I think there is a danger there of being mean to people and humiliating people and embarrassing people just because it might get you ratings. It is a disturbing trend. —Bruce Nash
“Stop being mean!”
That is the Tipster’s response when I put her to bed for the third time. In her six-year-old world, having an 8:00 bedtime is mean; the sun isn’t quite down yet, there’s still daylight, so she thinks she still has time to play. We have boundaries and schedules I am obligated to enforce for her own good, so therefore, in her mind, I’m the mean one.
Raising a little girl in today’s environment. I want her to be as independent and strong as her mother and she shows every sign of having all those qualities. Grandpa Bob tells me Kat didn’t like going to bed, either. Yet, when I look at the world into which she’s growing up, one that demeans and ridicules women just for being women, I worry. A lot. I think I have plenty of good reasons.
Earlier this week, it was revealed that one of the nation’s top software engineers, Jessie Frazelle, received so many death and rape threats that her employer had to hire bodyguards to guarantee her safety. She recently moved to another company and while she has yet to make any kind of statement the general consensus is that she was harassed out the door, that the company knew about the harassment and did nothing to stop it. Last July she wrote:
Ever since I started speaking at conferences and contributing to open source projects I have been endlessly harassed. I’ve gotten hundreds of private messages on IRC and emails about sex, rape, and death threats. People emailing me saying they jerked off to my conference talk video (you’re welcome btw) is mild in comparison to sending Photoshopped pictures of me covered in blood.
Then, earlier this week, Frazelle tweeted:
I lost something I loved so much and a small piece of my soul standing up for myself, and I just don’t know if it was worth it.
— jessie frazelle (@jessfraz) April 22, 2016
I wish I could say this was an isolated problem. I wish I could say this was a new problem. Neither of those statements would be true, though. Being mean to women online is as old as the Internet itself and the toll it is exacting is severe.
The same day that the Frazelle story was posted, The Washington Post ran a story questioning whether 31-year-old Fairfax County firefighter Nicole Mittendorff was harassed so severely that she committed suicide last week. What makes this story particularly upsetting is that the trolls who have continued to hound her claim to be her fellow firefighters. An investigation is underway, but no matter what they find, and it’s almost certain that someone will be charged in this case, the fact that nothing was done to stop the continual barrage of mean comments, that no one was able to sufficiently stand up for her and back the trolls down, incriminates the entire online system.
Being mean, especially to women, has reached epidemic proportions. While this is just observational speculation, I’m willing to be that one could ask any woman with an internet account if they’ve had someone they don’t know say something mean about them online and probably 9 of every ten, if not more, would say yes. I know Kat’s gotten comments, especially when we first started seeing each other. She was able to handle those quickly, though. Not everyone is so lucky.
We laugh when Tonight Show host Jimmy Kimmel has guests read mean tweets about themselves but the very fact we find those tweets and other similar comments funny is a part of what allows the online abuse of women to flourish. Part of the reason trolls say the mean things they say is because they think what they’re doing is absolutely hilarious and that if we don’t “get it” that we need to “lighten up.” There is no humor in threatening to rape or kill women, though. It’s not funny to send them pictures covered in what appears to be blood. There’s no joke behind telling women they asked for it. Every last bit of it is mean.
#MoreThanMean started trending on Twitter yesterday after a Washington Post video was posted where two sports reporters, Sarah Spain and Julie DiCaro, sat down and had sports fans read, out loud, some of the mean tweets the two women receive every day. The effect was emotional and drove home just how easy it is to type things that we never would consider saying to someone in person. The men reading the tweets were clearly uncomfortable and some even cried. You not only need to see this video, you need to share this video. Take a look:
Stop and think. Mother’s Day is coming up in a couple of weeks. Would you talk to your mother like that? Would you tolerate someone talking to your sister, your girlfriend, or your spouse with those words? Not if you have an ounce of decency in you, you wouldn’t. Those of you who have daughters, what if someone spoke like that to her?
Being mean has become so much a part of our culture, though, to the point that we have justified it and built organizations around it, and now embodied it in one of our leading presidential candidates. In a follow-up story on the boycotts we mentioned last week, a new article from Business Insider shows just how much hate and meanness there is around letting transgender people use the restroom with which they most identify. People of color have been beaten at presidential campaign rallies and the candidate has encouraged such mean behavior.
We have created a culture of mean and tolerated it far too long. The time has come for us to stand up, to confront the online bullies, especially those who harass women. We don’t have to necessarily be mean in response to meanness. I think responding with, “If you wouldn’t say it, don’t type it,” is a good start. And yes, unfortunately, there are people who are willing to say mean things. One of them is inexplicably running for president and appears to be winning his party’s nomination. Are we really willing to allow the election of a president who is mean?
