Mail story: Teenage 'trans student who dressed as a dog stabs parents to death and knifes pet golden retriever'

Indeed. And this wasn't contested by anyone at the school, or the education authority, or the clinic that treated her, or the health authority, or any other adult in a position of responsibility?

No one wants to lose their job or risk being ostracised. But I will never understand how this lunacy has so quickly and easily spread around the world and paralysed the people and organisations that could have prevented it.

So a teenager who identifies as a dog and spends time dressed up as a dog... turns out to be a danger to dogs and humans.

I am reminded of Scarlet Blake, who claimed to have multiple personality disorder, one of which was a cat, and who meowed at the jury during his trial for animal cruelty to a cat and murder. Scarlet Blake was also a danger to cats and humans, and was convicted of torturing and killing that cat and murdering a man.

Furries may identify as animals, but they don't necessarily identify with those animals, eh?

Yes, “Jenny” committed a particularly horrible murder of a young man.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-41671870

All in the name of "Be Kind".

ChatGPT is worse than useless as a source here. Waste of time.

Where everything will be upside down and children being converted to trans is the norm.

Are children in the Netherlands allowed go to school dressed up as animals? And does the staff and pupils have to pretend they are a dog/cat etc?

Need to repeat this

We have normalised 'disturbed'.

Made it fun and edgy, being your 'true self'.

'...more transgender people committed homicide than were victims of homicide in Britain in the 21st century. The victim/perpetrator ratio was 0.7 excluding post-imprisonment transitioners.
Without reliable figures on the transgender population, it is unknown whether transgender people were at greater risk of homicide than the population as a whole. If they were at greater risk than the population, however, then we would also conclude—given the victim/perpetrator ratio was less than one—that they were more likely to commit homicide. If the extent of fatal violence suffered by transgender people in Britain is considered to be an epidemic, then the
same epithet applies to the fatal violence inflicted by transgender people.'

My italics.

Extract from Biggs' paper I link upthread:

'Differentiating articles that mentioned that the individual was transgender from those that did not, there is a marked difference between the BBC’s treatment of victims and perpetrators.

Where a transgender person was the victim, the great majority of articles mentioned their trans identity, usually fairly close to the top of the story. The article reporting the conviction of Ghey’s murderers, for example, mentioned this in the second sentence: ‘The 16-year-old, who was transgender, was stabbed 28 times in a ‘ferocious’ attack …’. The sole exception was the reporting on Amy Griffiths. Only one out of three articles mentioned ‘her transgender identity’
(in quoting the judge), and that occurred only in the nineteenth sentence.

Where the transgender person was the perpetrator, by contrast, just under half the articles mentioned the fact that they were transgender. The difference in treatment is statistically significant: the 95% credible interval for the probability of an article on a perpetrator mentioning their transgender identity was 0.34–0.59, while for a victim it was 0.75–0.88 (or 0.67–0.89 omitting Ghey).7 A notable example is Blake. Most articles referred simply to an ‘Oxford woman’. Only a few mentioned that ‘she came out to her parents as transgender at
12’—and then only in the sixth sentence. This fact was added to one article only after complaints from readers (BBC 2024).

Furthermore, in a few cases where a perpetrator’s transgender status was reported, the focus was on them as a victim of suicide. Reports on Jenny
Swift and Rowan Thompson that mentioned their transgender identity focused on their suicide while incarcerated, with headlines such as ‘Transgender woman found dead in cell at HMP Doncaster’. The fact that they had committed murder was mentioned only later in the articles.

In total, then, BBC News produced 4.5 times as many articles mentioning transgender victims as articles mentioning transgender perpetrators (and some of the latter framed them primarily as victims of suicide), even though in reality perpetrators outnumbered victims.'

I've had a quick look at Dutch Reddit and there's some healthy debate going on there, as to whether being a furry was just an inoffensive hobby which had nothing to do with the teenager's being messed up and killing her parents (and it's fine to change your pronouns), or whether it's highly relevant to the crime. And some - How have we got here? posts.

