No, by refusing to allow IL to reframe the debate in absurd terms he’s sticking to the thread topic.
This is the kind of harassment that women routinely deal with on the Internet. The true origins of GamerGate: https://storify.com/davidsgallant/the-origins-of-gamergate
Deep, seething hatred of women, deliberately masqueraded as a fight for “ethics” because the misogynists who started it knew that a deliberate campaign of misogyny wouldn’t fly.
Now go and try to tell me with a straight face that “men get it too” in the exact same way, requiring the same sorts of solutions that women need to deal with.
Well it does clearly show how 4chan is creating and coordinating most of this Gamersgate drama.
4chan is certainly an amazing thing that is allowed to persist in the modern age - the (mostly) unregulated forum. That this is what you end up with when you have an unregulated forum is the distressing thing. Of course most of the people in 4chan are exactly of the shithead age bracket; young college age males with more time than propriety, and able to do and see “bad” things anonymously on the net.
I’m trying to understand what you just wrote… do you mean that there is no burden of proof when you make these accusations? That you do not need to provide credible evidence to support your claims?
If you’re going to argue there’s a problem, you need to provide more than just anecdotal evidence. Again, all I ask for is substantive evidence. And as I said before, I think the gendered distinction is one without meaning. Insults are often predicated on gender.
And good data is critical to the discussion. How can you propose a reform without understanding the problem in the first place? Take the wage gap for example, we’re launching a crusade against pay disparity when wages are actually quite close. If you compare two largely identical resumes, one male one female, the difference is just 2% on average. The gap has nothing to do with predatory HR departments underpaying women. That whole idea is rather silly actually, more than 72% of human resource employees are women. Are they really pulling a fast one on each other? There is of course the 2%, economists would argue that it’s largely a question of bargaining. Men are more willing to negotiate their salary packages. This is why the Fair Pay Act makes so little sense, and why I’m hesitant on this issue. I want to see evidence before we proceed.
What the actual fuck.
This is so boring. Do you have an argument?
If you’re going to argue there’s a problem, you need to provide more than just anecdotal evidence. Again, all I ask for is substantive evidence. And as I said before, I think the gendered distinction is one without meaning. Insults are often predicated on gender.
There are two responses to this. One is that women online certainly feel like they’re being harassed online - so you have address and take seriously their concerns, and that you’re implying the evidence presented demonstrating the harassment of women in social media isn’t convincing or true, and second that the topic here is specifically about the harassment of women in online communities, which is certainly a valid division even if or and harassment of men also happens as well, and even if the reasons men are harassed are or are not from the same cause. Even if you think it an arbitrary division it is a valid one. And most of all it seems one that women have made themselves, by and large, and it’s worth understanding their perspective and addressing their concerns on their terms rather than your terms.
You’re going to need to provide more than anecdotal evidence as to how this discussion is negatively impacting your life. I need hard data, credible evidence if you will, otherwise your discomfort seems feigned and imaginary.
-Todd
From your study:
Demos analysed two million messages received by 65 individuals with large Twitter followings, including Piers Morgan, Ricky Gervais and Susanna Reid.
So, to be more accurate, male celebrities are more likely to be the target of Twitter abuse than female celebrities.
I don’t think you can generalize these results to what the rest of the population experiences. Particularly because of findings like this:
The study found that 8.7% of tweets received by Piers Morgan were offensive, compared to just 2.6% of tweets to Ricky Gervais. The abusive tweets sent to One Direction’s Niall Horan were so numerous they had to be excluded from the study.
Not all social problems or injustices are easily identified by hard statistical data. Sometimes a preponderance of anecdotal evidence or testimony is adequate to begin the discussion. Think about trying to prove a Sundown Town was racist at one point. Social media is a new frontier in our society and the discussion is just beginning; we are only at the stage of awareness. Hard data may emerge at some point. Until then many of us are willing to listen, reflect, and consider our own actions out of a sense of decency. You have the right to claim that there is no problem until irrefutable evidence is presented, but I liken that to sticking your fingers in your ears and humming out loud.
-Todd
They used me as bait for several months while he continued calling and ramping up threats. He tried to break in multiple times, and the reason the police used me as bait was my guard dog. She kept him out. Then he killed the dog. The police called it off, and I moved in a hurry under protection. My family lived local to the university. So I heard they finally got him, but only after after he killed the next woman.
This seems crazytown.
I mean, if they were gonna “use you as bait”, you’d think they’d actually monitor your house and then catch him when he fucking broke in and killed your dog.
Usually “bait” implies some kind of trap.
Busbeq, Lemon: You dont’ need to ask for any evidence or proof on this issue. Go make friends with a woman or get a girlfriend. Ask her if she’s ever been harrassed or stalked in the past. It’s extremely common. I’d say alwmost every woman in the world has faced this abuse at some point.
If you don’t beleive it, you’re living in some little bubble with no meaningful interactions with women, sorry to say.
Want to prove me wrong? Go ask the women you know about this issue. I’m going to assume neither of you know any.
Take it from someone who has known a LOT of women. This issue is very real and data would be very easy to come by if you did a random poll of women. I invite you to do one anecdotally. Just see what you find.
I’m sure there are existing studies out there but finding them would be like looking for global warming studies to prove global warming is real. There is no point.
