|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 14:17:28 [Permalink]
|
Well... This is about Phil Plait for some of you. Okay then... But I stand with Watson and Myers on this one. Yeah it's blown way out of proportion. What could have been a little learning moment has turned into this. Whatever... Sorry it made its way to our boards, 'cause I'm sick of it.
And Mab. How do you feel about Christopher Hitchens? Would you read one of his books? Plait went overboard and that seems to bother you guys more than the screwed up thing that Dawkins did. Why is that? Check your bias's people...
I should probably add that I don't think Dawkins is particularly sexist and certainly not misogynistic. I think the good money should be placed on clueless.
Oh yeah. Her talk that night was on feminism in atheism and how she and other woman don't like to be objectified. All of the background sufficient to see where she was coming from has been posted. If after all of that you still don't see why she would feel creeped out on the elevator, what can I say? And even then all she asked was for guys to not do that. She has that right. |
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 : 14:29:19 [Permalink]
|
| I haven't read any of Hitchens'. Is there any one special you recommend? |
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. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 07/09/2011 : 14:33:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
I haven't read any of Hitchens'. Is there any one special you recommend?
|
You missed my point. Hitchens is a neocon. We take the parts we agree with and criticize what we don't agree with. What's so hard about that?
If Phil wrote a good book, why not read it? There is no requirement for you to agree with everything he says in order to read a good book on a subject that he is an expert on.
That was my point. |
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 : 18:27:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Well... This is about Phil Plait for some of you. Okay then... But I stand with Watson and Myers on this one. Yeah it's blown way out of proportion. What could have been a little learning moment has turned into this. Whatever... Sorry it made its way to our boards, 'cause I'm sick of it.
And Mab. How do you feel about Christopher Hitchens? Would you read one of his books? Plait went overboard and that seems to bother you guys more than the screwed up thing that Dawkins did. Why is that? Check your bias's people...
I should probably add that I don't think Dawkins is particularly sexist and certainly not misogynistic. I think the good money should be placed on clueless.
Oh yeah. Her talk that night was on feminism in atheism and how she and other woman don't like to be objectified. All of the background sufficient to see where she was coming from has been posted. If after all of that you still don't see why she would feel creeped out on the elevator, what can I say? And even then all she asked was for guys to not do that. She has that right.
|
Sure, she has that right. But what she doesn't have is the right to tell other people how to behave. Combined with her insane rantings about a guy defending his friend, calling him everything from a perv to accusing him of "using science" to defend his friend from accusations about having sex with underage girls (and her failure to obtain actual facts in that case), this makes me really not like her.
Dr "hysterical idiot" Phil Plait needs to stop though. He jumped into this mess swinging a big sack of stupid and has hit himself repeatedly.
I guess the two of them need to get together and make a fucking list of when and where it is appropriate to speak to a woman and what is appropriate to say to a woman. Otherwise we might all just remain "potential" rapists and/or sexist assholes.
I have no use for either of them any longer and I sure as fuck don't need them preaching morality, ethics, and etiquette at me. I don't tolerate that shit from religitards and I sure as shit won't tolerate it from what is supposed to be my own side in this (skeptics/atheists). And yes, sexism is an ethics issue. When you lay down right and wrong for a specific set of behaviors then you are discussing ethics and morality. So the same rules apply, all of these judgements are subjective. I do not need advice from an astronomer or a advertising blogger about how to behave. Ever. Nor does anyone else.
And Dr "any situation involving a man and woman alone is a rape waiting to happen" Phil especially need to STFU. That is so irrational that I can't believe it came from the keyboard of anyone who even claims to be a skeptic. It is also incredibly offensive. I have been in elevators alone (and in plenty of other situations) with women many times and never once did I think to myself, "hey, I should rape this chick!" I don't think the vast majority of men have ever had that thought either. But Dr "hysterical idiot" Phil read a story in his newspaper about a sexual assault that occured when a man and woman were alone, and Watson was creeped out by a guy propositioning her, therefore all men are potential rapists!
   |
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 |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 18:50:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
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). |
All she really suggested was for guys to not act creepy. That's taking something too far?| 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! |
Talk about hysterical. Again: the suggestion is that if you don't want to be seen as a creepy potential rapist, don't act creepy. This isn't a difficult calculus, unless you're unwilling to put yourself in the shoes of the people who have historically been the primary targets of sexual assault.No, you've created a number of straw men, and are now setting them ablaze.| 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! |
If you don't want to take her advice, that's fine, just don't be surprised when feminists think that you're skeevy instead of friendly.
