AH - not a safe space

[LazyAssReader]

Taking something out of context is real manipulation don't ya think.

Nope, It's just not that statement. I see what she is doing. Time will tell.

 

[TxRad]

Nope, It's just not that statement. I see what she is doing. Time will tell.

I have a tinfoil hat concession over in one of Freddie's threads if you want to make a purchase.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

News of this ground-breaking case broke at the start of the week. It means in the UK it’s possible anyone could prosecute for being coerced into ‘sexting’. ‘Anyone’ includes writers who were asked to email explicit nude photos in return for editing stories.

People here are authors and should know what words like coerced means. Coerced means forced, not asked. There was a gun to your head; you were being blackmailed in a way that would lead to permanent harm; someone was withholding your life-sustaining medicine. Those are coercion.

Authors here will testify that I've never hit on them. I'm not in favor of harassment but I am pretty rigorous about words, which is why I'm flipping out over your paragraph. It's utter nonsense.

If someone here does actually ask you to flash your tits on camera in exchange for help with stories, they are not coercing you. They are entering into a business deal with you, an exchange of labor for labor. It's a sensationally stupid deal for the male/editor, because he's exchanging hours of work for a one minute effort on your part; and to be perfectly honest if you agree to this amazingly unbalanced deal (I'm assuming he's worth something as an editor) the quality of what he receives is likely to be poorer than what he can get for free on the internet. The guy offering this deal is an idiot, but what he's not doing is coercing you. Your response should be that while you recognise the deal is a good one in terms of relative time commitment, you find it too intimate to enact and you put a higher value on your tits than he clearly does, so you must unregretfully decline and will in fact set ignore on him.

Problem. Solved.

Coerce? You're not required to be here. You're not required to ask for anyone's help. You're not required to give away your real name or location. Or even to interact with people you don't like. "Ignore" means that no one can coerce anyone here. Anonymity means you cannot be blackmailed or manipulated unless you want to be.

I don't mean to sound all Ayn Rand - I hate her stuff - but if we've entered the age where "Let's have a look at your tits" is actionable, when you had the trivial ability to block his advances and never deal with him again, it's a mad world.

Let me put it this way. If someone legitimately harasses you in the real world, you can go to the courts. What can get handed out is a Restraining Order, wherein they shouldn't interact with you anymore. But here on the net you can get a restraining order at WILL, one that works perfectly, no court needed, with three clicks. (Two, on better websites). If you're harassed by anyone more than once here, you're not a victim, you're an enabler. How can the law help you when you already have access to something more powerful than they can offer as remedy? What can the law do when you're unwilling to take the barest minimum action to stand up for yourself? Where is the personal responsibility here, the basic exercise of the need and right to choose who you associate with?

At this point I'd like a list of these male predators who run around here getting people to take intimate pictures in exchange for hours of writing time. The accusation's been made - let's see the evidence. Let's hear why this was actually a problem for someone and why Ignore didn't solve the problem. Because as stated this thread makes no sense to me.

Maybe I'm just agog because I've had readers sent me notes offering nudes (and sometimes rather more) in exchange for nothing but reading my stories. I had to put a note in my bio to chill the effect (mostly out of fear that some were under 18, in part because a few needed to lose weight and I don't need that kind of disincentive to my writing.) In other words the commodity being discussed here, nudes, doesn't seem to me at least to be in short supply, and any writer here trying to strike bad bargains to get them seems laughable. So forgive me if I just don't get it and demand to know details of actual cases here. If they pressured you you certainly won't mind naming names, and doing so might be the best way to discourage the behaviour.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

People here are authors and should know what words like coerced means. Coerced means forced, not asked. There was a gun to your head; you were being blackmailed in a way that would lead to permanent harm; someone was withholding your life-sustaining medicine. Those are coercion.

Authors here will testify that I've never hit on them. I'm not in favor of harassment but I am pretty rigorous about words, which is why I'm flipping out over your paragraph. It's utter nonsense.

