|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 07/08/2011 : 17:34:38
|
http://mblogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/07/05/richard-dawkins-and-male-privilege/
And Phil Plait... don't be a dick.... How about don't be a hysterical idiot?
Watson gets propositioned in an elevator. She declines, goes to her own room. Somehow Plait makes this, to quote him, "potential sexual assault". Yeah, in hysterical idiot land. Is it creepy? Maybe, I can sympathize with that much. But potential sexual assault? Really? WTF Phil?
The guy didn't take it beyond her rejection. He didn't press the issue. He didn't touch her. He didn't follow her. He just hit her up for sex (want to come to my room for coffee? At 3am that is a proposition, no doubt). She said no, the guy left it totally alone after that.
How the fuck is that sexism or "potential sexual assault"?
You'd have to be a hysterical idiot to say such a thing.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2011 : 19:44:59 [Permalink]
|
I don't think I can go through this again...
Rebecca Watson never claimed there was an assault. All she said was it's creepy and please don't do that. And that should have been the end of this saga. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2011 : 20:03:33 [Permalink]
|
| True |
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2011 : 20:51:47 [Permalink]
|
| By the way. If it weren't for Richard Dawkins fallacious and condescendingly sarcastic assessment of Watsons story, this whole thing would have been not much more than some good advice from Watson. Hell, even Myers was taken aback by Dawkins comments. If you're going to dis Phil Plait, don't forget what prompted him to write that blog, Dude. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 07/08/2011 : 21:47:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
By the way. If it weren't for Richard Dawkins fallacious and condescendingly sarcastic assessment of Watsons story, this whole thing would have been not much more than some good advice from Watson. Hell, even Myers was taken aback by Dawkins comments. If you're going to dis Phil Plait, don't forget what prompted him to write that blog, Dude.
|
Plait is the one who introduced "potential sexual assault" into it. So I can dis him for being a hysterical idiot all day long.
Dawkins was being an asshole, but he isn't substantively wrong.
As Myers and other pointed out in their criticism of Dawkins, a different bad thing doesn't lessen the badness of a bad thing. Dawkins being a dick does not make Plait less of a hysterical idiot.
As for Watson, I still don't like her because of the last thing. I'm not saying she is wrong about the guy being creepy, but she is taking it too far (again).
Plait said this:
| Being alone in an elevator with a man late at night is uncomfortable for any woman, even if the man is silent. But when he hits on her? There’s no way to avoid a predatory vibe here, and that’s unacceptable. A situation like this can lead to sexual assault; I just read in the news here in Boulder that a few days ago a relatively innocent situation turned into assault. This isn’t some rare event; it happens a lot and most women are all-too painfully aware of it. |
That is incredibly retarded. So now all men should just vacate elevators if a woman gets on, apparently. Because, you know, us men might decide to randomly assault a total stranger for no fucking reason, it happens every day! Dr Phil knows because he recently read about something just like it! Well, goddamnit~! Dr Phil must be right! Who knew than all men were inherently rapists! All of us who have never considered the idea, or might even be repulsed by it, we have just been missing out on the rapefest! WTF!
Seriously?
Plait (and Watson) are the problem here. Not Dawkins.
| Rebecca, apparently, handled this situation with aplomb, and I’m glad. She turned it into a useful lesson for men on how not to treat women. |
Uh huh. Because Watson is the first person we all think of when wondering how to treat a woman. She is, apparently, according to Dr Phil, an authority on the matter!
 |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2011 : 22:00:36 [Permalink]
|
Also, for the record, the person commenting at Dr Phil's blog as "Dude" is not me. Nothing I want to say would get past the profanity filter over there.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2011 : 22:15:33 [Permalink]
|
I think Watson's request was reasonable. I think Dawkins response was not. And yeah. A whole lot of people blew this out of proportion. Take it up with PZ Myers because I can't say it better.
Oh, no, not again…once more unto the breach
PZ Myers:
…However, the existence of greater crimes does not excuse lesser crimes, and no one has even tried to equate this incident to any of the horrors above. What these situations demand is an appropriate level of response: a man who beats a woman to death has clearly committed an immensely greater crime than a man who harrasses a woman in an elevator; let us fit the punishment to the crime. Islamic injustice demands a worldwide campaign of condemnation of the excesses and inhumanity of that religion.
The elevator incident demands…a personal rejection and a woman nicely suggesting to the atheist community that they avoid doing that. And that is what it got. That is all Rebecca Watson did. For those of you who are outraged at that, I ask: which part of her response fills you with fury? That a woman said no, or that a woman has asked men to be more sensitive?
