Female school shooter?

[Signalbox]

Female school shooter. The alleged attacker has been named. Natalie Rupnow also goes by the name Samantha.

Madison’s chief of police was asked about comments online that suggest the shooter may have been trans.

“I don’t know whether Natalie was transgender or not,” Barnes said at a news conference tonight.

“I don’t think that whatever happened today has anything to do with how she or he or they may have wanted to identify,” he said. “And I wish people would kind of leave their own personal biases out of this.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/live-blog/rcna184404

And we don't need to do anything to get trans people to fit the narrative, the violent, threatening and aggressive behaviour of their activists is setting the narrative without any 'fitting' required.

Transwomen are over represented in men's prisons.

The infamous Swedish study found that women with a trans identity conformed to a higher rate of crime than women without one.

Women are routinely threatened with rape, sexual assault, violence and death by men with a trans identity.

And TRA led guidelines in the police, CPS, and media reporting mean that you can read an entire article using female pronouns, and referring to a woman, when in fact it's a man.

Prior to transgenderism, no-one speculated on the sex of a person committing a crime. But now you just can't trust it.

I don't think it is reasonable to hear that a girl has committed a crime and instantly start asking if she is transgender.

However it is reasonable, to ask, if a female is reported to have committed a type of crime generally committed by males, whether the reporting is accurate. This is because we have seen many examples of crimes reported to have been committed by “women”, who are not women but men.

I don't think it is reasonable to hear that a girl has committed a crime and instantly start asking if she is transgender.
...
I think it is clear that this speculation comes froms a place of wanting this crime to fit a narrative.

If that narrative is "trans people are more likely to commit violent crime", then I can only speak for myself, but I feel like that's a fundamental misunderstanding on the part of people who subscribe to gender identity ideology in terms of what people with gender critical views believe.

When I ask whether someone reported as being female is also trans, I'm doing so because the assumption that I'm checking these events against is that "males are far more likely to commit violent crime". It's got nothing to do with trans people other than trying to determine the actual sex of the perpetrator. Obviously, if they aren't female and trans, then this doesn't fit this assumption about male violence being more common, and so this already shocking crime appears even more shocking as it's far more unusual for this kind of crime to be committed by a female. It's hard to make sense of a child killing people and to make sense of innocent children being killed, so any fact that might it make a tiny bit more sense is understandably sought after.

Because I don't subscribe to gender identity being anything more than a personal belief (which anyone is entitled to hold and express, like any other reasonable religious/philosophical belief within the usual parameters), I don't view trans people as a distinct class of people in terms of how their behaviour might differ from others'.

Sure, there might be subgroups of trans-identifying people on hormones or who haven't been able to access routine MH care who might be more at risk of certain behaviours. But the question people have been asking is about whether they were trans specifically, not about their medical or MH history.

While I can see why trans people see themselves as a separate category of people distinct from the group they would call 'cis' people, this distinction is only meaningful to people who subscribe to gender identity ideology. Therefore, given that I don't personally believe in that distinction, why would I view a trans person's actions through the lens of a belief system I don't believe in?

I still don't think it's reasonable.

When women commit child abuse or murder and it's on the news everyone just accepts she's an awful woman 99% of the time rather than instantly wondering if she's transgender. This is the only place I've ever seen this happen.

There is a movement to set the record straight about men who commit crimes as a woman, and are reported as a woman.

You can google it. 'These are not our crimes.'

Here is one example

Trans Crime UK document such cases, and they've produced a video, ._
This film presents over 70 male criminals from the UK who insist that they are women. They are not women, but their crimes are reported in the media as crimes committed by women. In Court they are referred to as 'she' and 'her'. Female names are used. Some of these men have had their crimes officially recorded as having been committed by a woman. Some have been sent to a women’s prison, to serve their sentences amongst female prisoners, who are given no choice in this.

https://mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2020/09/not-our-crimes.html

When historians look back on this period, they may be surprised to find a sudden upsurge in violent crimes committed by women.

Edited to add that because women very rarely commit sex crimes, even a few men can skew the statistics.

Yeah well, that might be because we're better informed.

When women commit child abuse or murder and it's on the news everyone just accepts she's an awful woman 99% of the time rather than instantly wondering if she's transgender.

Reasonably often those "women" are actually men, and I guess you're not on other social media sites much then, because it happens on them too.

I don't think it's fair to suggest this case is a one-off in terms of people wanting to know the sex of the perpetrator.

The first question people tend to ask nowadays is "well what do you actually mean by woman there?", as many of the violent crimes reported by mainstream news outlets as being committed by a woman turn out to have been committed by a biological male who identifies as a woman (presumably as that's what IPSO recommends).

Often, it's obvious from the photos if an adult's mugshot is published with the article, but given the circumstances and the fact this was a child, a confirmed photo wasn't readily available, so people asked for clarification.

