Lindsay Clancy‘s supporters want to stifle men’s opinions about a mother murdering her children. The trial has generated a lot of opinions in the nation’s political discourse, but none of them are welcomed by men who want accountability for Clancy’s filicide. Many of the murdering mothers’ supporters have cited in gatherings, demonstrations, social media posts, or disturbing TikTok videos that men don’t get to have an opinion on it because they are men, and Clancy is a woman. And, because of this difference in genders, men should be silenced from commenting about the court case of the mother who coordinated the premeditated murder of her three young children.
Why? Because, as some have regularly argued, men cannot understand a woman in this scenario because women are the ones to give birth, as if one needs to bear children to understand the horrors of filicide. It’s rather sexist, prejudiced, and outright misandrist. It’s also illogical. After all, if a man’s voice is not welcomed in the Clancy case, then why did she hire a male attorney to represent her instead of a female one?
In many instances, I have personally read comments by women suggesting men are unqualified to discuss a mother murdering her children simply because they are men. This despicable trend continued even more when the conversation involved discussions about postpartum depression. The anti-male discrimination and desire to suppress men’s opinions is a harrowing reality of the ills of generations being indoctrinated with the toxic tenets of feminism, particularly third-wave and fourth-wave feminism. Regardless, men are allowed to have opinions — and valid opinions — about a mother murdering her three young children and a father having his three young children murdered by his wife.
Some third and fourth wave feminist acolytes have advanced the narrative that men should not comment, and if they do, they should be disregarded simply because, well, they are men. It’s analogous to the tactics feminists used when spewing their pro-abortion defenses. I’ve also heard that men “can’t relate to or understand PPD” despite men ALSO being able to suffer from PPD — a FACT that many of these self-avowed PPD experts had no idea existed. Too many women have resorted to playing the woman card, expressing a ridiculously sexist view that men “just don’t understand.”
This is an obvious logical fallacy, of course, a variation of argumentum ad verecundiam, if you will. More importantly, it’s also indicative of the toxic femininity, even among some conservative women, that has brainwashed such people, causing them to repeat such nonsense. Sadly, this societal regression has gone so far that Clancy’s husband is being vilified, and in some instances, outright blamed for the murder. He’s been slandered in some circles as a lousy husband, despite no one knowing a single detail about the Clancys’ marriage.
Of course, as interactions have shown, the men who agree with their perspective, such as Clancy’s lawyer, are free to hold opinions about Clancy, PPD, etc. Whereas men who disagree with the Clancy supporters’ views are the ones being criticized, banished, suppressed, and stifled, etc., simply because they are men. They have turned a case about a mother murdering her three innocent young children into a battle of the sexes. This is what feminism has done to today’s culture. In their eyes, a judgment of morality, or lack thereof, behind killing children is predicated on one’s sex, not actual morality.
And why is this happening? Because third-wave and fourth-wave feminism have necessitated the demonization of men. Facts don’t matter, truth doesn’t matter, and reality doesn’t matter. All that matters is this incessant, disturbing desire to blame men. It’s a troubling trend that many have presumed exists solely among left-wing women. But the tribalistic desire to rush to dismiss male viewpoints, or slander a father of three murdered children, in many cases has been bipartisan. Only indoctrinations from third and fourth wave feminism categorize sympathy and empathy over the loss of lives of three young children murdered as an example of sexism and misogyny, as some have claimed.
This is extremely delusional, toxic, and misguided. An opinion on this case is not relegated to one’s sex, no matter how many of these female Clancy supporters may want it to be. Being a woman doesn’t make you an expert on PPD simply by being a woman, just as being a man doesn’t make me an expert on prostate cancer. Both men and women have good arguments and opinions on the case, just as men and women have bad arguments and opinions on the case. Ultimately, the court case will be decided by facts, not delusion or a tribalistic devotion to a gender.
However, once the verdict is reached and the societal dust has settled from this case, the current attitudes and harm from third-wave and fourth-wave feminism need to be addressed. Because, as the Lindsay Clancy case has shown, feminism isn’t just for liberals, Democrats, and left-wing women anymore. And it’s a scourge that is causing significant harm in American society, especially when people seek to rationalize and justify the murder of three young children — and even more so when it is frequently done through alarming social media posts and disturbing TikTok videos.
As I wrote last week, the rigors of raising children are well known. This holds for bearing children and the seriousness of postpartum depression. None of that should ever be discounted or summarily dismissed. However, ignoring the murder of three innocent young children due to a misguided allegiance to the female sex or devotion to the tenets of feminism — as many women are doing on social media posts around the country — is wrong. And so, too, is linking the stresses of giving birth and motherhood with Lindsay Clancy, the mother who killed her own children.