If You Can't Stand The Hate Mail, Get Out Of The Paper
Yet another writer-ninny, female of course, whinges about the horror of getting hate mail. I get it all the time. So do male columnists. I think my hate mail is funny, and when it's really good, it's hilarious. I see it as one of the perks of doing my job, and one of the signs I'm doing a good job (if you aren't pissing people off, maybe you're putting them to sleep?) If I couldn't take it, I'd work at the Humane Society.
Columnist Shari Graydon, however, writes in the Ottawa Citizen about the comments she gets from men:
Inside, the letter itself was unequivocal. In the same painstaking hand, the writer repeated my name in full and charged: You are a dog Faced Slut who likes to run off at the mouthThe random capitalization and complete absence of punctuation enhanced the disarming directness of the message, which continued: I hope some Bull Dyk gives you some B+D so Stick a Sock in it.
...Although none of these experiences have prevented me from continuing to share my opinions through print or broadcast media, I confess that they did briefly unnerve me.
Oh, boohoo.
And I know many women -- especially those with young children, a high- profile job, or a natural attachment to being treated with respect -- who would welcome such attention even less. Especially in an age of instant messaging, Google and YouTube.
So, advise them to avoid speaking out in the public eye.
Citizen columnist Kate Heartfield recently wrote that "No one is going to give women permission to join the public conversation," in a great column lamenting how few women opinion writers there are compared to men and exploring ways to change that ("Wanted: opinionated women," March 26).
Nobody gave me "permission." I annoyed the crap out of editors until they finally read my stuff and thought it would be something their readers would be interested in.
It seems to me that the more ubiquitous our faces and perspectives become, the less our femininity or feminism will stand out. And as Martha Stewart -- both a master of media profile, and a survivor of public condemnation -- would say, that's a good thing.
Oh, please. Gregg and I just shot a bunch of book covers. I keep reminding the publisher that we need to have my boobs on the cover. Men like boobs. And I like men, and I'd like them to buy my book.
The truth is, men attack a female columnist this way not because they're discriminating against her, but because they aren't. The gloves are off -- you're not being treated like some frail female who can't take it. Kingsley R. Browne makes this point in his terrific book, Biology at Work, with the section "Not All 'Sexual Harassment' Is Sex Discrimination."
Browne criticizes court cases "typically included unquestioningly under the rubric of sexual harassment" when they involved "expressions of hostility toward a woman that take a sexual form."
He writes that "men's tendency toward competition and striving for positions in hierarchies often leads to behaviors that, especially to women, may seem quite harsh. As Joan Kennedy Taylor has observed, 'Men will harass, tease, and verbally abuse each other, find vulnerable spots and use them to fluster each other -- almost automatically. When called on it, they will say it was all in fun. Women, when faced with such behavior, tend to take the content seriously, rather than identifying the underlying game.'"
He later points out, about workplace hazing, that hazing is usually aimed at "perceived vulnerabilities," and notes that "men's quest for dominance has not been primarily about attaining dominance over women, but achieving dominance over other men, which is consistent with Barbara Gutek's finding that in the workplace 'women are less often treated disrespectfully than men are.'"
So...in other words, when a guy sends me "Dear Bitch" e-mail and the like, he isn't discriminating against me -- he's treating me equally to how he'd treat a man. I like that.
No need whatsoever to whine.
"The gloves are off -- you're not being treated like some frail female who can't take it."
Well put, Amy. What is truly condescending to women is to assume that they are delicate little flowers. I don't "pull my punches" in my comments, I don't offer automatic deference, and I welcome similar treatment (and often get it, as you know!). Every piece of steel emerges from the heat of the forge.
Jay R at April 18, 2009 7:44 AM
I'm surprised at your casual tolerance of this Amy, considering the book you are writing. Men, real men I'm talking about, wouldn't feel the need to attack a woman by suggesting she is a "dog faced slut" or wishing a Bull Dyke would attack her. That's what cowards over the internet do.
Really, what percentage of your hate mail do you think would ever be actually said to your face? Tiny, frightened people do that from their computers; injecting unnecessary language and threats because that is the only place they feel secure enough to spew their anger. They should be called out for it.
Eric at April 18, 2009 8:09 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643896">comment from EricI don't defend the rudeness; I'm just saying it's not the attack on women it's taken to be. If you're in the public eye, people are going to send you nasty letters and e-mail. The same guy who attacks her for being a "dog faced slut" will attack some guy with whatever he thinks will get to him. You're a public person, you'll get hate mail. Goes with the territory.
