[bitcrunch]

I'm unsure how to take your phrasing "never realized that women in tech had to deal with all these issues on a daily basis."

On any other board I would assume that phrase to be argumentative and patronizing, but HN people always seem to be earnest and helpful, so I will take it on face value.

Many people have that kind of issue. Most of them are women. Women exist in tech. :) It's just more frustrating and sort of ironic when you're the one working on the products.

Not sure there's anything I can add that danah boyd hasn't covered on her many privacy presentations or that wasn't already "done to death" during the past "women in tech" arguments on Techcrunch, HN, etc. If there's something new or revealing that I can think of I'll share it, though!

ETA: Also, I didn't bring it up during the g+ name controversy on HN because I honestly couldn't add anything new. The pros and cons of the policy are out there for everyone to read. I watched it go on and decided what was right for me, which is to not engage in that medium due to the way it works and the intentions (that is, that g+ is an "identity service").

[BadassFractal]

I apologize if my reply sounded patronizing, I'm notorious for getting the wrong tone across the Internet.

What I had found interesting about your post was the level of detail of what you described. This clearly shows my ignorance of the subject. I was aware of the G+ pseudonym issue, but I imagined that the harassment was limited to your personal information being looked up on the Internet and certain people sending creepy / unwarranted messages to you online.

Again, I must have been very naive about this, but I didn't realize that women in tech with any level of Internet exposure had to continuously deal with stalkers in real life, following you home, to meetups, to your workplace and so on.. It's quite awful, borderline terrifying. I thought the harassment was mostly verbal and impersonal, still unacceptable obviously, but at least not nearly as dangerous as what you described.

[bitcrunch]

Online and offline ("real life") are inextricably tied to each other, though, particularly where real-world identity is imposed in online (indexed/searchable/social networking) platforms. What starts online can lead offline and what starts "in real life" can continue online.

I've been a die-hard citizen of the internet for over 15 years, I know how to handle things. If you have a threat in real life call local law enforcement and show them. If you have issues with someone online, use the privacy tools at your disposal, don't escalate things with the person, make reports to the service you're using if the other person violates the terms of service, but don't cause a scene (because that's often exactly what they're looking for; they want to rattle you).

I believe after the first in-real-life police episode the other party realized that they could not do anything physical to me. The odds are low that I'm currently in danger of a physical assault (in my opinion).

But back in 2008, when the Huffington Post suddenly decided to index the name of everyone who contributed to any political campaign by first name, last name, middle initial, address, and employer, I did feel that I was under physical threat. Their intentions were noble; have transparency about where political dollars were coming from. What they ended up doing is making the entire first page of Google results for my name all of the information about me that someone who really wanted to hurt me would need. I sent in four requests asking for it to be removed, re-indexed with my street number or first name removed, anything, and let them know I felt I was in real-life danger... but I never got a response, so for a year the first result on my name in a Google result was a map to my house, neatly pre-expanded in the first result. I moved, and I will never contribute to another political campaign again, in order to have that never happen to me again.

The annoyances that one can make on another without actually violating a law or getting banned from a service are enormous. It's a quality-of-life issue.

When my employer gets a call from someone for a reference for me, is it that person or a legitimate reference? When I get a friend request on Facebook, LinkedIn, or somewhere I have an account, is it that person? Or someone sent by them to find out where I'm currently working or living or hanging out?

The worst is when they get a bit bi-polar and start contacting my acquaintances out of the blue and asking if I'm okay, saying they miss me, and telling them all about our history. That happened to me when Facebook decided one couldn't hide one's listed friends. Over a certain threshold of people around me getting that type of communication about me and perception of me is permanently tarnished. It's not fair, but it's true - people think that the person being harassed must have done something to deserve it, or are "just handling it wrong" or something. It hurts my reputation, which impacts my ability to network effectively. Also, it makes me sad.

I still get LinkedIn friend requests from people I don't know: for instance, a college student from two states away. Is that last year's intern whose name I don't remember, or someone sent by this person, and I spend an hour finding photos of them to be sure... not a dangerous situation, but why should I have to deal with this until one of us dies? (Based on a follow-up Inmail, turned out to be someone sent by them, who thought that I'd welcome them putting the two of us "back in contact", ugh.)

I loved commenting at my local newspaper's website and a local online community blog/zine and had had an account/handle there for years. "In order to raise the quality of comments" they transitioned to Facebook commenting, so I don't do that anymore.

Based on advice from a psychologist, I left our old mutual acquaintances who didn't know the situation on my Facebook friends list back while things were still scary. Better to just stay status-quo than to provoke a reaction with a de-friending where you might cause more problems by having to explain to someone else the whole deal who isn't even aware there is a situation.

I actually was able to use Facebook with custom filters for updates, closing my wall, going to "just me" for every visible setting. But then Facebook came out with a new notification that randomly and without prompting posts a notice on your friend's activity feed that you're playing a certain game or using a certain app; there is no option to set that to a filter and I had no idea it was going to happen.

When that fired off without my knowledge I woke up the next morning to a bunch of comments (from mutual acquaintances who hadn't seen an update from me in two years) asking me where I'd been. The friend requests and attempts to locate me resumed, so I assume some of them asked around and let this person know they'd seen activity from me on Facebook so I must be using it.

If I stay un-searchable and off of "real name" social networks they seem to lose interest. I go about my life freely and don't even think about it for weeks at a time. When I surface, or my name shows up somewhere things tend to escalate.

I love talking to people and being on the internet and am passionate about social media - so flying under the radar may never be possible for me without a real-life name change. It doesn't feel fair that I'd have to do that, though.

But even then, I wouldn't join a public industry circle under my legal name, or RSVP to a public event under it, now that I have had this learning experience.

Not because I'm physically afraid anymore, but because I do not want to have to explain away anything that person might say or do. I don't want to have to be harassed or concerned about harassment when all I want to do is talk about fantastic ideas with smart people.

I don't want strangers or acquaintances to know my email, phone number, general location, employer, or where I'm going to be at 6:00 on Thursday night. Like most people 20 years ago, those are things I share with my friends, not the world.

There's only been one "incident" this year, but it was a doozy. Maybe it will calm down for me, but only time will tell. Privacy is not dead, but some of the greatest parts of the internet are unusable to people who desire it.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but it felt important to give an accurate picture. Now, hopefully to transition to a lighter mood and ring in the New Year! Happy 2012 to you!

[danso]

Thank you for sharing this...I was half-expecting a "What difference does it make if a HN participant is a male or female, we're all equal, right?" response to my question and I think your comments make a case for why gender-awareness is still an important thing to have.

Even if in cyberspace each gender were treated equally, in real life, that's not the case. And that's an issue we have to be aware of and vigilant in changing (for the better)...But we can't if there are virtually no women involved in our otherwise interesting and thoughtful discussions.

[BadassFractal]

That was very insightful, thanks for sharing.

Your response reminded me of another article I just read recently about how prevalent Asperger's seems to around the high-tech crowd, especially among the male population. It's likely not the main cause for negative experiences such as yous, but I wonder if it still hasn't had a big impact.