Okay, this Stuff Has Got to Stop Happening
In reading about what happened to Kathy Sierra, prominent Marketing blogger, I was disappointed but not surprised. Kathy received death threats and is now unable to attend presentations that she was going to give at a technology conference. You can see in her post that some guy threatened to kill her and perform sexual acts on her against her will. There is also a disturbing S&M picture. She says:
I do not want to be part of a culture–the Blogosphere–where this is considered acceptable. Where the price for being a blogger is kevlar-coated skin and daughters who are tough enough to not have their "widdy biddy sensibilities offended" when they see their own mother Photoshopped into nothing more than an objectified sexual orifice, possibly suffocated as part of some sexual fetish. (And of course all coming on the heels of more explicit threats)
I do not want to be part of a culture where this is done not by some random person, but by some of the most respected people in the tech blogging world. People linked to by A-listers like Doc Searls, a co-author of Chris Locke.
Similarly, Amanda Marcotte had violent and sexual threats posted against her, leading her to quit the John Edwards campaign. So, what we are seeing is women who are outspoken, being silenced by crazy trolls who want to "do things" to them. It is such a shame that this stuff still happens… how can you deny that these situations hold women back?
Chris Locke, author of Cluetrain Manifesto and the man who owned and moderated the sites which posted the threats against Kathy, says the following in defense:
However, given that half the human race consists of women, it should not come as a newsflash that some of them — in about equal proportion to men — are stupid, venal, dishonest, or just generally annoying. Expressing such an opinion may be distasteful to some and vehemently argued by others, but last time I checked, having a negative opinion of a public figure was neither a federal offense nor an expression of misogyny.
I did write two comments on the "Bob’s Yer Uncle" site, which I am happy to repeat for the record: 1) "Kathy Sierra is a hopeless dipshit."; and 2) "The only ‘passionate users’ I know are crack heads." I do not like Kathy Sierra. I like her even less after her post of Monday. If she is waiting for me to apologize for something I did or said, she is going to have a very long wait.
Now, this is a typical exaggerated response. A woman is trying not to be victimized in a sexual and violent way… then someone comes out and says that she is a wimp and can’t be criticized at all. Not true! Of course many women have stupid ideas, just as many men do. So – it is not the debating ideas part that is objectionable. It is the violence and the threats! And, in recognizing that women have a bigger challenge in that area and potentially standing up for them (such as nice-guy Hugh MacLeod and many of the commenters on Kathy’s post) maybe this stupid problem can start going away.
“It is not the debating ideas part that is objectionable. It is the violence and the threats!”
Well said. In matters such as these I’m disheartened that either (a) people can’t keep the issues separated, or (b) they are deliberately confusing the issues to hide behind one while actually advocating another. It’s either ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, and it troubles me when I find the best I can hope for is ignorance.
No kidding. Debate and discussion makes ideas stronger – but the threats silence. Who wants that?
The people who threaten, those are the ones who want silence. It is no different than domestic abuse threats. The hoped for result is that the threatened one will be quiet. Will shut up and let the bully do and get what he or she wants.
I haven’t read too much about this incident, just a blog entry or three. But I was wondering about the question of her reaction. In my mind, and I know, I am not a woman, I would have been concerned, but I am not sure I would have cancelled a event trip to a conference over it.
My question is does it really sound like the words of someone who would actually do anything, or is it the rantings of a basic coward who wants to appear big and bullying, but wouldn’t take a step out into the real world and actually do anything that might endanger them for a million dollars.
I am not making a judgment on her, I am looking for feedback on the idea I presented is all.
Hello Stefanie,
What has happened to Ms. Kathy Sierra is appalling to me. Only a cowardly, insecure man would threaten to take a woman’s life or take what doesn’t belong to him.
Please know that there are God-fearing men in the blogosphere who honestly believe that “a woman is a man’s most valuable resource.” We believe that a woman is too valuable to throw away.
I’m not the only man who wants all women to feel safe and secure while in the presence of real men who still love, honor, and respect God’s gift to this world.
Manchild,
What concerns me about your comment is that there may be “something” in it that seems a little too possessory. You speak of things belonging to a man, women being a resource and also of God’s gift. I’m not sure if all of those relate to women, or just the resource reference. I was wondering if it was too much to ask that you clarify a bit. I don’t want to misunderstand. I just don’t like thinking of women as possessions and resources for men, but I’m guessing that you don’t mean it that way (hey, I may be the only one in the world to feel uncomfortable with your comment).
Now having said that, I’m rather new to the Blogosphere and I don’t know what the etiquette is… Is it appropriate to comment on another comment? Forgive me if it is not, and likewise, apologies to Stefanie.
Heya Mac – go ahead and comment on the comments – I don’t think there is an etiquette!
Marty – I see what you are saying, but I think it is hard to imagine what it is like to be threatened if it hasn’t happend to you. Also, the point of the post is that we all have trolls (me too), but unfortunately women are more brutally threatened – and that sucks.
Manchild, God-fearing has very little to do with it. What matters is respect for women in general, that woman in particular, that person in particular and the idea that people have the right to put forth ideas without being threatened. You can have all those things without believing in God at all, much less fearing him/her.
I agree Stef, it is hard to generalize when it comes to individual response to a threat. At first glance I feel she overreacted, but I don’t know her psyche and the whole story so I reserve judgment. And the final say of course is that the culprit, the villain is not the woman no matter what her reaction. The villain is the one who threatens.