|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/16/2012 : 19:17:40 [Permalink]
|
Travis Roy also misquotes Rebecca Watson rather badly. He says (in part III, allegedly reading her post):“This is quite obviously” This being TAM. “…not a safe place for me or other women who want to be free of the gendered slurs and sexual threats and come-ons experienced in our day to day lives.” But Watson actually wrote:This is quite obviously not a safe space for me or for other women who want to be free of the gendered slurs and sexual threats and come-ons we experience in our day-to-day lives. The bolded word is Travis Roy's mistake. The term "safe space" has a specific meaning, quite different from what one thinks when one hears the word "safe," and Watson even linked to the Wikipedia entry to ensure everyone knew what she was talking about.
Again, Travis Roy doesn't seem to care what women are saying. He can't be bothered to even read a sentence accurately. Twice.
Oh, and he also gives the lame "nobody said anything about harassment in the post-TAM survey" excuse. The question in the survey was, "Did you feel welcome at TAM?" It wasn't, "Did you experience any sexual harassment at TAM?" The idea that the latter question would somehow dredge up every instance of harassment had it been asked is ludicrous, anyway. Harassment is under-reported. A lot.
Travis Roy doesn't deserve your respect, Kil, not on this issue. He's shown himself willing to misrepresent what people (women and surveys, at least) are saying in an obvious attempt to maintain the status quo instead of progressing towards a more equitable society. Whether it's because he feels DJ Grothe and/or the JREF and/or TAM were unfairly "attacked" (Emery's word), or because he doesn't like what specific women like Rebecca Watson and Ophelia Benson stand for or say, or because he's got a problem with women in general, I can't know. But I can say that he acted like an unskeptical ass in that 90-minute "debate." |
- 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 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/16/2012 : 19:42:01 [Permalink]
|
No really. Everyone's trying to demonize everyone. DJ is going to do what he's going to do. Hopefully it will be the right thing. But I'm sick of this. It's literally painful for me to see this much bickering among people who are on most things, on the same side. It's fucking crazy. I'll tell you what. My hat's off to Tim Farely for doing something constructive. That's where my head is at. This is nuts.
I haven't change my position. But WTF? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/16/2012 : 20:03:03 [Permalink]
|
| The problem with skeptics is they can't leave anything alone. Some guys get together and say some dumb things and the whole thing must be transcribed to show how wrong they are. It couldn't be, "oh man, that was dumb." Nooooo... It's got to be dissected to further make a point that's already been made. If skeptics had this much energy when fighting the battles we actually care about, we might get a lot more done. And yeah. I am being critical of both sides now, even though I substantially agree with one of those sides. This has gone well beyond being productive. |
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 - 06/16/2012 : 21:51:29 [Permalink]
|
Kil, this is one of the battles I actually care about. The fact that some men and women who belong to the Skeptical Movement got together and said dumb things about people who are trying to improve the Skeptical Movement matters. It matters a lot, to me, at least. The fact that there is so much vitriol demonstrates that something is seriously fucking wrong within the movement and needs to be changed. Dismissing it as "fucking crazy" instead of becoming more interested because it's so fucking crazy is also nuts. This is the sort of thing that it vitally important if you want the Movement to expand and succeed. These problems exist in every field the world over, and what better way to start tackling them but to clean our own house?
"...to further make a point that's already been made"? Seriously? Obviously, that's why every time a creationist shows up in these forums, we just point them to previous discussions with other creationists. The point's already been made. It's gotta be fucking nuts to go over these things again and again and again, doesn't it?  Really, the more we examine the symptoms of the problem, the more it's likely that a solution will be found, not less.
Also, saying that someone has been an unskeptical ass for an hour-and-a-half is not "demonizing" them. Get some fucking perspective. You suggested Travis Roy was worthy of respect, you brought up his name in relation to this issue, and the first example I get to see from him is nothing but misrepresentations and bad logic. You want to talk about craziness within the Movement? I give you Travis Roy, who's crazy enough to think that the arguments he put forth were good enough for an audience of skeptics.
And Tim Farley can get patted on the head for doing something constructive when he becomes chief of South Point security. Until then, he's just pointing out that other people who aren't necessarily a part of the Skeptical Movement are doing constructive things. And when he becomes a woman, his opinions on how safe TAMs are for women based on nothing more than his own personal feelings of safety might be worth something. Wait, no they won't, since plenty of women are dismissing Watson's concerns by saying, "I'm a woman and I've never experienced anything like that." This is the sort of thing that Skepticism 101 teaches is nonsense, for fuck's sake. Farley's statement is no different from someone saying, "I've used Hulda Clark's Zapper for 20 years and I haven't gotten cancer." So "what it's worth" is nothing at all. He should know that. Why doesn't he? Why did he waste his time time typing it out?