Also:| Watson dealt with the guy in the elevator, but let's face it, her opinion of this event is just that, her opinion. Subjective. |
And dismissing her opinion is a symptom of your male privilege.| Why does she think she can tell other people how to behave? Who gave her that authority? |
If you ever want to be a friend (or more) to her, you will give her that authority. And she'll grant you the same over certain of her behaviors. This is the basic bonding formula between equals. It's why I don't fart around my mother-in-law: I like her, and I know farting disgusts her.| What possible skeptical issue is linked to elevator etiquette? Who cares what her opinion on appropriate behavior is? |
She's been addressing (for some time now) the problem of some male skeptics seeming to think that skeptical or atheist conferences are singles weekends at which they can flaunt their male privilege. It's a problem because it drives away women skeptics.| 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. |
Welcome to the 21st century. Maybe you should think about why those things irk you so much, because it's only going to get worse for you as more and more women (and men) embrace feminism. It's good that you get Dawkins' jerkiness, because it means you're halfway towards not being irked by feminists. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 19:05:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
I guess the two of them need to get together and make a fucking list of when and where it is appropriate to speak to a woman and what is appropriate to say to a woman. Otherwise we might all just remain "potential" rapists and/or sexist assholes. |
Okay, nevermind. you're not even close to halfway there.| I have no use for either of them any longer and I sure as fuck don't need them preaching morality, ethics, and etiquette at me. I don't tolerate that shit from religitards and I sure as shit won't tolerate it from what is supposed to be my own side in this (skeptics/atheists). And yes, sexism is an ethics issue. When you lay down right and wrong for a specific set of behaviors then you are discussing ethics and morality. So the same rules apply, all of these judgements are subjective. I do not need advice from an astronomer or a advertising blogger about how to behave. Ever. Nor does anyone else. |
You do if you want to get into their pants.
| And Dr "any situation involving a man and woman alone is a rape waiting to happen" Phil especially need to STFU. That is so irrational that I can't believe it came from the keyboard of anyone who even claims to be a skeptic. It is also incredibly offensive. I have been in elevators alone (and in plenty of other situations) with women many times and never once did I think to myself, "hey, I should rape this chick!" |
That you think this is about you is where your problem is. It's about what other people think about you. Nobody cares if you've never thought to rape anyone. It's about whether your behavior might make women think you might rape them, and you don't get to dismiss any worries they might have about you. The best way to avoid causing such anxiety is to not act creepy.| I don't think the vast majority of men have ever had that thought either. |
The problem is that the number of men who have acted on such thoughts is non-zero. If 20% of American women have been victims of sexual assault, the number is much higher than it should ever have gotten, even if it's still a minority.
For an analogy, the vast majority of bad drivers don't cause fatal car wrecks, but I try to avoid them anyway. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 21:43:02 [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.
|
Why should it? Fuck, you do think that the man is our "pope" or something?
Let me tell you something: I have not read a single one of Dawkin's books...it doesn't make me any less an atheist/realist.
Atheism is not a cult of personality like so many religious cults are.
Atheism exists because many people don't see evidence for gods. |
>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. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2011 : 21:47:47 [Permalink]
|
Here's how it works: If someone says or does something dumb, we are free to call them on it.
It's called "accountability". We are accountable to each other in society, not to priests or "gods".
How does that make atheism weaker? |
>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. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2011 : 02:43:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
If Phil wrote a good book, why not read it? There is no requirement for you to agree with everything he says in order to read a good book on a subject that he is an expert on.
That was my point.
|
A point which escapes Rebecca Watson.
|
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. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2011 : 06:16:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Dude
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). |
All she really suggested was for guys to not act creepy. That's taking something too far?| 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! |
Talk about hysterical. Again: the suggestion is that if you don't want to be seen as a creepy potential rapist, don't act creepy. This isn't a difficult calculus, unless you're unwilling to put yourself in the shoes of the people who have historically been the primary targets of sexual assault.No, you've created a number of straw men, and are now setting them ablaze.| 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! |
If you don't want to take her advice, that's fine, just don't be surprised when feminists think that you're skeevy instead of friendly.
