When does criticism become harassment?

jtaylor73003 · 2015-11-01T02:20:04+00:00

Why is so many people okay with one party being a jerk, but if you respond in jerkish manner then only the responder is the jerk?

Lethn · 2015-11-01T07:47:15+00:00

The problem is you're looking at this from a logical point of view, to be blunt, a lot of these feminists we're having to deal with are fucking lunatics and manipulative sociopaths. They will quite happily bend definitions, lie about mathematical and historical evidence, all to further their personal goals and convince other people that they are being harassed.

Either that or they're taking one or two people who are spamming them with death threats and then trying to claim it's the whole of the internet which we all know would be bullshit either way. I don't blame you for wanting to figure out where they're actually coming from but these guys are delusional and paranoid, they see rapists and misognysts in every corner and really belong in a mental hospital and not given a political platform.

GoHoMoThrow · 2015-11-01T02:48:14+00:00

To a woman, harassment is when she says it is, and HR directives and some laws are now based on that.

Remember, your rights end where her fee-fee's begin.

ghebert001 · 2015-11-01T04:56:30+00:00

It should only be considered harassment once it is made clear that the behavior is unwanted but the person engaging in the behavior continues.

GrimB0LD · 2015-11-01T09:58:49+00:00

misrepresents what the other party believes

I would add the word "deliberately", because people can misrepresent the words of others because they haven't understood them.

MalibuStayZ · 2015-11-01T17:27:45+00:00

Ad hominems definitely don't make it harassement. If I say "I don't care about your medical advice, because you're not a doctor", it's not harassement. Neither if I say "I don't believe a word you say, because you lied to me so many times before."

Hzle · 2015-11-01T22:57:06+00:00

One slightly OT thing that drives me mad: you'll all have seen it. There's a controversial post or news item on a gender politics issue, and plenty of lively debate under the line..

It's all good - but there's ALWAYS someone who says "I'm concerned about the misogyny evident in some of these comments...blah blah"

There's a comment like this - spineless, passive aggressive, trying to put social pressure on people - in every gender issues comment section. (edit: the comment is never a response to anything, so you don't know who they are talking about, it just sits there, lol)

mensrightsresources · 2015-11-01T04:35:48+00:00

The question should also be asked of, "Should harassment be used, by the person being harassed, to deflect criticism? Is it a legitimate deflection/defense?" (no), and it should be said that by making yourself a public figure, especially on the internet, you're putting yourself at risk for harassment. Lots of people don't seem to realize that 99% of threats are empty. That doesn't make them right, but it is an important thing to know. Take threats against Erin Pizzey when she began talking out about reciprocal violence, and opening a men's shelter: she recieved multiple bomb threats to the point where she had to re-route her mail to the bomb unit before receiving it (they told her to do this, this was not something she wanted to do), and her dogs were killed. This is harassment you should worry about - if the threat is legitimate, if they make specific plans to do something and mention where you'll be, etc. Then you go to the police, you do not make it public (discourages people doing it for attention), and you be safe. Random insults/empty threats should be reported, the user blocked, and ignored.

oneiorosgripwontstfu · 2015-11-01T15:53:07+00:00

Your definition of harassment is flawed. It's not bad faith arguments, acting out of frustration, or pissing the other person off. Continuing to pursue a party a lot after contact has been broken off & they're not answering you, maybe. Blocking so you can badmouth the person behind their back, maybe. Following them from site to site (facebook to reddit to twitter, for instance) probably qualifies.

Calling someone a dumb fuck, pointing out that the what their argument means to you isn't how they're representing it (for instance, the way feminists defining women by victimhood relies on a belief that women are weak and stupid in comparison to men, and falls apart without it - which feminists wrongfully would call a misrepresentation), or ridiculing the ridiculous... none of those things are actually harassment by nature. They might be aggressive behaviors at most - and even then, not necessarily unwarranted.

