Twitter has suspended me

[Glinner]

I'm really sorry to barge in on you Mumsnettters with my problems, but
I've been finally suspended from Twitter and I have a feeling they're either going to ban me or just take my verified tick. I've submitted an appeal with Twitter and the Better Business Bureau but I thought I'd post here too so people knew what was going on.

Recently, I keep being locked out of my account and forced to delete tweets to get back in. The latest tactic by trans rights activists is to run a search for any time I've used the word 'groomer', a phrase Twitter recently decided was Not Allowed.

This was not a violation of Twitter's ToS at the time I used the phrase, and I have been careful to avoid it since. I still use the word 'grooming' in various permutations because I believe that gender ideology is a form of societal grooming. It is a very real threat to the wellbeing of women and children and if our ability to name a threat is removed, it is even more difficult to fight that threat.

You may remember that Twitter similarly removed Canadian feminist Meghan Murphy. She lost her account when she said "that's him" about 'Jessica' Yaniv. Bear in mind that Yaniv was still going under 'Jonathan' at the time, and just as in my case, her crime against Twitter's Terms of Service was not actually an offence at the time she committed it. She probably never thought she could be banned from the public square for uttering the words "that's him". But that's Twitter.

Twitter has a high percentage of trans-identified employees and for some time has been silencing feminists and their allies who run afoul of its absurd 'misgendering' policies. The one good thing about my situation is that I'm in great company--Claire Graham, Meghan Murphy, Skylar Gwynn, Miranda Yardley, GNC Centric and many more, important feminist and critical voices who have been silenced for fighting a dangerous ideology that tells children it's possible to be born into the wrong body.

Anyway, that's what's happening. Please let people know it's entirely down to malicious reporting from the usual suspects and please keep watching my YouTube Channel and visiting my depressing blog. I'll also be available on Glindr if people from Twitter want to re-establish contact there. Hope it's ok to post these links to those destinations

YouTube:
Glindr: glindr.org/home
Women are Important: glinner.co.uk/

Thanks for all the support, and thanks for letting me fight alongside you.

@Tianalia

You might have missed it, so just in case, the law has changed for #Trans folks. If you care to give the 2010 GRA a look, it's all in there

It hasn't given you women's rights dude has it though, you know, the real prize that you were really hoping for.

Is that one of the fraudulent laws that was circulated to councils replacing sex as a protected characteristic with transgender and gender identity? If you were involved in that you may be facing criminal charges.

@maudspellbody

The phrase we usually used is lapsed!

@midclegs

Adding my support *@glinner* ESPECIALLY after seeing this just now on Twitter

8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

Sorry the screenshot didn't copy. Good to know I guess.

Except most I know were people I taught with in a catholic school. Still very much mass-goers! Just not very devout...at all...

But we aren't talking about that anymore! I promise.

People are right - it's not helpful equating proper religion with this truly unholy cult.

@Glinner thank you for supporting us.

To those who claim to be feminists but claim that transwomen are women please can you explain what woman means to you?

Please can you explain how it is bigoted to believe that everyone should have the right to live peacefully (transpeople included) but not to be prepared to accept the patent lie that is TWAW?

I've written to my local MP, Kier Starmer, Liz Truss. Do I bother with Boris Johnson? I also believe you can write to the HoL. As they have the power to veto legislation etc is it worth doing? I'm quite new to this type of activism

Yes the TRAs will be celebrating Graham being blocked from Twitter but it is actually our victory. There will be a lot of free publicity now to raise awareness of the ridiculous constraints on free speech when it comes to the trans lobby.

And it looks like the GRA self ID reforms are not going to be implemented so 🤷‍♀️

I would say it's been a good few weeks?

It started with "you deserved it" and ended with describing their porn fantasies.

They can't help themselves.
There are MPs who bleat TWAW and never seem to check the profiles of their cheerleaders on Twitter. I suppose some of them might actually believe that the fishnet-clad bulge is just a resting female penis, but still.

