So there was this female speaker on an elevator

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Calculon

All the Knights of Chivalry ...
What have I learned? Never post a disagreement with Rebecca Watson. I will pay dearly for the affrontry.

Effrontery? Thanks for the link, that young lady being called out wrongly is ... well, not well played. Has Ms Watson made amends?

Originally Posted by Starthinker

I'm sorry she feels sexualized. When is the next naked skepchick calendar coming out?

^^^ Chortled, I did.

That still doesn't make creepy behavior a good thing ... Scrut's got a point.

Originally Posted by Kopji

And so,a short parental rant.

You stupid girl, we're all pigs! What part don't you get? The Rules! 1: Take a friend to the bar or club with you. 2: Have a good time. 3: Leave with the friend you came with. 4: If you meet someone really golly cool who values your brain and wants only to talk intelligently about atheism and stuff in his room - get his number and call the next day.

Yep, but try telling kids that these days. You think they'll listen?

Of course, Rebecca ain't a kid, but the sensible things you lay out are good guidelines.

[OrangeCatz]

Rebecca didn't like someone propositioning her like that. And she told him that when they woke up together the next morning.

[epepke]

Originally Posted by case#46cw39

I wouldn't call it that since it works both ways. For example if I told you I'm not interested in you and yet you persisted in making sexual advances on me I would consider you to be rude or maybe ignorant.

Quite reasonable.

On the other hand, if you told someone you weren't interested and they took "no" for an answer and did not persist, and if you then made a big fat hairy deal about it, you might be rude yourself.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Starthinker

I'm sorry she feels sexualized. When is the next naked skepchick calendar coming out?

[3point14]

I'm confused as to why this is a gender issue.

Someone very insensitive asked the wrong question at the wrong time. Happens all the time. Let's all get over it.

[fls]

Originally Posted by case#46cw39

aynsavoy
06.20.2011

"One assumption I am perfectly comfortable making is that, despite Rebecca’s prior assertions to the group that she wanted to go to bed, this individual thought that it would be a good idea to try to change her mind. Even if we decide that he had the best intentions in mind, this decision shows a disregard for Rebecca’s expressed desires.

I wouldn't call it that since it works both ways. For example if I told you I'm not interested in you and yet you persisted in making sexual advances on me I would consider you to be rude or maybe ignorant.

Right. Like I've said previously, one can talk about different circumstances where these distinctions are more obvious. However, since this wasn't a case of someone making persistent sexual advances, it's not clear why this represents hatred of women.

Linda

[Antiquehunter]

Originally Posted by Starthinker

I'm sorry she feels sexualized. When is the next naked skepchick calendar coming out?

I'd forgotten about that one. Point scored, sir.

[Seismosaurus]

That the message I take away from this is "Don't talk to women, because it might creep them out and if it does, that's the guy's fault."

Kinda sad, but there you go.

[Delvo]

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus

That the message I take away from this is "Don't talk to women, because it might creep them out and if it does, that's the guy's fault."

Kinda sad, but there you go.

So you're saying that, even though it's exactly what everyone who's commented on the original incident has been emphasizing all along, you still don't get the fact that the issue was not just the fact THAT he did it, but the circumstances and method; WHERE, WHEN, & HOW he did it.

That's just not believable. You can't be that stupid, so your distortion there has to be deliberate.

[Phlebas]

Good lord. The events you people are talking about sound a lot more interesting than what really happened.

I *believe* Rebecca's point, when she brought it up on her video, was essentially that behavior like Elevator Guy's is part of what's keeping women from coming to skeptic/atheist events. Don't proposition women the first time you ever speak to them, especially not in an enclosed place. What is so radical about that? That's not a rabid man-hating stance, that's manners.

If you're going to approach someone, be aware of your surroundings. You don't know the other person's experience, and it's not like people have never been assaulted in an elevator.

Since the guys in the skeptic/atheist groups don't get that, attracting women to these events will remain a struggle. TAM has done a good job at that, but how many others are something other than sausagefests?

Of course, what Rebecca actually did and said has been lost in the ensuing howls of outrage from the (mostly) skeptical men who feel their right to ask for sex is being threatened.

And Richard Dawkins is being a jerk. Yes, nothing violent happened to Rebecca in that elevator. Yes, the guy was probably just awkward/drunk/stupid. But Rebecca could not have known that would be the outcome at the time, and was understandably creeped out. So she said "don't do that." And she's right.

