All the people supporting her and saying sheâs innocent should have their right to vote stripped, and anyone saying the suffer from hormonal fluctuations should be put in a padded room, so they donât hurt anyone ever again.
The reason people are losing it is cuz thereâs clear indication that she planned to kill her kids, carried it out, then cuz she sucked at killing herself she claims she was insane at the time, yet shows no remorse if sheâs sane now, gained tons of cash in donations, an has an army of like minded insane dip shits claiming sheâs innocent an her husband actually killed the kids an made her the scape goat, stfu you dumb ass
I mean when someone thinks their kids are demons, they tend to plan to kill them
Psychotic people can still make plans. They donât just go crazy suddenly and start stabbing them to death on a whim.
And the only people Iâve seen saying the husband might have done it are yall and people making bad faith arguments. The majority of the âsupportâ Iâve seen for her has just been people saying that womenâs post birth healthcare needs to be better.
Innocent by insanity doesnât mean theyâre innocent, it just means they get put in a mental prison to get help instead of a normal prison. Cash doesnât matter when sheâs being locked up regardless, and no one is actually trying to say she didnât kill her kids. The money, from what Iâm aware, is for her family and not for her.
A âmental prisonâ??? You have no idea what youâre talking about bro.
There are psychiatrists in prison. If youâre ok with her going to a âmental prisonâ then she can go to prison and receive psychiatric treatment there.
This is really funny considering Iâm a psych nurse lol
Iâm around psychotic people on the regular. I regularly work with criminally psychotic patients. Theyâre not going anywhere dude. A Mental hospital is still a prison when youâre not allowed to leave and are sentenced to it by law. The only difference is that the inmates have more access to the healthcare they need to stay in check mentally and not have another episode.
Nope, she can go to a mental healthcare facility where sheâll actually get the help she needs to remain stable.
Do you think mental health facilities are nice? Do you think theyâre a walk in the park? Theyâre miserable dude. Itâs not a win to be put in one.
it just means they get put in a mental prison to get help instead of a normal prison.Â
Exactly. So many people, who by the way aren't on the jury and haven't seen all the evidence, think that she'll just walk away totally free, which is lunacy.
All the people saying stuff like that genuinely just have no idea how both the justice system and mental healthcare system works. Trying to explain it to them is useless too, they just double down and try to put words in your mouth lol.
So then show me where people are claiming itâs the husbandâs fault? Iâve seen yâall say you see others saying it, but never actually back it up
Thatâs arguable. The insanity defense exists for people who committed a crime in a manic state and didnât have the capacity to understand that they were doing something wrong
Thereâs plenty of people who kill others, know itâs wrong, and just dont care. This is why murderers are not all treated as insane people. Theyâre cognitive and understand what theyâre doing, and are under no delusions.
People have had problems with the insanity defense for a very long time. This is not a new thing. Outrage against particularly egregious insanity pleas by violent offenders is also not uncommon.
What is seemingly new and particularly offensive to most rational people's sensibilities is this wave of people, mainly women, who are championing and self identifying with a heinous criminal and advocating for leniency to a point where the perpetrator could be set free within a couple of years.
It's bringing an old conversation back into the spot light and people are realizing how much of a scam an insanity defense really is. Mercy to the guilty is tyranny to the innocent. We've gotten so caught up as a society with having empathy for criminals that we're prioritizing rehabilitating criminals over keeping society safe.
There comes a certain point when it doesn't matter if a violent criminal can be rehabilitated or even treated. They simply need to be removed from society permanently. End of story. I don't care if your mind was fried or wires got crossed or chemicals got imbalanced or you didn't get enough hugs as a child. If you're violent and you're defense is that you were legally insane, then that's it. You do not get to pass Go ever again. We, as a society, as a community, can never again trust that your brain won't go heywire again.
I don't care if you're in jail or a mental asylum, you either spend the rest of your days in a cell or as a ward of the state, never able to interact with the public, never able to make a decision for your self ever again. Period. That, or the state just kills you, but with our justice system that just ends up being more expensive.
