Continued: (Ed) Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Stout]

uhuh. Much easier than saying "no thanks". That's not creepy.

Jackie Coakley managed her alcohol consumption in exactly the same way yet nobody even remotely hinted at what she claimed to be doing was in the least bit "creepy"

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Jackie Coakley managed her alcohol consumption in exactly the same way yet nobody even remotely hinted at what she claimed to be doing was in the least bit "creepy"

I'm still confused by this reasoning that he hiding his alcohol consumption is somehow "creepy." This is behavior that I have witnessed literally hundreds of times as a bartender; people who wish to remain relatively sober and don't want to engage in the inevitable peer pressure will hide their consumption.

The behavior in this case only becomes "creepy" in retrospect, if you assume that it was part of some nefarious premeditated plan from the beginning. Taken by itself, it is evidence of exactly nothing.

 

[Stout]

Exactly. I've gotten rid of unwanted drink while still appearing to party on more times than I care to admit. My apologies to those houseplants and that aquarium.

 

[ponderingturtle]

So far as I can tell, she didn't say. Circumlocutions such as "Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me" don't exactly make it obvious one way or another.

According to widely respected sexologist Laci Green, if she's too drunk to drive, she's too drunk to give consent. Nevada law has a much higher threshold, the victim must be either incapable of resisting or understanding the nature of her conduct. Quite a few glasses of wine to be refilled between those endpoints.

ETA - According to Shermer, Smith made the decision to proposition him in a "very direct, assertive, and physical fashion" while still at the room party. Assign to that claim whatever probability you see fit.

Of course that raises issues. If both parties are too drunk to drive then clearly they must have raped each other and should both be locked up. And how can we charge women for drunk driving when they are to incapacitated to understand what they are doing?

The standard always is people are responsible for their actions while drunk.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

"Believe the victim" is one of the pillars upon which their religion is built.

Skeptics don't want to believe, they want to know.

Shermer aside, why is the default position on a he said/she said claim that the guy is the honest one?

I think it's the other way around, most women are not lying about such things but a lot of guys prefer to believe women are evil bitches.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Shermer aside, why is the default position on a he said/she said claim that the guy is the honest one?

I think it's the other way around, most women are not lying about such things but a lot of guys prefer to believe women are evil bitches.

I'd say the victim is the honest one over 90% of the time by default, and honestly mistaken most of the rest of the time.

In this case I think the odds are adjusted by the accuser's circumlocutions, lack of contemporaneous support and people who are claimed to be able to confirm the story getting amnesia, or being mysteriously silent, or not being quoted by journalists (a possible sign the journalist didn't find them credible). Further developments could of course change the odds further in either direction.

 

[Scopedog]

Delete

 

[Scopedog]

Jesus man, take his story, do some basic time math...... and then stretch to find another out for him (I guess).

BTW, when was the last time you send an email denying something nobody had accused you of yet? Happens all the time, right?

Alison Smith's online comments and actions after the incident are not evidence of anything but all of Michael Shermer's online comments and actions are evidence of something? This sort of ridiculous double-standard is why men balk at online rape allegations and anecdotes. (For the record- I believe that Michael Shermer is a sleazy guy, who, at best, took advantage of a vulnerable person.)

 

[devnull]

Alison Smith's online comments and actions after the incident are not evidence of anything but all of Michael Shermer's online comments and actions are evidence of something? This sort of ridiculous double-standard is why men balk at online rape allegations and anecdotes. (For the record- I believe that Michael Shermer is a sleazy guy, who, at best, took advantage of a vulnerable person.)

I dont understand. Alison's comments and actions after the incident are indeed evidence. She complained to (Jeff?) the GM of the JREF, and a little later to the president. She was upset and demanded to leave. She has told the story to numerous people since then, and has never wavered or changed it.

Shermer immediately went on the defensive, and has changed story several times. His latest construction bears no resemblance to reality at all, given that "we walked for several hours and were both sober" is laughable given the timeline as witnessed by different people.

Id have assumed this was a slam dunk, but apparently not. Stupid bitches shouldnt drink or wear short skirts, or something. I guess they just have it coming.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I dont understand. Alison's comments and actions after the incident are indeed evidence. She complained to (Jeff?) the GM of the JREF, and a little later to the president. She was upset and demanded to leave. She has told the story to numerous people since then, and has never wavered or changed it.

Shermer immediately went on the defensive, and has changed story several times. His latest construction bears no resemblance to reality at all, given that "we walked for several hours and were both sober" is laughable given the timeline as witnessed by different people.

Id have assumed this was a slam dunk, but apparently not. Stupid bitches shouldnt drink or wear short skirts, or something. I guess they just have it coming.

