapons and ammunition. Sherrill opened fire on his coworkers beginning with the supervisor who had threatened his job. After killing 14 coworkers and injuring 7 others, Sherrill shot and killed himself. (Brown, 2012; Lamar, 2001; Murderpedia, 1986) On April 16, 2007, Seung-Hui Cho, a 23-year-old college student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, shot and killed 32 fellow students and professors, and wounded 17 others in a rampage on the Virginia Tech campus before killing himself. In a video manifesto sent to NBC on the day of the rampage, Cho’s resentment toward the people and society that failed him was documented, stating, “you loved inducing cancer in my head, terrorizing my heart, and ripping my soul all of this time. I didn’t have to do this. I could have left. I could have fled. But now I will no longer run if not for me, for my children, for my brothers and sisters that you [fucked], I did it for them.” (Hong, Cho, & Lee, 2010; Langman, 2009; Murderpedia, 2007)
Murder-suicide (M-S) is a complex phenomenon involving a multifaceted set of interrelated factors, leading an individual(s) to commit catastrophic and tragic acts (Kennedy-Kollar & Charles, 2010). At play are biological (e.g., brain pathology, mental illnesses) and social factors (e.g., gun culture, interpersonal conflict, financial hardship), and consensus prevails that there are a range of profiles embodied by M-S perpetrators (Duwe, 2004; Fox & Levin, 1998; Hempel, Meloy, & Richards, 1999; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010; Levin & Fox, 1996; Levin & Madfis, 2009). Kennedy-Kollar and Charles (2010) highlighted complex and concurrent perpetrator stressors among murderers including financial, social, romantic, and psychological challenges. Similarly, Barnes (2000) and Fox and Levin (2012) suggest that M-S is driven by a range of motives including power, revenge, loyalty, profit, jealousy, and terror. Noteworthy is that while the three tragic M-S cases described in the introduction to this article might be, respectively, labeled a familicide, “going postal,” 1 and school shootings, one common denominator is apparent across most M-S cases—the perpetrators are men (Malphurs & Cohen, 2002; Travis, Johnson, & Milroy, 2007). Fox and Levin (2012) confirm that males account for 93.4% of M-S perpetrators in the United States, and this is higher than the male perpetrator homicide rates of 88.3%. While M-S is a rare event and the incidence remains at under 0.001%, trends including perpetrators substance overuse and depression are evident (Eliason, 2009). The incidence of M-S also indicates that male perpetrators are twice as likely to be over the age of 55 years (Eliason, 2009).
In M-S, the primary actor dies in the event, often leaving scant information about the context undergirding the event. This is a considerable challenge for scholarly analyses because details are critically important. While findings about M-S are understood as provisional, the literature suggests that M-S offenders likely display a history of failures and frustrations relating to home, work, and/or school (Fox & Levin, 1998; Hempel et al., 1999; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010; Levin & Fox, 1996; Levin & Madfis, 2009) and tend to blame others including partners, family members, coworkers, and/or society in general for their problems (Duwe, 2004; Harper & Voigt, 2007; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010; Lester, 2010). In the context of viewing external sources as the primary cause of their discontent, M-S perpetrators are also likely to self-isolate, oftentimes giving rise to brooding, and elaborate plans to avenge life’s injustices (Duwe, 2004; Gregory, 2012; Harper & Voigt, 2007; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010).
