Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

boston bean

(36,186 posts)
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 10:01 AM Apr 2013

Facebook Watchdog Group ‘Rapebook’ Throws In The Towel

On the other hand, you have to admire the tirelessness of the people who believe that expunging all of Facebook's gross violence and darkness would make a change. Yesterday, ABC News aired a segment on a 38-year-old Oregon mother of two named Tricia Hendren who co-founded Rapebook, a Facebook watchdog group that targets and attempts to shut down blatant misogyny and other forms of graphic trolling that goes against Facebook's terms and conditions. Says Hendren: "I have two young kids and I wasn't political at all and assumed it was a safe, happy place where you were there with your friends. And then I realized that it's really not."

Naturally, this being the Internet, Hendren and the other admins' personal information, including their home addresses, were leaked and the graphic threats came pouring in; eventually, Hendrin went off Facebook completely. As of 16 hours ago, Rapebook announced in a long post that that they were no longer an active group: "This page has achieved what it was set up to do. It has shown that Facebook's terms and conditions are null and void. We will leave the rest of the work for Facebook to do – or not."

It goes on:

When we widened our targeting of content that violates the terms and conditions, we pinpointed content that promotes hate speech towards minorities, such as races or women, or taking enjoyment in crimes like rape and murder. Facebook deemed the vast majority of these not offensive enough, stating that they are 'controversial humor'.


A Facebook spokesman elaborates, via Raw Story: &quot Facebook) tries to have a very permissive attitude toward humor because different cultures have different views of what is or isn't humor... As you may expect in any diverse community of more than a billion people, we occasionally see people post distasteful content or make crude attempts at humor."

They add that its terms and conditions require a clear indication that a post is "in poor taste." (Jokes about sexually assaulting babies, for instance, remained on the site because it didn't threaten any specific baby.) But Rapebook's farewell posts points out that these guidelines are selective.


Video at link:

http://jezebel.com/5993894/facebook-watchdog-group-rapebook-throws-in-the-towel
21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Facebook Watchdog Group ‘Rapebook’ Throws In The Towel (Original Post) boston bean Apr 2013 OP
I visited their page mercuryblues Apr 2013 #1
it's pretty disgusting. boston bean Apr 2013 #2
Yes, this is clear. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #3
It's difficult for some to grasp the difference. boston bean Apr 2013 #4
Another thought ... DURHAM D Apr 2013 #6
Skinner sets the tone for this place and just the action of him not boston bean Apr 2013 #7
I was trying to make the point DURHAM D Apr 2013 #8
I agree. boston bean Apr 2013 #9
I have mercuryblues Apr 2013 #5
So I wasn't around when HoF started ismnotwasm Apr 2013 #10
I will never, ever understand WTF is wrong with some people (including a few at DU). nomorenomore08 Apr 2013 #11
I can think of only one reason to be pissed off BainsBane Apr 2013 #12
Kind of scary in its implications. Especially knowing what the stats are on sexual predation. nomorenomore08 Apr 2013 #13
indeed BainsBane Apr 2013 #14
really nomore. either in RL these men keep their mouth shut, or the internet has allowed each other seabeyond Apr 2013 #15
Everybody's "braver" on the Internet I guess. Anonymity and all that. nomorenomore08 Apr 2013 #16
Is the link broken? I get a weird message sufrommich Apr 2013 #17
yeah it is broken. I'll see if I can find the story on ABC. boston bean Apr 2013 #18
I'll mosey over to Jezabel and read it. What a sad sufrommich Apr 2013 #19
here, try this link boston bean Apr 2013 #20
Oh my God! Raping babies is sufrommich Apr 2013 #21

mercuryblues

(14,491 posts)
1. I visited their page
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 10:41 AM
Apr 2013

The comments there are vile.

I understand what she experienced. remember when I posted a link to some FB page titled Don't make me hit you twice. or something like that.

I reported it, my friends reported it. They refused to take down the page. It wasn't until I posted the link in DU and it was reported enmass that FB took it down. That is what gets their attention, not the content. IMO FB needs to change their tos rules. To if we receive more than 10,000 alerts on a post or a page we will take it down. Post whatever you like. Even if it is about raping a baby.

boston bean

(36,186 posts)
2. it's pretty disgusting.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 10:55 AM
Apr 2013

we can't even get admins on this progressive board to insert two words regarding sexism and misogyny in the TOS.

They feel it is covered under "gender". Which is a bunch of blahooey...

Gender is not sex, and by refusing to call it out directly in TOS, they are more or less leaving out bigotry based a biological factor.

This is not rocket science. What if the TOS said, no bigotry based on black culture? It is not the same as bigotry based on race. Yes they are both bad, but not the same.

