In the absence of a pattern, I cannot accept a judgement of harassment. If I were terrorising, I would have put more on the screen than "Defaced by..." - anti-feminist propaganda on a feminist site would be more apropos terrorism.
This appears to be simple hacking in the absence of other evidence.
I disagree. Taking control of a website doesn't have to be recurrent to be harassment, any more than "I only hit her once" nullifies and accusation of abuse. Defacing a website doesn't have to be blatantly anti-feminist to inspire terror. Considering the amount and nature of misogyny aimed at feminist websites, this may be mild in comparison, but it is still an attack.
So, your entire basis for an accusation of harassment and/or terrorism is the nature of the site defaced? If this had been Pizza Hut's website, you would see it as simple defacement?
Harassment and physical abuse are substantially different - your argument is invalid because there is no basis of comparison.
I suppose one could argue terrorism if you defined the terrorism as "one website was defaced - mine could be next!" In this context, terrorism would be an appropriate accusation, since it removes the type of website from the equation, and reduces it to merely "a webiste". Therefore, any website could be next - after all, 19 nutjobs flew planes into buildings; therefore, any building could be next and we should be afraid to (a) be in a building and/or (b) be on a plane.
While I will not debate whether or not misogyny exists, to allege it along with terrorism and harassment without proof of an agenda, perpetrator or pattern of action is irresponsible - see Fox News for further information.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:13 pm (UTC)In the absence of a pattern, I cannot accept a judgement of harassment. If I were terrorising, I would have put more on the screen than "Defaced by..." - anti-feminist propaganda on a feminist site would be more apropos terrorism.
This appears to be simple hacking in the absence of other evidence.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 05:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 06:40 pm (UTC)Harassment and physical abuse are substantially different - your argument is invalid because there is no basis of comparison.
I suppose one could argue terrorism if you defined the terrorism as "one website was defaced - mine could be next!" In this context, terrorism would be an appropriate accusation, since it removes the type of website from the equation, and reduces it to merely "a webiste". Therefore, any website could be next - after all, 19 nutjobs flew planes into buildings; therefore, any building could be next and we should be afraid to (a) be in a building and/or (b) be on a plane.
While I will not debate whether or not misogyny exists, to allege it along with terrorism and harassment without proof of an agenda, perpetrator or pattern of action is irresponsible - see Fox News for further information.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-13 07:55 pm (UTC)