And don't not do it just so we can get more women to come to skeptic events. Don't do it because it's AT BEST impolite, and you may be presenting a threatening profile to someone who doesn't know you or your intentions.

That was it: be aware of how you come across, and treat people with respect.

Of course, Rebecca is an outspoken feminist (thanks to skeptic and atheist men), so everything she says and does is to further her man-hating agenda. And all the people who put their names on the bottom of Stephanie Svan's open letter to Dawkins are just humorless bitches who can't laugh off their own rapes and assaults.

Sheesh.

[Antiquehunter]

Originally Posted by mr. ottle

TAM has done a good job at that, but how many others are something other than sausagefests?

What's wrong with a good sausagefest? Sexist!

[Shaun from Scotland]

Calling someone out in a public setting without giving someone a chance to respond is out of order. creeping women out by being a letch is out of order.

Now, can we all be pals again and get back to stopping douchebag homeopathists and stuff?

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Having met Dawkins once, I consider Rebecca's blog condemning Dawkin's reply to the affair to be undeserved. I've never met a more mild mannered polite proper man than Dawkins.

It doesn't bother me either and I'm a middle class, middle aged, heterosexual white woman. It's hard to believe my being from the age of the sexual revolution in the US and Rebecca being younger is the difference, but maybe that's it.

Maybe I misinterpreted it but to me, it came off as; The skeptic community has some nerve standing behind RD, who uttered a few sentences about a situation where she felt uncomfortable, when there's women who have it far worse. Unless her genitals are being mutilated, don't complain. Really? So by that notion, unless you are being religiously persecuted in a violent manner, don't complain. You don't like the religious dominance in the US, get over it, people are getting their heads cut off in other countries.

Quote:

Of course groping is disgusting, but I have a hard time believing this is some common behavior. I've been groped a couple times in my lifetime and the atmosphere this happens in is rare, not common.

But as for the other stuff, sheesh, get over yourself. Ignore the fools. There are plenty of men an intellectual woman can have a legit conversation with. They can't all be drooling ignoramuses. I meet with both a skeptic's group and an atheist group. I've never seen anyone objectify women in either group the way Rebecca is describing. And I've been to dozens of professional conferences. I've never had any trouble finding intelligent conversations to participate in.

She said that in the beginning, she thought the attention was kind of fun. What you are doing is exactly what she referred to, in her speech as an argument from ignorance; because you don't experience it, it must not be a big occurance.
In my opinion, bullying is bullying, whether it's through an email or in person, no one should have to tolerate being told that they need to be raped to teach them a lesson. Telling her that she needs to get over herself for addressing it is the same as telling a kid to get over it, when they are addressing bullying issues at school. The behavior is wrong and the person committing the behavior needs to be confronted and told it's wrong. You just don't sit back and tell the victim that it's just how things are, learn to deal with it. If women kept that attitude, we wouldn't have the right to vote.

Quote:

Is this said unwanted attention really that much different from PZ being accosted regularly by Catholics and certain Christians, Dawkin's by Creationists, Plait by the Moon landing deniers, and Shermer by the 911 CTers?

As I've said before, threats of violence should be addressed, whether it's sexual or asexually physical. However, when someone addresses a point that RD by stating that he needs to get hit by a church bus, it shows ignorance and violent tendencies. When someone says that RW needs to get raped in response to a point she addresses, it shows ignorance, violent tendencies, and an underlying misogyny. Rape, in that context, is a show of dominance, an imbalance of power. It's very similar, if not identical to prison rape. Prison rape is not necessarily about sexual gratification, it's using sex to belittle the victim and prove your dominance. Unlike RD, RW does not need to be eliminated, they simply feel if they **** her hard enough, she will be more obedient.

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus

That the message I take away from this is "Don't talk to women, because it might creep them out and if it does, that's the guy's fault."

Kinda sad, but there you go.

Indeed it is sad, but it's brave of you to own up to your failings.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by mr. ottle

Of course, what Rebecca actually did and said has been lost in the ensuing howls of outrage from the (mostly) skeptical men who feel their right to ask for sex is being threatened.

As is often the case, everything started out reasonably. Rebecca's original remarks were fair and balanced. But now that the skeptic community has its share of celebrities, everything eventually gets blown up into a giant celebrity-fest.

