SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The actress, who has emerged as a Hollywood voice in the Harvey Weinstein sexual-assault scandal, revealed that Twitter had locked her account on Wednesday night.
Rose McGowan had a hold placed on her Twitter account Wednesday night, an act that quickly sparked outrage among the many users who have been following her posts ever since news first broke of the allegations against Harvey Weinstein.
The actress, who has emerged as a Hollywood voice after finding herself thrust into the center of the developing story of sexual misconduct, harassment and assault allegations against the movie mogul, took to her Instagram and Facebook accounts to relay the news of her temporary suspension, writing cryptically that "TWITTER HAS SUSPENDED ME. THERE ARE POWERFUL FORCES AT WORK. BE MY VOICE. #ROSEARMY."
She added a screenshot (below) from a message from Twitter telling her that she had violated their terms of service and that she would be locked out for 12 hours once she deleted certain tweets. She posted the message late Wednesday night.
As of 7:20 a.m. PT on Thursday, Twitter had unlocked McGowan's account, telling THR the temporary lock was due to the actress tweeting out a private number, which falls under the private information violation under Twitter Rules. McGowan deleted the post to regain access.
Are social media platforms common carriers, or not?
(Score: 2) by http on Saturday October 14 2017, @08:22PM (3 children)
Look in the mirror. You're still part of the problem.
Great, for you, I suppose. But pretty much every police officer, lawyer, judge, and juror that a victim will encounter post-assault won't even consider the possibility of guilt, which is what they should be open to as a matter of due process when a complaint comes up.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @09:06PM (2 children)
That is a separate issue and it is wrong of them to be biased against the plaintiff/victim.
The issue that I'm trying to discuss with you is about what the threshold for guilt should be. How do we preserve the rights of the accused or what are acceptable compromises to those rights for the greater societal good?
What evidence is needed? Is a single victim's testimony enough, what about two or three?
The legal system is clearly failing to provide justice for victims of sexual abuse, but what should we do about it? I'll appreciate your thoughts on this.
(Score: 2) by http on Sunday October 15 2017, @12:08AM (1 child)
It's the exact central issue. Attempts to derailing the discourse like that is, I dunno, weak and obvious? It doesn't matter what the threshold for guilt is if it never gets to the courtroom. Woman are simply disbelieved on this subject by default, and even when they are exceptionally compelling, they're actively discouraged from seeking redress - both in the legal system and socially.
If you're actually curious about feasible actions (which you've given good reason to doubt), the solution is for all of us to look in the mirror and ask, "why do I discredit women's statements about rape?" No matter how "rational" you might think you are, you have a bias. We are not immune to society's programming, fighting it requires constant hard work, and even then we will still slip up on occasion.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 15 2017, @12:46AM
Yes it does.
One of the reasons why people do not even attempt to take things to the courtroom is because of the low probability of winning the case. Also, people are far more willing to move forward with a case when there are multiple claimants (another positive about the "allegation escrows").
Thankfully, societal perceptions of women, sex, sexual harassment and assault is changing for the better. However, institutional barriers (presumption of innocence, reliability of testimony, and evidentiary standards) will remain in place and will prevent success in court no matter how supportive society becomes.