|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 08:53:44 [Permalink]
|
| So many of you voiced what I had already been thinking: that this person who I always admired for his intelligence and compassion does not care about my experiences as an atheist woman and therefore will no longer be rewarded with my money, my praise, or my attention. I will no longer recommend his books to others, buy them as presents, or buy them for my own library. I will not attend his lectures or recommend that others do the same. There are so many great scientists and thinkers out there that I don’t think my reading list will suffer. |
Ok, you're right she stopped short of recommending others DON'T buy his work or attend his lectures, she simply said she would not and would not recommend that anyone does, subtle difference. But it's ok, I didn't make that mistake on my blog. |
 |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 07/09/2011 : 09:07:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
| So many of you voiced what I had already been thinking: that this person who I always admired for his intelligence and compassion does not care about my experiences as an atheist woman and therefore will no longer be rewarded with my money, my praise, or my attention. I will no longer recommend his books to others, buy them as presents, or buy them for my own library. I will not attend his lectures or recommend that others do the same. There are so many great scientists and thinkers out there that I don’t think my reading list will suffer. |
Ok, you're right she stopped short of recommending others DON'T buy his work or attend his lectures, she simply said she would not and would not recommend that anyone does, subtle difference. But it's ok, I didn't make that mistake on my blog.
|
Go back and read my reply to you. You made other mistakes. For one, you left out the part where she had talked about woman being objectified and sexualized in her talk that very evening. Sometime afterward, she was down in the bar with people who wanted to meet her and talk to her, and friends. At four in the morning she said she was tired and needed to get some sleep. And then the encounter on the elevator. The person either didn't understand what she was saying or didn't care, or was socially inept. (How could he have found her interesting if he wasn't listening?) Doesn't matter. From Watsons point of view, after her talk and issuing a preemptive NO by saying she was tired and going to sleep, asking her (and likely hitting on her in an elevator) to come back to his hotel room for coffee IS creepy. Sorry... It just is. |
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 : 09:25:26 [Permalink]
|
Leaving things out is not making a mistake unless you deliberately misrepresent something as a result. I don't really think the backstory makes that much of a difference to my blog. I recognise that Dawkins was being an ass, and I didn't attempt to trivialise the elevator incident. My coverage is the hysterical reactions from both sides.
|
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 09:27:03 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 09:34:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Leaving things out is not making a mistake unless you deliberately misrepresent something as a result. I don't really think the backstory makes that much of a difference to my blog. I recognise that Dawkins was being an ass, and I didn't attempt to trivialise the elevator incident. My coverage is the hysterical reactions from both sides.
|
What you left out is completely relevant. The way you set this up is that Watson, who's only talent is talking about sex, gave a talk. (No mention that it was on being objectified and that it had a strong feminist theme.) So she talks about sex (because that's what she talks about) and some guy follows her and asks her back to his hotel room. If that's your version of the truth, I'd hate to see what you would say when you are lying.
 |
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 : 09:37:04 [Permalink]
|
If you really feel that strongly I will include it in my blog, but I don't think it makes a big difference to my piece. It's only 1 line.
She was giving a talk on feminism and the objectification of women |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 09:38:29 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 09:45:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
If you really feel that strongly I will include it in my blog, but I don't think it makes a big difference to my piece. It's only 1 line.
She was giving a talk on feminism and the objectification of women
|
Do what you think you should do. But I'm saying that what you left out matters, the way you describe Rebecca is not really fair, and is really a slap at us skeptics who think she has something to say. The impression you gave is that she's big in the skeptical movement only because we are waiting for her to say something crass. That's her talent. (Because she really has no talent.) As I said, your whole blog is insulting. Do you ever read her blog?
And where the hell did you get this from?
| Well, aghast at this, she declined, then proceeded to blog about how all men were insensitive meanies. |
What blog would that be? |
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 : 09:52:21 [Permalink]
|
Do what you think you should do.
|
Ultimately I will, but I can still take suggestions.
I read her blog a few times. I don't think the content is what makes her a name, she really says nothing that is not already out there because she is not qualified to do so. The only original things she does are opinion pieces. She is known and liked because she is good at networking. She does a lot of interviews, attends a lot of events, and makes a lot of contacts. She is well like by Phil Plait because she has interviewed him about 100 times. She is well liked by PZ meyers because she was responsible for PZ hijacking that creationist conference call a couple of years back.
I understand her qualifications are in advertising. Why doesn't this surprise me? |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/09/2011 09:53:12 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 09:57:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Do what you think you should do.
|
Ultimately I will, but I can still take suggestions.
I read her blog a few times. I don't think the content is what makes her a name, she really says nothing that is not already out there because she is not qualified to do so. The only original things she does are opinion pieces. She is known and liked because she is good at networking. She does a lot of interviews, attends a lot of events, and makes a lot of contacts. She is well like by Phil Plait because she has interviewed him about 100 times. She is well liked by PZ meyers because she was responsible for PZ hijacking that creationist conference call a couple of years back.
I understand her qualifications are in advertising. Why doesn't this surprise me?
|
OFFC in his blog:
First there is Rebecca Watson, a 30 year old Boston native divorcee and atheist of no discernible expertise or talents. |
But you just admitted she has a talent. And it's an important one. She has done more to bring woman into our community than almost any other person. Outreach is important. And you have contradicted yourself. |
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 : 09:58:01 [Permalink]
|
| That's pretty nitpicky, but ok. |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 10:01:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
That's pretty nitpicky, but ok.
|
Go ahead and wave it away. But the truth is she is a valuable asset to our community. If you feel okay with your little untruths, that actually do leave a wrong impression, what can I say? Blog away!
It's not as though I don't know how difficult it is to write a piece. But facts are still facts... |
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 : 10:20:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
That's pretty nitpicky, but ok.
|
Go ahead and wave it away. But the truth is she is a valuable asset to our community.
|
Now that I would argue is an untruth. Given the damage she has wrought. But you're right I'll probably make a new blog retracting that comment and clarifying exactly what it is that she excels at. I said she had no talent, when clearly self promotion is her talent. Dawkins' talent is demagoguery. They are both pretty vile people. |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 11:40:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Originally posted by Kil
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
That's pretty nitpicky, but ok.
|
Go ahead and wave it away. But the truth is she is a valuable asset to our community.
|
Now that I would argue is an untruth. Given the damage she has wrought. But you're right I'll probably make a new blog retracting that comment and clarifying exactly what it is that she excels at. I said she had no talent, when clearly self promotion is her talent. Dawkins' talent is demagoguery. They are both pretty vile people.
|
Yes. I can see how feminism and the promotion of those kinds of issues in the humanist community would seem vile to you, given Christianity's track record in that area. Call her a self promoter if you must. But again, she has done more to bring woman into our movement and has raised awareness of the sexism that plagues both our community and our culture more generally than any other skeptic that I know of. (I would say that it's less of a problem among skeptics, but that's no reason to not address it.) Outreach is important to any community with any hope of expanding. Trivializing it misses the point. And as for the damage that you say she has wrought, in every community there will be disputs, and ours is no different than any other in that way. And at least it can't be said that criticism of our own is off limits to critical thinkers. This little ta-do will pass. Make the most of it while you can OFFC. |
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 : 12:13:03 [Permalink]
|
| Yes. I can see how feminism and the promotion of those kinds of issues in the humanist community would seem vile to you, given Christianity's track record in that area. |
So you took the liberty of morphing my words "self-promotion" into you interpretation "promotion of feminism". That's pretty intellectually dishonest of you. How does disliking one feminist make me anti-feminist. Such an obvious straw man argument doesn't become you, Kil. |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 13:36:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
| Yes. I can see how feminism and the promotion of those kinds of issues in the humanist community would seem vile to you, given Christianity's track record in that area. |
So you took the liberty of morphing my words "self-promotion" into you interpretation "promotion of feminism". That's pretty intellectually dishonest of you. How does disliking one feminist make me anti-feminist. Such an obvious straw man argument doesn't become you, Kil.
|
Hey! I'm not working with much here so I took a stab at it. I mean you use the word "vile" to describe Rebecca Watson. Well vile is a pretty strong word. What has she done to deserve to be described that way? I'd really like to know? "Dislike" is pretty far from "vile" on the continuem, you know.
adjective, vil·er, vil·est.