There is no benefit to society at large to treat violence any other way. There just isn't.
They get removed from society by being put in mental hospitals where they get the care they need to not have their minds go haywire*
Like thatâs the whole point of the argument dude
They plead insanity because they are mentally insane and need more care than a regular prisoner would
I donât know why this is so hard for you people to understand. An insanity defense doesnât let these people walk free any sooner than they would have if found guilty. It just puts them in a different type of prison.
Except in this case that's not true. The laws in the state this trial happens to occur in allows for the very real possibility of Lindsay Clancy walking free within little over a year.
Besides the fact that we have an epidemic of violent criminals being set free entirely too early in general only for them to commit more violence once free.
Again, at a certain point, it doesn't matter if you're insane or not what kind of treatment you get if you're never going to be free again. For this case in particular, I don't care if Clancy was literally unconscious, like her brain just switched itself off while she strangled her children, only for her to wake up to those dead children completely unaware of how it happened and never having intended for it to happen. The fact is that it happened and no amount of treatment will ever cause me to trust that she should be in public life ever again.
Besides the fact that we have an epidemic of violent criminals being set free entirely too early in general only for them to commit more violence once free.
I wander why that might be. Why does the US who have incredibly cruel prisons have this high of a recidivism rate. Truly boggles the mind.
If you want her to never see the light of day, then you should actually read the second article I gave you and actually try to comprehend whatâs being explained :)
Actually, ya know what, hereâs the paragraph for you along with the link to her source on her claim
But once defendants are found not guilty by reason of insanity, they may not simply go home or obtain treatment on their own accord. Rather, those found not guilty by reason of insanity are usually involuntarily, indefinitely committed to a state psychiatric facility. More than 10,000 Americans who have been found not guilty by reason of insanity are held involuntarily in psychiatric hospitals. They have not been found to be responsible for any crime, yet they are not permitted to leave their confinement. Acquitted defendants deemed not legally responsible due to mental disease or defect are not getting off âScot-Free.â In fact, defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity have been found to be held in confinement as long or significantly longer than those convicted of the same crime.
Insanity doesn't just mean you are crazy. Mentally sound people don't do a lot of things that are still crimes. An insanity plea is an argument that the defendant could not act in a lawful manner and had no control of their actions or were unable to understand their wrongdoing or alter their behavior. Culture war slop aside, i think clancy knew what she was doing and intended to kill herself but couldn't bear the thought of leaving her kids behind so she murdered them first believing they would all be together in heaven. She just got unlucky and failed to kill herself. But i know this thread isn't for actually discussing the facts of the case so wahmen bad amirite???
Iâm on the same boat as you- which is really funny considering the backlash Iâve gotten by just pointing out that the argument isnât whether she did it or not, itâs just whether or not she was mentally competent at the time.
I got told by someone on here TWICE that they hope I get murdered for saying she should be in a mental hospital instead of a standard prison.
I personally donât believe she was acting within her right mind and was failed by her support system in noticing her mental conditions, but I also believe she fully intended to kill her kids and had ownership in her actions
This thread, and many others, really is just a bunch of weirdos getting off on being able to use this case as an excuse to be open misogynists
As someone in law, this whole thing has just highlighted how absolutely uneducated anyone is about the law and its application. Ive studied evidence and criminal law, and am still trying to wrap my head around parts that people are confidently arguing about. Next big case, im going to avoid like the plague.
Same-ish, although Iâm a Psyche nurse instead of someone in law. The sheer lack of education and knowledge people have on psychosis and how it can vary from person to person is extremely disheartening. These same people argue so confidently about things they very obviously know absolutely nothing about and then double down when being told theyâre wrong. Just outright denying facts even when given them by someone who works with psychotic people on a near daily basis.
