Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully

twitter Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0facebook Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0google Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0pinterest Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0tumblr Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbullyreddit Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0stumbleupon Ron Marz, Mark Millar, Comics Industry Act to Shut Down Cyberbully0

Abusive attacks via Twitter aren’t new, but have certainly increased in media visibility over the past few months. Racist and sexist comments and threats have been detailed repeatedly in the mainstream press recently, often aimed at various prominent people in society. It also exists on a personal level, sadly, with personal attacks and bullying on the rise online.

And sadly, this is true for the comics industry as well. I hadn’t been aware of this myself, but today Ron Marz alerted his followers to one Twitter user in particular, who has for the past few months been anonymously attacking prominent women in the industry with gender-specific abuse and threats. Writers, artists and journalists have all targeted by this poster over an extended period of time, whose attacks tend to refer back to rape, submission and misogyny at every opportunity. These were explicit threats made to women simply because they were women.

Mark Millar was one of those who saw Marz’s call for awareness, and made a post to his Millarworld forum in which he not only detailed the comments, but also made plans to take a stand against them. Asking for legal advice and people affected by the poster to step forward, several people contacted Millar via Twitter and his message board with what could be done about the comments.

Following which, he posted again later today, explaining that he has contacted a lawyer with a view to taking legal action against this poster—who has used various accounts over the past few months to attack people, but left behind an IP trail. The police, Millar says, have been informed, and will now be following up on this. Action will be taken within the next few days.

The threats are misogynistic in the extreme. I won’t link to them.

It’s a reminder that while abuse does exist online, they come from the minority voice. For every person who decides to use the internet to try and threaten other people, there are tens of thousands of other people who won’t tolerate prejudice. If you ever find yourself to be a victim of online abuse, please do not suffer it in silence. Let other people know.

Comments

  1. Alistair Robb says:

    Wasn’t Heidi one of the people targeted?

  2. It’s really hard to think of a woman in comics with a Twitter account he didn’t target. Pretty much everyone I admire with a recognizably feminine name.

    So that includes Heidi.

  3. Brad Rollins says:

    Wow, the internet really brings out the cowards doesn’t it. One wonders what kind of a pathetic life these cyberbullies have when their only source of joy comes from putting down and threatening others. I hope these pissants get prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

  4. What-Ev says:

    I grew up with REAL bullying, and the way the people in authority handled it back then was called “toughen up, and quit being a baby.” Cyberbullying laws are a joke, and should be treated that way. That person may be the king of all fuckwits, but I don’t, for one second, think he should be subjected to criminal prosecution. I am, however, all for banning him from the various services that he was using to spread his message of fuckwittage.

    There’s so much real shit to worry about that I can’t believe anyone gave anything this idiot said more than a passing glance.

    Just to reiterate: This prick needed to be shut down. Just not by the police.

  5. Johnny Memeonic says:

    I don’t support stuff like cyberbullying laws as they are anti-free speech. Remember that a big part of free speech is that even jerks can legally say what they want.

    Tracking this internet troll down and publicly shaming him is probably more than enough. Involving the police and the law is moving too close to that police state everyone says they don’t want but don’t seem to mind when it benefits them.

  6. Freedom only extends as far as the next person’s freedom.

    This guy is using his freedom of speech to infringe on other people’s freedom from discrimination and persecution.

    If someone is hurting people with hate, physically or with words, they need to be shut down. That’s what laws are supposed to be for.

  7. Maddy says:

    Um. To the commenters talking about “free speech”, how about the freedom not to be subjected to rape threats? I think that takes precedence over this disgusting scumbag’s right to abuse and harass people over the Internet. This isn’t playground bullying, and charging a man for harassing and throwing hateful abusive language at people online will not lead to a “police state”, for fuck’s sake.

    And banning him from every comics site isn’t going to cut it either. This dude has been harassing women in the online comics community for a couple of YEARS now.

    This is “real shit” and it goes on in more spaces and with more people than you apparently care to know about.

  8. What-Ev says:

    “Um. To the commenters talking about “free speech”, how about the freedom not to be subjected to rape threats?”

    where re these alleged rape threats? I didn’t see any.

    “This isn’t playground bullying”

    No, it’s internet bullying which is even more pathetic and inconsequential. Playground bullying is something real that happens. Internet bullying is inane prattle that only bothers the overly sensitive.

