|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday July 08, @01:09AM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Scott, et al,
Ever since her over-the-top rantings against Russell Yates (another "blame the man when a woman does something bad" article), I blasted her with an email and swore I would never read her tripe again, no matter how much she 'pitched' for men after that. No more comprimises with morons like her. At least not for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday July 08, @12:57PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Cathy Young is NO friend of the men's movement. However, this column does seem to give a balanced view on the issue of how female criminals are more lightly sentenced than males (if sentenced at all). Although she criticizes Warren Farrell's conclusions as exaggerations, she DOES admit that the problem is still a significant barrier to equality and men's rights. Here are quotes from her column:
Nonetheless, the pattern does exist. Two Justice Department studies in the late 1980s found that male offenders were more than twice as likely as women charged with similar crimes to be incarcerated for more than a year, and that even allowing for other factors, such as prior convictions, women were more likely to receive a light sentence.
The disparities are especially striking in family murders, the primary form of homicide committed by women. A Justice Department study of domestic homicides in 1988 found that 94 percent of men who were convicted of (or pled guilty to) killing their spouses received prison sentences, but only 81 percent of the women did. The average sentence was 16.5 years for husbands and a mere six years for wives.
****
Even when feminists do not actively defend violent women, they hardly ever speak up against inappropriate leniency toward female defendants. Mostly, they refuse to admit that such leniency exists -- perhaps because it would be heresy to concede that "patriarchy" has sometimes worked in women’s favor -- and prefer to focus on real or mythical instances in which the justice system treats women more harshly. (Battered women’s advocates have promoted the wholly fictional factoid that a woman who kills her mate is sentenced to an average of 15 to 20 years in prison, while a man gets two to six years.)
As a result, if a man commits a violent crime against a woman and gets off lightly, an outcry from women’s groups often follows. If it’s the other way round, the only vocal protests are likely to come from the victim’s family and from prosecutors.
The Working case, like the Wagshall case, received minimal publicity. Imagine the reaction if a judge had said publicly that a man who had ambushed and shot his estranged wife should have been spared prison because he was depressed over the divorce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's the venomous hatred like this that has led me to the view that the men's movement really isn't that different from the women's movement. Since then I've moved away from men's issues as my main cause.
I still try to keep myself informed, and I speak up when I feel it's needed, but lately I've been working on how to make activists more effective and credible.
One of the weaknesses I've seen in most movements is the inability to tolerate anyone who doesn't agree. The idea that anyone who holds a contrary opinion is the enemy is something that invariably eats away at the innards of a movement and leaves it with little public credibility.
The way to fight this is for people to speak up when they see this behaviour and let it known that dissent within the movement is ok and healthy.
I have read many of Cathy's articles including the one on Russell Yates, though I don't agree with all of her articles I have found her to be one of the rare individuals willing to discuss an issue in an unbiased manner. I also congratulate her on her courage to voice her opinion even when it might be unpopular.
I'd also like to take this opportunity to applaud Glenn Sacks for speaking up about the less savourable elements of the mens movement.
Matt
"Ahimsa magnifies one’s own defects, and minimizes those of the opponent. It regards the mole in one’s own eye as a beam and the beam in the opponent’s eye as a mole." -M.K. Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday July 10, @12:57PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"It's the venomous hatred like this that has led me to the view that the men's movement really isn't that different from the women's movement. Since then I've moved away from men's issues as my main cause." You call THAT venomous hatered?!! Man, get a GRIP!! With a panzy sensitive attitude like that, I'm HAPPY you've moved away from the mens movement as your main cause. Sheesh!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
