Feministing has commented about how feminist and female bloggers are often silenced by the sheer deluge of hateful emails, comments, etc. that many of them receive. One female blogger even was silenced by death threats. When your stomach is churning prior to opening your email, anxious about what you might find there, it makes you less likely to feel joy in your online presence.
I had a similar experience earlier today on Facebook. One of my female friends from high school made her status about health care reform, and she was almost instantaneously dogpiled by male, right-wing people telling her how she was wrong. I commented in support of her, the exchange got heated, and while all of my comments were issue related, I was called “nasty” and told I was engaging in “hysteria”. From that point on, I felt vaguely sick and angry every time I read a new post to that particular conversation.
This trend of dogpiling female Facebook users I see all too often and I think it illustrates how women are often still silenced for having differing opinions.
Every single time I make a comment that is leftist, or about health care reform, or when any other female friend makes a similar comment, we get the jerkwad naysayers jumping in to comment. My sister has experienced this right wing dogpiling, and I see it with friends from high school. Anytime any of my female friends posts something political, they get attacked by so-called friends who are males of differing opinions.
I realized today that I don’t see this interaction with men who post political comments. I see it much more often with women than with men. Women make a post and the right wing men come in and feel the need to teach us poor, deluded women the error of our ways.
When my spouse posts something political, his brother is the only one to comment against him, which is rare enough, and that is if he gets comments at all. What I find interesting is most people just assume that they are not going to convince my spouse to think differently, but yet they post to my status, as if I am not even more convinced of my beliefs. I guess my obvious lack of penis means they think that I should be “taught” the error of my thinking, but my spouse’s penis means that he has the right to his opinions unmolested.
There is an element of power here that I believe important. My spouse's brother is older and he feels superior - he looks out for my spouse in many ways and feels the need to teach him here and there. This is something that younger siblings often experience at the hands of older siblings (being both older and younger than my sisters, I have felt and done both). Since older siblings have a superior feeling to younger siblings, however innocuous, the power dynamic is not equal.
Women post political comments and the men come in and school them on how they are wrong, even when the woman in question is obviously more well versed on the subject than they are. I’m honestly torn. Is this behavior silencing? Or is it patronizing? Probably it is a little bit of both. Either way, it shows that the men doing the commenting feel that they have the right to challenge women, but they do not feel they need to do the same with men. If that is not an example of the inequality of the power dynamic between men and women, I don’t know what is.
Either way, after a few dogpiles, I notice a less frequent commenting on political issues from my female friends. From personal interaction, I know that they are not less interested or involved, merely less vocal.
You make a post, you get dog piled by 3 or 4 people telling you how you are incorrect while patting you on the head, and it makes it a little more tiring to post on the next issue. Just a little bit less important. The inclination is to not bother making future political status messages because you don’t want to have to spend the entire day defending your position from several rabid male friends.
Now, the men who post how *wrong* a woman’s post happens to be are usually polite and kind. It is not the same thing as opening your email to vitriol and threats. However, in many ways it is more insidious. I know, without a doubt, when I post something political to my status that I will have to explain myself and defend my position. I know for a fact when my spouse makes a similar post that he does not have to defend his position or explain his thinking.
People keep trying to convince me that feminism is bullshit and that we should all be humanists instead, because sexism doesn’t exist anymore. I have to merely think about how I have to explain myself for having an opinion in order to be taken even remotely seriously while most men do not. I just think about how I cannot blog about feminism without people attacking me on my personal blog. I just have to think about the millions of other things that say that feminism is needed more than ever.
The mere fact that I expect my opinions to be challenged makes me tired and angry. However, while many people would get tired and therefore post less, I just get angry and therefore post more. I encouraged all of us to continue to be loud and outspoken. We know we are right, we can defend our position, and eventually, the opposition will know better than to think they can shut us up or make us look like we are wrong.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Women Silencing on FaceBook.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15353
My initial reaction to your feeling of being silenced is that you should silence those who criticise you - on your own Facebook page you have the power to delete their comments. On any feminist blog, including this one, trolls are removed, and I would argue that your Facebook page is your own blog in a way. Edit their comments to say "I am a panda" if possible, or just delete them!
Luckily in my experience posting political things gets supportive comments from my friends, but I understand it's difficult to take a hard line against people who you would otherwise consider your friends/acquaintances...but does it make you rethink a Facebook "friendship" if someone treats you in that way?
Keep posting about the things that are important to you!
Again, you're simplifying this into some kind of sexist conspiracy. What exactly are your spouse'ss political opinions? Are they different from yours? Feminism is not well-recieved on Facebook by any stretch, and anyone, male or female, who blogs about it is not going get by without a challenge. I'm willing to bet your spouse has views that are more "popular" with the masses, and it has nothing to do with his gender.
I also don't understand why disagreeing with someone is "insidious". You're free to not respond.
Joanne,
Thanks for the comment. I have decided to delete the posts that are nasty. In my close circle of friends I am luckily enough (or picky enough) that they actually have the same ideological values as I do. Unfortunately, Facebook encourages shallow and acquaintance friendships, some who are distant relatives or friends from high school.
I would love to edit their comments to "I am a Panda!"
Cank,
I am simplifying nothing, and what do you mean by "again"? My last post here was MONTHS ago on a completely different topic.
For your information, I am not posting feminist content on my Facebook page. My husband posts feminist content on his Facebook page unchallenged, though, so see how you get to be wrong twice by assuming things based on gender?
I am occasionally posting things of a political nature - things my husband also posts 9part of why we get along so well is our similarity of political thought). He is not posting things that are more "popular" with the masses, he is posting the same content, to a large majority of the same friend group.
Furthermore, the point isn't that I do not like to be challenged. The point is that most of the women who post anything political, not feminist - political, get challenged whereas men who post similar or identical comments DO NOT. That is what is insidious. Men can have the exact same opinion and it goes unchallenged, but women have to "explain themselves". Much like I am explaining to you, when you obviously didn't bother to think through what I wrote originally.
There's the crux of the matter, you don't like to be challenged. I find that a little sad.
Reading comprehension fail.
Feather,
Thank you. I was going to clarify, but rereading what I wrote, it is clear that there is a definite reading comprehension fail. Probably in an effort to be a troll.
OMG, stop silencing me!
*cries*
actually, what redredrose is doing is an excellent example of what the poster is talking about. we should perhaps thank him/her for providing us with such a clear specimen:
1. setting up a straw man and engaging in a personal insult: There's the crux of the matter, you don't like to be challenged. I find that a little sad."
2. passive aggressive/patronizing talking down: "I don't understand people who can't handle disagreement. It's like you want to exist in an echo chamber."
3. sarcasm/ad hominem attack: "omg stop silencing me! *cries*"
at no time did redredrose address anything that the poster was expressing, thereby dismissing the existence of a problem.
redredrose set up a straw man, and posited that there isn't really any problem; rather, the poster is delusional or has serious issues about heathy debate: the poster does not want to hear someone disagree with her.
redredrose offered sympathy for the poor little lady, claiming that s/he found it "sad". and s/he expressed disdain at someone who only wants to hear her own views echoed back at her.
finally, she mocked the poster.
this is probably exactly what jaybull is talking about. we can all thank redredrose for demonstrating it so clearly.
i don't really find that this happens to me on facebook. but i do notice that i (and other women) are talked over and interrupted in mixed gender groups, or treated in a patronizing fashion on a regular basis.
Try again. She said. "The point isn't that [she doesn't] like to be challenged.
What she's saying indicates otherwise.
No, what she's indicating is that she's noticing a pattern where women who post political thoughts on Facebook face vehement arguments by men where similar political thoughts by men aren't faced with the same arguments. She's also noticed that after the online arguments, that the women who had posted about politics no longer seem to post about them.
Jbull is noticing a pattern and is sharing it here. But I have noticed that a lot of times, knee jerk arguments that are uninformed and attack the person rather than the ideas (claims of Jbull being "nasty" and "hysterical") ARE features of "arguments" meant to silence. ad hominem attacks are the refuge of those without a real argument.
Yeah I have noticed this too. Not so much that women are the only one's who's opinions are questioned, but it's done in a much more silencing type of way. People talk down to them and use ad hominem attacks. It's ridiculous.
Personal attacks and nastiness like this aren't tolerated. Check out our comments policy before writing again.
I will. Could you please check out that personal attack I forwarded you by email?
Aw, bye!
"The point is that most of the women who post anything political, not feminist - political, get challenged whereas men who post similar or identical comments DO NOT."
Perhaps this is true in your experience, but this is an absurd generalization that you have produced from pretty much nothing.
Male political pundits attack each other all the time. Silly partisan debate on internet forums are largely dominated by males debating each other. This is confirmed by analysis of their web demographics.
Go to, for instance, a facebook political forum, and you will invariably see vitriolic dog piling worthy of mention in a Neil Postman book.
"Male political pundits attack each other all the time. . . Go to, for instance, a facebook political forum, and you will invariably see vitriolic dog piling worthy of mention in a Neil Postman book."
This is true, but I don't think overgeneralizing or stereotyping was being perpetrated by Jaybull here. Her experience was anecdotal, yes, but one that is shared enough by her other female friends for her to acknowledge that it is a social trend, even if the social circle doesn't extend beyond her circle of friends. She's not scapegoating all men--after all, her husband is clearly not one of these guys--but noticing a distinct trend within the right-wing male perception of left-wing females in her community/school/neighborhood/family/etc. Even if it's a small one, it's still a social trend. And it's certainly not limited to her own experience. It's widely reflected in other women's social spaces, Jaybull is simply using her own to draw a point. Anecdotal doesn't mean insignificant.
And of course pundits attack one another--male, female and everything in between--but Jaybull isn't talking about random people on television and in online forums who don't know anything about one another except for their political leanings. She's talking about people who she's known and liked enough to add to her Facebook contacts. Of course, Facebook friendship status is by no means a marker of real friendship, but by adding someone you are essentially mutually agreeing that you like one another enough to see what's going on in each other's lives. The people she's added, then, should owe her the respect to let her pronounce a political opinion without being called a nasty name. If they wanted to challenge the opinion and open up a debate, that's one thing; but to call her hysterical and nasty is another.
I would imagine that a big part of Jaybull's frustration comes from these guys (guys who know her personally) deciding they are entitled to "teach" her a thing or too, which is absolutley condescending, patronizing, silencing, and yes, because they don't do it to the left-wing males they know, misogynistic. I've seen it with my own male friends, family members, etc. And I've seen it more than with the women, and of course I haven't seen it with every single one of the men I know--but a trend undoubtably exists.
I don't understand people who can't handle disagreement. It's like you want to exist in an echo chamber.
Yes, it's quite clear you are on the opposite end of the spectrum!
I believe Jaybull is getting at something difficult to pinpoint, but does exist. I don't believe she is making something up because she is "sensitive" or "can't handle disagreement." I know that you know you were being demeaning and (ironically) brushing her perspective off.
While it certainly isn't all the time, many women are familiar with the sensation of men talking over her, and not giving her opinion the respect that is given to the opinions of other men.
As I said, this is NOT always the case! Honestly, I've come to a place and community in my life in which my opinion is well respected. I also enjoy a good disagreement- unless the person is so much of an ass I realize it's a total waste of my time.
However, in group situations, I will sometimes stay quiet and observe. Particularly with certain communities or younger people, regardless of who is educated on the subject at hand, it is the men going on and on, and the women who either feel they can't contribute for whatever reason or get talked over and dismissed when they do. I don't know what the particulars are of Jaybull's situation, but it strikes me as situation of both male socialization and female socialization, as well as the community belief-system (I've been exposed a lot to a particular religious community where such a situation is the norm).
This is only my perspective. I'm curious if there are any studies on this topic.
Again, this doesn't happen everywhere and I'm lucky to be involved with some amazing communities.
Nice post, Jbull. I post progressive and feminist news and action alerts, and I haven't received much feedback besides a few friends "liking" it or letting me know they signed whatever petition I posted. This is probably because I deleted all conservatives (except for family members) from my Facebook and made it friends-only. I see a lot of anti-feminist and anti-progressive dogpiling on Facebook - my male partner just got into a huge argument with five or six anti-health care reform people on Facebook who weren't even on his friends list, but it seems to happen to women more often. And you're right, this is silencing and patronizing.
I agree with Joanne - you should immediately delete any nasty comments and challenge the polite but patronizing ones. In the middle of my partner's online argument, I pulled up a new tab and found a list of primary sources and reliable statistics in about ten minutes. He posted each one as rebuttals and two people actually e-mailed him afterward to say thanks for the sources because they changed their minds about health care reform based solely on his citation-filled rebuttals. I think this is a good tactic, even though it requires looking up a lot of crap to prove your points.
Another tactic I would use is pointing out exactly what they are doing when they attack your position. Tell them they are silencing and patronizing and explain why. Post a link to this article on your Facebook or post it as a note and link everyone who has attacked you to the note.
The mere fact that I expect my opinions to be challenged makes me tired and angry.
Anyone who is a feminist or a progressive should expect this. The point isn't that you expect your opinions to be challenged - the point is that men are challenged less, and questioned less. Their attacks illustrate the imbalance of power between men and everyone else. I welcome challenges from conservatives and anti-feminists, because this gives us an opportunity to debate our political and social positions, learn new things, and grow stronger in our convictions.