And look at the sad losers who attacked me before, en masse. They attack men and women -- they just have to perceive you to be a conservative (I'm a fiscal conservative, but socially libertarian). And they'll go after people in whatever they perceive to be their achilles heel -- with women, it's generally looks/beauty -- it's evolutionary that they do that. With men, it'll be their masculinity or hair loss or something. It's about trying to dig in where it hurts, not about some campaign to keep women, in particular, down.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 8:18 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643897">comment from EricReally, what percentage of your hate mail do you think would ever be actually said to your face? Tiny, frightened people do that from their computers; injecting unnecessary language and threats because that is the only place they feel secure enough to spew their anger. They should be called out for it.
Oh, and I agree with all of this. And this is why I track people down when I can and confront them.
If there's something I'll say to you on the Internet, I'll say it to you in person. That's why I put my name, my full name, on comments. I'm not saying everyone needs to do that -- but it keeps me from ever saying stuff I wouldn't say face-to-face.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 8:31 AM
On on-line fora, sometimes the objection is raised that I don't post under my real name. In such cases, I explain once again that the correctness of any statement does not depend on who utters it, but on the amount of support for the statement.
Lots of people have big trouble with that, along with things like the simple question about how they distinguish fact from fiction.
Mad people do stupid things.
I've had professing Christians speculate on-line about my being on fire, electrocuted and dipped in acid, and although I don't think they're coming at me with lighter fluid, I wouldn't put keying my car beyond them, so I eliminate the opportunity.
There are public figures who take this risk, and I applaud them, even as I would not, myself.
Radwaste at April 18, 2009 9:01 AM
Well, I've been posting under the moiker lujlp since I first went online, this day and age an online handle is as real to many as your legal name.
Im just lucky enought that its not that common, I've never run across anyone else using it.
Off topic but anyone having problems with the auto form feature of the new internet explorer upgrade?
lujlp at April 18, 2009 9:08 AM
But I agree with Amy, if they were discriminatng they wouldnt be righting in at all.
And Eric how often do you suppose those same cowards reply to men telling them they wish some biker would shove a barbwire wrapped baseball bat up their ass?
Just because they are saying it to women doesnt mean they arent saying it to men
lujlp at April 18, 2009 9:10 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643905">comment from RadwasteI can't see either of you, luj or Rad, going on the anon-attack. I understand the need by many to remain anonymous. Posting in my own name is just a safeguard I have against succumbing to posting something I wouldn't say to somebody's face.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 9:35 AM
Ages ago, when writing for the features section of a daily, I got a piece of hate mail written in blue crayon on a piece of stationary featuring frolicking puppies. The venom in the words themselves were rendered rather moot and hilarious by their presentation, especially when the writer identified herself as a middle-aged mother.
And I agree--if someone has something to say, I want them to say it. I'm a big girl, and believe me, am not going to be reduced to tears by some big bad meanie man.
mse at April 18, 2009 10:25 AM
I'd be more sympathetic to Ms.Grayson if she weren't attempting to spin an anonymous letter and a few phone calls by some kook into a systemic effort to oppress female writers.
and please..
"No one is going to give women permission to join the public conversation,"
no one's going to give me permission either - because it's not required.
It's that sort of passive-aggressive whinging that undermines female opinion writers - not the rantings of some random troll.
C.C. at April 18, 2009 11:16 AM
On construction jobs I took to pay back tuition loans, I was scrawny and young, and usually one of the most recent hires. Never worked on a site with women, but I must have seemed as vulnerable as one to a lot of those guys. I took a lot of razzing, and at first was too intimidated to push back.
Example: on one job, I must have been the first construction worker with a beard that one yahoo had ever seen. He would say, "Every time I see that little patch of hair with a hole in the middle, I get a hard on."
I should have said something like, "Yeah, we had a guy with your tendencies where I grew up, but most people just left him alone," but I was scared to. When I finally learned to come back with such remarks, the jobs got much less stressful.
I eventually got to where I would initiate the harassment. One guy was slouched on the edge of a scrap wagon at the stave mill with his butt-crack showing above his too-low jeans (the '60s, a little less extreme than today's ghetto fashions). I scooped up a handful of sawdust and poured it in. He wanted to fight about it, but I calmed him down by apologizing and pointing out that we all had sawdust in our shorts by the end of the workday anyway. The boss took my side. He said, "If a man can't take a little rawhiding, he don't belong on this crew."
Now if either one of those incidents had been perpetrated by a man against a woman, it would have been deemed a full-blown case of sexual harassment.
Axman at April 18, 2009 11:26 AM
If I couldn't take it, I'd work at the Humane Society.
Animal rescue organizations that screen "clients" can be very stressful places to volunteer. You wouldn't believe (OK, yes you would) the horrible things people say and do when you won't let them have a cat.
Pseudonym at April 18, 2009 12:56 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643922">comment from PseudonymI used to walk dogs for them (or the ASPCA, can't recall) when I lived in New York, before I could afford or care for a dog of my own.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 1:00 PM
As a woman in a technical field, I can agree completely with Amy.
