Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Carol Moore dc]

I'd largely agree, but there are some men who you really can't tell if 
they are clueless to their bad behavior (which some are) or just 
pretending to be (which others are), even when you are with them in person.


On 5/12/2016 9:51 PM, JJ Marr wrote:

We shouldn't conflate "creepy" and "harassment" at all, to be honest.
Sure, plenty of things that are creepy are also harassment, but plenty
of things that are considered creepy are just poor social skills
(laughing inappropriately) and may even be due to health conditions
(greasy skin).

Harassment is a very serious allegation implying plenty of abuse, and
using the term in conjunction with "creepy" degrades it to a level not
befitting of what it truly is.

Also, saying "defining harassment" and then implying that the definition
of it is the "nature of creepiness" feels pretty discriminatory to those
who are less privileged in the area of social skills. Sometimes I don't
know when I'm talking about a subject for too long, and labelling that
"creepy" and implying it might be harassment seems to be crossing the
line for me.



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[JJ Marr]

We shouldn't conflate "creepy" and "harassment" at all, to be honest. Sure,
plenty of things that are creepy are also harassment, but plenty of things
that are considered creepy are just poor social skills (laughing
inappropriately) and may even be due to health conditions (greasy skin).

Harassment is a very serious allegation implying plenty of abuse, and using
the term in conjunction with "creepy" degrades it to a level not befitting
of what it truly is.

Also, saying "defining harassment" and then implying that the definition of
it is the "nature of creepiness" feels pretty discriminatory to those who
are less privileged in the area of social skills. Sometimes I don't know
when I'm talking about a subject for too long, and labelling that "creepy"
and implying it might be harassment seems to be crossing the line for me.
On May 10, 2016 12:01 PM, "Neotarf"  wrote:

A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]

Some highlights:

*"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No, telling a woman
how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially when you don’t have that
level of intimacy with her."

*"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the potential for
ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that because one’s creep-radar is
keyed towards finding potential threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s
behavior could make people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you, you’re left in a
state of anxious paralysis; you’re continually on edge trying to determine
just what the appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and now you’ve
made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you harm."

*"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring issues of
boundaries and demonstrating that they have more information about somebody
than they should." Example from Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying
at the Excalibur?" She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how
f*cking creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
insinuating he knows where she is?"

*From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and manages not
to cross it obviously knows where it is."

[1] http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Carol Moore dc]

A known woman discussing any issue in real life anywhere at all may turn 
into an online harassment issue.


Shall I dig up 20 or 30 links to women who've been harassed online by 
creepy guys because they discussed or disagreed with guys on ANY issue 
in real life, be it men in bathrooms, or violent video games played in 
living rooms, or some sexual harassment or assault that happened to them 
or a friend in real life?


On 5/12/2016 1:57 PM, Neotarf wrote:



@Carolmooredc, I don't see how that would be either an online harassment
issue or a Wikipedia issue, since on the internet, no one knows when
you're in the toilet.  Events likewise would be in the hands of the
event sponsor, although I did hear of one event where a man was
accompanied into the ladies room by a staff member in order to change a
baby diaper, as the men's room did not have the right facilities.

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Carol Moore dc
> wrote:

dare i say it... so one can see why a lot of women (and their male
relatives) are nervous about any guy who SAYS he's really a woman
getting into the bathrooms, fitting rooms, lock rooms, showers,
shelters and prisons with us...


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Nathan]

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Neotarf  wrote:

