The realisation of female violence
The frequency and brutality of female offending is definitely on the rise. Men are increasingly in a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. What is the next generation going to look like with an increasing number of children suffering the consequences of universal suffrage.
An Australian father who regularly drank and played poker while his twin toddlers were starving to death in their bedroom has been sentenced to eight years’ jail for manslaughter.
Last month, the mother was sentenced to eight years’ prison, but she was eligible for immediate parole as she had already served over five years.
Prosecutor Jim Pearce said the children were starved and, if they ate when they were not supposed to, they were sometimes forced to vomit up the food.They were also ordered to stand against a wall all day and were beaten for stepping out of line. When authorities stepped in, one child was hospitalised with hypothermia and all the children were taken into care. The woman, who can’t be identified, admitted to spending social security payments on eating out, cigarettes and poker machines. Five other people will go to trial on similar charges.
An alcoholic British mother who let her 4-year-old son starve to death and left his body in a cot for almost two years will spend the next 15 years in jail.
These cases are all foreign; two Australian and one English but another thing that caught my eye was the severity of the jail sentences compared to New Zealand – they actually give women jail sentences in other countries. When was the last time you saw a media article with a women getting a jail sentence?
Actually now that I think about it, it was only a couple of days ago but that was for stealing money from her boss, who wasn’t Women’s Refuge.
The stories above seem to be more relevant to protecting children from incompetent parents (including incompetence due to substance abuse or addictions), rather than criminal intents. If that is so, it brings out three points:
1. Protection of children from incompetent parents isn’t reliable in any of these countries, or put around the other way, the child protection staff should be in jail or at the beach, The children were neither removed, nor the parents given sufficient support to ensure the children were cared for.
2. Most prisoners are under serious psychiatric disability and should be receiving treatment and training relevant to their problems, rather than marking time in a holding pattern until automatic release,
3. NZ is stupidly soft in punishment of women, despite the rising frequency and seriousness of women’s violence (even if we try not to observe it).
4. NZ often jails anyone who makes themselves available for jailing, after a serious crime has been committed. Just ask Scott Watson and the rest.. NZ public are unusually tolerant of incompetence and corruption among judges and police (and child protection staff too). It seems that this is because we have never known any better.
Expecting incompetent parents to reliably assess their own parenting skills, is as unreasonable as expecting incompetent judges to identify themselves and hand in their judicial warrants voluntarily. Judge Ryan has never made any public admission of incompetence as a judge and it would be unreasonable to expect him to voluntarily do this, at a cost of over $350,000 per year to himself? If he was incompetent, how could he know this? How would an incompetent child protection worker know that they were incompetent? They just made one mistake, that became publicly visible. It was just the secrecy that failed!
We set standards and test drivers, airline pilots, surgeons, doctors, plumbers, drain-layers, dentists, engineers, teachers, plumbers, chemists, restaurant chefs.
It is only professions where the public are unaware that there is any difficulty caused by incompetence, where external standards and testing is not required, such as judges (legal workers), methamphetamine cooks and child protection workers (I suppose sex workers could also be included).
Cheers, MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Sat 5th October 2013 @ 9:31 pm
Sex workers could be included – lol.
Comment by Downunder — Sat 5th October 2013 @ 10:18 pm
Look, I am sorry. I apologise for putting sex workers in a list, with legal workers. I was only intending to illustrate that such a comparison could usefully be made, certainly not to make any form of aspersion against sex workers.
Certainly, there are negligible complaints in public about sex workers (mainly delusional), compared to the many complaints about legal workers. So much so, that the illusional Judicial Complaints Hider was created, to maintain the public delusion of competent and corruption free judges.
The public want to cuddle their teddy bears as they go to sleep and not have to worry that they might be cheated by their legal workers or mistakenly be framed into jail. This security is provided to the public, by professional looking gavels and gown, professional level actors in judicial roles, more clowns than legal or evidence weighing experts.
Note that illusion really means self delusional, so it is really all psychiatric issues, the public really are deluding themselves. Those in the know about corruption, can easily afford to happily go to sleep in the arms of a sex worker or two. The crooks equally delude themselves that they will never be held to account for their actions and omissions. If the public were ever to wake up, then maybe such accountability would quickly occur.
I guess that the only logical connection that I can make, is that sex workers should be appointed to hear complaints about judges. I am confident that they could do it well, even if only by comparison.
It could work the other way too, but that would really be a waste of time.
Maybe my paranoia is getting away on me…… Hope I have sorted out my wrongs? MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 6th October 2013 @ 9:09 am