Misogynist Trolls Have An Agenda, And It’s Not Lulz

[phantom power]

I’d like to recommend a couple of interesting pieces by Paul Mason and Lindy West, who have a point that I think bears stressing: Trolls are real people and they have an agenda outside of some vague “need for attention”. They are misogynists, and as I said during the CONvergence panel on this subject, it’s important to understand that misogynists believe they are in the right. Indeed, they are incredibly dogged and self-righteous, as Mason found out when he first decided to explore online misogyny—they get really mad when you do this, by the way, because part of their self-righteous worldview includes a belief that they should be able to push their agenda without being examined or questioned too closely.

...

Of course, Mason interviews the guys who claim they’re just in it for the “lulz” and discovers to no one’s great surprise that actually, these trolls have deep hatred and resentment of women and actually do take the mission to silence women very, very seriously. They just can’t quite admit that to themselves, because part of the identity of the misogynist is to deny that he is a misogynist—he loves women as long as they know they are subhuman sex/reproduction appliances put here to serve, so how can he hate women?!—so the amount of rationalization that goes on is astounding.

...

The seething rage on display from so many men (and their female supporters) all the time on the internet is educational; it makes it much harder to hand wave and pretend that rape and sexual harassment are a matter of miscommunication, that anti-choice sentiment is a result of some kind of affection for “life”, and that women’s failure to reach economic and social equality is a matter of women’s failures instead of widespread sentiment that women don’t deserve said equality. Seeing the livid rage of devoted Republican voters at the very existence of independent women sharing their thoughts and opinions online makes it very difficult indeed to see Republican policies that hurt women as being merely coincidental. So this shit matters.

..

West is right; it’s time to stop thinking of trolls as idiots who are just seeking attention, and see them for what they are: Misogynists with a political agenda. These are men that absolutely do not want to live in a society where women are treated equally, and they are obsessed with silencing the women online whose writings they rightfully fear are going to help push society in a more feminist direction. They want to harass feminists into silence. If we keep this understanding front and center and discard useless theories about “attention-seeking” or “lulz”, we can begin to have a more productive conversation about what the hell to do about the problem.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/01/misogynist-trolls-have-an-agenda-and-its-not-lulz/

[GiaGiovanni]

1. I think that's probably right

.

[BrotherIvan]

2. Very well said

Speaking the truth, forcefully in this manner is the way to beat the knuckle-draggers. When we stop tip-toeing around the ignorant and hateful and start pointing out exactly what they are, we may find the apathetic or willfully indifferent open their eyes and "evolve" enough to push back against the Dark Ages onslaught.

[LanternWaste]

3. That very thing happened here on DU when two of my favorite posters were chased away

"and they are obsessed with silencing the women online whose writings they rightfully fear..."

That very thing happened here on DU when two of my favorite posters were chased away (or, at best, are still in-absentia) due the hate-filled, anti-equality vulgarity directed at them.

However, as cowards so rarely lack the courage of their own convictions, I have no doubt they will refuse stand up to be recognized for their "heroics", and maintain the comfort and safety of anonymity.

[Pab Sungenis]

4. Oh, please.

Here on DU you can be labeled a misogynist just because one of a certain cabal don't like your tone of typing.

Or because you're a man.

It's getting to the point where we have more of a problem of misandry in this place than misogyny.

[Squinch]

5. Here on DU there are plenty of misogynists of just the sort this article describes.

[liberalhistorian]

7. Seriously? There are plenty of established posters

on here who think child support is male enslavement, who think women are too quick to cry rape and too sensitive about it, (or, worse, that they provoke it and are to blame), who think women are only out to trap men and suck them dry financially, who think domestic violence is either too over-hyped or men are as much or more victims of it despite plenty of research evidence otherwise, (or, even worse, that women somehow provoke it or bring it on themselves and therefore deserve it), who think women have more power than men now and that they're using it to put down men, who think there's total equality now and any woman who says otherwise is just a man-hater or in denial or greedy, who think that if a woman chooses not to have an abortion that the father then shouldn't have to pay child support or be a father, etc., etc., etc., etc. And they're quite proud of it also.

They are as bad as women who blame men for anything and everything and refuse to hold women accountable for anything at all.

[QuestForSense]

8. Ya think?

You said it all, and in one breath, too!

[Whisp]

14. Very well said. Standing ovation here.

[Squinch]

19. Nicely said.

[Pab Sungenis]

23. Links, please.

[opiate69]

28. I'm guessing you're in for a loooong wait..

[Scout]

31. :snort: so you can tell us how that's not really misogynist, and we are being oversensitive, and

really WE are being the misandrists, etc. etc. etc.

[opiate69]

35. M is for.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2880075


(Far and away, one of the most brilliant posts in 12+ years of DU.... )

[boston bean]

134. You act like an innocent noob who never set foot into meta,

when in fact, you were a staple in that forum.

It could have been called the warren demontague snarkapalooza with google images forum, and no one would have known the difference! LOL

Also, in these threads, you seem to mock, you seem to have quite a bit to say. Not that you don't have the right to you do, of course, and I would never deny that fact. But what you did in meta is what you are doing in this thread. Really adding nothing of substance, but ridiculing feminists in a snarky way, making it well known, you think feminists are man haters who hate sex. That's a fair assessment, amirite?

[boston bean]

137. And you had nothing to do with it. LOL

Have a good one!

oh and ps

http://www.google.com/search?q=warren+demontague+%2B+PIV&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

[bettyellen]

49. Fetch them your self. If you haven't read all those statement here multiple times, then you weren't

paying attention. Many of us have been.

[Pab Sungenis]

59. Then you should be able to provide them.

Go ahead.

[bettyellen]

67. And you could find them your own damned self, if you were truly interested. LOL.

I know better than to think that.

[Pab Sungenis]

74. I'm not the one making the accusation.

So I'm not required to back it up.

I don't deny that there are misogynists on DU. But I DO deny that they do so with impunity. I also deny it's as big a problem as some think it is.

