A few months back I wrote a post about female bloggers, and how I don't get shaken up or outraged about the imbalance between female bloggers and male bloggers in the tech/SEO sphere. For the most part, I still stand by what I wrote, but today I'm going to (sort of) eat my words and talk about Kathy Sierra's unfortunate, infuriating situation.
Kathy's Creating Passionate Users blog is one of my favorite reads (and I'm not the only Mozzer who thinks so--Jeff is also a fan). She is a great writer--she's funny, knowledgeable, and engaging. Lately, however, she has been the victim of death threat comments and sexist, misogynistic, and offensive remarks and images that have been left on both her blog and on others. (To read about the situation, check out her "Death threats against bloggers are NOT 'protected speech'" post.)
Now, I don't get offended easily. I like a good off-color, inappropriate joke. I'm not overtly feminist, race-conscious, or politically correct. I like to think of myself as an equal opportunist. But I can distinguish between a joke and actual hate speech. There is a clear difference between making a joke (Jane the Kiwi rode a whale to work!) and making comments (even if they are meant to be a "joke") that promote violence and degradation towards women (or anyone else, for that matter).
Kathy is a woman, and she is attractive, too. But does her physical appearance grant people the right to leave lewd, sexual comments about her on her own blog? Would she be better off being overweight and unattractive? I'm betting that if she were, the comments would be just as bad (or worse). Regardless of her appearance, why should she be punished for being a smart, successful female in this sphere?
Disliking Kathy's blog or what she has to say is one thing--everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Hell, I've got my (large) share of thumbs down, but it's no skin off my back. Saying "God, that Kathy Sierra is a rambling b*tch" is your opinion, and she has thick skin, so she can take it. However, threatening actual violence, both sexual and physical, on her, even if you're not being serious, is a whole different matter.
What saddens me the most about this whole situation is that it appears that these spineless, soulless, inconsiderate, offensive assholes have gotten what they wanted. Kathy had to cancel an appearance at the ETech conference. She's afraid to leave her house. She said she may not post another entry on the Creating Passionate Users blog. These people hurt not only her, but the many, many readers who love her blog and get a wealth of valuable information from it.
Would the situation have been the same if the blog were authored by a man? Hell no. Why is it then that some people seem to think that if you're female they're allowed to call you dumb, slutty, or worse, and can objectify you and treat you as less than human?
I hope Kathy returns to blogging, and I hope the people responsible for all of this are found and dealt with accordingly. They have to be held responsible for their remarks--they can't assume that hiding behind a monitor gives them the right to say whatever they want without any recourse.
By: Rebecca Kelley
Kathy Sierra's Unfortunate Situation
Content
The author's views are entirely his or her own (excluding the unlikely event of hypnosis) and may not always reflect the views of Moz.
>>>People usually hate due to extreme jealously of others
Yep, some of the nastiest and most blindsiding attacks are done out of jealousy... usually either over a person's looks, brains, success or the attacker being so void of their own self confidence and self esteem that they need to find someone else to hate and screw over to either make themselves feel better or eliminate the "competition" in their fucked up little minds.
Women are just as guilty of these attacks as men though. And men can just as easily be a victim to them. Maybe not in a sexual manner in most cases, but threats are threats and attacks are attacks, regardless of them being sexual or simply hateful in nature.
The problem with the Internet is that while it gives us all a great freedom and access to anything we want, it also allows some people to be cowards and do shitty things to other people they never would to their face.
I was bullied for years at school, for being miles ahead of the rest of my peers (intellectually). Being exceptional in this world, or outstanding, causing extreme envy and rage in some people, who believe it is their God given right to be better than everyone else.
Sadly they're wrong, and prove it in their actions. But at least I knew the names and faces of my bullies. I could stand my ground and face them. And being a fairly big guy, do so pretty well. Kathy doesn't. And that's gutting for me. Anonymity sucks.
There's no proof that the comments and images came from a man, nor is there valid proof that the persons named were the actual people responsible for the attacks. Anyone can post to a blog and pretend to be someone they are not, esp. in situations where profiles and avatars are not required.
The blog owners, however, should have removed the offensive material as soon as it was discovered. I'm unclear as to whether comments were moderated before being posted.
Threats on the 'Net have been going on for years, esp. when you write an unpopular opinion or speak your mind. Blogs are the medium now, but back in the days of Usenet and newsgroups, they came via email. I received two death threats in the 1990's and one other one was broadcast across an email list I moderated to all of the members there. The latter was made by a homeless man from a public library. (I did a lot of investigating for that one.)
I have changed my house locks. I've been forced to alert the schools my children had attended because they were in grade school at the time of the two threats I got. Both times it was because I wrote about "blackhat" SEO and ways to know if you are being scammed.
There are topics I will not write about now, and opinions I no longer share online. As much as some people like to believe in a "free" Internet, and free speech rights, there is no such thing as long as there is fear.
Incidently, I don't think my being a woman has anything to do with my own experiences. The support from men I've rec'd far, far outweighs the relative few who wanted to be creeps.
Agreed. We shouldn't jump to conclusions about who might have done this, especially as the web makes it easy for people to hide behind anonymity online.