"The mere fact that I expect my opinions to be challenged makes me tired and angry. However, while many people would get tired and therefore post less, I just get angry and therefore post more. I encouraged all of us to continue to be loud and outspoken. We know we are right, we can defend our position, and eventually, the opposition will know better than to think they can shut us up or make us look like we are wrong."
I don't get it. When I post to a public or shared forum like facebook, I know that people will see it and those who disagree with my position will challenge it. They do, and I defend my position and challenge theirs (unless my argument proves indefensible in which case I change the subject). They're not "silencing" me, they're disagreeing with a statement they disagree with.
Clearly, disagreement=silencing.
Don't agree with me please, I've got troubles enough.
I'm going to be measured here, but I think you are missing the point. More importantly I think you are dismissing the OP's point by ignoring it.
The OP is not complaining about dissent. I cannot stress that enough. Rather, the OP is complaining about disproportionate dissent, which is based in on sexist double standards. Since you are on a feminist website, I am going to assume good faith and that we can all agree that sexist double standards are not okay.
This disproportionate dissent can come from a lot of things--the sexist assumption that a woman's political opinions are less developed, the sexist assumption that women are easier to badger, the sexist need to put a woman "in her place." Whatever the motivation, these sexist assumptions color the interactions the OP describes. They may not cause them, per se, but they affect them enough to create a gap between the treatment of women and men on the internet. That GAP is the problem. That gap is sexism.
Granted, my personal experience as a man has been very different--I have receieved more criticism on personal blogs from women than men (which may or may not be a function of peculiar demographics in my life). So while I can't speak to the larger preponderance of the pattern the OP has experienced, her experience is very valid and certainly truthful. To assume her experience online is invalid, and simply a misperceived version of YOUR experience online, well, that's dismissive.
Correct, double standards are not okay, and unless I'm missing something the poster is not leaving any room for genuine disagreement with a statement made by a woman. The only part that looks weird to me is how her husband doesn't have to defend his positions or explain his thinking.
"Now, the men who post how *wrong* a woman’s post happens to be are usually polite and kind. It is not the same thing as opening your email to vitriol and threats. However, in many ways it is more insidious. I know, without a doubt, when I post something political to my status that I will have to explain myself and defend my position. I know for a fact when my spouse makes a similar post that he does not have to defend his position or explain his thinking."
"The mere fact that I expect my opinions to be challenged makes me tired and angry. However, while many people would get tired and therefore post less, I just get angry and therefore post more. I encouraged all of us to continue to be loud and outspoken. We know we are right, we can defend our position, and eventually, the opposition will know better than to think they can shut us up or make us look like we are wrong."
maybe if we could have an open discussion without being told by trolls what is and is not okay to post than we could come to a conclusion about this. You can attack a person's position without attacking them personally and being rude and cruel. This is not okay why is this tolerated in a place that is supposed to be safe for us to talk about what we think about issues that concern us as feminists and issues that just concern us in general
Thank you. We get the same users again and again coming onto threads and just trying to shut down discussion with, "You're overreacting. You're taking this too personally. I don't see why you're making a big deal out of this. This isn't sexist." I.e., "You're wrong. There's nothing to talk about." And then they inevitably complain about censorship and how no one wants a discussion. Personally, I really miss getting to have a discussion ABOUT THE POST without endless derails on whether the topic is even worthy of discussion. We shouldn't have to be proving/explaining sexism and justifying discussing sexist issues every. single. time. on a feminist blog.
The internet is a harsh place and if you post controversial opinions you can and very often will get flamed.
I've found it useful to develop a thick skin about commenters and to fire back at them, with as much vitreol as they throw at me.
Of course, in our sexist society, it's a lot more acceptable for a man like me to respond that way then it is for a woman like you - but, that's patriarchal bullshit and needs to be challenged.
If guys know they are going to get cursed out when they attack you on your blog, they will tend to shut the hell up.
Also, since you and your friend are posting on facebook, maybe you might want to consider unfriending the right wing douchebags who dogpile your posts.
Do you and your friend REALLY need "friends" like that in your life anyway?
thanks
thanks
I get the OP. Talking about Feminism makes me tired too. I get tired of defending myself as well. Not in a "I hate dissent" way, but in a "My intellect is challenged much more often, and with blatant sexism" way. I get what the OP is saying, and it is indeed hard to explain. I don't mind spirited discussions in person or online, but when you are subject to a consistent dogpiling because of your gender, it's a silencing issue.
