you're reading...
Pre-2008 Posts

Invasion of the Body Snatchers


Heads up to one and all; this blog is Women’s Space.  My blog is about a year old.  I have a website entitled Women’s Space, and boards entitled Women’s Space as well.  My boards have existed for about six years.   My old website and boards were called “The Margins,” but the Margins women voted on names for our new site and blog a couple of years ago now, probably, and decided on “Women’s Space.” 

Another WordPress blog was recently created under the moniker “Woman’s Space,” “a“, as in singular, not “e“, as in plural.   That blog has nothing to do with this blog.    The person who started the imposter blog knows about my website and blog and has long known about them.  This person has already been mistaken for me by those unfamiliar with my writings. 

Yeah, it’s creepy.  Yeah, it’s stalker-like and identity-theft like.  All I can do is give a heads up and let people know what this person has done.




91 thoughts on “Invasion of the Body Snatchers

  1. Yeah and the act will go unchecked by a certain sect because the imposter is serving as a vehicle to attack you.

    You now have three females that I know of who are obsess with you. I wonder if you infiltrate their dreams as well.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 5, 2007, 8:04 pm
  2. Sheesh.

    I wonder what they’d do if someone (with whom they disagreed on key feminist issues) created blogs with titles one letter off their own blogs’ names. Mwah ha. One is sorely tempted to do that and find out. 🙂 Too bad some of us couldn’t do that and still have integrity. One’s own integrity does become a problem when dealing with those who have none.

    After this person did what this person did, I know someone who created a zillion blogs with names almost like her own blog’s name, just to protect herself!


    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 8:16 pm
  3. Heart, applying for a federal trademark may be something to consider, and it’s possible there are state laws that protect you now. One of the law schools in your area may have a clinic that could offer some help with this. I’m not giving you legal advice, but I’m suggesting you get some :>)

    Posted by Ann Bartow | March 5, 2007, 8:57 pm
  4. Really? Whoa, I wouldn’t even have considered getting a trademark or talking to a lawyer about this. But you’re the lawyer, and if you say so, maybe I should. Geez. :/


    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 9:00 pm
  5. God Heart you are so powerful. I had no idea.

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 9:17 pm
  6. Oooh, ooh, me too, apparently! It’s fascinating reading.

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 9:22 pm
  7. It actually is scary to me. I don’t know why this happens to me, but it has happened to me before. In fact, it’s this dynamic which in part gave rise to my lawsuit, women obsessed with me, doing crazy, really out-of-control, over the top things.


    Posted by Heart | March 5, 2007, 9:23 pm
  8. It is like saying you hate the popular girl at school but you turn around and dress like her every day. LMAO!

    Or like when I was in military and people were not promoted. They would say “I did not want to be promoted anyway.” Yet they took the test to get promoted.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 5, 2007, 9:27 pm
  9. Oh wow! I’m remembering something. A few years ago, someone in a kind of inner circle in a different national movement I was part of, far from this one, not going to name it at the moment, created a website to challenge and confront an the rotten information and deceptions of an organization on the Religious Right. The confronting website included the organization’s acronym, but it was “org” or “net”, no, it was “us”, in other words, acronym-of-hated-organization dot us instead of dot org. The person who set up the confronting website got served with a cease and desist order. And they then took the website down.

    This stuff is serious, huh.


    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 9:43 pm
  10. I’m thinking of maybe heading over to the protected forums, anyone want to come along?

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 9:44 pm
  11. I’ll be there.

    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 9:45 pm
  12. I was waiting for the other shoe to drop when I saw the blatant design to mess with you by having a name just like yours, Heart, a name that only varied by one letter.

    Any person who has been around since at least the MS board days will know this imposter by a variety of incarnations. They have been kicked off, banned from just about every woman’s and feminist site around the net including professional psychology for women list-serves, lesbian sites, local organizations in real-time and a host of others. Yet, they persist with an undesired presence on many feminist or woman centered boards, creating a new name to hide behind.

    This time though, they have directly attacked you Heart, with full knowledge of what the impact would be, the confusion it would cause, the opportunity to pose as you and create havoc with their whacked positions on feminism.

    I have personally watched this person, over the years, attack women left and right especially Heart. No wonder that they purposely created a name that people would mistake for you. Just a new twist on a very disturb individual’s stalking of Heart and abusive nature towards women in general.

    Let’s just get this out of the way, when you read the stalker/imposter’s bio on their blog, and they talk about being born with a little ‘misalignment’, do the math, this is the MTF in grand denial who also has a history of improper, abusive and pedophile-like interactions with teen and very young feminists.

    It is a sick, disturbing act and as we speak I am just pissed and upset as I saw on the imposter/stalker/young woman pedophile/abuser’s blog that they have gathered an email address from a young feminist who doesn’t know that this ‘radical feminist’ is actually a person born male and about 60, with a long history of abuses towards women and has been banned from every board worth its salt once the imposter is de-cloaked.

    I just want to scream and warn that young woman and all others. It is so frustrating to watch an abuser in action and feel unable to stop the cycle.

    Just my buck fifty’s worth.

