Drink the Shaker Kool-Aid

Submission: This is what has ACTUALLY been happening.

This is what she says has been happening.

The people who run and participate in this site are largely disgruntled former commenters, some of whom left on their own after I disappointed them in some way, and some of whom were banned after violating the commenting policy.

FALSE. The people who run and participate in this site are wildly varied and have their own reasons for being here. They include people who were once mods and contributors. They include people who left on their own after witnessing, or being victim to, MM and the mods/community arbitrary pile-ons and beat-downs for airing disagreeing opinions. They include people who have been banned for not adhering to the ever-moving goalposts of what is referred to as the “commenting policy”.

There are, increasingly, participants at the site who have never even engaged at Shakesville, but just find some satisfaction in participating in a space dedicated to the explicit purpose of destroying this community.

[citation needed]

[Screen cap with pull quote added by me.]
They explicitly want to chase me out of my space, offline, and want me to have no opportunities to make a living doing what I’ve done for the last ten years of my life. They want this community to cease to exist because they don’t like me and the commenting policy, and don’t care what destroying it would mean for the people to whom this community means something.

The hate site operates under the auspices of warning people—namely, you, the active commenters, whom they routinely deride as too stupid or gullible to “save” yourselves from me—away from this community, where they assert people are “abused,” the examples of which are inevitably people being held accountable for violations of the clearly stated commenting policy.

But, despite their preposterous claims to be engaging in legitimate criticism to prevent abuse, they in fact engage in egregious harassment and abuse themselves—of me, of the contributors and moderators, of Iain, and, increasingly, of commenters.

FALSE. Had you included the rest of the screencap which you selectively pull some words from, you would find that “They” want SV to cease being considered a leading feminist blog, when 80% of the content is now personal anecdotes, pictures or unrelated news. “They” find you and your commenting policy actively harmful to people who have been led to believe that SV is a “safe space”. “They” believe that those to whom that community means something would be better served elsewhere.

What constitutes “legitimate criticism” is, for example, a thread with 472 comments debating whether it’s acceptable to mock me for being fat and/or not understanding how my own body works.

What constitutes “legitimate criticism” is, as other examples, a thread discussing wanting to slapDeeky in the face, or discussing how Ana Mardoll is like a “cat lady” who will be eaten by her cats when she dies, or tracking down a WordPress test site I was using to explore alternative commenting options and then spinning wild conspiracy theories about what I was really up to.

What constitutes “legitimate criticism” is, as but one more example of literally hundreds, routinely referring to me as “Liz,” because I objected to being misnamed in comments here. The stated purpose is to try to harm me. It’s also a simple way of dehumanizing me: I am not Melissa McEwan, a real person, but Liz, a cartoonish version of me wholly invented by people who are making an existential attack on me and this space.

"Legitimate criticism" is their pretense for engaging in rank abuse and the dissemination of ludicrous conspiracy theories and lies, often posted by anonymous submitters, of whom are required no proof or substantiation of their claims.

The 472 comment thread was a discussion spawned by the fact that SVKA not allow fat-shaming submissions to be posted. The following thread was a wide-reaching discussion and it is incorrect to assert the entire thread was a debate only about MM.

SVKA is also a place to vent. Amongst the legitimate criticism there are many unserious or pet-hate type of observations. These observations/rants/vents do not cancel out the vast majority of legitimate criticism content. Cherry picking some petty examples of people posting slightly mean-sounding things does not mean no legitimate criticism exists.

The Wordpress “test site” found openly stated that Shakesville was going to shut down. All queries regarding the change and all subsequent references to it were deleted. The only suggestion it was to explore other commenting options were made **ON SKVA**, not in the actual SV community. Speculation is allowed on SKVA.

Many people openly object to the nickname “Liz” and do not refer to MM as such. Disagreement is allowed on SKVA.

We actually often provide screen caps and direct links to the things we are claiming. Previously MM has complained about us doing this so I’m not sure which she would prefer.

Relentlessly, members of the hate site propose and promulgate all sorts of conspiracy theories and straight-up lies about me and the moderators, including but not limited to: That I am a cult leader; that I’m not invested in this community beyond whatever capacity I have to exploit it for personal gain; that I trick people into becoming moderators by feigning friendships with them; that a moderator repeatedly emailed a commenter to harass her; that I have created multiple identities to sockpuppet at this and other sites; that Ana Mardoll and I am the same person; that I have invented Iain; that I abuse Iain; that my marriage is a sham; that I live in filth; that Iain makes so much money I don’t need to work; that I make lots of money; that I make no money; that I pay no income taxes; that I do not have health problems; that I do have mental problems aside those from which I’ve disclosed; that I am a compulsive liar; that I am lying about Sophie being tiny to get attention; that I abuse Zelly because she is “fat.”