The children dressed as animals apparently sometimes sat on the table and made animal noises:

"Going to school as a ‘furry’
The suspect is said to belong to a group of friends who – according to a number of pupils – sometimes come to school wearing animal ears and a tail as so-called ‘furries’. One pupil said: “They would sometimes sit on the table and make animal noises.”

A friend says she is completely shaken by it all. She had suspected for some time that the teenager was struggling. “He was very nice. Often quiet. But he also had problems. I raised this with the school, but they said the teachers couldn’t do anything about it because he didn’t want to talk about it.”"

Presumably they should have 1) spoken to the parents to see if they were getting help for the teenager, 2) brought in Social Services or some kind of mental health services, it that's possible in the Netherlands.

The disguising actually creates it own problem for amplification - that authorities are lying and concealing the truth. It means that it destroys trust. That's far right and conspiracy theory gold dust. It feeds narratives like two tier justice.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6182901

'Transgender people are often portrayed as especially vulnerable to violence, but estimating victimization rates is difficult because reliable population denominators are lacking. This paper proposes an alternative approach, comparing the ratio of transgender homicide victims to perpetrators. It analyzes all homicides involving transgender people in Britain from 2000 to 2025. Victims were outnumbered by perpetrators, even excluding those who declared a transgender identity after imprisonment. Almost all cases involved natal males identifying as transwomen. The victim-perpetrator ratio among these individuals closely resembles that for males overall and differs markedly from that for females. BBC News published more than four times as many articles on transgender victims as on perpetrators, contributing to perceptions of exceptional vulnerability. '

Article from yesterday's Times......suggestive of what I've already said which is rather than trans crimes being "amplified" by the media, they are actually disguised.

"The story concerned a 21-year-old man called Darren Rigby who had indicated he was preparing to act on his apparent murderous hatred of women and girls. Over the course of a week, in January this year, Rigby sent terrifying messages to three all-girls schools on Merseyside. Rigby told one: “I am on my way… with a revolver and a machete and I’m going to shoot and stab all of your girls. You terfs are going to learn to stop mocking, deadnaming and misgendering transwomen like me.” Terf stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist”, a derogatory term for women who do not accept that biological males can be women.

In another email, Rigby said his intention was “to injure and kill as many girls as I can”. This month at Liverpool crown court Rigby was sentenced to two years and four months in prison after admitting three charges of sending communications threatening death or serious harm. The specific nature of Rigby’s threats was made public during sentencing and there was a BBC reporter present throughout. Despite the newsworthiness of the details revealed in court, the BBC’s write-up of Rigby’s crimes ignored Rigby’s self-declared trans status. His apparent motive, so-called terfs “misgendering” him, was not mentioned. The article didn’t even make clear that Rigby’s violent threats were aimed exclusively at women and girls in single-sex schools. The BBC report bore a striking resemblance to a press release published on the Merseyside police website, which also elided all mention of Rigby’s emails."

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/media/article/bbc-apology-trans-story-darren-rigby-llq3kdqfn

It is also not actually 'kind' in the true meaning of the word.

It is not kind to lie to people about the truth.
It is not kind to force people to lie through manipulation, threats and fear.
It is not kind to create a group of people who think they can 'control the perception of others' and fall apart when someone won't or can't go along with their demands.

Exactly. There are situations where genuinely ethical behaviour is about acknowledging tough facts and taking tough calls.

Thats all been swept away for 'kindness', which as a virtue, needs other virtues to counter it.

'Be kind' strikes me as very often a cowardly position, dressed up as a moral one. It's embraced by people who don't want to engage with anything difficult, they want to make nice noises and pat themselves on the back.

Leaving aside any 'gender' issues, how utterly horrifying it is that this is a genre of violence that has enough instances to discuss percentages like this.

The reason for this madness is the cult of "be kind".

On the surface of course it is better to be kind than be nasty. So objecting to the "be kind" message must automatically make you a bad person.

But the problem is that this message takes priority over reality and facts. The "be kind" message also makes "victim hood" a compelling and preferable goal to "self resilience".

The reality is that this young human girl with XX chromosomes was not a male and was not a dog. Rather than point out these facts, the be kind message not only encouraged her and her friends to live out this madness rather than seek psychological help, it also forces the sane members of society to be brainwashed into accepting something as true which clearly it is not (she's not male and not a dog) all in the name of "be kind".

