Men are evil and deserve to die; women must be mentally ill or victims of abuse

[Rage for Order]

There is an interesting double standard in cases where parents kill their children; when a man murders his children the http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x899672#900110">vast majority of comments are along the lines of how he should rot in prison, he's evil, and he can't be punished enough. When a http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x880577#881948">woman murders her children the comments almost always conclude that her behavior was the result of depression or some form of abuse she must have suffered at some point in her life. What is also interesting is that when this double standard was pointed out in the case of the woman who drove her van with her kids in it into the river, killing 3 of her children, there were a good number of posters who claimed that no such double standard exists and the mere suggestion of it was ridiculous. However, take a look at the comments from today's thread regarding the man in Texas who allegedly killed his two children; nearly every post immediately condemns the man (rightfully so, imo) for the crime.

Why are people so quick to look for a reason deflect blame from a woman when she murders her children, but so quick to act as judge, jury, and executioner when a man does it?

[Confusious]

1. The same reason that every other

double standard exists.

Except the "men are evil/ women mentally ill" standard is useful.

[LisaL]

2. Useful for what?

I agree with the OP, there is no doubt a double standard when it comes to parents killing their kids, wives killing their husbands or husbands killing their wives.
If a woman kills her husband, there will be comment after comment how she must have been horribly abused.
A man who kills his wife ain't going to get these kind of comments, that's for sure.

[Confusious]

13. The female as the victim.

I usually have a pessimistic view of every group, and view their actions in light of what perpetuates their power.

let me repeat: every group. e.g. The rich, white men, activists groups, etc.

[bettyellen]

18. isn;t that because they much more commonly are the victim of men, who are historically more

agressive, dominating and vilolent? Sadly the stats all bear out that this is the case. Some me boo hoo the fact that they are more commonly the victims of violent crime and leave out the fact that it is other men who are doing it. Like it or not, the vast majrity of violence in this world is perpetuated by men. To say women "play" the victim card is bullshit, women suffer the consequences, it is not a game.

[Confusious]

21. women can be just as much perpetrators as men.

it seems some would like to downplay the fact when it happens.

Maybe I should rephrase also. The woman is always the victim, the man is always the perpetrator.

[bettyellen]

well of course it CAN happen, it just is so much less frequent than male on female violence

to try to pretend that the odds of a woman committing an act ofphysical violence is anywhere near the odds a man will is bullshit. It is statistically much rarer, always has been. Get your head out of th ground and look it up.

[Confusious]

38. I never said any of that

take your own advice, read, understand, respond, don't just react.

[bettyellen]

41. "just as much" but not as frequently causing injury or death? is that what you meant?

[Confusious]

46. They can be responsible for acts of violence

just as much as a man can.

Which is to say there is no inherent "angelic" quality of women that precludes them from committing acts of violence.

[bettyellen]

48. but "much" less "angelic" behaviour is to be found in men period

why are you comparing the two, and then refusing to look at stats? if you want to talk about "just as much" then you need to get real about the frequency of violent atcs. Stop playing possum.

[Confusious]

52. You're trying to drag me into an argument I'm not making

so please stop.

[bettyellen]

53. you made the argument women find victimhood useful, and that;s repugnant

women have no need to exaggerate the situation. there is an epidemic of violence against women.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Rage for Order]

57. You are incorrect

Men are physically abused by women at roughly the same rate as women are abused by men. That is a fact.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013743521_domesticviolence26.html

The fact of female abusers and male victims is often lost in the discussion of domestic violence. In fact, women's advocates have used selective statistics — the same federally funded survey that found women are equally as abusive to men — to bolster their plea for funding and services. "This is the best-kept secret on family violence," said Murray Straus, a sociologist who led the commissioned survey in 1975, and again in 1985 with the same results. "There is a tremendous effort to suppress and deny these results."

But other advocacy groups ignore female-on-male violence. Take one particular bullet point from a brochure sponsored by Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence, a state advocacy coalition backed largely by federal funds: "Every 15 seconds a woman is battered in the United States by her husband, boyfriend or live-in partner."

To Michaele Cohen, the nonprofit's executive director, that statistic sounds about right. "There are male victims, of course, but the majority of victims who come forward are female," she said. Cohen said other data suggesting that men suffer from equal rates of violence are unreliable. "That methodology is very controversial because, you know, you're saying that every hit is equal and you're not taking into account context," she said. "I think you have to look critically at those studies."

Yet both sides of the debate are actually looking at the same studies: that 1975 survey, updated 10 years later, that revealed nearly identical rates of abuse by men and by women. Cohen did not know of the connection to the statistics in her group's brochure, but said anecdotal evidence supports their contention. "I don't really want to quibble about the particular stats," she said. Instead, Cohen pointed to the "huge number" of female victims she sees in need of assistance each and every day. "I'm not relying on statistics. I'm relying on 30 years of experience."

[Confusious]

58. Men won't admit they were beaten up by a woman. nt

[bettyellen]

64. because their humilitaion is just as horrid as broken bones, right?

bullshit

[Rage for Order]

66. Humiliation? Is that what you think goes on?

Wow, you could really benefit from some self-guided research on this topic.

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Anderson, K. L. (2002). Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 851-863. (Data consisted of 7,395 married and cohabiting heterosexual couples drawn from wave 1 of the National Survey of Families and Households <NSFH-1>. In terms of measures: subjects were asked "how many arguments during the past year resulted in 'you hitting, shoving or throwing things at a partner.' They were also asked how many arguments ended with their partner, 'hitting, shoving or throwing things at you.'" Author reports that, "victimization rates are slightly higher among men than women <9% vs 7%> and in cases that involve perpetration by only one partner, more women than men were identified as perpetrators <2% vs 1%>.")

Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680. (Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggressionindicate that women were more likely than men to “use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently.” In terms of injuries, women were somewhat more likely to be injured, and analyses reveal that 62% of those injured were women.)

Archer, J. (2002). Sex differences in physically aggressive acts between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 213-351. (Analyzing responses to the Conflict Tactic Scale and using a data set somewhat different from the previous 2000 publication, the author reports that women are more likely than men to throw something at their partners, as well as slap, kick, bite, punch and hit with an object. Men were more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners.)


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013743521_domesticviolence26.html

When Adele Freeman fired five .38-caliber bullets into her boyfriend in 2000, she contributed to an often-overlooked statistic within the sometimes-deadly world of partner abuse: namely, that more than one-third of all homicides each year connected to domestic violence are perpetrated by women.

"Men can be victimized in the same way women can," said Laura Martin, the Calvert County, Md., state's attorney who helped secure Freeman's first-degree murder conviction in 2002. "And it's not just the violence. It's about control, dominion, power," she said.

The fact of female abusers and male victims is often lost in the discussion of domestic violence. In fact, women's advocates have used selective statistics — the same federally funded survey that found women are equally as abusive to men — to bolster their plea for funding and services

"This is the best-kept secret on family violence," said Murray Straus, a sociologist who led the commissioned survey in 1975, and again in 1985 with the same results. "There is a tremendous effort to suppress and deny these results." No one disputes that when physical violence occurs, women are prone to more serious injury than men; however, Straus and others caution that this should not obscure the fact that about a third of men sustain injuries, or are killed, from partner violence.

