TheRJCarter has continued his harassment of a children's group on YouTube with more "dirty tricks" and lies. See his latest videos.

**************************************** **

On January 28, 2008, an "article" full of lies and distortion was published by an Internet site, The-Trades.com:

Editorial:
YouTube: Pedophile Playground
by R.J. Carter

One target was a group formed by a 13-year old boy on YouTube who edits together video clips submitted by other kids on important topics such as Earth Day and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

R.J. Carter called this kid's group "a for-profit children's video-making organization with
over 6,000 members worldwide".

A blatant lie.

This group is comprised of a handful of KIDS, and anyone can see the "members" by simply watching any of their videos.
There they are. There are no "secret" or "anonymous" people (adults OR kids) "running" or involved in their group.

He also described "an organization vying for corporate sponsorship from Nike and CBS".

Another lie. Nowhere have they ever asked to get any sort of "sponsorship" or money.
The links to CBS and Nike were on their website as a partial list of YOUTUBE sponsors to contact to voice concerns about how YouTube was treating their patrons. It has nothing to do with trying to get them as a sponsor for their group.
This was made perfectly clear on the site.
If this is how badly RJ reads, he should have no business writing ANYTHING.

R.J. Carter wrote his article in a way that implied links to this kid's group with online child predators, child pornography, pederasts, boy-lovers, and pedophiles.

This is in no way true.

Does R.J. Carter have no shame? How dare he do this to kids that have done nothing but good. Who have shown concern for others in the YouTube community, and for issues that affect all of us.

What have these young people ever done to deserve this treatment? How cruel and heartless are these sick adult men with nothing better to do then torment children for fun?

For over a year, this hate group, the YouTube Yahweh Clan, has harassed this young teenager and his friends with death threats, pornography, spamming, degrading videos, and disgusting sexual insults.

Those whom have been reporting harassment against these kids to YouTube and Law Enforcement are labeled "pedophiles" by Troyriser TheRJCarter, and the Yahweh Clan, a typical form of intimidation by this group of criminals, whose activities have included felony crimes such as forgery, perjury, and fraud.

They call these activities "LULZ".

For a history of the Yahweh Clan hate group:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DynaCatlovesme

If you are being stalked or harassed, Irish282 has videos that show you how to report abusive videos and users:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Irish282
Irish282 also has some logged videos on this subject posted by others that may be of interest.

Keywords: DynaCatlovesme Irish282 Logansperman2 Troyriser encyclopedia dramatica ytyc therjcarter pedophile RJ Carter playground yahweh Cyberbullying Cyberstalking DynaCatlovesme  Irish282  Logansperman2  Troyriser  encyclopedia  dramatica  ytyc  therjcarter  pedophile  RJ  Carter  playground 

Stop Impostor Spammer and Hater activities, cyberbullying, and cyberstalking.

Keywords: TBD1000  DynaCatlovesme  Irish282  Logansperman2  stop  child  abuse  Troyriser  encyclopedia  dramatica  ytyc  youtube yahwey  clan pedophile kidfiddler  cyberbullying  cyberstalking Liars, Lies, Racism, Racist, Hate, Hatred, Haters, Groups, Stalking, Stalkers, bullying, bullies, Slander, Libel, Defamation, Defame, False DMCA

The YouTube Yahweh Clan has been preying on children with YouTube accounts for over a year. Along with posting hundreds of insulting and vulgar videos made with stolen photos and video clips of kids, thousands of hateful, obscene, and threatening comments directed at both kids and adults, they have posted.

Stop Impostor Spammer and Hater activities, cyberbullying, and cyberstalking.
For a history of the Yahweh Clan hate group:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DynaCatlovesme
If you are being stalked or harassed, If you are being stalked or harassed, Irish282 has videos that show you how to report abusive videos and users:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Irish282
Irish282 also has some logged videos on this subject posted by others that may be of interest.

