Roughly a year ago, Mary Winkler decided she had received enough abuse from her oral accounts, and allegedly had a heated argument with her preacher husband where the shotgun she held, on accident, went off.
Never mind that the wound itself was indicative of a premeditated murder against Matthew Winkler, and despite claims of past abuse, including sexual acts that she didn't like, Mary was not in the midst of struggle defending herself in a life or death situation. Never mind that the day Mary Winkler shot him, they both were supposed to have a meeting at a bank, whereupon Matthew would discover Winkler was involved in scams including bank fraud and wire fraud. This included cashing counterfeit checks in her name and her husband's, that he had not previously known.
I don't know if Matthew truly 'abused' Mary or not, but it seems remarkable that friends, religious associates, and family members declared otherwise. And regardless of motive, if Mary had been a man committing the same crime with a wife, it would have been considered an act of a fiend or a coward. But Mary is now free after only serving seven months, and although she is in a custody battle with Matthew's parents over the children, they are now without a father, and have a murderess for a mother. I don't even want to imagine what it's going to be like for them now that this tragedy has occurred.
The story of Matt and Mary Winkler is very telling---the defense of a battered/abused woman, sans proof, is still utilized as justifiable homicide, and in the eyes of gynocentric laws in our Western culture, women still can receive a slap on the wrist. When men do the same exact thing, they are usually nailed to the wall. As much as feminists' outright lie about that women receive harsher penalties for the any crime, the results indicate something quite different. Over the years, we have been exposed to more and more of these articles keep revealing the universal push that we're somehow supposed to swallow like a jagged, bitter pill: women who kill men do it out of reaction to systematic punishment and humiliation because of patriarchal oppression and malevolent men, and men who kill their spouses are, well, still evil men who wield the proverbial sword of that perceived cruel domination over victimized women.
Remember, that Winkler's sentence was to be a maximum of three years.
Occasionally, a modicum of sense prevails. Years ago Susan Wright claimed the same abuse card, and performed her own style of premeditated murder with a Basic Instinct style twist: she lured her husband, Jeff, into a rather kinky sex act, and while tied up, eventually stabbed him nearly 200 times. The jury was, at first, almost sympathetic towards her crocodile tear tale until the reality of seeing the bloodied bed hit them square in the face: thankfully, they had the impetus to find her guilty, although her conviction has a clause in it---it's not for life, and in thirteen years she is up for parole. If a man had sadistically killed a woman in the same manner, he'd never see the light of day if he didn't qualify for the death sentence in that particular state.
There's a lot more I could add, but I'll leave readers with these thoughts---until we, if ever, hold women just as accountable as men for their actions, for better or ill, our society with continue to sag under the weight of giving guilty women license for brutal crimes, while men are still ever-carrying the burdens of it on their backs. When more and more men continue to wake up about the disparities of injustice towards them and its inherent hypocrisies, those who don't politically protest may get so disgusted that social obligation will sound like a hallow concept rife with the toxins of exploitation. They will rebel by not giving credence to women, not helping them, and walking away.
The hideous irony of feminism is clear: when women win over men, ultimately, they lose. When will they realize that harming men only can continue to backfire?
Much has been said about the "disappearance" of men in many avenues, but no fact is so disheartening to find that men's lives are considered second rate---or worse---than American women's. If women want men to participate in the social compact, they will have to accept this challenge, warts and all. How women decide to exalt self-responsibly, I do not know. They shouldn't be surprised when Atlas truly shrugs---after all, enforced self-sacrifice, along with the fact that a man's life is viewed as disposable under a woman's whim, that more men are rebelling against the very system that innately devalues them.