|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2013 : 10:03:54 [Permalink]
|
Dave: If Hall's explanation is true, she wasn't "taking a swipe at Rebecca." Hall said the smiley face was to say, "no hard feelings" and Sastra said Hall had no ill-will towards any of the Skepchicks. |
She wasn't taking a swipe at the Skepchicks. What she was saying is that unlike Rebecca, she felt safe at TAM. If you look at the back of her shirt, what she was saying is that she didn't want to be defined by her gender, as a skeptic. My opinion is that she shouldn't have included the word "skepchick" on her shirt. What she told Susan is what she is still saying. I have no reason to doubt her, though the prevalent view in some quarters is that she must of been taking a swipe at the Skepchicks in general.
Do I think she should have shown more empathy toward Amy? Sure. She felt her message was more important that one woman’s feelings. But then, in her view, she felt that Amy was misunderstanding the shirt. And it wouldn't have made sense to try and make her point at some other venue, because it was TAM that was at issue. She is hard nosed. Does that make her an asshole or someone who will not be swayed by an emotional appeal and a misunderstanding that she thought was not a correct evaluation of her intentions?
She might be fighting an old fight. I dunno. She fought hard to advance to where she is, and for the jobs she has done. She has also been instrumental in making it easier for women who have followed her to accomplish what she has accomplished, whether in med school, which was frowned upon for women, or in the service, which is possibly the most sexist institution in America. It certainly was when she was breaking new ground. So maybe she is a cool customer. I suppose she had to be. It's pretty easy to just chalk that up to her being an asshole. But I think it's more complicated than that, even if that's how it comes off. It"s far too easy to judge someone based on our own expectations because that's what we would do. Me included. As I said, I would have taken off the shirt in deference to Amy. But I'm not Harriet Hall.
|
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 - 02/25/2013 : 14:02:52 [Permalink]
|
My respect for Hall has just gone up a bunch:I apologize for putting the word skepchick on my shirt. I honestly did not intend to target the organization, but rather the concept of chick in general. I did not foresee the reaction, and I should have. My social skills have never been very good. If I had it to do over again, I think I would have just said “I’m a skeptic. Not a woman skeptic. Just a skeptic.” I sincerely regret that I inadvertently contributed to inflaming the harassment that was directed at you... So we're done with the T-shirt incident. |
- 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 - 02/25/2013 : 14:08:28 [Permalink]
|
This just in from Surly Amy at Skepchick:
Chicks, Tough Old Hens and Roosters. Oh, and T-shirts at TAM
She starts:
It has been a long but very productive weekend for me. I spent my weekend in discussions with Dr Steve Novella with the hope of finding a way to end at least some of the drama surrounding the T-shirt incident that happened at TAM last year. As many of you know, Dr Harriet Hall wore a shirt that said on the front “I Feel Safe and Welcome at TAM.” On the back of the T-shirt it said, “I’m a skeptic Not a “skepchick” Not a “woman skeptic” Just a skeptic.” When I was confronted with the shirt it was very upsetting to me and I perceived it as a direct attack against me, this blog and another attempt at minimizing the discussions surrounding harassment that were being had at the time. But as the months went past since TAM I had noticed that people dedicated to cyber stalking and harassing me and my peers were continuing to use the shirt and its message to attack us unfairly, but Harriet was not. She responded when it was brought to her attention, but she was not the one constantly bringing it up. I realized at this point that Harriet Hall’s intentions may not have been to attack me or this blog but instead she was indeed trying to send a message that spoke from her own experiences as a feminist.
I decided to do what I could to help end this controversy and to hopefully stop some of misinformation surrounding the incident. I realized that there was a lot of emotion involved, particularly on my side because that shirt has been waved like a flag in an attempt to belittle and drive a wedge between Skepchick and some other members of organized skepticism and of course the harassers displayed it like a prize. As you can imagine, that was upsetting to me. I realized Harriet had been constantly questioned about her actions as well. She may not want to to talk to me. I knew Harriet identified as a feminist and odds were we had more in common than not ideologically and so there was hope to find common ground. Steve assured us we could start a dialog. |
Please read on. Most of the meat is in what I have not copied.