Kim I see you've turned off comments on your blog for awhile.
I read two of Kathy's posts about this about two hours ago. What I don't understand is where the antagonism toward Kathy started from. Why the hatred?!
It's just astounding what people will say to each other online. Most of us are guilty of writing things that we wouldn't say if we were standing in front of the intended recipient; however, I always claim my comments. I can't stand people who post anonymously (as did those people who are harassing Kathy), leaving no way of identifying who they are.
Although I'd hate to see Kathy leave the blogosphere, I'd understand if she did. I've had comparatively benign things said about me online and thought, "wow, why do I bother with this nonsense?"
A perfect example of why feminism is still very relevant...
Why is it that so many women don't want to labeled as a feminist? Even Rebecca labels herself as "not overtly feminist" as if being an overt feminist is a bad thing...
And men just don't seem to really get it - just look at how few guys have responded to this post and compare that to the responses to other posts...
We're gradually changing though... When I was in college (late 80s) the average woman with a 4 year college degree earned less than the average male high school drop out. Now, the same average woman with a college degree makes just a little more than the average male who went to college but didn't say long enough to get even an associate's degree (but that may say more about factory jobs moving overseas). But her male counterparts with college degrees are still earning 50% more than she is (all stats controlled for full-time, year-round work). So the progress is slow, but in the right direction (women now earn 66 cents on the male dollar - up from 62 cents on the male dollar 20 years ago).
>>>Why is it that so many women don't want to labeled as a feminist
I don't see it as not wanting to be labeled "feminist". I think many women, myself included, simply don't consider ourselves one.
In the simplest form, yes, almost all women are feminists in that we believe women should have the same rights as and complete equality to men.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_Movement
But, not all people who agree in the simplest form of feminism believe in all other causes tied into it. Being pro-choice and being against the "objectification" of women via pronography and the sex industry (porn, strippers and the world's oldest profession) are lumped in with the feminist movement, as is the use of non sexist language, being poltically correct to women, among many, many other things - even though certainly not all women who think they are equal to men agree with those causes.
I am not a feminist. I don't think being one is a bad thing. I simply don't classify myself into a movement where I don't agree with all of their causes.
A hundred years ago you couldn't vote and your choice of professions were limited to nurse, school teacher, librarian, and secretary. If you were married you probably had to give up even those jobs. The reason that's changed is because people who called themselves feminists stood up, fought, and in some cases even died to change things.
Starting in the late 70s, the conservatives managed to get people to think that all feminists were radical feminists, and as soon as women stopped thinking of themselves as feminists the advances in women's rights slowed to a crawl.
The story of Kathy and her blog just points out that there's a long way still to go for women to have equality. If her story really bothers you, then maybe you shouldn't let someone else's definition of "feminism" stop you from standing up and being counted.
Until women re-embrace the term "feminist" or find another term to organize their struggle, I just don't see the situation changing very quickly. As a result, there will be plenty more women who find themselves in the same position as Kathy. All the spin doctors will tell you - words matter (is it an "estate tax" or a "death tax", a "surge" or an "escalation"?)
I'd say take back the word "feminst" - it has power...
I don't think it's about embracing a term or organizing a struggle. Women have seen a steady growth in their rights in the history of America and that steady growth will continue.
And really, one of the reasons many women don't want to latch on to the whole "feminist movement" is b/c we're so darn busy - being women! Going to work, raising our kids, breaking glass ceilings, voting, optimizing websites, owning property, etc.
Women have seen steady growth in their rights because of feminists who campaign for those rights.
I'm not a big fan of anything that's too extreme, staunch feminists included. Many of the ones I've met feel they have to trumpet every injustice they've felt as a female. It's just not my style.
Despite what many people might believe, Feminism is not synonymous with "rule of the woman."
Currently, and from millenia, there has been "rule of the man" in our societies. True, some societies were matriarchal and gave a high degree of respect to their women - sometimes more than their men. However, the current intent of the feminist movement (at least from the last 30 years) is to create an egalitarian society, where men and women are both valued and appreciated for their contributions and are both given equal access to opportunities in all spheres of society.
Feminism is a response to patriarchy, and promotes bringing our society into equilibrium instead of being in imbalance. It's an ecumenical humanitarian mission, not some "kill all men" campaign.
That's fine, and I'm really happy that you stand up and say something when things cross the boundary of what you're OK with... People need to hear stories like Kathy's...
But "feminism" isn't "radical feminism". I just don't see why women run away from the term "feminism" when doing so slows progress on women's rights.
I probably shouldn't speak for everyone, but my guess is this is simply about not being labeled and put into a category.
I think all of the women above are more than happy to stand up for the things they believe in and I've seen them do it here and on their blogs. I don't think you have to be a feminist to promote the cause of equality.
I think part of equality should be letting the women of the world decide for themselves what groups they do and don't want to identify themselves with.
But people are labeled and put into categories all the time. Part of being a minority is understanding that that being labeled can lead to discrimination. But while you may not want to take on the label of your group, you can really only change things if you do take on he label and show people that your proud of who you are and you won't just sit back and accept the status quo.