I remember the fight over "feminist martyr" S.E. Cupp, where those of us who said she wasn't qualified for her job were roundly branded misogynists. That kind of overreaction is based in the misandry of certain people on here. And anti-male posts regularly get a pass by juries.

[bettyellen]

79. No one here is actually required to find links for you. We are discussing something we have seen

plenty of times. Waaaay too many times for a progressive site. We know loads of people will want to live in denial and they are a waste of time. If you missed it, you ain't paying attention. And you're wasting my time.

[Pab Sungenis]

92. And if you use what you think you've seen as an excuse to attack all men

then back up your claims. Otherwise, consider on what you are basing your view.

[bettyellen]

96. This makes little sense. But no, I am not searching for jack shit for you. Thought I made that clear

"Otherwise, consider on what you are basing your view. "
Um, yeah whatever that was supposed to mean.

If you actually gave a shit, you'd do research- but I am too smart to think that is the case.
Goodbye.

[Pab Sungenis]

101. I don't give a shit.

I just want you to back up your complaints.

Misogyny is not tolerated here on DU. Misandry too often is. Neither should be tolerated.

[bettyellen]

107. You can't always get what you want.

[Nine]

112. Misandry is tolerated? Well now I wonder if YOU will provide links supporting YOUR claim?

Asking for a link is appropriate when someone makes a narrow statement of fact. Not so much for broader observations. I don't have a bunch of links proving that racism is all too common in the US. I have the observations of a lifetime. Anyone who would dispute racism in the US based on the fact that I haven't spent my lifetime collecting links to support this observation is just nuts. Misogyny is shockingly common on DU. That is the long term observation of me and many others.

[Pab Sungenis]

119. The way I'm being treated in this thread is a good example.

The assumption that because I'm a man, and a gay man, I must be against women.

Then there's the whole fight over S.E. Cupp, which was riddled with misandry.

Here's a few more.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023334936
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2845844
Here's one that got a pass from a jury 0-6: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3398034
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=16792
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2345378
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=15432
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=21620
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2118468
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2529429
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021141700

And too many cases of responses to whatever I've posted (mostly from seabeyond) with only the word "man" than I have time to track down.

[Nine]

125. THESE are your examples of misandry?

Well thanks for providing links, I guess, but I looked at your first few links and I'm not seeing a lot of misandry. If there's disdain, it mostly seems directed at misogynists, not men generally. As for your being gay, I wasn't aware that you were gay and I wasn't aware there was a stereotype about gay men being misogynists. I would be more likely to assume a misogynist was a heterosexual male than anything. If people are responding to you negatively on this thread, it probably has much more to do with the views you're expressing than the fact that you're male or gay.

[treestar]

151. The first one isn't "misandry"

It's simply making fun of a certain attitude toward Weiner.

[Major Nikon]

158. I'm pretty sure if the mirror statement was made about women it would be labeled as misogyny

...by the same poster.

So it's either misandry or the DU definition of misogyny is skewed in favor of one gender over another.

Imagine the outrage if women's vaginas (complete with the vulgar reference to that body part) were deemed huge simply because the poster didn't like their politics or opinions. Would that be misogyny?

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22little+dick%22&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

[hfojvt]

120. I was gonna ask the same thing

a link or two showing that misandry was tolerated

but your claim is a broad one and harder to define

"misogyny is shockingly common on DU" is broad, and how do you define misogyny? Is it misogyny for me to object to the notion of "male privilege"?

But liberalhistorian made some narrow claims. She claimed that MANY posters on DU "think there's total equality now and any woman who says otherwise is just a man-hater or in denial or greedy," and also that MANY posters "think child support is male enslavement".

So there are say, twenty "established posters" who are going to make those claims, or just ten making each claim?

[Major Nikon]

141. How many thousands do you want?

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22limp+dick%22&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

[boston bean]

94. You attack all men, is the accusation. Well, I know you don't.

You speak out against misogynist trolls whose tactics are to claim you are attacking all men.

thanks for doing so.

[bettyellen]

100. is that what Pab was trying to say? LOL, I needed that translation!

Have they gotten it through their head that the "gimme links" tantrums do not work on me?

The links will be right next to the beer and sandwich, in their dreams.

[treestar]

149. Don't you have to get links to prove the assertion in your last sentence?

What's good for the goose, etc.

[hfojvt]

87. you may not know this

but I would guess that 90% of DU does not read 90% of DU.

There are tens of thousands of posts on this forum every day. Nobody here reads them all. I am guessing that most people here do not even read 10% of them. Remember, even to read 10% of them would mean you are reading 1,000 posts a day.

It is not snobbishness or putting people on ignore or putting blinders on, it is just the sheer volume of posts and numbers of people.

Although for myself, sometimes I will read a thread title and think "good grief, I am not going anywhere near that flamewar inferno."

[bettyellen]

93. I rarely read gun threads, so I would refrain from telling people what goes on in gun threads....

but I do read a lot on women's issues, and feel confident explaining what I know I have seen.
This poster is either talking out their ass, or picking nits. They have not convinced me they give a shit.

[hfojvt]

111. I think he is right on

but I could have missed some things.

He/she is demanding proof for a fairly outrageous statement

"there are PLENTY of established posters who ..."

and given that list of beliefs, I would be surprised and shocked if there were more than TWO such established posters on DU who believed even TWO of the things on that list.

I think that rant is mostly hyperbole. There are some established posters who dispute some things people say about women's issues. Perhaps even MANY such posters.

I would not dispute that, because I am probably one of them. I have my disputes even with some things which are part of the Liberal Nicene Creed. Things like "male privilege" or "unequal pay" (and I happen to be somewhat of an economist) and have scoffed at the notion of a "rape culture" in this country.

Now it is one thing to be very angry at the things I have actually said, or the way I said them, and it is another thing to say that, for example, because I scoff at the idea of "rape culture" that I believe (or have ever said) I "think women are too quick to cry rape and too sensitive about it, (or, worse, that they provoke it and are to blame)" or I "think there's total equality now and any woman who says otherwise is just a man-hater or in denial or greedy."

