Posted December 4th, 2004 by srichinmoyinspi...(#9572)
Cyber-Stalkers and Net Kooks
In the discussion called "Question For The Women," it was made
rather clear by Sundari, Bhuvah, Sushmitam, Nandita, Vasudha,
Nishtha, Tanima, Nemi, and many other women that their experience of
Sri Chinmoy Centre has always been one of complete safety. Parts 1
and 2 of that discussion are archived here:
Many children who grew up in Sri Chinmoy Centre have also talked
about the safety that they felt, and the advantages that a spiritual
upbringing has given them in adult life. See "Children in Sri
Chinmoy Centre" (Parts 1 and 2), archived in HIGHLIGHTS no.17 and
no.18:
Parents have also talked about how studying with Sri Chinmoy has
helped them raise their children with wisdom and compassion--free
from any kind of abuse.
Yet, sincere seekers occasionally ask how false and hateful material
vilifying Sri Chinmoy and his students can be allowed to exist. As I
discussed in message #4413,
it is not only Sri Chinmoy Centre, but many spiritual groups who
suffer at the hands of those who are not tolerant of spiritual
diversity.
One method used by those who want to limit the choices available to
spiritual seekers is to spread alarmist material that will make many
people afraid to follow a spiritual path. Ridiculous "atrocity
stories" are often circulated about a bona fide spiritual group with
no history of abuse, in order to stigmatize the choice of a minority
faith, and to persuade parents to hire an "exit counselor" who will
pressure their adult son or daughter to abandon their faith.
The core material for such absurd attacks often originates with
cyber-stalkers and net kooks, and is sometimes republished by anti-
cult groups, or by tabloids pandering to a reactionary mind-set. In
this article, I talk a little more about the problem of cyber-
stalkers and net kooks.
Some of the methods used by cyber-stalkers to harass their victims
include:
- Creating websites about the victim to attack or harass them
- Posting in a newsgroup or on an online discussion forum or
discussion board to attack the victim
- Accusing the victim of paedophilia to incite harassment of the
victim
Cyber-stalkers are often seeking retribution for some imagined
wrong. The stalker may have been fired or expelled from an
organization, or may have been incited by a hate group (or another
cyber-stalker) to believe false material vilifying the victim. The
stalker may be seeking attention from a person who has denied them
access, and may be using the Internet to threaten and harass.
As many as 40% of cyber-stalkers are women. Some of the most
persistent are those who have a romantic or sexual fixation on the
victim--who is often a celebrity. These kinds of stalkers may try to
persuade others that they are intimate with the celebrity they're
stalking. This is a form of harassing and controlling behavior, as
well as an attempt to leech publicity. Here's a quote from an
article published by the National Center for Victims of Crime:
"The vast majority of love obsessional stalkers suffer from a mental
disorder--often schizophrenia or paranoia. Regardless of the
specific disorder, nearly all display some delusional thought
patterns and behaviors. Since most are unable to develop normal
personal relationships through more conventional and socially
acceptable means, they retreat to a life of fantasy relationships
with persons they hardly know, if at all. They invent fictional
stories--complete with what is to them real-life scripts--which cast
their unwilling victims in the lead role as their own love interest.
They then attempt to act out their fictional plots in the real
world.
"The woman who has stalked David Letterman for five years truly
believes she is his wife. She has been discovered on Mr. Letterman's
property numerous times, has been arrested driving his car and has
even appeared at his residence with her own child in tow--each time
insisting that she is David Letterman's wife.
"Love obsessional stalkers not only attempt to live out their
fantasies, but expect their victims to play their assigned roles as
well. They believe they can make the object of their affection love
them. They desperately want to establish a positive personal
relationship with their victim. When the victim refuses to follow
the script or doesn't respond as the stalker hopes, they may attempt
to force the victim to comply by use of threats and intimidation.
... Some decide that if they cannot be a positive part of their
victim's life, they will be part of their life in a negative way."
[They become a hate-obsessional stalkers.]
Describing the "simple obsession stalker," the same article states:
"Stalkers in this class are characterized as individuals who are:
- Socially maladjusted and inept;
- Emotionally immature;
- Often subject to feelings of powerlessness;
- Unable to succeed in relationships by socially-acceptable means;
- Jealous, bordering on paranoid; and
- Extremely insecure about themselves and suffering from low self-
esteem."
