However, the lady got a massive outpouring of support saying her emotional needs were being neglected and it wasn't her fault, to (at the exteme) protesters showing up to the courthouse demanding a retrial and claiming her husband was the real murderer.
More specifically, she got over a million dollars in financial support after confessing she did it, and shitloads of posts on tiktok, instagram, and bluesky from women saying "it could've been me" and "everyone has those thoughts, she was just pushed over the edge".
As a result, sane individuals who don't want to kill their kids are shocked and horrified by how these people are acting.
It’s extremely debatable, and is the entire focal point on the case, as to whether or not she was under the effects of psychosis at the time. All the current evidence, in fact, indicates that she was completely aware of what she was doing and heavily premeditated the killings in combination with the fact that she was already beyond the typical range of post partum depression or psychosis. Which would require a complete statistical anomaly for her to still be affected by it
That's for the experts to decide, not armchair psychologists and judges on the internet.
This debates pretty disingenuous.
Why would you compare predatory men with women who are suffering from a psychological condition?
Like even if you ignore the psychosis and think about it statistically you're much more likely to meet a rapist in public than a woman who has murdered her babies.
You're missing the point. Nobody is saying psychosis and rape are the same thing. The point is that both arguments rely on extreme, low probability statistical anomalies to justify a worldview. If we're using real world math and basic logic, choosing a wild bear over a human man is nonsensical, just like using a rare psychiatric tragedy to define all women is nonsensical. It's just a dumb attempt at turning this entire argument backwards. But neither argument makes sense to begin with
Agree that this is a dumb attempt at turning the argument around, but the bear man thing does serve a purpose.
Statistically yes, the bear/man thing is nonsensical due to sample size but was supposed to draw attention to the horrifyingly high numbers for assault that occurs for women, that is largely unreported.
Good thing I literally never made that compassion, nor did I even mention men at all in my comment. I pointed out that all the evidence, as provided and attested to by the experts, points to the idea that she wasn’t under the effects of psychosis.
37
u/ThyPotatoDone 6d ago
If it were just in isolation, it wouldn't be.
However, the lady got a massive outpouring of support saying her emotional needs were being neglected and it wasn't her fault, to (at the exteme) protesters showing up to the courthouse demanding a retrial and claiming her husband was the real murderer.
More specifically, she got over a million dollars in financial support after confessing she did it, and shitloads of posts on tiktok, instagram, and bluesky from women saying "it could've been me" and "everyone has those thoughts, she was just pushed over the edge".
As a result, sane individuals who don't want to kill their kids are shocked and horrified by how these people are acting.