Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Miranda Yardley permanently banned from Twitter

22 replies

leyat · 25/05/2018 10:46

Just read this post today from Miranda and it is extremely worrying: mirandayardley.com/en/i-permanently-banned-twitter-make-worry/

I have loved Twitter as a platform for a long time, yes you do get some really nasty people on there (and of course as a feminist woman I have been on the receiving end of some awful stuff) but I just block them and move on; it's not nothing, but it's also not as though we are forced to endure posts and people we don't want to.

But also here's the thing, Miranda wasn't seeking out twitter accounts and posting abuse, or abusing the platform itself, Miranda was simply making statements in relation to sex and gender, statements which at times would mean stating the sex of a man with a public platform when that man has been attacking women.

And for that Miranda has been permanently banned.

I recommend reading their post on this, detailing why this is so dangerous in terms of what it means for women and feminist speech. I am getting more horrified by the day at the silencing of feminists. Trans activists know that twitter's algorithms will ban accounts that have been mass reported, and they have been organising to mass report feminist accounts that don't have preferred pronouns in their profile - cos that's how they can tell the evil ones (!) - and as a result a whole bunch of feminists have been suspended and banned over the last week.

I've been trying to think up some kind of action but really not sure what to do. We increasingly aren't allowed to name reality anymore, even though naming reality is imperative for the cause of women's liberation. And we are being targeted by men on a platform dominated by men, with a workforce dominated by men, that has given no option to report people on the basis of misogyny, which means they allow all sorts of hate towards women for being women, while adopting a political stance re gender that functions to denote feminism as hateful.

Mind you, if you look at the Yogakartya Principles, which don't recognise sex as a basis for oppression at all and yet are being upheld as best international practice, it becomes a bit easier to understand how they are getting away with it.

OP posts:
Original poster
leyat · 25/05/2018 13:46

Thanks so much! :D

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 25/05/2018 13:50

I did wonder if some of the issues raised on the thread above 'Calling lawyers and data protection gurus' would be worth reconsidering in light of GDPR new data protection laws? For example the mass 'terf' block lists.

Bowlofbabelfish · 25/05/2018 13:51

This is worrying. Nothing she’s posted has been hateful. A lot of whatvhas been directed at her has been hateful and left to stand. How can I make my voice heard on this?

Bowlofbabelfish · 25/05/2018 13:53

I’ve wondered the same rowan - discrimination by algorithm should be not allowed now, right?

R0wantrees · 25/05/2018 14:00

Mike Wendling is part of the BBC Trending team. He was interviewed on Woman's Hour 'The Manosphere' as they investigate & explore social media. He was reporting the online Incel movement. Link to his twitter account here:
twitter.com/mwendling?lang=en with further info.

May also be worth considering other journalists who have had an interest in SM manipulation eg Carol Caddwalldr etc
www.theguardian.com/profile/carolecadwalladr

R0wantrees · 25/05/2018 14:07

Bowlofbabelfish
I've 'bumped' the thread above re data protection gurus. Not sure of MN etiquette so hope this is ok!

LangCleg · 25/05/2018 14:48

discrimination by algorithm should be not allowed now, right?

I concur. At the very least, this should be testable in the courts.

ChattyLion · 25/05/2018 14:49

Jesus H. So not hate speech. And a permanent ban. What on earth...?

AppleBlossomTimeNow · 25/05/2018 14:58

I love Miranda. I'm gutted it's come to this. It is really frightening.

R0wantrees · 25/05/2018 22:23

Venice Allen (Dr Radfem) also blocked from both posting and viewing Twitter:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3259395-best-of-twitter

R0wantrees · 28/05/2018 12:10

Current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3260432-The-Shame-of-Twitter?pg=3

TooMinty · 28/05/2018 12:24

Isn't there an example of an algorithm or AI that became racist because it learned from exposure to real people online? If the overwhelming attitude on Twitter is misogynistic then can their algorithms be learning that?

