5 ms·

In my experience playing Halo (maybe it was Halo 2) 15 or so years ago was that there's a subset of teenagers who shit talk for the sake of it and they'll use w

In my experience playing Halo (maybe it was Halo 2) 15 or so years ago was that there's a subset of teenagers who shit talk for the sake of it and they'll use whatever language is most likely to offend. Sex (and race) didn't have much to due with it other than to expand the offensive word bank. That being said, the analysis done in the paper is very intriguing.

ubernostrum 9y ago
If you believe there's not a gendered component, and that it's just generic bullying by some "subset" of "teenagers", then I invite you to just read the replies on Twitter to women who speak out about, say, diversity in tech. Or start moderating a forum. I mod a couple of subreddits, and from that experience it is literally impossible for me to believe that you are correct.
- wldcordeiro 9y ago
  They were talking about their experience 15 years ago. Maybe that's what they meant and not Twitter replies in 2017.
- nitwit005 9y ago
  Occasionally you'll see online harassment shift once they have something they perceive as more damaging to use. Example I saw in the past was all the harassment shifted to mockery about dead child after son died. I'm afraid that, at least some of the time, people are just trying to be as hurtful as possible. The sexism and rape comments are often just what they think is most hurtful.
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    Again, it's not an "everybody gets bullied, it's just a choice of what words". It's a "women definitely and measurably get targeted more often, and subjected to far harsher treatment, than men". If you can't work this out from publicly-available evidence on social media, I'm not really sure what to say to you.
    - belorn 9y ago
      This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. Just concluding that "I think X is obvious and if you disagree then we have nothing further to discuss" will just result lose-lose situation for everyone. There has been games built on the idea of trolling. I have personally been in a guild where the distinction between "just a choice of what words" and "they really mean it" resulted in a person being expelled from the group. The concept is fairly well established, but the effect isn't. This article gives additional data but the interpretation is up for discussion. For example, do the data say that female players are treated worse by poor performing males, or do poor performing males act more submissive towards high performing males? The article do take a very biological view of the problem, so maybe we should compare the findings with studies done in nature on how animal use displaced aggression. About 80% of aggression in Baboons are are displaced aggression, normally done by a high ranking male having a setback and then go and attacking a low ranking male as form of stress management. If I recall right, the lowest ranking males don't have anyone else to displace the aggression so go after low ranking females instead.
      - ubernostrum 9y ago
        This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. No, the reason why we can't have civil discussions is mostly that the same sorts of people who commit disgusting gendered harassment also feel a need to deny that they do so (and that anyone else does so), and attempt to nit-pick apart anyone who asserts a patently obvious fact about our society. There's not really room for debate on "is gendered harassment of women, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying, a real thing that exists".
        belorn 9y ago
        You will then continue to see articles like this getting flagged. Either one accept that other people may have a different views, or civil discussions breaks down and you get a polarized society such as current political climate. Also, don't accuse people of committing gendered harassment with nothing to support it. This is exactly the 7th circle of hell comments that sctb mentions above. Just because some disagree with you it don't mean they are racist, sexist, or spawn of Satan. Name calling is just an other form of harassment. Just because homophobic comments are mostly directed at male players don't make homophobia a "gendered harassment of men, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying". People are allowed to a different view if something is a gendered harassment of women, gendered harassment of men, and what the cause of it. The use of facts and supportive statements is how civil discussion handles it.

ubernostrum 9y ago

If you believe there's not a gendered component, and that it's just generic bullying by some "subset" of "teenagers", then I invite you to just read the replies on Twitter to women who speak out about, say, diversity in tech. Or start moderating a forum. I mod a couple of subreddits, and from that experience it is literally impossible for me to believe that you are correct.

wldcordeiro 9y ago
They were talking about their experience 15 years ago. Maybe that's what they meant and not Twitter replies in 2017.
nitwit005 9y ago
Occasionally you'll see online harassment shift once they have something they perceive as more damaging to use. Example I saw in the past was all the harassment shifted to mockery about dead child after son died. I'm afraid that, at least some of the time, people are just trying to be as hurtful as possible. The sexism and rape comments are often just what they think is most hurtful.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Again, it's not an "everybody gets bullied, it's just a choice of what words". It's a "women definitely and measurably get targeted more often, and subjected to far harsher treatment, than men". If you can't work this out from publicly-available evidence on social media, I'm not really sure what to say to you.
  - belorn 9y ago
    This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. Just concluding that "I think X is obvious and if you disagree then we have nothing further to discuss" will just result lose-lose situation for everyone. There has been games built on the idea of trolling. I have personally been in a guild where the distinction between "just a choice of what words" and "they really mean it" resulted in a person being expelled from the group. The concept is fairly well established, but the effect isn't. This article gives additional data but the interpretation is up for discussion. For example, do the data say that female players are treated worse by poor performing males, or do poor performing males act more submissive towards high performing males? The article do take a very biological view of the problem, so maybe we should compare the findings with studies done in nature on how animal use displaced aggression. About 80% of aggression in Baboons are are displaced aggression, normally done by a high ranking male having a setback and then go and attacking a low ranking male as form of stress management. If I recall right, the lowest ranking males don't have anyone else to displace the aggression so go after low ranking females instead.
    - ubernostrum 9y ago
      This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. No, the reason why we can't have civil discussions is mostly that the same sorts of people who commit disgusting gendered harassment also feel a need to deny that they do so (and that anyone else does so), and attempt to nit-pick apart anyone who asserts a patently obvious fact about our society. There's not really room for debate on "is gendered harassment of women, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying, a real thing that exists".
      - belorn 9y ago
        You will then continue to see articles like this getting flagged. Either one accept that other people may have a different views, or civil discussions breaks down and you get a polarized society such as current political climate. Also, don't accuse people of committing gendered harassment with nothing to support it. This is exactly the 7th circle of hell comments that sctb mentions above. Just because some disagree with you it don't mean they are racist, sexist, or spawn of Satan. Name calling is just an other form of harassment. Just because homophobic comments are mostly directed at male players don't make homophobia a "gendered harassment of men, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying". People are allowed to a different view if something is a gendered harassment of women, gendered harassment of men, and what the cause of it. The use of facts and supportive statements is how civil discussion handles it.