Stalking expert Michael Scott writes:
"The stalker could be likened to one who is addicted to a drug. And
like many drug users, they will stop at nothing to satisfy their
habit. It is the stalker's desire to make the 'drug,' their victim,
the focal point of their lives. If they cannot get the victim to
give in to their demands, then they will be satisfied with the next
best thing... making themselves the focal point of the victim's
life."
Stalkers have a kind of love/hate relationship with their victims.
They are obsessed with them, but when they can't get what they want,
they try and destroy them by any means--including publishing false
and harassing material about them on the Internet.
Why Teachers Are At Risk
People in the helping professions, such as therapists and teachers,
are often at greatest risk of being stalked. They deal with troubled
people every day; and when they try and help a person change their
nature, they run the risk that the person will just turn around and
attack them.
Someone has been treated with unimaginable kindness by a teacher.
Their conscience tells them that they should respond in kind. But
instead, something in their nature rebels. They hate the teacher who
showed them kindness and compassion. They hate the teacher who tried
to prepare them for the spiritual life by speaking honestly about
the limitations of desire-life. Their conscience tells them that
they have no reason to hate; but human nature is very clever. Rather
than root out their unjust hatred, a person will justify it with
some kind of ridiculous story that bears no resemblance to reality.
They will say the teacher is very bad. But the truth is, some people
stalk Sri Chinmoy because he was the only person to ever show them
so much love and kindness. Like any good teacher, he dared to try
and help them change--which is what they asked him to do! But when
change becomes difficult, it's easier to blame the teacher than to
recognize one's own weaknesses.
Sometimes spiritual seekers lose their faith and courage. At one
time they were able to simplify their lives and live with very few
desires. But when they lose their faith and courage, all their
desires return. They become so angry about the years they spent
praying and meditating. They feel they could have spent those years
playing the stock market or making hay. Once, when they were rich in
the spirit of self-giving, they gave freely and joyfully of
themselves. They got tremendous joy from participating in the life
of a spiritual community. They dedicated each action of theirs to
God the Supreme, who is the true Guru--everybody's Guru. But when
selfish desires return, they say that they have lost everything to a
rogue. Who is the rogue? It is the teacher who gave them the true
message of self-giving.
You can say that this problem reflects a lack of wisdom and
humility. Suppose a person has followed a spiritual path for twenty
years. At the beginning of their spiritual journey, their teacher
told them: "Have faith in me, and be sure and follow these
beneficial practices: prayer, meditation, service--and above all,
love for God." Now, in the course of twenty years, at times they had
faith in their teacher and followed beneficial practices. At such
times, they felt great joy. At other times, they lost faith in their
teacher and did not follow beneficial practices. At those times,
their joy disappeared. Finally, they lose interest in that
particular path. Yet, if they have wisdom and humility, they see
that the path is beneficial for those who practice sincerely. They
do not assume that just because they have lost faith and no longer
practice as they once did, therefore the path has become bad and the
teacher has become bad. They do not adopt an apostate stance.
With wisdom and humility also comes a certain sincerity. The person
says, "All right, I am no longer getting joy from this particular
path. But thousands of other seekers are getting joy. I do not need
to bother and harass them. Perhaps they are doing what is right for
them. Perhaps for them, this teacher is absolutely the best." This
kind of person does not judge others harshly. He does not insist
that just because he has lost his faith, therefore everyone else
must also lose their faith.
Once there were two blind men. Both men lost their sight in middle
age. The wise blind man remembered what the sun looked like, even
though he could no longer see it. He felt certain that the sun
continued to shine every day. But the foolish blind man could not
remember what the sun looked like, so he mocked all those who said
they saw it, and told them they were brainwashed. To him there was
only darkness. He said the sun had become very bad: it no longer
shone!
So a wise person does not get carried away by his own changing
perceptions. Even if he becomes blind, he does not fault the sight
of others, and does not fault the sun.
It is also like divorce. After many happy years of marriage,
sometimes a couple experiences insurmountable problems. They cannot
reconcile, therefore they divorce. But after so many years, each
partner is like a theme running through the other's life. If they
are wise, they do not try to destroy their happy memories of each
other--and certainly they do not try to destroy the other person!
But since wisdom is often lacking in human nature, divorce sometimes
ends in hatred, bitterness, and countless recriminations.
