Something that never happens!!! Illinois gun suspect wore women's clothing to blend in

Hmmm not a full body photo but nothing about the clothing screams 'dressed as a woman' to me.

He's wearing makeup, isn't he?

To blend in.

So I remain lost about how we tell the difference between (a) a bloke who is a woman because he thinks he is/dresses like a women and (b) a bloke who is a bad bloke dressed as a woman. Maybe Stoneballs could assist....

Hmmm not a full body photo but nothing about the clothing screams 'dressed as a woman' to me.

They could have said 'wore a wig' to disguise tattoos rather than 'dressed as a woman'. As of course long hair isn't unique to women. Nor do all woman have long hair.

I'd like to see more photos of him and what he was wearing

Trump supporter, apparently.

I’d be surprised if he still identified that way. It looks like the Trump supporting phase preceded the interesting hair phase, which is a common pattern.

My point is that here we have a genuine multiple murderer (alleged) cross-dressing for some criminal purpose. So it does happen, whereas we have been told repeatedly that no male criminal would ever do such a thing. Anybody cross-dressing must actually be trans.

Oh ok, I get it. the "it would never happen" refers to that part of her book being deliberately misinterpreted.

I can understand that, but my problem is that recently (in the UK at least) a man disguised himself as a woman to sexually assault children, and the police and press reported that they were seeking a woman!

Trump supporter, apparently.

maybe, but it seems like they aren’t even sure there was a hairpiece!

replying to myself but wow, that article is very odd. Maybe just not up to date? Here is a different article with photos and there clearly was a wig happening.
news.sky.com/story/chicago-shooting-suspect-dressed-as-a-woman-as-he-escaped-the-scene-police-say-12646323

note also the pink and blue hair.

“Disguise” isn’t what I get from those photos, but I’m sure it will all become clear eventually.

Of course that's the point. But when JKR does it it's a sign that she's a transphobe in the deluded eyes of the gender ideologues.

My point is that here we have a genuine multiple murderer (alleged) cross-dressing for some criminal purpose. So it does happen, whereas we have been told repeatedly that no male criminal would ever do such a thing. Anybody cross-dressing must actually be trans.

Maybe it was the hairpiece which covered the facial tattoos?

maybe, but it seems like they aren’t even sure there was a hairpiece!

Maybe it was the hairpiece which covered the facial tattoos?

I’m confused, how does a man in women’s clothing blend in to a crowd better than a man in men’s clothing?

I know it says something about covering his facial tattoos but that makes no sense. Women’s clothing doesn’t cover the face any better than men’s clothing. Unless he wore a niqab or something, and why wouldn’t they just say that if he did?

It must be true. I read it on the internet.

Also, let's just take a moment to remember that one of the many lies told about J. K. Rowling is that she is a transphobe because she had a male serial killer character in her most recent Cormoran Strike book who wore a woman's coat to enable him to get close to his female victim, in a busy place at dusk where he wouldn't immediately have stood out as male. Her choice to include this very common ruse used by criminals in her plot was apparently evidence that she believes all trans people are criminals. Hmm

But isn't the point that she isn't a transphobe because this is a somewhat usual criminal attempt to evade capture. Or do you mean that her character was actually showing the dangers of allowing men identifying as women into single sex spaces? I thought she wasn't doing anything of the kind, simply writing a story.

Oh dear @CrossPurposes. You haven't read the book have you?

😬 embarrassing

Well, she did have that cross dressing killer in one of her books so...

The issue is that men dressed as women have become absolutely untouchable. Everyone is terrified to question or challenge them in any way. They have become a sacred caste.

In single sex spaces. That is the only place their clothes or affect is relevant. I would hate to think of a world where someone is questioned or challenged in a public place that isn't single sex simply because they are wearing clothes associated with the other sex.

This!

Also, let's just take a moment to remember that one of the many lies told about J. K. Rowling is that she is a transphobe because she had a male serial killer character in her most recent Cormoran Strike book who wore a woman's coat to enable him to get close to his female victim, in a busy place at dusk where he wouldn't immediately have stood out as male. Her choice to include this very common ruse used by criminals in her plot was apparently evidence that she believes all trans people are criminals.

And if this had anything to do with single sex spaces this would be very very relevant

How can anyone tell the difference between a man disguised as a woman going into single sex spaces with the intention of committing a crime and an innocent transwoman going into a single sex space to use the facility?

You can't.

So if anyone is allowed to enter these spaces on their own say so then the dangerous men can just walk in too.

The issue is that men dressed as women have become absolutely untouchable. Everyone is terrified to question or challenge them in any way. They have become a sacred caste.

And that is enormously dangerous

This crime was nothing to do with trans people. And I think it's a bit of a stretch to say people looked away because they didn't want to seem transphobic.

As covid said, men have been dressing as women to commit crimes forever. This is another example of this not uncommon practice.

The point is that it is not possible to tell a TW from a male criminal dressed in stereotypically female clothing (and we also don't know how this shooter identified...). Therefore the only way to maintain a few limited safe spaces for women is to exclude all men. TRAs argue that men would not dress as women, cases like this show this to be untrue.

it seems wearing women's clothing in this case is quickly being downplayed as a disguise, whereas for minor (non fatal) incidents police state that they are searching for a woman.

I don't think it is being downplayed. it is being reported as it happened. He didn't declare himself a woman. he disguised himself as a woman.

FWIW I don't agree with police stating they are searching for a woman when they are actually searching for a clearly biological male who has declared himself a woman. But that is a separate issue.

Still doesn't prove your point. Dressing as a woman (to disguise yourself) and self ID-ing as a woman (to gain access to women's spaces) aren't the same.