SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Jake Swearingen writes at The Atlantic that the Internet can be a mean, hateful, and frightening place - especially for young women but human behavior and the limits placed on it by both law and society can change. In a Pew Research Center survey of 2,849 Internet users, one out of every four women between 18 years old and 24 years old reports having been stalked or sexually harassed online. "Like banner ads and spam bots, online harassment is still routinely treated as part of the landscape of being online," writes Swearingen adding that "we are in the early days of online harassment being taken as a serious problem, and not simply a quirk of online life." Law professor Danielle Citron draws a parallel between how sexual harassment was treated in the workplace decades ago and our current standard. "Think about in the 1960s and 1970s, what we said to women in the workplace," says Citron. "'This is just flirting.' That a sexually hostile environment was just a perk for men to enjoy, it's just what the environment is like. If you don't like it, leave and get a new job." It took years of activism, court cases, and Title VII protection to change that. "Here we are today, and sexual harassment in the workplace is not normal," said Citron. "Our norms and how we understand it are different now."
According to Swearingen, the likely solution to internet trolls will be a combination of things. The expansion of laws like the one currently on the books in California, which expands what constitutes online harassment, could help put the pressure on harassers. The upcoming Supreme Court case, Elonis v. The United States, looks to test the limits of free speech versus threatening comments on Facebook. "Can a combination of legal action, market pressure, and societal taboo work together to curb harassment?" asks Swearingen. "Too many people do too much online for things to stay the way they are."
(Score: 2) by metamonkey on Friday October 24 2014, @03:57PM
That is the danger of online SJWs*. When they take some minor event and blow it up to extreme proportions, they drown out people with real problems. It's like crying wolf.
I've read a lot about the gamergate (god I hate typing that. Such a stupid name) situation, in which one asshole makes an almost certainly toothless threat against a woman and then countless blogs breathlessly tell us how this means that men who play video games are, as a group, awful deranged misogynists. It's bullshit and it's much ado about nothing.
Well a few weeks back I was browsing reddit and there was an AMA (Ask Me Anything) from a woman, and the title was something like "I'm a victim of harassment and stalking that started online, AMA." And my first instinct was to roll my eyes. Here we go, another woman desperate for attention blowing something out of proportion. I clicked on the thread and, um, no. This lady was hounded by some woman for 3 years, constant phone calls, death threats, mailing packages filled with nasty things to her, driving by her house, hounding her family. All kinds of crazy shit. After much difficulty getting the police to do anything they finally responded and the perpetrator is convicted and awaiting sentencing. That's serious shit.
But thanks to Anita and crew, when they crow so loudly about nothing, it makes legitimate crimes less likely to be taken seriously. That's probably one of the reasons the police were slow to respond to the woman who had a real problem. Crying wolf.
*I'm not talking about those who actually fight for social justice in court rooms, on the streets, in prisons, and relief workers. I'm talking about the far more vocal group of professional victims, bloggers and tweeters who think starving kids in Africa can eat FaceBook likes and are more interested in being seen to help rather than actually help.
Okay 3, 2, 1, let's jam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 24 2014, @06:39PM
> That's probably one of the reasons the police were slow to respond to the woman who had a real problem.
Right because in all the other cases of online harassment before "Anita and crew" the cops were right on it.
Except that the woman you are referring to has been stalked for 6 years, [reddit.com] long before "Anita and crew" were anybody's focus.
It is weird how you warped her story to suit your preconceived bias. I'm inclined to take that as sufficient evidence that your entire position on the topic is based on faulty logic, and that's the most charitable interpretation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 24 2014, @07:10PM
Meanwhile, as evidenced by her blog, the woman seems to be pretty firmly against gamertainters.
http://penbitten.com/post/100684247246/co-opting-the-language-and-posture-of-grievance-is [penbitten.com]
http://penbitten.com/post/100786314649/in-case-anyone-had-doubts-about-gamergates [penbitten.com]
(Score: 2) by metamonkey on Friday October 24 2014, @07:48PM
I didn't mean that Anita was the cause of the police not helping the stalked woman. I meant people like Anita, who resort to ridiculous hyperbole.
Like I've heard radical feminists say things like "marriage is rape!" No, no it's not. Rape is rape. But when you blow such things out of proportion it drowns out other legitimate concerns.
Okay 3, 2, 1, let's jam.