This is the primary reason we don’t allow comments on these pages. We tried it a few years ago and even then the mean and rude comments were enough of a problem I made the decision to simply not provide a forum where such statements could exist. I am still of the mind that unmoderated comments are unnecessary and unhelpful.
#MoreThanMean needs to become a battle cry. We cannot allow this culture of mean to continue. Lives are at stake. The lives of people we all hold dear, even if they’re not old enough to be online yet. For all the Tipsters and the Ravens and the Emmas and every other little girl out there who are not yet able to speak for themselves, we need to shut this culture of mean down now.
If you wouldn’t say it to someone’s face, don’t type it. And confront those who do.
5 Questions You Should Be Asking
Is unifying behind the president-elect something you can morally and ethically justify? Ask yourself these questions.
I was chided by an acquaintance yesterday, someone who does not know me well at all, because my frequent use of the hashtag #NotMyPresident is not unifying. She is of the opinion that, with the election being over, we should all put aside our differences in the name of unity. She finds my unwillingness to do so to be shameful, despite the fact we agree on the issues over which I find myself unable to support the new administration.
Let me be clear that I do not, at this point, condone the many street protests that are taking place, either. The violence that occurred overnight in Portland, Oregon is especially inappropriate and unhelpful to any meaningful actions that might need to be taken. The president-elect, as unsavory as his election might be to millions of us, has not actually done anything yet that carries any substantial power. One of the reasons mainstream Republicans had difficulty supporting their nominee was because he has a long and well-documented history of saying one thing and doing exactly the opposite. Until he proposes offensive rights-limiting legislation or, after being sworn in, commits acts of hate, street protests are meaningless and lack any authority.
However, that does not mean that unity behind this new administration is an option, either. For those who are considering abandoning their morals and ethics for the sake of unifying behind a president-elect who can’t be trusted, we strongly suggest you ask yourself these five questions.
1. Do you support sexual assault against women, diminishing the severity of rape, and perpetuating a culture of violence against women?
Despite having won the election, the president-elect is still scheduled to go on trial December 16 for the alleged rape of a 13-year-old girl. Let that sink in for a moment. While any rape is horrible, we’re talking about a 13-year-old. This is the shamefulness of the person who was elected president. To support him is to support his actions. Anyone who unifies behind this man is saying to all the little girls in the United States, “Hey, rape isn’t really all that bad.”
In addition to the rape charges, the president-elect is also facing numerous allegations of sexual assault. His response to those allegations was that he would sue the women making such statements once he is sworn in. Do you support victim blaming? You do if you plan on unifying behind this president.
The president-elect has an extremely misogynistic attitude toward women as demonstrated by his conversations not only during the campaign but across most of his public life. When Fox News anchor Megan Kelly questioned the nominee about his behavior, he called Kelly a “bimbo” among other things. His long history of insulting women is well documented and inexcusable.
Apparently, those facts don’t bother some people. If your morality and ethics are such that you can excuse and tolerate someone whose words and actions are actively and consistently anti-women, then you have elected someone who shares those values. For the rest of us, though, this is a disqualifier. We cannot and will not support anyone who does not treat women as equals for any reason. Therefore, we cannot and will not unify behind the president-elect.
2. Do you support the mistreatment, registration, and deportation of people based upon their religious beliefs?
In a November 10, 2015 article, the New York Times reported that the then-candidate for president supported registration for all Muslims who reside in the United States. When asked how that different from Nazi registration of the Jews prior to the Holocaust, the candidate’s reply was, “You tell me.” He has also stated, in multiple interviews, that, “We’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely. We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.” As a candidate, the now president-elect has been extremely harsh in his words about Muslims, including the possibility of an open ban on any Muslims immigrating or even flying into the United States.
This rhetoric and attitude have had a devastating effect since the election. Repeatedly, Muslim women have reported having their hijabs yanked off their heads in public. American Muslims, people who were born and raised here just like the rest of us, no longer feel safe. Some of the most devout have even warned other women to not wear their hijabs for fear of violence against them. The hate perpetuated by the president-elect is very real.
Unifying behind this president-elect is showing support for this kind of hate, disregard for the religious freedoms of the First Amendment, and bigotry toward people simply based on their religion. Can you imagine the backlash that would happen if the same statements were made against Southern Baptists? Muslims have the exact same rights as Baptists, Catholics, Lutherans, and every other religion in the United States. If you can’t deal with that, you need to find somewhere else to live. We’re not going to tolerate such hate toward our Muslim friends.
