Quantcast

«

»

Mar 27 2013

I endorse this message

Jill Filipovic points out that sexism in the workplace is alive and well.

If it sounds like I’m comparing the people who threaten Richards with rape to actual rapists, and the people who tacitly justify those threats with hand-wringing over what Richards could have done differently to rape apologists, it’s because I am. Despite attempts to characterize the internet as a space suspended outside of "real" life, cyberspace is real. It is a place where actual human beings connect, communicate, mobilize and work. And online harassment and misogyny very closely parallel harassment, misogyny and sexual violence in the "real" world.

The line is blurring between the physical and virtual world, and we’re not going to reduce a serious physical problem if we encourage it to flourish in a different domain.

68 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    WharGarbl

    I’m going to go a bit further. DDoS someone’s place of work because they disapprove of sexual joke in inappropriate setting is a form of terrorism.

    Yes, she did get someone fired, but how the hell is she supposed to know that their employees are jackass like that?

  2. 2
    chigau (違う)

    She didn’t get someone fired, unless you mean she got herself fired.

  3. 3
    Bronze Dog

    I get sick of the people who treat the internet flippantly. The internet is not some escapist MMO game people can opt out of. It’s a real thing real people use to interact with other real people. We live in an online world, but apparently some people haven’t gotten the message, and are still treating it like a worthless geeky ASCII art hobby that ties up the phone line and will never catch on.

  4. 4
    Rey Fox

    Time for I’m Donny And I Just Walked In On This Movie Round 4.

  5. 5
    chigau (違う)

    Chris
    I thought you had the keys to the banhammer?

  6. 6
    pwdm

    PZ says “The line is blurring between the physical and virtual world, and we’re not going to reduce a serious physical problem if we encourage it to flourish in a different domain.” This statement plausible, but is there any evidence to support it?

  7. 7
    Chris Clarke

    I thought you had the keys to the banhammer?

    Just checking to make sure she’d been formally endungeoned.

  8. 8
    noastronomer

    “The line is blurring between the physical and virtual world,”

    Perhaps I’m being naive but I’m really confused as to why anyone would think that sending someone a picture of a decapitiated body and the phrase “When I’m done.” over the Internet should be handled any differently than if the same message were sent via USPS.

    Furthermore, for years the ‘authorities’ have been steadily increasing their ability to trace online acitivities. Prosecuting the turd who sent the picture should be a no-brainer.

    Mike.

  9. 9
    Ing

    Ok brace for laughing on this.

    Annonymouse argues DOSA is freespeech

  10. 10
    bittys

    I came across this page recently while I was having a read about why people might behave like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect

    Apparently this sort of behaviour showed up on CB radio channels during the 1970s, for similar reasons, but there’s quite a few more people on the internet now than ever had CB radios, and so it’s correspondingly worse.

    I’m not sure what the solution might be, short of completely rearchitecting the internet to remove the ability of people to be anonymous, which I think is a really bad idea (as well as being virtually impossible)

  11. 11
    robro

    pwdm — A number of suicides. Does that count? In many respects it’s a false dichotomy: the “virtual world” is obviously very much part of the real world.

    Camomile Lox said “the man that apologized explained that the word “fork” was not used in a sexual connotation” — Are you familiar with the word “baloney”? It’s a lunch meat and a stupid self-rationalization. Get it?

  12. 12
    glodson

    I find the defense of “oh, it is just the internet” is the asshole’s way of excusing their assholish behavior. In a space where they can say what they like and likely not have it effect them, they feel they can just threaten and harass. They grab the ring of Gyges, and prove that they are really assholes when they think no one can catch them.

  13. 13
    Ing

    imo it’s clear a lot of theinternet freedom people really want to keep the place their private unrestricted playground

  14. 14
    Josh, Official SpokesGay

    You’re a liar Yori. Everyone knows it. You know it.

