Misogyny in the Blogosphere

Thankfully, I’ve been spared from the kind of horror that Kathy Sierra has faced. I read her story today — oddly enough before you wrote about it — with a deep sense of dismay.

I have never had an ugly comment on my blog or really anywhere on the Internet that I can recall. I did run into a pervert on Flickr who left an inappropriate comment on a photograph. I blogged him and reported him.

In my opinion, we, as a society, tend to be too tolerant of this sort of ugliness. Freedom of speech is one thing but freedom from harrassment should be something we can expect. I liken it to someone who tells a racist joke at a cocktail party. Most people will smile politely and try to change the subject instead of calling the “joke” teller on it. I have started to walk away when someone tells a racist or sexist joke (against either gender, thank you). But, I wish I had the gumption to interrupt the “joker” and say, “I don’t want to listen to that garbage. Take it somewhere else.” I think that we as a community on the Internet need to take that attitude — we don’t want that here and we’ll shun you if you keep it up.

So, all you misogynistic birders out there are given fair warning!

I’ve been reading about this for a few days now. It really is a sickening thing. People sit behind their screen name and think it’s OK to say whatever they want.

Fortunately, I believe these people are just childish morons that really wouldn’t do what they say but I’d hate to be in her position. I hope she fights it by continuing to blog. If she quits, they win and we all lose…

I’ve not received such comments but have seen them all over the blogosphere since falling in love with blogs in 2002. Those comments usually come from folks with anonymous or hidden identities aka cowards. They’re why I don’t allow anonymous comments on the blog; I expect folks to take responsibility for their words and to act like adults.

Yes.

The worst come privately and from one person in particular. When he tries to post anonymously, we’ve been able to trace his ip address.

Unfortunately, comments that differ from a blog authors opinions are often interpreted as sexist, racist, etc.
For instance, recently I read a blog with some really anti male, anti father sexist flaming in the disguise of an essay on Virginity.
The piece posited that men are creepy perverts worshipping their daughters virginity, and the piece was actually just another male rip.
So, when I posted in direct response to it, the blog, and related blogs, accused me of being a “creep” a “split personality”, etc.
So, is sexism a one way street? Good old misanthropy gets no press when it comes to Miss Odd Ginny constantly bleating as if she is a sheep on a stake, and responses to the standard daily issue male bashing is really the wolf.

Mike: the whole notion that Miss Anthropy is virtually nonexistent in the blogosphere is not only wrong, but so institutionalized that we fail to recognize it, organize against it, or feel its effects until too late. I give you one simple idea: war is everywhere. Correlation? matrilocal, matrilineal societies wage more war than patrilineal or patrilocal societies. That is a fact of science, and the evolution of all species.
The inherent problem however, is that we as individual men are sooooo caught up in the labels that women are pasting on us, good man, bad man, etc, as if we are all little guests at a ten year olds tea party, that we fail to recognize the facts of both misanthropy, or historical oppression.
But really, the best case in point would be this post above, when she says
“I know that misogyny is one of those evils that still lurk in the hearts of men.”
Presumptions? Any thoughts on that? Here is what Miss Anthropy thinks of men:
1) presumption that ALL MEN ARE ALIKE
2) presumption that all male hearts contain evil, a religous judgement, and her as god
3) presumption that Miss Odd Ginny is really what those men are actually feeling, rather than some other explanation for behavior that falls outside of matrilocalities harnessing of the dialectic resources of the intellectual environment
4) the use of the word ‘lurk’ in regards to males–a reaffirmation of the stereotype that men are sub-human predators ( which is the prevailing American feminine world view today)
5) the statement has built into it what all male bashing does: it discusses an isolated incident of one bad person ( I mean, do we have proof yet that it is a man doing it on Sierras site?) and then generalizes that incident onto all men.
6) I am just too tired now to continue…I think I will go find some other environment where the dialectic resources are not all used up by male bashing women and the wars they create, and the men they drag in to fight their battles…

