9 ms·

Why do trolls go after feminists?

19 points by jackgavigan 11y ago

bunnymancer 11y ago
Article hits pretty close to the truth in that our societal structure is based around males being trained to be loud and space-demanding while females are trained to "deal with it"
- martiuk 11y ago
  I don't remember being "trained" to be loud and space-demanding? And I don't remember my wife being "trained" to deal with it. Society is ever changing rubbery blob that's being melded into different shapes based on what people do, have done or will do. You can't just go ahead and make large generalisations about men or women without any backlash, especially on the internet. I'm sure if I made a comment saying all women should be/are xyz on twitter, I sure as hell would be trolled/attacked; it's what you as a person deals with it.
  - vegardx 11y ago
    You have never been told to "not act like a girl"? I'm genuinely curious, as that would be the first time I've heard that.
    - tracker1 11y ago
      "Don't be a wussy." On a serious note, not every gender stereotype is inherently bad. I don't recall ever making a threat against anyone, certainly not doxing them, and don't support the behavior. Some people tend to force a victim mentality, it doesn't mean that they aren't victims, I'm only saying it's so as there are instances where I think we've gone too far. The concept of "trigger warnings" in classrooms just seems absurd. Also, people can't take a joke anymore. Many comics won't even do shows at college campuses anymore. It's kind of a sad statement. As a kid, I was picked on more than most.. and while I feel such behavior shouldn't be encouraged, you can't stop all bad behavior in an instant, and becoming militant about it will only serve to fan the flames. Compare racial tensions in the U.S. vs the U.K. for example. There are times to speak out, and times to suck it up. --- Edit: I realize that this isn't a popular point of view, but if you disagree, reply and add to the conversation, the negative vote isn't supposed to mean you disagree with something.
      - wpietri 11y ago
        It's hard to disagree with a grab bag of vague, warmed-over right-wing talking points. Or rather, it's easy to do, but it doesn't seem worthwhile. If you'd like somebody to take you seriously enough to write a reply, take a point seriously enough to write it out clearly and give some substance to it. Data. Personal experience. Careful, clear reasoning. Anything to demonstrate that you've put some time in. As it is, I don't have any reason to think you have thought about the topic enough to be worth responding to. I'd expect the conversation to go something like this: http://chemicalsinpants.tumblr.com/post/101787704848/the-problem-with-trying-to-talk-about-womens http://chemicalsinpants.tumblr.com/post/101787704848/the-pro... It's enormously convenient for you to tell other people to suck it up, while being apparently unable to endure the discomfort of other people having opinions without whining about it online. It sounds familiar: http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-white-people-freak-out-when-theyre-called-out-about-race http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-white-people-freak-out-w...
        tracker1 11y ago
        I've given more thought to it, than is likely deserved. Most of the time, I don't say anything about it. There have only been a handful of times where I was even motivated to express an opinion in the past. I didn't want to dig into this specific case, as it seems to relate to gamergate, which is a lot of bad acting on all sides, especially those making physical threats of violence, and doxing people. Regardless of the merits of any underlying philosophy, such behavior is indefensible. I'm not really right-wing, though do lean that way on a few specific issues. I'm very much of a pragmatic libertarian mindset. I tend to disagree with many on the left and right-wing viewpoints simultaneously. Even on the same issue. It's not just a right wing talking point to say that there's been a lot of over-reaction to a great many things, and some of the actions coming out of our universities currently is pretty backwards. People have every right to be offended by things... they do not have a right to not be offended by anything. One's privilege ends where another's rights begin. My intent was not to derail conversation into a spew of he-said/she-said or even to deteriorate into hyperbole. I was vague because in this case, there's merit. I was only mentioning that in a lot of cases there is not.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    > I don't remember being "trained" I see. Do you remember being potty trained? Do you remember being trained on what things and behaviors are masculine and feminine? Because you were trained, and if you spend time around toddlers you can see them being trained on both. You were also trained in the use of tens of thousands of words. Do you remember being trained on each one of them? I sure don't. Do you remember being trained on how to avoid collision on the sidewalk? On how to use a fork? On how to use your fingers to put things in your mouth? Your memory of being trained on something isn't a good indicator of whether you were trained on it. A relatively small amount of what society trains people on is explicit, formal, and sufficient to cause episodic memory formation. Most of our learning is implicit. > And I don't remember my wife being "trained" Were you married when she was 2? Gender role training starts at least that early. Regardless, if you look you can read plenty of actual stories from adult women on how they have been trained to deal with it, and how they're still being trained in that by being punished for breaking from it. Clementine Ford has experienced exactly that kind of training, so if you wanted to learn something, you could start with her articles. Other good sources are Everyday Sexism, Project Unbreakable, or the autobiography of pretty much any pioneering woman. Madeleine Albright talks explicitly about this and how rising through the man's world of diplomacy forced her to cast off her training and adopt loud and space-demanding behaviors just to be heard.
    - csorrell 11y ago
      I find this attitude pretty condescending. A broad gender statement like "boys are trained to be loud and space demanding" isn't honest in representing all boys.
      - wpietri 11y ago
        No broad statement about X represents all X. That's what a broad statement means. Note that your reply here is basically "not all men!" A response that has been examined and found deeply lacking: https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men
        11y ago
scrupulusalbion 11y ago
FWIW, trolls don't uniquely focus on feminists. Their emotional buttons are just so easy to find and push; when your advocacy === your emotional button, then you are broadcasting how to make you upset. If you are easily made upset, then you are self-primed for being trolled. So, if you don't like being trolled, then either hide your emotional buttons or change what happens when someone pushes those buttons. The fact that feminists appear to be uniquely targeted by trolls is indeed the result of a societal structure, but it is not unique to feminists. Instead, feminists are just another set of humans who are louder when they get upset. People used to complain about so-called Soccer Moms being too easy to upset. If you don't like the trolls, then don't feed them. I had thought that people had learned from the vi-vs-emacs flame wars how to avoid unproductive drama. Feminists spin their wheels by getting upset at trolls, just as vi users wasted their time getting mad when emacs users were not using vi.
- CM30 11y ago
  Pretty much this 100%. It's not being a feminist or female specifically that makes you a target, it's being seen to respond poorly to attacks and trolling. If it's not feminists, then its furries, or otherkin, or bronies, or fanboys, or whoever else is seen as an easy target that responds poorly to criticism. Ignore trolls, and they'll (eventually) ignore you. Keep responding and baiting them, and you're toast. Same thing goes if you run a community. Don't want trolls? Ban and move on. Don't turn it into a big dramatic deal and 'war on trolls'.
  - scrupulusalbion 11y ago
    >Ban and move on. This might have mixed results. Some trolls see getting banned as proof of successful trolling, whereupon trolling via another account might still be an option. I think the users are the key to making trolls go away, because it is a social issue and not a mechanical issue. Put another way: you can't program away trolling, despite how fun XKCD's idea [0] might be to implement. [0] https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
nickpsecurity 11y ago
Interesting that this question was asked in relation to GamerGate. When I researched that, the major media was only reporting the feminists' side of things and the claims of abuse. It was really hard to cut through the noise to figure out what the core dispute was. By the time I found a structured presentation of counterpoints... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZY6D2hFdo&app=desktop https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZY6D2hFdo&app=desktop ...they suggested it was that a few women disrespected their market, trolled millions of people (including women gamers), made claims of abuse with feminist ideology, violated their own rules for money in design of their own games, and were possibly using the claims to get attention to their games. Never heard any of that in original reporting on major sites and that's why I was originally confused about why so much hate came their way. Not saying this is true of anything referenced in the above article. Just telling readers to be aware that there's at least two trends going on: 1. People, including & especially women, being harassed online with any number of bogus justifications covering up bullying. It's a larger problem & the justification (eg feminism) rarely is the real issue. 2. A tiny portion of women, who may or may not represent most feminists, getting slammed online for using bullying and media manipulation to push their politics or products. I say media manipulation because I almost never see major media report calling it out even when it's obvious. Reporting is often one-sided, possibly due to risk of losing business if their image is seen as discriminating against women. I think one can argue against specific women's claims without hating on women in general. So, we have two problems. One gets all the attention. Each time, the recipient of that abuse spins it as them being in a minority, having certain attributes, etc as evidence there's a large scale attack on those things. Reality is human nature is at work with any group competing with others and lack of accountability letting some be abusive. Certainly prejudices in there to combat but it really boils down to abusive people enabled by the Internet. Happens offline, too, as anyone who went to school, a bar, a football game... anything... should know. Other problem we should watch out for and call out when we see it. That problem is not limited to feminist: any members of a group that can make itself look the underdog or target of abuse can use that as leverage in promoting politics or themselves. This happens across the board. Relevant to this thread, that many feminists do it certainly contributes to attacks on those individuals and might contribute to attacks on others posting similar idea. The troll throws them all in one mental category and attacks at the first sign of the same ideology in a new person. So, that's my two cents on the problem.
mizchief2 11y ago
Are we talking about trolls as generally known on the internet or the definition feminists use which is anyone who disagrees with them or points out factual incorrectness?

19 points by jackgavigan 11y ago

Article hits pretty close to the truth in that our societal structure is based around males being trained to be loud and space-demanding while females are trained to "deal with it"

martiuk 11y ago
I don't remember being "trained" to be loud and space-demanding? And I don't remember my wife being "trained" to deal with it. Society is ever changing rubbery blob that's being melded into different shapes based on what people do, have done or will do. You can't just go ahead and make large generalisations about men or women without any backlash, especially on the internet. I'm sure if I made a comment saying all women should be/are xyz on twitter, I sure as hell would be trolled/attacked; it's what you as a person deals with it.
- vegardx 11y ago
  You have never been told to "not act like a girl"? I'm genuinely curious, as that would be the first time I've heard that.
  - tracker1 11y ago
    "Don't be a wussy." On a serious note, not every gender stereotype is inherently bad. I don't recall ever making a threat against anyone, certainly not doxing them, and don't support the behavior. Some people tend to force a victim mentality, it doesn't mean that they aren't victims, I'm only saying it's so as there are instances where I think we've gone too far. The concept of "trigger warnings" in classrooms just seems absurd. Also, people can't take a joke anymore. Many comics won't even do shows at college campuses anymore. It's kind of a sad statement. As a kid, I was picked on more than most.. and while I feel such behavior shouldn't be encouraged, you can't stop all bad behavior in an instant, and becoming militant about it will only serve to fan the flames. Compare racial tensions in the U.S. vs the U.K. for example. There are times to speak out, and times to suck it up. --- Edit: I realize that this isn't a popular point of view, but if you disagree, reply and add to the conversation, the negative vote isn't supposed to mean you disagree with something.
    - wpietri 11y ago
      It's hard to disagree with a grab bag of vague, warmed-over right-wing talking points. Or rather, it's easy to do, but it doesn't seem worthwhile. If you'd like somebody to take you seriously enough to write a reply, take a point seriously enough to write it out clearly and give some substance to it. Data. Personal experience. Careful, clear reasoning. Anything to demonstrate that you've put some time in. As it is, I don't have any reason to think you have thought about the topic enough to be worth responding to. I'd expect the conversation to go something like this: http://chemicalsinpants.tumblr.com/post/101787704848/the-problem-with-trying-to-talk-about-womens http://chemicalsinpants.tumblr.com/post/101787704848/the-pro... It's enormously convenient for you to tell other people to suck it up, while being apparently unable to endure the discomfort of other people having opinions without whining about it online. It sounds familiar: http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-white-people-freak-out-when-theyre-called-out-about-race http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-white-people-freak-out-w...
      - tracker1 11y ago
        I've given more thought to it, than is likely deserved. Most of the time, I don't say anything about it. There have only been a handful of times where I was even motivated to express an opinion in the past. I didn't want to dig into this specific case, as it seems to relate to gamergate, which is a lot of bad acting on all sides, especially those making physical threats of violence, and doxing people. Regardless of the merits of any underlying philosophy, such behavior is indefensible. I'm not really right-wing, though do lean that way on a few specific issues. I'm very much of a pragmatic libertarian mindset. I tend to disagree with many on the left and right-wing viewpoints simultaneously. Even on the same issue. It's not just a right wing talking point to say that there's been a lot of over-reaction to a great many things, and some of the actions coming out of our universities currently is pretty backwards. People have every right to be offended by things... they do not have a right to not be offended by anything. One's privilege ends where another's rights begin. My intent was not to derail conversation into a spew of he-said/she-said or even to deteriorate into hyperbole. I was vague because in this case, there's merit. I was only mentioning that in a lot of cases there is not.
- wpietri 11y ago
  > I don't remember being "trained" I see. Do you remember being potty trained? Do you remember being trained on what things and behaviors are masculine and feminine? Because you were trained, and if you spend time around toddlers you can see them being trained on both. You were also trained in the use of tens of thousands of words. Do you remember being trained on each one of them? I sure don't. Do you remember being trained on how to avoid collision on the sidewalk? On how to use a fork? On how to use your fingers to put things in your mouth? Your memory of being trained on something isn't a good indicator of whether you were trained on it. A relatively small amount of what society trains people on is explicit, formal, and sufficient to cause episodic memory formation. Most of our learning is implicit. > And I don't remember my wife being "trained" Were you married when she was 2? Gender role training starts at least that early. Regardless, if you look you can read plenty of actual stories from adult women on how they have been trained to deal with it, and how they're still being trained in that by being punished for breaking from it. Clementine Ford has experienced exactly that kind of training, so if you wanted to learn something, you could start with her articles. Other good sources are Everyday Sexism, Project Unbreakable, or the autobiography of pretty much any pioneering woman. Madeleine Albright talks explicitly about this and how rising through the man's world of diplomacy forced her to cast off her training and adopt loud and space-demanding behaviors just to be heard.
  - csorrell 11y ago
    I find this attitude pretty condescending. A broad gender statement like "boys are trained to be loud and space demanding" isn't honest in representing all boys.
    - wpietri 11y ago
      No broad statement about X represents all X. That's what a broad statement means. Note that your reply here is basically "not all men!" A response that has been examined and found deeply lacking: https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men
      - 11y ago

