Ignore Them And They'll Go Away

[trouble]

I sometimes wonder if we should start a "dead from harassment" list of feminist & social justice focused blogs. Maybe if we have a long list of blogs that have gone silent, have locked every post, or have, as This ain't living did today, as Avalon's Willow did over a year ago, just turned comments off rather than deal any longer. At the beginning of this month, two disability-focused blogs shut down due to harassment.

For myself, dealing with drive-by trolls is irritating, but not impossible. They usually leave something silly [my fav this week: "You dumb whiney bitch, I hope she exercised her right to ignore you."] and then leave, never to return. Sometimes they come in huge waves, like after the EE debacle, which leaves me shaking and frightened by the vitriol so many people can spit out in such a short period of time.

Then there are the campaigns some people seem to invest in. They don't just leave comments that are harassing. They send emails. They complain about the person they are harassing at other blogs. They question the other person's status. They start whispering campaigns. And every day, or every other day, they leave another harassing comment, write another harassing email, and then, when that comment isn't responded to, isn't approved, that email isn't acknowledged, it's added to the pile of sins. And since we, as Nice Bloggers, are not supposed to talk about the harassment, it looks very suspicious. "So, why didn't you approve that comment from Anna on your post? It's on topic! It's about the subject! It's very polite! Geeze, do you have something against Anna? Cuz Anna says you do."

I'm going to tell you something about me that is not good.

I have participated in some of the above activities. I've left angry comment after angry comment on a blog that I had formerly liked but eventually loathed. (I am not talking about Feministing.) I participated in one locked-conversation about how angry I was with the blog owner, and have had emails back and forth with people about how angry I still, quite frankly, am. I participated in one open conversation, that I know the blogger in question saw because she commented on that conversation as well. I've read and followed many threads that ultimately end up discussing how much people loathe this blogger.

As someone who has since become the subject of a similar campaign, I am so deeply ashamed of myself. I had no idea how incredibly horrible this stuff could become. I had no idea how much it could leave you shaking and upset, how much it could hurt. I felt that somehow or another being a "Big Name Blogger" would protect someone from the pain of being speculated upon in public.

I don't tell you the above so anyone can pat me on the head and tell me I did the right thing or that I'm a good person or that I'm being brave by talking about it now or anything of that nature. I write it because I think it's important to realise that we can be participating in harassing behavior, even if that's not our intention. I didn't want to harass this person off the internet. I just wanted to talk about her. I just wanted to "have my say". I just wanted to be sure that people knew "how I felt". And while I am far from the worst of people who have done this, I participated in this hazing because I wanted to. Because it was more important to me that people see how this person was doing blogging wrong than it was that I just ignore someone who so pissed me off.

There is a difference between questioning what someone has said, and questioning who that person is. And there's a difference between saying "Okay, I'm done with this. Your stuff is not what I want to be reading and supporting right now", and repeating that statement many many times, both to the person you mean, and to others when you talk about them, over and over and over in a public space.

There seems to be a theory in the blogosphere that some people can just take it; that somehow this type of harassment is okay because they're getting something out of it. They're "big enough" that talking about them - as opposed to their ideas - is okay. They're getting attention, right? They're Big Names, and Big Names don't deserve the same respect or response you'd give to someone smaller.

Of course, none of the above is limited to Big Name Bloggers, and I don't mean to imply otherwise. I've known of smaller campaigns against very small blogs that, just due to the sheer relentless nature of them, have driven the blogger in question underground. Because it ends up being every day - every time you check your mod queue, every time you check your inbox. And sometimes, without meaning to, other people will help the harasser. They'll ask, without knowing the background, why you aren't approving the comments. They'll be quizzical in the harassers blog about why their comments haven't been approved, because they don't know.

And as Nice Bloggers, we're not supposed to talk about it. That's "causing drama". That's "giving them power". That's "playing their game."

Just ignore them, they'll go away.

The harassment that drove s.e. smith to close comments on ou's blog started in September. It has been ongoing since then, and has including harassment at FWD. Ignoring it has not made the harassment go away, but it has made ou not blog about certain subjects, and now just shut down comments rather than deal with it anymore.

Ignoring it has not made it go away.

Now what?