[bettyellen]

77. Men were more likely than women to MURDER, strangle, choke, or beat up...

their women parteners. You really want to compare it to throwing a lamp? Fuck that bullshit, pooling any old injury in with murder. why don;t you dig up stats on serious injuries? Because that would make it more than the already 2 to 1 stat that makes men doubly viloent if you count throwing purses. What a fucking joke this is.

[InvisibleTouch]

92. I read a quote once that sums up the difference perfectly:

Deep down, men are afraid that women will laugh at them.
Deep down, women are afraid that men will kill them.

Either sex can initiate an "assault" - be that physical or verbal - but there's just no comparison in the end result.

[WatsonT]

102. Maybe that ingrained fear

is why vengeful women so often go after the children to get back at the father.

They know the kids can't fight back.

/many people are terrible. Being a horrible human being isn't a gender thing.

[woo me with science]

118. Thank you. nt

[Rage for Order]

111. Now you're moving the goalposts

You said:

"...try(ing) to pretend that the odds of a woman committing an act of physical violence is anywhere near the odds a man will is bullshit. It is statistically much rarer, always has been."

I showed your statement to be patently false (Not intended to be a factual statement, maybe?). Rather than admit you were wrong you claim that women don't commit the right kind of violence, so it doesn't count. In addition, you've been shown that women exhibit much worse behavior than "throw a lamp" or "throwing purses", yet you continue to minimize female aggression and violence. I wonder why that is?

[bettyellen]

114. your study is bullshit, equates self defense and throwing a dish w/ murder and rape, Shame on you,

Right kind of violence, indeed.

[Rage for Order]

122. LOL! It's the same study used by women's advocates

Had you bothered to read the article you would have seen that part. Therefore, if "my" study is bullshit then the study you cite is bullshit too.

:rofl:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013743521_domesticviolence26.html

The fact of female abusers and male victims is often lost in the discussion of domestic violence. In fact, women's advocates have used selective statistics — the same federally funded survey that found women are equally as abusive to men — to bolster their plea for funding and services. That absence of attention to the men's side of the coin has contributed to an imbalance of services for men who are victimized in abusive relationships.

"This is the best-kept secret on family violence," said Murray Straus, a sociologist who led the commissioned survey in 1975, and again in 1985 with the same results. "There is a tremendous effort to suppress and deny these results."

Michaele Cohen said other data suggesting that men suffer from equal rates of violence are unreliable.

"That methodology is very controversial because, you know, you're saying that every hit is equal and you're not taking into account context," she said. "I think you have to look critically at those studies."

Yet both sides of the debate are actually looking at the same studies: that 1975 survey, updated 10 years later, that revealed nearly identical rates of abuse by men and by women.

(R)eliance on nonscientific data is no shock to Richard Gelles, who co-authored the 1975 and 1985 surveys with Straus.

"People cherry-pick their numbers for advocacy studies," he said. "This is what advocates do, and that's not sad. What's sad is policymakers don't create evidence-based policy."

[bettyellen]

127. by your admssion, you have ONLY biased people touting this study, and that

is pathetic.

"you're saying that every hit is equal and you're not taking into account context,"

when self defence is equated with rape and murder the study;s methodology is completely invalid. It's liek lumping in the common cold and cancer, and pretending they are the same. Shame on anyone spreading this absolute piece of shit, feminists included.



960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend per year. (US Dept. of
Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March
1998)
• 3.9 million women are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners per year. (The Commonwealth
Fund, First Comprehensive National Health Survey of American Women. July 1993)
• One out of every four women is a victim of domestic violence at least once in her lifetime.
(www.domesticviolence.com)
• Every fifteen seconds, a woman is physically assaulted within her home in the United States.
(Survivor's Handbook for Battered Women. SAFE House Susan McGee)
• Women ages 19-29 report more violence by intimates than any other age group.
(www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Six out of seven domestic assaults are not reported to the police. (www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Domestic violence is the primary cause of homelessness in 46% of US cities
surveyed. (US Conference of Mayors 1998)
• In 1996, approx. 1,800 murders were attributed to intimates; nearly three out of four of these deaths were
female victims. (US Dept. of Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses,
Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March 1998)
• Only 3% of the male victims were known to be slain by wives or girlfriends. (Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Crime in the United States 1995: Uniform Crime reports)
• 78% of stalking victims are women. Women are significantly more likely than men (60% and 30%
respectively) to be stalked by intimate partners. (Center for Policy Research, Stalking in America, July 1997)
• Slightly more than half of female victims of intimate violence live in households with children under the age of
twelve. (US Department of Justice, march 1998)
• 40% of teenaged girls (ages 14-17) report knowing someone their age that has been hit or beaten by a
boyfriend. (Children Now/Kaiser Permanente Poll, December 1995)
• Source: www.umich.edu/~mserve/ProjectServe/HTML/IEA_domviolence.html

[Rage for Order]

132. The people touting the study in the article are the authors of the study and...

The executive director of Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence, who is female. In fact, your third bullet point is pulled from the same study that you claim is bullshit, and it's addressed in the article I posted.

Take one particular bullet point from a brochure sponsored by Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence, a state advocacy coalition backed largely by federal funds: "Every 15 seconds a woman is battered in the United States by her husband, boyfriend or live-in partner."

To Michaele Cohen, the nonprofit's executive director, that statistic sounds about right. "There are male victims, of course, but the majority of victims who come forward are female," she said.

"I don't really want to quibble about the particular stats," she said. Instead, Cohen pointed to the "huge number" of female victims she sees in need of assistance each and every day.

"I'm not relying on statistics. I'm relying on 30 years of experience."

This woman admits that she doesn't rely on facts; rather, she relies on her own personal experience of women coming to her agency for help - an agency that works with female victims of domestic violence. I'm sure her perspective isn't skewed at all from working almost exclusively with female victims of domestic violence.

Laura Dugan, a public-policy expert and associate professor at the University of Maryland, said you might not know of a need for men based on the services available to them.

"All of these service providers, they do not let men on their premises," she said, recounting a case she was familiar with in which an alcoholic wife was abusing her husband. "She really abused him. And he had nowhere to go."

In Maryland, the House of Ruth, one of Maryland's largest domestic-violence service providers, will assist men, but active outreach efforts seem in short supply.

"We also work with men," said program development director Cheri Parlaman, referring to an abuser intervention program.


You really should explore why you have such a bias against men; it borders on the irrational. Regardless of the facts you are presented with, you do the internet equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and screaming, "La la la la la!!!!".

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

67. Why? nt

[Confusious]

72. Serious question or just stirring the pot? nt

[uppityperson]

73. Serious question. I have my thoughts, wondering what yours were. Edited

actually, I'm headed off to bed soon so maybe should answer tomorrow. To avoid those who may object and all. Sorry, would like to hear though.

[bettyellen]

80. since its so rare and freaky, they are afraid other men will laugh at them...

just like we laugh at the idiot study that ignores murder and rape unless it;s equating it with throwing a dish.

[uppityperson]

138. A man getting beaten up by a woman is "freaky"? You are showing why men who are beaten up

don't want to tell others. Thank you for proving the point.

And yes, I've worked with DV places and emergency rooms and clinics and know there are men who are beaten by women who won't report it because "it is so rare and freaky".

:eyes:

[Liquorice]

84. Studies show that men are MORE likely to call the police

and report being hit by a woman than the other way around.

