Shadow Hawk

"It's a floor wax and a dessert topping!"

"Kilroy Wuz Here"

"Kilroy Wuz Here"

Seducing Mrs. Claus got me there, but the reindeer venison made it permanent!

Seducing Mrs. Claus got me there, but the reindeer venison made it permanent!

Using civil asset forfeiture, cops steal more from citizens than burglars do: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/

Other than an excerpt from Atlas Shrugged for a Business class in college and various early Rush lyrics, I haven't read anything by Ayn Rand.

The Boston Symphony performed Beethoven's Ninth recently. There's a 20 minute stretch where the double bassists have nothing to do. Instead of sitting there twiddling their thumbs, they decided to hit the tavern next door. After slamming down a few beers, one of them looked at his watch and said, "Oh. we're late!"
 
Another said, "Not to worry. I tied the last few pages together of the conductor's sheet music together with string. It'll take him a bit to get it undone."
 
Once they stumbled back in their place, a woman in the audience saw the conductor looking nervous. She mentioned this to her companion.
 
"Of course," her date replied. "It's the bottom of the ninth, the score is tied, and the bassists are loaded."

Soar, that was a really long post simply to say "I just don't get it".
 
I don't think the argument is about trying  "to appease a group of people who can't be appeased". I've talked to some, you know, actual women, and their - almost universal - complaint is "Why are there so few characters actually designed with us in mind?" We're not talking about penis-chopping manhaters here, but ordinary gamers, who feel that they are being ignored at best, actively mocked at worst, by much of the gaming industry.
 
I think you make the point exquisitely when you put Batgirl and Robin in the box, because it really is a good comparison: neither of them are original stand-alone characters like Batman. Both of them are derivative, subsidary appendages of the actual character, and both are well-worn archetypes: female version and trusty sidekick, respectively. Batgirl, Female Thor, Supergirl, She-hulk ... etc are not characters designed with women or girls in mind. Like Linkle, they are simply a male hero with tits slapped on, or as you put it yourself, just a reskinning of the character.
 
So I'm not surprised that this approach didn't satisfy feminists (or indeed, women in general) because not only was it not what they were asking for, but it was in fact exactly one of the things they were criticizing.
 
You make this point very well in your post, though I'm pretty sure it wasn't the point you were hoping to make.
 
cheers, Mark

Can opener!

Partly because there are potent mainstream individuals and groups who support the use of such tactics when they suit their purposes.
 
Earlier in this thread (here) I posted links to reports of harassment (cyber and otherwise) of climate researchers, and some of the harassment comes for folks on the payroll of Big Energy. Also, attacks by in-office and running-for-office politicians means, implicitly, that these people support cyberharassment etc. as long as it promotes their agenda. This being the case, vigorous systematic prosecution of harassers will never happen, because that's a tool they already use and like.
 
I focused on the harassment of climate scientists in my posts above because I follow that science/policy front more than casually (having once done research in radiative energy transfer), it is pretty much the same stuff (though admittedly the precise language varies if the scientist being harassed is female), there are identifiable political and business entities who make use of and encourage the harassment, and therefore important powers who will stonewall attempts to crack down on it.
 
That doesn't have direct effects on specific harassment of women, except that it means that existing political and business powers aren't going to permit it to be shut down.

Except I'm not buying your claims of being a skeptical, neutral observer trying to find out whether online violence is gendered.  I believe that you have a position on the subject, but don't wish to state it.  After all, if you really wanted to know the answer to the question of whether online violence is gendered, you wouldn't come here with the question; that is what Google is for. It is this refusal to state your position and defend it that I see as a form of intellectual dishonesty.  
 
Also, I take issue with the notion that the threats need be "creditable".  If you point gun at someone and threaten there life, you have assaulted them with a deadly weapon even if the gun is unloaded.  That isn't my opinion; it is the opinion of the law.  I imagine this is because judges got tired of having people commit armed robbery and then claim after the fact that the weapon had no bullets.  So maybe the person sending the death threat lives in another state and has a heart condition and can't travel.  How is the person he is threatening suppose to know that and why are they suppose to be sanguine about the death threat just because it is coming from a stranger over the internet?
 
Now back to the chatroom study (yes, I know that I am answering post in the reverse order from how it was written), a chatroom is not a bar.  When a man approaches a woman in a bar, he can see her, if he he is not a total meathead he can pick up what sort of signals she is sending and since they are both there something could potentially come of his approaching her.  In a chatroom none of this is the case.  The chances of "Jill" being an attractive female living nearby are less than the chances of "Jill" being a married man living in another state.   Now, I grant you that there are lots of lonely, stupid guys out there, so maybe some of the time these sexual advances are just pathetic attempts to hook up. However, given the low chance of these pick ups succeeding versus the high chance of them offending and possibly driving off the recipient of the comment, I am inclined to think that most of these "come ons" are actually aggressive, displays of dominance.  So I support the study's decision to categorize these messages as malicious. 

I apologize if I am misinterpreting you comment, but if you were receiving hundreds or thousand of death threats and people were doxing your address and other personal information, I suspect you would not consider the potential danger to yourself hyperbole or the internet trolls harmless.

Can opener!

My Dad had one that said Master Planner,
where the smaller size was needed to fit all the letters.

My Dad had one that said Master Planner,
where the smaller size was needed to fit all the letters.

My Dad had one that said Master Planner,
where the smaller size was needed to fit all the letters.

Q: What's the difference between a riddle and a rhetorical question?

Baby hawk...named Tony

The Worst Insult Ever