Amy ends her post with this comment:
In closing, I’d like to say that Harriet has been gracious and warm in our correspondences. She is intelligent and funny and the title of this post references part of a lovely conversation we had after the above emails were exchanged. I am happy to put this controversy behind us and move forward. I encourage everyone else to do the same. I know we do not agree on everything but hopefully, we can now have productive discussions about those disagreements that are not used as ammunition by the people who wish to spread only hatred and lies. Many thanks to Steve for his help with all of this. |
|
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 |
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2013 : 16:23:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Scooped by a little more than five minutes.
|
Yeah. I got it from Jim Lippard and was busy following all the links. I didn't even see your post when I entered mine. Oh well... |
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 - 02/25/2013 : 18:39:11 [Permalink]
|
Steve Novella is taking a bunch of crap in the comments to his blog post from the haters (who also assert that Hall had to apologize even if she doesn't mean it because she's the only one acting like an adult in the whole situation). Justin Vacula chimed in with advice to limit the amount of harassment that Rebecca Watson gets, advice which boils down to STFU. Class acts. |
- 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 - 02/25/2013 : 19:10:13 [Permalink]
|
And Hall still has some problems to address with Benson and Will, who commented about the responses he's received:Also, I have asked what was so offensive about my posts, and the only responses I’ve gotten have been “your tone was mean/cranky.” I shouldn’t have to point out how this argument is often a silencing tactic used against social minorities to avoid addressing the criticisms they are voicing, but that’s exactly what’s happened here. No one has attempted to refute or seriously engage my criticisms in any meaningful way; instead, this has become an exercise in lecturing people about charitable readings and saying things in a nice way. So, once again, the valid criticisms coming from the voice of a social minority have been ignored and the focus has instead, once again, been shifted back to the feelings of those in the majority as the most important point in the conversation. Nevermind the comfort of those in the minority who are actually affected by the sorts of things Hall tries to pass as science—what’s more important is that you’re nice when you criticize someone! |
- 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 - 02/25/2013 : 19:22:25 [Permalink]
|
Novella is handling it well. I suppose that was bound to happen. I'll tell ya though. They are delusional if they think Hall had to do anything. She's tougher than most if not all of the people commenting.
I'll leave it at that because I prefer to think of this a really good thing and would rather ingore a bunch of fuckwits trying to spoil it. |
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 - 03/07/2013 : 23:38:03 [Permalink]
|
New from Russell Blackford (speaking at TAM 2013) via Stephanie Zvan:Sorry, but I no have time for someone who whines about the so-called harassment of vicious bullies who vilify good people and destroy their reputations on a daily basis. The "vicious bullies" he mentions are specifically Stephanie Zvan, Ophelia Benson and Rebecca Watson (he also says that PZ Myers is "the worst of all"). And the "good people" are folks who are engaged in regular harassment of those alleged bullies. He's got the bullies and victims exactly backwards.
Of course, if challenged, Blackford wouldn't be able to name a single person whose reputation has been "destroyed," much less provide evidence that peoples' reputations are being harmed "on a daily basis." The fact of the matter is that people like Blackford, Mayhew, Shermer, Grothe and Jilette damage their own reputations through their own voluntary and independent actions, while Blackford's alleged "bullies" point out that behavior and talk about why it should probably change.
The idea that TAM attendees prefer the real world when their speakers include Blackford, Shermer, Mayhew (etc) is becoming a bit of a joke.
I'm sure lots of eyes are going to be on TAM 2013 attendance figures (if they're ever released). I've seen people are saying it's too expensive ($425 for early registration), too stale (many of the same speakers as previous years), too Vegas (rich white dude playground) and too populated by jerks. Other, similarly-themed conferences are cheaper (even free), more diversified and in cities less focused on money and boobies. TAM may have been a fore-runner, but it's not the only game in town any more.
The JREF would do well to pay attention to what's being said about their major fundraiser. And it's important to remember that that's what TAM is. Its primary purpose is to raise money for the JREF. Without a scholarship or other sponsors, a person would have to have some major love specifically for what the JREF (and nobody else) does to drop $425 on this sort of conference. |
- 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 - 03/08/2013 : 02:38:11 [Permalink]
|
Dave: The idea that TAM attendees prefer the real world when their speakers include Blackford, Shermer, Mayhew (etc) is becoming a bit of a joke. |
As I said before, there are always people there who I don't agree with. Big deal. The list is much longer than those you have named, and most of the people that you didn't name are very cool. Susan Blackmore for instance. And yeah. I do support the Jref. It's not as though the work they do doesn't matter. Plus they have been very kind to me, and I will most likely receive another grant this year.
And really... I wish you could be there, Dave. TAM is a thing, not just a skeptical conference. I can't even explain that. It's something you have to experience, I think.
You call it stale. Last year was one of the best years yet. I know. I was there, thanks to the help of the Jref and people like you. Your anger with a few people notwithstanding, TAM is still a major draw and will probably get the same numbers as it did last year, roughly. What I've tried to explain to you before is that many of the people who come to TAM know nothing about the stuff that drives you crazy. I'm talking about teachers and professionals who don't spend their time reading all the blogs and forums. They just want to support skepticism, and the Jref is a skeptical conference. There are also people who do know what's going on, and the discussions happen there too, face to face.
The CFI Cons are fundraisers too, by the way. And I'd love to go to one of those but they are always far away and too expensive for me. Even the free cons are too expensive for me. Fly to Atlanta, get a room, and so on. Of all the other cons, it's Dragon Con I'd love to visit. But it's huge, the rooms aren't cheap, and they don't supply half of the meals as part of the registration. And Skepticon, which Randi and Grothe support, by the way, is not of that much interest to me.
Boobies? WTF? TAM is held in Vegas because they get a very good deal from the SouthPoint. The room rates are much less expensive than other cities. The out of conference meals are very reasonably priced to down right cheap. And the hotel is deluxe. And I have yet to see a boobie at any TAM. Hell. It isn't even held on the strip. Any TAM attendee who thinks they will get to see boobies will be very disappointed. Most of us never even leave the freaking hotel once we get there.
I can't stop you from having your complaints, some of which I share. The Jref still does good work. But go ahead and insult me if you feel that you must. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2013 : 03:32:05 [Permalink]
|
I'm partial to Ms. Hall. She has sat next to me during TAM 9 and TAM 10, told me her personal stories, and she was welcoming to my fuzzy little fox plushy that I kept out during and after Deirdre Barrett's talk of Supernormal Stimuli.
And woo-hoo to the cheap rates at South Point. It's a little city. Fascinating. But cough cough at the smoke; no offense Kil and thank you and almighty Tech for the electro-cigarette!
All this talk of TAM and I'm considering going to it again long with the My Little Pony convention at http://www.everfreenw.com/
|
Edited by - ThorGoLucky on 03/08/2013 03:36:20 |
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2013 : 09:16:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
What I've tried to explain to you before is that many of the people who come to TAM know nothing about the stuff that drives you crazy. I'm talking about teachers and professionals who don't spend their time reading all the blogs and forums.
| Speaking from someone who's attended a TAM, that is a huge understatement. I was surprised to hear, when I asked, there were people there who weren't the least bit interested in skeptic forums. Some actually thought them a waste of time or conveyed as much. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2013 : 10:34:24 [Permalink]
|
Thor: All this talk of TAM and I'm considering going to it again long with the My Little Pony convention... |
Oh I hope you do come. It's been great having another SFNer there! And a great roomie!
It's Dr. Hall, by the way... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
alienist
Skeptic Friend
USA
210 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2013 : 11:38:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
This just in from Surly Amy at Skepchick:
Chicks, Tough Old Hens and Roosters. Oh, and T-shirts at TAM
She starts:
It has been a long but very productive weekend for me. I spent my weekend in discussions with Dr Steve Novella with the hope of finding a way to end at least some of the drama surrounding the T-shirt incident that happened at TAM last year. As many of you know, Dr Harriet Hall wore a shirt that said on the front “I Feel Safe and Welcome at TAM.” On the back of the T-shirt it said, “I’m a skeptic Not a “skepchick” Not a “woman skeptic” Just a skeptic.” When I was confronted with the shirt it was very upsetting to me and I perceived it as a direct attack against me, this blog and another attempt at minimizing the discussions surrounding harassment that were being had at the time. But as the months went past since TAM I had noticed that people dedicated to cyber stalking and harassing me and my peers were continuing to use the shirt and its message to attack us unfairly, but Harriet was not. She responded when it was brought to her attention, but she was not the one constantly bringing it up. I realized at this point that Harriet Hall’s intentions may not have been to attack me or this blog but instead she was indeed trying to send a message that spoke from her own experiences as a feminist.
I decided to do what I could to help end this controversy and to hopefully stop some of misinformation surrounding the incident. I realized that there was a lot of emotion involved, particularly on my side because that shirt has been waved like a flag in an attempt to belittle and drive a wedge between Skepchick and some other members of organized skepticism and of course the harassers displayed it like a prize. As you can imagine, that was upsetting to me. I realized Harriet had been constantly questioned about her actions as well. She may not want to to talk to me. I knew Harriet identified as a feminist and odds were we had more in common than not ideologically and so there was hope to find common ground. Steve assured us we could start a dialog. |
Please read on. Most of the meat is in what I have not copied.
Amy ends her post with this comment:
In closing, I’d like to say that Harriet has been gracious and warm in our correspondences. She is intelligent and funny and the title of this post references part of a lovely conversation we had after the above emails were exchanged. I am happy to put this controversy behind us and move forward. I encourage everyone else to do the same. I know we do not agree on everything but hopefully, we can now have productive discussions about those disagreements that are not used as ammunition by the people who wish to spread only hatred and lies. Many thanks to Steve for his help with all of this. |
|
I was so glad to see this. It shows that one can put aside past remarks and come to an agreement. No one tried to push her argument so she could say her side "won." Michael Nugent is also doing a good job in trying to negotiate communication among "warring bloggers." He won't change some people's opinions, but he is at least showing how to have a meaningful discussoin |
The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well! - Joe Ancis |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/08/2013 : 13:51:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Dave: The idea that TAM attendees prefer the real world when their speakers include Blackford, Shermer, Mayhew (etc) is becoming a bit of a joke. | As I said before, there are always people there who I don't agree with. | If it were about disagreement, I wouldn't be pointing this stuff out the way I am. A community can thrive on healthy, reasoned disagreements.
But this is about headlining skeptics acting in totally unskeptical ways. It's about Blackford claiming that the victims of a prolonged harassment campaign are instead the bullies. It's about Shermer exploding into unhinged Nazi analogies over some slight criticism of something he said. It's about Mayhew baiting people on Facebook, and when she gets a bite, pretending to be innocent of any aggression.
These aren't disagreements. These are examples of people with broken moral compasses who are being spotlighted by the JREF as exemplars of the skeptical movement.I do support the Jref. It's not as though the work they do doesn't matter. | Yeah. If it didn't matter, I wouldn't care who they put on stage. That's the whole point.No, I'm reporting what other people think. They see a lot of the same names, year after year.Your anger with a few people notwithstanding, TAM is still a major draw and will probably get the same numbers as it did last year, roughly. | I hope so.What I've tried to explain to you before is that many of the people who come to TAM know nothing about the stuff that drives you crazy. | I know. But dozens of people who do know about it have decided to not give JREF their money any longer because of the choices made by JREF. JREF is harming (but obviously not eliminating) its ability to raise funds by not addressing the complaints.
A thousand people giving money to the JREF is a good thing. 1,025 people giving money to the JREF is better. Do you think that that's such a small percentage that JREF shouldn't bother to try to respond to their concerns?The CFI Cons are fundraisers too, by the way. | I don't know of any CfI cons aside from the Student Leadership ones (which, given the subsidies and travel grants, would suck as fundraisers), and Women in Secularism which isn't for fundraising if Melody Hensley is to be believed.Boobies? WTF? TAM is held in Vegas because they get a very good deal from the SouthPoint. The room rates are much less expensive than other cities. The out of conference meals are very reasonably priced to down right cheap. And the hotel is deluxe. And I have yet to see a boobie at any TAM. Hell. It isn't even held on the strip. Any TAM attendee who thinks they will get to see boobies will be very disappointed. | I have no idea how you got there from what I said. Again, I was reporting complaints that I'd heard: that at least a few people won't go to TAM because they'd never set foot in Las Vegas because of what that city represents to them. Because of the way money flows around, supporting TAM and the JREF means supporting Vegas, and some people won't do that because Vegas is the playground of rich dudes (despite the family-friendly veneer they've tacked on recently).But go ahead and insult me if you feel that you must. | Why would I insult you? Have you been a part of the TAM planning committee and not told us? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail) Evidently, I rock! Why not question something for a change? Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|