Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The thought police on Twitter failed:

72 replies

Fizzingwithdisbelief · 21/11/2018 15:19

Maybe, just maybe Twitter are catching on. It would seem a series of my tweets were reported and were found not to be in violation of their rules:

Hello,

We have received a complaint regarding your account, for the following content.

Tweet ID: 1064942244640247809
Tweet Text: @BBCNews Yet it can afford to fund this: [url]

Tweet ID: 1064954044538658817
Tweet Text: @BBCWomansHour @Bex_Stinson @helenlewis Perhaps because regrets do happen and this factor is potentially damaging to the ideology? [url]

Tweet ID: 1064175345509810176
Tweet Text: 17 autistic children in one school indoctrinated into believing they are the opposite sex #eugenics Whistleblower teacher makes shocking claim that 'most are autistic' [url] via @MailOnline

Tweet ID: 1064674263922368512
Tweet Text: The full transcript of the debacle of a conversation on @BBCWomansHour between @Docstockk , @sally_hines and @janegarvey1 can be accessed here, read it and weep at the insanity of the "gender professor": [url]

Tweet ID: 1064674811778162688
Tweet Text: What is even more sickening is that students pay up to £9k per annum to be taught by this charlatan

Tweet ID: 1064856541642350592
Tweet Text: @BBCWomansHour @Bex_Stinson @helenlewis It is a very real concern that parents for example would not want their children in the same intimate spaces as a "transperson" who has not had surgical interventions as to all intent and purposes they are members of the opposite sex.

We have investigated the reported content and could not identify any violations of the Twitter Rules (support.twitter.com/articles/18311) or applicable law. Accordingly, we have not taken any action at this time.

Sincerely,

Twitter

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Fizzingwithdisbelief · 22/11/2018 14:56

To give you an idea of how many women are being shut down for speaking facts, check out this Twitter feed that itemises the accounts being targetted: twitter.com/SamBarber1910/status/1063250389791883264

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 22/11/2018 15:51

but even if your Tweets aren't against Twitter rules, have you considered that some of your content may be offensive to others if you are being reported for it?

I find sexist stereotypes offensive. And degrading and gaslighting to have the obstacles that my sex presents me with to be dismissed as bigotry.

I think this is the heart of the problem in many respects: one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

And if there is anything I've learnt from life, its about NI and how normal people don't like this shit and it's normal people who are harmed by extremism and that governments harm people and in not listening create situations where people consider the only thing they can do to protect themselves is to react and that government decides the only way they can protect themselves is to crack down, which further aggregates the situation.

Neither is wholy wrong, but neither is wholy right. And there are some right nasty bastards who revel in the harm of innocences for their own personal gain and to manipulate power.

It's amazing how the left which is supposed to be sympathic to pacifism atm, does not understand this and doesn't recognise the role its actually playing in comparison to the one it thinks its playing. There are also those on the right who are loving the choas and harm to normal people that it causes because it is in their interest. Meanwhile those who supposedly are in the centre, can't see for the wood for the trees and for whom the whole thing goes right over their head because the ugliness of the situation never crosses their threshold and enters their world. They just want to pretend everything is fine.

Until this is talked about, and talked about properly - without ideological nonsense of souls - it won't go away. It will just escalate.

deepwatersolo · 22/11/2018 16:03

but even if your Tweets aren't against Twitter rules, have you considered that some of your content may be offensive to others if you are being reported for it?

Is there any way to Tweet anything that does not offend anyone in this whole word? From saying the hijab is an instrument to the oppression of women, to the dictionary definition of women as adult human females, to statistics on male violence, to any opinion about the renaming of the Republic of Macedonia, to any opinion on the Armenia-Turkey issue, to any opinion about Assange - someone will always be offended. So what?