    “And banning him from every comics site isn’t going to cut it either. This dude has been harassing women in the online comics community for a couple of YEARS now.”

    As I understand it, he has been rambling on the internet at people. Calling that harassment is an insult to actual harassment.

    “This is “real shit” and it goes on in more spaces and with more people than you apparently care to know about.”

    It’s nowhere near being real shit. But you’re right, there’s no point in caring about the ramblings of a fuckwit on the internet, yet the only “space” it is going on in is the internet. Making such a big deal out of this stuff only encourages more of the same.

    Great, they got the guy. Now hopefully it gets thrown out of court.

  9. “Don’t feed the trolls” doesn’t always work: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/02/28/dont-feed-the-trolls-is-bad-science/

    You’re wrong and your view is a hindrance to people who do not deserve to be subjected to abuse, harassment, or threats–and YES, there have been threats. They have the right to be free of those things. By dismissing the victims of his harassment, you’re contributing the problem in a very real way. You’re essentially excusing his behaviour and saying it’s okay that it goes on.

    The reason why I want to distinguish this kind of behaviour from playground bullying is that this man is NOT A CHILD. Children bullying each other is awful, but this is a grown ass man who uses multiple identities, IP addresses, e-mails, etc, to continually harass women online, on multiple websites.

    This is someone who appears to be *obsessed* and absolutely full of hate. How the fuck are we to know he’s not going to take it further than words?

    This doesn’t just happen to women in the comics community. Did you not hear about what Anita Sarkeesian went through? http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/07/what-online-harassment-looks And this kind of thing happens to countless women across the Internet.

    Just because something happens on the Internet doesn’t mean it doesn’t have very real consequences.

    Your kind of head-in-the-sand “oh you’re just being ~SENSITIVE~” bullshit is this asshole’s best friend.

  10. Marteani says:

    Not all speech is protected speech. Repetitive, unwanted speech that is intended to threaten or intimidate a person is not considered protected. It’s why there are anti-sexual harassment, anti-discrimination, and defamation laws.

    Does Twitter have a policy in place for removing harassers?

  11. Matthew Southworth says:

    @What-Ev: I sort of agree with you in principle…free speech is vital and something to which we’re all entitled. When that speech becomes harassment or threatening, it ceases to be free of consequences, legally speaking.

    And I also agree that many bullying complaints seem a bit hyper-sensitive and “victim” behavior.

    BUT. Imagine this man was making harassing phone calls to your mother at her home. Saying she deserved to be raped or have her head cut off and that she’ll get what she deserves, etc. Clearly intimidating behavior–but it’s just a phone call, right? Would you support his free speech rights in that instance?

    Because the problem here is that, yes, it’s just the internet, anonymous asshole behavior is de rigeur. But this guy is making threatening comments and harassing women in the comics industry, folks who rely on convention appearances and signings and so forth for income and publicity. Who’s to say how seriously this guy means his comments? Perhaps he’s just trolling, perhaps he’s serious, we don’t know.

    But comic creators/commentators/personalities are likely to rub elbows with this guy at the Hyatt Bar at Comic-Con or share the elevator with him at 2:15 in the morning or something else. So I’d argue that ignoring a pervasive pattern of violent and intimidating speech is denying these women of THEIR rights, just as it would be denying those of your mother in my hypothetical example.

  12. Laroquod says:

    Not enough effort is made to distinguish what is legal and unpleasant (‘abuse’, ‘misogyny’) from what is illegal (credible threats bodily harm) in cases like this. All the bad behaviour is just rolled up into a ball and presented as the total reason for involving the police. It would be like if I said that it was right to call the police on my neighbour because house smelled awful and he murdered my uncle. That’s what leads to the side arguments about free speech and whatnot. This person probably needed to be stopped but it’s probably also dangerous to keep conflating legal with illegal behaviour when justifying this kind of response.

  13. What-Ev says:

    “You’re wrong and your view is a hindrance to people who do not deserve to be subjected to abuse, harassment, or threats–and YES, there have been threats.”

    You’re wrong for attacking me. Congratulations, you’ve lost the high ground. Your reactionary behavior is doing nothing to help your cause. WHAT threats? I’ve read all the tweets at Bleeding Cool, and there aren’t any. If you could back up your assertions with actual facts, then maybe you wouldn’t have to court more enemies to your agenda by appearing unhinged.

