Elon Musk and new pronoun rules on Twitter

[PriOn1]

It seems that people on Twitter face being penalized again for correctly sexing people and using their original names.

The new rules were quietly introduced, and Musk originally said he was “looking into it.”

Now it seems he has caved, defensively claiming that it’s only for “repeated, targeted harassment”.

So much for free speech. I guess now he’s taken a load of money from people in return for a blue tick, extra words and increased visibility, he has decided to shaft them all again. Bizarre behaviour.

Does this ALSO apply to sex offenders or those who repeatedly harass women or those who threaten women in various ways for stating they want resolution of issues where there is a proven negative impact on women?

Just to be clear, what protections are women getting from Twitter, or is it more of this one sided 'polite' Be Nice shit which fails to address practical legal implications?

The wording is ‘purposeful’. I think it is a valid question to query this. Because this says nothing about only ‘harassment.’

https://x.com/jamesesses/status/1763665915567042859?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ

It’s also very clear to those of us who have spent time on Twitter, that an large number of those adjudicating are perennially sexist and will not intervene when men attack women, even if those men are being obviously abusive.

To put anything remotely biased or requiring nuance in the rules is to hand those Twitter staff another weapon to use. Given the history, there absolutely should be no explicit rules on “misgendering” because it is so obviously open to abuse.

From a personal perspective yes, because I believe men are men, women are women and I would be offended if someone called me 'cis' when I consider 'woman' to be my correct title. I also believe that Musk believes men are men, women are women and that cis can be considered offensive. But from a policy perspective I can't see how he can treat one 'side' differently whilst claiming to be pro free speech, even - or especially - if it's his own side. I don't actually think the war on trans is to be won on Twitter regardless so I'm not sure how much it matters in the grand scheme of things.

I think he's probably got an issue with the legalities of this differing between countries.

What is legal in the UK isn't necessarily legal elsewhere.

This is a problem with other areas on free speech on twitter and international users.

It's not free speech, no. But I think there is also other factors in play in terms of how reality collides with rhetoric.

I do believe Musk in his ambitions on free speech. What is workable in practice is something different. But on that note, it's not ok that harassment of women is viewed as legitimate either.

You don’t “believe men are men and women are women”, you know it. It’s factual.

”Cis” is an invented, faith-based concept with no basis in reality. It’s also routinely used as an insult, where saying “you’re a man” is only an insult if you are denying reality.

There’s a massive difference and it’s not about who’s side you’re on.

That’s a good point. It could be considered that tweets (which are on your own page) and not direct @‘s or QTs to the person may still fall into that category. I can see how that would start to impose on your free speech.

Too many people have quoted me and I don’t actually care enough to go back and forth with about 8/9 different people!

And yet you're still here, telling us how much you don't care 😆

So I think we can gather that your don’t really understand all that much about how different people use social media. Nor do you quite seem to understand just how targeted reporting of Twitter accounts have always been done in the past.

Nor does it seem that you understand how the wording ‘purposeful’ can be abused by those targeting feminist accounts or how a investigation team can become biased as we have seen from previous Twitter and Reddit and other platforms. Yet you felt compelled enough to come and tell us we are being ‘foolish’ apparently.

It is quite remarkable.

Nowhere did I say anyone is being foolish! Please don’t put words in my mouth. I said, I genuinely don’t understand why you’d want to go back and forth with something that you view to be foolishness.

Yes of course everyone uses social media differently. Choosing to use social media to constantly interact with something you disagree with or something that you view to be foolishness, is something I can’t quite understand! As mentioned, I’d certainly like to hear from someone who’s faced repercussions in future

How far does that extend? If someone is not a doctor but wants people to believe they are is it reasonable to expect everyone to call them Dr? Would you consider that someone who called them Mrs instead was just doing it to "piss them off" or would you recognise that the person using Mrs was reasonably refusing to play along with a dangerous affectation?

The problem, created by trans activism, is that the words trans people are demanding already have different, sex based meanings. It's not as simple as being kind, it's that if we allow the words that hitherto refered to sex to come to mean something new it means we no longer have words that refer to sex, and that means we lose the ability to name, describe and support the challanges we have because of sex.

