I thought I'd bring this up for chuckles and grins. Prompted by this Huffington Post argument that Facebook began as a misogynist site and it never really escaped from those roots.

I was also taken by this Know Your Meme video about being a girl on the internet. Much of that video was about how to handle trolling and how to avoid sites that degrade women.

We've had a number of back and forths about feminism and misogyny IRL. I admit, though I've experienced a few things I'd consider sexist in my life, for the most part misogyny doesn't directly effect my day-to-day experience. The major exception is the internet, where I spend a lot of my time. Whenever I read something about women's health or feminism or stories about female acheivements or politicians or frankly, if I'm reading about women at all (which happens frequently, 'cause I'ma lady), if i scroll on down to the comment section for discussion, there is always some sort of rant or joke about tha' ladies that I find offensive.

Yeah, yeah. Trolls. Trolls are the devil, and we must all ignore them. But man, I find it irritating that if I comment to the worst offenders, I'm the one who is seen as having a problem. Don't Feed the Trolls, to me, immediately gives credence to the idea that the trolls shouldn't be called out because it's pointless: the misogyny will always be there and it's my fault I can't let it go. And even if there isn't trolling, little memes like "make me a sammich" are seen as unavoidable responses to a woman's comments or articles, especially those addressing sexism. TL;DR and Meh are used when one doesn't agree or is annoyed by a rant. "Make me a sammich" is used when one doesn't agree or is annoyed by a rant by a woman. I can't think of any other meme for "I don't care about your views/think your views are stupid" that is directed to any specific group, and I think that's a problem; the problem not being, of course, that we need to create a new meme for everyone, but that this meme, specifically aimed at women, surfaced on the internet in the first place.

And now, I want to get into what prompted the HuffPo article in the first place: a Facebook page called "The 12 Year Old Slut Meme". The page, purportedly updated by two 19 year old guys, collects Facebook posts and pictures from the internet that show underage girls acting "slutty". The page is listed as "controversial humor," and the content is pretty depressing. But instead of addressing the problem of how underage girls between the ages of 8 and 16 became oversexualized, the page is essentially about blasting the girls for being "sluts" and "whores" -- the problem is the character of the 12 year old girl, not what the girl may have experienced in her own life. Some of this, of course, is due to the age of the guys -- but it's problematic to me that teen boys in general (probably the biggest perpetrators of online sexism) have ingrained within them the whats and whys of female sexuality -- and that a girl who wears short skirts at 13 and puts on airs is an irredeemable slut-ho. And it's also troubling that a site like Facebook, which, as HuffPo reports, will take down racial and religious epithets and pages (marked humorous or not), don't address pages that support violence or slut-shaming towards women (marked humorous or not).

I think that's my least favorite thing about sexism on the internet. Racial stuff is usually policed pretty well on my favorite sites, so I know that moderators are watching out for icky stuff. Yet sexist, misogynistic stuff passes under the radar all the time, as if there's so much of it that it can't ever be fully policed. Or, worse, that is is somewhat acceptable because the commentors are either "joking" or "trolling" and should be ignored if they cause offense. It's depressing that I have to see it again and again if I want to be part of certain online communities.

Anyway, rant off. Any thoughts?

I am far from a facebook expert, but i am not so sure, eveything else is policed that well. A while ago in Austria journalists had much fun finding out in what facebook groops some Freedomparty members are, and what had been posted in that groups. Which was basically going as far as you can, declaring yourself a Nazi, without getting into legal trouble in Austria. I did not really follow that, since i am already convinced that the Freedom Party is the party for the closet Nazis anyway, so i don't remember that much details. But the impression i got is, that nearly-Nazi groups in Facebook are not censored.

As i have said in the other thread a while ago, i have the impression that there is a critical mass of anti femminist trolls and femminist trollbaits. I fully agree that the trolls that weatherway described exist. The flipside is femminists, who call you misogynist for almost anything. Thoose 2 groups keep each other alive, because anyone else leaves the flamewars in disgust and you can have discussions only in a coupe of places that are thankfully free of them (i consider this to be one of thoose places). And i have no idea what to do about that situation.

I think it's too simplistic to attribute the entire problem to trolls and trollbaits. The internet, particularly 4chan and related sites, does have a misogynistic streak. Remember, not too long ago there was a "rule" right up there with rule 34 that said, "There are no girls on the internet." The implication being that anyone claiming to be female was lying.

When I participated in the local Smash Brothers tournament scene, and posted on the Smash World Forums, the use of the term "rape" was pretty common to describe utterly dominating an opponent. People would say, "Oh so-and-so raped that guy," amongst other things. Occasionally (I think, I could be mis-remembering) the term would be used by itself as a synonym for "awesome" Although this usage was somewhat less common. I never used the term that way myself, but I did not speak out against its usage either, although I do recall a thread on the forums about the controversy of the term's usage.

The problem seems to be worst amongst youngish (teens to college age) males. I have no idea what the cause may be, but it is definitely a problem.

Regarding Facebook, I think the proper response is to use the reprot feature on stuff you find offensive. Don't post to the pages themselves, that's just asking fro trouble.

edit: haha, I just looked at the knowyourmeme video weatherwax posted, and the first thing that comes up is no girls on the internet. sorry.
edit2: Wow, that video kind of skeeves me out.

I think this is the whole thing in a nutshell. Many, if not most, teen to college age males have a strong misogynist streak. I know I did at that age. It stems from social and sexual insecurities, the need to separate from one's mother, and just plain youthful crudeness.

I haven't done the research, but I've always assumed most internet trolls and probably nearly everyone on 4chan, etc, falls in that demographic.

and from either frustration of not getting any; or the opposite case of not being a guy worthy to get any, knowing this, and getting some anyway, thus 'proving' that girls are sluts (i.e. apply Groucho Marx's club preferences to women)

I admit i don't know thoose examples very well as i don't read that part of the internet much. But i think the trolls and trollbaits setup is at least one of the root issues. Many people are so fed up with that discussion style, that whenever anything that looks like a discussion that attracts thoose is brought up (such as a complaint that a certain term is misogynistic), they shy away from answering, or propably don't even bother to think, what their answer would be, because what's the point anyway. And since now nearly only trolls and trollbaits discuss such topics, a lot of people assume, someone who brings up such a topic is either a troll or a trollbait, and treat them as such.

And a corollary is, that both real misogynists, and people who did not think through all the implications of what they said, do not get any feedback, that the (non flamewarriorish) population at large, does not support their opinions.

So if women would just put out have some sex with these mouth breathers, they wouldn't be such jerks on the internet?

I was once at a gathering where a guy was telling a story about how his friend got injured. He was running down the street carrying his date on his back after a night of drinking, and he tripped and fell over. Not wanting to drop the girl, he didn't put his arms out to break his fall, and fell flat on his face, splitting open his chin. The story teller ended the tale by remarking that the girl had been an ungrateful bitch; after he saved her life, she didn't even have sex with him. Everyone at the table laughed heartily at this statement, and I said quite sourly that if I were expected to have sex with anybody who happened to save my life, I'd rather be left to die, thanks. And I was the one who spoiled the mood of the party. The reason people say misogynistic things on the internet is because they have these attitudes in real life, they just exaggerate them for shock value.

Kea i think you are not neccessarily too feminist but rather too analytical.

I am fairly certain, that if someone related to the same group the story of that girl, who had been hit on by that sweet in a stupid kinda way guy, and he carried her around on her back, but managed to be so clumsy that he fell and broke his jaw and luckily she only got a minor bruise, and somehow he got it into his head, that this performance should earn him a place in her bed, they'd be laughing too, and be fully on the side of the girl.

Because analysing romantic stories with regards to moral and ethical guidelines might be fun to do, but misses the point. The right thing to do, is to root for whoever is closer to the center of your monkey sphere.

We-ell, if the storyteller literally called the girl an "ungrateful bitch", then I'm totally down for Kea's sour sendoff. It's always weird and creepy when people assume sex is equal payment for anything, no matter the gender. I've never found jokes to the alternative as particularly funny. I always just get awkward and uncomfortable. (See SPOILERS!!: new season of Louie, in which a woman physically assaults him for not performing oral sex, and then shames him until he performs).