Also:| Watson dealt with the guy in the elevator, but let's face it, her opinion of this event is just that, her opinion. Subjective. |
And dismissing her opinion is a symptom of your male privilege.| Why does she think she can tell other people how to behave? Who gave her that authority? |
If you ever want to be a friend (or more) to her, you will give her that authority. And she'll grant you the same over certain of her behaviors. This is the basic bonding formula between equals. It's why I don't fart around my mother-in-law: I like her, and I know farting disgusts her.| What possible skeptical issue is linked to elevator etiquette? Who cares what her opinion on appropriate behavior is? |
She's been addressing (for some time now) the problem of some male skeptics seeming to think that skeptical or atheist conferences are singles weekends at which they can flaunt their male privilege. It's a problem because it drives away women skeptics.| 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. |
Welcome to the 21st century. Maybe you should think about why those things irk you so much, because it's only going to get worse for you as more and more women (and men) embrace feminism. It's good that you get Dawkins' jerkiness, because it means you're halfway towards not being irked by feminists.
|
So I gather from this that you have no problem with old white women crossing the street when they see a black man walking towards them. Because we all know that black men are muggers and thieves, and if they didn't want to be perceived as thieves, then they should just be white.
Holding a feminist viewpoint or a racial equality viewpoints does not allow you to dismiss facts and evidence Dave. The vast majority of men are not rapists, just as the vast majority of black men are not thieves. You wouldn't tolerate that kind of racist comment about black people, so why would you abandon rational thinking when it comes to feminists? If sexism is wrong coming from men, isn't it equally wrong from feminists?
And yes, I do get to dismiss insane, paranoid, delusional "worries" from women, or anyone else who has them. Just like I can call old white people racist assholes for crossing the street when they see a black man, I can call anyone who thinks men are all potential rapists a sexist asshole. I can give equal scorn to actions and words that are equally ridiculous.
I can also dislike Watson for being a tabloid sensationalist hack, I can criticise her for offering advice to all men on how to behave, and not be a sexist while doing it. I can also be offended by Dr hysterical idiot when he claims all men are potential rapists. Still not a sexist.
Just as I can reject the stupidity of religious people telling me what us right and wrong, I can reject Watson and Plait's nonsense about appropriate behavior.
|
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 - 07/10/2011 : 09:29:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by Kil
If Phil wrote a good book, why not read it? There is no requirement for you to agree with everything he says in order to read a good book on a subject that he is an expert on.
That was my point.
|
A point which escapes Rebecca Watson.
|
Well... She was the target of his comments after all. Maybe she's a little bitter. I know I would be. And I bet if he offers an apology, she will let it go. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2011 : 09:45:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
So I gather from this that you have no problem with old white women crossing the street when they see a black man walking towards them. Because we all know that black men are muggers and thieves, and if they didn't want to be perceived as thieves, then they should just be white. |
So I gather from that that you think that guys who act creepy cannot do otherwise, just like a black person can't become white on a whim.| Holding a feminist viewpoint or a racial equality viewpoints does not allow you to dismiss facts and evidence Dave. The vast majority of men are not rapists, just as the vast majority of black men are not thieves. |
I'm not dismissing that at all.| You wouldn't tolerate that kind of racist comment about black people, so why would you abandon rational thinking when it comes to feminists? If sexism is wrong coming from men, isn't it equally wrong from feminists? |
The sexism in this case came from a man. He was dismissive of Watson's stated intentions, in order to ask her for sex (as you agreed in your OP). If not outright sexism, it was certainly an assertion of undeserved male privilege.| And yes, I do get to dismiss insane, paranoid, delusional "worries" from women, or anyone else who has them. |
So what was insane, paranoid or delusional about Watson's "don't do that?"| Just like I can call old white people racist assholes for crossing the street when they see a black man, I can call anyone who thinks men are all potential rapists a sexist asshole. I can give equal scorn to actions and words that are equally ridiculous. |
You don't grasp the import of the word "potential," do you? And you still seem to think that this is about you. It isn't.| I can also dislike Watson for being a tabloid sensationalist hack... |
