Sexism, Misogyny and the rise and rise and rise of the internet asshole....

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
Some women in this thread really enjoy basking in victim hood, what a shame that so many are willing to oblige.

And they're not victims of malice when some asshole with all the people skills of a starving tiger threatens to rape them or kill them?

What then, are they?

[More]

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far - been off the board for a while.

This whole thing was nailed on the first page.
Knowing that acting in such a way in the real world will get someone smacked keeps most of the freaks silent.
It's only the relative safety of the insulation from consequenses that the internet provides that facilitates this.
It's the same (to a lesser degree) with roadrage. People are quite happy to beep their horns, call folks all sorts of names and give all sorts of handsignals when they are protected in their little metal boxes...Things change rapidly when when they get a tap on their window though and reality comes crashing down.

I don't know the answer to net bullying etc. There will always be cowards, and I think it's wrong to curtail the freedom the rest of us enjoy because some folks just aren't able to socialise...

Alex from Target' is getting death threats and is afraid to go out in public because of screaming fangirls ...

Here's some more perspective on the topic at hand.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: tony9802

Searching for someone on the internet is legal, tony. Let's not convict people of stalking until stalking is committed.

Once again, someone who has been bullying and mistreating someone online, who later conducts personal information searches to find and locate that person, and then who later actually proceeds to stalk them is a criminal. It is illegal. I'm sorry you're unable to see it that way.

The thread concerns mysogynist internet abuse and mistreatment- We are not talking about happy people who are searching for old friends at www.findpeople.com, or www.myclassmates.com-- do you at all see the difference? If you could just follow the thread topic I think you'll be alright..


My standards are very simple and not at all hypocritical. My standard is to remain polite here on ATS. When I noticed you said something distasteful and impolite, I pointed it out to you. How did I do that..by correcting a silly grammatical mistake you had made thereby using your very own method and tactic against you: isn't that how you had operated against "InTheLight?

Are you saying then that your very own methods and tactics are those of a hypocrite? Perhaps so, I simply conducted the same maneouvre that you had.. I can see you didn't like it; Clearly, you can dish it out but you certainly can't take it..



I merely corrected you on two occasions, and you're calling my standards hypocritical.. It was your standard that ran afoul..I merely pointed it out to you..

a reply to: tony9802

Then what is online mistreatment? You said stalking. Unfortunately, sending messages and looking someone up is not stocking. Perhaps you can explain it better. Just follow the thread topic, but maybe not so blindly.

No I welcome corrections where I went wrong. Except you haven't corrected anything. What I clearly did not enjoy is your hypocrisy, which continues now. If I use an incorrect word I would hope someone might point it out. What you find distasteful and impolite should in no way include the correction of language. You give a bad name to true injustice. Hypocrisy and thought police? It gets worse and worse by the moment.

If politeness is your standard, remain polite. Maybe a please and thank you once and awhile.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: tony9802

Then what is online mistreatment? You said stalking. Unfortunately, sending messages and looking someone up is not stocking.

I have said that online mistreatment and abuse, that later becomes stalking is dangerous and a serious offense, a criminal offense. I will correct your grammer once again on this one, as stalking is spelled s-t-a-l-k-i-n-g and not stocking..

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: tony9802



No I welcome corrections where I went wrong. Except you haven't corrected anything.

I think I've corrected a few of your mistakes, but they're actually quite insignificant given the subject of the topic, which is naturally much more important than brief writing errors..

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: tony9802

You give a bad name to true injustice. Hypocrisy and thought police? It gets worse and worse by the moment.

What on earth do you mean by "true injustice".. Are you attempting to agree with me that online bullying that becomes online personal id info searches, that become physical stalking episodes, are truly unjust, surely criminal, and entirely naturally reprehensible..do you agree with me on that point, or not?


By the way, I am not policing your thoughts.. I am simply stating that it is incorrect to do online searches of people for the purpose of stalking them, which in turn is a criminal offense.



I'm virtually always courteous by the way; I normally like to start with the following phrases: " Excuse me,", or "I beg your pardon..", Those are pretty much standard etiquette phrases for healthy, gentle, appealing minds..


Perhaps you'd like to give those phrases a try someday..

a reply to: tony9802

I have said that online mistreatment and abuse, that later becomes stalking is dangerous and a serious offense, a criminal offense. I will correct your grammer once again on this one, as stalking is spelled s-t-a-l-k-i-n-g and not stocking..

What is online mistreatment and abuse? Cyber-punching someone? Typing something rude? Searching someone?

I appreciate you catching that mistake. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. “Grammer” is actually spelled g-r-a-m-m-a-r, “offense” is spelled o-f-f-e-n-c-e. I haven’t even started on your punctuation.

I think I've corrected a few of your mistakes, but they're actually quite insignificant given the subject of the topic, which is naturally much more important than brief writing errors..

I can agree with that. So let’s continue.

What on earth do you mean by "true injustice".. Are you attempting to agree with me that online bullying that becomes online personal id info searches, that become physical stalking episodes, are truly unjust, surely criminal, and entirely naturally reprehensible..do you agree with me on that point, or not?