In the spiritual life, when some seekers break with their chosen
faith, they show an immature, destructive attitude. They consciously
try and take away the faith of others. Those who are more sincere,
even if they are captured by desire, do not blame the spiritual
teacher or spiritual community. They know that the teacher and
community helped them when they needed help. Even if their goals
change, they remain grateful for the spiritual help they received.
They feel that the life of self-giving helped them to build
character and accrue merit. They do not harass and stalk their
former friends and teacher.
Exploitation by Exit Counselors and Anti-Cult Groups
Most stalking situations are fairly black-and-white. However, the
situation is sometimes complicated by societal problems of bigotry
and intolerance. Cyber-stalkers may be encouraged to continue their
stalking behavior by certain therapists and anti-cult groups,
provided that the victim of the stalking is a member of a minority
faith. The quirky rationale is that the stalker must have become
deranged due to "cult abuse," and that by using the Internet as a
virtual weapon, the stalker is regaining his or her self-esteem, and
performing a useful function for society, which (according to this
rationale) would be better off without minority faiths.
It's a little like a joke sometimes attributed to Groucho Marx:
"This guy goes to a psychiatrist because his brother has a problem.
He thinks he's a chicken. The psychiatrist answers simply: 'Why not
tell him he's not a chicken and be done with it?' To which the man
responds, 'I'd like to, but we need the eggs.'"
Like this, some exit counselors and anti-cult organizations exploit
former members of bona fide spiritual groups. They encourage
delusional thinking and troubled behaviour, as long as it advances
their agenda of opposing "cults." If a love-obsessional stalker
going through the hate stage is saying vile things about a minority
spiritual figure, some exit counselors and anti-cult groups will
publish this material, because it helps create a climate of fear
which will boost sales of anti-cult books, videos and "counseling"
sessions. Never mind that the material is false, and that it will
needlessly alarm parents. A frightened parent is a parent willing to
shell out big bucks for a "cult intervention."
When a member of a minority faith becomes a victim of cyber-
stalking, this places the victim in a double bind--first, because he
or she is being stalked; and second, because he or she may be non-
white and non-Judeo-Christian. In such cases, the stalker's method
of harassing the victim may be to pander to stereotypes about the
victim's ethnic and religious background, and to try and enlist the
less reputable media as surrogate harassers. In other words, if the
victim is David Letterman, everyone will believe him when he says,
"This is not my wife." If the victim is non-white, non-Judeo-
Christian, and not a media darling, some of the media will side with
the stalker!
Understanding and Dealing With Net Kooks
Often, people who harass and cyber-stalk a person or group are what
are known as "net kooks," defined by the Jargon File as follows:
"Term used to describe a regular poster who continually posts
messages with no apparent grounding in reality. Different from a
troll, which implies a sort of sly wink on the part of a poster who
knows better, kooks really believe what they write, to the extent
that they believe anything. The kook trademark is paranoia and
grandiosity. Kooks will often build up elaborate imaginary support
structures, fake corporations and the like, and continue to act as
if those things are real even after their falsity has been
documented in public. While they may appear harmless ... there are
several instances on record ... of journalists writing stories with
quotes from kooks who caught them unaware."
While kooks come in many flavors and colors, those spouting some
sort of hatred, bigotry or intolerance are perhaps the most
pervasive on the Net. When such kooks come together to form eGroups,
they begin to pose a serious threat. Within the group, some may
specialise in posting outright kookery, while others enhance their
position by trying to put a sheen of respectability on what would
otherwise be seen as psychotic ravings. Collectively, they may
engage in targeted e-bombing of journalists, until by the sheer law
of averages some of their kookery manages to hit the target, coming
to infect the popular imagination. Even when someone retracts their
false story, other members of the hate group may continue to
circulate the same material as if it were true.
Both cyber-stalkers and net kooks often use "sock puppets" (multiple
aliases) to give the impression that--yes!, there really are aliens
from the planet Tralfamadore invading Earth! In fact, the Internet
is rife with danger zones where reality takes a back seat to the
delusions of people with an obsessive grudge and too much time on
their hands. Kurt Vonnegut once wrote that "Bad chemicals and bad
ideas are the Yin and Yang of madness." Unfortunately, net kooks
have plenty of both!