    “By dismissing the victims of his harassment, you’re contributing the problem in a very real way. You’re essentially excusing his behaviour and saying it’s okay that it goes on.”

    I did no such thing. In fact, I did the opposite. You appear unable to talk about this in a calm and reasonable fashion.

    “The reason why I want to distinguish this kind of behaviour from playground bullying is that this man is NOT A CHILD.”

    Exactly. Children in a real bullying situation need protection. Anyone of any age on the internet can just move on. The internet has useful things such as this (taken from twitter): “Block and ignore

    When you receive unwanted communication from another Twitter user, it is recommend that you block the user and end any communication. Specifically this will prevent that person from following or replying to you. Abusive users often lose interest once they realize that you will not respond.” –it sucks, but I’d imagine any public figure spends a good bit of time or pays someone to spend a good bit of time just hitting the ignore button on their twitter feed. It’s not a crime to be an asshole. It’s often an unwritten part of a job description, actually.

    “How the fuck are we to know he’s not going to take it further than words? ”

    You don’t. One never does. But it’s phrases like that which do preced the police state mentality.

    “Did you not hear about what Anita Sarkeesian went through?”

    Yep. That’s a step above stupid twitter commentary. “And this kind of thing happens to countless women across the Internet.” But THAT is not THIS. As far as I’ve seen.

    “Just because something happens on the Internet doesn’t mean it doesn’t have very real consequences.”

    Only because it’s allowed to. Only because people can’t ignore and move on.

    “Your kind of head-in-the-sand “oh you’re just being ~SENSITIVE~” bullshit is this asshole’s best friend.”

    My head is firmly on my shoulders above ground, thank you. Your head is screaming hyperbolic rhetoric. You’re his best friend because you’re publicly proving that he’s accomplishing EXACTLY what he set out to do.

    Since you have had such a hard time reading my plain english comments on the subject, I’ll try again. This guy needed to be taken down. I don’t support anything about him except his right to say what he wants. I did not see any threats which could result in legal action against him. Harassment probably wouldn’t fly either because he wasn’t just repeatedly going after a single person. Instead, it was a collection of his attacks on everyone, and I don’t think that qualifies. I have scorn for any and all borderline thought-crime legislation which includes cyberbullying laws. Kids HAVE to go to school. Nobody HAS to go on the internet. It’s not a basic human right that is being infringed upon.

    “Don’t feed the troll” may be bad science, but as long as you ban the troll while depriving it of sustenance, then you’re doing it right. When I said ignore in the context of this incident, I didn’t mean “acting too above it all to reply.” I meant hitting an actual ignore button that removes and blocks that person (see above.) However, by blazing it across the internet, you fall into another cliche: “There’s no such thing as bad press.”

    Your reaction was completely uncalled for. I want an apology. Since you seem to be a woman and this is The Beat, I won’t hold my breath.

  14. Matthew Southworth says:

    Jesus, What-Ev–you were doing really well with that response, and I was taking you seriously, until you landed with the total dickhead comment “I want an apology. Since you seem to be a woman and this is the Beat, I won’t hold my breath.”

    Dick. Guess I owe you an apology, too. Being that I’m a guy and this is the Beat, don’t hold your breath.

  15. What-Ev says:

    “BUT. Imagine this man was making harassing phone calls to your mother at her home. Saying she deserved to be raped or have her head cut off and that she’ll get what she deserves, etc. Clearly intimidating behavior–but it’s just a phone call, right? Would you support his free speech rights in that instance?”

    Mr. Southworth, great job on Stumptown. Here’s the problem: 1. Phone calls are not twitter posts or even emails. They have a punch and emotional content which text-only communications lack. 2. That guy never said anyone deserved to be raped or have their head cut off…as far as I’ve seen. Please direct me to evidence to the contrary.

    “Would you support his free speech rights in that instance?”

    and yes, I would. It is possible to block a phone number from calling you, last I heard.

    “But this guy is making threatening comments and harassing women in the comics industry”

    Again, I don’t see it. Please show me. Mentioning gang rape isn’t the same as threatening it. One or two twitter comments isn’t harassment. His general behavior is antagonistic and disrespectful, but I don’t believe you can prosecute someone for general bad behavior. He has to specifically, repeatedly harass someone, not any and all someones. And he may be doing that. Just not from what I’ve seen attached to the articles I’ve read.

