EDIT: Framing a woman entirely as a passive victim of her hormones or postpartum biology strips away the concept of adult female autonomy.
By reducing her actions to medical helplessness, the defense inadvertently relies on old, patriarchal tropes... making Lindsay Clancy defenders, ironically, the ultimate anti-feminists.
There is a specific medical question at issue that is central to approximately 1% of felony cases. That is whether her condition rendered her incapable of comprehending the wrongfulness of her action at the time she carried it out. Extrapolating massive societal implications from this one criminal trial signifies a lack of seriousness about understanding the justice system.
Do you talk to any women in real life? I mean, probably not, but none of the women I’m friends with have defended her at all. Lots of not terminally online people have normal opinions and critical thinking it’s pretty wild.
My wife thinks the bitch should spend life in prison. I don’t understand wtf this has to do with the right to vote lol. Juries of men have convicted people of crimes that led to their execution only for DNA evidence to acquit them decades later. Does that mean mention shouldn’t ever be on juries?
you kid but if you've seen enough videos of cops in high stress situations over the last few years it's clear who handles stress better (and also, who is more aggressive)
Have to disagree there. I think women are just as likely if not more likely to get angry and act on it, men just have much more capacity for violence as the more physically dominant sex.
This is pretty obvious I don’t even think it needs to be said, but clearly it does.
Women are just as crazy as men, men are just, on average, capable of doing a lot more damage which makes things uglier a lot quicker and more often, not by willingness to do so, but by ability to do so.
I think women are just as likely if not more likely to get angry and act on it, men just have much more capacity for violence as the more physically dominant sex.
I don't necessarily think this is the case. There are plenty of ways to murder someone or commit violence even if you're less physically strong.
For example, a woman with an assault rifle or glock has just as much capacity to murder as a man does. A gun is an equalising force, a small woman with a gun could easily kill Francis Ngannou.
Yet despite this, the vast majority of mass shootings and firearm murders are done by men, not women. Proving that even when men and women have similar capacities to violence, men are still more dangerous.
I was more so pushing back on men being more likely to feel anger, I think it's pretty even. And by acting on it I didn't mean strictly violence or extreme examples. In my experience, women are quick to start arguments, lash out or act out when they are angry and some are easily triggered. For example, with DV, it happens at the highest rate in lesbian relationships, and woman on man DV is underreported for sure. A lot of men also tend to hold it in (not the best since it can fester and boil over).
Men in general do commit more violence and are over represented in those extreme cases; we do have more natural aggression and are more prone to risk taking. I don't disagree that men are inherently more dangerous.
Exactly. It’s like comparing a chihuahua to a Rottweiler. Chihuahua are far more likely to bite, but rotties have a higher kill count cause they can easily kill, even by accident sometimes.
Chihuahua Also don’t get corrected most of the time by their owners so they get away with that behaviour. Hence why you see so many small dogs trying to attack dogs 10x their size since they know the big dog won’t retaliate usually since social standards will always blame the big dog if it hurts the smaller dog, regardless of who starts it.
Same as how women get away with being aggressive to men and even slapping them without retaliation. If the man responds back, he will be blamed cause he’s bigger.
Men have more ego and aggression due to testosterone. Women are more emotional du en to estrogen . Both are emotional but in different ways.
But men are given more responsibility to “be tough” “be a man” “quit acting like a girl” “suck it up” “you have to be a man” this are all things young teens have to hear growing up.
So due to social expectations, men are gonna be more ready to deal with stress since the mindset is ingrained at a young age.
Fathers are harder on their sons more than their daughters
I'm not disputing men shoot more, they do. This is obviously anecdotal but i handle tort/1983 cases against police departments, including where police pursue a suspect and ultimately hit my client. I've only had four of those cases and two of the drivers were women, both testified more or less to having tunnel vision and by the time i took the deposition, each of them (who were under 35) had left the force. Women are 10% of the police force where I live, so its curious they account for half of the wrongful pursuit cases i've handled, and the two most egregious. IMO a chase is amongst the most high stress situations, esp for new officers, so its a good proxy for determining how well one handles stress
Yes and I’ve seen that women are worse at it. Men handle stress better biologically but upbringing matters too. A woman who grew up in a rough household, trains mma, spars with men, has a bunch of brothers is gonna be way better at handling stress than a sheltered rich Dubai man.
