Great article, Jessica.

Great article, indeed.

There's a violent misogyny that exists throughout the online community that is really disturbing. My experience after a decade of visiting blogs, BBS, forums, and gaming has been that men (or people perceived as men) are more likely to be able to post things without without harassment, and when they are attacked, it's generally more about their intelligence, and you almost never see men threatened with sexual violence.

It seems to be true that there is a very vocal group of netizens who see female bloggers/posters/gamers in two ways:
1. As objects of scorn and abuse.
2. As objects of sexual desire.

I've got really complicated feelings on this, and I'm still working through a lot of it, but I'm glad that people are starting to take online harassment more seriously, and writing like this can only help.

So, yeah... great article.

Thank you! Especially for ending with some comments about Take Back the Tech and the "stop cyberbullying" campaign- thanks for letting us know ways to fight back. I sure as hell didn't know about Take Back the Tech, and I'm definitely popping over there next.

Great job. Makes me depressed to hear about all of the disgusting shit going on, but I can't say that I'm surprised. Anonymity makes people a lot more generous with their horrible thoughts.

Jessica, that UM study certainly shows that IRC users harrass "women" more. But you can hardly extrapolate from IRC to the net as a whole. IRC exists for chatting; that's basically all you can do with it. And one of the things that many people like to chat about is sex. It's maybe not quite analogous to a bar, but close. Kind of like a big party where you're a stranger to everyone there.

If you go into a bar or go to a party, you can expect a certain amount of hitting on, including crass and undesired attempts. This is human nature.

Incidentally, seems to me the "25 times" figure is a crock. If you read the paper, you'll see that that is what happened on channels allowing bots; on human-only channels the similar figure was 6 times. Still unfair, but not as radical and alarming.

Also, the use of "163 per day" is misleading because you did not report that figure happened to robots that were logged in to a chat channel 24 hours a day. Most people do not chat on the internet 24/7. Furthermore, the 163 per day seems to have happened in channels that averaged 300 users chatting at once. Thus, the rate of getting malicious PMs was about 0.02 per other-user per hour. Log in with 100 other users and go for an hour, and you'd expect 2 rude come-ons at that rate.

Look, I realize that most people would be offended by a random stranger asking them if they are "feeling horney". (This apparently counted in this study as "sexually explicit or threatening language"). But there's a big difference between that and the kind of stalking that Jill Filopovic experienced. The latter is IMO dangerous; the former, not.

Very good article. I found no links for the "stop cyberbullying" campaign. Do you have more information?

From the article: "who doesn't have a blog, MySpace page, or Flickr account these days?"

The answer is: people who want to maintain their privacy.

Also, if you sincerely believe that the net hasn't always been sexist, you need to do more research (real research, not just talking to friends who already agree with you). Google "Babes on the Web" for a sample controversy from 1995, or just read this article:

http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/199506/msg00022.html

What you're talking about has been going on for a long time. In fact -- and I know I'm stepping out on a limb here -- I'll bet it started long before the Internet was invented.

mamis62, who said i thought sexism online was a new thing? and thanks so much for the advice on how to do "real research." please.

Jessica, I thought it was an informative, well-written article. It took a lot of issues that have been brought up on a number of posts across Feministing, and threaded them all together into an important article.

And the Guardian is well-respected and read by loads of people. Nice one!

Jessica's useful, well-written, informative article in a widely-read forum will increase awareness, attention, and discussion about online sexism and harassment.

So I thank her for it.

Yes, it was thoughtful and illuminating; I think that those of us who don't run public blogs are often unaware of the horribly threatening nature of the messages you get regularly. So, first, thanks for persevering, and second, I admire the calm, even tone of your piece. I don't think I would have been able to maintain it.

Yes, superbly done! I really appreciated the information about Take Back the Tech also. So great to encounter an article that I
1) greatly relate to and
2) find so full and informative

Your journalism's the shit!

Leonard, the fact that there are chatbots designed to solicit women in chats, while certainly not the same kind of explicit violence threatened by real humans in other fora, is the reason I stopped using IRC and pretty much any other forum in which people can contact me at will. I flatter myself to think I'm relatively thick-skinned, so if it makes me turn to avoidance the deterrent to female participation online is very real and pervasive.

