Whenever I complain about Twitter's negativity, someone pops up to say that I'm just complaining because of my privileged perspective as a white man.
But we white men aren't the one bearing the brunt of this platform's abusiveness:
But we white men aren't the one bearing the brunt of this platform's abusiveness:
My feed is mostly nice, friendly, constructive, and respectful - especially since I chain-blocked 70,000 Nazis.
I get the occasional person telling me I'm an idiot, or I don't know anything about econ, but whatever. That's just the life of a pundit.
I get the occasional person telling me I'm an idiot, or I don't know anything about econ, but whatever. That's just the life of a pundit.
But for many (most?) women on this platform it's a different story. Constant abuse and aggression. And women of color get it even worse.
Of course the whole internet is like that - women in the public sphere tend to get tons of threatening and abusive emails...
Of course the whole internet is like that - women in the public sphere tend to get tons of threatening and abusive emails...
...But Twitter has a direct, in-your-face quality, and a susceptibility to mobs, that other kinds of online interaction lack. This is just one of the most abusive, negativistic platforms on the internet. And women bear the brunt of that, not privileged white men like myself.
There are clear, easy steps Twitter's designers could take to make this platform less abusive and negativistic. But because they tend to view abuse as valuable speech, they don't take these clear, easy steps.
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
As long as abuse and insults are viewed as valuable speech by the people who have power over this platform, any woman who wants to speak up or exist in the public sphere is going to have to choose between being abused and fleeing this socially important space.
(end)
(end)
By the way, if you want to chain-block all the followers of abusive accounts, here's how you do it: chrome.google.com/webstore/detai…
