[Linux-aus] Victim Impact Statement
Donna Benjamin
donna at kattekrab.net
Sun Nov 3 18:28:30 EST 2013
Dear David,
Thankyou for your heartfelt and sincere statement explaining you did not intend to cause offence.
I unreservedly apologise for causing you to feel as you do. And I very much hope you are able to get the treatment you need for depression.
I accept you did not intend to offend. I also note you've not apologised for having done so. You say no-one explained why they chose to take offense.
I will do so. Privately to you and to council. I aim to do so with sensitivity and compassion and hope that might help you understand my perspective. As I feel I am now beginning to understand yours.
But not on my phone. Not whilst on a tram.
I also applaud your bravery. Speaking up about depression isn't easy. It affects too many of us.
Take care David.
- Donna.
David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>I cannot continue being associated with Linux Australia. It's bad for
>my health, very, very bad. Apparently telling people how their actions
>
>have impacted upon me can help mitigate the injury, so I'm resigning as
>
>a member and composing this message as my exit note. This is a
>narrative
>in which I tell you how the treatment handed out to me has made me
>feel. That's an unusual style of posting for this list, but,
>apparently, will help me recover from the injuries inflicted by others
>on this list.
>
>I'm resigning because the treatment met out to me in retaliation to my
>Support for Women post has emotionally battered me. The post was about
>
>a serious issue and I had hoped that talking about it might be a good
>thing. I hope I was polite and cogent, and can see nothing offensive
>in
>what I wrote. The concern that affirmative action programs can
>undermine the very people they are intended to benefit was not new nor
>my own idea. I was inspired to write it after that meme resurfaced in
>quality media a number of times over the last few weeks. My comment
>about Thatcher was drawn from a recent edition of Q&A.
>
>Some people were obviously incensed by what I wrote, but it seemed to
>be
>the idea of the discussion that incensed them. Typical of their
>replies
>was to call me a troll, which was a hurtful and offensive thing to do.
>
>What a pity they put in effort to imply that I was being offensive, but
>
>to omit any explanation of how I offended. They chose to take offense.
>
>Calling me a troll was the tactic of a bully. It's a practice of
>intimidation; kill the messenger; stifle the message. It hurt. It
>made
>me feel anxious and unable to cope with life.
>
>I was hurt by the replies which ascribed nefarious motives to me. I
>was
>hurt by having my words twisted and misrepresented, and by having
>different words thrust in my mouth.
>
>Donna Benjamin said, "You seem to assume women are inferior and are
>getting special treatment." No, I don't think women are inferior and
>nothing I wrote should give that impression. I did say that women are
>getting special treatment, which they are. Linking part of my message
>with something that I did not say made me feel frustrated and
>alienated. It made me feel that I was being demonised.
>
>Donna called me a troll and said I should be removed from this mailing
>list. It's easy to call me a troll, but the accusation without any
>substantiation hurt very much. It left me bewildered. What part of
>what
>I wrote was trolling? Linux Australia is the preeminent association of
>
>my peers, and to agitate for my removal was to agitate for my
>professional isolation. It made me fear for the future.
>
>Pomke Nohkan repeated Donna, accused me of obviously intending to
>troll. Wrong. I wasn't, and I don't see what gave the idea that I
>was. Pomke called for me to be banned. I felt like the whole world
>was
>turning against me; and for what? Only for saying something which is a
>
>concern that has been widely raised, and which seems so self-evident.
>When you mandate that a women is chosen, you leave that women open to
>being undermined as not being the best candidate. That must be
>particulaly upsetting for women who happen to be the best candidate.
>
>Daniel Bryan said, that there are other forums to air "Mens' Rights
>Activism." My post had nothing to do with men's rights, and he made me
>
>feel that I being pilloried by people who hadn't even read what I
>wrote.
>
>Rob Kearey said, "I'm done with entitled-neckbeards. I'm out." This
>made me feel that I did something wrong, that I drove him out, that I
>was not capable of successfully delivering a simple line of reasoning.
>
>Paul Gear wrote that "David is sitting back right now laughing that we
>were all silly enough to take the bait." I felt deeply hurt by this
>and
>every other accusation of being a troll. I tried hard to craft my
>message politely and cogently, and even though Paul expressed some
>sympathy with the views I expressed, being called a troll made me feel
>like a failure.
>
>Kim Hawtin said that, "David is well versed in trolling on our local
>lists," and that made me feel physically queasy. Kim has previously
>accused me of trolling, which is a tactic designed to intimidate me and
>
>to alienate others against me, and I did feel intimidated.
>
>Andrew Pam said I "intentionally posted contentious opinions with the
>intent to cause offense." Calling the opinions that I expressed
>contentious implies that the counter-opinion is widely accepted, but
>the
>thread, as well as common life experience, shows otherwise. It wasn't
>the opinion that was contentious but the subject matter. I had tried
>to
>broach the subject without offense, so being accused of intending to
>offend made me feel unwanted in this list.
>
>Russell Coker said it is "reasonably common for undiagnosed Autistic
>people to be labelled as trolls." I have struggled with depression
>for
>over a decade. His veilled accusation of autism made me feel angry. I
>
>have a hard time coping; just getting up each day is hard, let alone
>going out and doing things. Being called autistic exacerbated that.