I'm not sure if I had made myself clear here, as it is very difficult to explain... but there you have it.

Words that identify bigotry against women/females are sexism and misogyny.

boston bean

(36,186 posts)
4. It's difficult for some to grasp the difference.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 11:24 AM
Apr 2013

I guess is what I mean.

Or do they get it and just want to ignore it?

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
6. Another thought ...
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 11:58 AM
Apr 2013

What if the TOS simply stated - "No bigotry based on lifestyle".

One could read nothing or a lot into such a directive.

It would allow all sorts of homophobic/transphobic comments to pass a jury. It does not provide clear a directive to MIRT for PPRing new members. It would not necessitate a TOS decision by the admin even if a post is clearly homophobic or transphobic to some members but can also be read in such a way as to give the benefit of the doubt to a poster.

But the TOS is clear -

No bigoted hate speech.

Do not post bigotry based on...sexual orientation, gender identity ... To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians;


Also, and even more importantly, the admin have stated Zero Tolerance for homophobic and transphobic comments.

Note: As a member of the LGBTQ community on DU I am extremely grateful for this clear community standard set by the administrators/owners of DU.





boston bean

(36,186 posts)
7. Skinner sets the tone for this place and just the action of him not
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 12:02 PM
Apr 2013

putting in protection for women on his website has emboldened those who would like to make this place a male space.

Many people reject gender constructs, and that is pretty much which feminism is about. But the TOS re-inforces gender constructs simply by equating sex with gender.

It is in itself anti feminist.

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
8. I was trying to make the point
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 12:21 PM
Apr 2013

that the current use of "gender" in the TOS would be equivalent to using "lifestyle".

Both would be open to interpretation and manipulation.


This is so simple but yet has been made so hard.

boston bean

(36,186 posts)
9. I agree.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 02:23 PM
Apr 2013

it's sorry to say that we can't be taken seriously on a progressive website.

But there you have it.

It's an open field day on feminists and women who object to sexist or misogynistic treatment on DU.

mercuryblues

(14,491 posts)
5. I have
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 11:29 AM
Apr 2013

thought the same thing. Because it is not directly adressed, some people use as a loophole to get away with it. When they found out the milder stuff got a pass, they didn't even try to hide it anymore. Some even stepped up their game.

One of the things this board has educated me on, not only the right view women's views as something to be mocked and scorned. Thankfully, they do get called out on it. IMO it would be better if it was flat out hidden. It sends a stronger message and doesn't derail a thread.

ismnotwasm

(41,919 posts)
10. So I wasn't around when HoF started
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 02:52 PM
Apr 2013

But it seems to me, to understand sexism and misogyny paying attention to why it is the way it is, is crucially important. It's not just individual women though history, but the historical pattern of treating women as something less than human, or in a specific category. "Temptress " being the one most prevalent I believe and probably part and parcel of rape culture.

Was that how the group started? A lack of historical knowledge of how women have been perceived? I've been meaning to ask for some time now.

Some things are so obvious, they don't need an explanation. Another problem is some women don't see it, or don't see it as a big deal. And it's not that they want to 'play nice'---it's simply not in their consideration.

Sometimes being a hardcore feminist seems as thankless as being a Union rep in a open shop institution-- with good, but not great, benefits that are being ever-so-slowly chipped away. You point out what the union has done, and why being part of it is important; but new workers just see the cost of the dues, and stay ignorant of the larger costs of not paying them.

You try to put it in historical context and the worker thinks, "yes, but that was THEN, it's so much better now". You point out how much better it could be, and you get agreement, but no involvement. Or even a libertarian type argument about how unions are no longer needed, and in fact were NEVER needed.


Oy.

nomorenomore08

(13,324 posts)
11. I will never, ever understand WTF is wrong with some people (including a few at DU).
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 03:03 AM
Apr 2013

The absolute rage and hatred I see boiling over at times is frightening even to me, as a guy, thinking "These folks walk among us!"

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
12. I can think of only one reason to be pissed off
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 03:27 AM
Apr 2013

over efforts to call out rapists or more general discussions by rape survivors.

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
15. really nomore. either in RL these men keep their mouth shut, or the internet has allowed each other
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 08:12 AM
Apr 2013

to feed on this hate of women validating their hate and it is growing, or i just never had these type of men in my life. because i never had this experience in the past. i am having to adjust and learn the hate that is out there. and it really is very surprising to me, also.

sufrommich

(22,871 posts)
21. Oh my God! Raping babies is
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 08:56 PM
Apr 2013

controversial humor?? Sickening,Facebook should be shunned until this crap stops.

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»History of Feminism»Facebook Watchdog Group ‘...