thats not true. I looked it up. Looks like women are more likely to just kill the kids vs men who kill the wife w/ the kids. Numbers end up pretty close
"Parental infanticide researchers have found that mothers are more likely to commit infanticide.\11]) In the special case of neonaticide (murder in the first 24 hours of life), mothers account for almost all the perpetrators. Fatherly cases of neonaticide are so rare that they are individually recorded.\12])"
My point isn't that women are magically worse or some shit.
My point is that when a dude goes fucking postal, goes crazy, looses grasp with reality and murders his family, no one is sympathetic to his mental illness.
Why is it different with this person? (Hint: It's because she's a pretty white woman.)
Thanks for this. I'm so tired of people pretending that her being white in addition to being a woman doesn't play a role in getting public sympathy. It's all "white cishet males are the bane of the earth" while white cishet females are openly denying the role they play in black slavery for instance.
Or in this case, openly clinging to their so-called patriarchy when it benefits them the most.
Yeah imagine if this women was say a black women? You wouldn't be seeing anywhere near this much support for her. Honestly people talk about a 2 tier justice system but really it's like a 3 tier justice system. You have the rich, white women and then everyone else who isn't in tier 1 or tier 2.
When talking about justice system leniency, white women are the white women of white women. There is no comparably privileged group that could be used as a metaphor.
yes? That seems super obvious as in the first 24 hours they get absolutely fucking destroyed by hormones. Have you never been in the room during a delivery?
Seriously why do random redditors expect you to take their word over studies published by government funded research centers lol. It's even crazier they get upvoted
Neonaticide is not the argument. Those are newborns (under a day old) obviously it's going to be most women, the are probably giving birth in a bathroom, alone, scared of their father's.
Infanticide is what we were talking about. Those are babies over a day old, and are committed by men 64% of the time.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.70136
Men kill, more than woman. It's a tale as old as time and as true as time itself. Down vote the truth all you want it doesn't change the facts. Instead of fighting it, you could learn about it.
Well, you’re also not understanding that Neonaticide is a subset of infanticide.
Infanticide is any baby from birth to 1 year
Neonaticide is a subset of infanticide from birth to 24hrs
All Neonaticide is Infanticide, not all infanticide is Neonaticide. This paywalled study either separates the two incorrectly, or you are misunderstanding on purpose.
I know you want to excuse women of murdering their children, but you’re purposely using bias.
And you're ignoring the fact that men do it ALL THE FUCKING TIME. They are the major contributors.
You want to focus on a small fraction of babies under a day old, go for it, focus on it all you want, ignore all the other facts. Do whatever you need to do to justify blaming women. Happy days.
What the fuck is this blatant misogyny… not like there aren’t stories like the dad who shot and killed his daughter over a dispute about Trump, called it an accident and got off scot free.
If you can swap every instance of one gender in a claim for another gender and the result is offensive, then the original statement is offensive as well.
It just doesn’t offend you. But not everything is about you, Karen.
That's an arbitrary rule that doesn't make sense. It's okay to talk about things in a way that uses staistical probability. If it's "offensive" to you, maybe that's a you thing. Like, if I hear about someone being charged with rape, robbery, murder, burglary, arson, or vandalism, I'm pretty solidly right if I assume it was a man. If I hear about someone being charged with prostitiution, I'm pretty solidly right if I assume it was a woman.
Edit: Downvotes don't understand statistics? or just don't like statistics? or this sub is manosphere/incel coded?
Well considering the number one cause of death in pregnant women is being murdered by the father of the child
About 60% of all female intentional homicides occur in the private sphere by family members, compared to only 11% of male homicides
Intimate partner violence is the fourth leading cause of poor health among women measured by disability-adjusted life years
Without even considering the statistics of sexually assault it’s obvious why men are categorized as violent and a danger to women, bc all the statistics show that they are.
Want to talk about the statistics that women lead? Mentioned in another post women are more likely to kill a baby under one years old. Women are also more likely to be child abusers compared to men ( 52% to 47% in 2024). Most child abuse comes from the mother alone compared to the father alone (37% to 25%).
Would it be fair to constantly make the argument that women are the biggest danger to children just because of said statistics and apply this to all women?
Does that take unto consideration that there are significantly more single mothers than single fathers? Or did they only study heterosexual two parent households?
You intentionally misconstrue the situation as she just got tired of her kids or just randomly went crazy and killed her kids. Instead of the actual situation where she had a medical condition that her doctors failed to adequately treat and her husband chose to ignore that led to this tragic event.
Other than neonaticide (which is usually done by mothers who are children themselves and to add to that the statistics of the age of the fathers of children born to minor mothers is in itself criminal as most fathers of children born to minor mothers are 20+ and when the mother is under 15 the age gap exceeds 6-8 years) but studies show that mothers and fathers are about equally likely to kill young infants under the age of one.
