As of Thursday, Twitter has begun partnering with a nonprofit organization known as Women, Action, and the Media (WAM) to handle online sexual harassment. [Author smirks at his own Twitter trolling.] Investor place wrote:
The WAM website now has a comprehensive form where you report ‘gendered harassment.’ The organization will then ‘escalate’ relevant reports to Twitter within 24 hours.
One-time offenders may not be subject to any action from WAM because one tweet may not be considered as harassment.
The Atlantic does not believe this measure is extreme enough. The two employees of WAM can only flag abuse reports for Twitter to view more quickly, but they cannot actually moderate comments or users. It is planned to only be a temporary partnership. The Atlantic claims that delegating this large task to two nonprofit workers is a negligence and that more attention should be given.
The Atlantic claims that the internet is not “a safe space for women,” considering the force of “threats” from Gamergate and Pew’s finding that 25% of women have been sexually harassed online and 26% have been stalked.
I can understand that threats of plausible and specific violence against known feminists should be considered unsafe and should not be tolerated, but the implications of the statistics are laughable. “Sexual Harassment” and “Stalking” have become such vague terms, and if it is only done on the internet, how does that make it unsafe? If I look up a girl’s Facebook page, in what way is she in danger? If I post a picture of a hater with a “Would you bang?” caption, does she need to flee her home for fear of rapists?
Another issue is that the Atlantic only wants to protect women from sexual harassment. But how many men on this site and others have been accused of having a small penis? To give the female equivalent, I’ve never seen a man on the internet tell a woman she has a loose vagina. Sure, a man may call a woman ugly, but that is just from what he can visibly see, not conjectures about her genitalia, hence the term “private parts.” It seems that the people who most cry for love and acceptance are always the most hateful. Men slut-shame, and women small penis-shame, and there will always be a double standard.
The Atlantic states that Twitter is an extremely open forum. Anyone can send a message to anyone. That’s the beauty of Twitter, though. It puts everyone amongst each other. Sure, women will be made uncomfortable, but one will notice that it is almost always only if the women provoke the men to insult them. I doubt a single reader of ROK searches for completely random girls on Twitter for the sole purpose of ruining their day, because most human beings just are not that sociopathic and sadistic. What the leftists refuse to admit is that we hate on them because they first hated on us. I believe that’s in the Bible somewhere.
Internet hatred cuts both ways. Why one ideology gets a pass and another does not is beyond me, because an open discussion is necessary for any kind of societal progress. If our ideas were truly stupid and irrelevant, feminists could leave them alone, knowing we would die without ever breeding. But not only will they not leave us alone, they rarely confront us on our own talking points. They dance around the issues and mock us like they schoolyard bullies they are, because power for them ultimately about control and not about betterment.
This comic from Friedman herself is telling concerning her motives and specific aims. We see a woman drunk on what modicum of power she has, perfectly exhibiting the modern woman. You could put her in a glass case in the American Museum of Natural History.
Leftists never attempt to counter our claims about journalism or sexual ethics, because at heart they cannot think of a solid reasoning. For example, if you were to tell me that it is in the best interest of mankind to gather up some specific subculture on the internet send them to the sun, I could easily counter your argument with some kind of soft Kantian ethic or history lesson. Perhaps you would still disagree with me, but at least I confronted you head-on and had a conversation. However, the leftists will not confront us on our beliefs, because they cannot think of any halfway-decent counter based on logical reasoning alone. Tell me my fallacies, give me a syllogism, but do anything except throw an ad hominem, a tu quoque, or a strawman.
I especially like this comic in how they admit that our ideology is extremely contagious. I wonder whether or not they did that consciously. You can feel the panic and impending doom, as though we actually are something dangerous and powerful. I have always said that you can tell the most about a society by its literature and art.
Nothing New Here
Twitter is enabling WAM to attempt the ultimate feminist goal from time immemorial: a world without consequences to women. This is not so different from the “Find someone who loves you for you and won’t try to change you” ethic they tell girls, even though I have never met a man who tried to change a woman beyond her moral flaws.
Executive director of WAM Jaclyn Friedman would seem to disagree about women opening themselves up to verbal assault on Twitter. “I see this as a free speech issue,” she claimed, believing that without such measures, women and other types of minorities will feel uncomfortable speaking their opinion.
Perhaps there is some merit to this argument, considering that women who write provocative feminist rhetoric on the internet are often verbally assaulted. However, that does not compare at all to how often and (generally speaking) how rudely anti-feminists are assaulted. The sole differences lie in ideology and sex organs (unless one had them removed, in which case it would get a free pass). It appears as though WAM is using sex-neutral language to describe their Twitter policies, but realistically, you can bet money that they will report almost entirely against men.
The cold reality of the world is that life really is that difficult. People really are that brutal, especially in a place without consequences like on the internet. Being gay, colored, or female is only maybe 5% of the reason why life is that hard. It would be wise to learn to game the system instead of kick against it.
The great question is, “Will this make Twitter unsafe for men”? In the short term, I do not believe so. Two female employees of a non-profit cannot police the whole world. They can jump at the big scandals, but many of the other isolated incidents will be unnoticed. One wonders whether they will have enough hours in the day to even report all the big scandals. Another issue is that it may cause Twitter to neglect reports not given by WAM.
However, this outcome still represents bad tidings. With every civil rights decision of the last 100 years, at first there was a great controversy and laxity, but as time went on, people demanded even more rigor. Eventually, other major websites will be pressured into working with these kinds of activists, and then they will be pressured into have a large and permanent in-house staff to guard against “gendered harassment.”
Then you will find that it will be unacceptable for the small internet companies to go without such a staff, and women will refuse to be on any social website without a man behind a computer in an office to protect her from other men. They cycle of patriarchy continues.
Twitter’s decision is not innovative. Reddit and 4chan have blocked comments about Gamergate, and Youtube cancelled Sam Pepper’s partnership because of his sexist videos. Twitter themselves have previously white knighted against Red Pill men. However, with this new partnership, Twitter is the first large company to enact this much of a unilateral and broad-sweeping measure.
The SJWs, a small minority, are making their screeching voices heard, but how long will the masses put up with it? Perhaps the masses will eventually come to accept this new way of life, or perhaps the SJWs will eventually fly too close to the sun and fall into the sea with melted wings—as when they pushed gamers too far in Gamergate.