But if both parties have the same environmental factors, then the men will handle it better generally
Woman can’t kill people as easily. Golden and Labrador retrievers have a higher kill count than chihuahuas. Does that mean they are more aggressive? Of course not. Chi’s can’t kill problem
what are you trying to prove with this argument? it seems like you are saying women ARE capable of killing men easily, and they still statistically do it less than men do.
You’re saying women not killing as much can’t be attributed to “being weaker” since they can grab a gun. I’m arguing that most would rather use a knife but many men can still defend that
Women being weaker does protect them from their spontaneous physical violence being taken seriously. I'd have to dig it up but I recall reading that domestic violence is a lit closer to even than most people realize, but one factor among many for why it's seen as such a non issue when women do it is because they are far less likely to cause serious physical harm because they're not as strong and they tend to be hitting people who can take a lot more violence before being injured than women themselves can.
I disagree with Sean and anyone who agreed with him. I just didn't botber replying to them because I doubt they're capable of reason anyways.
I replied to this one message of yours because I thought it was incorrect and because I thought you seemed like you were capable of reason so it wouldn't be a waste of my time even if we ended up disagreeing.
That and also I think I have a personal grudge about the perpetuation of the idea that women aren't violent in regards to domestic violence, so sometimes I bring it up when something adjacent comes up. Sorry.
Are you a bot? I honestly can’t tell because of how stupid your comment is.
“First off osha doesn’t have an official top 10 most dangerous and stressful jobs list.”
Where did I say they did? Your reading comprehension needs work. My source is the OSHA education center (link below)
“Where does osha say ‘men do the most stressful and deadly jobs by an absolute mile’”
Again.. your reading comprehension needs serious work. I didn’t say that osha said that. I acknowledged that based on the all the stats that are available, the most dangerous, stressful jobs are done by men. Because they are.
Look up the demographics for yourself. I don’t care about arguing with you. All of those jobs I listed are overwhelmingly male. 94 percent of loggers are male. 89 percent of construction workers are male. I’m not going to do a basic google search for you on every job I listed because you’re too lazy to do it yourself.
men are worse absolutely, but that doesnt make this okay lol. its like you want men to be worse but if a women stoops to that level then its actually ok? like no. 8-10 of those men are not forgiven because of mental health related issues, and rightfully so.
This is like saying shark attacks tend to happen close to the shore - of course because that is where all the people are!
Yes men are 9-10 times more likely to kill their partner after a breakup than women are, because men are more physically capable of it in the first place. This says nothing at all about who or what groups handles stress better or worse.
They do especially if said person holds some kind of power. Lavena Johnson came up randomly in my feed recently. Comes off as pure cope to act like this hasn't happened. Look at various priest diddling kids.
She had postpartum psychosis and it’s documented that women can kill their children during it. Without proper treatment yes you completely fall victim to it, the same way men do when they are under psychosis.
Either way the screenshot you posted it worded purposefully to undermine the gravity of the situation. Its not the Aha moment you think it is
I’m not even sure what point you’re trying to make we all know the bitch should go to jail. What the fuck does that have to do with voting? Are we really fucking stupid enough to think tens of millions of women shouldn’t be able to vote because of a TikTok famous case?
There are literally people who have been convicted by juries of men and then executed by the state only for it to be discovered years later they didn’t do it. Do you have any idea how many criminal cases go to jury trial per year in the US?
Where are all the GoFundMes for those men? Where are all the men standing outside protesting their innocence and saying they understand why they did what they did? Some guy just killed 8 of his family members recently, where are the GoFundMes for them?
I'm not even trying to be sarcastic or argumentive, I'm unsure of who specifically you mean. Is this an American politician? I will say however that any politician man or woman should never be an example to follow for morals.
Your comment was about women on the internets response to to the trial and how repulsive it was compared to how men act.
Last week, Ratko Mladic died, an infamous war general convicted of committing a genocide. His life was celebrated widely among men, including those in power and not just some weird internet campaign
I had to Google him because I still didn't even recognize the name. The dude was from Bosnia or Serbia or something? I'm going to guess that society in Serbia is potentially different than what is happening in the US. I don't know much about Serbia though at all other than they got bombed in the 90s and there was a sniper alley that people paid money to kill people.
