7 ms·

This is the attitude that is frustrating. Should the net be free of censorship? Of course. But the dismissive attitude of some of the absolute vile garbage th

by bruceb 11y ago

This is the attitude that is frustrating. Should the net be free of censorship? Of course. But the dismissive attitude of some of the absolute vile garbage that is online is annoying. It isn't "some degree of harassment" it is god awful. Easy to be dismissive when you are not subject of something. Women by far are the target. A tad more empathy instead of dismissing something with the attitude their complaints are some needlessly whining

brighteyes 11y ago
> Women by far are the target. That is actually not true, see for example: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/01/the-darkest-side-of-online-harassment-menacing-behavior/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/01/the-darkest-... By perpetuating this false stereotype, you're doing more harm to gender equality than harassment does. Online harassment can be bad - I've suffered it myself - but at least it's fairly equal in harming everyone. The stereotype that men are harassers and women are victims arises because there are a few famous women that have been harassed very publicly. Why have there been more famous cases of women than men, when surveys do not find a large gender difference in actual harassment? I suspect it's that very stereotype of women as victims. It's an easy narrative to fall into, as you are doing right here.
- bruceb 11y ago
  How does this link prove your point? Doesn't measure the intensity nor does it go in to general atmosphere of hate. Having post after post about "fat chicks" that is not specifically aimed at you can still be incredible painful.
  - brighteyes 11y ago
    The very first chart shows women are not the "by far" targets of online harassment. Look at the numbers. Anecdotes like "posts about fat chicks" are not convincing. There are plenty of anecdotes going both ways.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      Can I just check: Are you saying "this happens to everyone, so it's okay"? Or "this happens to everyone, and it's not okay"? If it's the latter I agree. A bunch of people working in open source receive death threats and considerable levels of harassment. That kind of stuff needs to stop, no matter who it's aimed at.
      - brighteyes 11y ago
        Of course it's not ok - I said it was bad, and that I suffered from it myself. All I am saying is that gendering this issue, when the data shows it is actually something not limited or even focused on one gender, is incorrect, unhelpful, and sexist.
        DanBC 11y ago
        > Of course it's not ok You think "of course", I think "of course", but there are people in this thread saying it's not a problem.
  - pkinsky 11y ago
    I know, think about the kind of fedora wearing, basement dwelling neckbeard loser that makes posts attacking entire genders! /sarcasm
    - brighteyes 11y ago
      Adding a "/sarcasm" after hurtful words doesn't make it ok.
      - pkinsky 11y ago
        Sorry, I'm trying to point out that gendered harassment targeting men is very common online. I've edited my post for clarity.
        brighteyes 11y ago
        I understand, but the risk is that the sarcasm you used is in fact used online in a hurtful way. It can mean either what you did, or be used to intentionally ridicule people.
vezzy-fnord 11y ago
To back up littletimmy's point, I very much as a male have been the subject of it. I was persistently and relentlessly trolled for well over a year in some of the online communities I frequented when I was younger, and it has had an effect on me. I would dare say a somewhat positive one, in that it fueled a certain level of misanthropy and cynicism that influenced me to educate myself on the human condition and thus read on subjects that would nominally be considered outside my age group. I have thankfully mellowed out quite a bit since then, and none of this excuses the original actions, but it's not all grim. And, conversely, the Internet is not all rosy. The fact of the matter is we've opened up a real Pandora's box. This is the first time in human history we've enabled people to really be bombarded by public opinion in instant, rapid numbers at every moment they express a viewpoint. It's the first time the marketplace of ideas is out there in its true colors. Humans simply aren't used to this. It's perfectly normal that a lot will break down at the immense cognitive overload. However, one thing annoys me. The idea that this is purely a women's issue, and how it's presented as a culture war over gender and feminism. In fact, this is a very recent development, and it seems to me that the zeitgeist on the subject changes cyclically. It used to be trolling, and it was acknowledged it happened to everyone. Don't feed the trolls, don't share public info on the Internet. But then, as social media totally subverted that, it became "cyberbullying". And though it was still acknowledged it occurred to all, it became a matter of imminent policy decision. Now, it has gone further off the edge. It's no longer trolling or cyberbullying, it's harassment and it has suddenly been morphed into an identity politics issue. What tripe. I expect that soon this will change, of course. Some other neologism or term with a corresponding narrative will usurp the current gender feminist understanding. That's how it appears to work, observing prior historical precedent. The way I see it, there's two real options: a) Humans must adapt to this new circumstance and learn to be more resilient in the face of a new reality, one where they are under constant global supervision for their words, or b) We must lower our dependence on the Internet and have decent analog/low-tech fallbacks to how our societal institutions operate instead of marching in full digital for everything. The latter, quite clearly will not happen. This leaves us with a). Regulatory decisions will not work. The regulatory bodies do not understand the problem. I don't think any of us do. We have to learn to deal with the revolution we have started, as there's no reversing it.
- 11y ago

by bruceb 11y ago

brighteyes 11y ago

> Women by far are the target. That is actually not true, see for example: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/01/the-darkest-side-of-online-harassment-menacing-behavior/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/01/the-darkest-... By perpetuating this false stereotype, you're doing more harm to gender equality than harassment does. Online harassment can be bad - I've suffered it myself - but at least it's fairly equal in harming everyone. The stereotype that men are harassers and women are victims arises because there are a few famous women that have been harassed very publicly. Why have there been more famous cases of women than men, when surveys do not find a large gender difference in actual harassment? I suspect it's that very stereotype of women as victims. It's an easy narrative to fall into, as you are doing right here.

bruceb 11y ago
How does this link prove your point? Doesn't measure the intensity nor does it go in to general atmosphere of hate. Having post after post about "fat chicks" that is not specifically aimed at you can still be incredible painful.
- brighteyes 11y ago
  The very first chart shows women are not the "by far" targets of online harassment. Look at the numbers. Anecdotes like "posts about fat chicks" are not convincing. There are plenty of anecdotes going both ways.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Can I just check: Are you saying "this happens to everyone, so it's okay"? Or "this happens to everyone, and it's not okay"? If it's the latter I agree. A bunch of people working in open source receive death threats and considerable levels of harassment. That kind of stuff needs to stop, no matter who it's aimed at.
    - brighteyes 11y ago
      Of course it's not ok - I said it was bad, and that I suffered from it myself. All I am saying is that gendering this issue, when the data shows it is actually something not limited or even focused on one gender, is incorrect, unhelpful, and sexist.
      - DanBC 11y ago
        > Of course it's not ok You think "of course", I think "of course", but there are people in this thread saying it's not a problem.
- pkinsky 11y ago
  I know, think about the kind of fedora wearing, basement dwelling neckbeard loser that makes posts attacking entire genders! /sarcasm
  - brighteyes 11y ago
    Adding a "/sarcasm" after hurtful words doesn't make it ok.
    - pkinsky 11y ago
      Sorry, I'm trying to point out that gendered harassment targeting men is very common online. I've edited my post for clarity.
      - brighteyes 11y ago
        I understand, but the risk is that the sarcasm you used is in fact used online in a hurtful way. It can mean either what you did, or be used to intentionally ridicule people.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

To back up littletimmy's point, I very much as a male have been the subject of it. I was persistently and relentlessly trolled for well over a year in some of the online communities I frequented when I was younger, and it has had an effect on me. I would dare say a somewhat positive one, in that it fueled a certain level of misanthropy and cynicism that influenced me to educate myself on the human condition and thus read on subjects that would nominally be considered outside my age group. I have thankfully mellowed out quite a bit since then, and none of this excuses the original actions, but it's not all grim. And, conversely, the Internet is not all rosy. The fact of the matter is we've opened up a real Pandora's box. This is the first time in human history we've enabled people to really be bombarded by public opinion in instant, rapid numbers at every moment they express a viewpoint. It's the first time the marketplace of ideas is out there in its true colors. Humans simply aren't used to this. It's perfectly normal that a lot will break down at the immense cognitive overload. However, one thing annoys me. The idea that this is purely a women's issue, and how it's presented as a culture war over gender and feminism. In fact, this is a very recent development, and it seems to me that the zeitgeist on the subject changes cyclically. It used to be trolling, and it was acknowledged it happened to everyone. Don't feed the trolls, don't share public info on the Internet. But then, as social media totally subverted that, it became "cyberbullying". And though it was still acknowledged it occurred to all, it became a matter of imminent policy decision. Now, it has gone further off the edge. It's no longer trolling or cyberbullying, it's harassment and it has suddenly been morphed into an identity politics issue. What tripe. I expect that soon this will change, of course. Some other neologism or term with a corresponding narrative will usurp the current gender feminist understanding. That's how it appears to work, observing prior historical precedent. The way I see it, there's two real options: a) Humans must adapt to this new circumstance and learn to be more resilient in the face of a new reality, one where they are under constant global supervision for their words, or b) We must lower our dependence on the Internet and have decent analog/low-tech fallbacks to how our societal institutions operate instead of marching in full digital for everything. The latter, quite clearly will not happen. This leaves us with a). Regulatory decisions will not work. The regulatory bodies do not understand the problem. I don't think any of us do. We have to learn to deal with the revolution we have started, as there's no reversing it.

11y ago