Theorizing Masculinities and M-S
Connell’s (2005) masculinities framework is premised on understandings that men embody diverse relational, context-specific gendered performances that shape and are shaped by an array of alignments to dominant or hegemonic masculinities. Characterized by competitiveness, self-reliance, and stoicism, hegemonic masculinities are also patriarchal and imbued with power that is wielded to marginalize and subordinate women and other men (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). The characteristics and power plays central to hegemonic masculinities are learnt, and from a young age boys and men observe and practice what it takes to be a “real man” (Courtenay, 2000). For example, men are idealized and rewarded for being physically strong, powerful, assertive, and in control—and they are expected to
In the specific context of M-S, hegemonic masculinities prescribing power, control, and aggressiveness are implicated. Some researchers argue that M-S is an extreme end-product of
In terms of the act itself, M-S includes “murder” and “suicide”—two (or more) separate extremely violent events (Barnes, 2000) and both “murder” (Fox & Levin, 2012; Hempel et al., 1999) and “suicide” (Navaneelan, 2011) are most often committed by men. While suicide is generally preceded by compounding life stresses, men’s estrangement from mental health services and/or social supports also contributes to the high male suicide rates (Galasinski, 2008) and the violence toward others that can emerge from untreated depression and/or precede suicide (Brownhill, Wilhelm, Barclay, & Schmied, 2005). According to Scourfield (2005), the gendered nature of suicide affirms men’s emotional illiteracy whereby embodying manliness can provoke some actions, including M-S, that are both common and without justification. With the overarching goal to describe the connections between men, masculinities, and M-S, 296 newspaper articles detailing 45 North American M-S cases were analyzed—and the findings are shared in what follows.
Method
Sample
An online search was conducted to examine M-S in North America using newspaper articles through two digital archiving publishers:
Data Collection
The following terms were used across all search fields in all possible combinations: [“murder” AND “suicide”] AND [“work” OR “school”]. Possible search terms including “home” were not used because intimate partner violence and relationship discord have featured elsewhere (Kramer, 2011) and the focus of the current study was work- or school-related M-S. Though some of the M-S cases included in the current study were connected to the domestic sphere (by location for M-S and/or as a tension filled setting leading up to those events), the central storylines related to work or school. To maximize results, dates were not limited and the search included articles published through February 2013. Retrieved articles were screened for inclusion according to the following criteria:
North American based M-S cases including murder or mass murder where the perpetrator was male
Work and/or school were central to the M-S case
Search Outcomes
The initial searches generated a total of 1,751 articles (476 from
Data Analysis
Retrieved articles were initially sorted to the categories work and school based on the predominate storyline. The articles in each category were read independently by the first three authors and memos were made to summarize the content and denote preliminary interpretations about the articles and the 45 cases. The authors discussed and compared their analyses in deciding how best to organize and report the findings. Early on, it was decided by consensus that the cases should be clustered according to where the M-S took place to advance the analyses. The cases were assigned to three locales—domestic, workplace, and school; and the articles assigned to each were reread to inductively derive the thematic findings: (a) domestic desperation, (b) workplace justice, and (c) school retaliation. Drawing on the masculinities framework (Connell, 2005), each of the themes were critically analyzed to elucidate how social constructions of gender connected to the men’s M-S cases. Table 1 summates the 45 M-S cases included in this study. In terms of style, each thematic finding is illustrated by three representative M-S cases. The illustrative cases were agreed on by the authors as evocative but representative of the wider data subsets, and this approach was employed to contextualize the connections between men, masculinities, and M-S.
Summary of M-S Cases by Theme.
Findings
Domestic Desperation
Twenty-seven of the 45 cases were included in the
Karthik Rajaram was seemingly living “the American dream.” Born in India, he came to the United States and earned an MBA from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). He was soon offered an executive-level financial analyst position at Sony Pictures, where he worked from 1989 to 1994 before moving on to serve in a small consulting group. Rajaram’s job ended abruptly when he was dismissed in June 2004. He then struggled to find work and the financial hardships invoked by unemployment were central to his downward spiral. On October 6, 2008, he killed his wife and five children, before shooting himself. In Rajaram’s suicide note, he stated that he had two options—to kill himself or to kill his family and himself—and decided the latter claiming it to be a more honorable option. On June 18, 2007, out of desperation due to financial problems related to his crumbling family business, Kevin Morrissey shot and killed his wife and two young daughters before taking his own life. His suicide note expressed remorse blaming financial difficulties for the desolation that led to his actions on that fateful day. Similarly, Ervin Lupoe killed his wife, their five children and himself on January 27, 2009. In the suicide note and a two-page letter sent to the local television station, he described the ongoing financial hardship that he and his wife had endured after being fired from their jobs as medical technicians. Chronicled also was their inability to subsequently find work amid claims that they were ineligible for unemployment insurance. In desperation, they decided to end it all—taking the five children’s lives so that they didn’t “leave [their] children in [someone] else’s hands.”