I'm gay, so this isn't just theoretical for me. The more gay people are visible, the more we simply demand equality, the further we get. Yes, there can be a backlash, but over time more and more people see you as human and realize the absurdity of the situation.
I also see first hand the power of "the other group" changing the definitions of critical terms. The issue the gay community faces is that marriage has been redefined as a religious instituation despite the fact that heterosexual atheists can get married by a justice of the peace. Words and their definitions have immense power.
It's obvious that women are women. So for them it's about standing apart from women who are OK with the status quo in order to say things need to change. The first label their movement used was "sufferagist", and then "feminist" became the dominant label, but in both cases the labels had power and helped organize the movement.
The women who took on the label "sufferagist" and "feminist" achieved most of what you think of as women's rights today. It's not co-incidental that when women said they no longer wanted to be labeled 'feminist' that progress on women's rights slowed to a crawl.
Perhaps the term "feminist" is dead. Fine, but women will do better if they have a framework (including terms and labels) so they can go up against the discrimination they face today (like what happened to Kathy Sierra). And the more they understand the sufferagists and feminists before them, the more effective they'll be in securing equality for themselves.
I do understand your point. My thoughts though, are that you don't need to identify yourself with a label to help and support others who do identify with that label. For example I still think I can help bring about positive changes for the gay community without being gay.
In 1947 Jackie Robinson played major league baseball and as expected dealt with a lot of racism. His play and the way he reacted to the racism are monumental achievements. In fact I consider him one of the top two or three most influential people of the 20th century.
Branch Rickey a white man, made the decision to sign him to the Dodgers. At a game early in the season Pee Wee Reese another white man walked up to Jackie Robinson and put his arm around him in a public display of support.
Obviously Jackie Robinson is the one who did the most to break the color line in major league baseball and I'm not suggesting the actions of Branch Rickey and Pee Wee Reese should be placed on the same level, but neither of those two men could be labeled in the same way Jackie Robinson was yet both also played a big part in breaking the color line in the game.
I understand that accepting the label and identifying with it can be empowering and do a lot to be a force for positive change. But I also think that those who don't define themselves by a label can also be forces for positive change.
Maybe this comes down more to how much someone can affect change and you may be right that someone who accepts and identifies with a label can perhaps be the greater force in changing how others who accept that label are treated.
Call yourself what you will, but women are automatically categorized as women. That's a label they can't get rid of easily. The feminist movement in general (and you don't even have to be a woman to be a feminist) seeks to redefine what social assumptions come along with that overriding category of "woman."
Does it conjur thoughts such as frail, passive, subjugated, unworthy, less-qualified, or worse?
Or should it intone capabilities, intelligence, resilience, strength and worth at least equal to those our culture normally identifies with men?
Having a mother, sister and many female friends that I have the utmost respect and admiration for, I am solidly in the later camp, and I guess that makes me a feminist.
Ditto.
I've just been trying to find some t-shirts I saw recently that simply had the word feminist on them, and were designed for men who felt as many of us here obviously do.
People usually hate due to extreme jealously of others. This is a very obvious case of a few men who are jealous of an attractive woman who is smart, has an audience, and has people listen to her and follow her thoughts.
If there is one saving grace is that this story is picking up steam and should help to elevate legal action and hopefully set some form of online-hate precedence for women.
I don't know what to say, I actually feel sick to my stomach after reading the post on Kathy's blog about everything that has happend to her the last few weeks. I totally feel for her, it's just revolting how somebody could make these threats and think it's ok. What shocks me even more is that these comments were made on a site by people that are supposedly well educated, that speaks at conferences etc The really scary thing is that the people could be "normal" people, just make you really paranoid on who to trust. The whole concept of the now pulled website, meankids, is just discusting.
I really hope Kathy doesn't stop blogging, she is such a great writer. But I totally understand if she doesn't want to.
With no insensitivity to this situation, it seems to like Kathy's prowess at creating passionate users was powerful enough to elicit the worst kind of passion from the worst kind of (psychopathic misanthrope) user.
As indecent and heart-stopping as these comments are, I'm pretty sure they they are idle threats from some shy-lonely-nerd-guy- who-watches-sicko-Japanese-movies. These seem like the desperate words of someone who has never asked a girl out in his life - not someone hardened and capable of taking any kind of dramatic criminal action.
There is a similar threat that businesses face when they open themselves up to blogging, user-generated content, and social media marketing. For every story that gets Dugg, it's open season for the slanderous peanut gallery. This is the dark side of the openness and sharing in the social media world. We are just now learning how to deal with the new, uncensored, technologically-amplified "freedom of speech" for the common man and its many repercussions.
The terrorists who blew up NYC and DC on 9/11 wanted to make me afraid to fly and afraid to go to work. I felt strong emotions, but I promised myself not to let them "win" by making me afraid to enjoy travel or do what I normally did.
I hope Kathy will be able to find the strength to continue her awesome blog. Everyone is behind her. And we are so collectively so much mightier than a few cowardly, anonymous pictures and comments. Maybe she could ignore other sites for a while, and get someone to administer her blog comments and screen e-mail if she decides to start posting again?
Very well said!
Having comments moderated is one way to avoid this problem, but it could get time-consuming and tedious. You could require people to register accounts in order to comment. You could also require administrative approval for new accounts to be created. This would probably be less time-consuming than approving or denying every comment, especially on a popular blog.
Sadly, this is one more example of both intolerance and the advancing level to which people will strike out at someone else. We're seeing it more and more in real life, so it shouldn't come as a shock that it is growing online as well.
For all the incredible ways that the web has empowered lives and changed the world in such a short period of time, it is exteremly saddening to be reminded of how easily in can be used for hate as well.
Along with pure disgust, I can't help but feel pity for the "attackers." How terrible it must be to go through life feeling so inferior to another individual, to have such a low sense of self worth that your only way to feel better or even voice your opinion is through personal attack, fear and hate, rather than through discussion or debating your opposition to someone else's ideas intelligently.
I don't think this is a "men" versus "women" issue. I think it is "good" versus "evil". It sucks Kathy has had to go through this. I'm glad she had the guts to post about it. The word is getting out and that can only be good. Scoble makes a good point about us fixing our culture online - what kind of internet do you want? What kind of internet do you want for your kids?
Well said. I absolutely agree.
This is a matter of human decency, which shouldn't be tied to gender or any other demographic. I think making this a gender issue in some way belittles the impact... it becomes a "woman" thing. The attacks may have been gender focused, but the issue is far more reaching.
Similarly, I think that may explain why some women don't want to align with feminism as it may become an "all or nothing" point of view. That is the challenge with movements, everyone wants to hitch their ideas to it.
Beliefs should extend beyond movements and terminology. Equal rights and respect needs to move beyond gender, race, sexual preference, religious beliefs, etc.
Good points, both of you. I suppose I felt more sympathetic to her situation and what she's going through because, as a female, I could imagine feeling the same way if I were put in a similar situation.
But both of you (rmccarley and identity) are right--it is a matter of human decency, regardless of gender, race, etc.
Absolutely, and you should. We will always identify more with those who are of the same gender, closer to our age, similar backgrounds... that's only natural.
I just think it is important that as a community, we view the issue as unacceptable under any and all circumstances.
Yes, I agree that it is a human decency issue. But I think women get picked on because (generally) they are perceived as "weaker" gender, and preditorial a$#hole types are always seeking out a weaker victim. So, I guess, it is a women issue too.
Anyone that thinks women are the weaker gender should meet my wife. She didn't know how to read until 21. She got clean, had a kid and put herself through school. Now she has multiple degrees. Currently she works part-time (because she wants to), is a full-time mom of a teenager and our new baby and puts up with ME - no easy task. She's also a natural brawler so watch that left hook. ;)
Jane the Kiwi would not have ridden a whale to work, she would have been riding a sheep, at least get your insults right :-)
Riding a sheep along the sidewalk in Seattle would get me to work faster than riding the Seattle buses, that's for sure.
I'm yet to comprehend why do we kiwi's cop so much flak as a nation as apposed to others!?
Oh well, used to it by now... six years in AU and counting.
Again, it's jealousy :)
By now, I just laugh off the "insults." Yay for another Kiwi on the blog! Kia ora, friend :)
I always make the "riding a whale" to work joke because of the movie Whale Rider...even though Jane's not a Maori :)
Yet I'm not so sure the sheep would do so well traversing the Pacific-friggin-Ocean. A whale, on the other hand, could just drop her off beneath the Eastlake bridge and she'd have a quick, 3-block, jaunt to work.
As a victim of death threats myself, I can say it is pretty scary. One of the reasons I do try and not use too much personal information whenever I can is because of that. However I do live in such a difficult to get at area with neighbours who watch out and an overprotective husband (and police officer neighbours) that I feel more safe at home than at work.
I do still have the fear. I was afraid to post my image associated with my blog and stuff for the longest time but when I got back in to public speaking I thought it might as well happen.
I think the community helps protect and that often things are done to deliberately trap people who threaten. I know one guy who tried to incite prople to committ violence against me has actually left the country so that is good but that still leaves those he incited.
I know her life will never be the same again. I know she'll never leave the fear behind no matter how far down the road she goes. I know what she's going through - the death threat was phoned through to me and I was followed by a car. I know the fear.
I can only wish her police officer neighbours and understanding friends and community.
Rather than talking about concepts such as feminism, good vs. evil and human decency I think it begins and ends with anonymity. As Scott mentioned, the nature of Kathy's job makes her much more accessible to the public, while the participants are anonymous.
The projection of our identity (in real life relationships at least) hinges on concepts such as respect, integrity, etiquette & accountability.
When you’re anonymous, none of these basic human values come into play.
Similarly, online harassment can be more frightening then a real life stalker, because the unknown factor paralyzes the victim. From the victim’s perspective the offender could be anywhere & everywhere.
Unfortunately, the offending parties are probably celebrating their ‘power’ over Kathy – “Hey, look at what we’ve made her do”.
Unless they’re caught (& punished), they’ll continue their online harassment in some shape or form.
When you’re anonymous, you tend to think you’re invincible.
The question is, how do we remove anonymity when the anonymous nature of the internet is one of its great strengths?
