The Shame of Twitter

Well checking out a handful of those accounts shows them to be banned which undermines the point about only gender critical posters being subjected to censure.

Define how that proves hypocrisy Miranda?

or what about Morgane Oger who organises piles on, in this case to a victim of FGM

Here you go christine
terfisaslur.com/

You’re a bit of a hypocrite.

Ooh, do you do lottery numbers too? May as well put the whole psychic thing to good use.

Well your name does start with Angry.

Ah, so you have psychic powers? Given that you keep attempting to project rage onto perfectly calm people I think you may want to have them checked, they seem to be on the fritz.

I'm not inclined to do your homework for you. If you're going to affiliate yourself with a movement with a very nasty underbelly then policing that underbelly is your job, not mine.

Actually what you mean is that you know full well that extremist TRAs are banned just the same as extremist gender critical posters but you don't want to admit it because it's convenient to spin the dishonest 'TRAs get away with it' victimhood line.

It's always interesting to see how little it takes for women to be perceived as angry. We could be petting a puppy while drinking a cup of tea, but say something someone doesn't like and apparently you're a little ball of rage.

Yes, play the misogyny card. Unfortunately you're failing to spin your way out of the fact that you decided to go in all guns blazing in response to a post that was not aggressive or confrontational and don't like it when someone exposes the rabble-rousing points you make.

I'm not inclined to do your homework for you. If you're going to affiliate yourself with a movement with a very nasty underbelly then policing that underbelly is your job, not mine.

It's always interesting to see how little it takes for women to be perceived as angry. We could be petting a puppy while drinking a cup of tea, but say something someone doesn't like and apparently you're a little ball of rage.

I think everything you've said demonstrates that the one-eyed thing is mostly projection on your part, Christine. Note the lack of gendercrit people sending death threats, and the TRAs who do send them and don't get deleted or banned. You'd think a fair-minded person would notice that and take it into account when formulating their grand theory of everything, end yet...

Actually, I engaged with the original OP which was about gender critical people being banned. I think you're the one who's coming across as needing to take an anger management pill. Please feel free to supply a link to the hordes of TRAs making death threats who haven't been banned and I'll happily report them myself.

I went and created a ‘Miranda Yardley is a man’ thread. I wonder how that will pan out.

It's all too much for a bank holiday!

I think everything you've said demonstrates that the one-eyed thing is mostly projection on your part, Christine. Note the lack of gendercrit people sending death threats, and the TRAs who do send them and don't get deleted or banned. You'd think a fair-minded person would notice that and take it into account when formulating their grand theory of everything, end yet...

And why is it "going too far" when women say critical things, but not when men say equally critical or even far crueler things? Maybe have a think about that in between moments of smugness, Christine.

If you want to interpret pointing out in a reasonable manner how things can become one-eyed when you're involved in a cause as smugness then feel free. I think that says more about your natural hostility and tendency to attack rather than engage. Anyway, as far as bans being one-sided, whenever I've checked out the accounts of those that the gender critical side have highlighted for vile behaviour they have either been banned or suspended. It does work both ways.

I went and created a ‘Miranda Yardley is a man’ thread. I wonder how that will pan out.

People suggesting that we set up our own Twitter realize that the actual Twitter got started with venture capital funding, right? That it wasn't just a couple of blokes pissing around in their spare time?

And why is it "going too far" when women say critical things, but not when men say equally critical or even far crueler things? Maybe have a think about that in between moments of smugness, Christine.

I and others have the screenshots to prove it happened

How utterly ridiculous.

And what's stopping you setting it up?

Massive infrastructure investment.
Admin staff.
Legal Defence Fund (you'd better have one of these and it better be big!)
Agreement of Apple and Google*
Software Development costs.
Marketing budget

That list should get us started. And if you're wondering why you need Apple and Google to allow you to do this, it's because they have a de facto monopoly on the app market and apps are a critical part of such a platform today. Look at gab.ai . It's a Twitter alternative set up in response to censorship. But neither Google nor Apple will allow it in their markets because it doesn't censor speech. Therefore apps cannot be made available for it, thus it cannot take off.

You wont get anything that doesn't censor "hate speech" past Google and Apple. And Google especially will consider calling a man a man "hate speech."

So in short, your attempt to de-legitimize someone complaining about censorship by implying there's an easy way around it, is dumb.

It's easy to exist in a bubble when you're involved in a particular cause, to think that everything on your side is right to such an extent that you cannot sit back for one second and think 'Yeah, maybe they had a point there' or 'Perhaps they did go too far with that post'.

Yes, and the TRAs would know, wouldn't they? It's not gender critical people who generally block all people with opposing views. And below is evidence that Aimee Challoner (who runs a block list of 50k gender critical people) approves of mass reporting campaigns.

It happened

Maybe these mass reportings do happen, but I'm a member of several transgender websites and know several people you would probably call activists and have never once seen a message even remotely along the lines of 'Let's target so-and-so this week'. So is it a case of the reportings actually being coordinated or just the fact that there are an awful lot of people on Twitter so if someone says something that's seen as offensive (whatever the topic, not just relating to transgenderism, feminism etc), lots of people will naturally, without any prompting, act upon it? I honestly believe that plenty of people like to spin the coordinated attack line because it reduces the whole thing to some spiteful TRAs narrative rather than actually having to accept the fact that maybe some people do find certain things offensive. It's easy to exist in a bubble when you're involved in a particular cause, to think that everything on your side is right to such an extent that you cannot sit back for one second and think 'Yeah, maybe they had a point there' or 'Perhaps they did go too far with that post'. From what I can see on Twitter there's certainly a lot of mutual backslapping from the same people over and over again. When that sort of thing happens it's easy to become blinded to what others think and to find excuses or conspiracy theories that explain away anything you regard as a setback rather than engaging in any self-analysis and daring to admit 'Maybe that was wrong'.

It’s only a term of abuse if there’s something wrong with being a man. Which sounds to me like sexism.

Well, quite. We live in a bizarre world where some people think saying ' Miranda Yardley is a man' would be transphobic.

And also it's relevant to current consideration of legislation

Some calls in Ireland against 'cis-sexist' language eg reference to 'pregnant people' etc in forthcoming legislation & policies following the referendum result.

Current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3260503-Trans-Voices-For-Appeal-Complain-About-Together-For-Yes-Campaign