Keywords: DynaCatlovesme  Irish282  Logansperman2  TBD1000  Vloggerheads  stop  pedophile  encyclopediadramatica  troyriser  kidfiddler  cyberbullying  cyberstalking Irish282, LoganSperman2, tbd1000, DynaCatlovesme, Help,Disabled, People, Persons, Children, Handicapped Speech, Impediment, Stop, Yahweh, Clan, Liars, Cyberbullying, Cyberstalking, Lies,Racism, RacistHate, Hatred Haters, Groups, Stalking, Stalkers, bullying, bullies, Slander, Libel, Defamation, Defame, FalseDMCA

Hate groups on YouTube will attack anyone they can, of any age. Disabled, emotionally fragile, and ill people are not immune from their sick games.

Yahweh Clan member NOTLLMTE, is called the "Master of epilepsy" by Encyclopedia Dramatica. He mostly tries to interact with disabled people and manipulate them.

Other members, like ReinaMatisse(Just suspended- now MissMatisse), are attracted to depressed or suicidal people, and becomes very excited about anything having to do with the subject of death.

Yahweh Clan members are also members of the website Encyclopedia Dramatica, where terms like "ChairFags" and "Retards" are used to refer to the disabled, and Children with Aspergers Syndrome are called "AssPies".
They call handicapped people "Mong" (short for Mongoloid). They have posted sick videos about this on YouTube.

There is nothing new about any of this. YouTube has the ability to stop this, but has not.

For a history of the Yahweh Clan hate group:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DynaCatlovesme

If you are being stalked or harassed, Irish282 has videos that show you how to report abusive videos and users:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Irish282
Irish282 also has some logged videos on this subject posted by others that may be of interest.

Keywords: YtV Irish282 LoganSperman2 tbd1000 DynaCatlovesme Help Disabled People Persons Children Kids Handicapped Speech Impediment Stutter stutterer stuttering Stammer Downs Syndrome Troyriser Hate Harassment Special Needs Cyberbullying Cyberstalking

The women became the victims of vicious online attacks for the crime of, gasp, being women. Nothing was off limits: Not their race, family, gender, sexuality.

The women, thankfully, are fighting back. That's a gutsy and remarkable move. True pioneers -- I hope their nightmare helps to shine the light for others.

Link to news story here.

Link to Federal court filing here (20 pages that will make your skin crawl)autoadmit.

-Christy

My hope is to have links and resources available for all 50 states, although that, admittedly, is a tall order. The first focus will be on California.

So how in the heck did http://nosexualharassment.wordpress.com/ come to be christened Boudica? Inspiration crept in, again, via the boyfriend. His mom wanted to see El Camion Vacilador. She laughed aloud at the Fabled Enchantment entry and then, on the fairy tale topic, mentioned Boudica.

I’d never heard of the red-haired warrior queen who unleashed Celtic wrath on the Roman Empire following her inheritance plundering, public humiliation and the rape of her daughters. But I listened – and then read – with rapt interest at her strength, fortitude and bravery. (More about Boudica here.) So, in a nutshell, the boyfriend and his mother are in inspiration behind the name. My hope is that, like Boudica’s people, those who have been subjected to harassment (not just sexual), will rise up and protest the action.

Still, there’s another – selfish – reason for breathing life into the site: I’ll be damned if sexual harassment will control or define me. And that means that this blog, from now on, won’t be clothed by a sexual harassment focus.

Tuesday starts an infrequent series on objects kept. I hope you enjoy it.

-Christy

The bill isn’t law in California – at least not yet. But a spokeswoman from Houston’s office said that it’s expected to become law this year – if, that is, California’s budget ever gets settled. The bill awaits Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signature.

Bill’s status: Here

Bill’s language: (Link here, text below)

BILL NUMBER: AB 919	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  MAY 6, 2008
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JULY 5, 2007
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 30, 2007
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 10, 2007

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Member Houston

                        FEBRUARY 22, 2007

   An act to add Section 653.2 to the Penal Code, relating to crimes.