Over the years, many ethnic and religious minorities have found that
it's best to simply ignore net kooks spreading hate material. These
kooks are deeply troubled people who are far beyond the point where
you can engage in any constructive dialogue with them. They only
want to bait you, get your attention, and draw you into a
conversation so they can "rescue the cult member" (or simply bore
you to death!). As with encyclopedia salesmen, it's best not to let
them get their foot in the door.
Unfortunately, the attitude of some online services (such as Yahoo)
toward cyber-stalkers and net kooks is not merely to turn a blind
eye--but to profiteer off the hate speech generated by such kooks.
Yahoo is notorious for regarding hate speech as "free media content"
which they can use to run paid advertising. Yet strangely, they are
not regarded as the "publisher" of such material, due to a loophole
in the law. Yahoo's attorney, Anne Hoge, likes to defend her
company's actions by citing Jane Doe v. America Online, a tragic
case in which the mother of a child victimized by a pornographer
tried to hold AOL properly accountable, but was told by the court
that Congress had given blanket immunity to Internet service
providers.
Yahoo execs like Terry Siemel and Anne Hoge have no moral vision.
Their code of ethics is "We will profiteer off anything we can get
away with." Was someone hurt by false and harassing material Yahoo
is distributing? The essence of their answer is: "We could care
less! We and other ISPs got Congress to give us immunity. Our
answering machine is filled with complaints from people being
harassed on our service. That's why we have a form letter to blow
them off." (Here I am only expressing the essence of their
philosophy.)
I have written mostly from the victim's point of view. But
obviously, it can't be much fun to be a cyber-stalker or net kook
(nor someone who profiteers off hate speech). Certainly one can feel
compassion for people who waste their lives in such trivial
pursuits. One hopes that they might seek help in overcoming their
obsessions--and one day find healing.
Yet, one's empathy for troubled people understandably lessens in
inverse proportion to the malice that they show, and the amount of
emotional damage they inflict on innocents. When cyber-stalkers, net
kooks, and those who facilitate their actions go beyond a certain
point, breaking the law repeatedly, and infringing on the rights of
others to freedom of worship and the pursuit of happiness, it may be
necessary to take legal measures to protect the victims and end the
harassment.
Cyber-Stalkers and Net Kooks
In the discussion called "Question For The Women," it was made
rather clear by Sundari, Bhuvah, Sushmitam, Nandita, Vasudha,
Nishtha, Tanima, Nemi, and many other women that their experience of
Sri Chinmoy Centre has always been one of complete safety. Parts 1
and 2 of that discussion are archived here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sri_Chinmoy_Inspiration/message/3731
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sri_Chinmoy_Inspiration/message/3732
Many children who grew up in Sri Chinmoy Centre have also talked
about the safety that they felt, and the advantages that a spiritual
upbringing has given them in adult life. See "Children in Sri
Chinmoy Centre" (Parts 1 and 2), archived in HIGHLIGHTS no.17 and
no.18:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sri_Chinmoy_Inspiration/message/5531
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sri_Chinmoy_Inspiration/message/5854
Parents have also talked about how studying with Sri Chinmoy has
helped them raise their children with wisdom and compassion--free
from any kind of abuse.
Yet, sincere seekers occasionally ask how false and hateful material
vilifying Sri Chinmoy and his students can be allowed to exist. As I
discussed in message #4413,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sri_Chinmoy_Inspiration/message/4413
it is not only Sri Chinmoy Centre, but many spiritual groups who
suffer at the hands of those who are not tolerant of spiritual
diversity.
One method used by those who want to limit the choices available to
spiritual seekers is to spread alarmist material that will make many
people afraid to follow a spiritual path. Ridiculous "atrocity
stories" are often circulated about a bona fide spiritual group with
no history of abuse, in order to stigmatize the choice of a minority
faith, and to persuade parents to hire an "exit counselor" who will
pressure their adult son or daughter to abandon their faith.
The core material for such absurd attacks often originates with
cyber-stalkers and net kooks, and is sometimes republished by anti-
cult groups, or by tabloids pandering to a reactionary mind-set. In
this article, I talk a little more about the problem of cyber-
stalkers and net kooks.
According to information found at:
http://www.cyber-stalking.net/
Some of the methods used by cyber-stalkers to harass their victims
include:
- Creating websites about the victim to attack or harass them
- Posting in a newsgroup or on an online discussion forum or
discussion board to attack the victim
- Accusing the victim of paedophilia to incite harassment of the
victim
Cyber-stalkers are often seeking retribution for some imagined
wrong. The stalker may have been fired or expelled from an
organization, or may have been incited by a hate group (or another
cyber-stalker) to believe false material vilifying the victim. The
stalker may be seeking attention from a person who has denied them
access, and may be using the Internet to threaten and harass.
