We are, however, seeing women in politics who are vocal on Twitter carving similar spaces via Threads. One example is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the American politician and activist popularly known as AOC, who has 1 million followers on Threads and is posting and reposting content of political nature there. Hillary Clinton also has a profile on Threads and has over 100,000 followers.
I understand that the white man questioning the black feminist isn't exactly a great look, but really? Are we still doing the thing where the prominence of politicians like Hillary Clinton is conflated with the progress of women as a social group?
These politicians are in the news regularly, and come to the website primarily with the goal of self promotion. This does not really indicate a culture of feminism on Meta (Facebook) platforms any more than Bernie going on Fox indicates a culture of social democracy at Newscorp.
What does the discourse look like when the conservatism and hesitance of the Democratic party undermines the goals of feminism? How much space is there for criticism as the rights of bodily autonomy ablate, or advances in the labor conditions of traditionally female professions are resisted?
What degree of moderation is even taking place? Are casual misogynists being removed from the platform, or is Meta more interested in retaining every kind of bigot to increase their value as a platform for advertisers? Why would you excpect one of the largest media monopolies in the English-speaking world to transform the conditions with regards to feminist discourse, organizing, and practice, wnen the fruits of this organizing would directly undermine their power?
It's also worth mentioning that Instagram followers mostly transfer over to threads, so a high follower count there is more based on AOC's instagram savvy over the last 6 years than any pro-women policy that started with Threads a month ago.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the website that turned a teenager over to the abortion police is not safe for use.