None of these things are true. I certainly don’t imagine that I will convince anyone who is inclined to believe any of this garbage; the reason I am sharing this truncated list of absurdity is simply to delineate the unfathomable and varied scope of the desperate, unethical, irrational attacks that have been levied in an attempt to discredit me and anyone associated with me, without the merest shred of honesty or decency.

They aren’t even consistent in their wild accusations. If one attack doesn’t work (Iain is a figment of my imagination), then on to the next one (I abuse my husband), without even the slightest hesitation at the promotion of demonstrably incompatible theories.

FALSE. SVKA participants are not a monolith, and criticism and humour are not mutually exclusive. The participant who believes Iain is not real is clearly posting in brevity, and may be a different participant who believes MM abuses Iain.

There is no requirement for consistency in a community made of many different people, nor is it claimed. The one thing we do seem to find consensus on, however is that MM is engaging in behaviours recognisable to many as narcissistic and cult-leadery.

All of this was ignorable, as long as it was contained to being directed at me. In truth, I have never even visited the site (and I have no plans to do so). Trusted friends have kept me abreast of the goings-on, repeatedly urging me not to look at the site myself, as I’ve got enough abuse to process from other sources, and instead alerting me when there was something they thought I’d want to know, such as orchestrated trolling of Shakesville. All of the linked screen captures included for sample documentation in this piece have been taken by others, who were concerned for me, themselves, and/or the members of this community. I had, unfortunately, a vast store of screen captures of abuse from which to select the few provided examples.

Hypocrisy. MM objected to the SVKA site taking screen captures of her commenters posts and sharing them elsewhere. If the justification of this is because they perceive themselves documenting cases of abuse toward SV/MM - perhaps you will find resonance in the fact that this is exactly what we at SVKA were doing int he first place.

Also sometimes just to laugh at the ridiculous content notes. The one does not negate the other.

In spite of the insistent assertion made by the administrators and participants at the site that I am a voracious narcissist who only cares for myself (the sort of person who would care immensely if untrue things were being said about them), I have cultivated over the years of doing this work a keen capacity to ignore bullshit being said about me.

I do not and cannot ignore when people decide to go after people about whom I care, in order to get to me.

There is no better evidence that, in reality, the people who inhabit the hate site know exactly who I really am than the fact that when coming after me wasn’t working, they went after the people I love.

They know that I am a person who cares profoundly about other people’s safety, and they have endeavored to exploit that.

FALSE. MM has repeatedly demonstrated that she has no regard for anyone’s safety but her own, as evidenced by the laughable notion that she still refers to SV as a “safe space”.

No one is “going after” anyone to “get to” MM - any commentary of other people associated with MM/SV is due to their own behavior/complicity in the abusive dynamics that are documented at SVKA. That MM perceives that commentary on other people is STILL all about her is telling.

They now obsessively document the contributions of all the writers and moderators to this space, including what they do in their own spaces, if they blog elsewhere. Portly Dyke, who hasn’t been active on the site for years, as she’s now the primary caretaker of her elderly parents, is still a target. Her professional blog has been scrutinized and discussed, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with Shakesville. When I don’t give them enough fodder for obsessive discussion and documentation, they go after Ana Mardoll:

The moderators and contributors to SV are complicit in the abuse that many participants on SVKA have been subjected to. They contribute to the oppressive atmosphere at SV which causes people to have to consistently walk on eggshells, agonise over the wording of their comments, or simply not comment at all out of fear of getting it wrong. They have personally been part of pile-ons, take-downs and arbitrary enforcing of the ever-changing rules.

When discussing the hostility of the environment at SV, discussion of the people who contribute to that environment is fair (game).

They have posted vicious personal smears against the contributors and moderators, told flat-out lies about them, mischaracterized our relationships, and demeaned them in innumerable ways.

[citation needed]

They have found Iain’s LinkedIn profile and posted screen shots of it, and have discussed where he works, what he does for a living, and how much he might make. After his profile was posted, he got a flurry of contact requests from people he doesn’t know, hoping to exploit his one bit of online presence, which has nothing to do with Shakesville, in order to get access to our personal lives.

FALSE. Speculation on Iain/MM’s wider financial situation only arose because MM used to ask for donations so that she and Iaian didn’t have to “struggle” on behalf of the blog. It is worth noteworthy that this wording changed since some scrutiny was placed on Iain’s real world position and the fact that they are probably quite well off and nowhere near struggling.

