Is anyone else fed up of being censored?

A twitter acc is useful for reporting threats and harassment, that's all.

My fav is when they get suspended, create a second acc to whinge about getting suspended and then get suspended for operating another acc while suspended. That's the sweet spot.

Semantics

the correct names for things are important. The reason it is inappropriate for people who refer to themselves as transwomen to use spaces and provisions set aside for women is that transwomen are men. those things are not for them. they are there to counter disadvantages and dangers that men don't experience.

It is important say, and to be able to say, that transwomen are men. otherwise nothing makes sense

I’m not joking about being a coward. I am a survivor of csa, I live my life scared of everything.

But my safety doesn’t matter as much as children’s safeguarding.

And I think it’s important and helpful to challenge female sex role stereotypes, the need to be kind and qualify and justify our right to hold an opinion, because not challenging this conditioning doesn’t help how this is perceived from the outside. My daughters don’t need to see me apologising for holding an opinion because that perpetuates those female sex role stereotypes.

Falling over ourselves to be kind and to support everyone and to argue our right to speak on women’s rights makes it sound like we don’t have any right, that we might not be kind and that we might secretly hate lgbt+ people.

Don’t pussyfoot around this stuff. It’s like people smell weakness or doubts and use it to pounce.

It would be lovely not to have to pussyfoot around, but many women don't feel able to speak out because they risk losing their jobs, friends, family and the little bit of freedom they do have left.

I'm not saying it's right but women aren't scared for no reason - Stonewall say women don't exist and women's workplaces, banks, shops, doctors, colleagues, children and the government all agree because they sleep-walked into submission for fear of being labelled transphobic (according to Stonewall's definition, which includes thinking gender critical thoughts) too.

I hear you on not being a coward, but it's hard being constantly bullied and gaslit, and it wears you down. This is on top of all the other sex-based oppression women face, half of which they're not even allowed to name any more (e.g. see the Girls Night In thread). I realise that means there's more reason to speak out and not less, but none of us want to become the next test case either, as that would require us to suffer even more detriment than we already are.

I'm not suggesting we should all give up - obviously we should keep fighting. But I think it's important to acknowledge that women are in a complex situation here and currently, its not quite as simple as just speaking out as none of us are living in a vacuum.

I’ve recently been ‘permanently suspended’ from Twitter. As far as I can remember, I’ve never actually tweeted anything, only ‘liked’ and followed. Is that usual?

I recently opened a Twitter account. I did not post a single tweet, but I did "like" and retweet a number of GC posts.

After a while I tried to follow a link to someone's profile (FYI it was David Paisley) and was surprised to find he'd already blocked me, even though we've never interacted and I have never posted anything!

[quote EmbarrassingHadrosaurus]Just be direct and to the point.

Yes. And, in our own ways, we have to recognise and, where possible, resist our own self-censorship (within the boundaries of safety).

It’s dangerous. But let us refuse to say that which we do not think.
…
Our path is not to give conscious support to lies about anything whatsoever! And once we realize where lie the perimeters of falsehood, each sees them in his own way."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4382551-Live-not-by-lies-Solzhenitsyn-no-tambourines-involved

In an era when metaphysical and existential certainties are in a state of crisis, when people are being uprooted and alienated and are losing their sense of what this world means, this ideology inevitably has a certain hypnotic charm. To wandering humankind it offers an immediately available home: all one has to do is accept it, and suddenly everything becomes clear once more, life takes on new meaning, and all mysteries, unanswered questions, anxiety, and loneliness vanish. Of course, one pays dearly for this low-rent home: the price is abdication of one’ s own reason, conscience, and responsibility, for an essential aspect of this ideology is the consignment of reason and conscience to a higher authority.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4380135-I-dont-want-to-add-my-pronouns-at-the-end-of-an-email-but-I-cant-explain-why?msgid=111794485#111794485[/quote]
It’s actually possibly careless of me to post what I did. I’m in Twitter jail currently also.

But while that’s irritating, it simply isn’t real life.

My kids are real life. Their schools are real life. The health care we access is real life. Friend we see are real life. Public facilities we access are real life.

I’m not about to fall over myself apologising for being honest about a safeguarding risk to my daughters. Pandering to that teaches them they don’t really have a right to voice safety concerns. And it suggests I’m worried I’m wrong. And I’m not.

When people know there’s a safeguarding risk and they don’t speak up that makes them the safeguarding risk. I don’t care enough about online bans to shut up about this in real life. Safeguarding matters more than my right to identify as a coward.

