That's right, my all-time-fave misogynist magazine has just stooped to a new low and published an actual guide to stalking your girlfriend (or, I suppose, any woman who you feel entitled to). Check it out:
Click image to enlarge.
Sure, it contains a helpful disclaimer that this is illegal in many states. And it claims to be a guide to "eavesdropping" on "friends and foes." But the feature at the bottom of the page makes clear that these are really tips for keeping your little lady (aka your "target") in check, and making sure she's yours and yours alone. It even suggests (under the sub-head "Step Up the Stalk") using GPS tracking. (For a better-intentioned but still creepy guide for stalkers, see this Guardian piece. I was torn when I read it: Is this information more helpful to women -- because now they're aware that this is possible -- or more helpful to stalkers?)
This was a wake-up call to me about how, in the internet era, the term "stalking" has really been trivialized. I know I've definitely joked about "Google-stalking" people, and there's Katha Pollitt's already-classic "Webstalker" essay. Of course, using this terminology is not the same thing as promoting controlling, abusive behavior. But I do think we need to be careful about how we joke about this sort of online voyeurism, because it can be a fine line between kidding around about combing Facebook for info on your ex and laughing at Wal-Mart's classic "Some call it stalking, I call it love" T-shirt or the hoax site "selling" GPS panties or the above Maxim article. Because real-life stalking is, uh, decidedly not hilarious, to put it mildly, and we need to draw a bright line between a common joke of the personal-is-public-online era and the very real threat posed by stalking.
The Stalking Resource Center at the National Center for Victims of Crime has more info on stalking.
If you feel compelled to write a letter to Maxim, here's the email address.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Maxim's Simple How-To Guide for Stalkers.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/7073
It's not a wiretap, it's a bug! Sheesh, Maxim.
But honestly it's really hard to see me as this as something specifically targeted against women--it just seems more like a goofy gadget trick for grown boys to play Secret Agent Man. I don't think "friends and foes" is code for "female victim," I think you're supposed to use it to prank your buddies.
The sidebar is a little creepier.
Ok, that's it. This piece makes me want to give up and cry. I don't even know what to say....
Marissa, I am right there with you. This shit is so disheartening to me. I work with victims of domestic violence and most of the ones who have attempted to leave have been stalked to a degree by their abusers. Almost all domestic violence homicide victims have been stalked before they were killed. 95% of these victims are women, who are stalked by men.I know that my creepometer for this shit is set pretty low, but I don't know how you can see this pic, with the pic of the sexy woman, in MAXIM and not see it as implicitly targeted against women.
yeah, why is spying on other people an acceptable men's interest? like on the same level as sports or bbq?
This is more helpful to stalkers, because it doesn't provide any information about countermeasures. Though in this case, you'd check all the electric plugs for unidentified adapters and put on some white noise music, but sheesh.
I'm glad you guys posted this, people need to be made aware of this information.
I've seen so many stalking and domestic violence cases where the cellphone was in the dashboard and connected directly to the car's battery.
WTF?! This is not funny, or in the slightest bit entertaining. (Maxim is such trash). I had a physically abusive ex stalk me and I had to move out of state just to get away from him. I hate this magazine. Thing is, I know there's gonna be men that take this shit seriously and that's what is worrying. I mean, does Maxim want to be held liable for the harm that stalkers do? Furthermore isn't it illegal to publish advice for committing crimes? I mean someone couldn't get away with publishing a guide to assassinating people, or on making illegal drugs...How can they publish a "guide to stalking your girlfriend"?
Kids these days... in my day, hiding in dumpsters was all the rage and we LIKED IT! /Dana Carvey's Grumpy Old Man
"Learn what you've used to destroy someone's lives in minutes".
Uhm...
This is just fucked up in so many ways. If I was a Maxim reader I would be offended they thought their reading base were a bunch of low life tools with nothing better to do than stalk/harass their girlfriends and friends.
