Plus, if you want to talk about disparities in the legal system, woman already, on average, get less time than men for the same crimes.

I am sure you don’t even see how unhinged and revealing this line is on a topic like this.

But I hope you figure out why you’re so miserable feeling that laws attempting to help people suffering imbalanced levels of violence make you have to play this game. I highly recommend learning the emotion/rumination cycle and how it impacts your health. You and a lot of lonely guys in this godforsaken post. I feel bad for women and men alike every time I subject myself to a moronic conversation like this.

My days of talking it out with incel-adjacent, self-insecure men who haven’t learned how to stop ruminating are kind of past me. I’ve done my time, I’ve helped my share of young dipshits become men who don’t feel insecure and persecuted knowing there are special considerations being made for anyone who isn’t them. I hope you meet someone and feel better about yourself.

Your offer of a better solution

I am not offering anything, I am explaining the reasoning for this law and laws like it, which a lot of people in this post seem to be having a hard time with.

is to charge the act of killing someone because of who they are or what they believe should be a hate crime.

I read this like, five times and and I don’t know what you’re saying.

If more men commit hate crimes against women than women committing hate crimes against men, then there will be more men charged with hate crimes than women.

And? This is indeed how cause and effect work. Unfortunately temporal anomalies haven’t been discovered that can change how things lead to other things.

I am seeing an absolute ocean of butthurt men in this post, and not a single alternative, solution or idea for making a more just and fair world in the face of an imbalanced problem. Everyone treats this like some kind of logic puzzle. “Well we don’t do X when Y is a problem, why should we we treat THIS any different?” as if the world is based on some kind of symmetrical, blind logic system and all things are equal.

I used to moderate a large gender-related subreddit, it was a nightmare. If you ever want to lose all faith in humanity, have a behind-the-scenes glimpse at the really bad shit that gets removed right away.

The law isn’t symmetrical. Everything we do in every facet of society is responsive and proportional.

When there is an asymmetrical problem, we divert resources to addressing that problem in some attempt at making things more equal. It’s just that simple. I haven’t seen anyone offer a better solution or a reason for this attempt to make some small level of proportional response being a problem. Hate crime laws vary from region to region and by specific circumstances. Some parts of those laws address how crimes can be prosecuted, some how those crimes can be charged or punished. It’s besides the point. The point is, it’s laws addressing an imbalance.

I haven’t seen a valid argument in this entire post, just a lot of people who think that the law should apply evenly in all situations.

But nothing works that way. Everything we do in all facets of society are responsive and proportional.

I’m not seeing how anyone is being harmed by making it easier to prosecute men who commit violence against women when it’s a massively disproportionate problem. I’m not seeing a better alternative, I’m not seeing anything but a lot of guys in this post who are obviously hurt by this but can’t explain why. Maybe add value to the argument by making an argument and explaining why it bothers you.

You’re viewing law and order as symmetrical, it’s not like that. Nothing is like that, broadly as a global civilization we respond to imbalanced factors in order to preserve balance the best we can.

If an neighborhood is using more power than other neighborhoods, the power grid will be adjusted to compensate.

If you drink more juice than milk and you don’t want to run out of juice, you adjust your buying habits to buy more juice.

While some people probably have killed white people for their race, the problem here isn’t symmetrical, more white people have killed people of color for their race in most places than the reverse because of a complex historical context. The law, and all of society broadly, implements laws or other systems to balance imbalances. Hate crimes have been typically perpetuated by one group versus another. Gender-related crimes VASTLY dominate in one direction than the other, and I’m still not hearing a better solution for this fact from the standpoint of law and order.

Does this idea make you feel bad? Seriously, I’m wondering why this is being challenged without an offer of a better idea or solution.

Because the real world isn’t symmetrical, there are millions of factors that impact trends, attitudes, cultures and so on. If you don’t respond to issues appropriate to that scaling you will have spikes in problems. This is very basic, this isn’t even sociology, it’s just how everything works. If you don’t enforce building codes in an area where more buildings are being made cheap, that area will have too many buildings that fall over, whereas areas where the building codes are being adhered to don’t need the extra resources diverted to keeping a non-existent problem in check.