	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

   AB 919, as amended, Houston. Electronic communication devices:
threats to safety.
   Under existing law, any person who willfully, maliciously, and
repeatedly follows or harasses another person and makes a credible
threat, intended to place that person in fear for his or her safety
or the safety of his or her immediate family, is guilty of the crime
of stalking.
   This bill would make a person who, with the intent to place
another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the
safety of the other person's immediate family, by means of an
electronic communication device, and without consent of the other
person, and for the purpose of  imminently  causing that
other person unwanted contact, injury, or harassment by a 3rd party,
distributes specified identifying information  that would be
likely   to incite or produce that unlawful action  ,
guilty of a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, the bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
   The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
   This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 653.2 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
   653.2.  (a) Every person who, with intent to place another person
in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other
person's immediate family, by means of an electronic communication
device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose
of  imminently  causing that other person unwanted physical
contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically
distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for
downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not
limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic
message of a harassing nature about another person,  which would
be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action,  is guilty
of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in the county jail, by
a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both
that fine and imprisonment.
   (b) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic
communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones,
 cellular   cell  phones, computers,
Internet Web pages or sites, Internet phones, hybrid
cellular/Internet/wireless devices, personal digital assistants
 (PDA)   (PDAs)  , video recorders, fax
machines, or pagers. "Electronic communication" has the same meaning
as the term is defined in Section 2510(12) of Title 18 of the United
States Code. 
   (c) For purposes of this section, the term "harassment" is defined
as  
   (c) For purposes of this section, the following terms apply: 

    (1)     "Harassment" means  a knowing
and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that a
reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously
annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person
and that serves no legitimate purpose. 
   (d) For purposes of this section, the term "of a harassing nature"
is defined as 
    (2)     "Of a harassing nature" means 
information that a reasonable person would consider as seriously
alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously
terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
  SEC. 2.  No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the
Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the
meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution.      

Houston on the bill:

The bill isn’t law in California – at least not yet. But a spokeswoman from Houston’s office said that it’s expected to become law this year – if, that is, California’s budget ever gets settled. The bill awaits Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signature.

Bill’s status: Here

Bill’s language: (Link here, text below)

BILL NUMBER: AB 919	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  MAY 6, 2008
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JULY 5, 2007
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 30, 2007
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 10, 2007

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Member Houston

                        FEBRUARY 22, 2007

   An act to add Section 653.2 to the Penal Code, relating to crimes.

	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

   AB 919, as amended, Houston. Electronic communication devices:
threats to safety.
   Under existing law, any person who willfully, maliciously, and
repeatedly follows or harasses another person and makes a credible
threat, intended to place that person in fear for his or her safety
or the safety of his or her immediate family, is guilty of the crime
of stalking.
   This bill would make a person who, with the intent to place
another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the
safety of the other person's immediate family, by means of an
electronic communication device, and without consent of the other
person, and for the purpose of  imminently  causing that
other person unwanted contact, injury, or harassment by a 3rd party,
distributes specified identifying information  that would be
likely   to incite or produce that unlawful action  ,
guilty of a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, the bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
   The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
   This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 653.2 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
   653.2.  (a) Every person who, with intent to place another person
in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other
person's immediate family, by means of an electronic communication
device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose
of  imminently  causing that other person unwanted physical
contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically
distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for
downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not
limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic
message of a harassing nature about another person,  which would
be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action,  is guilty
of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in the county jail, by
a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both
that fine and imprisonment.
   (b) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic
communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones,
 cellular   cell  phones, computers,
Internet Web pages or sites, Internet phones, hybrid
cellular/Internet/wireless devices, personal digital assistants
 (PDA)   (PDAs)  , video recorders, fax
machines, or pagers. "Electronic communication" has the same meaning
as the term is defined in Section 2510(12) of Title 18 of the United
States Code. 
   (c) For purposes of this section, the term "harassment" is defined
as  
   (c) For purposes of this section, the following terms apply: 

    (1)     "Harassment" means  a knowing
and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that a
reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously
annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person
and that serves no legitimate purpose. 
   (d) For purposes of this section, the term "of a harassing nature"
is defined as 
    (2)     "Of a harassing nature" means 
information that a reasonable person would consider as seriously
alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously
terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
  SEC. 2.  No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the
Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the
meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution.      