  15. 15
    Ing

    shorter Yori

    Beep book con text does not compute beep book book human nature is confusing ande I am idiot beep beep insert more ram

  16. 16
    SallyStrange

    I’m not sure what the solution might be, short of completely rearchitecting the internet to remove the ability of people to be anonymous, which I think is a really bad idea (as well as being virtually impossible)

    You hadn’t noticed that plenty of people seem perfectly comfortable using their real names to issue threats and make blatantly sexist and racist remarks?

  17. 17
    Ing

    I repeat again that nerds apparently don’t know human interaction and should just be safe and never speak in public.

    Fucking rules lawyering bullshit

  18. 18
    Anthony K

    It would be thrown out in a court of law, and even if the law’s definition of harassment doesn’t match the dictionary definition, it’s still not harassment by dictionary.

    Ah, assuming this is Eucliwood, Eucliwood once argued the exact opposite with me on a post of Ed Brayton’s about the imposters impersonating Ophelia Benson on Twitter when I brought up copyright law and brand protection.

    Since skepticism is all about the tu quoque these days.

    Eucli, fuck off, you disingenuous liar.

  19. 19
    Josh, Official SpokesGay

    Oh, goodness, I got sucked in. Whoops.

    WAREZ MAH BUNNEH

  20. 20
    Ing

    are these conversations easier for parents? Yawll are used to answering questions on basic human interaction right?

  21. 21
    Anthony K

    Here’s Eucliwood’s comment on the law from that And it’s an Appeal to Law to say I should just because law backs it. Law also backs homophobia.

    Compare with:

    It would be thrown out in a court of law

    Apologies to Yori iroy if xe is in fact not Eucliwood.

  22. 22
    Ing

    seriously I’m still broken by the rock stupid of “just offering coffee”

  23. 23
    Rutee Katreya

    fucking tech nerds. Which is it, is it an amazing thing that delivers untold promise to human civilization, or some meaningless tripe that has so little influence and meaning that you can behave like assholes and never hurt anybody?

  24. 24
    Ing

    don’t apologize. Given their grasp of language they’ll probably take it as a mating proposition or challenge to fight to the death.

    Cause they’re odd English speaking aliens

  25. 25
    Ing

    @rutee

    Why it’s both! Two two TWO things in one!

    But wait that’s not all! Order now and get an infinite supply of diseased pusutle laden penis pictures via chatroulette absolutely free!

  26. 26
    Josh, Official SpokesGay

    We’ll never get to Tanagra this way.

  27. 27
    chigau (違う)

    I never understood how people found anything sexual in Beavis and Butt-head.
    huh huh huh

  28. 28
    ibbica

    @Yori, some unsolicited advice:
    Read what actually happened. Nothing was ‘overheard’ in Richards’ case; Richards was speaking with the men in question.
    Look up the term “microaggressions”. Being repeatedly exposed to inappropriate “jokes” contributes to harassment and denigration, regardless of whether it’s all coming from one individual.
    Stop referencing courts of law as the stick against which moral decisions should be measured. The stance that lawyers and judges and politicians should be the sole arbiters of what is moral is highly questionable at best.
    Consider the differences between making jokes about sex during a professional talk about sex, and making jokes about sex during a professional talk about something other than sex.

  29. 29
    Ing

    anyone else remember whose line is it anyway?

    Game: if you know why I mean.
    Premise: scene is set up. Using appropriate setting dialogue and jargon make the scene as filthy as possible via innuendo.

    Do these idiots just not watch tv?

  30. 30
    Chris Clarke

    Apologies to Yori iroy if xe is in fact not Eucliwood.

    Yori is Eucliwood.

  31. 31
    Ing

    @josh

    When the walls fell, amiright?

  32. 32
    Ing

    so using the same argument for and against something

    *slow clap*

  33. 33
    Anthony K

    Yori is Eucliwood.

    Okay, then for the record, since I borked the quote: LYING LIAR wrote this in another thread when it was convenient:

    And it’s an Appeal to Law to say I should just because law backs it. Law also backs homophobia.

