Even if what you said were true, it does not lead to the conclusion you have formed. Society has a long tradition of prosecuting criminals differently based on the perceived harm to society. If our society has decided that murders based on race/religion/ethnicity/sexual orientation represent a greater harm to our society than murder based on gender, then I see nothing in our legal traditions that prevents us from doing so. We have a long history of basing the sentence of a crime on the motive of the perpetrator and it does not in any way endanger our free and equal society because these laws protect every race/religion/ethnicity/sexual orientation equally. When you can identify people who hanve no race, no beliefs about religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation, then you might have a case for unequal protection under the law. Until then, the law protects all people equally.Yes, they are the exact same murder. One murder is based upon hatred of women; the other is based upon hatred of minoritites, yet one is prosecuted as a hate crime and one is not. The law thus declares that the murder of females based solely upon their gender is less important to society than the murder of minorities based solely upon their race/religion/ethnicity/sexual orientation. If you do not see the dicotomy of such "special" status in a free and equal society, then we will have to agree to disagree.