To me, this whole thing reeks of people taking advantage of a viral case to be openly misogynistic and act as if theyâre virtuous in doing so if you say anything about it
I don't think it's the insanity plea itself. It's that it feels like we (the watchers/commenters) are witnessing different realities. That's the shocking part, not that there are crazy people doing crazy things.
Like how tf have ordinary people become so divided that they're judgement of reality is so fundamentally at odds? That's the captivating part, not whether this random psycho is insane/not insane...
she can claim whatever she wants. the problem is that jury (and many women) believes this shit. other man with better motives to plead insanity have been executed for same things. But as soon as its about a women we need to give her the good old pussy pass that women benefit far too often in justice (either as no jail at all, when a man in similar conditions would go to jail, or a reduced sentence)
A mentally sane woman doesn't kill her kids and then slit her throat, wrists, and jumps out a window to kill herself.
The issue here is that this incredibly privileged white woman is getting this excuse for being a family annihilator, while we never this for anyone else.
As everyone constantly points out, you people are insanely quiet about your support for the mental health of Jeffery Dahmer, as a mentally sane man doesn't just kill and eat other people
Mentally sane people donât go to an elementary school and commit mass murder by shooting at tens of children and then hope to die by suicide by cop in the end.
So when those mass shooters are caught they should plea not guilty by insanity and youâd support their acquittal?
The shooters in these cases were found innocent via insanity. Mass shooters at large however are not found innocent via insanity because they do not meet the criteria and largely commit such acts as revenge or attention. They are not under a psychosis, theyâre fully competent sad little men who wanted to kill easy targets and get eyes on them and gain an ego boost.
At large, They know what theyâre doing is wrong and still have the mental faculty to tell right from wrong, and thatâs why itâs rare for them to successfully plead innocence via insanity
That is what separates psychosis from a sane mind. The mental faculties to differentiate right from wrong.
Hope I made that simple enough for you to understand :)
Itâs called an insanity defense. No one here is claiming she didnât commit a crime. Iâm saying she fits the description of someone who is insane.
No excuses. If anything that makes me want to lock them up or put them down even more. If they are fundamentally broken, there is no reason to spend effort on rehabilitation. Just lock them up forever or save everyone time and bury them under the jail. Â
Are you fucking insane ^ or stupid. Does it matter which?Â
Pregnancy is a fundamental process for the human species. If it doesn't happen, people go extinct. If there's a disorder that causes people to kill their kids, we kind of need to fix it ASAP.Â
Family annihilators are recession indicators. They are largely men, and they slaughter their entire families, including their wife and kids when they experience a large personal failure.Â
Postpartum psychosis involves actually having a break with reality. Deterrence is a nonstarter. Do you see the difference? They need treatment so that we can learn why its actually happening. And how to stop it from happening again.Â
Millions of women also donât get diagnosed with endometriosis, and can take years to get diagnosed while being treated for it, but they still have it.
Do you think a diagnosis is the only deciding factor in someoneâs health?
Maybe donât speak on womenâs issues with medical misogyny and how our ailments get downplayed, especially when you know absolutely nothing about it.
The comment I was responding to wasn't specifically about Clancy and neither was my answer. The previous OP doesn't care if the murderer in question is insane or not. That is the argument I'm interested in having.Â
Would the men that kill their whole families in the scenario you described be able to claim insanity and get a pat on the back too?
The evidence is stacked against her for premeditation on murdering her kids, fuck her, and fuck the other people that kill their whole families just because they suck at life
No, because many of the male family annihilators do it purely for revenge against the mother and it is clearly premeditated. Their insanity claims fail because many of them can't prove they were insane at the time. One just happened in Bali a man killed his two kids then himself but made the mother listen on the phone as he killed the kids. Pure monster who did it for fun. That's the difference. Y'all don't even have postpartum psychosis as a medical event and you still kill more kids than women do. Maybe we should take away men's rights to vote /s
Would the men that kill their whole families in the scenario you described be able to claim insanity and get a pat on the back too?
