They’re focusing heavily on her work mentoring women in a very similar way to how articles focused on the Brian Thompson’s humble roots. That narrative attempts to frame her as the “pro woman” side. The implications exist in the rhetorical negative space, that there was a murder and if the victim was so pro woman, what does that say about the killer? And the actual answer is nothing, we don’t know enough about the murderer to be certain of their motivations but it sure doesn’t look to be about that.
Wow they’re really trying to imply misogyny there.
I read the article you responded to. Not sure which bit implied misogyny. Did skim it so maybe I missed it?
They’re focusing heavily on her work mentoring women in a very similar way to how articles focused on the Brian Thompson’s humble roots. That narrative attempts to frame her as the “pro woman” side. The implications exist in the rhetorical negative space, that there was a murder and if the victim was so pro woman, what does that say about the killer? And the actual answer is nothing, we don’t know enough about the murderer to be certain of their motivations but it sure doesn’t look to be about that.
Ok, I can see it now, just. Feels like a stretch TBH. Two men, two women killed, none planned ahead as deliberate targets. I mean maybe, but…
They’re just throwing anything out there.