Further, former commenters to this space, to some of whom I’ve given considerable amounts of my time and concern to help them in some personal or professional way, participate there—bitterly resentful of having been banned for repeated violations of the safe space, which only meant as much to them as it protected them, and nobody else. Naturally, they aren’t inclined to share stories of Liss, who cared about them, but gleefully pile on the abuse of Liz, who is a cartoonish effigy of me. There are breathtaking betrayals out of nothing but sheer vengeance, and it has made me deeply reluctant to be as open with strangers in need as I used to be.

To make the obvious point, there could not be more compelling evidence that we made the right moderating decisions regarding these former commenters than the quality of the content at that site.

They demonstrate in every conceivable way that they are hostile to the ideas, central to the space here, of consent for boundaries and harm mitigation.

No, they don’t tell the stories of Liss who cared about them, because they experienced the Liz who ignored them when they reached out, castigated them when they tried to clarify a point, swore at them, belittled them, and then turfed them out when they expressed any confusion or hurt. The safe space they thought they had, was violated by the very person who claims to be defending it, so they sought out somewhere else they could share their story and work through their feelings of betrayal, anger and confusion about the loss of the place they thought SV used to be.

Their harassment does not stay contained at the site. It comes to me via Twitter and my inbox. When I take time off, I get calls from numbers I don’t recognize, so I can’t get a moment’s peace. Threatening messages have been left on my voicemail, or, sometimes, just maniacal laughter, so as not to break any laws. Other writers/online activists have reported to me receiving communications admonishing them not to have anything to do with me.

VERY FALSE. I don’t doubt for a second that MM gets real, frightening and offensive harrasment - few women online don’t. But it is disingenuous at best, and offensive at worst, to link criticism that SKVA VERY DELIBERATELY KEEPS SEPARATE FROM SV, to people who actually personally contact or threaten MM in real life. SVKA content is easily available to people with less pure motives than sharing disagreement with each other regarding SV.

To use MM’s own parlance, this is engaging in Occam’s Big Paisley Tie - the most likely culprit for contact like she describes are MRA/anti feminist trolls, which a cursory read of SVKA will show are in short supply over here. To link this sort of real-world harassment to people discussing problematic elements of her online presence is dishonest.

And their “borrowing” from Shakesville does not end there, naturally. After positing a conspiracy theory about how I use the Open Threads as a sort of gateway drug to recruit sycophants to my cult, they started posting Open Threads of their own. After complaining about Shaker Gourmet threads, they started posting food threads of their own. The site admin hosts threads inviting people to share how they found their way to the space, just as I have done many times. They mock me for posting content like kitty videos, and then post kitty videos. They even use a variation on the teaspoon concept in their tagline: “Knocking down Shakesville 3/4 cup at a time.”

In a nod to the possessive and projective nature of stalking, they ape me even as they claim to despise me, and they imagine me to be capable and desirous of doing the very things they do: Lying, sock-puppeting, infiltrating their space to stir shit.

But, unlike me, they are not remotely concerned with the safety of other people.

FALSE. SVKA exists, in part, because people were mourning the loss over what they once felt was a valuable community, and as we realised more and more we were not alone in our criticisms it was a pretty natural progression to add comments/discussion with each other. To claim that we are borrowing from Shakesville in having open threads, food threads, and introduction threads, when that is literally the format of pretty much every discussion forum on the internet is hilarious.

Unlike SV, we do not claim to be a safe space. Unlike SV, we actually manage to have one for a whole bunch of people who certainly didn’t find it there.

To state the obvious: No one is required to read this space, and no one who reads it is required to participate in comments. All anyone has to do to avoid the monster that is Melissa McEwan and her cult of abusive moderators is not read Shakesville and/or not follow me on Twitter.

I haven’t written for an external publication in years. I have done a total of three on-site speaking engagements in a decade. My sphere of influence is limited to people who seek me out.

I am fully cognizant of the fact that Shakesville isn’t for everyone. And the way most people deal with finding Shakesville disagreeable for any one of a number of reasons is simply not reading it.

Pot, meet kettle.

That is not criticism. That is harassment; it is exploitation; it is abuse.

FALSE. There has been multiple discussions on SVKA about this but it bears repeating: commenting on, discussing, or making fun of public words written by a public persona on the public internet, in a place completely separate from the real-life person behind those words, is not harassment. It is not exploitation. It is not abuse.

Multiple mods and commenters belittling long time members of a community because they posted a light hearted comment in response to a particular post on a particular day is harassment.

Encouraging struggling followers to donate their last few dollars to a fundraising drive to buy new tattoos is exploitation.

Systematically twisting good faith comments into unrecognisable arguments to keep people on thier toes and always afraid is abuse.