Horrific that those men would do that but that doesn’t absolve these women. Whataboutism isn’t a free pass for shitty behavior.
However people supporting that war criminal all Serbs or Serb supporters and not because they are men.
Women who are who support Lindsey Clancy are women supporting another woman and mother. It’s a tribal identity reflex.
I wouldn’t trust a Serb to be a juror for a Serbian war criminal, what makes anything tied to gender related issues so hard is the entire population is biased toward their own gender and it’s also unfair to stack it with men who might be biased against them.
This should be a question of guilt or not guilty by reason of insanity but instead it’s become a tribal identity test. At that point there’s no good outcome.
These women are as out of line and insane as men who defended Andrew Tate. Delusional tribal shit.
I don't know why you're implying I am saying this absolves anyone of anything.
Their support of Mladic is very much a tribal identity reflex, his war crimes and genocide were a tribal identity reflex.
Not a lawyer, but isn't the whole thing with a jury is they dont have outside influence? Like all these psychos on tiktok and shit, have literal zero influence on this case right?
Like the woman who married Chris Watts? The guy who killed his wife and child? How could I have missed the millions that were raised for him? Damn. Lol.
Not goalpost moving at all. You said most family killers are men. I never disputed that. I asked you to show where the GoFundMes are for those men who killed their families. Since the majority of family killers are men, then there should be thousands of GoFundMes that are defending them and arguing for people to understand those mens mental health during their violent actions. It's just odd that we can find the GoFundMe for Clancy, or there is the GoFundMe from back in 2016 where another woman killed her two children because she was served divorce papers. I'm not finding any GoFundMes for the men who kill their families, which is weird, since you would think if they commit the majority of the family killings, then men should have an overwhelming number of GoFundMes raising money.
There are real women holding real signs with their own real children saying they understand why Clancy did what she did. Not goalpost moving at all to make the logical connection that those same women are nothing to be trusted.
nobody said she killed her kids due to stress or hormones, they’re blaming psychosis. anyone can go through psychosis.
and yeah actually it is goalpost moving to go from “women shouldn’t have the right to vote” to “THOSE SAME women are nothing to be trusted”, but i’m glad you changed your opinion.
So now we are going to focus on psychosis? Alright. Fair enough. So when do we start letting school shooters out? I mean they are obviously clearly mentally ill and unstable if they are able to commit such heinous crimes. When do we start lining up giving them millions because of the mistakes they made while being mentally ill?
the focus was always on psychosis. it’s not my fault you guys strawmanned and accused women of blaming hormones.
most people who get found not guilty by reason of insanity are men. so i hope you now realize it’s not a gendered issue. if you have a problem with the concept of being found not guilty by reason of insanity then that’s your own problem.
You're so stupid you dont even know what psychosis is. Were those boys under psychosis? They cna be mentally ill but still not be under psychosis. And i assume you can vote. Absolutely incredible.
You want an actual example of a psychotic man that was let out? The guy who decapitated a man in a bus and cannibalized him while others watched. That guy is a free man today. Go fight against that first.
The majority of family killers are men, so why are men not lining up in droves for all of these male family killers? There should be thousands of GoFundMes for them since they are the majority. It's really odd how Clancy and other women in the past have them set up to raise money when they kill their children.
Yeah I see you have repeated yourself but not sure how it connects to womens' rights unless you're saying these women giving support is an argument against them having rights
There was a large lineup support for Tate brothers lmao after all fking child pornography , sex trafficking and rape allegations. Its the same shit on my book.
Thats actually false, in regards to killing children. Women are most likely to kill children under 2 by a wide margin. They are most likely to kill children under 5 by a smaller margin.
I mean, it wasn't just her hormones or postpartum biology. It was also all the meds she was on.
I honestly don't care what happens in the trial but lets be honest. For all the times men have been able to rape women and the first thing that gets asks is what was she wearing? or did she provoke him? or did she ask for it? and all the times men have gotten slaps on the wrist with overwhelming evidence perhaps we can let women have this one... lol.
299
u/Available_Dot_935 4h ago edited 3h ago
EDIT: Framing a woman entirely as a passive victim of her hormones or postpartum biology strips away the concept of adult female autonomy.
By reducing her actions to medical helplessness, the defense inadvertently relies on old, patriarchal tropes... making Lindsay Clancy defenders, ironically, the ultimate anti-feminists.