UK: New Judicial Law Treats Women More Leniently

From stevemoxon.blogspot.com

"Playing man-hating politics with murder law
The proposed changes in the law on murder are overtly 'gender politics' with
all the hallmarks of Harriet Harperson's visceral hatred of men. A man who
kills in a jealous rage will have no defence to a charge of murder, whereas
a woman who kills her sleeping husband in some supposed release of
bottled-up rage will do.
This flies in the face of the science. There is very well researched sex
difference in jealousy: which in men is aroused by a single act of sexual
infidelity (an evolved response because a woman having extra-pair sex can
return bearing a child, whereas a man cannot) but in women by emotional
infidelity (because this heralds a man's desertion). Women are far less
concerned with a partner simply 'playing away' sexually if that is all it
is. This is why men much more than women kill a rival or a partner in an
uncontrollable rage upon discovering infidelity.

"There is no sex difference that has ever been found in scientific research
in bottling up rage for it to explode at a much later time, as is supposed
to explain the predilection for women to murder their sleeping partners. It
is this scenario that is behind the proposals. Both sexes have very real
fears in a serious domestic violence situation, but the attempt is to try to
tease out one more pertaining to women: 'fear of violence' (though in fact
research now comprehensively shows that there is if anything more violence
domestically by women than by men). This can then be used to supposedly
justify a pre-emptive lethal attack on an incapacitated male partner when of
course there is no justification to do other than simply leave.

"It is welcome that Harriet Harperson's sex-hate fascism will now be the
subject of parliamentary scrutiny. It is hard to see how even the stupidity
of MPs could ever let through nonsense as profound as these proposals."

-ax

manonthestreet

This is just putting into law what is happening anyway. However, I don't think men should get into a state over unfaithfulness. Really women are no worth it and since men should never marry the provocation should never happen.

inclined to agree with the judge on this one. Claiming a crime of passion should have some small impact, but definietly nothing to bring it down to manslaughter.

And, if this law were actually put into place properly (which it obviously won't be with harman putting it forward), it would be a good thing.

I'd like to see some info on the women who used the crime of passion defence, and how they were treated.

And (if it exists) information on men who used the domestic violence defence, and how they were treated.

Then i want to throw this information in Hariet Harm-man's face.

You say ,

"Claiming a crime of passion should have some small impact, but definietly nothing to bring it down to manslaughter"

Did you know that in many cases where women kill their partners, they are not even convicted of manslaughter? Why do you agree with the judge, if the decision also goes toward furthering that injustice? The judge is making one decision - did you notice that?

You also ask,

"I'd like to see some info on the women who used the crime of passion defence, and how they were treated. And (if it exists) information on men who used the domestic violence defence, and how they were treated."

How long have you been a tr*** on..excuse me, a member of..men's rights boards? Any greater than a few days of looking at the posts, and you would already have the answers you seek.

-ax

I've never seen such clear evidence of a double standard in the law. Now they're actually wording the law to prove the existence of female favourtism. I think Harman needs to realize that men are already punished more severely for crimes they are falsely accused of than women are for crimes they really committed. That is unacceptable, and to further this inequality is counter-productive, and serving a facist agenda.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!