Sexism, Misogyny and the rise and rise and rise of the internet asshole....

a reply to: neformore

It's utter nonsense, and is commonplace (almost) everywhere online. On one hand, I want to punch about 80% of the guys I interact with in the neck, but I have to be honest:

As a guy newly returned to the casual dating scene after a 17 year marriage, it is a godsend to my ground game. Women are so used to the inappropriate language and overtures of my peers, and their expectation is that every guy is absolutely NOT what he pretends to be means a few emails and a phone call where I deliver is all it takes to lock in a meet. Whether we end up as friends or more if there is a spark is irrelevant to the process of collecting no's towards a yes.

So -- thanks losers! You have created a toxic environment which makes guys like me come across so much better just because you can't open your mouth online, in texts or even in phone calls without revealing yourself to be childish, lying, abusive douchebags.

Many thanks!

a reply to: TrenchRun

Hello TrenchRun, then I suppose he should not have written the book after all.. I do not see anything wrong with punishing psychotic behavior that shows no remorse. That's just me though.



My point is this:
If society becomes so animalesque, and so vicious as to outrightly on all fronts believe it is tolerable and acceptable to subject women and children to all types of hideous crimes, then I would, out of sheer personal obligation favor and welcome a regime change, that opposed that type of anarchy against those particular more vulnerable members of society. If that regime change were to be considered tyranny or fascism, than I would welcome it, if, I thought certain more vulnerable members of society were to be protected by it.

In other words, I personally would welcome leaders even dictators and tyrants that believed it was appropriate to protect the elderly, to protect the disabled, to protect children, etc. Have there been dictators and tyrants in the past who have done exactly that?
I believe so..


Just a day or two ago, I was reading an article concerning trafficking of children into prostitution in the U.S. It was a terrible article, with details about the percentages and ages of youth subjected to this nauseauting yet most prevalent industry; The children are in the range of 12-14 years of age, when they are forced to operate for deathly sick grotesque pimps and people of that hideous sort..If society gets so bad as to deem it all acceptable and tolerable merely looking away from the problem, then I say that the State should intervene, take charge, and do something about it.


Bush and Obama and their colleagues are creating a different monster, so I am not referring to state control according to their nwo agenda..not at all. Nonetheless, some type of state control over tyrranical behavior conducted by the masses, by masses of ignorant herds of criminals is, in my opinion, an absolute must.

I do not understand this bizarre logic that I keep seeing being stated here on ATS..stating that it is wrong to punish, wrong to correct, wrong to discipline, malevolent criminal behavior- malevolent behavior that cannot co-exist in standard society. I am not taking away a criminals freedom by requesting that he be punished, and disciplined ..I am merely requesting to have my freedom and my loved ones' observed, respected, and honored.



By the way, in that same article, concerning trafficking in the U.S. there is information that explains that many of these traffickers actually go to online networks, Facebook and the like, to seek their victims.. once again causing online activity and online access to be partially responsible for the problem..In some way or another it brings us back then to the whole question of internet freedom and internet privacy which in turn returns us to the issue of internet acitivtiy and "virtual" mistreatment of women online.. None of it right.


Are we able to agree that Enough is Enough?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

No. It's called a "topic" - is that a strange concept to you?

Discussing a particular issue that occurs against women is not sexism, no matter how much you choose to whine that it is.

Feel free to start your own topic on how poorly men are treated online, or how unequal you perceive yourself to be, or how evil you might think women are, because those things aren't the point of this thread.

a reply to: neformore

While forcibly ignoring the fact it doesn't just happen to women.
That it isn't a phenom confined to just women.
That your assertions of misogyny and sexism are not quite fitting.
In fact you get obviously get quite angry when it is pointed out it doesn't.
The insults you continue to fling as well as what I am addressing below betrays you ma'am.

And where, exactly did I say anything to the effect that women are evil to any degree?
That would be an incredibly stupid thing to say especially considering that is no sense something I believe.
Is this a Freudian Slip in reference to your aims than?

