Guilty verdict in Brianna Ghey case

"excusing the obviously transphobic comments made by the perpetrators"

I've just read through this entire thread, I don't see anyone excusing anything?
On the contrary, the only thing I can see is posters stating, is how horrific this tragedy is and/or that transphobic comments do not mean the attack was BECAUSE of their trans status.

And the police.

The father's social media is public, all of a fortnight ago he posted a pic of Brianna in 'boy mode' and had relatives 'deadnaming' in their comments by way of condolence, so I think it's fair to say that the mother is probably comfortable with a range of views on this provided they're provided with respect and sympathy.

As for those accusing "TRAs" of point scoring, there's plenty of that on both sides, if you're so convinced the victim being transgender had nothing to do with the crime, why is this discussion even taking place on the Sex and Gender board?

Because TRAs (trans rights activists) have made it about women who speak about women's rights from the outset, because they were point scoring against "terfs" even though this appears to be a senseless murder for thrills by a couple of disturbed teenage kids. That's why. There's even a disgusting and libellous accusation made by India Willoughby today against various prominent GC people.

You have no high ground either. If you don't like it being discussed, maybe you should lead by example.

There have clearly been posters here with an agenda to minimise the role of transphobia in the crime

You mean posts directing to what the prosecution and judge said?

This stood out to me too. I wondered if it just my age to feel so shocked and saddened by it. Such normalisation of cocaine use, at 15. Not even in the context of partying; in the middle of a normal day, just to escape reality.

Are you suggesting the mother of a murdered child isn't perfectly capable of deciding for herself based on what she reads here whether she thinks MN is a transphobic site or not? Why do you think "TRAs" must have told her what to think like she doesn't have a brain and eyes and opinions of her own?

As for those accusing "TRAs" of point scoring, there's plenty of that on both sides, if you're so convinced the victim being transgender had nothing to do with the crime, why is this discussion even taking place on the Sex and Gender board? There have clearly been posters here with an agenda to minimise the role of transphobia in the crime, including excusing the obviously transphobic comments made by the perpetrators, or trying to pretend that using transphobia to dehumanise their victim makes it less transphobic somehow. You have no high ground here.

We should also remember that whilst a verdict has been given, we still await the sentencing hearing.

I cant emphasise this enough, that this whole concept of 'being true to your self', 'being your whole self/true self', counts just as much for little thugs or violent or warped people as much as wanting to be accepted and included or benign differences.

And this is the whole problem with it.

I dont think people with personality disorders or anti social traits or inappropriate views of the world should be 'true to themselves', they need to change to fit in with the rest of society safely and positively.

Its pretty much a non-point from an understandably emotional woman which posters are now trying to weaponise. Its awful, but it doesn't necessarily say more than she was upset by something she read.

YY.

This.

Yes she mentioned MN.

It doesn't mean that MN is more problematic. Or more transphobic.
It just means she had been on MN. We don't know if she had been on other social media.
She was upset by MN. We don't know if she'd have been upset if she'd seen something elsewhere.

Its pretty much a non-point from an understandably emotional woman which posters are now trying to weaponise. Its awful, but it doesn't necessarily say more than she was upset by something she read.

Its effectively similar to an ancedote v a substantied piece of evidence: meaningless on an level beyond an individual recounting a story and their emotions, but not necessarily based in legal issues nor reflective of content on the internet.

People going on about it have an agenda they want to drive.

Are you suggesting that a mother of a transgender child would not be aware of the TRAs view of MN as a “transphobic site”?

AYOG?

Yes to this. We talk about safeguarding a lot, other sites / platforms can be more brutal.

Well I guess that she mentioned MN because that's where the post she found was on.

Are you suggesting that a bereaved mother gave a quote to a pathetic local newspaper in order to further a TRA objective against MN?

AYOG?

Talking to someone else about this we were speculating about what has changed so much since we were teenagers. There is now more violence, especially more use of knives, than we ever heard about. There has been much talk of internet access but the other thing that has changed is drug use. Yes there were drugs around when we were teenagers but it didnt start at such a young age as it does now and was not as widespread, in part because not all teenagers had the money.

The verdict was pretty predictable, I dont see how anyone could listen to/ read about the planning of the murder and not want to see both children locked up.

It's not really all that relevant, as the mother of a murdered child she is bound to find the discussion of most aspects upsetting, and certainly not without evidence of what it was that upset her, so I'm not sure why you're continuing to push it.

It's perpetuating misinformation about the many women on this site who care about women's rights and child safeguarding. I promise there is far more objectionable stuff on Twitter from all sides.

Why do you think she mentioned a site that TRAs have long targeted, rather than other sites where there has been similar or worse discussions?

Yet she mentioned Mumsnet in particular.

I'm not passing comment on MN compared to other platforms at all. It was what she mentioned though.

The previous FWR thread on this was respectful and I believe nominated for deletion by regulars because a troll kept trying to link to sites speculating about the defendants' identities which could have causee issues for the legal case, then trying to derail by arguing about why they should be able to discuss unfounded speculation.

I could see that starting to happen, then I didn't read for a couple of days and when I returned it had gone.

Yet she mentioned MN, and not WG comments, Twitter or FB.

Do you honestly think there wouldn't be equally or more upsetting things posted on those platforms? This isn't helping anyone.

Yes there was agenda pushing from a few TRAs

Mostly though posters were respectful but did argue against the take of IW and others

The mother is bound to be upset by anything which is not wholly eulogising her child. It is inevitable when she has suffered such a tragedy.

But that is not enough reason not to discuss all aspects of the case, the safeguarding implications, the route which led to this outcome, etc. There is a reason why the victim or bereaved does not set the sentence. Absolutely, their views must be heard and considered, but they must be weighed against all the facts.

Yet she mentioned MN, and not WG comments, Twitter or FB. That was what prompted me to post.