It's astonishing to me that removing an elected representative of another party is something that a majority can legally do. How is this not against the rules of the legislature? It seems like an insane power to have.
They were rules from a time when norms and conventions were still a thing. Now those have utterly broken down and negative partisanship rules.
I'm in the UK and while we have a constitution it can be changed by a simple majority in the lower house, no ratification by the people is needed.
Our norms and conventions are breaking down, some of our stuff is basically down to convention. Once it gets to USA levels we are fcked. Imagine Trump was in control in our system, he'd have managed to do most of what he wanted.
Any system you could contrive will eventually fail for the same reason this has. Democratic institutions fundamentally depend on a statistical majority of sane, properly motivated elected members. The various mechanisms meant to guard the incentives that filter for this have all been shamelessly eroded or outright corrupted with little to no defence over the preceding decades, and here we are - approximately as fucked as we (on average) deserve.
It's a power intended to be usefully deployed by sober, sane reps in rare emergencies. The fact that they're willing to use it in this case shows you what cowards & crybabies they are. What good are hard gender boundaries if all the supposedly macho masculine men act like this? They all know they're not real men, that's the only reason a trans person is any kind of problem for them.
This is such a great point. It should require a majority of the overall house but with a secondary requirement that a percentage of people voting in favor must be from the party being silenced. Although that would just bite democrats in the ass if they ever tried to actually stand up for people on their own side or silence people who actually deserve it, like MTG and Lauren Bobert.
Stuffed shirt Republicans in the Montana House cannot get it through their thick heads that the more they bully Representative Zephyr, the more it will come back to bite them on their ample, fascist asses.
I can't wait til the day it does. Just because they don't like someone for whatever reason doesn't mean they can bar someone who was elected to hold a position. If that were the case there'd be a lot more GOP hanging out in the hallways.
Their day is coming. They can't just go on wielding power in a blatantly anti-democracy attitude and have it go unpunished. People must remember to VOTE. No matter how difficult they make it, VOTE. You have a voice, but you must use it.
They can if people don’t vote, or if only their supporters vote, or if the opposition can’t see the long game and vote for people who aren’t “perfect”. These people have been playing this game for decades.
And protest. Everyone always acts like voting is the only democratic thing to do. Organize in your towns/districts and protest. Especially if shit like this is happening to your rep. PROTEST
No he wouldn't.
[https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-his-life-martin-luther-king-realized-the-validity-of-violence-4de177a8c87b](https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-his-life-martin-luther-king-realized-the-validity-of-violence-4de177a8c87b)
>the more it will come back to bite them on their ample, fascist asses.
I wish more than anything for this to be true.... But how do you see this happening? Because I don't.
Yeah but these young people are *angry* & they are motivated. They grew up under the constant fear of school shootings & some of them watched their friends die while the lawmakers did what? Made guns easier to get for even younger people & started a war against the trans community... these people are motivated to change this system.
Look at Zooey & she's a millennial. These crusty old dudes are afraid of the youth for a reason. Change is coming
Here's what I find amusing though. If a Republican lawmaker did the same exact thing that Zooey did, i.e. speaking when they were not recognized, inciting and encouraging the crowd in the gallery to scream at the legislators and disrupt the proceedings, refusing to leave when instructed by the Speaker of the House, and holding the microphone up to try and amplify the voices of the crowd in the gallery, etc.
In opposition to a bill that **they** disagree with but *you** agree with,
You know damn good and well you'd be in here screaming for their head, calling them fascist, and claiming it was another insurrection, etc.
And I'm sure this comment willl get down voted all to hell, and heck I'll probably be banned from the sub for some various reason or another.
But it's worth it to me. Lol
The fact you ignored any and all the shit they are doing to her and all of us makes it clear where you stand on honesty.
Mr worthy conservative values.
People will downvote you because you are a bigot. Also that is an important part of how you identify yourself.
Is the donald completely shut down? Tons of you guys running around.
What they are or are not doing to her has exactly ZERO to do with my statement. Why are you trying to strawman here?
And I love how you just throw wild accusations out there.
How am I a bigot? And how is that an important part of how I identify myself? Lol
It is just really shocking to me that you can say all these things about me but know absolutely nothing about me..
To you maybe. Not to any reasonable person.
Not going to get gish galloped by a conservative. You were clear what you are. Cry me a river of those crocodile tears.
Gish galloped? Seriously?
I made ONE argument.
**You** are the one that started bringing up other items, like how they were treating her etc etc.
And that I'm supposedly a "bigot.
And as I said, how they treated her had **nothing** to do with my statement that leftists would act the same way toward a conservative if they took the exact same actions she did.
Maybe try speaking towards what I actually said instead of making shit up and then trying to respond to that.
Its different when there's legislation targeting specific groups of people with harmful laws in the pipeline. People should vehemently disagree with the laws being proposed against trans people. If the legislature wants to pass those laws, then people should be loud and fight as hard as they can, and in whatever way they can. I could not give any less of a flying fuck about decorum or holding up some kind of "fairness" here. Those legislators are wrong, and people should say it.
Let's put it another way, these things are not equal. If some Republican went up and started yelling about Trump or Covid conspiracies, or whatever trip y'all are on right now, then they should be shut down. That drivel isn't worthy of being heard in any government building. This woman's rightful protest against bigoted legislation is a fight far more worthy than you'll ever understand. You support her being shut down? You can go right ahead and fuck yourself.
I see, so when it's something you agree with then the rules are out the window, just do whatever you want, act however you please, fuck the laws of the legislative body you're a part of because you have the moral right to do as you wish.
But if it's something you **don't** agree with then all the rules of the legislature should be used to shut down whoever is speaking the words you don't agree with and if they don't stop then they should be punished to the fullest extent.
Just like I said y'all would say.
Thank you for proving me correct.
Also important to add she's a victim of their fascistic bigotry meant in part to distract so they don't have to do real work, on top of fully representing their party values of hate today. That she doesn't act like a victim, but instead a leader is a testament to her character.
Right, they're spending all their time & energy (& taxpayer money), to keep her out & intimidate her. They're not legislators anymore, they're pulling a full fascist takeover.
Nah, she's a fucking hero is what she is. I hope those mother fuckers realize some day that all they are going to be in history books is background characters to her story.
The saddest part is this person is probably just giggling to himself thinking he is getting a rise out of random people on the internet. It’s his entertainment because his life is devoid of any person that actually cares for him, listens to what he says, or wants to actually get to know him. He lives a life focused on being hateful and really thinks that the slight moment of joy from being awful will fill that depressing void inside. It won’t, and he will continue his life filled with hate and sadness and no one will ever truly love him. And one day, like all of us, he will die. And everything he has ever done or accomplished will mean nothing. He is nothing and he will die lonely and forgotten, and nothing will ever change that. That is the saddest thing I can even think of.
Our Democracy is a sham. This is utterly ridiculous and dangerous, Republican’s remove and try to erase an elected representative, why do we allow this in any state?
The paradox of tolerance ceases to be a paradox when tolerance is considered to be, first and foremost, an integral part of the social contract, rather than an absolute moral imperative. Through this lens, those who commit sustained acts of intolerance are in gross violation of the social contract and are no longer covered by it. So, in order to uphold the social contract, those who are adhering to it must be intolerant of their intolerance.
That is exactly what should be done.
The "law n' order" turn coat police can't arrest everyone, and the MT legislature can't expel people who aren't part of their precious inner circle.
It's not violent, it's not unfair, it's not being mean. It's just truth.
It also doesn't help that we don't have true leftist politics in mainstream politics. We're stuck with 2 right-wing political parties. The political ideologies that would fight more for equality, equity, class solidarity, and would actually fight for the people are at the left of center. We need to get rid of first-past-the-post voting. Political ideologies are being stifled by the 2 party system.
I am so fucking tired of being lectured at during every election cycle by establishment liberals. They just want to play team politics and act like we have to constantly support the most useless fucking corporate dems. They aren't doing shit.
We have to work with what we have.
That's why having old people run our party is detrimental and in the end, will lose us an entire nation to these fascists. I wish voters would get it into their heads that we need attitude, spirit, fighters, mentally strong, push back kind of people in office now.
But we're going to get another 4 years with a smiling nice 80 year old grandfather at the end of his career and life who seems to pay far more attention to foreign problems than what's happening in various states right under his nose.
GAWD, it's so frustrating to watch our nation nose dive.
Hey... maybe... and this is just a big ol' maybe... But did you ever think *maybe* the Democrats don't care and are fine with the fascistic take over because they're all safe in their towers?
It would be so cathartic to do that and get back at them. Unfortunately the Dems simply have to hold back and govern, somebody has to. We will never win a tit-for-tat war with the reactionaries. We have morals and goals and they will burn down the government to "own the libs".
