When I see a little boy like this, gaslighted so young, I'm scared for his future, and not solely because of the risk he may face from medical 'transition'.
It's that we only live childhood once. It forms who we are. He may even desist, unscathed by hormones or surgery.
But even if he does, he will have to come to terms with the truth that his childhood has been a complete lie, his beliefs about himself utterly contorted throughout all his formative years.
Sex is such a huge part of who we are.
This child is being robbed of the chance to live his childhood with self-acceptance.
We each get one shot at growing up, forming who we are in our heads.
There are no do-overs.
How do you come to terms with losing your one chance to live your childhood in self-acceptance?
This is more than kids feeling negative or lacking self belief. We all grow up with some of that baggage.
This is about him believing at a fundamental level that he is a girl, forming his entire character throughout childhood on that basis.
Adults did that to him.
And I imagine him discovering as an adult that the whole of his childhood was a lie, and realising he can't go back and undo what that did to his brain, neurones, synapses and all.
What happens to us in childhood shapes us for life.
And although we choose our path as adults, that childhood experience and the changes it causes in us - that's irreversible.
You can lay down new thoughts and connections. You can direct your life. But you bring your childhood legacy with you. It's not erasable.
It must take a lifetime to reconcile to being the true sex you are, after a childhood of being told by adults, and believing to your very core, that you are something else.
Rejecting your very self.
Let's not do this to children.
/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We do not have an Act to recognise racism - for it would indeed be racism - to 'identify' as a race we are not, based upon racist stereotypes we treasure of race 'psyche' or race aesthetics.
We would understand it is demeaning to people of genuine ethnicities were we to ratify false, stereotypical, racial characteristics into law about them, as a means to facilitating entry of an imposter into their group.
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.
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?