Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if a corporate board used the same logic? That candidate is "helpless little girl" and so they don't hire her.
What would happen then? Would that be considered just peachy? Or would there be rabid, foaming-mouthed feminists screeching for a lawsuit?
If it benefits women, it's fine. If it doesn't, it's discrimination.
Who said its perfectly fine? I'm sure most people would like to see equality and fairness in the courts but as has been said our legal system is open to personal bias, interpretations, and judicial discretions. There is nothing that I or any other women or feminist group can do about the personal bias of individuals within the justice system as long as they are following the law.
As far as the corporate world there are also law to abide by. Even so the same thought processes have been used to prevent women from gaining employment or getting promotions. As long as its done within the boundaries of the law there is not much that can be done.
Like the majority of people, I don't protest so I'm not going to stand up demanding or defending anything that doesn't negatively affect me or mine personally.
I'm not blaming the women. Of course anyone faced with sentencing wants a lighter sentence. That's common sense.
But the responses here are very telling.
Apparently it's OK be treated differently than men when it benefits the women. /shrug/
At least people are being honest about their personal biases. Same crime, lighter sentence for women is A-OK according to most posters.
There is no tree to *bark up.* There are only facts. Fact: Women get lighter sentences for the same crimes. Fact: Most posters think that's fair.
You came out the gate with this: Where are all the feminists demanding equal treatment?
Shocked that they aren't responding. /sarcasm/
Poor defenseless victim model of modern women applies here.
If your not blaming women why is it you feel women should "demand equal treatment" and claim women play the victim card?
What responses are telling. Most everyone agrees things should be fair and equal but the reality is anyone, male, female, black, white is going to go with a lighter sentence. You said it yourself.
In theory you would think so, but in practice they rarely, if ever, are. Just think of all the crimes where both say a man and his wife/gf participate in some horrible act yet all the time in the end you get the man getting sent to life in prison and the woman getting 10 or so years, or a man getting sentenced to 25-50 years and again the woman gets about half that.
Or in the case where a female teacher gets caught having sex with underage students and doesn't get near the sentence a man of the same age does.
It's all simple, one man can impregnate many women, but you need a woman to carry out babies for 9 months. And most women, no matter how bad they are, tend to stick to their children for life. So - you need GDP grow, military force have sufficient supply of young fellows without any criminal records, and population must grow in general... Men aren't really that much needed (and can serve their purpose of cheap labor perfectly in jail), women on the other hand are better outside of the system sooner rather than later.
What if a corporate board used the same logic? That candidate is "helpless little girl" and so they don't hire her.
What would happen then? Would that be considered just peachy? Or would there be rabid, foaming-mouthed feminists screeching for a lawsuit?
If it benefits women, it's fine. If it doesn't, it's discrimination.
Here's something from popular culture that apparently many men (and thus judges) believe:
In the movie, “As good as it gets”, Jack Nicholson, who plays a writer in the movie, is just leaving the publisher. The young female receptionist asks Nicholson a question.
Receptionist:
“How do you write women so well?”
Nicholson:
“I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”
So it's a double-edged sword - it may help women get off easier in terms of crime but it certainly doesn't help them in the workplace or just about any other place!
the researcher mentions that women may be more likely excused than men because of various economic hardships, having children, drug addiction, etc. Of course men certainly have these same hardships - she wonders if rather than women being informally given the benefit of these factors that these factors should instead be formally considered in sentencing so that men would also get the same benefits.
Now I know that doesn't sit well with men lusting for the blood of women to PAY as much as men do...but hey, "equality" (or equivalence) can be achieved either way.
Here's something from popular culture that apparently many men (and thus judges) believe:
In the movie, “As good as it gets”, Jack Nicholson, who plays a writer in the movie, is just leaving the publisher. The young female receptionist asks Nicholson a question.
Receptionist:
“How do you write women so well?”
Nicholson:
“I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”
So it's a double-edged sword - it may help women get off easier in terms of crime but it certainly doesn't help them in the workplace or just about any other place!
