Recently in Harassment Category

Photo by Jason Wagner, via Gothamist.

This is horrible:

Greenpoint resident Chrissie Brodigan says she was riding on the L train between Bedford and First Avenue when her pug, who has health problems, overheated and began vomiting in the tote bag she was carrying him in. As she was leaving the subway station with the dog in her arms, she says a police officer's attempt to issue her a ticket turned ugly, and when she became upset the cop began saying, "If you're going to act like a woman I'm going to treat you like a woman."

Brodigan says the cop went on to punch her in the back, and in the scuffle to handcuff her, he "grabbed my breasts and pinched them." A witness's account:

Melissa Randazzo, a speech language pathologist who lives in Williamsburg, witnessed the arrest and tells us, "something about it seemed very wrong. The cop's tone seemed really inappropriate and he kept saying things like, 'Are you going to act like a woman?' She tried to walk away, and then he grabbed her and pushed her against the wall outside the turnstile."

Luckily both Brodigan and her dog are okay.

A couple of thoughts here. Because the cop who Brodigan identified as her attacker is the NYPD's lone Hasidic officer, the Gothamist comments section has a bunch of racist comments and negative stereotypes about Hasidic Jews. Can we all please just agree that racism is not a useful response?

Also, Brodigan appears to be pretty plugged-in, and has thankfully been able to draw attention to this incident. I wonder how often this sort of abuse happens, but the woman in question does not have so many resources at her disposal. How many of these incidents do we never hear about?

*Trigger Warning*

A young woman in Detroit, Asia McGowan, was shot and killed by someone who had been leaving her nasty comments on her Youtube account and also had been stalking her on Facebook. This was someone she knew in real life-it was one of her classmates.

This story is really upsetting me, but I am trying to keep my head straight about the issues at hand. It is stressing me out for two reasons. One, almost every woman I know that has an internet identity has received some sort of threatening, stalker-ish, troll-ish email, comment, forum posting, death threat, blog post or shit even a vlog. This story is chilling and it is important to remember the stalking and murder of women happened before the invention of social networking technology, but this story is chilling nonetheless. As Miriam just said to me over IM, maybe these cases are just more visible now because of technology.

Two, why isn't this story on any of the national news networks? Because black women getting stalked and killed isn't worthy of national news coverage?

For more on this story check out What About Our Daughters, she has all the youtube videos up.

Thanks to Tiffany for the link and reminding me that this type of thing happened even before the internet.

In light of Bill O'Reilly's upcoming speaking gig with the Alexa Foundation, an organization that supports the rights of victims of sexual violence, Amanda Terkel at Think Progress exposed O'Reilly's victim-blaming past. In the past O'Relly asserted that the rape and murder of a woman was partially her own fault based on what she was wearing. Strange that Bill O would be speaking at Alexa.

This odd match becomes more apparent because due to the frustration by the O'Reilly camp, Terkel was stalked and harassed by the producers of Fox News. In her own words, Terkel writes,

This weekend, while on vacation, I was ambushed by O'Reilly's top hit man, producer Jesse Watters, who accosted me on the street and told me that because I highlighted O'Reilly's comments, I was causing "pain and suffering" to rape victims and their families. He of course offered no proof to back up this claim, instead choosing to shout questions at me.

I expect O'Reilly to air this "interview" at some point this week, possibly as early as tonight. I have no expectation that he will show the entire altercation or give the entire story about what happened, so here is the full account, offering a glimpse inside the O'Reilly harrassment machine:

You can read the play by play stalking on her post. Terkel concludes that the point remains that O'Reilly needs to apologize that it is in any way relevant what woman was wearing or drinking when she is raped and killed. Suffice it to say, O'Relly and his team owe Terkel an apology for stalking and harassing her.

Feministe, Raw Story and Daniel at the Feministing Community have more. You can also join the Facebook group in support of Terkel here.

Jesse Watter's the producer who followed Terkel can be emailed here.

Also, last night in full O'Reilly style, he called Terkel a 'villian' for standing up for rape victims.

UPDATE: Check out Amanda on Keith Olbermann's show tonight, discussing the incident.

The Center for Emerging Media's Marc Steiner Show aired a talk with our girl Jill from Feministe, the amazing Latoya from Racialicious and Danielle Citron from the University of Maryland (whose research is on online harassment) to discuss the ways that the blogosphere has been extremely hostile to female bloggers and what can be done to create a safer environment.

I'd bet every blogger who is a woman has experienced some form of online harassment. This is definitely a necessary discussion to be had. Click here to listen to the show, I'm waiting on the transcript.

The lovely Campbell Brown gives us the low-down on a Massachusetts woman and her husband who were pulled over for speeding, given a ticket, and then asked by the state trooper to prove her pregnancy by showing her belly.

Read transcript here.

Nothing gets me more heated than law enforcement officials and the like who feel the need to expose and humiliate women, probably because I've had a couple of encounters myself. One was when I was in the airport last year going through security check-in - the security person told me to take my scarf off, which I did. Then he told me to take my thin cardigan off (I only had a small tank underneath), which I refused - you know, considering the woman who was already in the clear in front of me wasn't asked to take her scarf or jacket off. So he "allowed" me to proceed. Fucking jerk.

I'm sure some of you have had your own experiences...

Last week I wrote about an article run by Salon about "upskirting" and "downblousing" using a quote from John Morris at the Center for Democracy and Technology that certainly set off some alarm bells.

From my post,

Unfortunately, the debate that ensues is a question of whether or not your privacy is being violated since you are on the street and as a public place is free to be photographed with all participants or as John Morris, from the Center for Democracy & Technology, says in the article, "If you don't want to be photographed walking the street, don't walk down the street -- it's a public street."

I have a friend that works at CDT and felt this was a bad characterization of the goals and values of their organization and brought it to the attention of the Director and CEO Leslie Harris, who has released this statement.

The recent Salon article, "Porn in a Flash," contains a quote from our General Council John Morris that was taken out of context. John's quote: "If you don't want to be photographed walking the street, don't walk down the street -- it's a public street," spoke to the broader, general question of whether someone has an expectation of privacy in a public place. Placement of the quote, however, made John sound unsympathetic toward "upskirting" and "downblousing." Of course these practices are wrong, and of course there is a difference between a snapshot on the street and this sort of invasive voyeurism.

CDT is a strong advocate of personal privacy and commends the steps states have taken to criminalize these nefarious practices. Federal privacy laws were passed before the majority of today's portable technologies existed outside of Dick Tracy comic books. That's why CDT is pressing Congress to rewrite the privacy laws and bring them up-to-date with today's technology and provide the sorely needed protections missing from the law as it stands today. We fully believe that state invasion of privacy laws can, if carefully drafted, adequately address these upskirting and downblousing practices.

Leslie Harris
President & CEO
Center for Democracy & Technology

Tracy Clark-Flory at Salon has an informative piece up about the increase of creepy upskirt photography. What is upskirt photography? When someone stands behind you or below you and snaps a pic on their camera phone up your skirt when you don't realize it. Then shares it with other upskirt fetishists on the internets. It is gross, offensive, violating, and a very popular form of pornography.

When it comes to voyeurs who photograph or videotape up a woman's skirt (known as "upskirting") or snap a photo down a woman's shirt ("downblousing"), though, "there are not many practical, legal remedies available to people who find themselves the victim," says Anita Allen, a privacy expert and professor at Penn Law. That's if the woman even realizes she is a victim in the first place, which is unlikely, as the voyeur typically manages to go undetected. If the photo or video is published online -- which, increasingly, it is -- it would be difficult for the subject to ever come across the material. Even if she did, how could she recognize one underwear-clad rear as her own?