And it's not sexism?
It's not being selective as to which gender?
You're not keeping on only about females?
I guess I'll add that to the growing list of things I would be fascinated to hear your the rationale on.
If any of it is based in any sort of reason that is.

My opinion is that it is a better idea to stay away from intoxicants while we attempt to write and convey ourselves online.. I just think communication works better that way..

Probably nice to avoid arguments like this one:

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: Dark Ghost

When was the last time someone threatened to rape you?

Do you understand the psychological concept of rape to a woman and the effects of actual rape?

I'm guessing you dont, because if you did you would not be sounding so callous about it.

As a person that has had certain experiences and has had this style of argument levelled against me, I find it pretty distasteful. Not only is it calling someone out in the worst way, it's like someone's personal experience as a survivor is valued and even special so long as they agree with whatever the accuser has to say about what that experience means and how it should impact one's world view.

There is also this hidden implication that people who suffer certain life events possess not just a perspective, but a new super human kind of empathy towards that life situation. I actually find it to be an incredible burden to find out I'm meant to be that person!

It's just not the case that these type of life events always give you that kind of insight. If it was the case, it wouldn't be written about as losing part of one's soul.

Hope you understand, danke.

a reply to: silo13

I agree.

However, You and I are older and wiser than the younger women using the net and the remarks do not bother us. We see it for what it is, but pubescent teenage girls don't. Cyber bullying is a huge issue. There are young teenagers committing suicide because of the very things Neformore mentions.

Some of the young women use Facebook (previously MySpace) as a diary and they put everything out there not understanding the implications.

Carly Ryan Foundation

EVERYONE needs to check out the above link. It is tragic what happened to her.
Cyber Safety and education is important.

a reply to: tony9802

You are missing the point.

This idea that men have some tangible "expectation" standard to live up to in virtue of their sex alone is preposterous. There is no standard to "being a man", there is only a standard to being a good human - and that should apply to both sexes.

I didn't say the women in my life have expectations to fill that aren't being met. Again, you missed the point, which is that it is silly to assign "expectations" to only half the population (based on their sex alone).

That was a rather cunning reply. Nice try, but I am not that easy to fool.

originally posted by: neformore
Simply put, if anyone thinks that because they have a penis, its ok to threaten to rape and kill women for "lulz" or because you are "trolling" or that its fine to do so because you can be "anonymous" on the internet, then they are an asshole, who is acting like an animal and is incapable of being a part of a civilised society.

Demonstrate one person who has said that.

Nobody is endorsing that behavior.

They are resisting endorsing behavior that will make it *worse*. They are resisting endorsing uncivilized behavior as a response to "jackass" behavior.

originally posted by: tony9802
....then I would, out of sheer personal obligation favor and welcome a regime change, that opposed that type of anarchy against those particular more vulnerable members of society. If that regime change were to be considered tyranny or fascism, than I would welcome it, if, I thought certain more vulnerable members of society were to be protected by it.

Who do you think is going to wind up running your new regime? Good men and women who mean well?

You have thousands of years of examples to contemplate this.

originally posted by: TrenchRun

originally posted by: tony9802
....then I would, out of sheer personal obligation favor and welcome a regime change, that opposed that type of anarchy against those particular more vulnerable members of society. If that regime change were to be considered tyranny or fascism, than I would welcome it, if, I thought certain more vulnerable members of society were to be protected by it.

Who do you think is going to wind up running your new regime? Good men and women who mean well?

You have thousands of years of examples to contemplate this.

Absolutely..
There are plenty of dictators who meant well, and who attempted to protect their peoples, their lands, their communities.. if their presence means outlawing anarchists, street mobsters and disobedient delinquents, then I would want them to take charge..

a reply to: tony9802
Scary thing is, you probably really mean that. Scarier still, you are not alone.

a reply to: tony9802

Then you miss the obvious moral to their stories.......
That moral being the classic theme of "Absolute power corrupts absolutely.".

