7 ms·

This is naïve at best. Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. That already eliminates a bunch of po

This is naïve at best. Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. That already eliminates a bunch of politicians.

wwweston 7y ago
> Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. The idea that if twitter had a rule against misgendering means Twitter's rules are heavily ideological is... pretty ideological itself. For one thing, I don't seem to see that rule here: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules [EDIT - respondent provided text that appears under a subheading: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-condu... ] For another, even if I missed it or it's implicit in another rule, while I suppose there's an argument that identifiers have political implications... there's plenty of social space for them to be about being polite in the same way that usually, you should use the names people give you for themselves. Maybe most of all, though, how many of the other rules would you characterize as heavily ideologically driven? Perhaps the one about not threatening violence against an individual or class? Promoting terrorism? Child sexual exploitation? Suicide? Doxing? Personally, I can think of a pretty wide latitude of discourse ranging over a variety of ideologies that's allowed me even if I'm forbidding those forms of engagement AND have to be careful to use someone's preferred pronouns.
- Shaanie 7y ago
  >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. While I don't really have any issues with it being prohibited, I wouldn't put misgendering or deadnaming in the same category as inciting violence or advocating for child exploitation.
  - mosselman 7y ago
    > ... I wouldn't put misgendering or deadnaming in the same category as inciting violence or advocating for child exploitation. Sadly, this is a point that is lost on many people.
  - wwweston 7y ago
    That's one of the reasons why it's really weird to generally characterize Twitter's rules as heavily ideological -- whether you consider rules against misgendering and deadnaming a matters of courtesy, or a key rights issue, or an ideological plot, there's so many other rules that are uncontroversial (unless you find yourself in a position where you want to incite violence or advocate for child exploitation). (Thanks for the text under the subheading, comment above edited with link to it.)
    - ramblerman 7y ago
      > there's so many other rules that are uncontroversial (unless you find yourself in a position where you want to incite violence or advocate for child exploitation). It's disingenuous to lump these together as equivalent to misgendering. Child exploitation and violence are against the law of pretty much all nations in the world, and there is a clear consensus. As well as harm caused. That line hasn't been drawn yet for gender. For one it's not clear how many genders exist. Are they fluid day by day, can people change in and out of them at will. Do I misgender someone if I fail to keep up. Is this a biologically supported concept, should we really open the Pandoras box of forced speech, etc.. etc..
      - collyw 7y ago
        > For one it's not clear how many genders exist. It is clear to many of us that there are two genders. Particularly to those of us that have studied biology.
        jstanley 7y ago
        I would think that the fact that people disagree on what the number is implies that it's not clear what the number is.
- belorn 7y ago
  > how many of the other rules would you characterize as heavily ideologically driven? Most of them. It doesn't mean I always disagree with that ideology, but I do recognize them as ideology with political implications. > Doxing? The US has the sex offender register. Germany has the right to be forgotten, including sex offenders. Should a twitter bot in the US be allowed to write about sex offenders or is that doxing? > Promoting terrorism Terrorism has sadly become a very muddy word. The recent Turkish offensive into north-eastern Syria see a lot of disagreement on who is a terrorists. In the past we had US policy of counting any dead male in a conflict zone under the age of 15 as a killed terrorist. To me that is the typical examples of a heavily politically driven definition. > Child sexual exploitation Combine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age_of_Consent_-_Global.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age... with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_law#/media/File:Prostitution_laws_of_the_world2.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_law#/media/File:P... as sets and what we get is a bunch of intersections and symmetric differences. Yes, pre-puberty child sexual exploitation is universally wrong on the planet. The exact line however is heavily ideologically driven with plenty of people with the view that all prostitution is exploitation and any person under the age of 20 is a child. > Suicide Are we including physician-assisted suicide? It is a common point that get brought up when suicide discussions get banned.
peteretep 7y ago
> Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules You call that ideological, but presumably wouldn’t call Twitter prohibiting calls for genocide ideological. They’re obviously excessively far apart on a continuum, but I’m curious how you’ve decided where to draw your line? Racial slurs? Calls to murder doctors who perform abortion? Promotion of cannibalism? Incitement of violence against the LGBT community? How have you decided misgendering is ideological and (I’d hope) decided that the others are obviously unacceptable?
- ramblerman 7y ago
  Discrimination and calls for violence are codified in law and commonly accepted as wrong. Making up your own category, then forcing other people to name you by that category on pain of committing a "verbal assault" is still a pretty contended topic.
  - dwb 7y ago
    It might be, but gender is a category that has quite some precedent. I'm willing to bet that you would be at least mildly perturbed by being misgendered. (I'm interpreting "made up category" as "relatively novel category"; all categories are "made up".)
    - TheAdamAndChe 7y ago
      The implication here being that any perterbation or social disagreement should not be allowed on the site. How is that a good thing?
      - peteretep 7y ago
        Can you think of any case _at all_ in which purposefully misgendering someone is anything other than outright harassment against a minority who already has it pretty fucking tough?
        7y ago

