What kind of support is that, when it can only be provided by a service that is not even one month old? The way you put it, it makes it sound as the only possible way for people to reach out privately to others in their trusted circle is through their computers/smartphones.

The OP is right. If privacy/concern of safety is so important to some people, they should re-evaluate their need for this product.

The OP has made a general claim about /all social networks/, not just G+. In some cases his sentences specifically state "Google+", but none of the arguments are Google+ specific, and his comment ends with an explicitly general recommendation.

I hope you realize that you can fine tune every bit of your profile to hide sensitive information (and show it to the right circles). The stalker would only be able to see that [someone] has a Google+ profile...

The goal should be that people who are being stalked, which could be anyone (and frankly will probably be me soon: I already get the occasional death threat), should be able to participate in discussions on important subjects (possibly about death threats and stalking online) /in public/ without divulging their identity. The person I responded to seems to claim that people in that situation should simply give up: that social networks are simply not an option for them. To me that is as damaging to society as claiming that people who can't see shouldn't be attempting to use a computer, as "duh: they can't see it or read anything or stuff".

Well the way I see it is it's something that would be nice but in no way should be demanded from a service like Google+.

> Ok, so when someone is being stalked by someone they simply don't get to use the Internet anymore.

Google+ != the internet.