And I don't think Jessica meant to say this is a new problem--people talked about the web as a brave, new, genderless world, but the fact is that the assumption of white male privilege and even white male identity as the default has always been there. It's past time to do something about it, and I'm glad Jessica's raising the issue in a place where efforts to stop misogynist online harassment can get some notoriety.

mamis62, who said i thought sexism online was a new thing?

You did.

The title of your article is "How the web became a sexists' paradise." This implies that there was a time when it wasn't, and it has become one. And that's just not true. Hell, Usenet was a sexists' paradise when I started using it in the late 1980s.

And if you think your research was good, why not respond to leonard's question about the 25x figure? Sounds like he read the paper and you didn't.

Good article in a good place. Thanks!

You wrote:
"It was, without doubt, the most humiliating experience of my life - all because I dared be photographed with a political figure."

When the US media devoted weeks to the discovery that Gingrich called Hillary Clinton a bitch, I wanted her to have an press conference to thank him for it.

In high school, our parents expected us to get serious, work hard, and excel, including my sister. She did. In her first year of high school, a boy passed her a note, crude and cruel, and signed by a half-dozen boys. She stood up to it well in school, but she was in tears when she told us about it. I still feel proud of her that day, and proud of telling her that she should take the complement. She did.

The more the best women do, the more they can depend on the best from the best men, and the worst from the worst men.

Althouse, and the aparatChicks she belongs to, have still more to answer for. Apparently she, and the rest of them, feel envious and angry at any one, and particularly any woman, brighter, prettier, and frankly better than them. And you were right when they are still wrong. Surely, they wanted to attack you for being right too early, gaining success without their approval, and meeting with a president who was not the worst in our history. However, that had already stopped working for them.

The better you are, and the better you do, the more they want to attack you. So, they attacked you for your beauty. What else could they do?

Weirdly, none of the gang seems to feel embarrassed yet. Maybe you still find their mess worth some attention. You could get some good photographs of yourself (which looks easy to do), have friends Photoshop the best pictures to make you look even better, and stick them at the top of your blog. You can all write a post of condolences to the sexually and intellectually frustrated gynophobes and harpies who attacked you. Thank them for the complement.

Many cultures of the world have traditions of judging people by their enemies. You can feel pleased with your enemies. And the world should know.

Thank you, Jessica. What a great article.

The other day, I had a man attack me online... I honestly was nauseous. It started when I told him that he was attacking my personally instead of my responses, was illogical, and was doing what every single misogynist does when faced with a young, smart woman: degraded her. I said that I would debate when he gained the maturity to argue rationally and not start a dick-waving contest.

He promptly proceeded to prove my point by telling me:

"Your nothing but a dime a dozen femaNazi with a chip on her shoulder, over compensating and lying about her accomplishments based on her inferiority complex — inside, you know for a fact there are all kinds of things you cannot do that a man can — YOUR CONFLICTED ROSIE!...

One malady associated with your bred I find fascinating is — usually unattractive women try to compensate for it with a pleasant personality but not in the feminist’s case.

Fascinating how you brought a Johnson into the matter…are we a might envious of that particular bit of anatomy?…was Freud right, or are you in dire need of a date?

You can get a date. Hang out down at the docks or at the discharge gate at a near by prison.�

...because we all know what a raging liberal I am (eye roll).

The only thing that women can really do is to do what we've always done: gang up on men and tell them to shove it, collectively. The strength of misogyny is the ability to make us doubt our humanity and our sanity; collective support goes a long way towards ensuring that smart, strong women are not dehumanised.

The more the best women do, the more they can depend on the best from the best men, and the worst from the worst men.

Great comment. My sincere thanks for it - it's something that I've often thought or wondered, but never heard articulated so well.

Completely off-topic, but have y'all had a gander at this ? I don't know why I'm asking here. Doesn't seem relevant to this thread at all.

And I don't think Jessica meant to say this is a new problem--people talked about the web as a brave, new, genderless world, but the fact is that the assumption of white male privilege and even white male identity as the default has always been there. It's past time to do something about it, and I'm glad Jessica's raising the issue in a place where efforts to stop misogynist online harassment can get some notoriety.