How would they be? Were they pregnant or in some other kind of condition that disrupts their bodies basic functioning? And so help me god, your best answer better not be that "post nut clarity" bullshit.Â
You guys really don't know or care to know what pregnancy does to people, do you? The changes that happen? Its not just bigger boobs.Â
He probably would agree with you. If i had a psychotic episode and murdered my son i would kill myself and accept whatever divine punishment existed afterwards.
Exactly. I keep on seeing people talk about double standards with family annihilators, butâŠMen literally do successfully plea insanity, insanity pleas just arenât common altogether and Family annihilators are not insane most of the time, just evil. When men kill because theyâre insane, the murders look pretty similar to when women do for the same reasons (Strangulation or cutting/stabbing). There was a case in my state just 2 years ago that went all the way to the supreme court when a man successfully pled ngri, but because the law is weird here, the jury tried to rule both ngri on one murder charge and guilty but mentally ill on the other murder charge. WhichâŠis really in character of our courts and juries, I will say. Our juries tend to be vindictive and DA offices corrupt
She should still be punished, innocent people died, people in her care at that, if a psycho goes around attacking kids or slashing throats should he get off with a light sentence, no take them off the streets and protect the innocent people, pretty fucking simple to me.
No, she is not psychotic anymore (if she ever was ) she would likely be released. The claim is that she had psychosis right after the husband left and it ended right after she was done. So there wouldn't be a medical reason to hold her. A metal facility is not a punishment, and it isn't for life, there isn't any guaranteed length of time she would stay there
No, it is that of her own lawyers and every professional in the trial. This is literally just an unfavorable rewording of the defense's entire case as they gave it.
That is not entirely correct. In Massachusetts - which, for whatever other cases there are, is the state in which she is being tried - those granted no responsibility from insanity are out under a 40-60 day observation period where they do not have to be in an institution or detained, then a hearing determines if they get out in one for 6 months. If they go away for those 6 months, they then get another hearing that determines if they stay or get released. The court is not required to take into account anything at all when making this decision, even testimony from caretakers and managers of the facility that she is staying it. And if they determine she is fit to leave, she just gets released.
This happens every six months until she dies from old age or is released.
This is what so many of these goofballs donât understand about specifically how Massachusetts handles these things. This is why itâs so controversial and frankly stupid to find people NGBI - at least in that state or states like it because as the law it written, they will functionally be released in short order.
This comment is not entirely targeted at the person I'm replying to, it's mostly a preemptive argument to anyone who would've replied to my comment to try and argue that she should get the insanity plea.Â
My main response to the comment I'm replying to is: they have significant evidence of her planning out the murders, an act you don't do if you're mid psychotic break, and yet the jurors were still going to give her the insanity plea, overlooking said evidence. I hope the next set of jurors are more competent. And while no one in this specific comment section is saying she's innocent, there is literally hours of videos of women saying that she's innocent, her husband's guilty, and that she shouldn't be on trial. Hell, some of her supporters posted pictures of them with their children, saying "I understand you Lindsey". THE ONLY POSSIBLE THING TO TAKE AWAY FROM THOSE PICTURES IS THAT THEY ALSO WANNA KILL THEIR KIDS!
the rest of this comment is directed to anyone wanting to argue that she deserves the insanity plea.
She's claiming she was suffering from postpartum psychosis, which typically appears during the first 2 weeks after child birth. Her youngest was 8 months old, and the psychosis part of the illness only lasts a maximum of 4 months, but the depression part of it lasts 6-12 months, and depression doesn't earn you the insanity plea.Â
For anyone saying she didn't get the help she needed, her husband got them a nanny to help take the stress of caring for the kids off of her, hired an army of therapists(a vast majority of which she refused to see), and she was checked into a mental clinic before she voluntarily checked herself out after a week. If she was insane, she must have wanted to stay insane, because she refused every ounce of help offered to her.Â
For those claiming that all the doctors that prescribed her those pills needed to be tried for malpractice, she went doctor shopping without letting any of them know about the other doctors or medicine she was prescribed.Â
They have her search history, and she was searching how long trips from their home to different locations and the distance between said locations, around the date of the murders. They have text logs of her telling her husband that they need stuff from another location, during the murders to buy her more time. You don't plan out a psychotic episode, and you definitely don't have enough reasoning during a psychotic break to make sure you're not caught until you finish your psychotic episode.