SwordToFlamethrower · 22/11/2018 16:06

I'm also in Twitter Prison. 7 days and counting. I said that in UK law, rape is committed only by a man because only men have a penis.

deepwatersolo · 22/11/2018 16:15

A couple of months back, I would have had a 24h Twitter ban, time counting from the moment I delete one Tweet - or I could have tried to appeal. I could not be arsed. So now I am off Twitter.

My offence was telling a TRA who yelled TERF at some other person, that I did not understand, why he did not spell out the 'die in a fire, choke on my dick...' stick, I had thought TERF was only used as a synonym for this type of stuff for matters of brevity. And his Tweets, actually, seemed short enough for him to spell it out, no need for the acronym.

Fizzingwithdisbelief · 23/11/2018 23:49

If anything this has emboldened me to post more and more GC articles, well done Twitter idiots!

OP posts:
RoseDreams · 24/11/2018 00:03

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 07:34

Meghan Murphy article in Feminist Current:
'Twitter wants me to shut up and the right wants me to join them; I don’t think I should have to do either
I don’t want to choose between the left and the right, I want to engage in critical thought, challenge myself, and form my own opinions.'
(extract)
"To be fair, it’s not that insane. Multi-billion dollar companies are clearly primarily interested in profit, not free speech or women’s rights. But Twitter is a company that represents itself as a platform for communication, for debate, and for sharing ideas, news, and information. While of course, as a private company, Twitter has the right to limit who participates on the platform and what is said, we, the public, have become accustomed to understanding this social media platform as a relatively free space, wherein everyone from politicians, to celebrities, to pornographers, to activists, to students, to anonymous gamers, to feminists, to men’s rights activists may say what they wish.

Despite my disinterest in seeing graphic pornography on Twitter and in being called a “TERF cunt” who should “drink bleach,” I accept that this is something I am likely to be exposed to on Twitter, and choose to use the platform anyway. Cruel and graphic comments are things, for better or for worse, I am accustomed to and that, frankly, don’t bother me much at this point. If you are a public figure, you do just get used to this kind of thing.

What is insane to me, though, is that while Twitter knowingly permits graphic pornography and death threats on the platform (I have reported countless violent threats, the vast majority of which have gone unaddressed), they won’t allow me to state very basic facts, such as “men aren’t women.” This is hardly an abhorrent thing to say, nor should it be considered “hateful” to ask questions about the notion that people can change sex, or ask for explanations about transgender ideology. These are now, like it or not, public debates — debates that are impacting people’s lives, as legislation and policy are being imposed based on gender identity ideology (that is, the belief that a male person can “identify” as female or vice versa). That trans activists and their allies may find my questions about what “transgender” means or how a person can literally change sex uncomfortable, as they seem not to be able to respond to them, which I can imagine feels uncomfortably embarrassing, feeling uncomfortable is not a good enough reason to censor and silence people.

As a result of these attempts by Twitter to silence me, the right has leapt to support me, or at least engage with me, and criticize Twitter’s nonsensical, unwritten policies (nowhere in their Terms of Service does it say users may not differentiate between men and women or ask questions about transgender ideology). While the left continues to vilify me, and liberal and mainstream media continue to mostly ignore feminist analysis of gender identity, people like Dave Rubin and Ben Shapiro (and hundreds of right wingers and free speech advocates online), and right wing media outlets like the Daily Wire and The Blaze have either attempted to speak with me and understand my perspective, expressed support, or covered this undeniably ridiculous decision on the part of Twitter.

