Online abuse, leaked nudes and revenge porn: this is nothing less than terrorism against women

[seabeyond]

The abuse of women on the internet, like the hacking of female celebrities' naked photos, is not just intended to hurt the individuals involved. These are deliberately outrageous acts designed to create a spectacle and to instil fear in a target population - in other words, terrorism.

*

These codes provide cover for a pastime as old as patriarchy: punishing women who step out of line. The nude photos of female celebrities, including the actress Jennifer Lawrence, were presumably hacked for the lulz – as well as for bitcoins, which a 4channer initially requested in exchange for them. Now it seems that half of Reddit’s users have decided it is their chivalrous duty to find the identity of the 4chan user who hacked the pictures. The other half are busy uploading the photos to the internet every time an image-hosting service removes them. Somewhere out there, I hope, a psychology student is gathering material for an excellent thesis. In the meantime, something strikes me about both the celebrity photo hack and the harassment of Anita Sarkeesian and Z. This is a form of terrorism. (Sarkeesian agrees: “There is just no other word for it,” she tweeted on 31 August.)

What we are witnessing are deliberately outrageous acts designed to create a spectacle and to instil fear in a target population. Where Osama Bin Laden watched in approval as every news network endlessly replayed the footage of a plane hitting a tower, the hackers and harassers must feel thrilled by all the carefully search-engine-optimised headlines above articles decrying the latest leaked pictures. It is a function of successful terrorism that the media becomes unavoidably complicit in spreading the terror. There is no way to report the story without increasing its potency. We cannot stop looking.

As for the target population, tell me that young women aren’t supposed to look at the harassment of Sarkeesian for being a public figure and get the message: “This could happen to you, you uppity bitch. Watch your mouth.” The leaking of the celebrity nude photos has the same impetus as revenge porn. As the internet heaves under the weight of freely exposed nipples, violation has become a form of titillation. (If you must see an actress’s breasts, may I recommend watching pretty much any 18-rated movie made this year?) Any expression of women’s sexuality moves them into Camp Slut, where they are fair game for punishment and humiliation.

*more

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/09/online-abuse-leaked-nudes-and-revenge-porn-nothing-less-terrorism-against-women

[Tuesday Afternoon]

1. “This could happen to you, you uppity bitch. Watch your mouth.”

just let that one soak in ... feels so very close, doesn't it.

[seabeyond]

2. just saying. can happen? does happen. crickets. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. we have watched it happen, haven't we, sea -

Does ...

and I am not talking about a Female Deer .

[seabeyond]

4. who is the worse offender? creating DU women rape porn fantasy? rape threats? or uppity women that

call it.

one longtime woman walked. one i believe is still flagged for two outrageously ridiculous hides cause she is the baddest of the bad. or am i the baddest of the bad, seeing i have been kicked off 11, 12, 13 times?

i was thinking about it last night. i had one poster throwing cum at me in a couple posts. got hides. was flagged. and unflagged the next morning. around christmas started an OP talking about my old uterus not up to birthing two sons. got flagged, and was immediately unflagged. YET.... baines sits here flagged.

i am trying to understand the reasoning. but, seeing how i do not get the reasoning of our community standards consistently, i am having a tough time with this one.

seeing how this is a feminist forum, that discusses the patriarchy, and the sexism in our culture. an OP discussing the misogyny on line. i have to discuss lower lever similarities, right? isnt that what we do in this group?

[JustAnotherGen]

5. I'm with you sea

And I 'see' what you see. Someday - there will be place other than DU.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

6. I understand what you are saying. It is happening to me, also. My last two hides happened

IN THIS GROUP.

I hope you are being rhetorical with the questions.

Someone mentioned a name. You replied using the name given.

I am just saying that I have seen alert messages written where the using of another DUer's name is considered a CALL-OUT.

Whether or not it is justified to me, matters not.

I am neither the alerter or a jury member because, thanks to My Hides I have been taken out of the Jury Pool, which is just another way to silence the input on how Community Standards are established.

[seabeyond]

8. yes. taken out of jury pool. taken out of serving in host. all kinds of means, shutting us down. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

13. Yes, it is built into the system, whether it is an unintentional consequence or not, It Is Inherent

In This System and, crippling as it is, we keep coming back with our

*black eyes* (HIDES, people, this is metaphorical device.)

shining for all to see on our Profile Page.

Somehow one could come to the conclusion that we are supposed to be embarrassed.

I am embarrassed for the fist not, the eye.

[seabeyond]

14. i know. lol. after 3, 4, 5th kick off du, i was hearing rumblings i should feel shame. lol.

that somehow, i should be learning a lesson, and be nicer, better, whatever.

nope.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

24. I stand with you, sea. I am learning a lesson but, I don't think it is the one intended.

My *voice on DU* may be silenced today or, tonight or, early in AM tomorrow.

I may wake up to a yellow banner with some Jury Results that could possibly herald a Time Out for me. I will never know my Accuser (Alerter) and I will not know which particular peers make up the jury panel. I will never have a chance to rebut the Alert Message.

fine. well and good.

I still stand on MY corner of This EARTH and my voice can still be heard.

My VOTE will be COUNTED.

[seabeyond]

27. beautiful post tuesday. i hear ya.... sister. nt

[niyad]

26. I am sooooo glad I put down my coffee-- YOU need to be nicer,

better??? don't know about the rest of the world, but some of us like you just the way you are!

[seabeyond]

28. some of us like you just the way you are!

you like her... for just the way she is.

bridget jones.... lol

thank you.

[sheshe2]

80. Yup, saw that. And that list should continue on...sea

You should be sweeter, more feminine, and it's not just children that should be seen not heard, apparently it's women too. The menz want so mansplain.

Nope~

[CrispyQ]

7. Are you saying the OP's you mentioned were allowed to stand?

This time around I am not letting the fucking little hearts charm me into sending Skinner more money.

[seabeyond]

9. the throwing around the cum at me, specifically, were hidden. The OP was allowed to stand,

about my uterus unable to birth boys and over a hundred posts of duers that do not like me, dissing me. i finally got a heads up about it. saw host were doing nothing about it. made a comment saying host allowing to stand. and all of a sudden it was locked. i just needed to be more patient.

with the hosts getting ot it. and with the man who made the OP cause he was drunk, after all. i should be more .... oh, what? patient. bad me.

[AuntPatsy]

10. I logged in just to see the hidden post by Baines???? If that hide is not proof that their are

Those attempting to silence the women who speak out than someone is Not paying attention, don't let them win Sea, we both know they are laughing, you can get the last laugh

[seabeyond]

11. did you notice if she was still flagged? i havent checked.

i think it is pretty clear to most. sheeeeit, they talk about it out loud, on DI. lol. not like they are playing coy or anything.

[AuntPatsy]

16. Last time I looked yes

[sheshe2]

22. no, she is no longer flagged, sea.

she did write this though...

epitaph

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=291098

[seabeyond]

25. thank you sheshe. i had not read that. a message to be heard. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. Yes, sheshe2, she is still flagged. her Transparency Tab is still Yellow. She can not post

until 10/7. If she decides to post at that time ... she may not.

Here is her Profile Message =

About BainsBane
Epitaph: She was taken down by two hides for pointing out she found hurtful comments that focus on the failings of victims of domestic violence rather than the violent abusers who break the law. As a survivor of domestic violence, I do indeed find such comments hurtful, yet two juries have insisted I have no right to say so. When it is okay to say \"some women will do anything for money,\" but it is not okay to point out victim blaming hurts people, something is seriously wrong. If community standards truly do sanction victim blaming but do not allow survivors to talk about how they experience those comments, that is not a community that values justice, non-violence, or freedom of speech.

[seabeyond]

31. no. she is not flagged. flagged is two or more hides, small period of time. cannot pm.

administration decide to unflag. once unflagged, can pm people.

5 hides is kicked off, but can continue to pm

i know this well. cause i am often times doing du thru pms. has its own place of interesting doing du thru pms....

[Tuesday Afternoon]

33. I am using the word FLAGGED because her Transparency Tab is FLAGGED bright YELLOW

for all to see and her page is showing. Her HIDES are EXPOSED for all to see.

You are right. She is NOT flagged for review but, she still can NOT post because her Transparency Tab is YELLOW.

you are correct.

[sheshe2]

32. Thanks Tuesday,

I thought sea meant 'flagged' for review. I saw she had 5 hides and read the epitaph where blaming the victim is okay but a survivor is not allowed to speak. I too am a survivor and her epitaph breaks my heart.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

34. I think sea did mean FLAGGED FOR REVIEW and YES there is a difference.

Baines is OUT for FIVE HIDES within a NINETY DAY TIME LIMIT.

The clock starts ticking with the first hide which does not drop off for NINETY days. if one gets another FOUR hides within that NINETY day period then one must take a TIME out until the first hide drops off.

sea keeps coming back when her first hide drops off leaving her with FOUR HIDES if she gets a hide before the oldest one drops off then she is out again.

I also, am sitting on four hides. =

Profile information
Jury
Willing to serve on Juries: Yes
Eligible to serve on Juries: Yes
Chance of serving on Juries: 0% (explain)
2000 or more total posts: +20
200 or more days of membership: +20
20 or more posts in the last 90 days: +20
Not a Star member: +0
4 posts hidden in 90 days: -80
TOTAL: 0

[sheshe2]

81. Stay safe, Tuesday...

I know it's easy to get a hide for saying nothing wrong.

[ismnotwasm]

12. The good news is feminisms not only isn't "dead"

But women are getting pissed everywhere. Is sexism still rampant? Sure. But looking through the blogosphere this am, I'm seeing calls for a fucking revolution.

http://www.vice.com/read/explore-future-feminism-with-lydia-lunch-marina-abramovi-and-laurie-anderson-at-the-hole-gallery-987

http://www.wheatandtares.org/15116/speak-girl-speak-female-input-in-councils-weekend-poll/


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/12/amy-davis-roth_n_5813070.html


http://www.buzzfeed.com/catesevilla/listen-and-believe#2a68n38

[seabeyond]

15. yup. ism. you are so right on. now it is so, in the face, people simply cannot pretend,

anymore.

and that is pissing others off all the more.

[niyad]

19. and that is wonderful news to hear.

[seabeyond]

20. woman.... how are you doing? good to see you.

i have been spending internet time in your area and i always think of you.

[niyad]

21. doing okay here. computer problems, so not spending much time

online. but, borrowing a friend's today. how does the hunt go?

[seabeyond]

30. still sittin in wait, and i do it so well. yet, looking to wrap shit up

by the end of 2014, surely?????? lol.

[niyad]

17. k and r + gazillion. no matter how some try to deny it, we know

what these things are meant to do. guess what, guys?? some of us do not give a "flying fart in space" how you try to shut us up.

[jakeXT]

18. I'm surprised Apple is getting away with all of it at the moment

Eva Longoria says Apple employee accessed her private information to contact her by phone, email

...

According to the former "Desperate Housewives" star, the breach occurred after she visited an Apple Store in San Antonio, Tex.

Not only did an employee supposedly contact her via email and phone, but they offered to send her a gift.

"'I made a dress, I want to send it to you,'" Longoria recalled the person writing, adding, "'I work at the Apple Store here in San Antonio.'"

Obviously shocked by the message, the actress began questioning how they were able to contact her, asking, "Did someone give out my email? Or my phone?"

The individual reportedly responded saying, "I saw your phone number from your profile, I just wanted to call and say hi, I'm a fan."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/eva-longoria-reveals-iphone-mac-email-broken-article-1.1926123

Model Joy Corrigan is reportedly suing Apple after naked pictures of her were allegedly leaked via iCloud.

...

Corrigan told TMZ that she allegedly informed Apple of the hacking in July, but claims that the organisation said she was victim of phishing and needed to change her password.

She says she followed instructions, only for more images to be circulated days later. She claims that Apple responded in the same way. A spokesperson for the model or Apple could not be reached.


...

The model now plans to sue and is encouraging other victims to do the same.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/model-joy-corrigan-sues-apple-over-naked-icloud-photo-hacking-9733150.html

[seabeyond]

23. you wonder how a whole lot of powerful rich men are getting away with misogyny? lol.

thank you for the information. there is so much conversation in your post.

a world where we are being told to see thru mens eyes, not womens. and women are saying no.

[Orrex]

35. If Longoria didn't want that creep to call her, she shouldn't have owned a phone.

Simple!

[riqster]

36. Calling a spade a spade. Bravo.

[Eric J in MN]

37. Leaked nudes weren't called "terrorism" after it happened to Vanessa Hudgens or Scarlett Johansson.

But now that it happened to America's sweetheart, Jennifer Lawrence, it's called "terrorism."

[seabeyond]

38. wrong

[Eric J in MN]

39. Who called it "terrorism" after it happened to Vanessa Hudgens or Scarlett Johansson? NT

NT

[seabeyond]

41. 15 yrs ago is not today. that would be the first and simplest explanation. what is clear,

is actually discussing the issue would be a total waste of time and i do not embark on that fruitless wasteful journey, with anyone.

[Eric J in MN]

43. The leak of Scarlett Johansson nude photos was in 2011. NT

NT

[seabeyond]

46. whatever your purpose is here, i am not playing, i do not care

[seabeyond]

40. this is where i am having issues with your post. did you read the article? cause i can see no way

for you to make that statement having read the article. has nothing to do with what you posted.

[Eric J in MN]

42. I read your excerpt. NT

NT

[pnwmom]

44. It simply wasn't recognized then, but it's all part of the same pattern, obviously. n/t

[Eric J in MN]

45. Should people who posted hacked-and-leaked photos of nude celebrities be charged with terrorism

...and put in prison for decades?