"Some people claim that men are less likely than women to report domestic violence, out of shame or chivalry or the fear that they won't be believed. However, the available evidence finds instead that men are more likely to call the police, more likely to press charges and less likely to drop them ."

http://www.xyonline.net/content/claims-about-husband-battering

[Confusious]

86. That's not a study, it's an article

it says "article" right at the top.

another clue was the words he used like "patriarchal." That would be fine for a study on ancient societies, but it's not on a modern study comparing abuse. The author shows he has a built in bias.

[Liquorice]

87. No it's a study. The article cites the study . The study was done by

Schwartz who analyzed US crime data over a period of years. Here's a book that talks about that study and a similar one.

http://books.google.com/books?id=POS6vDssTbAC&lpg=PA36&dq=Schwartz%2C%201987&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q=Schwartz,%201987&f=false

[Confusious]

88. The book points out crime statistics

analyzed by Schwartz and says, on the page you linked to, I quote "Whereas the claim husbands underreport because of shame or chivalry is largely speculative"

The CTS survey has been used 70,000 empirical studies and about 400 peer reviewed scientific or scholarly papers, including longitudinal birth-cohort studies<3>; at least ten books reporting results based on the CTS were published.

That survey said it was 50/50. which is even farther then I was willing to admit. I have a hard time believing one person over 400 and 70,000 studies.

[bettyellen]

130. Ha, you want to refute all this:;

960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend per year. (US Dept. of
Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March
1998)
• 3.9 million women are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners per year. (The Commonwealth
Fund, First Comprehensive National Health Survey of American Women. July 1993)
• One out of every four women is a victim of domestic violence at least once in her lifetime.
(www.domesticviolence.com)
• Every fifteen seconds, a woman is physically assaulted within her home in the United States.
(Survivor's Handbook for Battered Women. SAFE House Susan McGee)
• Women ages 19-29 report more violence by intimates than any other age group.
(www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Six out of seven domestic assaults are not reported to the police. (www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Domestic violence is the primary cause of homelessness in 46% of US cities
surveyed. (US Conference of Mayors 1998)
• In 1996, approx. 1,800 murders were attributed to intimates; nearly three out of four of these deaths were
female victims. (US Dept. of Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses,
Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March 1998)
• Only 3% of the male victims were known to be slain by wives or girlfriends. (Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Crime in the United States 1995: Uniform Crime reports)
• 78% of stalking victims are women. Women are significantly more likely than men (60% and 30%
respectively) to be stalked by intimate partners. (Center for Policy Research, Stalking in America, July 1997)
• Slightly more than half of female victims of intimate violence live in households with children under the age of
twelve. (US Department of Justice, march 1998)
• 40% of teenaged girls (ages 14-17) report knowing someone their age that has been hit or beaten by a
boyfriend. (Children Now/Kaiser Permanente Poll, December 1995)
• Source: www.umich.edu/~mserve/ProjectServe/HTML/IEA_domviolence.html

[treestar]

97. Exactly. That's where the double standard harms men

It may advantage men in more instances, but in a few, it does not.

I notice it when men who get custody of children won't sue for child support. They think it is somehow unmanly to ask for money from a woman. Yet the child support laws are gender neutral so in those cases, the mother is liable to contribution for support. If she makes less than the father, often the case, it would not be much, but whatever it is, she should also be supporting them to her proportional financial ability.

[bettyellen]

63. oh bullshit, men are not injured nor are they murdered at anywhere close to the same rate

results matter. i could punch and slap my man all night and he'd not be any worse for it in the morning. it would probably take him five minutes in the real world. and in hospitals and police stations all over the world, the real life results are tallied up. Men suffer humiliation, women are disabled and murdered. Fuck pretending it;s equal results. What utter garbage,

[Maru Kitteh]

125. "I'm not relying on statistics" = I have an opinion and I'll not let facts interfere.

Utterly unimpressive.

[Threedifferentones]

89. Men and boys are the victims of other men too, so why no sympathy?

Men are more aggressive and domineering than women on average, but that does not mean men are spared abuse. I'd bet my bottom dollar a man who kills his family was a victim himself many times. Men who are abused are much more likely to become abusers, why are we not deserving of sympathy as well?

[Exilednight]

117. Your basic premise is false. Women are just as agressive as men are. It's

perception that perpetuates this myth. Every 30 seconds a man is the victim of domestic abuse by a woman. When female serial killers are caught, their numbers are often 10 fold that of a standard male serial killer. One of the reasons they get away with it for so long is due to the fact that police often initially assume that every serial killer is more than likely to be male.

Sadly, many in our society have fallen for this myth.

[bettyellen]

129. bullshit, by you own stat men abuse 2 to 3X more frequently, furthermore:

960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend per year. (US Dept. of
Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March
1998)
• 3.9 million women are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners per year. (The Commonwealth
Fund, First Comprehensive National Health Survey of American Women. July 1993)
• One out of every four women is a victim of domestic violence at least once in her lifetime.
(www.domesticviolence.com)
• Every fifteen seconds, a woman is physically assaulted within her home in the United States.
(Survivor's Handbook for Battered Women. SAFE House Susan McGee)
• Women ages 19-29 report more violence by intimates than any other age group.
(www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Six out of seven domestic assaults are not reported to the police. (www.abnet.org/domviol/stats.html)
• Domestic violence is the primary cause of homelessness in 46% of US cities
surveyed. (US Conference of Mayors 1998)
• In 1996, approx. 1,800 murders were attributed to intimates; nearly three out of four of these deaths were
female victims. (US Dept. of Justice, Violence by Inmates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current Spouses,
Boyfriends, and Girlfriends. March 1998)
• Only 3% of the male victims were known to be slain by wives or girlfriends. (Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Crime in the United States 1995: Uniform Crime reports)
• 78% of stalking victims are women. Women are significantly more likely than men (60% and 30%
respectively) to be stalked by intimate partners. (Center for Policy Research, Stalking in America, July 1997)
• Slightly more than half of female victims of intimate violence live in households with children under the age of
twelve. (US Department of Justice, march 1998)
• 40% of teenaged girls (ages 14-17) report knowing someone their age that has been hit or beaten by a
boyfriend. (Children Now/Kaiser Permanente Poll, December 1995)
• Source: www.umich.edu/~mserve/ProjectServe/HTML/IEA_domviolence.html

[ZombieHorde]

3. My guesses...

Many women do get postpartum depression, or baby blues, so depression is a likely scenario.

Another reason may be because our culture usually frowns on directly killing women outside of a war context. US men are usually raised to believe men should protect women, not execute or torture them.

[girl gone mad]

4. I think the comparison between these two events is not valid.

The guy was sending a mother pictures of her dead toddler and baby. It looks like it was premeditated and he did it to just to make his ex suffer.

I don't think the woman was being sadistic or vindictive when she drove the van into the river. She was acting irrationally in a state of panic. Even before it was over, she told the surviving son she had made a mistake.

These were different types of crimes with different motives.

[LisaL]

6. But why isn't it assumed he is suffering from some sort of mental

disease or defect? If the woman did that I bet there would be plenty of suggestions that she must have been depressed, psychotic, etc, etc, etc.

[girl gone mad]

8. Obviously he has some kind of mental problem.

But the fact is that he took pleasure in sending pictures of his dead children to their mother. Long after they were dead, he was proud of what he had done and he probably would have done it again.