    Posted by uppitybiscuit | March 5, 2007, 9:52 pm
  13. Oh my god, is it who I think it is???

    Posted by Sassafras | March 5, 2007, 10:04 pm
  14. Yes, it’s Bob Dole.

    The thing about “Bob” is, while she might be a she now, she’s still the person her purportedly abusive dad wanted to create, his perfect little clone to go on hurting women even after he could no longer do it himself.

    What a legacy.

    Posted by Rich | March 5, 2007, 10:08 pm
  15. Ugh. Creepy.

    Posted by Sassafras | March 5, 2007, 10:14 pm
  16. Hey Heart, can’t find the forums. I’m sorry this is upsetting to you. I can see why it would bug you, but this person has no credibility whatsoever with anyone who knows anything about the history of it all, and certainly no feminist credibility when feminism is nothing more than a tool for that person to prove that person is who that person believes that person is. If that makes any sense. I mean, I don’t know how anyone can in any seriousness say that we are advocating for the maintenance of patriarchy!!! All anyone has to do is read what we’ve written. Not that I have anything like the honor of being obsessed about to such a degree as you, or anything. But still. People can read what we write and know what we stand for without needing it to be filtered through someone else’s skewed analysis of writings that can be twisted to say what’s wanted.

    Sheesh is right. Geez louise and geeny criney.

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 10:18 pm
  17. Hi Everyone. I’ve been an off-and-on lurker lately, but I don’t think I’ve said hello until now. Nice to “see” some familiar “faces.”

    Heart, I’m really sorry this is happening.

    The more I see of this person, the crazier she seems. I think I may be one of the young women to whom UppityBiscuit refers (although I’m not sure, as I don’t know you, at least not by your current moniker!) Perhaps it will be reassuring to some that while our friendship/whatever was not normal or healthy, it was not nessarily abusive. We met IRL once, and nothing improper or terribly exciting happened. However, I know that her relationship with another women of my approximate age has been different, so how respresentative my experience was is, maybe, doubtful.

    Anyway, I’m not sure why I’m saying all this…except to say, what a trainwreck, in this instance, and as a life. Its sorrowful, and I’m sorry that it’s impacting you Heart.

    Posted by Atalanta0jess | March 5, 2007, 10:57 pm
  18. I like the part where I called Germaine Greer or somebody a transsexual. Or something. Somehow. If you mash various individual words together and craft a whole new sentence out of them. Maybe. Uh huh.

    Like Xander said, that’s insane troll logic.

    Posted by Rich | March 5, 2007, 11:08 pm
  19. Is there any hope that this guy will just become homeless and die?

    Rats. I didn’t think there was. 😦


    Posted by Mary Sunshine | March 5, 2007, 11:27 pm
  20. R!ch, did you see the part where you’re a “6’2″ hairy ape-like creature”?

    But “transpeople never talk trash about ‘cispeople’,” oh no.

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 11:27 pm
  21. Not to mention the pro-pornstitution links in the blogroll! Because porn and prostitution, and advocacy thereof, is SO radical feminist!!!

    This is more fun than a barrel of monkeys, I tell you what.

    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 11:29 pm
  22. The blogroll is creepy because it’s comprised of everyone this person believes is antagonistic towards me or has gotten into it with me at some point. Really, really beyond the boundaries of creep factor.


    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 11:37 pm
  23. Mary Sunshine! I missed you. Sorry this is what brings you to write. Now where is pony?


    Posted by womensspace | March 5, 2007, 11:38 pm
  24. No, R!ch, it was Catherine MacKinnon you called a transwoman! How could you! Cause transwomen, you know, what a shitty thing to be! Especially if you’re an epistemologically born woman.


    Posted by Amy's Brain Today | March 5, 2007, 11:40 pm
  25. Ugh, Heart. Sorry about that and that said stalker hasn’t improved since the Ms days. I thought about leaving a few comments over there, but it’s a tradeoff for driving up hits and traffic. Hopefully, the site will die a death of oblivion.

    You could try complaining to WordPress. I think LJ has deleted similar blogs.

    Atalanta, I’m glad you got clear of that mess.

    Posted by Miranda | March 6, 2007, 12:30 am
  26. Thanks, Miranda. I did report it to WordPress, so we’ll see what happens.


    Posted by Heart | March 6, 2007, 12:32 am
  27. Ann Bartow is right. And/but the WomanSpace commenter – and I have seen her/him before – is not easily mistaken for you, and it’s pretty obvious what s/he is doing.

    Posted by profacero | March 6, 2007, 1:23 am
  28. The blogroll is creepy because it’s comprised of everyone this person believes is antagonistic towards me or has gotten into it with me at some point. Really, really beyond the boundaries of creep factor.

    I wanted to assure you that, though you and I definitely disagree on some important things, I’ve never initiated or encouraged any contact with your blogger doppelganger. Why I’m blogrolled there on such a short definitive list is beyond me. Well, or just creepy.

    Posted by Blue/Kay | March 6, 2007, 2:12 am
  29. FFS, why won’t this person just GO AWAY already.

