BBC at it again withholding fact ‘woman’ charged with murdering husband is trans

[Heylo]

You know what to do Mumsnet. BBC apologised previously because of mass complaints about sick cat killer Scarlett Blake not being referred to as trans and just being referred to as she / woman in original article. They’re now at it again.

this person arrested for killing husband with samurai sword.

bbc article
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp00de3r3qro

daily mail article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480347/amp/Trans-woman-70-appears-court-accused-murdering-husband-samurai-sword.html

complain and let’s get a precedent set, these are not our crimes!

I never said that you've been abusive, don't put words in my mouth. You have been verbally jumping on every woman that has posted about men's crimes and your responses display male pattern aggression. No doubt you will respond again, you must have very undemanding children with so much time on your hands 🤔

HootyMcBooby · Yesterday 21:05

& Mummy2024

99% of whom happen to be men.

NAMALT but the VAST majority who are convicted sexual or violent criminals, murderers, rapists and abusers ARE MEN.

As a man, it's not a very pleasant thing to admit, but it's absolutely true. As a sex class, men are responsible for far and away the vast majority of violent and sexual offences and it's counter productive to try to distract from that with more unusual crimes committed by women.

Nobody is saying that some women don't commit crimes, including violent ones. Fiona Beal was mentioned upthread and a woman was jailed today for sexually assaulting two other women.

These are very unusual, "Man bites dog" stories, which is why they get disproportionate levels of attention. There are murders by men, which barely rate a byline.

Would you support stories that involve a Christian killer being headlined: "Muslim killer x, y, z"?

Presumably you'd think that was bad?

This is a bit like Rachel Dolezal being reported as a black killer, if she were to commit that crime.

If true that sounds like very useful data to have. How would you gather that without "profiling"?

@Mummy2024

shouldn't we oppose gender discrimination and stereotyping when we see it?

Have you read any of the research on stereotype accuracy, Mummy2024?

Common stereotypes are surprisingly accurate. That's because humans are very good at spotting patterns, partly because we have evolved to do so. Sometimes it leads us astray: we can mis-identify patterns. And sometimes we spot patterns that are accurate but socially awkward, and reasonable people can disagree on the best way to respond to that.

But noticing that men are more likely than women to commit murder is not "gender discrimination", and nor is discussing it. It's crucial to know that to design policy (and to assess risk day-to-day).

Do you disagree that men are more likely than women to commit murder, or do you agree but think it should not be said?

(Incidentally, I agree there are a few anti-man posters on MN, and quite often there is simplistic blank-slate reasoning that identifies a problem where there may be none. But this thread is definitely not one of those times!)

@Mummy2024

Their sex DOES NOT pre-dispose them to be violent [...] toxic masculinity does.... you would do well to look up the term. This is something imposed on them by nearly everyone in society, the same is not imposed on woman.

Pretty much any fact about human life is going to be a mix of nature and culture. What makes you so confident that on this one issue, it's 100% culture, 0% nature? (And of course, nature shapes culture too)

If being a man pre disposes them to being violent, why are so many men not violent?

The logic doesn't work at all. You might as well say that men being taller than women must be culture not biology, because there are exceptions to the pattern.

Plus, for the purposes of the discussion on the BBC's reporting, the debate about "toxic masculinity" vs nature is not really relevant.

The purpose of this thread is not to discuss why men commit more sexual and violent crime than women.

The purpose of the thread is to point out that the sex of an offender should be recorded accurately.

In order to begin to discuss statistics and the reason for them we have to keep accurate statistics. If we don't keep accurate statistics academics could, for example, do research to try to explain a rocketing amount of violent murder in women - when there has been no such rise and only appears to be so because violent murders carried out by men are being recorded as carried out by females.

What if an offender could "identify" as under 18 and the crimes be recorded as such. Would we be happy to believe that violent crimes carried out by children were rocketing just because grown adults "identified" as under age. Those statistics would be a nonsense- as are statistics that record murders, assaults and rapes carried out by men as being carried out by women.

@Mummy2024

Apologies, I asked you a question which I now see you had already answered upthread:

Do you disagree that men are more likely than women to commit murder, or do you agree but think it should not be said?

You have stated it's the latter (ie, true but shouldn't be stated).