The woman instantly regretted her decision.

This is why she gets sympathy and he gets scorn, in my opinion.

[LisaL]

10. Considering she posted on facebook before driving off,

I don't see how one can say "she instantly regretted her decision."

[uppityperson]

19. never mind, see it downthread. thanks anyway

[Rage for Order]

12. The woman's regret was likely the result of her self-preservation instinct

It would be natural for everyone to think they made a mistake when they are looking death directly in the eyes.

[bettyellen]

25. he IS assumed to be a psychopath, a cruel one. all mental defects are not equal in the amount of

empathy we can give them. Very difficult to empathize with someone who has no empathy themselves, easy to be seduced by one, but once you have seen underneath that, no.

[Rage for Order]

7. The woman's act was premeditated as well

She posted to Facebook 30 minutes before she killed her children.

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20110415/NEWS05/110414026/Facebook-post-left-hint-Please-forgive-me-message-woman-s-last

La­Shanda Armstrong’s aunt said she learned Thursday that her niece posted a message on Facebook about 30 minutes before she drove her minivan, and her four children, into the frigid Hudson River Tuesday night.

The message, posted via Armstrong’s BlackBerry at 7:13 p.m. Tuesday, proved ominous.

“I’m sorry everyone forgive me please for what I’m gonna do,” Armstrong posted. “This is it!!!”

Soon after, the 25-year-old Armstrong drove into the Hudson.

[girl gone mad]

9. I still don't think these cases are comparable.

Sorry.

[LisaL]

11. Is it because in one case it's a mother and in the other it's a father?

[Rage for Order]

14. Notice, though, that few details were available when the story was posted

There was no mention of her statement of regret; it was a bare-bones news report before any color was added to the story. Nonetheless, people were quick to pull a Bill Frist and assume that she must have suffered from post-partum depression or some other mental malady despite there not being anything in the story to support their "diagnosis" beyond the acts of murder.

[bettyellen]

23. the detail that only women seemed to note was having four kids in ten years starting at age 14

it's amazing that men think this was NOT notable nor did it occur to them the bottom would seem to drop out of her life if the Dad left her. her act was borne out of self pity and desperation added to her illness..... what do you think this man intended to do, aside from torture his entire family? it would seem that he is a very cruel psychopath, and she was paranoid and deeply depressed, both ill, yes, but the similarity ends there.

[uppityperson]

37. That is a good summation of the similarities and differences

Of course I AM a woman though. Both mentally ill, but very different types.

[WatsonT]

104. Well ok but it wasn't pre-pre-meditated

because you know, she has a uterus so she couldn't have really meant to kill those kids.

[uppityperson]

70. Intent matters. She was negligent. He meant to cause much pain. In crimes, intent matters.

There is a difference between vehicular homicide and murder. If you run someone over during a fog, the outcome will be very different than if you run someone down premeditated in cold blood. Yes, the person is dead either way, but intent matters.

Negligence is different from premeditation. The intent matters more than the sex of the perpetrator.

[WatsonT]

100. Women can't kill their kids for sadistic reason?

Or to make the husband suffer?

[WatsonT]

103. Maybe she had abused him in one way or another for years?

Maybe he was depressed or suffered some other mental disorder.

Maybe he felt hopeless and trapped and was taking his revenge on those who had ruined his life in the only way he could.

Etc.

Seems silly when reversed doesn't it?

[Zephie]

5. I think that the ideal of woman as a nurturer is so ingrained

that when they fail to live up to those expectations we must try to find an explanation for their behavior. Historically women have been cast in the role of quiet care takers, whereas the histories of men tend to be remembered in conquests and bloodshed so it is easier to place them in the role of "monster" without evaluation of their circumstances: certainly in both these cases there was obvious mental disorder involved. It's a bias created by thousands of years of gender roles.

Grammar edit.

[anneboleyn]

27. good points.

[Liquorice]

15. Probably because men commit so many more assaults rapes and murders

in the world. Men are much more aggressive, and much more likely to harm someone out of pure aggression. Men are 10 times more likely to murder than women. We don't view women as violent because they generally aren't, at least as compared to men.

[bettyellen]

17. THIS

[Guilded Lilly]

20. I'm in your court here...

History has proven the male to be more violence-prone and physically threatening. Males carry out wars. Males use physical force and sheer strength to resolve differences.

Females by nature and nurture are not physically threatening. As the natural carriers and procreators of the human race, theirs is a protective role.

All acts of extreme violence are abhorant.

The sheer percentage of physical acts of violence is so much higher for males, that it is not surprising and therefore easier to condemn violence against a weaker human as a physical atrocity worthy of similar punishment and anger.

When a female acts violently it goes against her natural, emotional (and psychological ) make-up and seems to be the antipathy of her psyche and is easier to blame as a very serious lapse in mental stability that comes about as pity.

Both scenarios are awful and ultimately self-destructive.

[WatsonT]

106. "Females by nature and nurture are not physically threatening"

Nurture maybe, nature absolutely not.

http://psp.sagepub.com/content/20/1/34.abstract

"When a female acts violently it goes against her natural, emotional (and psychological ) make-up and seems to be the antipathy of her psyche and is easier to blame as a very serious lapse in mental stability that comes about as pity."

Women are in fact human beings, human beings as a species are violence prone.

Social constructs limit violence to men primarily because violence (like say war) is a risky business so it makes more sense to risk those that are less essential to the perpetuating of a group. Due to our biology a population can lose a few men and be fine but suffer from the loss of a few women. Doesn't matter much now but we're geared to think in groups of a few dozen to perhaps a hundred where the loss of a half dozen women would be devastating to the ability of the tribe to maintain itself, but not a men.

This isn't nature, it's social.

[Guilded Lilly]

121. I'll just have to respectfully disagree :) Peace!

[lumberjack_jeff]

26. Men and women are equally violent.

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Men are simply stronger.

But you do realize that you're defending your stereotype with another stereotype, right?

[Liquorice]

28. Men are 10 times more likely to murder. They also commit most

rapes and assaults. Sorry, but it's just the truth. I don't necessarily think it's a moral failing of men; I believe testosterone powers a lot of the violence.

[lumberjack_jeff]

33. This is typical of studies of the issue

Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression: Impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of Internal Medicine, 152, 1178-1184. (Examined 93 couples seeking marital therapy. Found using the CTS and other information that 71% reported at least one incident of physical aggression in past year. While men and women were equally likely to perpetrate violence, women reported more severe injuries. Half of the wives and two thirds of the husbands reported no injuries as a result of all aggression, but wives sustained more injuries as a result of mild aggression.)

Men and women are equally likely to be violent. When that violence escalates, women are more likely to be injured or killed. The conclusions have been confirmed in dozens if not hundreds of independent studies.

[Liquorice]

44. Nah, men do most of the violent crime. It's just a fact.

You can cite that dubious study on marital strife all you want, but everyone knows that men commit much more violent crime (and all crime) than women. And it's not because women are trying to commit just as much violent crime, but are unable to do it because they're not strong enough. LOL

Next you're going to try to get me to believe that women are trying like crazy to rape at the same rate as men, but they just don't have the physical strength to complete the act. hahaha.

I'll tell you one thing, I've never been afraid of being attacked by a strange woman, but I have been afraid of being attacked by a strange man. Men are generally much more aggressive than women. Obviously.