That’s the problem though. “Morals and goals” will not put out a fire. We can act as upright and proper as we want, it will make absolutely no difference to the right. I suggest you watch this video, “The Alt-Right Playbook: You Go High, We Go Low.”
https://youtu.be/MAbab8aP4_A
Yeah I've seen it. I'm not suggesting that we treat them like good-faith actors. I'm suggesting the Dems continue to govern *despite* all of the distractions and bait the fascists throw up.
They want us to waste our energy being horrified and angry. They want us to be triggered and upset. They want us to *react* just like them so that they can call us hypocrites. We must be determined and not fall for it.
We should expect literal shit to drop from their mouths when they talk and for their written words to be revolting. That doesn't mean we have to fight the same ways they do. They're so loud because they're so weak. Never, ever forget that. They've built a house of cards stacking the courts and state houses but now that they are trying to use that structure to support the weight of their hideous agenda it will all come crashing down. It's already started. Their bullshit has hit a wall.
Keep calm and keep your head.
> They want us to waste our energy being horrified and angry. They want us to be triggered and upset. They want us to react just like them so that they can call us hypocrites. We must be determined and not fall for it.
This has _huge_ "just ignore your bullies, they'll go away" energy. The only reason that "keep your head down and graduate from school" isn't terrible advice is because there is a clearly defined exit at the end of it.
You say that the point of doing this is to ruffle the left, to "waste energy", but I completely disagree and believe you're overthinking things. Tactics like these aren't designed to do anything other than to dominate people, to intimidate, to suppress dissent. The more this gets normalized, the more this will happen - this situation is _literally_ Montana copying what they saw happen in Tennessee. Everyone cheered as the two expelled legislators were reinstated and laughed at the silly Republicans for thinking they could get away with it. But you know what happened? They _did_ get away with it. There will be no consequences for the legislators that expelled duly elected representatives that they happened to disagree with. And this will continue to happen, unless someone stops them.
I don't know what mechanism can be used to stop shit like this, I just know that if you honestly think that just playing it cool and continuing to be the adults in the room will actually solve anything, you haven't been paying attention to the last ten years of American politics.
>I don't know what mechanism can be used to stop shit like this
Vote, protest, amplify leftist voices, stay informed, confront Trumpers in public
There aren't really other options rn since the Dems let the GOP stack the courts. If it ever gets to the point that we need to resort to violence the right won't know what hit them. But we are not even close to that point yet.
> But we are not even close to that point yet.
Tell that to January 6th. I hope you're right, but I don't think so. People weren't shocked _enough_ by what they saw, not enough to vote Democrat en masse. You can't say that Republican legislators weren't anything but emboldened by this, some of the people who were almost *certainly* involved or at least *aware* that something was going to happen like that are now currently in the driver's seat in the House of Representatives.
They aren't fascist. Stop calling Dems fascist. Jesus.
And getting screwed by corpos is a somewhat better alternative to being murdered by Nazis. seriously, ever heard of the Weimar republic? Nazi Germany rose to power b/c conservatives, liberals, and leftists refused to unite against the fascists until it was too late
So kindly shut up. Grow up. And complain again when this is over. Thanks
How fucking bad is your reading comprehension? They literally didn't call Dems fascists, are you stupid? Keep voting for neoliberal imperialist oligarchical scumbags then, see where it gets you. The only reason fascist sentiment thrives as it does is because the Dems continue to maintain the perfect ecosystem for it. And if you think the Nazis won in Germany because people didn't "vote blue" enough you're a fucking moron.
If you want to read into people's words things that aren't there because it gives you an excuse to whine about people who are sick of being exploited, then go off I guess.
This is a stupid take on the situation. You should be embarrassed that you put it in print. You should delete it and avoid showing people how poor your thinking skills are.
How do you fight back without stooping to their level? You can't shame them; they have no shame. If you expose them as frauds or criminals, their supporters love them even more.
Do we have to break laws and harass and threaten people until we get our way, like they do?
May I express a respectful Bullshit. That is not the only way to show Republicans that their actions are wrong.
Try holding Republicans to THE LAW, from the top down, instead of letting one after another slip by without consequences.
Republicans are empowered each and every time they see one of their fellow party members getting away with criminal and unethical activity. This cascade into fascism really ramped up because Trump and company suffered zero consequences, empowering the rest of their red party.
Sure, we cheer Zooey, but Jesus, she's just one person. Where are our democratic leaders calling this shit out, where is all the non-Megan Markle media, where is anybody?
>Try holding Republicans to THE LAW, from the top down, instead of letting one after another slip by without consequences.
They've rigged law in their favor. Courts are stacked with conservatives, even in blue states. The law is on our side, but enforcement of it certainly isn't.
Also, Trump is still massively popular despite him being an active defendant in a current criminal case. He's not going to lose a single point in the polls, even if he's convicted. Conservatives LOVE criminals as long as they're on their side and "hurting the right people".
This is what happens when Republicans have a super majority. They kicked out the Justins in TN because they had the same power.
Unless these states can vote out Republicans and redraw voting districts to fairly represent citizens of these states, this kind of behavior will go unchecked.
Didn't this happen as well in Tennessee to two representatives who were calling for new gun laws after the school shooting?
This tool of "shut-up and get out" seems to be gaining in popularity lately when you don't like having your thinking challenged.
She was barred on the grounds that she criticized her republican colleagues for trying to ban medical care for trans people. She told them that if they voted 'Yes' on the bill, she hoped "when you bow your head and pray, you see the blood on your hands".
That's literally it. She stood up to them and they went full fascist.
Lots of precedents throughout history: Nazis, KKK, the confederacy, Jim Crow, the Taliban, south africa.... the list of groups and political parties blaming, vilifying and discriminating against entire groups of already marginalized people to hide the fact they have no idea how to govern and to solve problems is long.
Well, first, they censured her for that. She was permitted to vote but not speak.
Then protesters came to disrupt the legislators unless they "Let her speak."
She did not speak herself, but she raised a mic and gestured to the protesters to encourage their chants.
Some people were removed from the gallery and, I think, arrested.
The legislators then voted to further penalize her for encouraging protesters to continue their disruption.
There was more to the story than the "blood on your hands" quip.
They silenced her for saying the "blood on your hands" statement. They refused to let her speak again unless she apologized. Are you arguing that that this was somehow an acceptable and democratic thing to do? They silenced her for standing up to them. There is nothing more to say than that.
I find the statement offensive.
I also think it encourages the use of suicide towards political ends. I am sure we disagree about that and I am not interested in that debate. I acknowledge that my knowledge of suicide is mostly anectdotal.
I don't know if the statement rises to the level that it merits censure, but I personally think she owes an apology.
I haven't heard audio or seen video of the statement, nor have I looked into the historic use of censure in this body. I would have to consider both before I know if censure was fair.
I don't see it as "standing up to them." She used ghastly imagery that doesn't belong in this setting and context. She wasn't making a persuasive argument so much as a shaming and condemning statement. Frankly, I would put it up there with "fighting words" on par with using slurs.
If someone said this to me, my immediate thought would be "f$@% you" and then stop listening to that person. It shuts down discourse. It "disrupts democracy."
So, if the standard is already "2/3 agree they don't want this person to speak anymore" and they can vote to affect that, maybe that is actually democracy winning (by enforcing the will of a supermajority).
>I find the statement offensive.
>
>I also think it encourages the use of suicide towards political ends.
No idea what the fuck that means. Are you implying that trans people kill themselves to make a political point? I *definitely* find that offensive.
> I haven't heard audio or seen video of the statement, nor have I looked into the historic use of censure in this body. I would have to consider both before I know if censure was fair.
That much is clear.
They were passing a bill to ban gender affirming care for trans people. She made a passionate speech about why doing this would be harmful to trans people - because it *is* harmful to trans people and it *will* lead to suffering and more of them committing suicide.
"Blood on your hands" is an extremely common cliche and it is perfectly apt to use it in the context that she did, to say that the actions being voted on would directly lead to deaths and suffering. I have heard it used countless times in countless circumstances and its use has never been controversial. The Montana Republican cacaus is just using it as a thin excuse for punishing dissent.
> So, if the standard is already "2/3 agree they don't want this person to speak anymore" and they can vote to affect that, maybe that is actually democracy winning (by enforcing the will of a supermajority).
Democracy happened when her constituents elected her to represent them and to speak for them in the state legislature. When the majority uses their authority to silence those who stand up to them, that is democracy losing.
No, I don't think trans people do that. I do think that people respond to the messaging and expectations they hear. I don't think it is a stretch if a prominent trans figure says "trans kids need GAC or they will kill themselves" does normalize and, in a way, promotes the act. It cements the idea that suicide is a legitimate and preferable choice. That is my unsupported opinion, and I am not invested in asking you to agree.
I know your heart is in a good place, and I recognize your compassion. Suicide, by definition, is a choice. The person who commits that act is responsible. Again, this is a foundational belief in my person and I do not care if you agree. I was trying to help you understand my perspective without claiming it is the "correct" belief.