    Posted by Melissa | March 6, 2007, 4:38 am
  30. Heart:

    You don’t have to publish this if you don’t want…just wanted to let you know that getting a trademark is fairly easy and would be a good idea for all who want “right of domain” over their titles, and truthfully, most of us who even read here or see your comments sporadically know who you are because, well, you sign them… i.e. “statement” -Heart. The other WS does not.

    Posted by RenegadeEvolution | March 6, 2007, 4:38 am
  31. Ren Eve and Profacero, thanks, that’s vaguely comforting. 🙂 I saw one comment thread today in which someone just straight up addressed the imposter person as “Heart,” and another one in which someone, upon reading this person’s ongoing obsessive (and dishonest-to-fantastic-to-deranged) rantings about me, said, “I thought you were Heart.” So I think the confusion factor is an issue. I also think that was the intention, or part of it. I think the deeper intention was violation. I think this person is, pardon my French, a prick.

    Thanks for that reassurance, Kay. I just took a look at the blogroll because I hadn’t noticed you were on it. To me, it makes sense that you got included. Undoubtedly after having exhaustively (and obsessively, and stalkingly) readng everything that is on my blog and everything findable elsewhere — that’s a lot! — Imposter Prick compiled a list of every person who ever said, “I won’t be back here because of (whatever reason)” or who got mad at me for some reason. You said at one point, I think in the Ashley thread, that you wouldn’t be back (though I’m glad you are right now!) Sour Duck got pissed off in the Ashley thread,and tried to make a project out of me for a while on her own blog. bfp and I fell out mostly over trans issues so that was useful to Imposter Prick. bint and I got into it in the Monster thread (I think?), also re trans issues, so bint went on the blogroll. Fetch Me My Attention — I know some of you like her, and I don’t actually dislike her, but I think she should get over me 😛 — is obsessed with me and piles on at any opportunity, which earned her her spot. The people who didn’t get included, even though they were mad at me, are people who know Imposter Prick and would tell IP to fuck severely off. You’ll note that every person on that blogroll is someone IP doesn’t know and they sure don’t know IP. There’s not a soul on there from the old Ms boards (except possibly you, Kay, but I don’t think IP recognizes you from there) or from the Michfest boards or from the Margins (my boards) or from the Strife, or from the Chicken, or any of the other venues which ultimately banned Imposter Prick.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 6:25 am
  32. Well, lookee what the cat dragged in. I recognize that one! Well, Heart, I would look into the legalities and protecting yourself from further malignant copycatting.


    Posted by Ginny | March 6, 2007, 7:07 am
  33. For what it’s worth – she has been very clear that she isn’t Heart whenever anyone has expressed confusion. It’s been obvious to me that her viewpoints are quite different from Heart’s, anyway, and I would think that would be obvious to everyone.

    I’m on her blogroll, and I’ve critiqued Heart elsewhere, but I’ve also posted here, and I don’t think that Heart and I have ever had an interaction of any kind. I don’t believe I was put there because she thought I had a particular ax to grind.

    Which is not to say that I wouldn’t be upset if someone started posting under “plainfeminist.” I do understand.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 6, 2007, 8:16 am
  34. Your impostor absolutely recognizes me from past feminist board interaction and alluded to that on a comment at my site. That’s one of the reasons I’m bothered by all this. If interested, the comment is here:

    Posted by Blue/Kay | March 6, 2007, 9:40 am
  35. Or, more accurately, alluded to some past familiarity with me.

    Posted by Blue/Kay | March 6, 2007, 9:41 am
  36. For what it’s worth – she has been very clear that she isn’t Heart whenever anyone has expressed confusion. It’s been obvious to me that her viewpoints are quite different from Heart’s, anyway, and I would think that would be obvious to everyone.

    But see, that’s not the Imposter Prick’s intention. IP doesn’t want to actually fool anyone, IP wants to abuse Heart. I spent almost a year in IP’s web of delusion. IP is a very, very troubled person who is completely, utterly obsessed with Heart and has been for years. I have never been able to figure out if she wants to be Heart’s best friend or if she just literally wants to be Heart.

    I’m not surprised that IP has never gone farther than the overt duplicity in calling her site Woman’s Space (ie, she’s been upfront in correctly people who assume she’s Heart). People mistaking IP for Heart is an unfortunate and unfair side-effect of what IP is really trying to do – desperately be a part of Heart’s life, however irrational her approach is. IP is highly dysfunctional and this impostery is just one sick personification of that dysfunction. It’s completely uncalled for. The fact that IP is taking an antagonistic approach does not surprise any one of us who knows her – IP is incapable of healthy discourse or reciprocal relationships.

    Heart, I would be willing to help pay for any costs associated with trademarking your blog, to whatever degree I can. I’m sorry this is happening to you.

    Posted by Sassafras | March 6, 2007, 3:17 pm
  37. plainsfeminist, aren’t you this person’s internet friend from other venues? From before you started your blog?

    I don’t give a rat’s ass whether she’s “corrected people.” I care about how many people she has deliberately deceived and continues to deceive, and I have already asked an attorney in the office I work in to help me with this.