Comments

[kaz]

I had no idea any of this was going on and it appals me. Both because of the people (people I really respect) being hurt and because I'm afraid it will start happening to me.

Excellent point re: us doing it, though. I think it's a bit like isms: we think that because we're the good guys we could never behave in a bullying harrassing way! After all, people who do that are Evil and we aren't Evil. Pity, the world doesn't actually work that way.

This has become my context comment

[trouble]

I think part of why people are generally unaware of it is because there's a nebulous line that people draw across what's okay to talk about, and what's not, and when it crosses from "talking about being harassed" into "bullying someone else".

If I may use a relatively-innocuous example where I feel okay going into specifics.

I started my LJ in, I think, 2003, when I moved to China (hence why it's troubleinchina), and developed a smallish-for-LJ-fandom flist of people I chatted with regularly and had some connection with. When I started writing about Feminism, which I think was around 2005/06, that list grew, and was mostly of people I didn't know off-line, and who shared my views on a lot of subjects.

But my flist also included people who knew me off-line back in Edmonton, and those people I knew had people on their flist that we knew in common, but with whom I had a falling out with (read: we hated each other by then).

When I started writing about feminism, people I knew off-line started talking about feminism, both in my LJ and at their own, and apparently in off-line discussions. And this person who I shared a mutual dislike with (let's call her "Mary") responded by writing this hate-filled screed on her LJ about how much feminism was about man-hating women, and how some people were just ugly, and some people should shut up, and some people were stupid.

Which, whatever, until I saw a bunch of people who I thought had been discussing with me in good faith agreeing with her.

And then when people we knew in common would write about something regarding feminism, often in response to stuff I said, there was Mary, in the comments, complaining (without ever saying it outright) about stuff I had said.

And then she started answering my polls whenever I put them on my LJ, meaning I got her name in my inbox a lot.

And then she decided to friend me on LJ and follow my discussions.

And then she started leaving comments.

And the whole time this is going on, I wasn't sure how to respond to it. People I really cared about knew her, and I didn't want to put them in a bad position by complaining about her. I didn't think that was fair. I didn't want to ban her, because then she'd just go back to her space and complain about how I was violating her freedom of speech, and we'd be back to people we knew in common being asked to "choose". And I didn't want to talk about it, even under flock, because what if people went and harassed her in return? I had a flist of about 150, and she had a flist of 7.

I mean, this is a relatively trivial example. "Mary" never threatened me, or questioned my identity, or any of that stuff, she just talked shit about me. All the time. In places I felt I couldn't respond and defend myself without playing into her narrative. To the point where I was walking around my flat - 3,000 miles aware from where she lived - ranting and raving about it. To the point where every bad thing that had happened to me in Edmonton was constantly on my mind. And it continued for a long time - well into when I was living in Australia, with a much more limited support group of people off-line who I could rant at. (Amy & Jezz were awesome, but didn't have the context that Don & the folks in Edinburgh did.)

And how do you talk about that? There's a strong requirement in these discussion to "name names". To make sure everyone has "context" and can read every harassing comment. But in order to make it really clear why what "Mary" was doing was so damned upsetting, I would have to talk about so many personal things - things that "Mary" was aware of, but that the general online community I was in (and many of the people we knew in common) were not.

I don't think any of my off-line friends were aware of how awful this was for me, because it would be mean to talk about it. And heaven knows I don't want to be perceived as "mean". (But damn, I can't tell you how often I've wanted to write the Definitive Why I Left Edmonton Post.)

As I say, a relatively minor example. Eventually "Mary" left such a nasty comment on my LJ that people we knew in common called her on how she was wildly misreading what I had said, someone told her that every time she voted in a poll I got an email (and I suspect that I had begged them to stop telling me what she was saying about me), and she got bored of LJ and it all stopped. And this is the first time I've written down any of it. Because none of them are on DW, and so they won't see it. (And I'm resisting the urge to link you to some of these discussions so you have "context" because Do Not Want this to start up again, omg please no.)

