When matched for age, race, prior offending, type and severity of offending, the study finds that:

-A substantially larger percentage of males receive prison than do females (47% compared to 33%, respectively)

-A substantially larger percentage of females receive probation than do males (42% compared to 34%, respectively)

-Male sex offenders receive longer sentences than female sex offenders. Males on aver-age receive prison sentences that are more than 20 months longer than those assigned to females (102.9 compared to 81.4), intensive probation sentences that are on average 1.5 months longer (20 compared to 18.5), and probation sentence lengths that are on aver-age 5 months longer (62.7 compared to 57.).

Male sex offenders, all else equal, are perceived to be more dangerous and culpable than their female counterparts and so experience more punitive and incapacitating sanctions.

But the study is too female empathic. Its conclusion try to find excuse for judge: 

"these findings do not support advocating for policies that “even the score” by becoming more punitive for females"

And they go on on how maybe male offenders are really more dangerous, that male cannot be treated without prison or that women cannot be treated in prison (like all the feminist bullshits saying that prisons is not for women). They say all that without any proof. Instead of being concerned that female abusers are given a free pass, are in liberty while potentially dangerous and are not punished for their action, they prefer to protect female sex offenders.

What is funny is that they were wondering about if they were going to find that women would be punished harsher. I wonder if their reacrion would have been: "do not punish women lighter" or "policy should be immediately implemented to be faire toward women !" ?

Would be good if feminists acted like that. Each time they would find a gao in favor of men (even if it is because their methods of measure are false), they said "it is because men work harder and are more intelligent".