People here seem weirdly confused about the term "feminicide": it means homicide motivated by misogyny. It's a subset of hate crimes.

They exist in all western societies I'm aware of, if you're confused it's probably only because you're unused to thinking of women as a protected class and hate for women as aggravating circumstances, the way hate for any race of religion is in most legal systems.

Yes they're 50% of the population, but also yes they're disproportionately the targets of violence because misogyny exists. Yet they are rarely treated as such in many legal systems.

Yea… I’m with the incels that don’t really understand the point. If murder was already a crime that would be punished by life in prison, narrowing the specificity of who was murdered doesn’t change much of anything.

“Cool, if it makes you happy I guess 👍”

"Let's slap a bandaid instead of fixing the underlying societal problems causing this and score some popularity points" - every politician ever.

Edit: okay maybe there are a few smart politicians, but they're not scoring the popularity points with this:

“Italy is one of only seven countries in Europe where sex and relationship education is not yet compulsory in schools, and we are calling for it to be compulsory in all school cycles,” said the head of Italy’s Democratic Party, Elly Schlein. “Repression is not enough without prevention, which can only start in schools.”

A lot of people in here seem upset for some reason.

There needs to be more accountability for law enforcement for this too have any real effect. Studies show up to 40% of law enforcement self identify as domestic abusers. So why would they investigate themselves?

This post has helped me root out all the shitty piece of shit incels to block on Lemmy. Thank you for this.

I don't see how the femicide part makes any sense or difference. There were already the exact same punishments for killing of anyone, so isn't this essentially copy pasting existing laws but with a specific group highlight? If that's the case, it will do absolutely nothing.

The second part is fine, though I hope it's meant for everyone and not just women. I don't know about Italy specifically, but in many European countries if you fall victim to these crimes as a man, you'll likely receive no help.

Would be great to see some more protections for everyone, as well as more serious punishments for violations against anyone. Making anything like this gender-specific will just fuel already problematic anti-other-gender sentiment.

This is confusing. So killing a woman is now criminally worse than killing a man? That seems absurd.

Does this imply that previously killing women wasn't criminal in Italy?

I presume that femicide is a subset of "homicide", but I can't tell if it means "any killing of a woman", "any killing of a woman by a man", "any killing of a woman because she's a woman", or "any killing of a woman by a man because she's a woman".

And I shudder to imagine how trans-women and trans-men fit into this weirdly sexist label.

(In America we have nice gender-neutral crimes, with enhancers if it was done out of prejudicial hate.)

It take a certain type of flaw in logic to assume that because a group is “getting” something, it means another group is losing something.

What if one group is getting something unproportionally more than the other.

That creates inequality, essentially meaning that the disadvantaged group is losing something. I.e. they get less that the other group.

So yeah, if you give one group much more than the other, they are losing something.

I'm reading a lot of responses here that seem to rhyme with the "White lives matter!" responses to the BLM movement.

As was the case then, what seems to be getting missed by those saying this is the context. Italy has a major issue with domestic violence, including spousal murder. From the sound of it, it's usually women who are the victims. Thus, a new law to target wife abusers specifically.

There may be some merit to debating whether this is an effective move or not, I'm not up on my research there; but let's not deny that they see a need, and are attempting to address it.

These comments seem to be full of the same people who misunderstand that the word “racism” describes a massive cultural and societal issue that affects people in large, hidden ways throughout their life, rather than using bad words.

If they had a problem in Italy of men being murdered for not being obedient, it might be worth considering broadening the scope of this classification.

This does not even target the perpetrators as a class (even though we can probably guess a general demographic), just classifies the crime according to what has happened to the victim, and why. This is the same for all hate crimes that are prevalent enough to warrant it. Imo it is the culture and society that makes it a hate crime, not just the intent.