And also, the scenario switching doesn't really work. In both instances, the guy was expecting sex from the girl for getting his face smashed in lieu of allowing the girl to fall. In both instances, it's kinda creepy. However, Kea's storyteller assumed the creepy behavior was correct and the girl was an "ungrateful bitch", while in your scenario it's deemed appropriately creepy and deserving of laughter.

I cannot remember any more if the word "bitch" was used, but I'm sure he described the girl as "ungrateful". He also wasn't even in my monkeysphere, since I'd only met him that afternoon, but even if he had been I don't think it would have helped.

My larger point was that sexual frustration leads to anger and resentment only when you believe that you are owed sex. If you don't believe that the universe owes you sex and is being unfair by denying you any, you're more likely to turn your frustration inwards into insecurity about your own flaws. This after all is the typical response pattern of women who find themselves frustratedly single - "Am I unattractive?" "Am I putting men off somehow?" "Is there something wrong with my personality?" It is not very common for women to get angry at those scummy men for failing to recognize their awesomeness and refusing to have sex with them.

I think this is because everybody, male and female, has been raised on the trope "boy saves the day, boy gets the girl". A woman is a reward for being the hero. A good guy deserves to get the girl, a girl who, according to the dictates of the narrative, is always attracted to the guy. But when real life doesn't play out this way - the girl doesn't want to have sex with you because you didn't drop her on the pavement - there's something clearly wrong with her. And then they log on the internet and yell "Tits or get the @%* out!"

This notion that you are owed sex and that girls should put out for certain behaviour is mysogonistic. The problem with the 'funny' story is that some guys believe in it and when their friends laugh at the joke it enforces in their mind that they are right to do so.

There is the underlying meme, that if you put much investment into something, you should get something out of it.

I suppose, if a woman spends much effort, to get into bed with some guy, and if that story gets told from the womans perspective, i think she can get a similar amount of sympathy. Admittadly there will be gender role inspired interpretations as well, such as "look how much public embaressment she riskes for him, and what macho prestige he gains by having a woman that determinated to bed him".

You have the same basic pattern, where people in a relationship spend much effort to drive the relationship and the partners life in a direction, that the partner does not want. They should be gratefull, for what the partner is doing for them. Happens with both sexes.

There is one advantage that men have over women. On the mystical game board, men get maximum points for one night stands, while women get points for catching a prestiguous husband. And if you make the mistake of accepting an offer, that you don't actually want, because you think about the mystical points, the one night stand has most likely a smaller impact on the rest of your life and you have no reason to fear that something happens, that takes thoose points away from you again.

The basic problems i see, are that people beleive they should be guaranteed rewards for risky or pointless investments, because they tried so hard, and that people aim for mystical points. Gender roles confuse the issue and are used often in ad hoc sophistry, to avoid blatant claims of "the other people are supposed to behave like I want, who cares about what they want". But i don't think this sort of idioticy would disapeare, if we managed to get rid of genderroles*.

Regarding monkey sphere metrics, a person you talk to is marginally more in your monkey sphere then a total stranger. I have to admit i use the term monkey sphere in a rather generalized manner though. And you can also argue, that shared demographics can beat barely knowing a person. I am aware that i have no complete picture of the situation, but based in experience with other people, and educated guesses, i am leaning more to the interpretation, that anecdote guy was upset, because he and his friends are not in Keas monkey sphere and less about a violation of some consistent gender based behaviour code.

*something i would approve of and which i would consider in principle possible. I am much less optimistic of geting rid of such idioticy.

No, that's actually the opposite of what I said. Start with 'the opposite case'... With these folks, it's a catch-22.

A juvenile male who treats women with respect was generally taught to do so by their father or other male role model. A distressing number of young men are growing up either without a male role model, or with one that fails to teach them respect for women. Combine that with the disinhibiting anonymity of the Internet, and the result is not surprising, though that doesn't make it any less dismaying.

One problem is the view of sex as a prize, as a commodity to be earned or won, rather than an activity that people enjoy doing together. If viewed as a mutually enjoyable recreational activity, then expecting someone to have sex with you in return for allowing yourself to be injured to protect her makes no sense. But if sex is viewed as a prize, then it makes perfect sense. Even after protecting her with your face the puzzle box failed to release the SexPrize™? This puzzle box is much too challenging to open. It's clearly unfair.