And I'm the one intoxicated...
hEh........

okay i'm playing an online mmorpg. i always play female characters. i have, once in a great while, been harrassed by other players who still don't know that female character doesn't automatically = female in real life and neither do male characters automatically = male in real life. so i made a male character and within 2hours, i already had a guy walk up to my male character, call him gay, then strut around him like a chicken. guys are much harder on other guys in video games, i'm telling ya. lol

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Once again, the thread topic is about the way women are treated online by a certain section of male society. Which is what I'm trying to discuss here.

Its not about anything else you wish to try and throw in and/or make it about.

If it was about all the stuff you are trying to put in it, it would be called something entirely different and, I'm sure, different views would be being expressed by different people.

But its not, and it isn't.

And if you wish to discuss those things, start your own thread about them

I don't think I can put it much clearer than that. That is what topic driven threads on discussion boards are about.

a reply to: TrenchRun

Here's a perfect example of the behaviour;
www.theguardian.com...

Ennis-Hill received the abuse on Twitter, with one tweet, sent from the handle @RickieLambert07 reading: “Jessica Ennis-Hill is a stupid redcated Saying she will remove her name if Ched Evens [sic] is signed. I hope he rapes her.” Both the tweet and account were then deleted.

After the troll was called “scum” for his threat, he replied: “Freedom of speech mate … I’ll say what I want when I want!”.

People here are suggesting that there is no problem with that because of "freedom of speech", or that it doesn't happen at all.

Personally I think the person who wrote it is scum.

originally posted by: neformore
Here's a perfect example of the behaviour;
www.theguardian.com...

Ennis-Hill received the abuse on Twitter, with one tweet, sent from the handle @RickieLambert07 reading: “Jessica Ennis-Hill is a stupid redcated Saying she will remove her name if Ched Evens [sic] is signed. I hope he rapes her.” Both the tweet and account were then deleted.

After the troll was called “scum” for his threat, he replied: “Freedom of speech mate … I’ll say what I want when I want!”.

People here are suggesting that there is no problem with that because of "freedom of speech", or that it doesn't happen at all.

Personally I think the person who wrote it is scum.

You are entitled to your opinion and if you want to think he is scum (and even call him that to his face) you can.

But what exactly are you advocating here? A hefty fine? Jail Time? Likening his comment to actually committing rape?

It's a slippery slope with bad stuff at the bottom of the pit.

a reply to: neformore
If you want to feed the trolls, that is your prerogative, be my guest. If you want to worry about what some idiot says on the internet, be my guest.

How about castration threats? Those bother you as much as rape threats? Yeah, that's actually a thing.

Everyday sexism project - this is everyone's business...not just a woman's issue.

usa.everydaysexism.com...

A thought about not choosing to be a bystander when others are being threatened and abused online or offline.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I've always had trouble with the idea of cyberbullying itself. As I see it, the conditions of cyber bullying imply that the victim is on a computer, sitting in a chair, alone, interacting with shapes and words on a computer screen. How can one be bullied under these conditions? These are very safe conditions. Is it spooky bullying at a distance? Is it about as real as cyber sex, and the bullying is self-inflicted? I fear there is not enough research, and too much legislation already.

That's because you want us to believe that words are meaningless - and harmless. There's a reason why you make this argument over and over again. You rely on words the same as all of us. More than most actually - and in fact, I've seen you edit your posts often enough to demonstrate that you re-think what you've said

Huh... :-)

Words mean things - unless you want to make a serious argument about how everything is meaningless. That would be hypocritical but very revealing

Cyber-bullying is real enough because words are real - the intent behind them is real. We feel words

The people who have no problem with cyber-bullying are usually also an interesting form of cyber-coward

Enough said

Now, please do go on to explain how words aren't magical, how they have no power - how the long history of language, written or spoken, is completely meaningless and how mankind would be the same as it is now if we had spent all our time nosing through the mud for grubs with nothing but excited grunts and squeals to announce our thoughts and intentions

We should be able to say anything we want to each other without repercussions?