This one issue - much more than libertarianism or atheism did - is turning people who were paragons of skepticism into gibbering idiots. I'm embarrassed to be associated with them, even if that association only goes as far as the common goals I allegedly share with them.
And that's why my opinions don't matter. Despite the fact that it's not supposed to matter, I'm not anywhere close to the leadership of any major organization related to skepticism; I don't publish books, magazines, podcasts or articles; I don't have the freedom to hob-nob with the big players at conferences; I don't have the resources to be a donor; I don't have the time to volunteer; I don't have the expertise needed to offer original thoughts; I don't have the courage to make outstanding sacrifices. All I've got are my arguments, and they aren't sufficient to make any sort of substantial difference given that I have no political influence within the Movement. All I can do is type stuff out on the Internet and hope that someone who has that sort of influence sees it, agrees, and acts on it, and even that seems massively naive. I am not a productive member of this enterprise. The last nine years of my skeptical life can be charitably described as SIWOTI Syndrome run amok, for all the good I've accomplished. |
- 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 - 06/16/2012 : 23:31:32 [Permalink]
|
Oh come on Dave. How can you think such a thing? You are of more value here than I am. Your opinions do matter. And yeah. This issue is turning people who are paragons of skepticism into gibbering idiots. I'm not defending any of them. I'm not defending myself for being weary of this. It's my issue, not yours. I can't help it if I find this painful. I envy those skeptics who are watching this debate but not taking an active part in it, and there are plenty of them. Are they doing the right thing? Am I? I'm completely conflicted over this issue. Not because I haven't chosen a side, because I have. But because many of the people I admire are behaving like gibbering idiots. I can deal with the issues. But it's becoming personal. I hate that. Consider it a personal failing of mine, but some of the people being attacked on both sides of this thing, mostly the other side of this thing, are people I have a high regard for. Some of them I know personally. Some of them I want to defend, just because I consider them friends. I have mostly withheld doing that because I can't defend what I don't believe to be correct. What can I say? I let my frustration show.
As for Farley, he isn't calling anyone a liar. He's just pointing out that there is security at the event for those who think it's just a free for all. He's being honest when he says he hasn't experienced any of what has been reported. I haven't either. He's not denying that it happens. I'm not either. Last year I sat and drank beer with one of the offenders and we talked for hours on and off through the event. I mean really! But I'm taking the reporters word for it, because why would they lie? And there is evidence and corroboration to boot. WE ARE ON THE SAME SIDE.
Do me a favor. Cut me a little slack. Not as a skeptic, but as a friend. How I feel is my problem, not yours. I don't think we found my blind spot, but we might have located a weakness I have. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2012 : 09:23:32 [Permalink]
|
| My intention wasn't to shut down this conversation, just so you know. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
 Posted - 06/19/2012 : 06:45:58 [Permalink]
|
Dave W,
I lurk here quite a bit. One of the main reasons I keep coming back is because of you. No offence to the other regulars, but when you weigh in on an issue, I listen. Your insights and arguments, to me, are almost always unimpeachable. I may not be a person of much influence, but you influence me quite a bit (and other, too, I'd wager).
Just thought you'd like to know. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/19/2012 : 09:14:30 [Permalink]
|
| I'd like to apologize to everyone for my depressive rant, and thank people for their support. I'm mostly better, now. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 06/19/2012 : 10:03:52 [Permalink]
|
| This is one of those issues where I fail to see two sides. Rather, it's like half the skeptical community has lost its fucking minds. In a bizarre new twist, a few privileged white men have taken to Twitter to denounce women who speak up about harassment and abuse as "bullies". What could they possibly be thinking? Well, they probably aren't think much at all, of course. It's the same mindless victim-blaming we see from every privileged class, it's just disturbing to find it so nakedly expressed in our community. |
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/19/2012 : 10:28:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Oh come on Dave. How can you think such a thing? You are of more value here than I am. Your opinions do matter. And yeah. This issue is turning people who are paragons of skepticism into gibbering idiots. I'm not defending any of them. I'm not defending myself for being weary of this. It's my issue, not yours. I can't help it if I find this painful. I envy those skeptics who are watching this debate but not taking an active part in it, and there are plenty of them. Are they doing the right thing? Am I? I'm completely conflicted over this issue. Not because I haven't chosen a side, because I have. But because many of the people I admire are behaving like gibbering idiots. I can deal with the issues. But it's becoming personal. I hate that. Consider it a personal failing of mine, but some of the people being attacked on both sides of this thing, mostly the other side of this thing, are people I have a high regard for. Some of them I know personally. Some of them I want to defend, just because I consider them friends. I have mostly withheld doing that because I can't defend what I don't believe to be correct. What can I say? I let my frustration show. |
Jen McCreight recently wrote, about a completely different subject:I know some people will say I’m an asshole for not being supportive of her personal decision…but that’s not how friendship works in my mind. When my friends make terrible decisions, I don’t shut up about it. It may be more important, Kil, to let those people you admire or that you think of as friends know that you think they're wrong. After all, they might listen to you more than they'll listen to (for example) bullies, bully-enablers and witch-hunters. Like I recently pointed out to Convinced, the words of a perceived ally are going to go a lot further towards changing behavior than the words of an enemy.
