"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 .

"The vitriol will seek to explot your perceived weakness (sex, race etc)."

I am being dense I think and not getting the point.

Surely, by typing these very words, you're admitting it's a feminist issue. Why is a woman's sex a weakness to be exploited?

Oh I see Lucy, (and PartyP) I misread your comment, you think it is more likely that the abuser would threaten to rape the female relative of a male writer than he is likely to threaten to rape the male writer himself. I expect that is true.

What I was saying is that it is possible that if the person who was writing the article was male, the abuser would still take issue. He probably wouldn't threaten rape, because that is not the standard abuse thrown at a man. It is possible he would have threatened violence instead and I think that would be more likely than switching the threat to a female relative. I don't think that 'rape threat' is the only abuse option.

It isn't, but it is a feminist issue when it is.

"Yes, well I suppose that comes down to the skill of the interpretation or the 'twisting', doesn't it? Politicians do that, they take a statement, add a bit, take a bit away, put a spin on it and in the end it doesn't resemble anything that was said."

And, later in the very same post...

"I really wonder if that's why men seemingly rule the world... they don't get caught up in the pointless catfights?"

Which is it?! You can't have it both ways! Unless you're saying only women politicians (all few of them) spin....

This is true, sexual assault threats aren't the only threats. sorry about my vagueness this afternoon- stuck to phone. i was trying to stay in the context of the threat portrayed in the article. a sexual assault is different to other forms of assault, so i didn't want to muddy the waters where that's concerned. i find a threat of sexual assault and a threat of common assault very different. there's always murder threats as well, but again, they don't feel comparable. is that clear? sorry if it's not

working, abuse on the internet covers so many issues. Sexist, racist, anti-semetic, homphobic, you name it, people receive abuse.

People are all kinds of nasty on the internet. Focusing on one small area of it and saying 'hey, this is dreadful, how can we stop this' would be akin to trying to stop a river with a cork.

I know, but this was an opinion piece from one perspective. How terribly boring journalism would be if it had to cover all an gles, all the time. It is not a Grand Statement on the Value of Male Victims, it is an opinion piece. Misogyny is alive and kicking, just as many other kinds of nastiness, but this article wasn't about everything that could go wrong on the internet ever. I think its important to have this perspective.

i find a threat of sexual assault and a threat of common assault very different. there's always murder threats as well, but again, they don't feel comparable. is that clear?

That's the problem, you can't say that a threat of sexual assault is worse than common assault or a death threat because it would be to you. That is personal to you and to someone else, it could be different again. It's what hits home, and for many women, that would probably be rape. But for someone else a rape threat might wash over them but 'you are a loser with no friends and everyone hates you' might hit the spot, where others would shrug that off.

but surely if some effort was put into solving this problem then that could be used to help stop other types of abuse. It would at least be a start.

I wasn't saying one was worse. i said i didn't feel they were comparable. the nature of the threat is different, hence why someone may feel unaffected by one type of threat, yet very affected by another.

Working, I know it was an opinion piece, and I have to say I am really cross at the author for making such a hash of it.

giyadas - how could you tackle sexual threats made to women on the internet while ignoring death threats to men? Surely the issue is merely one of abuse on the internet and doesn't need breaking down into separate campaigns. Let's rid the internet of misogynists then get to work on the homophobes?

what about the other authors that have been linked though? Have none of them written an article good enough?

giyadas, I already said further up the thread that one of the other pieces would have been much better as an OP. It is a shame that they were not and I suspect the discussion would have been much calmer if they had.

xkcd's take on it

I agree, noble. all abuse should be tackled. it's as i said a few pages back. we need unity. that means we tackle ALL hate speech.

noble one way is for each group that is being abused for being what it is (muslim/christian/women) to be public about the abuse they are receiving. Did you read The New Statesman article I think SGM linked to? There were other women there talking about the abuse they had received and having to wade through inboxes of bile every day because they chose to blog/write/be public in some way about their beliefs.

I also think that the Protection from Harassment Act and the Malicious Communications Act are outdated and could be revised (think they were only enacted a decade or so but they are struggling to contend with FB and Twitter and the eruption of social media generally) because really, at the moment, a woman receiving threats of rape over the internet is going to have to be either raped or suffer attempted rape for the police to act. So groups affected by this kind of hate crime (including all the white straight men who are being abused for being white and straight on the internet who I am sure will be quick to rise up and protect themselves as other groups are if it is causing them to be silent through fear) could lobby for better legal protection against hate crimes on the internet.

but there has been no talk of campaigns, as the discussion can't seem to progress beyond peoples dislike of LP.
Why not just focus on the issue that has been highlighted by all of the articles? That would make the discussion calmer. Everyone has acknowledged that men get abuse too, but they haven't been writing about it. And no-one has suggested that men be excluded from being helped, should any measures be thought of.
Insisting that the focus always be on some other group won't actually help that group. It just stops a discussion before it can even start, so nothings achieved and things don't get better for anyone.

Or as per WidowWadman's link we need more emp cannon's to melt down the PCs of those cowering in their bedrooms spouting this vile crap

hello

PP, these women writing about their hate mail isn't anything groundbreaking or even unusual.

It's time the law started taking hate speech against women as seriously as it takes anti-semitism and racism.

Cheers Sprogger for agreeing with me!

Well doesn't that say a lot Noblegiraffe? it's not a new thing, and it's still happening. Why shouldn't they? Or indeed any other group.