I do not agree with you in the slightest. Stalking someone else is indeed an injustice. But researching someone, sending them messages, even for the purpose of murder, isn’t.

By the way, I am not policing your thoughts.. I am simply stating that it is incorrect to do online searches of people for the purpose of stalking them, which in turn is a criminal offense.

But it isn’t incorrect. Looking up someone for the purpose of stalking is not stalking, just like buying a gun for the purpose of murder is not murder. There is no sense in blurring the lines like this. Even if someone gathers all the information, buys duct tape, a balaclava, hand cuffs, and leaps out the door in the dark to stalk someone, he still has the god-given right to change his mind.

I’m virtually always courteous by the way; I normally like to start with the following phrases: " Excuse me,", or "I beg your pardon..", Those are pretty much standard etiquette phrases for healthy, gentle, appealing minds..

Perhaps you'd like to give those phrases a try someday..

We’re not bumping into people or tapping people on the shoulder here. We’re not smiling to each other and shaking hands. Why confuse the online with the offline? This is what I do not understand. There is no need for etiquette, moral superiority and manners where nothing but text is concerned, because we are sitting down, alone, on a screen, dealing with no one but ourselves.

This thread should be fully renamed to “The rise of the internet crusader”, those who try to limit the freedoms of others because they value security over freedom.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope




It's nice to see you're standing on your toes now.. welcome back to ats..


Alright, so you're saying any criminal can look up any individual's information, that any criminal can look up anyone's personal details, personal banking information, personal marital information etc..and that it's perfectly alright, and perfectly acceptable so long as they do not do anything illegal or criminal with that information; isn't that what you're saying?


Then we would need to ask what the point is in obtaining that information in the first place by that very same criminal. Does he want to feel a sense of power over someone..does he want to feel a sense of control over someone, does he want to be able to act upon that information whenever he desires..what is the point and purpose in having that info?

Does he feel a sense of pleasure knowing that he is "on top of someone," in secretive manner, or does it gratify some type of psychotic narcissistic need of some sort..All of those are dangerous reasons for obtaining someone's private information online, irrespective of whether one acts upon those personal details or not.

Most dangerously, on impulse, or due to some type of irrational distortion, that criminal can suddenly act upon the information that has already been obtained..Now that he has all of those details, he has all of the power in the world, and he can do virtually anything he wishes to do with that information..


It's pre-emptive manoeuvering on his behalf,and while it may be legal to conduct those searches, in any investigation of a criminal case that were to follow, you can be certain that the authorities and the investigators would observe the intention behind those searches, and that that intention would at least be indicative, relevant, and important to those authorities,so relevant so as to create a grave criminal case against someone..


Take for example child molestors or prostitute killers, and the type of information they might look up to find and control someone..the searching on the internet may not be illegal, but the intention behind the searching is. Policing thought and intention, in those cases, isn't always necessarily a bad thing in my opinion, but that would be a whole new thread obviously altogether.



If it were up to me, I would use bona fide mind readers and serious psychics to control criminal conduct pre-emptively..that would not amount to mind control in any way, at least not in my opinion; Stopping filthy polluted minds from committing vile, repulsive crimes would actually, in my opinion, be a good thing.






p.s. points well taken..

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

This thread should be fully renamed to “The rise of the internet crusader”, those who try to limit the freedoms of others because they value security over freedom.

Well, living in a society means all kinds of people living together- young people, children, handicapped people, old people, sick people, injured people, pregnant people....... people in all sorts of states of fragility or vulnerability.
Part of being "civilized" entails respecting them too, and part of being a member of a society is having a certain amount of security in it.

Probably persons who are parents have a heightened sense of the need for protective limits- we have to consider those on a daily basis, as part of our responsibility to our offspring in the temporary state of vulnerability.

I admit, I don't much support that it is fine for a man to look up my young daughter's info on the net and be able to find her physically. I don't especially want my sons involved in activities or with people who will encourage him to do such a thing to someone else. Call me evil freedom basher. I'm just saying what I feel, I am not actually stopping you or anyone else from doing so.

Which is where I think the concern lies- I am an adult. You are an adult. I can choose to expose myself to potential danger and be ready to face whatever happens, you can too. But kids don't always see as far as us and understand just what potential consequences they are choosing.

The young generation has more trouble compartmentalizing their "real" life and "cyber" life, so it isn't as simple for them as it might seem to us. Their online behavior and persona might be more easily integrated into their physical in-person interactions.

So I think it is reasonable to have places separated, lines drawn... some places are for this, some are for that. People who are vulnerable can still go there if they want, but at least it gives parents some way of guiding and advising their children, or, for example, someone who is in a state of extreme sensitivity can avoid places where their buttons can be pushed. (imagine a woman who had been brutally attacked and raped, still traumatized, and being faced with a man net stalking and threatening her).

a reply to: Bluesma

I'm actually beginning to see just how dangerous the internet is.. only a couple of decades ago, these concerns were not an issue and suddenly with the advent of the internet, here we are discussing whether or not it is appropriate to search and obtain personal details belonging to anyone.. what has occurred? It used to be that, if I needed to look someone up, I would call 411 and find the phone number and maybe even the address of someone with whom I wished to communicate.