I don't understand your reasoning though. Even if it were true that the reason is 100% culture, ie toxic masculinity, why would that make it bad to say?

Now I do agree there are some true things that shouldn't be discussed publicly (eg how to make bioweapons, or your bank PIN).

I also agree that there are statistical facts that need careful handling in the interests of social cohesion (gaps between groups in tested IQ, for example).

But I don't see male violence as being like either of those cases.

Is your concern that talking about men being a higher threat legitimizes it and thus increases it?

Or is it trans-specific, ie you think a transwoman has stepped out of toxic masculinity so it's unfair now to tarnish them with the 'man' brush?

My view is that men being more violent is both nature and culture (we're an evolved species, and also a complex society). And that regardless of that debate, recognising facts about male violence should not be considered an insult to anyone (nor, for that matter should discussion of female-propensity negative traits, where relevant).

And that speaking plainly about male violence is pretty much necessary if we want to try to mitigate its harms.

By the way, I also think it's likely that culture on balance restrains male violence (i.e. the "nature" bit gives men a propensity to violence, and in modern advanced societies "culture" is what reins that in a bit). So the Toxic Masculinity debate is not straightforward. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't seek to further restrain it. It seems plausible that males are optimally violent for the conditions under which we evolved, but now too violent for our current needs in peacetime. Or at least, that what we need is regulated violence, and too many men express unregulated violence.

Haha 😄 I wish, look I don't care if you believe I'm a man. I know I'm not so that's all that matters. There are woman on the planet who still care about mens rights to equality. I can see some women may struggle with that concept given their views on being male.

I find it interesting that you see my unagressive words as male pattern aggression given that I am most definitely female, with far to many years on the clock lol

To be honest I've always thought that there is a biological reason why males are more aggressive compared to females, thinking for example about behaviour in primates and in mammals in general. I thought it was a commonly accepted notion? I never thought it was mainly cultural/from how you are raised. So if there is a sex predisposition to violence (towards both males and females) culture is reigning it in pretty well. Obviously the situation can and should improve, as demonstrated by the vast majority of males that do not commit violence. By the way, whatever the root cause, I believe that an accurate recording is the prerequisite to understand and solve problems. I won't have time to read the thread in the next few days, but I'll catch up eventually.

Research on the reasons men are more violent suggests a mix of reasons; yes gender roles and expectations are often cited. As are absent father figures, child abuse, and substance abuse in the home.

Testosterone seems to be have more complex effects than one might expect.

This article notes the higher incidence of personality disorders among men.

https://nypost.com/2019/01/16/the-scientific-reasons-why-men-are-more-violent-than-women/

And of course, the BBC and the police mis reporting and missing recording the sex of violent men is making it harder, not easier, for society to parse out the reasons for male violence.

To address male violence - which is the overwhelming majority of violence - we need accurate data on which to base research and services.

Recording males as women fucks that up. And quickly, too, given how few violent women there are; it only takes a few males recorded as women to show up as a massive increase in women committing violence.

"Male pattern violence is a result of toxic masculinity and absolutely nothing to do with being male. Females are not subject to the same and is the reason they are less violent."

This is absolute nonsense.
Do you know anything about biology?
Do you know what a powerful hormone testosterone is?
There is a reason males are in general more aggressive and deal with their emotions in a different way. It is a BIOLOGICAL reason and little to do with "toxic masculinity".
If you were to take a group of men and women and plonk them from birth on a deserted island, the males would still be the more aggressive ones without ANY input from culture or society, because they are hard wired to be fighters by their very nature.
In fact, you can look at any tribe of people in the modern world, far removed from western ideals and society - guess what? The males are still the warriors and fighters. What you are saying is that being male has "absolutely nothing" to do with male violence - that is clearly nonsense.
Testosterone is the male hormone, and it is responsible for aggression, impulsiveness and obviously strength, speed and muscle mass. Any body builder on testosterone or similar hormones will tell you that it increases their rates of aggression, as will any WOMEN on it. Have you heard of the tern "roid rage"? It is a documented phenomenon.
Males overwhelmingly commit violent offences because they ARE male. Why don't you get that? NOBODY is saying that EVERY male will go on to commit violence, but they do so because they are fighting against their hard wired innate biology.
Nobody on this thread has said that all men are violent. What they have done is point out and highlight the statistics, and for some reason you don't like that.
Pointing them out does not make them any less true.

