"We" can always tell

If you do it, I'll judge you. It's that simple.

Removed from the "list", when we know how these kind of lists have gone in the past shows how far gone you all are. A list of the unworthy. Frightening.

I've said my piece. I think this whole thread and the excuses about labelling that poor woman a man is awful. Won't be replying again. You know what I think of you all.

I've said my piece. I think this whole thread and the excuses about labelling that poor woman a man is awful. Won't be replying again. You know what I think of you all.

We don't know the reason(s) she was removed from the list and then added back.

We do know the reason that there was doubt - the courts and police have a history of providing inaccurate information which is then relayed by the media.

The solution is to report sex accurately.

Yes and it was a woman who was murdered. It's disgusting behaviour.

That MN rethink whether they want to be a hub for behaviour that includes going off site to harass the family of a murder victim and write awful posts about the victim herself because they think she is trans.

One woman. Judged as a man because of the way she looked, is one too many.

One woman. Judged as a man because of the way she looked, is one too many.

It’s a list of dead women. Murdered by men. Sex is relevant.

The position of needing to have clear data to analyse to understand male violence against women?

No you're not. You choose that position.

In front of greiving relatives, or in a nasty way, of course not.

But Never? Why not?

And for how long is that prohibition in place?

Whose interests are served by making sex unsayable?

Any other meaningful questions one can no longer ask?

No you're not. You choose that position.

The point is that no one should be questioning the sex of a dead person.

As I said in the same post you replied to:

As you will of course know from reading this thread, I have made no bones that the behaviour of the people who actually harassed the victim's family was deeply shitty.

So I consider your statement

Using the poor behaviour of men and TRAs as an excuse to justify the abuse this woman suffered even after death

To be manipulative and dishonest

No one is excusing abuse.

You are dishonestly conflating women on FWR noting the reason people now question whether a woman in the news is in fact female is that people reported as women are not always now female with abuse of a specific woman by other people on a different site.

Unfortunately we are unavoidably placed in that situation if we need to collect data and there is reason to doubt the integrity of the information available.

The point is that no one should be questioning the sex of a dead person.

As I said in the same post you replied to:

As you will of course know from reading this thread, I have made no bones that the behaviour of the people who actually harassed the victim's family was deeply shitty.

So I consider your statement

Using the poor behaviour of men and TRAs as an excuse to justify the abuse this woman suffered even after death

To be manipulative and dishonest

No one is excusing abuse.

You are dishonestly conflating women on FWR noting the reason people now question whether a woman in the news is in fact female is that people reported as women are not always now female with abuse of a specific woman by other people on a different site.

I haven't "condemned women as abusers".

I'm pointing out the tactic of "look what you made me do" is - as too many women know - straight out of an abusers charter.

You are also hugely minimising what happened as "considering" or "reacting rationally".

A private musing to yourself is one thing. Posting publicly on social media that you think this poor woman is a man, often not with neutral or considered language, because of her appearance is extremely distasteful - for many reasons - and extremely distressing for her family.

Using the poor behaviour of men and TRAs as an excuse to justify the abuse this woman suffered even after death is just... To me I can't even fathom that mindset.

I disagree with your framing of women considering that someone reported as a "woman" may in fact be male because we know know this sometimes happens as "poor behaviour". I consider your framing to be manipulative and that your holding that view exhibits bias about the value of women's own needs, rights and social identity.

You, of course, do not have to agree.

As you will of course know from reading this thread, I have made no bones that the behaviour of the people who actually harassed the victim's family was deeply shitty.

But those are different people.

You are condemning women as abusers simply for reacting rationally to the knowledge that sometimes people reported as women are male.

This issue is wholly created by news outlets and the police reporting Men as Women.

So nobody can trust a single reort of 'woman did or had done to' any more.

And an onslaught of 'That's not a woman' is bound to result in people pulling stuff UNTIL THEY FIND OUT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Which is exactly what KIS did here.