4 ms·

I'm only one, but as a woman - a woman in tech - I do not put my identity out in public. If I can't use a pseudonym I don't use a service or even RSVP to an ev

I'm only one, but as a woman - a woman in tech - I do not put my identity out in public. If I can't use a pseudonym I don't use a service or even RSVP to an event. Many tech events now require a Facebook RSVP; I just delete those invitations and don't attend. I've had the creepy stalker thing happen to me and now anything requiring my legal name is a service/event/circle/platform I don't (and can't due to real safety concerns) use.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
danellis 15y ago
I'm sorry for the cliched phrasing, but doesn't that mean the creepy stalkers have won?
- zacharycohn 15y ago
  Not if they're not stalking her..
- bitcrunch 15y ago
  That was my initial feeling, and I continued to do what I did. After several years of it now, I'm tired. I'm tired of having someone at my door, showing up where I am, joining groups and communities I'm in, and friending my co-workers and vendors, sending notes to my employers, and so on. They're doing nothing illegal these days (with one exception about four months ago), but when I surface it's always causing just one more thing to deal with. Once I decided to actually use my privacy, it was refreshing. Aaaaah, the calm. Aaaah, the amount of freedom I felt going that first stretch of months without incidents. Also, after dealing with this for just over four years it's pretty tiring to always be told that I'm the one who is doing something wrong. I wasn't necessarily a "privacy advocate" before, but understand that viewpoint more and more. It's kind of frustrating dealing with your vendor at Google who sends you a note saying "hey, I can't find you on g+ - let's use hangout" and saying something (nicely) like "yeah, I'm not on g+" and then leaving it at that. Admittedly, I get somewhat cranky at all the questioning about my choices and my behavior and it's all I can do not to respond "because g+ use is completely optional and no one is forcing me to use it, according to Eric Schmidt". I give up the interaction with my friends, vendors, co-workers and potential friends, vendors, co-workers, etc. in return for lack of harassment and stalking. I'm not super-happy about it and it's not a perfect solution but don't feel I should have to justify it. Yet I did once again (* /em headdesk*).
  - BadassFractal 15y ago
    If you ever get around it, you should share your stories and takeaways with the rest of the community. I've never realized that women in tech had to deal with all these issues on a daily basis. Raising awareness can only be good, right?
    - bitcrunch 15y ago
      I'm unsure how to take your phrasing "never realized that women in tech had to deal with all these issues on a daily basis." On any other board I would assume that phrase to be argumentative and patronizing, but HN people always seem to be earnest and helpful, so I will take it on face value. Many people have that kind of issue. Most of them are women. Women exist in tech. :) It's just more frustrating and sort of ironic when you're the one working on the products. Not sure there's anything I can add that danah boyd hasn't covered on her many privacy presentations or that wasn't already "done to death" during the past "women in tech" arguments on Techcrunch, HN, etc. If there's something new or revealing that I can think of I'll share it, though! ETA: Also, I didn't bring it up during the g+ name controversy on HN because I honestly couldn't add anything new. The pros and cons of the policy are out there for everyone to read. I watched it go on and decided what was right for me, which is to not engage in that medium due to the way it works and the intentions (that is, that g+ is an "identity service").
      - BadassFractal 15y ago
        I apologize if my reply sounded patronizing, I'm notorious for getting the wrong tone across the Internet. What I had found interesting about your post was the level of detail of what you described. This clearly shows my ignorance of the subject. I was aware of the G+ pseudonym issue, but I imagined that the harassment was limited to your personal information being looked up on the Internet and certain people sending creepy / unwarranted messages to you online. Again, I must have been very naive about this, but I didn't realize that women in tech with any level of Internet exposure had to continuously deal with stalkers in real life, following you home, to meetups, to your workplace and so on.. It's quite awful, borderline terrifying. I thought the harassment was mostly verbal and impersonal, still unacceptable obviously, but at least not nearly as dangerous as what you described.
- niels_olson 15y ago
  But that's not her fault, is it. That's a societal issue. If you don't like it, work to fix it.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

danellis 15y ago

I'm sorry for the cliched phrasing, but doesn't that mean the creepy stalkers have won?

zacharycohn 15y ago
Not if they're not stalking her..
bitcrunch 15y ago
That was my initial feeling, and I continued to do what I did. After several years of it now, I'm tired. I'm tired of having someone at my door, showing up where I am, joining groups and communities I'm in, and friending my co-workers and vendors, sending notes to my employers, and so on. They're doing nothing illegal these days (with one exception about four months ago), but when I surface it's always causing just one more thing to deal with. Once I decided to actually use my privacy, it was refreshing. Aaaaah, the calm. Aaaah, the amount of freedom I felt going that first stretch of months without incidents. Also, after dealing with this for just over four years it's pretty tiring to always be told that I'm the one who is doing something wrong. I wasn't necessarily a "privacy advocate" before, but understand that viewpoint more and more. It's kind of frustrating dealing with your vendor at Google who sends you a note saying "hey, I can't find you on g+ - let's use hangout" and saying something (nicely) like "yeah, I'm not on g+" and then leaving it at that. Admittedly, I get somewhat cranky at all the questioning about my choices and my behavior and it's all I can do not to respond "because g+ use is completely optional and no one is forcing me to use it, according to Eric Schmidt". I give up the interaction with my friends, vendors, co-workers and potential friends, vendors, co-workers, etc. in return for lack of harassment and stalking. I'm not super-happy about it and it's not a perfect solution but don't feel I should have to justify it. Yet I did once again (* /em headdesk*).
- BadassFractal 15y ago
  If you ever get around it, you should share your stories and takeaways with the rest of the community. I've never realized that women in tech had to deal with all these issues on a daily basis. Raising awareness can only be good, right?
  - bitcrunch 15y ago
    I'm unsure how to take your phrasing "never realized that women in tech had to deal with all these issues on a daily basis." On any other board I would assume that phrase to be argumentative and patronizing, but HN people always seem to be earnest and helpful, so I will take it on face value. Many people have that kind of issue. Most of them are women. Women exist in tech. :) It's just more frustrating and sort of ironic when you're the one working on the products. Not sure there's anything I can add that danah boyd hasn't covered on her many privacy presentations or that wasn't already "done to death" during the past "women in tech" arguments on Techcrunch, HN, etc. If there's something new or revealing that I can think of I'll share it, though! ETA: Also, I didn't bring it up during the g+ name controversy on HN because I honestly couldn't add anything new. The pros and cons of the policy are out there for everyone to read. I watched it go on and decided what was right for me, which is to not engage in that medium due to the way it works and the intentions (that is, that g+ is an "identity service").
    - BadassFractal 15y ago
      I apologize if my reply sounded patronizing, I'm notorious for getting the wrong tone across the Internet. What I had found interesting about your post was the level of detail of what you described. This clearly shows my ignorance of the subject. I was aware of the G+ pseudonym issue, but I imagined that the harassment was limited to your personal information being looked up on the Internet and certain people sending creepy / unwarranted messages to you online. Again, I must have been very naive about this, but I didn't realize that women in tech with any level of Internet exposure had to continuously deal with stalkers in real life, following you home, to meetups, to your workplace and so on.. It's quite awful, borderline terrifying. I thought the harassment was mostly verbal and impersonal, still unacceptable obviously, but at least not nearly as dangerous as what you described.
niels_olson 15y ago
But that's not her fault, is it. That's a societal issue. If you don't like it, work to fix it.