If they didn't want to get straw manned, they shouldn't have posted in this thread now should they? They were asking for it. They wanted it. You just gave it to them.

 

[H'ethetheth]

Shermer aside, why is the default position on a he said/she said claim that the guy is the honest one?

I think it's the other way around, most women are not lying about such things but a lot of guys prefer to believe women are evil bitches.

I think you excluded the middle there. Also, who is "a lot of guys"? I have very rarely seen any sign that any of the guys I've known might "prefer to believe" anything of the kind.

 

[Stout]

Id have assumed this was a slam dunk, but apparently not. Stupid bitches shouldnt drink or wear short skirts, or something. I guess they just have it coming.

Oooooooo......project much ?

Anyways

The claim was "Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent" and we want to know just what that coercion was.

Did he drug her, threaten her, beat her up?

Why is this such a big secret ?

 

[devnull]

<snip>

I dont actually know why Im answering these questions to be honest..... This is all public and old news. If people still want to associate with shermer, so be it. Not sure Id have coffee with the guy though.....

If people wish to exclude Shermer from their skeptical activities, I think it is a very well supported decision.

Edited by Loss Leader: 

Edited in accordance with Rules 0/12

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

The coercion has been revealed ?

Must have missed it

I think this thread could definitely do with a simple, clear, sourced summary of what the accuser actually says happened. If no such thing exists, that makes the accusation at least somewhat problematic.

 

[Stout]

I think this thread could definitely do with a simple, clear, sourced summary of what the accuser actually says happened. If no such thing exists, that makes the accusation at least somewhat problematic.

The coercion quote came directly from Myers grenade post and it's what Shermer supposedly did to (presumably) incapacitate Smith that's the big question.

Had Smith said something like Shermer had sex with me when I was way too drunk to be consenting to sex, then nobody would have batted an eyelid and gone with the Shermer is a sleezebag narrative as we were supposed to.

If Shermer is indeed out there doing things to people to alter their mental states then it's important that we know exactly what he's doing yet there appears to be a deep seated unwillingness to expose the thing(s) that Shermer is doing to mess people up.

 

[devnull]

I think this thread could definitely do with a simple, clear, sourced summary of what the accuser actually says happened. If no such thing exists, that makes the accusation at least somewhat problematic.

In short, he hid drinks while pretending to drink like most everyone else (although a few people just said "no thanks" and stayed sober), Alison was off her tree, at some point it was revealed that he wasnt drinking, even in her impaired state Alison panicked slightly and left, he followed and led her to his room while she was trying to get to hers..... at no point was she in any way capable of consent, and only has vague memories of the activities (and some physical issues), at some point she sobered up a little, realised what had occurred and, upset, complained to the GM of JREF..... The next day (or so), Shermer sent a pre-emptive email.

Shermer is full of crap on the time line. There was no time for Alison to sober up from her admittedly sorry state. Shermer admitted to hiding drinks, and having sex with Alison. It simply doesnt work.

Later, Jeff (who had been present I believe at the party I believe) and Alison approached the newly appointed president of JREF (mostly to warn him about Shermer's behaviour), who did nothing, and in fact denies having the conversation that 2 other people can recall with clarity. At no point did JREF act at all, until other issues were raised by other women and the magazine article, and only then did Randi came out with his disgusting "Shermer has been a naughty naughty boy" response.

Since then, there's been a constant parade of people attempting to find any possible whole for Shermer to wriggle out of, to the point where I dont think Alison even moves in skeptical circles any more.

Ive probably got a detail or 2 wrong (Im **** with names) and may have left some stuff out, but that's the 5 second summary of events.

The issue isnt that you dont have the details, and/or dont believe her - the main issue as I see it is the completely inaction of the JREF until their hand was forced by constant complaints about this guy. Personally Id have nothing to do with the skivy prick, but your standard of company might differ to mine.

 

[devnull]

The coercion quote came directly from Myers grenade post and it's what Shermer supposedly did to (presumably) incapacitate Smith that's the big question.

I have no idea what Myers said, havent seen his post, and honestly dont care to. Personally I think PZ Myers drowned in the koolaid years ago.

This doesnt alter the nature or truthfulness of Alison's complaint in any way though.

 

[Stout]

Myers grenade post is certainly worth the five minutes as it houses Smith's original complaint with the coercion statement in what appears to be a direct quote from an email, sent by Smith.

What's in question here is Smith's claim that Shermer put her into a position where she was unable to consent. i.e. he spiked her drink, drugged her etc.

