Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

We shouldn't conflate "creepy" and "harassment" at all, to be honest. Sure, plenty of things that are creepy are also harassment, but plenty of things that are considered creepy are just poor social skills (laughing inappropriately) and may even be due to health conditions (greasy skin).

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

A known woman discussing any issue in real life anywhere at all may turn into an online harassment issue. Shall I dig up 20 or 30 links to women who've been harassed online by creepy guys because they discussed or disagreed with guys on ANY issue in real life, be it men in bathrooms, or

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Neotarf wrote: > I'm not quite sure how to answer JJ Marr and Nathan, but if you watched > the Berkman panel I posted about earlier [1], the conclusion of the WMF > harassment survey is that the effect of harassment on women in Wikipedia, > is

Re: [Gendergap] Defining harassment: the first empirical investigation into the nature of creepiness

I'm not quite sure how to answer JJ Marr and Nathan, but if you watched the Berkman panel I posted about earlier [1], the conclusion of the WMF harassment survey is that the effect of harassment on women in Wikipedia, is that they leave. And not to beat around the bush, for those who are not