I keep saying this is a relatively minor example, because some folks in the blogosphere are under siege of this nature, and it's all from people "within" the community. And there's no guidelines to how to deal with it. There's no real support for talking about it. I've veiled this whole post in such vagueness because I'm unwilling to talk about the stuff that's prompted it in specific - hence why I talked about my actions rather than someone else's. (And I haven't gotten into the specifics there because I don't want to make the discussion about whether or not it's okay to go after this one blogger, and then keep wanting to assure people "Well, I don't mean THAT person.")

And then, because I'm not willing to go into specifics here, people really should be wondering: Is Anna writing about actual harassment, or is she trying to write of legitimate critiques of people as harassment?

But in order to give everyone the information to answer that question, I open people who are being harassed up to the harassment escalating, because I've just given it the "attention" that we're not supposed to, and because some people will inevitably "pick sides".

And thus. *sigh*

[coffeeandink]

I'm really glad you posted this.

[trouble]

Thank you. I don't think I would have been able to write it without your thoughtful commentary, both in my space and in your own. You have done a lot over the past few years to make me really *think* about stuff.

[meloukhia]

As I said when I was discussing to the decision to close comments at this ain't livin' earlier: 'it doesn't resolve the much larger problem, which is that I did it because of harassment and I don't really see an end to the harassment happening any time soon, it's just not happening on my personal site any more.'

This post is important. It's important because it brings up, as Kaz says, the fact that we can be complicit in this activity even though we think we are the good guys. That what we think is 'harmless' and 'having our say' is not.

And it underscores the need to have a better mechanism for identifying harassment and abuse because people should not be driven to the point of closing down comments, flocking, or closing down their sites because of harassment.

I don't care about the rape threats in my inbox this morning from restarting the Feminism and Joss Whedon series. I don't care about the random @replies on Twitter calling me a stupid fat cunt.

I care about the harassment that happens from within the community that is carried out in such a way that most people are completely unaware of it. I don't care if people from within the community don't like me, disagree violently with me, hate what I write. That is all fine. Really. And they are more than welcome to trash me (as they do) and the sites I write for (as they do) offsite. But when they are making my own spaces unsafe for me and I am too terrified to speak out, this is not ok.

[ginny_t]

I would be really sad if your voice was silenced (to some extent or entirely), but I would completely understand. I'm so sorry this shit is going on.

Seriously, I hate people so much.

You do what's right for you. *hugs*

[trouble]

Part of the problem is it's not really about me. I mean, the thing going down at FR is just stupid bullshit. People I respect can look at that and go "Wow, that was just horrible" because the folks behind it didn't even bother to think they were doing anything inappropriate enough to hide it.

It's this chipping away that's going on, and I know it happens to other SJ sites because I've seen it, I've been part of it, and I've witnessed some spectacular fallout as a result of it.

And, you know, I don't mean things like "Anna, you've written something really racist here, and that is not okay", followed up by a post at someone else's place talking about "that racist thing Anna said", and a discussion about that. Whereas I've seen that conversation (because I, as Anna, have written some really shitty things) and been hurt by it (wah wah, oh my hurt fee fees), that's been critique of Shit Anna Has Said.

And there's always the question, you know - what is legitimate critique, and what is questioning someone's stated identity. When I first started writing for FWD, there were people who were legitimately pissed off because I had not been very public about my own mental health condition, and they viewed me as an "ally" and not as an actual PWD. But is demanding people self-disclose harassing, or is it asking for information that is important? And how much self-disclosure should there be? If I hadn't outed myself on FWD or here as being a regular partaker of the crazy cakes, I wouldn't have felt the need to cover my tracks when a student got my email, after all.

[ginny_t]

I keep trying to type thoughtful and helpful things here and failing utterly. This is entirely out of my depth. I so wish I could help or even contribute constructively. :/

I am rather outraged at this pissed off reaction you got when you made your mental health condition public. Grr. Stuff like that is hard to talk about when it's personal. And then you run the risk of making it All About You.

Some people are just never going to be happy. The problem is that there is a subset of those people who get something--I have no idea what--from gnawing and worrying at others and wearing them down until they break. Then they move on to someone else. It's really quite disgusting. :(

[ironed_orchid]

There is a difference between questioning what someone has said, and questioning who that person is.

I think this is the real crux of the matter. I think it's important to comment when what someone writes is hurting people, or perpetuating myths and stereotypes that hurt people. But there are useful ways to do this, and the main one is sticking to what they said and the context in which they said it.

