u/AfghanistanIsTaliban

"A male Gemini is the worst... They want all the props to being a good person"

astrology people need to be stopped NOW. Take their phones away

Excerpt from a subreddit dedicated to the Clancy case:

>On January 24, 2023, Lindsay Clancy, a Massachusetts' Mom of (3) young children sent her husband Patrick out to run errands. Patrick was gone for less than one hour. During this time, Lindsay strangled each of their children with separate exercise bands, leaving them in the basement. She then locked herself in a 2nd floor bedroom, cut her wrists and neck and then jumped from the bedroom window. This community is to discuss thoughts around this tragedy.

Lindsay Clancy, a L&D nurse, had an extensive medical health history leading up to the killings. In a New Yorker article titled "A Husband in the Aftermath of His Wife’s Unfathomable Act," Clancy's husband Patrick states that he "wasn't married to a monster" and that Clancy was just "sick." Before the killings, she had already been hospitalized in a psychiatric ward, and she was prescribed 13 medications within 4 months. According to a medication diary that Clancy kept, she was taking just three of those drugs in the days leading up to the killings.

It is confirmed that Lindsay Clancy had killed all three children by both parties of the 1st degree murder trial. The strategy of the defense team (Clancy) is to try for a NGRI (not guilty by reason of insanity) verdict, admitting that she killed the children but was under the effect of psychosis (either postpartum or medication-related) at the time, which would mean that she did not murder the children. The strategy of the prosecution is to prove that the defendant acted methodically, rationally, and deliberately to unlawfully kill the three children. Just like 2021 Lauren Dickason case in New Zealand, the prosecution believes that the defendant's motive is to control the fate of the children, as the prosecution believes that Lindsay was distressed for not having enough control over her own life. The defense argues that there is no rational motive for the killings because she deeply loved her children.

That concludes the somewhat lengthy background. Now let's get to what the intelligent folks are saying on tiktok. (Disclosure: I am very suspicious of Lindsay fans for obvious reasons but I also think that PPP is legit)

slide 1: more delulu than the person who strangled the chlildren

slide 2: The defense team already admitted that she strangled the kids. Also, she could have just lied about the voices?? Why believe in crazy conspiracy theories where only one person/group is capable of lies? Also, that DV awareness tag won't apply just yet... the trial is still ongoing haha

slide 3: Ahhh it's both sides (even though this trial is only about Lindsay) that need to go to prison. She made only one comment that she wanted to die, and made further comments to Patrick that she had unwanted thoughts of harming the children. Patrick did not ignore her comments and dropped her off at the ER after noticing that her mood was worsening. 'Intrusive thoughts' are very common in mothers with mood disorders, so it would be very uncharacteristic of Patrick to immediately divorce Lindsay over thoughts that she did not seem that she wanted to act upon. The only thing Patrick can do at the time was to get her committed, and she would only stay there until her condition improves. Unfortunately, she only had the appearance of improvement :(

slide 4: The factual, non-tiktokified timeline is in court documents and also found in news articles. At 4:53pm, the defendant texted: “Any chance you want to do takeout from 3V... I didn’t cook anything... It’s beena long day.” At 5:15pm, the defendant asked her husband to go to CVS for a laxative, and he was spotted on CVS surveillance video at 5:32pm. Lindsay then called Patrick at 5:34pm, and at 5:54, Patrick arrived at 3V and headed home in the same minute. At 6:09, Patrick arrived home, and at 6:11, he called 911. Lindsay's call and the CCTV footage gives Patrick a feasible crime window of 17 minutes between 5:54 and 6:11, and would need to act in such a convoluted manner as to frame Lindsay (ex: gently lowering her from the window while smearing her blood over it, making superficial wounds only to her neck and wrists, avoiding her back entirely, etc.). Lindsay had a whole hour to do whatever she wanted in whatever fashion she wanted. Here is the 299-page search warrant if you're curious (most of it is repetitive)