More women are online now and are noticing it is a "sexists' paradise." Salon's editor in chief, Joan Walsh, addressed this last week with "Men Who Hate Women on the Web." She changed the letters policy so everyone has to register with an email address and have all their letters next to their name. It got 700 comments with a bunch of trolls whining about censorship.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/03/31/sierra/index.html

I was mighty pleased to open my Guardian this morning and find your article, Jessica. Well done!

This is an amazing article, Jessica! Thanks for a great read.

I also had an experience with web misogyny recently. I read many blogs that pertain to issues that interest me (mostly because they're directly related to me, my gender, and my heritage) and it's been very troubling and conflicting for me. For instance, recently an Indian American principal at the Montessori School was arrested for sodomizing a minor. While I found her behavior appalling, I was just as appalled at the commenters who started up an impromptu game of "hot or not" and some bile filled comments about "how women get away with everything."

I don't understand how individuals who can make very enlightened comments about race relations and social policies can throw all their consideration out the door when a woman is involved.

I recently discovered one of the individuals in my circle of family friends is a sexist cyber bully and I haven't been quite the same since. I've become paranoid while simply walking around my neighborhood or going to community events, wondering if the young men and boys who greet me respectfully to my face have a dark cyber identity where they unleash the latent misogyny that seems to grow exponentially within them.

It's a shame online anonymity for women doesn't work any more because if you use a non-gender or race specific name, the sexism and racism are so bad, women and minorities usually have to say something and end up "using the gender or race card" as they call it.

Great article in today's Guardian, Jessica. Thanks for writing so clearly & strongly.

I thought youmight be interested in the response your article got on the MB for Women's Hour on BBC Radio 4 (you can listen via the web -- for non-UK readers here it's actually only 45 minutes of a feminist-lite magazine programme). But the response on the MB often acts as though it's a hotbed of feminazis. Note in the thread I'm linking you to "Kassandra" is not a woman IRL.

Here's the discussion:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio4/F2766779?thread=4036336&skip=0&show=20

Darn straight - great piece. I'm a co-founder of a web conference in Toronto, Canada called mesh. Had we been thinking (!), this would have been a great topic for this year's conference - misogyny on the Web. This needs to be dragged into the daylight, and IMO web conferences are a good place to start.

mamis62 - FYI, it's most often the editor that writes the headline, not the journalist. And anyway, the point is that this climate is a problem now.

Thanks, Jessica, for bringing these issues to the attention of a broader audience!

Online haters are a huge problem and really troubling. Thanks for the article. If this is the result of unhooking physical presence from consequences, then I'm afraid we can expect a lot more of it. Someone (with a better computer than me!) should report back from Second Life about this.

I found out about your Guardian article and Althouse's latest response by way of Lawyers, Guns, and Money.
In her response she says you've never addressed her point that feminists shouldn't be "cozying up" to Bill Clinton.
Now, I don't remember exactly what was said when this whole picture thing came up but I have wondered about just that point.
I'm old enough to remember clearly the Clinton impeachment mess and all the Republican hypocrisy surrounding it. But I don't remember hearing much from feminists who had a platform to speak.
Sincerely, I've always wondered why Clinton gets such a pass from women. None of the women I know have been as forgiving or lenient when men cheat. And by way of my sister I know of two marriages ruined by mens' cheating.
I don't really buy Althouse's explanations and rantings. I don't know her real motivations but I'm certain they're not good or healthy.
But I'm still curious. What do you think about Althouse's point?

daveh, if that were actually her point in this whole mess i would address it. but it's not. it's sad backpeddling after being called out for harassing me.

"From the article: 'who doesn't have a blog, MySpace page, or Flickr account these days?'

"The answer is: people who want to maintain their privacy."

When I first went online in the mid-1990s it seemed as though making up your online identity (or online identities!) was more popular than uploading lots of info about your offline self. ;)

You could make up your name! You could hide the stuff your classmates picked on you for! You could hide your gender, or even choose a new one! Whee!

What ever happened to that?

"Jessica's useful, well-written, informative article in a widely-read forum will increase awareness, attention, and discussion about online sexism and harassment.