    “a pervasive pattern of violent and intimidating speech”

    Again, I don’t see it. There’s nothing intimidating about it. Maybe nobody has published the legally actionable ones. The ones where he makes threats and such. I am only commenting on what I’ve seen which is all anyone can do.

    The world is a scary place. The internet? Not so much.

  16. Heidi M. says:

    people, What-Ev is a troll — please don’t feed it.

    I’m kind of amused that John V Has been around for years — and I publicly confronted him on TWitter a few months ago— but when a man calls him out do people finally notice?

    That said, I definitely appreciate Mark Millar’s efforts and that of other comics pros— to publicize this annoyance. What I don’t appreciate — the websites going out of their way to catalog this guy’s abuseive comments. I have tons of his deleted messages saved up if anyone wants a private look, but I’m not going to make them public.

  17. Otistfirefly says:

    “the world is a scary place. The Internet? Not so much”

    Why don’t we ask these eleven kids if this is true? Oh, wait we can’t. Because they’re dead.

    http://www.cyberbullyingnews.com/2010/05/list-of-cyberbullying-related-suicides/

    And that list is 2 1/2 years old.

    (Sorry, Ms. Heidi. Didn’t mean to feed.)

  18. @Otistfirefly, thanks for that list. As someone who works with young people, I can attest first hand that the effects of cyberbullying can be devastating to kids and teens. Because it’s easier to tear down someone behind a keyboard than to their face, you would not believe some of the messages young people have to put up with ON A DAILY BASIS. It affects their grades, their ability to leave the house, their physical health, and their emotional well-being. Not all speech is protected, especially not speech that puts someone’s safety at risk.

  19. http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/09/mark-millar-others-team-up-to-take-down-online-bully/#comment-106100

    If you disagree with the law, take the law degree you evidently have and go challenge it in court. Not here. You can’t change the law by complaining in the comments section of The Beat.

    Yet.

  20. Matthew Southworth says:

    While I think What-Ev’s “you’re a woman and won’t apologize” comment was shitty, I’m not sure it’s fair to call him a troll (not based on this thread; maybe there are others that further cement that description, of course).

    I think his point that free speech should be defended is a fair one and worth making. However, the question is whether A) the guy made actual threats and B) whether those threats fall into the realm of free speech. I read some of the jerk’s tweets yesterday and recall reading actual threats, though I may be misremembering.

    I do believe that there needs to be some manner of dealing with behavior that crosses a line and becomes deliberately abusive and harassing. I also agree that it’s a very slippery slope to outright censorship, however, and I think What-Ev’s point is worth considering, even if he handicapped his own credibility with that misogynistic comment.

    Of course, this is your house, Heidi, and I don’t mean to argue with you or disrespect your judgment. But I wasn’t comfortable just sitting on the feeling that maybe What-Ev was getting more than he deserved and thought I should speak up.

    And now!, I’m going to bed.

  21. Shawn Kane says:

    I’m all for free speech but the moment that one person gets a specific threat and doesn’t feel safe then the person ABUSING their free speech has crossed the line. I’ve read a bunch of this guy’s postings and they’re pretty sick.

  22. faustino perez says:

    Dare I say it? I have a new-found respect for Mark Millar. (I USED to have respect for Mark Millar and then it fell behind the couch. Now I’ve found it again. YAY!)

    With regard to “Freedom of Speech” and all … um … your right to throw a punch ends exactly before my nose begins. Posting hateful things on the Internet isn’t exactly a crime against humanity (except YOUR OWN humanity) but it’s not to be defended. Posting threats? Okay, call the cops in.

    “Don’t feed the trolls” may be bad science but it’s good policy. And IF a troll jumps out from under the bridge, one should rightfully expect the proper authorities to step in and deal with the matter.

    The “issue” of Women in comics (both as pros and fans) is significant. How many straight guys would want to go to a place where they were leered at or threatened with violence (sexual or otherwise), just because they were straight guys? Not many. Okay, fellas. That’s what the ladies go through ALL THE FRICKIN’ TIME. So show a little empathy, nerds!

    And police state? Um. In 1917, under the Alien & Sedition Acts, President Woodrow Wilson rounded up 50 000 people (yes, you read that correctly) and had them jailed (many for indefinite periods), mainly because they were a) “communists”(unionists, actually) b) “foreigners” (ie – born somewhere OTHER than America) or c) “radicals” (and yes, some of them might have been bomb-throwing anarchists, which was the style at the time, much like tying an onion to your belt.)Please, PLEASE don’t throw around words like “police state” unless you know what they actually MEAN.

