14 February 2007
A woman who was jailed for trying to kill herself and her child by jumping 100ft from the Humber Bridge has been freed “as an act of mercy”.
Well, she does have a vagina, and it would be an act of merciless Patriarchal Oppression to actually keep her in prison, even if she did try to kill her baby daughter.
Said Judge Mangina:
“We have asked ourselves, is it really necessary, or was it really necessary to send this unhappy woman to prison to punish her for the momentary aberration which led her to try and take her own and her child’s life?
“Momentary aberration”? She did specifically drive all the way to the bridge, that can’t have taken a mere moment. Clearly it was premeditated. And she was unhappy? Oh boo-hoo! Maybe if I ever end up in prison I could tell the judge at the appeal court that I was little bit unhappy at the time of the offence, and thus obtain early release. Hurrah!
Oh wait, I don’t have a vagina. Silly me. I therefore wouldn’t be eligible.
“Could I be any more evil looking? Bwhahaha!”
He said she had then kept her child afloat “for some 45 minutes”, saving the lives “she had tried to end”.
The only reason her child’s life needed saving was because this demented fruitcake had jumped into a big bastard river whilst holding the crying child. She put the baby’s life in danger and only saved her life, and her own, after changing her mind about the whole murder-suicide thing (it’s a woman’s prerogative after all.) Yet they just about want to give her a bravery award.
Stake + firewood + match = proper justice
posted by Duncan Idaho @ 8:51 PM
At 11:10 PM, Days of Broken Arrows said…
You have no email address to send a link to, but please write about this: The top LA sperm donor now lives in a trailer!!
At 11:30 PM, mfsob said…
Yep … welcome to Amerika, and yes, it IS that fucked up here. Just ask me about the family courts sometime …
At 1:31 PM, Anonymous said…
Stake + firewood + match = proper justice
I discovered that you were a bit extreme in your proposals, Duncan. This goes definitely too far. The baby would lose its mother and a prison sentence is fairly enough.
Remember: she did not kill the child.
Do not be so extreme you remind me of Andrea Dworkin or the deluded Simone de Beauvoir.
At 7:39 PM, Lisa said…
Anon @1:31, it is true she did not kill her child. Whether it was divine intervention or a great stroke of luck, the child did not die that day. She jumped,however. It’s not like she stood at the rail of the bridge, talked herself out of it and returned to the car with her baby for a good cry. Though I agree the suggestion of burning her at the stake is a bit extreme, it really is time we started getting mad at these situations versus assigning all sorts of psychological babble to the event. Sometimes I think we need extreme suggestions (not necessarily actions) as a catalyst to move the end result further away from the absurd.
Although, maybe the feminists are on to something with this. By not punishing women for attempting to kill their children via murder/suicide, they are creating an environment where women are more likely to change their mind and back out of an attempt. When men choose to kill their children via murder/suicide, they appear to be much more inclined to follow through on the entire plan. Randomly tallying the stories I’ve heard in recent years regarding parental murder/suicide, the men have killed themselves and their children. The women have either just killed the children or ended up not killing either. I honestly can’t think of an occasion where the woman followed through on killing herself after killing or harming her children. I’ve heard several weepy stories about how that was their intention, however. They always seem to fall short when it comes to terminating their own life. Perhaps men realize they have reached a point of no return once they’ve attempted to harm or have successfully harmed their children. There will be no sympathy; no attempt at understanding. They are going to jail for a long time. They might as well finish what they started. Women have brighter prospects to live for (notice I didn’t say bright, just brighter). How many male versions of Andrea Yates do you honestly believe would be in a psychiatric hospital right now versus sitting behind bars for life (probably on death row)?
Maybe in a way the feminists are saving lives…female lives. If that’s the case, men should have the same opportunity for understanding and less severe consequences. If we can’t save our children, let’s at least draw comfort from saving some men’s lives too.
The whole thing is pretty sad.
At 11:29 AM, Anonymous said…
Well said Lisa…but I did laugh at the ‘stake’ bit when first sighted !!
Have to admit -I couldn’t watch anything like it happen ,of course.
Those scary times are best left behind.
I wonder though will the ‘witchfinder general’ return one day ??
At 9:10 PM, Anonymous said…
…it really is time we started getting mad at these situations versus assigning all sorts of psychological babble to the event.
Why? The quickest way to cure a child of the curiosity about an electric socket (even though you lecture until you’re blue in the face) is to let the child stick a fork in it and experience the joy of 120 volts alternating current (AC) first-hand.
Let’s give these nut bags whatever they want until they choke to death on their own stupidity.
Things have to get REAL BAD to sear on onto everyone’s souls what a disaster feminism is. Right now it’s just a debating club. Rational people on one side. Feminuts on the other. We’re at about 1966 in the Vietnam war right now. Or 2005 in Iraq war. Average people are starting to complain, but the psychos running the show keep saying everything is OK. It had to get really fucking bad in Vietnam before we said enough. The same will be true for Iraq. Feminism ditto.