How?
“Sarah Everard was not murdered for her gender identity.” Sarah wrote. “She was murdered for her sex.” Shock horror responds the lecturer in political science, a woman. “This is just the worst take ever. How exactly do you think he knew her sex?”
Pause to straighten eyes after an excess of rolling.
How do we think he knew her sex? The usual way. The way men always have. On sight, to begin with – he has to have known her sex on sight or he wouldn’t have “arrested” her. On sight and then on hearing and touch and smell. He didn’t have to pause and consult a check list, he simply recognized a woman when he saw one – a young pretty desirable woman he wanted to torture and murder, to be exact.
It’s nauseating that adult academics are spraying this nonsense all over us.
Comments
11 responses to “How exactly do you think he knew?”
How exactly do you think he knew her gender (if any)?
If it isn’t sex that is the underlying basis of perception, what the hell do they mean by ‘passing’?
Is her implication that Couzens asked for pronouns of any person he was potentially stalking to ascertain whether he should commit a
sexgender crime against them?Is that really how she would prevent rapes, by having all the women declare male gender identities, or at the least non-binary?
But we are told trans and non-binary people are the most subject to violence? So which is it?
Thank goodness transactivism has solved rape! Now that rapists no longer rape based on sex but on gender identity, and gender identity is invisible to others; all you have to do to avoid being raped is to lie about your gender identity, always say you have the identity of a man!
The rapist can’t tell you are lying and will leave you alone!
Thanks TRAs.:)
Oh, and well done all you rapists for not being like those horrible TERFs!
With everyone in enclosed spaces required to wear a mask covering the lower portion of their face, I am astounded to realise I can still tell men from women by their eyes, forehead, and skull shape. Their gender – not until they tell me “their pronouns”.
But Roj, phrenology is long discredited pseudo-science. You can glean no information whatsoever from looking at anyone’s useful information whatsoever from looking at someone’s “skull with a brain”.
I am appalled to see that this person buttresses her credentials by declaring an academic interest in Judith Shklar.
MH #3
My reading is that the perpetrator knew the woman’s sex through her “gender expression”, therefore anyone with a feminine “gender expression” is female.
I suspect there are TiMs who “pass” well enough that an assailant might mistake them for women, but that doesn’t make them women.
There are any number of creatures whose very lives depend on appearing to be something they are not, but that doesn’t make them what they are mimicking.
Instead of asking what the victim was wearing…now they’ll ask what their pronouns were.
And if your pronouns are she/her, then you’re out of luck because…well, you’re a woman. Unless you aren’t, but claim to be, then you will get all the deference in the world.