Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 WomenBoycottTwitter is trending and I'm seeing Tweets of these feminists saying they're going it in "solidarity and support of a woman who was silenced" for one day. I don't really know what happened but that's not the point What is boycotting Twitter for one day going to prove? Will it make this woman not be "silenced" anymore? Plus I see plenty of Tweets of feminists saying they won't do it or jokingly saying things like this Click here to view the Tweet so even they aren't even very serious about it It seems counter productive tbh: Click here to view the Tweet They make a good point because I don't get how women going silent on Twitter when these feminist idiots are complaining is the issue is giving whoever their enemy is (I guess men) just what they want There's other stupid stuff like this Click here to view the Tweet Click here to view the Tweet I don't get how Twitter as a whole is responsible for being biased against women? People use Twitter for so much more than just SJW issues, they don't specifically have to care about the ones these people care about. I mean this seems like a problem against the media if anything, not social media. And are we assuming "Twitter" doesn't ignore this stuff for men too (doxxing, rape threats) or other issues when its against men? So whats the point? If they hate Twitter why not just quit? A one-day boycott proves nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitargeekette 5,960 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Tbh I thought the same, but hey...maybe it'll bring extra awareness to some issues people try to sweep under the rug. I guess that's what they're hoping for (a month of boycott might have been more effective than 24 hours tbh but that would have maybe required actual effort). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gore 8,169 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 oh come the fuck on. twitter locked rose mcgowan's account because she posted a ss of an email with an agent's number in it (allegedly that's why they did it). women have since come out to say that they've reported rape threats, death threats, doxing, etc, to twitter, only for twitter to say "just block them" etc. i'm not agreeing with the idea of a stupid boycott like this because idg the point but i can see why these women would be mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frogurt 7,163 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 People still say SJW unironically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinkika 446 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 don't they need to go on twitter to make the hashtag trend? but lol, that's modern day feminism for ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunjo 7,657 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Does it hurt to be this edgy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoopula 5,670 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 "dont really know what happened but thats not the point" 10/10 thread op Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tearose 1,193 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 oh come the fuck on. twitter locked rose mcgowan's account because she posted a ss of an email with an agent's number in it (allegedly that's why they did it). women have since come out to say that they've reported rape threats, death threats, doxing, etc, to twitter, only for twitter to say "just block them" etc. i'm not agreeing with the idea of a stupid boycott like this because idg the point but i can see why these women would be mad. yeah and the least you can do before starting a thread on OH is actually know at least some context behind it. otherwise it just comes across as needlessly complaining. Support your views y'all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 Tbh I thought the same, but hey...maybe it'll bring extra awareness to some issues people try to sweep under the rug. I guess that's what they're hoping for (a month of boycott might have been more effective than 24 hours tbh but that would have maybe required actual effort). If they can't put in the effort to go more than 24 hours I don't think it will help their case much tbh, even other women don't even want to participate, which also hurts oh come the fuck on. twitter locked rose mcgowan's account because she posted a ss of an email with an agent's number in it (allegedly that's why they did it). women have since come out to say that they've reported rape threats, death threats, doxing, etc, to twitter, only for twitter to say "just block them" etc. i'm not agreeing with the idea of a stupid boycott like this because idg the point but i can see why these women would be mad. But if they're mad they should just totally quit, I want to know they point of what a 24 hour boycott will prove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 don't they need to go on twitter to make the hashtag trend? but lol, that's modern day feminism for ya This too how does this boycott even work? Does it hurt to be this edgy? I just want to know what they're trying to prove lol "dont really know what happened but thats not the point" 10/10 thread op Because its not the point lol, I want to know why they think boycotting for 24 hours will get their point across yeah and the least you can do before starting a thread on OH is actually know at least some context behind it. otherwise it just comes across as needlessly complaining. Support your views y'all I'm not complaining I just want to know what they want to prove lol I don't care about the hastag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rohan Kishibe 13,713 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 OP serving a lack of intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ddeona Oneul Bame 61,630 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 To be completely honest, I kinda agree that 24 hours won't really mean much~ I mean I guess I get what they're going for but I agree a month long thing or just quitting totally would be better but whatever they wanna do, not really my issue or place to speak on it~ I don't even much use Twitter but I wouldn't boycott it or anything~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tearose 1,193 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 If you really want to get into this, I'm guessing that a part of it is the marketing of the boycott. There are more women who are willing to participate for 24 hours than there are women who will participate indefinitely. It makes for a more dramatic effect in a shorter period of time. Burn brighter, burn faster. the goal of a boycott is usually to get the attention of higher-ups and open up a conversation with them, so being as dramatic as possible in a short amount of time is, in their minds, going to accomplish that goal. not saying it'll work, but this is probably the mindset they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tide 14,243 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 TIL 1. feminists are a monolith. if one moves, all of them move. 2. boycotts have to be 100% successful or they arent real. it's almost as if the point of a boycott is to make a statement. 