Royal Institution getting a pasting on Twitter

[EwwSprouts]

"If you identify as a woman" they'd like you to complete their survey to understand what women watch. twitter.com/Ri_Science/status/1232681119939731458

The transphobic lobby is very nimble, well funded

So well-funded, they've got balloons. Watch out!

"We have just taken down a tweet and survey we posted yesterday. We’ve heard all your messages and we’re going to take this away to reflect."

Thanks Lordfrontpaw, yes because deleting something that was in a public sphere means it never happened of course PR magic "just like that"

Peddling the 'well funded' line again? Gosh well my cheque better hurry the fuck up, my kitchen extension isn't going to pay for itself.

If you responded to the original tweets, your tweet is still ‘there’ it’s just orphaned so not attached to anything, you can only find it on your it own profile.

Think I’m going to repost mine on the deleting announcement.

Inclusivity is apparently only inclusive if it fucks over women.

'Erase' is also the end of the line for me. If you can only exist in your own mind if I validate you then you have a problem you need to take responsibility for. I'm not your caretaker, or your therapist, or your mum. I don't do free labour for strangers.

There seems to be so much anger at mothers of all people having opinions and choosing to reject that ‘mothering’ role of putting other people’s needs first.
So many seem to have a problem with women being real people rather than cardboard cutouts onto which they can project their notions of ‘womanhood’.

Are we surprised that men who want to be women have issues with mothers? Sure there is a phD in there!

I wonder if the bloke realised that some of the questions in the survey were specifically in relation to the respondents children? Someone wondered upthread if the RI would have had this focus if the survey had been aimed at men. Anyway, we can infer that 'mothers' were a group the RI was particularly hoping to hear from.

This forum for mothers is particularly toxic

Bad mums. Naughty ladies. Women can be so horrid. Sign. If only we could just be nice like the ladies on twitter.

Interesting use of mothers rather than the usual bra burning old feminists. That'll also rattle a few cages I would think. Us old GC fems are easy prey, but people'll get pissed if they start coming for the mothers.

Some people say Shaft was a bad mother.

Maybe he self-identified?

Mockers don't assume pronouns!

Can you dig it?

Shut your mouth!

No one understands him like his woman.

....Actually, Shaft is gender nonconforming.

He's a complicated man

He’s a cat...

If you responded to the original tweets, your tweet is still ‘there’ it’s just orphaned so not attached to anything, you can only find it on your it own profile.

Does this mean that the RI while reflecting on its own tweet can no longer access the thread for the purpose of reflecting on the content of the replies? Can someone with more knowledge of Twitter explain? Thanks.

I'm not your caretaker, or your therapist, or your mum. I don't do free labour for strangers.

Michelle absolutely. It’s endlessly amusing the utter disgust and horror from certain men when they realising that, isn’t it. Like we’ve taken the job description they’ve given us and then shat on it or something.

I actually think it's a shame they've deleted the original tweet as that had lots of excellent responses that threw a lot of light on the issues. By deleting it and sticking the 'reflection' one up in isolation, you're getting lots of responses saying "thank you" but also lots of the "oh no, don't give in the transphobes". People who haven't seen the original tweet and the completely logical and well thought out objections to it could well be conned into thinking it was unreasonable for the RI to delete it.

@EwwSprouts

I may be wrong and someone can correct me if I am but I believe that if they went into their account there’s a tab called ‘mentions’ so everyone that replied and @‘d their account (which happens automatically replying to someone) they’d still see all the replies.

@rollonoctober
True, but the comments are split 50/50 approaching the 500 mark but it’s got 1000 likes, compared to the other tweets that got 500 comments, 95 percent disparaging and 5 percent in support but only around 100 likes each.

I must be missing something
how
by pointing out that Women are Women
are we being Haters

TW are welcome to identify as women
but we, without a prostate gland, are women
is that exclusionary and hating ????

Honestly, why didn't the original tweet simply say "If you're a woman"?

Those who believe that TWAW could still interpret it as meaning that TW could respond. So what's the problem?

In fact, I am not sure why TR advocates see "If you identify as a woman" as a more inclusive wording. Inherently, it implies that those who identify as women may not in fact really be women, after all. It implicitly denies that "TWAW" by making explicit that it is basing things on identification rather than on actually being. :)