As many as 40% of cyber-stalkers are women. Some of the most
persistent are those who have a romantic or sexual fixation on the
victim--who is often a celebrity. These kinds of stalkers may try to
persuade others that they are intimate with the celebrity they're
stalking. This is a form of harassing and controlling behavior, as
well as an attempt to leech publicity. Here's a quote from an
article published by the National Center for Victims of Crime:
"The vast majority of love obsessional stalkers suffer from a mental
disorder--often schizophrenia or paranoia. Regardless of the
specific disorder, nearly all display some delusional thought
patterns and behaviors. Since most are unable to develop normal
personal relationships through more conventional and socially
acceptable means, they retreat to a life of fantasy relationships
with persons they hardly know, if at all. They invent fictional
stories--complete with what is to them real-life scripts--which cast
their unwilling victims in the lead role as their own love interest.
They then attempt to act out their fictional plots in the real
world.
"The woman who has stalked David Letterman for five years truly
believes she is his wife. She has been discovered on Mr. Letterman's
property numerous times, has been arrested driving his car and has
even appeared at his residence with her own child in tow--each time
insisting that she is David Letterman's wife.
"Love obsessional stalkers not only attempt to live out their
fantasies, but expect their victims to play their assigned roles as
well. They believe they can make the object of their affection love
them. They desperately want to establish a positive personal
relationship with their victim. When the victim refuses to follow
the script or doesn't respond as the stalker hopes, they may attempt
to force the victim to comply by use of threats and intimidation.
... Some decide that if they cannot be a positive part of their
victim's life, they will be part of their life in a negative way."
[They become a hate-obsessional stalkers.]
Describing the "simple obsession stalker," the same article states:
"Stalkers in this class are characterized as individuals who are:
- Socially maladjusted and inept;
- Emotionally immature;
- Often subject to feelings of powerlessness;
- Unable to succeed in relationships by socially-acceptable means;
- Jealous, bordering on paranoid; and
- Extremely insecure about themselves and suffering from low self-
esteem."
Stalking expert Michael Scott writes:
"The stalker could be likened to one who is addicted to a drug. And
like many drug users, they will stop at nothing to satisfy their
habit. It is the stalker's desire to make the 'drug,' their victim,
the focal point of their lives. If they cannot get the victim to
give in to their demands, then they will be satisfied with the next
best thing... making themselves the focal point of the victim's
life."
Stalkers have a kind of love/hate relationship with their victims.
They are obsessed with them, but when they can't get what they want,
they try and destroy them by any means--including publishing false
and harassing material about them on the Internet.
Why Teachers Are At Risk
People in the helping professions, such as therapists and teachers,
are often at greatest risk of being stalked. They deal with troubled
people every day; and when they try and help a person change their
nature, they run the risk that the person will just turn around and
attack them.
Someone has been treated with unimaginable kindness by a teacher.
Their conscience tells them that they should respond in kind. But
instead, something in their nature rebels. They hate the teacher who
showed them kindness and compassion. They hate the teacher who tried
to prepare them for the spiritual life by speaking honestly about
the limitations of desire-life. Their conscience tells them that
they have no reason to hate; but human nature is very clever. Rather
than root out their unjust hatred, a person will justify it with
some kind of ridiculous story that bears no resemblance to reality.
They will say the teacher is very bad. But the truth is, some people
stalk Sri Chinmoy because he was the only person to ever show them
so much love and kindness. Like any good teacher, he dared to try
and help them change--which is what they asked him to do! But when
change becomes difficult, it's easier to blame the teacher than to
recognize one's own weaknesses.
Sometimes spiritual seekers lose their faith and courage. At one
time they were able to simplify their lives and live with very few
desires. But when they lose their faith and courage, all their
desires return. They become so angry about the years they spent
praying and meditating. They feel they could have spent those years
playing the stock market or making hay. Once, when they were rich in
the spirit of self-giving, they gave freely and joyfully of
themselves. They got tremendous joy from participating in the life
of a spiritual community. They dedicated each action of theirs to
God the Supreme, who is the true Guru--everybody's Guru. But when
selfish desires return, they say that they have lost everything to a
rogue. Who is the rogue? It is the teacher who gave them the true
message of self-giving.
You can say that this problem reflects a lack of wisdom and
humility. Suppose a person has followed a spiritual path for twenty
years. At the beginning of their spiritual journey, their teacher
told them: "Have faith in me, and be sure and follow these
beneficial practices: prayer, meditation, service--and above all,
love for God." Now, in the course of twenty years, at times they had
faith in their teacher and followed beneficial practices. At such
times, they felt great joy. At other times, they lost faith in their
teacher and did not follow beneficial practices. At those times,
their joy disappeared. Finally, they lose interest in that
particular path. Yet, if they have wisdom and humility, they see
that the path is beneficial for those who practice sincerely. They
do not assume that just because they have lost faith and no longer
practice as they once did, therefore the path has become bad and the
teacher has become bad. They do not adopt an apostate stance.
With wisdom and humility also comes a certain sincerity. The person
says, "All right, I am no longer getting joy from this particular
path. But thousands of other seekers are getting joy. I do not need
to bother and harass them. Perhaps they are doing what is right for
them. Perhaps for them, this teacher is absolutely the best." This
kind of person does not judge others harshly. He does not insist
that just because he has lost his faith, therefore everyone else
must also lose their faith.
Once there were two blind men. Both men lost their sight in middle
age. The wise blind man remembered what the sun looked like, even
though he could no longer see it. He felt certain that the sun
continued to shine every day. But the foolish blind man could not
remember what the sun looked like, so he mocked all those who said
they saw it, and told them they were brainwashed. To him there was
only darkness. He said the sun had become very bad: it no longer
shone!
So a wise person does not get carried away by his own changing
perceptions. Even if he becomes blind, he does not fault the sight
of others, and does not fault the sun.
It is also like divorce. After many happy years of marriage,
sometimes a couple experiences insurmountable problems. They cannot
reconcile, therefore they divorce. But after so many years, each
partner is like a theme running through the other's life. If they
are wise, they do not try to destroy their happy memories of each
other--and certainly they do not try to destroy the other person!
But since wisdom is often lacking in human nature, divorce sometimes
ends in hatred, bitterness, and countless recriminations.
In the spiritual life, when some seekers break with their chosen
faith, they show an immature, destructive attitude. They consciously
try and take away the faith of others. Those who are more sincere,
even if they are captured by desire, do not blame the spiritual
teacher or spiritual community. They know that the teacher and
community helped them when they needed help. Even if their goals
change, they remain grateful for the spiritual help they received.
They feel that the life of self-giving helped them to build
character and accrue merit. They do not harass and stalk their
former friends and teacher.
Exploitation by Exit Counselors and Anti-Cult Groups
Most stalking situations are fairly black-and-white. However, the
situation is sometimes complicated by societal problems of bigotry
and intolerance. Cyber-stalkers may be encouraged to continue their
stalking behavior by certain therapists and anti-cult groups,
provided that the victim of the stalking is a member of a minority
faith. The quirky rationale is that the stalker must have become
deranged due to "cult abuse," and that by using the Internet as a
virtual weapon, the stalker is regaining his or her self-esteem, and
performing a useful function for society, which (according to this
rationale) would be better off without minority faiths.
It's a little like a joke sometimes attributed to Groucho Marx:
"This guy goes to a psychiatrist because his brother has a problem.
He thinks he's a chicken. The psychiatrist answers simply: 'Why not
tell him he's not a chicken and be done with it?' To which the man
responds, 'I'd like to, but we need the eggs.'"
Like this, some exit counselors and anti-cult organizations exploit
former members of bona fide spiritual groups. They encourage
delusional thinking and troubled behaviour, as long as it advances
their agenda of opposing "cults." If a love-obsessional stalker
going through the hate stage is saying vile things about a minority
spiritual figure, some exit counselors and anti-cult groups will
publish this material, because it helps create a climate of fear
which will boost sales of anti-cult books, videos and "counseling"
sessions. Never mind that the material is false, and that it will
needlessly alarm parents. A frightened parent is a parent willing to
shell out big bucks for a "cult intervention."