Until a few examples are provided, that list reads like a bunch of strawmen.

[bettyellen]

117. wow, way to go, privileged white dude. we are so sorry that you need to be exposed to other

people who walked the earth's analysis and opinions- and without hem giving you foot notes.
That must really suck for you!

[hfojvt]

122. so you won't provide the requested evidence

but you will provide some insults.

You realize that provides evidence of some other things that you may not have wanted to prove.

[bettyellen]

123. that white privilege exists!

[Major Nikon]

159. Notice also the obvious "privilege" conflations

"male privilege" = "white privilege". Evidently the poster makes absolutely no distinction between the two terms, even though male non-whites suffer the effects of lack of privilege disproportionately compared to female non-whites. Asking someone like this to actually back up their assertions is like asking a cop where is the best place to buy a dime bag.

[BainsBane]

65. There is currently a thread

claiming that women engage in as much violence as men. Of course they define violence as making a rude comment. Have a look at all the posts about false rape allegations in that group, about how public service announcements seeking to combat rape are "misandrist." Look at the threads about the horrible oppression faced by men and the journals of the hosts. You should be able to figure out where to go.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

128. So rude comments do not rise to the level of violence?

Got it. You're completely wrong, of course, but I'll be sure to point that out to you when you 180 when it suits your agenda.

[BainsBane]

130. No, they most certainly do not

That's not to say they are a good thing to do or acceptable, but they are not violence.

Perhaps the dictionary will help you out: a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house)

[theHandpuppet]

140. Pab Sungenis...

I'm entering this discussion way too late in the game to know exactly what y'all are talking about at times (I have no idea what the "Meta" thing is) but I can tell you most of us here have dealt with misogyny on a regular basis, some in-your-face and some more subtle. I'm only tossing in an observation here because as chance would have it I had posted just this morning, on LBN, about some men in the UK who had been tweeting women politicians and threatening them with rape, murder and bombing. A poster, responding to the article, described these atrocious and intimidating threats as simply "adverse comments" from a few nutters and scolded the women who complained because what kind of administrative response could they expect from a free service?
This is the kind of thing which many might not even recognize as an example of misogyny. But dismissiveness bordering on disdain is what many of us have had to put up with, even here, year after year. Part of the problem, I think, is that many wouldn't even recognize the inherent misogyny in flipping off rape threats as just some "adverse comments", not to mention scolding the women who complained about it. It's the same kind of lack of self-recognition to be found in many posts I would consider to be homophobic.
Yes, over the course of time I've read some posts which I thought to be guilty of misandry but they pale by comparison to the number, tone and language of misogynic posts here. Condescension, dismissiveness, insulting women by referring to them as body parts (which is, IMO, a type of violence), insulting other men with suggestions of effeminacy, et al.
I've come to believe that you perceive feminists as the enemies of men (and that may be, I hope, a misperception on my part) and that's really a shame. Feminism is an ideal, not the banner for misandry, that belongs to people of all genders.

[bettyellen]

164. yep.

[Major Nikon]

143. Here's the really sad part

If they are so delusional to think a left biased web site is overrun with teh misogynists, imagine the potential for outrage generated by just going out in public to the market. The horror must be absolutely unbearable.

[theHandpuppet]

144. Sigh

And your post is exactly the kind to which I was referring in post #140 -- dismissive, derisive and condescending. Oh well. I'm outta here.

[Major Nikon]

154. It was a bit wordy, so I didn't read much of it

I have no idea who you are and I'm not sure if I even care, so if you think I was being dismissive, derisive, or condescending towards you then there's a good chance you're exactly the kind I was referring to as well.

Just sayin'

[Inkfreak]

147. Heh. (nt)

[bettyellen]

165. You didn't realize we do spend all day in public - in the market , LOL? And you have no clue what it

is like out there? LOL, what do you do, skim over every woman here's postings? Sounds like it.

[Major Nikon]

170. "you have no clue"

I do pretty much all the cooking for my family and always have. You can find many of my recipes over in Cooking and Baking where I'm a frequent poster.

Cheers!

[bettyellen]

173. Oh dear, you assume cooking makes you understand what women's lives are like, LOL.

How delightfully naive and regressive. It seems I was right, you have no idea it't not the 50's and who cooks means jack shit. I am certain however, that you think you deserve some sort of pat on the back if you boast about it here.

[Major Nikon]

174. I'm just pointing out how your obvious display of sexism was dead wrong

The implication that gender subjects are beyond the scope of reason is all yours.

Cheers!

[Katashi_itto]

181. I live in New Orleans. Going to the Market is a normal thing.

In New Orleans almost every guy is an ametuer chef of sorts.

Not many places in the US where you can sit in a coffee shop and see two guys get into a shouting match over cooking processes.

[raccoon]

24. Great post. nt

[JustAnotherGen]

26. +100000

And I wish those two posters would come back. But - they are tough women who are probably putting their beliefs into practice and action while on hiatus. . . and that will do us all good.

[sufrommich]

27. Well said. Their agenda in obvious. nt

[Posteritatis]

40. Yep. People have to be pretty blind not to see that those types are around here. (nt)

[Warpy]

51. Thank you. Most of us have run into at least one of those

poor victims and some of us have used "ignore" as liberally as we do on word jumpers and other pests.

[BainsBane]

64. There are a few

Not many. The most vocal one was recently tombstoned.

[Arcanetrance]

11. That's bullshit the two posters mentioned were bullied and called out constantly even

When the discussion had nothing to do with them. They'd be referenced and bullied the "cabal" you mention are people who aren't going to take the misogynistic crap that shows up here and will call it out. There's not one poster I can find that are anti man .

[Gormy Cuss]

13. More of a problem of misandry? That's horseshit.

Oh sure, there is occasional misandry. More often though the claim of misandry is made as a lame retort to posts pointing out misogyny.

