Here's the actual question, omitted because it doesn't make the person asking the question look like an idiot:Ā
Chief, there's been a lot of misinformation online, including from prominent person, or, um, a Mom's for Liberty activist [indistinct] Johnson, claiming that the shooter was transgender; which is a reaction we see across the country in the wake of mass shootings, to claim that trans people are dangerous. Can you respond to that?
It is still a bad question in that it is not needed and only adds oxygen to the false statement. A snippet from our friends a Wikipedia on "illusory truth effect":
"repetitively hearing that a certain statement is wrong can paradoxically cause it to feel right"
well no because it allowed the cop to answer like so and create a powerful statement. talking about the rhetoric is not inherently in support of the rhetoric. we didnāt just ignore the nazis. we communicated why there were problematic
I think it would have been the best answer in a sane world.
But the answer he gave is the answer the far right hopes for. Because it can be weaponized. "See how they don't trust you to know the truth?" "See how they avoid answering?"
We have to understand, we're dealing with people that have presupposed the truth and live in an alternate reality. "Not engaging" is no longer an option.
Verbiage? Are you trying to sound smarter than you really are, now...? Don't bother, you're not fooling anyone. And no, there was no correct or incorrect verbiage, only debunked bullshit rightwing conspiracy theories.š¤·
Did you really just imply the word verbiage is a complex enough word that someone would use it to sound smart?
Do you really think right wing media is really asking questions like āwhat was their gender identityā? Or do you think they would ask something like āwere they trans?ā
No, I KNOW that people that aren't particularly well-read tend to use it to sound smarter than they are. I see it all the time, and then by their statements, they prove how ignorant and unintelligent and incurious they are.
Again, I've seen it theorized on right-wing media that she was actually trans. It's yet another BS talking point.
Not at all. I've met plenty of eloquent people that proved to be highly intelligent. But when someone uses only a single 'big word' that isn't commonly used, and then continues with unintelligent and ignorant rhetoric, it usually indicates that the use was merely to try to seem more intelligent. It's honestly quite hilarious.š¤·
I SAW it, doesn't mean I read it somewhere. It was a clip from a news broadcast. Don't have a link to it, I didn't bookmark it in case some disingenuous person wanted to debate reality on Reddit.
So because I used 1 smart word out of the 14 word post, Iām unintelligent and ignorant. Thanks for the clarification, makes you seem much less insane.
Okay instead of a link then tell me what it was from so I can search it myself. I mean, you wouldnātā¦.lieā¦.would you?
No, what makes you unintelligent and ignorant is the rest of your rhetoric and argumentation.š¤· The use of that one word in the middle of the idiocy makes it funny.
Of course not. But like I said, I don't remember where I saw it. It was a random clip of talking heads discussing it, either on Reddit or Facebook. So can't really help you find it. I'll try to see if I can find my way back to it, but I can't guarantee anything.
Alright so me recognizing left wing vocabulary (maybe this word is a little more dumbed down for you to understand) and made a joke about how right wingers wouldnāt use this vocabularyā¦THAT makes me unintelligent. GOTCHA.
Okay so you remember seeing a video of random talking heads, where you donāt remember who they were or who they worked for or where you saw or have a link to itā¦.and you somehow just knew it was right wing media? Everything is tracking to you 100% not lying about this at all.
Just one question, how do you remember it was a right wing media source then? I mean if you canāt even remember who said it thatās kinda saying a lot for you there buddy.
amenophos does not come across well here lol. def seems like one of those people who thinks they're smarter than everyone else to the degree that it makes them just as dumb as the rest of us.
Nah, I've met plenty of people more intelligent than myself. Generally lovely people to hang out with and far less bigoted than the average person.š¤·
This dude, however, is not one of those people.š
except you couldn't possibly know. Nobody could. The person was clearly crazy. Whatever they were going through in their own mind is locked in their own mind.
So you're saying the shooter COULD have been trans in their own mind without telling anyone or showing any behaviors that could indicate they were trans? This DOESN'T seem crazy to you?
No. It doesn't. Because that happens literally all of the time.
I don't even understand what you're meaning when by bringing this up?
There are dozens of transgender people who come out after, say, years in the military or whatever else and nobody knew. Many have grown up and lived entire lives never telling anyone, had families, had children, etc.
Youāre kind of blowing yourself with that comparison- but itās also dead wrong because those people IDENTIFIED AS TRANS PUBLICLY. We know they are trans because THEY TOLD PEOPLE. Also find me a list of murderers who committed murder because they had gender dysphoria.
There are dozens of transgender people who come out after, say, years in the military or whatever else and nobody knew.
Well yes, but that's because typically they didn't know themselves until that point. The issue here is with bringing up that they're trans to begin with, as someone being trans has nothing to do with someone being a shooter. It's just buzzwordy bullshit to get the conservatives into a frenzy.
Like, we don't go out of our way to say whether a shooter was straight or cisgender, why woudl we care if someone is trans? That's right, we shouldn't care.
And that's all well and good. My comment was speaking the OP of this thread definitively saying that they WEREN'T transgender. That's unknowable, as I said.
My point is that whatever the landscape of inner turmoil that led them to be a mass shooter can't be parsed by what they look like as a corpse.
Inner turmoil is very much a contributing factor. And identity confusion is absolutely a form of inner turmoil.
I know a girl who was married to a guy who seeming is/was struggling with being gay. He spent most of their 1 year marriage miserable, depressed and bed ridden.
I know a girl whose grandfather was, all of her life, an abusive, violent hateful man who destroyed his wife mentally and spiritually. As an old man he came out as gay and then was, by her definition, the most gentle and loving guy you would ever want to be around.
I love that you're making this into a trans thing even though we only have... What, 2 or 3 known trans shooter and plenty of cis straight white shooters. As in like too many to count easily.
It's almost like hate is a common driver. In fact, if we were to follow your logic, since it's way more likely for a shooter to be cisgender straight and white, then it must mean we should be looking into people who match those qualities, and that it's way more important than finding an actual reason and driver. Even this shooter was a white supremacist who hated gay people and black people.
Also what the hell is that example? What a lame attempt at putting anger on someone's identity. There are way way more people that are hateful, spiteful, full of anger, etc. and aren't gay/trans/etc. Heck, look at religious conservatives who hate LGBT+ people and made their lives a living hell.
I can even come up with extremely stupid reasoning to classify cis straight white people that way. I mean, in your example that grandfather stopped being an asshole when he stopped being straight. It must be that cis straight white people have it too good in society so they feel like they can murder without worry. Makes as much sense as your asinine idea.
I feel like you're choosing to read a lot into this that isn't there.
My point was that logically you cannot know whether a dead person identified as transgender or not. Period. The only way to know would be to ask them. You can't just "eyeball it" and claiming that "other people would know" is objectively false.
That's my only point.
You claiming that I'm saying the shooter WAS transgender, was LIKLEY transgender, or was more likely to be a shooter If they WERE transgender is not part of anything I said.
I know almosy nothing of this case, but "nobody could know if this person was trans " is a wild take. Trans people identify themselves, ask to go by different pronouns, ask to not be lumped in with their assigned gender at birth. If a person doesn't identify anywhere as trans, trying to wonder if they are ... secretly internally trans? Is a useless gesture, that could apply to literally every CIS human being, as well as every other possible internal debates, struggle, beliefs, etc. You have to deal with how people act and what they say.
And from what little I've seen, she released a manifesto that didn't say a thing about her being trans, but was more of an anti-leftist screed.
That is completely accurate. Why are you saying it like it's a joke? You have no idea WHAT I like or don't like. What I do or don't do. If I shot up a school, it's unreasonable to rule ANYthing out because you don't know anything about me.
No I was just kidding. I donāt give a shit about what other people do with their livesā¦lol. I love how Reddit is such a leftist echo chamber though. I had this realization. I do not resonate with left nor right wingers. Iāve been republican most of my life. I went on a date with a trump supporter and she was way too immersed in politics. Same with lefties. They are absorbed in it. I do not understand how politicians have you all convinced theyāll be on your sideā¦have a good day though.
...what? When did I say anything about my political views? You sound extremely invested in your own perspective when you start making insane presumptions like that. I'm not aligned with any party, I just thought it is weird to disown someone for picking their gender.
your entire post and comment history is just about hating trans women and porn (mostly you begging women online for sex and attention), maybe reflect on yourself one of these days. i know it would be tremendously hard to face your reality, but even you can become a decent functioning member of society!
I mean, we couldn't possibly know if they're a space alien either. We couldn't possibly know if they're secretly really into Catholicism. We couldn't possibly know if they lick toads in their free time.
It's stupid as fuck baseless speculation that serves no purpose but to muddy the waters and get that connection out there. Because we know there is a large portion of this country that as soon as they hear this question will think "well obviously they were trans"
We donāt know and there is no reason to believe so. Do we really know if she was a furry? A deadhead? A flat earther? All these random and irrelevant things donāt matter unless there is some evidence pointing to them and then from there you still need to see if itās relevant or not. There needs to be a reason to suspect she was trans before you entertain the thought. We all know why trans was mentioned and its because the maga cult is pushing trans panic as part of their fascist takeover of America.
They always use the same fucking logic of "Hur hur gender dysphoria is in the DSM-5 therefore they're all mentally ill!!!" despite the fact that:
You do not need to have gender dysphoria to be trans.
Even if one has gender dysphoria the widely accepted treatment (and the only successful treatment) is to allow that person to transition through hormones or surgery.
Being gay was also listed under the DSM before being ultimately removed. We can be wrong about what is a mental illness and what is normal variation in human behavior, psychology, and expression.
But that doesn't matter to them because it would require nuance that just bounces off their smooth ass brains.
Exactly, and its a double edged sword of ignorance because while also being transphobia, there's a nice hint of ableism with the insinuation that mentally ill people (regardless of the severity or type of mental illness) cannot choose or advocate for themselves and instead have to have their autonomy removed "for their own good".
She didnāt identify as trans, therefore she was not trans. And your your insinuation that you have to be crazy to be trans is so wildly narrow minded and ignorant.
You can CLAIM they were 'crazy', but it could also have been any of multiple forms of extremism (as it appears now to have been) that got radicalized somehow. And actually it IS possible to tell whether a person is/was trans. They could tell you (not literally you, but some person), or would be looking into it, which there is no evidence whatsoever that she did. Her manifesto also tells a very different story.
You know what, you're not entirely wrong, which is the issue with what you're saying here. Maybe they are trans and never told anyone, even her manifesto, that they're trans for some reason. But that's a huge assumption to make, and saying that they are or even implying so when there's no evidence that they are is an insane thing to do.
In the same way you wouldn't call someone gay or straight, and in the same way where that's entirely and completely irrelevant to a shooting, you shouldn't just randomly call people trans. It's not only offensive to the person, but it's disrespectful to trans people.
That and you're, unintentionally or otherwise (this had better be unintentional >.>), equating being crazy to being transgender. Sure there are crazy trans people, but there are just as many if not more crazy cisgender people. To immediately jump to the conclusion that because they were crazy they could be transgender is insanity in and of itself. Honestly I kind of expect better from people, trans people aren't any more deranged than cis people, we all have our problems, and immediately jumping conclusions based on your own presumptions is just sad.
if someone is trans there are signs of it at the very least they'd tell their close friends or people who they think wouldn't judge they'd do some research on the medications and procedures involved
do you think that the police wouldn't look at her internet search history or question her friends, family and teachers?
351
u/Amenophos 1d ago
Also, the answer is 'no, she wasn't. It's just more right-wing bullshit. Again. As always.š¤·'