3. Do you support the denial of basic civil rights, including the right to marry, based on one’s sexual identity?
Blame the vice president-elect for this one. As Governor of Indiana, he attempted to enact one of the most egregious and damaging anti-LGBTQ laws in the country. Hoosiers immediately revolted with industry from all over the world showing support by removing their business and conventions from the state. The then-Governor was forced to back down and amend the law to protect everyone regardless of sexuality. However, as vice president-elect, he has made it very clear that this administration “will be anti-LGBTQ and anti-women.”
Once again, it is the attitude of the incoming administration that is setting off real violence in the streets. Tuesday evening, a Calgary film producer visiting Santa Monica, California, was beaten to a bloody pulp for being gay by supporters of the president-elect. Is this how it is going to be? Does anyone actually think we are making America great with this sort of behavior?
Our LGBTQ friends have made some great strides in terms of establishing their rights as citizens over the past eight years. Now, all those rights appear to be in jeopardy under this new administration with the vice-president leading the attack. There is no way anyone of reasonable mind can unify behind a government that fails to condemn hate and is threatening to remove the rights of people based upon their sexuality. We are morally and ethically required to fight against any such activity.
4.Can you support a president who shows complete disdain and disrespect for people of color?
Someone apparently failed to tell the president-elect that white people no longer make up a majority of the U. S. population. Here are just a sampling of his documented statements about people of color:
“Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.” (source)
“Laziness is a trait in blacks.” (source)
“And if you look at black and African American youth, to a point where they’ve never done more poorly. There’s no spirit.” (source)
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.” (source)
The list could go on and on for days. The fact is that if you’re not as pasty white as he is, the president-elect has no respect for you. None. In fact, one of his primary goals within his first 100 days is to enact legislation that would provide inner-city police more powerful weapons in dealing with alleged crime and violence in urban neighborhoods. If you thought police violence against people of color was bad before, it could get a lot worse under this administration.
“Black Lives Matter” is not an opinion. We cannot unify behind a president who does not protect the best interests of people of color, who does not respect their lives and their contributions to the fabric of our country.
5. Do you support the denial of health and reproductive rights to women?
We’ve already established that this administration is anti-women, but what matters now is that the entire political structure in Washington is ready to wage a full-scale war against women. Over the past six years, the Republican-controlled Congress has tried repeatedly to limit, freeze, or completely destroy funding for women’s healthcare, especially when that healthcare involves a matter of choice. With the election of this new president, all legislative roadblocks that prevented Congress from achieving their evil plans are removed. Women across the United States are in grave danger.
Healthcare is a tremendously serious issue for women, especially when it comes to pregnancy and child care. Thanks to increased insurance coverage and support for non-profits such as Planned Parenthood, the United State’s unreasonable high rate of infant mortality has gone down in recent years. Make no mistake, however, that should the funding for those programs be removed, which would happen if both the president-elect and Republican-controlled Congress get their way, those deadly numbers would once again skyrocket. More women would die in childbirth. More women would have unplanned pregnancies. More babies would die from disease and distress before they are one year old. More women would die of cancer because they wouldn’t have access to early treatment programs. The devastation across our country would be severe.
I understand that not everyone agrees on a woman’s right to choose. Most of those who fail to agree on that topic, however, are men, who have no right to even have a voice in the conversation. Women alone should be in control of their bodies. Government has no business telling them what to do and men, especially, have to business trying to force women to do what they’re told. To remove funding for women’s healthcare is a form of legislative rape. Congress has already proven its willingness to commit, if not outright fondness for rape against women’s rights. Now, they have a president willing to sign that legislation into law.
I cannot fathom how any person with the ability to reason above the level of a six-year-old can support or unify behind such intent. To unify behind the president-elect on this issue is to stand up and tell the world that you hate women. There is no excuse. There can be no tolerance. We cannot unify behind such policies and we must do everything in our power to keep them from becoming law.
I could take this list on and on forever, but I don’t have time to type it all and you probably wouldn’t read the whole thing if I did. Five questions are sufficient enough for anyone to decide whether or not they can morally and ethically justify unifying behind this president-elect. I know I can’t. On each of these issues and more I plan on remaining very diligent, very vocal, and very adamant about stopping any moves on the part of this new administration that in any way threatens my family, my friends, or my freedom of expression. As long as the threat remains, there can be no unity.
Share this:
Like this: