Richmond Democrat bringing box of 'dynamite' to Andy Ngo's speaking event
POLITICO: Menswear expert says Fetterman's hoodie isn't as bad as election denialism
Antifa attacks a father protesting gender ideology in schools
Right on Cue: WaPo fluffs for frumpy Fetterman
Here's another 'fun little item' by the reporter who did the Dave Portnoy...
Neil deGrasse Tyson makes mind-numbingly stupid case for men in women's sports (watch)
GoFundMe campaign launched to make Dove's 'Fat Liberation' ambassador feel 'safe'
Washington Post is very concerned about misinformation, but it's as one-sided as you...
Ummm WUT? Wildlife TV Presenter says it may be time to break the...
American Library Association president thinks libraries need to be a site of socialist...
Get the popcorn: Libs are attacking lib Ken Burns because of an old...
NBC News: Russell Brand 'attacks' the British government
Cenk Uygur pulls out the long knives and a whetstone for Joe Biden
Michael Knowles suggests a different kind of prenuptial agreement to save America's marria...
Menendez takes from Rubin, Vindman and others are just coincidentally exactly the same

How exactly is this account advocating the rape of 'TERFs' NOT against Twitter's rules?


A while ago, Elon Musk presented an ideal of what he thought free speech on Twitter should be:


This is slightly confused thinking given that the American Constitution often overrides the will of a mere majority, but it would have been pretty great, frankly, if Twitter refused to ban anything outside of what is allowed by the First Amendment.

But we don’t live in that world. We live in a world where Musk very often allows for bans such as prohibiting an account that told people where he was in real time, bans on pedophilia advocates and other restrictions. Of course, it is 10,000% better than the old regime, but it's not quite the pure free speech utopia he suggested early on. So, if we are not going to have complete freedom of speech (our preference), then how the heck is this allowed?

Yes, the account is literally ‘Rape All TERFs.’ And advocating for such a violent act is protected under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has said:

the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969). In other words, the mere existence of this account cannot be criminalized under American law. But as we just said, Twitter goes further than what can be prohibited under American law and if an advocate of pedophilia is banned, how is this account allowed?


And while we can’t say if any individual Tweets might violate American law—because the account is protected—J.K. Rowling retweeted this Tweet alleging that the account seems to have crossed the line into threats via DM:

Here’s the pics, blown up:

That sure sounds like a threat and threats are not free speech (not to mention that such dm's suggests its writer belongs in a straightjacket).

That’s fine as a joke, but the actual correct reaction is to get angry and use that energy productively.

*pushes up glasses* That’s not technically true, unless you get hung up on a lack of punctuation at the end.

Reaching … for … mental … bleach…


Words can’t hurt, but threats can lead to a breach of the peace, which is why they are rightfully prohibited by law in most jurisdictions.

Or she might be able to report it to her own local police—which is easier.

Still, in the end ‘Feminist Roar’ had this relatively hopeful message:

Good to know she’s not letting it get her down.

Still, someone had a helpful reminder:

This is a perfect example of why we say often the Second Amendment protects the First. If you are concerned someone might physically attack you because of your beliefs, having a gun might make you feel safer when advocating your views. How much differently would the attack on Salman Rushdie have turned out if Rushdie had been packing? Heck, if he was openly carrying a gun, would it have happened at all? Sure, the police should protect you regardless of your viewpoint, but 1) we are increasingly skeptical of the claim that they would act neutrally and, 2) even if they would, they can’t be everywhere at once.


Of course, ‘Feminist Roar’ says that she lives in Wales, where they aren’t protected by the actual First or Second Amendments and they don’t enjoy a government that respects the principles underlying either one. But it highlights again why such principles are vital, and every government should adopt and respect these principles.


Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Twitchy Videos