[jesse_the_k]

Thank you, Anna, for looking inside to see how you've participated in trashing. Anger can be a powerful motivator; a shield against oppression; an engine for evil; and a derailer of planning and progress.

This-all is making me incoherent, but I think there's something useful in questioning what the nature of our communication -- as real-time social justice writers -- is. Are we discussing? debating? arguing? persuading? educating?

Debate certainly has rules; persuasion has elaborate theories, strategies & techniques; it's only in the movies that we can "agree to disagree" and let it go at that. Are we entering into communication expecting one set of standards and encountering others?

[meloukhia]

I think this is a really good point. I know that, in general, people have differing expectations of what social justice writing is about and how it should work. This becomes exacerbated in abusive situations where people are harassed not just for being 'wrong' (as though there 'wrongs' and 'rights') but for 'not blogging the way you're supposed to,' which presupposes, again, that there are right/wrong ways.

Unfortunately, I think that even explicitly stating what someone's philosophy is and how one is approaching communication, people will still harass and say 'you're doing it wrong.'

[trouble]

Before I deleted my tumblr (and thank you, meloukhia, for finding this for me), I wrote a post about social justice & a sense of urgency, which basically says that demanding an immediate and perfect response from people omg right now is... not good. And I think it's relevant to your comments here, so I link it. I may repost it here on DW/LJ because I think what I had to say in that post was really important to the overall discussion we want to have.

I mean, like that letter I wrote to Ms Magazine. I did haunt their website and watch to see when/if it got a reaction, while simultaneously keeping in mind a) it was a late week post; b) they were getting a lot of comments that were criticising them for what they said; c) they have an editorial board that should consider how they want to respond; d) there is also the author to keep in mind. Demanding a response from them right now omg, and posting "why haven't you answered this yet, huh? Huh? huh?" comments & emails to their site would be ineffective from a social justice standpoint, but kinda satisfying from an "I'm Anna, and I am so fucking angry" one.

[automaticdoor]

I feel really ashamed to admit this, but I have also participated in that behavior. I never left hate comments on the blogs, but I definitely talked about the bloggers behind their backs shamelessly, and in some cases, openly. It's something I'm trying to come to terms with in real life as well: just because someone's popular or talented or whatever does not mean that they are okay to gossip about, no matter how sie has treated you. (Example that I am particularly ashamed about: the ball debacle with our queen bee of 1L and its fallout.)

tl;dr: I don't know what to do either. I'm trying.

[polemista]

Awesome post!

I have to admit that I probably participated in stuff like this, too, although I don't know to what extremes.
It's a really important subject, because there's a fine line between criticism of someone's work/writing and pure trashing and I feel extremely uncomfortable when I write a post wondering whether I went too far, and what kind of bitchy comments it'll attract.
One thing is clear though, if someone doesn't want to engage with me, for whatever reasons, I need to accept that whether I'm right or not, a thing I can never know for sure anyways.

Also, I'd like to recommend this post on the subject, it is awesome for starting a discussion about what constitutes harassment:
Square 8 - Defining Terms

[sqbr]

With all these posts I feel like I'm missing something, either I haven't witnessed the behaviour or I didn't recognise it. I mean I have seen terrible bullying on social justice blogs, but pretty much only from people whose opinions I strongly disagreed with, and I get the feeling (especially from this post) that it's not as simple as just people not wanting to admit their privilege or whatever (though obviously that's a major problem too).

[meloukhia]

'I have seen terrible bullying on social justice blogs, but pretty much only from people whose opinions I strongly disagreed with...'

I see this too, and I have to admit that in the past I kind of went 'oh, it's That Person, yes it's nasty but everyone knows That Person' and I think that was a mistake. Even though the abuse was coming from someone I disagreed with (and sometimes actively disliked) it was still *quite* hurtful for the target. And, looking back on those incidents, I really regret not doing...something. I don't know what that would have been.

[spiralsheep]

I know you know this but I'll put it here for other potential readers, but building supportive communities (plural because some people can't comprehend intersectionality but are still useful members of one community or another) is one fundamental way to counter feelings of isolation.

