Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The Impact of Online Harassment/Trolling

161 replies

womanformallyknownaswoman · 28/04/2018 12:11

The impact of unrelenting trolling, whether sealioning/concern trolling/flaming discussions/ weaponising the mod reporting system, is a form of coercive control as it disrupts the free flow of women commenting and thinking. I think we do very well here to contain it. Sometimes it helps to educate others by dismantling/exposing the methods and motives of trolls. I get that. However it's a fine line between that and actually enabling harm when individuals are targeted/mobbed, whether directly on the board or by covert malicious reporting.

Verbal abuse is very harmful and many don't understand it and it's insidious effects in detail. Those who have experienced intimate partner and/or family violence in their history tend to have a lower harm threshold than those who don't.

As an illustration, I have altered the effects of verbal abuse in domestic situations to apply to an online environment:

• Your troll/stalker criticises you and makes you doubt yourself. You might start believing that you’re a not good poster or lucky to have a right to comment at all.
• You feel anxious and stressed in your troll’s presence. You worry about how your online harasser might react and this makes you change your behaviour (like agreeing with them more) to avoid arguments with them.
• You feel intimidated and scared of your online harasser when they get angry — their behaviour might be unpredictable or aggressive. It silences you and forces you to stop commenting.
• You’re made to feel guilty and not given the freedom to say the things you want to say. Your online stalker might control you by telling you what you can and can’t believe, say or think. They may also emotionally blackmail you.

I have described Verbal Abuse at length below in the final part of the post, for those who are interested. Patricia Evan’s book - The Verbally Abusive Relationship - is great. There’s chapter or two where she goes through each of the verbal abuse tactics, what it looks like and so on, plus gives rebuttals. If you’re in an intimate partnership I would go on to read Lundy Bancroft’s “Why Does He Do That?” (as TheBewilderness recommended somewhere else)- the bible for all women in relationships. Both authors have YouTubes and are quoted extensively online, so important are their contributions.

My question is do we need more containment e.g. a code word which, when used, means you are being forced to close down/leave? That you are feeling harmed? Do we need to highlight the trolls more where they are swamping a thread and refusing to go away. What about where modding is weaponised?

I still think better informed modding is the key but that is unlikely to occur soon. I tend to leave if feeling "got at" or the unrelenting gas lighting gets too much. There seems to be enough of us collectively to hold the trolls to account at present and we rely on people self caring by taking time out. Maybe everything is fine. I thought I would check by asking the question.

ABOUT VERBAL ABUSE
Verbal abuse creates emotional pain and mental anguish. It is a lie told to you or about you. Generally, verbal abuse defines people, telling them what they are, what they think, their motives, and so forth. ….Usually one person is blaming, accusing, even name calling, and the other is defending and explaining.

Most people targeted by verbal abuse try to explain to the abuser why what they’ve just heard is not true or not okay. They explain themselves because they believe the perpetrator is rational and can hear them and the relationship will then get better. Then they usually hear more verbal abuse, for instance, “You’re too sensitive.” At that point they don’t usually realize that they have just been defined, and, therefore, verbally abused again.

Since the target of verbal abuse is often blamed, ignored, or yelled at, she may have difficulty recognizing just what is going on in the relationship.

Verbal abuse includes withholding, bullying, defaming, defining, trivializing, harassing, diverting, interrogating, accusing, blaming, blocking, countering, lying, berating, taunting, put downs, abuse disguised as a joke, discounting, threatening, name-calling, yelling and raging.

FRANCE PASSES LAW ON PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE (couldn't find UK stats)
“...the main abuse helpline for women in France received 90,000 calls a year."Of these, 84% concern psychological violence,"..."We have introduced an important measure here, which recognises psychological violence, because it isn't just blows [that hurt] but also words," Nadine Morano, the minister for family affairs, told the lower house of parliament.”

Source: I prefer this old website of hers that has lots of content on it

OP posts:
womanformallyknownaswoman · 02/05/2018 13:02

Just thought I'd try a TL;DR

FermatsTheorem
Here's something I think might work. It's this: Don't ever name-check a troll.

Where someone is trolling by sea-lioning, or plopping, ignore, but ignore in an "active" way, i.e. scroll back up the thread to the last genuinely interesting comment and engage with that, making sure to name check that poster.

Where someone is trolling with factual inaccuracies/misrepresenting arguments in a way that you feel needs to be dealt with for the sake of the lurkers, do so but in a neutral way. Start the response with a third person account of the mistake: "It is sometimes mistakenly suggested that..." or "Some people wrongly use the straw man argument that..." Do not name check the troll.

That way, they are effectively ignored, the conversation moves on around them, they get frustrated by being made invisible (and possibly over-react to this, thus revealing them for the troll that they are).

Unsure where we are in terms of recipes - I really like those recipe threads. It's like a collective "up yours". :)

OP posts:
AngryAttackKittens · 02/05/2018 13:12

The first time I saw the term "pansexual" I couldn't figure out whether it was more likely to refer to attraction to hooved Greek deities or cooking equipment.

DJLippy · 02/05/2018 13:19

It's a slur against bisexuals. Like, "I'm an enlightened bisexual, unlike you bigoted old genital obsessed bisexuals. I fall in love with all bodies."

No you just wanted to find a new way to piss off your parents.

AngryAttackKittens · 02/05/2018 13:21

It's fun saying "no, I'm just a regular old fashioned bisexual" and watching the reaction.

DJLippy · 02/05/2018 13:29

When did bisexual become boring? That was my way to signal my innate superiority. Think I might have to get me one of these trendy new queer labels...

AngryAttackKittens · 02/05/2018 13:31

My favorite is "sapiosexual". Because everyone else is attracted to complete fucking idiots, except you, you smug bastard.