If someone here does actually ask you to flash your tits on camera in exchange for help with stories, they are not coercing you. They are entering into a business deal with you, an exchange of labor for labor. It's a sensationally stupid deal for the male/editor, because he's exchanging hours of work for a one minute effort on your part; and to be perfectly honest if you agree to this amazingly unbalanced deal (I'm assuming he's worth something as an editor) the quality of what he receives is likely to be poorer than what he can get for free on the internet. The guy offering this deal is an idiot, but what he's not doing is coercing you. Your response should be that while you recognise the deal is a good one in terms of relative time commitment, you find it too intimate to enact and you put a higher value on your tits than he clearly does, so you must unregretfully decline and will in fact set ignore on him.

Problem. Solved.

Coerce? You're not required to be here. You're not required to ask for anyone's help. You're not required to give away your real name or location. Or even to interact with people you don't like. "Ignore" means that no one can coerce anyone here. Anonymity means you cannot be blackmailed or manipulated unless you want to be.

I don't mean to sound all Ayn Rand - I hate her stuff - but if we've entered the age where "Let's have a look at your tits" is actionable, when you had the trivial ability to block his advances and never deal with him again, it's a mad world.

Let me put it this way. If someone legitimately harasses you in the real world, you can go to the courts. What can get handed out is a Restraining Order, wherein they shouldn't interact with you anymore. But here on the net you can get a restraining order at WILL, one that works perfectly, no court needed, with three clicks. (Two, on better websites). If you're harassed by anyone more than once here, you're not a victim, you're an enabler. How can the law help you when you already have access to something more powerful than they can offer as remedy? What can the law do when you're unwilling to take the barest minimum action to stand up for yourself? Where is the personal responsibility here, the basic exercise of the need and right to choose who you associate with?

At this point I'd like a list of these male predators who run around here getting people to take intimate pictures in exchange for hours of writing time. The accusation's been made - let's see the evidence. Let's hear why this was actually a problem for someone and why Ignore didn't solve the problem. Because as stated this thread makes no sense to me.

Maybe I'm just agog because I've had readers sent me notes offering nudes (and sometimes rather more) in exchange for nothing but reading my stories. I had to put a note in my bio to chill the effect (mostly out of fear that some were under 18, in part because a few needed to lose weight and I don't need that kind of disincentive to my writing.) In other words the commodity being discussed here, nudes, doesn't seem to me at least to be in short supply, and any writer here trying to strike bad bargains to get them seems laughable. So forgive me if I just don't get it and demand to know details of actual cases here. If they pressured you you certainly won't mind naming names, and doing so might be the best way to discourage the behaviour.

Long ago a gal I dated made it clear she wanted to fuck me and other guys. I said NO, and that was the end of us. But what she told her daddy was how jealous I was. He confronted me on the phone for being an asshole, and I let it go without spilling the beans with the details of what his baby really wanted.

 

[MichaelinChina]

If someone bothers you set ignore. In email, create a block. Anyone being bothered is consenting to being bothered, when it comes to forums.


("Unsafe" is what happens to women in Iran, Kosovo and Afghanistan. On the internet it's an annoyance that can be mitigated).

QUOTE]

I don't know about that!

Today's News:

#EndViolenceAgainstWomen: Secret Facebook group names men it says troll women online

from the article:

'I'm ashamed to be honest, it shows it does silence women'

Journalist and television personality Tracey Spicer is a member of the group and has endorsed its strategy.

She said ashamedly, trolls had silenced her.

"Ever since I started writing opinion pieces ... I noticed some of the vicious, hateful, scary comments that would come [on social media]," she told the ABC.

"I put up with it for years and thought it was normal until a couple of pieces I wrote got attention from the MRA — the Men's Rights Association — in the US.

"I started to get some really terrifying stuff."

....

Spicer said the group knew where she lived and what school her children went to, threatening her on Twitter, Facebook and email.

"I spoke to a friend of mine who is very high up in New South Wales Police and he said, 'look, you can complain about them ... but once you do that it can fire them up'," she said.

Spicer said she made the decision to be less "strident" in her viewpoints to protect her family.

 

[NaokoSmith]

REALLY!
Manipulation at its best in this thread.

Taking something out of context is real manipulation don't ya think.

Actually LazyAss is right. I am an arch manipulator.

