It looks like my account at Twitter has been restored.
I wonder what could have happened?
Could it be Elon Musk is keeping his word?
Those of you who have been following me on here know that Twitter had suspended my account and it looked like I wasn't getting it back.
Well, following the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk, I decided I would try logging back into my account, and lo and behold, it looks like I'm finally able to start tweeting again.
However, I'm not sure how active I'll be now that my account is back.
It was nice not having to worry about who was tweeting, responding to me, mentioning me etc.
Do I really want to go back to that?
Perhaps for now, I'll just stick to publishing any new posts I create on this blog.
My Thoughts on Elon Musk's Acquisition of Twitter
I'm of two minds regarding the recent series of events surrounding this social media platform.
On the one hand, I'm not sure how I feel about one man having the power to censor or allow information to be published.
That was the problem before, though.
It still IS the problem on platforms such as Facebook, who are owned by a single billionaire, namely Mark Zuckerberg.
Actually, as long as I've been an intactivst, there have always been people trying to label us "anti-Semites," and what we post "hate speech" or "disinformation."
How verifiable fact can be called any of these things is beyond me, and yet, for a while, it seems advocates of male infant circumcision were successful in having me silenced on Twitter.
It is not uncommon to hear from other intactivists that Twitter, Facebook or other social media platforms had suspended their accounts and put them on periodical bans.
It's rather sad, frustrating, scary, all of these things and more at the same time, that the factual information that intactivists have to share can be labeled "hate speech," "disinformation" etc. and banned, blocked, deleted, what have you.
So on the other hand, I'm glad that Twitter is now in the hands of someone that, at least for now, seems to be a champion of free speech.
It is a problem when truth and verifiable fact can be labeled "hate speech" and/or "disinformation" for the sake of censoring it.
It is my hope that Mr. Elon Musk is a man of his word and he protects the free speech of intactivists, although this would be construed as "hate speech" and/or "disinformation" by those who are inconvenienced by it and who would have us silenced.
WHO would be interested in silencing intactivists?
-Those who profit from this procedure performed on millions annually in the United States alone.
-Those who have religious or cultural conviction to protect what they see as an age-old custom.
-Those who have malpractice lawsuits for disseminating medical misinformation and reaping profit from non-medical procedures on healthy, non-consenting individuals to evade.
There are pocketbooks, reputations, religious beliefs and cultural customs to protect.
Arguments stand or fall on their own.
Given a proper hearing, it would be self-evident that arguments against male infant circumcision are robust, and arguments in favor collapse under their own weight.
The only way advocates of male infant circumcision *can* win is to find ways to make sure the conversation doesn't happen, whether it be by crying "hate speech," "disinformation" or by demanding platforms have us banned.
So I am glad that it sounds like we have a champion in Elon Musk.
A lot of people don't like this, but allowing the freedom of speech is a GOOD thing.
It allows us to have important, meaningful conversation, discuss difficult topics such as male infant circumcision, and to present the facts so people can see and verify them for themselves.
It's thanks to freedom of speech that we're allowed to question guidelines put out by male infant circumcision advocates at the CDC and AAP, which we know are deliberately misleading.
It is a logical fallacy to dismiss information when it's not being purported by "the experts" at medical organizations, and/or to prop it up when it is.
It's called "ad verecundiam," also known as "appeal to authority.
Information is either true or false based on its own merit, regardless of who is presenting it, and it is completely possible for even experts at prestigious organizations to be wrong.
It is those interested in suppressing information while maintaining a false narrative who are interested in having the power to decide what is "mis/disinformation" or not.
Intactivists have factual, verifiable information on our side, but what good does it do us if circumcision advocates on Twitter deem it "hate speech" or "disinformation?"
I'm SO glad Mr. Elon Musk decided to buy Twitter.
Only those who fear the truth need fear freedom of speech and eager to wield the power to silence others.
Those who fear actual lies and disinformation need not fret, for the truth shall set us free.