[sqbr]

Oh, absolutely. I in no way meant to imply that that sort of bullying isn't as bad, and I've been trying to get better about confronting that sort of behaviour. But since it's always bundled up with statements I find generally offensive (rather than personalised attacks) I've tended to see stopping bullying as part of the general "stop people being racist/sexist/etc jerks" goal.

But your and trouble's posts seem to be talking about both that sort of behaviour and stuff that isn't actively (or at least not obviously) prejudiced or whatever. To quote from your post:

When we say “well, maybe this person has a point…”

Because when someone uses the right keyphrase, anyone who speaks up and says “you are being an asshole” is clearly Not A Good Ally.


And that makes me worry that while I might be ok at recognising (and sometimes confronting) bullying from people I disagree with, I might not be from people I agree with, or who seem to superficially agree with me.

(My brain ran out of spoons to keep making my point, I hope it's clear!)

[spiralsheep]

I also think I'm missing something or, more likely, several somethings (especially because I'm not used to failing to understand trouble, which I suspect I am this time).

Also missing something

[tigtog]

Not a request for more context - you've made it clear why you've limited the specifics and I fully support your decision. Just that my spoons have been low for months and I just haven't been following as many blogs/journals as I normally do, so I feel that I've missed absolutely heaps of background on this. However, I will cope.

Here is an open invitation to anyone who wants to post an exploration of this or similar harassment issues as a guest poster on Hoyden About Town, by all means using a single-purpose new nym, where I can cope with all the moderation of nastiness with my vorpal blade of SMITE! so that you don't have to - I have filters and I'm not afraid to use them.

This sort of harassment needs to be spotlighted, especially our own complicity in it.

Re: Also missing something

[spiralsheep]

I posted. Anyone who thinks the post is useful enough to link may, of course, link:

http://spiralsheep.dreamwidth.org/325541.html

[lilacsigil]

Thank you for posting this. I'm taking a good hard look at my own commenting right now.

[spiralsheep]

Hmm, I'm also feeling as if there's an elephant or two in the room. I'm going to ignore one of them for the moment but here's the one I want to acknowledge up front.

People with disabilities are often stereotyped as (a) Passive Victims who become Good by Overcoming Adversity and/or (b) Attention-seeking Fakers of Victimhood, and I think that both those extremely problematic stereotypes feed into the complexities of dealing with harassment and/or bullying within the context of social justice for people with disabilities.

Hi, Laura Hale/Michaela Ecks

[coffeeandink]

I could take your advice more seriously if you didn't consistently harass and enable the harassment of other fans.

psa

[(Anonymous)]

link collection on purplepopple/partly_bouncy's long history of bullying other fans

http://ithiliana.livejournal.com/922604.html?format=light

sorry for this comment being anon

i never post anon but am too scared to use my deewee name bcos i might end up as hale/eck's next victim

[ldragoon.livejournal.com]

This is a really good post and gave me a lot to think about. Thank you for writing it.

[georgiaclaire.livejournal.com]

I'm really glad you wrote this, 'cause I've just moved to ban anonymous users on my lj after seven years, because yes, people were using anonymity to be crap, and it wasn't about my opinions (which, frankly, aren't even ON lj these days 'cause no one gives a crap), it was to have a go at me. And I don't feel like playing any more.

I hate walking away from things, letting these guys pull shit and get away with it. But it isn't worth it. I'm just going to make it harder to be shit.

[firynze.livejournal.com]

Very thinky post, and I'm not sure how to respond, really.

This seems to be a specialized version of the general Fishbowl Effect - once you make yourself a public figure, in any sense, once you become active and available and in the public eye, you automatically forfeit your right to privacy, to dignity, to solitude, to feeling hurt or ashamed or embarrassed or tired or in any way human. You are now a Public Figure, to be discussed or derided at will - and that includes your private, non-public persona and qualities.

I've never much liked this phenomenon.

[dinpik.livejournal.com]

I'm so sorry this happened to you. I don't really have any ideas on what to do next.

I write it because I think it's important to realise that we can be participating in harassing behavior, even if that's not our intention.

For some reason, this sentence reminded me of a line from L&O: SVU's Capt. Cregan: "We don't get to pick the vic."