Note: On the flipside, there is something Doc Searls likes to call accuracy, or 'Getting your facts right isn't always so simple'. Bloggers associated with the antagonists are being smeared by the 'wisdom' of the mob. This mob is lashing out at any target within striking distance and I'm almost as disgusted at them as I am with Kathy's attackers.
There is no wisdom in a 'mob'. Worse, the mob is fickle. All mobs are anonymous until individuals within it are caught.
Some may argue a few spoil it for the rest of us but this irrelevant phenomenon, or noise, will never shatter the pillars of democracy. We will need to remain vigilant to protect our new online freedoms and we will search out the Neanderthals who have just learned to type with one finger.
God knows I've argued the feminist angle to death (above), but in a way you're right - anonymity is a huge part of it. I'm not saying it's not about all the other things (good v. evil, human decency, etc.), and I'm not saying some of it wouldn't happen even if it were face-to-face interactions (there are some genuinely hateful people out there), but anonymity definitely makes the problems a lot worse.
The anonymity issue should be easier to tackle than general public opinion, so perhaps that should be the primary focus...
There is a perception of anonymity. Unless you take additional precautions you're generally speaking not truly anonymous.
In terms of its repercussions it doesn't make much difference. There are still those who feel that the normal standards of human interaction need not apply.
Forgot to mention . . .
Frank Paynter, the owner of the meankids.org site, has said how sorry he is that this has happened. Hopefully that means he will want to help out and if he still has them isn't going to delete any logs from the site.
I would imagine that wordpress.com keeps logs for a while so the police should be able to get the IPs of the people who made these comments and hopefully follow it up with the ISPs involved.
Hopefully those responsible can be identified and dealt with appropriately.
Having said this though if they haven't been identified already all this publicity could be a serious problem. If I were them I'd be wiping my hard drive.
Okay. To post a comment with her personal info (correct or wrong) on a site that's likely part of a police investigation is about the stupidest thing I've heard of in a long time.
(And, the other stupid thing is my putting this in the wrong place, out of sequence.) sigh
Just what I was going to say...why would she stop blogging, cancel a public appearance, and then leave her comments enabled? At this point, she's not taking all the steps she needs to take.
I assume the police are monitoring the comments and are trying to flush the poster who threatened her out of his hole. How easy or difficult is it to trace these messages?
I would assume so too.
I have to imagine that tracking things after the fact is one thing, but actively monitoring and tracking live presents a much better opportunity... and if they're stupid enough to continue, all the better.
No idea for sure, but was thinking... if the person/s are in the US especially... they may be crossing "state lines" with all this, and since to post this garbage they must connect over phone lines, I have to imagine that this might become more than just an issue with the local authorities and could escalate to FCC and FBI.
Talk about getting in way over your head in a very bad way real quick!
Wtf??! There's no shortage of mean people with incredibly negative things to say out there, but these particular f*ckers are sick and should be lynched and quartered. Free speech my ass!
Kathy, I don't know you personally but I am so sorry for the emotional pain these assholes are inflicting on you. The threats of sexual violence are appauling and completely inexcusible. I hope you won't let this keep you from blogging and know that there are a lot of people pulling for you.
I'm a big fan of Kathy's blog too. I coudn't believe what I was reading on that post today. I've seen similar things happen online in other circles, but not anything like this. She is a professional, writing about a technical topic - it's mind boggling to me that people are low enough to write such degrading things about her. Haven't they got anything better to do? And one of the people involved even said something about sueing her about it all (something about her misinterpreting the comments or something, I don't know)! I don't understand why they care so much. If you don't agree with what someone writes that's fine, but that doesn't give you permission to attack them personally.
As a female blogger this is really disconcerting. I think things like this could really discourage other women from getting involved. I think women are generally more sensitive to criticism than men, and that already holds us back. And rational criticism is a far cry from what Kathy is experiencing now.
Well, after reading this blog post, I feel inclined to comment, because I'm a woman.
I wish I could make a comment about how it's some nerdly guy sitting in front of his computer with greasy hair, eating doritos, thinking he's awesome for this kind of crap, but I won't. (oh wait, I just did)
It doesn't matter who is more sensitive about criticism, it's about how this would never happen to a man.
Guys get flak in forums and on blogs all the time, but the comments typically aren't as blatantly appalling and graphic as they were towards Kathy. How many threats of sexual violence do men receive? Probably not as many as women...
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say these things never happen to men. Men are abused online and in "real life" as well, but misogynistic comments are (obviously) aimed solely at women.
I do hope you're right: that the creep(s) behind the abuse are useless losers who don't actually have the means or the drive to physically hurt anyone.
I definitely agree with all three of you!
I didn't mean to imply anything about women being more sensitive, just that this adds another hinderance on to what we already feel. Just making sure I'm not being mis-interpreted here :)
Just to make clearer what I said before (because I hate misunderstandings as well), men and women both experience abuse and it's never acceptable.
Kathy was very thick-skinned about this for a long time. That's not a masculine characteristic, any more than getting upset about it is feminine. She put up with it until it scared the crap out of her... it would have scared me a lot earlier.