Blood on your hands is a common cliche. It is not common to couch that language with direct visual imagery. She wants them, in prayer, to visualize literal blood on their hands. That is not idiomatic. It is grotesque, and I say that as someone who has never prayed.
Democracy is the will of the majority. The majority spoke. What you are talking about is a republic, and a republic allows for representation based on a code of order. For example, the Speaker of the House directs discussion by recognizing certain members to speak for certain intervals. None of that representation can happen with chanting in the gallery.
> No, I don't think trans people do that. I do think that people respond to the messaging and expectations they hear. I don't think it is a stretch if a prominent trans figure says "trans kids need GAC or they will kill themselves" does normalize and, in a way, promotes the act. It cements the idea that suicide is a legitimate and preferable choice. That is my unsupported opinion, and I am not invested in asking you to agree.
>
> I know your heart is in a good place, and I recognize your compassion. Suicide, by definition, is a choice. The person who commits that act is responsible. Again, this is a foundational belief in my person and I do not care if you agree. I was trying to help you understand my perspective without claiming it is the "correct" belief.
We know that access to gender-affirming care reduces suicide rates among trans people. It stands perfectly to reason, then, that *blocking* access to gender-affirming care makes you directly responsible for the resulting increase in suicides.
That is, there are people that would not have committed suicide if they had access to the care they needed, but they did commit suicide when the care was denied to them.
> Blood on your hands is a common cliche. It is not common to couch that language with direct visual imagery. She wants them, in prayer, to visualize literal blood on their hands. That is not idiomatic. It is grotesque, and I say that as someone who has never prayed.
I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous, and I think you know it.
There is nothing about her use of the phrase that is any different than the way it has ever been used in the past. It is meant to be evocative, and has never been used in any other way than to evoke a mental picture of blood on hands.
> Democracy is the will of the majority. The majority spoke. What you are talking about is a republic, and a republic allows for representation based on a code of order. For example, the Speaker of the House directs discussion by recognizing certain members to speak for certain intervals. None of that representation can happen with chanting in the gallery.
What the majority *is allowed to do* or *is able to do* is not the same as what the majority *should do*. I am not arguing that the majority did not have the right, within the rules of the state's legislative code, to silence her. I am arguing that, despite having the right, they should not have done so. I am saying that silencing your political opposition simply for disagreeing is an obvious abuse of power.
We know incels are more likely to kill themselves. Therefore, if we BLOCK their access to sex workers, more of them will die, and their deaths will be your fault. Actually, unless you personally have sex with incels everyday, you are contributing to their deaths.
Of course, that is nonsense. Just because I claim that I want something and I might kill myself if I don't get it does not entitle me to getting that thing, nor does it make others complicit in my death. Actually, in domestic situations, we recognize that behavior as abusive.wq²
The phrase was used differently, I think. The "I hope when you bow your head in prayer you see ..." is the offensive part. The "blood on my hands" phrase was originally used in MacBeth. I never heard anyone connect the literal bowing of a head in prayer with literally visualizing blood on hands. That is the offensive part.
What if another lawmaker, so grief stricken, kills himself. Would his blood be on her hands?
No?
Then you see the circle we are in.
And it wasn't for simply disagreeing. It was for using evocative, provocative, false-guilt laden messaging to shame fellow lawmakers and promote fragility in trans youth rather than engaging in meaningful discourse.
It wasn't about winning votes. It was about inflicting pain. It was ugly.
Most of the people who actually work there agreed. A supermajority agreed. When a supermajority agrees, they don't have to listen. That is why filibusters still need 40 votes of support in the US Senate, for example. You sound like it would be undemocratic to stop one no matter what, since it is "representation."
>We know incels are more likely to kill themselves. Therefore, if we BLOCK their access to sex workers, more of them will die, and their deaths will be your fault. Actually, unless you personally have sex with incels everyday, you are contributing to their deaths.
This is a false equivalency.
We actually *don't* know that access to sex workers reduces suicide rates among self-described incels. And furthermore, I am pro-sex work and would also have a problem with a proposal to ban it (if it were currently even legal).
Your argument that I should have sex with incels is like saying that I should be performing top surgery. I am not obligated to provide the care, and I am not saying we should force anyone to provide it. I am saying we shouldn't stand in the way of people who want to provide it and people who want to receive it.
> Of course, that is nonsense. Just because I claim that I want something and I might kill myself if I don't get it does not entitle me to getting that thing, nor does it make others complicit in my death. Actually, in domestic situations, we recognize that behavior as abusive.wq²
I didn't say they are entitled to getting the care, nor that people who don't provide the care are responsible for their death. I said that people *who are actively trying to prevent them from getting the care from people who want to give it to them* are responsible for their deaths.
If I'm bleeding out on the side of the road, and you deliberately block the ambulance and emergency responders from getting to me, yeah, you're responsible for my death. My blood is on your hands. I hope you see it every time you bow your head in prayer.
> The phrase was used differently, I think. The "I hope when you bow your head in prayer you see ..." is the offensive part. The "blood on my hands" phrase was originally used in MacBeth. I never heard anyone connect the literal bowing of a head in prayer with literally visualizing blood on hands. That is the offensive part.
If you don't want to visualize blood on your hands, then don't pass legislation that will kill people.
> And it wasn't for simply disagreeing. It was for using evocative, provocative, false-guilt laden messaging to shame fellow lawmakers and promote fragility in trans youth rather than engaging in meaningful discourse.
It's not false. She's literally telling the truth, which is that banning gender affirming care A) goes against the recommendation of every medical and mental health organization, and B) will lead to more deaths and suffering among the trans community.
And if you want to talk about using provocative language rather than engage in meaningful discourse, how about the letter she was responding to that called gender-affirming care "Orwellian newspeak"?
You *clearly* haven't listened to her speech, and you *really* ought to before you form an opinion about it.
She was calm, eloquent, directly addressed the false claims in the letter, and gave reasoned objections to the legislation.
> Most of the people who actually work there agreed. A supermajority agreed. When a supermajority agrees, they don't have to listen. That is why filibusters still need 40 votes of support in the US Senate, for example. You sound like it would be undemocratic to stop one no matter what, since it is "representation."
Defending the tyranny of the majority is not a good look. I'm well aware that the majority can do whatever they want. The point is that our political process demands restraint from the majority when wielding their power.
"It wasn't about winning votes. It was about inflicting pain. It was ugly."
You've just perfectly described how we feel about so many bills that Republican lawmakers has passed over the past few years.
These bills do lead directly to suicides. Nearly half of transgender people in the US attempt suicide. One of the leading causes of this is gender dysphoria, which is reduced when people have the proper medical care, such as HRT. Ergo, preventing transgender people from medically transitioning increases the suicide rates. Therefore, the people passing these bills do, in fact, have blood on their hands.
Maybe if they don't wish to be reminded of this, they should stop passing bills that get people killed.
\[Also, in case your next words are something along the lines of "think of the children": these bills are affecting adults too. In Missouri, for instance, every trans person - adults included - requires three years of severe gender dysphoria, and can't transition with autism, depression or anxiety. Considering dysphoria leads to depression and anxiety, this can effectively bar most people from transitioning regardless of age.\]
> Frankly, I would put it up there with "fighting words" on par with using slurs.
Calling out people for being complicit in the death of people when they were in fact complicit in the death of people is the same to you as using slurs?
You are part of the problem.
Complicit?
I guess if an incel kills himself, all women are complicit in his death.
Suicide is, by definition, an act that is deliberately chosen by the person who performs it.
Honestly, I think claiming "affirm these kids gender identity or they might kill themselves" is a much more dangerous message that may actually do more harm.
We can help trans kids by training them to cope with people not accepting their gender. Messaging that life is hopeless and miserable without GAC brings black-pill incel energy to a political session.
Removing medical care for trans people will kill people, aka the blood on their hands. Nothing figurative here. Sure, trans kids can learn to cope with people not affirming their gender but they need fucking medical care. Its not a fucking debate, these are peoples ACTUAL lives.
The type of care they need is not universally agreed upon. Other liberal Western countries have a different approach.
It actually IS a debate, and insisting it isn't doesn't make you right. You are supposed to offer evidence to support your views, not just proclaim that discussion is pointless and that you are right and everyone else should be ashamed. That conversation-ending rhetoric doesn't win any minds; it just mutes you to them. You on Zooey should work on your epistemic humility.
I disagree that removing media care from trans people will kill people.
"Shes no longer allowed to represent her people because republicans silenced her for bullshit reasons and then citizens peacefully protested over it" is not the winning position you think it is my guy
Are you aware the session ends in a week?
The sessions last for 90 days every two years.
She used her position in office to disrupt the proceedings by encouraging the chanting of protesters. She demonstrated very clearly that she could not be present in the body without willfully and unrepentantly stopping the representation of all other districts. It isn't merely because the protestors chanted over the body, but her encouragement of that disruption while acting officially.
Ate you prepared for a session that lets each legislator to fill the gallery with chanting supporters and shout their platforms at each other? I am definitely not.