[Sheldon Cooper]

15. lol

[La Lioness Priyanka]

16. this is akin to people claiming that gay people have too much control of du. nt

[geek tragedy]

18. Oh jeez, menz complaining about the poor oppresssed menz. nt

[Katashi_itto]

20. +1000

[Starry Messenger]

62. Ridic.

And several of *my* favorite women posters are gone, gay women who were TS'd or run off because of the abuse here.

[WinkyDink]

89. Exhibit A! Thank you!

[LanternWaste]

124. As long as people are still asking, "what was the rape victim wearing?"

As long as people are still asking, "what was the rape victim wearing?" it's still a concern rather than a cabal.

[Katashi_itto]

182. Agree

[trumad]

9. Does the little boy group still exists?

Haven't visited that whinefest for a long time.

[Pab Sungenis]

22. I rest my case.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

129. And by "a long time", you mean five minutes ago

Keep obsessing, sunshine.

[trumad]

132. shit...I put the little boys group on ignore

A long time ago.... by the way...that poll for the hottest celeb still the most popular?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

150. Don't even know what you are talking about

There is no "poll" for hottest celeb that I know of.

[bettyellen]

162. then you don't know much.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

179. I guess you don't know what a poll is.

[sufrommich]

32. Both Redqueen and Seabeyond were very active

at DU2 and in the feminist forum well before Meta ever existed. Your accusation is without merit,as usual.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

55. matter of fact they were both active all over DU.

seabeyond maybe even more so than Redqueen ... although long ago Redqueen was a regular in the lounge and GD.

[Sheldon Cooper]

17. They chased them away and are still high-fiving each other over it.

[The Straight Story]

29. That place was a wonderful, beautiful, cluster fuck

It was like an asylum run by Dr. Doofenshmirtz

[Tuesday Afternoon]

36. I really don't think that is what chased those two away. The dissolving of Meta.

Really, there was other stuff going on In Real Life as far as one of them was concerned. The other one I can not speak to.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. All I have to go on are my keen skills as an observer of human nature.

It's pretty apparent, to me at least, from this thread that some people dearly miss meta.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

38. oh yeah, for reals that ... but, I was speaking to the other thing but, you know

after watching Meta seep all through the rest of DU with its poisonous tentacles, I sometimes wonder if it did serve a purpose keeping it all contained in the cesspool.

Sort of double edged sword or something. a necessary evil.

I don't miss it but, I hate seeing it all over DU.

With it there, if I wanted drama I knew where to go.

Now it seems there is drama every where and no where is safe.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. also, having interacted with those guys over the years, I might speculate that maybe, just maybe

they got tired of having the same totally pointless fights over and over again.

I know I do.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

42. me too, Warren, me too. it is -just- a message board after all.

even if it is some internet experiment. I feel like a bug under a microscope sometimes.

[Posteritatis]

44. Or a magnifying glass on the sunnier days... (nt)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

46. fried, yep.

[Posteritatis]

43. There always was, I think, but that did affect it

It brought a lot of the more specific, personal grudges a lot of posters have out into the open - it makes it harder to ignore (or miss) it in, say, LBN or GD if there's fifteen threads in Meta where different people are complaining about the conduct of a couple of others, whether the complaints are justified or not.

I adminned a much smaller (but still large), mostly apolitical board a few years back that tried a similar setup for discussing moderation and policy. It was an absolute disaster - a large audience started hanging out there almost exclusively, and when the subforum was shut down the drama it brought out into the open was impossible to ignore everywhere else.

(That said, I'm still happy to see Meta gone; that place was a cesspit.)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

47. I don't claim to have solution but, I recognize the problem.

I can remember times past when one of the posters mentioned but not mentioned hung out pretty regularly in the Lounge.

Things sure have changed.

[mstinamotorcity2]

156. If you are talking

about NG. She is great. I miss quite a few of the strong authors.

[dkf]

176. Who got chased away?

[historylovr]

12. K & R

[Decoy of Fenris]

25. Sounds like Mason and West got trolled by the pros.

The whole Lulsec mission extrapolated outside operational capacity is to perform acts directly against the social norm, "for the lulz", precisely because it gets people riled. These guys (and girls) don't care one way or another about the end result of their actions; they do it for the reaction and they get their jollies when people throw fits or try to understand them, as Mason and West have done. Quinn Norton described the phenomenon in the best way:

"Anons lie when they have no reason to lie. They weave vast fabrications as a form of performance. Then they tell the truth at unexpected and unfortunate times, sometimes destroying themselves in the process. They are unpredictable."

While the OP may have a point in macro, the analysis of the lulz is poor at best and willful ignorance in analysis at worst.

[bettyellen]

52. except too many women haters give themselves away. they arent nearly as smart as

you are making them out to be.

[Decoy of Fenris]

61. Except they're not particularly "women haters". They just say things to piss folks off.

There's very little intelligence behind it; they find out what will provoke the most response, and then say/strike at that particular point, solely to entice a reaction.

[bettyellen]

69. Trust me, there are too many of them in real life to think this is just

a game. Some of us, who have a stake in this shit pay attention.
Others who do not, blow it off as harmless fun. It is not. It makes the net shittier for lots of people.

[Decoy of Fenris]

73. I never said there weren't such folks in real life.

I know quite a few of these "lulz-worthy" folks. I game with them, I hang out with them, I work with them; they're kind and caring spouses/boyfriends who would trip over themselves for their female counterparts, most of them are happily married with kids. Not a one of them would raise a hand or their voice at any women, let alone their significant others. They're good folks, and they engage in the kind of trollery described in the OP.

Why?

For no reason other than that the reaction makes them laugh. That's it. No ulterior motive, no deep conspiracy, no mommy issues or relationship troubles. To quote one of my coworkers last night on the subject: "Your crying makes us laugh." Also, "Your tears are sweet and taste of jam."

It may be a dark revelation, but some people just like to watch the world burn.