scrupulusalbion 11y ago

FWIW, trolls don't uniquely focus on feminists. Their emotional buttons are just so easy to find and push; when your advocacy === your emotional button, then you are broadcasting how to make you upset. If you are easily made upset, then you are self-primed for being trolled. So, if you don't like being trolled, then either hide your emotional buttons or change what happens when someone pushes those buttons. The fact that feminists appear to be uniquely targeted by trolls is indeed the result of a societal structure, but it is not unique to feminists. Instead, feminists are just another set of humans who are louder when they get upset. People used to complain about so-called Soccer Moms being too easy to upset. If you don't like the trolls, then don't feed them. I had thought that people had learned from the vi-vs-emacs flame wars how to avoid unproductive drama. Feminists spin their wheels by getting upset at trolls, just as vi users wasted their time getting mad when emacs users were not using vi.

CM30 11y ago
Pretty much this 100%. It's not being a feminist or female specifically that makes you a target, it's being seen to respond poorly to attacks and trolling. If it's not feminists, then its furries, or otherkin, or bronies, or fanboys, or whoever else is seen as an easy target that responds poorly to criticism. Ignore trolls, and they'll (eventually) ignore you. Keep responding and baiting them, and you're toast. Same thing goes if you run a community. Don't want trolls? Ban and move on. Don't turn it into a big dramatic deal and 'war on trolls'.
- scrupulusalbion 11y ago
  >Ban and move on. This might have mixed results. Some trolls see getting banned as proof of successful trolling, whereupon trolling via another account might still be an option. I think the users are the key to making trolls go away, because it is a social issue and not a mechanical issue. Put another way: you can't program away trolling, despite how fun XKCD's idea [0] might be to implement. [0] https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/

nickpsecurity 11y ago

Interesting that this question was asked in relation to GamerGate. When I researched that, the major media was only reporting the feminists' side of things and the claims of abuse. It was really hard to cut through the noise to figure out what the core dispute was. By the time I found a structured presentation of counterpoints... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZY6D2hFdo&app=desktop https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZY6D2hFdo&app=desktop ...they suggested it was that a few women disrespected their market, trolled millions of people (including women gamers), made claims of abuse with feminist ideology, violated their own rules for money in design of their own games, and were possibly using the claims to get attention to their games. Never heard any of that in original reporting on major sites and that's why I was originally confused about why so much hate came their way. Not saying this is true of anything referenced in the above article. Just telling readers to be aware that there's at least two trends going on: 1. People, including & especially women, being harassed online with any number of bogus justifications covering up bullying. It's a larger problem & the justification (eg feminism) rarely is the real issue. 2. A tiny portion of women, who may or may not represent most feminists, getting slammed online for using bullying and media manipulation to push their politics or products. I say media manipulation because I almost never see major media report calling it out even when it's obvious. Reporting is often one-sided, possibly due to risk of losing business if their image is seen as discriminating against women. I think one can argue against specific women's claims without hating on women in general. So, we have two problems. One gets all the attention. Each time, the recipient of that abuse spins it as them being in a minority, having certain attributes, etc as evidence there's a large scale attack on those things. Reality is human nature is at work with any group competing with others and lack of accountability letting some be abusive. Certainly prejudices in there to combat but it really boils down to abusive people enabled by the Internet. Happens offline, too, as anyone who went to school, a bar, a football game... anything... should know. Other problem we should watch out for and call out when we see it. That problem is not limited to feminist: any members of a group that can make itself look the underdog or target of abuse can use that as leverage in promoting politics or themselves. This happens across the board. Relevant to this thread, that many feminists do it certainly contributes to attacks on those individuals and might contribute to attacks on others posting similar idea. The troll throws them all in one mental category and attacks at the first sign of the same ideology in a new person. So, that's my two cents on the problem.

mizchief2 11y ago

Are we talking about trolls as generally known on the internet or the definition feminists use which is anyone who disagrees with them or points out factual incorrectness?