Falling for the bollox
Twitter’s new trick is labeling gender-skeptical replies “probable spam” – despite the glaringly obvious lack of spamness. Like:
How is that “probable spam”? In no way. It’s not. It’s argumentative; it dissents from trans dogma; it’s not spam.
FWIW
I read a fair bit of stuff on Quora.
Posts calling Trans nonsense, and saying why, seems to be at least as common as pro-trans posts.
On another topic, I see more pro-Israel posts there than pro-Hamas.
I’m wondering if algorithms are feeding me more posts similar to what I spent time reading before.
When I was banned from a popular atheist site I’d been frequenting for years, every single one of my comments I’d made in the past 3 months disappeared and was replaced by a notice that it was (possible? probable? ) spam. That’s how I realized I was blocked. Not only did my arguments and concerns on transgender and related issues get deleted, but absolutely everything I’d written on atheism, humanism, church/state separation, and the dangers of Trump got axed. Jokes, agreement, encouragement, and consolation were now deemed “spam.” They were unworthy of being observed, and violated the topic of the space even when they were not only obviously and clearly on topic, but supportive of whatever was in the Original Post. Multiple threads and conversations now made no sense as people were repeatedly engaging with and replying to { deleted spam.}
Apparently, I’m a bot. I thought that was an interesting tactic coming from people who were very, very concerned that people wouldn’t be “erased” by having their “humanity and existence denied.” My being deemed a bot could have been a blind result of the banning mechanism, but it could also have been a ham-handed and cringeworthy attempt at showing me how I made others feel when I brought up biological sex as a legitimate category. Or, likely, both.
This is weird because Twitter /X has been one of the last places where being gender critical is even allowed. I’ve tried BlueSky but there’s no questioning trans dogma there. I stay at Twitter for that reason, even if almost everything else about it is terrible.
Sastra – Well that stinks. On many levels it stinks. Are you sure you don’t want to name the site? Your choice of course, but I’d say they don’t particularly deserve protective anonymity.
[…] a comment by Sastra on Falling for the […]
I mentioned the site at the time — it was Hemant Mehta’s Friendly Atheist.
To his credit, I was allowed to argue my case for at least a year and a half before I was booted. I’d received no official warning, though plenty of regulars kept telling me to stop it and wondered how I could be such a total bigot in just one little area but fine on everything else.
The “spam” business and total wipeout made me laugh. Oh, for pete’s sakes. “We will sow the ground with salt.”
Oh yes so you did. I forget everything. You said it here:
https://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2023/hemantsplaining-biology-to-a-biologist/#comment-2999687
Or perhaps, sow the ground with Spam?
(Bloody Vikings!)