Across the 27 domestic desperation cases, striking was the manner in which financial adversity fueled feelings of hopelessness to the extent that M-S (specifically familicide-suicide in this theme) emerged as an option. Working man identities and concerns about failing to provide for family through paid work prevailed in the stories describing the M-S perpetrators. Evident also were men’s power and authority in taking charge to end and/or avoid further economic hardship (Kennedy-Kollar & Charles, 2010). Therefore, when Rajaram, Morrisey, and Lupoe concluded that there was no way out of their financial struggles, they ended the ordeal altogether on their own terms. Killing family might also be understood in terms of men’s proprietary attitude toward women and their children (Daly & Wilson, 1988). As Frazier (1975) noted, men can see their family as extensions of themselves whom they perceive as being personally responsible. Evident in the cases where suicide notes were left, men also justified their actions in doubting their family’s viability without them. Embodied in this regard was masculine dominance over family, which Kennedy-Kollar and Charles (2010) suggest is synonymous with patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity. While including family victims and occurring within the domestic sphere, these M-S cases were driven by a failure to gain or sustain masculine capital through paid work. Consistent with Liem, Barber, Markwalder, Killias, and Nieuwbeerta (2011) the majority of the M-S cases reviewed for the current study involved a family victim(s), took place in the family home, and involved firearms.
Workplace Justice
The second theme
On April 7, 1999, in Ottawa, Canada, a former Ontario-Carlton Transport employee went on a shooting rampage killing four coworkers and injuring two others. Investigations revealed that the perpetrator, Pierre Lebrun, had a history of depression and long-standing workplace grievances. The 40-year-old had filed numerous complaints against the company, including repeated but unresolved harassment claims that coworkers were ridiculing him about his stutter. Frustrated and aggrieved, Lebrun shared his homicidal plans with a coworker who did not take the discussion seriously. Lebrun’s suicide note listed seven colleagues, four of whom he had conflict with. Justice drove Lebrun’s actions; his note asserting “they have destroyed my life, I will destroy their life.” In British Columbia (BC), Canada, on October 15, 2002, Richard Anderson fired three shots in the Kamloops office of the BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, killing a visiting regional supervisor and staff scientist, before shooting himself. The 55-year-old was known to be stressed having recently received a layoff notice from the visiting supervisor. Similarly, in Jacksonville, Florida, Shane Schumerth, a 28-year-old Spanish teacher at the Episcopal High School, shot and killed the headmaster, Dale Regan, before killing himself. Schumerth was said to have left the school after being fired earlier in the day. However, he returned to the Episcopal’s campus in the afternoon with an assault rifle in a guitar case, where he proceeded to shoot and kill Regan ahead of turning the gun on himself. In Lebrun, Anderson and Schumerth’s cases the workplace was central—whereby bullying or job insecurity and/or loss fueled the perpetrator’s actions toward punishing the individuals who had inflicted their pain.
Paid work is central to most men’s masculine identities and threats to employment are known to increase the risk for men’s depression and suicidal behaviors (Oliffe & Han, 2014). Specifically, “working man” identities and/or career status often defines a man’s place within masculine hierarchies; and workplace bullying and/or job insecurity can threaten to emasculate men by signaling inadequacy in that arena (Haywood & Mac an Ghaill, 2003). Within this context, “taking justice into their own hands” through M-S might be understood as perpetrators contesting the conditions under which they worked as well as asserting their right to work. The strong linkages between M-S and men’s work and men’s identities in these nine workplace justice cases support Brown (2012) and Kalish and Kimmel’s (2010) plea for caution to understand how some men’s extreme endorsement and overinvolvement in work can increase the potential for M-S when those connections are threatened or severed. As Haines, Williams, and Lester (2010) observed, M-S can be driven by a need for justice and/or interpersonal crises, and these motives were ever present in the workplace justice cases.
School Retaliation
Nine M-S cases occurred in school settings, and they were closely connected to “pay-back,” wherein perpetrators justified their actions as retaliation in ending the perceived insults and bullying that had been endured. Within this theme, most prominent in terms of the number of articles were three infamous school shootings: (a) L’École Polytechnique de Montréal (1989), (b) Columbine High School (1999), and (c) Virginia Tech (2007; please refer to Table 1—School Retaliation subsection).
On the afternoon of December 6, 1989, Marc Lepine murdered 14 women, while leaving 10 other women and 4 men wounded, before inflicting a fatal gunshot on himself at L’École Polytechnique de Montréal. Found inside the 25-year-old’s jacket pocket was a three-page letter expressing the motives behind his horrific actions including hatred toward women and his belief that feminists had ruined his life. A decade later on April 20, 1999, friends, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold committed the notorious killings at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, an event that has become a euphemism for rampage school shootings. Vengeful and aggrieved by interminable peer torments, the two 18-year-old senior high school students took the lives of 13 people and injured 24 others before ending their own lives. On April 16, 2007, tragedy grieved the nation once again as Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and wounded 17 more, before shooting and killing himself. In his manifesto, mailed to an American broadcasting station earlier that day, the Virginia Tech senior undergraduate student divulged his anger toward wealthy peers.
While the actions of Lepine, Harris, Klebold, and Cho were hyperviolent (Cullen, 2009; Langman, 2009), less chronicled are how such heinous actions connect to masculinities; specifically, how retaliation and pay-back underpinned these events. While the aforementioned perpetrators varied in their upbringings, striking were reports of their shared challenges around fitting in with peers (Dutton, White, & Fogarty, 2013; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). In the Columbine case, for example, being ostracized by peers in adolescence were detailed, and such “othering” is known to be especially jarring for young men (Canetto, 1997; Kimmel, 2009). Though reports differ on whether or not Harris and Klebold were bullied, the pair perceived that they were subjected to bullying and humiliation, which served to marginalize and subordinate them (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). Moreover, as seen in Lepine and Cho’s accounts, many grievances (i.e., Lepine’s unsuccessful applications to the Canadian Forces and L’École Polytechnique de Montréal; and Cho’s difficulties with acculturation and academic studies) fueled their perceptions of being victimized and wronged to the point that retaliation through M-S emerged as the remedy (Harper & Voigt, 2007; Levin & Madfis, 2009).
Notwithstanding mental illness issues, rage featured in the extremes of these perpetrators’ retaliation. Shocked at the extent of the carnage, the newspaper articles reviewed described horrific and tragic events. Inversely, cultural ideals often reconcile the violence used by men to stand up for themselves (or defend others) especially when they are challenged or provoked (Gregory, 2012; Kimmel, 2009). In this respect, M-S can be a means to avenge as well as an avenue to end any further victimization (Harper & Voigt, 2007; Levin & Madfis, 2009). The seemingly “weak” man takes up an “avenger” or “punisher” role to assert his power by invoking the ultimate pain and getting the last word (by virtue of a suicide note) in resolving disputes real and imagined (Heitmeyer et al., 2013; Kalish & Kimmel, 2010). Among those cases where suicide notes were left, these extreme actions were justified as aggravated actions (Langman, 2009). In Lepine and Cho’s suicide note/manifesto, they depicted themselves as “a rational erudite” (Lepin) and “a Jesus-Christ-like savior” (Cho), blaming others who had “forced (them) into a corner and gave (them) only one option” (Cho) or incited their act “for political reasons” (Lepine) and to “inspire generations of the weak and defenseless people” (Cho). As such, these perpetrators’ ideologies about righting the wrongs against them and others who are marginalized were used to justify—and glorify—their actions (Langman, 2009). Emphasized also were claims that asserting power and dominance ended their oppression, and in many cases their oppressors (Kalish & Kimmel, 2010).