> I'm not quite sure how to answer JJ Marr and Nathan, but if you watched
> the Berkman panel I posted about earlier [1], the conclusion of the WMF
> harassment survey is that the effect of harassment on women in Wikipedia,
> is that they leave.
>
> And not to beat around the bush, for those who are not going to read the
> piece, the "certain topic" is sex, sex, and sex:
>
> "...behaviors that were seen as being sexual or having a sexual edge to
> them were far more likely to be creepy than more innocuous ones. Women,
> especially, noted that behaviors like unwanted sexual advances, constantly
> turning the conversation towards sex, requests for photos, dates and
> invading their personal space were signs that a person was creepy."
>
> So this goes back to defining harassment.  How do you tell the difference
> between someone who genuinely does not want to appear creepy, as in the
> hotel example, and someone who is deliberately skirting the boundaries, in
> order to harass people while flying under the radar.
>
> There is a long history of defining harassment and "hostile work
> environment" in employment situations.  For in-person interactions, there
> is a whole set of non-verbal signals that tell you when to back slowly
> away, the "odd smile" for example.  But obviously in online communications,
> you are not going to be able to see how someone smiles.  Harassment on the
> internet is something new, the old HR harassment definitions can't just be
> copy-pasted.
>
> And how far can you go in telling someone they have to adjust to something
> that creeps them out?  On enwiki, we have seen women advised to "keep a low
> profile" if they don't want to be photoshopped onto porn.  So the
> "encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is now "the encyclopedia that anyone
> can edit as long as they don't mind potential employers finding
> non-consensual pornographic images of them on the internet".
> Paradoxically, the WMF has gone the opposite direction from arbcom,
> particularly in their recent safe space event policy, although the means of
> enforcement are not very evident.
>
>
Interestingly the WMF harassment survey didn't specifically call out sexual
harassment as a type. Male and female respondents reported roughly similar
levels of harassment experienced, although those who responded as "other
gender" experienced significantly higher rates. Of the examples of
harassment given, many (when they occur on-wiki) are of the "block on
sight" type - assuming they are reported. Many were also not overtly sexual
in nature, although some call out gender in a way that might not qualify as
sexual harassment per se (one example is "Die CIS Scum!").  If harassment
is indeed a significant factor in the gender gap - and I don't think that
has been established - its not clear what strategies could result in real
progress in preventing harassment or ameliorating its effects.
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Neotarf]

I'm not quite sure how to answer JJ Marr and Nathan, but if you watched the
Berkman panel I posted about earlier [1], the conclusion of the WMF
harassment survey is that the effect of harassment on women in Wikipedia,
is that they leave.

And not to beat around the bush, for those who are not going to read the
piece, the "certain topic" is sex, sex, and sex:

"...behaviors that were seen as being sexual or having a sexual edge to
them were far more likely to be creepy than more innocuous ones. Women,
especially, noted that behaviors like unwanted sexual advances, constantly
turning the conversation towards sex, requests for photos, dates and
invading their personal space were signs that a person was creepy."

So this goes back to defining harassment.  How do you tell the difference
between someone who genuinely does not want to appear creepy, as in the
hotel example, and someone who is deliberately skirting the boundaries, in
order to harass people while flying under the radar.

There is a long history of defining harassment and "hostile work
environment" in employment situations.  For in-person interactions, there
is a whole set of non-verbal signals that tell you when to back slowly
away, the "odd smile" for example.  But obviously in online communications,
you are not going to be able to see how someone smiles.  Harassment on the
internet is something new, the old HR harassment definitions can't just be
copy-pasted.

And how far can you go in telling someone they have to adjust to something
that creeps them out?  On enwiki, we have seen women advised to "keep a low
profile" if they don't want to be photoshopped onto porn.  So the
"encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is now "the encyclopedia that anyone
can edit as long as they don't mind potential employers finding
non-consensual pornographic images of them on the internet".
Paradoxically, the WMF has gone the opposite direction from arbcom,
particularly in their recent safe space event policy, although the means of
enforcement are not very evident.


[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2016-April/006300.html

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Isarra Yos  wrote:

> Knowing what these traits are, even if they are uncontrollable, may also
> be useful for educating others about them. If someone is creeped out by
> something and actually knows why it's creeping them out, it may be possible
> for them to realise that, oh, it's just blah, and not actually a threat.
> And if on-wiki we notice someone who might be put off by another user's
> behaviour, reaching out to them and explaining why that behaviour is
> happening (especially if it's fairly normal, which a lot of the things that
> may seem weird to outsiders often are) could do a lot to put them at ease.
>
> Possibly.
>
> -I
>
>
> On 10/05/16 17:02, JJ Marr wrote:
>
> Other highlights:
>
> From the list of "creepy" behavior
>
> >Laughing at inappropriate times
>
> >Talking too much about a topic
>
> >Displaying too much or too little emotion
>
> >Smiling peculiarly
>
> >Having excessively pale skin
>
> >Having bags under their eyes
>
> and then
>
> >Here’s the thing: not being creepy *isn’t that hard*.
>
> >Many of the examples of creepy behavior listed in the Knox University
> study could be avoided throughbasic social calibration
>  and
> being aware of the other person’s signals.
>
> Setting aside that a lot of Wikipedians don't have "basic social
> calibration", a lot of these behaviors are uncontrollable in general. If
> you're "suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior which
> prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely that they
> will contribute?", as another has proposed, a lot (but not all) of these
> "creepy traits" that allegedly make women less likely to contribute are
> uncontrollable by those who have them. I need to stop smiling peculiarly?
> What does that mean? And if we want to attract women to Wikipedia by
> removing creepy people, does that mean I might get banned due to me talking
> "too much" about a certain topic?
> On May 10, 2016 12:25 PM, "Nathan" < nawr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It boils down to "people with aberrant behavior or bearing produce
>> anxiety in women." This is drawn from a Facebook survey. It's interesting,
>> even if the "study" doesn't really produce any more knowledge than most
>> other Facebook surveys.
>>
>> The link to the problem of addressing Wikipedia's gendergap seems
>> tenuous; are you suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant
>> behavior which prospective female editors find creepy, making it less
>> likely that they will contribute?
>>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Neotarf  wrote:
>>
>>> A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
>>> behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]
>>>
>>> Some highlights:
>>>
>>> *"*So we’re 