R0wantrees · 28/05/2018 14:50

It seems more likely that Twitter responds to reports.

They have published their guidance, so reports will (I presume ) be judged in this context.
help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy

(extract)
"Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease. We also do not allow accounts whose primary purpose is inciting harm towards others on the basis of these categories."

Sexism is not listed.

mirandayardley · 28/05/2018 14:54

I’m still not convinced I’ve said anything that is ‘hateful’.

Elendon · 28/05/2018 15:12

Of course you haven't said anything hateful.

You have only said the truth. I praise you for such honesty. I'm sorry the truth has to be squashed because it's termed as 'hate speech'.

It's an appalling state of affairs.

TooMinty · 28/05/2018 15:17

I'm not excusing Twitter. I'm saying computers are machines, it's the humans that are the problem...

LangCleg · 28/05/2018 15:32

I’m still not convinced I’ve said anything that is ‘hateful’.

No, you haven't.

But perhaps more to the point - you definitely haven't said anything inciteful, which, to my mind, is the principal difference between the two "sides".

SmartBoots · 28/05/2018 16:23

I had an idea about trying to raise the subject but without either attracting any such attention from activists who monitor accounts and one which also would start registering in the minds of journalists maybe.

Basically when a story hits the media about a one-off woman's story those of us on social media tentatively ask if this is a woman actually born as a woman.

I'll expand this....

For instance a woman is entering the Golden Globe race which I was interested in as I am a big fan of all things ocean exploration etc. But I was amazed how much attention Sky News was giving to the fact that she's the first woman contestant - quite a lot of attention.

Perhaps if enough people gently enquired if this woman was a biological woman or a trans woman then perhaps it might start registering with people that we are looking at a potential problem in the future.

I have already mentioned on here the future of female sporting events but perhaps if we all started requesting whether any sports women - especially ones that the News outlets are focusing on - are indeed biological women and not trans, then that's just a genuine question, nothing more.

R0wantrees · 29/05/2018 15:49

from:
fairplayforwomen.com/martha/

"This is a letter to Martha Lane Fox, the entrepreneur and feminist who sits on the board of Twitter. We write to her in the wake of mass deletions from Twitter of gender critical feminists who in many cases have had their IP addresses and phone numbers blocked so that they cannot re-join Twitter.

Transactivists have recently stepped up a concerted campaign to get feminists banned from every platform where they can speak out against the dangerous dogma of trans ideology and stand up for women’s rights... continues

"Not only that, women are being told that to talk about their biology is transphobic. That we must refer to ourselves as menstruators, uterus havers, pregnant people. And if we do not comply , we will be punched, that we deserve to be punched. That we are terfs, who should die in a fire, choke on a ladydick, be beaten and abused. Go to www.terfisaslur.com if you do not believe me.

This is a concerted attack on women’s free speech. The words we use to describe ourselves, our bodies, our biology and our experiences as women are becoming unsayable.

And the worst thing? The platform on whose board you sit not only allows these threats and abuse to go on, but women who point out basic, incontrovertible biological facts are being banned from Twitter for speaking the truth. For saying that men are not women. For refusing to lie."

R0wantrees · 29/05/2018 16:49

BBC report: 'Twitter 'bans women against trans ideology', say feminists'
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44288431

"Transsexual writer Miranda Yardley said she was banned from Twitter for stating that a Green Party spokesperson is a man - despite Aimee Challenor describing herself as a transwoman.

Writing on her blog she said: "According to the rules of Twitter it is now hateful conduct to call someone who is a man, a man.

"The implication of this is that the concept of proscribed speech, things we are now not allowed to say, now extends to the truth. This is fundamentally illiberal."

Fair Play for Women also said women receive abuse for talking "about their biology" - including being threatened with violence and referred to as Terfs (trans-exclusionary radical feminists).

The group has called on Martha Lane Fox - who is also a member of the House of Lords - to use her position in Twitter to "stop allowing bullying men to police our language, threaten us and abuse us"."

New posts on this thread. Refresh page