Time article shows men more likely to be abused online then women

mrkiscool2

Before I even start this discussion I don't want it to be the usual "feminism vs MRA" style crap we have been getting recently, or about how males have it worse than women. The article shows that men are slightly more likely to receive abuse online.

The Pew online harassment study, based on a survey of nearly 3,000 Internet users last June, found that 44 percent of men and 37 percent of women had experienced some form of online abuse, from name-calling to physical threats and stalking. The biggest gender gap was in the fairly mild category of being called offensive names, experienced by nearly a third of men on the Internet but only 22 percent of female users. However, more men—10 percent, compared to 6 percent of women—also reported being physically threatened. Women were more likely than men to say they had been sexually harassed (9 percent versus 6 percent) and stalked (10 percent versus 7 percent); sustained harassment was reported by 8 percent of men and 7 percent of women. Interestingly, the survey also found that people perceived most online spaces to be female-friendly; 18 percent even said that the social media were more “welcoming” to women than to men, while only five percent agreed with the reverse.

Meanwhile many articles on the study emphasized the perils for women. Sample headlines: “Pew: Women Suffering Online Harassment Worse Than Men.” “For Women, the Internet Can Be a Scary Place.” “Everyone’s a Jerk to Everyone Online, But Young Women Have It the Worst.” Some commentators even expressed frustration and disbelief that so few Netizens saw online life as a hostile environment for women.

The rest of the article is an extremely interesting view of how online media and journalistic pieces make it out like women get a lot more abuse than males.

What I think about this is that both sides (both female and males) receive abuse online. But that's the nature of the internet. The anonymity, facelessness of the online community makes it a lot easier for the darker side of us to come out because of no fear of repercussion. Obviously both sexes should report anything like credible threats or stalking to the relevant authorities but apart from that it's best to just ignore it.

RobYourBuilder

I don't want it to be the usual "feminism vs MRA" style crap

Best of luck with that, bud.

stateofflux

impossible as there are no women on the interweb

mrkiscool2

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Best of luck with that, bud.

I know, optimistic or what? But still, better to put it there and see what happens then to seem to endorse it I suppose!

Hold the Cheez Whiz

Obviously both sexes should report anything like credible threats or stalking to the relevant authorities but apart from that it's best to just ignore it.

Perhaps the fact that the article reports women are more upset by online insults and harassment - i.e. less willing to 'ignore it' - than men may explain some of the disparate public reaction...and some poster reactions on boards as well.

How Soon Is Now

Hold the Cheez Whiz wrote: »

Perhaps the fact that the article reports women are more upset by online insults and harassment - i.e. less willing to 'ignore it' - than men may explain some of the disparate public reaction...and some poster reactions on boards as well.

And where off!!

shruikan2553

These threads are like a hydra. The mods cut one down and more take its place.

RayM

Would it be fair to say that men are more likely to get into arguments online? Whereas all a woman has to do to receive a torrent of (often gender-based) abuse is express an opinion.

mrkiscool2

shruikan2553 wrote: »

These threads are like a hydra. The mods cut one down and more take its place.

I don't think this is quite similar to anything we've had so far though? As in it's an actual article that isn't biased in one way or another and it's brought up some interesting results that can be discussed. If it get's too bad I'll gladly want it to be closed

How Soon Is Now

RayM wrote: »

Would it be fair to say that men are more likely to get into arguments online? Whereas all a woman has to do to receive a torrent of (often gender-based) abuse is express an opinion.

No not really.

RayM

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

No not really.

Okay. Let's not argue about it.

How Soon Is Now

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I don't think this is quite similar to anything we've had so far though? As in it's an actual article that isn't biased in one way or another and it's brought up some interesting results that can be discussed. If it get's too bad I'll gladly want it to be closed

The article is grand and if there wasn't so many mongos in here maybe we could actually talk in a civil manor about it but ya .

How Soon Is Now

RayM wrote: »

Okay. Let's not argue about it.

:pac: Dont worry im not going to. I just think it can come from either side man or woman. Where all the same in that there's gonna be people who love arguing and starting fights man or woman.

pharmaton

Hold the Cheez Whiz wrote: »

Perhaps the fact that the article reports women are more upset by online insults and harassment - i.e. less willing to 'ignore it' - than men may explain some of the disparate public reaction...and some poster reactions on boards as well.

I don't know about other site dynamics, but boards has an oerwhelming majority male user base. the last census here shows an 81% to 18% ratio of male to female. Digest that for a minute. These stats are important.

Omackeral

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

The article is grand and if there wasn't so many mongos in here maybe we could actually talk in a civil manor about it but ya .

Fantastic.

Sheep Lover

Is that not because there are more men online than women anyway?

Sheep Lover

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

The article is grand and if there wasn't so many mongos in here maybe we could actually talk in a civil manor about it but ya .

Brillant, which are the "mongos" by the way?

Disgraceful comment, highly offensive to those of a mental disability.

How Soon Is Now

Omackeral wrote: »

Fantastic.

That was nicest word I could think of to describe some the fools had in After Hours lately.

Seriously it could be a great place to talk about so many different topics but it's been ruined lately.

Macavity.

Sheep Lover wrote: »

Is that not because there are more men online than women anyway?