The difference between me and trolls is that I like to manipulate to make a supportive and creative mood, not to disrupt. I know how they operate because I operate like that, for different ends. I don't undermine people, identify their weaknesses and stick a knife in them for a laugh. If someone suffered a bereavement or is in difficulties, I prefer to offer them a virtual tissue or a . I like to get people together and have group fun devil: - ooops, I mean in a celibate writerly way ), rather than get into a group and break it up in the hopes that that makes me look more special.

 

[NaokoSmith]

People here are authors and should know what words like coerced means.

There is a distinction between these four things:
violent rape
non-consensual sex
coerced sex
consensual sex

The issue that you have is distinguishing between non-consensual, coerced and consensual.

Consensual is when both parties are up for it, obviously. An example of non-consensual is where one person is incapable of saying Yes but would have said No if they could. For example, they are too drunk to say Yes or No.

Coerced is where someone inveigles another person into sex or to give images when if they were to ask up front in an equal situation, the person would say No. For example, a man in a group of writers who is highly regarded, he has a position of some power in the group, pressures women in the group to let him edit for them. He persuades them that it is normal to be flirty and sexy in messages, and although they feel uncomfortable they trust him on this, as an established group member. They may value being part of the group and not want to be bumped out of it.

If the man is smart he will make sure they don't privately talk to each other to say: "He is hitting on me and I'm not sure about it." "He is hitting on me too, I don't like it." If that happens, the women may out him. But until it does, he can coerce them into things they think might be 'normal' in the group, because they aren't confident to ask outright: "Is this really OK?"

I would like to think the world has reached a stage where women are as empowered as you think we are. However I get a lot of messages which tell me women often agree to some sexual act they didn't really want to provide, when they are pressured by men. Research I have done suggests girls in school still get accused of being frigid, lesbian, mean etc etc if they will not, for example, send a boy photos of their breasts. That is coercion.

 

[sr71plt]

Since you have chosen to personally attack me in this thread beyond anything that was posted to this thread, NS, and the mod hasn't deleted it under the personal attack rule, I feel free to respond.

Harassment means demeaning or sexual remarks or behaviour which cause someone to lose confidence and not be able to fulfil their work properly.

Bullshit. Harassment exists regardless of the effect of it on anyone else and it's much broader than you claim here.

It does not mean playground insults.

Bullshit. Yes it can. As arrogant as you are (and showed to be in your dhiahrea of posts to this thread overnight), you aren't the arbitrator of what harassment is and isn't.

I have been called a lot of names on here.

Bullshit. You've been treated with kid gloves with a lot of posters going along with your silly, giggly posts, and the site tolerating you pimping your off-site blog here in violation of Forum Rule 6.

However when I was told at work, that I was not capable of teaching statistics, doing research properly or understanding equalities data, I took out an official grievance. The men who did that in a sexist and racist manner got badly burned when senior management came down on them. I got material compensation because what I experienced was harrassment.

Yes, I'm sure they tip toe around you at work. I think you're probably the classic arrogant work-place know-it-all, ready to sue at the drop of a hat.

Sr71plt, things you say suggest you are in a position of considerable privilege: a married white male with a very senior and well-paid position. Yet you like to come on here, pretend to misunderstand someone’s posts, get them embroiled in an argument and then say that they are victimising you. WTF is wrong with you that you love to play the victim like that? At least one person has commented in this thread that they have seen writers they respected behaving like pouty children on here, naming you as one of them.

Bullshit, pot/kettle. Who took this thread up again when it was dead? Whose trying to embroil the forum into a woman poster not having to take any responsibility herself for being here and how she deports herself here? Glad you did, though, because I think Hands closed you down perfectly. (not that you paid any attention to what he posted.)

And where do you get off dictating to me how I can behave on the forum? Who appointed you God? I haven't gone after you on the forum and you're such a silly goose it would have been easy to do.

At least one person has commented in this thread that they have seen writers they respected behaving like pouty children on here, naming you as one of them.

And now I name you, so there's one for you too. But then you can run back to your AH self-proclaimed "best writers of erotica ever" voting bloc (with another member of the bloc, Sheablue clapping for you) and get all of the false strokes you need.

