"Assistant State's Attorney Julie Drake said the sentence was compassionate but fair."

A woman who starved her 1-year-old son to death at the behest of a religious cult leader was given a sentence Wednesday that won't require her to serve any more jail time.

Ria Ramkissoon, 23, pleaded guilty last year to child abuse resulting in the death of Javon Thompson. She admitted denying food and water to the 16-month-old child when he did not say "Amen" before a meal. Javon wasted away over the course of a week before his heart stopped beating.

Baltimore Circuit Judge Timothy J. Doory suspended the balance of Ramkissoon's 20-year sentence and ordered her to report to a residential treatment facility for young women. The treatment program includes Bible study, and Ramkissoon will be required to complete the program, which doesn't have a specified length, before she can live on her own....

Assistant State's Attorney Julie Drake said the sentence was compassionate but fair.

"The state has always seen her as something of a victim in this case," Drake said.

Doory reminded Ramkissoon that she would have to live with knowing she was partly responsible for Javon's death, but added, "You were misled and did not do this with any ill will to your son."

Can you imagine the sentence if the defendant was a man and had starved his child to death? Would the judge feel all compassionate and think that a man could be brainwashed by a cult into killing his kid? Of course not.

The judge recognized that this woman was responsible in part for killing her child but he (probably due to his chivalry) is letting her go? Sorry, but having to "live with knowing she was partly responsible" for this boy's death is not the same as paying for it. A residential program for something this cruel? In terms of justice for this boy, it seems a bit cruel itself. (Thanks to Trey for emailing this story.)

"Police said the stiletto penetrated the eye socket and touched the victim's brain."

A reader sent me this article about a man who was attacked by Staci Hargreaves, 33, from Stalybridge, Cheshire, in a cab:

A woman has appeared in court charged with wounding after a man was stabbed through the eye with a stiletto heel.

Gavin Taylor, 28, remains seriously ill in hospital after the incident last Sunday.

He suffered the injury in the back of a taxi while travelling home from a night out in Huddersfield with his girlfriend.

A West Yorkshire Police spokesman said: "At around 2am on Sunday, police received reports of a serious assault which occurred in a vehicle travelling through Huddersfield town centre.

"A 28-year-old man was struck to the head and taken to Huddersfield Royal Infirmary.

"He was subsequently transferred to Leeds General Infirmary and is currently in a stable but critical condition...."

Police said the stiletto penetrated the eye socket and touched the victim's brain.

What struck me about the short article was the matter-of-fact tone about the attack, almost as if the incident happened with no woman present. There is a lack of emotion when reporting about violence against men, which makes it seem like "no big deal." When reporting on women who are abused or hurt by a boyfriend, it is almost always more sympathetic, emotional, and more detailed. Though this seems like a small thing, the apathetic way that the media portrays female on male violence, without emphasis on the female perpetrator as a serious threat, makes the public take incidents like this less seriously.

Women's violence against men is really dangerous

Ann Althouse makes a good point in response to an article that reports Elin Nordegren hit Tiger Woods with a golf club to wake him from an Ambien-induced sleep. Her response is to a commenter who thought that hitting a man with a golf club wasn't attempted murder, but a wake up call:

AllenS wrote: "Nonsense, it was a wake up call." Now, I was going to use a "wake-up call" wisecrack in the original post. Why did I reject it? Because it would signal that women's violence against men isn't really dangerous, isn't really a crime. It would say that when a woman has a righteous reason to be angry at her man, what would otherwise be a crime is not a crime. Think about how ugly it is to hit someone with a golf club while he is asleep. Did she know it was an Ambien-induced sleep — from which it will be very difficult to wake up and defend himself? How hard a swing did she take at him? It seems it was scary enough to make him run out of the house and attempt to drive — quickly — when he was in no condition to drive.

I'll add this: it doesn't matter if Nordegren knew Woods was in an Ambien-induced sleep. A spouse has no right to hit his or her partner with a golf club for cheating, regardless of the reason. Yell? Yes. Cry? Yes. Tell him to leave? Sure. Leave herself? Of course.

But to use a weapon to whack him and run him out to the car to escape, if this is what really happened, is not the way to resolve a problem like this, nor should it be legal for a male or female to beat their spouse with a weapon for cheating. It is very dangerous in this case, because, as a man, Woods probably had no other recourse than to get in the car and get away, or face being put in jail for defending himself.

"I was abused by a woman and it haunts me every day "

This story is an important one:

It seems unthinkable, but ChildLine says calls from boys abused by women have doubled in a year. This deeply disturbing investigation reveals the terrible impact of a crime that society has never dared to confront.

The psychology of men is so much more complex when it comes to abuse than we realize. Read the article and let me know what you think.