Work reproach regarding my social media usage in trans discussions

[VladmirsPoutine]

I'm wondering what, if anything, I can do. I have a Twitter account which among other things I use to tweet news articles, Brexit updates, the bagel offerings at the café down the road and so forth but increasingly I have retweeted people with GC views on the trans discussion.

I do not work in a role related to the social media management of my organisation but we do have a sort of generic social media policy that outlines the usual things such as not bringing the organisation into disrepute. Thus far none of my musings have done so - as it's not a line I wish to cross and I'm very wary of a backlash having seen it happen to others.

However, at some point during the past couple of weeks a senior manager 'had a word' and in effect told me to be more "mindful" of the content I tweet/retweet as the organisation "does not tolerate discrimination". This has never been an issue until my recent tweeting of articles and assorted tweets by those I think are making valid contributions to the wider trans discussion and the role of women within it.

To give you a couple of examples of the things I have tweeted; please do point out where I have crossed the line and stumbled into impudence:

• Recent news story about a transwoman whom pretended to be a 14 year old boy in order to groom a young girl. I retweeted someone who commented under an article that had used 'Woman' in its headline as opposed to 'Transwoman', something along the lines of; why be a determinist about time because if the predator can be a woman why can't they also be 14 years old.

• A story about the unfairness of a transwoman who had won a cycling race.

• The use of the #NoDebate hashtag serving as yet another convenient tool to silence and denigrate women who take an alternative view to the dogmatic "Transwomen are women. Full stop. #NoDebate".

Apologies for the essay but I'm caught between going back to just tweeting about bagels and cream cheese, the occasional news story and leave it at that; but equally I also want to scour twitter for more GC views to retweet as frankly I don't want to be silenced.

I put retweets are not endorsements in my bio.

Just make a new twitter account, be anonymous and keep your job intact.

Remove your place of work if it’s on it any reference to it.

This is why I support anonymity on the Internet.

The Civil Service Electronic Media Policy, for instance, is one of the most draconian I’ve ever seen.

The fact that Sp!ked now links comments to Facebook is one of the reasons I won’t post on GC articles anymore. It’s more than my jobs worth.

Unfortunately, the current climate means that many women can not afford to be outspoken using their real world names.

Every woman must weigh this up according to their own risk.

Those of us with less to lose (something Posie has taken on board, brilliantly) have to pull up our giant knickers and get our heads above the parapet, knowing that as the tide changes, our anon/closeted sisters will be emboldened.

Don’t feel ashamed if you decide the back seat option is the safest for you right now - that’s why we are a collective action -covering each other’s backs as need be.

Also, your senior manager needs to give their head a wobble (I hate that phrase, but it’s very useful)!

I don't think it is an unreasonable policy actually.

I was told off for including political information on a whatsapp group for my condominium and I apologised. Just use that tweeter account for the purpose it was designed for.

Coyoacan it's a private account- it is designed for whatever the private individual want to use it for.

I do have the standard disclaimer in my bio about my views not being those of my organisation which incidentally I haven't named in my bio. But I do use my real name and I'm also on a 'social media' list that was made by the External Outreach department who often encourage us to tweet out their statements/blogs/reports and the like.

The senior manager in question is not my direct manager but someone I do work alongside. But the conversation left me with more questions than answered because it was a very casual chat, if you like, not an arranged meeting. And I'm wondering if that conversation might count as a warning of sorts? And if so do I get a right to respond or defend myself? I honestly don't want it to be escalated and become a disciplinary but then again the logical part of me can't see how my tweets and retweets even if they were to be read out infront of a management panel would be seen as so egregious as to be in contravention of the organisation's policy.

Don’t feel ashamed if you decide the back seat option is the safest for you right now.

@BettyDuMonde I hate to say it but that's exactly how I feel right now.

@Coyoacan I also don't think it's an unreasonable policy. In fact I'd go so far as to say it should be more robust** as currently it's more or less just a general statement of common-sense values.

**robust if they intend to pick people up on things which don't contravene the policy. Short of expressing ableist, ageist, racist and other deplorable views, everything else seemingly goes...

You either need to be removed from the social media list or stop referencing anything 'controversial' on your feeds. If you're removed from the list and have no work colleagues/clients following you, they'd be hard pushed to discipline.

I wouldn’t link anything GC to my own name.

Even if my current employers were relaxed about it any future employers might not and they might look at my social media profile. The Internet never forgets.

It might be cowardly and I salute those brave enough to come forward but I have to eat.

Right now the Overton Window* is centred on trans ideology. My only comfort is the belief that it will eventually shift back and the more deranged supporters find out what it’s like to have their misogynistic views thrown back in their faces.

*I’m relatively new here so not sure if the term Overton Window is well known.

The Overton window, also known as the window of discourse, describes the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse. The term is derived from its originator, Joseph P. Overton, a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, who, in his description of his window, claimed that an idea's political viability depends mainly on whether it falls within the window, rather than on politicians' individual preferences. According to Overton's description, his window includes a range of policies considered politically acceptable in the current climate of public opinion, which a politician can recommend without being considered too extreme to gain or keep public office.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Do you have a diary or day book or something you could make a note in about the conversation so if anything rears it’s head later you have something contemporaneous to fall back on?