ErrolTheDragon · 02/05/2018 13:35

The first time I saw the term "pansexual" I couldn't figure out whether it was more likely to refer to attraction to hooved Greek deities or cooking equipment.

Judging from the results of googling 'pansexual meme', definitely the latter (though I may possibly have some filtering on which discriminates against goaty people)

DJLippy · 02/05/2018 13:39

I should probably wind my neck in about all this pansexuality is BS talk. Somebody is going to report me for homophobia because pansexuality is definitely a protected characteristic. It has nothing to do with your rainbow coloured undercut.

AngryAttackKittens · 02/05/2018 13:42

I just see it as more of the usual women shouldn't have boundaries shit, honestly. Lesbian = won't sleep with men at all, that's clearly unacceptable. Bisexual means you may sleep with men but it's a bit suspicious, isn't it, that whole not actively stating your willingness to shag absolutely anyone who asks? Whereas pansexual, well, that's properly inclusive, innit?

DJLippy · 02/05/2018 13:49

This is probably the wrong time to admit my secret crush then right? #boundaries Blush

The Impact of Online Harassment/Trolling
AngryAttackKittens · 02/05/2018 13:52

I have Concerns about the horns.

DJLippy · 02/05/2018 13:53

Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase trolling...

thebewilderness · 02/05/2018 20:10

Almost as good as bees and recipes.

UpstartCrow · 02/05/2018 20:59

@DJLippy He just looks so... underdone.

Weezol · 04/05/2018 17:13

@MNHQ You really need to read this thread. It's quite an education.

thebewilderness · 04/05/2018 22:44

I wish @MNHQ would pin this post as has been requested.

Pratchet · 05/05/2018 09:19

Bump

Weezol · 08/05/2018 12:27

This thread has been running since the 28th of April. I can't help wondering that if @MNHQ had read it, as has been requested by several posters, the Twitter disaster may have been avoided.

womanformallyknownaswoman · 11/05/2018 05:06

Verbal abuse is very harmful and many don't understand it and it's insidious effects in detail. Those who have experienced intimate partner and/or family violence in their history tend to have a lower harm threshold than those who don't.

As an illustration, I have altered the effects of verbal abuse in domestic situations to apply to an online environment:

Your troll/stalker criticises you and makes you doubt yourself. You might start believing that you’re a not good poster or lucky to have a right to comment at all.
You feel anxious and stressed in your troll’s presence. You worry about how your online harasser might react and this makes you change your behaviour (like agreeing with them more) to avoid arguments with them.
You feel intimidated and scared of your online harasser when they get angry — their behaviour might be unpredictable or aggressive. It silences you and forces you to stop commenting.
You’re made to feel guilty and not given the freedom to say the things you want to say. Your online stalker might control you by telling you what you can and can’t believe, say or think. They may also emotionally blackmail you.

OP posts:
leggere · 11/05/2018 06:15

What if you're wrong about someone being a troll or insincere and it's just a mn poster trying to get a different view across/disagreeing with prominent regulars/trying to hear what some random new poster has to say (albeit suspicious)? What if you're wrong and you're "recipe"ing a fellow MNer, which is what some of you did to me last week?

womanformallyknownaswoman · 11/05/2018 06:51

Oh I forgot to mention crying wolf is another way of attempting to obfuscate the truth

OP posts:
leggere · 11/05/2018 07:23

And what if you've got it wrong?

FermatsTheorem · 11/05/2018 07:38

Another thing worth bearing in mind is that (beyond a basic level of respect for the other person's shared humanity should you choose to respond - and the choice is yours) no-one owes anyone a response, or a particular type of response.

No-one has to respond at all. If a poster is saying something silly, they have no right to a response. If a poster looks like they're trolling or is not in good faith, one is not obliged to take them seriously.

Conversely, you can control what you say, but not how others respond to it. If multiple posters treat your posts as trolling, well, it could be because a given board has a party line which you're going against, but equally it could be something about your posting style that means others interpret your posts as trolling (which they might or might not be, but if your posting style is that open to interpretation, it's hardly the reader's fault).

leggere · 11/05/2018 07:42

Ok, I guess that was aimed at me, so thanks for the reply.

FermatsTheorem · 11/05/2018 07:52

It's happened to me too, so the response is meant to be more generic. Many years ago, I joined a writers' forum online. Seemed like a nice bunch of women, we were interested in writing in similar genres. However, I was interested in discussing feminist issues like the Bechdel test. They were not. It rapidly became apparent to me that they liked a certain, very traditional sort of romantic sub-plot in their work, and didn't like any sort of feminist analysis of existing works in the genre we wrote in.

I realised I was in a situation where if I continued to push my point, I would come across as trolling them, even though it was not my intention to do so. (In fact, I'd have been sea lioning - if every time the majority of them picked up a particular work to discuss and said "I love the way the writer handled the love scene between X and Y" and started talking about the details of building and resolving romantic tension, I came along and said "but doesn't it worry you that the work as a whole fails the Bechdel test?", that would have been annoying and derailing - because they did not want to talk about that issue and had not set up their forum to talk about that issue.) I decided to duck out and find a forum more congenial to my needs (which I did) and leave them to run their forum the way they wanted to.

Obviously there are limits to this too - too much bowing to the prevailing ethos of a forum is what generates echo chambers. But banging on about a point when it's been addressed just gets tedious.

I wonder if that's why formal debating societies have rules and a fixed format: state the case, state the antithesis, "for" side gets to cross examine and rebut, "against side" gets to cross examine and rebut, floor is opened for debate (one question and one follow-up each), concluding arguments on both sides, vote. It time-limits the possibility of derail.