If trans people were asking us to use new words that reflected their desire to dissociate from their birth sex without appropriating the words of the other sex I think very few people would have any issue with it.

Here is another example of how it is being used.

https://x.com/ang052998/status/1763761332002701413?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ

Anyone who thinks humans own pronouns and that others are "assholes" for using the language describing the world the way they see it, is the real asshole.

I don’t believe in compelled speech. But I also don’t believe in Twitter/X. The easiest thing is to come off it altogether.

oh. So you’re leaving the thread straight after saying “I genuinely don’t understand why you’d want to go back and forth with something that you view to be foolishness.” was* *not to be viewed as you declaring that you viewed me as discussing something you deemed foolishness then?

And you can’t see how anyone can have made that interpretation? While you are still telling us all that we are wrongly interpreting something that is clearly stated in the policy as ‘purposeful’ use as below as the level that Twitter has used in its policy. FFS. I am not sure how much clearer it needs to be. Just using pronouns that are different to what someone wants can be construed as ‘harassment and abuse’ according to this policy.

Just because Elon Musk says something doesn’t mean that his team will do exactly that. Plus…. Musk is not going to intervene in all cases, is he?

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/abusive-behavior#:~:text=January%202024&text=We%20recognize%20that%20if%20anyone,express%20themselves%20and%20cause%20harm.

This is the relevant section.

Use of Prior Names and Pronouns

We will reduce the visibility of posts that purposefully use different pronouns to address someone other than what that person uses for themselves, or that use a previous name that someone no longer goes by as part of their transition. Given the complexity of determining whether such a violation has occurred, we must always hear from the target to determine if a violation has occurred.

But you can tag them so they see how you are talking about them. If you are persistently using the wrong pronoun and making sure they can see it, you are being deliberately rude.

The only pronouns a person uses about themselves are “I” and “me”.

So I wouldn’t be using the same ones about another person as they use about themselves.

I simply thought that YOU VIEWED things like men requesting to be referred as she/her as foolishness. If I incorrectly assumed that you thought these things to be foolishness, then my bad. I just thought there must be a reason why you’re so passionate about the subject but I’m clearly wrong. Seriously, enjoy your day because we’re not getting anywhere. You seem deadset on misinterpreting my words

Elon's just tweeted: "Turns out this was due to a court judgment in Brazil, which is being appealed, but should not apply outside of Brazil"

He also responded "I agree" to the comment: "There is no reason to have a misgendering or deadnaming policy

If someone is harassing then you can block them"

(Can't easily attach screenshot, sorry)

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1763956635439972402?s=19

I view males who demand people use female pronouns for them to not be as harmless as some
posters which to portray them. Because it leads to not just justifying policy decisions but also ambiguous communications that can cause misinformation and harm in their own way. I don’t regard it as ‘foolishness’. Foolishness would imply that not one of those male people had a political agenda that meant harming female people.

I am ‘passionate’ about the topic on the Feminine Chat: Sex and Gender discussion board because I have seen how dismissing pronouns can be harmful. I have attempted to explain how this new policy can also be harmful to women who are trying to campaign on Twitter.

I am not ‘deadest’ on misinterpreting your words, I am however, pointing out that your personal experience and usage of social media is narrow and limited. Yet you feel compelled to tell others how to interpret policy while also seeming to try to tell people that if they are kind they have nothing to worry about.

I expect that Genspect from
all their previous posts are some who use preferred pronouns yet have claimed this has indeed already impacted their engagement. Feminists and organisations who have been actively working to be able to state very precisely and accurately what their needs are have been through misuse of these types of policies before.

Absolutely, you have your own opinion, and you are free to express it. However, you are not free from being challenged on this board just because you feel that you don’t want to be challenged.

This would be excellent for all outside of Brazil if true. I hope so. But crap for Brazil, mind you.

So we should call convicted male rapists and murderers "she" and have no problems with their crimes being recorded as female crimes because they say so? Do you always do as you're told? Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?

If I requested to be called "fucking twat" all the time, even in person, you'd have no problem addressing me as such? Even in front of children?

If I requested to be called "fucking twat" all the time, even in person, you'd have no problem addressing me as such? Even in front of children?

It's fun, it's different!!

Totally fine.