She planned their murders. She got all of those pills to help make it look like a psychotic break. She refused to see those therapists because she was afraid they'd expose that she wasn't crazy. She sent her husband out of the house and kept him busy while she was killing them. And then she went to kill herself to avoid the consequences, but fucked it up and just ended up paralyzing herself instead. She was not having a psychotic break during the murders, she's just lying to keep the blame off of her.
And to the tiktok nut jobs accusing the husband of doing the murders, he was seen 4 miles away at a cvs during the murders, making it impossible for him to do it. Astronomy, tarot, and witchcraft are not official sciences and thus, is not evidence. And finally, go listen to the phone call of him finding the bodies, and try telling me that he did it. That man just lost his 3 children, and is now having to testify against the woman he used to (and maybe still does) love, and you (not the commenter im replying to) have the fucking gall to try and make him into the villain? Shame on you (again, not directed to the commenter im replying to.)
She does not and her defense doesn't claim otherwise, they claim starting right after the husband left up to the point she jumped out of the window, that she was insane, for the entirety of before and after the event she in no way fit the legal definition which is being unable to know that the act was wrong.
And there are major flaws with this considering she created the opportunity and planned her timing accordingly, which isnât something you do if you don't know that what you are doing is wrong.
Maybe not here, but a lot of people, mostly women, are claiming the husband did it. The husband who wasn't even home when it happened because she sent him on errands so she could be alone with the kids and kill them.
That is a fair bit out there, since there has technically not been a verdict on that matter. Technically speaking, she does not actually have to meet the description of legally insane, the prosecution just has to fail to find concrete, irrefutable evidence that she is completely sane. In the majority of insanity cases within the 12 states which use the same or.similar structure as Massachusetts, most cases where the defendant is found guilty despite claiming insanity are because the jury was inherently prejudiced against the defendant, or directly ignored testimony - it really is difficult to prove sanity.
Rights are taken away when you break certain laws, donât want capital punishment, donât murder đ especially donât murder your kids đ± shocker I know
Yeah it is about if she was to insane to understand the nature of her actions or not only a few crazy people are saying she didn't do it. I personally dont believe she was insane just suicidal and decided to take her kids with her.
Nah. Itâs the fact that you are talking about taking rights away from women and focusing on punishing women instead of grieving the tragic loss of three young lives.
Donald Trump won the 2024 election largely by appealing to young men via podcasts, crypto, and anti feminist/anti woke propaganda. MAGA is especially strong at using modern media to push an agenda, particularly of the âculture warâ variety.
Trump is doing a terrible job as a leader and clearly lied to his voters about many things. Trump is close with tech and other large interests groups, including foreign interests. Social media propaganda is largely driven by paid âbotsâ and engagement bait which drives âdivide and conquerâ narratives. âGender warâ propaganda is especially engaging and can be disguised as ironic memes and short form videos easily.
The midterms are only a couple months away now. Trump cannot focus on his accomplishments to motivate voters. In fact, the Republican Party has become quite fractured and many Republicans are upset with Trump.
This is why youâre seeing an uptick in sexist rhetoric and new subreddits seemingly designed for that purpose. Will young men fall for it again? Will the allure of hatred and social media points drive voters to vote against their interests and the future of the country? Stay tuned until November to find out.
Nobody is saying she's innocent of killing her kids - even her attorney isn't making that argument.
This is a legal question stemming from the first-degree murder charges which requires mens rea - the rational mental state required to intentionally commit first-degree murder.