[bettyellen]

50. so true, but you'll never get him to admit it....

maybe he'll move on to mental crulety being the same, and BS that veers into "she asked for it" territory.

[Liquorice]

55. Yep, it's such a crazy argument that it's really downright absurd. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

68. You're still defending the stereotype in the OP based on your own stereotype.

to wit: "The double standard is appropriate. It's obviously true that men should get a lesser benefit of the doubt because I'm afraid of them."

The point in this sidebar conversation is only tangentially related to the OP. Domestic statistics indicate that men and women are equally violent. The fact that more men than women are convicted of violent crimes is because; a) in the cycle of violence women are more likely to be injured, and b) because women are given lighter sentences for the same crimes.

the money quote

Feminist readers are likely to take particular note of the harsher sentences given to men, compared to women convicted of the same crimes. Mustard suggests that this may be caused by sexist paternalism among judges; women are seen less as full adults, and as being less capable of being responsible for their own actions, and as a result judges depart from sentencing guidelines to give women lighter sentences. Although I can’t know if that’s true or not, it certainly seems plausible to me, and also compatible with feminist analysis of how women are treated and viewed by society.

[Liquorice]

75. Your belief that women are equally violent as men has been debunked

numerous times. This theory originates from claims by men's rights groups and is apparently called "Gender Symmetry." The people doing these gender symmetry "studies" use the same flawed research tool and keep repeating their flawed results over and over among male rights activists.

"These studies use a research tool called the “Conflict Tactics Scale,” which does not control for the context in which the violence occurred, such as use of force in self-defense or retaliation. So, for example, if a man is strangling a woman and she scratches him to get him to stop, they each get “one point” on the conflict tactics scale for use of violence..."

http://www.stanford.edu/group/maan/cgi-bin/?page_id=331

"The Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) has three key flaws as a way of measuring violence. Firstly, it leaves out important forms of violence, such as sexual assault, choking, suffocating, scratching, stalking, and marital murder..."
You can read about the other two serious flaws in the methodology here:
http://www.xyonline.net/content/claims-about-husband-battering

When you use a little common sense, you can see how ridiculous it is. Men are far more violent than women in every category of violent crime in every society. They commit almost 90% of murders, most rapes, most assaults, etc. It flies in the face of reason to claim that behind closed doors women all of a sudden become just as violent as men. It's just crazy to believe such a thing. I mean think about it. There is no way in hell a woman living with an abusive man is going to hit him because he could easily MURDER her. It can't get any more clear-cut than that.

[bettyellen]

79. yep, this ONE study has been debunked so many tmes it;s fucking hilarious

and it;s the big one they always cite. I love how you get one point for throwing a shoe, and one for rape or murder. I am embarrassed any one posts this shit here. But quite a few do. I shudder to think what drives them to want to believe this garbage. It;s pathetic and completely dishonest..

[bettyellen]

82. totally skirting the issue of who actually commits vastly more true violence?

and that;s the reason women have much more completely valid and statistically provable reasons to be afraid. Sentencing is a side issue. There are not nealry as many women who are violent criminals. Unless you count throwing a dish, and self defense. Shame on you.

[lumberjack_jeff]

95. "unless you count throwing a dish"

:facepalm:

Why shouldn't throwing a dish count? Would it count if the man was throwing the dish? What should the person hit by the dish do?

Throwing a dish is the opening volley in a cycle of violence, the brunt of which women bear.

[bettyellen]

115. count it equally with rape, broken jaws and murder? are you fucking for real?

this is just another way of saying she asked for it.

[lumberjack_jeff]

124. They're your dishes. Throw 'em all you want.

Let us know how it goes.

[bettyellen]

126. a non answer from someone weilding a total bullshit study, perfect

[Rage for Order]

60. Men murder men much more frequently than they murder women

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/gender.cfm

Homicide Trends in the U.S.

Trends by gender

Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male

Male offender/Male victim 65.3%
Male offender/Female victim 22.7%
Female offender/Male victim 9.6%
Female offender/Female victim 2.4%

Both male and female offenders are more likely to target male victims than female victims.
Victimization rates for both males and females have declined in recent years

* Males were almost 4 times more likely than females to be murdered in 2005.

* In 2005 rates for females reached their lowest point recorded; rates for males increased slightly from the low point recorded in 2000.

[Liquorice]

61. Okay, but what does that have to do with my post? Men commit almost 90% of all murders according to

those statistics. They also commit almost all acts of rape, and their usual victim is a female. The vast majority of pedophiles are also male, and a majority of pedophiles target female children.

[Rage for Order]

71. Yes, 90% of murders are committed by men

However, out of all of these murders they only attack women 22.7% of the time. Men are 3 times as likely to be murdered than a woman is (74.9% vs 25.1%). However, when a woman murders someone the target is 4 times as likely to be a man rather than another woman. (9.6% vs 2.4%)

As for pedophiles...

http://equalwrites.org/2009/11/10/why-gendered-stereotypes-actually-help-female-pedophiles/

I can’t speak for anyone else, but when I hear the word “pedophile,” I picture a man. Indeed, the sexual abuse of children is societally understood to be a crime perpetrated by males—in general, I think, we assume that women are extremely unlikely (and maybe even incapable) of sexually abusing a child. Traditional stereotypes of women as nurturing, inherently maternal, instinctively sympathetic toward children, and (perhaps more insidiously) less sexually active or sexually violent than men, all contribute to this belief. And yet the BBC reports that Childline, a British organization that offers support and counseling for child victims of sexual abuse, has seen a steady increase in the number of calls from young boys who have been abused by women—in fact, in the past five years, the number of children reporting sexual abuse by a woman has risen five times faster than the number of those reporting abuse by a man.

Historically, sexual abuse by women is vastly underreported because it carries such stigma. According to Dr Lisa Bunting, a researcher for NSPCC (a part of Childline), there is even greater guilt and shame attached to being the victim of a female abuser: “We get a lot of stigma with any type of sex abuse, but this is particularly the case in the participation of women.” She says victims are more likely to “internalize” the abuse than to report it, not only because they fear that their stories will not be believed, but also because they have difficulty coping with the sheer fact of the abuse—they struggle to believe that a woman would be capable of such a crime.

The professionals who treat and care for child victims of sexual abuse often exhibit the same disbelief about female perpetrators (which only serves to reify the victims’ fear that their experiences will be dismissed as false or exaggerated). Childline suggests that professionals are more reluctant to acknowledge sexual abuse by a woman, especially in cases where the abuser is the child’s mother—which account for about two-thirds of female-abuse claims made on their helpline—but also that the British policies, guidelines, and practices for child protective services and the management of sexual offenders do not deal adequately with the circumstance of a female offender. Dr Bunting explains, “If you don’t think females are capable of committing sex offences, then you are never going to be looking for that.”

Fortunately, Childline thinks that the drastic upswing in claims of child abuse by women does not reflect an increase in the rate of abuse, but in the rate of reporting. They wonder whether this trend might be connected to the recent Vanessa George scandal, wherein a British nursery worker was revealed to have abused children under her care and to have participated in an internet pedophilia ring. With sexual abuse specifically by a woman coming to occupy a prominent and acknowledged place in the public consciousness, Childline thinks (and hopes) that perhaps victims feel more comfortable and less stigmatized in acknowledging that they have undergone a similar experience. However, they highlight the necessity of further research about sexual abuse by women—of developing a better understanding of its circumstances and characteristics—and of continuing to raise public awareness about female offenders.

[Liquorice]

76. If a woman gets murdered, a man did it over 90% of the time. And

you simply can't be implying that women could engage in pedophilia at anywhere near the rate of men. That's utterly preposterous and a slap in the face of reason itself. Most pedophiles are men and their victims are little girls. AND almost all rape victims are women who were raped by a man. How can you argue against that?

[Rage for Order]

112. Do you have any evidence to support your statement that "most pedophiles are men"?

Or are you simply assuming that men are inherently more evil and violent, therefore they must also enjoy having sex with children? Last I saw, it wasn't a rash of male teachers molesting their female students that was making headlines.

[defendandprotect]

113. Heretosexual males are 100X more likely to sexually abuse children than gays -- !!

I'm repeating this from my post below --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=901856&mesg_id=904950

[defendandprotect]

107. It is also MALES -- hetereosexual males -- who are responsible for sexual abuse of children ....

Even RIGHT WING GROUPS acknowledge it is MALES --

And HETEREOSEXUAL MALES are 100X more likley to sexually abuse children

than homosexual males -- !!!!!


From "same-sex -- marriage in the United States

Focus on the Facts" -- Sean Cahill, PH.D

Lexington Books -- 2004
See: Footnote

A 1998 Study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of pedophiles are men, and 95% of these individuals are hetereosexual.

Research has indicated that gay men and lesbians are less likely than heteeosexual to sexually abuse children.

Perhaps the most egregious and damaging claim promulgaed by anti-gay groups is the claim that homosexuality is intrinisically linked to pedophiia and child sexual abuse.

The social science research on sexual orientation and child sexual abuse clearly disproves the claim that homosexuals are more likely to molest children. A 1998 study in the Journal of the American Medical Assocation found that 90% of pedophiles are men, and 95% of these individuals are hetereosexual. One researcher explained this statistic by noting, "Gay men desire consensual sexual relations with other adult men. Pedophiles are usually adult men who are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. They are rarely sexually attracted to other adults. In fact, research has indicated that gay men and lesbians are LESS likely than heterosexuals to sexually abuse children. Two studies that examined the sexual orientation of convicted child molesters found that less than 1% in one study and 0% in the other were lesbian or gay. One psychologist reviewed the existing social science literature on the relationship between sexuality and child sexual abuse and found that "a gay man is no more likely than a straight man to perpetrate sexual activity with children." Further, "cases of perpetration of sexual behavior with a pre-pubescent child by an adult lesbian are virtually nonexistent."

Gay rights activists, like all advocates for children's welfare, oppose child sexual abuse and support equitable age of consent laws that help prevent and punish such abuse.

At least 110,000 children are waiting to be adopted in the US. Approximately 588,000 children are currently in foster care. Barring gay men and lebians from adopting or foster parenting decreases the number of potential suitable homes for children in need.
Children who remain in foster care for much of their childhood, as do tens of thousands of American children, are more likely to have emotional problems. Some children in foster care live in 20 or more homes by the time they reach the age of 18. Barring gay men and lesbians from adopting or foster parenting is not simply unjust and unethical; it also decreases the number of potential suitable homes for children in need.
Research shows that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are not disadvantaged vis-a-vis their peers raised by hetereosexual parents.

Footnote 65 -- p.123
A review of 352 medical records of children evaluated for sexual abuse during a 12-month period at a Denver chidlren's hospital found that less than 1% had been abused by a gay man or a lesbian. Of 269 adult perpetrators of child abuse identified among the 352 cases of abuse, only two were gay or lesbian. The vast majority of the children in the study (82%) "were suspected of being abused by a man or a woman who was, or had been, in a hetereosexual relationship with a relative of the child." And the review concluded that in this sample, " a child's risk of being molested by his or her relative's heterosexual partner is over 100X greater by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual."
Jenny, C., and Roesler, T.A. (1994)

Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics. 94(1).p.44.
In an earlierstudy of convicted male child molesters in Massachusetts, none of the 175 men were found to have an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation orto be primarily attracted to other adult men.

Groth, A.N., and Birnbaum, H.J. (1978).
Adult sexual orientation and attraction to underage persons.
Archives of Sexual Behavior.7(3).pp.175-181.

Also : The right-wing "Family Research Council" notes/confirms findings that "almost all child sexual abuse is committed by men."

[bettyellen]

65. so that makes them less dangerous or physically violent somehow? LOL

hilarious to see someone pointing to this with pride.

[bettyellen]

40. men have more success dominating through greater physical aggression, yes they do!

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lumberjack_jeff]

123. Specifically relevant to this topic.

61% of child homicide victims under 5 were killed by parents. 30% by mom, 31% by dad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_murder#By_family_members_vs._by_strangers

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/162/9/1578

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/reprint/162/9/1578.pdf

[Cetacea]

16. Men are far less likely to seek mental health treatment

And our culture hardly supports them expressing venerability.

[bettyellen]

54. yes, and they are taught anger is okay, depression is for losers

[uppityperson]

22. Sometimes there is a double standard and it is good to examine each case individually.

[alphafemale]

24. And what malady was Susan Smith suffering from?

Evil does not know a gender.

A female murdering children for malice and spite is as timeless as Medea.

[pipi_k]

30. Well, here's one answer...

http://www.echeat.com/essay.php?t=28765

yes, it's "just" an essay, but if all the other facts about her life are true, then that would be enough to push her over the dividing line between "normal" and "abnormal" behavior.

I'm starting to think that calling people evil is just a way to avoid having to see them as human beings who may be suffering so much inner torment that they do horrible things.

dismiss them. call them evil. dispose of them.

[alphafemale]

39. She got rid of her kids because the guy she was cheating on with her husband didn't want them.

period.

make up some excuse because she was a woman.

It's bullshit.

The kids were standing in the way of her nookie. period.

And then she blamed it on a black guy to compound the evil.

[Iris]

29. Most studie indicate just the opposite. And in recent cases, women who kill there children

have been looked upon rather harshly. In fact, about a year ago, I made a post here on a thread about a case where a woman killed her child b/c she suffered from post-partum depression. She was taking a real beating by DU-ers. At the same time that happened, there was a report of a returning veteran who killed his girlfriend and boiled her head. He got a lot of compassion.

Personally, I think they both deserved compassion. Postpartum depression is real and even has some evolutionary roots and we all know PTSD is real and we're facing another generation that will suffer from it for the rest of their lives.

[Pithlet]

36. Exactly.

I don't get where people get this idea where women get nothing but sympathy and men get nothing but scorn. People see things through their filter of bias. I think the details in the facts of each case are going to determine how people react. If the details are more sympathetic, they're going to be more likely to garner more sympathy generally speaking. But mostly, people are either "Hang 'em high!" types, or bleeding heart or fall somewhere on that scale. And which ever way you go, the gender of the person isn't going to matter so much.

[defendandprotect]

69. Post-partum illness is recognized everywhere -- but America seems still poorly informed!!

Rightwing has a lot to do with that -- as it continues its war on women --

[seabeyond]

31. susan smith... no empathy. the mother that took down her 3, sad.

from the story i have heard thus far.

some of the men stories, no empathy. i can remember one not so long ago. a father that had always appeared to be a connected loving father. lost job, went into depression. killed his 9? yr old and tried to kill himself but survived. huge sadness for him. his story haunts me.

people say i am a self hating misogynist where men can do no wrong. people say i am a man hater.

people say, i just wont admit to the difference of men and women

this is a case, it is not gender specific.

there are cases where i am so full of sadness for men. and i have none for a woman. or broken hearted for a woman, a feel little for a man. depends on the situation. they are people.

[cynatnite]

32. The woman is the nurturer who carried those babies inside her...

It's such a repugnant notion that we have to search for explanations.

With men it's completely different.

[seabeyond]

35. it is such a repugnant thought a mother can harm child. BUT... couple decades ago

i had first hand experience of a truly ugly woman so narcissistic she was incapable of doing best for her child. that was my first real, up close experience with it. truly fascinating and not in a good way. my sister in law was able to disconnect from her three children, and not raise them and yet see herself as a good mother. another experience of the woman that was not the nurturer. through these experiences i have come to learn .... it is not gender specific.

[bettyellen]

47. a friends wife turned psycho and left her kids wthout a look back, started chasing men and drinking-

totally became another person in a very short period of time. He blamed himself, he blamed her drinking, Two years later she was diagnosed with brain cancer- and it was on that part of the brain that gives you empathy and curbs behaviour. he cancer had turned her into a selfish nasty zombie more or less, and by the time they realized it, she was inoperable. Thank god she was a sweetheart before this, imagine what that might do to someone who had violent ipulses? so I have a smidge of sympathy for almost everyone in these cases, their brains are fucked. But empathy? I just can;t do it like I can for a depressed person. Depression I do understand.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

74. It is something you really have to see first hand to even comprehend

My ex's mother was a borderline sociopath and as a mother were talking "Ginger McKenna" here. When we first became involved her extreme vitriol for her mother, who by that time was dying made me think she might be the pyscho. But as time went on and I came to know her brother who corroborated and more everything she had ever said about dear old mom. My ex counts among her earliest memories having watched her mother have sex with strange men while she sat in her car seat and seeing her mother high on all sorts of drugs. "Bring Mommy her Medicine" meant it was time for her to reach her little arm under the drawer under the stove to retrieve her stash box. In later years and after her mother left her father she and her brother were dragged through all sorts of unstable living arrangements with her mothers various unsavory partners for no other reason than to terrify their father who failed to win custody. Ultimately as "Ginger" aged and went from wild party girl to simply an aging junkie the kids in tow became too much of a liability and she ditched them so she would have more time for her true loves: speed, heroin and cocaine.

Although if one were so inclined I am sure they could whip "Ginger" into a sympathetic narrative as well.

[seabeyond]

90. i think a person really does, to truly understand or believe. still i will say

how can a mother not be a mother

i think it is happening more and more. as children are raised by more narcissistic mothers they dont learn how to be a caregiver and we are seeing more moms that dont have the skills, knowledge, instinct in being a mom

[WatsonT]

120. So women are biologically different to such a degree that their think and respond

in ways significantly different than men?

[Beaverhausen]

34. If you read what we know about the two cases, these judgements are valid

the man is accused of abusing his girlfriend in the past, and he sent her text photos of the dead children. From what we know, what he did looks like it was out of anger and seems to be a pretty evil act.

The woman who drove into the river with her children had a small history of domestic disturbances. She also was the mother of 4 who's first child was born when she was 15. It's possible she was in a situation that she felt she couldn't get out of any other way, and she wanted to take her children with her for whatever reason.

But none of us know yet just what all the facts are. All we can comment on is what it looks like to us now.

[bettyellen]

42. yep, I am weirded out how anyone would twist these two cases together.... if the Dad had

killed himself, and not tirtured the baby mom, they would be. But there;s real malice in this case.

[Pithlet]

45. I know.

Gee, why don't people view them the same? Clearly, evidence of bias! :sarcasm:

[bettyellen]

51. many men like to reduce things into simple contests, and sometimes t;s helpful...

but in this case, it;s complete bullshit.

[wickerwoman]

43. I feel sympathy for suicides, regardless of the gender.

Anyone who kills themselves and takes their kids out with them is clearly really depressed and ill. It's a terrible thing to do, but clearly the person who did it was also suffering.

I don't feel sympathy with people who just kill their kids, regardless of their gender, especially when it's a case of alcohol-fueled abuse that went too far.

For some reason, most of the former that have been in the news in past few years have been women and most of the later that I've heard of have been men.

I don't think that creates a double standard.

On edit: Just after the crash in 2008, I remember a story about a dad who lost his job, killed himself and his two kids... he wasn't called a monster on DU, at least not any more than the woman in the current story is being called a monster on DU (and she is... if you check the original thread).

Here's the link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3530183
I'd say he gets a proportional amount of sympathy and condemnation to the woman in the other thread.

[PufPuf23]

49. One could think that the USA cultural narrative

but reality is much more complex.

On average males are larger and prone to violence; women are more tactical because of less strength and protection of young.

There are male and female and children that are victims by circumstance, the children deserve 100% the benefit of the doubt but still there are exceptions because of genetic.

Men and women should look at each other less as commodities.

[spotbird]

56. Motive

Any person (including woman)who kills her children or anyone else for that matter, with true malice aforethoughtt she should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law

Not all criminal acts are treated the same, even when the consequences to the victim are the same. Crimes with premeditation are the most serious of crimes and so forth. Men often kill out of revenge, not postpartum psychosis. Perhaps that happens because they don't give birth? Maybe not, who knows? Naturally, there will be some explanation in the rightwingosphere regarding how postpartum depression/psychosis is a lefty plot designed to give women one last chance to kill the babies they missed in abortion. If there were sanity left in the world, someone would call them on it, but alas...

Anyway, there is no statutory exclusion for women perpetrators, in fact even when it is clear that the mother has lost all touch with reality, she is typically punished severely for crimes she was unaware she committed at the time. Laws which are designed to recognize intent as an element of the crime are helpless against the simpleminded vigilante mentality which holds women must suffer regardless of actual guilt. This concept will be impossible to understand for those who believe mental illness does not exist.

It's just bullshit that women are given a break when they kill their children, but it's another wingnut myth that has become a mainstream reality.

.

[TheMadMonk]

59. Likely motivation is the short anwer.

Whilst there are the odd notable exceptions, women who kill their children, generally do so as a result of some sort of "short circuiting" of their "nurturning instinct". Even though they may still intelectually know they are doing the wrong thing, the driving part of their brain has become "convinced" that their actions are "protecting" the child they are smothering.

A man on the other hand who commits this type of child murder, is most likely motivated by thoughts of revenge, or even a completely mercenary cutting of his losses.


It may well be that both suffer a psychotic break prior to committing the deed, but hers most like begins with the thought "My children." whilst his begins with "That cunt!" Hers is a cycle of despair. His one of anger.

Highly simplistic, and there are obviously always going to be exceptions, but that is basically why we are more likely to look for reason to forgive a woman and are so ready to condemn the men.


And WTF is it with these bloody "allegedlies"? "Alleged" is a legal term, very carefully defined to be completely neutral. In common usage, that legal neutrality confers a good deal of doubt in lay minds. It "demands" the proof. And in cases when guilt is clear, (sending photos of a hanged child might be considered a fair indicator) the dichotomy tends to make the person using it look like a dick.

Why can't a persons simply be "accused". "Accused" is a word which invites us to test both sides of the argument for ourselves.

[Union Scribe]

78. Not just kids, also when one spouse kills the other.

Man kills woman, he's a monster (no problem with that label). Woman kills man, man must've been a monster to make the woman do that.

[HankyDubs]

81. How sick do you have to be?

to look at this event as an opportunity to make some tired point about how persecuted men are. I mean jesus h. christ. What the fuck is going on in a person's head when they rush to type out this crap?

When I read about either one of these stories I guess I just feel kinda bummed out. Maybe I should be feeling something stronger, dunno.

But I don't start composing posts on DU about how rough men have it in this society...

[bettyellen]

83. and his big proof is a study that says men kill more men, and men kill mre women! Ha ha ha.

I don;t think he thought abot how that sounds when you string it together like that. Really grasping at straws, ain't he?

[HankyDubs]

85. I'm a boy and all

I have man parts and everything, the whole shebang.

I even sometimes feel resentful toward particular women or even women in general. I've said nasty words to women when I was angry and/or hurt. I'm happy I can say I've never struck a woman, but I've done things I'm not proud of. I feel like its pretty normal to have feelings like that on occasion. Girls, even mommies, can be kinda mean sometimes.

But for the life of me I just can't fathom the mentality of a person whose first thought after reading one of these stories is "hey, there should be more chest-thumping anger being expressed by total strangers!!!" Makes no sense to me whatsoever.

What does that accomplish?

[undeterred]

91. So many of us have known men who hurt their families

for selfish narcissistic reasons- its easy to go there.

[woo me with science]

93. A lot of women hurt their families for selfish, narcissistic reasons, too.

Men have no market on narcissism.

[undeterred]

94. I don't know any women who have physically injured their families.

I know plenty of men who have.

[WatsonT]

101. Well there's that lady who drowned her kids

that's a pretty hurtful thing for that family, no?

Also physical abuse is not the only kind.

Physical wounds can heal quicker than many psychological ones.

Would you rather be beaten or mentally torn down every day of your life?

Frankly I find neither desirable

[undeterred]

108. I didn't know her personally and I'm guessing you didn't either.

If we stick to non news stories I think most of us know more physically abusive men.

[WatsonT]

110. I'm guessing most of us didn't know her or the other guy

who murdered his kids.

Still plenty of speculation on both.

And being more common among certain populations doesn't make individual cases better or worse.

[Iris]

131. Really? You've never heard of a woman abusing her children?

[undeterred]

135. I said I do not know any.

[Iris]

136. That you know of.

It's not like people go around self-reporting this sort of info.

[seabeyond]

98. i have seen a lot of women cause a lot of pain. and though not a physical pain

pain it is.

[Arugula Latte]

105. Agree -- It's far, far more common for the man to hurt his family

Abandonment, abuse, etc. -- it happens routinely with men. I personally can cite several examples using families I've known.

With women it's more the exception, which probably explains the double standard.

[woo me with science]

116. Nope. It just depends on what type of pain you are talking about.

There's a rich research starting in early years of aggression in boys versus girls. Girls and women are equally as vicious, just in different ways. The difference is that hateful, borderline, or narcissistic mothers who are destroying their families emotionally don't generally make the news like the Dad who is swinging a baseball bat.

[WatsonT]

119. Ding ding ding we have a winner!

Abuse is a human problem.

Men and women go at it differently and mental scars are less obvious than physical ones, but no less harmful.

Keep everything the exact same but make women physically stronger than men and we'd see as many stories of men beaten and hospitalized by their spouses as we see women currently.

People are awful to one another and pretending otherwise makes it less likely we'll ever be able to address this problem successfully.

[bettyellen]

134. you seriously think men don;t emotionally abuse women also?

as if women have a lock on emotional abuse? most of the women who endure only do so because they have been emotionally abused. and yeah, women hit too, but when they do it's much more unlikely to land someone in the hospital.

[treestar]

96. Interesting issue

There are points where the double standards appear to the advantage of women.

Though if you step back you can see it: a man knows what he is doing, a women doing the same thing is crazy. That is women are less likely to know what they are doing and more likely to be crazy.

but it's a good point.

[lumberjack_jeff]

109. This.

Exactly correct. Or, to put it another way;

http://creativedestruction.wordpress.com/2006/09/12/prison-sentencing-study-whites-women-non-poor-and-us-citizens-are-given-lighter-sentences/

According to Mustard’s analysis, most of the sentencing disparities are caused by judges departing from the official sentencing guidelines; when judges decide to take mercy on a felon and offer a very light sentence – or to not sentence the felon to prison at all – they are significantly more likely to do so if the felon is not poor, is white, is female, and is a U.S. citizen.

Feminist readers are likely to take particular note of the harsher sentences given to men, compared to women convicted of the same crimes. Mustard suggests that this may be caused by sexist paternalism among judges; women are seen less as full adults, and as being less capable of being responsible for their own actions, and as a result judges depart from sentencing guidelines to give women lighter sentences. Although I can’t know if that’s true or not, it certainly seems plausible to me, and also compatible with feminist analysis of how women are treated and viewed by society.

Another study, by Max Schanzenbach of the Northwestern University School of Law, ((Max M. Schanzenbach, “Racial and Gender Disparities in Prison Sentences: The Effect of District-Level Judicial Demographics” (April 2004). American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings. American Law & Economics Association 14th Annual Meeting. Working Paper 4. Pdf link.)) looked at sex disparities in sentencing according to the sex of the judge. He found that, for serious crimes, female judges did not give harsher sentences to men, but male judges did:

The greater the percentage of female judges on a district’s bench, the smaller the gender disparity. These results are hard to square with the suggestion that unobserved accomplice status or blameworthiness is behind the gender disparity. At the very least, male and female judges view the dangerousness, accomplice status, or blameworthiness of female offenders differently.

The female offender/percent female judge effects <...> were not evident at all in the category of less serious crimes. (There was some evidence in the case of less serious crimes that more Democratic districts treated men and women alike when granting downward departures.) However, paternalistic views about the dangerousness or blameworthiness of female offenders may well be most evident in the case of serious crimes.

In other words, progressives are less likely to make excuses for women who do bad things because we accept that they are full adults.

[WatsonT]

99. Yeah I pointed this out on the first thread

and people were offended. They swore they'd find mental illness in men who murder their children as well.

Definite double standard.

[bettyellen]

128. nope, they said they'd be more sympathetic to suicidal killers- than psychopathic ones who torture.....

that is what was stated again and again in that thread, and you grossly mis characterized the responses there.
People find depressed people more sympathetic characters than cold cruel psychopaths who torture people, hide the bodies, and intend to continue on as if it never happened.....and this surprises you why exactly?

[Darth_Kitten]

137. All these posts do is bring out the "women are evil, etc" comments...

Women know that we are evil.....not that we aren't told in so many ways. :sarcasm:

Told we are never good enough, smart enough, hard-working enough, thin enough, pretty enough, kind enough, strong enough, self-sacrificing enough, etc, etc, etc.....

Therefore we deserve all the second-class treatment we always get.

So there. :sarcasm:

[Forkboy]

139. You women are just as good as us men.

But that isn't worth much. ;)

I think 90% of the human species sucks, so I have no love for either gender. Both genders seem equally whacked to me.