So the only people who abuse online are men? That's good to know.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn are speaking at the UN about online harassment
- Thread starter crimsonheadGCN
- Start date
- Status
Lord British
Member
Because he's a twat. I hope this helps.
AtomnayaKlubnika
Member
Amazing.
I'll take a look. I will say though, as far as studies go, it is interesting no one has really brought up the pew study, which is actually one of the studies cited.
This statistic here comes from the Pew study:
It is the only statistic they take from it.
It shows clearly that women are far more likely to be stalked or sexually harassed, specifically in that age range, This all makes sense, and it correlates well with real life harassment. In terms of online sexual comments towards women, I see it all the time on 'Live on Playstation'. In terms of sexual harassment this is a legitimate women's issue. If we're focusing on that fair enough.
However in terms of other areas, particularly physical threats, this study does not show this as a uniquely female problem. In fact overall, men are a little more likely to be victims of this sort of harassment.
If we're talking all harassment overall, the percentages are 44% for men, and 37% for women. If I were to take issue, it would be with how this problem is being presented. That's not necessarily to say they are presenting this data incorrectly, I don't know, it's just that, If we're talking about harassment in general, I'm not sure presenting it as solely a women's issue is fair. If it is presented as a sexual harassment issue specifically then it is fair.
In terms of other data, there is the WOAH data. The data here does predominantly show women as the victims to be fair. The problem with this data however, is that the data does not constitute a scientific study. The reason being is that they're self-selected responses from people who have sought out advice from the organisation. So for example, does that mean more women are victims of online harassment in general, or does that mean more women seek out advice from WOAH? We don't know. Despite that, the data is still obviously of some use. However, I was looking through the data and I'm not sure what to make of it. I will give you some reasons why.
2012 was probably the most disproportionate in terms of male and female victimisation. 80% of women sought advice from WOAH in comparison to only 20% of men. I picked that year because of just how overwhelmingly one sided the data is. It is mostly women. This makes some of statistics quite weird though. This is the other reason for using this year.
So 80% of the people that sought advice that year were women. Interestinglg, while 194 of the harassers were men, 123 of them were actually women. It means less women are harassers overall, but that is not an insignificant number. 77 were unknown, Perhaps those 77 were men, The thing is though, this isn't just a one off. it is a statistic that remains consistent throughout all of their data. Generally speaking more men are doing the harassing, but it is never significantly higher. It is only ever like 5-10% higher. I thought that bit of information was interesting.
Another thing to point out is, the majority of cases reported that year, (about 63% of cases) were of people they had some kind of relationship with. The top answer given was an ex-partner. This is another statistic that remains consistent throughout all of their data.
http://www.haltabuse.org/resources/stats/2012Statistics.pdf
http://www.haltabuse.org/resources/stats/index.shtml
Very informative, thanks for posting that. This kind of data shouldn't be ignored in these conversations.
I would say posts like these are really harmful to the movement and is one of the key reasons why these two are talking to the UN.
Currently, right now, at this point in time there is nothing comparable to the online harassment women face. Harassment so bad people MOVE to different states. Has any high profile male YouTuber had to forcefully move? Deal with daily harassment just for existing and trying to improve your life?
There are women who will never enter the industry because of this. We have permanently lost talent because of this. And are losing more each day.
We need to talk about this, non stop. That's the first step to solving this problem.
I'm calling you out right now. Explain. Don't shitpost and run away, give me a name right now that is more qualified than these two.
SubiyaCryolite
Banned
"The report argues that rigorous oversight and enforcement of rules banning cyber VAWG on the Internet will be an essential foundation stone if the Internet is to become a safe, respectful and empowering space for women and girls, and, by extension, for boys and men."
Thats a tall order, moderating a forum is one thing but the entire web and social networks? An article from the Washington Posts raises some interesting points.
"Under U.S. law the law that, not coincidentally, governs most of the worlds largest online platforms intermediaries such as Twitter and Facebook generally cant be held responsible for what people do on them. But the United Nations proposes both that social networks proactively police every profile and post, and that government agencies only license those who agree to do so.." ~ No. You can ban users who breach terms of use but profiling and policing is a big no no. I know that profiling does go on behind the scenes but its mostly for advertising (I would hope). Id hate for big sites to use it for things like this (social issues/opinions). The last thing we need is profiles with "bigot", "liberal" or "racist" tags.
"How that would actually work, we dont know; the report is light on concrete, actionable policy. But it repeatedly suggests both that social networks need to opt-in to stronger anti-harassment regimes and that governments need to enforce them proactively." ~ OK if we are talking about legitimate harassment (doxxing, death threats, revenge porn) . Anything else would be subjective and could be easily abused.
"At one point toward the end of the paper, the U.N. panel concludes that political and governmental bodies need to use their licensing prerogative to better protect human and womens rights, only granting licenses to those Telecoms and search engines that supervise content and its dissemination." ~ I cant see this taking off, and to be honest I wouldn't want it too.
"In other words, the United Nations believes that online platforms should be (a) generally responsible for the actions of their users and (b) specifically responsible for making sure those people arent harassers." ~ Part b is worrisome, these networks should profile users to that extent.
"This U.N. report gets us no closer, alas: all but its most modest proposals are unfeasible. We can educate people about gender violence or teach digital citizenship in schools, but persuading social networks to police everything their users post is next to impossible." ~ I agree
"Is a reckoning or at least rebalancing imminent? The United Nations suggests it has to be. But it certainly wont look like the model dreamt up in this report. For better or worse, thats several steps too revolutionary." ~ I agree
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...future-of-the-web/?postshare=2461443164984121
Yes, they refer to Breitbart at one point but don't use that as an excuse to dismiss the entire article.
Thats a tall order, moderating a forum is one thing but the entire web and social networks? An article from the Washington Posts raises some interesting points.
"Under U.S. law the law that, not coincidentally, governs most of the worlds largest online platforms intermediaries such as Twitter and Facebook generally cant be held responsible for what people do on them. But the United Nations proposes both that social networks proactively police every profile and post, and that government agencies only license those who agree to do so.." ~ No. You can ban users who breach terms of use but profiling and policing is a big no no. I know that profiling does go on behind the scenes but its mostly for advertising (I would hope). Id hate for big sites to use it for things like this (social issues/opinions). The last thing we need is profiles with "bigot", "liberal" or "racist" tags.
"How that would actually work, we dont know; the report is light on concrete, actionable policy. But it repeatedly suggests both that social networks need to opt-in to stronger anti-harassment regimes and that governments need to enforce them proactively." ~ OK if we are talking about legitimate harassment (doxxing, death threats, revenge porn) . Anything else would be subjective and could be easily abused.
"At one point toward the end of the paper, the U.N. panel concludes that political and governmental bodies need to use their licensing prerogative to better protect human and womens rights, only granting licenses to those Telecoms and search engines that supervise content and its dissemination." ~ I cant see this taking off, and to be honest I wouldn't want it too.
"In other words, the United Nations believes that online platforms should be (a) generally responsible for the actions of their users and (b) specifically responsible for making sure those people arent harassers." ~ Part b is worrisome, these networks should profile users to that extent.
"This U.N. report gets us no closer, alas: all but its most modest proposals are unfeasible. We can educate people about gender violence or teach digital citizenship in schools, but persuading social networks to police everything their users post is next to impossible." ~ I agree
"Is a reckoning or at least rebalancing imminent? The United Nations suggests it has to be. But it certainly wont look like the model dreamt up in this report. For better or worse, thats several steps too revolutionary." ~ I agree
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...future-of-the-web/?postshare=2461443164984121
Yes, they refer to Breitbart at one point but don't use that as an excuse to dismiss the entire article.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
The big numbers presented here do not have much to do with the extreme cases you cite though. A miniscule amount of "73% of all women" gets harrassed so badly that they feel the need to move (I say feel the need because this of course is always highly individual, not because I want to state that the feeling is wrong). So we have to differentiate between "depth" and "width" of the violence in question. Certainly what is happening to the women and girls who were targeted heavily by anti-feminist videogame players is disgusting, but it's not a problem of masses of women being heavily assaulted. This is a mass movement against particular people, rather than masses of people being the target.