And here, just in, from a CD poster: It's all simple, one man can impregnate many women, but you need a woman to carry out babies for 9 months. And most women, no matter how bad they are, tend to stick to their children for life. So - you need GDP grow, military force have sufficient supply of young fellows without any criminal records, and population must grow in general... Men aren't really that much needed (and can serve their purpose of cheap labor perfectly in jail), women on the other hand are better outside of the system sooner rather than later.
All of these responses are basically agreeing that women benefit. And that it is OK that they benefit.
Do you think the men sentenced to the same crimes who received tougher sentences would agree that it is OK that women benefit from lighter sentencing?
The prevailing idea is that it is OK if women benefit from how they are perceived, but it is NOT OK if men benefit from how they are perceived.
It's hypocritical. That's all that I am pointing out.
And feminists always demand equal treatment. So in theory they should be very upset that women are being treated differently than men.
In theory. /shrug/
You're reading very selectively if you are getting that anyone has said that bias in the justice system is okay. What everyone agrees on is that legal interpretations and sentences are subject to personal interpretation by lawyers and judges and that can unfortunately lead to biases, whether that be social, economic, racial, or gender.
What people are questioning is what exactly, you expect women to do? Do you similarly expect white people to demand harsher sentences because blacks and Latinos are discriminated against? Do you think wealthy people who can afford counsel should lobby for more time and higher fines because poor people with public defenders get that? How is this all going to work? The system is unfair, but that's not a productive way to advocate for justice.
You're reading very selectively if you are getting that anyone has said that bias in the justice system is okay. What everyone agrees on is that legal interpretations and sentences are subject to personal interpretation by lawyers and judges and that can unfortunately lead to biases, whether that be social, economic, racial, or gender.
What people are questioning is what exactly, you expect women to do? Do you similarly expect white people to demand harsher sentences because blacks and Latinos are discriminated against? Do you think wealthy people who can afford counsel should lobby for more time and higher fines because poor people with public defenders get that? How is this all going to work?
Well, when hiring agencies and corporate board just kind of FEEL that well, a man could do a better job and offers the position to him, what's anyone to do about it?
And what should the man do?
Should he turn the job down?
Same logic. Some human interpretation.
So no one should feel any outrage, male or female, when EITHER sex benefits from how they are perceived in any given circumstance.
Here's something from popular culture that apparently many men (and thus judges) believe:
In the movie, “As good as it gets”, Jack Nicholson, who plays a writer in the movie, is just leaving the publisher. The young female receptionist asks Nicholson a question.
Receptionist:
“How do you write women so well?”
Nicholson:
“I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”
So it's a double-edged sword - it may help women get off easier in terms of crime but it certainly doesn't help them in the workplace or just about any other place!
the researcher mentions that women may be more likely excused than men because of various economic hardships, having children, drug addiction, etc. Of course men certainly have these same hardships - she wonders if rather than women being informally given the benefit of these factors that these factors should instead be formally considered in sentencing so that men would also get the same benefits.
Now I know that doesn't sit well with men lusting for the blood of women to PAY as much as men do...but hey, "equality" (or equivalence) can be achieved either way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice
All of these responses are basically agreeing that women benefit. And that it is OK that they benefit.
Do you think the men sentenced to the same crimes who received tougher sentences would agree that it is OK that women benefit from lighter sentencing?
The prevailing idea is that it is OK if women benefit from how they are perceived, but it is NOT OK if men benefit from how they are perceived.
It's hypocritical. That's all that I am pointing out.
And feminists always demand equal treatment. So in theory they should be very upset that women are being treated differently than men.
In theory. /shrug/
No - you are incorrect. I've read MANY responses that were negative toward women and my response explicitly put forward the notion that men SHOULD get the consideration of life circumstances that women appear to get.
But you can't stand it! YOU are the best victim of them all on this and any similar topic. Until you extract a pound of flesh from every woman in the world you'll continue to howl on here. Who done ya soooooo wrong?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
