Sexual harassment at TAM?! - Page 76

Cleon · 10th July 2012, 03:52 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%.

Trying really hard to stir the pot, eh?

The Central Scrutinizer · 10th July 2012, 04:50 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%.

Wrong.

I've done the calculations and it's only 14.1%.

DrDave · 10th July 2012, 05:03 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Wrong.

I've done the calculations and it's only 14.1%.

How does that figure change when you take DrBuzz0's absence into account?

The Central Scrutinizer · 10th July 2012, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by DrDave

How does that figure change when you take DrBuzz0's absence into account?

Surprisingly little. Only goes up by .1% to 14.2%.

Walter Ego · 10th July 2012, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Trying really hard to stir the pot, eh?

No, just exercising my (limited) right of free speech on this forum.

You got a problem with that? If so, put me on ignore.

DrDave · 10th July 2012, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

No, just ~~exercising my (limited) right of free speech on this forum~~ spamming.

ftfy

16.5 · 10th July 2012, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%.

Citation?

The Central Scrutinizer · 10th July 2012, 06:08 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Citation?

There is none. It's made up.

The second part (about improving TAM) is opinion only.

gentlehorse · 11th July 2012, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Citation?

This might be what he's talking about:

http://skepchick.org/2012/06/why-i-w...tam-this-year/

Rrose Selavy · 13th July 2012, 05:24 AM

Washington Post reports on the issue. Seems they don't know where to put this other than under "faith"

Quote:

Do atheists have a sexual harassment problem?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...AgW_story.html

RemieV · 13th July 2012, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

Washington Post reports on the issue. Seems they don't know where to put this other than under "faith"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...AgW_story.html

Wow, that is one of the most inaccurate articles I've ever seen.

RandFan · 13th July 2012, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by RemieV

Wow, that is one of the most inaccurate articles I've ever seen.

Could you give a "for instance"?

RemieV · 13th July 2012, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Could you give a "for instance"?

I have seen no quote from DJ explaining the percentages and what the base number was; rendering the "down to 18%" part meaningless.

The "personal attacks on prominent female skeptics" line is misleading, in that comments on a blog made by individuals who could well be trolls are not the same thing as a widespread epidemic of harassment.

Two other female skeptic bloggers DID cancel attending TAM, but the article doesn't give their reasons. The implication is that it was for sexual harassment that was TAM-related. This is incorrect.

Dawkins' position was mischaracterized.

Where Jen gets her information on the warning of female attendees is not cited.

I was headed to page two when their site froze up, and I've been unable to load it again since. Oh well, good enough to start with.

RandFan · 13th July 2012, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

¹I have seen no quote from DJ explaining the percentages and what the base number was; rendering the "down to 18%" part meaningless.

²The "personal attacks on prominent female skeptics" line is misleading, in that comments on a blog made by individuals who could well be trolls are not the same thing as a widespread epidemic of harassment.

³Two other female skeptic bloggers DID cancel attending TAM, but the article doesn't give their reasons. The implication is that it was for sexual harassment that was TAM-related. This is incorrect.

⁵Dawkins' position was mischaracterized.

Where Jen gets her information on the warning of female attendees is not cited.

I was headed to page two when their site froze up, and I've been unable to load it again since. Oh well, good enough to start with.

Thanks.

That you haven't seen something doesn't make the claim false. But I do remember numbers similar to those cited in the article.
I really don't understand your complaint here. Much of the drama has taken place on blogs and I can't honestly say that the author is being misleading.
I don't see how either proposition follows.
Iffy.
Actually I don't think so.

IMO: The article is on average what I expect to get out of most such articles. FWIW: I've not too much spirit to engage in a long debate over these issues. By all means follow up to my post but let me just say this, I'm not finding the case compelling in favor of your claim. Though as always I respect your opinion.

cornsail · 14th July 2012, 12:25 AM

I noticed PZ's only response to that disturbing email Greg Laden sent Justin Griffith was a snide comment about how Justin likes to publically post people's emails and then a further un-Laden-related lambasting of Justin (except not as extreme and without the threats).

Quote:

I just had to send a complaint to one of my fellow bloggers here at FtB. And since he likes to post his email publicly, I just thought I’d do it myself and get it out of the way.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...medium=twitter

That (in isolation) would seem to be in line with AvalonXQ's predictions about the response of the FtB community to Greg Laden...