Yikes, Mike: I refer to earlier comment “and the men that they drag in to fight their battles”….
I apologize for mistaking your identity. It is more and more possible to do that in cyberspace then it used to be, because the male bashing propaganda press, then, was 99% female owned and operated, matrilocal from Berkeley, or Boston College and their surrounding intellectual breeding grounds. Now it is primarily institutionalized thanks to the ilks of Catherine MacKinnon, et al., and again I refer you to the war in Iraq, and all of those single mother raised young men;-)

Oh, yeah, back then, a few guys generated that pabulum as well: the guys who were/are attached to the male bashers, and/or the guys trying to get attached to them;-) So I didn’t expect a gendered author issue here,and was responding to you as a poster. I stand on what I said earlier-which is that misogyny is a female generated issue, and is everywhere:

Yahoo Hit counter sayyyyyysss:
misanthropy in cyberspace generates 1,050
“misogyny in cyberspace” 24,400 hits
and the squeeky lil phrase :
“misandry in cyberspace” 127 hits

So, I am doing with the word ‘misanthropy’ what was done to so many words in the not so distant past: I am owning it, and morphing it into a broader meaning of “hatred of menkind”. I fear the general public is not ready for an actual discussion of misandry–what do you think?
I think you might have missed my point, or not actually read my post: how can you disagree with me “completely”?
I mean, you are aware indeed that matrilocal/matrilineal societies crank out men who they train to do more warring than any other form of society, right? That is a fact of all human species. I mean, you watch birds right? What do those cranky little fellers do in the nests of others?

Well, egalitarian is a great thought isn’t it? How does it work for you in practice? Or, may I ask “who defined that term for you?” What was Her name;-)

Well, where oh where did you get the idea that hazmatixezs
MO is to insert RANDOM opposition to dialogues? Random is hardly in the MO of the wearer of a HazMat suit. Can I presume that some one else out there in the matrilocal environment has influenced that opinion for you as well? Not that I want to be rude and presume, tho.

But an alarming trend recently: hazmatix has been demonized by people with weak intellectual constitutions, and even worse definitions of misogyny. Oh, yeah, and also hated by quite a few male bashers;-) BUT, on the brighter side, the Haz has opened up some interesting new dialogues;-) Over at Greg Ladens blog, a few ‘homeschoolers’ were being incredibly evasive, and defensive about discussing abuse, and particularly defensive about sexual abuse in the homeschool environment, until haz weighed in. Especially some from the more matriarchal schools of thought, ala” I want to raise my kid in a matriarchy. Matriarchy doesn’t exist. So, I will create it, and use my kid as a sketchpad for it.”;-) I merely refered them to bonobos, and several studies about maternal sexual abuse of infants as a resource.
Then like thunder, the skies opened up, and statistics and anectdotes were flying;-)The down side is that haz was labeled as a troll………
Which I am;-)
The other downside was that some yak took my words out of context,and began some talk, and then the slightest inference that Sierras really sad plight is somehow linked to comments like those of haz, or others like me who find male bashing repugnant, and respond to it….then, yak, and some fellow members of the herd labeled me massaginist, which I highly resent, because I have never, ever given one bad backrub !!
Which led me to your site, and if all of that is random, I accept the plea.
But I just call bullshit “bullshit” when I see it. And I especially like to address the issue of male bashing wear-ever I need to suit up. As I stated earlier, the case of Sierra is one that deserves attention, but all of these others talking about it? Yikes, the web is FULL of that already. But it does keep the males in the herd closer to the females in the herd indeed, bandying the idea of misogyny around, rather than misandry, and the misanthropic wars it creates.
The saddest fact, is that the men who could,and the women they are/should be attached to, could righteously complain about misandry, generate,or join in the dialogue about it . But they don’t.
Even more unfortunately, the guys who could best take on misandry, which really leads to misanthropic world views,are often dead soldiers, prisoners, homeless vets, or just Joe 9 to 5, with no time, or resources to speak up about it–you know, the guys who listen to Rush and wear their hats backwards on the drive home from work as their last most remote vestige of rebellion to a society that internalizes hatred of males so deeply that women are allowed to ‘own’ the dialogue, and then teach it to , well, you, and any of so many other categories of men that go overlooked, until they are labeled, or assaulted in the game of words.
So, yeah, I applaud you–kind of, for taking the issue on, but really, yeah, just kind of. But I am no longer mystified as to why protests of male bashing are instantly labeled as “misogyny” by so many folks.

