I knew it. Allison Mack, tears and all at the trial, just validated the 'Chivalry Hypothesis' once again. Folks, it is NOT a 'hypothesis' though. It can be verified by the long-running record. Women are treated very differently than men are in the courts. Look at this particular case for an example. The 'Chivalry Hypothesis' tells us the following:
-- Men are one fifth as likely as women to be acquitted for the same crime. -- Men are 16% more likely to be imprisoned if convicted. -- Men receive prison sentences 2.7 times longer than women for the same crime.
The epitome of all of this goes something like this (A true story):
"Lizzie Borden took an axe. Andrew Borden got 10 whacks. Abby Borden got 14 whacks. Lizzie Borden was acquitted and died in 1927 a millionaire."
How about a contrasting statistic? One side of it goes like this -- 95% of the incarcerated are males. It sounds really bad, doesn't it?
Now, let's look at the other part that never gets mentioned:
Women murder their own children 55% of the time. Women are twice as likely to initiate a contract to murder their husband. The list goes on, especially where false accusations are concerned.
Rarely, are women ever prosecuted for false accusations when it is very common and at epidemic levels. Rarely are women sentenced the same as men.
Go to court sometime when there's a woman on trial. Watch the defendant cry. Doesn't it touch the heart, especially if you didn't know it was an act? Or is it? No one enjoys the tears of a woman. Now, consider the Chivalry Hypothesis. Did Allison Mack play the same game? She KNEW what she was doing. These trafficked women even bore her branded mark.
Does 'chivalry' comes into play? Stupid men!
It's not that women aren't committing crimes. They aren't being prosecuted for it.
"Were our State a pure democracy . . . there would yet be excluded from their deliberations . . . women, who, to prevent depravation of morals and ambiguity of issue, should not mix promiscuously in the public meetings of men." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Kercheval (Sept. 5, 1816), in 10 Writings of Thomas Jefferson 45-46, n. 1 (P. Ford ed. 1899).
Hmmmm, "ambiguity of issue"? Women cause men to be distracted from the issue? Tell me its not so, Joe. You corporate types, how well does your tea breaks meetings go?
Now, let's talk about feminism...... and equal rights.
Amen Patriot, Justice should be applied equally, and three years is not Justice, even if she sang her butt off.
Thomas Jefferson was correct. Women are ruled by "feels".
in a domestic abuse situation women are far far far more likely to survive abuse by a male.
male domestic abuse victims are almost guaranteed to die.
men might yell at and smack around their wives but women flat out murder their husbands.
every fuckin time i see 'Rosie Batty' in the newspapers in australia you know its because somewhere buried in the newspaper is a small article talking about a 'domestic partner' who 'fatally injured' their spouse in a 'disagreement' - that is newspaper speak of 'woman killed husband in domestic dispute.
on top of that there is the public enforcement - ill tell you straight up most security companies that work at shopping centres deal with domestic violence the exact same way - if a male is causing the issue you dogpile him and put him in cuffs and feel free to put him in pain because whatever, you collect every single bit of evidence you can, hand him over to the police and make sure he gets a charge regardless of whether the girlfriend/wife/whatever wants him to or not.
If a female is the agressor you get in between them, you tell them to take it somewhere else, you escort the male out, you tell the woman to walk out of another exit, you delete the camera footage in case someone comes looking for it, and you never speak of it again.
You're describing what is called -- 'Chivalry Hypothesis'. Look this up. It is astounding that, one, there is a constant attempt at debunking it, while 2, there is overwhelming evidence verifying it.
(post is archived)