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Isarra Yos]

Knowing what these traits are, even if they are uncontrollable, may also 
be useful for educating others about them. If someone is creeped out by 
something and actually knows why it's creeping them out, it may be 
possible for them to realise that, oh, it's just blah, and not actually 
a threat. And if on-wiki we notice someone who might be put off by 
another user's behaviour, reaching out to them and explaining why that 
behaviour is happening (especially if it's fairly normal, which a lot of 
the things that may seem weird to outsiders often are) could do a lot to 
put them at ease.


Possibly.

-I

On 10/05/16 17:02, JJ Marr wrote:


Other highlights:

From the list of "creepy" behavior

>Laughing at inappropriate times

>Talking too much about a topic

>Displaying too much or too little emotion

>Smiling peculiarly

>Having excessively pale skin

>Having bags under their eyes

and then

>Here’s the thing: not being creepy /isn’t that hard/.

>Many of the examples of creepy behavior listed in the Knox University 
study could be avoided throughbasic social calibration 
 and 
being aware of the other person’s signals.


Setting aside that a lot of Wikipedians don't have "basic social 
calibration", a lot of these behaviors are uncontrollable in general. 
If you're "suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior 
which prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely 
that they will contribute?", as another has proposed, a lot (but not 
all) of these "creepy traits" that allegedly make women less likely to 
contribute are uncontrollable by those who have them. I need to stop 
smiling peculiarly? What does that mean? And if we want to attract 
women to Wikipedia by removing creepy people, does that mean I might 
get banned due to me talking "too much" about a certain topic?


On May 10, 2016 12:25 PM, "Nathan" > wrote:


It boils down to "people with aberrant behavior or bearing produce
anxiety in women." This is drawn from a Facebook survey. It's
interesting, even if the "study" doesn't really produce any more
knowledge than most other Facebook surveys.

The link to the problem of addressing Wikipedia's gendergap seems
tenuous; are you suggesting that Wikipedia editors display
aberrant behavior which prospective female editors find creepy,
making it less likely that they will contribute?

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Neotarf > wrote:

A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology,
unfortunately behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]

Some highlights:

*"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No,
telling a woman how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially
when you don’t have that level of intimacy with her."

*"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the
potential for ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that
because one’s creep-radar is keyed towards finding potential
threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s behavior could make
people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you,
you’re left in a state of anxious paralysis; you’re
continually on edge trying to determine just what the
appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and
now you’ve made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you
harm."

*"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring
issues of boundaries and demonstrating that they have more
information about somebody than they should." Example from
Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying at the Excalibur?"
She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how f*cking
creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
insinuating he knows where she is?"

*From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and
manages not to cross it obviously knows where it is."

[1]
http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org

To manage your subscription preferences, including
unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org 
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
please visit:

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[JJ Marr]

Other highlights:

>From the list of "creepy" behavior

>Laughing at inappropriate times

>Talking too much about a topic

>Displaying too much or too little emotion

>Smiling peculiarly

>Having excessively pale skin

>Having bags under their eyes

and then

>Here’s the thing: not being creepy *isn’t that hard*.

>Many of the examples of creepy behavior listed in the Knox University
study could be avoided throughbasic social calibration
 and
being aware of the other person’s signals.