Also, Trooper Andrew Chiachio from the warrant pdf reviewed Apple Maps and noticed that it would take 9 minutes to come home from 3V. So he has to do the drugging, strangling, slashing and throwing in 17 - 9 = 8 minutes before calling 911... when he could have just waited a bit longer to make sure that his wife is dead. And this is all to ensure that his wife doesn't die but gets the full agony of being paralyzed and falsely convicted. Maybe he is secretly a software developer for the CIA instead of Microsoft 😆🤣

slide 5: Investigators found a smeared bloodstain on the exterior window. If he wanted to make sure she is dead, why wouldn't he toss her when he had the perfect chance? And if she is a nurse she would ABSOLUTELY crush her drugs, because she wanted to ensure that she gets the full dose and that her attempt is a lethal one. She would mask it using something that tastes sweet to get rid of the taste of bitter medicine. Also, marrying quick has nothing to do with this because her husband is NOT ON TRIAL. And this case is indeed similar to "Chris Watts," just not in a way you would like it to be.

slide 6: This is true, investigators had access to her pink iPhone and found that she was documenting her mental state, keeping track of medication, and "researching ways to kill." The defense does not deny any of this, but maintains that she was only looking up lethal methods so that she can end her life. If the husband had unauthorized access, why would she admit to looking these things up? Was she brainwashed???

slide 7: The message that the commenter is sending to her husband is that no matter how hard he tries, he will never be enough. That is what Lindsay supporters have devolved towards. 13 prescriptions in 4 months did not come out of thin air, and most people have neither the hubris nor the economic privilege to go MD shopping like Lindsay did.

slide 8: No way this has 30.5k likes wow. If he was truly cheating on her, it would give more ammo to the lead prosecutor, who seems to be desperately looking for a more convincing motive than the usual 'power/control' one. That is more convincing that him doing all of THAT within a span of 17 minutes so that he is able to smile for the CCTVs.

slide 9: He was not charged for anything because the police do not have probable cause to arrest or search him. The police still had lots of questions for him and he was very cooperative. Also, they did not need to take his word, because the police had access to CCTV for both CVS and 3V, which already gives him a narrow window to commit his hypothetical crime. Men are already held accountable for homicides - there are lots of them in prison and some even have lifelong mental illnesses and/or TBIs!

slide 10: OK, he did lock her up and she lied about being better so that she can go home and put the children's lives at risk, unbeknownst to Patrick of course. Even if Hypothetical Patrick knows that she is lying, what is his choice besides divorcing a mother of three children and possibly calling CPS on her??? for having too many meds in her cupboard? for admitting to intrusive thoughts like many other mothers? I feel like Hypothetical Patrick would still be hated by these misandrists for reasons far beyond misandry itself. It is a catch-22 situation

slide 11: "neglect" lol. You could just invent new crimes in your head and people on feministok will believe you.

slide 12: if the husband was threatening her, the defense lawyer would have talked about it by now. He represented a woman who was acquitted in a case where she stabbed her husband in the eyes while he was asleep, and she managed to win because of 'battered woman syndrome.' It makes no sense for the defense to throw this perfect opportunity away. Also, her husband was already a multimillionaire. I am pretty sure that comes part and parcel with working a cushy remote job at Microsoft for a few years.

This is a long one but I assure you it's worth it. Not in a good way but in a sense where you end up truly understanding how misandristic the true crime community is. It's even worse on TikTok but the TC subs on reddit are still a plague on this site.

First case is an Australian woman being arrested under suspicion of murdering and cannibalizing her 4-year-old son. Social services visited her three times over concerns of child neglect and substance misuse. The accused does not have any known mental health diagnoses (except for addiction perhaps) but she has a background of substance abuse, criminal convictions, and even her mother secured a protective court order against her. It is unclear whether or not she had diminished legal responsibility at the time of allegedly committing the crime - not all cannibals or drug users are psychotic. However, many in the true crime thread I have shown suspect that she had some kind of mental issue at the point where she allegedly murdered and cannibalized her son.

Second case is regarding Tyree Smith, an American man from Bridgeport, Connecticut who was found to have murdered a homeless man and ate his brain and eyeballs afterwards. He was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity in 2013 and was ordered to be committed to a psych hospital for 60 years. 10 years after the incident, he was released after a security review board deemed him safe. He is ordered to meet regularly with a psychiatrist for medications, which have kept him stable during his time in the hospital. As an NGRI acquitee, he is significantly less likely to commit any crime than those with guilty pleas (see pg. 70). I recommend reading this 2023 law review article that I have just linked - it is called Toward a More Scientific Jurisprudence of Insanity and it debunks 6 myths about the insanity plea, including the myth that criminal defendants who plead insanity are usually faking.

---

The comments on the first thread focused on various things. One of which was the content of the allegations - the comments understandably saying that it is "horrible." Another focus was on how "the system" failed the child, implying that the system (which is admittedly flawed) which should receive ultimate culpability for the mother's actions. Other comments even blamed the family (mostly male) for not doing enough in their capacity to take the son away - which is untrue as the child had been in the family's custody before being return to the bio mom. One comment blamed emphasis on "[preserving] the family unit" for the murder. There weren't any comments making value judgements about the alleged murderer, or how the alleged murderer poses a threat to children.

The second thread have been littered with comments doubting that Tyree Smith is safe to enter the community, despite him being clinically sane with medication and being monitored far more closely than Australia monitored the woman in the first case.

One comment in the second thread pushed back on the anti-insanity plea rhetoric. This reasonable comment got fewer net points than someone who believed that the acquitee should serve 50 years in a "main prison" for something that he did in a state of insanity. Many people in this comment section suddenly lost their knowledge of insanity pleas but they suddenly regain this understanding in threads where mothers kill their children. And these threads are always mixed in with allegations of medical sexism, or how the criminal justice system hates women; though they won't be able to explain safe haven laws, which were created in 50 US states to prevent mothers from abandoning their infants in plastic bags. Or "battered woman syndrome"

One of these post-partum murder threads is about Lauren Dickason, a White/Boer South African immigrant mother who murdered three of her daughters in New Zealand. Comments had an outpouring of understanding even though the majority of jurors rejected her partial defence and accepted the Crown's argument that she killed to have power/control over her daughters and prevent them from being mothered by someone else if her husband remarries. She killed with anger and acted methodically, even looking up different methods for murdering the girls. She tricked them into believing that they were making necklces with cable ties, then pulled on them to kill the girls. She then smothered the girls with their own bed blankets because they were still breathing. Another mother by the name of Lindsay Clancy also allegedly murdered three of her children - the subreddit reacted by blaming the man and mocking him for dating a new woman four months after the incident. Many comparisons to Andrea Yates were made despite her husband being very different, even saying that he "wasn’t married to a monster - I was married to someone who got sick.”

this is from last year (a few months after Trump's inauguration) when a bunch of anti-male homophobes crawled out of the depths of tiktok to attack '''feminine''' men for no reason. Comments are full of reasonable folks (roughly half of them are women #goodnews) roasting her into dust.

The vid creator also has Jesus in her bio because Jesus taught her to bully and mock people who do not follow gender roles or something ✝️

bonus points for calling "gay boys" (homosexual men) the "gworls" in an updated description

Description:

UPDATED** yall still not hearing me, gay boys ain’t who im talking about those are the gworls why would I be talking about them ??

Transcript:

I'm so confused by women are now getting hate for saying "and who gonna be the boys." Because the saying is still true and "who gonna be the boys;" everybody want to be the girls. Like, y'all know what that saying or should I say y'all know who that saying is going to. I'm seeing all these people coming here talking about, I see you in one guy so I'm a, [unintelligble] y'all gonna be the boys y'all gonna be the boys. No one ever had to like fight to be a lady. But for me, I'm okay. You all gonna be the boys. You all gonna be the boys. No one ever had to like fight to be a lady. But for me, I personally like was seeing like every guy wants to be in their feminine area. Ever like talking about being. I see you knowin' on our slang, trying to like, literally they think they the prize. They wanna be chased. They wanna be tricked on. They want their meals paid for. They want you to plan the dates. They want you to text them good morning every day. They want you to pick them up in your car. They want to come over to your house. They want to go 50-50. They want you to apologize. Like what happens to men being bold, strong men? That like, it's slowly dwindling away in the past. I'm sick of it. Being in this generation, it's tiring. It's hard to watch. But this is a generation we're in. Some people, why people are trying to come up here arguing and trying to bash them for saying "who gonna be the boys?" Because the statement still stands. Who's gonna be the boys?

Blatant xenophobic and misandrist rhetoric by the former trillionaire. Even if you believe that these men are abusing asylum processes, surely there must be a more humane way to adress this issue?

Yes, these are mostly young men in the video. But many of them are facing extreme economic pressures and are looking for better opportunities. Some could be trapped between family abuse vs. homelessness and they are using Europe as a third option. As the economic situation worsens during the ongoing cost of living crisis and leads to worsened legal, social, and medical outcomes, the thin line between economic migrant and refugee begins to blur.

