Pinky Artichoke posted:

I love how any time someone points out that lovely stuff disproportionately happens to women, gays, people of color, etc. there's always that one guy who's like "On rare occasions this happens to white men, too! It's unfair not to mention that front-and-center!"

Zythrst posted:

Why yes there are over 7 billion people on the planet many of them woman, some of those are lovely people. This of course is in no way evidence that a solid majority of internet harassment happens to women.

Botnit posted:

I don't know if you're saying that yourself or just saying that's what's said but it isn't true, there have been several websites run by women there were the exact same thing, Don't Date Him Girl was one of them for years where the owner was a convicted felon and she refused court orders to take down or provide information on orders of who posted what, and after years of the current swimming against her she swerved the site into a "women's empowerment" motif which made it beyond reproach and is still up to this day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DontDateHimGirl.com

ed: I'm only referring to online harassment generally, which is what half his segment was on, not the other half of posting nudes. I'll readily accept that men might do that more than women (even though there are women's sites to do that too).

Botnit posted:

Not a gamergater(?) or redpiller(?) or whatever they call themselves

Botnit posted:

Nope, you'll actually find there are studies showing both women and men have more/less

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daniellecitron/2014/09/05/are-women-facing-more-cyber-stalking-and-cyber-harassment-online-than-men/

And either way, it doesn't matter who technically has more harassment, it's laughable that he spent 15 minutes ranting about online harassment towards only women. Times he mentioned, even in passing that the same poo poo happens to women? Zero.

That article posted:

It appears that being a woman arguably raises one’s risk of cyber stalking and cyber harassment, and for women of color and women from minority groups the risk may be higher.

Botnit posted:

Nope, you'll actually find there are studies showing both women and men have more/less

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daniellecitron/2014/09/05/are-women-facing-more-cyber-stalking-and-cyber-harassment-online-than-men/

And either way, it doesn't matter who technically has more harassment, it's laughable that he spent 15 minutes ranting about online harassment towards only women. Times he mentioned, even in passing that the same poo poo happens to women? Zero.

Botnit posted:

Nope, you'll actually find there are studies showing both women and men have more/less

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daniellecitron/2014/09/05/are-women-facing-more-cyber-stalking-and-cyber-harassment-online-than-men/

And either way, it doesn't matter who technically has more harassment, it's laughable that he spent 15 minutes ranting about online harassment towards only women. Times he mentioned, even in passing that the same poo poo happens to women? Zero.

quote:

While the study, conducted by the British think tank Demos, was limited to a fairly small sample of British celebrities, journalists and politicians whose Twitter timelines were tracked over a two-week period, its findings are nonetheless interesting

Botnit posted:

Ah yes, mentioning even once in a 15 minute rant that women do the same thing is indeed the exact equivalent of firefighters choosing to ignore a house on fire.

And you wonder why no one bothers posting in this thread.

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

Botnit posted:

Ah yes, mentioning even once in a 15 minute rant that women do the same thing is indeed the exact equivalent of firefighters choosing to ignore a house on fire.

And you wonder why no one bothers posting in this thread.

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

Botnit posted:

Ah yes, mentioning even once in a 15 minute rant that women do the same thing is indeed the exact equivalent of firefighters choosing to ignore a house on fire.

And you wonder why no one bothers posting in this thread.

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

sbaldrick posted:

Reddit's redpill site is horrible and I hate that I clicked on it (redpill women is somehow worse)

My biggest problem with the episode is it was a tad scatter shoot compared to some of the recent episodes. If it had been about that Revenge porn then he should have talked about the Girls gone Wild rear end in a top hat and the rear end in a top hat in Arizona or make it all about Gamersgate (the dumb thing I still don't follow understand beyond women can't make games and someone lied about cheating).

pentyne posted:

The revenge porn stuff is particularly bad because all of the jokey "oh well, just don't do that!" attitudes from the media when it's someone who was intrinsically trusted by the victim at that time and then had said trust betrayed.

pentyne posted:

For all the "Oh, Brianna Wu is a piece of poo poo etc." it still doesn't justify people promising to come to her house and rape her and kill her

Botnit posted:

Ah yes, mentioning even once in a 15 minute rant that women do the same thing is indeed the exact equivalent of firefighters choosing to ignore a house on fire.

And you wonder why no one bothers posting in this thread.

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

pentyne posted:

It's pretty hard to cover the insanity of GamerGate and the institutional problems women face with the internet in 15 minutes. It's easier to just focus on some high profile examples that any sane person would say "gently caress, that's unacceptable that they had to go through that".

