Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think that females can in fact be criminals

129 replies

worridmum · 20/07/2017 14:15

Sorry for posting this here but I attended a seminar about feminism and one of the main topics was that of female prisons and how in a just society there should not be any because apprently females cannot be criminals as females who commit crime are just sick and should be in out patiant treatment centres.

It went further and suggested that all female crime root cause was men. for every crime they commited a man was usaually involed eg ether making them do it or not stopping them, with examples of NRP not paying enough CM meaning the mother had to shop lift to get food for her child despite being a self confessed heavy smoker/drinker and that she should not of been in prison but her child's dad should be for forcing her to become a criminal.

She went further and suggested that one of the main root causes of all crime and particaully female crime was caused by influences of there father and was suggesting that men should have less input/involement in their childs lives because they are one of the main causes of crime.

AIBU to think that she is talking total bollackis and suggesting that no woman has antomany over their own actions as what ever they do it is because of a man. and to think that what she is sprouting is boardering on hate speech as if you replace the word man with black person / muslim it would be shut down as a hate crime.

AIBU in also thinking that it is both toxic and dangerous for society as whole if these sort of views are not challanged and feel sorry for her son as she said she would be raising him to be aware that because of his sex he is a boarderline monster and a route cause of all problems in society.

(sorry for spelling errors that might be present I am dysixlica and my phone has a rubbish spell checker and for not naming names as I dont want to out myself or open myself up for slander by identifying the speakers)

OP posts:
donquixotedelamancha · 20/07/2017 15:14

I'm surprised at people disbelieving OP. I've heard the exact same argument put forward by various feminists and sociology academics. A very quick google gives:

We should stop putting women in jail. For anything.

Scrap women's prisons, peer says

Why we should close women's prisons

The last time I listened to someone espousing this was on radio 4 and, as OP suggests, there was no nuance. It was very much 'women should never be put in jail'.

Amd724 · 20/07/2017 15:16

I believe there are people out there with these views. I don't believe she went to a symposium where this was discussed. Otherwise she could just say when and who. I've searched NYUs website and haven't found it.

CockacidalManiac · 20/07/2017 15:16

I think people are disbelieving the OP because she's being so weirdly evasive about her source.

Umpteenthnamechange · 20/07/2017 15:17

Name the speaker in this Samposiumium only then we can understand their interputation and if it was finicial or not.

Bullfuckingshit

BertrandRussell · 20/07/2017 15:18

"I'm surprised at people disbelieving OP. "
I am sisbelieveing her because she will not name her source for spurious reasons. I am not disbelieving that the mysterious speaker said it, but I need to read what she said before I am prepared to engage.

HorridHenryrule · 20/07/2017 15:19

Don't give names you'll be stupid to. Even kids sues their parents I do think thats amusing (spoilt brat).

stitchglitched · 20/07/2017 15:20

I'm disbelieving the OP because her posting history shows her agenda and she certainly isn't a feminist!

coconuttella · 20/07/2017 15:22

Assuming the OP's account is correct, the feminist cause isn't helped by such extreme opinions... iUnfortunately there are radical feminists with some genuinely disturbing views on the sexes. Try searching for 'witchwind' and you'll see what I mean!

MrsTerryPratchett · 20/07/2017 15:23

There are people that believe all sorts of things. We should all live in Marxist lesbian communes and such. Good for them Grin

But whether the OP is posting to be disingenuous and discredit radical feminism as a whole is an interesting point.

SpaghettiAndMeatballs · 20/07/2017 15:24

Have you read those links donquixote - because they actually make some pretty sensible arguments around the suitability/economic benefit of incarceration for women.

I doubt that anyone's saying female serial killers should be on the streets, but does whacking a woman in jail for not paying her TV license solve anything?

I certainly think it's worth talking about.

coconuttella · 20/07/2017 15:27

I'm disbelieving the OP because her posting history shows her agenda and she certainly isn't a feminist!

There are radical feminists out there who hold these kind of views... Wishing it wasn't so doesn't make it so and it's doesn't mean feminism is wrong....