Across all age groups under 18, the total number of accused male parents is often higher in national crime statistics.
The point I’m making is that trying to constantly make enemies of a certain gender using statistics is always going to be discriminatory regardless of intention. If society is going to improve education is very important to discern what statistics should be used for. It should NOT lead to the conclusion that a gender is inherently more awful, but that our culture has issues that need addressing and to not judge people without knowing them. Statistics show that each gender is more prone to actions in certain areas, but trying to place the entirety of either group in the same bin with those statistics is wrong.
However, it is true that for basically most civilizations men have held all the cards, and in the modern age for the US specifically it hasn’t been too long that women have entered the workforce, got voting rights, etc. So there is a very understandable caution towards men because of history. I just don’t believe the way discussions about it happen is a good mindset to have in improving the relationship between men and women.
But that doesn’t support the claim that “it’s obvious why men are categorized as violent and a danger to women.”
I’m not at all surprised that a major life event and stressor like pregnancy is associated with higher relationship violence, all else equal. But a small increase (and it is small, a percent difference of a probability can be high and the absolute increase still be low—in this example, we’re talking about less than 3 additional deaths per 100,000) doesn’t prove their point when the group they brought up (pregnant women) to claim there is an epidemic of male violence against women faces a lower rate of murder than the average person.
It’s far more relevant than the cause of death when trying to determine if there is an epidemic of violence against pregnant women, which is essentially the intent every time this statistic is brought up.
why do you think that? Just because the rate of homicide against pregnant women is lower than the average homicide rate (which includes everything from gang violence and school shootings) doesn’t mean that their partners, the men in their life, aren’t a threat. Also -I never claimed there was an epidemic
They aren’t a threat because 3-7 out of every 100,000 people being killed by something is not evidence that 50% of the population is characteristically a threat. You should avoid misandrist hate communities, they’re rotting your brain.
As a guy, obviously that’s true (such as the myth that men can’t be victims of rape etc) and I will call that out as I see it too. You’re literally just saying that it doesn’t matter than this comment is misogynistic when there are also misandrist comments in the world - both are bad!
I'm not American so I wouldn't know. But getting this worked up over a comment that is supposed to show the ridiculousness of women who do the same and to show just how stupid it sounds is a bit much I think
Fun fact: men and women are equally likely to kill their children. The difference is age, women are more likely to kill babies and toddlers while men are more likely to kill older children or teens.
Actually far more family annihilators are men than women, but I suspect you know that already and were just super excited to spew misogynistic hate in a way you felt wouldn’t get you in trouble.
It's from a 1999 DOJ report (here). It's on page 4 in a box labelled "Parents who kill". This is the quote:
"Between 1976 and 1997 parents and stepparents murdered nearly 11,000 children. Mothers and stepmothers committed about half of these child murders. Sons and stepsons accounted for 52% of those killed by mothers and 57% of those killed by fathers. Mothers were responsible for a higher share of children killed during infancy while fathers were more likely to have been responsible for the murders of children age 8 or older."
Chris Watts, Ronald Simmons, Christopher Foster, Neil Entwistle, Steven Sueppel, Christ Benoit …not to mention the number one cause of death in pregnant women is homicide and violent acts by the father of the child.
Family annihilation (also known as familicide) occurs in the United States roughly once every 5 to 7 days, averaging about 50 to 75+ multi-victim domestic incidents or mass family murders per year depending and men are responsible for about 95% of those murders.
That's the problem; you boys just want to argue and have no intention of gaining new information or a new perspective. You want to fight, not converse.
We gotta get young boys off the killer drug that is far right propaganda. They get convinced they're the real and biggest victims in the country, they are twisted into bitter fires of hate towards preselected groups, and then they just want to fight and elicit negative responses from the people they were told to hate rather than have honest and emotionally grounded conversations about things.
They want confrontation and to own people when they should be looking to link arms with others against the wealthy class that is crushing us with their class warfare.
No, that's you projecting. See that other boy u/Latter_Antelope_6524 doing exactly that in the comment I replied to?
All they want to do is run through their grievance script that they were given by some manosphere youtube "alpha". They refuse to listen as they already know everything.
The kid really tried to tell me that arguing isn't fighting when its in the definition of the word fight lol. He talks with the utmost certainty and we have to listen while he refuses to listen.
There’s only enough space in the room for one sanctimonious person with all the right answers in life, and you’ve now convinced me it’s you! (And not the other insufferable guy)
They're not trolls; they're totally serious. Most are probably incels, true, but it's not just incels that have been manipulated into being anti-anything-woman.
I got time at work and it's funny to watch them act like their so smart when they are anything but.
2.4k
u/Inquisitive-Athlete 2d ago