I get the OP. Talking about Feminism makes me tired too. I get tired of defending myself as well. Not in a "I hate dissent" way, but in a "My intellect is challenged much more often, and with blatant sexism" way. I get what the OP is saying, and it is indeed hard to explain. I don't mind spirited discussions in person or online, but when you are subject to a consistent dogpiling because of your gender, it's a silencing issue.
Also, merely saying she should just delete trolls doesn't negate the fact that people are trying to silence her.
So I never thought about this before. I imagine people do get tired of explaining constantly why they believe what they believe. Thank you for this. It is something to consider next time I have a discussion.
Sometimes I don't think some people think about this enough. I mean it's one thing if you have to explain yourself once or twice, but to constantly have to say the same thing over and over again, and to have your identity questioned when you fail to respond because you've had to explain the same bloody thing already 12 times over seems a little tedious.
Thank you for this. As always it is a pleasure to read this space.
Thanks for this post! I agree 100%--and some of the comments just prove your point. Why is it assumed that we are not as well-read or firm in our opinions as our male counterparts?
I loathe being condescended to--it usually does tend to be men who do this. A little trick I've learned is to put THEM on the defensive instead. "Why do you presume I don't already know this?" or "I'm not debating this any further. I stand by my opinion."
This behavior, this 'dogpiling' IS insidious. Because it doesn't come right out as what it is (socially approved sexism), it's easy for men to say (and even believe) that they're simply trying to make you see the error of your ways.
Yet there are hints, one of the first being the vocabulary employed. You mentioned 'hysteria', for example. Other ones I've gotten: irrational, ridiculous, emotional.
Listen to an argument and/or political debate between two men. I guarantee that it's unlikely in the extreme that you'll hear ANY of those words, or any variation thereof, in their dialogue.
And that's why this is so significant, and why it disturbs me so much to see commenters try to downplay it. There is STILL a belief, buried though it is, that women are creatures of emotion, not immediately capable of logic or reason.
This is a great post and I defiantly think there is a huge difference. I have had Dr.Tiller's picture as my profile pic since his murder and the response I get from people who think it is me is a world of difference than when they know/assume that I am a WOC, a world of difference. People are more open to networking opportunities and actually friend me as a colleague or potential colleague, and I do not get called a stupid b or whatever when playing risk (worst I've gotten was "old man" or people deciding to team up on me because they assumed I was "old and smart"). Also, it helps that Tracey (though the "e" is usually left out) is also a not to uncommon male name. I suggest the people who say you are being over sensitive try posting a picture of a middle aged white male as their profile pic (if they are not and esp. if they have an ambiguous name) and see if the response from non-friends are any different. I know it has made a HUGE difference in the way I am perceived by ppl looking to network and interactive games.
Say it, Sister!
I have had the same problem but tend to be knowledgeable enough to defend my stances.
Today I had a gentleman respond to one of my posts about South Carolina governor Mark Sanford's misuse/abuse of state transportation. This gentleman responded-KINDLY- that all male politicians are sleaze-balls and that this is "just the way it is" and to expect more or to complain is to be gullible. I responded with this:
"It's not the way it HAS to be, and no g-damned excuses! WRONG IS WRONG... I do NOT want a slimeball, AM NOT GULLIBLE, and will not tolerate slimeballs in office. NO EXCUSES!!! The sooner we ween these *ssholes out and bare their *sses to the wind the sooner we can reform the system. I refuse to give up hope and I refuse to give in to "the way it is." If we all gave in to things just being the way they are African Americans would still be riding separate buses (and a president- fuggetaboutit), and women would make up the majority of impoverished people in this country AND earn 75 cents to every man's dollar for the same job. Oh, wait...."
LOL
Another case in point: I write a blog where my main emphasis is feminism. I once had a debate with a gentleman who read my blog in which he called me "bitter and ungrateful" for the gifts I've been given in life by dint of being an American female. Nice!
A very good friend of mine, who is a Religious Studies professor, opened my eyes to feminism. She made a very good point to me that I think is a wonderful rule of thumb for all of us:
"feminism is the DEFAULT position. It is not incumbent upon me to defend it. It is the burden of the opposition to argue why s/he would defend sexism and inequality... I no longer engage in arguments that seek the 'truth' of social order, i.e. 'is it nature?', 'does GOD decree it?' etc. For the question (about anything) is no longer, 'what is true?' The question is, 'what is JUST?'"
Just a thought: it's possible to "unfriend" those people who are constantly trying to correct you. I mean, I understand if said people are close family/friends, but if it's merely acquaintances who are going up in arms about your posts, perhaps it's time to give them the old axe?