Instead of turning it into a family throwdown that's unpleasant for everybody. They won't change your mind, they won't change yours. You can't control what they think, but you can control how it affects you. Endure it for a few hours a couple of times a year, and go on with your life the rest of the time. If even that's too much, opt out of the family get togethers. Sad if it comes to that, but it's preferable to annual holiday fights.

I'm going to have another beer and try to change the subject. And if that fails I'll wander off to watch the basketball or something.

Women get nearly 2/3rds less jail time for the same crime a man commits (on average in federal court).

are we supposed to be happy with that and feel sorry for the poor men being discriminated against?

This is the worst problem and men are the victims?

Why do you think women get less jail sentences than men? The answer is because society and the justice system still largely views a woman's actions (good and bad) as a result of their environment and without agency. Any man involved in the situation is at least initially given ultimate responsibility for the act.

Take the shooting in San Bernardino, for example. When there was a media report that a woman was one of the shooters, everyone jumped to the conclusion that it must be her male partner that radicalized her or made her go along with his evil ways. However, it's been reported that it may in fact be the opposite.
When a woman blows off the head of her boyfriend, we start to think, "What did he do to deserve that?" We jump to the conclusion that he must be an abuser or cheated on her or did something wrong to provoke her actions. We never think that just maybe she was abuser, do we? Once again you initially place all responsibility for a criminal act upon the man involved until proven otherwise.

I remember watching a prison documentary. And they did a segment on women in prison. And focused on how most of these women don't deserve to be there. They are only there because of their bad boy boyfriends. The documentary treated them all like they were victims and how wrong it is to keep them away from their kids.
That segment was in such stark contrast to the other 45 minutes of the show where they portrayed male prisoners as all animals and evil and deserved all the punishment they got.

So yes, it does highlight a serious issue because it's counter-productive to the idea of equality. If society and the legal system don't view women capable of agency and being able to make her own decisions when it concerns criminal acts, what do you think these judges, juries, and prosecutors believe in other legal matters involving women? The legal system has a long way to go.

"The answer is because society and the justice system still largely views a woman's actions (good and bad) as a result of their environment and without agency..."


You of course, have objective, peer-reviewed evidence to support that allegation, yes?

now and we hear a lot more about her. Though I think the fact she was foreign born affects that. Once again anti-immigrant forces use this as an excuse to exclude all immigrants.

What you mention has to do with sexism and the patriarchy - it's not to the advantage of women - it's because sexism is still a problem. As for people in prison saying they should not be there - they all do that. Criminals blame others routinely - it's because they are criminals, not because they are women. Men don't blame women for their being in prison because that's not macho and manly, though you are bet there are a few (if they are there for beating up a woman, they will blame that woman). Criminals don't agree that they have to abide by society's rules, male or female, thus they look for any excuse for their behavior.

Men still commit more crimes too and perhaps more violent crimes. A study on why their sentences might be on average longer might be more complicated that just saying the poor men get discriminated against.

more jail time than men who commit murder.

Women (especially white women) are less likely to be convicted, less likely to be charged, less likely to be incarcerated, and less likely to serve the same sentence that a man does for the same crime and same criminal history. Some states and some criminal acts don't allow judges to discriminate based on gender. But in the federal system, there is many times a large amount of wiggle room for judges to base criminal sentences on. And studies show when judges are given this discretion, they tend to disproportionately give a lighter sentence to women compared to men for the same crime.

Here's one study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002

And you say women who kill their abusers get more punishment than men men who commit murder? Where are your sources? Have you looked at death row in any death penalty state? How many women are on it compared to men?

That seems to generate more awkward conversations these days.

will be nothing but enlightened, respectful and accepting. Or perhaps not.

I do believe women should have equal opportunity in participating in college athletics, however, counting participants by gender can skew the results and cause unintended results.

I do not believe the intention of Title IX was to reduce the number of males who participate in collgiate athletics to equal the number of female athletes, yet that is what has happened in many cases. The smaller sports that do not produce a lot of revenue (men's gymnastics, golf, tennis, wrestling) have been cut in order to equal the number of male to female college athletic participants.

The problem with this equalization is college football. College football rosters are huge, much larger than NFL rosters. There are no female college athletics that have a comparable roster size. Consequently, the minor men's sports are cut.

I do not think that college football rosters (numbers) shod be included in the Title IX equation. Football produces the revenue that pays for the men's minor sports and most of the women's sports.

If the suggestion is made that all college athletics should be discontinued, that is another subject entirely.

I had two nephews who played small college football. Those games were well attended and were more entertaining to me than Big Ten games. (Of course, if those boys had played for a Big Ten team, my opinion would be different.)

arguments in defense of men's sports vs. women's sports all the time.

The report they link to says

The regression analysis of earnings one year after graduation for the combined sample of women and men shows a gender pay difference of 6.6 percent, controlling for education and occupational choices as well as demographic and personal characteristics (see figure 13). That is, when we include all the selected job and workplace, education and training, and demographic and personal variables, women earned 6.6 percent less in 2009 than men earned.

So it should be that after taking everything else into account, women are paid 93 percent of what men are paid, not 79 percent. Still unacceptable, of course, but 79 percent gives a misleading idea of the size of the gap.

As someone who does a bit of demographics, I'm also a bit surprised they didn't look at income-region interactions and ethnic group as predictors.