  23. Alistair Robb says:

    Heidi; personally I really sympathise with what’s been going on. I have often voiced my opinion about how, today, what goes on within the context of the internet is just as valid as what goes on in the “real” world. That having been said I need to respectfully take issue with your statement that

    “…kind of amused that John V Has been around for years — and I publicly confronted him on Twitter a few months ago— but when a man calls him out do people finally notice? ”

    Now, before you get all riled up and stuff, bear with me. I am someone who spends a fair amount of my time surfing around sites such as The Beat, Bleeding Cool and CBR, I’m on Facebook constantly and used to use Twitter much more than I do today; but I’ve kind of given up on that as I really don’t want to know what someone’s farts smell like or if their Weiner bitch has had a hystorectomy.

    Having spent all this time on these sites, the day before yesterday was the FIRST time that I’d heard about this problem, brought to my attention on my Facebook feed by Gene up there! Does this mean that none of the women involved really took this seriously? I suspect not, I know a couple of the people involved and I’m pretty sure that they took the attitude that if you ignore it, it’ll go away. Unfortunately these asshats who get their jollies harrassing people online do not take the hint, that’s why they’re asshats.

    I’m not a massive fan of Mark’s work. I’ve enjoyed some of his stuff and hated other stuff, but his stock has risen considerably in light of his attitude with this guy. I’m pretty sure he did it because he likes the people who are being harrassed. So kudos to him there.

    Finally ( yes there is a finally to this ramble)I think that’s it’s high time that the, not insubstantial, internet community got its act together and started policing themselves a little better so that we can all enjoy the freedoms that the world wide web can give us, without fear of harrassment and with the opportunity to really shut out those voices we don’t want to hear because their talking through their sphincters.

  24. alistair says:

    Just for those that think that cyberbullying is harmless or inocuous:

    http://jezebel.com/5939225/next-top-model-judge-hospitalized-after-twitter-bullying-leads-to-suicide-attempt

  25. Joe S. Walker says:

    Mark Millar being held up (rather grudgingly) as an example of public virtue! Who’d have thought it?

  26. john layman says:

    Hooray for Ron and Mark. Well done!

  27. Chris Hero says:

    I think a lot of us got beat up by bullies when we were younger. Back then, the rule seemed to be “man up” and either “take your beating like a man or learn to fight.” At least that was the world I grew up in.

    That being said, looking back on it, what an awful way to raise kids. Because words *can* hurt badly.

    Anyway, this was a man who was making threats on women and he very well could have followed up on them someday. I’m all for letting someone like that being arrested. No man should ever make threats against a woman.

    Thank God somebody finally stopped it.

  28. For those wondering what’s the big deal, if these threats were made over the phone or via snail mail, people would consider them stalking, harassing behavior. Legally, no less. Just because it takes place on the internet doesn’t make it less dangerous. The legal definition of assault is saying the threat of violence against someone, not the actual contact. And guess what? That’s not free speech. That’s an illegal act of harm against someone.

    There’s no way to tell whether people like this are just trying to push buttons or whether they really intend to do harm, and so it’s absolutely imperative to fight back against folks like them. And I can guarantee that if he had actually physically harmed any of his targets, the internet would be full of people saying, “Why didn’t she go to police about his messages? Why didn’t she say anything?”

    There’s no shame in everyone standing up and saying, “This is unacceptable.” As far as I’m concerned, it’s overdue, but I fully welcome it. That’s what a community should do for each other.

  29. jeremeyes says:

    This got douchey pretty quickly.

  30. Torsten Adair says:

    “I did not see any threats which could result in legal action against him.”

    So there’s no harm in letting the police investigate? Or is that harassment against him? Supposedly, the authorities were sent evidence, which would generate enough probable cause to investigate. Then there might be an arrest, a trial, and acquittal or conviction.

  31. Serhend Sirkecioglu says:

    Well I guess it’s about time for me for put in my two cents on the whole matter. I’m from a generation(86-90) where something like this almost a non-issue, there are just as many if not more ladies in every aspect of our industry. we had a tome of an anthology dedicated to women cartoonists and it did glorious numbers on KS and girls have cartoonists like Raina Telgemeier and Vera Brogsol to look up to.
    When I read the comments, I honestly felt if he ever directed those words to me or my family I would break him without a shred of doubt, but yet at the same time I was interested in how far does this misogynistic undercurrent in comics go and why does it exist in the first place? is this a kernel of sympathy for this prick? No, more curiosity on this chronicle of hate and what I perceive as the “last bastion” of the comics boy’s club. If anyone could point me to when and where this hate all started, I would like that. I want to do a little digging on it.