[seabeyond]

47. put them in fuckin prison. you betcha. criminal behavior. lock em up

not to mention the totally non prosecutionable scum bag, bottom feeders they are.

[Eric J in MN]

48. For decades? NT

NT

[pnwmom]

49. There are different levels of all crimes, including terrorism. So, no, they shouldn't go to prison

for decades.

But there should be penalties significant enough to deter.

[ismnotwasm]

68. So true

A friend of mines son got in a lot of trouble for calling in a bomb threat because his ex-girlfriend was leaving with their child on a plane. Holy hell that caused trouble. He tried to blame it on her too. Dumbass. He's spent a couple months in so far and was just released. I don't know what further repercussions may be. Bet he doesn't get to fly commercial

[ismnotwasm]

51. Your seem to be here to derail the conversation

Why?

.. Clearly the answer to your question is no, but a few months in jail is appropriate, unless of course, hacked pictures turn up on porn sites and are integrated into pornography, then it's a form of virtual sexual assault and they should be sentenced to no less than 5 years along with a hefty fine.

[Eric J in MN]

53. Expressing a contrary opinion isn't "derailing."

This is a discussion board, not an agreement board.

[ismnotwasm]

54. Well perhaps.

If you are responding to the title.


So is that your only insight into stolen nude pictures? Argue against the premise of the title, which is practically rhetorical?

[Eric J in MN]

56. It isn't just the title.

The author writes about posting the celebrity nude photos, "This is a form of terrorism." I disagree.

[ismnotwasm]

60. What would you prefer it to be called

If you wrote the article?

[Eric J in MN]

63. It's hacking. NT

NT

[ismnotwasm]

64. And the personal and social repercussion for the persons involved?

What would you call that?

[seabeyond]

66. this article has gone beyond talking about merely hacking, talking about a social structure that is

being created, as a whole, to attack women ....

[ismnotwasm]

69. He didn't read the article

He said he just read the excerpt. He is objecting to the word "terrorism" and apparently he isn't thinking past Guantanamo Bay.

[LanternWaste]

83. Hence, you're not taking exception with the actual premise of the article, merely the use of idioms

Hence, you're not taking exception with the actual premise of the article, merely the use of idioms and phrasing? That's quite the academic, if irrelevant addition to the conversation you've allowed us all...

[seabeyond]

84. i really wish more would take serious thought with what this article is saying.

to address the actual issues, we need to see and understand what is happening. thanks lantern.

[Eric J in MN]

85. Calling hacking "terrorism" is the premise of the article. NT

NT

[LanternWaste]

86. The premise is calling "deliberately outrageous acts designed to create a spectacle and to instill

What then is specifically false with the following statement?
"These are deliberately outrageous acts designed to create a spectacle and to instill fear in a target population - in other words, terrorism..."


"Calling hacking "terrorism" is the premise of the article."
Incorrect. The premise is calling "deliberately outrageous acts designed to create a spectacle and to instill fear in a target population" terrorism.


Additionally, I failed to see where the author equivocates terrorism with *only* the legal definition of terrorism (as implied by your responses), as informally, the actions falls well within the standard of the word in and of itself. You will of course, point that out for us, yes?

[Eric J in MN]

87. The hackers weren't trying to spread fear. NT

NT

[seabeyond]

88. merely a thing to use, not a human. yes. it is clear the message. that is precisely what they are

saying. and all the men not involved in the hacking, but feel their right to get off on the picture, and make lewd and vulgar comments about the womens personal pictures, with out consent from the women, absolutely having no regard what so ever for a womans consent, send the message loudly, supporting the bottom feeder and their actions.

yes. it takes the whole to create what the article is talking about. you have to step beyond only the littlest of point that you want to allow.

[LanternWaste]

96. Your allegation rather than an objective analysis. And yet it does indeed, spread fear.

Your allegation rather than an objective analysis. And yet it does indeed, spread fear.

Hence, your subjective interpretation of the phrase, and inference of the objective of the act merely illustrates your bias.

[Orrex]

50. That's a meaningless objection.

By your reasoning:
When Bob ran a stop light in 2013, it wasn't called a moving violation by the cop who saw him do it; therefore running a stop light can never be called a moving violation.

[Eric J in MN]

52. There have been lots of celebrities whose photos were leaked previously.

They weren't as popular as Jennifer Lawrence.

People are letting their fondness for Jennifer Lawrence lead them to treat this as a crisis, when they didn't treat previous cases as a crisis.

[ismnotwasm]

55. Times are changing

You will understand in retrospect

[JTFrog]

57. And the guy who hacked Scarlett Johansson is doing a decade in prison.

What exactly is your point? That he shouldn't have been sent to jail? Or that people didn't care enough because he only got 10 years?

[Eric J in MN]

61. People convicted of terrorism get decades in prison, not one decade.

Calling it "terrorism" means calling for harsher punishment.

[JTFrog]

62. Oh for fuck's sake.

I see you really have no point here.

Thanks for playing.

[Eric J in MN]

71. If you're referring to me, I never wrote anything of the sort. NT

NT

[seabeyond]

73. werent you in the continuous threads defending the right to view the pictures and ignoring the women

lack of consent in stealing the things?

what was your position at the start of the whole picture thing. and granted. that has nothing to do with my OP. nor the explanation of terrorism or article as a whole.

[Eric J in MN]

74. This is the only DU thread on this subject I've posted in. NT

NT

[ismnotwasm]

75. That seems to be true

I can't find any other posts on the topic.

So what's really bugging you I think is a perception of the use of the word terrorism, when we still have people locked up in Guantanamo, the patriot act is n full force and my guess is you would like the word to be be a little more regulated in use-- am I close?

[Eric J in MN]

77. Yes, I want the word "terrorism" to be used in a limited way. NT

NT

[seabeyond]

78. it is being used in the manner it is defined. not your way, but the proper manner. nt

[ismnotwasm]

79. Ok I get your objection now

I even understand it-- I don't agree, but I understand.


I figured it was something like that after I searched you posts. I think you did miss the point of the article, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

[LanternWaste]

97. Dictionaries want something else. Let's defer to them, hmmm?

Dictionaries want something else. Let's defer to them, hmmm? Limiting a word to only its legal use is rather constricting... however, I do see the ethical convenience it affords you in this context.

[seabeyond]

76. ahhhh. i believe i was mixing you up with another. at least he has an interest in womens issues.

now that you make me aware, i am really wondering your point here. i misstepped from the very beginning. i should have ignored you from the first post. i see. thank you.

[seabeyond]

65. now you are holding tight to the term terrorism. here is a simple definition for you.

noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

the POINT. what is happening with women, on line is the very definition of terrorism and it was clearly defined and explained in the article.

[Orrex]

58. Refresh my memory, because I haven't followed the prior examples too closely.

When did we previously see the theft and release of hundreds of photos of dozens of female celebrities?

I recall isolated incidents here and there, as well as dubiously "leaked" sex tapes, but I don't remember a previous event similar in scope to the current scandal. The scale makes a big difference.


Your apparent animosity toward Ms. Lawrence is causing you to nitpick, apparently pointlessly.

[seabeyond]

59. what a stupid conclusion you give to a well argued article. cause people like this woman? really?

that is what you conclude? i do not know the woman. i know she is a woman, minding her own business, and some creeps hacked her info, gave it to the public, and hte public feels they have a right to something she did not give consent on being seen. the whole argument for men jacking off to porn, is consent. there is none here. and now you dismiss her lack of consent cause YOU feel i like the woman? i do not watch tv. i do not watch movies. i do not give a crap about her popularity. the issue is beyond that and YA... it is derailing to suggest the only issue here is her popularity. really? that is your well thought out argument to creeps abusing her right to keep her personal pictures to herself?

first.

second. that is a minimal part of the whole discussion on the article i put up. ya. derailing.

[seabeyond]

82. i wanna kick this cause i really like the article. nt

[nomorenomore08]

89. There really is an implied aspect of intimidation to it. Somewhat similar to the rape/murder threats

directed at women online. The people who do these things want to intimidate and silence women who express opinions they don't like, or even women they simply perceive as insufficiently submissive.

[ismnotwasm]

90. I think that last line covers a lot of ground as far as the 'why'

"Insufficiently submissive"---give the word submissive its broadest term, and there you have it, from "mansplaining" to outright abuse.

It would be interesting to see a psychological study on it.

[seabeyond]

91. interesting. and i would also like to explore, the women that do not intimidate.

i know there have been times in my life that there has been male intimidation to submission and i do not see it until replaying in the mind, saying.... oh. oh.... i was suppose to be intimidate. my bad.

i think that would be interesting.

[ismnotwasm]

92. Yeah

one of the things about having the father I have, (tried to teach me there were no "real men" around anymore, and this 40 years ago, among other gems---the manipulative ass) is I don't intimidate well. And like you it kind of goes over my head, unless someone is trying real hard. Then I'm all like motherfucker...

[seabeyond]

93. lmao.... +1. two different man got us to the same point. OR

is that simply who we are.

hence the study.

[freshwest]

94. K&R

[seabeyond]

95. woman.

just sayin....