"A woman's opinion is the miniskirt of the internet"

[HedleyLamarr]

I posted this in Feminism [brave emoticon], and someone has suggested putting it in AIBU.

So, I was sent a link to this article in the Independent. Your thoughts/ideas are much appreciated .

But we don't know what the threat would have been were she a male poster. it may have remained a rape threat, but directed at female relatives, or it may have stayed the same. i suspect the former. either would have been traumatic but the target changes.

Why do you suspect the former, Lucy? From what I have seen of the hate mail aimed at men, very little of it is rape threats aimed at female relatives.

The article starts 'You come to expect it as a woman writer' and lists 'vitriol, insults and death threats'. It then moves onto sexual threats.

Correct. as a writer of any colour/sex/religion/planet you must expect 'vitriol, insults and death threats' and then add in your particular soft spot that people will go for. Classic bit of sleight of hand that :)

But in general, men do hold the majority of power on the internet. but i don't wish to rely on men to defend me.

Actually the Internet is one of the few really good things that is pretty equal wrt to access and use, there are as many women on as men and the Internet really doesn't give a fig for gender, race, species etc. I have loved it from its beginning for that very reason, so seeing people like LP write proviocative, outrageous stuff and then scuttle back to the safe skirts of Ma Indy and wail just irritates me, especially when I am then supposed to then defend her cause.

I'm just glad to see women speaking up and speaking out about it. It has to stop and everyone needs to play a part in that.

How is it going to stop? Who will stop a global open medium? Why should journalists (and anyone with a platform) be protected from the outrage they provoke?

noblegiraffe (good name, giraffes ARE noble) I don't know if Lucy would agree but addressing your point: If LP was male it would be less likely for (now) him to receive sexually abusive or sexually violent threats against him personally because:

(1) I think it comes back to sexually abusive or violent threats to a man being far less common because they just don't hold the same connotations in the context of the level of rape or sexual violence men suffer at the hands of women or other men.

Hence the need for Duncan Bannaytne's detractors having to threaten to rape his daughter as a way of threatening him, as opposed to threatening to rape him.

(2) I also think very few men who use rape as a threat against women are going to want to threaten another man with rape or sexual violence because they would think it was homosexual of them and would probably want to distance themselves from being considered gay.

So I think Lucy was saying we don't know what abuse a male version of LP would have received, but IF it had been a rape threat it would have been more likely to be directed towards a close female to LP as opposed to LP themselves.

I don't like being called a man-hater for example so I said on here and hope I won't be called one again

But you will be, by someone on MN, next time you enter into some hotly controversial arena, sure as eggs is eggs. On MN. And MN is heavily moderated, if it was the Web it would be much stronger.

No one is arguing women are not getting online abuse, but others (and I think its mainly women who have been on the Web awhile) are just telling you everyone gets it. Including white males. Its just the flavour that differs.

And LP knows all that and still goes out there and lights fires, so IMHO then wailing about it is a bit - dare I say it - disingenuous.....

whatmeworry So do you think LP is inviting specifically sexual abuse/threats or do you think she is just inviting abuse?

I get your point about an abuser picking the thing that is immutable about the poster they want to abuse (e.g. female/male/black/white) but I am not clear whether your position is that if LP as a woman expresses certain views she should expect to receive abuse for being a woman? Is that why she is disingenuous - that she should have expected to be abused for being a woman as opposed for the views she holds?

I was going to come back to that, but yes. partypooperz is right. that's why i suspect the former.

Lenin, i think all the feminists have had the man hating label thrown at them, either by trolls or those who are missing points we're trying to make. it's kinda disheartening, because it prevents some possibly interesting discussions from developing.

I'd rather see an article about how the police don't take this type of threat more seriously and clamping down on it and how the press encourage it with the tone and content of their articles. But still.

I just think she's a poor journalist tbh, who doesn't actually get to the heart of the issue and what makes people do this and how we can stop it. Instead the focus is purely playing on being the victim.

She IS a victim though, not the only one, but a victim of a particular nasty flavour of abuse, I don't think she's wrong in highlighting this particular problem, even if some think the scope is too narrow.

I don't think the author is 'wailing' or 'scuttling back to the safe skirts' of anyone. And she is a victim of hate speech, who is quite rightly saying that this is wrong. I just don't understand why some posters are suggesting she shouldn't write what she does, or that she should put up with it, instead of condemning the respondents who have used misogynist abuse in an attempt to belittle what she has to say.

Do you really think this, or is your anti-feminism just blinkering you to the difference between right and wrong?

fwiw it's worth I used to contribute on a politics forum, under my initial nickname I got very patronising comments when I made throwaway non serious comments and unpleasant sex based ones when I argued a serious political point. When I changed my nn to something gender neutral, I was engaged with more - then torn to shreds of course, but the insults were about my lack of intellect rather than my lack of penis. My views or the expression of them hadn't changed.

to me the point of the article above is that being a woman is seen as a weak spot which nasty little inadequates will exploit, whereas being a man is the standard, and you need a different stick to beat them with (being ginger or mc will do in a pinch)

anti-feminist?

And none of the other people I know are victims cos they don't get abuse deemed to be on the same level as rape by feminists.

Yes lets just completely miss the point about what the problem is...

sigh.

you really aren't getting it.

The writer is more then ten years behind this subject.

Thus I don't think think this is a "rape" issue per se, I think its a "slag off someone you disagree with with every thing you can throw at them" issue. I also think she is deliberately aiming it to get a shocked response from people who are not that familiar with the Internet and its nature. Anyone who has ever seen an Alt.Net flame war is probably going "So?"

This is where I'm coming from.

I think its tabloid level quality journalism from a woman who is more interested in her own voice than looking at the subject in any more depth.

But still. I'm anti-feminist... not anti-inability to look further than my own little bubble and mailbox.

Quietly, you seem to be very "anti" feminism e.g. you don't really like feminism etc, and this is what was referenced.

What is this "abuse" that has been mentioned that is not "deemed to be on the same level as rape" by feminists? You fat cockney bastard?

I don't understand why saying that one thing has happened to you personally is an implication that other things that have happened to others are not serious or at the same level. It is a reflection on a personal experience, it shouldn't have to reference all the other potential experiences humans may have, even in similar contexts.

Sorry "I don't understand why saying that one thing that has happened to you personally has been upsetting or serious is an implication that other things that have happened to others are not serious or at the same level".

whatmeworry So do you think LP is inviting specifically sexual abuse/threats or do you think she is just inviting abuse?

If you put an opinion up on a public forum on the Internet, someone will pick you up on it - that's a given. If you are deliberately confrontational you will get more comeback, plus it will be more vitriolic. The vitriol will seek to explot your perceived weakness (sex, race etc). That is what I think is happening here.

I think LP is being disingenuous as she must know the score, but has chosen to wail about it in the Indy, where less Internet savvy people will look at it and get all upset without understanding how the Internet works. I think anyone who has seen an internet flame war is looking at that and going "So?".

What is LP writing about that attracts so much anger and hate? - I've only read her in The New Statesman and saw nothing outrageous there ( haven't read her for a while I must admit ) what is she saying these days?
I stopped following her on twitter because she was a bit annoying and slightly boring - if she'd been mega controversial I'd still be following her.

As several posters keep pointing out, condemning the hate speech referenced on this thread and directed at this author, does not equate to minimising hate speech directed at other groups, or denying that people in those groups are victims too.

Also despite the various inferences on this thread about posters' lack of internet awareness, I imagine that like me, many posters have been using it since its inception and are very well versed in the medium. That doesn't mean we shouldn't object to what happens on that medium, or that people who condemn hate speech 'live in a bubble',(what ever that means).

Wail? Why is it wailing??

I have seen many Internet flame wars and frankly, some of what has come out in response to this article has been pretty explicit and crossing boundaries.

Surely the point is that being a woman is seen as a weakness and rape as a good way of highlighting that? Isn't that the issue? Do you consider all the other women writers who have written about this since this came out are also "wailing"?

Ok so LP has been deliberately confrontational (i.e. provocative) and has therefore invited the abuse and because she is a woman she must have realised she would receive specifically sexual abuse/threats to rape for expressing political opinions? Is that the score? Speak as a woman in a confrontational manner and expect to be abused for being a woman as opposed to holding a particular opinion? (and the same goes for men/any colour/race/religion/special needs)

In trying to dig up the campaign posters catgirl was convinced didn't exist I wandered into some rather nasty territory

www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/

and was trying to find a site run by a woman/women that directed the same level of hate and wish for violence/sexual aggression on men but am struggling. I did post on another thread to separate it out from this debate but it has really shocked me to the core as to the level of hatred on this site. Has anyone on this thread seen the same level of hatred against men by women on a 'women only' site?

Gosh this thread is depressing. Women shut your 'suckholes' or we'll shut them for you. And what's more if you're expressing a controversial view (which opinion isn't controversial to someone?) expect to be silenced and if you dare to 'wail' complain expect more of the same until you are silent.