Letters to the Editor
-
Yeah, men are never told they are faggots or assholes or rapists or ugly or tiny dicked
There are lots of comments about our looks and sexuality or ... likability, to avoid using the f-word, a theme you almost never see even in angry, nasty threads about male writers.
Then you need to hang out in Pandagon's comment section in which men that disagree are all the time called unfuckable misogynistic rapist idiotic bitter old men. And worse.
What you have discovered is that idiots on the web push buttons and they push the worse button they think they can.
-
But Joan, you don't work in science
Summers was an idiot to say what he did, but the reaction of certain female professors disturbed me, too. Nancy Hopkins famously told the media that if she hadn't walked out, ''I would've either blacked out or thrown up." That bothered me. If I blacked out or threw up every time I experienced sexism in my career, I'd be in a hospital, not working in journalism. I don't think we can be fragile flowers about workplace sexism. Fight it, but don't take to your bed over it.
People expect more from scientists, especially in a professional context.
When you're in science, you have expectations that a scientific talk is not going to contain the same type of objectionable crap you have to put up with in social conversation.
When that wall is breached, it's horrendous. It can feel like everything you believe in is at stake.
But what the hell -- Joan is a tough broad, and tough broads don't have sympathy for the kind of meek little wimps who are good at math, do they?
God I end up hating her even when she's writing about something I agree with.
-
There is an answer...
It's simple. Men and women need to provide consistent, steady, relentless pressure to men (and probably some women), especially when they're young, so that they know this sort of shit isn't all right. Of course, it's unbelievably difficult, but that's what changes minds, attitudes and, most important, behavior.
Meanwhile, I hope you and every other woman who tries to make a difference takes the encouragement, the legitimate criticism, and the belief that you've got something important to say (because you do) more seriously than people whose anger, pain and stupidity causes them to lash out when threatened.
It's not your fault this shit comes your way, and what you do to keep yourself safe (mind and body) is totally your business.
With respect,
Pat
-
Thanks, Joan
I really appreciated this article. After reading some of the vitriolic letters to the editor, I've often felt sympathy for the Salon writers. It seems that, for some people, the anonyminity of e-mail eliminates all of their social filters making them feel free to spout off whatever garbage comes into their heads. Can you imagine what would happen if people spoke to one another in the real world like they do in the cyber world?
-
Keep on keepin' on
Like you, Ms. Walsh, I am disturbed by the spleen-venting that passes for dialogue on the boards, and I have been particularly disturbed by the depth of hatred for women that seems to exist there.
As someone trained as a research social scientist, interested in gender issues, I have to wonder: has anyone tried analyzing the boards? It wouldn't be difficult -- you just have to find a coding system for such language, e.g., references to (1) sexual capability, (2) intellectual capability, (3) physical traits, (4) behavior, etc., and compare across genders: both the gender of the writer and the gender of the person being criticized.
On my own blog, I've gotten surprisingly vicious and personal criticism in the past for something I didn't even say, so you have my sympathy -- but it isn't the same as this kind of hateful language you describe on Ms. Sierra's blog.
Unfortunately, I feel this kind of reaction (that is, giving up) only encourages the trolls. "Ha-ha! I can intimidate a woman and drive her off the Web!" Simpleminded use of power, but from the simpleminded what else can we expect? The problem with the Internet, as we all know, is that it is entirely too easy to post something, so that a statement bypasses the brain on its way from the spleen to your fingers. I suspect that most people in this position are incapable of mustering the thought required to actually come up with a way to harrass someone physically, let alone act on their plans, but that doesn't mean the letters alone aren't emotionally painful to the victim. That is what they are counting on, of course.
It's easy for me to suggest that Ms. Sierra needs to keep going, and ignore the trolls, because I didn't receive this sort of language and don't go to venues where I am likely to encounter that hostility. But I do think that the message needs to get out there that this is unacceptable behavior, if not by her, by the rest of us. It's not a restriction of free speech to criticize a troll -- it's a manifestation of it. I'm glad you put this up, and I'm glad it is a featured story on Salon instead of just being in your blog. It's important to those of us who would like to use the Web thoughtfully.
-
The threats are beyond the pale, but try listening to what people are saying...
There is nothing like hysterical masculine self-pity posing as righteous indignation." I couldn't put it any better than that. Man up, fellas!
I don't have an answer to that question, or a solution. All I can really do is promise to think and talk about it more, and not dismiss other women's -- and some men's -- complaints about what women suffer online as easily as I have in the past.
I do have a suggestion for you. Salon writes a great deal about progressive liberal issues. And sadly for us all, Salon is further to the left than the mainstream. That's why I come back to you time and again.
But your particular focus on feminism is specifically mainstream, specifically takes from the canonical menu of typical feminist issues, and mainly seems to focus on the issues of wealthier, younger, single feminists.
I don't know, but I think there might be a lot of room for you to broaden your coverage of feminist issues. There might be a lot of frustration with Salon for how it covers some issues and ignores others.
That first paragraph I quoted above. Reverse the genders and tell me you wouldn't find that misogynistic.
Man up fellas, means Joan Walsh is calling you faggots. Your reactions are hysterical. Your complaints are self-pity.
Good job Joan, with one sentence you revealed everything that you have been denying about yourself up till now.
Joan, is there a reason that young women flee the label of feminism? Is there a reason that there are so many "outcasts" from traditional feminism? Apart from Cathy Young, where are the Wendy McElroys or Daphe Patais or any of the feminist critics of feminism?
Where are the feminists that say that a strong component of feminism is the hatred of men? Where are the feminists in your pages that say that women's studies are unscientific and do have an overtly political agenda and do cause great harm to women and to men?
Why aren't your pages covering feminists that believe that divorced fathers are getting the shaft in court due to feminists abuse of the courts?
I don't know if any of that will lessen the attacks in your letters, but it's a damn sight smarter than your suggestion that you will use the occasion to double down and focus even more closely on women's complaints.
All I can really do is promise to think and talk about it more, and not dismiss other women's -- and some men's -- complaints about what women suffer online as easily as I have in the past