However, it is notable that on Justin's Blog the readers have almost universally condemned Laden except for a couple "I like you both" or "You're both at fault" type comments. On PZ's post, GL's name is almost not mentioned at all in the comments, although in the cases where it is the comments are speaking out against GL.

In conclusion this makes me like PZ less (already not a fan), but I think there's some hope that GL will be dealt with appropriately.

cornsail · 14th July 2012, 01:06 AM

I also want to address this to AvalonXQ:

My only problem with your use of the term "radfem" is that there are a group of people who self-identify as radfems and they are quite distinct from the FtB/somethingawfulforums style feminists. I don't think it's the best term to use, for clarity's sake.

Radfems openly and explicitly claim to be misandrist/anti-male/man-haters. They are also trans-haters. PZ Myers and Greg Laden would not be accepted by them. They are not egalitarians and don't claim to be. I may be over generalizing, but from what I've read that is my experience of radical feminists.

FtB style feminists and those who share their general attitudes, jargon and communication styles (I've encountered a large group of feminists on SAF's debate/discussion forum who seem to be quite similar and there is probably some overlap) may tend toward some misandrist attitudes, but I'm pretty sure they would tend to deny being man-haters, misandrist or anti-male.

What I do see as a bit misandrist on FtB/SAF is the general hostility toward the idea that any male issues might be valid. However, it seems what they really hate are people who disagree with them on anything, not so much men (hell, many of them are men). If you are male and disagree with them your gender will often be used against you (e.g. "mansplaining", "maleprivilege.txt", but if you are female you can still expect vicious attacks, they just will not be gendered. I remember a long thoughtful post by a woman on SAF about how she knows taking certain precautions when she goes out shouldn't be necessary and maybe doesn't actually make her safer but it still gives her some sense of psychological comfort to do so was dismissed as "unapologetically triggering rape victims" and not being a real feminist among other attacks (the fact that she actually had apologized was just icing on the cake).

[Disclaimer: I don't want to paint ALL FtB/SAF feminists with the same brush. Some I like and do consider reasonable (what little I've read of Justin's blog I liked). I'm just talking about the atmosphere and general tendencies.

I also don't extrapolate these particular internet subcultures with "feminists" in general.]

Dumb All Over · 14th July 2012, 05:31 AM

As of right now, this story's headline is appearing on the Drudge Report.

On Drudge the headline reads, "Attendance by women down at annual atheist conference..."

zeggman · 14th July 2012, 10:12 AM

Are preliminary estimates available, or is 31% still the unofficial figure?

bookitty · 14th July 2012, 10:45 AM

So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive.

A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?

gentlehorse · 14th July 2012, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by bookitty

So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive.

A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?

This will be my 24th post, so I guess I meet your criteria for having posted dozens of posts, though I don't consider myself "deeply invested in this subject". I've discovered that Grothe's efforts to meet the needs of some who've voiced concern about sexual harassment will never be good enough. I've operated under the preconceived notion that this thread would amount to good folks talking past each other for dozens of pages. I've learned that some folks are so deeply entrenched in their ways of thinking that they've become caricatures. I've grown by seeing that others struggle with their own personal forms of bigotry as much as I do.

bpesta22 · 14th July 2012, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by bookitty

So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive.

Present company included.

Quote:

A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?

Sexual harassment is a hobby / academic interest of mine. I did adjust my idea of what harassment is at a conference, relative to work settings, but the thread has really just cemented my bias/belief that men and women are hopelessly, biologically different.

cornsail · 14th July 2012, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by bpesta22

Sexual harassment is a hobby [...] of mine.

Oh dear.

RemieV · 14th July 2012, 07:22 PM

Originally Posted by cornsail

Oh dear.

I lol'd.

bpesta22 · 14th July 2012, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by cornsail

Oh dear.

See interests here, but first describe your wardrobe!:

http://facultyprofile.csuohio.edu/cs...ultyID=B_PESTA

UnrepentantSinner · 14th July 2012, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by cornsail

Oh dear.

I just took a sexual harassment class and now I harass like a pro.

16.5 · 15th July 2012, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by bookitty

So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive.

A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?