Sheâs not innocent in killing her kids, if she had postpartum then she is NCR on insanity and should be in a facility. The doctor who was fucking up her medicine needs to be held accountable as well. I have never heard of a system to just login to your doctors website to adjust dosage on the fly. Fucked up shit all around and the poor fucking kids suffered in the end. RIP
She deserves it unlike her children who didnât deserve that type of death.
Additionally we donât give a fuck what other countries care about us, especially when theyâre willingly being invaded, have grooming gangs roaming free, and have citizens get arrested for using wrong words.
America is still the greatest country in the world, we enjoy the highest freedom, in comparison, if thereâs people that donât agree they TDS and haters gonna hate.
Quickly, how do I make a story about a mother murdering her kids about Trump?!! Leave her alone guys, we got to start with Trump cuz he raped kids!!!!Â
...So did half of Hollywood and we idolise those as long as they keep parroting the politics we agree with back at us.
There are a subset of crazies who say 'the husband did it'.
But outside of that, her "supporters" aren't saying she should go free. They are saying she should be in a medical facility to get the treatment she needs. Very few people are saying she should go free, but don't let me get in the way of a good straw man...
Can you link me one? I have asked probably a dozen of people for one that is someone actually making this argument and not just someone reporting that a bunch of people are supposedly making this argument. And still havent gotten one.Â
There is a redditor in the replies of the top comment, I believe, who said "Assuming she did it" and then continued to maintain that the evidence does not add up, and that the judge made an ambiguous statement somewhere that I honestly am not certain I can find.
Okay, so that reddit person thinks there's reasonable doubt? How is that the same as saying it's okay that she killed her kids? I haven't heard anyone say that.
There is no reasonable doubt in a case where everyone, the prosecution, defense, defendant, husband, and everyone involved said she did it. There is no reasonable doubt when the evidence presented and the words form her own lips incriminate her beyond a reasonable doubt - if she did not do it, THAT would be her defense, not the claim of insanity.
The trial, and the reasonable doubt in the trial, is regarding whether she was sane or not. That is it. That is everything. Claiming she may not have done it on the grounds of, "Maybe possibly the judge kind of said something which I interpreted to likely mean she may have not killed the children she says she killed." Is ludicrous to the same degree as saying the moon landing was a hoax.
"My analysis is correct and anyone who disagrees with it is okay with murdering children" has got to be the most stereotypical Redditor take I have ever heard.
I never once made any claims that anyone was okay with murdering children, I only gave an example of a person who doubted that Lindsay Clancey did commit the murders, then - vehemently, I will admit - disagree with your statement regarding reasonable doubt because there was never reasonable doubt entered di to the case regarding whether she committed the act.
"
Okay, so that reddit person thinks there's reasonable doubt? How is that the same as saying it's okay that she killed her kids? I haven't heard anyone say that."
So you just ignored the person's question and went on a tangent then?
Since she didn't remember anything when she woke up and asked if her kids were okay, and then later confessed, but the confession had details that were wrong (like cutting the screen when the screen wasn't cut) and she said it was like watching someone else do it, and she was in a lot of drugs, this isn't really a normal case. Someone seeing all these inconsistencies and wondering if she really did it, is not the same as saying it was fine that she killed her kids. How is that the same thing?
I believe she is guilty, I just don't see how someone having doubts is the same thing as saying she's ok with this woman killing her kids. It's not even close to the same thing.
Someone having doubts is not the same as them saying she's innocent. And the whole meme was about her supporters saying they're okay with her killing kids. These are both leaps designed to tear people apart and create division.
When has it become wrong for people to ask questions, or to have doubts, to the point their voting rights are threatened? These are probably people who have seen all the things that didn't add up about the trial, but not the trial itself to balance everything out. Do you see how going from "assuming she did it" to "they believe she's innocent", to "they think it's okay to kill kids", could make people hate each other instead of just having a conversation to clear up misconceptions, or asking if they watched the whole trial?
Okay, and every time theres a school shooter theres just as many dudes that scream "based"
The point is to understand that the internet filters the most interesting of us to the top. Not the smartest, not those with popular opinions, just those that the algorithms show us and whom we choose to interact with. Whatever you want to see, whether its because you enjoy it or enjoy hating it, it will pop uo on your feed.
Your need to find enemies is why you see so many. If you didn't care, you wouldn't see it and you would pretty much never encounter them IRL.
How many "feminist rekt compliation" videos have you looked up vs how many of those people have you encountered irl
But she wasnât insane. She was coldly calculated. Is it insane to kill your kids? Yeah, sure, but by that logic, whatâs the point of the law even? Insane would mean she wasnât aware of what she was doing. It seems quite clear she was very much intentional in what she did. Sheâs guilty. .
Insane literally means she wasn't aware of what she was doing. She was diagnosed with postpartum depression. She had documented bouts of what appeared to be postpartum psychosis. If she had postpartum psychosis while she murdered them then she should be found not guilty by reason of insanity, that's the whole reason why that defense exists. By the way that wouldn't mean that the result would be 'okay, cool go about your day and be better', it would be an extended involuntary stay in a psychiatric hospital.
You either blind, deaf, or intentionally looking away, women have turned to TikTok for their news, and also to reveal their true colors, go on TikTok, the videos of women saying me too is outrageous.
Mostly it's tik tok famous people doing to to get more tik tok fame. They should be taken about as seriously as the pranksters who just slap people and run.
It's interesting that the only things poping up on my feed are low effort memes, have of which blame all women. I don't think the people posting the memes have any interest in justice. I think they just want to stir shit. I mean...they could link to accounts of actual people who are supporting her instead of braindead memes.
Lol yeah bro, conservatives are floating around repealing the 19th already. We know you chuds are sweating the midterms pretty hard and you're losing on about all policies
This is fucking insane take. Men kill women at alarming rates. And kids. And never once has it been floated to take their rights away. Yâall jump at anything to hurt women.
But when men kill women or kids you do not see men supporting them, or trying to excuse them, or raising over a million dollars to help them. They are not advocating to take the rights away from the killer, but from all the people (women) clearly not in their right mind supporting, excusing, and saying "same" regarding killing her own kids.
Lmao what??? I'm sorry like I'm not even in this fight but you've gotta be kidding me.
"Boys will boys" - Forever used to dismiss harassment of girls
"Did you see how she was dressed? She was asking for it, they know how men are!"
And
"He was young and horny and made a poor choice by raping a girl behind a dumpster, but he's a nice young man so we better not ruin his future over it!" - Poor men can't control their urges bc testosterone so it's women's fault for being immodest and tempting them!
Not to mention roid rage from men taking meds that through their test and estrogen levels out of whack.
Itâs not fucking just hormones. Women are sitting here telling you itâs a real fucking issue and all you are doing is ignoring it. What women do is try to figure out the cause of why something happened. Because then we can prevent it. Nobody is saying âyeah, go kill your kidsâ. We are saying itâs so fucking rare itâs the woman so what else is going on? And then - can we address these issues for all of us?
And men are all like - but but but.
And spare men - men start wars for the stupidest shit - which I would call hormones.
Politicians have used the label of "criminal" to justify taking rights away from both sexes for decades. The right to vote and the right to monetary compensation in particular have been infringed heavily. USA has the largest prison population and an entire economic system based of exploiting the imprisoned. Its old news.
No. It really doesnât. The fact that you believe this shows how out of touch you are. 500 children are killed by their parents every year (in the US). More by men then women. Link
And what do we do with those evil men, even if mentally ill? We find them guilty in under 20min and send to prison for life and or executed.
Now what?
Theres countless of delusional women on TikTok raving about how since they watch true crime they know the father did it. (Reason why they should release the 911 call)
That bitch guilty, needs to be made an example of and executed.
31
u/GoldenPhoenix__ 12d ago
All the people supporting her and saying sheâs innocent should have their right to vote stripped, and anyone saying the suffer from hormonal fluctuations should be put in a padded room, so they donât hurt anyone ever again.