Salon’s Editor-in-Chief Joan Walsh discusses the Kathy Sierra madness. Here’s a snippet:
"Attitudes toward women have improved dramatically just in my lifetime, but still the world has too many misogynists, and the Web has given them a microphone that lets them turn up the volume on their quavering selves, their self-righteous fury, their self-loathing expressed as hatred of women. And yet, mostly, women on the Web just have to ignore it. If you show it bothers you, you've given them pleasure...But it coarsens you to look away, and to tell others to do the same. I've grown a thicker skin. I didn't want skin this thick. And what does it mean that women writers have to drag around this anchor every time they start to write -- that we reflexively compose our own hate mail, and sometimes type and retype to try to avoid it? I can honestly say it's probably made me more precise and less glib. That's good. But it's also, for now, made me too cautious. I write less than I would if I wasn't thinking these thoughts. I think that's bad. I think Web misogyny puts women writers at a disadvantage, and as someone who's worked for women's advancement in the workplace, and the world, that saddens me."
This particularly reminded me of the conversation we had yesterday at the WAM! conference about this assumption that women threatened on the internet should be thick-skinned and just deal with the trolls that come our way rather than talk about the seriousness of the issue, that violence can actually exist on the internet.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Salon on Sierra..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/5050
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
So true. I've noticed this in my own life, as well, though on a much smaller scale than what Sierra has been through. My boyfriend and I (I'm female) run a blog together. Most of our hate mail is from male readers. When he gets hate mail about entries he's written, it's along the "You suck, you're a horrible writer, etc." vein. When they direct their anger toward me, however, it's of the "You're a stupid cunt" or "I bet all you do is suck congressmen's dicks all day" (we live in DC). Very marked difference between the comments he gets and what I get. It's really infuriating. I mean, if you don't like my writing, fine, but say THAT instead of turning it into a misogynistic/sexual/power thing. I really feel awful for everything Sierra's been through, and I'm thankful for Joan Walsh articulating the process that female writers go through when we present our ideas to the world.
It really kinda kills your faith in mankind to spend too much time reading comments on news sites and blogs. I've kinda stuck now to a few blogs that have small communities associated with them to avoid the morons, but I can only imagine what it's like to deal with the email.
This is what I was getting at in my comment on the thread that first mentioned Sierra's harrassment. It's the same old shit, and the same old advice, too--ignore it and maybe it'll go away. Has that ever really worked? Is there a better solution? Do we just have to accept it?
It's frustrating and depressing. And you can't unsee it (even if you wish you could) and sometimes end up envying the ignorance of those who continue to exist unaware of just how vicious some people can be, and how many of them are out there.
Yeah, there's a huge difference in constructive criticism or friendly debate, and personal attacks or threats. And both warrent a different type of response. Perhaps one may need thicker skin when responding to the former, but certainly not when it comes to the latter.
I wish I could get to it right now, but I know Arthur Silber had a post relating to the "thick skin" argument and how, by growing a thick skin, we reduce our own humanity and our ability to react with compassion.
His site is powerofnarrative.blogspot.com. Sorry I can't provide a good link, but I found it by following a link in one of his most recent posts.
Kathy has posted a followup on her blog. It includes a link to a pair of coordinated statements by her and Chris Locke.
Both of the above links are well worth reading for anyone interested in this issue.
Vervain said:
It's the same old shit, and the same old advice, too--ignore it and maybe it'll go away. Has that ever really worked?
I'm reminded of the woman in Florida who ignored some guy catcalling her and so he ran her over with his truck.
I recognize there's a fair amount of apples/oranges there, seeing as we're discussing the internet and the poor woman in Florida was attacked "in real life", which come to think of it, is a really poor phrase to use, because it gives a certain tacit approval to the notion that the things that happen on the internet are somehow /not/ real.
If the friendships people can develop over the internet are real (and they are!), then obviously threats and attacks delivered via the internet are real as well.
And no, I really don't think ignoring them works at all.
"I recognize there's a fair amount of apples/oranges there, seeing as we're discussing the internet and the poor woman in Florida was attacked "in real life", which come to think of it, is a really poor phrase to use, because it gives a certain tacit approval to the notion that the things that happen on the internet are somehow /not/ real."
Yeah, threats delivered via the internet are real. Communication's real whether it's online or offine, friendly or hostile, etc. As for attacks, now I'm wondering how someone could punch me in the face via the internet. Maybe if he or she had a really really really skinny fist it could fit through my ethernet cable...?
violence can actually exist on the internet.
i wrote on joan walsh's thread that for women of color and poor women of color it is doubly and triply worse.
oh i wrote a starred comment too which said: Too many women are apologists for sexism who don't speak out against sexism because of economic inequality or the belief in gender essentialism and roles. Women should always speak out against sexism but it is not convenient or easy. More men would then speak out and cultures would change.