Setting aside that a lot of Wikipedians don't have "basic social
calibration", a lot of these behaviors are uncontrollable in general. If
you're "suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior which
prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely that they
will contribute?", as another has proposed, a lot (but not all) of these
"creepy traits" that allegedly make women less likely to contribute are
uncontrollable by those who have them. I need to stop smiling peculiarly?
What does that mean? And if we want to attract women to Wikipedia by
removing creepy people, does that mean I might get banned due to me talking
"too much" about a certain topic?
On May 10, 2016 12:25 PM, "Nathan"  wrote:

> It boils down to "people with aberrant behavior or bearing produce anxiety
> in women." This is drawn from a Facebook survey. It's interesting, even if
> the "study" doesn't really produce any more knowledge than most other
> Facebook surveys.
>
> The link to the problem of addressing Wikipedia's gendergap seems tenuous;
> are you suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior which
> prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely that they
> will contribute?
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Neotarf  wrote:
>
>> A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
>> behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]
>>
>> Some highlights:
>>
>> *"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No, telling a
>> woman how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially when you don’t have
>> that level of intimacy with her."
>>
>> *"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the potential for
>> ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that because one’s creep-radar is
>> keyed towards finding potential threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s
>> behavior could make people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
>> wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you, you’re left in a
>> state of anxious paralysis; you’re continually on edge trying to determine
>> just what the appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
>> have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and now you’ve
>> made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you harm."
>>
>> *"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring issues of
>> boundaries and demonstrating that they have more information about somebody
>> than they should." Example from Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying
>> at the Excalibur?" She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how
>> f*cking creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
>> insinuating he knows where she is?"
>>
>> *From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and manages not
>> to cross it obviously knows where it is."
>>
>> [1] http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Nathan]

It boils down to "people with aberrant behavior or bearing produce anxiety
in women." This is drawn from a Facebook survey. It's interesting, even if
the "study" doesn't really produce any more knowledge than most other
Facebook surveys.

The link to the problem of addressing Wikipedia's gendergap seems tenuous;
are you suggesting that Wikipedia editors display aberrant behavior which
prospective female editors find creepy, making it less likely that they
will contribute?

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Neotarf  wrote:

> A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
> behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]
>
> Some highlights:
>
> *"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No, telling a
> woman how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially when you don’t have
> that level of intimacy with her."
>
> *"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the potential for
> ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that because one’s creep-radar is
> keyed towards finding potential threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s
> behavior could make people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
> wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you, you’re left in a
> state of anxious paralysis; you’re continually on edge trying to determine
> just what the appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
> have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and now you’ve
> made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you harm."
>
> *"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring issues of
> boundaries and demonstrating that they have more information about somebody
> than they should." Example from Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying
> at the Excalibur?" She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how
> f*cking creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
> insinuating he knows where she is?"
>
> *From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and manages not
> to cross it obviously knows where it is."
>
> [1] http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

[Neotarf]

A study published in the journal New Ideas in Psychology, unfortunately
behind a paywall, reviewed by Dr. NerdLove. [1]

Some highlights:

*"*So we’re not allowed to give women compliments?  – *No, telling a woman
how sexy she is isn’t a compliment, especially when you don’t have that
level of intimacy with her."

*"One of the keys to what made someone creepy was the potential for
ambiguity. The study’s authors suggest that because one’s creep-radar is
keyed towards finding potential threats, the ambiguousness of somebody’s
behavior could make people uncomfortable. After all, if you’re continually
wondering if this person actually poses a threat to you, you’re left in a
state of anxious paralysis; you’re continually on edge trying to determine
just what the appropriate reaction to the situation is. Guessing wrong can
have consequences, after all; misjudge a potential threat and now you’ve
made yourself vulnerable to someone who means you harm."

*"One of the most common ways guys are creepy is by ignoring issues of
boundaries and demonstrating that they have more information about somebody
than they should." Example from Instagram: He: "So I take it you're staying
at the Excalibur?" She: "Excuse me, do you not seriously realize how
f*cking creepy it is for a stranger to message a woman out of the blue
insinuating he knows where she is?"

*From the comments: "Someone who comes close to that line and manages not
to cross it obviously knows where it is."

[1] http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2016/05/the-science-of-being-creepy/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap