During the trial, after the guilty verdict, and even after the sentences were handed out there was a fairly large public outcry....for the rapists.
Pleas that they were good people. Claims that they had bright futures ahead of them. All in all people who were trying to downplay the horrible crime they committed and even trying to frame the issue as if they were the victims of some tragic circumstance.
This sort of treatment is frequently (and correctly) pointed out when the criminals are male. But I find it odd that when the criminal is female and the same attempt at downplaying happens it tends to slide under the radar of people who have a problem with it when it happens for male criminals.
This is Elaine B. Goodman. Elaine raped an under age boy, her daughter's boyfriend in fact. When she pled guilty to the crime she faced up to 15 years in prison. Now mind you I think 15 years may be a bit overkill but there is no doubt in my mind that this woman deserved hard time for what she did. She committed one of the worst crimes of all on top of the fact that she committed it against a child. But the judge presiding over the case, Robert B. Young, felt otherwise and sentenced her to two years probation.
According to Young, "This came out of the blue,". While acknowledging that a terrible thing happened and people were affect he seems to have concluded that "...incarceration is not the answer."
It would be easy to fly into a rage and go on about gender flips but calm is needed here.
Sentencing like this is why people are able to see that when it comes to justice for sex crimes its not uniform. There is no "sex crimes are taken seriously no matter who the victim is or who the perp is".
When a male criminal is given a light sentence for a major crime it becomes a national outrage as it should. Saying that he is a pillar of the community or that he has a bright future ahead of him or that he contributes to society would fall of deaf ears because we all know that past or even the potential of future contributions do not make up for committing a horrible crime.
So why is it acceptable for women?
Simple. Crimes committed by women, especially those committed against males, are seen as lesser crimes. There is a level of compassion, empathy, and sympathy that is reserved for women that men are simply denied.
Because of this women are given slack in ways that would spark outrage if extended to men.
Cases like this don't help. The judge basically said that yes she did something terrible but she doesn't deserve to be held responsible for it or to be punished for it. What kind of follow through is that?
I know it can be counter productive to just rant and rave about situations like this but frankly using those rants as a way to avoid addressing this is even more counter productive because it perpetuates a female privilege and allows it to continue unchallenged.
For all the talk of treating people of all genders equally you would think that this would be acknowledged by more people.