|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 07/12/2011 : 11:09:25 [Permalink]
|
Oh, by the way...
Originally posted by Kil
Well... This is about Phil Plait for some of you. |
Incidentally.
| Yeah it's blown way out of proportion. |
Yes, and I blame feminism and lack of skepticism. People assuming lots of stuff not in evidence, and not minding speaking on Rebecca's behalf even if they didn't need to, and exaggerating while doing so.
| What could have been a little learning moment has turned into this. |
I still think it's a learning moment: we can see how rational thinking flies out the window when sex and procreation comes on the table. It shows us how, in this situation, now more than ever, we need to rely on cool heads, logical reasoning, and especially evidence.
Plait went overboard and that seems to bother you guys more than the screwed up thing that Dawkins did. Why is that? |
Because I think that Plait screwed up much more than Dawkins. It wasn't Dawkins who gave the speech about not being a Dick and the need to approach controversial subjects with a less confrontational tone and not calling people idiots (or in this case potential rapists).
| Check your bias's people... |
I did, and it was at that point I noticed my tricorder was flashing red for hypocrisy.
| 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. |
I agree. Social skills around women, and elevator etiquette, isn't something we are born with. I confess to a lack of skills in this area, being born that way is my excuse.
When I asked to be invited to a woman's apartment for a cup of tea, at midnight on my way back from the pub, I wasn't looking for sex, I was hoping to gain a friend. She didn't think I was objectifying her sexually, or find it creepy. But then, we also did speak some at the pub before starting home in the same direction, and she wasn't in a confined space when I asked. But contrary to Rebecca, she did accept my suggestion we have tea, and I did gain a friend.
Now, as Phil Plait put it: that's just an anecdote. Just as Rebecca's story.
| 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. |
I still don't get how Rebecca felt sexually objectified by the words Elevator Guy said. As far as I read/heard, he sounded as respectful as one could ask for a guy who invites a woman to his room for either coffee, or if you prefer to assume implied sex.
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. |
She has that right, to ask on her own behalf.
I don't agree that she has the right to decide this for every and any other woman. Not everyone is creeped out by a respectful advance for a shared cup of coffee (or if you prefer your own interpretation, implied sex), even if she knows beforehand she will be declining (I refer to the anecdote above: she might possibly have missed out of a great friendship had she declined). Some women may even get disappointed if all they get is coffee. What gives Rebecca the authority to decide for them?
If anyone actually knows of the Elevator Guy, who can speak on his behalf, could only let us know what EG was actually thinking, all this could possibly get cleared out quickly.
All we have now is one side of the story, in which I can read conflicting statements, and a shitload of opinions. |
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 - 07/12/2011 : 11:42:04 [Permalink]
|
Dave_W said:
| Can't do it. Too many premises (more than two). |
If there were twenty premises it wouldn't be difficult to write out. The reason you can't write it out is because the logic is broken. You don't have a premise that lets the conclusion follow.
| But, pick a random man. The empirical data suggest that one time out of ten, you'll have picked someone who will commit (or attempt) rape or other sexual assault at least once during his lifetime (can't tell by looking at him, though) |
Bolding mine. That is the reason your logic is broken. That is the reason why the negative reaction to elevator guy is sexism. The reaction isn't based on any empirical evidence. Sure, you can make a statistical argument about 10% of men being sex offenders all day long, but that information is not useful when the sample size is 1. Analysis of trends in groups is not useful when trying to predict the behavior of an individual. More data is required, and if the skeptics were using their skepticism instead of letting the emotional response and cultural bias blind them, they would realize their error.
| That's what I've been saying. Dude is trying to defend a man's right to act like a creep towards women and yell "sexism!" when that creepiness is pointed out. |
That is pure emotional bias talking there Dave. Hitting on a woman is not creepy. The behavior of elevator guy after he was rejected strongly suggests that he isn't a "creep". Not unless you want to make the argument that dropping the question, totally leaving her alone, and not speaking to her again after is somehow inappropriate? It is sexism when you call a guy a creep when his behavior is not inappropriate. It is a hysterical over reaction when you call him a potential rapist.
| "Don't act like a rapist" is all that's being suggested, and you got hysterical over it. |
Well, no, that isn't all that is being suggested. That is how it may have started, and Watson's reaction is still sexism (because it isn't creepy to hit on a woman, and elevator guy's response to rejection was appropriate), but this was blown out of proportion when people (including Plait) started to characterize it as potential sexual assault.