I will respect your wishes indeed, and I did ask you some questions about your thoughts on this and other topics already in my earlier posts. If you can reply, I am at hazmatix@ the address that you have for me already on file( I presume these posts contain that).
I am prefacing this with the idea that you don’t appreciate my inference that hate is hate, or that misogyny is related to misandry,and so I will stay on your topic here in my comments, re: misogyny, and possible causes, and solutions for said misogyny. I didn’t see that you are actually asking me to leave the discussion entirely, only that you felt I was hijacking the thread, so I will stick to the issue about misogyny in the blogosphere.
And this will be my last post, with that in mind. Thanks for your sentiments, and I part ways with this dialogue, no censorship of this topic is necessary, as that “link” and the correlation between The Sierra misogyny incident and misandry is valid.
I really liked Sierras bold and uncompromising statement that “I would never be for censoring speech–these people can say all the misogynistic, vile, tasteless things they like–but we must preserve that line where words and images become threats of violence. Freedom of speech–however distasteful and rude the speech may be, is crucial.”
An I trust the courts will figure that out if she files a lawsuit, where that line is drawn, and hope that rather than basking in the free publicity that this has generated, an actual charge is filed. I will follow it closely now. But hating is a two way street, and it is internalized whether you internalize misogyny, or misandry–internalized hatred of men and a link to misogyny is clearly evident on the same blog! This particular thread that you have posted to Sierras contains below the post on misogyny, “is your app an ass-kisser?”
Has no less than eight picture portrayals of men as “assholes” ” anal retentives” etc, and no less then three images of men that contain the phrase ” you can’t trust ” him,and no less than three of those images portray references to the male rectum, and in this case the rectum of males.
Really, It is terrible when these things happen to nice people, and my heart sincerely goes out to someone who has tolerated such things, but not exclusively because they are women–that would be truly misogynistic. But because the issues are sort of realted to the “you get back what you give out” theory of existence.
My heart goes out to every working stiff who has internalized such imagery of himself so deeply that these kind of images of men–that post had exclusively men portrayed as ass kissers, anal retentives, flaky intellectuals such as “tempermental guy…who is a pain in the ass, but worth it?” Hmmm…..are these just funny, or something more grand, and if so, it begs the question: what sort of personal politics lead people to such incidents?Are such images just “funny”, or some other sort of thing…Sure, these eight steretotypes of male tech geeks can be funny to insiders, if taken in the right context, and not when taken the wrong way. Would you tolerate such a double standard in regards to misogyny and ‘humor’? And because that sick’humor’ by Locke or whoever she has publicly labeled as responsible for that sick humor/law breaking death threat is more extreme, are they more or less both merely derogeuratory?
I wasn’t able to judge for myself, because she pulled the original threats from the site. So I will respect your wishes, and leave this thread and now, and post on my own site, because apparently you feel that contributing to the discussion is hijacking. Seeking input into the issue you asked about, or lively discussion of its definitions or its causation is moot next to expressions of sympathy, or discussions of “blatant bias” as long as those biases don’t include male opinions of misogyny, and her children misanthropy or misandry.

Just a note: here we are some month and a half since the Sierra thingy, and no one is charged or prosecuted. Is that because I was right: it was an orchestrated scandal? Or is it that when she accused three innocent men, she was wrong on all counts, and faces no prosecution herself?