Anger at Twitter’s now ongoing attempts to silence me (I remain locked out of my account, awaiting an appeal process that is likely to result in nothing, and received a second notice today that I have been locked out doubly, on account of a tweet posted in May, criticizing Lisa Kreut for participating in a smear campaign against a local feminist, anti-poverty activist. Kreut has publicly admitted to “knowing someone” at Twitter Safety, so this is unsurprising, perhaps, albeit disconcerting) is not limited to the right or to free speech advocates, of course. There are numerous feminists around the world and unaffiliated members of the general public who see transgender ideology as dangerous (or simply ridiculous), and are critical of the ongoing silencing and smearing of those who challenge it. But one thing that does seem undeniable to me — something that the left should consider carefully, in terms of their own political strategizing — is that while the left seems to have taken to ignoring or refusing to engage with detractors or those who have opinions they disagree with or don’t like, the right continues to be interested in and open to engaging. And I think this is a good thing." (continues)

concludes:
I choose to think independently and critically. I choose to make strategic and thoughtful decisions about who to ally with. I choose to support free speech and also to reject right wing positions on things like abortion and the free market. I choose to continue to support universal healthcare, social housing, reproductive justice, and a viable welfare system. I choose to continue to oppose exploitative labour practices, privatization, and war. I choose to continue to advocate against male violence against women, sexual exploitation, porn culture, and legislation I consider to be harmful to women and girls. I choose to consider facts and take what I consider to be ethical positions based on those facts, even if those facts and positions don’t fit whatever is considered to be politically correct.

There are people on the right who are bad and who are good, who are smart and who are stupid, who are wrong and who are right, and then there are a million combinations in between. The same can be said of the left. And to pretend things are any more simple than that is, in my opinion, a mistake. While we may not agree on much else, the right and I both agree that transgenderism is nonsense, which may be awkward, but is better than being wrong or dishonest. Speaking of which, I reserve the right to be wrong about all of this, and change my mind accordingly, though I suspect I am not."
www.feministcurrent.com/2018/11/20/twitter-wants-shut-right-wants-join-dont-think-either/

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3432212-Should-I-know-Meghan-Murphy

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 08:30

from current thread, QuietContraryMary wrote:

"Twitter has a new Hateful Conduct Policy.

help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy

"We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanize, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category. This includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals. "

So apparently 'deadnaming' crooks is not allowed.

Also banned is cartoons

"altering images of individuals to include animalistic features"

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3418617-mumsnet-is-breaching-section-26-of-the-equality-act-2010-harassment-by-hosting-feminist-forums-that-discuss-gender-critical-issues-legal-case?pg=17#prettyPhoto

FermatsTheorem · 24/11/2018 08:38

But note that women are still fair game on twitter for any misogynistic attacks you fancy - "sex" is noticeably missing from their list of protected characteristics.

Danaquestionseverything · 24/11/2018 08:38

"altering images of individuals to include animalistic features"

Wait, what? Technically wouldn't that include all those photos of people with filters of puppy ears? Won't someone think of the furries.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 08:47

Aren't they actually identifying as puppies etc though?

I had a brief look at the corner of the twittersphere where the UK's Mr Puppy competitors share their experiences and dreams recently. There was an overlap with some of those pushing for female (transmen) access to gay men's sauna spaces etc. It took a while to uncurl my toes

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3410716-Transman-kicked-out-of-gay-sauna

rightreckoner · 24/11/2018 08:52

Speaking of people who ought to have spoken up and haven’t - paging Martha Lane Fox who is on the board of Twitter. Another webchat suggestion @MNHQ

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/11/2018 08:53

Also banned is cartoons

Now that needs challenging. Cartooning (cartoonage? What is the word?) is a tradition stretching back a long way which has a long history of political protest and has been used for good. Hogarth would have been banned.

Let’s just think about what banning cartoons means - ISIS? Charlie Hebdo massacre? How can they ban cartoons?

Has anyone alerted Private Eye to this??

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:01

Bowlofbabelfish
I was just thinking the same thing.

This may become a very interesting chapter in the history of political satire.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/11/2018 09:05

Lack of humour and a savage response to satire and pillory is the hallmark of fundamentalism.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:08

"We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanize, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category. This includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals. "

So apparently 'deadnaming' crooks is not allowed.