Here are more points to put the "military age" male migration in context:

• The 'provider' role does not stop at the border. 2/3 of migrant laborers in the world are male, which is indeed a supermajority, but it is not clearly not "all military age males." The UNHCR 2025 stats show that only 17.2% of asylum-seekers in the world are males between the ages of 18 and 59. Economic migrants contribute to the local economy while also sending a small portion of their money back home in the form of remittances, yet this income is key in keeping millions out of poverty. According to the UN DESA, remittances "are a private source of capital that’s over three times the amount of official development assistance (ODA) and foreign direct investment (FDI) combined." This is odd behavior for an invasion. An invasion which puts Europe's revered international aid to shame.
• Morocco forbids homosexuality in both sexes, although in practice, the law is enforced more harshly against men. Gay men in Morocco also experience harassment on dating apps, including from transgender model Sofia Taloni who encouraged Moroccan women to set up fake accounts to persecute gay men. Obviously, not all of those fleeing Morocco are gay, but it's a sign that it is a very socially regressive country. Drug use, STDs, sex work, and mental health disorders are very stigmatized in Morocco, and these conditions tend to be very comorbid with each other.
• Men and boys in Morocco are not recognized as victims of sexual exploitation. The stigmatization of homosexuality and the exclusion of male-on-male and female-on-male rape victims make it harder for men and boys to report sex crimes or receive help from programmes specifically designed for rape victims. Article 486 of the Moroccan Penal Code defines rape as one committed by a male against a female, and 487 provides further penalty if the crime takes away the female victim's virginity status. According to a 2022 US State Dep. report, the "government did not report referring any labor trafficking or male victims to care despite identifying 12 labor trafficking victims and 54 male victims." There are no current legislative measures to detect and combat child sex tourism, although sex trafficking involving boys and girls is severely punished if caught. While Elon sounds the alarm about "invasion," the "foreign nationals, primarily from Europe and the Middle East, engage in child sex tourism in major Moroccan cities," according to the State Dep. report. And it is plausible that many of these migrants have been affected by forced labor or sexual abuse (poverty is a strong risk factor for sexual exploitation) at some point in their childhoods, yet it is undetected.

On top of the legislative blindspot concering men and boys, the social systems in Morocco are impoverished, leaving victims of crime to fend for themselves even when public sympathy is high. Morocco relies on NGOs to solve its social problems for this reason. Maybe Musk can lend a hand?

Article: Stereotype threat, gender and mathematics attainment: A conceptual replication of Stricker & Ward

What is stereotype threat?

>Mathematics education researchers have long been concerned that mathematics is experienced differently by men and women. This concern is, in part, fueled by gender differences in post-compulsory participation rates in mathematical study and STEM careers. One mechanism which some believe contributes to these observed gender differences in participation is stereotype threat. This account suggests that members of negatively stereotyped groups underperform when that stereotype is salient, perhaps because stereotype-related thoughts place an extra burden on stereotyped individuals’ cognitive resources.

Abstract

>Stereotype threat has been proposed as one cause of gender differences in post-compulsory mathematics participation. Danaher and Crandall argued, based on a study conducted by Stricker and Ward, that enquiring about a student’s gender after they had finished a test, rather than before, would reduce stereotype threat and therefore increase the attainment of women students. Making such a change, they argued, could lead to nearly 5000 more women receiving AP Calculus AB credit per year. We conducted a preregistered conceptual replication of Stricker and Ward’s study in the context of the UK Mathematics Trust’s Junior Mathematical Challenge, finding no evidence of this stereotype threat effect. We conclude that the ‘silver bullet’ intervention of relocating demographic questions on test answer sheets is unlikely to provide an effective solution to systemic gender inequalities in mathematics education.

Female participants received a higher mean score in the math competition. Contrary to the hypothesis, the "gender-first" female participant group received a non-significantly higher mean score than the "gender-last" equivalent, rather than having a significantly lower mean score as expected.

