There's a culture of just total impunity over there when it comes to violence. On Twitter, as far as I can tell, it's rare for people to post violent threats or musings under names identified with their IRL identities. Over there, they know they can do so without any risk.
2/ All the death threats are couched in the idea that *I* pose an imminent threat to the community. That's the line: I'm putting users there at risk. No one can explain how. NBC is at work on an article with that angle, based on the request for comment they sent me.
3/ Sounds painful
4/ not ideal for the kinder, gentler twitter alternative
5/ "i think if we all tried hard enough we could get Jesse Singal to kill himself, but that's just me" seems problematic if bluesky is trying to present itself as a kinder, gentler alternative to twitter
6/ "me and my friends would beat Jesse Singal to death with hammers i can tell you that much"
from an future investment/site-climate perspective, i'd argue this is problematic
7/ "I think Jesse Singal should be beat to death in the streets"
I disagree
8/ "Jesse singal get fucked and die stupid kiddy fucker piece of shit trash sub human bitch. Fuck I hope someone breaks every bone in your body and castrated you penis and balls then beat you to death stupid bitch."
9/ "Jesse Singal has said many times he enjoys getting punched in the face. I am in no way endorsing or inciting violence. I am simply asking the question why not punch Jesse Singal in the face as hard as you can? It's not wrong to ask questions after all."
10/ One of many posts justifying the behavior on the grounds that I am a literal murderer of children, so anything done to me is deserved. (I disagree with Emma Cumslutress)
11/ In a similar vein: "jesse singal and assorted grifters want us dead so i similarly want him dead"
the sick thing is I think a subset of people earnestly believe this
12/ Last one. The reason this shit takes off is b/c big-follower accounts like Kevin Kruse here (famous Princeton history prof) just regurgitate whatever the most deranged people are saying to stay on the Right Side of History. It's pathetic and it contributes to genuine menace.
13/ This is what I mean by a culture of *total* impunity. This guy knows there is no way he will be banned or suspended. That's the site Bluesky has built.
14/ As all this was ramping up Friday, I got this email from an NBC reporter. This reporter was *very concerned*... that I responded trollishly to the death and assault and torture threats. That was the story NBC saw in all this. Piece is now dropping today or tomorrow, I'm told.
15/ Emailed all the accounts in this thread to Bluesky's hire-ups and moderators (making clear I was asking them to ban only the violent ones, not the HELP I AM THREATENED BY HIS PRESENCE ones).
Here's how that's going
16/ NBC's story about how I pose a threat to [the] Bluesky users [attempting to doxx me and posting lurid death threats about me] appears to be dead. Though I guess we'll see!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ Emma is well beyond reasoning with, but for anyone who is close to her and actually cares: According to pretty basic tenets of suicide research, it's likely dangerous to constantly spread the idea that trans kids are on the verge of killing themselves over policy disputes
2/ This simply isn't how suicide works, usually, thankfully. In a vaccuum, it's uncommon for someone to receive bad political news and kill themselves. What's more common is for already-at-risk kids to internalize the meme that suicide is a common/rational response to adversity
3/ None of this is to say that there's no connection between a group's mental health and how that group is treated by society. But it's a lot more complex than Emma is suggesting, in part because adversity can cause people to come together, seek support, etc. If you have a
2/ They're going after Hannah Gais, who works at the SPLC and who I knew foreeeeeever ago (People's Republik RIP). She stands accused of not giving a straight answer as to whether she'll sign (she'll sign, I'm sure), and liking a problematic skeet.
FASCINATING community.
3/ This is like an online summer camp for people who would have been gulag guards if they'd been born in a different time and were capable of leaving their houses. I've never see anthing like it and I can't turn away.
1/ New from me in @TheEconomist Johanna Olson-Kennedy is the most famous youth gender doctor in the U.S. She has long been skeptical of comprehensive assessments, viewing them as unnecessary gatekeeping. Now, she’s being sued by a former patient who argues she didn't get *enough* gatekeeping.
2/ Clementine Breen is a 20-year-old UCLA student. She got puberty blockers at 12, testosterone at 13, and a double mastectomy at 14. She regrets it all and her lawsuit argues that Olson-Kennedy, her therapist, and her surgeon all provided her with lackluster care. Olson-Kennedy’s own notes, ...
3/ ...which Breen’s legal team acquired and shared with me, substantiate many of her claims. For example, Olson-Kennedy referred Breen for puberty blockers at her first visit. In her notes from that visit, Olson-Kennedy explicitly states Breen hasn’t seen a therapist yet and had come out as trans...
MASSIVE scoop here. Many of us have wondered why Johanna Olson-Kennedy's team, which has received ~$10 million in NIH funding, hasn't published its study on puberty blockers. JOK says the results weren't positive and she doesn't want them weaponized.
2/ A situation in which a researcher can ask for money from the federal government to run a study, run the study, and then not release the results because they weren't what she wanted is a situation in which federal funding for science is fundamentally broken.
3/ Congrats to Azeen Ghorayshi -- this is massive.
I don't know what to say anymore, man. There are just no adults left at most of these supposed gatekeeping and quality-control institutions within journalism.
2/ This is the textbook definition of "manipulation." I don't understand this.
3/ This is also just completely wrong, factually speaking. My article drew upon emails submitted as evidence, not some politicized amicus brief. Where are the standards?
I thought the contemporary concept of 'gender' was muddled beyond repair. Then the American Medical Association's Draft Guidance on Reporting Gender, Sex, Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, and Age in Medical and Scientific Publication TOTALLY cleared it up.
Thank you AMA!
2/ Let's affirm everyone's individuality by dictating to them that they have these four characteristics, two of which aren't coherently defined anywhere