8 ms·

> Twitters rules are heavily ideologically driven, for instance misgendering is against their rules. The idea that if twitter had a rule against misgendering m

> 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.
        berbec 7y ago
        I am not taking a stance on gender numbers, but that exact argument is being used against climate change and vaccine safety.
- collyw 7y ago
  "Harmful stereotypes" was the reason that James Damore got fired from Google. Despite the fact his harmful stereotypes were backed up with scientific references.
  - cookie_monsta 7y ago
    *backed up with heavily contested social science references
    - tenpies 7y ago
      And refuted not with "uncontested" social science (an oxymoron if there was ever one), but with job termination. We had someone clearly trying to have a constructive discussion on a topic and he was treated as if he had written the manifesto for the Fourth Reich and was demanding all women be sent back to the kitchen.
      - krapp 7y ago
        Plenty of science-based refutations of James Damore's manifesto can be found in HN discussions and throughout the web if you care to look. No, I am not going to provide a canonical list here.
        Bantros 7y ago
        What a surprise
        collyw 7y ago
        Reddit level of debate. Make a claim and expect the other person to do the fact finding to prove it.
      - krageon 7y ago
        There is a time and a place for "constructive discussion" of certain topics and that place is apparently not Google. It might be regrettable that he (supposedly) does not understand it, but really it is not a surprise to me and should not be a surprise to any working individual that your workplace is not a space in which you discuss things of a sensitive nature (especially not if it is very visible). This is the case in almost every large corporation, so the fact that this specific incident is so widely discussed is very strange to me.
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.

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.
      - berbec 7y ago
        I am not taking a stance on gender numbers, but that exact argument is being used against climate change and vaccine safety.
collyw 7y ago
"Harmful stereotypes" was the reason that James Damore got fired from Google. Despite the fact his harmful stereotypes were backed up with scientific references.
- cookie_monsta 7y ago
  *backed up with heavily contested social science references
  - tenpies 7y ago
    And refuted not with "uncontested" social science (an oxymoron if there was ever one), but with job termination. We had someone clearly trying to have a constructive discussion on a topic and he was treated as if he had written the manifesto for the Fourth Reich and was demanding all women be sent back to the kitchen.
    - krapp 7y ago
      Plenty of science-based refutations of James Damore's manifesto can be found in HN discussions and throughout the web if you care to look. No, I am not going to provide a canonical list here.
      - Bantros 7y ago
        What a surprise
      - collyw 7y ago
        Reddit level of debate. Make a claim and expect the other person to do the fact finding to prove it.
    - krageon 7y ago
      There is a time and a place for "constructive discussion" of certain topics and that place is apparently not Google. It might be regrettable that he (supposedly) does not understand it, but really it is not a surprise to me and should not be a surprise to any working individual that your workplace is not a space in which you discuss things of a sensitive nature (especially not if it is very visible). This is the case in almost every large corporation, so the fact that this specific incident is so widely discussed is very strange to me.

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.