Is the Trans shooter in Nashville Male or Female?

[Tradeup]

The murderer who came in and killed 3 children and 3 adults is trans and called Audrey, I am confused as to their biological sex.

@AllOfThemWitches
I'm not sure what you mean by discussing his mental health.

I meant that terrorism and mass murder are such extreme forms of violence and so unusual (outside the USA) that we would want to find out as much as we could to, for example, help us identify people (ok, men) who might pose that sort of danger in the future. Rape and child abuse are horrendous but very common crimes. We know a lot about such perpetrators - that's how we recognise red flags in behaviour and why we implement safeguarding protocols. We've learnt. Like we've learned that there is a link between domestic abusers and terrorists, as I said in my previous post.

I'm not disagreeing with you. Frankly, my point is, had it been established that this shooter was biologically male, I don't think as many people would be pondering his potential neurological disorders or mental ill health. I think it would boil down to 'he's a bad man.' Obviously, people are going to say that's wrong but I'm basing the opinion on previous threads.

People keep saying there is a link between domestic abusers and terrorists, which is true, but as most domestic abusers nonetheless (fortunately) do not go on to commit acts of mass murder, I am not sure how much use this insight is. It doesn't allow us to predict anything very much, as far as I can see.

@AllOfThemWitches

Frankly, my point is, had it been established that this shooter was biologically male, I don't think as many people would be pondering his potential neurological disorders or mental ill health.

But this shooter was biologically female, which is vanishingly rare statistically and therefore has shocked people more than hearing of a male shooter which has lead to them asking more / different questions than they normally would.

It doesn't make the individual deaths of the poor victims any more or less shocking than in other murders, but it is extremely rare (a female mass shooter, let alone school shooter) so of course people's responses are different to situations that are absolutely equally tragic but less unusual.

There have been discussions about the motivations and triggers of male violence on here. However male violence is so common that there does not really need to be the same conversations over and over again as the causes are already pretty much well established

This particular case is very different in that it was carried out by a female which is very very rare, so of course their will be questions raised about how it could have happened.

It's really not that difficult to understand

There was quite a bit of discussion about neurodivergence and violence in the US because a number of fairly recent shooters had autism (Sandy Hook, Parkland, Colorado theatre) and lots of dicussion of bullying ever since Columbine - and it has come up over and over with many of the school shootings by young men. There is a common theme that amny of these young adults who kill have struggled socially, struggled with mental health, struggled to transition to adulthood, struggled with relationships, and have dealt with a lot of bullying, rejection etc. Obviously healthy happy people don't shoot people but I am not sure how one would know in most cases that their family member or friend would snap.

It keeps saying ‘she’ and even her friend is saying ‘she’.

Surely if she was transgender her friends would be saying ‘he’.

Why even mention that she is transgender if they’re going to keep calling her by her biological sex anyway.

The Trans Activist Network (apologies if I haven’t got that title exactly accurate) posted in response to the shooting. Basically their message was, ‘look what you made us do, give us what we want, or we’ll do it again’, all wrapped up in a message sending condolences to the families. There’s also been activity online from TRA’s celebrating the incident, calling for more, and expressing regret that more people weren’t killed. The shooter also had a manifesto in which she detailed her whole intended route, so it’s entirely possible that more people would have been killed had she not been stopped. The shooter attended the school, which is linked to the American Presbyterian Church, members of which have been very vocally anti trans, so that’s likely at least part of the reason they were targeted. And on 1st April, TRA’s are planning a ‘day of vengeance’. So it’s a bit simplistic to mock and suggest that it’s about individuals feeling vulnerable, when in fact it’s something akin to a call to arms.

And as for your assertion that she, and other shooters should be addressed as ‘it’. What do you think will be the likely outcome of using language that targets and dehumanises any section of the community ? Why do you think the government was criticised a few weeks back for using dehumanising language when referring to asylum seekers ? Because it makes it easier to whip up public sentiment that suits your own narrative - think Germany in the 1930s. Referring to the Jews, or any other minority whose existence ‘offended’ them, using similar language allowed the Nazis to enlist the support of the German people in setting them apart, and then the killing began. No matter how strongly you feel, you can’t allow yourself to be sucked in otherwise you become part of the problem.

Who are the brownshirts again?

The families participating in the church and school including her parents are allowed their own world view and beliefs as was the shooter.

The shooter was 28, she could have gone off and live her best life believing whatever she liked.

Many families don't agree on politics, religion and all sorts.

You can't go around punching 70 year old women and throwing fluids at 5 foot 1 inch women or shooting the 9 year old daughter of your pastor and head teacher because they don't share your beliefs.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/28/nashville-school-shooter-identity-transgender?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The Guardian think this rare case will be used by the far right to further their objectives. Alternatively it could be a piece to try and suppress any debate about the factors that led to an utterly heinous crime.

If the reasoning behind the killing spree is in anyway linked to local legislation about gender recognition then surely this act of horrific violence has a political/social basis in some way and therefore of importance to debate

I think it would be lamentable if there is any hint of 'justification' or reasoning put forward that it is the fault of a democratic system that led to this. We all disagree and have profoundly held views but absolutely nothing can go any where near to justifying this.

I have no clue what you’re talking about.

Well that's not true, Guardian.

'The number of shooters who are trans or gender nonconforming is even rarer, placing Hale in an almost unique class. The only other member of this category known in recent years is the 22-year-old shooter who killed five people in a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs last November who, according to defense lawyers, is non-binary.'

Two other mass shootings were committed by females who identified as trans.

The Guardian always sounds like it cared more about this point than the sorrow and atrocity of children killed.

The words are oddly positive - unique class etc

There's another one on the list they link to 🙄 and another that doesn't make the list as not enough fatalities.

I have no clue what you’re talking about.

What are you confused about exactly?

I posted a link upthread somewhere to a recent amendment to Tennessee legislation concerning the prohibition of providing any healthcare procedure to a minor which facilitates transgendering. This had been mentioned in a news report this morning as possibly being a contributing factor, as there had been recent protests against it from TRAs.

All of it.

@MarshaBradyo

It's a subtle piece with the implicit suggestion that if you wish to discuss mental health and trans issues together this immediately puts you on the far right of politics which is simply not true. Anyone who wanted to explore the link between trans activism and homicide (as put forward in this so called manifesto) are being effectively shamed to stop

Nope, it is pure transphobia. As a journalist of 3 decades I can say this with authority.

Motive is something established through a process that takes time, not by a baying mob on social media.

@DotAndCarryOne2

The debate about limiting any life changing surgery or effect on puberty for minors is an active one in the UK. The scary thing is that the behaviour of the shooter may be akin to radicalism of the sort we have had for terrorist atrocities.

By painting those that wish to limit gender related surgery for minors as the far right you are effectively giving those who are susceptible to radicalism a cause with potentially horrible consequences.

Agree or disagree with American law making it does so democratically.

Gosh you are rude. And you are coming across as extraordinarily ignorant - and transphobic. It must be painful to be you!

Firstly, trans people are not all the same and I cannot believe I had to explain that to you. And secondly, you cannot possibly know what anyone else thinks, only what they tell you.

Quite what you contribute to the world beyond hate is difficult to imagine.

⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆

How very patronising.

And disingenuous.

@missyounot

The problem lies with the fact that if the manifesto written by the perpetrator contains grievance linked to trans rights then there is an argument that these killings could be viewed as a 'hate' crime themselves of an utterly horrible magnitude.

I think this is justification to as fully as possible look at any potential reasoning to mitigate the possibility of recurrence. If the shooter had been radicalised do we need to look at the source of radicalisation in much the same way we would look at incel sites or culture if this led to crime?