In other harassment news, on Sunday some FtBers and Rebecca Watson had A Conversation about TAM. A transcript is halfway done as of this writing. There is a massive difference in tone between this and "the Great Penis Debate."
Greg Laden clarifies something in his introduction:I guess I’m the person who officially asked for DJ to resign, and I want to clarify just briefly that. That I don’t really care if he resigns or not. That’s the kind of thing you say to people when you want them to explain what they’re doing. And he hasn’t done that. And that’s kind of what I’m hoping will happen someday, but I’m increasingly thinking that it won’t. Something I learned: TAM is a fundraiser for the JREF, which explains why registration is so expensive compared to other conferences (Skepticon, for example, is free).
Something else I learned: Rebecca Watson had been talking with DJ Grothe a lot before he made the comments that started all this. They'd been planning - together - how Skepchick was going to participate at TAM. I think if I'd been in her shoes, I wouldn't have just said that "I do not feel welcomed or safe," I would have said that I felt betrayed.
I also learned how to pronounce some people's names.
In still other news, a gamer discusses misogyny in his culture. The highlights:...for now, I'm just going to say to everyone else, and especially my fellow dudes, that when you see something like that going on, you - and by 'you' I mean we - have an obligation to speak out against it more often...
No matter what scene on the Internet is your scene, if you are a dude on the Internet and you see other dudes in your scene harassing women or transgendered people or anyone else who's outside of our little privileged corner of the gender spectrum, we need to speak up, we need to treat this like it matters, we need to add some extra humanity into our scene to counteract their detachment from their humanity. Right on, dude. |
- 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 - 06/19/2012 : 10:53:24 [Permalink]
|
By the way, Kil, nobody will fault you for having conditional admiration for people. You know, admiring people when they act admirably, and saying they're being jerks when they don't.
For example, if I'd known what was going on in the mid-90s and had had Carl Sagan's ear, I would have said, "Carl, you've done many great things, but right now you're being an ass."
If the targets of your criticism turn on you, then maybe they're just that much less admirable. If they make friendship with you conditional on you not criticizing them, then maybe they're not the kind of friends you really want to have. |
- 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 - 06/19/2012 : 10:55:38 [Permalink]
|
Dave:
It may be more important, Kil, to let those people you admire or that you think of as friends know that you think they're wrong. |
This is not an invisible thread. I have said how I come down on this both here and on the Jref forum. There isn't really much more I can do. If I wanted to remain invisible by not expressing my opinion, as some have done, I could have. It's not as though SFN is not looked at. Trust me! (Actually, you don't have to trust me. You have had experience along those lines.)
Dave:
Something I learned: TAM is a fundraiser for the JREF, which explains why registration is so expensive compared to other conferences (Skepticon, for example, is free). |
Absolutely true. I've known it all along. But still, as conferences for skeptics go, it's the big daddy of them all. Whether it remains so is hard to predict. The CFI also puts on skeptical events likeTAM, and those are also fundraisers.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/19/2012 : 11:03:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
By the way, Kil, nobody will fault you for having conditional admiration for people. You know, admiring people when they act admirably, and saying they're being jerks when they don't.
For example, if I'd known what was going on in the mid-90s and had had Carl Sagan's ear, I would have said, "Carl, you've done many great things, but right now you're being an ass."
If the targets of your criticism turn on you, then maybe they're just that much less admirable. If they make friendship with you conditional on you not criticizing them, then maybe they're not the kind of friends you really want to have.
|
If it comes up in a conversation that I'm in, I will say what I think. I'm not as well aquatinted with the FTB as you are, and I'm not following everything that's being said. Most of what news that I'm getting from there is coming from this thread.
We'll see. Who knows what discussions will come up at TAM? And where it comes to this sort of thing, with the people I actually know, I would feel much more comfortable saying what I think face to face in a conversation.
And yeah. That apple thing and Sagan was crazy weird. They were paying homage to him! |
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 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Rebecca Watson Not Appearing at TAM
