What's in a name?

[Ace42X]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4736984.stm

So men are goingto be caught more easily and often (a good thing) - and thus the crime statistics will be interpreted by feminists to show that men are so barbaric and criminal (a bad thing.)

[ms.peachy]

- and thus the crime statistics will be interpreted by feminists to show that men are so barbaric and criminal (a bad thing.)
erm, that's quite a leap you're making there. As I understand it, all this does is help narrow down a huge field of potential suspects by pegging chromosomal characteristics. Not a big deal, certainly not a major inter-gender issue.

[Ace42X]

erm, that's quite a leap you're making there. As I understand it, all this does is help narrow down a huge field of potential suspects by pegging chromosomal characteristics. Not a big deal, certainly not a major inter-gender issue.

I appreciate it is a leap. But it only works on the male chromosome, there is no inference for females. If it improves detection rates on men, then it will have a significant effect on male criminals, whilst leaving female criminals the same as ever.

An increase in male convictions, without a corresponding increase in female convictions, creates a false impression of increased male criminality, is my point.

I am not saying that one follows the other, merely that there are plenty of feminists who'd be only too eager to interpret the inevitable change in statistics as such.