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

[Greatly]

They headlined with the shooter being a woman yesterday.

Today of course we learn the shooter is transgender.

They would have known this yesterday.

Absolutely!

Women are just what men say we are. It’s sickening

Sorry, meant to quote you

I think he was addressing a business event, doing what he was planning, and maybe didn't know the news had cut to him for live comment

stitch up? i don't have a high opinion of him but I don't think he intended for the world to see him chatting about ice cream rather than what just happened.

Hopefully that's what happened.

After watching them in New Zealand the weekend and the media and politicians in lockstep with their narrative, I think expect anything.

The reason why many women on MN are talking about this, is because they've seen or worse, been the target of threats of violence from TRAs which have gone unchallenged by public figures and people in positions of authority. For a number of years there's been considerable concern that it would eventually tip over into more extreme violence (than that we've already seen).

The concern is that, it is the first step in predicted escalation.

Whether that's a fear that has grounds to be taken seriously is open to debate and we can't make a judgement about without actual evidence.

If you can't destroy the children with the methods made illegal in that state, find an alternative?

"Today of course we learn the shooter is transgender." Not sure why you have said "of course" and tbh the only thing that I have been thinking about are the lives lost, the utter terror that pupils and staff would have gone through. When will America, the country that purports to cares so much about the rights of the unborn do something to prevent the unending loss of life in school shootings. Imagine saying goodbye to your child in the morning and telling them you hope they have a good day at school only to find out that they have been murdered there. Sickening and incomprehensible.

No they are not saying that. They are saying - it's fucking INCONSISTENT and the very INCONSISTENCY speaks to the inherent confusion, illogicality and misogyny of the TRA.

According to BBC, she was using male pronouns online, so not identifying as a trans man?

Imagine saying goodbye to your child in the morning and telling them you hope they have a good day at school only to find out that they have been murdered there. Sickening and incomprehensible

Then imagine that the murderer was inspired to violence by an extremist rhetoric but the media was uncomfortable with that particular narrative so they created a Kafkaesque reporting style, mangled with riddles so that nobody could speak of the hatred without being accused of being the monster?

No it isn't "nuff said". If a mother had a son who was a trans woman and who died or committed an act of violence, and she then described that child as a "man", then she'd be called a Terf, accused of dead-naming him, and generally be denied the right by the TRA to her own view of her own child.

Can you not see how inconsistent this is?? And how that inconsistency/double standard erodes women's rights even further?

Of course this person was a woman. Isla B is a man. But saying the latter, is a CRIME in Scotland.

Imagine saying goodbye to your child in the morning and telling them you hope they have a good day at school only to find out that they have been sexually abused by being shown age inappropriate materials and gaslighted about biological reality at school by Teachers, that lead to sterilisation and mutilation.

The BBC is absolutely no voice of independence on the trans agenda.

@anythinginapinch is correct.

No-one is trying to wiggle out of the fact that this particular killer was a woman, who identified as a man. On the contrary - we are glad that it is correctly reported (at least I am). What we are saying is that this accuracy in reporting the sex of a criminal - especially a violent, murderous or sexually abusive criminal - should be extended to EVERY case.

Men will always be men, and women will always be women, and this needs to be acknowledged publicly by politicians, newspapers and organisations.

By all means, smash the gender stereotypes, wear what you want, call yourself by any name you want, but NO-ONE CHANGES SEX, and this needs to be acknowledged.
.

we don't believe this individual biologically was a man at all. Because that's daft

this individual as a biological female committed a crime with male pronouns they absolutely are a man

Like I said, make up your mind.

They are over represented by trans at the BBC.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41265644.amp

Dinner** I'm taking the piss out of the inconsistency of it

She is a woman. She may have had her behaviour effected by testosterone but she is a woman. Her trans-ID may have been a red flag for mental illness that should have prevented the purchase of weapons but she is a woman.
Like male criminals are men.

It’s all too early. Just have some respect.

I forgot to come back to this. This is trotted out after every mass shooting. "it is too soon to talk about gun control"
When we move on (horribly quickly) nobody wants to talk about gun control

And now added to the too soon to talk about gun control, it is too soon to talk about the press getting a grip of themselves and reporting properly (biological sex followed by gender if their gender identity doesn't match that? using the word trans where appropriate? i don't know. pick one and stick to it)

blimey, this is shocking

How Rare Is It for a Woman to Commit a Mass Shooting? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

"Most mass shooting suspects are male.
In a database of 172 U.S. shootings involving at least four victims over the last five and a half decades, all but 4 of the perpetrators were male."

There's actually been a lot.of research done into this and current the recommendation is that when these mass shootings are covered as little attention as possible is paid to the shooter and the focus is on the victims.

Paying attention to the shooter, especially 'trying to understand why' glorified then, and gives them status which, in turn, can motivate others to carry out these kinds of horrendous acts. Many (if not most) mass shooters reference previous shooters, going back to Columbine. We (wider society) don't need to know their motivation. We need them to be ignored and forgotten and their victims remembered.

https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2021/03/25/981170871/npr-standards-need-more-clarity-around-when-to-name-a-mass-shooter

This!

Some transactivists online are openly celebrating. Others are upset that more people weren’t killed

Where is this happening? Can you provide a link @Boudicasbeard ?

There is a mega thread about Nashville on Reddit 's r/trans. Post after post expresses sorrow, heartbreak for the victims and their families, anger and determination that "this shooter does not represent us".

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-study-shows-link-between-domestic-violence-radicalisation-risk-2021-11-25/

If you ignore why, you miss out on this kind of data.