Twitter Bans Misgendering & Deadnaming Transgender Community

Jul 5, 2018
397
174
170
#10
What are the parameters for misgendering?
“We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanise, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.




“This includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.”
<Twitter has promised to permanently suspend any account which either breaks the rules too many times or is “engaging primarily in abusive behaviour.” >

Like in most cases it requires it to be intentional and continuous behavior.
Edit: wrong part sorry Edit2: added more to make it more clear
 
Last edited:
Likes: matt404au
Mar 6, 2018
1,218
1,328
265
#11
Oh, this is going to be fun when it backfires.
In what way could this backfire? Twitter has no real competitor. They're a monopoly.

And is this just for male / female, or if a transwoman says to someone "I'm not calling you a made up third gender / there are only two genders," will they find their twitter account banned?
 
Apr 25, 2009
5,205
4,547
700
Australia
#12
“We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanise, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.




“This includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.”
<Twitter has promised to permanently suspend any account which either breaks the rules too many times or is “engaging primarily in abusive behaviour.” >

Like in most cases it requires it to be intentional and continuous behavior.
Edit: wrong part sorry Edit2: added more to make it more clear
Just as I thought, it's vague enough that it's ultimately open to the interpretation of the particular Twitter moderator. There is no distinction between he/she/xie/unicorn.
 
Aug 24, 2016
1,032
275
265
#13
Twitter can't handle simpler stuff on its platform and is barely making money, now they have a vague rule on misgendering that the algorithm will likely ban someone doing it the first time by incident.
 

njr

Member
Jan 26, 2009
830
35
635
#14
How does one determine whether or not a comment was intentional? Who in twitter is going to interpret these comments? This is a very large task for platform of that size.
 
Likes: matt404au
Sep 22, 2018
135
235
170
#19
“We prohibit targeting individuals with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanise, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.
Protected category...
We have “protected categories” now.:rolleyes:
What the fuck happened to people? When did everyone become such useless pussies?
—————————————————————————————————
“Oh no! Soresphincter69 said means things. Who will save me from these anonymous people I don’t know or care about?”

“Don’t worry. We, the thought police, will ban anyone who may say something we believe is not nice... or what we think may be used improperly... or what could be taken out of context... or what we don’t fully understand. Especially if anyone uses humor. As we do not have a sense of humor, we feel that any use of it alienates us and the perpetrators will be banned”

“Why thank you, thought police! Now I can safely read the internet without having to read anything from alt-right nazi facists (that is everyone, regardless of political affiliation, who may not share every single one of my views.)

 
Mar 3, 2014
4,911
785
350
#21
All this stuff is just like the secular version of blasphemy. Can't say this, can't say that, can't question this, can't question that. Just shut up and unthinkingly agree with the brave new vision. I think a growing number of people are getting fed up with all these attempts to force people to repeat things that they do not believe to be true. The people banned from Twitter will just go elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
May 26, 2018
333
662
195
#24
What happens when someone is addressing someone who changes his/her/xir/xor/nand/they/er/zorg pronouns on a daily basis (there's a subculture for this, and there were people called transphobic before when they went out of their way to use gender-neutral language instead of the "preferred pronouns" that "smash the gender dichotomy") considering twitter has no edit button and the now outdated tweet is "misgendering" that someone?

I can see this limiting quite a bit what can be said about artists (who have a name change or go by a public alias, hence calling them their real name is deadnaming them) and anyone with an established career who suddenly decided to undergo transition (like Cosmo on youtube) and so all quotes, material, and posts with the real name should be memory-holed. Of course no one will ever abuse an existing framework to erase entire bodies of work because of a wrong pronoun or name that we should instead pretend "it was always this way since the beginning of times"

Can't wait for wikipedia to be the next party to do this, with all the marvelous implications, they're already on track for this.
 
Last edited:
Likes: matt404au
Oct 26, 2018
678
419
215
#28
What happens when someone is addressing someone who changes his/her/xir/xor/nand/they/er/zorg pronouns on a daily basis (there's a subculture for this, and there were people called transphobic before when they went out of their way to use gender-neutral language instead of the "preferred pronouns" that "smash the gender dichotomy") considering twitter has no edit button and the now outdated tweet is "misgendering" that someone?

I can see this limiting quite a bit what can be said about artists (who have a name change or go by a public alias, hence calling them their real name is deadnaming them) and anyone with an established career who suddenly decided to undergo transition (like Cosmo on youtube) and so all quotes, material, and posts with the real name should be memory-holed. Of course no one will ever abuse an existing framework to erase entire bodies of work because of a wrong pronoun or name that we should instead pretend "it was always this way since the beginning of times"

Can't wait for wikipedia to be the next party to do this, with all the marvelous implications, they're already on track for this.
Best thing to do is ignore and avoid.