I have always respected you as a senior member of the US military. If you really are such a person, the fact that you can’t de-escalate a little name-calling on an online chat board says everything about why the military seem incapable of resolving world-wide violence.

I can't help it if you insist on being ignorant on this point. I have repeatedly posted that I never was in the military (but I'm a 1988 graduate of the U.S. Army War College--figure that one out). This comes from the SR71 pilot business, and, like others, you just can't get your head around that one (and it's irrelevant to writing erotica and posting it to Lit. anyway. I don't bring it up, and those who do, like you have, do to engage in personal attack).

Zeb, in thinking he was attacking me, explained that one months ago. The SR71 (like the U2 before it) was developed and the planes are paid for by the CIA. They are maintained and fielded by the Air Force. They are flown by either CIA civilian pilots or Air Force military pilots, demanding on what they are flying over. It's an act of war under the Geneva Convention for a military pilot to fly a recon plane without permission over another country--it isn't for a civilian pilot to do so. Francis Gary Powers was a civilian when his U2 was shot down over Russia (read his Operational Overflight.) Zeb came up with a list of SR71 pilots here to point out I wasn't on the list. No, Zeb, SR71plt wasn't listed D). That anyone was on the list was because they now were dead. The KICKER, though D again), was that nearly everyone listed was listed as a civilian (read CIA). So, you don't have to have been military to fly recon planes for the U.S. government.

Got that in your widdle brain now?

Other than that, you can take your smug personal attack and stick it where the sun don't shine.

Now, since you can't let this thread go and want to engage in personal attack, over to you.

 

[lovecraft68]

Harassment means demeaning or sexual remarks or behaviour which cause someone to lose confidence and not be able to fulfil their work properly. It does not mean playground insults. I have been called a lot of names on here. I don’t give a sh!t about it, in fact some of the insults have given me a good laugh. However when I was told at work, that I was not capable of teaching statistics, doing research properly or understanding equalities data, I took out an official grievance. The men who did that in a sexist and racist manner got badly burned when senior management came down on them. I got material compensation because what I experienced was harrassment.

Sr71plt, things you say suggest you are in a position of considerable privilege: a married white male with a very senior and well-paid position. Yet you like to come on here, pretend to misunderstand someone’s posts, get them embroiled in an argument and then say that they are victimising you. WTF is wrong with you that you love to play the victim like that? At least one person has commented in this thread that they have seen writers they respected behaving like pouty children on here, naming you as one of them.

I have always respected you as a senior member of the US military. If you really are such a person, the fact that you can’t de-escalate a little name-calling on an online chat board says everything about why the military seem incapable of resolving world-wide violence.

Are you talking to yourself?

 

[lovecraft68]

If someone bothers you set ignore. In email, create a block. Anyone being bothered is consenting to being bothered, when it comes to forums.


("Unsafe" is what happens to women in Iran, Kosovo and Afghanistan. On the internet it's an annoyance that can be mitigated).

QUOTE]

I don't know about that!

Today's News:

#EndViolenceAgainstWomen: Secret Facebook group names men it says troll women online

from the article:

'I'm ashamed to be honest, it shows it does silence women'

Journalist and television personality Tracey Spicer is a member of the group and has endorsed its strategy.

She said ashamedly, trolls had silenced her.

"Ever since I started writing opinion pieces ... I noticed some of the vicious, hateful, scary comments that would come [on social media]," she told the ABC.

"I put up with it for years and thought it was normal until a couple of pieces I wrote got attention from the MRA — the Men's Rights Association — in the US.

"I started to get some really terrifying stuff."

....

Spicer said the group knew where she lived and what school her children went to, threatening her on Twitter, Facebook and email.

"I spoke to a friend of mine who is very high up in New South Wales Police and he said, 'look, you can complain about them ... but once you do that it can fire them up'," she said.

Spicer said she made the decision to be less "strident" in her viewpoints to protect her family.

Go post that in all of LJ Reloaded's threads....he thinks the MRA are a group created to protect themselves from women.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--I0-IDL96--/1813aqov5wc2jjpg.jpg

 

[Handley_Page]

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--I0-IDL96--/1813aqov5wc2jjpg.jpg

Operation Castle ?

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Operation Castle ?

sjp made me reach for the button.