3. people making a statement on not wanting to give traffic to a website that silenced a woman in regards to her claims about sexual assault? just silly feminist things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nsfw 5,496 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 guess my thread wasnt the only tragic thread today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 OP serving a lack of intelligence. Ok lol To be completely honest, I kinda agree that 24 hours won't really mean much~ I mean I guess I get what they're going for but I agree a month long thing or just quitting totally would be better but whatever they wanna do, not really my issue or place to speak on it~ I don't even much use Twitter but I wouldn't boycott it or anything~ I jus tdon't see it being effective If you really want to get into this, I'm guessing that a part of it is the marketing of the boycott. There are more women who are willing to participate for 24 hours than there are women who will participate indefinitely. It makes for a more dramatic effect in a shorter period of time. Burn brighter, burn faster. the goal of a boycott is usually to get the attention of higher-ups and open up a conversation with them, so being as dramatic as possible in a short amount of time is, in their minds, going to accomplish that goal. not saying it'll work, but this is probably the mindset they have. But if it's supposed to be a serious boycott will it have that much of an effect if it's over after a day? Will it catch any attention that way or as much as they want? people negging me because they think I'm against it or something lol I just wanted to know what the mindset was so thank you for you answer <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Bear 9,461 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Shit like this is never addressed by twitter but they could get their fat fingers working to ban Roses account asap- Click here to view the Tweet Also some of twitters staff are alt right trash- Click here to view the Tweet Click here to view the Tweet So this may mean nothing to you but this can send twitter a much needed message. It's shitty af to label this as just some sort of "feminist agenda". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TickleMePink 17,072 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 I don't use twitter, so I don't care what goes on there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 TIL 1. feminists are a monolith. if one moves, all of them move. 2. boycotts have to be 100% successful or they arent real. it's almost as if the point of a boycott is to make a statement. 3. people making a statement on not wanting to give traffic to a website that silenced a woman in regards to her claims about sexual assault? just silly feminist things. But they'll be giving them traffic after 24 hours so what I was asking is why not longer if they really want to make a statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 Shit like this is never addressed by twitter but they could get their fat fingers working to ban Roses account asap- Click here to view the Tweet Also some of twitters staff are alt right trash- Click here to view the Tweet Click here to view the Tweet So this may mean nothing to you but this can send twitter a much needed message. It's shitty af to label this as just some sort of "feminist agenda". The tweets are mentioning feminism, I just said what they said And I'm not saying the message is bad only what good will it do if they go back on it the next day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tearose 1,193 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 But if it's supposed to be a serious boycott will it have that much of an effect if it's over after a day? Will it catch any attention that way or as much as they want? people negging me because they think I'm against it or something lol I just wanted to know what the mindset was so thank you for you answer <3 Trying to carry out an indefinitely long boycott would be both infeasible and also wouldn't make much of a stir in the overall twitter demographics. But if everyone(as much as they're gonna get) participates in a day it'll make for a more dramatic effect. The point is to show that they have supporters, so the more women boycotting the better. Even if it doesn't last long. Ideally it shouldn't take more than a day of heavy boycotting to get Twitter's attention; I'm assuming that is what the participants are hoping to achieve. Hype for the story dies down quite quickly and gets swept away by new scandals, so they are wanting to do this as quickly and as soon as possible. It's also a matter of wanting to feel like you're doing something to make a change; in a social media society, these things move fast and everyone's attention span is too short to care about a boycott after a week or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-kitsune 3,367 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 I don't really know what happened but that's not the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpletea 3,148 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 I didn't even read all of this so I have no opinion on why they're doing this but boycotts don't really work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vtzu 1,500 Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 Trying to carry out an indefinitely long boycott would be both infeasible and also wouldn't make much of a stir in the overall twitter demographics. But if everyone(as much as they're gonna get) participates in a day it'll make for a more dramatic effect. The point is to show that they have supporters, so the more women boycotting the better. Even if it doesn't last long. Ideally it shouldn't take more than a day of heavy boycotting to get Twitter's attention; I'm assuming that is what the participants are hoping to achieve. Hype for the story dies down quite quickly and gets swept away by new scandals, so they are wanting to do this as quickly and as soon as possible. It's also a matter of wanting to feel like you're doing something to make a change; in a social media society, these things move fast and everyone's attention span is too short to care about a boycott after a week or so. I'm confused, won't the effect be more dramatic if its for more than a day? I feel like losing revenue for one day wont get Twitter's attention as much as doing it for even a week if not longer. Like someone else said, people will only know about it by the hashtag (I saw it by coincidence) and to keep the hashtag going, they have to use Twitter. How will people know if they stop Tweeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tide 14,243 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 But they'll be giving them traffic after 24 hours so what I was asking is why not longer if they really want to make a statement? bc what matters is the statement. if this boycott gains enough traction, even just a days worth of decreased traffic would be enough to make twitter reconsider their policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.