I think reasonable men will be quite capable of both opposing Islamic fundamentalism with vigor and refraining from driving away their godless colleagues with petty harrassment, colleagues who may well be even more fervent and dedicated to our common cause of promoting equality all around the world. These are not mutually contradictory actions. They are complementary and necessary. Our goal isn't to set the bar of equality at a level slightly higher than the situation in Saudi Arabia, or to some point somewhere around the significantly more enlightened (but still not adequate) level in America, but at a point where every woman has the same rights and privileges as every man, where women don't have to fear being raped, and yes, where women don't have to face this dismaying, depressing, common situation of seeing their autonomy disrespected and their compatriots rushing to excuse loutish behavior… |
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 00:44:25 [Permalink]
|
| Wow, a schism in the atheist community. Over LIFT ETIQUETTE. Good to see Watson and her horde of drooling, geek-lord fans are going to completely marginalise the most famous atheist in the world from the whole community. |
 |
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 00:49:59 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 02:58:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Wow, a schism in the atheist community. Over LIFT ETIQUETTE. Good to see Watson and her horde of drooling, geek-lord fans are going to completely marginalise the most famous atheist in the world from the whole community.
|
Morris, Ham, Hovind, Johnson. et.al would be proud if they could have made a tenth of that damage to the atheist community.
Making a proposition to a woman is something I'm too shy to do in public. I suppose the elevetor guy was too, and took a chance the first possible time they were on their own. Which happened to be in an elevator. And Watson makes it public. At least she had the good sense of letting him stay anonymous.
She took a private matter and made it public. That's not cool in my eyes.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 04:46:27 [Permalink]
|
| That makes no sense. How is stating you were made uncomfortable by a stranger in an enclosed space a "private matter". I know you guys worship Dawkins, but he's totally in the wrong here in the first instance. When the "Skepchick" tells everyone to boycott everything Dawkins ever does, that is the real overreaction, and it is hilariously damaging to the entire atheist cause. At any time she could've taken the higher ground but instead of 1 atheist acting like a brat, now it's 2. I wrote about it on my new blog (see sig). Dawkins has been marginalised, and this woman has been held up as some kind of martyr. But now she's well known, what exactly does she have to offer? You lose one of the world's leading biologists, and elevate this woman, who is stupid enough to simultaneously call herself a chick and a feminist. I can't wait to see her debate someone. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 04:48:29 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:16:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Wow, a schism in the atheist community. Over LIFT ETIQUETTE. Good to see Watson and her horde of drooling, geek-lord fans are going to completely marginalise the most famous atheist in the world from the whole community.
|
Morris, Ham, Hovind, Johnson. et.al would be proud if they could have made a tenth of that damage to the atheist community.
Making a proposition to a woman is something I'm too shy to do in public. I suppose the elevetor guy was too, and took a chance the first possible time they were on their own. Which happened to be in an elevator. And Watson makes it public. At least she had the good sense of letting him stay anonymous.
She took a private matter and made it public. That's not cool in my eyes.
|
See. The problem is people are making judgments about this without knowing the back story. Here's the video that started this little debate. Do you really see anything wrong with what Watson is saying here? (The supposedly horrible thing she said starts a little after the four minute mark.)
ABOUT MYTHBUSTERS, ROBOT EYES, FEMINISM, AND JOKES
Here was Dawkins initial response in Pharyngula. Please note what Myers has to say because I pretty much agree with him.
Always name names!
Dear Muslima
Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and … yawn … don't tell me yet again, I know you aren't allowed to drive a car, and you can't leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you'll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.
Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep"chick", and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn't lay a finger on her, but even so …
And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.
Richard |
After being criticized for that response, he came back with this:
Posted by: Richard Dawkins:
[Did you just make the argument that, since worse things are happening somewhere else, we have no right to try to fix things closer to home?]
No I wasn't making that argument. Here's the argument I was making. The man in the elevator didn't physically touch her, didn't attempt to bar her way out of the elevator, didn't even use foul language at her. He spoke some words to her. Just words. She no doubt replied with words. That was that. Words. Only words, and apparently quite polite words at that.
If she felt his behaviour was creepy, that was her privilege, just as it was the Catholics' privilege to feel offended and hurt when PZ nailed the cracker. PZ didn't physically strike any Catholics. All he did was nail a wafer, and he was absolutely right to do so because the heightened value of the wafer was a fantasy in the minds of the offended Catholics. Similarly, Rebecca's feeling that the man's proposition was 'creepy' was her own interpretation of his behaviour, presumably not his. She was probably offended to about the same extent as I am offended if a man gets into an elevator with me chewing gum. But he does me no physical damage and I simply grin and bear it until either I or he gets out of the elevator. It would be different if he physically attacked me.
