Why these women are refusing to join the Twitter boycott
Some argue that women should use Twitter to amplify their voice rather than be silenced.
Defiant women are refusing to join a 24-hour Twitter boycott saying silence will not help them to spread their message.
Instead of ditching the social media platform, rival protesters says people should embrace the technology to make their voice heard – rather than retreat into silence.
It seems counterproductive to respond to people who want to silence women by becoming voluntarily silent. #womenboycottwitter— Mary Hamilton is stockpiling schadenfreude (@newsmary) October 13, 2017
Sod #womenboycottwitter I've been silenced by misogyny far too much to now do it voluntarily. EVERYONE should shout louder against sexism.— Melissa Cole (@MelissaCole) October 13, 2017
#WomenBoycottTwitter quitting twitter a whole day won't make it better. being silent is sometimes the worst thing to do. RAISE YOUR VOICE.— 🖤 M̵̨̮̻͓͈̠̞͕̈̾̔̌̋̉̚ä̧̬͙͕̱̖͋͊̐̍̋͘͢͜͝z͊̏̍̍͞ 🎃 (@mazzaful) October 13, 2017
One woman identified as Maz tweeted: “Quitting Twitter a whole day won’t make it better. being silent is sometimes the worst thing to do. Raise your voice.”
The original #WomenBoycottTwitter campaign followed the suspension of actress Rose McGowan’s own account on the site.
She had been vocal in speaking out against shamed film producer Harvey Weinstein and had also directed her ire at Ben Affleck.
Twitter initially said she had broken the site’s terms of service – posting a private phone number – before her suspension was lifted early.
Her situation prompted supporters – including men – to stay silent and not post on the site for a whole day as a form of protest. It drew support from celebs including Anna Paquin and Christine Teigen.
Ladies. Let's do this. #WomenBoycottTwitter. Not because of hate but because I love this platform and know it can be better.— christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) October 13, 2017
But those still using the site called that boycott crazy.
Would've made far more sense to have men off Twitter for 1 day, thus making women louder, not silencing them. #WomenBoycottTwitter is cray.— Randi Mayem Singer (@rmayemsinger) October 13, 2017
They questioned if silence was the right way to make a protest about having a voice.
I’m not going to silence my voice voluntarily when many other women have had theirs silenced forcibly. #WomenBoycottTwitter— 𝕿𝖔𝖗𝖊 🍑🍃 (@atinymew) October 13, 2017
I will not be silenced by Twitter or anyone else.— Geraldine ✒ (@overheavenshill) October 13, 2017
A woman's opinion matters. Boycott? Shout loud instead #WomenBoycottTwitter 🚫
Brittany Pole wrote: “Let’s speak up about injustice and get our voices heard.”
How about instead of #WomenBoycottTwitter which will accomplish nothing, let's speak up about injustice and get voices heard— Brittany (@Brightknee91) October 13, 2017
Those arguing in favour of the boycott explained that it would cost Twitter money. That’s because the network generates income via people seeing adverts meaning it’s in the company’s interest for users to stay on the site or app for longer.
Others have said the boycott sends a message to the company that people are not happy with some of its policies.
For those that don’t get it. If you don’t like a company’s policy you boycott. This is a Twitter boycott. For a day, not forever— Dawn 🤦🏼♀️ Wagner (@My2citygirls) October 13, 2017