Interesting to read on the website for those in legal profession, RollOnFriday this week:

'EXCLUSIVE Transgender lawyer suing Graham Linehan was convicted of threatening a man with a golf club'
22 November 2018
"The transgender lawyer who has accused Father Ted scribe Graham Linehan of transphobia and is suing him for harassment was once convicted of affray for threatening a man with a golf club, as well as for a number of other offences.

Stephanie Hayden, who is also suing Mumsnet and recently sued a transsexual solicitor, now identifies as a lawyer. But in 1999, when Hayden was a 28-year-old man known as Anthony Halliday, Halliday was charged with assault and affray. In court documents seen by RollOnFriday, the prosecutor in the Preston Crown Court case described how Halliday became embroiled in an argument after he refused to move his car from outside a man's house in Burnley. When the man said he would use a fork lift truck to remove the car, Halliday "became abusive", said the prosecution, and threw a punch after calling the victim a "big fat bastard".

The victim told police that the pair scuffled, and as he walked back to his house he felt a blow to the back of his head. He said he turned around to see Halliday wielding a golf club. After another scuffle in the street, the victim returned to his house, "bleeding from the head". His wife grabbed a video camera and recorded Halliday as he "picked up his golf club and brandished it, tapping on the glass of the victim's house".

cad "Well sir, I guess for double glazing in Burnley I'd recommend a five iron."

The charge of assault was left on Halliday's file after he pled guilty to the lessor offence of affray. He was sentenced to 150 hours community service, which he subsequently appealed on the basis of another case which he said was similar. It was dismissed as having "no merit" by the Court of Appeal in 2002. The judge noted that Halliday had appeared in court and been convicted in respect of several other crimes, which included disorderly behaviour and "a number of offences of dishonesty".

Hayden, who told RollOnFriday that the police were watching three of her properties as a result of Linehan's complaint, denied striking anyone with a golf club and emphasised that she was never convicted of striking anyone with a golf club. She said, "These events date back to 1999 and whilst the original sentence was indeed a 150 hours community punishment order, upheld on appeal in 2002, the sentence was subsequently varied by HHJ Badley (the original sentencing judge) in May 2004 to a 1 year Conditional Discharge following a referral back to that judge after successful proceedings in the Administrative Court involving the Probation Service. The conviction is long spent.”

www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-transgender-lawyer-suing-graham-linehan-was-convicted-threatening-man-golf

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:10

Lack of humour and a savage response to satire and pillory is the hallmark of fundamentalism.

The British especially though tend to have a very sharply satirical and imaginative response to fundamentalism.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/11/2018 09:12

I love the caption on the photo.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:19

I'd missed that. Thank you! Grin

The thought police on Twitter failed:
Needmoresleep · 24/11/2018 09:34

I wonder whether pressure from advertisers has anything to do with it.

Unilever will not fund 'hate'

www.unilever.com/news/Press-releases/2018/unilever-will-not-invest-in-online-platforms-that-create-division.html

I am not sure of the implications but it seems they talked to Twitter et al 5 weeks ago at some CES conference. They are also committed to ending gender stereotypes. If they mean what some might think they mean it could imply pressure for MN.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:37

from the article, Unilever highlight sexism:

“Fake news, racism, sexism, terrorists spreading messages of hate, toxic content directed at children – parts of the internet we have ended up with is a million miles from where we thought it would take us. It is in the digital media industry's interest to listen and act on this. Before viewers stop viewing, advertisers stop advertising and publishers stop publishing."

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 09:39

Twitter revealed its intent to implement these policies some time ago.
There was a short period where they canvassed opinions though this was not well publicised.
The dangers and limitations were obvious and highlighted.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/11/2018 09:39

Unilever will not fund 'hate'

Well that’s lovely, but if they mean ‘anything g we disagree with’ rather than actual hatred then well, I won’t fund Unilever.

Because we buy their products. We fund them. I’m the one who does the shopping and I’m happy to check labels.

Bowlofbabelfish · 24/11/2018 09:43

toxic content directed at children

Cough cough ‘grooming by influencers’ cough cough ...