    I’m also sick of being stalked and harrassed by her, I’m sick of her really perverted and sick obsession with me, I’m sick of her lies, and I’m about ready to get some help with that as well.

    She’s not an okay person. I didn’t name this thread “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” for nothing. She’s a fucking vampire, and not in a good way.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 5:08 pm
  38. Also, plainsfeminist, no offense, but I know what this person’s manipulations and tactics are only too well– I’ve seen it over and over for over five years now. I’m not up for you coming in here to defend indefensible behaviors, and again, not to be unkind, but I’ve been dealing with this person’s destructive manipulations for far too long and I’m just really very done with it all.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 5:13 pm
  39. Thanks, Ginny and Sassafras, and yeah, I think what you’ve said there is right, Sass. Kay, I don’t know what to say about why you got included, maybe because others IP included are your internet friends, and so far IP has never actually gotten into it with you yet? But if you start getting five, six or more e-mails a day laced with {{{{}}}}}}s and the 🙂 🙂 :)s, well, take care of yourself, is all I can say.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 5:34 pm
  40. So creepy.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 6, 2007, 5:49 pm
  41. The sites which welcome and encourage (de facto if not openly) the blogger’s threatening and frightening behaviour may want to consider their role in this potentially litigious behaviour. The encouragement of harrassement toward Heart and her posters could embolden this party to continue and even increase the hostile actions. Do they want to wait until after the fact to distance themselves? Harassing and stalking is illegal; so is being an accessory to it or abetting it. Further, I would think these actions on the blogger’s part, and the blogger’s supporters part, may cause women who would like to post here to stay away, in fear.

    Posted by Incorrigible | March 6, 2007, 6:36 pm
  42. Incorrigible you are speaking as if these people are rational. They are nothing of the sort, they are reckless and enjoy the fall out. The three that focus the most on Heart are by far CANCERS! What woman would focus on another woman so much? It is insanity.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 6, 2007, 6:40 pm
  43. Heart (and Sassafrass),
    First, no, as far as I’m aware, I don’t know her IRL or from elsewhere online. I started my blog over a year ago and only “met” her a few weeks or a month ago when she posted a comment on my blog.

    I commented here simply because I didn’t know if you were aware of what I had observed, and I thought that if you weren’t, it might lessen your distress to know that she wasn’t posing as you (which is what I thought was your concern, initially). Obviously things are more complicated than that.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 6, 2007, 6:55 pm
  44. I think this blogger is posing as Heart and is doing so with malice. I am frightened and constrained by this blogger’s actions.

    Posted by Incorrigible | March 6, 2007, 7:06 pm
  45. Yay, incorrigible is here. Thanks for that, incorrigible. What’s creepy is this. This is the way we get terrorized when we do not agree that those born male can decide they are actually”women.” This is what happens to us. It’s not only this person who is doing it, it’s many others as well. If we take the position that under patriarchy females are a marginalized, oppressed group and entitled on that basis to define our own in-group/out-group boundaries and define and defend our own liberation work, we will be punished for that. That’s what this is all about. IP has created a feminism which at its core exists to shore up IP’s identity as a woman. Any ideas which are threatening to this particular project of IPs result in what we are seeing, the message being: Be very afraid. Embrace the male-born with open arms, if they say they are women, that’s all you need to know, and if you don’t, we will make your life as miserable as we can possibly make it. Which is male terrorism, pure and simple, including when women participate in it.

    I am very concerned about the fact that IP is posing as me when it suits IP, but yeah, it’s a tired old story by now. Thanks for clarifying, plainsfeminist.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 7:07 pm
  46. Sorry if I was curt, plainsfeminist, but it really does come down to being a situation where, once IP has methodically attracted a few women who are naive to her motives, she launches an attack and plays the victim, martyring herself so that her new entourage (and indeed, she has made you into part of her new, self-serving entourage) can bolster her ego by:

    1. defending her on various internet venues where women are wise to her tricks; and
    2. telling her how much they are feeling for her, wanting her to succeed, appreciating her writing, etc.
    3. offering audience to her “suffering” – once cannot be a martyr, afterall, if no one is there to pay homage.

    Posted by Sassafras | March 6, 2007, 7:15 pm
  47. I didn’t think you were curt, Sassafrass. I appreciate that there’s a lot going on here that I’ve not been privvy to. I’m sure that you can also appreciate that I don’t want to get in the middle and that I honestly don’t know what to think about all of this. So I’m being cautious and I’m trying to not make any assumptions.

    Which – I want to be clear – isn’t to say that I think anyone is lying about anything.

    Anyway – I advised her to change her blog and screen name. [Comment edited because I don’t want to refer anyone to this particular blog. No offense intended, plains feminist.]Heart

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 6, 2007, 7:38 pm
  48. None taken.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 6, 2007, 7:45 pm
  49. This is the way we get terrorized when we do not agree that those born male can decide they are actually”women.”

    This is where I part with you completely, Heart. I don’t believe for a moment that one person’s pathological behavior over decade(s?) and many different online venues can be extrapolated to an entire group of people. Or to other people who carry on blog commentary/criticisms elsewhere (however polemic) of the particular beliefs the community on this blog discusses.