"So I thank her for it."

Yeah! :)

"It's a shame online anonymity for women doesn't work any more because if you use a non-gender or race specific name, the sexism and racism are so bad, women and minorities usually have to say something and end up 'using the gender or race card' as they call it."

Good point. Now I'm wondering what would happen if a whole bunch of us went beyond non-specific usernames and sometimes used "male" and/or "white" usernames when pointing out those jerks' bigotry.

Sincerely, I've always wondered why Clinton gets such a pass from women. None of the women I know have been as forgiving or lenient when men cheat.

Because I really don't give a flying fuck if politicians cheat on their spouses or not. I care about their politics. Clinton cheated on his wife? Well, that's their problem, and also Lewinsky's problem. What on earth does it have to do with me? What I expect from my husband and what I expect from my president are two entirely different things.

Here's what I liked about Clinton: the repeal of the global gag rule, the fact that I thought he could be counted on to veto anti-choice legislation, the fact that he wasn't commited to abstinence-only nonsense.

Here's what I didn't like: don't ask-don't tell, bombing Baghdad, destroying AFDC.

Good points as usual, EG. What politicians do to affect one or two people is nothing compared to the policy they make which affects millions and many more abroad because what US presidents do with regards to women replicated itself in other countries.

Now I'm wondering what would happen if a whole bunch of us went beyond non-specific usernames and sometimes used "male" and/or "white" usernames when pointing out those jerks' bigotry.

It would be cool if enough people had the energy to do this. I find it takes a lot of energy to be dishonest like that. I read on wikipedia that losers used to troll as an advanced hobby. Maybe they still do. I don't know.

"It would be cool if enough people had the energy to do this. I find it takes a lot of energy to be dishonest like that."

Yeah, faking something can take a lot more energy than being yourself. OTOH, isn't anonymity sort of the default online?

I mean, it would take more energy getting dressed in the morning for me to pass for male IRL than it would for me to just let people see that I'm female*. OTOH, typing "John" when I registered for a TypeKey account wouldn't have taken that much more energy than typing "Mina" did and leaving out the stuff I've posted about my personal experiences (like in the footnote below ;) ) would have taken *less* energy than typing it into my posts did.

* ...and some other women's cases would be even better examples of this because passing for male IRL would cost a *lot* more energy than looking "feminine." In *my* case passing for male would cost more energy in some ways (like chest-binding) and save energy in others (like leaving alone the facial hair I inherited from my Middle Eastern foremothers).

I hate to be the bearer of bad, or rather pathetic, news, but Ann Althouse has posted about this on her site.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2007/04/lets-keep-talking-about-breasts.html#comments

speaking of masculine gendered user names, notice how most of the negative comments towards Jessica on the latest althouse post are from users with masculine names. it's infuriating how they dismiss the fact that the attack had anything to do with gender with absolutely no irony or self-awareness. sigh. fuck them, Jessica, they're obviously misogynist twits. great article, by the way.

I found this article particularly interesting as I read the Guardian's online Comment blogs/articles everyday. If Jessica's article had been published there, well... we would all have seen a fantastic demonstration of the article's point. I hate reading those boards so much. I like the Guardian in many ways, but the unbelievable mysogyny! The open ignorance and hatred of women! I have read such horrible things on there, Online Intellectuals debating whether women should really be able to vote, whether women are really capable of holding down a job (aren't they naturally lazy?) , whether rape is our fault afterall, whether every single feminist is a man hater... It's so tiring, I can't bare to read them anymore. Vile vile vile. I feel totally excluded from many of the debates there.

yeah what's up with the rampant misogyny and ignorance on comment is free? sheesh. as far as using a male username as a female, it would be hard to keep my mouth shut about misogynist arguments but if i had a plan and some patience i could act like a man with feminist beliefs.

For what it's worth, donna, I find it hard to keep my mouth shut when I see misogynistic arguments on other forums.

Of course, nobody has ever threatened me with violence over opening my big mouth. The closest I've had is someone harassing my old roomie and spamming his website. I feel pretty sure that if I were a woman (or they thought I was), the nature of the of the attacks would have been a lot different.