When it comes to volatile situations, no point risking anything if the other party may overreact even when accidentally stated.

It's like walking around the neighbourhood and saying hi to neighbours or petting their dog. Fine and all, but if the situation seems risky, don't bother. Just keep on walking unless you want to be yelled or barked at despite yourself just trying to be a friendly neighbour.
 
Aug 25, 2018
276
246
210
#29
Compelled speech? I can see Jordan Peterson was right about this getting out of control. But once the Canadian government took the step, it legitimized this sort of thing.

The distinction needs to be made clear. Calling someone however they like is fine. But being made to use certain words under laws is an unrelated issue. A much bigger issue.

This won't end well.
 
Aug 17, 2018
186
180
170
#30
More like your daughter decides to change her name as an adult and you keep calling her by her birth name because spite, pettiness and the need for control all go hand in hand.
The daughter would be the cunt in that scenario. The spite pettiness and the need for control would be on her.
 
Jan 13, 2018
217
91
180
#33
Compelled speech? I can see Jordan Peterson was right about this getting out of control. But once the Canadian government took the step, it legitimized this sort of thing.

The distinction needs to be made clear. Calling someone however they like is fine. But being made to use certain words under laws is an unrelated issue. A much bigger issue.

This won't end well.
First demanding redistribution of women, now demanding nationalization of private corps. Is Jordan Peterson secretly a Marxist tricking young reactionaries into becoming socialists?
 
Apr 8, 2009
19,968
677
380
#34
Compelled speech? I can see Jordan Peterson was right about this getting out of control. But once the Canadian government took the step, it legitimized this sort of thing.

The distinction needs to be made clear. Calling someone however they like is fine. But being made to use certain words under laws is an unrelated issue. A much bigger issue.

This won't end well.
Yes, this Twitter law has gone too far. Hopefully the Twitter Supreme Court strikes it down.
 
Apr 25, 2009
5,205
4,547
700
Australia
#35
First demanding redistribution of women, now demanding nationalization of private corps. Is Jordan Peterson secretly a Marxist tricking young reactionaries into becoming socialists?
Private corps that have for all intents and purposes redefined the public domain. I’m constantly astounded at the irony of so-called leftists supporting the development of the corporate dystopia. Maybe they need their cyberpunk fix another way since they’re boycotting Cyberpunk 2077?
 
Mar 6, 2018
1,218
1,328
265
#36
Religion is also a protected class, so twitter should now also ban everyone who says God isn't real.

Or maybe they shouldn't, since forcing people to say things that they don't believe isn't a good thing. I say that as someone who is definitely supportive of transgender people, but this is a bad idea that is only going to lead to resentment. It'll also likely be wildly arbitrary when it is and is not enforced, like all of twitter and you tube's policies.
 
Apr 25, 2009
5,205
4,547
700
Australia
#38
Religion is also a protected class, so twitter should now also ban everyone who says God isn't real.

Or maybe they shouldn't, since forcing people to say things that they don't believe isn't a good thing. I say that as someone who is definitely supportive of transgender people, but this is a bad idea that is only going to lead to resentment. It'll also likely be wildly arbitrary when it is and is not enforced, like all of twitter and you tube's policies.
Protected classes should only be for immutable characteristics, i.e. things you cannot change. This includes:

Race
Sex/gender
Sexual orientation

This does not include:

Religion
Name
Preferred pronouns
 
Likes: RedVIper
Apr 8, 2009
19,968
677
380
#39
Amazing. You always twist yourself into contortions just to misrepresent people’s arguments so you can get your regular sneering high. You’re addicted, my dude.
He literally said “being made to use certain words under laws.” You will let me know when you have an actual argument, won’t you?
 
Last edited:
Apr 25, 2009
5,205
4,547
700
Australia
#44
He literally said “being made to use certain words under laws.” You will let me know when you have an actual argument, won’t you?
I believe he was talking about the flow-on effects of the cultural precedent that the Canadian law set. This is pretty easy to see if you don’t spend all of your time looking for gotchas. How about you try steelmanning your opponents’ arguments for once instead of constantly strawmanning them? I know the latter is so easy to do but it reveals a character flaw on your part.

You can fuck off with the condescending shit too, btw. You’re not as clever as you think you are.
 
Aug 25, 2018
276
246
210
#45
I believe he was talking about the flow-on effects of the cultural precedent that the Canadian law set. This is pretty easy to see if you don’t spend all of your time looking for gotchas. How about you try steelmanning your opponents’ arguments for once instead of constantly strawmanning them? I know the latter is so easy to do but it reveals a character flaw on your part.

You can fuck off with the condescending shit too, btw. You’re not as clever as you think you are.
Yes I was. Thank you for saving me the trouble of explaining it.
 
Oct 2, 2018
86
200
165
#46
So if someone tweets the question: “Who won the gold medal in decathlon at the 1976 olympic games?”

and I tweet a reply of: “Bruce Jenner”

that’s a tick towards my future Twitter banning?

Fucking lol. These people are a bunch of idiots.
Yeah, I don't understand why it's seen as such an egregious offense? Permaban because you called someone by the name they once went by.

Misgendering seems a little different because it is an insult if someone is clearly trying to pass and female and you are insisting on using "he" or "him" or whatever. OK, I would be insulting someone if I did that. So yeah it's a ban-able offence maybe.

I'd be fine with this if the rules were clear but they are not.

Do people get to just self-identify?
Can that identity change?
How frequently could it change?
Does it have to be a legal name change before "dead naming" becomes relevant?
Is it only "dead naming" if it's a legal name change PLUS a gender change?

So if "Seamus O'Flaherty" legally changes his name to "Oscar Smith" is it dead naming when someone with a grudge keeps calling him Seamus?

Would you have to prove that you had changed your name or gender legally before you could have someone banned over this?

Twitter is not very clear on this. No transparency at all.

If you want to see how I think this would be handled by Twitter then you can probably look to Wikipedia.

No matter that you think of the person on a personal level you cannot deny that Lauren Southern's gender was legally changed to male. Legally. Yet, the Wikipedia article on Southern uses female pronouns. The logic behind this is that the legal gender change is not sincere or honest. So the rules CAN be bent or broken when it suits.

However, should you then look at the Wikipedia page of Caitlyn Jenner you will see a very different attitude towards the use of pronouns.

It would seem like this system would be open to abuse by trolls but it's far more likely that Twitter intends to selectively apply these rules.
 
Apr 8, 2009
19,968
677
380
#47
I believe he was talking about the flow-on effects of the cultural precedent that the Canadian law set. This is pretty easy to see if you don’t spend all of your time looking for gotchas. How about you try steelmanning your opponents’ arguments for once instead of constantly strawmanning them? I know the latter is so easy to do but it reveals a character flaw on your part.

You can fuck off with the condescending shit too, btw. You’re not as clever as you think you are.
You believe he was talking about something he never suggested. Ok. An American company’s “flow-on cultural effects” (what a stupid nonsense phrase) from a canadian ordinance that Daddy P didn’t even understand. Sure.

I’ll stop pointing out your non-arguments the moment you stop making them.
 
Last edited:
May 22, 2018
2,640
1,802
240
#48
Yeah, I don't understand why it's seen as such an egregious offense? Permaban because you called someone by the name they once went by.
Its the same transphobic attitude that goes behind calling transgender women by male pronouns. If someone who was once known as "Harry" is now "Harriet" but you still continue to call them "harry" its the same as calling them "he" or "him".


You are refusing to acknowledge who they have chosen to be. Whether its out of ignorance, spite, religious reasons etc etc. It doesn't matter. You are choosing to ignore who they are and thats not okay. The fact that more platforms are beginning to crack down on this is a good thing. It means the problem will be weeded out over time.

Oh and InB4 someone comes in with a ridiculous example in order to counter my point.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Akira1983
Aug 25, 2018
276
246
210
#49
You believe he was talking about something he never suggested. Ok. An American company’s flow-on cultural effects from a Toronto city council ordinance that Daddy P didn’t even understand. Sure.

I’ll stop pointing out your non-arguments the moment you stop making them.
What do you mean I never suggested it? Its my opening sentence. I could have worded it better, but you'd have to seriously lack in critical thinking to not see the context.
 
Apr 25, 2009
5,205
4,547
700
Australia
#50
You believe he was talking about something he never suggested. Ok. An American company’s “flow-on cultural effects” (what a stupid nonsense phrase) from a canadian ordinance that Daddy P didn’t even understand. Sure.

I’ll stop pointing out your non-arguments the moment you stop making them.
I see that you’re only capable of abstract reasoning when it suits you.

Why do you post here? You add literally nothing of value to the community. You should be ashamed of your post history - nothing but pathetic takedown attempts with absolutely no contribution to discussion.

That was a rhetorical question, btw. We all know that you only post here because you get off on sneering and condescension and Era would ban you for that if they haven’t already.