    Posted by Blue/Kay | March 6, 2007, 11:38 pm
  50. Blue/Kay, that wasn’t what I was saying (though I can see how you thought it was). I’m not suggesting that this persons pathology over decades can be extrapolated to an entire group of people. I’m saying that this person’s behavior is a response to my (and others here) not agreeing that this person is who this person says this person is. If I do not agree that this person is a female, a woman, and a woman born woman — I shit you not — then all hell breaks loose. Although this person is extreme, in the very same way, when I do not agree that “identifying” as a woman or female or woman born woman means a male born person is actually a woman in the same way I am or you are or the women here are, then I (and others) receive the treatment we are seeing now in various venues. It is my (and others’ here) position as to transgender, and our commitment to females as females which earns us this particular treatment, make no mistake. It’s not our views as to race, or radical feminism, or anything else (with the possible exception of pornography, sex work and sm). *It is our views as to transgender.* I have seen this over and over and over again on the internet and other women here have as well.

    And just to be clear, though I have clarified this a thousand times if I’ve clarified it once, I do believe transwomen are transwomen and women, for all intents and purposes. That doesn’t mean they are female or women born women. But I am not allowed to say that, but if I do, then this is what happens.

    Anyway, that’s what I meant. Yeah, IP is an extreme case. But she’s got all kinds of support and from whom? Those who are mad at me because of my stance towards transgender and my commitment to females. It’s become a watershed for a certain kind of progressive who is far more in the corner of, and concerned about, males, including white males, including racist, classist and sexist white males, than of women, of any race or ethnicity or color.


    Posted by womensspace | March 6, 2007, 11:47 pm
  51. Oh, for fuck’s sake. I have absolutely ZERO knowledge of anybody e-mailing anybody about the person who created the imposter “Woman’s Space” site, to warn them about the imposter person or for any other reason. Whoever might have done that did that on his or her own and I knew nothing of it.

    This morning plains feminist e-mailed me wondering whether she should be concerned about anything so far as this person goes. I said pay attention to what you write in your e-mails, if you e-mail. That is the extent of my e-mailing around this issue.

    I learned a long, long time ago *never* to e-mail the imposter person directly, and to be *extremely* careful about responding to e-mails about this person. I walk wide circles. Have to. Of course when I don’t respond to e-mails about this person — like from her former girlfriend — I am accused of shunning her former girlfriend.

    So let me nip that bullshit right in the bud.

    This blog is not going to be waste any more time — not one bit — on male projects, male agendas, projects or agendas which benefit males, or projects and agendas which do not directly benefit females. This blog *definitely* will not be wasting any more time or energy on this particular boondoggle, which I had NOTHING to do with, could do nothing about, and which has caused me nothing but harm, difficulty, and time I don’t have dealing with absolute nonsense.

    So fuck off, whoever suggests I’ve e-mailed anybody or put anybody up to e-mailing whoever about the imposter. I don’t know anything about that and whoever suggests that I do is a straight up liar or delusional and paranoid.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 6:51 pm
  52. People should, however, take note of the extent, degree, and pathology of this harrassment I’ve received. Take note of it. Make no mistake– this is what is done to women who stand for females and who defend woman only space.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 7:00 pm
  53. WOW. I’m sorry, Heart.

    Some day I would like to invent a roving multimedia autodisclaimer.

    An electronic warning message that flashes over someone’s head, plays after phone conversations, and appends itself to every written communication, warning of the volatile situation in which passerby have become engaged merely by conducting their usual business while certain people are in the vicinity.

    Posted by funnie | March 7, 2007, 7:41 pm
  54. Heart: serious question: why not explain who she is, what she’s done, the plethora of screen names she’s had? I feel like everyone is tiptoeing around not saying her name and I’m wondering if I’m missing something?

    Majorly creepy. She’s so disturbed, it’s scary. I don’t understand why more people are not screaming for folks to stay away from her.

    Posted by HC | March 7, 2007, 8:30 pm
  55. “I don’t understand why more people are not screaming for folks to stay away from her.”

    Because the people who are allowing her comments, hates Heart. To such an extent that their own personal vendettas are more important than what is right or wrong. They have their axes to grind. Talk about egos. The bigger picture is never in their thoughts on their wounded selfs taught to them by the school of no one is wrong everyone is a rock star, everyone goes to Heaven when they die, etc etc.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 7, 2007, 8:36 pm
  56. Yeah, I’ve wondered about the tip-toeing too, HC – just in general. There seems to be some unspoken rule on the internet that if you use a screen name, only you can divulge your real name. Anyone who “outs” you has commited some egregious sin.

    In some ways, I think anonymity is important and in some situations may allow us more freedom to say things. However, I think what happens more often is that anonymity allows people to act like complete assholes, to not really own their words, and to treat other people like shit.

    Given that absolute anonymity on the internet is pretty much a myth nowadays anyhow, I don’t see why the myth is still so revered. Especially when it comes at such a cost by keeping people from truly being accountable for their words.

    Just some thoughts.