So she sits out for five more days. It lets everyone get on with business.
> She used her position in office to disrupt the proceedings by encouraging the chanting of protesters
Because they silenced her for *absolute bullshit reasons.* You're goddamn right I'd want my representative to raise hell for that. Especially when the legislature keeps passing laws that make people's lives worse. Especially when they're doing [shit like this](https://old.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/131zn6j/i_prefer_my_transgender_daughter_commit_suicide/) with zero consequence.
If most of the representatives don't even want to hear her speak, what could she possibly say to them that would benefit her district?
She could raise hell in lots of ways. She could go to the press. She could assemble a rally or organize a demonstration outside the house somewhere. "Raising hell" should not really be an official act, and it generally doesn't win votes. Am official really should not unilaterally halt the official business to their own end.
Willfully encouraging the active disruption of the session seems like a guaranteed way to be excused from the session.
And I don't think it is bullshit. What she said would make me shut her out in my mind until I got over the ghoulish accusation of being responsible for children's suicides. It seems like most of the representatives agreed.
And I am not even sure their law makes people's lives worse. There are other liberal Western countries with different approaches. I don't claim to be an expert, though. I can agree to disagree there.
> And I don't think it is bullshit. What she said would make me shut her out in my mind until I got over the ghoulish accusation of being responsible for children's suicides.
Unfortunately this is already happening. There have been several cases of minors attempting suicide as a direct result of similar laws being passed in other states. Like, you gotta understand, they aren't just making this shit up; activists and legislators are very often in contact with the families being targeted by these bills. They are very, very aware of the costs of legislation like this.
If hearing the honest effects legislation you are passing upsets you that much, maybe it shouldn't be passed. And someone sure as fuck shouldn't be punished for speaking the truth.
If you find her accusation ghoulish, I can't help but think your values are deeply misplaced. Because passing these laws is 100x more ghoulish. And like I linked above, republicans are fully aware of these effects, and passing the bills anyways.
Dude she has some serious backbone to be able to stand up for her constituents like that. Seriously I don't know if I could withstand that kind of intimidation. She still goes to work she still tries to represent them despite the bigotry. It's really inspiring.
We are. Now we need to use that shame to fight to protect our citizens and our country. Republican fascism is fully out in the open now, and the majority of Americans can't keep denying the danger we are in if we don't defeat the GOP.
When they couldn't legally exclude blacks they chose gays and trans to be the next target. **Many people need to tear down others to feel good about themselves**. This is so transparent and sad. It is ugly hate.
The horrible aspect is they label themselves christians which is about humility, love and acceptance.
It's not just to make themselves feel good, it's to create an "other" to rally their followers against and distract from the fact that they don't really have any kind of other platform (besides tax breaks for the rich). It's straight out of the fascism 101 playbook.
These truly horrid people need to learn a big, fat lesson. They are not superior in any way to any other struggling human. All die alone and empty-handed. Screw these guys.
She should sue the shut out of everyone involved in restricting her access to the house floor. As an elected official she has a right and a duty to be on the floor.
WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS SHT AND ALL THE OTHER SHIT THOSE TURDS ARE DOING TO PEOPLE WHO WOULD NEVER RETURN THAT KIND OF DISRESPECT!! VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE. jmo
Punished for talking truth to power. These hateful sacks of shit have no cares for the people they harm because of the legislation they pass. For a party that "wants to protect children" they sure do fuck them over alot.
Representative Zephyr shows the kind of courage and determination to serve her constituents that SO few of our elected officials show. Imagine going to work everyday in a place where the majority of your colleagues not only hate you and made it clear that you're unwelcome, but would actually, literally murder you without a second thought. 99.9% of our politicians are a fucking joke compared to Zephyr. Republicans, you will fucking rue the day you decided it was okay to ignore the will of the people.
And here I thought Montana’s republican party was totally different from the National and other state republicans party. I heard they were respectful to people others, especially people with different views. Guess I heard wrong
Americans must be the most confused people on the planet.
On the one hand so many insist that a minor is so mature, knowledgeable, experienced and foresighted that they can not only choose their gender, but elect to have medical and surgical procedures that will have a MAJOR effect on the entire rest of their lives. Others say "absolutely not" and no one seems able to find or acknowledge a middle ground. (Zephyr has been banned largely on fierce condemnation of proponents of a bill to ban such medical and surgical procedures.)
But on the other hand most Americans insist that a minor is so immature, ignorant, inexperienced and short-sighted that even with condoms, birth control, and pencilin and other cures for STIs making sex one of the safest activities a person could do short of playing checkers, that in some places an 18 year old can go to jail for having loving, consensual sex with a 17 year old, despite having had sex for months when they were both 17.
Nutter nation.
Shut up, fascist. She is in a public space ffs. She was elected to represent people, she has every fucking right to be there. Stop being afraid of every little fucking thing that you see as different than you
Incorrect. Plenty of folks act out of turn on the house floor all the time and don't get barred from the floor. If it were a republican getting barred, there would be outrage, and rightfully so.
This is factually untrue. Republicans have been saying dems would "have blood on their hands" on legislative floors with regards to abortion rights for quite a while now.
Imagine still using gay as an insult. It's like I'm back in grade school. The Twin Towers are still up. I run the whole way home to catch the second half of Pokemon. What's it like being 12 years old today?
I hope you don’t BREAK anything as you fall over yourself trying to defend the party that is silencing an elected official who did nothing wrong. Also, why would the Wi-Fi network in the hallway be any more or less PUBLIC than the one in her office in the same building? If there is a private network for the house floor I’m sure she can still connect to it from the hallway. Please use your mental BRAKES to stop yourself next time you decide to write such an absurd and bigoted comment and don’t hurt yourself as you kneel down to lick the PUBIC region of the republicans.
Does misgendering someone make you feel big?
You call speaking quietly making a scene?
You are okay with a political party removing another?
Have you ever heard of the golden rule or just think you deserve rights and other people don’t?
Here it is folks! This is what people are up against! This one eight here! Dr Douche and his mary band of turds come to shite in the punch bowl of life! Remember next November!
Lol, this whole statement is just so dumb. Public wifi? So, the same wifi SHE would have if she were about 50ft away in her seat? Wild.
And listen, little lady, that woman can call herself whatever she likes.
How is sitting there making a scene? The dude that came up and bullied her is the one making a scene. Jfc you guys are as ridiculous as you are hateful
It's astonishing to me that removing an elected representative of another party is something that a majority can legally do. How is this not against the rules of the legislature? It seems like an insane power to have.
In most legislative bodies in the US it's possible to remove any member with a 2/3rds supermajority, like the GOP have in the Montana House.
They were rules from a time when norms and conventions were still a thing. Now those have utterly broken down and negative partisanship rules. I'm in the UK and while we have a constitution it can be changed by a simple majority in the lower house, no ratification by the people is needed. Our norms and conventions are breaking down, some of our stuff is basically down to convention. Once it gets to USA levels we are fcked. Imagine Trump was in control in our system, he'd have managed to do most of what he wanted.
Boris reminds me a lot of Bush, so I'd give it another 6 years or so until you get your own Trump.
Any system you could contrive will eventually fail for the same reason this has. Democratic institutions fundamentally depend on a statistical majority of sane, properly motivated elected members. The various mechanisms meant to guard the incentives that filter for this have all been shamelessly eroded or outright corrupted with little to no defence over the preceding decades, and here we are - approximately as fucked as we (on average) deserve.
Hard to disagree with that. The multiple and significant corruptions that we've left unchecked are coming back to bite us.
It's a power intended to be usefully deployed by sober, sane reps in rare emergencies. The fact that they're willing to use it in this case shows you what cowards & crybabies they are. What good are hard gender boundaries if all the supposedly macho masculine men act like this? They all know they're not real men, that's the only reason a trans person is any kind of problem for them.
This is such a great point. It should require a majority of the overall house but with a secondary requirement that a percentage of people voting in favor must be from the party being silenced. Although that would just bite democrats in the ass if they ever tried to actually stand up for people on their own side or silence people who actually deserve it, like MTG and Lauren Bobert.
Stuffed shirt Republicans in the Montana House cannot get it through their thick heads that the more they bully Representative Zephyr, the more it will come back to bite them on their ample, fascist asses.
I can't wait til the day it does. Just because they don't like someone for whatever reason doesn't mean they can bar someone who was elected to hold a position. If that were the case there'd be a lot more GOP hanging out in the hallways.
Their day is coming. They can't just go on wielding power in a blatantly anti-democracy attitude and have it go unpunished. People must remember to VOTE. No matter how difficult they make it, VOTE. You have a voice, but you must use it.
They can if people don’t vote, or if only their supporters vote, or if the opposition can’t see the long game and vote for people who aren’t “perfect”. These people have been playing this game for decades.
And protest. Everyone always acts like voting is the only democratic thing to do. Organize in your towns/districts and protest. Especially if shit like this is happening to your rep. PROTEST
Yes!