Houston on the bill:

Hey fellow TI's!

I would like to get a group of TI's together for some dating and adult fun happy times. Open to kisses, ac/dc, soft caresses, insertions, expelling of love fluids, face sitting, deep bum fingers, felching, midgets, hermaphrodites, transexuals, transvestites, aliens, gods, clouds, radio waves, etc.
If this sounds like fun, get back to me.

NO PERPS ALLOWED

unless you're well hung or have a beautiful coochie)!!!!!!!!!

Kelly Brewer, former editor of the Record Searchlight, offered several screenings of the 2003 film in the R-S conference room. I wanted to see the film, a cautionary and dramatic tale based on the reporting of Adam Penenberg, a Forbes.com journalist who discovers the threads of deceit when he attempts to fact check a Glass story. And, in a coup for online journalism, the dot-com publication shone a million-candle spotlight on the tales that Glass had spun. But I never had time to watch it while I worked.

That story, of course, shows just how powerful online journalism can be. With a few keystrokes, mouse clicks and phone calls nearly any fact can be checked – and the result published. The good news out of all of that: This new culture can quickly out shoddy journalism. And those checks and standards serve the public and, by proxy, makes for better overall journalism.

Still, I couldn’t help but juxtapose that message – online journalism can uncover and tell the public the truth, which is the goal of journalism – with what happened to me: Punishment (sexual harassment, cyberstalking, a smear campaign, and more), including from a couple of colleagues, for daring to tell the truth. 

Food for thought and movie trailer follows below: 

Forbes.com article about Glass: http://www.forbes.com/1998/05/11/otw3.html#

Salon.com article about Glass: http://archive.salon.com/21st/rose/1998/05/14straight.html

David Carr on Fox News and their treatment of journalists who dare to tell the truth: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/business/media/07carr.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

NYT magazine piece, including original Fox video, about Carr's piece: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/07/_in_this_mornings_times.html 

Presumably, those points can be cashed in for made-in-the-U.S. McTroll fare at the McCain campaign store. OK, I won’t touch on the outsourcing of the U.S. or the goods that McCain is hawking. (At least right now.)  

But I was reminded of the HuffPo story while reading “Debunking anti-Obama e-mails” in today’s Salon.com. It’s one thing to disagree with someone, their politics, their actions, their deeds. And it’s one thing to call them on the carpet and shred their platform and arguments.

But these tunneling trolls, some of whom have only bits and bytes of a life, aren’t like drunks on a bar stool, as one editor has likened the banter. They’re more like skittering cockroaches, which flee at the flick of a light. Their mission is not to encourage thinking, dialogue or free speech. It’s to cover, disgust and squelch the speaker. And to bludgeon those who hold differing views and, barring that, frighten their targets into retreat.

Those cockroaches skittered – even a few in my office – when I was sexually harassed (imagine colleague-supplied references to my clothing, my bosom and genitals and the regurgitation of office conversations, just to let me know that it was an inside job; harassing comments that sped to my e-mail inbox and spread via my employer's Web site) for, it seems, having a voice and viewpoint while being a woman. Just as that was vile, reproachful and disgusting – and sexually harassing, not to mention plain creepy, so is this. McTrolling and harassing someone into retreat – with the intention of silence. I wonder if that’s truly compatible with democracy. And to think, the Internet was the promise of egalitarian democracy, where nothing but your mind mattered.