Gotta disagree here. Saying men are immune to threats of violence (physical, sexual, etc) is naive and, oddly enough, anti-feminist.
I doubt the Matthew Shepards of the world would find your comment (jtaylor) tastfeul or accurate.
Hey, I didn't say men were immune--just that women are the recipient of those types of comments much more often.
yeah, I did make quite a sweeping generalization. I stand corrected.
Actually, to elaborate further, when I wrote "This would never happen to a man", I thought about it in my head, trying to think of an instance of the opposite genders, where a woman would do something like this to a man.
That's something that is far less likely to happen, I think.
Male to male stuff like this never occured to me, like with Matthew Shepard.
I think things like this more commonly happen to women, but it can and does happen to men too. Definitely not as often, but never isn't fair.
It doesn't really matter who it's happening too and who's responsible though, since it's clearly wrong no matter who the parties are.
I've never really thought of blogging as a particularly brave activity, but I do now. After all, you never really know how people on the other end will respond to your posts.
I hope Kathy decides to continue her blog, but I'm sure that will be a difficult decision.
I didn't have anything that drastic happen to me, but when I was in high school the school kicked out anyone who went to my site based on the anti-school content I had posted. They actually tried sue me because of my site (I had premade flyers to print that had a picture of vice principle and a comment bubble saying you have no consititional rights). Mine worked the opposite of hers it seemed.... I got real life threats for my blog.
It's tragic. I've already posted on it, and it's been written up on the BBC here.
People can really suck sometimes.
I'd love to know who's behind it all... who does this type of crap! It's good to see the subject being covered int he mainstream media as well (yay BBC!). Although probably not the case here (as Kathy is in a very techy sphere), I think sometimes inexperienced people get online and start throwing flames... the "general public" needs to hear about how the internet can hurt people in "real life."
I'd love to know too. One of the involved parties has come forward and appologised. Others haven't.
What staggers me most though isn't what's happened, it's that it was so premeditated. I'll be the first to hold my hand up and say that I've said things in the heat of replying to a comment or post that's got me riled. But I'll come back later with a cooler head and appologise if needed, and I'll always post with my name and website addy. I don't believe in hiding behind anonymity.
But setting up a site, with the sole intention of mocking people, and doing this kind of stuff is just beyond the pale. It's vile, and I really hope whoever the people are who were behind it are brought to justice. You have the freedom to speak your mind to express opinions, not to destroy people's lives.
Unfortunately, it sounds like Kathy is a victim of Internet anonymity, where overzealous guys with an "I'd hit that" mentality take things to an AintItCool.com-like extreme.
Some people think because they are "hidden" behind their keyboards, they can say and act (in a virtual manner) anyway they please and that, my friends, is exactly why the Internet cannot escape its creepy image completely.
Fortunately, I'd say none of those morons were actually smart enough to hide their IP - so perhaps they can be shown the error of their ways... painfully.
Kathy should contact the ISP's from the originating comments; does WordPress remember the IP's of anonymous comments?
Otherwise why doesn't she just close open comments or limit it to pre-approved ones?
I'd love it if they were identified. Anonymity is my pet peeve.
Nice to see you in our comments, Chris! Hopefully those Kathy haters will pull a Gob Bluth and realize that they've "made a huge mistake."
Exactly - this is the danger of not having to be in real contact with someone when communicating with them.
It's the (seriously) thick end of a wedge I posted about a while back, but it really is beyond the pale.
These sort of comments are absolutely unforgivable and you would hope that if they are reported to their ISP, they can be brought to justice (we've just had a libel action over here in the UK due to comments on a blog)
Thankfully, comments are now locked on Kathy's blog. I definitely think it was the right thing to do. Why enable these shitheads any longer?!
Edit: How the hell did my post end way up here?
Apparently our server has been smoking the funny stuff, because it's very confused as to the date and the time.
Wow. They're still at it over on Kathy's blog. Some asshole just posted a bunch of her personal information in the comments. I don't know if the info is accurate but it's pretty scary all the same.
From Comments: Hope you enjoyed pimping your whore of a girlfriend, Bert. Kathy and Bert live at <address removed>. Feel free to send them gifts that properly express your sentiments towards them. Kathy's SSN is <removed>. If you think I'm lying, you're free to check her credit report and call local hospitals yourself. My name is <asshole>. It has been an honor welcoming you to the Internet, Kathy.
Wtf is this world coming to?? Leave her alone already.
What the hell is wrong with that asshat?! Some people are so hateful.
I think that Kathy needs to turn off comments to her blog for a bit...
Some people are so sad. Who has nothing better to do with their time than torture someone whom they've (most likely) never met?! What a sad piece of crap.
I don't know why this struck such a deep chord in me, but I think it is because I've seen sooooo much hatefulness over the web where it is easier than in the real world face to face. In spite of working in the Web world for 7 years, I honestly can't think of a situation like this where people went so overboard against someone who as far as I know is not even controvercial.
I, and I bet many others, have much thicker skin as folks that work in the Net industry, just a violent movie makers can watch a head chopped of in a movie without blinking. This incidident will make me think more about how "hardened" I am to nasty writing on the Web. It's not all just part of another usual. It's not just another fictional movie. We forget how close to real life text, images, and video on the web are.