    Getting the authorities involved would scared this prick, barring him from using a computer would be nice to. Threats are threats, nuff said.

  32. What this guy’s doing is known as a shtick. This one, to be exact:

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hateman

  33. I’m tired of someone invoking ‘free speech” as if that is enough to resolve an issue. the world is a little more nuanced than that.

  34. Dave Hartley says:

    Schtick huh ? Interesting choice of word. Normally means a regular routine or persona that’s consciously adopted as part of a performance. What if this shithead wasn’t fully in charge of his persona or performance ? Would it make it easier to think about the issues if that was the case ? Or if it wasn’t ?

    Doesn’t really make any difference to whether something should be done about it.

    Nor does it really matter whether the guy articulated clearly worded threats, (interesting how the legalism is picked up so quickly though), nor whether he had any intention of carrying them out. It’s clearly a persistent pattern of bullying behaviour.

    Not surprising that the usual contrarians should be so quick off the mark to raise concerns about the guys freedom of speech and suggest that people should grow a thicker skin. (No need to declare the obvious self interest). That’s just what we want, right – a world of impregnably armoured arseholes.

  35. george says:

    I’ve seen sick and twisted stuff online, but this guy is one of the worst offenders. His call for “more comics that promote rape” is actually one of his MILDER comments.

  36. while i’m not a fan of any of millar’s work (sorry, just not my cup of tea), he is without a doubt on the side of the angels on this issue. as for cyber bullies (or any kind of bullies for that matter) fuck ‘em, they deserve whatever punishment they get for their disgusting actions. i really do not understand why as a society, we tend to coddle these bastards. for the kind of lasting pain and fear they instill in their victims, they always seem to get off pretty light.

  37. george says:

    The anonymity of online posting unleashed a lot of cowardly bullies — people hiding behind “screen names” and acting as nasty as they want.

    Some newspapers have shut down their reader forums because of the racist and libelous comments, the endless personal attacks posted on these sites. When offenders are banned from these forums, they usually get another handle and start posting again. And they post at all hours, making the sites difficult to police.

  38. What a tool. Idiots like this are why I gave up Xbox Live.

    Enablers that babble in anger with fuck-wit phrases like ‘get over it’ and ‘free speech’ are almost always speaking from a position of privilege.

    Just count to ten while they rationalize it. Eventually naked misogyny will slip out.

  39. Wowzers says:

    Good job trying to ruin this guy’s life over something as petty as an online threat. Yeah, he’s an asshole, but that’s all he is. Alerting the police is absolutely ridiculous.

  40. Why do I read the comments.

    So many of you so-called people are absolute scum. Horrible, awful, EVIL people: “wowzers,” “whatev-er,” and a bunch of other folks here. You don’t understand the law, first of all and you’re all sick misogynists.

    Listen up dirtbags: we don’t want you in our communities. Not any more and we never did. Go away. Comics is not a safe haven for misogynists. Your kind is not tolerated.

  41. Wowzers says:

    “Dirtbag?” “Evil?” Please, get a life.

  42. Jade Carver says:

    Thanks for making me laugh, Wowzers. And by ‘thanks’ I actually mean sorry you’re so nauseatingly ignorant as to call the repeated and malicious harassment of many women over several years “petty”. I think YOU are absolutely ridiculous.

  43. I’m with Maddy, Heidi M & Anun & others of that viewpoint.

    This is harassment, pure & simple. I also dealt with “real” bullies in school. At least I got to go home after school, away form those. The ‘net & cel phones = potential bullying/intimidation/threats 24/7.

    When it gets to the point that this schmuck took it it shows a clearly disturbed mind. We should be grateful there’s an IP trail. If all the encounter w/ law enforcement does is shake him up & scare him straight before he tries to physically hurt someone, great.

    Ruin his life? Hah! Anyone suggesting that should try living as a woman, who constantly has to assess their safety relative to the odds of being raped. Nothing to kid about; those anonymous threats are not just “for lulz”. Guy obviously has deep problems.

Speak Your Mind

*