As far as I can tell, once your account is marked, you're stuck with the restrictions for good.
They're activated/deactivated based upon how you tweet.
Here's what I think you can do freely:
Quote tweet
Reply to followers
Create your own tweets
Here's what re-activates the ban:
*Replying to people who don't follow you
(Particularly Blue ticks)
*Certain keywords (sex etc)
Here's how to temporarily release a restriction:
Post an innocuous reply on a sponsored tweet and then check status
This often resets you.
However, it's unlikely you will ever now be able to freely reply to tweets outside your bubble.
You'll be censored and ringfenced away from the rest of Twitter.
Bear that limitation in mind when trying to engage in a public conversation on someone else's tweet.
It means politicians, celebrities, public figures won't see your replies to them.
This is unlikely to change.
That's probably the point of the ban, to prevent you gaining a wider audience or exerting influence.
This seems to be permanent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are people who are so devoid of any principled stance of their own, that they will justify any atrocity. They live by one rule; these people must win, those must lose.
When faced with a principle of fairness that should apply to all, they freeze.
They worship an idol.
If you test them with a question:
"A person is distressed at being forced to share intimate space with people they believe to be the opposite sex or gender. Is this acceptable?"
Their answer will be "Who, though?"
Because the rule they live by is:
"Everything my idol does is acceptable. When the heathen does the same, it is evil"
They assess not morality, but idols.
Because their one rule is to worship their idol and justify all their acts, and condemn the heathens for the exact same act
An unjust authority removes property from its rightful owner, and gifts it to an undeserving thief who covets it.
Then a law is passed, declaring the stolen property now belongs to both the interloper AND the rightful owner.
The rightful owner objects.
People then suggest that the rightful owner must be punished for failing to recognise the interloper & thief as a rightful owner of their stolen property.
There is no recourse for the rightful owner to reclaim what is rightfully theirs, or deny the validity of the thief's claim.
The rightful owner is punished more harshly for the 'crime' of reporting the theft & refusing to recognise the validity of the 'new owner' than the thief is for laying claim to stolen property. The thief garners public sympathy as the purported victim of the rightful owner's ire.
I talk about all this stuff in real life.
I'm not just anonymous online.
But I avoided one particular conversation with one particular person, for fear it might affect a huge and important source of my happiness.
The cost/benefit analysis definitely didn't stack up.
I firmly support everyone's right to safeguard their own wellbeing in certain circumstances, so that they can retain the resilience to fight the things that need to be fought.
If avoiding peaking your next door neighbour allows you the space to do your stuff elsewhere, so be it.
Pick your battles.
Have a sanctuary somewhere.
Fight what you can, and protect yourself enough that you can find the strength to keep going.
Better to be effective sometimes, than burn out completely.
Are you more influential than you think?
A little test.
(I'm about to make you feel really good)
This exercise may help you understand how powerful Gender Critical twitter accounts are, and why we keep being censored.
Have you ever checked your "engagement rate"? No?
It's a metric used to see how much people engage & interact with you.
In other words, how INFLUENTIAL you are.
A simple way to calculate it is to look at the analytics data on any tweet.
And then calculate this:
Total Engagements
÷
Total Impressions
x 100
This gives you the
'engagement rate'
It's the percentage that saw your tweet and then actively engaged with you, (likes, retweets, replies etc) instead of ignoring and scrolling on by with a 'meh'
What's an average, and what's a good engagement rate on twitter?
Those who are tasked in their formal roles with defending the rights of women and girls, but 'dare not' wade into the 'debate' on whether sexed bodies are intended to MATCH 'sexed minds'?
Understand this.
You stood in the way.
You stood in the way of those of us desperately trying to prevent girls coming to harm.
We could have spared more children physical harm, without your choices preventing us.
Some children have now come to harm, that we might have prevented, had you not demonised us.
Whilst we were desperately telling girls their bodies are not wrong, don't need binding, don't need amputating, that they ARE PERFECT AS THEY ARE,
YOU were saying "Well, we're not sure."
YOU were saying "Those women, they're quite cruel, not like us"
When my ovaries failed early, and I needed to find out which hormones would best eliminate symptoms, reduce my cancer risk, mitigate dementia risk, preserve my bone density
I know *I* definitely needed the advice of men lingering in menopause forums on HOW TO ACCESSORISE
And when the menopause clinic cut my tummy yesterday to insert another oestradiol pellet, I COMPLETELY FORGOT to ask the female nurses to decorate my wound with a flower tattoo AND they never so much as SUGGESTED a different colour of stitch.
They need men in that clinic STAT
Because without men, how will we know whether we are inserting a micronised progesterone capsule with enough FLAIR in our vaginas?
And if taking it orally, does the resultant dizziness cause a swoon onto an ON-TREND FAINTING COUCH, or instead some piece of velvet crap from B&M?