Muslim women suffer physically from misogyny, their lives are substantially damaged by religiously inspired misogyny. Not just words, real deeds, painful, physical deeds, physical privations, legally sanctioned demeanings. The equivalent would be if PZ had nailed not a cracker but a Catholic. Then they'd have had good reason to complain.
Richard |
After which, another blog by Myers:
Oh, no, not again…once more unto the breach
And so on...
I can't really believe that anyone can find what Watson said worthy of contempt or even something that is so hard to understand. At the very least her wishes should be respected. PZ Myers gets it and Dawkins doesn't. I strongly recomend that you read all of Myers own words in the blogs that I have linked to.
And with that, I'm out. This has been going on for a week now, and it's I'm burnt out on debating this. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:28:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
That makes no sense. How is stating you were made uncomfortable by a stranger in an enclosed space a "private matter". I know you guys worship Dawkins, but he's totally in the wrong here in the first instance. When the "Skepchick" tells everyone to boycott everything Dawkins ever does, that is the real overreaction, and it is hilariously damaging to the entire atheist cause. At any time she could've taken the higher ground but instead of 1 atheist acting like a brat, now it's 2. I wrote about it on my new blog (see sig). Dawkins has been marginalised, and this woman has been held up as some kind of martyr. But now she's well known, what exactly does she have to offer? You lose one of the world's leading biologists, and elevate this woman, who is stupid enough to simultaneously call herself a chick and a feminist. I can't wait to see her debate someone.
|
Firstly, we don't worship Dawkins. I don't know anyone who does. Often agreeing with him on the subject of religion isn't worship. That's just an insult, which is exactly what you were going for. The other problem here is that Watson didn't call for a boycott on Dawkins. What she said is she is done with him. And I suspect that would change if he apologized. Happy blogging. Nice that you are armed with the facts...
Let me add that I just read your blog about this and you conveniently left out the back story while pretending to present it. You got your facts wrong here too. The rest of it was just slinging insults. Well done and honest! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:33:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
That makes no sense. How is stating you were made uncomfortable by a stranger in an enclosed space a "private matter". I know you guys worship Dawkins, but he's totally in the wrong here in the first instance. When the "Skepchick" tells everyone to boycott everything Dawkins ever does, that is the real overreaction, and it is hilariously damaging to the entire atheist cause. At any time she could've taken the higher ground but instead of 1 atheist acting like a brat, now it's 2. I wrote about it on my new blog (see sig). Dawkins has been marginalised, and this woman has been held up as some kind of martyr. But now she's well known, what exactly does she have to offer? You lose one of the world's leading biologists, and elevate this woman, who is stupid enough to simultaneously call herself a chick and a feminist. I can't wait to see her debate someone.
|
Dawkins hasn't been "marginalized", and Watson isn't as popular or powerful as you seem to think. She isn't even that credible to some of us.
As for the rest....
Watson dealt with the guy in the elevator, but let's face it, her opinion of this event is just that, her opinion. Subjective. Why does she think she can tell other people how to behave? Who gave her that authority? What possible skeptical issue is linked to elevator etiquette? Who cares what her opinion on appropriate behavior is? And Dr Phil, taking a non event and turning it into potential rape! Both if those things irk me more than Dawkins being an asshole. A lot more.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:37:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
[quote]The other problem here is that Watson didn't call for a boycott on Dawkins. What she said is she is done with him. And I suspect that would change if he apologized. Happy blogging. Nice that you are armed with the facts...
|
Well I'm pretty sure she did, and I now resent the fact that I'm going to have to spend the next hour or so digging the quote up on a very slow connection, so thanks a lot for that.
Originally posted by Dude
Dawkins hasn't been "marginalized", and Watson isn't as popular or powerful as you seem to think. She isn't even that credible to some of us.
Well we will see at TAM, since a lot of the prominent names who came out against Dawkins and Watson herself will all be there. And I think Watson is more popular than you think, she's on some popular podcasts. It's one thing to write a best seller every few years, but being plugged into the community on a weekly basis gives her a very loyal following. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 08:43:50 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:43:49 [Permalink]
|
OFFC:
Well I'm pretty sure she did, and I now resent the fact that I'm going to have to spend the next hour or so digging the quote up on a very slow connection, so thanks a lot for that. |
You're welcome. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:43:53 [Permalink]
|
Just to be clear, I am more pissed off with Dr Phil here than anyone else involved. Watson is annoying, and Dawkins' assholishness is over the line in this instance, but Plait is the one descending into hysterical idiocy.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
I do not like Rebecca Watson (aka skepchick)