Just be direct and to the point.

Yes. And, in our own ways, we have to recognise and, where possible, resist our own self-censorship (within the boundaries of safety).

It’s dangerous. But let us refuse to say that which we do not think.
…
Our path is not to give conscious support to lies about anything whatsoever! And once we realize where lie the perimeters of falsehood, each sees them in his own way."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4382551-Live-not-by-lies-Solzhenitsyn-no-tambourines-involved

In an era when metaphysical and existential certainties are in a state of crisis, when people are being uprooted and alienated and are losing their sense of what this world means, this ideology inevitably has a certain hypnotic charm. To wandering humankind it offers an immediately available home: all one has to do is accept it, and suddenly everything becomes clear once more, life takes on new meaning, and all mysteries, unanswered questions, anxiety, and loneliness vanish. Of course, one pays dearly for this low-rent home: the price is abdication of one’ s own reason, conscience, and responsibility, for an essential aspect of this ideology is the consignment of reason and conscience to a higher authority.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4380135-I-dont-want-to-add-my-pronouns-at-the-end-of-an-email-but-I-cant-explain-why?msgid=111794485#111794485

Just be direct and to the point.

Falling over ourselves to be kind and to support everyone and to argue our right to speak on women’s rights makes it sound like we don’t have any right, that we might not be kind and that we might secretly hate lgbt+ people.

Don’t pussyfoot around this stuff. It’s like people smell weakness or doubts and use it to pounce.

I don’t have an issue with:

A Transsexual Woman is a (MtF)Transsexual Woman
A Transsexual Man is a (FtM)Transsexual Man

But my brain works like this:

2+2 = 4 = 2x2 = 3 +1 etc

Therefore:

Transsexual woman = adult and human and male and so = man.

Leafstamp

I’m speaking the truth here today:

Woman = adult human female
Man = adult human male

You will get no argument from me on either of those two points

A trans woman is a man.
A trans man is a woman.

Can't say I agree with that (but I would say that wouldn't I)

Much happier with

A Transsexual Woman is a (MtF)Transsexual Woman
A Transsexual Man is a (FtM)Transsexual Man

Which is not to deny any biological realities. I have a pesky 'Y' Chromosome whether I like it or not ... I chooses not to deny that 'Fact' but I do not describe myself as a man.

Semantics ?

At some point, will users of popular parenting forums find themselves saying the same thing and never think about the number of times that threads were moved from a high-traffic part of a site to a 'naughty step' or they voted to split a high-traffic point of entry to neutralise its drawing power?

I know - I find myself thinking, well, parenting forums have to do that to survive, so I can see why their commercial success means that we still have a platform. So hiving us off into a dark corner means we at least have somewhere we can speak (as long as we keep it to a whisper in the dark corner, of course).

And then I realise I'm basically telling myself that I should be grateful to even have a platform at all to express gender critical views, like I'm actually doing something wrong!

Try not to get upset when you see things like tweets going down when you vote, or your account being banned for no reason.

It means they are scared of your words. Remember that they have to rig the game to beat you.

NecessaryScene posted something about Robert Lifton and Thought Reform on another thread. A brief read around has brought the shock of the familiar but is an interesting way to look at what is happening to women on social media platforms.

In the book, Lifton outlines the "Eight Criteria for Thought Reform":

Milieu Control. This involves the control of information and communication both within the environment and, ultimately, within the individual, resulting in a significant degree of isolation from society at large.

Mystical Manipulation. The manipulation of experiences that appears spontaneous but is, in fact, planned and orchestrated by the group or its leaders to demonstrate divine authority, spiritual advancement, or some exceptional talent or insight that sets the leader and/or group apart from humanity, and that allows a reinterpretation of historical events, scripture, and other experiences. Coincidences and happenstance oddities are interpreted as omens or prophecies.

Demand for Purity. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.

Confession. Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins," "attitudes," and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders.

Sacred Science. The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. Truth is not to be found outside the group. The leader, as the spokesperson for God or all humanity, is likewise above criticism.

Loading the Language. The group interprets or uses words and phrases in new ways so that often the outside world does not understand. This jargon consists of thought-terminating clichés, which serve to alter members' thought processes to conform to the group's way of thinking.

Doctrine over person. Members' personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.

