infrequentposter88 re As I have answered your question I would be grateful if you could answer mine.
Are you talking to me?
If so, is your question ...is applying an aggravating factor as a blanket term to it really going to make a difference in a way that more convictions would?
If so, my answer is - I don't know. I don't think it is an 'either or'. I don't think we say either we are (IMHO) honest and admit that rape and violence against women is sometimes (if not mostly) part of a wider picture of misogyny as part of patriarchy, which keeps women down... or we have more convictions. What if being (IMHO) honest about the extent of the problem lead to more convictions?
Does more convictions help women if the guilty men are let out early, if they have no help inside problem to address their aggression and violence. IF there aggression and violence were identified as being against women generally rather than against the specific women they chose to rape could the prison service not set in place a better way of rehabilitating these men (IF possible) to minimise the risk the female population on their return to society.
Let's take an example of a man who rapes and abuses his wife or parter or ex wife or ex partner. Is he doing that because of some intrinsic part of her as a person or is he doing that because that is how he relates to women and how he thinks of women and their value; perhaps how he reacts to any presumed provocation in terms of his own internal jealousy or fear etc etc.
If we think the former than we may think with a different women things would be different! Yet don't such men who beat up or rape or murder women, including their own wives and partners, often do so again if they get the chance?
Serial rapist rape many women, what do these women have in common, maybe nothing except that they are women.
Is this not a hate crime?
Is calling this a hate crime more or less likely to lead to detection and capture, arrest and prosecution and possible rehabilitation? If someone were out there murdering trans women would identifying that factor not lead to better detection? If someone is killing or beating up people who are members of an ethnic group does identifying this not help detection, does it not, in an ideal world, lead to prevention of crimes?
Why are we as a society afraid to identify these crimes against women but not afraid to identify crimes against any other individual group in society?
I am not asking any specific person these questions, I am just musing, but anyone who wishes to can answer.