-Christy

 Update: A Washington Post article about McCain's McTrolls (aka political activits) here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/06/AR2008080603589.html

I had so many years of harassment with my phones, now its my computer, so  it is no coincidence.  The last cartrige of ink I bought was nearly all used up on printing out "this page can not be displayed" that was all I was getting every time tried to use the computer.  Day after day. I'm keeping them for a reason.  I'm on a pension, I don't use my ink up for nothing, I can't afford to buy more every few weeks. I used to be able to play games and watch videos on my computer, even though it was a struggle to do so, with constantly being disconnected from whichever one, having the computer turned off etc.  Over the last few weeks can't even do that anymore. Everything, java, flash, etc, has been checked and showing working and enabled etc. But no, not one game, video, youtube or anything.  This is exactly how it was with my telephones, swapped on a daily basis as to which one would work and which wouldn't. I don't need 7 or 8 different reasons for the computer interference, as telecom tried to give me regarding the phones back in the 80's. I find that very radical. (I guess I still believe a company is accountable to its customers.)

Damn, it’s a slippery slope that we’re wrestling with as a society. A worrisome, slippery slope.

The David Carr column below illuminates what Fox News has done to journalists who dare to cross them – or report on them at all. Where will it stop? Will presidential hopefuls drop spittle into the blogosphere about the reporters who work to inform with objectivity? Corporations and individuals are already engaged in it. And what about those tender stories that dig into an emotional truth -- the ones that connect us as human beings? I wonder how the stories that I worked on about Annie Nelson -- a woman who lost her war with ovarian cancer and was brave enough to let me tell her story and attend her funeral -- would play out on the 'Net now. It was emotionally deflating to watch -- and, several times, reduced me to a puddle of tears -- but it was an important story to tell, I thought. I cared. And I knew readers would, too.

How will this free-for-all play out? And what will it mean to the fibers, not just the fabric, of our society? Those thoughts and more bounced through my head like a pinball last night. I’m confident that it’ll work out. But maybe I’m just a Pollyanna who’s reaching into Pandora’s box in search of hope. (Sorry for mixing allusions.)

Check out Carr’s article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/business/media/07carr.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

(And I promise to lighten the fare tomorrow.)

-Christy

The case is not unprecedented, but it is a reminder that anonymous postings on the freewheeling Internet can be traced, legal analysts say.

"A lot of people don't really think about that," said Daniel Solove, a professor at George Washington University Law School. "I do think it's going to have an effect on what people say. It's one of the most prominent cases of its type."

The women's lawsuit, filed last year, charges that they were defamed by repeated postings they considered sexually harassing and threatening. ...

Posts by other defendants included remarks about one plaintiff's breasts and a claim that women with the same first names "should be raped." Some postings discussed the women's family backgrounds and supposed sexual exploits while invoking racially and sexually charged slurs.

Some people who posted the Web items threatened to rape one of the women and attempted to start rumors that one of the women had died or committed suicide, according to the lawsuit.

 It appears I may have a place,  going back weeks ago when I went looking for one, later the same day got "Move again and I'll fu**ing kill you". Why? does it cost more or take more time to start things again?  Thought you'd already be organised, are you bloody slipping, doesn't appear so to me. Or gee mate, I may even have the bloody cheek to think I can go out somewhere, or do something I want to do, hey? ( Melbourne Cup Day 1996 woken to "If the bitch isn't in that she's not in anything".  Think it's way past time I started to be a bitch against these cretins. ) A week ago got "I want to bury you". Of course. Bury the truth. I have only one wish for a piece of filth like that.  Actually just remembered, when watching T.V. awhile ago an advert came on for a funeral home, and exactly the same time there were two very loud distinct clicks on the T.V.

Today has been constantly raining, cold and windy, but had no problems with the car starting earlier each time I wanted to use it, must have used it too many times for their liking, tonight after the flashes of light went to use it, and of course no go.  Read up a little on Electromagnetic engine kill. Pretty easy to do it to someones vehicle.