1.wretchedly bad: a vile humor.
2.highly offensive, unpleasant, or objectionable: vile slander.
3.repulsive or disgusting, as to the senses or feelings: a vile odor.
Are all of us who do outreach in our community vile? Who's vile and who isn't vile? Is the promotion of atheism vile? Is that it? Or the use of bad language and bawdy stories vile? What makes Rebecca Watson vile? And for that matter, what is it about Richard Dawkins that makes you think he deserves to be called "vile?" I understand that you don't agree with what they are promoting. But what makes them vile?
I'll tell you what. I read your blog and it's full of insulting language like that.
| Even PZ Meyers chimed in with a critique on Dawkins, as did of course, any and all atheists without penises. |
You are talking about me here. Should I not be offended?And there is more where that came from. Want me to post the rest of your tortured and insulting account of things here? We can take it line by line if you like.
Obviously you are not particularly concerned about tone. And Dawkins sexism doesn't seem to bother you. So I ask you again, what is it about those two that makes you think they deserve to be called "vile?"
Let's recap shall we? You got your facts wrong, you presented your incorrect facts in the most insulting way you could, and you are calling Richard Dawkins and Rebecca Watson vile, while insulting me, and really any of us who respect Dawkins or Watson at the same time. Does that about sum it up?
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 14:03:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
See. The problem is people are making judgements about this without knowing the back story. |
Obviously I'm missing something. She talks about some other video, to which responders are either pro-feminism or misogynists. But without a link to that video, I'm missing some context.
All I know was that a guy invited her to his room for some coffee and a chat, but got a "no thanks" in reply.
She wrote...despite the fact that I had clearly indicated my wish to go to bed (alone) and the fact that the bar had coffee and therefore there was absolutely zero reason to go to anyone’s hotel room to have it. Weird, I can think of a simple and innocent reason for inviting her to his room for a coffee and a chat: There won't be other people there constantly wanting to distract her from the conversation.
It's less noisy than the hotel bar.
There's a lot of femi-n**** taking the opportunity to spin Watson's story on her blog, and she herself doesn't do much to discourage that. I see the same thing on PZ's blog.
I agree with Dude, Dawkins was a bit dickish, but hell, many feminists took the opportunity to demonize the dickish sex. Both the original guy's mistake on possibly trying to hit on Rebecca, and Dawkins who dares questioning what the fuzz (Both Rebecca's and the other F's) was all about. They seem to go after everyone who thinks what happened was non-issue.
And why is the word Misogynist being thrown around so much?
Verlch (remember him?) was one. I don't think neither Dude nor Richard Dawkins is one, based on his posts on Pharyngula.
But just in case, where do I pick up my membership card to He-Man woman hater's club?
I can't really believe that anyone can find what Watson said worthy of contempt or even something that is so hard to understand. |
Neither can I, but obviously people got overboard and have now labelled the elevator guy a sexual predator.
Phil Plait writes about Dawkins: "I have tried and tried to see some other way to interpret this, but it looks to me that he really is comparing a potential sexual assault to someone chewing gum."
WTFF?
I used to have a lot of respect for Phil Plait.
These comments, especially after the "Don't be a dick"-speech, he looks just a disingenuous prick who's jealous at Dawkins for his success.
The next book I was planning on buying was "Death from the Skies!", but I think I'll buy "The Blind Watchmaker" or "Climbing Mount Improbable" (or both) by Dawkins instead.
|
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. |
|
|
 |
|
I do not like Rebecca Watson (aka skepchick)
