A jury's decision, filed as one more reason women shouldn't hold power.
The trial of Lindsay Clancy ended in a mistrial, and from September 8 jurors gave interviews calling the lone male holdout arrogant and saying he admitted reasonable doubt but refused to acquit. Matt Walsh and Robby Starbuck read the interviews as jurors admitting they had disregarded the law. On September 10, MyronGainesX posted on X that the jury was "Example 472957291947 why women shouldn't have power." The post takes the conduct of one jury and turns it into a reason to keep women as a whole out of power. The next day the same account posted "GET WOMEN OUT OF MALE SPACES!" The September 10 post drew about 68,429 views.
Shouldn't have power is a claim about every woman. It takes one jury decision and turns it into evidence that a whole sex is unfit to decide anything, and the cure it implies is keeping women out of power altogether. That is a description of people by their nature, with exclusion as the conclusion.
The running number settles it. Calling this example 472957291947 tells the reader the count is endless and that every case with a woman in it belongs on the list. A fair-minded reader can disagree with a jury without deciding that half the population should lose its say.
The receipts
Every quote, checked against its source.
MyronGainesX (X)
"Example 472957291947 why women shouldn't have power."
One item from a weekly pass over the news and the reaction to it. Most of what gets said that week doesn't cross the line and isn't here.
Everything here is a plain-language cut of research published in full at hobocode.net, including the hate methodology that defines every score on this page.