Quote:

And Richard Dawkins is being a jerk. Yes, nothing violent happened to Rebecca in that elevator. Yes, the guy was probably just awkward/drunk/stupid. But Rebecca could not have known that would be the outcome at the time, and was understandably creeped out. So she said "don't do that." And she's right.

Indeed, except what does the fact that Dawkins is an elderly, rich, white guy have to do with anything?

I'll take a lesson from Rebecca's original request for men to think twice about what they are doing. After that, I'll step out of the way and watch the ensuing shenanigans.

~~ Paul

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Shaun from Scotland

...snip...

Now, can we all be pals again and get back to stopping douchebag homeopathists and stuff?

This. (ETA: And Paul's post above.) It seems to me to be way too much focus on "skeptical personalities" these days by the so-called "skeptical movement/community". Yes I know people have to make a living so that will involve a level of publicity but it really does make me glad that I'm not part of it.

[Antiquehunter]

Originally Posted by Darat

but it really does make me glad that I'm not part of it.

Oh, but you are. Didn't you realize that your role as lord of the JREF forum is exceedingly high-profile? You aren't being harassed by skeptical paparazzi?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

Oh, but you are. Didn't you realize that your role as lord of the JREF forum is exceedingly high-profile? You aren't being harassed by skeptical paparazzi?

But quite seriously I've actually worked at the opposite after I saw what "personalities" and the inevitable clashes and falling outs had done to some other extremely popular forums/websites in the past.

Plus of course I'd rather remain in the shadows and ask "What do you want?"

[NoZed Avenger]

If I see a man on an elevator with a room key . . . .

[Phlebas]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Indeed, except what does the fact that Dawkins is an elderly, rich, white guy have to do with anything?

That question has been asked and answered all over the place. Either you accept the responses or you think Rebecca just said something in anger and frustration. (Or the third option: Rebecca hates men.)

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

I'll take a lesson from Rebecca's original request for men to think twice about what they are doing. After that, I'll step out of the way and watch the ensuing shenanigans.

Probably the wisest move Not something this community has a lot of experience doing...

[Phlebas]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

What's wrong with a good sausagefest? Sexist!

It has its place, but some of us crave variety!

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Darat

But quite seriously I've actually worked at the opposite after I saw what "personalities" and the inevitable clashes and falling outs had done to some other extremely popular forums/websites in the past.

Plus of course I'd rather remain in the shadows and ask "What do you want?"

Oh, so you're more like Azrael, in Dogma. You'll pick the winning side after the fallout.

Seriously, though, and I am not trying to keep the discussion going but you got me curious. Could something like this actually divide communities?

[Antiquehunter]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

Could something like this actually divide communities?

I think it could - I think it may already have!

Look at the heated debate on many of the fora. The discussions here at JREF have been (surprisingly) relatively even-keeled. There are thousands of posts at PZ's blog, on RW's site, on BA's site, the Friendly Atheist - which indicate the foaming-at-the-mouth rabidness certain segments of our 'community' can display.

Dawkins (unfortunately) is alternately being beaten like a ginger-haired stepchild, or being placed on a pedestal and held as being some sort of ubermensch.

I've read suggestions that people should wear stickers saying if they're willing to be approached to be asked for a date or not. (Personally, I prefer going back to the old tried and true gay handkerchief in the back pocket code system). Lots of women saying 'this is why I won't go to a convention'. Lots of men saying 'if I can't talk to women, I'm not going to a convention'.

Its really getting beyond bizarre.

[Seismosaurus]

Originally Posted by Delvo

That's just not believable. You can't be that stupid

Oh, I get that this particular set of circumstances creeped this particular woman out. But I don't really get why it would, or how he could possibly have been expected to have known in advance that it would.

To me what he did, as she described it, seemed perfectly polite and reasonable. Even if we assume that an invitation to talk more really meant an invitation to something else, I honestly don't see why it would creep somebody out. The rules for this, if any, seem arcane and difficult to grasp, at least for me. Given that I would be horrified to find that I had made a woman feel that way, not to mention the potential cost of doing so... seems to me like the only thing to do is play it safe.

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

Indeed it is sad, but it's brave of you to own up to your failings.

Thanks. As Eastwood once said in a movie, a man should know his limitations. I don't know that I'd call it brave, but I am well aware of mine.

