There's absolutely nothing to substantiate it. You made this up based on your delusions that the wimmenz are after you and trying to kill you and all other men.
But then we have a female judge, who sees that it's one of the in-group harming the out-group and therefore means nothing.
What is your evidence that the sentence would be any different if the judge had not been female?
If this was someone of either gender abusing a girl, they'd get far more.
Prove it.
Where are the staunch woman defenders to explain this one?
Right here. You're full of shit, as usual. Speaking of which, have "they" managed to kill you yet with that "virus created by women to kill men", and with that "vaccine created by women to kill men"? You said they'd switch out the Pfizer vaccine for the AZ vaccine to kill you.
Even if there isn't, that doesn't make the sentence correct. You're really trying to deflect this whole thing by calling out my assumption? By what I know of my former country, my logic works.
Common sense? When have you ever seen a child abuser get such a low sentence?
^
I never caught Covid and I don't plan to be vaccinated for it at any point. Did you see that the fatality rate for AZ has already doubled since they started vaccinating under 60s, even in the Government's questionable metrics?
Even if there isn't, that doesn't make the sentence correct.
Absolutely not. She should be hanged from the highest trees - by lawful authorities, after a fair trial. No mercy for child abusers.
My objection is not to you pointing out that this sentence is absurd. It is. My objection is to the unsubstantiated claims that you are making, and unsubstantiated claims of 'sexism' - which is what feminists do.
Common sense? When have you ever seen a child abuser get such a low sentence?
Slow tap... low sentences are universal, boy.
I never caught Covid and I don't plan to be vaccinated for it at any point.
If you claimed that they would swap out Pfizer for AZ, and you did, why wouldn't you claim that they would swap out any other injection you're going to get in the future with AZ (or even pure arsenic), just to kill you.
Did you see that the fatality rate for AZ has already doubled since they started vaccinating under 60s, even in the Government's questionable metrics?
Like I've said several times...neglect doesn't equal this. People who don't care about a child don't attack it, they just ignore it. The motive claimed doesn't go with the actions.
Yeah, no. I highly doubt a man would walk for this.
It was a suggestion, not a definitive answer. I still think the excuse will be a new variant that's deadlier and therefore that vaccine needs to be unblocked.
Could be incompetence. Has anyone seen the "professor" that created it? She was all over the place before people started dying.
Like I've said several times...neglect doesn't equal this.
And like I already answered, this was probably resentment over the kid depriving her of her ChildFree BS.
People who don't care about a child don't attack it, they just ignore it. The motive claimed doesn't go with the actions.
So we should also presume that men who abuse girls are acting out of misogyny?
Yeah, no. I highly doubt a man would walk for this.
You're changing the argument now. First you said that this sentence was due to the "female judge" and because of the gender of the kid, now you're saying that it's because of the gender of the offender. Make up your mind already.
If you think only female judges are soft on crime, and only when the offender is a woman, you have a much more positive view of the criminal justice system in the UK than I do.
It was a suggestion, not a definitive answer. I still think the excuse will be a new variant that's deadlier and therefore that vaccine needs to be unblocked.
Your 'suggestion' was that they would secretly inject people with AZ to kill them. That's pretty insane, innit?
Could be incompetence. Has anyone seen the "professor" that created it? She was all over the place before people started dying.
Considering that the cost-benefit ratio of the vaccine is still vastly positive, especially for older people, I don't think she has anything to be ashamed of. The fact that this has taken 'authorities' by surprise, however, shows that no one should put trust in theeeeem (the authorities).
You may be downvoted, but you're right. Let's not fall into the same trap of victimhood and moral indignation that our old enemies do, however easy it may be.
There's absolutely nothing to substantiate it. You made this up based on your delusions that the wimmenz are after you and trying to kill you and all other men.
What is your evidence that the sentence would be any different if the judge had not been female?
Prove it.
Right here. You're full of shit, as usual. Speaking of which, have "they" managed to kill you yet with that "virus created by women to kill men", and with that "vaccine created by women to kill men"? You said they'd switch out the Pfizer vaccine for the AZ vaccine to kill you.
The one thing I think is that if it was a man doing this he would have gone to jail, but because she is a women she is basically free of consequences.
Even if there isn't, that doesn't make the sentence correct. You're really trying to deflect this whole thing by calling out my assumption? By what I know of my former country, my logic works.
Common sense? When have you ever seen a child abuser get such a low sentence?
^
I never caught Covid and I don't plan to be vaccinated for it at any point. Did you see that the fatality rate for AZ has already doubled since they started vaccinating under 60s, even in the Government's questionable metrics?
Absolutely not. She should be hanged from the highest trees - by lawful authorities, after a fair trial. No mercy for child abusers.
My objection is not to you pointing out that this sentence is absurd. It is. My objection is to the unsubstantiated claims that you are making, and unsubstantiated claims of 'sexism' - which is what feminists do.
Slow tap... low sentences are universal, boy.
If you claimed that they would swap out Pfizer for AZ, and you did, why wouldn't you claim that they would swap out any other injection you're going to get in the future with AZ (or even pure arsenic), just to kill you.
Must be The Genocide.
Like I've said several times...neglect doesn't equal this. People who don't care about a child don't attack it, they just ignore it. The motive claimed doesn't go with the actions.
Yeah, no. I highly doubt a man would walk for this.
It was a suggestion, not a definitive answer. I still think the excuse will be a new variant that's deadlier and therefore that vaccine needs to be unblocked.
Could be incompetence. Has anyone seen the "professor" that created it? She was all over the place before people started dying.
And like I already answered, this was probably resentment over the kid depriving her of her ChildFree BS.
So we should also presume that men who abuse girls are acting out of misogyny?
You're changing the argument now. First you said that this sentence was due to the "female judge" and because of the gender of the kid, now you're saying that it's because of the gender of the offender. Make up your mind already.
If you think only female judges are soft on crime, and only when the offender is a woman, you have a much more positive view of the criminal justice system in the UK than I do.
Your 'suggestion' was that they would secretly inject people with AZ to kill them. That's pretty insane, innit?
Considering that the cost-benefit ratio of the vaccine is still vastly positive, especially for older people, I don't think she has anything to be ashamed of. The fact that this has taken 'authorities' by surprise, however, shows that no one should put trust in theeeeem (the authorities).
You may be downvoted, but you're right. Let's not fall into the same trap of victimhood and moral indignation that our old enemies do, however easy it may be.