Dispensing of existence. The group has the prerogative to decide who has the right to exist and who does not. This is usually not literal but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious, and must be converted to the group's ideology. If they do not join the group or are critical of the group, then they must be rejected by the members. Thus, the outside world loses all credibility. In conjunction, should any member leave the group, he or she must be rejected also.[3]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

So women can't highlight their marginalisation in the sex/gender debate because they're too marginalised by their sex to do so!

Yes.

And then Twitter and newspaper comments are replete with faux-outraged women and men saying, "Where are/were the feminists? Why didn't they say anything?"

At some point, will users of popular parenting forums find themselves saying the same thing and never think about the number of times that threads were moved from a high-traffic part of a site to a 'naughty step' or they voted to split a high-traffic point of entry to neutralise its drawing power?

i think the point to remember with twitter is that a pretty small number of people actually work there.

Dana McCallum is a man charged with the vicious rape of his estranged ex wife (he since pleaded guilty to one count of domestic violence and one count of false imprisonment and the rape charge was dropped). he also identifies as a woman and is referred to as 'one of the geniuses behind twitter'.

www.womenarehuman.com/trans-identified-twitter-engineer-rapes-his-wife-dana-mccallum/

Although I believe he no longer works at twitter i would be astonished if he hasn't left a lasting impression, and this is clearly reflected in the moderation policies.

twitter is in no way a free speech platform, and is quite within its rights not to be. the problem, as pointed out by a previous poster, is with organisations regarding it as a barometer of public opinion, when it is in fact carefully curated

And, much as I think the ability to block and mute is much needed (especially by women) it does facilitate being in a bubble - which is why those crossover coolers are so necessary.

Yes, agreed.

The problem is that in order to protect themselves, women have to take themselves out of the conversation. For every person who'd see that as victim-blaming, there'll be a hundred more pointing out awful tweets that haven't been deleted in an attempt to deny women's experiences.

Covid Isolation hasn't helped with moving more interactions online where they are censored in line with the patriarchy, but the other issue is that women are always going to find it harder to be heard in a patriarchal society as they're statistically far less able to just drop everything and go out and organise because they're more likely to have caring and domestic responsibilities, etc.

So women can't highlight their marginalisation in the sex/gender debate because they're too marginalised by their sex to do so!

Agree with you completely.
And then consider that the internet is 99% porn (my made-up figure but you get the gist) and you know exactly where we stand in the pecking order.

Horrendous things left up on the internet but women talking.. OMG you can't have that!!!

Twitter isn't a public agora, through - it's a private commercial company, so while it may claim to promote free speech, the reality is that they will only allow free speech that they deem acceptable.

Agreed. We're increasingly governed in such matters by a transnational oligarchy that has many influences in silicon valley.

The impact of this is that the absence of critical voices and women's voices is contributing to preference falsification and the parameters of the Overton Window.

It can also perpetuate cons/fraud (riffing off some research into leveraging what is known about that to reduce the impact of disinformation).

Goffman observed that all “marks” eventually come to understand that they have been defrauded. But strangely, they almost never complain or report the crime to the authorities. Why? Because, Goffman argues, admitting that you have been conned is so deeply shameful that “marks” experience it as a kind of social death – the painful end of one of the many social roles we all play.
…
Within those groups, we can pinpoint influential members who may be turning their backs on Covid denialism, and encourage them in their journey. We can message them offering support, particularly if our reference groups overlap – whether that means sharing the same home town, or practising the same faith. The more shared social space, the better. We might offer to back them up if they get trolled for expressing misgivings about Covid denialism. Or we could let them know that we would admire them for telling the truth.

Those people may not have a television audience of millions, but they nonetheless have the potential to act as “coolers” for those in their reference groups – both online and off. The higher their status within the groups, the more influence they will have in reconciling their fellow travellers to the reality of the pandemic, perhaps enabling them to rejoin society, or at least preventing them from endangering the rest of us.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/09/convince-anti-vaxxers

I've no idea how the above is possible if SM platforms keep banning some people because this reduces interaction and stops them gaining status where they can act as influencers. And, much as I think the ability to block and mute is much needed (especially by women) it does facilitate being in a bubble - which is why those crossover coolers are so necessary.

Aye, I'm with you.

Women are prevented from speaking, silenced, ignored, disbelieved, censored, ridiculed, hunted, arrested, dismissed, belittled, Karenned, and talked over as a matter of course.

It is infuriating, but we know it happens and we have to find out ways to get beyond the sound barrier.

YANBU, OP.