[Phlebas]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

Lots of men saying 'if I can't talk to women, I'm not going to a convention'.

This is the part I don't get. We're skeptics, not Juggalos. This was at an atheist conference, not a wet t-shirt contest. Aren't we supposed to value critical thinking and reason and fairness and equality? If you're coming to a skeptic or atheist conference to get laid, you are part of the problem. You're actually part of several problems.

The people who are interpreting this as "don't talk to women" are not using their critical thinking faculties. By all means, talk to women, men, Toby, whomever. But do so with respect -- at least at first, until you know each other well enough to establish other rules. If you find someone attractive, great. Go talk to them. Get to know them. Do not assume they are just transportation devices for sex organs. Let them believe you admire their minds or their personalities. (If you don't, then you have other issues to deal with.)

I do not see what's so difficult about that. Didn't we learn that in kindergarten? Did we not figure this out long before the opposite sex got over their cooties?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

Oh, so you're more like Azrael, in Dogma. You'll pick the winning side after the fallout.

Seriously, though, and I am not trying to keep the discussion going but you got me curious. Could something like this actually divide communities?

Can't see why not, it happens all the time in all aspects of social interactions, it's really just human behaviour that all you humans seem to partake in from time to time; the need to group identify and tribalism is sadly very strong in humans!

[Phlebas]

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus

Oh, I get that this particular set of circumstances creeped this particular woman out. But I don't really get why it would, or how he could possibly have been expected to have known in advance that it would.

Ask anyone who's been sexually assaulted in an elevator.

[cwalner]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

Lots of men saying 'if I can't talk to women, I'm not going to a convention'.

Its really getting beyond bizarre.

Truly Bizarre, considering that my take on Rebecca's initial post was that had the guy approached her in the bar and struck up a conversation then, it would not have been an issue at all.

Her complaint was not about him trying to talk to her, but him employing an incredibly clumsy pick-up move (so clumsy she labeled it 'creepy' and bordered on threatening) after she spent the day talking about how that is the very kind of behavior she does not appreciate at conventions.

[chran]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Indeed, except what does the fact that Dawkins is an elderly, rich, white guy have to do with anything?

Because MAILE PRIVELEDGHE!1!

[fls]

In all fairness, all that we were given is that the guy was doing just what has been advised - get to know someone before making sexual advances. The rest has been filled in by our prurient desires for a sausagefest.

Linda

[Seismosaurus]

Originally Posted by mr. ottle

Ask anyone who's been sexually assaulted in an elevator.

People can be and have been sexually assaulted in pretty much any kind of place. Therefore if it's weird to proposition somebody in places where that happens, it's weird to proposition somebody anywhere.

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

I think it could - I think it may already have!

Look at the heated debate on many of the fora. The discussions here at JREF have been (surprisingly) relatively even-keeled. There are thousands of posts at PZ's blog, on RW's site, on BA's site, the Friendly Atheist - which indicate the foaming-at-the-mouth rabidness certain segments of our 'community' can display.

Dawkins (unfortunately) is alternately being beaten like a ginger-haired stepchild, or being placed on a pedestal and held as being some sort of ubermensch.

I've read suggestions that people should wear stickers saying if they're willing to be approached to be asked for a date or not. (Personally, I prefer going back to the old tried and true gay handkerchief in the back pocket code system). Lots of women saying 'this is why I won't go to a convention'. Lots of men saying 'if I can't talk to women, I'm not going to a convention'.

Its really getting beyond bizarre.

I think people being verbally attacked or idolize for their stance in this is strictly based on how important they hold other people's opinions. I made it clear that I disagreed Dawkin's input, as much as I've disagreed with some posts in either thread on this topic. It doesn't automatically invalidate every thing Dawkins or posters here have ever said before or will ever say again. It's just one opinion on a multifaceted topic.

[Starthinker]

Originally Posted by mr. ottle

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus

Oh, I get that this particular set of circumstances creeped this particular woman out. But I don't really get why it would, or how he could possibly have been expected to have known in advance that it would.

Ask anyone who's been sexually assaulted in an elevator.