And to say that male violence is purely down to "toxic masculinity" is utterly false. We are, as often on this forum, talking about the grass roots of biological differences between men and women. THAT'S the reason for the MASSIVE disparity between the statistics of male and female crime.

Cross posted with you Arabella.

And pointing out these factual, scientific, biological differences does not mean we are all male hating horrible witches. I have a father, brothers, a husband, sons and male friends as I'm sure many others have. I don't hate men!

Yes.

It is quite amazing to see those who like to attempt to draw symmetry by saying ‘women do it too’. It is fucking lazy thinking. And they don’t even get it when they see the only people they keep mentioning is historic cases.

Meanwhile, every week there are female people being murdered in the UK and that is a tiny number compared to the rapes and sexual attacks. And people wonder why we check out the reports! Because all of the fucking sudden the once rather stable statistics for women committing these types of crimes have seen remarkable increases if you went by the media reports.

Truth matters. And lying to society is not acceptable just because of someone’s feelings or philosophical beliefs. How bizarre to be against accurate reporting.

I think there is an aspect of because they are (are as a class) bigger and stronger too. The average man can hurt/kill the average woman far more easily than the average woman can hurt/kill the average man. So a woman may want to harm someone but is aware that they could end up getting hurt themselves where as a man thinks I can wallop her and not her hurt in return.

Personally I wouldn't even call a trans woman I'd call her a woman if that's what she wanted Given that the first requirement of a transwoman is that the TW is a male bodied person, what sensible or reality-based reasons would you have for calling that male bodied person a woman? Why would you deny reality to pander to his thoughts?

Yes I didn't even realise it was an issue until this post if I'm honest. It should be recorded accurately even if that means a new category. It could be done why it isn't I'll never know. What new category would this be? Human sex is binary - always has been and always will be.

Gender is a collection of regressive stereotypes; sex is real and demonstrable. Laws shouldn't be written on gender feelz, especially as so many are misogyny personified.

Facts are the way forward: an XY male's crimes should be noted as a man's crimes, never those of a woman. It's no more complicated than that.

DV - generally MVAWG - is a very different crime than male-on-male violence.

Mummy, no one is saying it is "because they are male". That's something you have seized on for some reason.

The facts are:

Statistically men commit murder and sexual crimes far more often than women do, like over 10 times more often.

Something is happening that is different for men amd women for this to be the case. This should be researched so whatever the cause is can be tackled and these men stopped from becoming violent in the first place.

In the meantime, until we can identify which men will become violent before they do, we need to treat all men as higher risk of commiting violence and murder than women, not because all men are guilty but because we cannot predict yet which ones will be and women and girls deserve safety even if this hurts the feelings of the men who are not violent.

If you cannot see the relevance for accurate reporting of crimes, in media, in court and in crime statistics, then I don’t think anything anyone says here will make any difference to you.

You bringing in religion and race actually shows that you haven’t thought deeply about this. Should the crime reports show race and religion? Yes. Because if there is an issue where particular groups are targeted, this needs to be identified.

And if women have suddenly started to commit crimes at a higher rate, this needs to be investigated and what drives it explored. If male on male intimate partner violence is increasing, this also needs investigating.

So, while you can stay positioning this as a negative, accurate reporting is the only way to address real issues. Reporting males as females in the media is just the start.

The slogan is apt and it is fitting. I can see that you seem to think that class groups of people don’t suffer the ramifications of what the is statistically shown to be trends in behaviour, however, we do. Safeguarding protocols are shaped by the crime statistics.

If women suddenly need to be more aware to protect themselves from other women, we need to know this. All of a sudden, instead of walking with another woman for safety, we need to find other ways to strengthen our safety.

You can keep trying to personalise this and be personally affronted by believing that is the aim of ‘not our crimes’. It matters not. It is quite clear though that you are not using feminist collective analysis when you do so.

I think you will find that physical strength plays a very big role in the violent tendencies of some male people. So in a very real way, yes, being male does mean that they are ‘pre disposed’. Just because many men are not violent doesn’t mean their bodies are not built for it when it comes to power over women and children.