    ~Amber C. Holen
    AKA “Sassafras”

    Posted by Sassafras | March 7, 2007, 8:41 pm
  57. HC, feel free to provide that information if you would like to, on a blog you create or by providing your e-mail so that people can contact you. I’ve thrown enough good energy after bad dealing with this destructiveness in all of its ramifications and forms, I have been deeply, personally affected by it, and I’m done. This is my blog, established to blog about women’s issues and feminism. It is not a venue for the discussion of an individual who has given me and countless others nothing but grief. But again, if you or anyone else would like to provide additional information which you believe to be important, feel free to offer your own blog or e-mail address.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 8:50 pm
  58. And of course, my full real life name is plastered all over this blog and all over my boards and site and everywhere I am. That’s my business. Just as your providing your real life and internet information, Sassafras, and your not providing yours, so far, HC, are your business.

    Whether any of us posts our own real life, personal information on the internet is, again, our own business. When it comes to posting personal, real life information about another person, without their permission, particularly someone who deliberately has harmed us and/or threatened to, that’s trickier. I do not intend to do that here with respect to this particular person.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 8:55 pm
  59. Hey, chasingmoksha, I don’t think too many people hate me (though undoubtedly a few do). I think they don’t like what I’m saying, and that I am not going to be deterred in saying what I have to say. I think what I have to say — and others here have to say — makes a lot of sense. And that really gets to people.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 9:00 pm
  60. Whether any of us posts our own real life, personal information is our business. When it comes to posting personal, real life information about another person, without their permission, that’s trickier.


    (My pursuit of this is not because I necessarily want to see the imposter outted, here or anywhere really, but rather because I don’t really fully understand the logistics behind why it’s considered “outting” or why it’s “tricky.” What are we really protecting in protecting others’ real life identities? What would be lost by stating real names? What could be gained?

    Maybe that conversation is beyond the scope of this blog or this thread, so if I’m diverting just say the word and I’ll drop it.)

    Posted by Sassafras | March 7, 2007, 9:01 pm
  61. Sassafras, if someone chooses to use their own name that is fine.

    They’ve made the decision and I admire and honour that. However, if someone ELSE makes that decision for them and tells that person’s real name that’s another story. As with posting private e-mails, I think it just reflects very badly on the one who breached another’s privacy and sends a message to other posters and bloggers about the breachers integrity.

    Of course in the instance of harassement, this ‘rule’ may need to be broken.

    Posted by Pony | March 7, 2007, 9:04 pm
  62. Sassafras, the bottom line is, if we provide someone’s real life name, without their permission, and some disturbed sicko goes looking for them, finds them, and goddess forbid, harms them, we might be responsible for that.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 9:06 pm
  63. Further: I’m sorry I abuse the word “really” as an adjective so much. I’m really trying to stop doing that.

    Posted by Sassafras | March 7, 2007, 9:07 pm
  64. Sorry, I was unclear. I meant her screen names. I actually don’t think it’s safe to ever “out” someone without their permission and I do prefer my own anonymity in so far as I can have it on the internet.

    I just thought your post here was missing so much of the story that it leaves room for RS to look not so disturbed. What I meant to ask was there a specific reason as to why the whole story didn’t get told?

    I was just curious. It’s just so disturbing to read that the part of me that hates injustice is screaming WHAT THE HELL? DO SOMETHING! STOP HER. ‘ya know?

    Chasingmoksha: I disagree with you entirely. I just watched shit unfold and I think the craziness of this is that this time RS picked people who don’t actually know who she is. It’s freaky.


    Posted by HC | March 7, 2007, 9:08 pm
  65. For me, for example Sassafras, I have had loss to the abilities I have used to earn my living. Physical damage. I don’t want it around, or I’d lose what little work I have. On blogs my use of language and writing is far sub par for ME, the ME employers know. I choose my work carefully so I don’t ‘out’ myself, but if the word was out there employers would make the decision for me, not to hire me for anything.

    Posted by Pony | March 7, 2007, 9:08 pm
  66. pony, right. And even in the instance of harrassment, when we’re talking about the internet, there’s no need to provide the harrasser’s real life information. It’s the screen names that are at issue at that point. What this person is capable of is pretty obvious, just in the creation of an imposter blog and screen name. If people don’t recognize that kind of behavior as very troubling and wrong, well, there’s really no need to continue the discussion with them.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 9:10 pm
  67. if we provide someone’s real life name, without their permission, and some disturbed sicko goes looking for them, finds them, and goddess forbid, harms them, we might be responsible for that.

    Like, legally responsible? Or ethically responsible? Or both?

    Because I’m going to have to disagree with you there. I don’t know about the legality of it, and I could understand criminal liability if you knew someone was out to hurt someone and you provided critical information making it possible for them to do so, especially if you provided the information knowing it would lead to harm.

    But otherwise, how can any of us ultimately be responsible for the violence perpetrated by another? How can any of us ultimately be responsible for another’s protection? Is an anonymous internet poster’s safety really dependent upon my ability to keep a secret?

    Posted by Sassafras | March 7, 2007, 9:14 pm
  68. The upside to this, though, is that RS does a pretty good job of revealing the extent of her instability all on her own. I don’t think it takes too long for someone to figure her out.

    Posted by HC | March 7, 2007, 9:15 pm
  69. HC, thanks, that makes more sense. The thing is, you’re right, this person picked people who are strangers, but providing all the screen names would help how? Even providing the information would help how? That’s kind of the problem– unless you’ve seen what goes down with this person firsthand, as most of us here have,for years and years now, you aren’t going to get how serious what this person does actually is. I am a vocal, outspoken, and visible defender of woman-only space, I am a vocal radical feminist, and that makes me a target, as we have seen in this incident in all sorts of venues. That being the case, I’m inclined to be conservative so far as what I say about this person.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 9:21 pm
  70. I don’t think we can be responsible for the violence perpetrated by another, but I will say this. If I was anonymous on the internet — I never have been, but if I was — and someone divulged my real life information and some sicko went looking for me, found me, and hurt me, I *would* hold the person who divulged my real life information responsible, legally. I don’t know what the laws might be, but I know enough to know that this isn’t an area in which a person ought to take chances.

    Beyond that, I have deep, deep convictions about outings, of any and all kinds. They are my personal convictions and ethics, but they are mine. The boards ethos for my boards has always included a paragraph which says some version of “don’t out anybody, no personal information, no addresses, no job addresses, don’t do it.” I think when a person is dangerous, sometimes it *is* necessary to out them. I also think where they have outed themselves to a lot of people and their real life identity is known, as on the Michfest boards with this particular person, it’s less an issue. But this isn’t the Michfest boards. This is my blog and I’m responsible for it and am feeling cautious and careful.


    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 9:27 pm
  71. Perhaps my inclination to not protect identities comes from my own privilege in not having to worry what employers think of me (thanks for bringing that up, Pony), and my own relative safety in that I don’t have a lot of people wanting to hurt me (that I know of anyhow!). I wasn’t even considering the fact that many women are literally hunted in real life and rely on a high degree of anonymity to just survive. So even though you didn’t say that out-right, thanks Heart for reminding me of that too.

    So points taken, I’ll drop it now. 🙂

    Posted by Sassafras | March 7, 2007, 9:39 pm
  72. Oh, and thanks, funnie, way up there. 🙂

    Posted by womensspace | March 7, 2007, 10:00 pm
  73. I stand corrected. I used the wrong word, “hate” makes it personal. Perhaps I should have said you are used by many as the stand-in, the whipping post.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 8, 2007, 1:15 am
  74. Sassafras, Heart and some other bloggers who keep a feminist woman centred blog do hunted, physically and psychologically injured women a great service. A place to speak and have your voice heard and accepted. Anonymously, and protected. So that’s another reason why what this person who wants to hurt Heart , and by extension US, is such a scoundrel. Cruel and sick and perverse.

    I’ve been thinking and reading about the internet and women. There was a great changing of the world in the ’60s and ’70s feminist movement. There is again now, because feminists have the internet. No sick jealous and unbalanced person is going to do this without naming of it.

    Posted by Pony | March 8, 2007, 2:23 am
  75. Hi, Heart et al–

    I’ve been out of town and just got caught up on all this. ::shudder:: I’m so sorry you had to go through this.

    By the way, it looks like the imposter’s blog is no long there. Is this true?

    Good luck and keep fighting the power!

    Posted by Gaias Muse | March 8, 2007, 5:18 pm
  76. Oh no. It’s still there. :/

    Thanks, Gaias Muse, I wondered where you were and missed you! Hope you were having fun wherever you went!


    Posted by womensspace | March 8, 2007, 5:25 pm
  77. For the record: we figured it out (who she is and what the deal is). And no, it was not her vendetta against Heart that led some of us to be friendly with her; it was that she was friendly and appealed to our sympathy. I -am- sorry for her, but I do not endorse what she’s doing here, and I want nothing to do with the whole business.

    Posted by belledame222 | March 8, 2007, 6:40 pm
  78. I don’t speak for anyone else; but thanks Belledame222. That was kind of you to say this.

    Posted by Pony | March 8, 2007, 7:21 pm
  79. Yeah, thanks belledame.


    Posted by womensspace | March 8, 2007, 7:37 pm
  80. “Battle Royal” awarded to the soldier.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | March 8, 2007, 7:46 pm
  81. I want to second what BD said, and to add that, as I commented the other day, I did advise her to change her blog name and screen name when she emailed me about the issue. She said then that she would take my advice and we even discussed a possible alternative name. I was hopeful that this would happen quickly. However, it seems apparent from her blog that she is no longer planning to do this, which is unfortunate.

    And also, just to back up what Heart said about our email:
    This morning plains feminist e-mailed me wondering whether she should be concerned about anything so far as this person goes. I said pay attention to what you write in your e-mails, if you e-mail. That is the extent of my e-mailing around this issue.

    That *was* the extent of it (and I appreciated it). And Heart, I’m very sorry that you have been targeted in this way and that you’re having to deal with what seems to be a very long and ongoing harassment.

