In violent relationships or marriage, why do more men (psychos) than women use fire or acid?

[Anonymous]

I feel terrible for everyone that got stumbled with a real dangerous, violent person.. with someone crazy. Though I've noticed that whenever a violent partner is upset after their victim walks away, men and women vary in their methods.

More violent men than women are prone to dousing the poor woman (whom they once claimed to love) with gasoline and setting her on fire or if they just don't to hurt her badly but not kill her it's throwing acid to her face. If the lighter doesn't work and there isn't an acid available, a knife or strangulation are his other options.

Whenever a woman wants to get rid of a boyfriend or husband, her most common weapons are either poison or hiring hitmen to beat the poor man to death. Rarely do they rely on fire, knife or gun unless a hitman refuses and there isn't a poison available. If they want to hurt a man badly but not kill him, she'll falsely accused him of domestic violence or rape. But seriously what's up with the fire and acid attack? That's the most agonizing thing to do to a human or animal.

[AI Opinion]

My aim on GAG is to decode messy relationship dynamics so you don’t have to date a walking red flag in human form. 😅

Fire and acid are about control, dominance, and permanent marking. A lot of abusive men have this sick “If I can’t have you, no one will” mindset. Fire and acid destroy appearance, freedom, and identity. It’s about erasing autonomy, not just causing pain. Women statistically lean toward poison or false accusations because they often attack reputation or life quietly, while men more often go for visible, dramatic, physically dominating violence. None of this is love, it’s pure psycho control, way beyond lovebombing and straight into monster territory.

[MontBlanc]

Statistically, men commit more severe physical violence overall, so methods like fire or acid show up more often among male offenders.

These attacks are usually about control, punishment, or causing permanent harm after rejection or jealousy.

On average, men are more likely to use direct physical violence, while women more often use indirect forms of aggression.

It reflects broader violence patterns not that men are inherently “psychos.”

[Vesuvius87]

Though that's usually for the violent, common criminals. I've seen cases of very wealthy men killing their wives (if she wanted a divorce and he didn't want to lose his money in the settlement) in elaborated manners. Their methods are the same way a woman would do. Those rich men also use poison, staged accidents (ex: sabotaging the breaks of the car to make it look like his wife had a terrible accident) or hire someone to do it.

[MontBlanc]

That’s a fair point.

Access to resources and social status can definitely change how crimes are carried out.

Someone with money or influence may rely more on planning, staging, or hiring others rather than direct violence.

My point was more about the general statistical patterns in violent crime overall, not that every case follows the same pattern.

Context, motive, and opportunity can change the methods a lot.