BertrandRussell · 20/07/2017 15:28

Ah, good old "witchwind"! Time somebody brought her up again. Interesting that it's always her, isn't it and that ancient blog post of hers. If all radical feminists thought all PIV sex was rape you'd think there would be lots of other references to be made!

DotForShort · 20/07/2017 15:29

People have all sorts of views, including wildly unsubstantiated claims. But it is disingenuous to attribute views to a specific person without naming that person. If you want to discuss this individual's claims, we can't do that without knowing who it is.

BertrandRussell · 20/07/2017 15:29

"There are radical feminists out there who hold these kind of views"

Which kind of views? And some names, please?

MrsTerryPratchett · 20/07/2017 15:30

Does Malcolm X discredit Martin Luther King or Nelson Mandela? Of course not. So I don't see why one feminist should affect all feminists. Unless we are assumed to be some kind of female hive-mind. Which is kind of sexist...

HorridHenryrule · 20/07/2017 15:31

Men says its the women who brings us up and makes us who we are today.

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 20/07/2017 15:31

'I doubt that anyone's saying female serial killers should be on the streets, but does whacking a woman in jail for not paying her TV license solve anything?'

That's it. As far as I am aware, no one has suggested we give dangerous people non-custodial sentences. But most women are in prison for non-intrusive crimes, such as not having a TV licence, or shoplifting, it doesn't make any sense to incarcerate someone for that kind of crime. And I've seen plenty of commentary saying non-violent male offenders shouldn't be imprisoned either. In many parts of the world (Scandinavia for example) they wouldn't be. However, we spend a fortune locking g people up for no real gain.

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed · 20/07/2017 15:33

Non-violent crimes not non-intrusive. Stupid AC.

stitchglitched · 20/07/2017 15:34

I've no doubt that some radical feminists share these views (I agree with the principle behind some myself). So given that someone apparently shared these views in a public lecture I don't see why the OP can't just name her.

But whilst OP is doing the mumsnet equivalent of vaguebooking, in addition to her previous posts, I'll keep on thinking it's bollocks thanks.

Bloomed · 20/07/2017 15:38

OP would you like to name the speaker? As you are not misreporting them, you're quite safe. That way we can engage with what you're saying and clear up any confusion.

donquixotedelamancha · 20/07/2017 15:38

"Have you read those links donquixote - because they actually make some pretty sensible arguments around the suitability/economic benefit of incarceration for women."

I have. The first one (WP) is as simplistic as the OP suggests; the other two are not. I wasn't trying to prove the OPs point, merely indicating that this is a common discussion, so I went for mainstream sources (nothing to do with lazy googling :-).

As I say, I've heard it discussed in the excessive way the OP recants. That does not mean that the arguments for prison reform are weaker, just that some people do stretch them to unsupportable ends.

Amd724 · 20/07/2017 15:39

MLK and Nelson Mandela actually had very radical views at the time, some of which aren't spoken about very often. They were radical civil rights activists, as was Malcolm X. Malcolm X just gets known as the most radical of them all, because he was quoted and recorded more often speaking these views. Their views, MLK and Malcolm X, are mainstream now. The need to discredit Malcolm X in the civil rights history by relating him to MLK was a way for the government (who spied on these men, threatened them, and arrested them without cause) to whitewash their involvement and resistance in the Civil Rights era.

Just saying, I'm African American, and when we honour the Civil Rights era, we try to make sure these things are well known.

Amd724 · 20/07/2017 15:40

The OP could even just share a link to the persons website, or research so we could read ourselves...Its pretty simple. Quoting a persons research isn't slander or libellous

MrsTerryPratchett · 20/07/2017 15:47

Totally Amd724. I agree. My point was that the circulated views of one doesn't reflect on the others. People massively cherry-pick things Malcolm X said to discredit him just like I suspect the OP is doing.

mavs801 · 20/07/2017 15:50

You can unpick anyone's past to attribute why They have found themselves in jail, but life being all about choices mean it is hat persons fault they are they...this 'poor me' cry does not get far with me.

In my experience of dealing with many criminals, I hate dealing with women, very often they are a criminal with an extra bitchy edge. Awful!...but of course, it's someone else's fault. 🙄