Just not very devout...at all...

😳 ah, I got you... although i suppose that is a lack of adherence rather than belief iyswim...

I don't suppose Graham could go on Andrew Marr or something?! 😆 perhaps a head to head with Munroe?

@happyless

I've followed *@Glinner* for a long time. I don't really agree with his methods, but I think he's asking important questions and I'll miss reading his posts.

My understanding is that transgender people are not saying or claiming to be female - they are saying they want the right to identify as a woman. So there's no argument about the biological facts of life, but in terms of gender, they identify more as women than men, and therefore feel more comfortable using the women's bathroom. Under E&D laws 'sex' is the protected characteristic but the wording says man/woman instead of male/female. And we talk about womens rights rather than female rights.

I've been confused by this for ages, but I believe that's on the right lines of the problem (in a very simplified way). I really want to understand the bones of it - is that it?

I don't understand why asking questions and opening debate gets people branded transphobic - it puts me off asking anything at all.

No, sadly that's not it. That was my own understanding, and therefore I thought the outrage and anger unfair and wrong. But now, we are told transwomen are women, and therefore there is no injustice in, for example, a trans athelete, even in some cases without any medical intervention at all, competing against a girl. Because they are women. The claim is made that not wanting to share a changing room with a transwoman - who is male, and in 80% of cases will have had neither surgery nor hormones - is the same as not wanting to share with a black woman. Not wanting to compete against a male athlete is compared to not wanting to compete against a lesbian. This implication that black or gay women are not real women is for some reason not regarded as racist. or homophobic. Then again, lesbians are told that they are bigots if they exclude all males from their dating pool, and that this is offensive. They need to examine their prejudices, and recognise that a transwoman's penis is a woman's penis, too. Lesbians who object to this, and assert their right (under the law, in fact) to same sex attraction are ostracised. Check out some lesbian forums some time. There is a bleak rage about it, in many.

We are also told that women who don't want to share a changing room with males would be prejudiced against women who have had mastectomies - that it is about bigotry around diverse women's bodies, and not wanting single sex provision, because trans women are women.

My advice would be to go and read Pink News. And then go and read Stonewall's site - be aware that their statistics are hugely questionable across every possible sphere. They say that men can be lesbians, if they identify as women. That's why so many threats to JK Rowling referenced using a "girl dick" to choke her to death, for making the terrible claim that sex matters, and exists. That, by extension, transwomen are transwomen, and not, in actuality, women: the biologically identified group, who suffer violence and disadvantage because of that biology.

So no, I'm afraid your understanding is not correct. If only it were. It's the sane and reasonable view, yes. But it is now seen not just as bigotry, but actively hateful, to believe as you do.

I was told by a Labour figure that it did not matter that no women's groups were consulted in the original GRA reforms, because trans women are women, and therefore women were consulted. And they meant it completely literally. They saw no differences in rights, needs or interests at all, and suggesting that there might be is seen as hate.

The intention is to redefine 'woman' completely, and ensure that it is a group of people determined by assumed or declared gender identity. Not sex. In fact, that has quietly been brought in in Scotland.

Mysteriously, men remain unaffected by this change.

I feel so sorry for the truly dysmorphic souls who feel better presenting as the opposite sex with no desire to make others validate them or budge over to accommodate them (and they do exist - they are just shouted over by both sides). They have been totally done over by the trans twitter radicals.

It's a betrayal in a way. Being labelled 'truscum' and finding themselves lumped in with this toxic drive for unreasonable demands.

They lose all round.

My issue with Glinner, is if you agree of disagree with him, his entire platform was defending women, by speaking over women. Men who disagree are not letting women speak, and women who disagree are idiots. Even women who backed your opinions were reworded. You're centering yourself, a straight white man, as some sort of hero for female voices, having been banned from twitter you stumble onto a female centric space to further make the discussion about yourself. I don't want to get into a debate about trans rights, don't have the energy honestly right now, but you never actually let women talk, either way. It's infuriating.

