Photo via Robert F. Bukaty/APIn case you missed it, here is a gem of a clip from Scott Brown's acceptance speech. Did the Senator-elect show his possible sexist side by offering his daughters up as objects to the entire nation? Or was it just a super creepy mistake? Typically, being the child of a politician gives the masses all the permission they need to critique and objectify freely, so all Brown did was speed the process along.
Unsurprisingly, the comment boards lit up in response with disgusting posts from anonymous creeps letting the world know what they would want to do and to which of the daughters.
Here is my challenge:
Commenters, man up and use your real name when you tell us which condiments you want to see us slathered in.
I strongly believe that if anonymity were banned, over 98% of the crap posted would go away out of shame. But as long as this trash floats freely on the internet it just perpetuates the impression that misogyny is a accepted pillar of our society. If you don't believe in your words enough to go on record with them... why are you still typing?
CLARIFICATION: I was challenging Gawker, etc.'s readers, not you. While we're flattered you want to slather us in condiments, we were hoping to get somewhat away from the whole objectification thing.
Why still type? Because people like to vent private feelings (however twisted and impolite they may be) into the public sphere without having everyone know the source of those feelings. Banning anonymity will not make misogyny disappear (though point taken that it might reduce it to some extent if public misogyny begets more misogyny).
ReplyDeleteAlso, when you ask about why people choose to post anonymously, look in the mirror. You've chosen to blog under an alias, and I figure you've mainly advertised this blog to friends and friend's friends. You did not choose to blog under your real name and announce to ALL of your former/(current?) classmates, professional associates, and older relatives that you were blogging.
Starting from a point of less antagonism (because come on: it was the Democrats' seat to lose), I see the comment as analogous to your parents announcing your single status at a dinner party because they're concerned you're not dating. (I've not had this happen, but more because of a lack of dinner parties than a lack of parental focus on such things.) It's awkward and weird (ESPECIALLY when in such a broad forum), but it's not like he has a website set up to date his daughter in exchange for a campaign contribution. I'm confident this guy would have done the same thing if he had sons.
ReplyDeleteBut even forgiving the politician for being weird, I agree that the subsequent internet comments are pervy and wrong. It's the internet; what do you expect? The sad reality is that there will always be some idiot spewing garbage that you would spend your life shouting down: that's free speech. Judging from talk radio and Fox News (at least as I've seen on the Daily Show clips), lots of people say ridiculous things without any hope of anonymity.
But to respond to your challenge: I would go for slathering you in chocolate sauce, but as sexy (?) as the idea of having an excuse to lick you all over your body might be, that seems like a disturbing amount of chocolate sauce intake even for your svelte form.
i think those kinds of comments will be said. Anonymity just allows us to see the comment as well. it's the kind of thing that some guy is saying in a locker room somewhere to his buddies. i'd rather allow anonymity because i want to hear what people think, however disgusting it may be, it's still honest. And they are probably not embarrassed to have their mother's overhear- a misogynist tends to be raised in a misogynist household, so mom's probably heard similar remarks from dad. i think people are more scared that an employer will see, since most people act at least a little well-mannered in front of their boss.
ReplyDelete