Hazor

Just a thoughtless prescriptivist, repeating what I'd understood from previous such discussions, without having done my own due diligence. 🤷 I stand corrected.

It's not the use of the word "female" itself, but the use of the word as a noun to describe a woman, because it is taken to imply that the woman is a mere object. As the other person who replied to you said: context matters.

I use the word "female" (and "male") every single day when documenting on my patients, e.g. my notes commonly begin with "Patient is xx years old, female, [...]." This is normal and no one would take issue with it, because it is using "female" as an adjective and in a context where the information is important.

It's worth noting that the words 'male' and 'female' are adjectives, not nouns, so if you want to be technical then it's erroneous to use them thusly. That is, it is correct to say "I am male", but to say "I am a male" is grammatically erroneous.

In common speech, people don't tend to describe other human beings with these two adjectives, i.e. most people would say "she is a woman" rather than "she is female" (note, not "she is a female" because 'female' is not a noun). However, we do commonly describe animals using these adjectives, and colloquially the noun is commonly dropped. E.g., "it's a female" is seen as a perfectly normal way to describe a horse when it's understood that the other party knows that you mean "it's a female horse". This is why it is considered offensive to refer to a woman as "a female": it implies that she is an object, less than human and more suitably treated as livestock.

He *allegedly" did those things. Part of the problem here, and with the death penalty generally, is the apparently general presumption of his guilt. He has not been to trial yet. Under US law, he is to have the presumption of innocence until proven guilty (as it is entirely possible, however unlikely it may be, that they have the wrong guy or that the charges do not reflect what actually happened), and so it is unreasonable by any measure for the federal AG to be stating that they're pushing for the death penalty before he has even been federally charged.

Further, he didn't plead "innocent", as thats .... not a thing? He pled "not guilty", to the charges, which doesn't intrinsically mean that he's denying what actions were accused, but only that he believes the legal charges are not commensurate/congruent with whatever actions he did take (which, again, may or may not even include what he was accused of, cause it could be the wrong guy or an innacurate charge, hence why we have trials in the first place). E.g., someone who killed in self defense but was charged with murder would obviously plead not guilty even if they did in fact kill the person, because killing in self defense is not murder by any legal definition of either. Moreover, "openly denying any wrongdoing" would be entirely appropriate to do if he is in fact the wrong guy and he didn't actually do anything.

The reporters can always seem to sane-wash Trump and his ilk, and always give them the benefit of the doubt, but not Mangione. Musk gave a salute that was "awkward" and "looked similar to" a Nazi salute, but Mangione is just presumed guilty. Trump is a "successful businessman" despite bankrupting numerous companies, but Mangione is assumed to be a guilty evil murderer before he's even indicted!

Tbh, I'm not convinced either of them are compromised by Russia in that sense (though wouldn't be surprised, to be clear. We pretty much know Trump has assaulted and raped underage girls; I wouldn't be surprised if Musk has also). I think they're both just scared little boys who are trying to impress who they see as a big, strong man, in order to get the kind of fatherly approval that they never received from their actual fathers. They're both childishly impulsive and both try comedically hard to be seen as strong and capable, and then get emotional when they see that image being challenged.

Where's DOGE on this waste and abuse?

He's a billionaire.

Allegedly. His inability to pay some of the judgments against him calls that into question, e.g. the E. Jean Carrol suit. If nothing else, he definitely has a billionaire mindset.

"~~Innocent until proven~~ guilty."

A 75% reduction in words. Look at all that efficiency! Clearly, DOGE should be taking notes from Pam Bondi.

The guy who almost Luigi'd him was a Republican.

Hopefully they survive this administration.

Pro-business/anti-regulation types teamed up with the anti-abortion types around 50 years ago in order to get votes for their unpopular ideas, then they did everything they could to conflate the two ideologies to where Christians (the dominant religious group) now think Republican=Christian=Republican and thus ALL Republican ideas intrinsically align with their religion. I.e., Jesus was a capitalist rather than anything that's actually in the bible.

Tl;Dr: propaganda and the natural human tendency toward in-group bias.