John Kowalski
Banned
I always think of Pierce Brosnam when i read that name, it's very confusing tbh.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Kudos to both of them. However I can't help but feel feel weird this is happening in at the U.N. When you have other members discussing issues like genocide, refugees, hunger, human trafficking and poverty.
BossDarkseid
Member
Ran fake stories in a paper about various torture related incidents in Iraq/Afghanistan while the editor of the paper and essentially refused to apologies and has made a career in media out of it.
weemadarthur
Member
just to clarify, they refer to an editorial on breitbart and describe its ideological links to movements like gamergate. it's informative and not at all endorsing the position.
I was exposed to AOS from his video where he talks about the rumour of Anita Sarkeesian getting involved with EA for the development of Mirror's Edge 2 and he bought it hook line and sinker. I say he talked about it, he was mostly calling her the unspeakable and plenty of other obscenities in between encouraging people to sign the online petition to get her involvement out of ME2 which he believed to involve changing the difficulty and control scheme to make it easier for girls (lol). Why he thought an outside feminist critic has more persuasion into the design of a game over a team of developers is beyond me. All this amazingly, a few days after the fact that the rumour of her involvement was debunked by EA themselves. If he can't take the time to google his facts before making a 15 min long rant about the subject then why should I care? Suppose I should have known better than to get a nuanced opinion from someone called AlphaOmegaSin. Typical GG fare to jump the gun before doing any research so not surprised he's a role model to them.
Neoriceisgood
Member
Sure, but that's not her general reputation in the populus. I'm not talking about her reputation to people who are dedicated fans, but amongst people who'd search out her twitter cause they heard she did x or y.
I'm sure fans who actively follow her see her political tweets and show strong interest in her books beyond Harry Potter, but she's still the "harry potter woman" in the general populus.
On the flipside, I don't think I've ever heard Piers Morgan's name come up outside of the "wow I hate this guy's opinions/show"-context.
Would you disagree with the notion that simply based on their mainstream reputation, more people actively seek out Piers Morgan to insult him because his views/show are basically how he's known v.s. Rowling's mainstream reputation?
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I must say, if Anita gave EA ideas how to improve the control scheme of Mirror's Edge to make it more accessible (because traditional twin stick is definitely not the most comfortable way of playing a platforming-heavy game), I, as a male, would certainly be happy about that.
While this is something, I asked, too, it is not a contradiction, as long as you do not rule out psychological violence. Of course, physical violence cannot happen via the internet (disregarding controlling some device via the internet).
Shrike_Priest
Member
"Cyber VAWG includes hate speech (publishing a blasphemous libel), hacking (intercepting private communications), identity theft, online stalking (criminal harassment) and uttering threats. It can entail convincing a target to end their lives (counselling suicide or advocating genocide)."
Thanks. I've always thought of violence as inherently physical, so even the term "psychological violence" seems wrong to me. I was under the impression that if it was not physical, it wasn't violence, and whatever you'd call "psychological violence" has some other, more appropriate term.
Guess I'm just behind the times, linguistically.
davis aurini has update his look
he's not going for super villain anymore
now he's some kind of mra cowboy
formasymphonic
Member
On the one hand it's great that they get to speak on this / it be acknowledged at such a high level. On the other though, it's extremely depressing to see what they have been through as a result of speaking out on these issues.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
So online stalking is indeed limited to criminal harassment and does not include people "stalking" social network profiles and collecting info via search machines? In that case, 73% seems hard to believe and disastrous. Though on the other hand I don't think that a drastic reduction in freedom rights is the right reaction to that.
I think it would speak volumes for how far DICE has fallen if they have to take design tips from a YouTube personality and internet activist who's mark in the industry has nothing to do with critiquing game design, mechanics, or controls.
I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that I think using the word "violence" in this context is misleading.
John Rabbit
Banned
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Yes, but DICE seems to really be fixated on shooter controls, unwilling to adapt to the different genre, at least judging by the first Mirror's Edge.
ebullientprism
Member
Was expecting Fedoras and neckbeards. Kinda disappointed.