Trans should be regarded as a mental health issue, the medication should be regarded as potentially influencing behaviour and the ideology as being one which can distort reality and motivate hatred towards targeted groups.

This is absolutely right. It's the only same way of starting to cope with all the harms of this mass delusion.

That’s because 99% of people aren’t aware that the BBC lie about the sex of violent offenders all the time. Does the average person on the street know that Scarlett Blake is a man, for example?

This forum, and some informed people on Twitter, are the only people flagging up this persistent misinformation.

The thought did flash in my mind when I read the report, "woman, oh really? The penis having kind or what?"
But then I saw a photo of the perpetrator and it was obviously an actual woman.

That thought would have never entered my mind 5-10 years ago. It just wouldn't have.

Here is one recent example of a "woman", as reported by the Manchester Evening News. It turned out to be a man and the M.E.N. were later shamed into retracting the use of the word woman in the headline but kept it in the body of the article.

"A judge has jailed a ‘dangerous’ woman for violent physical and sexual abuse.

[...]

She pleaded guilty to assault by penetration, sexual assault, strangulation and threatening with a bladed article in relation to the victim."

And just what does this "woman" look like? Have a look below and judge for yourself if this is a woman?

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/dangerous-woman-jailed-violent-physical-30571646

.

There was also this recent article as well which involved a "woman" being arrested for "The force has confirmed that a woman was arrested on suspicion of sexual assault [of a child], possession of a bladed article, and being drunk and disorderly."

Somehow, that sounds a lot more like what a man might do.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/woman-arrested-after-disturbance-cafe-30192742

These days you really do have to read between the lines in newspaper reports until you see a photo.

This thread has reminded me that lots of people do just take these articles reporting women as having committed violent crimes at face value, which then leads the general public to believe there isn't any noticeable difference in the number of males vs females committing violent crimes (when obviously, in reality, there is).

When it comes to UK cases, this, combined with ONS data (particularly crime stats) having been irreparably contaminated by similar interpretations of what 'female' means, is incredibly frustrating.

"Women" can include girls, explicitly stated in paragraph one of www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/212

I think it is clear that this speculation comes froms a place of wanting this crime to fit a narrative.

Nope. It's because [[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/women-murders-men-ons-sarah-everard-b1815779.html 93% of murders are carried out by men and the press will lie by calling male murderers "women" on request, so when we are told that a woman has murdered, we question whether the press are lying again.

OMG! How dare we try to «checks notes» verify the truthfulness of a news report.

As "fake news" goes, claiming that a man is a woman is pretty fake.

These days you really do have to read between the lines in newspaper reports until you see a photo.

And if you are visually-impaired, you are screwed because you can't see the photo. Did anyone at IPSO carry out an Equality Impact Assessment before imposing this policy?

I feel like America has become so numb to school shootings. I'm old enough to remember the seismic event that Columbine was and how much discussion and national mourning there was afterwards. Now school shootings just seem to evaporate out of the media after a few hours without any introspection about how or why

Nope. It's because 93% of murders are carried out by men and the press will lie by calling male murderers "women" on request, so when we are told that a woman has murdered, we question whether the press are lying again.

The press and the police...

And if you are visually-impaired, you are screwed because you can't see the photo. Did anyone at IPSO carry out an Equality Impact Assessment before imposing this policy?

If they did do an Equality Impact Assessment, they should have taken into account the protected characteristic of philosophical belief and included a translation to biological sex for GC readers.

It's fundamentally unfair to describe an event using language that only one religion/belief group finds meaningful while the rest of us are left in the dark wondering what it all means and what the hell actually happened.

Given that doing so bears an unsettling resemblance to the Trumpist/Muskian false narratives claiming the shooter was trans which immediately sprang up in the wake of the incident, I distinctly doubt that.

Yes, indeed, this is one of the few places where people can still be found who can read beyond the headlines. Thus we are as you see.

For example, a few years back, before I ever became an active poster here, a neighbour messaged me a link to a shocking story of a female paedophile in our home town, being covered in the national tabloids. When I clicked on her link, it was a news report in the Daily Mail concerning a child predator who had been given an extremely lenient sentence. The comments below the article were full of men saying that this offender's sentence was proof that women were treated too softly by the judiciary and that a man would never have walked free with a suspended sentence.

However, the offender was male and had committed the offences before disclosing to anyone that he had gender dysphoria. He had only taken on a traditionally female name after being arrested for child abuse. Nevertheless, as a result of his decision post-arrest, the headline reported the case as an instance of a woman abusing children, cue the aforementioned posts from angry men's rights activists.

Note to mods and other MNers: Mumsnet has previously stated that MNers do not have to respect the pronouns of convicted sex offenders. I have chosen to use male pronouns here as
i) I am referring to a convicted sex offender, and;
ii) I am referring to an unnamed, unidentified sex offender.

Are you collectively checking the truthfulness of every news report or only the ones where women commit crimes incase they're transgender?