If I needed to proceed with a more serious background search and background check, I would go directly to the authorities or I would go to a private investigator requesting a review of someone that I thought was suspicious or dangerous.


Nowadays though, we have all of these tools that can provide so much information about anyone that it is virtually absurd. Is privacy any longer important? I'm beginning to find this discussion a bit disturbing and eerie..

a reply to: Bluesma
Listen dont take this wrong its not an attack on woman kind or anything. But I really dont want to argue the meaning of a word with you, semantics is fun, but only for a minute or two. And after that whole thing with in the makeup thread, well I really really dont want to be spending more time then I have to explaining or spinning around words and meanings which you seem to twist around, its all quite meaningless.

So ya equal can be taken to mean what you say. But only if you dont actually think about it, in fact I think most if not all just nodded there heads on this whole equal thing just because its all meaningless and not worth the headaches it would incur if they went against the grain. But in reality were things have consequences, and there is such a thing as cause and effect, well lets just say I have not seen much if any of this equality, and I have never seen a female who wanted equality, most especially feminists.

In fact a few minutes with you getting down on the finer points of why women wear makeup, or you trying to compare oranges to apples, plainly shows that equality is the last and farthest thing in women's minds and the word is just a catchphrase in the minds, one used to get what they want. So ya! I was not joking when I said I wanted you to go away, in fact I may just call the mods on you and say your bothering me with your nonsense, or sexist or something. It would be hilarious wouldn't it?

But ya, most of this equal thing its all just tirade of bull#, upon bull#, and i dont for one minute think any of you actually believe it, and most even know what it would actually entail. In all, you all may want to pick a different word to describe what you mean. I could think of a few off the top of my head which could fit in without all the necessary dramas of taking the garbage out or working in the mines, or whatever else. Its really not hard to do, but I suppose its a practice among females that if the shoe does not fit you jam it in there till it works. And then you walk all funny, and later complain that you feet hurt, and somehow you may even blame it on men because of it. But ya!

What I am saying is. You may want to find another word that would best and more accurately describe all that your trying to say. I could take 5 minutes to just jot down a bunch of words that would do that, but hey I am sure that if anybody really cared they would have done so long ago.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows
OK! I read the whole thing and watched the videos. And after all that I can only say...I dont get it?

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

Remember, if it happens to females, even if they're going into places where talking crap to get a rise out of others is common, it's misogyny and sexism.

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: Bluesma
But I really dont want to argue the meaning of a word with you,

As I wrote at the beginning of that post, I am not interested in you reading it. It was not written or posted for you.

lets just say I have not seen much if any of this equality, and I have never seen a female who wanted equality, most especially feminists.

In general, if someone clamors for something to come about, it is because they perceive it is missing. So I am not surprised if you don't perceive much of it- we agree on that. You have read a female who wants it- I am one.
Though to repeat- I am not a feminist.

I was not joking when I said I wanted you to go away, in fact I may just call the mods on you and say your bothering me with your nonsense, or sexist or something. It would be hilarious wouldn't it?

Yes it would. My participation started in this thread on page 3, then you showed up after, so if you wanted to stay away from me, you made a choice that doesn't fit with that claim.

Discussing equal rights in a thread about misogyny and sexism is appropriate.

What I am saying is. You may want to find another word that would best and more accurately describe all that your trying to say. I could take 5 minutes to just jot down a bunch of words that would do that, but hey I am sure that if anybody really cared they would have done so long ago.

I prefer to use one word instead of a bunch whenever I possibly can.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

This thread should be fully renamed to “The rise of the internet crusader”, those who try to limit the freedoms of others because they value security over freedom.

The thread title is fine, thanks.

The thread isn't about limiting personal freedoms. It's about personal responsibility, and people who simply cannot conduct themselves in a manner that reflects civilised behaviour.

You can try and couch it any other way you want, but threatening to rape a woman is not an exercise in freedom of speech, it's simply being an asshole.

There is no justification for such an action.

Since when has threatening to rape someone got anything to do with feminism?

Am I seeing people trying to legitimise rape here by coming up with an excuse for it?

a reply to: neformore

A lot actually.
It feeds into the victim mentality feminism fosters.
Even when such threats are obviously quite laughably hollow.

originally posted by: neformore
Since when has threatening to rape someone got anything to do with feminism?

Any reasonable person would agree that threatening rape on another human being is abhorrent. So is telling somebody to go "do the world a favour and kill yourself" as I've been told on more than one occasion while playing online games. In fact, I would wager far more males are instructed to go kill themselves than females are threatened with rape.

The point is women don't have a monopoly on being genuine victims of violence/harassment whereas feminists act as if they are, and men as a whole are the scapegoat.

Am I seeing people trying to legitimise rape here by coming up with an excuse for it?

It seems YOU are seeing plenty of non-existent issues when it comes to this topic.