I wouldn't consider myself deeply invested, but I have certainly learned about the Hoard where incredibly radical people take incredibly obnoxious positions written in incredibly bad prose. I could not imagine that people would write so poorly and so against their own interests.

I also found out about the Orwellian place called "Free Thought" blogs.

AdMan · 15th July 2012, 03:13 PM

This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live:

http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/

Cleon · 15th July 2012, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live:

http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/

I so <3 Pamela.

RemieV · 15th July 2012, 03:44 PM

I'm hearing stories that Surly Amy left TAM after issues with harassment. No details as yet. Post em when you see em.

AdMan · 15th July 2012, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

I'm hearing stories that Surly Amy left TAM after issues with harassment. No details as yet. Post em when you see em.

If she was harassed, I really hope she reported it. The volunteers had training on the subject, and there was (or is, since it's not quite over) a well defined process to deal with any reports, however minor.

What I've heard is that she left because she felt uncomfortable with people arguing with her about the issue, rather than actual harassment incidents. Don't know what actually happened.

RandFan · 15th July 2012, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by bookitty

So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive.

A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?

Yes. Though for me the discussion is an end in and of itself. Social progress via the dialectic is often slow and imperceptible. Though sometimes the costs outweigh the benefits but that is the risk of living as a social and diverse species in a democratic society.

RandFan · 15th July 2012, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live:

http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/

???

I'm really at a loss. It seems to me, re: harrasment, her point was that harassment happens and that there are "trolls". Perhaps I had my hopes unfairly elevated and I say that sincerely. Since there was a standing ovation I guess I was expecting to read something unifying and perhaps some insight. Was there something I missed? Don't get me wrong, I think it was a good speech and I've no issue with anything she said, except perhaps that there is a dichotomy of monolithic views (those against harassment and the trolls).

So what was the significant message of this talk? Acknowledging the problem of harassment?

truethat · 15th July 2012, 08:40 PM

If that's what is representative of female speakers at TAM, I don't think I'll ever go. WTF? She actually attributed the "Our deepest fear" quote to "anonymous?" She's joking right? I mean how hard would it be to look that up online? She wouldn't even have to look up the whole thing since it's such a well known speech. You know how it's often attributed to Nelson Mandela since he used it in a speech himself????

She cut it off a box of "Silk........." wow, talk about losing credibility in about three seconds.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=our+deepest

RemieV · 15th July 2012, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by truethat

If that's what is representative of female speakers at TAM, I don't think I'll ever go. WTF? She actually attributed the "Our deepest fear" quote to "anonymous?" She's joking right? I mean how hard would it be to look that up online? She wouldn't even have to look up the whole thing since it's such a well known speech. You know how it's often attributed to Nelson Mandela since he used it in a speech himself????

She cut it off a box of "Silk........." wow, talk about losing credibility in about three seconds.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=our+deepest

I'm going to regret asking. Why is it a bad thing to cut a quote off a box of soy milk?

RemieV · 15th July 2012, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

???

I'm really at a loss. It seems to me, re: harrasment, her point was that harassment happens and that there are "trolls". Perhaps I had my hopes unfairly elevated and I say that sincerely. Since there was a standing ovation I guess I was expecting to read something unifying and perhaps some insight. Was there something I missed? Don't get me wrong, I think it was a good speech and I've no issue with anything she said, except perhaps that there is a dichotomy of monolithic views (those against harassment and the trolls).

So what was the significant message of this talk? Acknowledging the problem of harassment?

I think it probably resonated with people because Pamela Gay is a person who "should" be taken seriously. "Should" is in quotes, because all of the reports of harassment should be taken seriously; but they aren't because the people who make them aren't well-liked, or are a bit crazy, or whatever.

I'm easy to dismiss, for instance, and she echoes a sentiment I've expressed in this thread - namely, that I'd love to sit around naming names, but I don't really feel like my universe would survive doing so.

*shrug*

UNLoVedRebel · 15th July 2012, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

I'm hearing stories that Surly Amy left TAM after issues with harassment. No details as yet. Post em when you see em.

I heard she called Metro after being repeatedly harassed by Watson.

eta: I heard it started with some obscene jokes Watson heard from his friend, Brian Griffin.