It does indeed alter the nature of her complaint if it can't be shown that Shermer actually did anything to her other than take advantage of her inebriation.

 

[d4m10n]

...at some point she sobered up a little, realised what had occurred and, upset, complained to the GM of JREF...

She didn't sober up and complain to the GM, she called him from the lobby of the Flamingo while still very drunk and disoriented. This is all documented in the other thread.

 

[Scopedog]

I dont understand. Alison's comments and actions after the incident are indeed evidence. She complained to (Jeff?) the GM of the JREF, and a little later to the president. She was upset and demanded to leave. She has told the story to numerous people since then, and has never wavered or changed it.

Shermer immediately went on the defensive, and has changed story several times. His latest construction bears no resemblance to reality at all, given that "we walked for several hours and were both sober" is laughable given the timeline as witnessed by different people.

Id have assumed this was a slam dunk, but apparently not. Stupid bitches shouldnt drink or wear short skirts, or something. I guess they just have it coming.

I will attempt to illustrate what I see as a double-standard.

Post #2129

...several witnesses who say Shermer was feeding her alcohol while secreting his own (ewwww, that in itself is sooo shady)...

Post #2169

And Shermer himself admitted that he was hiding drinks in order to remain sober, in a completely unsolicited email..... why would he send that btw, if everything was above board?

Post #2170

BTW, when was the last time you send an email denying something nobody had accused you of yet? Happens all the time, right?

Post #2172

uhuh. Much easier than saying "no thanks". That's not creepy.

Post #2172

...Shermer's new timeline doesnt fit, and he sent an email in an attempt to cover his tracks. Cmon dude.

Post #2189

Shermer immediately went on the defensive, and has changed story several times.

All of these are examples of interpreting evidence in the least charitable light for Michael Shermer and makes it seem that whatever Michael Shermer says or does is evidence that he is a rapist. If, for example, a rape victim continues dating or marries their rapist we are expected to believe that this is not evidence that the rape accusation is questionable since there is no standard way to react to rape. This sort of benefit of the doubt apparently does not apply to the accused in your view. For further example, I do not know if Michael Shermer knew that Alison Smith was calling the incident rape right after it happened, but his initial e-mail could also be interpreted as an attempt to preserve Alison Smith's plausible deniability about a consensual encounter that he thought she might want to keep between them because it was simply nobody else's business. That is a charitable interpretation and probably something that happens every day when people hook up and want to keep it to themselves.

You have also painted the manner in which Michael Shermer was abstaining from over-drinking as "shady" and "creepy" and that he should have said "no thanks", but this should also receive a similar benefit of the doubt as far as there being no right or wrong way for an accused rapist to abstain from over-drinking. Your view of his abstinence seems to be more of a problem for him in retrospect since you appear to be looking for anything to support the conclusion that he is a rapist so everything a rapist does is evidence they are a rapist, such as waking up, brushing their teeth, showering, and dressing.

Post #2172

At the end of the day, Alison is believable, there are witnesses...

Post #2172

Forced by continued employment. Is this not obvious? I would have thought it was.

Post #2172

Youve been raped by a guy, everyone you reported it to did nothing, all the MRAs come out of the woodwork to do their stretching.... Who else would you invite to a panel about sexual ethics and consent than a rapist and a rape crisis counsellor? Cmon man, that's pure genius.

Post #2189

Alison's comments and actions after the incident are indeed evidence. She complained to (Jeff?) the GM of the JREF, and a little later to the president. She was upset and demanded to leave.

These are examples of a very charitable interpretation of evidence. The JREF apparently committed an ethical violation against her by not acting on her allegation but she chose to continue working for them and with Michael Shermer and this is evidence that she is a rape victim. Alison Smith saying she had a great time with Michael Shermer at a later meeting is evidence that she is a rape victim. Alison Smith inviting Michael Shermer to a panel is evidence that she is a rape victim.

What was the JREF supposed to do about the allegation anyway? Did it happen at a JREF-sponsored or sanctioned event? Did it happen on their property? What authority did they have to interview witnesses? What sort of investigation were they supposed to do? They should have referred the matter to police, I think. Everyone who became aware of it should have reported it to the police but not reporting it is evidence that she is a rape victim. Apparently, when Alison Smith wakes up, brushes her teeth, showers, and dresses, this is evidence that she is a rape victim.

Post #2126

I do find it amusing though that people's standards of evidence change depending on the topic

Yes, yours appear to.

Post #2189

...Stupid bitches shouldnt drink or wear short skirts, or something. I guess they just have it coming.

Is this directed specifically at me? I do not feel this way. Are you reading my words as uncharitably as possible?