I schlepped this from the last thread, because, well--I think it's important to make the distinction between Jodi Arias and other women.
I think WindyCityGirl has a pretty darned good point. Your response is reasonable, but she does have a point about social double standards with regard to gender bias where sexuality and labeling is concerned.
It would be a good point about social double standards and labeling if we were discussing a woman who represented any significant segment of the female population, and the labeling of this woman were anywhere near accurate.
Jodi Arias does not represent women. She bears no resemblance to most of the female population of this planet.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'd prefer she be left out of arguments intended to further women's rights. She is an anomaly. She is a freak. She is the epitome of evil.
And Travis Alexander did not learn this until it was far, far too late.
If it hadn't been Travis, it would have been someone else. And if she ever walks free again, it
will be someone else.
So there's not much room for the "gender bias" argument here. Unless, of course, you care to examine the bias that works strongly in favor of Arias at this point: that women are seldom sentenced to death or executed.
Jodi Arias's decision---a well-planned, carefully executed decision
---to slaughter Travis Alexander has absolutely nothing to do with gender bias. It has only to to with a deranged, destructive murderess and her victim.
That society would choose to think more highly of the victim than the lying, manipulative, heinous murderess is not indicative of gender bias. It's indicative of societal intolerance of murder, and its particular disgust with the murderess's attempts to not only kill the victim, but also his reputation and memory, during trial. I am enormously grateful that society, in the form of a jury of her peers,
SAW beyond Jodi Arias's breasts and "beauty" and manufactured tears and tales to send this message.
The message has no "gender bias" subtext. It simply states, "You killed this man in a particularly heinous manner."
If the defendant were male, we'd be hearing about the abuse HE perpetrated. We wouldn't belabor that "their relationship wasn't perfect, and the victim wasn't an angel." We'd focus on the facts of the case.
If you want to argue gender bias, though, I'd point out that there's been plenty of it working
in Jodi Arias's favor. The talking heads spent the five years prior to her trial belaboring her "beauty," and speculating--oh, how unthinkable it is!--- that only something really
terrible could cause such a "beautiful" woman to do something so horrible. The implication was (and remains, to a certain degree--though I think the next phase of the trial will effect a long-needed change) that the "something terrible" rested with Travis Alexander.
In fact, the "something terrible" lies in Jodi Arias's very makeup. It is who she is. And to attempt to place it at anyone else's feet is repugnant.
For one, it perpetuates the implication that Travis Alexander exploited Jodi Arias sexually---though the evidence does not show this. The evidence shows that Jodi Arias was far more experienced sexually, and tapped into her sexuality to manipulate Travis. Tragically, it "worked." It also shows that Travis Alexander was conflicted about this, and attempted to end the (consensual) relationship.
And THAT is what ended his life. Ending a relationship with a person (male or female) with Jodi Arias's constellation of personality disorder is quite often deadly. When the victim in male, we don't tend to hear about it---or recognize the phenomenon for what it is. But make no mistake about it: Travis Alexander was exploited by Jodi Arias. Financially, for status, for
the identity she lacks. (The latter is a particularly volatile factor.) And when he attempted to leave the relationship, he was brutally slain.
It happens to both men and women. If gender bias is at play, it's shown by the incredulity that Travis Alexander was exploited and abused, then murdered by the woman he figured out, far too late, was toxic.
The double standard here is operating in the opposite direction than has been contended above.
If you want to discuss gender bias, you need to really look at this relationship for what it REALLY was, see the exploitation Travis Alexander experienced, and approach it from an accurate perspective.
Otherwise, you set progress in REAL women's issues back. This is just not an appropriate case to forward the gender bias/societal hypocrisy/exploitation of women agenda. It just doesn't work when one of the parties is as profoundly disordered as Jodi Arias.
Jodi Arias has positioned herself to be the martyr for gender bias/abuse against women/etc. If we buy into any part of her fraud, we set hard-won progress toward gender equality back.
Jodi Arias is a killer. She is profoundly personality disordered. If it had not been Travis, it would have been someone else. If she ever walks free again, it WILL be someone else. And it will have nothing to do with gender issues---except inasmuch as Jodi Arias enjoys using her sexuality to exploit men.
In this phase of the trial, gender bias
will play in hugely in another way, strongly in Arias's favor: women are sentenced to death --- and executed-- far less frequently than men.
Do YOU want Jodi Arias standing alongside you, as a woman, when we're working hard to be treated equally? When we're making strides toward that?
I sure as hell don't. If we, as women, can't make the distinction between a beautiful female whose partner "wasn't perfect" (and since when does perfection come into ANY human relationship?) and FUBAR psychopath, the cause is seriously endangered.
Jodi Arias is not representative of very many women on this planet.
We should all be
VERY grateful for that.