Unfortunately, the debate that ensues is a question of whether or not your privacy is being violated since you are on the street and as a public place is free to be photographed with all participants or as John Morris, from the Center for Democracy & Technology, says in the article, "If you don't want to be photographed walking the street, don't walk down the street -- it's a public street."

But as Clark argues and I agree, there is a big difference taking a picture of someone on the street and strategically placing a camera between a woman's legs or down her shirt for kicks and jerk off material. Suggesting if a woman doesn't want to be upskirted, she shouldn't be on the street or shouldn't wear a skirt-well that just sounds like a "blame the victim" line of defense to actually be a legitimate excuse for a blatant violation of privacy.

Thoughts?

Newsweek recently posted a Q&A with Jean-Claude Van Damme conducted by Sarah Ball, a female reporter in her early 20s. I know that women are sexually harassed at work every day. But not all of those women have got a tape-recorder on them...

There's a monologue in the film about being a washed-up action star. Did you improvise that?
I like structure--like driving: go past the school on the street, stay on the right side, no hitting the car, go in right, you'll see a big church, stop and take a left, and you'll have it. By doing this I'm giving a structure of life, a path of light, and showing what happens between me and me, which is something very beautiful.

Beautiful? Why?
I really opened myself up in "JCVD." I peeled back the skin of the fruit, cut the pulp and then took that very hard seed. In this film I cut that hard seed, and inside that seed was a kind of liquid cream substance of the man I am, or the woman you are.

OK --
It was like being naked--I would love to be naked in front of you.

Well, I --
Not being naked being naked. I say such things in Hong Kong and they thought I was being a crazy Frenchman. Being naked of protection.

So you've no regrets at all?
Believe me--I've done very good stuff and very crazy stuff, and I don't regret the crazy stuff. So are you in New York?

Yes, I am.
And are you 27, or 32?

I'm 22.
Oh, f---. That is very young. Will you come to the premiere?

I don ' t know. When is it?
I don't know. You will wear all black, a black dress and high heels?

Uh --
You can come find me, I will be the one with the very broad shoulders, dark hair and a simple suit. We can have some champagne, you and me.

Props to Newsweek for actually publishing this. Almost every female journalist I know has a story about being harassed while trying to conduct a serious interview with a male source. Van Damme illustrates this phenomenon so perfectly. What a fucking creep.

Just two months after we found out that the New York City MTA had agreed to post anti-harassment ads in the subway, I was thrilled to see them up and just had to share. Big ups to MTA and, once again, to the organizations who helped make this happen.

It is no secret that women in the male entertainment industry are often subject to harsh conditions, violence, lack of pay and sometimes murdered. But I think the abuses faced by women that have recently immigrated are harsher, especially when they may not have networks developed yet, they may not understand the legal system or aren't sure who they can turn to or if they are still waiting on papers, oftentimes fear will keep them silent.

Most of the time the women are paid next to nothing, $2 for a dance, $10 for a set and $40 for an hour.

via AP.

The scene plays out in immigrant neighborhoods across New York, providing a key source of employment for immigrant women and a haven for men seeking to stave off the loneliness of being far from home. It is a perfectly legal form of entertainment -- there is no stripping, but plenty of hand-holding.

But some of the women say the clubs have a darker side. They complain about exploitative management, sexual advances from clients and even violence. A dancer was recently shot and killed in Queens, and one of the city's largest dollar-dance venues is now the target of a federal lawsuit.

They have yet to find a gunman for the young woman that was killed. They didn't mention her name in the article. Ultimately, the dancers have been coerced to put up signs saying they are treated fairly, but frankly they don't have much of a choice.

Furthermore, the article discusses how this is an old form of entertainment for lonely men and became popular during the depression. Since the economy is tanking, I wonder if there has been an increase in violence faced by women working in all facets of the male entertainment industry. Finally, suggesting that this is the old form of work, one wonders why dancers aren't treated better, even with benefits and stock options. Sometimes the obvious seems ridiculous because sexism is so ingrained in how we look at exotic dancing.