Out of your entire list, only threats (real ones, not "go die in a fire, asshole") or other illegal acts and inciting illegal acts remotely qualify as harassment. Fuck... if I thought of the rest of that as "harassment" I'd never get online.

Hzle · 2015-11-01T22:52:59+00:00

My initial thought is that your concepts of harrassment are still liable to misinterpretation. So you haven't cleared up the issue.

There will still be plenty of scenarios where one side will claim they are arguing the case - and the other will say "you're misrepresenting my position/insulting me!"

Harassment should only be in RL - or if someone is following you around in every thread and forum you comment on, pestering you.

Only ban something if you absolutely have to. Usually, you don't have to..

TheDude41 · 2015-11-02T05:48:56+00:00

When they follow you to your home, follow you around your workplace, or around your real-world friends or family.

CraftyDrac · 2015-11-02T13:42:03+00:00

How about "going beyond a block", e.g making a new account?

wisty · 2015-11-03T04:22:56+00:00

Criticism becomes harassment when someone is no longer a participant, but a target.

For example, saying "That woman debating against free speech is full of shit" is criticism, if she can promptly reply "It's a debate, you have to argue for your side, even if you don't completely agree. Do you think Jack Gleeson is an asshole based on his portrayal of Joffrey in Game of Thrones?"

The right to reply is pretty important. By replying, people can ensure they aren't misrepresented, and they are harder to dehumanise.

So "no platforming" is a pretty big driver of harassment. MRAs aren't given a right to reply, so they are unfairly targeted. And their criticisms aren't responded to, so they become more polarised.

This is why free speech is important - by engaging in a civil discussion, both sides can come to a common understanding.

iainmf · 2015-11-01T02:42:26+00:00

Harassment is ongoing, unwanted, deliberate provocation.

mwobuddy · 2015-11-01T02:49:02+00:00

Shit, I must be getting harassed all the time by people saying shitty things about me in this sub when they disagree with me. Or maybe harassment means much more than just ad homs and personal inults/personal abuse.

The reason "I know it when I see it" and "depends on the personal feelings of both the target and the majority of people" is because harassment is okay or not okay depending on the target of it.

Westborough Baptist Church saying god hates fags? They're free to be harassed and systemically ridiculed and personally attacked. Its everyone's right. Feminist getting the same treatment? Its harassment. I think somewhere in "real" law, the term is "by a reasonable person". If the majority of people who are considered reasonable think its okay to say WBCers are pieces of shit who should die, it wouldn't be harassment. The mob rules supreme in this case, since many reasonable people are okay with this kind of thing vs VBC, thereby making it non-harassing, since the premise is that "reasonable people feel it is or is not harassing" makes its mark.

The entire ruleset of harassment, both verbal and physical/sexual, is completely arbitrary past repeated and body/life threatening incidents.

chocoboat · 2015-11-01T06:36:16+00:00

I think one further way to define what is and isn't harrassment is "would these unwanted messages stop if I stopped telling people that they are bad and that their hobby is bad?"

In a more rational world people would just ignore Anita Sarkeesian instead of getting angry and calling her names, but unfortunately we don't. But I don't think that behavior counts as harrassment if it's in direct response to having someone accuse you of being a woman-hater who's afraid that their hobby is being invaded by someone different from them, and being told that their hobby brainwashes people into becoming evil and hateful.

zktr · 2015-11-02T20:47:40+00:00

Your definition of harassment leaves out the 2 key defining aspects of actual harassment: repeated, and communicated as unwanted. Without both of these, it is NOT harassment, under any circumstances.

Hamakua · 2015-11-02T21:00:15+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	When does criticism become harassment?
Author	actingverystrangely
Upvotes	31
Comments	79
Date	November 1, 2015 1:55 AM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3r1ccv/when_does_criticism_become_harassment/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/when-does-criticism-become-harassment.968203 https://theredarchive.com/post/968203

Comments