I agree completely.
Unfortunately, the essence of bigotry is that it's unexamined and there's lots of subtle misandry in the way some people view this case. Most of it comes from "white knights" like Samuels or true believer anti-male bigots like LaViolette. In fact, some people may think that calling her an anti-male bigot is way out of line, but I think the recurring dogmatic assumptions in her testimony speaks for itself and really comes down to Travis Alexander behaved like a self actualizing human being who finally made a choice of who he wanted to be with and that constitutes abuse on the level that self defense in the form of murder by Jodi Arias is warranted.
[. . .]
But some people in this forum are doing it too, believing Jodi's story that she arrived at 4:00 am, they slept together and then, in the morning, slept together in earnest. Of course most people don't believe the anal rape in the study story, and her tale of being attacked, but the idea that Travis Alexander had consensual sex with Jodi Arias simply because she showed up and her lady bits were convenient, even though everything he blogged about and his text messages to her indicated he was done, done, done with her, prompting her stealth death road trip in the first place.
Ask yourself why you assume they did have sex, that Travis was a not only willing to tolerate Jodi Arias' presence, but her advances and ask yourself, is it due to something you know about Travis Alexander (who you probably didn't know, even if you think you do now) or is it a generalization based on, well, "you know how men are"?