    I’m not interested in publically shaming this person or even kicking her off my blog as long as her posts continue to be appropriate (that’s my rule for everyone – no one is blocked – and the day I have to change that rule will be a sad day for me). But I’m also not going to support what she’s doing to you, Heart.

    And FWIW – I think public accusations of any sort may have a reverse effect, as if she is as destructive as some of you have said, then any kind of ongoing engagement with her, even to call her out, is only going to fan the flames. There is nothing more satisfying to someone who wants attention than any kind of attention, esp. negative attention that will allow her to elicit sympathies from those who think she’s been wrongly attacked or accused.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 8, 2007, 7:57 pm
  82. “And FWIW – I think public accusations of any sort may have a reverse effect, as if she is as destructive as some of you have said, then any kind of ongoing engagement with her, even to call her out, is only going to fan the flames.”

    I suggest you take your own advice. You are playing doctor here, and it’s not only not welcome (by me at least) but dangerous.

    If you insist on doing this, you are not only endangering us, but screwing around with this person’s mental health. Are you a psychiatrist, a doctor? then quit playing at being one. You have no right to do that. Let me make myself perfectly clear; you wouldn’t perform open heart surgery on someone, what gives you the right to think you can dabble in psychiatry? You have veered now, into taking it upon yourself, without any medical degree that I know of, to advise on how to “treat” this person and how you will “treat” someone who may be delusional and psychotic. You endanger her, yourself, Heart and we who wish to post here in safety.

    Please stop.

    Posted by Pony | March 8, 2007, 8:18 pm
  83. Pony,
    I guess I don’t understand what you mean. I’m not “playing doctor” or trying to “treat” anyone. I was responding to the comments above about what to do and whether or not to “out” this person.

    If it’s what I said about asking her to change her blog name, that happened the other day, before I had more information about the extent of what is going on.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 8, 2007, 8:30 pm
  84. Oh, let me add: “You endanger her, yourself, Heart and we who wish to post here in safety.”

    I have not communicated anything to her about anything said here or even that Heart has a post about this, nor would I. I put that in my initial comment, I think, but that is part of what Heart deleted in the process of deleting another link. The issue has been discussed elsewhere on line and it is in that context that she approached me and that I told her to change her blog name.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 8, 2007, 8:32 pm
  85. Time to drop it plainsfeminist. It’s being dealt with.

    And for general information, “here” is the world wide web. Google archives, and has several million hits a day. This is not some cozy corner known to or read by only a few dozen feminists.

    Posted by Pony | March 8, 2007, 8:41 pm
  86. “or from the Michfest boards or from the Margins (my boards) or from the Strife, or from the Chicken, or any of the other venues which ultimately banned Imposter Prick.”

    You forgot the Phoenix. Wasn’t she banned from there too? What a nightmare!

    Posted by anonymous | March 8, 2007, 11:12 pm
  87. Oh my god, Heart, I’m sorry. I don’t read blogs very often and don’t know the full story behind this (I was only on the Ms boards toward the end and posted pretty rarely) but you should not have to deal with this.

    I’d also like to say that although it’s easy for us as sane people to realize pretty quickly that the imposter blogger is unbalanced (and has a writing style that’s boring as SHIT, no, wait, even shit is a lot more interesting) a lot of people aren’t so savvy. I work at a library and often deal with kids and the Internet, and a lot of them just assume that if it’s on the Internet it’s true and trustworthy. One girl gave her MySpace password to a friend so the friend could make a cool layout for her, after which they apparently “got into it” at school, and her friend deleted everything on her account. This doesn’t just extend to kids, either — my dad believes everything he reads on every Internet message board, which explains why his politics are always so extreme. (First extreme right wing, now extreme left wing.) So, while it’s easy for us to believe that nobody will be fooled by her, that’s because we’re probably mostly well-educated and quite experienced with the Internet, as well as old enough to not fall for things. Every day I see Internet users who still don’t know the difference between ads and content on pages, and who believe that they really have won an IPod when they see pop-up ads saying as much. Granted, most of them wouldn’t have the attention span for that blog, but I worry for the few who might. I would also hesitate to contact this person in any way because e-mail messages will give away your IP address — and if she has a tracker on her blog, even just visiting her site will give away your IP address. (Granted, I don’t know if you can have trackers on WordPress, but I have two invisible ones on my MySpace page.)

    Also, did anyone notice that when you go to a WordPress blog with the name womenspace (one fewer “s”) you get a message saying “This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.” I wonder what that’s about?!? (Of course, it could be something totally unrelated.) Anyhow, here’s hoping the imposter blog soon has a similar message. Do something good for yourself today, Heart.

    Posted by mekhit | March 9, 2007, 1:54 am
  88. And I did not introduce the topic here. Not sure why I stand out as the one for you to go after, but after reading your two posts, I don’t much care. I’m done with this thread.

    Posted by plainsfeminist | March 9, 2007, 3:03 am
  89. I don’t know what to say other than “eeewwww.” And “holy crap, that is so blatantly creepy and obsessive.”

    hugs to you, Heart ((()))

    Posted by Cinder | March 12, 2007, 10:36 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 2,600,484 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


The Farm at Huge Creek, Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, The Feminist Hullaballoo