Kudos to the writers and editors at Maxim for being part of the problem instead of the solution.
I've had experience with net stalkers...and lets just say they're really creepy, and I've had to delete almost all my online accounts on community sites because of it. Am I paranoid? You bet.
My most recent ex hates my guts. Literally. He and his current girlfriend have stalked my on line journals and sites to keep tabs on my life. I'm afraid that if he gets his hands on this information he might stalk me using his cell phone. Just another reminder that stalking is a serious problem, that its not done to flatter, and we should really consider if our society wants this type of technology. And if we do, what rules we want to apply to it. Maybe even give general educational classes about stalking/internet stalking.
"Step Up the Stalk" ?????
This should be considered accessory before the fact when some asshat who was stalking by Maxim's direction and then kills his ex-gf or wife.
Maxim figures that if the Bush adminstration can violate the constitution; you can too! I wonder if that on statistic on women and porn where it says that 1 out out of four viewers of pornography are women is really true. I think that obviously this is horrible and that Maxim should be ashamed of itself for giving stalkers tips. As for the Guardian article; that was purely informative.
"Maxim figures that if the Bush adminstration can violate the constitution; you can too!"
Sorry Mike, but only state action can violate the Constitution.
holly, i generally agree with you on the piece itself, apart from the bottom. but as someone who has been stalked, i just have such a visceral gut reaction to anything like this and genuinely fear that while most readers would just chuckle or agree that such moves are silly/downright douchey, there is someone out there who would take this advice to heart and make some woman's life miserable in new ways.
i don't want to sound humorless--i appreciate an offensive joke plenty of the time and don't take too many things too seriously, but i have a hard time when the subject matter of the "
humor" is connected to violence against anyone and invasions of privacy. i just really get icked out by the notion of proprietary rights in relationships and the allusions to women as chattels that is often interwoven into all this "hunt down the cheaters" stuff.
sort of a tangent: i just wish more of the anti-cheating complaints centered around how the cheated-on partner (regardless of sex) feels emotionally hurt and betrayed rather than the victim of some territorial incursion.
As a result, "playing secret agent" isn't inherently problematic, unless it is being used to harm a fellow citizen. (Okay, you can make a fairly good argument that it's not okay to use it to kill people in other countries, either, but that way lies extreme thread drift.)
Frankly, I think the world needs more people with laser mics pointed at windows of corporate headquarters when unethical behaviour is suspected. Whistleblowers tend to be so badly outgunned in the technology department.
I've seen stalker esque guides for both women and men, usually in crappy magazines like Cosmo or Maxim. Not only is it illegal and/or immoral, but it says a lot about how relationships and intimacy are considered property arrangements rather than sources of happiness by many people. Seriously, if you have to even contemplate spending hundreds of dollars and dozens of hours figuring out whether the person you "love" is cheating, and you can't trust their answer or even bring up the topic, what's the point?
In Maryland under the Electronic Surveillance Act, I believe that this would be a felony. It's the same statute that (sort of) got Linda Tripp for tapping Monica Lewinsky, only this would be a more egregious case. Some states have a one-party consent law for recording; Maryland does not. But this is clearly ZERO consent and I would fear for the future of the fool who did this and got caught here.
I *despise* maxxim, but I've read a few.
They always seem to have "how to" articles, which always seem to have topics that are unlikely to ever be usefull, or just plain weird. It's always a joke.
I really don't get how you're making the leap here that this is to be used on your gf, but I guess that's why you have a blog and I don't.
If it wasn't in Maxim, it wouldn't be on this blog.
Guides like this appear in magazines like Make and Wired.
Yes, Maxim is a sexist magazine and the device could be used against women but it's a stretch.
Sorry feministing, I just can't see it.
Ann, thanks for posting about this - but thanks especially for not making the post specifically about men stalking women. women can stalk women, too - i know some who have - and it's just as serious an issue (and plenty of girls read Maxim, too - they just don't admit it). Disgusting article - thanks again for the heads-up. Maxim is usually tasteless, but this crosses the line.