When a member of a minority faith becomes a victim of cyber-
stalking, this places the victim in a double bind--first, because he
or she is being stalked; and second, because he or she may be non-
white and non-Judeo-Christian. In such cases, the stalker's method
of harassing the victim may be to pander to stereotypes about the
victim's ethnic and religious background, and to try and enlist the
less reputable media as surrogate harassers. In other words, if the
victim is David Letterman, everyone will believe him when he says,
"This is not my wife." If the victim is non-white, non-Judeo-
Christian, and not a media darling, some of the media will side with
the stalker!
Understanding and Dealing With Net Kooks
Often, people who harass and cyber-stalk a person or group are what
are known as "net kooks," defined by the Jargon File as follows:
"Term used to describe a regular poster who continually posts
messages with no apparent grounding in reality. Different from a
troll, which implies a sort of sly wink on the part of a poster who
knows better, kooks really believe what they write, to the extent
that they believe anything. The kook trademark is paranoia and
grandiosity. Kooks will often build up elaborate imaginary support
structures, fake corporations and the like, and continue to act as
if those things are real even after their falsity has been
documented in public. While they may appear harmless ... there are
several instances on record ... of journalists writing stories with
quotes from kooks who caught them unaware."
While kooks come in many flavors and colors, those spouting some
sort of hatred, bigotry or intolerance are perhaps the most
pervasive on the Net. When such kooks come together to form eGroups,
they begin to pose a serious threat. Within the group, some may
specialise in posting outright kookery, while others enhance their
position by trying to put a sheen of respectability on what would
otherwise be seen as psychotic ravings. Collectively, they may
engage in targeted e-bombing of journalists, until by the sheer law
of averages some of their kookery manages to hit the target, coming
to infect the popular imagination. Even when someone retracts their
false story, other members of the hate group may continue to
circulate the same material as if it were true.
Both cyber-stalkers and net kooks often use "sock puppets" (multiple
aliases) to give the impression that--yes!, there really are aliens
from the planet Tralfamadore invading Earth! In fact, the Internet
is rife with danger zones where reality takes a back seat to the
delusions of people with an obsessive grudge and too much time on
their hands. Kurt Vonnegut once wrote that "Bad chemicals and bad
ideas are the Yin and Yang of madness." Unfortunately, net kooks
have plenty of both!
Over the years, many ethnic and religious minorities have found that
it's best to simply ignore net kooks spreading hate material. These
kooks are deeply troubled people who are far beyond the point where
you can engage in any constructive dialogue with them. They only
want to bait you, get your attention, and draw you into a
conversation so they can "rescue the cult member" (or simply bore
you to death!). As with encyclopedia salesmen, it's best not to let
them get their foot in the door.
Unfortunately, the attitude of some online services (such as Yahoo)
toward cyber-stalkers and net kooks is not merely to turn a blind
eye--but to profiteer off the hate speech generated by such kooks.
Yahoo is notorious for regarding hate speech as "free media content"
which they can use to run paid advertising. Yet strangely, they are
not regarded as the "publisher" of such material, due to a loophole
in the law. Yahoo's attorney, Anne Hoge, likes to defend her
company's actions by citing Jane Doe v. America Online, a tragic
case in which the mother of a child victimized by a pornographer
tried to hold AOL properly accountable, but was told by the court
that Congress had given blanket immunity to Internet service
providers.
Yahoo execs like Terry Siemel and Anne Hoge have no moral vision.
Their code of ethics is "We will profiteer off anything we can get
away with." Was someone hurt by false and harassing material Yahoo
is distributing? The essence of their answer is: "We could care
less! We and other ISPs got Congress to give us immunity. Our
answering machine is filled with complaints from people being
harassed on our service. That's why we have a form letter to blow
them off." (Here I am only expressing the essence of their
philosophy.)
I have written mostly from the victim's point of view. But
obviously, it can't be much fun to be a cyber-stalker or net kook
(nor someone who profiteers off hate speech). Certainly one can feel
compassion for people who waste their lives in such trivial
pursuits. One hopes that they might seek help in overcoming their
obsessions--and one day find healing.
Yet, one's empathy for troubled people understandably lessens in
inverse proportion to the malice that they show, and the amount of
emotional damage they inflict on innocents. When cyber-stalkers, net
kooks, and those who facilitate their actions go beyond a certain
point, breaking the law repeatedly, and infringing on the rights of
others to freedom of worship and the pursuit of happiness, it may be
necessary to take legal measures to protect the victims and end the
harassment.
Just my personal opinion!
Assistant Moderator