From an Orwellian 1984 perspective it's all quite chilling.

And this is what happens when obvious signs of mental illness are ignored for the sake of being progressive.

Believing you are something you are not (like a fucking dog) should be an automatic referral to get psychiatric help.

Now we have cctv we should also bring back the asylums. It would create jobs and could be implemented in a way that protects patients.

It's insane.

If we were affirming identity fully then this girl was a dog, and should not have been going to school and her parents should not have been recieving benefits and she should not have been eligible for healthcare. She should go to the vets when needed and this would be fully chargeable.

So everyone involved, can see she is human so what purpose does affirming as a dog serve? This might sound like a silly question and point but it's central to just how insane these ideas are and how glaring the lack of appropriate mental health support is.

The authorities were allowing her to present and identify as a dog. Why? As I say this actually has no end goal and certainly doesn't parallel with the idea that you are who you say you are with sex. This child simultaneously is told she can identify as a boy and if she does, she really is a boy. And then is being positively affirmed as a dog, but is expected to still go to school. Think about this contradiction. Everyone expects her to ultimately grow out of the dog phase and be a human. Otherwise the alternative is a stray dog living on the streets with no notion of wrong or right, just food and sex and animalistic urges.

Whenever you have medical treatment the focus should be as much on the end goal as managing current systems because of the possibilities of long term harm. We don't allow some people some treatments because they have serious side effects or can cause long term harm even if they may help with current symptoms.

This case, regardless of how it's ended in the awful murder of two people, really highlights the screwed up thinking and unethical treatment of a child. Everyone here knows she's not a dog and yet they've continued to fail to challenge the behaviour and address why it is happening and why she shouldn't be doing it. Instead they encouraged it and didn't think about the contradiction between saying yes you can become a man just because you say so and no you can't become a dog just because you say so.

It is massively relevant to point this out. Especially in the context of a mental health crisis in young people. Just today there's a report out on referrals to mental health services for children (front page of BBC news) with anxiety related issues, ADHD and autism significant groups.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyd1l0lge8o

In the UK there is a known clear lack of support and intervention. I don't know about the Dutch system generally but this case strongly suggests this girl falls between the cracks because of her trans identity (the dog affirmation business lays it starkly out). And more generally in the UK we can't explain this rise in our society and why we have a generation struggling to cope. It speaks of a wider cultural issue. The Netherlands is one of our closest cultural matches despite the language difference. Culturally we are a closer match to the Netherlands than the USA.

This isn't a trans related story as such. It's one about mental health provision. This is the lens it should be viewed through because of so many questions about why this girl was being allowed to behave like this and was being encouraged to do so.

This in terms raises inconvenient truths and conversations about trans issues. Not the other way round (this distinction is important). If you were affirming this child and that was the 'right approach' then you should still be saying that behaviour isn't ok and needs mental health support. (This is where we need to have massive conversations about best practices in trans identifying teens and the whole premise of affirmation only as the only practice collapses - remembering this is the model of care so many campaigner are aiming for and see as the goal)

This kid didn't do this because she was trans. This kid did this because she a child showing significant signs of mental distress which were being positively affirmed as ok behaviours. Authorities were cheerleading red flags with red flags. It's a red flag parade.

What about people who killed their parents, and not a mass killing? After all, the furry teen in this post killed her parents, she didn't shoot up her school.

A 'cis' teen would not be pumped full of puberty blockers and then wrong sex hormones their bodies simply are not at all designed to handle. But keep thinking this is about a 'minority' rather than a mass medical scandal. Keep looking in the wrong direction because you don't want to face the facts.

Notable, I think, that the school was allowing children to come to school dressed as dogs - something the left has repeatedly assured us is a lie put about by right-wing outlets.

Dutch schools rarely have uniform or anything other than pretty basic dress codes banning unsafe or objectively offensive clothing, so this aspect was probably not as notable as it might have been in a British school.

The girl seems to have been hugely let down, though. And now two people are dead and the rest of the child's life will be a mess.