This is naïve at best. Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. That already eliminates a bunch of politicians.

wwweston 7y ago

> Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. The idea that if twitter had a rule against misgendering means Twitter's rules are heavily ideological is... pretty ideological itself. For one thing, I don't seem to see that rule here: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules [EDIT - respondent provided text that appears under a subheading: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-condu... ] For another, even if I missed it or it's implicit in another rule, while I suppose there's an argument that identifiers have political implications... there's plenty of social space for them to be about being polite in the same way that usually, you should use the names people give you for themselves. Maybe most of all, though, how many of the other rules would you characterize as heavily ideologically driven? Perhaps the one about not threatening violence against an individual or class? Promoting terrorism? Child sexual exploitation? Suicide? Doxing? Personally, I can think of a pretty wide latitude of discourse ranging over a variety of ideologies that's allowed me even if I'm forbidding those forms of engagement AND have to be careful to use someone's preferred pronouns.

Shaanie 7y ago
>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. While I don't really have any issues with it being prohibited, I wouldn't put misgendering or deadnaming in the same category as inciting violence or advocating for child exploitation.
- mosselman 7y ago
  > ... I wouldn't put misgendering or deadnaming in the same category as inciting violence or advocating for child exploitation. Sadly, this is a point that is lost on many people.
- wwweston 7y ago
  That's one of the reasons why it's really weird to generally characterize Twitter's rules as heavily ideological -- whether you consider rules against misgendering and deadnaming a matters of courtesy, or a key rights issue, or an ideological plot, there's so many other rules that are uncontroversial (unless you find yourself in a position where you want to incite violence or advocate for child exploitation). (Thanks for the text under the subheading, comment above edited with link to it.)
  - ramblerman 7y ago
    > there's so many other rules that are uncontroversial (unless you find yourself in a position where you want to incite violence or advocate for child exploitation). It's disingenuous to lump these together as equivalent to misgendering. Child exploitation and violence are against the law of pretty much all nations in the world, and there is a clear consensus. As well as harm caused. That line hasn't been drawn yet for gender. For one it's not clear how many genders exist. Are they fluid day by day, can people change in and out of them at will. Do I misgender someone if I fail to keep up. Is this a biologically supported concept, should we really open the Pandoras box of forced speech, etc.. etc..
    - collyw 7y ago
      > For one it's not clear how many genders exist. It is clear to many of us that there are two genders. Particularly to those of us that have studied biology.
      - jstanley 7y ago
        I would think that the fact that people disagree on what the number is implies that it's not clear what the number is.
belorn 7y ago
> how many of the other rules would you characterize as heavily ideologically driven? Most of them. It doesn't mean I always disagree with that ideology, but I do recognize them as ideology with political implications. > Doxing? The US has the sex offender register. Germany has the right to be forgotten, including sex offenders. Should a twitter bot in the US be allowed to write about sex offenders or is that doxing? > Promoting terrorism Terrorism has sadly become a very muddy word. The recent Turkish offensive into north-eastern Syria see a lot of disagreement on who is a terrorists. In the past we had US policy of counting any dead male in a conflict zone under the age of 15 as a killed terrorist. To me that is the typical examples of a heavily politically driven definition. > Child sexual exploitation Combine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age_of_Consent_-_Global.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age... with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_law#/media/File:Prostitution_laws_of_the_world2.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_law#/media/File:P... as sets and what we get is a bunch of intersections and symmetric differences. Yes, pre-puberty child sexual exploitation is universally wrong on the planet. The exact line however is heavily ideologically driven with plenty of people with the view that all prostitution is exploitation and any person under the age of 20 is a child. > Suicide Are we including physician-assisted suicide? It is a common point that get brought up when suicide discussions get banned.

peteretep 7y ago

> Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules You call that ideological, but presumably wouldn’t call Twitter prohibiting calls for genocide ideological. They’re obviously excessively far apart on a continuum, but I’m curious how you’ve decided where to draw your line? Racial slurs? Calls to murder doctors who perform abortion? Promotion of cannibalism? Incitement of violence against the LGBT community? How have you decided misgendering is ideological and (I’d hope) decided that the others are obviously unacceptable?

ramblerman 7y ago
Discrimination and calls for violence are codified in law and commonly accepted as wrong. Making up your own category, then forcing other people to name you by that category on pain of committing a "verbal assault" is still a pretty contended topic.
- dwb 7y ago
  It might be, but gender is a category that has quite some precedent. I'm willing to bet that you would be at least mildly perturbed by being misgendered. (I'm interpreting "made up category" as "relatively novel category"; all categories are "made up".)
  - TheAdamAndChe 7y ago
    The implication here being that any perterbation or social disagreement should not be allowed on the site. How is that a good thing?
    - peteretep 7y ago
      Can you think of any case _at all_ in which purposefully misgendering someone is anything other than outright harassment against a minority who already has it pretty fucking tough?
      - 7y ago