"Inconvenient victims": another brilliant piece by Victoria Smith

[RoyalCorgi]

She is so good. She puts her finger on something that has disturbed me for a long time - the minimisation of violence against women if the perpetrator belongs to a group that progressives regard as underprivileged:

thecritic.co.uk/inconvenient-victims/

The inconvenient victims problem arises the minute a political faction decides to define societal problems not first by the nature of those problems, how they come about, and how they can be solved, but almost entirely by focusing on those who are victimised by particular problems.

That is when you get the oppression Olympics, and that is when you walk straight into the awful mess of trying to decide which victim group should rank the highest and so get most support, even if that victim group in some specific instances is oppressing a different victim group or presenting intolerant and bigoted views towards such other groups.

How the Cologne New Year eve mass sexual harassment was covered in progressive and feminist sources is an example of this happening to many mainstream feminist writers.

This study compares the criminal sentences of 300 homicide offenders who killed at least two victims with a single co-offender (150 pairs) within their dyads using the actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) to determine if gender has an effect on leniency for even the most extreme crimes.

Can you not lie? That study has nothing to do with female abuse victims killing their partners. It is in fact a study of multiple murderers who killed with an accomplice. I did you the undue credit of thinking you’d read your own link and that you’d posted it in response to the point about mass murderers in a male-female dyad. My bad, I now have a better handle on your debate skills.

And the extensive discussion of how every other study has found female victims of IPV were unduly punished for murder is to be found in the study that is ACTUALLY ABOUT IPV. You know, the other one? You only posted two.

your lack of shame is infuriating tbh.

Can you not lie? That study has nothing to do with female abuse victims killing their partners.

I didn’t say that study had anything to do with female abuse victims killing their partners. The Philadelphia study, I also posted was specifically about IPV homicide sentencing leniency towards women murderers…which you btw haven’t posted any evidence to the contrary.

Look, you posted an objection to to my general statement regarding female murderers by claiming that this was “disconnected from reality” and then gave as an example an ignorant claim that female murderers of intimate partners get harsher sentences than to male murderers, even if it’s proved they were abused by their partner.

So I posted first, a study that goes over in its literature review multiple recent studies that supported my general statement was reality and itself shows that even in extreme cases where women kill at least two victims in a single event, that even then, they still get lesser sentences than do men.

I also posted the Philadelphia study focussing specifically on your narrow example to show even that was incorrect.

@DarkDayforMN
And the extensive discussion of how every other study has found female victims of IPV were unduly punished for murder is to be found in the study that is ACTUALLY ABOUT IPV. You know, the other one? You only posted two.

Ah, this is why I’m confused because this is a LIE. The IPV study I posted has no such extensive discussion saying every other study…blah blah…lie lie lie.

It actually says regarding other studies done on female victims of IPV who kill or as they phrased it “battered women who kill” the following:

“A number of studies have examined the criminal justice system experiences and outcomes for battered women who kill (E.g. Bannister, 1996; Browne, 1986; Leonard,2002). Although such studies make a worthwhile contribution to the field, they do not permit comparison of victim-offender relationship configurations, or of the role of gender differences in adjudication outcomes in homicide cases. Other studies that examine the phenomenon of IP homicide are limited by extremely small sample sizes to relatively unsophisticated analytic techniques ( e.g. Barnard, Vera, Vera & Newman, 1982; Stout & Brown 1995.)”

Ive posted the screen shot just to drive this home.

your lack of shame is infuriating tbh.
Because I’m not the one who should be ashamed. You should.

Another screen shot of the actual difference in sentences.
Which is surely a good thing? That the justice system has since 1995 recognised the fact that many women who kill an IP were acting in self defence?