    And then, in this thread, conveniently:

    It would be thrown out in a court of law

    Just in case anyone ever thinks of taking her seriously.

  34. 34
    noastronomer

    @Ing #20

    “are these conversations easier for parents? Yawll are used to answering questions on basic human interaction right?”

    Speaking for myself I would have to say yes these conversations are easier for parents to have with their children.

    Because, in general, children are not complete and utter idiots. That comes later.

    Mike.

  35. 35
    Anthony K

    I recommend reading what she wrote in Ed Brayton’s post. She shoots herself in all sorts of feets she tries to walk around on here.

  36. 36
    Bronze Dog

    Another aspect of “the internet isn’t real” that irritates me is that it comes across like a variation on the “new media are evil” trope, to the end that “new media are irrelevant/trivial/a passing fad” by treating the content as inherently worthless, meaningless, or deceptive because it’s from the internet.

    It also strikes me as a way to reinforce a bigoted status quo, treating bigots like non-humans that aren’t responsible for their actions while simultaneously trivializing their existence, hence it’s the victim’s fault for provoking them, they shouldn’t get worked up about it, and they especially shouldn’t draw attention to the problem or try to do anything about it.

  37. 37
    Josh, Official SpokesGay

    I think something’s wrong with Eu beyond mere assholishness.

  38. 38
    Chris Clarke

    I recommend reading what she wrote in Ed Brayton’s post. She shoots herself in all sorts of feets she tries to walk around on here.

    An impressive achievement, given that those feet are wedged into her mouth while her head is up her ass.

  39. 39
    Anthony K

    I think something’s wrong with Eu beyond mere assholishness.

    Yes, though that applies to me as well.

  40. 40
    Chris Clarke

    I think something’s wrong with Eu beyond mere assholishness.

    She PMed me on Facebook some months back demanding to have a conversation about how horrible PZ is. #IAskedPolitely not to have the conversation and she exploded in rage. I blocked her and she exploded again. A sad, sad individual.

  41. 41
    Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle

    I think something’s wrong with Eu beyond mere assholishness.

    Really, I can’t imagine why you’d think that!

  42. 42
    frog

    The problem isn’t that you can’t figure out who people really are, it’s that even if you do know, it’s a pain in the ass to go after them.

    If they live within driving distance, maybe not so much. If you can send their assholishness to their mother and have her deal with them, then okay. (Both of these are real-life examples.)

    But if they live far away? What then? Report them to their local authorities, or to the federal authorities?

    That would work great if the authorities would take the damn case seriously. I long for the day that the Feds turn their power on the likes of the pieces of shit who created the Anita Sarkeesian punching game. I might support keeping Gitmo open, if I knew that was where those guys were headed.

    But of course we’re not just dealing with Americans, either. I’m sure lots of these shitheads live in other countries.

    Hmmm. Maybe an international organization of people to whom one can report real identities, and then local people show up on doorsteps and do the public shaming thing.

  43. 43
    Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought

    Internet isn’t real. Threats sent by email, or written on facebook aren’t real. Sending someone a picture of a decapitated head isn’t a real threat because Internet… BUT, tweeting a picture with a message “not cool, please do something about these guys” is a life ruining act of horribleness.

  44. 44
    Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought

    /sarcasm tag missing up there, just in case it’s not obvious, with all the trolls around

  45. 45
    Crissa

    Tags are sadly necessary. Any sarcasm indistinguishable is therefore counterproductive. x-x

  46. 46
    PZ Myers

    #40: For future such conversations, I cheerfully stipulate that I am incredibly evil. I am the greatest monster on the internet, and proud of it.

    Usually makes the conversation short and simple, anyway.

  47. 47
    Jackie

    We tremble at your rottenness, oh great and squidly one.

  48. 48
    Chris Clarke

    #40: For future such conversations, I cheerfully stipulate that I am incredibly evil. I am the greatest monster on the internet, and proud of it.

    Dammit Jim, I’m a coblogger not a publicist.

  49. 49
    WharGarbl

    Um… did this Yori character get banned? That would explain the seemingly bizarre chain of correspondence.

    @bittys
    #10
    I remembered that Penny-Arcade comic (hey, they even linked to it!).
    I preferred the Penny-Arcade’s name “John Gabriel’s Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory”

  50. 50
    Rey Fox

    From the bizarre fanfic e-mail:

    but I would prefer to use the first name Jason because I can’t thnk of any other good J names.

    Tip of the iceberg, I guess.

  51. 51
    jefrir

    We don’t need to rearchitecht the internet. We need to rearchitect society, so no-one considers doing this shit any more, under their real name or a pseudonym.

  52. 52
    daniellavine

    but I would prefer to use the first name Jason because I can’t thnk of any other good J names.

    Umm, Jacob, Jeremy, Jeremiah, James, Janus, John, Jonathan, Jackson, Jean…

    Dunno, Eu could be having real troubles or she could just be an entitled brat. Without more information I can’t say any more than that I will probably avoid engaging her in conversation.

    Incidentally, I think this anonymity stuff is why g+ required real names on their accounts. I remember that being a rather unpopular move.

  53. 53
    robro

    J names — Don’t forget “Jehovah” (it isn’t used much) Amen.

  54. 54
    daniellavine

    Oh, but “Jesus” is! How did I miss that one?!

  55. 55
    myeck waters

    Christ, daniel, that’s a pretty big omission.

  56. 56
    Great American Satan

    The comments section there is unremittingly fucked up and makes me want to watch the world burn. Apparently, no one that reads the Guardian has any reading comprehension and all of them are dudebros who are certain the ill considered opinions they regurgitate are more important than anything a woman would say. Good for them. *YACK*

  57. 57
    ibbica

    @WharGarbl

    Um… did this Yori character get banned? That would explain the seemingly bizarre chain of correspondence.

    Er… yeah, seems that way ;)
    That is to say… yep, there are posts now missing that were up earlier. Don’t worry, they weren’t anything particularly interesting or insightful or anything. That’s one of the dangers of replying to really bad comments: their removal makes you look like you’re talking to an imaginary friend (although ‘friend’ is obviously the wrong term to use there).

  58. 58
    daniellavine

    myeck waters@55:

    I know. I guess I’ll have to go write some Buddy Christ slash fic as penance.

  59. 59
    Great American Satan

    Oh, Eucliwood was around? You know what I find interesting abotu her “J names” problem? She has been very very good at coming up with alternates that have the feel of her original handle. Stuff beginning in “Y” sounds phonetically similar to stuff beginning in “Eu.”

    I think it’s funny that one of the most prolific Slymers du jour is a gothic lolita type. We live in an extremely weird universe.

  60. 60
    sotonohito

    I think a large part of it is that people have the irrational expectation that their comments in public meatspace are a) private, and b) anonymous by default.

    Unless you are in your home, you should expect that everything you say and do is being recorded. Cameras are everywhere after all, and in the hands of many people who previously couldn’t afford them.

    So the sort of person who wants to present a persona of being a decent human being, but also wants to crack racist or sexist jokes in the “privacy” of a crowd gets affronted and offended when reality intrudes and it turns out that no, you can’t actually expect that people won’t record your BS and show it to the world.

    While plain old fashioned misogyny and offense at anyone disrupting the good ole’ boy’s feel of tech conferences is certainly a huge factor in the hatred Richards has gotten, I think we make a mistake if we overlook the fact that until recently it has been reasonable for people attending public events to assume that they can say stuff like the people Richards reported on and get away with it. But the environment has shifted and now they can’t, and I think a not inconsiderable part of the outrage at Richards is really outrage at the world changing.

    Tech people are no more resistant to culture shock and the belief that the way the world was when they were children is the way the world should always be than anyone else.

    And, regrettably, I think that in many ways tech people are even more prone to assume as Filipovic and Bronze Dog point out that the internet is, and should be, kept strictly segregated from real life. Especially to believe that what they do and say online is isolated and not really important to their real life selves.

