Sentencing for sex-related crimes: compare and contrast

In this case last week, the female paedophile got probation.

"Ward's lawyer Donald Hocker cited the psychiatric testimony in asking for home imprisonment for his client. Hocker said Ward will be vulnerable to physical and emotional abuse at the hands of other prisoners."

Poor ickle thing. Can't be putting criminals in mean, nasty places can we?

No difference in both cases of course. Apart from the fact that the man is the owner of a penis and is therefore lower than the lowest low.

The saintly ickle woman is according to "forensic psychiatrist Donna Schwartz-Watts" "not a pedophile, but rather a childlike victim suffering from personality disorders and a repressed childhood."

She's the victim in this case people!!! They should castrate the five boys involved in this case!!! How dare they be abused by her!!!
_________

"They have the right to work wherever they want to - as long as they have dinner ready when you get home." (John Wayne)

trying to watch the real news w/o hearing these talking heads screaming
about laws to put MEN in prison forever and execute them for having sex w/ minors
is futile. women that rape children almost get an apology for having to be arrested.
"but don't worry darlin', we got special rates for women".

they want "special" laws, like jessica's law and such to deal out
loooong mandatory sentences to MEN. and in the next breath they talk about
American values and what our forefathers did and said and such, posturing for
Independence Day. what a bunch of hypocrites.

the squeallie women lawyers on o'reilly are really obnoxious to me.

with all this reading they say they do and all they say they know about American ideals,
you would think someone would come across "Equality under the law".
when was the last time MRA's saw any of that? every true American is
ENTITLED to Justice, Fairness, Truth, Equality, and Honor when
dealing w/ their government. not screeching self-righteous talking heads and women lawyers
telling us what to think and what is bad and what isn't.

imho - losers all. you can't come clean crawling around in the mud trying to kiss
all that feminist butt.

The cultural issue here is that women's sex has value while men's sex has little or no value. It's why men buy dinner, pay for dates, and buy sex from prostitutes. If a woman has sex with a man, she is giving something of value and she expects something more in return than just sex--dinner, money, a house, a lifelong commitment. Only if her partner is, say, Brad Pitt would she be satisfied with just sex.

Thus, if an adult female has sex with a boy, she is giving something of value, not taking something of value. If an adult male has sex with a girl, he is taking something of value, not giving something of value. This is why rape laws protect women more than men.

The bad news is this cultural view treats men as having less value that women.

The good news is that most of the people who commented on the Colorado case opposed any disparity in sentencing. A few tried to justify the disparity.

Even the uber-liberal, uber-feminist Boulder Camera wrote an editorial that at least recognizes the issue. You can read it here

We must make it clear that adults having sex with children, male or female, is wrong. We do that by the sentences we hand out. When we give a light sentence to a female perpetrator, we give a form of approval--well, it's not really so bad. I suspect that also encourages male perpetrators--if it's okay for a woman to do it, it's okay for a man to do it, especially in an age of supposed sexual equality.

Finally, inequality before the law engenders disrespect for the law. The law is supposed to be balanced and fair, not tilted in favor of one sex or another. If you do the crime, you do the time, man or woman.

and is no doubt a big driving part our problem as men and fathers in a society of women who hate men. however, it goes a lot deeper than just the value of a shag.

for instance, women who murder their children can usually expect to spend a
couple of years in rehab and back out onto the streets. and, for some strange reason,
it appears to be especially bad in states that are the hardest on Men, texas for instance.

and it's the same for women who murder their husbands. no crime women can commit
the half-men and the courts can't live with. excuses galore. i suspect they hand out a book of feminist excuses for all situations the last year of law school.

there are special laws made just to pander to women in many many areas of the law.
and this is directly in opposition to what our founding fathers laid down in
all those great documents. Equality Under The Law anyone? not likely.

special treatment is what it is. and it is destroying any semblance of just law.
you lose any one of the precepts of law (equality, fairness, truth, etc.)
and you lose them all. and we have.

the thing about special treatment is that when you finish your "social engineering experiment", you can't get back to a level field again. EVERYBODY wants handouts.
special handouts is a way of life in the amerika we appear to be stuck with.
need an example? no problem: right now 2 NW states are trying to put a stop to
affirmative action handouts. if things go as usual some black robe will rule
on some technicality or, as men/fathers are usually told, they will have no standing,
or no rights that any court need consider.

so, on this day when America is celebrating the great things our forefathers sacraficed their very lives to give us, think about how little respect we are actually showing them.
creating a utopia for women at the expense of men, fathers and children is not what they were striving for, i'm sure.

daveinga wrote:

"the thing about special treatment is that when you finish your "social engineering experiment", you can't get back to a level field again. EVERYBODY wants handouts."

Couldn't agree more. We've turned into a society where everyone wants handouts and believe they deserve them.

Everyone, that is, except for white, able-bodied, heterosexual men. We're the only group not entitled to some special treatment. We're to blame for everybody else's problems.

I supported the civil rights movement thinking it would lead to equality of treatment. What really happened is special treatment for certain groups to make up for past mistreatment. To gain special treatment, you had to be a member of a victim group. Everyone who could jumped on the "victim" bandwagon--white women, homosexuals, you name it.

The idea of equal treatment before the law is more distant than ever--we still give special treatment to certain groups. Especially women, who play on traditional male chivalry and their status as "victims."

So a man goes to jail for 4,000 years and a woman gets probation for the same crime.

It's called F.O.S.D. (Female Offender Sentencing Discount) and it applies to criminal acts perpetrated by women across the spectrum of law.
From the cited sex offender cases (although Deb Lafave would have a better example) to the Mary Winkler murder case in Tennessee to the Barbie Bandit bank robbery case in Georgia to.... etc.
Gunner Retired