Internet abuse culture is a tech industry problem

[mjg59]

After Jesse Frazelle blogged about the online abuse she receives, a common reaction in various forums[1] was "This isn't a tech industry problem - this is what being on the internet is like"[2]. And yes, they're right. Abuse of women on the internet isn't limited to people in the tech industry. But the severity of a problem is a product of two separate factors: its prevalence and what impact it has on people.

Much of the modern tech industry relies on our ability to work with people outside our company. It relies on us interacting with a broader community of contributors, people from a range of backgrounds, people who may be upstream on a project we use, people who may be employed by competitors, people who may be spending their spare time on this. It means listening to your users, hearing their concerns, responding to their feedback. And, distressingly, there's significant overlap between that wider community and the people engaging in the abuse. This abuse is often partly technical in nature. It demonstrates understanding of the subject matter. Sometimes it can be directly tied back to people actively involved in related fields. It's from people who might be at conferences you attend. It's from people who are participating in your mailing lists. It's from people who are reading your blog and using the advice you give in their daily jobs. The abuse is coming from inside the industry.

Cutting yourself off from that community impairs your ability to do work. It restricts meeting people who can help you fix problems that you might not be able to fix yourself. It results in you missing career opportunities. Much of the work being done to combat online abuse relies on protecting the victim, giving them the tools to cut themselves off from the flow of abuse. But that risks restricting their ability to engage in the way they need to to do their job. It means missing meaningful feedback. It means passing up speaking opportunities. It means losing out on the community building that goes on at in-person events, the career progression that arises as a result. People are forced to choose between putting up with abuse or compromising their career.

The abuse that women receive on the internet is unacceptable in every case, but we can't ignore the effects of it on our industry simply because it happens elsewhere. The development model we've created over the past couple of decades is just too vulnerable to this kind of disruption, and if we do nothing about it we'll allow a large number of valuable members to be driven away. We owe it to them to make things better.

[1] Including Hacker News, which then decided to flag the story off the front page because masculinity is fragile

[2] Another common reaction was "But men get abused as well", which I'm not even going to dignify with a response

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Jesse Frazelle's article was a whole new level of disturbing with which I had not previously become acquainted. I'm glad I saw it (via Twitter, with appropriate warning labels attached). I knew that people (and I use the term loosely) in the tech industry were sick, but I didn't know just how sick. It amazes and impresses me that she was willing to talk about it and call attention to it, in an effort to help others.

Regarding HN: As much as people talk about "filter bubbles" (which is not that much, really, but DuckDuckGo made it a thing with a convenient name), people like Google for giving them what they want and hiding from them what they don't want. Is it broken that HN hides things that an apparently significant subset of its members aren't interested in, or is the brokenness that there are people in HN that aren't interested in it? I'd tend to believe the latter (and in particular that the subset of people is the same as the subset who leave awful comments); the former is the result of showing people what they want to see and hiding what they don't.

At least when articles like this hit HN, it seems like there's a substantial number of people downvoting and flagging the awful comments they attract. The fact that such comments don't tend to get upvoted gives me some hope that, while HN contains many awful people, the good ones outnumber the bad.

(To clarify: HN clearly has a serious issue they need to eliminate. I'm not questioning that they have a problem; the evidence doesn't lie. I'm asking what the right way to eliminate it is, and I'm wondering if the right solution involves changing people rather than algorithms. Because in the end, it's always about people, the communities they construct, and the other people they put up with in those communities. I've seen enough good things come out of HN that I'd like to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater^Wraw sewage.)

[(Anonymous)]

> After Jesse Frazelle blogged about the online abuse she receives, a common reaction in various forums[1] was "This isn't a tech industry problem - this is what being on the internet is like"[2].

It amazes me how often I hear this from people in tech whose work has a significant impact on shaping the experience of being on the internet. You can’t be all “I work in tech so I can bend the world to my will” and also “lawl what do you want, the internet is just like the weather, no one can control it and it’s super shitty sometimes”. I suspect what people mean is “social stuff is complicated and I don’t want to take responsibility for it”.

It seems to me that the best way to fix the internet is to fix the culture of the people who make the internet. But, y’know, human nature is bad and terrible, and the internet is a giant garbage fire, and these things just are and must be true forever. So.

- neverett

[vlion]

the basic problem I have here is this: this should be a police matter. if these messages were sent via postal mail, the police would be involved, and there would be a solution in play which would - in the best case - wind up in a courtroom as a criminal case.

how does this get played out in the online realm? I'm not really very knowledgable about 'policing online'.

Stupid is stupid

[(Anonymous)]

Ignorance is one thing, wilful and sustained ignorance is another. The latter, whether it's directed at a gender, gender preference,or race - is self destructive. It's the equivalent of taking a dump upstream. I'm no fan of any religion either - but I don't propose the world would be better without it, it's possible that many need it (perfect is the enemy of good?).

Take women for instance - everyone had a mother, many a sister, and it's unlikely that any will live a life where it's quality at some time won't be determined by the actions or beliefs of a woman.

There will always be injustice and inequality, but that's no reason not to redress the balance - nor is it justification for more stupidity i.e. we are all equal (then why can't I reach the same shelves as you?); we are all the same (so is evolution horizontal?).

The greatest failings of bigotry (IMO) is to suppose that anyone is in a position to judge who is of greater worth - only history may be able to decide that; and that all questions can be reduced to simple arguments (simple is a synonym for dumb).

In an increasingly interconnected world there is less and less excuse for sustained wilful ignorance. Those that claim they are only aping the actions of their peers can only be excused if we suppose that the world if perfect and there is no need for improvement. To do otherwise is, likely, only to lower the standard until the world we live in becomes that of the Iron Ages - and the civilisation we all enjoy (no matter how much we complain of it's failings) becomes a desert populated by sheep and goat herders whose views are laws that must never be challenged or questioned.

That's not to say that the "tech" world shouldn't take a lead - we have, with our daily connection with people of all types all over the globe, and access to many views of history - *less* excuse than others for sustained, wilful ignorance.

Self-awareness and self-education are only part of a possible solution. I propose that the hardest tasks are upsetting others i.e. "don't feed the trolls" serves no constructive purpose and IMO is the equivalent of sticking our heads in the sand and hoping we'll be left alone. Dealing with trolls is not as simple as just replying or attacking.
Likewise dealing with those who attack women - you will offend someone in the process, even if, quite fairly, some women will complain that if it's a man doing the defending, they are being patronising. In lieu of a perfect solution I suggest it's better to do something than nothing (the greatest evil being to look the other way and encourage the wilfully stupid, by allowing them to interpret your silence as meaning support). Light, knowledge (and humour) is the enemy of stupid.
[/rant]

Kind regards, thanks for another informative and interesting article Matthew, SFITCS

[jewelfox]

A fear of online abuse is part of the reason I share my identity experiences and ideas about radical equality on Dreamwidth, instead of getting eaten on Tumblr. ^^; I've already seen multiple women get driven off of that site, people I considered passionate and articulate, one of whom seems to have disappeared off of the Internet altogether. I miss her.

Another problem is simply not acknowledging women's contributions. In the free software world, for instance, things like outreach and documentation are often seen as "women's work" and are much less prestigious than coding.

I realize I'm preaching to the choir here, of course ^^; I guess I just feel that, in my personal experience this is the case ... I was an advocate of one particular decision I felt would make GNOME development more accessible, and spent a lot of time blogging about it on Planet GNOME and creating tutorials and wiki pages. And then a few months later the decision-makers apparently had that same idea independently, and did not acknowledge me or any of the work that I'd already done on it under the aegis of the Outreach Program. Except to say that it was incomplete.

I'm pretty sure I discussed this with you awhile ago already. >_>; It was ... kind of an eye-opener for me, though. In a lot of ways.

reply to this funny article from a woman IT professional

[(Anonymous)]

what a funny article.
This typical mangina line of this article - "Another common reaction was "But men get abused as well", which I'm not even going to dignify with a response" - sums it up all. What a sexism?

This author, will not even acknowledge that this problem exist for males, but he will cry a river for the same thing - if a woman receives the same thing. These kind of weirdo sexists make me worry a lot.

This geek feminism was supposed to bring females positively into IT fold, but it did what its sister of feminazism had done. It turned it into professional victimhood. They will daily theorise as "If some industry has lesser number of females, then it has to be due to some kind of systematic victimhood of females in IT".
Then if medical nursing has lot of lesser number of males, then does it indicate some kind of victimhood of males in that profession.
What was expected as bringing some positivity in environment, has been turned into blame game by these professional victims a.k.a Feminazist and their companion manginas.

This victimhood crap is increasing in redhat and fedora communities, these feminists have brought there negativity all around.
There have been wonderful women and men in IT, there are wonderful women and men around in life. And remember women and feminists are not synonymous.
There are lots of women against feminists and their crap. This includes myself. And other examples are
http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/
http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juR74OYiegY
http://kristalgarcia.wordpress.com

Message for this author: Rather than projecting yourself - 'as some kind of alpha male trying to save us females' - , it would be better to try to make your workplace positively. Don't get into false statistics and propagandas of these negativities. Men and women were and are complimentory, not some kind of enemies/competitors.
This world is not perfect. There are many problems being faced by men, many problems being faced by women. Problems of both need to be heard and solved. Trying to say that only one gender faces problems and not the other, makes you blind chauvinist of that gender, and nothing else.
I hope you understood - what equalism actually means

"because masculinity is fragile"

[(Anonymous)]

"because masculinity is fragile" - reminded me of a really amazing paper I read a while ago, by Robin DiAngelo of UNCG...

http://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/view/249/116

"White people in North America live in a social environment that protects and insulates them from race-based stress. This insulated environment of racial protection builds white expectations for racial comfort while at the same time lowering the ability to tolerate racial stress, leading to what I refer to as White Fragility. White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium. This paper explicates the dynamics of White Fragility."

STFU

[(Anonymous)]

Dude get the fuck out with this "I am technically worthless so I'm going to try to market myself on supposedly edgy social skills". You're below those schmucks that go around trying to defraud companies by hijacking the CEOs email - those at least sometimes succeed.

The "victims" you defend are equally worthless. Once they get over their overinflated stupid egos already, they might have something to contribute, but that seems improbable.

Just go back to whatever mom's basement you crawled out of, it's not that the world isn't missing anything by your absence - it's that the world would pay good money for you to not even exist in the first place.