Dr. Hall's Shirt

[rustypouch]

Wow. Amy sounds like she *really* needs a hug.

[Dani]

Originally Posted by Dani

I'm also perplexed by the fact that some of the blog comments from the link equate this behavior to misogyny.

Correction to myself: I agree that those comments from that forum help perpetuate misogyny. They may not be misogynist driven, but it's difficult to tell the difference, and that's why this is a problem.

[Lucian]

Originally Posted by AdMan

Did she really wear it for three days, or is that an exaggeration and just a rumor being spread online?

I first noticed the shirt on Saturday evening (and commented to Dr. Hall that I liked it, to which she responded that she'd been getting a lot of flak for it). On Sunday she wasn't wearing it during her panel.

It's an honest question--I hadn't noticed the shirt before Saturday so only saw it for one day.

I'm pretty sure I saw her wearing it Thursday, Friday and Saturday.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Lucian

I'm pretty sure I saw her wearing it Thursday, Friday and Saturday.

Before it comes up in this thread as it has elsewhere, I shared a ship cabin with Harriet on the Galapagos cruise. Both of us washed clothes in the sink every night as traveling light requires. If she had one shirt I'm sure she washed it between wearings.

[RemieV]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Before it comes up in this thread as it has elsewhere, I shared a ship cabin with Harriet on the Galapagos cruise. Both of us washed clothes in the sink every night as traveling light requires. If she had one shirt I'm sure she washed it between wearings.

How often she washed her shirt is the important part here?

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I have no clue except in the twitter feed she said, "Harriet walked into the speakers lounge where I was already in tears [expletives deleted]. I was asked to comment on the shirt to Ophelia. I did. I don't owe you any explanation as to why I was crying. So piss off."

Yes, there was something else that had her in tears which was unrelated to Dr. Hall's shirt. I have a pretty good idea what it was, too (since I was privy to it). But unless Amy wants to mention it, I'm staying mum, as it was a bit personal.

Please, continue speculating wildly and trying to make it sound like you know what you're talking about

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by El_Spectre

One can make a point without it being an insult. If others choose to take it as one, so be it.

As an example, someone else cited the pro-atheist billboards that are occasionally put up. They are (usually) polite and cheerful, yet many people are upset by them. Should the billboard come down because some people don't like it?

False analogy. Nobody asked Dr. Hall to stop wearing the shirt.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by RemieV

Sigh... I find it so odd that, just because people don't like the Skepchicks, it's fair game to just do whatever. Does anyone actually browse around for information? At all?

It was in the comments here: http://skepchick.org/2012/07/ask-sur...eal-with-hate/

I get that some people don't like her for whatever reason. But really, guys, all she's doing that pisses you off is BLOGGING. Every other thing Skepchick does benefits the JREF - like the fact Surlyramics was a sponsor of TAM, or that Skepchick gave all those women scholarships to go.

What is it about them that pisses you off so much?

This ^^^

Folks, if you don't like the Skepchicks, fine by me. But the lengths to which some here will go to rag on them seems almost obsessive.

ETA: Once again, I have to point out that a number of people here are perpetuating a bunch of nonsense because the are not working with all the facts. As I said before, I have a pretty good idea of what set Amy to crying, and it had nothing to do with Dr. Hall's shirt. And i'm not going to share it because it's none of your frakking business! But if you guys want to keep on playing high school gossip games, have at it.

[/thread]

[ravdin]

I regret I came across this thread just now and have learned about this sorry story. It's depressing that a t-shirt would cause any controversy whatsoever at TAM. If you're that upset about the words on a t-shirt, you need to grow up.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Lucian

I'm pretty sure I saw her wearing it Thursday, Friday and Saturday.

Yes, I can confirm that too.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by RemieV

How often she washed her shirt is the important part here?

It was preemptive. In the other threads and blogs multiple people made false accusations that wearing the shirt three days in a row must smell. The conversation here drifted to wearing the shirt multiple days.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Yes, there was something else that had her in tears which was unrelated to Dr. Hall's shirt. I have a pretty good idea what it was, too (since I was privy to it). But unless Amy wants to mention it, I'm staying mum, as it was a bit personal.

Please, continue speculating wildly and trying to make it sound like you know what you're talking about

If you're referring to me speculating find the quote where I did. Good luck.

Here's some help: "I have no clue except in the twitter feed she said..."

And, note the contradictory quotes Dani cited from another source.

Feel free to explain the discrepancy but personally I refrained from doing so other than to say, "Looks like Amy's tweet might have been a backpedal."

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

...Folks, if you don't like the Skepchicks, fine by me. But the lengths to which some here will go to rag on them seems almost obsessive....

As do some of the apologies.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam

Is this a spoof thread, or have I been drinking too much?

The drinking will do that to you Iam told. Fortunately though I do not drink that often, when I do get drunk I am a happy drunk and have never so far been inappropriately offensive to others.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It was preemptive. In the other threads and blogs multiple people made false accusations that wearing the shirt three days in a row must smell.

It certainly crossed my mind.

[Ethan Thane Athen]

Originally Posted by RemieV

How often she washed her shirt is the important part here?

There is no 'important part' here. The whole thing is a nonsense with someone who, considering the position they adopt, should know better, seeming to do everything they can to illustrate the stereotype of the 'over-emotional woman'. Quite frankly it's pathetic.

Before the usual apologists weigh in with 'You weren't there, you don't know what went on. It wasn't the t-shirt it was something "really horrible"...but we can't tell you what' - her own words lead to the former conclusion, followed by some pretty serious back-pedalling which does unfortunately make it look very much like she realised how pathetic she was being and cast around for another excuse for being such a wuss.

And even if there was something else 'really horrible', unless it was a physical assault (in which case don't blog about it, call the sodding police!) then quite frankly I don't care. Was someone really cruel to her verbally? Grow up! Give them some verbals back or walk away. Geez I thought we left getting upset by name-calling or whatever behind when we left school - and most were well capable of coping with it even there.

Good luck if you can come up with something that was more then 'being nasty' (oh boo hoo!) but less than some form of assault - if you do, I may (depending what it is) change my stance and apologise for being wrong. No sweat.

Until then, sorry, vague excuses do not change my (possibly ill-informed) opinions on what, to me, seem a bunch of whiny, attention seeking (but then hate it if it's the wrong kind), over-emotional, drama queens.

To be clear, I had absolutely nothing against the Skepchicks before the whole 'Elevatorgate' nonsense and this latest debacle - to be honest, I'd barely heard of them - but they do seem hell bent on giving an extremely poor impression of their 'movement'.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Quote:

a lot of real people who, while they never touched me, they did things like make fake Surly-Ramics necklaces with words on them that mocked things I said online and there were actual people live blogging from the event saying things like I was part of an ‘axis’ that was trying to destroy the event and people celebrating T-shirts that served to make me feel like an outcast and people singing songs that said we ‘should pull the sticks out of our ass’ etc.

I'm sorry, but some of this doesn't pass my sniff test. I know about #FTBullies, but fake Surly-Ramics necklaces and singing songs? That just sounds bizarre.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

I'm sorry, but some of this doesn't pass my sniff test. I know about #FTBullies, but fake Surly-Ramics necklaces and singing songs? That just sounds bizarre.

I can verify the fake Surly-ramics necklaces were real, as I saw more than one of them. Strange, but true.

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

I can verify the fake Surly-ramics necklaces were real, as I saw more than one of them. Strange, but true.

Aw geez, please tell me you're kidding. Regardless of what "side" you're on, that's just plain infantile.

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by rustypouch

Wow. Amy sounds like she *really* needs a hug.

Watch it know, that is sexual harassment to some people. Guys don't do this.

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

I can verify the fake Surly-ramics necklaces were real, as I saw more than one of them. Strange, but true.

What did some of them say that was so demeaning and cruel?

[Darat]

What are "surlyramics"?

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

...What did some of them say that was so demeaning and cruel?

What does it matter? Such behavior is extremely immature and has no place among adults.

[Verklagekasper]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

False analogy. Nobody asked Dr. Hall to stop wearing the shirt.

True. Instead, Dr. Hall was called an insulting attacking enormous jerk, dishonest, really nasty, a petty and vindictive person, a petty *******, someone who should damn well know better, outright mean, spiteful, thinking irrationally and putting it on display for everyone to see, slapping the faces of those who don’t feel safe and welcome at TAM, parading around her good fortune instead of showing empathy, an *******, awfully committed to repeating ******** and sucking up to teh menz, gender-blind, wearing a petty spiteful and childish thing, minimizing the experiences of others, someone who should be ashamed of herself, sacrificing nuance for volume, blaming the victim, harassing a group out of TAM by directly and unambiguously attacking Skepchicks and Rebecca Watson, vicious, petty and mean, cutting off her nose to spite her face, taunting people, doing dehumanizing and gender/color blind and hurtful and cruel and shortsighted things, taking advantage of her status, crossing the line, being benignly stupid in her actions, acting cluelessly careless, someone who shouldn’t be surprised if next year the people at TAM treat her like she’s not exactly welcome if she continues to take that attitude.

But hey, that's "just blogging".

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Stellafane

What does it matter? Such behavior is extremely immature and has no place among adults.

It matters because you are calling the behavior extremely immature without knowing what the behavior actually is. I would think that adults can wear necklaces, even ones that say stuff. That isn't immature. Context is everything.

ETA: If I am going to agree that it is immature, I will have to know what they said.

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Verklagekasper

True. Instead, Dr. Hall was called an insulting attacking enormous jerk, dishonest, really nasty, a petty and vindictive person, a petty *******, someone who should damn well know better, outright mean, spiteful, thinking irrationally and putting it on display for everyone to see, slapping the faces of those who don’t feel safe and welcome at TAM, parading around her good fortune instead of showing empathy, an *******, awfully committed to repeating ******** and sucking up to teh menz, gender-blind, wearing a petty spiteful and childish thing, minimizing the experiences of others, someone who should be ashamed of herself, sacrificing nuance for volume, blaming the victim, harassing a group out of TAM by directly and unambiguously attacking Skepchicks and Rebecca Watson, vicious, petty and mean, cutting off her nose to spite her face, taunting people, doing dehumanizing and gender/color blind and hurtful and cruel and shortsighted things, taking advantage of her status, crossing the line, being benignly stupid in her actions, acting cluelessly careless, someone who shouldn’t be surprised if next year the people at TAM treat her like she’s not exactly welcome if she continues to take that attitude.

But hey, that's "just blogging".

You would have been nominated if all of those statements were hypertexted to the original sources. Otherwise, nice post.

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Darat

What are "surlyramics"?

http://surlyramics.com/

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

It matters because you are calling the behavior extremely immature without knowing what the behavior actually is. I would think that adults can wear necklaces, even ones that say stuff. That isn't immature. Context is everything.

"Adults can wear necklaces." Yeah they can -- as if that's even remotely the issue at hand; but of course you know perfectly well it isn't. The thing is, adults stop being adults and start acting like a bunch of socially undeveloped middle school children if they don such necklaces for the sole purpose of trying to embarass someone else in attendance, or to make some joke at someone else's expense. As you say, context is everything.

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Stellafane

"Adults can wear necklaces." Yeah they can -- as if that's even remotely the issue at hand; but of course you know perfectly well it isn't. The thing is, adults stop being adults and start acting like a bunch of socially undeveloped middle school children if they don such necklaces for the sole purpose of trying to embarass someone else in attendance, or make some joke at someone else's expense. As you say, context is everything.

And you are STILL assuming that this is the case, without knowing what they said, unless you do know, in which case it doesn't make sense that you don't share it.

I am going to remain skeptical on that point unless I get more information. Why is this difficult for you to understand?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Stellafane

"Adults can wear necklaces." Yeah they can -- as if that's even remotely the issue at hand; but of course you know perfectly well it isn't. The thing is, adults stop being adults and start acting like a bunch of socially undeveloped middle school children if they don such necklaces for the sole purpose of trying to embarass someone else in attendance, or to make some joke at someone else's expense. As you say, context is everything.

Looking at the site to get a handle on what these necklaces are meant to be - I'm at a total loss to understand what a fake "surly ramics" necklace is and how I would tell one was a fake one and not something similar with something someone wanted to say on it unrelated to surly ramics or one of the people who make such things.

I have to say I think there may be just a teeny-weeny bit of "I'm the centre of the universe" in that particular complaint.

(Obviously I could be totally wrong but there doesn't seem to be any evidence to confirm that folk had created "fake" surly ramic necklaces with the objective of causing discomfort for one of the people who make "real" ones.)

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Darat

Looking at the site to get a handle on what these necklaces are meant to be - I'm at a total loss to understand what a fake "surly ramics" necklace is and how I would tell one was a fake one and not something similar with something someone wanted to say on it unrelated to surly ramics or one of the people who make such things.

I have to say I think there may be just a teeny-weeny bit of "I'm the centre of the universe" in that particular complaint.

(Obviously I could be totally wrong but there doesn't seem to be any evidence to confirm that folk had created "fake" surly ramic necklaces with the objective of causing discomfort for one of the people who make "real" ones.)

This is EXACTLY what is going through my skeptical mind, that doesn't seem to register with other(s). I would like to know what words are on these necklaces that some are getting offended at.

As to the bolding, I would say that you probably do have a good idea of what a fake would be, but that there is a wide grey area where something could go either way.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

...snip...

As to the bolding, I would say that you probably do have a good idea of what a fake would be, but that there is a wide grey area where something could go either way.

I really don't as the actual type of jewellery they seem to produce doesn't look unique to me, looks like a lot of other handmade ceramic pieces. On a site a friend of mine has a shop "Etsy" you can find very similar example of the type, have a look at http://www.etsy.com/search/handmade?...plicit_scope=1

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

http://surlyramics.com/

And these are a problem, why?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Darat

I really don't as the actual type of jewellery they seem to produce doesn't look unique to me, looks like a lot of other handmade ceramic pieces. On a site a friend of mine has a shop "Etsy" you can find very similar example of the type, have a look at http://www.etsy.com/search/handmade?...plicit_scope=1

They sell them all over here. I saw a bunch at one of those comic-com events (dragon-con or whatever), and our fearless leader sells them as a fundraiser in our skeptic's group. Someone donated them. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if any Seattle skeptics at TAM had them on.

If Spoony reads this thread she might be able to tell us.

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

They sell them all over here. I saw a bunch at one of those comic-com events (dragon-con or whatever), and our fearless leader sells them as a fundraiser in our skeptic's group. Someone donated them. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if any Seattle skeptics at TAM had them on.

If Spoony reads this thread she might be able to tell us.

I am envisioning (not drawing conclusions without evidence) ones that have words specifically making fun of the group, perhaps saying things like "elevatorgate" or "guys don't do this" which would be considered a "fake" unless purchased at the surly site, run by Amy. Does she hold exclusive rights on these things?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

I am envisioning (not drawing conclusions without evidence) ones that have words specifically making fun of the group, perhaps saying things like "elevatorgate" or "guys don't do this" which would be considered a "fake" unless purchased at the surly site. They do custom ones too. I don't think the fake thing is the issue here.

True it was just something that caught my eye because I had no idea what the references to surly ramics was about.

[AvalonXQ]

Hmmm. One of the Surly-Ramics advertisements has off-camera speech bubbles saying that a girl "smells great," and "hubba hubba!" Somehow I didn't think such comments were consistent with Skepchick ideals...

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Hmmm. One of the Surly-Ramics advertisements has off-camera speech bubbles saying that a girl "smells great," and "hubba hubba!" Somehow I didn't think such comments were consistent with Skepchick ideals...

Well, it appears that the comic was drawn by a man, one who still gets the impression that women are enthralled with shiny things that make men more attracted to them when they smell good. (back off, jackson?)

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

.... at the surly site, run by Amy. Does she hold exclusive rights on these things?

If that is the basis of calling them 'fake' she's in Lala land. They're all over the place.

You can even buy them unglazed and paint your own.

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by Careyp74

...Why is this difficult for you to understand?

Because I'm stupid? That's the implication of your statement, after all.

I will grant that no, I haven't personally seen the offending (or otherwise) necklaces in question, so I suppose I should preface everything I subsequently say with "assuming that MattusMaximus is telling the truth."

(For the record, I do happen to understand, and perfectly well. The particulars being discussed in this thread -- and for that matter, the attitudes of those contributing to it -- just aren't all that complicated or difficult to comprehend. I just don't happen to agree with some other people, which I suppose makes me dumb in their eyes. And that, unfortunately, is all to easy to understand.)

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Stellafane

Because I'm stupid? That's the implication of your statement, after all.

I will grant that no, I haven't personally seen the offending (or otherwise) necklaces in question, so I suppose I should preface everything I subsequently say with "assuming that MattusMaximus is telling the truth."

(For the record, I do happen to understand, and perfectly well. The particulars being discussed in this thread -- and for that matter, the attitudes of those contributing to it -- just aren't all that complicated or difficult to comprehend. I just don't happen to agree with some other people, which I suppose makes me dumb in their eyes. And that, unfortunately, is all to easy to understand.)

It's not even about him telling the truth. He said he saw necklaces. OK, I can believe that. We don't know what they said that he might have taken the wrong way or even misunderstood. You don't take his word for it. Skepticism 101.

And aside from what is petty or juvenile about the whole thing, or little parts of it, my comment deals directly to you asking me why it matters what they said, and then once given good reason for wanting to know, still go on like you don't get what the reason is.