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2011 : 12:04:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Mab:
In the video she said she felt creeped out by people who sexualize her, which isn't the same thing as the Elevator Guy being creepy. Especially since neither we nor Rebecca knew his true motivation for inviting her, he could just as well have been looking for something hot refreshing to drink and a nice chat. |
It's irrelevant what the guy's actual intentions were. RW was being asked to go to a strange guys hotel room at 4 in the morning after she made clear that she was tired and wanted to go to sleep. |
Except we don't know if he actually heard her saying so. And since he is remaining anonymous (who could blame him?) we can't ask him. So why assume facts not in evidence? She didn't clearly identify him as belonging to her entourage at the bar. Did she shout out her intentions just to make sure everyone in the bar and lobby knew?
That should have been enough. |
Yes, assuming he heard her and understood her correctly.
She didn't call him a creep. But she made clear, even in the video, that what he did was creepy, especially after the talk she gave. I think there is a whole lot of discounting about what RW felt. I think her request was reasonable. I think her wishes should be respected. Remove all of the static, and that's the bottom line.
Frankly, atheists, skeptics, you’re embarrassing as fuck
|
Ryawesome wrote:I urge you to watch the section of the video, starting at 4:30, yourself to see the casual, not hysterical, tone of voice that accompanied it. Enphasis mine. Right. The hysteria came afterward. And while Rebecca herself never said any of the things Ryawesome enumerate in his blog, ryawesome too is assuming facts not in evidence, even if he isn't fully taken in by Rebecca's fem-squad, who don't mind bringing up the "all men are potential rapists".
Either way, many women have attempted to communicate how it is that they feel, and that it’d be great if men could, you know, consider it. Many women (and men) have also decided that they can tell you how Rebecca felt, besides being creeped out when sexualised. Both in her own blog and on Pharyngula. And while they do that, they don't mind stretching the truth a bit.
The feminists and the misandry-mafia is doing Rebecca a great disservice by pressing and overstating this issue, because I feel they are alienating people sitting on the fence. Me, among others. |
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. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2011 : 12:17:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Edited to add:
| Well... She was the target of his comments after all. |
Are you absolutely sure about that?
I went back and re-read Richard Dawkins' responses that were linked by Phil Plait, and in none of them can I read a line specifically addressed to Rebecca, even though he mention her by name as participant in the original event. To me, it looks like he's addressing the femi-nazi-squad that cries misogyny and perv.
|
I haven't had any response to this what-so-ever.
Does anyone else care to go back and re-read what Dawkins said without the assumption that he was answering Rebecca?
I still think his posts in Pharyngula was primarily aimed not at Rebecca, but those who went overboard in defending her.
Anyone care to comment on this?
Also no one bothered to comment on this question:
My impression of the request by the guy, as initially retold by Rebecca herself, seemed to be to be rather respectful. Do any you disagree with that?
|
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. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 07/12/2011 12:20:14 |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2011 : 13:14:30 [Permalink]
|
| Can I just say that you guys need to stop using the word "Hysterical". It is a sexist term with it's roots in medical myogyny |
 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2011 : 13:22:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Can I just say that you guys need to stop using the word "Hysterical". It is a sexist term with it's roots in medical myogyny
|
That is precisely why I selected that word to describe Plait's comments and reaction.
|
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 - 07/12/2011 : 13:28:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ebone4rock
I don't know whether to find this whole fiasco amusing or pathetic.
To all the men who keep endlessly talking about this.... STFU and listen to the woman. She is giving good advice about WHAT NOT to do when you are trying to score. Listen instead of talk and you might find more opportunities for procreation.
Fer da cryin' out loud, it's a wonder any men get ever get laid.
|
If this were about how to meet women, you'd have a point Ebone. But this is about skeptics losing their fucking minds, abandoning critical thinking, failing at simple inductive logic, failing to understand that group trends do not apply to individuals (ok, it is easy to misunderstand statistics, some slack can be granted for this one), and becoming hysterical to the point of a total breakdown of their ability to apply skepticism.
|
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 - 07/12/2011 : 14:31:04 [Permalink]
|
Mab. Why would the guy say he found RW interesting and would like to speak further, if he wasn't at her talk where she brought the subject up, or at the bar? What was he doing up at 4 in the morning and just happened to be on the elevator with her with that introduction if he hadn't heard a thing she said? I'm just throwing that out there because I'm not sure I will have time to respond to your call for concrete proof that he was there.
You know what? It might not be you Mab who keeps bringing up that the guy might have not heard her. I'm in this discussion on so many fronts, this is getting...no...it has gotten ridiculous.
And yeah. She has the right to be creeped out and to ask men not to do that. While I think she was doling out some good common sense advice, I don't think she was pretending to speak for all woman.
As for feminists, would it hurt so much to listen to them a little bit?
WHY WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS: ATHEISM, SEXISM, AND BLOWING UP THE INTERNET
I'm officially out of this thread for now. You all know where I stand, and my position on this hasn't changed. I'm getting ready to blow town. It might be interesting to see what goes down at TAM, if anything, since all of the major players will be there. If there is anything to report (and I doubt there will be) I'll let you know.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2011 : 14:50:57 [Permalink]
|
| Have fun Kil. Update us if you can! |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2011 : 07:10:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Mab. Why would the guy say he found RW interesting and would like to speak further, if he wasn't at her talk where she brought the subject up, or at the bar? What was he doing up at 4 in the morning and just happened to be on the elevator with her with that introduction if he hadn't heard a thing she said? I'm just throwing that out there because I'm not sure I will have time to respond to your call for concrete proof that he was there. |
Since we don't know who the Elevator Guy is, and we don't have a GPS transcript or some other formal (or non formal) record of where he was at any given time, we can't say for sure if he was an conference attendee or just some dude hanging in the bar for some other reason, hearing Rebecca and thinking her ideas seemed interesting.
Is that a plausible scenario?
If it is, it could explain why he was clueless about her dislike of being sexualised.
| You know what? It might not be you Mab who keeps bringing up that the guy might have not heard her. |
I am, because it provides a reasonable explanation to why failed to give Rebecca the personal space she has declared she wanted.
So why don't we see if there can be a reasonable explanation to why he would miss Rebecca's declaration that she's getting too tired?
How about he was just on his way out of the men's room?
As for feminists, would it hurt so much to listen to them a little bit?
|
Since I've had many women tell me I'm a kind and gentle man in person, and try to treat everyone the same (unless they give me reason to do otherwise) I consider myself fairly non-sexist. So I haven't felt I need to pay much attention to feminists.
I haven't paid Skepchick much attention either (until now) because I didn't think she was contributing anything of interest to me.
I like the kind of feminists who like men.
I look with revulsion at the hysterical misandry-mafia who scream rape if someone steals a kiss on the cheek, or disavow women who gets a breast implant or those who enjoy being photographed in swimsuits.
I respect Rebecca's compulsion to mention the Elevator Guy in her video-blog.
I detest some of her supporters who took it as an excuse to vent their own misandry, and ascribing their emotions to Rebecca, and elevate all men to potential rapists.
Just because we have the tools for it...
Regarding rape in elevators:
How often does a man and woman, "strangers" to each other, travel together in elevators and nothing happens, and how many times is the woman raped?
I don't have statistics on man-and-woman alone in elevators, but given how many elevators there are and how many people travel in them, I guess the risk of being raped in an elevator is slightly more elevated (pun intended) than being hit by lightning.
This is merely conjecture by me, so if any you have compelling arguments otherwise, I'd love to see them. |
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. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2011 : 07:38:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
If there were twenty premises it wouldn't be difficult to write out. |
You asked for "the standard format," which is two premises.| The reason you can't write it out is because the logic is broken. |
No, I've described it to you in some detail already. There shouldn't be any need for writing it out in a different format.| You don't have a premise that lets the conclusion follow. |
All of the premises taken together lets my conclusion follow. After all, it's a statistical argument, and not deductive.| But, pick a random man. The empirical data suggest that one time out of ten, you'll have picked someone who will commit (or attempt) rape or other sexual assault at least once during his lifetime (can't tell by looking at him, though) |
Bolding mine. That is the reason your logic is broken. That is the reason why the negative reaction to elevator guy is sexism. The reaction isn't based on any empirical evidence. Sure, you can make a statistical argument about 10% of men being sex offenders all day long, but that information is not useful when the sample size is 1. Analysis of trends in groups is not useful when trying to predict the behavior of an individual. More data is required, and if the skeptics were using their skepticism instead of letting the emotional response and cultural bias blind them, they would realize their error. |
So let's say you come down with a disease, floobyitis. Your doctor tells you there are two medications, A and B, to treat floobyitis with a single dose. Medication A has a 10% risk of killing you, and medication B has a 1% chance of killing you. According to your logic, you would say, "Don't tell me the difference in risks, doc. The sample size is going to be 1, so the odds of dying from either medication are irrelevant. Choosing one over the other based on the difference in risk is nothing more than unskeptical, irrational medicationism."
Or a different analogy: say you're faced with two doors, A and B, and you're told that there's a 10% chance there's a tiger behind door A, and a 1% chance there's a tiger behind door B. Because you only have to select and open a door once, your logic tells you that the only reason to choose door B over door A is a completely unreasonable bias. Even if you hear tiger-like sounds coming from behind door A, there's no evidence that there's actually a tiger behind it, so the risk isn't elevated by those sounds (and the risk should still be completely irrelevant to any door selection anyway).
Nobody is trying to "trying to predict the behavior of an individual" when saying that differential anxiety about strangers on elevators is justified, based on sex, without being sexist. That's why your arguments have been straw men. You're so wrapped up in your own bias and irrationality that you can't be bothered to get the conclusion of the argument correct.| That is pure emotional bias talking there Dave. Hitting on a woman is not creepy. |
Nobody is saying that is it. Your bias is blinding you to what's being said.| The behavior of elevator guy after he was rejected strongly suggests that he isn't a "creep". |
Nobody is saying that he's a creep, they're saying that what he did was creepy. Adjective, not noun. Just like one can act serious without being serious, nobody is claiming that Elevator Guy did anything more than act creepy.| Not unless you want to make the argument that dropping the question, totally leaving her alone, and not speaking to her again after is somehow inappropriate? |
No, you're just completely clueless about what is being called "creepy."| It is sexism when you call a guy a creep when his behavior is not inappropriate. |
His behavior was inappropriate. It was dismissive of Watson's stated intentions and mimicked some of the behaviors of rapists.| It is a hysterical over reaction when you call him a potential rapist. |
All people are potential rapists. What is it about the word "potential" that you don't understand?| Well, no, that isn't all that is being suggested. That is how it may have started, and Watson's reaction is still sexism (because it isn't creepy to hit on a woman, and elevator guy's response to rejection was appropriate), but this was blown out of proportion when people (including Plait) started to characterize it as potential sexual assault. |
You have completely ignored the real point to all of this, in order to substitute your own. You're just making up stuff and screeching about sexism which doesn't exist while excusing sexism which does, while hypocritically pontificating about admission of errors and lecturing on logic.
Elevator Guy's question was creepy in the context in which it was asked, his response to rejection was irrelevant (but good). Nobody is claiming that hitting on women is creepy. Every interaction between strangers has a non-zero chance to end in a sexual assault. Differential anxiety about sexual assault based on the sex of a stranger is empirically justifiable. These aren't difficult facts to understand, but you're making a career of it, Dude. |
- 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 - 07/13/2011 : 08:06:22 [Permalink]
|
Mab:
I like the kind of feminists who like men. |
That would describe most feminists. Michelle is one of those and so are those who's blogs I linked you too. Of course, some feminists are lesbians, but that in no way makes them man haters. The man hating kind of feminist sort of went out about 20 years ago.
And now i really have to go. I will check in somehow! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2011 : 08:08:54 [Permalink]
|
If you guys need some advice on how to pick up women in a non-threatening way I'd be glad to give you some pointers. I've been out of the game for a while and I'm not quite as handsome as I once was but I am confident that the theory has remained unchanged. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2011 : 08:35:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Is that a plausible scenario? |
It is very likely that EG is an okay guy, but this is about how he was perceived and not about him in particular. Watson's "don't do that" is a suggestion to think about how your actions will be seen by others, regardless of your intentions, which is why some of us, Mab, will continue to tell you that his intentions were irrelevant, and your attempts to find plausible or reasonable scenarios just look like excuse-making. It misses the point. |
- 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 |
|
 |
|
|
|
I do not like Rebecca Watson (aka skepchick)