I'm sure some women have been assaulted in an elevator, but I'm also sure there are perhaps millions who haven't been insulted. I'm sure you ask someone who escaped a fire what their views on fire safety is and it will be different from those who have never experienced a fire. If this guy was never sexually assaulted on an elevator, and doesn't know or has never met anyone who has, how would he know how she would feel? What about people who have given birth on an elevator? People who have had heart attacks in elevators? People who have been stung by bees in elevators? Are we supposed to know every single circumstance that has ever happened in an elevator so we can know how to act for every single person we meet on an elevator? Are we supposed to have questionaires before getting on elevators so we know what we can and can't do so as not to freak others out?

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

Lots of men saying 'if I can't talk to women, I'm not going to a convention'.

I totally agree. I would never go to a convention if I can't talk to women -- that would indeed be quite bizarre, as you phrase it. Luckily, I have learned how to talk to women without creeping them out, by avoiding doing things such as, oh I don't know, say propositioning them at first sight in elevators at 4:00 AM. Oddly enough, I've managed to live my life without finding myself doing stuff like that, and all and all it was neither very difficult nor did it put much of a crimp on the conversations I did want to have with women.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by mr. ottle

Good lord. The events you people are talking about sound a lot more interesting than what really happened.

I *believe* Rebecca's point, when she brought it up on her video, was essentially that behavior like Elevator Guy's is part of what's keeping women from coming to skeptic/atheist events. Don't proposition women the first time you ever speak to them, especially not in an enclosed place. What is so radical about that? That's not a rabid man-hating stance, that's manners.

If you're going to approach someone, be aware of your surroundings. You don't know the other person's experience, and it's not like people have never been assaulted in an elevator.

Since the guys in the skeptic/atheist groups don't get that, attracting women to these events will remain a struggle. TAM has done a good job at that, but how many others are something other than sausagefests?

Of course, what Rebecca actually did and said has been lost in the ensuing howls of outrage from the (mostly) skeptical men who feel their right to ask for sex is being threatened.

And Richard Dawkins is being a jerk. Yes, nothing violent happened to Rebecca in that elevator. Yes, the guy was probably just awkward/drunk/stupid. But Rebecca could not have known that would be the outcome at the time, and was understandably creeped out. So she said "don't do that." And she's right.

And don't not do it just so we can get more women to come to skeptic events. Don't do it because it's AT BEST impolite, and you may be presenting a threatening profile to someone who doesn't know you or your intentions.

That was it: be aware of how you come across, and treat people with respect.

Of course, Rebecca is an outspoken feminist (thanks to skeptic and atheist men), so everything she says and does is to further her man-hating agenda. And all the people who put their names on the bottom of Stephanie Svan's open letter to Dawkins are just humorless bitches who can't laugh off their own rapes and assaults.

Sheesh.

This. In spades.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Antiquehunter

What's wrong with a good sausagefest? Sexist!

Shouldn't that be "homophobe!!!"?

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by fls

In all fairness, all that we were given is that the guy was doing just what has been advised - get to know someone before making sexual advances. The rest has been filled in by our prurient desires for a sausagefest.

Linda

If I can't just show an alternate possibility, whether or not his intention was to sound like he was propositioning her, it's how it came off. As I've said before; back to your/my place, your/my room, someplace a little more private are universally known as "let's have sex." It's practically an unspoken rule that the whole, getting to know you, part, generally occurs in public and the private part follows if the signals are there. I am sure there are exceptions.

[Phlebas]

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus

People can be and have been sexually assaulted in pretty much any kind of place. Therefore if it's weird to proposition somebody in places where that happens, it's weird to proposition somebody anywhere.

It's pretty weird to proposition someone the first time you ever speak to them regardless of the location. That was mistake #1.

But let's see... what's different about being a stranger in an elevator versus a crowded bar? One is completely enclosed without a reliable means of escape and no witnesses, the other is a crowded bar. If this guy had been inclined, he could have easily hit the Stop button and prevented Rebecca from hitting it again.

I don't know your gender, but one thing I've learned from this and other discussions like it is that women often feel more at a man's mercy than a man does around women. Normally, nothing happens, but the chances of something happening are non-zero.

If you seriously do not get why a woman could feel threatened in a closed space with a stranger who has made it clear that he wants himself some sex, then I don't know what else to say.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

What you are doing is exactly what she referred to, in her speech as an argument from ignorance; because you don't experience it, it must not be a big occurance.

I personally have never experience sexism at TAM. However, I can't speak for other guys.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger

If I see a man on an elevator with a room key . . . .

Wins the thread.