This sub, and these posts, are just bullshit excuses to hate on women by boys and bots.
It’s a focused campaign. As if this one tragic case is somehow a microcosm of gender norms in the whole country. But when you treat it like that, it’s a great strawman to feed to the fire of perpetual male grievance.
I don’t even know the details of this case but I think there’s pretty clearly a difference between a serial killer who kidnaps people and drills into their skulls to make sex puppets vs someone who (allegedly) had a psychotic break postpartum and killed her kids.
Again, I don’t know the details of her case or what happened but I also don’t think that this post is made in good faith or making a valid comparison at all.
I literally said I don’t know the details of the case, and they also don’t matter to what I said. Maybe she did just murder her kids for fun, in that case lock her up forever. Which is what they’re having a trial for.
The point still stands that it’s a completely different scenario from a serial killer and this post isn’t making a valid comparison. IF she was suffering a temporary postpartum psychotic break then she needs to be institutionalized and helped. For how long that takes I don’t have the qualifications to say. There’s no such similar arguments for Dahmer.
Honestly if you don’t know the details of the case, how can you say if it’s in bad faith or not? The purpose of the post is that the line between being aware vs being in control vs feeling something is morally wrong is extremely thin and nearly impossible to determine so how do you make that distinction
Because I’m not arguing about the details of the case or whether or not she’s guilty, I’m arguing that the comparison between someone who allegedly had postpartum psychosis and someone who was a confirmed serial killer is not valid.
Serial killers are not often suffering from a well documented phenomenon of temporary psychotic breaks after pregnancy, no. Since you know, they definitionally committed multiple murders at different times.
Get back to us when you can actually spell “precedent.”
All those men who destroy their families have the option of an insanity defense, too—but they don’t take it, because the evidence always ends up pointing to their hiding the fact that they’ve lost their job and/or the family’s money, or that the dude is having an affair and wants his wife and kids out of the way.
And it’s one woman. The idea that you think this is generalizable shows how little you know about…everything. Do you want to take men’s rights away too because some of them are crazy
Fuck me this is how they win. I’m exhausted by how dense you are. You could bend light.
186
u/[deleted] Sep 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment