✨patriarchy✨

For the record? Anyway...

Firstly, I saw several pieces of news coverage on the grandmother case before all of the details came out, and in the end the story was more grim than I had anticipated. Early in the coverage, I had assumed that one of the two parents of the children was responsible. Soon, it became clear that the father was not involved, which left only the mother, grandmother, or possibly one of the children. I admit that I did not want to consider it possible that it would be the grandmother, and was horrified to find out that it was. I could not, and cannot, conceive of anyone killing her child and the children of her child. I do not know what circumstances drove her to do this, but my thoughts of course went to mental illness, dementia, substance abuse etc.

Then, today I see the post you've quoted above and the first sentence - what a weird way of phrasing this. I mean, wouldn't you have a hard time understanding anyone's reasoning? The sentence seemed so "needlessly gendered". Unless the poster finds such murders committed by women reasonable, or thinks that women don't commit such murders, or finds the motives of men especially baffling, then what is the point of phrasing it in this way?

I'd hoped that my post would nudge the original poster into explaining, but "somehow" that conversation was derailed and I haven't gotten a reply.

All of these cases are sad, and I saw no discussion at all on the grandmother case. From your comments, you seem to prefer to look at tragedies like these through a gender lens. I just don't.

There really isn’t much to learn from misandry