Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be glad the Guardian have stopped describing the school shooter as a woman?

265 replies

Greatly · 28/03/2023 10:48

They headlined with the shooter being a woman yesterday.

Today of course we learn the shooter is transgender.

They would have known this yesterday.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
PSNonsense · 28/03/2023 11:31

TheHoover · 28/03/2023 11:29

More swooping in on trans criminality by people desperate to add currency to their arguments

Damn these women calling out double standards!

drspouse · 28/03/2023 11:31

I noticed the BBC gave the first name but used no pronouns.

sst1234 · 28/03/2023 11:32

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheHoover · 28/03/2023 11:33

Er….OP thought the shooter was a biological male identifying as a woman

Tealsofa · 28/03/2023 11:34

PuttingDownRoots · 28/03/2023 11:04

It appears the shooter was biologically female.

It also appears that they referred to themselves as male... and the precedent is that preferred pronouns and names should be used.

Or we could concentrate more on the tragedy that three 9yos didn't go home last night, plus three staff members.

No one is saying its not an absolute tragedy that there has been yet another shooting and lives have been lost

What we are saying, is that yet again men are treated differently to women

MTF trans? Female
FTM trans? Female

sst1234 · 28/03/2023 11:34

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

morekidsthanhands · 28/03/2023 11:35

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

No pun intended.

BellePeppa · 28/03/2023 11:37

So if the shooter had been biologically male but identified (in name only) as a woman would they have been reported as one of the very few women shooters? If there had been no female shooters before would they have been described as the first ever female shooter? It’s all such nonsense. It’s a terrible tragedy for the families, it must be seriously frightening sending your children to school in the US.

fainallyhere · 28/03/2023 11:39

This reply has been deleted

We don't believe that this was posted in good faith.

tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 28/03/2023 11:46

She wasn’t transgender, she used male pronouns on social media. Slag men off all you like, this shooter was female.

//

But those pronouns mean they identify as male so therefore make that person a man surely? Just like Isla Bryson was definitely clearly a woman?

Or am I just confused? Or are pronouns just meaningless bollocks?

tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 28/03/2023 11:48

News reports suggest she hadn’t transitioned.

//

Ah but apparently this is irrelevant. If you feel it you are it.

tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 28/03/2023 11:48

PSNonsense · 28/03/2023 11:21

Or we could concentrate more on the tragedy that three 9yos didn't go home last night, plus three staff members.

OR, accept that people can care about the abhorrent killing of innocent children/staff members AND be bothered by the emerging double standards that male offenders are referred to as she/her if they identify as a 'woman' by using pronouns, wearing a wig, pink leggings or merely just saying so, yet a woman using male pronouns is still regarded to be a woman.

It's not difficult to do both, at the same time.

👏

railwaysleepervegpatch · 28/03/2023 11:49

Greatly · 28/03/2023 10:48

They headlined with the shooter being a woman yesterday.

Today of course we learn the shooter is transgender.

They would have known this yesterday.

How could you have read so little about an event before creating a post? This just screams of wanting to create yet another post about TWAW are are not as seems to be your point and you even got that wrong. Ask for this to be deleted. Get yourself better informed and try again.

Brefugee · 28/03/2023 11:56

Get yourself better informed and try again.

the first report i heard said "women" and i was surprised because it is hugely rare. It actually didn't cross my mind that it might be a transwoman.

Then i read an article this morning saying that the shooter was indeed a biological woman but went under a male name and used he/him pronouns.

Convention, if reports of trans prisoners etc are a benchmark (hint: they are) is that the shooter be referred to as a man.

If we are now going to use biological sex, that is fine but it must be done consistently. Or we can use the words trans man and trans woman. That would confuse some people who aren't clear what the biological sex of a trans man is. (for eg)

HTH

Gincan · 28/03/2023 11:59

From what I've read, the police first reported her as being a female shooter so that's what all the news reports referred to her as. It then transpired that she used male pronouns on her social media (I think just on one profile)

How she actually identified seems a bit of a grey area. I think it was a genuine misunderstanding. It's all a bit confusing, but definitely a biologically female shooter.

railwaysleepervegpatch · 28/03/2023 11:59

The first report YOU Heard. I wasn't talking to you

HTH

Rowthe · 28/03/2023 12:05

Beamur · 28/03/2023 11:02

She wasn’t transgender, she used male pronouns on social media. Slag men off all you like, this shooter was female

I'm pretty sure using pronouns that are incongruent to your sex puts you under the trans umbrella.

She was transgender using the current definition.

But the emphasis is that she was a woman.

It doesnt make any sense to me, because if it was a transwoman- they would have been reported as a woman shooter also.

Maybe the trans lobby dont want to be associated with a child shooter?

Blossomtoes · 28/03/2023 12:06

But those pronouns mean they identify as male so therefore make that person a man surely?

No, they make that person a woman pretending to be a man.

PSNonsense · 28/03/2023 12:06

Blossomtoes · 28/03/2023 12:06

But those pronouns mean they identify as male so therefore make that person a man surely?

No, they make that person a woman pretending to be a man.

Exactly such is the nonsense that is gender ideology.

LadyWindermeresOnlyFans · 28/03/2023 12:08

it is the 89th such event in a US school. So i will continue to treat these tragic events in the same way they are treated in the US: it's just something that happens.

My God. This is breathtaking. So callous.

And disingenuous. You're not treating it as just something that happens: you're gleefully grabbing on to an opportunity to disparage trans people.

Horrible, horrible thread.

MsJD · 28/03/2023 12:10

Perhaps if no details were ever released about the shooters, it would help reduce the frequency of the shootings

Brefugee · 28/03/2023 12:10

No, they make that person a woman pretending to be a man.

but that's not what is in question here.

What is in question is why when it is a trans woman the news reports are all about "woman" and "she" but it seems when the shooter is a trans man (as using he/him pronouns would indicate) the shooter is "woman" and "she".

That's not consistent. And I'm aware that this case is difficult because the actual gender of the shooter can't be reliably given. In this one case.

MissGroves · 28/03/2023 12:11

Why does this awful tragedy have to be turned into an issue with gender? People have lost their lives, loved ones and other seem to only see the tragedy as another area to battle about gender issues (uninformed people at that!) turning it all about themselves.

A little respect people. I can see why this site gets the rep it does.

PSNonsense · 28/03/2023 12:13

MissGroves · 28/03/2023 12:11

Why does this awful tragedy have to be turned into an issue with gender? People have lost their lives, loved ones and other seem to only see the tragedy as another area to battle about gender issues (uninformed people at that!) turning it all about themselves.

A little respect people. I can see why this site gets the rep it does.

It's the reporting of it, not trans people themselves. If you read some of the posts in this thread you'd know that.

Brefugee · 28/03/2023 12:14

My God. This is breathtaking. So callous.

And disingenuous. You're not treating it as just something that happens: you're gleefully grabbing on to an opportunity to disparage trans people.

bollocks i am. It is hugely tragic and devastation. It is the 89th event this year. 88 of them went by pretty much unnoticed. Unremarked. Once Sandy Hook happened and the US (in general, i am aware that individuals there have different ideas) is not prepared to change their batshit gun laws to stop it. So in that respect i will treat it as yet another shooting, yet another completely preventable set of individual tragedies that i am not going to focus on because i'd go mad. 89 of them. We haven't had 89 days yet this year i think.

And again since you don't appear to have grasped the actual conversation: it is about consistent reporting of the gender of people in press reports. That is important.

As it happens i have a lot of sympathy and empathy for trans people. I do want the press to be consistent though