I think this has answered my long time question: What is this world coming to? This is really creepy.
Thank you for the warning
This should be considered accessory before the fact when some asshat who was stalking by Maxim's direction and then kills his ex-gf or wife.
Spot-On.
I wouldn't say this article is sexist, so much as it's just plain wrong. Women read Maxim, too (I know a ton of girls who refuse to admit reading it, but actually do), and this info can be used by anyone to do some pretty immoral and illegal stuff.
Saying this will only be used by guys to stalk their exes is disingenuous, and I've seen comparable articles in magazines like Cosmo about how to scour your significant other's cell phone to see if they're cheating. It's all wrong.
G.Whiz. I had no fucking idea that men were being stalked & murdered in directly proportional numbers by batshit crazy exexs who equate their femininity with the amount of control they exert over their former significant others while the police do their usual with standing by & doing fuck-all until someone winds up dead.
DaveNJ17 & a_human: tastelessly pushing the boundaries of Plausible Deniability since....whenever.
1-This is a bug, not a wiretap.
2-Who would actually use this? It's not only easy to spot, but a real bug only costs $20 at the minimum, which not only offers real time observation, but recording too.
3-Come on feministing staff, this isn't dangerous. Google "spying bug" and you can buy professional tools that will cost you $200 to wire up a house with not only real time and recorded audio, but video as well! The only reason this is here is because of the magazine, not the content.
So, this isn't a wiretap - it is, however, a hidden listening device. That is, it is using an electronic device to eavesdrop on a conversation without the consent of any of the parties involved in the conversation.
Which is to say, this is flat out illegal anywhere in the US under federal law. (18 USC 2511) Some states require additionally that the eavesdropper gain the consent of all parties to the conversation, not just one. In general, eavesdropping electronically on a conversation with no one's knowledge and no court order is just illegal, period. This is why security cameras almost never carry audio.
And okay, maybe your local US attorney is too busy to prosecute illegal electronic eavesdropping in your case. There's still the option that whoever you listened to and whose life you decided to "destroy" (as per the article's directions) can sue you in a civil case. According to 18 USC 2520, they're entitled to whatever their actual damages were, or at least $10,000 if damages were less than that.
Come on, feministing, you're crazy. You're making shit up. Other magazines advertise this stuff, so Maxxim's article is not sexist or threatening. Besides, bitchez stalk men! All the time!
You over-sensitive females, geez. Get over it. You're making shit up. This isn't dangerous. Stalking is a joke. If you saw an article on how to get a girl drunk or drugged you'd say the article was promoting rape!
Does that about cover it? Misogynists can leave now.
In Maryland under the Electronic Surveillance Act, I believe that this would be a felony. It's the same statute that (sort of) got Linda Tripp for tapping Monica Lewinsky, only this would be a more egregious case. Some states have a one-party consent law for recording; Maryland does not.
I've always thought that this (Maryland's law prohibiting recording without consent) was terrible for women, myself. I mean, what better way to prove DV in court than to surreptitiously record your husband in your home as he abuses you? What better way to prove rape than to hit the record button of a private recorder in your pocket while an acquaintance is trying to rape you and you're trying to fight him off? Asymmetric power relationships *need* the ability to record bad actors without their knowledge; I know as a kid I always used to fantasize about being able to bring a recorder to school to tape record the bullies who were abusing me, so that the school would be finally forced to *do* something. (Of course when I was a kid tape recorders were the size of a Playstation 2 or Wii, so this was not an option, although it may be legal in New York for all I know.)