Discussion and Conclusion
Much of the early masculinities and men’s health literature suggested hegemonic masculinity was fundamentally detrimental to the well-being of men (Courtenay, 2000; Lee & Owens, 2002; Sabo & Gordon, 1995). In the context of the current article, it is arguable that extreme alignments to and hyper-performances toward embodying hegemonic masculinity influenced the actions of the M-S perpetrators. However, it is important to recognize linkages between masculinities and M-S as being subject to change, and therefore amenable to prevention strategies—while acknowledging these characteristics as pertaining to a particularly troubled “outlier” subgroup of men. These provisions reduce the potential for pathologizing particular masculine tropes that might further ostracize potential M-S perpetrators while opening up challenging conversations about M-S prevention. Indeed, though retrospective (i.e., describing M-S in the aftermath of those events), the current findings confirm “our” collective obligation to lobby for changes that disrupt rigid representations of hegemonic masculinity, both in terms of structure and agency. In this regard, the findings reveal three key considerations to guide strategizing M-S prevention efforts.
First, in line with previous research by Large, Smith, and Nielssen (2009), firearms were ever-present in the M-S cases reviewed for the current study. While the U.S. debate about the right to bear arms continues (Boylan, Kates, Lindsey, & Gugala, 2013), cross-country comparisons have indicated fewer murders, suicide, and M-S correlate with reduced rates of civilian gun ownership (Liem et al., 2011; Panczak et al., 2013). While tighter gun control is unlikely to be the antidote for M-S, it does seem reasonable to prospectively evaluate if reducing the number and restricting the types of guns (i.e., high powered, automatic) results in fewer cases of M-S and/or reductions to the number of murder victims in M-S. In the context of gender, guns have been linked to masculine identities ranging from law enforcement officers to gangsters—and such “good guy”–“bad guy” binaries continue to feature whereby the central character(s) (villains and heroes) are men using guns (Combe & Boyle, 2013). One central challenge here is to distance, and ideally dislocate masculinity from the reactive and fatal use of guns by modeling and affirming alternatives to wielding power and asserting dominance with such aggression and tragedy.
Second, the cases studied revealed implicit and explicit references to mental illness when describing the M-S perpetrators. Acute and chronic mental and psychological distress featured among perpetrators garnering responses recursively entwined with idealized masculinity—including resistance to seeking professional help. Upstream M-S prevention in this regard points to the need for targeted men’s mental health services. That said, evidence confirms complexities wherein meaningfully engaging men with professional services is especially challenging. For example, men’s reluctance to seek help for depression (Johnson, Oliffe, Kelly, Galdas, & Ogrodniczuk, 2012), fragmented pathways to mental health services (Strike, Rhodes, Bergmans, & Links, 2006), and ineffectual doctor and male patient consultations (Wide, Mok, McKenna, & Ogrodniczuk, 2011) have contributed to men’s poor mental health outcomes. Equipping and educating service providers to better identify and treat men’s mental illnesses may help address some of these issues (Muller, Ramsden, & White, 2013). For example, men’s depression may not be identified with generic depression screening tools, and the men-specific tools including the Gotland (Walinder & Rutz, 2001; Zierau, Bille, Rutz, & Bech, 2002) along with open-ended questions to assessing men’s suicidality (Brownhill et al., 2005; Hempstead, Nguyen, David-Rus, & Jacquemin, 2013) might better identify and support men experiencing mental illness. In addition, targeted online mental health services and resources may engage men who are concerned with anonymity and confidentiality (Robinson & Robertson, 2010). Both in detailing adjustments to traditional face-to-face mental health services and affirming the need to formally evaluate online resources, strength-based approaches that work with (rather than to change) men seem to have the greatest potential (Sloan, Gough, & Conner, 2009). Recommended strategies identified for reaching high-risk men include removing mental illness language, providing role models of hope and recovery (e.g., through testimonials), helping men recognize the connection between physical symptoms with emotional issues, and appealing to male self-reliance and empowering men with the tools and opportunity to “fix themselves” (Hindman, 2013). Translating these strategies into bold innovative approaches can garner new directions for reaching out to men (e.g., Man Therapy; Sofen the Fck up).