If you drink more milk than juice, you should buy more milk.

I am struggling to understand how this is a hard concept to grasp. Do you have an emotional or personal connection to this topic that is making it hard to see practicality in how our entire society is built?

Not sure why people assume I’m against it for asking questions.

Scroll through comments. There are a lot of people in here “just asking questions” but are really participating in bad-faith because they feel the law should be “symmetrical” or that this is some kind of logic puzzle. The article does outline the story and explains it, but again, this is just a response to a disproportionate level of a specific kind of crime. It’s not about the punishment per-say, it’s about how it’s handled by the legal system.

Meaning that murderers of women had not been getting life before?

It doesn’t actually matter. This isn’t about how much “time” people are getting in prison, this is about defining a type of crime so that it can be prosecuted differently. Read up about why hate crimes exist or really any kind of law targeting a specific crime in specific circumstances. Prosecution and actual punishment are wildly different things. The law responds to what people are doing, it’s all it can do.

And it’s a real world problem not a logic quiz.

Seriously.

I am massively disappointed with the number of dumb chuds on this site who are looking at this like a goddamn fucking logic trick and feeling some kind of personal offense to the fact that some men, somewhere, are committing a disproportional level of a specific kind of crime.

Why shouldn’t the legal definition be symmetrical?

Because the legal system isn’t symmetrical, that’s not a thing, that’s not how anything outside of fucking physics work. The system responds to what people are doing in the material world. If bank robberies start going up, they are going to adjust the law to make it more efficient to process and punish bank robbers.

deleted by creator

This is typically how the legal system responds to increases in specific kinds of crimes, they adjust the system to more efficiently prosecute that crime.

If you have a better idea for how to combat disproportionate crime statistics without targeting that specific kind of crime, from a legal standpoint, I’m sure the world would love to hear it.

This is about how crimes are prosecuted, since there is a disproportionate level of violence against a class of people, they are adjusting the law to make it easier to process and prosecute those crimes and ensure they see court. This isn’t about making the punishment worse. If you read the article you will learn something.

If you have a better idea from a legal standpoint how to address a disproportionate crime statistic against a specific group of people, I’m sure the world would love to hear it.

I appreciate you making the effort here to try to speak reason to a lot of really, really triggered men. It’s kind of absurd how even on what you would think is a largely progressive/leftist site like Lemmy, the moment a story about disproportionate issues between genders comes up, suddenly every other guy sprouts the biggest, bushiest beard from their necks and starts talking about why there aren’t enough state-mandated programs to help short, angry men get girlfriends or whatever.

This is a legal response to a legal problem. If there are societal causes that can be studied and addressed, it’s not the job of the legal system to undertake that.

But let’s be real here. If it bothers you that women are getting “special treatment” due to a disproportionate level of violence against them, you’re really not going to like the outcome and findings of a “study” to figure out why it’s happening.

Prosecution is a very different thing than punishment. This is a change to how some crimes are prosecuted in response to a very disproportionate rate of violence.

Goddamn I wish the biggest contention about this story was the etymology.

I find it amazing that half the threads on this post I can’t open because they’re being piled on by people I’ve already blocked on lemmy. 🙄

Men with sexual insecurity is a driving force of contention and violent politics in this entire world. If you read that special protections are being made for a class of people who are suffering dis-fucking-proportionally and you say “What about meeeeee?” to it, you need to get your shit together. You’re not healthy.

There is a massive imbalance in violent crimes, in that nearly half of all women murdered are murdered by a spouse, partner or boyfriend or other kind of male acquaintance.

This doesn’t skew the other direction, so that’s why women victims are getting special consideration and why there are special laws being made to make it easier to prosecute this kind of crime in a different or more efficient way. (Like we have “hate crime” laws that allow for special forms of prosecution.) This isn’t supposed to solve all the problems, but it may help by making the consequences of a man killing his wife or girlfriend far less likely to be reduced by pleas of temporary insanity or the like or be dropped by the court for minor reasons.

The “baby-fication” of pets is an incredibly damaging culture. People don’t see dogs and cats for what they are and it causes problems in the lives of animals and humans alike.