TWITTER CONTINUES WAGING WAR AGAINST CONSERVATIVES, NOW INCLUDES POLITICALLY INCORRECT LIBERAL SPEECH
Twitter Bans Radical Feminist for Saying
“Men Aren’t Women”
BY SELWYN DUKE
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength — and men are women. Unlike the first three, the last comment wasn’t an example of doublethink from Orwell’s 1984,
but one from America 2018. In fact, tweeting the opposite, that “men
aren’t women,” actually got a radical feminist banned from Twitter.
While it’s usually conservatives in the crosshairs of social-media
censorship, one of its latest victims is Canadian feminist Meghan
Murphy, a self-described socialist and founder of the website and
podcast called
Feminist Current. Yet her views on “transgenderism” weren’t current enough for Twitter.
Heavy provides some background:
It all started back in August, when
she wrote and tweeted about a transgender activist named Lisa Kreut.
Lisa Kreut is also a dominatrix who uses the name Hailey Heartless.
Hailey Heartless was asked to be a
speaker at the annual Women’s March in Vancouver. Murphy and others were
upset by the decision. This was partly because they disagreed [with]
what they perceived to be Heartless’s views on violent sex and legal
prostitution. They were also upset because, Murphy said, “this was,
after all, a march for women.” And in their view, Hailey Heartless is a
man [in their view?!].
Murphy’s Twitter account was first suspended in August after she
criticized Kreut for allegedly having targeted “‘Feminist Current’s ad
revenue and [leading] efforts to have Vancouver Rape Relief blacklisted
at the 2016 BCFED Convention,’”
reports Daily Wire. The site continues:
In order to regain full access after
having violated Twitter’s rules regarding “hateful conduct,” Murphy
deleted the tweets. She then complained publicly to Twitter, asking if
she was “no longer permitted to report facts” on the social media
platform. For this, Murphy claims that she was suspended for half a day,
and told by Twitter to delete her public complaint.
In October, Murphy sent out a pair of
tweets in which she questioned the transgender movement, writing, “Men
aren’t women,” and asking, “How are transwomen not men? What is the
difference between men and transwomen?”
Murphy was notified by Twitter on November 15 that her tweets had once again violated the company’s “hateful conduct” rules.
In fact, she has now been “permanently banned” from Twitter,
according to
Spectator USA, and her
Twitter page is inaccessible.
Strikingly, also banned according to the
Spectator is referencing a person with the correct pronouns (e.g., calling a man masquerading as a woman “he”). So is “so-called ‘
deadnaming’ — referring to a previous name of a trans person,” the
Spectator writes.
What should scare you is why my earlier
1984 reference is
apropos here: This is an attack on objective reality itself. Murphy
alluded to this in a complaint to Twitter, too, saying,
Daily Wire relates:
I’m not allowed to say that men aren’t
women or ask questions about the notion of transgenderism at all
anymore? That a multi billion dollar company is censoring BASIC FACTS
and silencing people who ask questions about this dogma is INSANE.
What ARE we allowed to say here??? How tf
is simply saying ‘men aren't women’ hateful??? I am losing my
g[**]d[****]d mind over this. Enjoy your brave new world, sjws. Here’s
your f***ing social justice … I’m assuming my account is going to get
locked again simply for speaking about this.
Of course, censoring people under the “hateful conduct” pretext is
also a denial of reality, since the yardstick used isn’t “hatefulness”
(a hard quality to measure unless a mind-reader) but
ideological conformity.
In fact, “transgender” activists are an intensely angry bunch whose
efforts to destroy others are generally driven by hate, yet they’re not
censored by social media. In contrast, while there are exceptions, I and
many others opposing them mount deeply intellectual arguments that,
simply for being unfashionable, are labeled “hateful.”
Many are found
here, for example, in an essay in which I explain why there’s no good science whatsoever behind “transgenderism.” Moreover,
here
I examine the importance of controlling language and explain why I
won’t — and don’t — adhere to the politically correct
“transgender”-pronoun model. You tell me: Are these arguments “hateful”?
(Regardless, since I do what Murphy does, only more unabashedly and
consistently, it should be only a matter of time before Twitter bans me,
too.)
What’s hateful, of Truth and the imperative of allowing the vibrant
intellectual debate necessary to reveal it, is social media’s
censorship. How can people discern reality if they’re not even allowed
to discuss it?
As for Murphy, her Twitter trials have inspired her to widen her
discussion. In fact, before being completely banned, she tweeted that
she’d changed her mind about some matters and was tired of the
“‘right=bad/left=good’ dichotomy,” as she put it, as it wasn’t good to
“limit ourselves to engaging only with those we already agree with.”
Furthermore, she said that right-wing “media has been the only media
to cover Twitter’s attempts to silence me, and has been the only media
to reach out to me.” In contrast, liberal media refuses “to even
acknowledge that feminists have a critique of transgender ideology.”
Murphy also complained that, in Canada, at least, the media and Left
in general refuse to utter a word about “transgender” bullying of and
threats against feminists. She concluded by saying that while the right
was willing to engage “with those they may disagree with,” the Left
“wants an echo chamber.”
