Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
HPluckrose's profile
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
@HPluckrose

Tweets

Helen Pluckrose

@HPluckrose

Editor @AreoMagazine Secular, liberal humanist. Mother. Doglover. Writing book about epistemology & ethics on the academic left Helen.pluckrose@areomagazine.com

London.
areomagazine.com/author/hpluckr…
Joined August 2011

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @HPluckrose @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      I think the confusion here is a conflation of "racism" and "race based discrimination". Those aren't the same things. Racism might be a motive for race based discrimination, but isn't necessary for race based discrimination to occur

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    2. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @HPluckrose and

      So if there's a rule that says "black women are fired first" it's both race based discrimination and sex based discrimination. Doesn't matter if the employer doesn't have a problem with black men.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      But did the law allow for that? If all the black women were fired first, could a complaint of sexist or racist discrimination be made if there were plenty of white women and black men who weren't fired? I don't know and don't have time to read Crenshaw again now.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    4. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @HPluckrose @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      If there was evidence that black women were targeted as a class, yes, it would be illegal discrimination even if the motives for it weren't racism because black men kept their job or sexism because white women kept their jobs. It's still race and sex based discrimination.

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      You read the Crenshaw thing and the rulings saying that cases couldn't be judged like this which was later overturned and now they can?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    6. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @HPluckrose @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      Did I read the entire 31 page document you linked? No. I can tell you in the highlighted portion she has the facts of the case wrong. Black men were also laid off and were filing suit.pic.twitter.com/3CrPLU0UP4

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @HPluckrose and

      The court wanted to combine the cases but the plaintiffs refused because the claim that black women were being doubly discriminated against. That's what the court was responding to in the section she quotes

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      Yes, I know. There wasn't a way to complain of that. Now there is. Is that a bad thing?

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
      Replying to @HPluckrose @doublespeak152 and

      I'm going to leave it here. The article reported what Crenshaw did accurately. If you think this is itself is bad, think about whether you'd like to be able to complain if straight, white men get discriminated against by SocJus ppl when just one of those identities wouldn't be.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
      Replying to @HPluckrose @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      I've literally been trying to explain for hours that it ISN'T the case that you can discriminate against a subset of a protected class by narrowing parameters so it's not "racism". Never once said "it's ok if ppl can discriminate against black women". Not once

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
      Replying to @doublespeak152 @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

      I'm not saying you did! You seem to be answering things that weren't said and not addressing what Crenshaw did say which was reported accurately in the article. Did you not see what the courts ruled & that it was decided this required a change in law & that that happened?

      6:10 PM - 9 May 2018
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Tom Quinn‏ @doublespeak152 May 9
          Replying to @HPluckrose @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

          The article reported what Crenshaw wrote. I didn't say it mischaracterized Crenshaw. Obviously got her argument correct. My tweet was saying her argument mischaracterized the case.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose May 9
          Replying to @doublespeak152 @QuilletteM @xchrisgonz

          This argument? I'm prepared to believe she could have got this wrong even tho she is a professor of law who focused on this because she was ideologically motivated. I don't understand your explanation tho. The law was later changed to fill this gap so it must have existed.pic.twitter.com/X5wVsbIhK6

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info