I do not agree with this...but just my opinion. I do think everyone cares and worries but when it gets down to politics and agreeing on things that matter, well we are back to partisan crap...i am sure there are some bad judges, just like there are some bad teachers, bad sales clerks. etc...but i don't think it is a sex-biased. JMO and I am a woman with five beautiful nieces between 17-25 about whom i worry constantly. We live in a dangerous world and as another poster pointed out tonight, this is not an American problem, it is worldwide. And our laws are generally much tougher than any in Europe, which is very forgiving...
I don't know for sure if I agree or disagree with that poster, I was just attempting to clarify what she meant! Sorry to go a little off topic here, this is the original post:
Originally Posted by IzzyBlanche
Longtime lurker yet posting newbie. I've lurked here since the Danielle van Dam case so I know how smart you Websleuthers are.
So I want to throw out my theory and see what you think. With apologies in advance for going a bit off topic, at least at first.
What do the above three mentioned by SWAG have in common?
They are all named for females, and yes, nothing has really changed.
My theory is that these types of crimes, and the handling/punishment of the perpetrators, are not taken seriously enough because by and large the victims are female. If the epidemic were hitting young boys as frequently, our (mostly male) politicians might be goaded a little more into action.
I've searched for statistics on this and the most conservative I found that seem legitimate say that 1 in 4 girls is sexually abused before the age of 18, compared to 1 in 6 boys. (Source:
http://www.darkness2light.org/KnowAb...atistics_2.asp)
Again I am having trouble finding statistics on this--maybe some of Websleuths' crack researchers can--but I bet the statistics on prepubescent victims show an even greater gender disparity.
An event that I think proves my point: remember the Amish schoolhouse shooting in 2006? The perpetrator invaded the school and forced the male students to help him carry in supplies for the attack, then let them go. Then he proceeded to assault the girls.
Now imagine (with credit, IIRC, to Bob Herbert of the New York Times, his idea not mine) if the perpetrator had forced the white students to help him prepare for an attack on the black students, then let them go. Or vice versa. Or the Christian students to help him prepare for an attack on the Muslim ones, or vice versa. You can bet we would still be hearing about it to this day as an object lesson in what is wrong with our society, or in terrorism.
But (my theory) since the victims were "just" girls...business as usual, nothing to see here, move along.
And Amber Dubois? Do you think if she had been male, under the exact same circumstances, she would have been so quickly dismissed as a runaway despite absolutely no supporting evidence?
I don't.
Sorry to go off on such a rant on only my second post here, but I feel better having gotten this off my chest. I too am local (hi, PQ neighbors!) and although I didn't really expect any other outcome, the "body found" news today punched me right in the gut and I am pretty emotional.