Third, while masculinity frameworks have been used to describe and theorize men’s illness experiences and health practices, less often discussed are men-centered interventions (Barnes, 2000; Heitmeyer et al., 2013). In terms of gender-specific interventions, an important starting point might include affirming an array of less rigid ideals and plural masculinities to reduce the likelihood of action among potential male M-S perpetrators. For example, the 45 M-S cases revealed perpetrators as reacting to potentially emasculating issues capable of eroding their sense of self and identity. Included were financial and family provider failures and being visibly weak and subordinate. These and other related deficits can catalyze men’s M-S actions and violence as masculine ways to contest oppression (Newman, 2013; Pollack, 1998). As Heitmeyer et al. (2013) asserted many men overidentify with popular culture’s hypermasculine ideals in attempting to regain their sense of control and male identity. Related to this, Barnes (2000) suggested that the social context of hegemonic masculine performances (e.g., ownership, control, and power) including violence to enforce/maintain masculinity is central to understanding M-S. In this regard, the dominant representations of masculinity as well as hegemonic masculinity need to be conveyed less prescriptively and with fewer restrictions (Ellis, Sloan, & Wykes, 2013). Operationalizing multiple masculinities is important to the field of violence prevention and public health, and future research could offer empirical understandings about how best to achieve this. Strengthening workplace initiatives to ensure respectful and fair employment practices, along with early mitigation to address concerns related to unjust treatment are also important. Increased emphasis on upstream approaches to promote men’s mental health in the workplace can also increase awareness about alternatives for dealing with distress.
Another feature of the current article was the perpetrator’s employment circumstances. As Oliffe and Han (2014) reported, men’s mental health can be compromised in and out of work, and given the long-standing economic volatility and increasing job insecurity, many of the pressures and stresses underpinning the M-S events described here are especially relevant. In terms of potential remedies beyond the hopes for a sustained economic upturn, supporting men at risk for depression, suicide, and M-S, and their families is key. Usefully included are policies and services dedicated to engaging men in skill sets to adapt to a constantly evolving and challenging labor force. Over time there has been a clear and obvious equalization policy around paid employment in Western society (Gunnell, Platt, & Hawton, 2009). It has been argued that this has eroded some men’s sense of masculinity particularly in terms of self-worth through diminished masculinized role responsibility of being the financial provider for the family (Berk, Dodd, & Henry, 2006). Therefore, greater attention and expertise is required at a variety of levels to assist subgroups of men to understand and come to terms with such areas of life.
In terms of study limitations, the data set comprising newspaper articles warrants discussion. While earlier studies linked newspaper coverage of murder and suicide to increased M-S (Phillips 1977, 1980), the ever-expanding reach of the Internet and multiple sources of news information has made it “impossible to assess any one newspaper’s reach today” (Kramer, 2011, p. 6). Indeed, the Internet’s multiple pathways and platforms transmit news and opinion in greater volume and speed than at any other point in history. By virtue of this, the findings from the current article are but part of the M-S media story (Zadrozny, 2013). While challenges to reporting these events in newspapers have been based on concerns that profiling M-S perpetrators might lead to copy-cat killers (Phillips 1977, 1980), the influence of the Internet on M-S warrants research attention. In addition, focusing the search terms to abstract North American work and school related M-S cases provided a focused but partial account about a complex and challenging issue. Acknowledged are search term omissions that would have highlighted additional cases confirming established linkages between misogyny and M-S wherein divorce, separation, and domestic violence feature alongside the predominance of female victims (Eliason, 2009). Researching M-S wherein the primary actor dies, and oftentimes, scant media information is reported also renders the findings drawn from the current study as exploratory.
In conclusion, M-S and the connections to masculinities are underresearched, and in this regard, the current study goes some way toward breaking the silence on an important men’s health issue. In refuting assertions that all men share in patriarchal dividends, Synnott (2009) highlighted how patriarchal taxes accompany many men’s quests for embodying hegemonic masculinity. In the context of M-S, it is clear that there are a multitude of “taxpayers” including those who die as well as the survivors who are left to deal with the aftermath of such catastrophic events. So while the target for M-S prevention programs should be men, effective efforts in this regard will benefit everyone.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was made possible by Movember Canada (Men’s Mental Health Initiative) for the Masculinities and Men’s Depression and Suicide Network (Grant No. 11R18296). Open access article funds were provided by the School of Nursing and Faculty of Applied Science, University of British Columbia. John Oliffe is supported by a Peter Wall Distinguished Scholar in Residence award.