The claim IL made and that peterb ‘responded’ to was about the gendered wage gap adjusted for hours worked. Hopefully we can agree that you can have a fact-based debate about that topic, and come to an answer based on evidence instead of supposition and whatever intuitively makes you feel superior to the other people in the conversation.
Obviously they did. He noticed the marked cars and from his messages seemed to greatly enjoy the game of cat and mouse that resulted. He manged to kill the dog OUTSIDE the house, during a day. The police and the dog did keep me alive (Hi! I’m typing this 30 years later.). When that happened a neighbor chased him in his car, after telling me and I’m told police responded within a few minutes (in a rural area), obviously close, but I was on my way to the vet with the dog ASAP. It was an incredible amount of manpower for a small rural police to provide over several months. Now, if you don’t mind, I’m done sharing on this topic. I did a fair job of not letting it rule my life then, and certainly won’t let it now.
ElGuapo - But of course people do do metastudies of AGCC data to see how bad the problem is.
This clip from the Daily Show is my favorite that succinctly describes your post:
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/z2b627/the-fault-in-our-schools (whole thing is good, but especially starting @ 2:19)
Well, I’m doubtful on your claim men underreport versus women. I want to see data on that before I support that assertion, like you do. Can you point to it? All I know is that there’s a lot of underreporting on sexual assaults on women, so your assertion that they tend to appeal to authority feels unproven, really. Honestly that whole paragraph feels full of cliches.
And the twitter study is ignoring context. I believe the difference between aggressive language, abuse and harrassment (different things!) is in part a matter of context, which the study ignores.
But even taking away context… The study shows men use more aggressive and potentially abusive language, and that they use it more against men than women. It does not show how many interactions men have with men vs. how many they have with women, since it does not measure interactions without abusive language (one of the possible caveats: if a man interacts 4 times more with men but only shows abusive language twice as often to men respect to women, the he’s still, on average, using it more often towards women when compared to the whole body of his interactions. There’re a lot of other datapoints missing -I can have missed something, didn’t read the whole thing- that actually makes it quite unable to say that abuse and harrassment online against women is not gendered).
Actually, following the numbers we got in the excerpt, and even ignoring the weighting against non abusive interactions -for we don’t have data-, men sent 75% of abusive messages, but only received 66% of them. That means that a man is quite more likely to abuse women than a woman is to abuse men, according to that study. That is, it shows any gender tends to abuse it’s own gender more, but in the case of men, not so exclusively. Does it show that disparity is neccessarily misogynistic abuse and harrassment? No it doesn’t, but it doesn’t show the contrary, and actually makes you think. It does shows women are vastly more likely to receive abuse from the opposite sex than men.
It does show how genders interact to an extent, but it doesn’t go into the meaning of those interactions (because it’s lacking meaningful data).
Now, the headlines made it look like the study was saying something else (so they got clicks), but it’s not the case…
27% of internet users have been called offensive names
22% have had someone try to purposefully embarrass them
8% have been physically threatened
8% have been stalked
7% have been harassed for a sustained period
6% have been sexually harassed
Theres a lot of good data in there, especially the section on men and women ages 18-24. They report much higher levels of abuse. Overall, men and women were equally like to receive what was termed as severe harassment although the subtype varied. Women were more likely to be sexually harassed for example, while men more likely to receive physical threats. Women as a whole are more likely to label their experiences upsetting and that appears to color their perceptions of subsequent incidents as well. It appears men on the other hand, as you might expect, shrug off abuse more readily.
Generally the survey is good news though. Most harassment is largely trivial and recipients generally ignore it.
Nope. The type that is more prevalent between each sex varies, but the study shows that indeed the chance of receiving severe harassment is indeed very different between men and women.
From that study:
Young women, those 18-24, experience certain severe types of harassment at disproportionately high levels: 26% of these young women have been stalked online, and 25% were the target of online sexual harassment. In addition, they do not escape the heightened rates of physical threats and sustained harassment common to their male peers and young people in general.
I say a 25% is not a trivial number. Plus the article seems to clearly state harassment against women seems to be more severe (if slightly less frequente) than against men.
According to the data, severe harassment against men is 1 to 3% higher when it’s higher against men! while the kind of harassment that are more frequent against woman show a 2 to 19% gap.
Basically, this graph from the study. Of the four more severe (and less frequent) forms of harassment, only physical threats is more prevalent against men, and since the amount of threats is equal to the amount of stalking (for example) there’s a noticeable gender difference.
The study does shows harassment is not the main form of online interaction, thank god for that, but that’s not the point. If it where few of us would remain online.
The survey asks overlapping questions.
For example, an episode of stalking could also be classified as sustained harassment.
If I have an issue with the report it’s that. They do address the overall rates, but only in passing and it’s buried in the middle of page six.
They should have done a better job of presenting that. It would also be useful to see the overall incident rate of men and women ages 18-24. As it stands we know men and women are equally likely to receive abuse, is that also true of the young adult demographic?
The report doesn’t address the gender of the abusers either, which is unfortunate. That would have been interesting to explore at least.
As a sidebar, Pew did a poll of public sentiments in Ukraine last year - asking a number of questions about identity and politics. It was interesting and timely material, but the survey had one issue. The lumped several Central Ukrainian oblasts in with the East. That made it very difficult to actually tease out what Easterners thought of the revolt.
Breaking down harassment into distinct subtypes, as Pew did here, can be useful - but it can also muddy the picture.