Irrelevant.| ...I can criticise her for offering advice to all men on how to behave, and not be a sexist while doing it. |
And we all get to criticize you for being pathetically shrill when your undeserved privilege is threatened by the least little thing.| I can also be offended by Dr hysterical idiot when he claims all men are potential rapists. Still not a sexist. |
No, just a moron for failing to understand the point.| Just as I can reject the stupidity of religious people telling me what us right and wrong, I can reject Watson and Plait's nonsense about appropriate behavior. |
Again, you're free to do so, but don't be surprised if you come off as creepy. Which is better from your point-of-view: putting women at ease or filing a lawsuit because you got maced based on a false impression? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2011 : 09:51:20 [Permalink]
|
Dude:
So I gather from this that you have no problem with old white women crossing the street when they see a black man walking towards them. Because we all know that black men are muggers and thieves, and if they didn't want to be perceived as thieves, then they should just be white. |
Funny? Where is it that Watson asked for no men to ride on an elevator with her? All she asked is that men not hit on her in an elevator (and probably any very secluded space.) And especially not follow her back to an elevator at four in the morning after she said she was tired and going to sleep, (a preemptive "no") which was after her talk about not being a sexually objectified, among other feminist issues, earlier in the evening. Your analogy is false.
|
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 - 07/10/2011 : 10:27:24 [Permalink]
|
| So I gather from that that you think that guys who act creepy cannot do otherwise, just like a black person can't become white on a whim. |
Who is the moron for missing the point? Sad that you have to intentionally distort what I said to try and make your case. What I'm saying, in case you really didn't understand, is that fear of assault is unfounded. Be it by a black person walking down the street or by a lone man in an elevator. When that fear manifests as action to avoid a black guy, we call it racism. When it manifests as an action to avoid a man, what can you call that besides sexism?
| The sexism in this case came from a man. He was dismissive of Watson's stated intentions, in order to ask her for sex (as you agreed in your OP). If not outright sexism, it was certainly an assertion of undeserved male privilege |
So hitting on a woman is an assertion of undeserved male privilege? Ummm, no. It isn't. Not when, as in this case, the guy accepts the rejection and moves on. That isn't sexist, it isn't undeserved male privilege, and it isn't potential sexual assault.
Also, you should try to follow better. You seem to be having a problem with who I am criticizing here. Mostly Plait for his hysteria and falsely equating a single proposition with potential sexual assault. Watson for her past tabloidism and current sexism. Calling a guy creepy for a single proposition when he accepted the rejection and moved on? How is that not a sexist attitude on her part? If being alone with men creeps her out, how is that any different from an old white person being creeped out by black people? It isn't.
|
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 - 07/10/2011 : 11:08:23 [Permalink]
|
Dude:
Calling a guy creepy for a single proposition when he accepted the rejection and moved on? How is that not a sexist attitude on her part? If being alone with men creeps her out, how is that any different from an old white person being creeped out by black people? It isn't. |
She didn't ask men not to ride on elevators with her. Your analogy is still false.
Bottom line, again from Myers who puts this whole affair into perspective.
Oh, no, not again…once more unto the breach
I'm taking one last stab at explaining this. Imagine that Richard Dawkins meets a particularly persistent fan who insists on standing uncomfortably close to him, and Richard asks him to stand back a little bit; when he continues, he says to the rest of the crowd that that is rather rude behavior, and could everyone give him a little breathing space? Which then leads to many members of the crowd loudly defending the rudeness by declaring that since the guy wasn't assaulting him, he should be allowed to keep doing that, and hey, how dare Richard Dawkins accuse everyone present of trying to mug him!
That's exactly analogous to Rebecca Watson's situation. She did not make these hysterical accusations everyone is claiming, she did not compare herself to the oppressed women of the third world, she did not demonize the clumsy sap in the elevator — she asked for some simple common courtesy, and for that she gets pilloried.
Sorry, people, but that sends a very clear signal to women that calm requests for respect will be met with jeers by a significant subset of the atheist community, and that's not right. |
I agree. It's not right.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
I do not like Rebecca Watson (aka skepchick)
