Friday, April 25, 2014

Thanks for Noticing

Bonald at Throne and Altar posted thoughtfully about the "catfight" between Sunshine Mary, Lena, and Laura that has got half the manosphere chirping like an aviary full of parakeets.  (See also Jim's Blog for a measured response to SSM's "doxing" and manospherean reaction.)

Identifying "The Real Danger to Pseudonymous Bloggers," Bonald concludes:

So anyway, if you’re writing an anti-feminist blog, your main danger of being outed or made the target of hostile internet campaigns comes from the lunatic wing of the manosphere, not from actual feminists.

True, and thanks for acknowledging it.  Whether a female blogger is a "feminist" or an "anti-feminist," the real danger (of being doxxed, maligned and harassed) is from the manosphereans.  Blogging-while-female is asking for trouble, regardless of which team you're playing on.

What is "the real danger" of being doxxed and maligned, even libeled online?  The potential consequences are widely acknowledged to be so severe that most people consider doxxing their ideological opponents beyond the moral pale. The intersection between one's "online persona" and one's public face is a fragile membrane; in some cases, it is a horrific car crash just waiting to happen.

Being doxxed online is, in a way, to suffer the exposure of celebrity with none of its perks.  It's disconcerting, at least, to know that thousands of people can identify you, while you have no way of knowing who they are.  (Of course, I am not suggesting that thousands of people care who I am; in fact, it's obvious that they do not.)

The greatest threat to the victim is the possibility of suffering bodily harm or exposing one's children to physical harm (or humiliation).  The fact that it is statistically unlikely does not lessen the psychological impact of the threat.   

If you're blogging under a pseudonym, you'd better be prepared to be identified with the material you post in your personal and professional life, and be willing for your family members to be identified with it as well, because you are just one "Matt Forney" away from having to slap your John Hancock on it forever.

Being doxxed and my name linked to a "character assassination" was a personal violation that I would not wish on anyone, no matter how abhorrent I found his or her opinions.  But I'm also very fortunate.

I'm fortunate in that there is little that I have posted here that could ruin my professional or personal reputation.  Indeed, I live so transparently that there is little here that would surprise anyone who knows me.  That's probably why my blog is kind of boring...


  1. Lol your blogs not boring. If you want to spice it more though, do more posts on the women, it'll spike your page views for sure !!

  2. The manosphere is characterised by a very high level of emotion, and the people who participate in it freely admit it's because of trauma - divorce, violent pasts, job losses, lack of a normal sex life, whatever. These people go online and basically perform rage for everyone else - what is Matt Forney but a seething ball of anger? (And a projectionist - count how often he accuses everyone else on the planet of narcissism.) The neo-reactionary sphere, as much as I disagree with it, is built on a genuine idea e.g. that the Enlightenment is a perverse kink in history. The Christian wing of all of this is, of course, built on Christianity. What's the manosphere got? Rage.

    Which, on the other hand, is why I read the manosphere and I don't read the others - the manosphere is full of drama and colour. In much the same way East Enders is. But, of course, anybody who is emotional and lacking in self awareness enough to go online and say the stuff they do, is by definition someone it's best to stay away from. You know it's bad when the neo-Stormfront women over at Return of Queens can't stomach it either.

    1. Yeah, I am in it for the drama, of which there is aplenty. Who needs tv when you have internet drama?

      In other news, SSM is Twittering up a storm; I don't think she's worried about teh doxing, as she's still out there filling up her share of bandwidth under the same handle like nothing ever happened. I am inclined to agree with the Practical Conservative: the whole thing is just garden variety internet drama. I used to be involved with a left-leaning attachment parenting/natural birthing internet circle that had the same kind of drama on a regular basis: someone would pose dramatically with a particularly charismatic "persona," attracting lots of admirers and haters; it would gradually become noticeable that this person wasn't quite who she represented herself to be (duh; by definition, there aren't that many exceptionally high-achieving, charismatic people out there and the ones that do exist don't spend hours yakking on the internet!)

      People would either defend or attack the semi-fraudulent persona (generally along the lines of how they'd felt about her in the first place) forming factions of their own, and finally there'd be some kind of schism.

      and then whole process would start afresh as new people came on who didn't know or care about the Great Drama of '03, and former participants drifted away into other interests.

      Super embarrassing in hindsight. There's drama in real-life circles too, obviously, but I think the combination of semi-anonymity/selective self-presentation and the "wide open spaces" aspect of it fuels some really, really weird social dynamics. I think it's sort of funny Matt is just discovering that... they say the kids these days are so savvy. lol

  3. My blog is also on the dull side, given I never give an opinion I wouldn't stand by publicly. My only fear about being doxxed is being slightly embarrassed at being such a sad sack at times, but then again nobody I know in real life would ever visit this corner of the internet, so who cares?


Thanks for commenting!