I didn't know the hate was SO bad

[laurawriter]

Did everybody know about this?
I recently started a website for women (I don't know if I'm allowed to say what it is because of the advertising rules thing - am I allowed to say?) But basically it's a site where women can share very mundane, everyday instances of niggling sexism like being shouted at in the street or called 'babe' in the office etc etc. The idea was simply to give women a safe space to feel catharsis and talk about something that had been sexist and upsetting but which may well have been brushed off elsewhere or which they might not have been able to raise elsewhere because of the old 'overreacting' myth.

It doesn't mention men, isn't even overtly 'feminist' - so I've been completely blown away by the vitriol and hatred I've received for the past 3 days. Overnight, everynight, trolls post around 300 comments to the site (fortunately after the first horrible wave I've now managed to turn on moderation so at least only I can see them but still have to read them all to get to the genuine posts). Many of them are explicit descriptions of sexual assault, physical abuse and domestic violence. Many others use my name and 'pretend' to be me saying horrific things about myself. And several contain very explicit threats towards me, many including rape and some mentioning death.

I just wondered - is this normal? Is this a thing that people know about? I feel so horribly naive because I knew sexism was a problem but I had no idea there was such violent, blind hatred with no real reason or thought behind it just against women and their audacity in daring to speak out for themselves.

Sorry for the long post, I just wondered what people's thoughts were - I'm feeling pretty shaken up and don't know whether I should just be accepting this as 'normal' and par for the course with what I'm doing. I thought I was fine and being so strong the first day but then I woke up in the night terrified people were in my garden. Silly really!

Abigail - you have lost me. Basil asked me a question at 09:41. Can't you see it? And my reply to Laura at 09:24. Can't you see that either?

extremism your mask is starting to slip, not that it was ever very convincing.

The extremism I referred to was not within this thread. It was within the feminist movement as a whole. It is a broad church, and contains feminists with much that they agree and disagree on. It is demonstrated all over this board. I hoped that this was clear by my talking about feminism as a political movement. If there weren't different degrees, or sections, within feminism, then why do some call themselves radical and others liberal feminists? These two sections have varying views - pornography for one.

This is the kind of thing I think startail has a problem with, and was in answer to Basil's question.

radical does not equal extreme. can i recommend some 101 time?

I know Sanjeev's capable of speaking for himself but please will you avoid assuming he's got egregious motives? He made the mistake of taking startail's post at face value. This is likely to be because he's new here. It might also mean he supposes he Knows How To Do Feminism Better Than Women. But assuming any man has a superiority complex is ... well, isn't it a bit sexist?

Startail hasn't directly said that she thinks most men are awful, people who have a low opinion of men very rarely do say that.

What she's done, is say that most men she knows would fall about laughing at (what she thinks are) radical feminist ideas - ie the radical notion that women are people and should be treated as such. She's also made reference to "human nature" (by which I presume she means men's nature in this context) while talking about men threatening women and making sure we know that we can't assume we'll be treated the same as men (IE allowed to express our opionion without being threatened with violence, or even just walk down the street without being remindied that we're the sex class). She also mentioned that she thought normal men can't relax in the company of women without being thought of as sexist.

I read that as her having a very low opinion of men. Either that, or as a very high threshhold of what should be considered sexism.

YY, all effective political movements have extremists. They're the engine that drives the ideology. Naturally, they are the most feared - and most lampooned - by opponents and, also the most misunderstood by fellow members.

SAF's right to point out the difference between radical and extreme.
I'm radical but not particularly extreme (hence friction, probably).

Good post, Basil, imo.

Sanjeev may well have taken Startail's post at face value.

Which is why I was surprised that he as a man, is not slighytly insulted by it.

She seems to think that most men are neanderthal knuckle-draggers, in his words.

That's why I asked the question. I wondered if a man would think her assumption tht threatening and de-humanising women, was just human nature.

I read Sanjeev's post as referring to feminism as a movement, not to this thread in particular. I reckon he's on our side. He made a good point though, that the extremer ideas are the ones that are highlighted/ridiculed/attacked to devalue the whole movement. Let's not do that here! We're here to support Laura!

SaF - only if you assume extreme=bad. Within a political sense, extreme means (to me) away from the middle ground. I assumed that rad fems were frustrated by the staus quo after early gains for equality in some areas of society, and having identified the patriarchy's overarching control, decided that something had to be done. Radical, liberal, socialist and revolutionary wings of feminism imply that there are splits in the way different groups want to go about achieving equality, even if their aim of equality is the same.

Are you trying to say the rest of us are extreme, Garlic?

Very boring to talk about feminists and women, yet again, when we should be talking about unacceptable male behaviour that harms women's lives and makes our existences just so much more unpleasant than they should be.

Laura your site is excellent.

I think the internet is becoming the 21st century equivalent of 60s and 70s consciousness raising groups, where women got together to share their experiences of sexism and misogyny under male domination and realised that it was a system, that men create it to be exactly like that, and that we need to change it.

frustrated by the staus quo after early gains for equality in some areas of society - hah, that's me!

having identified the patriarchy's overarching control, decided that something had to be done - not sequential to the above. We identified that and attacked the roots (radicalism) by winning structural changes to our laws & economy.

Sadly, the hoped-for ripple effect isn't happening much. We need to throw in some more rocks!

Nyac, forgive me ... I reckon it's always worth doing 101s when asked.

nothing extreme about not being sexist/misogynistic imho.

I don't see how what you wrote Sanjeev was answering Basil's questions as she didn't ask you where you thought startail stood politically. She asked you whether startail was wrong in her view of men.

Changing laws isn't radical GB, it's liberal feminism. Do you think maybe that's why you've been a bit confused about being a radical feminist.?

nothing very radical about being sexist/misogynistic imo either. but hey we all get to self label i guess.

Radical feminism seeks to overthrow the whole structure of male supremacy by ending male violence against women and girls - rape, domestic violence, prostitution, pornography, forced marriage, sexual assault, sexual harassment, child sexual abuse and so on.

Anyway sorry as this isn't the point of the thread. It just seemed erroneous. I'll disengage now.

whist I'd expect debate,cantankerous exchange etc
threats of rape,violence.blimey that's appalling
quite shocking

Depends who you mean by "the rest of us" Trophy

I'm not taking sides!

I'd say shouting at women in the street or sexually harassing or sexually assaulting us was the extreme behaviour.