RandFan · 15th July 2012, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

I think it probably resonated with people because Pamela Gay is a person who "should" be taken seriously. "Should" is in quotes, because all of the reports of harassment should be taken seriously; but they aren't because the people who make them aren't well-liked, or are a bit crazy, or whatever.

I'm easy to dismiss, for instance, and she echoes a sentiment I've expressed in this thread - namely, that I'd love to sit around naming names, but I don't really feel like my universe would survive doing so.

*shrug*

Being someone who should be taken seriously and saying something significant are very different things.

RemieV · 15th July 2012, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Being someone who should be taken seriously and saying something significant are very different things.

What's significant is that it was her saying it. Pamela Gay - a person with credentials and respect who hasn't, to my knowledge, ever done anything crazy - is agreeing that there is harassment at critical thinking events.

I feel somewhat validated by that.

truethat · 15th July 2012, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

I'm going to regret asking. Why is it a bad thing to cut a quote off a box of soy milk?

To include it in a speech and not cite it is ridiculous.

bpesta22 · 15th July 2012, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by RemieV

What's significant is that it was her saying it. Pamela Gay - a person with credentials and respect who hasn't, to my knowledge, ever done anything crazy - is agreeing that there is harassment at critical thinking events.

I feel somewhat validated by that.

Are you claiming by default that many (some?) TAM speakers lack credentials-- at least outside of non-protected class credentials?!

10th July 2012, 03:52 AM	#3001
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,506	Originally Posted by Walter Ego Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%. Trying really hard to stir the pot, eh?
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

10th July 2012, 04:50 AM	#3002
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Walter Ego Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%. Wrong. I've done the calculations and it's only 14.1%.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

10th July 2012, 05:05 AM	#3004
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by DrDave How does that figure change when you take DrBuzz0's absence into account? Surprisingly little. Only goes up by .1% to 14.2%.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

10th July 2012, 06:06 AM	#3007
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,642	Originally Posted by Walter Ego Rebecca Watson is boycotting TAM until Randi fires DJ Grothe. Her absence should improve the event about 100%. Citation?
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,642

10th July 2012, 06:08 AM	#3008
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by 16.5 Citation? There is none. It's made up. The second part (about improving TAM) is opinion only.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

10th July 2012, 05:03 AM	#3003
DrDave Guest Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Geneva Posts: 3,110	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Wrong. I've done the calculations and it's only 14.1%. How does that figure change when you take DrBuzz0's absence into account?

10th July 2012, 05:06 AM	#3005
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by Cleon Trying really hard to stir the pot, eh? No, just exercising my (limited) right of free speech on this forum. You got a problem with that? If so, put me on ignore.

10th July 2012, 05:16 AM	#3006
DrDave Guest Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Geneva Posts: 3,110	Originally Posted by Walter Ego No, just ~~exercising my (limited) right of free speech on this forum~~ spamming. ftfy

11th July 2012, 10:33 AM	#3009
gentlehorse generally confused Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,129	Originally Posted by 16.5 Citation? This might be what he's talking about: http://skepchick.org/2012/06/why-i-w...tam-this-year/
	__________________ "Oh Holy gravity, the mother of all powers, what you do to us, the children of the stars" pillory "How can the third-person requirements of the scientific method be reconciled with the first-person nature of consciousness?" Win

13th July 2012, 05:24 AM	#3010
Rrose Selavy Stranded in Sub-Atomica Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: UK Posts: 2,915	Washington Post reports on the issue. Seems they don't know where to put this other than under "faith" Quote: Do atheists have a sexual harassment problem? http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...AgW_story.html

13th July 2012, 09:59 AM	#3011
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy Washington Post reports on the issue. Seems they don't know where to put this other than under "faith" http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...AgW_story.html Wow, that is one of the most inaccurate articles I've ever seen.
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.

13th July 2012, 10:47 AM	#3012
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,113	Originally Posted by RemieV Wow, that is one of the most inaccurate articles I've ever seen. Could you give a "for instance"?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

13th July 2012, 11:46 AM	#3013
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	Originally Posted by RandFan Could you give a "for instance"? I have seen no quote from DJ explaining the percentages and what the base number was; rendering the "down to 18%" part meaningless. The "personal attacks on prominent female skeptics" line is misleading, in that comments on a blog made by individuals who could well be trolls are not the same thing as a widespread epidemic of harassment. Two other female skeptic bloggers DID cancel attending TAM, but the article doesn't give their reasons. The implication is that it was for sexual harassment that was TAM-related. This is incorrect. Dawkins' position was mischaracterized. Where Jen gets her information on the warning of female attendees is not cited. I was headed to page two when their site froze up, and I've been unable to load it again since. Oh well, good enough to start with.
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.