>Participants’ mean scores, split by answer-sheet version and gender, are shown in Fig 2. As stated in our preregistration, these scores were subjected to a 2 (version) by 2 (gender) between-subjects Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). This revealed a significant main effect of gender, F(1,1165) = 8.410, p = .004, η2 = .007, which reflected that female participants had a higher mean score than male participants, 46.2 versus 42.7, d = 0.177. There was no significant main effect of version, F(1,1165) = 1.586, p = .208, η2 = .001, (means 45.7, 44.0, d = 0.091. Crucially, we did not find the hypothesized version-by-gender interaction effect, F(1, 1165) = 0.525, p = .469, η2 = .000. Indeed, contrary to the prediction of the stereotype threat account, female participants in the gender-first condition had slightly (but non-significantly) higher scores than those in the gender-last condition, 47.3 v 45.0, t(717) = 1.61, p = .108, d = 0.120.

>To be consistent with Stricker and Ward, our primary preregistered analysis involved performing an ANOVA. However, we also ran a multilevel analysis to take account of between-school variation. We compared models with (i) random intercepts (where intercepts were able to vary across schools) and (ii) random intercepts and slopes (where both intercepts and slopes were able to vary across schools). Allowing intercepts to vary across schools yielded a significantly better fit (BIC = 10037.65) than a model where intercepts were identical across schools (BIC = 10298.66), χ2(2) = 268.1, p < .001. However, allowing slopes to vary across schools did not significantly improve the fit of the model that included version, gender and the version-by-gender interaction (both BICS = 10047.86), χ2(2) = 0.00, p = 1. In this model (in which gender was coded 0 for males, 1 for females; and version was coded 0 for gender-first and 1 for gender-last), neither version, b = -0.902, t(1161) = -0.551, p = .582, nor gender, b = -2.99, t(1161) = -1.863, p = .063, nor the version-by-gender interaction effect, b = -1.04, t(1161) = -0.499, p = .618, were significant predictors of participants’ scores (intercept b = 46.95, t(1161) = 8.96, p < .001). In sum, analyzing the data in this fashion again provided no evidence of the hypothesized version-by-gender interaction.

>Finally, we conducted a preregistered Bayesian version of our main ANOVA. This required us to specify a model for the null hypothesis. As specified in our preregistration, we ran two analyses, with Cauchy prior widths of 0.2 and 0.5. Both analyses provided strong support for the model that only included gender as a predictor over the model which captured the predicted stereotype threat effect (i.e. the model which included gender, version and the version-by-gender interaction effect), BF01s = 8.123, 46.052 respectively.

One of the included schools was a high achieving all-female school, which has led to an increase of the female participant mean score. An exploratory analysis which excluded this school yielded a similar result to the preregistered (pre-study) analysis:

>To explore whether our inclusion of a single-gender school in the sample effected the results (perhaps, for example, students at single-gender schools are not as affected by societal stereotypes as those at coeducational schools [cf. 24]), we conducted an exploratory analysis with the 329 participants from this school omitted. This resulted in an essentially identical pattern of results. In particular we again found no significant version-by-gender interaction effect, F(1,836) = 0.059, p = .809, η2 = .000.

>To explore whether or not our decision to use the standard method of scoring the JMC affected the results, we conducted the primary ANOVA analysis again using (i) number of problems answered correctly and (ii) percentage accuracy (number of problems answered correctly as a percentage of problems attempted) as dependent variables. Our primary conclusions remained for both these dependent variables. Specifically, neither version-by-gender interaction effects with these two dependent variables was significant: number correct, F(1,1165) = 0.253, p = .615, ηp2 = .000; percentage accuracy, F(1,1165) = 0.326, p = .568, ηp2 = .000.

>In sum, we found no evidence in favor of the hypothesis that female participants scored lower when they received the gender-first version of the answer sheet in any of our analyses, and a Bayesian analysis provided strong evidence against this hypothesis.

When researchers excluded the data from the all-female school, the researchers found a small male advantage that is consistent with the general population. Although the mean score was lower for female participants this time around, the researchers found no evidence of the hypothesized stereotype threat effect.

>Might the small female advantage found in our sample, compared to the small male advantage found nationally, account for the lack of a stereotype effect in our data? Again, we doubt this. This difference was driven by the inclusion of a high achieving girls-only school in our sample. This school had the highest mean score of any which participated. When this school was excluded from our analysis, we found a small male advantage consistent with the overall picture, t(838) = 2.391, p = .017, d = 0.165. As noted above, our substantive conclusions remain if the analysis is conducted on this restricted sample (N = 840).

Although the study does not explicitly deny the existence of a stereotype threat, it rules out the effect of relocating demographic questions with respect to the gendered mathematics achievement gap, and also calls into question the robustness of the stereotype threat effect.