[LisaLynne]

75. I can't see how someone who really, really thinks of women as equals...

would also think it's really funny to do the sort of trolling that the article is talking about. I don't think someone who is a good person can really find getting others upset by attacking who they are is funny. I know the kinds of guys you're talking about. I think you're missing a huge part of their personality.

And just not raising a hand to any woman, as you put it, doesn't mean they don't have deep-seated sexist or misogynistic feelings.

[Decoy of Fenris]

80. Then you've missed a generation or two.

This is the mid-beginning of an age where friends insult, injure and humiliate each other -as signs of affection-. Likewise, it's an era of "Me", where "I got mine so fuq you" is the growing standard. The Internet provides an outlet for everything and anything, and no topic or subject is taboo. Note the recently-growing trend of "Trayvoning", where someone puts on a hoodie, grabs iced tea and skittles, and pretends to play dead, to be photographed and put on the internet for "the lulz". It is not meant to protest anything; it's a fad. A child's murder is now a passing fad. -That- is the growing environment in the world today, and it's rapidly becoming normalized, if it isn't already.

The raising a hand was meant as an example, less to be taken literally and more taken euphemistically.

I'm not saying there aren't genuine "Mens Rights" loonies out there who genuinely believe women are inferior or should be treated as if they were, but I'd bet the vast bulk of the "Lulz" folks are not those people.

[LisaLynne]

82. I've missed nothing.

I think you are really missing something, but I don't harbor any hope of getting you to see that.

I actually sort of see what you're saying -- you don't think these people mean it. They're just goofing off on the internet. It's what people do. Yeah, I've been here on the internet probably way longer than you, so yeah, I've see it all. I've been INVOLVED with it all. BUT what the article, if you read it, actually brings out is that there are people who have gone out and TALKED to these guys and they are coming back with reports that, no, they are not "just" being funny. Their posts and harassment come from a place of true hatred.

[Decoy of Fenris]

91. I've read the article, and I've done similar to what's in it.

In games, I've helped destroy real life years of effort and time; I've scammed the equivalent of close to $80,000 worth of real money out of in-game groups, I've wiped out in-game livelihoods and structures that took a decade to come into being. I've worked alongside Anon and one of their subgroups, being a part of Project Chanology most notably. I've done my part to define certain aspects of the internet, both creating and disseminating memes, one in particular reaching megaviral status and is still in use at the moment.

Do you want to know why I, and others like me, do such things? It's very simple; Because we can.

-That- is what "For the lulz" means. Because it makes us laugh. I'm missing nothing, because I've been a part of exactly what the article describes. The two authors can attribute meaningless drivel to "Lulz" folks as much as they wish, but in the end, it's incredibly and utterly simple.

On the net, we have the power to do whatever we want. Any idle thought, any passing notion, all attainable with a whim and a few keystrokes. Whether we use our power for good or evil, assuming such arbitrary notions are a concern (Generally, they're not), is irrelevant in the matter.

I can see where the writers of the article might think they're on to something, and maybe they are, but what they don't understand is that it's far, far bigger than they think, and attempting to dissect one small corner of a phenomenon and claim truth is like trying to say that the entire universe is lifeless aside from Earth, simply because that's what we have observed.

[LisaLynne]

95. IF you did all that and you think it was just for fun, you are fooling yourself.

If you are over 20, I'd suggest, and I honestly mean this in the kindest way you are able to take it, you really take a nice long look at yourself, who you are, who you will become, and what you want your life to have been about.

[Decoy of Fenris]

106. I already have, and I am pleased.

I've done things that hundreds of thousands will remember. I've written articles that are still in use fifteen years after their inception. I've written (and re-written, and altered) history in one of the greatest, largest and most enduring games yet known to mankind. I've been published, cited and used as a source. My actions are both myth and history, and in a way, in -my- way, I've become a legend, a folk-tale, looked at in equal parts terror, awe, and reverence. There was a time when my words or thoughts shaped the lives of five hundred thousand people in an instant, and I could shape or unmake any creation.


Be it Dungeons and Dragons, or EVE, or World of Warcraft, or Warhammer, or Magic: The Gathering, or the old Yahoo forums, the Bolter and Chainsword forum, a webcomic or two, and even (in most ways) real life, I've shaped the world around me, not the other way around.

I can't say that I'm disappointed or that I regret any of it. Can you say the same for your life?

[bettyellen]

104. ha ha, first "you know people", now you are one of them... is that the fun "evil" trolling

you do to feel such "power". Good god, stay in the basement where you can bask in all that incredible imaginary "power".
If you'd all do that, the world would be a more interesting place. What a sad fucking life you have described for us.

[Decoy of Fenris]

115. I -was- one of them. Feels like a lifetime ago, though it was only a few years. n/t

[bettyellen]

83. Not beating their female partners is a tellingly low standard. I'm guessing the cars are nice and

the women pretty and that's what makes the poster think all is well in their troll lives.
It's very telling that this poster thinks he knows all about their perfect little lives. Incredibly naive, if not BS he's pulling out of his ass. I don't know a decent person who does that shit over the age of sixteen.

[LisaLynne]

85. Yeah, and I think the age thing may be coming into play here.

I can forgive it, perhaps, in 16 year olds, but you do need to grow past that. If you're still doing it even in your early 20s, let alone your early 30s, there's something else going on.

[bettyellen]

90. Exactly- and any troll that picks on women as a specialty does have an axe to grind....

even if they are keeping up appearances to their friend, they have an anger that the net is giving them an outlet for. And the net gives them clubby little pockets whee they can feel normal in their hatred with other assholes.

[LisaLynne]

97. And a nice little shield to hide behind.

So they don't have to face the consequences of their actions.

[bettyellen]

78. I've met a few too. And they weren't the angels you describe. And they are asses in

real life too. So, there you go. That's the company your perfect gentlemen LULz friends keep.
And you know what- if you are an asshole sometimes, then it IS what you are, sometimes. It's not like you are not doing it just because it's the net. And it;s not like you actually know how great they are at home. Lots of happy looking home harbour fucked up people.

[Decoy of Fenris]

81. Oh, assholes are assholes, no doubt there.

There will always be assholes in any group; there's no stopping that. The point I'm getting at is that sometimes, "Lulz are lulz". Is everyone an angel? Hell no, I'd bet you've got some pretty dark skeletons someone could dredge up if they wished, but we all do. That's besides the point. The point is, the article in the OP describes a phenomenon that is in place -solely- to create tension and animosity, because watching the following explosion of emotion and drama is funny to some people.


And I'll have to call you out on "not like you are doing it just because it's the net": These types of people are doing it -solely- because it's the net. Anonymity is the rule of law, and there are no repercussions of any merit. They can say what they want, when they want, simply because they can and without reason.

Here's an exercise: Go dig around Youtube comments. You'll see racial epithets more than you'll see proper grammar, and you won't believe how promiscuous some users' mothers apparently are.

[bettyellen]

86. what you don't get is that a decent percentage of those acting hateful on the net really are.

many of those people are saying what they really think about women and minorities. Some have more courage because it's the net- but many find situations in real life where there will also be no repercussions. I judge people on the net by what they put out, I don't think there's any reason I should go looking for excuses to pardon the hatred they spread- why do you?
Hate is hate. Geting off on hurting people is a vile trait. Your friends are assholes.

[Decoy of Fenris]

102. I don't "Excuse" anything. I understand it.

The article above is seeking ill-intent; they will thusly find it. Any time a group goes searching for a result, they'll find it one way or another, and that's exactly what has happened in the article.

I'll give you probably 40% of displayed hate on the net is real. The rest, though, I'd wager is simply to elicit reactions.


See? Here's the crux, right here. You say "I judge people on the net by what they put out", and that's fine and good. But you're not judging me (or anyone else). You're judging the person I display on this particular forum. You're not judging a person, you're judging a name, and that's why the Internet is as much a weapon as a tool: I could viciously insult you, degrade you, humiliate you here, and I, -personally-, am not held accountable. Sure, Skinner could ban my username or my IP, but in the end, in the real world, I am suffering no ill effects, while you could (potentially) suffer from emotional injury and other ill-effects.

There's no consequences, no retaliation of note, no reaction that can harm or otherwise stop the lulz-folks. That is why they do what they do; they can say anything, hurt anyone, help anyone, or do anything they wish, with no repercussions, simply because they want to. Hence the maxim, "For the lulz".


I see where you're coming from, but it's not something that can be stopped, short of policing the entire internet for hurtful words and phrases.

[bettyellen]

105. why do you refer to "them" when you admit here, it is you too?

slightly afraid of repercussions, I suppose.

[Decoy of Fenris]

108. I retired, so to speak.

I wish I could say I outgrew them, but they outgrew me. I'm too slow to keep up any more. Now it's all code, programming, and politics that I just don't have a head for. I got replaced, and that's okay. I was out of my depth.

[bettyellen]

110. Out of your depth here too. Goodbye and very good riddance.

[Decoy of Fenris]

114. Hardly. This is a kiddie pool in comparison.

However, if you wish to avoid further discussion, I can't force it upon you, and I wish you a good day and safe travels.

[Gormy Cuss]

138. In this subthread your descriptions of LULZers align with many traits of sociopaths.

Just an observation. Lying just for the sake of lying, trying to rile up other just for one's own gratification, no remorse or guilt about it, etc.

[bettyellen]

163. I noticed that too.

[Dash87]

148. Or the other option is that these people are sad troglodytes that

feel superior by bringing the "evil wimmenz" down a notch.

And usually, when someone claims to be doing something for "teh lulz," they're really just being an ass because of shortcomings in their own life. They're bullies lashing out online because they're too afraid to do so in real life.

[quinnox]

30. and sometimes there are groups on the opposite

side, made up of feminists with extreme views, who have big time agendas. Everyone and their brother is a misogynist in their eyes, or so it seems.

[Posteritatis]

41. So what?

The comparison's meaningless because those groups have negligible power and influence - those fretting over them are, on their best days, precisely as silly as evangelical Christians panicking over the "war on Christmas."

Perhaps when they send aggressive sympathisers to their views to sit in Congress - or the legislature of any country - in enough numbers to affect policy, that fringe will be relevant enough to consider, maybe, in certain circumstances, bringing up as a counterpoint to the overwhelmingly larger, overwhelmingly more active, overwhelmingly more powerful herds of outspoken misogynists out there.

While waiting for that day to come about, I'd suggest not embarrassing yourself by making that kind of incredibly asinine comparison.

[bettyellen]

53. Bravo- all this BS about a few outliers. Thanks for laying it out clearly.

[William769]

45. Kick & recommended.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. According to this article, "abuse" = "gentle condescenscion laden with malice"

I would posit that they're not the same thing, not even in the same neighborhood, any more than jaywalking is the "alter ego" of serial killing.

No wonder the author sees "abuse" everywhere on the interwebs. If the idea now is to try to get rid of all the "gentle condescenscion" on the net... well, good luck. You can tackle that right after you get rid of all teh porn.

[mercuryblues]

58. Did something get

lost in translation?
The actual quote:

Now my timeline’s been flooded with abuse – and its alter ego, gentle condescension laden with malice –

[Warren DeMontague]

60. Right.

Keep it going! This thread is fun. Just like old times, huh?

[mercuryblues]

66. yup

Because the author of the OP did not define abuse as mild condemnation as you stated. By the use of the word AND it was a list that defined the range of posts, from mild condemnation to outright abuse.

She makes the that quote even clearer with this sentence:

This is why writing on the internet while female means getting everything from laughably delusional men pretending to “critique” your writing while barely concealing their rage to rape and death threats.

So this begs the question. Were you pretending to critique the OP by using an intentional misrepresentation of what was actually said or did you speed read the OP and miss critical words?