13th July 2012, 12:24 PM	#3014
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,113	Originally Posted by RemieV ¹I have seen no quote from DJ explaining the percentages and what the base number was; rendering the "down to 18%" part meaningless. ²The "personal attacks on prominent female skeptics" line is misleading, in that comments on a blog made by individuals who could well be trolls are not the same thing as a widespread epidemic of harassment. ³Two other female skeptic bloggers DID cancel attending TAM, but the article doesn't give their reasons. The implication is that it was for sexual harassment that was TAM-related. This is incorrect. ⁵Dawkins' position was mischaracterized. Where Jen gets her information on the warning of female attendees is not cited. I was headed to page two when their site froze up, and I've been unable to load it again since. Oh well, good enough to start with. Thanks. That you haven't seen something doesn't make the claim false. But I do remember numbers similar to those cited in the article. I really don't understand your complaint here. Much of the drama has taken place on blogs and I can't honestly say that the author is being misleading. I don't see how either proposition follows. Iffy. Actually I don't think so. IMO: The article is on average what I expect to get out of most such articles. FWIW: I've not too much spirit to engage in a long debate over these issues. By all means follow up to my post but let me just say this, I'm not finding the case compelling in favor of your claim. Though as always I respect your opinion.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

14th July 2012, 12:25 AM	#3015
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	I noticed PZ's only response to that disturbing email Greg Laden sent Justin Griffith was a snide comment about how Justin likes to publically post people's emails and then a further un-Laden-related lambasting of Justin (except not as extreme and without the threats). Quote: I just had to send a complaint to one of my fellow bloggers here at FtB. And since he likes to post his email publicly, I just thought I’d do it myself and get it out of the way. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...medium=twitter That (in isolation) would seem to be in line with AvalonXQ's predictions about the response of the FtB community to Greg Laden... However, it is notable that on Justin's Blog the readers have almost universally condemned Laden except for a couple "I like you both" or "You're both at fault" type comments. On PZ's post, GL's name is almost not mentioned at all in the comments, although in the cases where it is the comments are speaking out against GL. In conclusion this makes me like PZ less (already not a fan), but I think there's some hope that GL will be dealt with appropriately.
	Last edited by cornsail; 14th July 2012 at 12:27 AM.

14th July 2012, 01:06 AM	#3016
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	I also want to address this to AvalonXQ: My only problem with your use of the term "radfem" is that there are a group of people who self-identify as radfems and they are quite distinct from the FtB/somethingawfulforums style feminists. I don't think it's the best term to use, for clarity's sake. Radfems openly and explicitly claim to be misandrist/anti-male/man-haters. They are also trans-haters. PZ Myers and Greg Laden would not be accepted by them. They are not egalitarians and don't claim to be. I may be over generalizing, but from what I've read that is my experience of radical feminists. FtB style feminists and those who share their general attitudes, jargon and communication styles (I've encountered a large group of feminists on SAF's debate/discussion forum who seem to be quite similar and there is probably some overlap) may tend toward some misandrist attitudes, but I'm pretty sure they would tend to deny being man-haters, misandrist or anti-male. What I do see as a bit misandrist on FtB/SAF is the general hostility toward the idea that any male issues might be valid. However, it seems what they really hate are people who disagree with them on anything, not so much men (hell, many of them are men). If you are male and disagree with them your gender will often be used against you (e.g. "mansplaining", "maleprivilege.txt", but if you are female you can still expect vicious attacks, they just will not be gendered. I remember a long thoughtful post by a woman on SAF about how she knows taking certain precautions when she goes out shouldn't be necessary and maybe doesn't actually make her safer but it still gives her some sense of psychological comfort to do so was dismissed as "unapologetically triggering rape victims" and not being a real feminist among other attacks (the fact that she actually had apologized was just icing on the cake). [Disclaimer: I don't want to paint ALL FtB/SAF feminists with the same brush. Some I like and do consider reasonable (what little I've read of Justin's blog I liked). I'm just talking about the atmosphere and general tendencies. I also don't extrapolate these particular internet subcultures with "feminists" in general.]
	Last edited by cornsail; 14th July 2012 at 01:08 AM.