Of course, this is nothing new. Whether it was the French
revolutionaries, the Soviets, the Chinese Red Guards, the Khmer Rouge in
Cambodia, or their other philosophical soulmates, the Left has never
brooked dissent and always ends up eating its own.
Yet also true is that, in a way, feminism is responsible for eating itself here — because it paved the way for “transgenderism.”
How? Well, note that feminists used to espouse so-called gender
neutrality theory, which taught that “gender” (a term previously
reserved almost exclusively to grammar) was just a “social construct”;
consequently, the theory also held that if you raised the sexes
identically, they’d be identical beneath the surface. I was inundated
with this growing up.
Now let’s tie this together. Feminists insisted that “the sexes are
the same except for the superficial physical differences.” Now the
male-claiming-female status crowd insists that if they change the
superficial physical differences (i.e., external genitalia, facial
hair), they can be the “other sex” — though, of course, they call it
“gender.” A straight line absolutely can be drawn between the two
claims.
So it’s ironic: The feminists peddled the “sameness” lie to gain
entry into what had been men’s realm. Now men are using it to gain entry
into women’s sports, women’s marches, and women’s bathrooms. I guess
that’s equality.
____________________________________________________________
Twitter bans ‘misgendering, deadnaming’
as ‘hateful conduct’ in updated rules
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
November 26, 2018 (LifeSiteNews)
– Referring to gender-confused individuals by their actual sex is now
“hateful” conduct on par with racial slurs, according to new Twitter
guidelines defining grounds for banning users from the platform.
The company’s “Hateful conduct policy”
says Twitter’s mission is to “give everyone the power to create and
share ideas and information, and to express their opinions and beliefs
without barriers,” with special concern for “the voices of those who
have been historically marginalized.” It also claims to believe “free
expression is a human right,” and that public conversation “requires
representation of a diverse range of perspectives.”
“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,” it now reads. “This
includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming” of transgender people.
Punishment ranges from being asked to remove “violating content” and a
“period of time in read-only mode before [violators] can Tweet again,”
to “permanent account suspension” for repeat violations.
“Deadnaming” refers to calling someone by his or her given legal name rather than a new opposite-sex name, such as Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner or Bradley “Chelsea” Manning.
The change was officially made in October but is just now gaining notice in the media, The Blaze reports.
The homosexual news site PinkNews reports that
pro-LGBT Twitter users are ecstatic about the news, but others are
alarmed at the potential to stifle debate on transgenderism, and
silencing users who assert the scientific consensus that biological sex
is rooted in an individual’s chromosomes and reflected in hundreds of genetic characteristics.
“In light of my years of negative experiences trying to engage
progressives on issues like pornography, prostitution, male violence,
and now gender identity, I’ve unfortunately come to see many of them as
cowardly, hypocritical, lacking in political and intellectual integrity,
and disingenuous,” Murphy
wrote in response.
“While of course there are leftists who are critical of the sex trade
and trans activism,” she continued, “far too many of those who
represent progressives (in North America, in particular) — politicians
and leftist political parties, as well as activists and representatives
of the labour movement — will not speak out about these issues nor will
they defend the women being ripped to shreds for speaking out.”
Like Facebook, Twitter is the subject of numerous
ongoing controversies about restricting conservative content and users,
including LifeSiteNews.
____________________________________________________________
House Committee Investigating Twitter CEO
For Lying Under Oath
Jack Dorsey under fire after accelerating
conservative purge on platform
BY JAMIE WHITE
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A top House committee is reviewing whether Twitter CEO Jack
Dorsey lied under oath over the social media platform’s history of
censoring and banning conservative users.
The House
Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees the U.S. telecom industry,
has decided to review Dorsey’s testimony following the accelerated
purge of conservative users,
including journalist Laura Loomer and combat vet Jesse Kelly.
“The committee is aware of Twitter’s actions and is currently reviewing Mr. Dorsey’s testimony,” a House aide
said Tuesday after Twitter
arbitrarily banned Kelly with no explanation.
Dorsey had testified that Twitter doesn’t consider “political viewpoints” when enforcing their policy enforcement decisions.
“I want to start by making something very clear,” Dorsey
testified
in September. “We don’t consider political viewpoints, perspectives, or
party affiliation in any of our policies or enforcement decisions,
period.”
“Our policies and our algorithms don’t take into consideration any affiliation, philosophy, or viewpoint.”
Dorsey has still refused to respond to a number of questions posed by the committee, according to the aide.
“Twitter has not yet provided responses to members’ questions for
the record, despite an October 15th deadline,” the aide said. “It is
important that Congress receive this requested information to ensure we
are able to properly perform our oversight responsibilities.”
“We believe Twitter and other tech companies should be forthright
with Congress and the American people in an effort to shed light on
often opaque rules and processes,” the aide noted. “Transparency and
trust are essential components of our increasingly digital communication
channels.”
Since Dorsey testified, Twitter has banned
Alex Jones and Infowars, Gavin McGinnes, Laura Loomer, Jesse Kelly, suspended actor James Woods for
refusing to remove a meme, and has even
targeted other leftists for critiquing transgender issues.
The concept of “dead naming” is being pushed as a new label for bigoted behavior. Paul Joseph Watson exposes the hypocrisy by leftists that cry about the treatment of transgendered people while denying the abuses against conservatives and Christians world wide.