[bettyellen]

68. you're post was wrong, and is now corrected. perhaps if you didn't post bulllshit....

people wouldn't need to correct you= "keep it going"

[boston bean]

135. It's quite common for them to cherry pick, and then claim others can't understand context.

All to try to shift an argument, and those who don't take the time to research end up believing the fallacious hype. That's the hope for those who employ the tactic, and unfortunately, it works well.

[mercuryblues]

160. It does

because you can be assured that, that misinterpretation will most likely end up as a reply somewhere else.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

54. It is really bad when a Misoygnist Troll is a female.

because those are really Not Funny. Not Funny At All.

[Comrade Grumpy]

56. Meh. A tempest in a blog post. But still a chance for some to get their jollies. Oh, well.

[Z_I_Peevey]

57. Thanks for this demonstration...

I mean this post.

[Starry Messenger]

63. k&r

For too many to mention.

[boston bean]

70. One poster still can't help himself in this thread.

Speculating bullshit, re writing history, downplaying his role, still trying to get the women's to shut up.. Even though he was instrumental in forcing two feminists off DU. Par for the fucking course!

[Major Nikon]

71. Derp

[Pab Sungenis]

76. I assume you're talking about me.

Please elaborate on my role. Point out where I've told a single woman to shut up.

[MadrasT]

77. Always interesting when the responses to these types of articles

beautifully illustrate the point

[Pab Sungenis]

98. Only in the eyes of

The Girl Who Cried Misogynist.

Not every criticism of a woman is rooted in misogyny. Not every bad thing that happens to a woman is due to misogyny. It did not rain on your day off because of misogyny.

Accusing people inaccurately of misogyny does not help your argument. It diminishes it. And it invites backlash.

Learn how to recognize who is really on your side and who is really against you. It will make the fight easier in the end if you stop fighting your allies.

[boston bean]

103. Yep. just look at the response to you.

berating women who post about sexism and misogyny. A male on top of it. He would know best I guess. We ought to resign ourselves as lowly little women that we just dont know what the fuck we are talking about.

[Pab Sungenis]

113. Who is berating women?

Sexism exists. Misogyny exists. But they are not the cause of every problem.

Nor are they tolerated culturally or here on DU. In fact, they're marginalized so much that those who use them as a crutch have to make shit up to justify their victimhood.

I don't belittle these spurious claims out of misogyny. I belittle them because they ARE spurious. They have no more basis in fact than the claims of "men's rights" activists who say that child support is slavery.

[Posteritatis]

121. Here and pretty much anywhere else they're discussed

There's been a lot of discussion of misogyny and related issues in the gaming world the last couple of years, for a specific example. It's slowly, painfully making some headway in pretty good and intelligent ways, but I'd be hard-pressed to name a high-profile piece written about it in that world where certain types of people didn't just pour out of the woodwork to whine about how women are getting cooties all over the treehouse or something like that.

It's not quite that bad on DU (though I've noticed things tend to get pretty ugly if an article is about a younger girl or woman getting wronged; given the demographics of DU people will turn the paternalism knob up to 11 for those), but it's a difference of degree more than kind.

[Warren DeMontague]

131. To paraphrase the Immortal Dr. Seuss:

Last edited Sun Aug 4, 2013, 06:03 AM - Edit history (1)

"Start a new meta thread. Treat it unkind.
Feed it stale outrage, flamebait and wine
Start a week's worth! A month!
All the old, worn out flack
Then perhaps old missed meta,
and its friends
will come back!"

[boston bean]

133. These threads certainly do bring you out. That's for sure!

[LisaLynne]

84. I found this part of the article to be really interesting:

I would argue that people who are dogmatic on the “ignore the trolls” front—who are far disproportionately men, in my experience—have ulterior motives a lot of the time. Not that they support misogyny! On the contrary, I think misogyny makes a lot of men uncomfortable, and so they try to fix their discomfort by pressuring women being attacked by trolls to conceal what’s happening.

You know, I can see that. I think it happens on DU, too. I think it does come from a good place -- OMG HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN, IT'S AWFUL AND I DON'T WANT TO LOOK. I mean, hey, I feel that way sometimes, too. I just don't want to deal with it. But I think the author's take on it makes me feel a little better about it. They aren't saying "ignore it because it doesn't matter" but more, whether they realize it or not, don't make me look because it's too painful.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

99. ^^^^ yes.^^^^

[bettyellen]

109. it's not painful- it;s just to frightening to think they'd have to go up against their more bullying

type bros. Painful my ass, they want to go along to get along, and not consider the collatoral damage to the women they puport to care about. Chickenshit rules.

[WinkyDink]

88. Power has never wanted to share. Ever. If these men could eliminate all women, they'd turn on each

other afterwards.

[bettyellen]

118. they would turn on the more vulnerable- chicken shits do that.

[WinkyDink]

146. Amen.

[LittleBlue]

126. This thread is a good example of why they do it

Look at how many precious souls inhabit DU.

Someone above mentioned two posters who were "chased off" DU. lol. They got their fun by making inflammatory threads. When they hit a nerve, they exploited it by making thread after thread that inevitably end in flame fests. Then the pro trolls turned the tables with boob threads, Femen, and other topics that riled them. They cried misogyny, but the admins weren't having it, knowing full well what they'd been up to for months. Their group demanded action in the form of bans for members and topics that they disliked. When they didn't get their way, they left in a huff, claiming DU was a cesspit of sexism and misogyny.

That's the truth of DU and the internet in general. Those who take it too seriously end up disappointed. At heart the internet is a free-for-all, and those are the terms you accept by browsing it unfiltered. If that upsets you, then it isn't the place for you because others will quite easily sense this and exploit it.

[msanthrope]

142. You have described the antics of those two "feminists" so well. Good job. nt

[opiate69]

145. exactly... and the concerted effort some are engaged in...

To try to whitewash the history, and paint two of the most belligerent, uncivil, obnoxious posters this board has ever seen as somehow being fucking victims is the height of absurdity.

[msanthrope]

152. I think they gave as good as they got. The idea that they were victims, as opposed to willing

participants is ludicrous.

