Statement from Southall Black Sisters on decision to leave X

I agree, and think if you have an important message to put out and Twitter is the most effective medium its wrong to shame people for using it. Especially GC women who were chased of other platforms. But increasingly Twitter/X only gets in the news when it's something Elon Musk has said or something he has retweeted. He's the richest man in the world so his doings will always be reported on. Because he IS powerful. I don't think Twitter/X can be relied upon to give a voice to the less powerful. Even KJK had far more impact with grass roots on the street actions. So maybe that's what protest/public discourse goes back to.

I like the Critics analysis usually but this piece is off. I feel it slightly contradicts itself when it says on the one hand Twitter/X is important because it bypasses prestige media/the elites. And then says it's disproportionately powerful because it's used by those same "elites". The second part is true but not an original observation. It was true before Musk bought Twitter and it's true now.

It also mentions Elon Musk takeover and his reshaping of the algorithms that previously favoured mainstream views. But it doesn't really delve into what those algorithms mean. Previously, Twitter was able to disproportionately sway mainstream discourse on things like Trans issues because he who controls the algorithm controls what the journalists, politicians using Twitter saw. So they were probably given the false impression there was more consensus than there really was on the issue, and this affected their own reporting. Now Musk has taken over he hasn't made the algorithms public or democratised the platform. He is still shaping what people see but in a different direction. In fact, AIs like Grok are intended to control users perception to an even greater extent. More basic chatsites e.g. Mumsnet and even every right wing sites like the antipodean farmers may have their own rules and biases but the posts you read aren't filtered through some unknowable algorithm so they are oddly more honest as social media sites.

The thing is, that outside influence that makes Twitter important only works as long as Twitter continues to be used by the Great and Good as a bell weather for public perception it's circular.
As more people lose interest, and as public suspicion grows about how representative it is, the less influence it will have on what journalists write. This is always a weak point with social media sites - they depend on people using them because of the other people using them. At a certain point they become irrelevant or just old fashioned (the way young people stopped using Facebook). Musk can try to keep interest in it through the use of new features like Grok and that's been fairly successful. But it also means when he goes too far on the shock value or as Twitter becomes viewed as his personal toy people lost interest.It was never a public square. That's just becoming more obvious now. And yes, there is a gap between Twitter users and non Twitter users but I think it would be a mistake for anyone to base their identity on the social media site they use.

As Ozymandias said "look on my MySpace Page ye mighty and despair".

Stay on X using it exclusively.

Stay on X and join other platforms.
Leave X and join other platforms.
Leave X and all other platforms to free up time and give your head a rest for a while.

Women's Rights commentators along with everyone else will decide for themselves.

That's a really good article which articulates how Twitter works much better that I could. It says that journalists pay attention to Twitter stories much more than other sites and I think that's why feminist organisations need to think very carefully about how they're going to keep communicating their message.

Is that happening for criticising Twitter? I don't get the impression it does. You have to be pretty offensive to have a post deleted and community notes work well.

Good point. I agree they were pornified images.

I would never put a personal image or my name on Twitter. However, I do take your point that those who are brave enough to be on there under their real name and photo could be deterred. However, GC feminists take so much abuse they've probably seen it all before. Photoshop has existed for a while and other image making packages are available.

There was plenty of pushback on the platform, and plenty of pushers back had the most awful things said to them.

I follow many interesting accounts on X that aren't on the circlejerk of superiority that is bluesky (i also follow many interesting accounts on BS now, but i am careful about what i look at on there)

I get info about women in Afghanistan, Iran, men against FGM (several accounts) etc etc. Not to mention the GC accounts.

It's not how many people use X, it's who and how it works. I thought this article in The Critic was interesting: thecritic.co.uk/why-twitter-matters/

Where else do you suggest women's rights commentators go? BlueSky won't let you say transwomen are men. I can't think of another platform where its so easy to find out what's happening in your particular area of interest ( in my case, the gender wars).

Or maybe, in January 2026, SBS had enough. Like women all over the UK. Like right thinking people all over the world!

10 Oct 2025 tweet from KJK-

Today a speaker from Southall black sisters gave a talk at filia stating she refused to condemn the actions of Hamas (violence against women) because the Israeli governmemt is evil and led chants of free Palestine. Several Jewish women left in distress.

It's all performative outrage because they hate the right wing discourse on X.

add "forced smiles etc."

Like bruising. Ball gags. Sexualised positioning and the rest!🤢🤢🤮

The idea that Musk gives a shit about free speech, women, children, or anyone other than himself, is for the birds.

Users are also inviting removal of the Blue Tick, demonetisation and Shadow banning by X itself.

Perhaps 10 years ago, but I'm sceptical that there is much benefit to organisations being on twitter now.

People who follow them anyway can receive their news other ways, and the algorithm is designed to farm outrage, not to communicate.

An ethical refusal to participate in a site that reflects how people (men) think and behave in the real world? Having been banned from Twitter for expressing GC views, I appreciate being allowed back so I can challenge - or simply mock - the views I find abhorrent and read the opinions of people I both agree and disagree with as well as find links to interesting articles. If there is another site that does this, please let me know because I know from experience that blusky ain't it.

You're right I shouldn't have said nudes. Thanks for correcting. I will change that to pornified images since it's not just bikinis, it also lets the user make it look like the bikinis too small, pose them in stereotypical porn tropes, add "forced smiles" etc.

Another problem is, if you do criticise it on X you are then inviting people to start posting bikini images of you. So unless you already are used to arguments where you know you will receive aggressive pish back (which GC women are) then it is quite tempting to keep your head down. If for example I was a woman who posted about gardening tips I don't think that is the time I'd decide to get involved in women's rights.

Lots of women I follow were pushing back about this. I didn't bookmark and have the attention span of a gnat so not sure who now. There were arguments where blokes were saying: 'it's only what you see on a beach' and women saying 'If I wear a bikini on a beach then I'm consenting to being seen in a bikini. Someone creating an image of me in a bikini is something I haven't consented to.' X is so huge that you only ever see a tiny amount of what goes on so it's easy to miss stuff.

Actually I think Twitter should have one of these: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/flouncers_corner