My scans, of which I have to do 2-3 times a day, showed their  usual rubbish. Keycorder, spytech, spyall, 4porn, something else porno, didn't get time to catch that one, prostit finder and hacking tool.  They must get very bored with there pathetic little lives.  I have some notes from last October on what they were doing nightly to me and the dog and computer, and then commenting on how hard it was to kill me, which I shall put on later.

These thoughts and more were rattling through my head months ago when I was under attack, sexually harassed -- by colleagues and others -- for the crime of being a woman journalist. For some reason I had a country station tuned  in while I zigzagged through the mountains around Weaverville, Calif. And while thoughts pinged and ponged through my mind, a radio tune interrupted that match. It was Brad Paisley singing "Online."

Fitting, I thought.

Fitting.

-Christy

 

Does free speech tend to move toward the truth or away from it? When does it evolve into a better collective understanding? When does it collapse into the Babel of trolling, the pointless and eristic game of talking the other guy into crying “uncle”? Is the effort to control what’s said always a form of censorship, or might certain rules be compatible with our notions of free speech?

 

One promising answer comes from the computer scientist Jon Postel, now known as “god of the Internet” for the influence he exercised over the emerging network. In 1981, he formulated what’s known as Postel’s Law: “Be conservative in what you do; be liberal in what you accept from others.” Originally intended to foster “interoperability,” the ability of multiple computer systems to understand one another, Postel’s Law is now recognized as having wider applications. To build a robust global network with no central authority, engineers were encouraged to write code that could “speak” as clearly as possible yet “listen” to the widest possible range of other speakers, including those who do not conform perfectly to the rules of the road. The human equivalent of this robustness is a combination of eloquence and tolerance — the spirit of good conversation. Trolls embody the opposite principle. They are liberal in what they do and conservative in what they construe as acceptable behavior from others. You, the troll says, are not worthy of my understanding; I, therefore, will do everything I can to confound you.

When I wrestled with taking my complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission – forgive me for vagueness on that front; details will come later, although not necessarily in a blog form (It would be foolish of me to publish details that would help my employer’s sexual harassment attorney hurt me) – I was met with staunch, blue-collar, gotta-protect-your-career-and-livelihood-(is a $28,000 income really a livelihood these days?) wisdom from loved ones: Don’t do it.

But I did do it. I had no choice, I felt. To give in to the harassment – it appeared intended to silence me as a journalist, humiliate me as a human being, punish me as a woman and strike fear of sexual assault in my heart – would be unthinkable to me ethically and professionally. To give in would be a betrayal to myself as a woman and a journalist. Fighting back, career consequences be damned, was – and continues to be – my only option.

As far as career suicide goes, which my father cautioned me would be a result of my stance, I felt and feel that I not only can't work with colleagues who engage in such vile behavior, but I most definitely don’t want to work in an environment in which my employer allows it. (That, by the way, is not a statement about my current employment status or desire. I have not quit, and I refuse to quit, my job.)

All of that leaves me with one choice as a journalist: dig in, document, fight back, provide resources for others who have been hurt in similar ways, shine the light and tell the painful truth: Some 83,000 people filed employment discrimination charges with the EEOC in 2007. That figure doesn’t include complaints filed with state commissions, such as the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. And it leaves out another painful truth: More employees ducked filing charges out of their own career suicide fears, figuring that to endure harassment or to move on in silence were better options.

I didn’t want this fight. It was thrust upon me. I didn’t want the depression. Didn’t want the anxiety. Didn’t want the stress. Didn’t want the fear. Didn’t want the sexual harassment and didn’t want the cyberstalking. And I don’t want it for any other woman, or any other person, who finds herself or himself the object of base, sexual, racial, religious, ethnic background or any other where-we-live characteristic. That, in a nutshell, is why I’ve taken this route, scarlet letter and all.

