People are so mean. And sheesh, what’s with all the drinking comments? How many times does a bro have to say he’s sorry, yo?
Like I said in the OP:
Bullying and Calling Out People
There is a right and a wrong way to educate kinksters, and calling people out in public is definitely not the right way to go about it. As a community, we need to be welcoming people and not leaving a bad taste in their mouths! #InsertSexualJokeHere
Somebody’s asking for the ban hammer. Booyah! Taste that.
Nice timing. Goes well with the article I’ve been quoting all morning:
That’s why it’s uncomfortable to have so many people insist that there’s an easy fix for troll targets, the “ignore the bullies and they’ll go away” fix, usually spouted by people who haven’t considered for a moment that the trolls may very well be actual people who are trying to protect and perpetuate sexism. West is skeptical of the ignore-the-trolls strategy:
In other words, when we ignore the issue—leaving trolls to twist in the wind—not only does it not fix anything, it actively hurts us. It poisons healthy conversations. And, more specifically, it actively drives women off the internet and out of the conversation and back into our “safe spaces”—which is exactly what the trolls want. They want us to shut up. They want us out of their territory.
Trolls want to silence women. When they are allowed to shout at you without a response, they have created a microcosm of the world they want, where men are yelling at women who are sitting there and taking it. This is an interesting point, though as West points out, trolls also “win” when they get attention—particularly with the “women won’t fuck me like I deserve!” anger mobs, getting negative attention from women becomes a sort of revenge for them. So it’s tough, but like sexual harassers, trolls know how to create a situation where you can’t win: Either you endure their harassment or you are a “bitch” for pushing back. Cultural misogyny works in their favor.
I would argue that people who are dogmatic on the “ignore the trolls” front—who are far disproportionately men, in my experience—have ulterior motives a lot of the time. Not that they support misogyny! On the contrary, I think misogyny makes a lot of men uncomfortable, and so they try to fix their discomfort by pressuring women being attacked by trolls to conceal what’s happening. From Mason’s piece:
Stella Creasy MP and Caroline Criado-Perez have been targeted now for days, together with other high profile women. They’ve been criticised for re-tweeting the abuse, instead of the strategy of ignore and block. Ms Norton says:
“I think there’s a good space for the re-tweet. I think there’s a really, really good space for saying ‘This is what I’m dealing with and this is what is happening.’ I think that it’s not something to be used in isolation, and it needs to involve critique as opposed to attack.”
I retweet trolls a lot (and then usually block them immediately, because I know that there is no potential for actual discourse here). I get a lot of shit for it, mostly from men. Every time a man condescendingly tells me, “You are giving them attention! Just ignore and block them!”, I hear, “Being exposed to the brutal misogyny you get aimed at you every day is uncomfortable. It would be so much better for me if I didn’t have to know this is what’s going on.” This phenomenon is not unique to the internet. Kids who get bullied get “don’t be a tattletale” from adults. Women who get street harassed end up having to apologize for making men in their lives uncomfortable by bringing it up. The intention is almost never to tell someone they are to suffer this in silence, but the effect is that you are telling them just that.
via Misogynist Trolls Have An Agenda, And It’s Not Lulz | The Raw Story)
…FetLife wants you to believe their walled garden is safe, but not only can anyone create an account in seconds, the walls themselves are full of holes. The security problems with FetLife were put on display when last summer, a simple proxy connection service was set up to allow access to the site without an account. FetLife responded by trying to block the server and assure everyone that the bad person had been stopped, without actually fixing the security holes. This preference for spin over reality is commonplace at FetLife and its allies. For example, I tried to talk to Alan, Esq., one of the leaders of the NCSF, at CatalystCon in March about the FAADE tool. Instead, he went off on a rant about this supposed hack and how fishy a person Maymay was, and loudly declared he had no idea why Maymay did what he did. Really, I said? Because Maymay has been very transparent about it on his blog. It quickly became apparent that Alan had no idea what I was talking about, no any desire to educate himself. Let’s be real. Maymay did this with the express purpose of showing that FetLife was insecure, all the while live-tweeting the event. This is how people who work to expose security flaws so they can be fixed operate, not how hackers opperate. But don’t take my word for it:
“Nobody ‘hacked’ FetLife,” says Yonatan Zunger, chief architect of Google’s social network Google Plus, when we explain the situation. “No locks were picked; someone simply noticed that FetLife never locked the door in the first place.”…
So I’m reading this rather quite excellent thread in a group here on Facebook and I start trying to figure out how to best share it. Figured it was a public group, so linking should be no problem. Turns out the link requires you to be logged in to Facebook to see it. Any login. Which I realized is the exact same level of security as most everything on Fetlife. For some reason that really tickles me.
“FetLife is a really scary, creepy website, in my opinion, and merely requires interacting from one’s computer, so I don’t see it as indicating engagement with the wider community. […] To my understanding, one of the people running NCSF also runs FetLife, and I have seen ads and mentions of NCSF on FetLife. The way FetLife and NCSF talk about consent is pretty much the same, and that is – they both talk about consent as being mostly the responsibility of the bottom/sub/woman, or at least not as being particularly a matter of actually *not violating someone’s consent*. Most of the things I’ve read on FetLife about consent have been about how people need to stop complaining about consent violations, or wrongful accusations of consent violations. NCSF has the same focus when it comes to talking about consent – it’s primary focus is on protecting those who are wrongfully accused of consent violations. Therefore, it is equally if not even more plausible that a disproportionately high number of respondents to the survey were those who think the same way as FetLife and NCSF about consent, because those who do not might not even be on FetLife or take NCSF seriously, and those who do would be eager to fill out the survey to demonstrate how supposedly *low* the consent violations are. If anything, it might be in NCSF’s interest to keep the numbers low.”
– Comment on “One in Three Kinksters Reports a Consent Violation” (via maymay)
I unfriended John a few years ago when he tweeted a screenshot of his FetLife feed which had my & [REDACTED]’s & other people’s activity/fet names/profile pics. The image was publicly accessible on the web, & I promptly took steps to make sure I didn’t show up on his friend activity feed any more. I appreciate his site, but I don’t think he exercises the best discretion on his public web presence.