So there was this female speaker on an elevator

[PGH]

I don't see how 'prick' isn't sexist.

I debated about that one...

 

[rustypouch]

No - that was me, not PGH. And I've already apologized to you for your hastily construed assumption that I was being sexist in calling you 'Petal'. I was merely being provocative, nothing more.

Mind if I steal that phrase?

But I still don't see how's it's easy to tell when a woman is interested in casual sex. It's not like they walk around with signs saying "Do me now," or walk up to cute guys and ask if they want to go back to his place.

One person's advertising could be another's harmless flirting.

A shy person's encouragement could be an outgoing person talking for the sake of talking.

There's no real way to know without asking, and hence running the risk of an uncomfortable situation.

 

[3point14]

Ok apparently they advertise it in Essex and I need a plane ticket...

If you want to go where the women at least look like they're advertising for casual sex, you need Newcaslte.

Oddly, women dressed like this are often the most offended when approached for casual sex. By the wrong man.


Look, if anyone has a copy of the rulebook, could I get a look at it because it would really help.

 

[Antiquehunter]

I don't see how 'prick' isn't sexist.

If I wasn't so attached to my prick, I would almost say it was condescending.

 

[PGH]

If you want to go where the women at least look like they're advertising for casual sex, you need Newcaslte.

Oddly, women dressed like this are often the most offended when approached for casual sex. By the wrong man.


Look, if anyone has a copy of the rulebook, could I get a look at it because it would really help.

One key thing I'll need explained beforehand. Are they women who look like they want casual sex or do they look like women who want casual sex?

Because I'm guessing the first one is going to cost me some money and the second one is going to cost me some therapy.


But seriously as to the rulebook you mention, as far as I can see that's the ENTIRE problem here. People assuming that all men know what constitutes a proper way to ask a woman if she's interested in sex. We just keep being told over and over that "you know!" Or that a woman will "advertise it". Well we clearly don't know, they never advertise it and seeing as how every single woman is different trying to apply rules to all of them is impossible.

 

[Antiquehunter]

Mind if I steal that phrase?

Be my guest, Petal Rusty.

I can't lay claim to it - it was used on me by a feisty young lady from Brisbane when I had my knickers in a twist about something or other. I shamelessy stole it from her (in a non-sexist fashion) and I willingly share it with you.

 

[Delscottio]

This 'openly advertising for sex' is a bit surreal considering the amount of rape threads when it is continually pointed out a woman attire doesn't indicate her intentions etc.

The other point further to something Tanya joked about, have a night out in Newcastle, while it may look as though the women want casual sex in the main it ain't the case

 

[latsot]

"NO WOMAN ADVERTISES THAT THEY WANT CASUAL SEX."

Untrue. But that wasn't the point I was making. The point I was making is that even *if* you're right and no woman ever has advertised their availability for casual sex (a breathtakingly idiotic assertion) then that would mean that no woman ever was available for casual sex and I'm afraid you'd have to live with it. Barging up to someone and propositioning them without any attempt to make a connection would probably be unwelcome in a lot of cases. That's all I'm saying.

"Completely dependent on the woman being hit on."

Well you see, here's the thing. "hit on" like she's a target? She's not a target. She's a person. She might be a person who'll **** you without learning your name. She might not. Acting like she is can be threatening and insulting. That's really all I'm saying and I don't get why you find the concept so objectionable.

"So for you to act like there are simple and clear cut rules for how to approach a woman is nonsense, it IS you speaking for all women and you are wrong."

I'm not speaking for all women and I'm not saying there are clear cut rules. Obviously different women want different things at different times, I've never said otherwise. What I'm saying is that if you don't consider that women might be scared or insulted by your approach then YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG. If women are scared or insulted then it isn't THEIR fault, it is YOURS.

"Also my interactions with women are fine, I associate exclusively with women honestly and everyone of them would tell you what a gentleman and kind person I am. I would ask that you stop making accusations about my personal life."

Boo, once again, hoo.




Ok apparently they advertise it in Essex and I need a plane ticket...[/QUOTE]

 

[3point14]

"You made a blanket statement that if a woman is not overtly advertising in some way that she's up for casual sex, then on no account should a man approach her for such because there's no way she'd be 'up for it'."

No, I didn't say that or anything like it. But to be clear on what I meant:

If a person is not clearly advertising an intention for casual sex, it is often an aggressive act to proposition them on that basis. Especially if it's a woman and especially in a situation such as a lift at 4am. Simply because women have more reason to be scared of men than men have of women.

I think you have to admit that this is quite a different statement to:

It is really *really* simple. If she's not obviously advertising casual sex (for example, by being on a casual sex forum of some kind) don't act like she might want casual sex. Don't proposition her in a lift, for example. If you want sex, casual or otherwise, get to know the person. Make an effort. Demonstrate that you're interested in the person rather than just her naughty bits. Shy or not, it's the only way to do it. Whatever you do, don't blame women's freaking out at your stupid, clumsy advances for your inability to get your end away. It's all you and your attitude that's to blame, I'm afraid.

Which is what you originally said.

"It is also incorrect. Lots of women would be interested in casual sex with the right man regardless of how they're dressed or where they are."

Of course they are and I never said or suggested otherwise.

"Let's put it this way, dressed in baggies and at the supermarket, how many women do you think would say yes to a quick bunk up casually offered by George Clooney, Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp while he was wandering down the frozen food aisle?"

I don't have the slightest idea and NEITHER DO YOU. But you are once again entirely missing the point. If they decided to do that, it would be up to them and entirely their decision. You don't get to say "oh, well I have decided that you might **** someone who isn't me, so I get to pester you to **** me".

There's no need to shout, I can read both upper and lower case letters.

I don't believe there was any actual pestering. It doesn't sound like it.

Oh, and I think I have a fair idea that there's at least a decent minority of single women who would happily adjourn to a hotel room with a major hollywood celebrity given the chance. You do too, if you're honest with yourself.

Okay, let me try this. How does anyone, ever get to say yes if they're never asked the question?

 

[Beth]

I am sympathetic to women's concerns about being attacked, but if you can't handle an elevator ride then maybe you should re-evaluate your decisions that put you there in the first place.

I don't think RW had any problem 'handling' the situation or with being on an elevator alone with some stranger. I think her statement to 'don't do this' is a perfectly reasonable approach, especially considering that clearly plenty of males don't/didn't realize this is a situation that will freak out a large percentage of women.

Watson, and many of her allies, have been insisting that disagreeing with her is itself misogynist and anti-feminist behavior.

This nasty bullying is exactly the sort of radical sexist "feminist" behavior that we need to roundly condemn.

I'm not clear on whether or not RW acted as a bully herself, as I wasn't there and I'm not aware of any video of that event. But that was pretty clearly what set the blogging world off on this incident, not RW's request that guys not proposition women in hotel elevators late at night.

I don't agree with her labeling of the EG as sexist or objectifying her; it seems like feminists label anything and everything they don't like sexist.

I do agree that disagreement with her stance that the EG was sexist, objectifying her, etc. being labeled misogynist is inappropriate. The feminist approach to dissenters has often been to demean and disparage them. It is one of the main reasons I don't consider myself a feminist despite having been a women working in a male-dominated profession and a male-dominated industry for over 25 years and having suffered through various episodes of discrimination due to my gender.

How do you feel about Rebecca's story? Do you feel no harm was done? Do you sympathise for the guy who was only trying to get his end away (and who isn't?) or do you sympathise for the person who felt trapped and pressured?

Was any harm done? That depends on how you define harm of course. The guy in the elevator suffered through a rejection. That always hurts, at least a little. If he's reading any of this stuff, he's probably already suffered far more than he deserves.

RW was made uncomfortable - I can understand that, I was once propositioned late at night in an elevator myself - but I didn't think her video was a complaining 'oh it was awful' sort of thing. It wasn't and she didn't make it out to be any worse than it was. Her video seemed mainly an attempt to clue in guys who are apparently clueless about appropriate behavior in certain social settings.

This is what Watson believes, and in fact appears to be one of the things she believes she has to be a crusador about -- namely that being objectified and constantly propositioned at these conventions make women not want to attend them.

And was what we were given enough evidence to support the conclusion this perceived "objectifying women" keeps women from attending atheist and skeptic's conferences? I don't think there was evidence to support the objectifying women charge let alone the conclusion it keeps women from attending these events.

I don't know what additional evidence that RW may have to present, but that wasn't her purpose in the video. Reading through a portion of the 1000's of posts on this, there are other women talking about how bad it can be - particularly for a single women as opposed to one who is there with a spouse or boyfriend - and that the constant barrage of sexual come-ons caused them to not go to more such conferences. I also get the impression (perhaps not accurate) that such propositions happen to RW on a regular basis when she speaks at atheist/skeptic conferences.

Oh, and if someone has a particular problem with being alone with a stranger in elevators then perhaps they should use the stairs.

Like the stairs in a hotel late at night would be safer if some guy is following you and looking for an opportunity to take advantage of you? Sorry, that's not reasonable. A better option when a stranger enters and, for whatever reason, you don't feel safe with him is to get out of the elevator before the doors shut and take the next one.

In this case, RW never said anything about feeling unsafe in the elevator. The guy just made her uncomfortable with his proposition in those circumstances, which from my POV is completely understandable. It was inappropriate. Not a crime. Not harmful. Just inappropriate.

Is Randi a bully when he criticizes Uri Geller in his speeches? Are PZ and Dawkins bullies when they take apart creationists in theirs?

I would say that yes, Randi, Dawkins and especially PZ are often bullying those they are criticizing. Frankly, I don't read much of their stuff on specific creationists or others they disapprove of for that very reason.

I think that Dawkins response to RW has been an example of bullying behavior. I'd far rather be propositioned late at night in an elevator by a guy who's willing to take 'no' for an answer any day than be the target of one of Dawkins, PZ's or Randi's verbal missiles.

Where did this idea come from that you can't criticize someone else in a speech?

Where did this idea come from that all criticism is bullying? It's quite possible to criticize someone else's ideas or opinions without being personally insulting and bullying about it. It's also quite common for people, at least in the skeptic community, to be rather nasty, mean and bullying when doing so. I don't know what RW said, so I can't comment on whether she was bullying in her talk. Quoting statements from a blog and identifing their author is fine IMO.

So what is it? Is asking a woman to have coffee not acceptable? Or is it the time of day? Or is it the dreaded fear of being alone in a enclosed space with a male (gasp!)

You act like it's simple and easy to figure out when it's absolutely not.

It's being alone in an enclosed space without an easily accessable exit with a strange man who makes it clear that he wants to have sex with you. Granted, women are different and not all women are made uncomfortable by such circumstances, but a large percentage are. Now you know, so please don't do that sort of thing.

 

[PGH]

I'd just like to know what Latsot meant by "being on a casual sex forum" since he stated he was not referring to the internet.

 

[3point14]

One key thing I'll need explained beforehand. Are they women who look like they want casual sex or do they look like women who want casual sex?

O Christ, I don't know!

 

[3point14]

Like the stairs in a hotel late at night would be safer if some guy is following you and looking for an opportunity to take advantage of you? Sorry, that's not reasonable. A better option when a stranger enters and, for whatever reason, you don't feel safe with him is to get out of the elevator before the doors shut and take the next one.

In this case, RW never said anything about feeling unsafe in the elevator. The guy just made her uncomfortable with his proposition in those circumstances, which from my POV is completely understandable. It was inappropriate. Not a crime. Not harmful. Just inappropriate.

Accepted. It was throwaway and wrong.

 

[Tatyana]

No, that's unlikely to be an issue in this case. Rebecca has been to the UK many times (I've met her here, and seen her at TAM London), and was living there until recently with her husband.

I think that it might be.

While both countries speak English, there are many cultural differences that are not obvious immediately.

 

[bookitty]

Mind if I steal that phrase?

But I still don't see how's it's easy to tell when a woman is interested in casual sex. It's not like they walk around with signs saying "Do me now," or walk up to cute guys and ask if they want to go back to his place.

One person's advertising could be another's harmless flirting.

A shy person's encouragement could be an outgoing person talking for the sake of talking.

There's no real way to know without asking, and hence running the risk of an uncomfortable situation.

If you're going to TAM for the casual sex, you might be disappointed. Yes, some casual sex will happen but the percentage of people engaging in it will be small. Remove those who have previously met and/or previously established rapport and it will be smaller.

Your chances of finding that one person who paid 500 bucks for a ticket to a conference about science, skepticism, and free-thought who also wants to screw the total stranger who approaches them with the perfect line are microscopically small. Heading to TAM with the goal of finding them, even if you need to weed through the disinterested could end up with you being branded a creep.

ETA: Casual sex is sort of one of those life perks that's better if it isn't desperately sought and preplanned. Sometimes, the seeking and planning are counter productive.

 

[latsot]

Mind if I steal that phrase?

But I still don't see how's it's easy to tell when a woman is interested in casual sex. It's not like they walk around with signs saying "Do me now," or walk up to cute guys and ask if they want to go back to his place.

One person's advertising could be another's harmless flirting.

A shy person's encouragement could be an outgoing person talking for the sake of talking.

There's no real way to know without asking, and hence running the risk of an uncomfortable situation.

It's not *easy*. Who said it had to be *easy*? But a large part of the difficulty lies in trying to understand people's motives, fears, desires... Rather than just deciding to proposition someone because you're horny.

 

[PGH]

"NO WOMAN ADVERTISES THAT THEY WANT CASUAL SEX."

Untrue. But that wasn't the point I was making. The point I was making is that even *if* you're right and no woman ever has advertised their availability for casual sex (a breathtakingly idiotic assertion) then that would mean that no woman ever was available for casual sex and I'm afraid you'd have to live with it. Barging up to someone and propositioning them without any attempt to make a connection would probably be unwelcome in a lot of cases. That's all I'm saying.

Want to know a breathtakingly idiotic assertion? Stating that unless a woman has advertised her availability for casual sex that means casual sex has never happened. I know people who've had sex without so much as speaking to the other person. Women don't advertise it. They simply don't. The only exception (because nothing is 100%) is a woman walking into a bar and announcing "SOMEONE'S TAKING ME HOME TONIGHT!!" Yes it happens. But casual sex happens WAY more often without that ever being said.

"Completely dependent on the woman being hit on."

Well you see, here's the thing. "hit on" like she's a target? She's not a target. She's a person. She might be a person who'll **** you without learning your name. She might not. Acting like she is can be threatening and insulting. That's really all I'm saying and I don't get why you find the concept so objectionable.

"So for you to act like there are simple and clear cut rules for how to approach a woman is nonsense, it IS you speaking for all women and you are wrong."

I'm not speaking for all women and I'm not saying there are clear cut rules. Obviously different women want different things at different times, I've never said otherwise. What I'm saying is that if you don't consider that women might be scared or insulted by your approach then YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG. If women are scared or insulted then it isn't THEIR fault, it is YOURS.

"Also my interactions with women are fine, I associate exclusively with women honestly and everyone of them would tell you what a gentleman and kind person I am. I would ask that you stop making accusations about my personal life."

Boo, once again, hoo.

Again wrong. It's not always a man's fault if a woman is scared or insulted. As it's been stated some women feel scared simply being alone on an elevator with a man. Is that his fault? Women can be insulted for all sorts of reasons. To automatically assume that the man is to blame in all cases is ridiculous.

Do you understand that this is a forum for logical and skeptical debate? Also do you know that what you've said before is still there and we can look back to check? Because you keep attempting to change what it is you're saying, though you keep ending up at the same place.

 

[latsot]

If you want to go where the women at least look like they're advertising for casual sex, you need Newcaslte.

Oddly, women dressed like this are often the most offended when approached for casual sex. By the wrong man.


Look, if anyone has a copy of the rulebook, could I get a look at it because it would really help.

Are you *serious*? Women can dress however they like without implying they're interested in having sex with you. There isn't a rulebook and it's not straightforward, but neither is it all that difficult.

 

[zooterkin]

I think that it might be.

While both countries speak English, there are many cultural differences that are not obvious immediately.

But they tend to become known after you've lived in the country, married to someone from that country.

 

[PGH]

Are you *serious*? Women can dress however they like without implying they're interested in having sex with you. There isn't a rulebook and it's not straightforward, but neither is it all that difficult.

Let's try something different. Less arguing, more rational discussion.

Much of this argument is centered around women "advertising" if they want sex or not. As you state a woman can dress however she'd like and sex has nothing to do with it, I completely agree.

So what does a woman advertising a desire for casual sex look like? Keeping in mind that this has to be made clear before a man so much as speaks to her.