For all the "Oh, Brianna Wu is a piece of poo poo etc." it still doesn't justify people promising to come to her house and rape her and kill her, and Anita Sarkeesian's work might be ripe for serious critique but the bulk of it is death/rape threats against her and attacks on her gender. The revenge porn stuff is particularly bad because all of the jokey "oh well, just don't do that!" attitudes from the media when it's someone who was intrinsically trusted by the victim at that time and then had said trust betrayed.

Pick posted:

Not to mention that society still has an extremely broken view on nudity/sexuality, so a harmless act (taking photographs of yourself when it doesn't have fabric on it) can be grossly detrimental to your career and life generally.

BigRed0427 posted:

Mind if I try an experiment?

I want you to try and find ten examples of John Oliver receving death or rape threats related to yesterday's episode.

If you can, I'll put up a new avatar, your choice.

Pick posted:

Not to mention that society still has an extremely broken view on nudity/sexuality, so a harmless act (taking photographs of yourself when it doesn't have fabric on it) can be grossly detrimental to your career and life generally.

IRQ posted:

I don't think anyone is actually getting fired over it, but especially in the case of the college teacher I could see it really wrecking your ability to do your job.

Botnit posted:

Ah yes, mentioning even once in a 15 minute rant that women do the same thing is indeed the exact equivalent of firefighters choosing to ignore a house on fire.

And you wonder why no one bothers posting in this thread.

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

Toxxupation posted:

literally nobody here is arguing that

Toxxupation posted:

I mean she does stuff like marginalize other women in her industry and argue that women can just become developers via bootstrap-pulling and don't need to go to college, like she did when she literally received one hundred thousand dollars from her insanely rich parents to start a business

At a certain point if you're positioning yourself as the face of female advancement in a sexist industry but argue against all the ways that women that aren't privileged can advance you're a loving rear end in a top hat

Botnit posted:

Now go on and continue ignoring the study showing that no, it isn't 3/100 comparison so you can continue living in your SJW tinted biodomes.

Pick posted:

Well, we know people have committed suicide over online harassment, which is just about the worst thing you can do for your career.

pentyne posted:

Strobe posted:

There's this thing that happens when you say you don't think something, and then literally everything else you say makes it look like you think that anyway. People don't believe you.

Toxxupation posted:

did you not read my first loving post where I literally said that the death threats aren't justified, like ver loving batim

Afro posted:

idk maybe if your first response to someone receiving death threats is "actually this person said some dumb things" it sounds to me like you're excusing the threats as justified

Toxxupation posted:

that sure would be accurate if within that first response i didn't literally say "the threats aren't justified"! HMM

Afro posted:

then why even bring up the other stuff in the first place

Toxxupation posted:

lol "this person is a lovely person because they said x, y and z" = "this person deserves to be killed"

Zythrst posted:

So when you go, oh but the victim is really bad it can't help but sound like an excuse for it.

Toxxupation posted:

it's relevant to the contention that she's a bad "Face" for how public harrassment has gone wrong, and it's important to specifically note how the things she said and done are specifically harming the industry she has specifically set herself up as the cause d'etre for

like, let's say all this happened to ann coulter, right, i guaran loving tee all of you people would say something along the lines of "well, the death threats are disgusting but ON THE OTHER HAND ann coulter has literally argued that women shouldn't have the right to vote, so on some level she's a stupid rear end in a top hat who deserves criticism if explicitly not to the level of threats"

I'm saying the fundamental argument that women get horrible treatment on the internet, that is 100% true and needs to stop, now

but i'm also saying that the specific example of brianna wu is a bad one to use to represent public harrassment because she's someone whose public actions deserve criticism, and now you can't even point out how the things she has said and actions she has taken are directly hypocritical to the person she presents herself as, but you can't ever bring those criticisms up because about a billion uninformed idiots will jump down your loving throat saying that you're actually furthering an argument you're explicitly against

like even now people are conflating legitimate criticisms (like how she's actually an elitist, classist, self-aggrandizing douchebag who explicitly ostracizes other women in her industry who criticize her) with whatever stupid horseshit that reddit or gg think, they're not the same argument and one isn't part of the other, i'm approaching criticizing wu from a far left perspective and they're criticizing from far right

it's like saying that people who go "Obama is a friend of the family who deserves to die and is a kenyan" are the same people as people who go "obama doesn't deserve death threats but on the other hand he's a douchebag who approved an insane expansion on our spying program, still allows torture to continue in government-funded black sites, and has kowtowed to everything the monied people in power want furthering the wealth gap"

Toxxupation posted: