![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In which Michelle has an opinion
If you spend much time on the internet in writers’ circles, you will no doubt have heard about the Stop The Goodreads Bullies web-site. Set up by anonymous bloggers, it purports to be a site created by concerned readers, readers who are dismayed and outraged by the bullies on Goodreads. These so-called bullies are reviewers. They are generally very snarky reviewers.
In order to stop these bullies, our concerned “readers” have gone through the effort of anonymously outing them in public. They have posted their real names, as most of them write pseudonymously. Not only have they posted their real names, but they have also posted their home addresses, their phone numbers, and (some of) the restaurants and parks they frequent.
This is, in my opinion, sick. It is sick, disturbed, harassment.
First, I want to point out that a pseudonym is not the same as anonymity. A reviewer who does not post under the same internet handle is not an effective reviewer, because most readers need to read a variety of reviews to get a sense of the reviewer's likes and dislikes; they can then compare these to their own.
My husband pointed out that I post nothing on the internet anonymously. He’s right. I don’t. I don’t work at the bookstore anonymously either. My husband--like other men on the internet--was momentarily confused at the level of my disgust and anger. If I don't do anything anonymously or pseudonymously on the internet, is it so very bad that people have been outed?
I pointed out that we don't live in the real world anonymously, and we don't -- but I don’t hand my home address and home phone number to total strangers in the bookstore. I didn’t hand them out to total strangers when I worked in an office either. These people know who I am - but they don’t know where I live. He thought about this for half a second and said, "You're right."
(Upon reading this, my husband said: You're right. It's the male/female divide. If you unmask a man's name in this city, you have his phone number and address in all likelihood. If you out him as an ass, he is not likely to feel that his life is in danger, because in all likelihood it's not. He may be embarrassed. His dignity may suffer. But he is unlikely to feel physically threatened.)
This demonstrates and leads into my second (important) point: men and women live different lives on the internet. Men may get hate mail; women get death threats, rape threats, promises-to-stalk and possibly kill if they show their faces in public. Women get this (it comes with a trigger warning). This is what the site is inviting the disturbed & the dangerous to do.
Putting photographs, home addresses, phone numbers & places which these women - and they are all women - frequent is a threat.
There is no excuse for this.
I am not going to talk about the reviewers who are being stalked and harassed. I am not going to talk about their reviews. I don't care about their words because the words they've written are not relevant. It doesn't matter what they've written: they are people, they are women, some have children at the home addresses which were publicly announced, and they do not deserve to be harassed & threatened in this fashion.
Picking up a gun and shooting someone because they hurt your feelings happens. If the person who is shot dies, we call it murder. It doesn't matter if someone hurt your feelings; you are not legally allowed to pick up a gun and point it at their head. And there are good reasons for that.
This, to me, is the equivalent of pointing a gun. I cannot convey in printable language just how disgusted I am. So this will have to do.
In order to stop these bullies, our concerned “readers” have gone through the effort of anonymously outing them in public. They have posted their real names, as most of them write pseudonymously. Not only have they posted their real names, but they have also posted their home addresses, their phone numbers, and (some of) the restaurants and parks they frequent.
This is, in my opinion, sick. It is sick, disturbed, harassment.
First, I want to point out that a pseudonym is not the same as anonymity. A reviewer who does not post under the same internet handle is not an effective reviewer, because most readers need to read a variety of reviews to get a sense of the reviewer's likes and dislikes; they can then compare these to their own.
My husband pointed out that I post nothing on the internet anonymously. He’s right. I don’t. I don’t work at the bookstore anonymously either. My husband--like other men on the internet--was momentarily confused at the level of my disgust and anger. If I don't do anything anonymously or pseudonymously on the internet, is it so very bad that people have been outed?
I pointed out that we don't live in the real world anonymously, and we don't -- but I don’t hand my home address and home phone number to total strangers in the bookstore. I didn’t hand them out to total strangers when I worked in an office either. These people know who I am - but they don’t know where I live. He thought about this for half a second and said, "You're right."
(Upon reading this, my husband said: You're right. It's the male/female divide. If you unmask a man's name in this city, you have his phone number and address in all likelihood. If you out him as an ass, he is not likely to feel that his life is in danger, because in all likelihood it's not. He may be embarrassed. His dignity may suffer. But he is unlikely to feel physically threatened.)
This demonstrates and leads into my second (important) point: men and women live different lives on the internet. Men may get hate mail; women get death threats, rape threats, promises-to-stalk and possibly kill if they show their faces in public. Women get this (it comes with a trigger warning). This is what the site is inviting the disturbed & the dangerous to do.
Putting photographs, home addresses, phone numbers & places which these women - and they are all women - frequent is a threat.
There is no excuse for this.
I am not going to talk about the reviewers who are being stalked and harassed. I am not going to talk about their reviews. I don't care about their words because the words they've written are not relevant. It doesn't matter what they've written: they are people, they are women, some have children at the home addresses which were publicly announced, and they do not deserve to be harassed & threatened in this fashion.
Picking up a gun and shooting someone because they hurt your feelings happens. If the person who is shot dies, we call it murder. It doesn't matter if someone hurt your feelings; you are not legally allowed to pick up a gun and point it at their head. And there are good reasons for that.
This, to me, is the equivalent of pointing a gun. I cannot convey in printable language just how disgusted I am. So this will have to do.
no subject
Thank you Michelle
no subject
I realize different people can have very different definitions of harrassment, but as far as the author/reviewer connection goes, it's very easy for an author to disengage. Just don't read the reviews. Don't comment on the reviews. Don't head into what is essentially the reviewer's territory at all. None of the reviewers in question were chasing the authors down in real life or over the internet. All engagement was two-sided.
no subject
The reason I haven't talked about the reviews and the ways authors can avoid them is because, in the end, people focus too much on the reviews themselves. I've seen various people say they're mean or etc., etc., etc., as if this excuses the site. Oh, they were mean? They were mean girls so they deserve this? Really? I mean, seriously?
It's why I said it's irrelevant. I don't actually care what the reviewers read or say to each other. I don't need to evaluate the reviews. I don't need to read them.
They don't deserve to be exposed, to have their home addresses posted on the internet, period.
no subject
Clearly they don't. Idiots is, in my opinion, a kind way of describing them.
no subject
People think that because it's just words on, "teh internetz" that there aren't real consequences and nightmares from their actions. It's horrible and invasive.
Re: Thank you Michelle
no subject
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." - Isaac Asimov
I'm aware that in terms of international issues, etc., they go deeper and are more complicated, but these are supposed to be Internet discussions and opinions, not political games or human disaster catastrophes.
Your daily life should not be a minefield.
no subject
You could say that 'Michelle the bookshop clerk' is a form of pseudonymity - you can't avoid putting your real face to it, but people don't know anything other than what you choose to share with them, and most likely it doesn't get more personal than 'I'm tired' or 'my kid was teething last night', and even the latter is something that you would share with very, very few customers. Most of the time strangers don't know _and can't find out_ whether you're single, married, gay, disabled... they just see a role and see whether you do your job or not.
The internet doesn't allow for that compartamentalisation of life, so we need a different mechanism.
no subject
"Something is very wrong with us, and it’s not bad reviews
It’s so much worse than that. Something is very wrong with us, and by “us” I mean the online community of (largely) women authors and readers. What is wrong is the “outing,” threatening, shaming, and silencing of readers who are perceived to be too critical of or hostile to authors." (http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/something-is-very-wrong-with-us-and-its-not-bad-reviews/)
There are pro-voices and of course the regular trolls of the site also raised their head. One eloquent commenter who I haven't met there before with the handle NM has been the voice of support for the GRbully site and many more eloquent readers and authors (yay, Courtney Milan for one) have tried to engage her in civilised discourse.
I was reading my way into the 200 comments, when I came across one from that commenter which used a metaphor that basically accused women who wear short dresses of asking to be raped (and compared it to the nasty reviewers asking to be outed: as in, if they had been nice, they wouldn't be into this trouble now, so it is deserved.).
That's when I stopped reading the thread. A woman who in all seriousness believes this sort of thing (another commenter called her an imperialist, heh) has no common ground with me. So I can't try reaching her across it. Her view of life is too other. Kudos to all the ladies who are still trying to engage her civilly. That is beyond me.
ETA: 514 comments by now.
no subject
no subject
no subject
If someone makes snarky remarks in person in public, usually they'll only possibly get that level of venom from 1 person, the one described. Other people may disapprove of the snarky remarks and weigh in, but they're not going to have that same level of venom. This is part of the internet making data more powerful I guess. It's interesting the different ways free speech becomes bullying/threats.
no subject
Makes me wonder what would make the harassers take notice.
no subject
It seems to be a lot of people's first reaction - which is in part why I posted, fwiw. The question of safety, of threat, of physical danger seems to get lost - and it's the defining one for me.
no subject
It would be wildly inappropriate under any circumstances. But it's especially over the top given that the reviewers' crime was to review books on a book review site.
no subject
BTW, I recently read a lot of reviews of Deverry books on amazon and goodreads. A number of characteristics of the books came up over and over -- split time scheme, amount of detail are the 2 I remember. These characteristics were the reasons that some reviewers loved the books and others hated the books. The same things!
My conclusion : reading one's reader reviews is a waste of time and adrenaline. :-)
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-07-19 06:04 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
no subject
This was the first, best lesson I got from reviews: that there is no thing I can put in a book that won't be one reader's Best Thing Ever and another reader's Thing That Ruined The Book Entirely.
So I might as well just keep writing my own weird books and not worry so much.
Except to be glad ... love or hate the words ... that readers are at least engaging.
The bile I see about negative reviews is disturbing and a little terrifying. And seems mostly to afflict newish writers who are still feeling very fragile.
I sometimes wish we could tell writers (not that we know these folks in particular) are writers to just Stay Quiet for the first three years, and only react in public once they've had time to chill and mellow a little. (Except, of course, it's also not a universal response.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
Thank you.
no subject
Can someone serve a cease and desist to the site? Soliciting harassment has got to be illegal.
no subject
Though I will say one of the reasons that you're my favorite author was (aside from the obvious) years ago, on the yahoo group, somebody posted something about not liking one of your books, and the reasons behind the dislike/etc. And your response was...to thank them, and then to suggest things that they might like more. It was such a classy moment. The people behind the website in question should really...there's way, way better ways of handling these things. Way, way, way. All of them include NOT POSTING PEOPLE'S PERSONAL INFO. Argh.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-07-25 01:13 pm (UTC)(link)A well thought out piece. If I didn't already buy your work, I would now.
Goodreads Reviewer Outing
(Anonymous) 2012-08-16 09:29 pm (UTC)(link)