AIBU to be annoyed by this?

[falcon]

We recently had an attack on a woman here in Glasgow, she was viciously assaulted and it's getting the appropriate publicity.

However what annoys me is that in every report they refer to the woman as a prostitute.

Does it really matter if she's a prostitute or a 'respectable' finance manager?

Is she of less importance because of her job?I think not, so why must they constantly make mention of it when they could just say 29 year old woman instead?

I understand it's of course relevant to the police and their enquries, but perhaps not so relevant to the general public.

It seems to me that it's almost a way of saying, it didn't happen to one of us, we nice normal respectable people.

see your 'most' dittany? most important.

and we have no such onus, btw, the burden is on our police force to catch the person, man or woman, who has murdered this person. the would-be jessica fletchers can chatter all they like on the internet, their schoolgirlish understanding of this one particular unknown criminal's behaviour will never actually haunt them.

interesting, though, that the sex worker's job is irrelevant at the same time as being the very reason that she died according to inspector mable of the yard. you can see the quandary...

truth be told, dittany, i think mable's opinions on here have been idiotically simplistic wrt This Particular Crime. she has jumped to all sorts of conclusions about This Particular Criminal that she has no right to without at least qualifying her statements as being her own opinion rather than fact.

and you are being v boring about the mysogyny... read what i've written on this thread, about women who work in the sex industry, and particularly about This Crime. i've never disputed that many of these types of crimes are conducted by men who hate women, just that mable's assessment of this particular criminal, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, is farcical.

and as for schoolgirlish... her name is mable, i'm working on the premise that that when she was in the sixth form doing her criminology a-level, she was a girl, and therefore a schoolgirl.

i haven't even tried to pose a counter-argument, you annoying woman, in fact i've acknowledged on at least two occasions that she may well be right.

what i don't concede is that she is automatically correct in her assertion about this particular case BECAUSE SHE DOES NOT AND CANNOT KNOW. none of us do.

ffs, that's what justice is all about, we WAIT until we have all sides of the story before coming to a decision. we don't just pile in and say of an unknown assailant that "the killer is not killing prostitutes because he hates prostitutes, he hates women, it's just that it's EASIER to kill prostitutes! So to report that it's just prostitutes that are being killed IS irrelevant."

he might just hate this particular woman because she might have done him a terrible wrong, he might not know her at all. only god and mable know, apparently.

and the woman's profession? relevant or not? according to mable, both irrelevant and the very reason she was killed. [double]

Hi just butting in again, sorry about my posts yesterday was reading through them and they just didn't come out right at all, sorry for any offence I caused.

Did anyone read today's Sun? It was a bit similair trying to demean the victim. It was about a 17YO girl who was murdered and chopped up by her BF in Brazil it was all sympathetic at the end then at the end it said

'Cara went to Brazil last year was under a 2 year ASBO in Britain'

Why is that relevant?

because you get what you pay for.

Hi exterminAitch !

I was thinking about our debate (slightly onesided as I have learnt to bow down to your superior wordplay )

But I am intrequed as to how much you would defend your profession-

you seem to view the newspaper industry as a moneymaking scheme, that will write anything to sell a story and see the customers as wanting to hear only what they all ready think

from your replies you are obviously intellegent and have morals (as I'm sure you will agree not all of your peers have)

so why do you want to write in an industry that pretends to convey the truth yet twists it to ensure a readership?]

I am not trying to start an argument but a really interested

ps tell us who you write for!

apologies for any typos I have had a bad bad day

i don't have to defend my profession any more than a lawyer/estate agent/doctor etc has to defend theirs...

i'm not telling you who i write for, but as i said before i don't work in news. the area i work in is easy-peasy straight up and honest, my ethics are unimpeachable.

oh, and i sincerely think every single one of my peers has morals. they may not be the same as yours, however.

fair enough I was just interested!

I wouldn't bother defending my profession either - mainly coz I am sick to death of it and want to do anything else

i am struggling to think of a easy and honest area in the paper..? weather ummm
travel ? sport deffo not ? umm health - depends who else your working for! economics/money no no no...advertising Ha ha... arts etc ? possibly ???

you're twisting what aitch is saying

most journalists aren't like (the picture you paint) at all. I happen to know a rather fine news journalist who would never ever report a factual news story incorrectly.

I think there are areas of news (like politics) which are open to interpretation.

In fact, Matthew Parris had an interesting column last week about this (have commented on this on a political thread somewhere on mumsnet) about Cameron's bike being stolen outside Tesco. He was saying that had that been Brown, with the week he was having, that some papers would have reported it as Brown being a twat for not securing his bike properly. A lot of it is interpretation and yes, that can depend on the paper or the journalist at hand.

But I think in these crime stories, it's a different matter and reports are made based on facts released by the police and often, the first hand family or friends' stories which people often say they don't read but actually pour over.

I agree Mamadiva, can't see the relevance of the dead girl's ASBO to her case.

But I can see the relevance of the dead woman's job to the case at the heart of this thread.

Also FWIW I completely agree with ExterminAitch. Although not a counter-argument as such, in a previous post I identified reasons why a man may murder prostitutes, that are not necessarily all about hating women. That could certainly be a factor but certainly not the only one! Until all the facts are heard and psychological reports are completed, none of us would know why this man killed this prosititute, including a judge and jury. Until then, all we can do is assume which is down to our personal opinions.

I don't really have it in for journalists - some of my best friends are......

to be fair Oi you were slamming the industry more than I was!

and come on - I have been in the paper twice for really innocuous rubbish and both times I was misquoted - one of the words I had to ask DH what it meant!!

she wasn't slamming it, she just wasn't expecting it to be something it isn't.

Aitch if what you said is true perhaps wrong wording for that statement about the MNer.

oh fuck shit yes. i'll ask for it to be deleted.

I'm sure everyone will understand Aitch thought it was a pun joke, then realised you wouldnt do that.

Am sure everyone will understand.

Should have read my own post sorry for repeating himself.

i've reported it. wasn't really thinking about the wording, iykwim?

myself rather was distracted by phone.

Know what you mean Aitch don't worry about it.