I never had issues with the first games controls. I'm not sure what control scheme you'd even replace it with. A first person game has first person controls, makes sense to me unless you want it to go in the AssCreed direction, which in my opinion would be the equivalent of a built-in aim hack for an FPS.
Judging a game company based on what never did or will happen is weird.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I never had issues with the first games controls. I'm not sure what control scheme you'd even replace it with. A first person game has first person controls, makes sense to me unless you want it to go in the AssCreed direction, which in my opinion would be the equivalent of a built-in aim hack for an FPS.
Metroid Prime, for instance, is a first person game, too, but for platforming, the controls seem way more practical (if you replace the visor changing functionality of the C-Stick with looking around).
EDIT @oversted: You see that "would" in there?
We know bud. Someone gave their opinion on the situation as if it happened and I replied. It's all in good fun.
I still need to play the Prime games. What exactly makes it more practical?
Shrike_Priest
Member
Mirror's Edge controls are tuned to KB+Mouse. That said the controller options are fine and the top shoulder for jump and bottom for slide makes a lot of sense. It's unique and very effective. It's like complaining about QCF and HCF in fighting games.
Doomburrito7
Banned
I'm glad to see that larger organizations are finally taking a stand against online harassment. Look at this filth, it's disgusting:
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Imagine Super Mario 64-like controls for movement using just one stick. It frees the right hand, it is less complicated and basically its only disadvantage - if you are not playing a shooter, where the right stick is constantly needed to aim with your weapon - is that you lose strafing, which is a mostly useless move in platformers anyway. By the way, you should really play the Prime games if you haven't yet, at least if you like exploration.
Playing a platformer with standard shooter controls certainly is unique, but I claim it is far from optimal. Still, since you'd be using the right analogstick to look around, I'd leave the shoulder button based controls intact.
I'm glad to see that larger organizations are finally taking a stand against online harassment. Look at this filth, it's disgusting:
i do believe there's a difference between, while in a mean spirited way, telling people to, basically, fuck off and actual harassment.
it would be a lot closer to harassment, if those tweets had the same recipient.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I'm glad to see that larger organizations are finally taking a stand against online harassment. Look at this filth, it's disgusting:
If this was what we were talking with online harassment, then I can't imagine many people using the internet regularly have never been harassed. At the same time it marginalizes real harassment to put it on one level with such banter.
Doomburrito7
Banned
I'm not saying other forms of harassment aren't worse or disgusting (they are, absolutely more so), I'm just saying this is also disgusting.
Anita used "You suck" as an example of online harassment at her talk at the UN, is that inherently worse that "set yourself on fire"?
I'm not trying to marginalize harassment, I think there is harassment out there that is obviously harassment and obviously repugnant, but I think when it comes to the less "obvious" cases like above, it's still important that even these smaller examples of hateful speech are harmful.
I'm glad to see that larger organizations are finally taking a stand against online harassment. Look at this filth, it's disgusting:
Reacting like this in response to harassment isn't...harassment. You realise that, right?
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Then her example is shit, everyone should be able to cope with a simple "you suck". Considering what I've been hearing here, what people worte to her and the depression quest maker, "you suck", even daily by 10.000 people is irrelevant. It certainly is not violence from my perspective, it's just rash and bad mannered.
He dropped the skulls?davis aurini has update his look
he's not going for super villain anymore
now he's some kind of mra cowboy
Also while editor, he hacked the phone of a missing 13 year old girl who was later found dead. They even deleted voicemails leading the parent's to think the girl was still alive. He's absolute scum.
I wouldn't get hung up at one single example, no matter what you think.
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
Derek Smart invents feud with Randi Harper
He also texted her on her Google Voice number and threatened her.
He also texted her on her Google Voice number and threatened her.
Dongs Macabre
aka Daedalos42
I'm glad to see that larger organizations are finally taking a stand against online harassment. Look at this filth, it's disgusting:
Yes, let's just ignore all context and call someone disgusting after constant harassment from GamerGate assholes like you.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked