Female school shooter?

This was already discussed. https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5232045-female-school-shooter?reply=140651121

You understood what was meant though? Female person. The 'mis-ageing' is not the main point here.

“Everyone” isn’t.

Why is everyone referring to a schoolchild as a woman?

I personally think it's in bad taste to start transvestigating someone immediately in the aftermath of such an awful crim

I personally find just about every aspect of this bonkers movement in bad taste, particularly pink leggings and grotesque fake breasts. Oh and fishnet tights.

So it is just news about women that you fact check so thoroughly then

This is because transmen aren't taking sporting trophies from men, nor are they warping the shoplifting and TV Licence non-payment (back when you could be jailed for that) offending figures to make it look like more men are committing these crimes than really are.

because the transgender issue is so important to you all.

Wrong. Women not being defamed as a class by having more murders and rapes ascribed to us than we actually carry out is important. I don't care whether Isla Bryson was reported as female because he identified as such, or because he lied about his gender identity when he was arrested, or because the custody sergeant ticked the wrong box by mistake. I care that a man's crime was wrongfully ascribed to a woman.

why the shooter did what they did

Can you not see how sex is absolutely critical to understanding that? Can you not see how being raised as a boy and having typically male levels of testosterone would substantially alter the likely motives of a male shooter compared to a female shooter?

I find it crass that you are exploiting this tragedy to tell women to sit down and shut up about the routine gaslighting we are abused with every time a violent criminal is reported falsely as being a woman.

I agree with the police man who said there is more important information about this crime and whether somone is transgender or not should be the first thing or the main thing people should be asking about. I find it crass.

People are trying to make sense of an unfathomable tragedy - if the police describe the perpetrator as female, it's reasonable to check what language they are speaking in to be able to understand the facts of the situation.

If the police genuinely believed the perpetrator being female is irrelevant to the case, they wouldn't have included this information in their statement.

The fact that they stated she was female but that whether or not she is trans is irrelevant suggests that they want everyone else to accept that their secret definition of female is the one we should all accept as fact, despite the fact we don't know what they actually mean by female.

I'm checking news reports that don't fit with established statistical patterns for violent offending by the sex of offender.

Violent and sexual offences are committed by men 93% and 95% of the time. Where such an offence is reported as being committed by a woman, I check whether the press are lying, because we have seen many times that they are.

Whether the offender is trans or merely pretending to be trans to get a lighter sentence is unknown to me and also irrelevant. I am interested in correcting the record when male pattern violent crimes are committed by men and blamed upon women.

What kind of person accuses women who are protecting themselves against institutional gaslighting of being transphobic for doing so?

Once again, questioning a press report is not the same as contradicting it.

i'm wondering if you would find it 'crass' if a man is sent to a woman's prison.

Because this is the whole point of trans ideology. That sex is irrelevant.

How do you square that sex is irrelevant on one hand, and that 98% of all sex crimes are committed by only one sex, on the other?

Well there was I working hard to safeguard women and children, knowing that biological sex is crucial for safeguarding and every time it is concealed or falsified the risks of future safeguarding failures increase. Hard work but feeling it was more than worth it.

But then I found out some people consider that crass.

Oh no!!! Crass!!

Oh wait, actually I have no fucks left to give. 🥱

I find it crass

More crass than the multiple examples of the crimes of males being reported as women’s crimes?

Do you want some Duraglit for that halo?

So it is just news about women that you fact check so thoroughly then because the transgender issue is so important to you all.

I personally think it's in bad taste to start transvestigating someone immediately in the aftermath of such an awful crim when more focus should be given to the victims, impact on the community and why the shooter did what they did. I agree with the police man who said there is more important information about this crime and whether somone is transgender or not should be the first thing or the main thing people should be asking about. I find it crass.

Not just the crime ones, no. I also fact check sports reports, sporting accolades and other awards made to women.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to ensure our sex is represented accurately by the media and police.

I personally sense check every article that mentions a woman, and wonder if it's the bepenised women they're talking about. It's tiresome, it would be nice if they just told the truth.

However when it's things like crimes or sports where men are more likely to rape / murder/ punch on average 162% harder then obviously it becomes more obvious when they're lying.

Are you collectively checking the truthfulness of every news report or only the ones where women commit crimes incase they're transgender?

Yes, indeed, this is one of the few places where people can still be found who can read beyond the headlines. Thus we are as you see.

For example, a few years back, before I ever became an active poster here, a neighbour messaged me a link to a shocking story of a female paedophile in our home town, being covered in the national tabloids. When I clicked on her link, it was a news report in the Daily Mail concerning a child predator who had been given an extremely lenient sentence. The comments below the article were full of men saying that this offender's sentence was proof that women were treated too softly by the judiciary and that a man would never have walked free with a suspended sentence.

However, the offender was male and had committed the offences before disclosing to anyone that he had gender dysphoria. He had only taken on a traditionally female name after being arrested for child abuse. Nevertheless, as a result of his decision post-arrest, the headline reported the case as an instance of a woman abusing children, cue the aforementioned posts from angry men's rights activists.

Note to mods and other MNers: Mumsnet has previously stated that MNers do not have to respect the pronouns of convicted sex offenders. I have chosen to use male pronouns here as
i) I am referring to a convicted sex offender, and;
ii) I am referring to an unnamed, unidentified sex offender.

Given that doing so bears an unsettling resemblance to the Trumpist/Muskian false narratives claiming the shooter was trans which immediately sprang up in the wake of the incident, I distinctly doubt that.

And if you are visually-impaired, you are screwed because you can't see the photo. Did anyone at IPSO carry out an Equality Impact Assessment before imposing this policy?

If they did do an Equality Impact Assessment, they should have taken into account the protected characteristic of philosophical belief and included a translation to biological sex for GC readers.

It's fundamentally unfair to describe an event using language that only one religion/belief group finds meaningful while the rest of us are left in the dark wondering what it all means and what the hell actually happened.

Nope. It's because 93% of murders are carried out by men and the press will lie by calling male murderers "women" on request, so when we are told that a woman has murdered, we question whether the press are lying again.

The press and the police...

I feel like America has become so numb to school shootings. I'm old enough to remember the seismic event that Columbine was and how much discussion and national mourning there was afterwards. Now school shootings just seem to evaporate out of the media after a few hours without any introspection about how or why

These days you really do have to read between the lines in newspaper reports until you see a photo.

And if you are visually-impaired, you are screwed because you can't see the photo. Did anyone at IPSO carry out an Equality Impact Assessment before imposing this policy?

OMG! How dare we try to «checks notes» verify the truthfulness of a news report.

As "fake news" goes, claiming that a man is a woman is pretty fake.