I would like to see Maryland's law changed so that you can make any recording you want of yourself and someone else, but that you may only *publish* said recording with permission from the others, with publication including the Internet, except where you are using the recording as evidence of a crime committed against you or someone else. Then the recording can be subpoenaed into the justice system and only listened to by those who have legal rights to hear it. This wouldn't be perfect -- you still have no recourse if you have the recording but no one will take the case, such as big whistleblower cases against corporations with their hand up the justice system's asses, or cases where it's a cop that abuses you and the cops just unfound the charge -- but it would be better than what we have now, where I cannot present a recording to prove rape or abuse because I can't have legally made the recording.
This is a digression. I agree that an article on how to wiretap people published in a men's porn magazine with language like "Step Up The Stalk" and no discussion of countermeasures is aimed at men who want to spy on ex-girlfriends, ex-wives and current SO's, and as such it's pretty reprehensible; they would have needed to do a lot more to get across "This is for silly pranks on your guy friends", including not using the word "stalk" anyplace. But I just had to respond to the Maryland thing because, frankly, I've been steamed about it ever since I moved here.
Furthermore isn't it illegal to publish advice for committing crimes? I mean someone couldn't get away with publishing a guide to assassinating people, or on making illegal drugs...How can they publish a "guide to stalking your girlfriend"?
Without defending the article, to be fair, people can and do publish guides to committing crimes. Ever seen or read High Times, or the multitude of other books on how to grow marijuana? I also recall reading in a reasonably reputable magazine a guide to laundering money. Again, not defending the general douchiness of the article (though I must say that JohnDoes makes a decent point about the many many more sophisticated devices available for this kind of thing with a simple google search - I doubt anyone seriously considering stalking someone will be particularly enlightened by the amateurish advice here), just saying that this isn't exactly unique in the "how to break the law" department.
The point is not that Maxim is providing information that is not available elsewhere. The point is that it's making a joke of abusive behavior.
This article might be a joke, or secret-agent game stuff, but seriously. As someone who has been stalked (and had the police take the guy's side because "he's probably just drunk when he acts like that"), my first reaction is whyyyyyyyy??? Don't people THINK? Uggh.
Yeah Matt, I realized that after I posted, it's basic first amendment stuff, I should-a known.
My letter:
I'm utterly appalled at your article on how to make a cell-phone "wiretap" (it's actually a bug).
Not only have you promoted an activity that is illegal in many states, but the sidebar "Catch a Two-Timer" makes it all-too-clear that your intention is not harmless fun, but to assist men in stalking their girlfriends and potentially any other woman. You may find it funny to make jokes of stalking and domestic violence, but these are serious issues. Sadly, these crimes are a reality for the many women who are stalked by strangers and abusive exes. You may want to think twice about what exactly it is that you are promoting or trivializing in the future.
Of course Maxim isn't doing anything illegal.
The mere fact, however, is that the amount of stalking done to women by abusive and paranoid men isn't a joke. In fact, it often winds up in a homicide.
After working with the victims of domestic abuse for a research project, I can sincerely say that nothing about this article is remotely funny. The defense that "oh, women do it all the time too" isn't a valid argument, simply for the fact that most female stalkers don't wind up killing their ex-boyfriend. While the opposite is depressingly common.
Domestic abuse and stalking is a huge problem, a problem that effects more people that we'd like to realize. I'm fairly certain that at least one jackass is going to think this article is a good idea, and probably ten thousand others are going to think that stalking is actually funny.
This article aside, it's pretty clear that the potential tools for a stalker have increased substantially.
But I want to hear people's opinion about the other point in this post: that the stalker label has become somewhat trivialized with the internet. Does this mean that there's no longer a clear line between okay behavior and stalking? Maybe the line is clear, but the term is just the part that's trivialized, but that's what I'm wondering. If I meet someone when I go out (or did, when I was single), I'd look them up on myspace, google, whatever. Why not, right? What if I want to get in touch with an ex I lost contact with. Is all internet available data fair game?
I'm already angry at Maxim for reviewing the Black Crowes' newest CD without ever listening to it. Ths just puts (another) nail in the coffin. I encourage all people to boycott Maxim.