  61. 61
    Esteleth, [an error occurred while processing this directive]

    No, sonohito, I don’t think that’s all of it. If you wander over to this thread, you’ll see a discussion about that presumption of privacy in public.

    If you scroll down to my comment (#190), you’ll see that I posit that the discourse on privacy is heavily colored by the fact that there are two groups of people in the world: those who have no reason to be afraid of a lack of privacy (because (1) they don’t face averse consequences for being completely open, and (2) anyone who attempts to use their lack of privacy against them would face social backlash), and those who do have reason to be afraid of a lack of privacy. The people who have no reason to be afraid of a lack of privacy have more or less no compunction to be less than completely open, because this openness does not harm them. They tend to be the socially privileged in general (the bit about how those who act against their interest suffer should make that obvious).

    Richards dared to say, “No, you people in the first group really do belong in the second group.” And – remember the thing about privilege – it is a privilege to be able to do whatever you want without fear of consequence. Richards asserted that this privilege could be stripped away and proceeded to do so.

    That is what she’s being punished for. For saying “there are social rules and standards, and they apply to everyone equally. You don’t get an out because of the color of your skin or the shape of your genitals.”

  62. 62
    Inaji

    Esteleth:

    No, sonohito, I don’t think that’s all of it. If you wander over to this thread

    Sonohito was bunnified in that thread.

  63. 63
    Esteleth, [an error occurred while processing this directive]

    Yes, I know. I still think he’s ignoring important things.

  64. 64
    Inaji

    great1american1satan:

    I think it’s funny that one of the most prolific Slymers du jour

    She was banned from the ‘pit.

  65. 65
    sotonohito

    @Esteleth, stupid fucking starchild Tolkien worshiping douche, I think we’re saying much the same thing, I didn’t use the language of privilege, but it’s what I was getting at.

    One of the privileges the people in question have had for some time is the privilege of presenting one persona (cool, inclusive, not a jerk), while acting in a manner contrary to that persona. They had that privilege because of the fact that until recently their other privilege (typically white, male, cis, hetero, etc) meant that if someone reported on their jerk behavior it’d be ignored and the accuser would be attacked as a liar.

    With the expansion of recording technology to a wider number of people, that privilege has been stripped away, and like many privileged people finding that one of their privileges is vanishing, they’re reacting with a great deal of anger.

    I’m not at all saying that’s all there is to it. But I am saying that it’s a factor, a lesser factor I think than just plain old misogyny and racism, but a factor nevertheless.

    @Caine, Fleur du mal, indeed I was. Until then I had been unaware that threads modded by Chris Clarke were circlejerks, and that dissent would be met with a ban. Live and learn.

  66. 66
    kate_waters: Not Your Father's Oldsmobile.

    Sotonohito, you were banned from that thread for clearly stated reasons. If you want to throw a tantrum over that, take it to the Thunderdome. Stop stinking up this thread with your petty bullshit.

    If you want to disagree, learn to do so without using various “isms” which are not tolerated here. If you are unclear on what that means, I suggest you learn to lurk before you step in it again.

  67. 67
    sotonohito

    @kate_waters: I’m not the one who brought up the other thread, or Chris’s decision to ban me there. Complain to Caine, Fleur du mal if you want to complain to the person who brought it up. I learned my lesson (don’t ever disagree with Chris in threads he mods) and I had no intention of complaining. His forum, his rules. Why Caine, Fleur du mal decided to bring it up here I don’t know. Why don’t you ask them?

  68. 68
    kate_waters: Not Your Father's Oldsmobile.

    Soronohito, your reading comprehension is very poor. Others disagreed with Chris in that thread and were not smacked with either bunnination or a banhammer. Stop lying. Everyone can peruse the thread and see quite clearly that your little pity party is nothing but you being a disingenuous, lying ass.

    Now fuck off until you learn to tell the truth.

Comments have been disabled.