Garbage stinks more when it’s closed up and hidden away. I’m opening the lid. Stand up, ladies and gentlemen. It’s your right to work in a harassment-free environment. And if you’re worried about employment retaliation, know that it’s illegal – both to retaliate against an employee who complains and to refuse to hire an applicant based on her or his harassment complaint, which the EEOC dubs a "protected activity." It’s not about being a corporate drone, who fears the loss of a paycheck and career advancement opportunity for speaking up. It’s about standing up for your rights and refusing to accept less-than-humane treatment while earning a living in this corporate-America work zone.

Meanwhile, here are a couple of videos that deal with sexual harassment:

-Christy

A YouTube video diary about a woman's experience with sexual harassment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InUff39cYZw

Another time I rang Telecom? re phone problems, (when wasn't there?) and I'm sure it was the same female, says to me, "Say it loud enough and he'll hear you." I think she's got pretty good hearing also.

Just a short time ago, trying to open page for new post, which took about 10 minutes, got, "You won't catch me". Does she think she's that quick? 

I deliberately changed my password awhile ago, gave a name which I think is quite suitable for her, My, my, did she get upset, not too much longer into the night got yelled "Oh, well done bitch".  As I said before I don't miss having the land line, as this is identical to what happened with my phone services, day after day, year after year. Radical b's.

The night before had hardly no sleep, got attacked nearly all night, at 2.51am, got "That's what we do to kiddy rooters", and car took off. Yes, I am putting that on.  I WILL PUT EVERY PATHETIC BIT OF BULL/S and the terror tactics they do.  It was the coldest night here for over thirty years yet myself and the dog were hot. At one stage his heart started racing over double what it should be, mine already was. Will also put it on my new blog, the Aust one. I think Australians should know the kind of crap that lives here. I don't believe many do. I have read on many sites how the media etc, won't get involved and expose this for what it is, I can't understand this? Why? Why shouldn't this kind of crime be exposed, it's no different from many others, except its done to innocent people on a daily basis for sport. Kind of reminds me of an Australian movie i think it was called "Turkey Shoot" where they used people as targets in a hunting game.  More people should COMPLAIN about this, because while they don't, they are allowed to keep getting away with this. Are we allowed to just go out in the street and shoot someone or knife them? No. This is no different except its done over a period of time. Tortured to death. Thats what people are. Tortured on a daily basis. Every single aspect of life they enjoy is taken away from them one by one, + V2S crap B/S to go with it.  Even just the mundane things like food shopping becomes something you become greatful you can do.  They're scared, yes, of being exposed. How many years would it be behind bars if exposed. DISGUSTING. So instead of being exposed, they want their victims put away. Lord help the truth be known.

Today it actually took me 7 minutes to open page for a new post. On the weekend took me both days to do what is normally done within an hour or so. A file I downloaded took an hour and fifteen minutes on the weekend, did it again yesterday and took 8 seconds. Can you believe.

Please, do NOT show up to anywhere I am not inviting you to/isn't a huge event and try to approach me like it's no big deal. It would not be cool at all.

Now I'm admittedly an open book to an extent. Much of my basic information is public knowledge. I've considered going private many times just thinking about these crazies. Like many women, I take a chance at leaving these doors open.

But hearing about this true story of one man who did this to someone I know got to me a little.  It's now an awkward.. wait, now that they're in my social network are they going to do that to me?

I explained to the person that what they did to the girl was not kosher.  He said he got it, but I don't think he really understands the extremity of it.  I want to quietly step away.. but am stuck.

The last thing that I want when out with a group of my friends is some random stranger coming up to me saying they found out where I was via a social geotagger.  If you're going to be in the area and want to meet me- fine.  Dm me.  Text me.  Ask if it's alright.  Otherwise, assume it's not, unless you are already a friend in real life.

I have only one thing left to say.

I don't just wear heels because they're pretty...