I wasn't a pioneer. There were women who came before me who had to fight for the simple right to apply for the tech job I got by simply passing the same test as the men did. Those women were not allowed to take the test just because they weren't men. They sued, won, and paved the way for women like me who came after them.
I passed the test and got the technician job. I never experienced any harassment by any of the men I worked with. Not once. If anything, all the guys I worked with went out of their way to help me learn the job and do better in the job.
Other women have always been a bigger problem for me than men have ever been. I would much rather work for, and with, men any day.
I once went to a two day conference on "Women in Technology" and it was the worst two days of my life. I was so embarrassed for my gender. The whining. The examples of "harassment" these women faced was just cringe inducing. Every single example was simply a case of being a thin-skinned imbecile who couldn't take a good natured ribbing by a co-worker.
It was the typical touchy feely type seminar that is routinely foisted on workers today in "diversity training". I was so pissed off by it that I told the two women who were running it that men would have never sit through such bullshit and they were dragging women down by promoting it.
That was 20 years ago and now everybody thinks that kind of thing is normal.
Jaynie59 at April 18, 2009 1:12 PM
Well, Jaynie, we still have "diversity" seminars, where the only consideration is skin color.
Nothing else matters.
Nothing.
Radwaste at April 18, 2009 1:28 PM
I have to respectfully disagree. Whether it's a man or woman, first and foremost you should be required to be civil. This lack of basic civility, a derivative of civilization, is what brought the level of political discourse in America to it's current state of polorization. As A. Lincoln said so well "A house divided against itself cannot stand". Amercians, generally speaking, are rude and seem to think that's ok. It's not. I may not like someone, but I always treat them with civility. But, then again, my parents were from The EU. If I ever called anyone, much less a woman, a dog faced bitch I'd catch hell like you can't imagine from both of my parents.
jon at April 18, 2009 1:54 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643928">comment from jonWhether it's a man or woman, first and foremost you should be required to be civil.
I've tried standing in front of my mailbox, clicking my heels together three times, and saying that over and over, but it doesn't seem to make the slightest difference.
Yes, of course, ideally, people should be polite. Not the point. (I just spent two years writing a whole book on the subject of rudeness, or lack of politeness, to put it the other way, and it will be out in November.)
The point, again, of this post, is that hate mail for women who write columns isn't a sign of a plot against women, but a sign female columnists are being treated like any other columnist -- with derision! It's part of the job description, let me tell you, and if you haven't got the stomach for it, remain a private person who never puts anything in print with your name on it.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 2:07 PM
The point is not to accept it in any form for whatever reason, job related or not.
jon at April 18, 2009 2:22 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1643936">comment from jonOh, I'm all about not accepting harassment. Don't steal my car or shout into a cell phone next to me, or you'll hear from me. Unfortunately, I have yet to acquire the power to psychically stop people from mailing angry letters -- and my life would be duller without all my hate mail anyway.
Amy Alkon at April 18, 2009 3:06 PM
Miss Alkon, I applaud you once again. You are one of the few women (I could lose 6 fingers and still count them on one hand) that actually understands how men think and act, both with women and with one another.
I had a female professor of sociology years ago, nice lady, bit of a 60s throwback right down to her attire, who would talk about the importance of building each other up.
She talked about how we on average hear over 60 "put downs" (her words) per day as adults.
I raised my hand, and explained to her that male "put downs" aren't necessarily "put downs". They are form of communication that both bonds us and asserts our social positions, its done in place of the more gentle bonding style that women share, and our "put downs" are seldom put downs, but calls for communication, expression, bonding, or competition, amongst other things, according to circumstances.
Robert at April 18, 2009 8:46 PM
Working with women is...odd, in some ways.
On the one hand there are some I've worked with who were just "one of the guys", they could be spoken to & with just like any of us would with each other.
Then there are others I've worked with that if you didn't genuflect to their gender, you were harassing them or discriminating.
I stood in a formation once and listened to a female general talk about the importance of promoting female soldiers. I was a young private then, and was confused, I had thought the goal was to promote the best people for the job.
I've also worked for people who went out of their way to make sure there were no females in their squad just so they didn't have to tip toe all the time.
It varies a great deal, the experiences one has with working with the opposite gender.
Some have been tough as nails and fit right in, some make it tough on everybody without a vagina.
I suppose at the end of the day its character and conduct that decide the kind of experience we inflict, and have, on and with one another.
I've been described as threatening, just being to close to someone (partial deafness means I sometimes stand a little to close just to hear properly)
And I've been described as being "protective" for the same situation.
Perception is a bitch.
