[Recently], it was reported that Twitter has suspended journalist Andy Ngo for tweeting inconvenient facts about the purported “epidemic” of transgender deaths, and undercover journalism organization Project Veritas from running recruitment ads. But if you’re a pedophile who wants to discuss your attraction to minors — Twitter’s just fine with that.
Big League Politics discovered a little-noticed, quietly enacted Twitter rule change from March, which says “Discussions related to child sexual exploitation as a phenomenon or attraction towards minors are permitted, provided they don’t promote or glorify child sexual exploitation in any way.”
So, if you post politically inconvenient yet accurate statistical facts, as Ngo did, you get suspended. But if you discuss “attraction towards minors,” Twitter explicitly allows it.
It goes without saying that Twitter’s policy did not arise out of some blanket commitment to free speech.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has specifically rejected such commitments, rubbishing the idea that Twitter is the “free speech wing of the free speech party,” as one VP at the company described it in 2012.
In an interview with Wired last year, Dorsey said that the “free speech wing” comment was a “joke” that was taken too seriously.
“This quote around ‘free speech wing of the free speech party’ was never, was never a mission of the company. It was never a descriptor of the company that we gave ourselves,” said Dorsey.
The Twitter CEO continued, saying that a commitment to free speech “comes with the realization that freedom of expression may adversely impact other people’s fundamental human rights, such as privacy, such as physical security.”
In other words, Twitter’s decision to allow pedophiles on its platform is something they’ve chosen to do, not something they have to do.
In the worldview of twitter, a journalist posting statistics that contradict the intersectional left is somehow a threat to human rights, privacy, or physical security. But allowing pedophiles to openly organize isn’t.