Maybe something along the lines of ‘curious chat with xxx today. Surprised he follows me on twitter but glad to see that he also seems to be worried about the increased discrimination women are suffering’ - sort of deliberately misunderstanding your discussion with him so that if there is any comeback you can say ‘but look, at the time I thought it was curious and there was certainly no element of formal warning or telling off, I thought that he was also worried about the fact that the rights of women, protected under the equalities act, are being pushed aside for others that aren’t even mentioned in the equalities act. I’m sure that you too must agree that it’s very important for diversity to ensure that all listed protected groups are treated equally and any issues are treated seriously because at the moment it seems that women are the group having their rights ignored and removed and I’d really like your help in ensuring that this workplace doesn’t discriminate against women...

There was a great article by Trevor Philips in the Times (I think!) recently (it’s mentioned in the feminism topic, at least 1 thread about it) that might be worth retweeting as he wrote the equalities act and reckons it is being hijacked. Also a good piece by a gay guy that has been recommended several times on here - so if they were reading your account you could at least educate them!

Sorry VladmirsPoutine, I misunderstood the nature of your account.

Just as a matter of personal privacy, I don't use my real name anywhere on social media.

Always keep a record of discussions with your line manager. They certainly do.

There was a great article by Trevor Philips in the Times (I think!) recently (it’s mentioned in the feminism topic, at least 1 thread about it) that might be worth retweeting as he wrote the equalities act and reckons it is being hijacked

I’d love to see how anyone could discipline staff under the equalities act for tweeting something from the guy who wrote it.

Great advice from pp, I would add, check the twitter timeline of others on the firm with the same social media status. If they are tweeting pro trans material it might help you.

Here's a shareable link to the Trevor Phillips article if anyone wants it

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-extremists-are-putting-equality-at-risk-fjv8skwz0?shareToken=2cc0c88834f61cb125951a1aefeacc37

It’s possible the manager who spoke to you was warning you to be careful.
I’d agree that you need to be very careful what you post in your own name and an anonymous account may be better.

Agree get your name taken off the external outreach list. They have no right just to add you. Or stay on it and go back to bagel reviews.

What a resourceful lot of posters with some top advice.

But I do use my real name and I'm also on a 'social media' list that was made by the External Outreach department who often encourage us to tweet out their statements/blogs/reports and the like.

There seems to be a confusing mix of work and private on your twitter account. When they "encourage " you to tweet out statements is that in your own time or theirs? Is this a private or a work account?

I would treat this account as a work account, purge followers and who you are following, block any managers or at least that one just because, and wind down your use of the account whilst setting up a new anonymous account and carefully following everyone non work related from your other account. Keep work and private separate. Don't follow anyone from work on your new account and block them if they find it.

And follow advice of pp's to keep a record and protect yourself.

Thanks for the link to the times piece by Trevor Philips - and yes, that was exactly my thought about being a good thing to retweet as if they said anything about it to you, you can keep saying that you believe in the equalities act and how can they reprimand you for that unless they are saying they don’t support the equalities act which isn’t going to go down well!

I didn’t know about the Overton Window - thanks for that.

I think you should have a private twitter account too if you want to keep abreast of what’s going on. Use your existing one to share the most common sense and mainstream manifestations of your views. Trevor Phillips being the obvious one as mentioned. I think you should be entitled to have a dialogue with colleagues about factual errors.

Thisnsino viouslt a really prescient question and lots will be dealing with it. If we’re all too scared to say our views others with the same view won’t know they aren’t alone in the minority

@Iused2BanOptimist I agree very useful advice here - especially for sounding out my thoughts. I did think I might end up having to create a new account with a pseudonym of sorts but for whatever reason I also thought that in itself is also encroaching on being censored. However, as has been pointed out by PP, which is also a conflict I've been toying with, is ultimately I need a job and I need to pay bills to live - therefore it would be especially unwise to rock that boat. Other than contributing to consultations (GRA) and donating to certain causes - that's pretty much all I can do and I do admit to feeling quite embarrassed about the fact that I don't want to stick my head above the parapet, as it were.

But back to your point - my twitter account is to all intents and purposes a private account but I have in the past and continue to use it professionally. This has never been a problem until I happened to engage in discourse about the trans movement.

When I refer to the social media list it isn't anything particularly nefarious or untoward. It's a generic list of colleagues who have social media accounts that the External team grouped together. Similarly to the way I have a list of US-news journalists or BBC journalists. So in that sense whenever they've a new release they notify the 'social media' list iyswim?

@ArkeNOTen Precisely my dilemma. I feel as though if I 'hide' then it seems I am alone, I'm very sure I'm not alone but there we go.

And with apparently no hint of irony, the voices I seek to question appear to be so loud, dominating and dogmatic in their rhetoric with such unquenchable support, that it renders any other view at best negligible and at worst bigoted cis-menstruators.