Frankly, there is a group of posters who think that their mission is to 'educate' the rest of us. I think I have bras older than some of them. That one of them used the filthiest term I have ever heard to describe a female--and then defended that use with some specious 'academic' reason was vile.

Now, don't mistake me--there are blatant violations of the TOS with regards to gender that happen here, and they must be dealt with. But the idea that GD should become this shitfest of flamebait threads that serve no purpose but to foment martyrdom is bullshit.

[Major Nikon]

157. +1

[Gormy Cuss]

166. Interesting that so many on this thread think they know which two posters were referenced.

Some are assuming the reference was to seabeyond and redqueen but they're hardly the only DUers who have left in the past six months because of the level of misogyny tolerated by the community. I know because others have told me on their way out the door. Hell, I've even taken a break because of it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

167. well, their names are mentioned earlier in this thread but,

I agree with what you say and I also take a break in the form of hiding threads and ignoring certain misogynistic DUers but, it gets old and I am tired of being intimidated and told to Lighten Up and go along with the tired, old, lame ass sexist jokes that try to pass as humor in some places on this board.

The jokes are stale and weren't even that funny when they were told the first time over forty years ago.

This is a political message board not some porno site.

There are plenty of those all over the internet and I (and everyone else) know how to find them if that is what we want.

I too, have witnessed a mass exit of good contributing DUers because of the rampant misogyny occurring on a daily basis in and around this website.

[Gormy Cuss]

168. And as one of the study authors pointed out, "Ignore" is not my friend.

Ignoring the bad behavior trolls doesn't make them go away. It certainly doesn't change their behavior -- if anything, it emboldens them.

Sea and RQ weren't mentioned by name for some time in the discussion. Once they were named the discussion deflected to their posts and personalities rather than the real issue raised by the OP.

Thank you for adding your witness that there are many other former DUers who left because of the misogyny tolerated here.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

169. Yes, you are right and it is a shame that subthreads developed because their names were

mentioned. Still, I am grateful for this thread because it is spot on as to what is happening all over the internet and with a certain regularity in some forums and groups right here on DU, a political message board.

[LittleBlue]

171. Seems to have coincided with improvements to GD

We don't get many trollish threads on those topics anymore, whereas before, especially with Meta, it was a constant flame war. I would suggest that the timing of their departure and the instant improvement in the forums is no coincidence.

The victim claim wore thin when they were trolling Meta and GD. They made themselves sport for trolls when they wore out the forum's sympathy.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

172. Yes but, you realize that you are admitting that there are, indeed Trolls when you say this:

... They made themselves sport for trolls ...

and They are gone while the Trolls are still here, right?

I think that is what I take from that statement and just want to clarify if that is what you intended.

Thanks.

[Gormy Cuss]

175. And I would suggest that you consider that those two weren't the subject of this thread

and by reducing the topic to a rehashing of the likers/dislikers of two specific posters the broader discussion of misogyny trolls has been hijacked. How very Meta.

As for the condition of this forum, GD has always had one-topic posters and/or endless threads on a topic argued with great fervor (in recent time, it's guns, Snowden, NSA, for example.)

[knitter4democracy]

127. They live on dating site forums.

There are some scary, scary men on some of the dating site forums.

[me b zola]

139. It has taken me far too long in life to understand

...that behind misogynists statements are men who have very serious issues with women and inevitably inflict one type or another of abuse (verbal/emotional, physical, or sexual) on the women in their personal lives.

Its not funny nor cute.

[Just Saying]

153. Intersting this thread is still going.

I posted once earlier today and came back to find a hidden post response with a link to fathers unite or some such thing. I believe part of the quote that was hidden mentioned "radical feminist minority" and how they wreak havoc on families and children for the self-interest of women.

Wow.

[inspiraven]

155. good read

I thought the comments on the Raw Story page were actually interesting and worthwhile.

Every time a man condescendingly tells me, “You are giving them attention! Just ignore and block them!”, I hear, “Being exposed to the brutal misogyny you get aimed at you every day is uncomfortable. It would be so much better for me if I didn’t have to know this is what’s going on.” This phenomenon is not unique to the internet. Kids who get bullied get “don’t be a tattletale” from adults. Women who get street harassed end up having to apologize for making men in their lives uncomfortable by bringing it up. The intention is almost never to tell someone they are to suffer this in silence, but the effect is that you are telling them just that.

Shutting the messenger and or victim down instead of shutting down abuse is so pervasive in our society. Destructively so. Even the best most caring people contribute to this pattern every day, and it further harms and isolates victims and does in fact assist the abusers, manipulators, and those who are so sadly broken that they (insert destructive behavior here).

I like the idea of shifting from hide it / ignore it to quashing it. I am loving the trend on the internet and on the streets to stop this type of bullying.

On a side note:
To the folks who came to this thread purely because of their discomfort with the word / concept of misogyny:

[Zorra]

161. Women should be seen and not heard. They need to STFU and stay in the kitchen and the bedroom

where they belong, because they are only good for cooking, cleaning, and sex. It even says that women must submit to their husbands in the Bible. What more proof is needed than that? That's why men are legally given the rightful authority and power to decide what women should be allowed to do with their bodies. Men clearly are superior, everybody knows it, and that's the way it is, and has always been. The women who are always complaining about not being equal have no case. Women are clearly treated equally to men under the law, because that is the law, so how can it be otherwise? I'm not saying that men should not be nice to women when they deserve it. its just that this whole feminism thing is a silly waste of time.

That said, I don't hate women, and I am not a troll!!1!! I have every right to express my opinions here!1!!!

Besides, this whole who-is-the-misogynist-troll-witch-hunt is disruptive nonsense.

It betrays an utter lack of creativity on the part of the women and their male enablers who are making these accusations. They are so convinced that they are right that they cannot imagine someone else might hold a different point of view in good faith.

Either that, or they are incapable of advocating for their own point of view on its merits.

[roody]

177. What does lulz mean?

[phantom power]

178. "lulz" == "laughs"

[In_The_Wind]

180. Kicked & Recommended