14th July 2012, 05:31 AM	#3017
Dumb All Over A Little Ugly on the Side Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: They call it the Earth (which is a dumb kinda name) Posts: 3,692	As of right now, this story's headline is appearing on the Drudge Report. On Drudge the headline reads, "Attendance by women down at annual atheist conference..."
	__________________ The Three Word Story Pledge of Allegiance-- "I Hereby swear upon Engelbert's grave that I will gallop, not stride run, not walk posting three words on Shemp's honor, honoring: bananas, dwarfs, clarinets, [the 7th naughty word], haggis, Batman, nuns, wombats until such time as I'm sober. Or dead." "Some people have a way with words, other people...Um...Oh...Uh, not have way." --Steve Martin Last edited by Dumb All Over; 14th July 2012 at 05:39 AM.

14th July 2012, 10:12 AM	#3018
zeggman Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,761	Are preliminary estimates available, or is 31% still the unofficial figure?
zeggman Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,761

14th July 2012, 10:45 AM	#3019
bookitty Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 5,532	So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive. A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way?
	__________________ No more cupcakes for me, thanks.

14th July 2012, 11:21 AM	#3020
gentlehorse generally confused Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,129	Originally Posted by bookitty So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive. A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way? This will be my 24th post, so I guess I meet your criteria for having posted dozens of posts, though I don't consider myself "deeply invested in this subject". I've discovered that Grothe's efforts to meet the needs of some who've voiced concern about sexual harassment will never be good enough. I've operated under the preconceived notion that this thread would amount to good folks talking past each other for dozens of pages. I've learned that some folks are so deeply entrenched in their ways of thinking that they've become caricatures. I've grown by seeing that others struggle with their own personal forms of bigotry as much as I do.
	__________________ "Oh Holy gravity, the mother of all powers, what you do to us, the children of the stars" pillory "How can the third-person requirements of the scientific method be reconciled with the first-person nature of consciousness?" Win

14th July 2012, 03:57 PM	#3021
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	Originally Posted by bookitty So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive. Present company included. Quote: A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way? Sexual harassment is a hobby / academic interest of mine. I did adjust my idea of what harassment is at a conference, relative to work settings, but the thread has really just cemented my bias/belief that men and women are hopelessly, biologically different.
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	__________________ Manifest thy bosoms or decamp.

14th July 2012, 06:34 PM	#3022
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by bpesta22 Sexual harassment is a hobby [...] of mine. Oh dear.

14th July 2012, 07:22 PM	#3023
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	Originally Posted by cornsail Oh dear. I lol'd.
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.

14th July 2012, 08:34 PM	#3024
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	Originally Posted by cornsail Oh dear. See interests here, but first describe your wardrobe!: http://facultyprofile.csuohio.edu/cs...ultyID=B_PESTA
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	__________________ Manifest thy bosoms or decamp.

14th July 2012, 10:05 PM	#3025
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 26,351	Originally Posted by cornsail Oh dear. I just took a sexual harassment class and now I harass like a pro.
	__________________ I am an American citizen who is part of American society and briefly served in the American armed forces. I use American dollars and pay taxes that support the American government. And yes, despite the editorial decison to change American politics to the nonsensical "USA politics" subforum, I follow and comment on American politics.

15th July 2012, 08:14 AM	#3026
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,642	Originally Posted by bookitty So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive. A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way? I wouldn't consider myself deeply invested, but I have certainly learned about the Hoard where incredibly radical people take incredibly obnoxious positions written in incredibly bad prose. I could not imagine that people would write so poorly and so against their own interests. I also found out about the Orwellian place called "Free Thought" blogs.
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,642

15th July 2012, 03:13 PM	#3027
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,160	This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live: http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,160	__________________ It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

15th July 2012, 03:42 PM	#3028
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,506	Originally Posted by AdMan This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live: http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/ I so <3 Pamela.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

15th July 2012, 03:44 PM	#3029
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	I'm hearing stories that Surly Amy left TAM after issues with harassment. No details as yet. Post em when you see em.
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.

15th July 2012, 04:04 PM	#3030
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,160	Originally Posted by RemieV I'm hearing stories that Surly Amy left TAM after issues with harassment. No details as yet. Post em when you see em. If she was harassed, I really hope she reported it. The volunteers had training on the subject, and there was (or is, since it's not quite over) a well defined process to deal with any reports, however minor. What I've heard is that she left because she felt uncomfortable with people arguing with her about the issue, rather than actual harassment incidents. Don't know what actually happened.
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,160	__________________ It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

15th July 2012, 07:26 PM	#3031
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,113	Originally Posted by bookitty So, I've been gone for a while now. The thread is up to 76 pages and the primary players are still keeping it alive. A quick batch o' questions for anyone who has dozens and dozens of posts in this thread - As you are obviously deeply invested in this subject, what have you gained? Have you discovered any information unknown before this thread? Have any of your previous notions been challenged? Have you learned anything? Have you grown in any way? Yes. Though for me the discussion is an end in and of itself. Social progress via the dialectic is often slow and imperceptible. Though sometimes the costs outweigh the benefits but that is the risk of living as a social and diverse species in a democratic society.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th July 2012, 08:01 PM	#3032
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,113	Originally Posted by AdMan This is the talk that Pamela Gay gave at TAM yesterday which addressed some of the issues discussed in this thread. It received a standing ovation and is worth a read if you didn't see it live: http://www.starstryder.com/2012/07/1...-world-better/ ??? I'm really at a loss. It seems to me, re: harrasment, her point was that harassment happens and that there are "trolls". Perhaps I had my hopes unfairly elevated and I say that sincerely. Since there was a standing ovation I guess I was expecting to read something unifying and perhaps some insight. Was there something I missed? Don't get me wrong, I think it was a good speech and I've no issue with anything she said, except perhaps that there is a dichotomy of monolithic views (those against harassment and the trolls). So what was the significant message of this talk? Acknowledging the problem of harassment?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th July 2012, 08:40 PM	#3033
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,622	If that's what is representative of female speakers at TAM, I don't think I'll ever go. WTF? She actually attributed the "Our deepest fear" quote to "anonymous?" She's joking right? I mean how hard would it be to look that up online? She wouldn't even have to look up the whole thing since it's such a well known speech. You know how it's often attributed to Nelson Mandela since he used it in a speech himself???? She cut it off a box of "Silk........." wow, talk about losing credibility in about three seconds. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=our+deepest
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,622	__________________ “Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

15th July 2012, 09:00 PM	#3034
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	Originally Posted by truethat If that's what is representative of female speakers at TAM, I don't think I'll ever go. WTF? She actually attributed the "Our deepest fear" quote to "anonymous?" She's joking right? I mean how hard would it be to look that up online? She wouldn't even have to look up the whole thing since it's such a well known speech. You know how it's often attributed to Nelson Mandela since he used it in a speech himself???? She cut it off a box of "Silk........." wow, talk about losing credibility in about three seconds. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=our+deepest I'm going to regret asking. Why is it a bad thing to cut a quote off a box of soy milk?
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.

15th July 2012, 09:03 PM	#3035
RemieV Lostie, Pirate, Snape Lover Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,217	Originally Posted by RandFan ??? I'm really at a loss. It seems to me, re: harrasment, her point was that harassment happens and that there are "trolls". Perhaps I had my hopes unfairly elevated and I say that sincerely. Since there was a standing ovation I guess I was expecting to read something unifying and perhaps some insight. Was there something I missed? Don't get me wrong, I think it was a good speech and I've no issue with anything she said, except perhaps that there is a dichotomy of monolithic views (those against harassment and the trolls). So what was the significant message of this talk? Acknowledging the problem of harassment? I think it probably resonated with people because Pamela Gay is a person who "should" be taken seriously. "Should" is in quotes, because all of the reports of harassment should be taken seriously; but they aren't because the people who make them aren't well-liked, or are a bit crazy, or whatever. I'm easy to dismiss, for instance, and she echoes a sentiment I've expressed in this thread - namely, that I'd love to sit around naming names, but I don't really feel like my universe would survive doing so. shrug
	__________________ Visit me at Unbridled Chaos. For funsies. There's Watson pix involved. Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l'erreur.