I hate the idea that she's getting death threats and insults because of her gender. That's wrong. It's not because of her gender.
It's because she's a notable figure on the internet.
I challenge the reader to find any notable figure online who has held a controversial position and not been the target of death threats.
That is an Internet anonymity problem, not a gender problem!
Women are not the only targets of anonymous death threats online!
(Not to excuse the appalling behavior of anonymous cowards who point their threats at almost every notable news target. Seriously, go read the forums on a major partisan site. Vile, disgusting, hurtful and violent language aren't the exception, they're the norm).
By playing into the gender context we're playing once against into these stupid gender arguments where they don't belong.
"But they're using anti-women language"
Of course they are! If it were a crippled man being insulted, why not imagine the language they'd use. If it was a black man being insulted and threatened, guess the language they'd use.
They pick their language to troll their target. They pick it after picking their target -- the language isn't the reason!
And yet again, a non gender issue will be filed under sexism.
> Then the internet erupted, as male developers saw one of their own attacked for something that just about every man can envision himself doing.
There were plenty of female developers that also expressed outrage, that also admitted to making similar jokes. The root cause of this entire debacle is that everything keeps being framed as a battle between all male developers vs a lone female developer.
What's so great about his rebuttal? I read that whole thing and it's all anecdotal and seemingly exaggerated. Plus it's based on a single person. It rebuts something but it's definitely not the OP's point.
> I hate the idea that she's getting death threats and insults because of her gender. That's wrong.
Maybe I'm a fool to try to figure out the motivation of anonymous jackasses on the internet, but: It sure feels like the passion and energy being put into some of the attacks is due to her gender.
"If it was a black man being insulted and threatened, guess the language they'd use."
uh... racist language?
So wait, if I get riled up about something for non-racist reasons, but then use racist language... I'm not racist? I get a pass?
Don't confuse your argument. You're saying that her gender is not SUFFICIENT for why she's getting those threats. Fine. But don't make the case that her actions were sufficient alone; that her gender (or race) has nothing to do with it. That just defends anyone who wants to use racist or sexist language any time they get bent out of shape about something.
No, you're still a racist, you just weren't a premeditated racist.
A person choosing the most obvious, vicious, and personal way to insult and hurt someone is still guilty of acting prejudiced. Just because they would have used a different way to attack a different person does not get them off the hook for what they actually did.
Please explain how this situation would have worked if, instead of Adria, the original tweeter/picture-poster had been a white, heterosexual, Protestant man.
I'm a very generic white male with absolutely no real notability and because I have some degree of worth in a very small part of the internet I've had people threaten to drive to my apartment and beat me up because I did something they don't agree with -- they never do, but the threats happen. Entirely possible that Adria's gender or race contributed to this, but it definitely happens to white straight males too. You're looking at the wrong end, don't look at the victim, look at the aggressors: anonymity and distance is the cause. There will never be any recourse for those that threaten, so they'll do it until they're blue in the face.
You've never seen Anonymous go nuclear on white supremacists? Or back when they were trolling Tom Green's live web show? etc.
The fact that this is a "Women in Tech" issue is what generated so much publicity, and the publicity is what draws the trolls. If two posters on 4chan's /b/ board had some exchange where one named-and-shamed the other over a penis joke, and he ended up losing his job? I don't think it's hard to imagine Anonymous coming down hard in the perpetrator, whether male or female.
| I bet if you compared their campaign of
| "going nuclear" on white supremacists it
| would register but a blip compared to what's
| going on here.
What is it that makes what's going on here worse than anything else? The DDoS attacks? The threats? The volume of threats? Has she been SWAT'd[1]? (I'm not heavily invested in this mess, so maybe I'm missing something)
Protestant like baptist or something? I guess maybe they could have stirred up some outrage from the religious crowd, over some sort of perceived religious slight? But most issues these days likely to offend fundamentalist protestants are likely to offend fundamentalist catholics too... I don't really know; what are you trying to get at?
What white men never get, and this is just an observation, I have no sides or deep interest in this mess, is a comment like: "this makes me re-think hiring white men, they're not worth the drama". I've seen a few of those around the place regarding Ms Richards.
Also if a man did this, it wouldn't even register on the internet's "burn-the-hypocrite" scale and I would actually be able to read something else on HN.
I agree that this is an Internet wide problem. And yet, I suspect it is worse for women.
This abuse is generated by the "long crazy tail" of the Internet populace. In general, this crazy tail is mostly male (testosterone/societal/genetic influences). Therefore, the crazies are more likely to sympathetic to people like them and less likely to be able to relate to those far outside their own identities (among this set, women), and so the abuse level will be higher.
It's because she's a notable figure on the internet.
I challenge the reader to find any notable figure online who has held a controversial position and not been the target of death threats.
That is an Internet anonymity problem, not a gender problem!
Women are not the only targets of anonymous death threats online!
(Not to excuse the appalling behavior of anonymous cowards who point their threats at almost every notable news target. Seriously, go read the forums on a major partisan site. Vile, disgusting, hurtful and violent language aren't the exception, they're the norm).
By playing into the gender context we're playing once against into these stupid gender arguments where they don't belong.
"But they're using anti-women language"
Of course they are! If it were a crippled man being insulted, why not imagine the language they'd use. If it was a black man being insulted and threatened, guess the language they'd use.
They pick their language to troll their target. They pick it after picking their target -- the language isn't the reason!
And yet again, a non gender issue will be filed under sexism.