Robert at April 18, 2009 8:57 PM
I too lament the death of manners.
I have somehow managed to avoid women like this. People here seem to be less outgoing than in other parts of the country, so maybe it's less common, or it just doesn't come out as fast. When I was in the Marines, we had a guy come into the barracks drunk, and start annoying people. The smallest guy in our platoon proceeded to beat his ass, and Cpl Jerk was a big Iowa farm kid. Picking on people can be dangerous.
I'm going to take a guess that at least some of these workplace shootings are triggered by assholes who don't get stopped soon enough. There is a reason manners evolved in human society.
MarkD at April 19, 2009 5:28 AM
Welcome to equality.
Women scream for equality and when they get part of the equality they don't like, they whine.
You begged for equality- it would be impolite of you to refuse it!
David M. at April 20, 2009 6:34 AM
Oh, please. Gregg and I just shot a bunch of book covers. I keep reminding the publisher that we need to have my boobs on the cover. Men like boobs. And I like men, and I'd like them to buy my book.
Don't be afraid to apply the same principle to the blog, Amy.
*winks*
Robert E. at April 20, 2009 11:05 AM
"he's treating me equally to how he'd treat a man." I agree but I doubt Walter Cronkite (sp) was ever called a dog faced slut.
I have never seen the need to be rude or hostile at work. However each job has a basic code of conduct. Shit that was fine on the pier as a diver doesn't really work well at an office.
Being a public figure comes with that as one of the down sides or perks depending on your view. Any chance of getting a section where you post the best hate male from the previous day. Especially the ones with horrid misspellings, or written in crayon?
vlad at April 20, 2009 12:36 PM
"Other women have always been a bigger problem for me than men have ever been. I would much rather work for, and with, men any day.
I once went to a two day conference on "Women in Technology" and it was the worst two days of my life. I was so embarrassed for my gender. The whining. The examples of "harassment" these women faced was just cringe inducing. Every single example was simply a case of being a thin-skinned imbecile who couldn't take a good natured ribbing by a co-worker."
I hear this now and then, and it's too bad, but it's not women, it's the way they are raised. I never encountered/have encountered this working with, for or in charge of women in the Army. Never. I think it's because they get socialized as men in Basic Training and in every other school.
So when it comes to some things, maybe gender is socially constructed.
Jim at April 20, 2009 1:07 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/04/18/if_you_cant_sta.html#comment-1644142">comment from vladI agree but I doubt Walter Cronkite (sp) was ever called a dog faced slut.
Everybody in the public eye gets hate mail, I'd venture. What's particularly cruel, I think, is some tabloid treatment of celebrities. Because you're famous doesn't mean you lack feelings.
Amy Alkon at April 20, 2009 1:35 PM
I don't know if this will help this lady but there will always be rude people.
If you have seen the Susan Boyle clip on Youtube- almost 30 million hits- there are a few people who have posted rude comments.
Legitamately, there is nothing negative you could say about this gal.
However, there are people who want attention, even if it's negative attention and they will say anything to get it.
I used to work at a state prison for juveniles adjudicated as adults. Needless to say many of these kids were neglected as children. Being neglected is worse than not having any attention at all. Therefore these kids would frequently act out. Negative attention is better than no attention at all.
Dvaid M at April 21, 2009 5:06 AM
I'm amazed and glad at the number (and quality!) of women who write on the conservative side. There are dozens of excellent minds out there trapped in a body with boobs. Very few of the boobed ones with a brain seem to inhabit the left, but then again, that can be said of the nutjobs, too (har har).
Make ya a deal, since you seem ok with the idea, anyway. Send me a pic of your boobs, and I'll buy a copy of your book and paste it on the cover. (Ok, I may buy a copy, anyway, but what the hell. It was worth a shot...)
Chris Bracco at April 21, 2009 9:13 AM
Dear Bitch,
Thank you for your perceptive analysis of male behaviour in the workplace and online. Just because we tease and make fun of our co-workers it's not always sexual in intent. Just because I may call another fellow in the office "Pencil Dick" doesn't mean I want to experience his pencil dick. Just because you catch a coworker looking at your boobs doesn't necessarily mean he has lewd and lascivious designs on you. He may just appreciate how nice your boobs look. It's nothing personal.
Of course in the Political arena, just because we may criticize PrezBo it's not because he's black. It's because he's a dumbass.
;D
Ralph Gizzip at April 21, 2009 10:01 AM
"I doubt Walter Cronkite (sp) was ever called a dog faced slut. "
People say all sorts of things in the heat of passion. "Who's your Daddy?!" and "Call me Ishamael!" and "Which one am I?!" (a favorite of the Beatles in their early years, I hear).
You just never really know.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at April 22, 2009 8:53 AM
Leave a comment