[Roundy]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/marjorie-taylor-greene-tweet-jake-teixeira-b2319612.html

What is wrong with her? "He may be a dangerous traitor responsible for leaking classified materials to our enemies but BIDEN EVIL, since BIDEN EVIL Teixeira is a hero!"

How does the argument she's making make a lick of sense? What does Biden being involved in a war she doesn't agree with have to do with what Teixeira did?

Why are the Republicans hanging their hats on nimrods like this? Between Trump's toxicity among non-Republicans, Desantis's increasingly unhinged attempts to set up his own little autocracy in Florida that he plans to use as a jumping off point for his presidential aspirations, their incredibly unpopular stance against abortion, and putting any amount of faith in dipshits like MTG, it really feels like the whole party is on the verge of imploding, and they have no clue how to right the ship.

God, please let Trump be their nominee in 2024. That would be off-the-chart hilarious.

[stack]

I think because if you throw enough bananas at the wall, eventually a few are going to stick. You've got keyword bananas like, 'classified', 'stolen' 'secrets' 'traitor', 'biden', 'Russia', 'China', so that in six months time all any repub is going to remember is "Biden is a traitor who stole classified documents and revealed them to the Russians and China."

[Lord Dave]

I think its because they successfully programmed 30% of the us to be crazy and hatefilled, so they gotta keep it up or risk losing that base to apathy.

Like imagine if your base of angry zelots suddenly got told that they're wrong.  "Look, we understand that you hate Biden but he didn't do anything wrong."

I mean, some were ready to Hang Trump's VP. 
Republicans made a monster and they gotta feed it

[honk]

God, please let Trump be their nominee in 2024. That would be off-the-chart hilarious.

There are really only two options for the Republican nomination, and Trump is by far the stronger choice. DeSantis is genuinely one of the least charismatic politicians I've ever seen. He almost never drops his constipated scowl, every speech and public statement he makes have a snappish and scolding tone to them, and by all accounts, he's extremely awkward and abrasive in face-to-face encounters with individual people. I don't see someone like that thriving up on a debate stage next to candidates who are capable of showing off charisma, enthusiasm, and personal warmth.

[Roundy]

God, please let Trump be their nominee in 2024. That would be off-the-chart hilarious.

There are really only two options for the Republican nomination, and Trump is by far the stronger choice. DeSantis is genuinely one of the least charismatic politicians I've ever seen. He almost never drops his constipated scowl, every speech and public statement he makes have a snappish and scolding tone to them, and by all accounts, he's extremely awkward and abrasive in face-to-face encounters with individual people. I don't see someone like that thriving up on a debate stage next to candidates who are capable of showing off charisma, enthusiasm, and personal warmth.

"By far the stronger choice" is all relative. Neither one is desirable for the Republicans if they want to win. Desantis has no charisma and he's very publicly taking away basic freedoms in Florida, among other things. To everyone but The Base Trump is being viewed as more and more of a criminal and a shyster who tried to seize control of the government as time goes on. I'll be fine with either.

[Tom Bishop]

I've barely heard of her. But her posts seem pretty reasonable to me.

[Pete Svarrior]

But her posts seem pretty reasonable to me.

That's surprising, though potentially attributatble to you not knowing much about her.



EDIT: I forgot Elon unbanned her personal account. Now that it's back up, we don't need to rely on a screenshot, so here's a direct link:

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1476634966779957248

[Tom Bishop]

But her posts seem pretty reasonable to me.

That's surprising, though potentially attributatble to you not knowing much about her.

I don't disagree with her that science says that the earth is round, and should be held as accepted knowledge. RE is the current accepted knowledge. It is held as default until proven otherwise. No argument there.

I do agree with her that there is not sufficient evidence that there are more than two genders. It's two by default until someone demonstrates otherwise, and that they are more than mental disorders. The rainbow of 23+ genders is not accepted by mainstream academia as legitimate genders, so it doesn't even have that going for it.

She is clearly saying that you can't just make up your own genders, and you can't merely say that the earth is a different shape. Substantial evidence is needed.

Science is the default truth and that's that. The general theme of the FE Wiki is actually about what Science really says about RE. It is about how Science says that many parts of RE are wrong.

[Pete Svarrior]

Ah, this went about as well as I expected. Thank you, Tom!

[Tom Bishop]

It is pretty clear what she is saying. She shouldn't need to explain to you why there are not more than two genders. You need to explain (prove) to her that there are, because they don't exist by default. She is applying the same to Flat Earth by analogy.

She still sounds pretty reasonable to me. Can you point out where she is crazy/unreasonable in that?

[markjo]

I suppose that it is difficult for some people to accept that there is now a recognized a difference between sex and gender.

What do we mean by sex and gender? Aren’t these terms interchangeable? Perhaps at some point in time they were used as synonyms, but this is no longer true in science.
...
Importantly, the committee emphasized that neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience. To differentiate between these broad areas of investigation, the members created working definitions of “sex” — when referring to biology — and “gender” — when referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural, and personal experience.

[stack]

I've barely heard of her. But her posts seem pretty reasonable to me.

I'm surprised you've barely heard of her. You don't remember that she was big on Qanon, now distanced herself from it, “Like a lot of people today, I had easily gotten sucked into some things I had seen on the internet,” Greene said Sunday when Fox News host Howard Kurtz questioned her past association with the conspiracy theory."

And the whole Jewish Space Lasers caused California wildfires thing? You don't remember that? That one was fun.

Now she wants a red/blue state "divorce". Not sure what she means, but it kinda sounds like what the South wanted during the Civil War but maybe without the war part.

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1627665203398688768

[Dr Van Nostrand]

It is pretty clear what she is saying. She shouldn't need to explain to you why there are not more than two genders. You need to explain (prove) to her that there are, because they don't exist by default. She is applying the same to Flat Earth by analogy.

She still sounds pretty reasonable to me. Can you point out where she is crazy/unreasonable in that?

Legally, biologically, genetically and morphologically there are three sexes, male, female and intersex. Some people are born with traits of both sexes. There is a spectrum in the physicality between a physical male and a physical female. A person might favor one side of the spectrum but not be completely cis.

It's part of general physical diversity. Just as some men have tiny penises that create insecurity and anger which drives them to join a fringe ideologies like flat earth, MTG may have a giant clit that hangs down several inches like a dick . It's a reflection on the Republicans that they're worried about stupid shit like this while the Russians attack our infrastructure and freaks that they armed are gunning down children. You have to wonder what the fuck is up with these people. The entire conservative movement is so freaked out on homos and drag queens, you know they have some serious psycho-sexual issues.

[Tom Bishop]

I suppose that it is difficult for some people to accept that there is now a recognized a difference between sex and gender.

What do we mean by sex and gender? Aren’t these terms interchangeable? Perhaps at some point in time they were used as synonyms, but this is no longer true in science.
...
Importantly, the committee emphasized that neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience. To differentiate between these broad areas of investigation, the members created working definitions of “sex” — when referring to biology — and “gender” — when referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural, and personal experience.

There are people going around claiming to be furries who have animal genders.

Here is a person who identifies as fishgender and uses the pronouns toy/toyself - https://www.reddit.com/r/LiberalsOfTikTok/comments/twkzxe/this_person_identifies_as_fishgender_and_uses/

So you can see why some people are skeptical that these are actual genders rather than psychiatric problems.

Legally, biologically, genetically and morphologically there are three sexes, male, female and intersex. Some people are born with traits of both sexes. There is a spectrum in the physicality between a physical male and a physical female.

If a tiny fraction of people are born with multiple contrasting sex organs that might be a mutation, not a genuine sexuality. Since this is incredibly rare, and since those people only express combinations of male or female sex organs, it seems to reinforce the notion that there are only two sexes.

You can also find opinions like this published in places like the Journal of Sex Research:

https://www.leonardsax.com/how-common-is-intersex-a-response-to-anne-fausto-sterling/

How common is intersex?

Journal of Sex Research
August 1, 2002

...

CONCLUSIONS

The available data support the conclusion that human sexuality is a dichotomy, not a continuum. More than 99.98% of humans are either male or female. If the term intersex is to retain any clinical meaning, the use of this term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female.

The birth of an intersex child, far from being “a fairly common phenomenon,” is actually a rare event, occurring in fewer than 2 out of every 10,000 births.

I'm surprised you've barely heard of her. You don't remember that she was big on Qanon, now distanced herself from it, “Like a lot of people today, I had easily gotten sucked into some things I had seen on the internet,” Greene said Sunday when Fox News host Howard Kurtz questioned her past association with the conspiracy theory."

In that quote you provided here she appears to be backtracking from something she had previously said. That is evidence that she is introspective and reasonable, not evidence that she is unreasonable.

[Roundy]

Tom, do "fishgender" people have the backing of the scientific community? 

[Rushy]

Tom, do "fishgender" people have the backing of the scientific community? 

If it did, would that affect your personal opinion of "fishgender"?

[honk]

A reasonable person would have never thought that something as ridiculous as QAnon could be true for a second. MTG enthusiastically embraced QAnon and advocated for it online for years. That she finally realized it wasn't true years later simply isn't making a good case for her mental fitness.

[Roundy]

Tom, do "fishgender" people have the backing of the scientific community? 

If it did, would that affect your personal opinion of "fishgender"?

What's your purpose in asking this question?

[Rushy]

Tom, do "fishgender" people have the backing of the scientific community? 

If it did, would that affect your personal opinion of "fishgender"?

What's your purpose in asking this question?

You asked if it had the backing of the scientific community and so I thought I would ask you if that matters to you or not. If a large number of studies were released that confirmed people experience "mammal dysphoria" and that they genuinely believe themselves to be fish, would that make you more accepting of fishgender?

[markjo]

Looks like Trump isn't the only one who has a problem understanding that secret information is supposed to stay secret.
https://www.tag24.com/politics/politicians/did-marjorie-taylor-greene-openly-admit-to-committing-a-crime-on-live-tv-2859278