>
>Glen Turner twisted my words by taking them out of context. He put it
>that I said, "women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable
>(or more needy) men." I did say that, and the risk of that outcome is
>intrinsic to a policy that requires appointing a woman. But by omitting
>
>my subsequent sentence, "this undermines their credibility," Glen made
>me feel the victim of "negative spin." Glen once played a hugely
>important role in connecting Australia to the internet, and I felt
>belittled by his use of my words to present a meaning that was not
>originally there. His subsequent refusal to correct himself added to a
>
>feeling of paranoia.
>
>Hugh Blemings, on behalf of the council, announced that the subject was
>
>not to be dropped because it "doesn't meet a reasonableness test of
>being relevant to linux-aus aims or Free and Open Source Software." I
>cannot, for the life of me, understand how that got said without
>challenge from us all. How can the council say that a discussion on
>association policies is unreasonable? The attempt at censorship, and
>the lack of outrage expressed over it, made me feel paranoid. Joel
>Shaw
>agreed with the censorship! I especially felt that the council was out
>
>to get me.
>
>When I refused to meekly accept that the council could prohibit
>discussions relating to association policy, Rusell Cocker repeated his
>Asperger claim in these terms: "you're really doubling-down on the
>behavior that gives Aspies a bad reputation." I doubt he really does
>think that policies may not be questioned. Linking his implied slur
>with the council's ham-fisted attempt to wrongly stifle discussion was
>doubly hurtful, as well as bewildering. Does he think that policies
>may
>not be questioned, or is it just this one?
>
>Apparently a complaint was made against me, and the council have chosen
>
>to follow process. They do not have to do that. They are entitled to
>find the complaint without merit, and had they done so I wouldn't have
>known it was made. They chose otherwise. They threatened me. This
>made me feel confused: was my message really offended? Is the topic
>taboo? It made me feel anxious: that the council intends kicking me
>out, denying me association with my peers. I was unable to work. I
>had
>to go to bed, and wasn't able to eat, or to get up again, until three
>days later.
>
>My posting was not imflamatory, although a few people chose to react as
>
>if it was. It was not unreasonable, although the council took two
>different approaches to stop ensuing discussion. When I asked people
>on
>this list how they felt about the council's action, not a single person
>
>cared enough to reply, other than Craige McWhirter, and one other
>private message of abuse. Neither of those two messages addressed the
>question of how they felt about the council's action against me.
>Nobody
>spoke to that issue. That made me feel more unwelcome than did all of
>the hate mail sent in response to my original post.
>
>I feel very hurt by the many people who chose to belittle me, or to
>attack me instead of what I said. I considered suicide. I feel
>unwelcome because of the lack of any sort of support over what I tell
>you is an abuse of process by the council, in fact two abuses,
>including
>the censorship as well as the complaints process. I have become
>anxious
>and feel agitated, cannot work at all, indeed it has been a great
>struggle to compose this impact statement. I am now able to get up,
>but
>avoid seeing people. I cannot talk to clients and so have switched my
>phones off. Even though I will have no professional peers with whom to
>
>engage, the impact has been so great that I resign membership. I have
>no real choice in the matter; to do otherwise will prevent me from
>recoverring from the harm done to me. I see no future where I contine
>being a member, which would not include deliberately personal attacks
>on
>me. I cannot stand idly by while the council engages in underhanded
>attacks against me to protect bad policy, or even good policy, if is is
>
>good; but apparently not so good; apparently it needs censorship from
>discussion; apparently it needs bullying and intimidation for its
>defense.
>
>I am very sorry to lose contact with those others of you who have me
>politely, as people should be treated. I am greatful to the majority,
>who engaged in the discussion that I started, rather than engaged in
>personal attack against me. Some people supported what I said; some
>people opposed it. Most were constructive and pollte. Some people
>chastised those who attacked me, instead of the message, and I was
>encouraged by that fair-mindedness. But it was not enough. Nobody
>objected to council censorship. Nobody objected to egregious abuse of
>complaints process. I cannot be part of a group that makes me a
>pariah. I cannot be part of a group that drives me to actual tears,
>leaves me so low that I cannot get up, cannot work, cannot see friends
>or family.
>
>I cannot stand to imagine how this statement will be treated. I expect
>
>it will be largely negative. I shall unsubscribe as soon as I see it
>has been received. I resign membership and revile you collectively as
>nasty bullies who lie and intimidate to achieve a purely political goal
>
>using what should be a technical group. I hope some of you feel shame
>over how you treated me, but predict only joy at an outcome sought
>after
>and achieved.
>
>I thought writing this was supposed to be cathartic, supposed to help
>me
>move past how I have been treated, but I feel even worse. Maybe it
>takes
>time. I thought that I would feel terrible resigning membership, but
>no, that is giving me a sense of peace.
>
>_______________________________________________
>linux-aus mailing list
>linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
--
Donna Benjamin
@kattekrab
Sent from phone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20131103/d62fd9c0/attachment.htm
More information about the linux-aus
mailing list