Percentages.

pharmaton

Sheep Lover wrote: »

Is that not because there are more men online than women anyway?

The link above doesn't make clear who the main contributors of abuse are, are men more likely to be abused, bullied and harrassed by other men or women and vice versa? It suggests that there is a sexual element but it's not very clear. If there are larger numbers of men on boards for example, would that suggest that men are generally more inclined to abuse each other and if so how to come up with solutions for same? (rather than turning it into a gender issue?..again?)

Omackeral

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

That was nicest word I could think of to describe some the fools had in After Hours lately.

Seriously it could be a great place to talk about so many different topics but it's been ruined lately.

It's anything but nice to be honest. Using that is as ignorant as anything these so called fools would say. Just smacks of a time when people would say 'coon' or the likes in casual ways.

Hold the Cheez Whiz

pharmaton wrote: »

I don't know about other site dynamics, but boards has an oerwhelming majority male user base. the last census here shows an 81% to 18% ratio of male to female. Digest that for a minute. These stats are important.

OK, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, or how this is inconsistent with what I or the article said...

pharmaton

Hold the Cheez Whiz wrote: »

OK, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, or how this is inconsistent with what I or the article said...

see post 22 above. You referred to poster reactions on boards, which I quoted in my response.

How Soon Is Now

Omackeral wrote: »

It's anything but nice to be honest. Using that is as ignorant as anything these so called fools would say. Just smacks of a time when people would say 'coon' or the likes in casual ways.

Right ok I know. I didn't mean it as an insult to anyone with disabilities etc. It be an insult to them to compare them to some the people hanging around.

Anyway no point dragging this off topic I'm just hoping we can have one conversation in here that doesn't lead to you know what!

Chunners

The Misogynists are on fire today lol

How Soon Is Now

It could be a lot to do with the numbers but at the same time it's hard to know.

What I do know is having spent many hours in chat rooms and forums over the years women give it just as good as men do when it comes to arguing online!

spurious

Who is doing the abusing?

Men of other men?
Women of men?

pharmaton

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

It could be a lot to do with the numbers but at the same time it's hard to know.

What I do know is having spent many hours in chat rooms and forums over the years women give it just as good as men do when it comes to arguing online!

I agree! but as I tend to use boards more than any other site, the majority of it is from men! (as it has a larger male user base)
and i try to stay away from the women parts of the site

Bipolar Joe

Chunners wrote: »

The Misogynists are on fire today lol

Oh, for fuck sake, can you not say any God damn thing without being made out to be bigoted in some way? "Lol" indeed, it's hilarious, I bet you're a riot at every party.

How Soon Is Now

pharmaton wrote: »

I agree! but as I tend to use boards more than any other site, the majority of it is from men! (as it has a larger male user base)

Lads will argue and dish out **** between each other probley more then women do. It's hard to tell what goes on fully online but I'd say as with most things it depends who and where it's coming from. Some sites will be all men some be all women!

Qualitymark

Don't know that the Time article is correct. When you look at the kind of stuff that's happened to Kathy Sierra, for instance - rape threats, death threats, her face photoshopped onto corpses, etc, which have actually driven this talented woman offline - you'd wonder.

pharmaton

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Lads will argue and dish out **** between each other probley more then women do. It's hard to tell what goes on fully online but I'd say as with most things it depends who and where it's coming from. Some sites will be all men some be all women!

yea,and I imagine if a minority, in terms of gender, were on the receiving end of the "usual" daily dosage that is considered acceptable (maybe not acceptable but has been normalised) by the majority, it might be safe to say they could perceive it as a gender thing.

How Soon Is Now

pharmaton wrote: »

yea,and I imagine if a minority, in terms of gender, were on the receiving end of the "usual" daily dosage that is considered acceptable (maybe not acceptable but has been normalised) by the majority, it might be safe to say they could perceive it as a gender thing.

I'd be curious to see what kinda number of the people abusing and being abused are teens.

hatrickpatrick

Will probably get attacked for this, but my own view is that sometimes people with agendas automatically frame certain online abuse as "because of X" without any evidence of that. This doesn't just apply to feminists, there are a lot of demographics which do this without considering that, as someone said in the other thread, people might be "equal opportunities trolls".

In other words... If I get attacked, I'm not going to say "I got attacked because I'm a guy" or "I got attacked because I'm Irish". Certain others like to run with that without any evidence to stir sh!t up, in my view.

Wibbs

Chunners wrote: »

The Misogynists are on fire today lol

Reds under the bed and all that. TBH I'm getting really fcuking dog tired of this imported US dramalamma gender war bullshít. I really fcuking am. On both sides. Keyboard victims all over the bloody place. Give it a bloody rest and go out and engage with real people FFS. Or better yet, take your agendas and stuff them.

shruikan2553

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I don't think this is quite similar to anything we've had so far though? As in it's an actual article that isn't biased in one way or another and it's brought up some interesting results that can be discussed. If it get's too bad I'll gladly want it to be closed

Most of them have potential for good discussion, The problem is most of them lead to some people claiming crap like all woman are slut and others claiming you either agree with them or are the problem. Its like any traveler or dole thread, although we dont have a sticky about those two yet!