Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Press Council rules Daily Mail must not report that woman accused of domestic violence killing is transgender because it is 'irrelevant'

31 replies

QuietContraryMary · 03/02/2019 20:41

"The Council considers that it was not relevant to the alleged criminal acts reported to identify the woman as being transgender. Although it provided some further identification of the woman, it was not necessary to do so. The Council considers that as being transgender was not relevant to the alleged criminality, prominently identifying the woman as transgender in the headline and again in the article could contribute to substantial prejudice towards transgender people."

www.presscouncil.org.au/document-search/adj-1756/

Notes:

  • This is the Press Council Australia though such 'logic' pervades the Western world
  • The charges were subsequently dropped but at the time the tw was suspected of killing a man in a 'domestic incident' after breaking in. Domestic violence.
  • The Press Council says that it is no more relevant that the 'woman' is 'transgender' than say 'white', so it should not be mentioned.
  • This is odd, because what about the inconvenient fact that most crime is committed by men. Should we not also censor that because it might excite prejudice against men?
  • Moreover in the context of a man being killed there's a very significantly difference in strength between a biologically male suspect and a biologically female one. No such differences pertain to say religion or race.
  • One for the 'Daily Mail lies' ploppers I think. Daily Mail reported facts, and they were told not to.
OP posts:
ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 03/02/2019 23:25

I tend to think the transgender status is irrelevant, but that is not what is being said Confused The sex of the perpetrator is generally relevent, so in this case the DM should simply have reported them as "male" rather than "transgender woman".

Having said that if there is clear evidence that a male who identifies as transgender is more likely to commit crime than a male who does not, then yes transgender status may be relevant.

WokerThanWoke · 03/02/2019 22:29

This is really concerning. There isn’t always a picture of the criminal. If they just use the female name and she/her pronouns we can’t know.

AngryAttackKittens · 03/02/2019 22:21

It is relevant, though, isn't it? Both to catching criminal for whom the police are providing a description and to crime statistics.

ZuttZeVootEeeVro · 03/02/2019 21:29

I agree, sex is relevant. The crime needs to be recorded and reported as being committed by a male transgender person because otherwise the implications is that it has been committed by female person. And that simply isn't true.

heresyandwitchcraft · 03/02/2019 21:02

Although it provided some further identification of the woman, it was not necessary to do so. The Council considers that as being transgender was not relevant to the alleged criminality,

This is so false it makes me angry.
The SEX of the perpetrator/alleged perpetrator is highly relevant.

-identification/provision of further information by the public (I've seen reports of male criminals where they show both "woman" and "man" pictures so they can remain vigilant, and maybe someone knows something important they need to share with police about a person's past before they transitioned)
-it might be that the victim or their family perceives that perpetrator as a man, and they should have the right to their reality being described

  • MtF trans people retain male-pattern violence, AFAIK, and we should be kept aware of that
-female crime statistics will be skewed completely unless a distinction based on sex is made -the news should not be in the business of gaslighting their audience
GrinitchSpinach · 03/02/2019 20:52

This is odd, because what about the inconvenient fact that most crime is committed by men. Should we not also censor that because it might excite prejudice against men?
Moreover in the context of a man being killed there's a very significantly difference in strength between a biologically male suspect and a biologically female one. No such differences pertain to say religion or race.

Men, especially men in power, are really intent on telling us all that women are never, in any way, oppressed by men, aren't they?