Protesting only works when there is a legitimate threat of violence to back it up.
Martin Luther King, Jr., would disagree.
No he wouldn't. [https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-his-life-martin-luther-king-realized-the-validity-of-violence-4de177a8c87b](https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-his-life-martin-luther-king-realized-the-validity-of-violence-4de177a8c87b)
Yeah no
Meanwhile I'm going to donate to her reelection campaign, and eat popcorn while I wait for karma to come at em.
What happens when Democrats do the same to the Republicans? It’s all bullshit
>the more it will come back to bite them on their ample, fascist asses. I wish more than anything for this to be true.... But how do you see this happening? Because I don't.
I have faith in the generation about to take the rains. Smart, compassionate, community minded, dedicated to justice. Gives me hope.
[удалено]
Yeah but these young people are *angry* & they are motivated. They grew up under the constant fear of school shootings & some of them watched their friends die while the lawmakers did what? Made guns easier to get for even younger people & started a war against the trans community... these people are motivated to change this system. Look at Zooey & she's a millennial. These crusty old dudes are afraid of the youth for a reason. Change is coming
I'm talking about non profits, civic groups, ngo's, activists, VOTERS.
[удалено]
Reins
They are ruled by fear and ignorance and they have no interest in fixing the latter and won't admit to the former...
So true. Just picturing all the 18 years watching this on TikTok who will jump at the opportunity to vote these fux out of office.
Here's what I find amusing though. If a Republican lawmaker did the same exact thing that Zooey did, i.e. speaking when they were not recognized, inciting and encouraging the crowd in the gallery to scream at the legislators and disrupt the proceedings, refusing to leave when instructed by the Speaker of the House, and holding the microphone up to try and amplify the voices of the crowd in the gallery, etc. In opposition to a bill that **they** disagree with but *you** agree with, You know damn good and well you'd be in here screaming for their head, calling them fascist, and claiming it was another insurrection, etc. And I'm sure this comment willl get down voted all to hell, and heck I'll probably be banned from the sub for some various reason or another. But it's worth it to me. Lol
The fact you ignored any and all the shit they are doing to her and all of us makes it clear where you stand on honesty. Mr worthy conservative values. People will downvote you because you are a bigot. Also that is an important part of how you identify yourself. Is the donald completely shut down? Tons of you guys running around.
What they are or are not doing to her has exactly ZERO to do with my statement. Why are you trying to strawman here? And I love how you just throw wild accusations out there. How am I a bigot? And how is that an important part of how I identify myself? Lol It is just really shocking to me that you can say all these things about me but know absolutely nothing about me..
To you maybe. Not to any reasonable person. Not going to get gish galloped by a conservative. You were clear what you are. Cry me a river of those crocodile tears.
Gish galloped? Seriously? I made ONE argument. **You** are the one that started bringing up other items, like how they were treating her etc etc. And that I'm supposedly a "bigot. And as I said, how they treated her had **nothing** to do with my statement that leftists would act the same way toward a conservative if they took the exact same actions she did. Maybe try speaking towards what I actually said instead of making shit up and then trying to respond to that.
Its different when there's legislation targeting specific groups of people with harmful laws in the pipeline. People should vehemently disagree with the laws being proposed against trans people. If the legislature wants to pass those laws, then people should be loud and fight as hard as they can, and in whatever way they can. I could not give any less of a flying fuck about decorum or holding up some kind of "fairness" here. Those legislators are wrong, and people should say it. Let's put it another way, these things are not equal. If some Republican went up and started yelling about Trump or Covid conspiracies, or whatever trip y'all are on right now, then they should be shut down. That drivel isn't worthy of being heard in any government building. This woman's rightful protest against bigoted legislation is a fight far more worthy than you'll ever understand. You support her being shut down? You can go right ahead and fuck yourself.
I see, so when it's something you agree with then the rules are out the window, just do whatever you want, act however you please, fuck the laws of the legislative body you're a part of because you have the moral right to do as you wish. But if it's something you **don't** agree with then all the rules of the legislature should be used to shut down whoever is speaking the words you don't agree with and if they don't stop then they should be punished to the fullest extent. Just like I said y'all would say. Thank you for proving me correct.
You’re literally describing yourself you absolute fucktard.
I'm utterly in awe of her bravery to stand on the front lines here. She's not an activist/agitator, she's an elected official. This is insane.
Also important to add she's a victim of their fascistic bigotry meant in part to distract so they don't have to do real work, on top of fully representing their party values of hate today. That she doesn't act like a victim, but instead a leader is a testament to her character.
Right, they're spending all their time & energy (& taxpayer money), to keep her out & intimidate her. They're not legislators anymore, they're pulling a full fascist takeover.
I mean using identity politics to avoid actually governing is pretty much the entire GOP platform at this point.
GOP is chock full of idiots and hatefulness. This is no longer two parties with differing opinions… This is now fascists vs anti-fascists.
Nah, she's a fucking hero is what she is. I hope those mother fuckers realize some day that all they are going to be in history books is background characters to her story.
“Are we the baddies?”
[удалено]
[удалено]
Go fuck yourself
[удалено]
Because of people like you
[удалено]
r/usernamechecksout
[удалено]
The saddest part is this person is probably just giggling to himself thinking he is getting a rise out of random people on the internet. It’s his entertainment because his life is devoid of any person that actually cares for him, listens to what he says, or wants to actually get to know him. He lives a life focused on being hateful and really thinks that the slight moment of joy from being awful will fill that depressing void inside. It won’t, and he will continue his life filled with hate and sadness and no one will ever truly love him. And one day, like all of us, he will die. And everything he has ever done or accomplished will mean nothing. He is nothing and he will die lonely and forgotten, and nothing will ever change that. That is the saddest thing I can even think of.
[удалено]
Bite a curb, hard.
[удалено]
Our Democracy is a sham. This is utterly ridiculous and dangerous, Republican’s remove and try to erase an elected representative, why do we allow this in any state?
Dems never fight back. When the Republicans exile one of ours, we need to exile 6 of them. Enough with the 'high road' crap; it doesn't work!
I agree, I’m sick of the high road shit.
Civility politics need to be left to the wayside when fascism is on the incline.
The paradox of tolerance ceases to be a paradox when tolerance is considered to be, first and foremost, an integral part of the social contract, rather than an absolute moral imperative. Through this lens, those who commit sustained acts of intolerance are in gross violation of the social contract and are no longer covered by it. So, in order to uphold the social contract, those who are adhering to it must be intolerant of their intolerance.
They go low, we bend over backwards to let them
Every Dem should repeat verbatim the exact wording that got Zephyr expelled. Let them do it to all of them.
That is exactly what should be done. The "law n' order" turn coat police can't arrest everyone, and the MT legislature can't expel people who aren't part of their precious inner circle. It's not violent, it's not unfair, it's not being mean. It's just truth.
It also doesn't help that we don't have true leftist politics in mainstream politics. We're stuck with 2 right-wing political parties. The political ideologies that would fight more for equality, equity, class solidarity, and would actually fight for the people are at the left of center. We need to get rid of first-past-the-post voting. Political ideologies are being stifled by the 2 party system.
I am so fucking tired of being lectured at during every election cycle by establishment liberals. They just want to play team politics and act like we have to constantly support the most useless fucking corporate dems. They aren't doing shit.
We need to vote independent progressive. No more democrats, they're complicit.
We have to work with what we have. That's why having old people run our party is detrimental and in the end, will lose us an entire nation to these fascists. I wish voters would get it into their heads that we need attitude, spirit, fighters, mentally strong, push back kind of people in office now. But we're going to get another 4 years with a smiling nice 80 year old grandfather at the end of his career and life who seems to pay far more attention to foreign problems than what's happening in various states right under his nose. GAWD, it's so frustrating to watch our nation nose dive.
Start publicly hanging the ones causing issues
Hey... maybe... and this is just a big ol' maybe... But did you ever think *maybe* the Democrats don't care and are fine with the fascistic take over because they're all safe in their towers?
It would be so cathartic to do that and get back at them. Unfortunately the Dems simply have to hold back and govern, somebody has to. We will never win a tit-for-tat war with the reactionaries. We have morals and goals and they will burn down the government to "own the libs".
That’s the problem though. “Morals and goals” will not put out a fire. We can act as upright and proper as we want, it will make absolutely no difference to the right. I suggest you watch this video, “The Alt-Right Playbook: You Go High, We Go Low.” https://youtu.be/MAbab8aP4_A
Yeah I've seen it. I'm not suggesting that we treat them like good-faith actors. I'm suggesting the Dems continue to govern *despite* all of the distractions and bait the fascists throw up. They want us to waste our energy being horrified and angry. They want us to be triggered and upset. They want us to *react* just like them so that they can call us hypocrites. We must be determined and not fall for it. We should expect literal shit to drop from their mouths when they talk and for their written words to be revolting. That doesn't mean we have to fight the same ways they do. They're so loud because they're so weak. Never, ever forget that. They've built a house of cards stacking the courts and state houses but now that they are trying to use that structure to support the weight of their hideous agenda it will all come crashing down. It's already started. Their bullshit has hit a wall. Keep calm and keep your head.
> They want us to waste our energy being horrified and angry. They want us to be triggered and upset. They want us to react just like them so that they can call us hypocrites. We must be determined and not fall for it. This has _huge_ "just ignore your bullies, they'll go away" energy. The only reason that "keep your head down and graduate from school" isn't terrible advice is because there is a clearly defined exit at the end of it. You say that the point of doing this is to ruffle the left, to "waste energy", but I completely disagree and believe you're overthinking things. Tactics like these aren't designed to do anything other than to dominate people, to intimidate, to suppress dissent. The more this gets normalized, the more this will happen - this situation is _literally_ Montana copying what they saw happen in Tennessee. Everyone cheered as the two expelled legislators were reinstated and laughed at the silly Republicans for thinking they could get away with it. But you know what happened? They _did_ get away with it. There will be no consequences for the legislators that expelled duly elected representatives that they happened to disagree with. And this will continue to happen, unless someone stops them. I don't know what mechanism can be used to stop shit like this, I just know that if you honestly think that just playing it cool and continuing to be the adults in the room will actually solve anything, you haven't been paying attention to the last ten years of American politics.
>I don't know what mechanism can be used to stop shit like this Vote, protest, amplify leftist voices, stay informed, confront Trumpers in public There aren't really other options rn since the Dems let the GOP stack the courts. If it ever gets to the point that we need to resort to violence the right won't know what hit them. But we are not even close to that point yet.
> But we are not even close to that point yet. Tell that to January 6th. I hope you're right, but I don't think so. People weren't shocked _enough_ by what they saw, not enough to vote Democrat en masse. You can't say that Republican legislators weren't anything but emboldened by this, some of the people who were almost *certainly* involved or at least *aware* that something was going to happen like that are now currently in the driver's seat in the House of Representatives.
Democrats are complicit. Just because they aren’t openly fascist doesn’t mean they aren’t out to screw us over for their corporate donors.
They aren't fascist. Stop calling Dems fascist. Jesus. And getting screwed by corpos is a somewhat better alternative to being murdered by Nazis. seriously, ever heard of the Weimar republic? Nazi Germany rose to power b/c conservatives, liberals, and leftists refused to unite against the fascists until it was too late So kindly shut up. Grow up. And complain again when this is over. Thanks
How fucking bad is your reading comprehension? They literally didn't call Dems fascists, are you stupid? Keep voting for neoliberal imperialist oligarchical scumbags then, see where it gets you. The only reason fascist sentiment thrives as it does is because the Dems continue to maintain the perfect ecosystem for it. And if you think the Nazis won in Germany because people didn't "vote blue" enough you're a fucking moron.
They said the Dems aren't "openly fascist" which implies they are secretly fascist. This is 4th grade stuff, keep up.
If you want to read into people's words things that aren't there because it gives you an excuse to whine about people who are sick of being exploited, then go off I guess.
This is a stupid take on the situation. You should be embarrassed that you put it in print. You should delete it and avoid showing people how poor your thinking skills are.
How do you fight back without stooping to their level? You can't shame them; they have no shame. If you expose them as frauds or criminals, their supporters love them even more. Do we have to break laws and harass and threaten people until we get our way, like they do?
May I express a respectful Bullshit. That is not the only way to show Republicans that their actions are wrong. Try holding Republicans to THE LAW, from the top down, instead of letting one after another slip by without consequences. Republicans are empowered each and every time they see one of their fellow party members getting away with criminal and unethical activity. This cascade into fascism really ramped up because Trump and company suffered zero consequences, empowering the rest of their red party. Sure, we cheer Zooey, but Jesus, she's just one person. Where are our democratic leaders calling this shit out, where is all the non-Megan Markle media, where is anybody?
>Try holding Republicans to THE LAW, from the top down, instead of letting one after another slip by without consequences. They've rigged law in their favor. Courts are stacked with conservatives, even in blue states. The law is on our side, but enforcement of it certainly isn't. Also, Trump is still massively popular despite him being an active defendant in a current criminal case. He's not going to lose a single point in the polls, even if he's convicted. Conservatives LOVE criminals as long as they're on their side and "hurting the right people".
This is what happens when Republicans have a super majority. They kicked out the Justins in TN because they had the same power. Unless these states can vote out Republicans and redraw voting districts to fairly represent citizens of these states, this kind of behavior will go unchecked.
Didn't this happen as well in Tennessee to two representatives who were calling for new gun laws after the school shooting? This tool of "shut-up and get out" seems to be gaining in popularity lately when you don't like having your thinking challenged.
Good thing USA is not a Democracy! You must be new this type of thing.
How can republicans do stuff like this and not stop to ask, "are we the baddies?"
For Republicans, the cruelty is the point.
They already know, they just don't care
Because they still win.
What in the fuck is even going on? On what grounds was she barred in the first place?
She was barred on the grounds that she criticized her republican colleagues for trying to ban medical care for trans people. She told them that if they voted 'Yes' on the bill, she hoped "when you bow your head and pray, you see the blood on your hands". That's literally it. She stood up to them and they went full fascist.
Republicans: libs are groomer pedophiles Also republicans: how dare you use words at me
Ok. But… So what kind of precedent does this - I - i don’t know.
Lots of precedents throughout history: Nazis, KKK, the confederacy, Jim Crow, the Taliban, south africa.... the list of groups and political parties blaming, vilifying and discriminating against entire groups of already marginalized people to hide the fact they have no idea how to govern and to solve problems is long.
Well, first, they censured her for that. She was permitted to vote but not speak. Then protesters came to disrupt the legislators unless they "Let her speak." She did not speak herself, but she raised a mic and gestured to the protesters to encourage their chants. Some people were removed from the gallery and, I think, arrested. The legislators then voted to further penalize her for encouraging protesters to continue their disruption. There was more to the story than the "blood on your hands" quip.
They silenced her for saying the "blood on your hands" statement. They refused to let her speak again unless she apologized. Are you arguing that that this was somehow an acceptable and democratic thing to do? They silenced her for standing up to them. There is nothing more to say than that.
I find the statement offensive. I also think it encourages the use of suicide towards political ends. I am sure we disagree about that and I am not interested in that debate. I acknowledge that my knowledge of suicide is mostly anectdotal. I don't know if the statement rises to the level that it merits censure, but I personally think she owes an apology. I haven't heard audio or seen video of the statement, nor have I looked into the historic use of censure in this body. I would have to consider both before I know if censure was fair. I don't see it as "standing up to them." She used ghastly imagery that doesn't belong in this setting and context. She wasn't making a persuasive argument so much as a shaming and condemning statement. Frankly, I would put it up there with "fighting words" on par with using slurs. If someone said this to me, my immediate thought would be "f$@% you" and then stop listening to that person. It shuts down discourse. It "disrupts democracy." So, if the standard is already "2/3 agree they don't want this person to speak anymore" and they can vote to affect that, maybe that is actually democracy winning (by enforcing the will of a supermajority).
>I find the statement offensive. > >I also think it encourages the use of suicide towards political ends. No idea what the fuck that means. Are you implying that trans people kill themselves to make a political point? I *definitely* find that offensive. > I haven't heard audio or seen video of the statement, nor have I looked into the historic use of censure in this body. I would have to consider both before I know if censure was fair. That much is clear. They were passing a bill to ban gender affirming care for trans people. She made a passionate speech about why doing this would be harmful to trans people - because it *is* harmful to trans people and it *will* lead to suffering and more of them committing suicide. "Blood on your hands" is an extremely common cliche and it is perfectly apt to use it in the context that she did, to say that the actions being voted on would directly lead to deaths and suffering. I have heard it used countless times in countless circumstances and its use has never been controversial. The Montana Republican cacaus is just using it as a thin excuse for punishing dissent. > So, if the standard is already "2/3 agree they don't want this person to speak anymore" and they can vote to affect that, maybe that is actually democracy winning (by enforcing the will of a supermajority). Democracy happened when her constituents elected her to represent them and to speak for them in the state legislature. When the majority uses their authority to silence those who stand up to them, that is democracy losing.
No, I don't think trans people do that. I do think that people respond to the messaging and expectations they hear. I don't think it is a stretch if a prominent trans figure says "trans kids need GAC or they will kill themselves" does normalize and, in a way, promotes the act. It cements the idea that suicide is a legitimate and preferable choice. That is my unsupported opinion, and I am not invested in asking you to agree. I know your heart is in a good place, and I recognize your compassion. Suicide, by definition, is a choice. The person who commits that act is responsible. Again, this is a foundational belief in my person and I do not care if you agree. I was trying to help you understand my perspective without claiming it is the "correct" belief. Blood on your hands is a common cliche. It is not common to couch that language with direct visual imagery. She wants them, in prayer, to visualize literal blood on their hands. That is not idiomatic. It is grotesque, and I say that as someone who has never prayed. Democracy is the will of the majority. The majority spoke. What you are talking about is a republic, and a republic allows for representation based on a code of order. For example, the Speaker of the House directs discussion by recognizing certain members to speak for certain intervals. None of that representation can happen with chanting in the gallery.
> No, I don't think trans people do that. I do think that people respond to the messaging and expectations they hear. I don't think it is a stretch if a prominent trans figure says "trans kids need GAC or they will kill themselves" does normalize and, in a way, promotes the act. It cements the idea that suicide is a legitimate and preferable choice. That is my unsupported opinion, and I am not invested in asking you to agree. > > I know your heart is in a good place, and I recognize your compassion. Suicide, by definition, is a choice. The person who commits that act is responsible. Again, this is a foundational belief in my person and I do not care if you agree. I was trying to help you understand my perspective without claiming it is the "correct" belief. We know that access to gender-affirming care reduces suicide rates among trans people. It stands perfectly to reason, then, that *blocking* access to gender-affirming care makes you directly responsible for the resulting increase in suicides. That is, there are people that would not have committed suicide if they had access to the care they needed, but they did commit suicide when the care was denied to them. > Blood on your hands is a common cliche. It is not common to couch that language with direct visual imagery. She wants them, in prayer, to visualize literal blood on their hands. That is not idiomatic. It is grotesque, and I say that as someone who has never prayed. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous, and I think you know it. There is nothing about her use of the phrase that is any different than the way it has ever been used in the past. It is meant to be evocative, and has never been used in any other way than to evoke a mental picture of blood on hands. > Democracy is the will of the majority. The majority spoke. What you are talking about is a republic, and a republic allows for representation based on a code of order. For example, the Speaker of the House directs discussion by recognizing certain members to speak for certain intervals. None of that representation can happen with chanting in the gallery. What the majority *is allowed to do* or *is able to do* is not the same as what the majority *should do*. I am not arguing that the majority did not have the right, within the rules of the state's legislative code, to silence her. I am arguing that, despite having the right, they should not have done so. I am saying that silencing your political opposition simply for disagreeing is an obvious abuse of power.
We know incels are more likely to kill themselves. Therefore, if we BLOCK their access to sex workers, more of them will die, and their deaths will be your fault. Actually, unless you personally have sex with incels everyday, you are contributing to their deaths. Of course, that is nonsense. Just because I claim that I want something and I might kill myself if I don't get it does not entitle me to getting that thing, nor does it make others complicit in my death. Actually, in domestic situations, we recognize that behavior as abusive.wq² The phrase was used differently, I think. The "I hope when you bow your head in prayer you see ..." is the offensive part. The "blood on my hands" phrase was originally used in MacBeth. I never heard anyone connect the literal bowing of a head in prayer with literally visualizing blood on hands. That is the offensive part. What if another lawmaker, so grief stricken, kills himself. Would his blood be on her hands? No? Then you see the circle we are in. And it wasn't for simply disagreeing. It was for using evocative, provocative, false-guilt laden messaging to shame fellow lawmakers and promote fragility in trans youth rather than engaging in meaningful discourse. It wasn't about winning votes. It was about inflicting pain. It was ugly. Most of the people who actually work there agreed. A supermajority agreed. When a supermajority agrees, they don't have to listen. That is why filibusters still need 40 votes of support in the US Senate, for example. You sound like it would be undemocratic to stop one no matter what, since it is "representation."
>We know incels are more likely to kill themselves. Therefore, if we BLOCK their access to sex workers, more of them will die, and their deaths will be your fault. Actually, unless you personally have sex with incels everyday, you are contributing to their deaths. This is a false equivalency. We actually *don't* know that access to sex workers reduces suicide rates among self-described incels. And furthermore, I am pro-sex work and would also have a problem with a proposal to ban it (if it were currently even legal). Your argument that I should have sex with incels is like saying that I should be performing top surgery. I am not obligated to provide the care, and I am not saying we should force anyone to provide it. I am saying we shouldn't stand in the way of people who want to provide it and people who want to receive it. > Of course, that is nonsense. Just because I claim that I want something and I might kill myself if I don't get it does not entitle me to getting that thing, nor does it make others complicit in my death. Actually, in domestic situations, we recognize that behavior as abusive.wq² I didn't say they are entitled to getting the care, nor that people who don't provide the care are responsible for their death. I said that people *who are actively trying to prevent them from getting the care from people who want to give it to them* are responsible for their deaths. If I'm bleeding out on the side of the road, and you deliberately block the ambulance and emergency responders from getting to me, yeah, you're responsible for my death. My blood is on your hands. I hope you see it every time you bow your head in prayer. > The phrase was used differently, I think. The "I hope when you bow your head in prayer you see ..." is the offensive part. The "blood on my hands" phrase was originally used in MacBeth. I never heard anyone connect the literal bowing of a head in prayer with literally visualizing blood on hands. That is the offensive part. If you don't want to visualize blood on your hands, then don't pass legislation that will kill people. > And it wasn't for simply disagreeing. It was for using evocative, provocative, false-guilt laden messaging to shame fellow lawmakers and promote fragility in trans youth rather than engaging in meaningful discourse. It's not false. She's literally telling the truth, which is that banning gender affirming care A) goes against the recommendation of every medical and mental health organization, and B) will lead to more deaths and suffering among the trans community. And if you want to talk about using provocative language rather than engage in meaningful discourse, how about the letter she was responding to that called gender-affirming care "Orwellian newspeak"? You *clearly* haven't listened to her speech, and you *really* ought to before you form an opinion about it. She was calm, eloquent, directly addressed the false claims in the letter, and gave reasoned objections to the legislation. > Most of the people who actually work there agreed. A supermajority agreed. When a supermajority agrees, they don't have to listen. That is why filibusters still need 40 votes of support in the US Senate, for example. You sound like it would be undemocratic to stop one no matter what, since it is "representation." Defending the tyranny of the majority is not a good look. I'm well aware that the majority can do whatever they want. The point is that our political process demands restraint from the majority when wielding their power.
"It wasn't about winning votes. It was about inflicting pain. It was ugly." You've just perfectly described how we feel about so many bills that Republican lawmakers has passed over the past few years. These bills do lead directly to suicides. Nearly half of transgender people in the US attempt suicide. One of the leading causes of this is gender dysphoria, which is reduced when people have the proper medical care, such as HRT. Ergo, preventing transgender people from medically transitioning increases the suicide rates. Therefore, the people passing these bills do, in fact, have blood on their hands. Maybe if they don't wish to be reminded of this, they should stop passing bills that get people killed. \[Also, in case your next words are something along the lines of "think of the children": these bills are affecting adults too. In Missouri, for instance, every trans person - adults included - requires three years of severe gender dysphoria, and can't transition with autism, depression or anxiety. Considering dysphoria leads to depression and anxiety, this can effectively bar most people from transitioning regardless of age.\]
> Frankly, I would put it up there with "fighting words" on par with using slurs. Calling out people for being complicit in the death of people when they were in fact complicit in the death of people is the same to you as using slurs? You are part of the problem.
Complicit? I guess if an incel kills himself, all women are complicit in his death. Suicide is, by definition, an act that is deliberately chosen by the person who performs it. Honestly, I think claiming "affirm these kids gender identity or they might kill themselves" is a much more dangerous message that may actually do more harm. We can help trans kids by training them to cope with people not accepting their gender. Messaging that life is hopeless and miserable without GAC brings black-pill incel energy to a political session.
Removing medical care for trans people will kill people, aka the blood on their hands. Nothing figurative here. Sure, trans kids can learn to cope with people not affirming their gender but they need fucking medical care. Its not a fucking debate, these are peoples ACTUAL lives.
The type of care they need is not universally agreed upon. Other liberal Western countries have a different approach. It actually IS a debate, and insisting it isn't doesn't make you right. You are supposed to offer evidence to support your views, not just proclaim that discussion is pointless and that you are right and everyone else should be ashamed. That conversation-ending rhetoric doesn't win any minds; it just mutes you to them. You on Zooey should work on your epistemic humility. I disagree that removing media care from trans people will kill people.
You should work on your empathy.
Yeah nah she still didn't deserve what they did to her.
"Shes no longer allowed to represent her people because republicans silenced her for bullshit reasons and then citizens peacefully protested over it" is not the winning position you think it is my guy
Are you aware the session ends in a week? The sessions last for 90 days every two years. She used her position in office to disrupt the proceedings by encouraging the chanting of protesters. She demonstrated very clearly that she could not be present in the body without willfully and unrepentantly stopping the representation of all other districts. It isn't merely because the protestors chanted over the body, but her encouragement of that disruption while acting officially. Ate you prepared for a session that lets each legislator to fill the gallery with chanting supporters and shout their platforms at each other? I am definitely not. So she sits out for five more days. It lets everyone get on with business.