Clearly you never actually followed Glinner Flying.

"Then again, lesbians are told that they are bigots if they exclude all males from their dating pool, and that this is offensive. They need to examine their prejudices, and recognise that a transwoman's penis is a woman's penis, too. Lesbians who object to this, and assert their right (under the law, in fact) to same sex attraction are ostracised. Check out some lesbian forums some time. There is a bleak rage about it."

Indeed. There was a thread on Twitter only yesterday where a lesbian was banned from the lesbian dating app, Hinge, for specifying 'biological women only'

On top of that, there is actually an option to choose preferred ethnicity, so it's ok to be race-excluding, but not penis excluding.

Through the looking glass...

Don't see Glinner as centring himself. He's been calling out anyone in thrall to extremist TRAs. Which turns out to be quite a lot of people. Including women.

[quote Wolfgirrl]@Nihiloxica the difference is you can choose to be, or not be, a Catholic. Catholics are not trying to change the law to compel non-Catholics to proclaim the bread to be the Body of Christ.

Plus bringing Catholicism into the argument gives credence to the TRA's accusations of GCs being somehow driven by the religious far right in the States.[/quote]
There are loads of differences. I'm not saying they are exactly the same.

I'm saying that there are interesting similarities in the way the central tenet is a stated belief in something impossible.

I think it sheds light. It certainly does for me.

I'm not sure how it can possibly lend credence to GC feminists being funded by American Christian fundamentalists.

I got my first strike on here earlier this week for a post that included the word groomers.
Its interesting

Sorry I missed all of the "fun" on the thread and on Twitter, @Glinner, but am chiming in to say I support you. You have been asking all the awkward questions "no-one" actually, everyone who's anyone wants aired, and I salute your investigative spirit and your bloody-mindedness. We cannot be "nice" about any of this, even to one another, so let me just be a sarky bitch and say, "Woman up, man!" #CourageCalls

The reason people campaign to have people removed from Twitter is not because they are concerned about a private company's terms of service, but because they want certain views to be silenced.

This is nonsense. No-one seriously believes that the views of anyone banned from Twitter are silenced. There are SO many other platforms.

Just wanted to add my support for you @Glinner and thank you so much for all you have done, no matter what the price. Thank you.

This is nonsense. No-one seriously believes that the views of anyone banned from Twitter are silenced. There are SO many other platforms.

The conversation about this mainly happens on Twitter.

[quote Dhalmeup]@SuperJan

If you were shown one, it would be 'show me another'. If you were shown a dozen, it would be 'show me more'. If you were shown a hundred, it would be 'that's not enough proof'.

Sadly we will never be able to test your guess at what might happen.

Because we have never been given one screenshot, let alone tens. Not a single one.[/quote]
Last night one of them pasted a screen shot of Magdalen telling a troll to eff off.
That was supposed to be proof that WDIT. (Women do it too)
At this point a woman speaking for herself is viewed as transphobic by misogynists because reasons.

@DuineArBith

The reason people campaign to have people removed from Twitter is not because they are concerned about a private company's terms of service, but because they want certain views to be silenced.

This is nonsense. No-one seriously believes that the views of anyone banned from Twitter are silenced. There are SO many other platforms.

I suspect it is because so many journalists use twitter. and the TRAs and MRAs do not want any more of them to see the misogyny Feminists and their allies are subjected to. That is why when Jo Rowling stood up for women's rights there was an explosion.

This is nonsense. No-one seriously believes that the views of anyone banned from Twitter are silenced. There are SO many other platforms

Not really. All the MSM journos are on there and encouraged to tweet. They are not on MN or anywhere else in number. And it’s notable which views get banned. Unsurprising given the number of incel men there must be coding up the algorithms on Twitter.