This is disturbing. And, I think, unique in scope at least to the internet. I agree with the comments above saying this was made much worse by the anonimity afforded by the internet, but also the speed with which people are able to post and get their nasty comments circulated - to millions of potentially like-minded people. Obviously, someone thought it was funny, the site and posts stayed up for longer than they should have.
Human decency. I'm a feminist, and I have no trouble with the title (even though I heartily agree the radicals are insane), but really this does come down to common decency. Having the lack of empathy required to say these things publicly ... it just shouldn't happen.
Obviously what happened to Kathy is an extreme example of internet anonymity gone beserk, but what I see far more commonly is people engaging in Argumentum ad Hominem - attacking the person instead of (or along with) the argument.
This manifests itself on poorly-run discussion boards all the time, most commonly seen in name-calling and the like. It sounds like Kathy was a victim of this as well, even from those who decry the threats of violence that were made against her.
From time to time, even posts on this blog attack the person rather than the argument; I won't mention who or when but it does happen.
It's not remotely as morally decrepit as what happened to Kathy, but it's still not necessary and is a slippery slope that can lead to worse.
Thanks for this post, Rebecca. I don't know who Kathy Sierra is, nor do I keep up with her, but I too have noticed that the blatant sexism and misogynistic views held [typo edit] by the "anons" of the internet are pretty disgusting.
I completely agree with Jane. Anonymous commenters piss me off. Some may say that anonymity helps people share their feelings, but more often than not it just leads to a lot of disgusting comments with no one to hold accountable for them.
Keep up the good writing.
It is outrageous that any human being may have to deal with persecution in any form. I am hoping the radical speed at which social media is catching on and ultimately influencing the next generation will help foster respect, dignity, integrity, greater consciousness, intelligence, and egalitarianism.
There is a good outcome from this particular situation (with all due respect to Kathy) as one can see from the comments on this post that there is a greater good in people and when things of this nature happen we are all ready to participate in elevating our levels of consciousness, making others aware, and building consensus.
Well done to all who comment - it is this kind of participation that will drive greater respect among all peoples of the world.
BTW, seems these threats have affected a man - Robert Scoble. He's taking a week off from his blog due to the matter....
It's terrible what has happened, but at least it's getting her some good press about it - even slashdot linked to her today.
Nice post Rebecca. I too have never read Kathy's pieces. I only today found out about this.
It's a wierd and crappy world when some anonymous #%^$ can make an anonymous death threat. If it's sexist oriented that makes it worse.
I'm astonished at the confrontational language on the web in various formats. If this stuff was said face to face it would often end up in fights. It is literally changing one aspect of the essence of interaction.
I simply hope she sails through this in a healthy way and they somehow capture the sick b*stard!
You can say "bastards" on our blog if you want to. Sugarrae has said worse :)
Ahh, but Rae is like Jason - we know to take her more flowery language with a pinch of salt. :)
This is very scary. I just saw Kathy a few weeks ago at SXSWi and she is very intelligent, well spoken, and cute to boot. It is really unfortunate that something like this happens. Hopefully good will come of this and she will remain blogging. Spineless people like that have no place on the web or anywhere else. If you dislike someone, fine, there are ways to go about expressing your distaste. Death treats and sexual violence is the most cowerdace of ways to do it. Utterly disappointing.
Rebecca--I’m glad you let us know about this serious situation. Thank you.
In order to help Kathy--which should be the immediate concern of all right now--I think we should remind the online SEO community of blog owners and participants to report any unusual activities they’ve come across in the past year. Don’t clog the investigation by reporting every weirdo’s comments, but do be diligent and report serious concerns.
What are you looking for? Comments that are similar in nature, comments that keep nagging at you, same misspelling of a word that he/she used in a message to Kathy, same use or misuse of a phrase, a similar style of writing, a similar mindset, etc.
Kathy may not be the only person the poster threatened.
If you’ve received a similar threat and brushed it off, now is the time to come forward and report it to the police.
The odds are that at least one of us has interacted online with this person, or worse, in person. Scary stuff.
I think we should focus on the immediate issue of helping Kathy in any way we can.
I can't help but imagine that quite a few people know who made these threats. People show off; there's no reward or satisfaction in posting these things completely anonymously. They'll have told at least some people about it.
Jane, that's a great point.
...and you've just got to hope that at least one of those has a conscience...
Either that or a lack of fear for those people who did it.
it is very sad that these things happen...
but it's a police matter isn't it?
We've seen people denouncing the existence of God on youtube in exchange for a DVD. Celebrities and their crazy lives. Saddam Hussein's execution. People jumping out of trees or crashing into cars or beating each other up. The internet is as much a place of inspiration as revulsion. It is the world, in fact, exaggerated.
I guarantee that the people who posted those hateful, threatening messages and images wouldn't have the guts to say it in person to Kathy. The amount of attention this story is getting, not just on Kathy's website but on every other internet communications website, is actually giving notoriety to nobodies. It is making them infamous. Problem is, they can't tell anybody that they are the ones everybody is enraged about. Soon as they did, they would be toast.
In any case, the awareness being created is also extremely valuable. It can only be good if more people secure their websites against spam; more people take an active role against violent threats on the internet; and law enforcement agencies and government create better programs to find, charge and prosecute criminals for internet harrassment.
Here in Canada, just a few days ago, there were a group of students who made defamatory and personally insulting comments about their principal on Facebook, and were subsequently suspended from school. One of the students was expelled. They had a protest which turned violent and some of the students were arrested. The students were saying their freedom of speech rights were not being protected; the school authorities were saying they needed protection from internet harrassment. In the end, hate speech will (and always should) lose this battle.
My feeling is that the exposure of this story is probably (hopefully) serving to villify the perpetrators of the aforementioned hate speech. Especially if legal action is brought against them, one would hope it'll serve as a warning that, even online, threatening violence against someone is unacceptable.
I would add that there may be a million teens in chat rooms saying, "I'm gonna kick your ass," which is, at worst an empty threat. In Kathy's case, she is not just an online persona: she is a real person and a public figure with an available speaking schedule. If someone truly intended to do her harm, they'd know where to find her, which (I presume) is why she canceled her speaking engagements. This aspect adds incalculable validity to her fears and concerns.
I don't know about Canada or any other country (including my own :|) but I believe that the exception to "freedom of speech" in the U.S. is hate speech.
Trumpeting free speech when you've said something abhorrent is rather disgusting. Certainly, freedom of speech wasn't invented and isn't protected in order to protect hate.
As I understand it, while the speech itself is protected by the First Amendment, the outcomes of that speech may be legally actionable. If your speech incites physical, emotional or real harm to another person or property, either by yourself or through the advocation of hostile action to others, you may be liable.
Ahh, okay. I'd imagine that you could make the argument that real harm has already been done to Kathy Sierra, given that she's virtually locked herself away in her home and is obviously upset.
Still, what's the likelihood of anyone being caught?
She could also probably sue in the UK for libel (we have libel laws that put the pressure on the libeller to prove that what they said wasn't libel)- although it was published in the States, I think that if she could prove that people in the UK had read it, and could have their views effected by it, that she's got a case (I seem to remember the Wall Street Journal pulling this off a while back).
Hands up anyone here who's based in the UK who'd be a witness?!
*holds hand up*
I was searching earlier and the best source of information I found about these <a href="https://www.slcgov.com/mayor/speeches/free%20speech%20guidelines.htm">Guidelines Regarding Free Speech</a>.
I don't think the threats Kathy received would fall under Free Speech though. There's a concept called 'fighting words" that's not protected under free speech laws, but I think it's meant for something different.
I think the threats fall under something like 'intent to harm' or 'intent to injure' or something like tha. I'm probably not using the correct legal terms.
I think hate speech is protected and in all honesty it should be even though most of us find it objectionable. It's hard to accept sometimes, but you have to protect everyone's right to free speech no matter how objectionable or disgusting.
We've all said something that someone on the planet would have a problem with. If you censor something even hate speech then it sets a precedent for someone else to censor you. So objectionable or not you have to protect free speech.
Scott's right it's the inciting to riot part (which is probably what's meant by the 'fighting words' thing) that's not protected and there are other specific cases where speech isn't protected like screaming 'fire' in a crowded theater. Pornography and obscenity are other issues that always get fought over.
But you do have to be very careful in what you don't protect since it really can lead to a lot of censorship very quickly once the precedent is set.
Sorry about the link above not working. Let me try again.
Guidelines Regarding Free Speech
It's from the Slat Lake City Attorney's office.
Matt if you read this I find that whenever I post a link in a comment it only becomes active if after posting I go back in to edit the comment and save changes even though I don't actually change anything.
>>"It is the world, in face, exaggerated"
"Take away all restraint, and you'll see under the face of modernity and evolved morality that we paint over our lives, we are simply beasts kept in check by the laws we create for the good of the herd."
Just look at Lord of the Flies, or A Clockwork Orange. Online, many people have little restraint. So the darker side of humanity gets to shine through without the normal veneer of restraint we have.
"These people hurt not only her, but the many, many readers who love her blog and get a wealth of valuable information from it."
I would like to add those who haven't yet discovered her blog to the list here. I'm relatively new to this corner of the blogosphere and haven't, or hadn't, yet come across her blog. In the multiple posts I've read in the past few hours on the subject though it's clear that she is very highly thought of by many people whose opinions I value. Hopefully she will continue posting and I'll probably go through her archive in the next few days anyway.
I've had a few hours to think about it now and I'm still not entirely sure how to respond. The whole thing sickens me. As you say there are your usual trolls which I think most people with any sort of online presence will have come across but what has happened here takes it to an entirely different level.
Would something similar happen to a man? I think it is highly unlikely. Death threats are certainly possible but not the threats of sexual violence. In my, entirely unqualified, opinion the type of people who are capable of this level of unrestrained hate are so insecure that they wouldn't be willing to question their own sexuality.
I read her blog all the time and I'm disaponted to see people acting that way! I hope she continues to post in the future! I wish you the best Kathy!