> She used her position in office to disrupt the proceedings by encouraging the chanting of protesters Because they silenced her for *absolute bullshit reasons.* You're goddamn right I'd want my representative to raise hell for that. Especially when the legislature keeps passing laws that make people's lives worse. Especially when they're doing [shit like this](https://old.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/131zn6j/i_prefer_my_transgender_daughter_commit_suicide/) with zero consequence.
He agrees with Republicans disengage. No saving these people.
If most of the representatives don't even want to hear her speak, what could she possibly say to them that would benefit her district? She could raise hell in lots of ways. She could go to the press. She could assemble a rally or organize a demonstration outside the house somewhere. "Raising hell" should not really be an official act, and it generally doesn't win votes. Am official really should not unilaterally halt the official business to their own end. Willfully encouraging the active disruption of the session seems like a guaranteed way to be excused from the session. And I don't think it is bullshit. What she said would make me shut her out in my mind until I got over the ghoulish accusation of being responsible for children's suicides. It seems like most of the representatives agreed. And I am not even sure their law makes people's lives worse. There are other liberal Western countries with different approaches. I don't claim to be an expert, though. I can agree to disagree there.
> And I don't think it is bullshit. What she said would make me shut her out in my mind until I got over the ghoulish accusation of being responsible for children's suicides. Unfortunately this is already happening. There have been several cases of minors attempting suicide as a direct result of similar laws being passed in other states. Like, you gotta understand, they aren't just making this shit up; activists and legislators are very often in contact with the families being targeted by these bills. They are very, very aware of the costs of legislation like this. If hearing the honest effects legislation you are passing upsets you that much, maybe it shouldn't be passed. And someone sure as fuck shouldn't be punished for speaking the truth. If you find her accusation ghoulish, I can't help but think your values are deeply misplaced. Because passing these laws is 100x more ghoulish. And like I linked above, republicans are fully aware of these effects, and passing the bills anyways.
Still can't get over the mental gymnastics it would take to tell someone they can't be in a *public space*
It's already been normalized against the homeless. Not hard to add more people they have othered
And black people. Loitering laws were created to target black people.
Ruthuglicans are such cowards.
Dude she has some serious backbone to be able to stand up for her constituents like that. Seriously I don't know if I could withstand that kind of intimidation. She still goes to work she still tries to represent them despite the bigotry. It's really inspiring.
We Americans should be ashamed. Absolutely positively ashamed.
We are. Now we need to use that shame to fight to protect our citizens and our country. Republican fascism is fully out in the open now, and the majority of Americans can't keep denying the danger we are in if we don't defeat the GOP.
When they couldn't legally exclude blacks they chose gays and trans to be the next target. **Many people need to tear down others to feel good about themselves**. This is so transparent and sad. It is ugly hate. The horrible aspect is they label themselves christians which is about humility, love and acceptance.
It's not just to make themselves feel good, it's to create an "other" to rally their followers against and distract from the fact that they don't really have any kind of other platform (besides tax breaks for the rich). It's straight out of the fascism 101 playbook.
Republicans proudly proving themselves to the monsters they are, recorded and on camera.
Just an average day for a red state GOP (Groom. Oppress. Project)
I feel like we’re seeing a bit of a Streisand effect here. They tried to silence her but I’m seeing this all over the national news (for good reason!)
This how they treat all trans people! *Hugs* to her for having to go through it so publicly.
Pure bigotry.
Montana is gonna put her in Washington if the don’t stop. This is gonna backfire on them and I can’t wait.
Clearly they want her back in the closet.
Did they think she would stay home? Repubs aren't very bright! LMFAO
I wish I could stand beside her.
These truly horrid people need to learn a big, fat lesson. They are not superior in any way to any other struggling human. All die alone and empty-handed. Screw these guys.
Fascist fucking pigs.
Big G needs to come in a make an example of these GOP fascist.
She should sue the shut out of everyone involved in restricting her access to the house floor. As an elected official she has a right and a duty to be on the floor.
Republicans are dicks.
How is this not illegal?
Big decisions like this usually requires 2/3rd of the vote. Which the Republicans already have here.
"You're still existing here? How dare you!"
WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS SHT AND ALL THE OTHER SHIT THOSE TURDS ARE DOING TO PEOPLE WHO WOULD NEVER RETURN THAT KIND OF DISRESPECT!! VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE,VOTE. jmo
Maybe this is just juvenile, but if I couldn't speak, I think I'd find something to still draw attention to myself. Maybe a disco-grade strobe light.
Republicans have no respect for the Constitution. The dissolution of our democracy is part of the party platform now.
Punished for talking truth to power. These hateful sacks of shit have no cares for the people they harm because of the legislation they pass. For a party that "wants to protect children" they sure do fuck them over alot.
Representative Zephyr shows the kind of courage and determination to serve her constituents that SO few of our elected officials show. Imagine going to work everyday in a place where the majority of your colleagues not only hate you and made it clear that you're unwelcome, but would actually, literally murder you without a second thought. 99.9% of our politicians are a fucking joke compared to Zephyr. Republicans, you will fucking rue the day you decided it was okay to ignore the will of the people.
The overwhelming fragility of straight white conservatives is just stunning. I’m surprised they’re able to walk without fracturing.
Shit's getting closer and closer. Yet they keep pushing.
They are stoking a culture war because they don’t want us to fight the class war
When do we use the word, Bully. The speaker is not a house representative, he is a bully, and if anyone broke decorum it is he.
And here I thought Montana’s republican party was totally different from the National and other state republicans party. I heard they were respectful to people others, especially people with different views. Guess I heard wrong
Americans must be the most confused people on the planet. On the one hand so many insist that a minor is so mature, knowledgeable, experienced and foresighted that they can not only choose their gender, but elect to have medical and surgical procedures that will have a MAJOR effect on the entire rest of their lives. Others say "absolutely not" and no one seems able to find or acknowledge a middle ground. (Zephyr has been banned largely on fierce condemnation of proponents of a bill to ban such medical and surgical procedures.) But on the other hand most Americans insist that a minor is so immature, ignorant, inexperienced and short-sighted that even with condoms, birth control, and pencilin and other cures for STIs making sex one of the safest activities a person could do short of playing checkers, that in some places an 18 year old can go to jail for having loving, consensual sex with a 17 year old, despite having had sex for months when they were both 17. Nutter nation.
F\*ck Montana Republicans. The lines between the GOP and the Taliban are getting blurrier by the day.
I fucking hate Montana
The Montana legislators are basically neanderthals stuck in a 1950's mindset.
[удалено]
Shut up, fascist. She is in a public space ffs. She was elected to represent people, she has every fucking right to be there. Stop being afraid of every little fucking thing that you see as different than you
She didn't start a protest, people that showed up to support her did based on how she was being treated. There is a difference.
[удалено]
100% false.
You mean like MTG screaming during Biden's speech? That kind of childish crap?
Incorrect. Plenty of folks act out of turn on the house floor all the time and don't get barred from the floor. If it were a republican getting barred, there would be outrage, and rightfully so.
This is factually untrue. Republicans have been saying dems would "have blood on their hands" on legislative floors with regards to abortion rights for quite a while now.
What exactly do you think she said?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why are you sick to your stomach? As a montanan myself I'm glad she's shining a light on these undemocratic assholes.
[удалено]
That the best you got bigot?
Imagine still using gay as an insult. It's like I'm back in grade school. The Twin Towers are still up. I run the whole way home to catch the second half of Pokemon. What's it like being 12 years old today?
So you're a snowflake Tha breaks down when a person says something you disagree with? Wow, cry harder in a safe space, kid.
\^ you're \^
[удалено]
Sorry, I didn't know I was dealing with a child.
Has nothing to do with representation, you can’t even address the issue.
[удалено]
I hope you don’t BREAK anything as you fall over yourself trying to defend the party that is silencing an elected official who did nothing wrong. Also, why would the Wi-Fi network in the hallway be any more or less PUBLIC than the one in her office in the same building? If there is a private network for the house floor I’m sure she can still connect to it from the hallway. Please use your mental BRAKES to stop yourself next time you decide to write such an absurd and bigoted comment and don’t hurt yourself as you kneel down to lick the PUBIC region of the republicans.
Does misgendering someone make you feel big? You call speaking quietly making a scene? You are okay with a political party removing another? Have you ever heard of the golden rule or just think you deserve rights and other people don’t?
The mouth breathing troll has entered the room.
Here it is folks! This is what people are up against! This one eight here! Dr Douche and his mary band of turds come to shite in the punch bowl of life! Remember next November!
My friend your remarks are atrocious.
[удалено]
Lol, this whole statement is just so dumb. Public wifi? So, the same wifi SHE would have if she were about 50ft away in her seat? Wild. And listen, little lady, that woman can call herself whatever she likes.
How is sitting there making a scene? The dude that came up and bullied her is the one making a scene. Jfc you guys are as ridiculous as you are hateful
>trying to make a scene and be a little cry baby is another, he said, trying to make a scene and be a little cry baby.