It’s been months now since I wrote part 1, and I am still blocked by Jeffrey Carr. This makes me think that he doesn’t get it… get the whole “don’t do all-male panels,” and don’t “speak so disrespectfully about (and to) women in the community” thing.
And this isn’t just about how he treated Jamie — immediately after my blog post, on Twitter Carr questioned my professionalism, implied I was crazy, told me how to do my job and how to blog. And then blocked me.
I didn’t want to write about his ineptitude at finding speakers for his controversial panel for an outlet, because, frankly, I am not a big fan of the whole shaming industry that exists online these days. I was hoping a silly, relatively low-key personal blog post pointing out how problematic his behavior was would be enough. There is something to be said about how clearly out of touch he is with the community he was looking for speakers in, but again, coverage like that is not really my style.
After I posted part 1, I had a few women — professionals — tell me in private their issues with Carr. This made me feel a little better about my blog post, but the silence that resonated from the rest of the women in the industry was really disheartening. I tried to justify their silence with thoughts like …maybe their silence was because Jaime, who is a goddamn legend in that scene, is also a known troll? And the people who came to her defense (and mine) were also trolls and satirists? But if you’re not a troll in infosec, or understand them, then you don’t understand infosec. (Troll here is not to be misconstrued with cyberbully or stalker.)
And then I thought… maybe it is because with trolls, and Anonymous, you have to take anything they say with a grain of salt. Trolls and Anonymous like to manipulate the press for their own agenda, and while I saw some of that in the initial outcry, the intentions were valid and sincere. Even YAN came to Jaime’s defense.
Maybe it is because Carr has been in the scene for what looks like decades, and has worked with the US government and is therefore too big to criticize? Or is it a combination of all three?
I tried to find reasons for this silence, and it made me question myself, until I remembered this is a pattern in this particular community. When that man accused another man of raping his wife, and purchased the domain name of the accused where he posted his plea to the community, there was very little outcry, and no press about it. When that favorite academic was accused of sexual misconduct with his student last year, the community also responded atrociously. The same men who helped organize those Anonymous anti-rape ops spread the name of the victim, and if that wasn’t bad enough, sent threats to the literally 3 women that called out their hypocritical behavior. These women got rape threats too. The most vocal one had semi-nude photos of her shared online to shame her. It was disgusting.
The “sexism in tech” discussion has been raging online for years now, with the mainstream focus on Silicon Valley and the video game community. Both those sectors have vibrant and active women trying to make those industries better for women and minorities, and have made some substantial strides (even just in terms of public perception) in just a few years. The same could be said for the science community. And the men in those industries are actively listening, and trying.
But this community? Many don’t even want to hear it.
Conversation with Gabriella Coleman about her latest book “Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: The Many Faces of Anonymous”Posted: March 5, 2015
Here is the unedited 30 minute conversation/interview with Coleman, three times the length as the one published on CSM’s Passcode.
FE: I finally finished your book last night…. at 3 in the morning…. it’s a pretty long book… while I was reading it, it hit me that this book is really about everything that has to do with the modern Internet, so in that way it makes sense why it is so long… you have to provide context for all these different and new concepts that no one has really written about.
GC: that’s something that’s been interesting to see the reviews, a lot of them have been repetitive. It is about Anonymous, but it is about so much more….
FE: Like modern activism…
GC: yeah, and what it means for hackers… they’ve really coalesced into a major political force just in the last five or six years.
FE: I’m glad you brought the political activism angle, do you think there will ever be an Anonymous political party?
GC: I don’t think so, they’re going to continue in their guerrilla war fashion, but we will see more hackers in government, for sure. Anonymous has to be independent… there’s no way that they can overtly work with government…
FE: So, onto prepared questions… what does the media still get wrong about Anonymous?
GC: I am currently writing this article for this anthropology book about relationships with journalists, and how I came to see journalism differently over time, just as the same way Anonymous is not unanimous, the same can be said for journalism. There are much more local journalists, and some are fucked up, there are structural constraints, and it is the same for Anonymous.
GC: But basically, I do think a lot of journalists get it, and initially there was three things that were really difficult. Read the rest of this entry »
gamergate best thing for SJWs prop OH
fourth wave feminist, network net worth
infiltrate the media in acts
you will see, it is about ethics in video games
bullies in headlights, right-wing vultures punishing harlots, men
harassing from on high, opera tune twist the knife
SJWs in IRC chat rooms
who is spy and who is snitch,
who is Queen SJW riding in the night
on brooms of illusion, in flew ants and army
gamers defeated by women on TV, how pathetic
rings the inner sneer
consumer cultured in a petri dish, cap it all off
with a ban on matter and polarity tricks
grumble, shade and nod, in ether out of acorns and Briar Wood
a struggle to accept what they’ve been denying, lying
what balance is here
and your tea
are the same thing