3 ms·

Part of the problem with addressing Sexism in policing is that "women commit violent/dangerous crimes less often than men" is a less obviously wrong statement,

Part of the problem with addressing Sexism in policing is that "women commit violent/dangerous crimes less often than men" is a less obviously wrong statement, since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. I am 100% not trying to defend this; I agree with you that there's a problem. But I've never actually seen much research that demonstrates that there's a problem, even when there obviously is one. For instance, women can't rape men and it is instead legally classed as "forced envelopment" or something, so there's... very, very clearly a disparity, but almost no one ever hears about it. I can't think of any reliable central archive of information that isn't vividly a "Men's Rights Activist" website that screams 90s conspiracy theorists. EDIT: If you do know of any useful sources for spreading the idea, I'd love to hear about them.

SkyBelow 6y ago
>since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. If someone tried to make the same argument about populations of individuals (I specifically use population instead of race due to how race is socially constructed from populations), would people even glance at the evidence before condemning them? At best you'll get those saying the results are tainted due to how society treats people and thus you cannot make any definite claims about biological differences, which would apply just as well to behavioral differences between males and females. Actually, I do often enough see such a claim applied to gender differences as well, though primarily when dealing with something where males appear to be perform better on some metric. At the core it shows that people are not consistently applying the logic to these situations, which leaves one to question what standard they actually are using and if we are even able to have an honest conversation as long as they do not admit (or maybe even remain unaware) of the other standard.

SkyBelow 6y ago

>since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. If someone tried to make the same argument about populations of individuals (I specifically use population instead of race due to how race is socially constructed from populations), would people even glance at the evidence before condemning them? At best you'll get those saying the results are tainted due to how society treats people and thus you cannot make any definite claims about biological differences, which would apply just as well to behavioral differences between males and females. Actually, I do often enough see such a claim applied to gender differences as well, though primarily when dealing with something where males appear to be perform better on some metric. At the core it shows that people are not consistently applying the logic to these situations, which leaves one to question what standard they actually are using and if we are even able to have an honest conversation as long as they do not admit (or maybe even remain unaware) of the other standard.