Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

if jackson was a woman....

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
would it be the same? would it have gone to court?

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    would it be the same? would it have gone to court?

    Can a women be charged with rape in the US?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Spliffie wrote:
    Can a women be charged with rape in the US?

    I thought they won the equal rights war decades ago?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yes i think it would
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I thought they won the equal rights war decades ago?

    Taxi.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    J wrote:
    What about a hermaphrodite? Interestingly can a hermaphrodite marry a member of both sexes? This confuses me greatly.

    A hermaphrodite is given a legal gender, usually female, and so can only marry members of the other gender.

    Yes, Jackson would have gone to trial if he was a she. There have been enough cases of women who have lured drunk teenage boys to their beds being jailed for the behaviour.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    J wrote:
    What about a hermaphrodite? Interestingly can a hermaphrodite marry a member of both sexes? This confuses me greatly.

    Hermaphrodites (aka inter sex or third gender) choose either to be bought up as male or female, therefore they can only marry the opposite gender to the one they decided to live as. I saw a documentary on it! :thumb:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I thought they won the equal rights war decades ago?

    You know that everytime you post something stupid like this, you support the notion that women are superior to men.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    A hermaphrodite is given a legal gender, usually female, and so can only marry members of the other gender.

    Yes, Jackson would have gone to trial if he was a she. There have been enough cases of women who have lured drunk teenage boys to their beds being jailed for the behaviour.

    sure whenever its in the news they got away with it even thoguh they admitted to it.. or they get a far mroe reduced sentence, and its a sleaze fantasy story more than anything
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So are you saying the courts favour women?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So are you saying the courts favour women?


    in sexual offences cases, as a whole, yes

    thats just my opinion on it but i seriously reckon they do

    middle aged women are the least expected to do any crime even though for certain crimes a la shoplifting theye the most likely statistically
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    in sexual offences cases, as a whole, yes
    Could you please give some evidence to back that claim up?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Could you please give some evidence to back that claim up?

    i said IMO.........

    from all the cases ive read about, if a woman has sex with a teenager especially teenage boys, its seen as less of a bad thing :s

    from certain family experiences in other court situations like child custody, the mother gets preference as long as she aint a drugged up alchi, and even then it isnt her 'fault' when in all fairness men and women are apparantly 'equal' these days so a mother isnt more important than a father...... if theyre both decent parents they should both get access, with priority going to most stable family background
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    On the 'sharing a bed' front, yes, I think it would have been seen as more acceptable for a woman to share her bed with someone in a non-sexual manner (as this was deemed by the court to be).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dont think its ever such a big deal with women and kids
    very wrong idea but i jus get the impression if a woman had been ina similar situation, the maternal instict n all maternal natural stuff would have been brought into the case and it would be a million times more complicated.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Placebo, saying "in my opinion" does not prevent you from having to provide at least some sort of evidence to support it.

    As for the family court, I suggest you go and read the recent comments of Dame Butler-Sloss, who is the head of the family division. Very interesting reading, and they do illustrate why there may be a "bias". Women tend to get custody more because they have always been the main carers, and men tend to be at work more than women; the right-wing press always try to portray it as "feminazism gone maaaaad" but that quite simply isn't the case.

    Not that it would be my place to suggest your opinion is grossly ill-informed.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Placebo, saying "in my opinion" does not prevent you from having to provide at least some sort of evidence to support it.

    As for the family court, I suggest you go and read the recent comments of Dame Butler-Sloss, who is the head of the family division. Very interesting reading, and they do illustrate why there may be a "bias". Women tend to get custody more because they have always been the main carers, and men tend to be at work more than women; the right-wing press always try to portray it as "feminazism gone maaaaad" but that quite simply isn't the case.

    Not that it would be my place to suggest your opinion is grossly ill-informed.


    basically it comes from my uncles situation where he ahsnt seen his daughter since she was 10 and shes now 16, and his son every weekend and holiday, because his wife made up how hes a crap father and they believed it, so much so his daughter now wants a legal divorce(he'll still have to pay maintenence for some reason though as well) whilst he gets on great with his son and his to be daughter inlaw who are 18 i think now

    im not saying the main carer shouldnt look after the children mainly, that still shouldnt mean the one at work doesnt get to see their children ever again or whatnot, from families i hear of where it goes to court, unless the woman is a drunkard or whatnot, she'll get priority even if the father is a decent father
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    J wrote:
    Well that's just stupid! What if they are a precise 50/50 mix? Surely that's like killing half of yourself?
    And since when did God make chicks with dicks?
    There's a difference between transgender people (chicks with dicks) and hermaphrodites. Hermaphrodites don't tend to be born fertile and their genitalia isn't really what you would see in those Japanese fetish hentai with a big dick and fanny... Sometimes the penis is like a deformed clitoris. The baby is given an operation to determine what sex he/she will be however this can cause problems in later life... I don't know whether it would be counted as gender dysphoria or not. Also, a lot of hermaphrodites are born retarded.

    And I agree with Kermit on the right wing media... It's the same case with violence.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The mother is usually the main carer of a child, and as such will get "priority" (as you like to call it) because of this. Like it or not, that's biology, it's nothing to do with a feminazi conspiracy trying to subjugate men and destroy them.

    It wouldn't be for me to comment on a individual case, but normally if a court refuses one parent access to a child at all then it is because the court believes that that parent doesn't deserve it. It is not a decision taken lightly, and it is not a decision taken on hearsay evidence alone.

    As Butler-Sloss has said before, if a parent ignores a court ruling then the court are in a very bad position. Taking a child off a parent is very distressing to a child, and will often make a child resent the parent s/he has to move to be with. Jailing is even worse for the child. A fine punishes the child and not the parent also, or because of this it is not big enough to act as a deterrent anyway. It's not some terrible conspiracy, it is the very nature of these proceedings.
Sign In or Register to comment.