How can Dawkins redeem himself?

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, it's not terribly difficult to tell after introduction and bland sentence that someone is tired, not feeling social, is not feeling you, would rather be somewhere else, or is intimidated. All of which are indications that they would rather not spend more time with you whether it be sex or discussion.

How am I supposed to change my behavior so that men do not randomly approach me? I've already tried getting old.

You do know I hope that you are saying the world revolves around you?


Does everyone need your permission to approach you, or only guys who are romantically interested?

 

[bookitty]

Expecting everyone to follow Bookitty's rules of interaction is so far beyond the bounds of expectation, it falls off the planet.

Think about how ludicrous your suggesting is. Do you plan to seek a consensus and then personally teach every male in the country what your expected rules are? Are you really that naive?

Oh my dear sweet aunt fanny! I have seen the light! How could I have made such a ludicrous suggestion as introducing oneself and then following that up with ONE whole sentence. It's positively draconian! If (and I do know that it is an if) someone wanted a way tell whether or not someone was receptive to their advances, giving a name and starting with small talk is just...unthinkable!

And for the record, the above is hyperbole. It's fun, but I can see that you already know that.

 

[bookitty]

You do know I hope that you are saying the world revolves around you?


Does everyone need your permission to approach you, or only guys who are romantically interested?

Actually, yes. I expect everyone I interact with to treat me like a human being. If for example, a woman would like some advice on how to sell her grandmothers books, I would prefer that they introduced themselves, made a bit of small talk and then asked "I hear you're a bookdealer. Do you want appraise my grandmother's library?" I would be perfectly happy to do so, even if the books weren't something I buy. If she barged up to me and started with that sentence, I would probably be a bit startled and I would decline.

I have a history of passing difficult clients on to less picky dealers. I find that rudeness most often leads to an unsatisfactory experience for both of us.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Rule #1: know your audience.

Like a single woman hanging out in a bar until 4am?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh my dear sweet aunt fanny! I have seen the light! How could I have made such a ludicrous suggestion as introducing oneself and then following that up with ONE whole sentence. It's positively draconian! If (and I do know that it is an if) someone wanted a way tell whether or not someone was receptive to their advances, giving a name and starting with small talk is just...unthinkable!

And for the record, the above is hyperbole. It's fun, but I can see that you already know that.

Have you worked out the details of your education project yet?

Or are you sending out the message by ESP?

 

[bookitty]

Have you worked out the details of your education project yet?

Or are you sending out the message by ESP?

I had thought, perhaps, communication within the groups that interest me, perhaps via a forum or other social media. So far, results have been mixed. But I take heart from this lovely storiy buried in the link above

...sitting in a policy meeting in which she noticed that the few token women in the room were constantly being interrupted by the men. She decided to perform her own little social experiment, carefully keeping count of the number of times both men and women in the meeting were interrupted.

The results: women were interrupted (invariably by men) at least three times more often than the men. Sandler shared her results with her male colleagues, who were predictably defensive, claiming she must have miscounted or been biased in some way because of course they would never do such a thing. But the next day, when the meeting resumed, the men were far more careful not to interrupt when the women were speaking. Their awareness of the problem altered the way they treated the women in the meeting, even though they denied the problem existed.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Like a single woman hanging out in a bar until 4am?

Your blatant attempt at flirtation has failed, badly.

At least, I assume you were flirting with me because... well, that's just what judgmental women who hang out on Internet message boards do when they interact with men they don't know, right?

ETA: Not to mention that you added to your comment. It just proves that you want me. Sorry, not interested.

 

[bookitty]

Like a single woman hanging out in a bar until 4am?

Ah yes, more of the "Watson is a slut giving off mixed signals" meme.

If only she had said something so that the signals were no longer mixed. Something Like "I'm tired and I am going to bed." or will you now argue that men are too stupid to see anything but symbolism in that sentence?

 

[MikeSun5]

Yup, and every single person whom I hugged (both men and women) I asked first and got permission. Actually, I went one further and simply stated that "hugs were available upon request", and then I let them approach me.

Mr. MattusMaximus sir, I'm pretty sure I know who you are now...

 

[bookitty]

Mr. MattusMaximus sir, I'm pretty sure I know who you are now...

 

[RandFan]

Ah yes, more of the "Watson is a slut giving off mixed signals" meme.

If only she had said something so that the signals were no longer mixed. Something Like "I'm tired and I am going to bed." or will you now argue that men are too stupid to see anything but symbolism in that sentence?

Fair question, then again we should wonder about the symbolism of coffee.

 

[Dr. Fascism]

Let's assume EG did want to have sex with Ms. Watson. What was the obvious signal that she was not interested in having sex with him?

Because she's the great Rebecca Watson! She only sleeps with the best.

 

[bookitty]

Fair question, then again we should wonder about the symbolism of coffee.

Because being left alone is out of the question? What if it was just coffee? Is the freethought community really so rude that they will follow one of the speakers into an elevator at 4 AM in order to ask for a one-on-one chat? Even after they had full and freely given access to the speaker at the bar for many hours beforehand?

I can not see someone ignoring Dawkins or Myers if they said "It's 4 AM, I'm tired and going to bed." Perhaps Watson has not made the same contribution. Fair enough. But is that the only reason that she would be exempted from fairly basic politeness?

ET: Please note that Dawkins did not compare EG to a skeptic following him into an elevator to ask for further private conversation. He compared it to a man chewing gum. Perhaps he hasn't experienced the former as often as the latter?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Your blatant attempt at flirtation has failed, badly.

At least, I assume you were flirting with me because... well, that's just what judgmental women who hang out on Internet message boards do when they interact with men they don't know, right?

ETA: Not to mention that you added to your comment. It just proves that you want me. Sorry, not interested.

Hey, that's cute. If you highlight the winky smiley it looks like it has yellow hair.


Sorry Matt. I haven't been to a bar until 4am for a couple decades.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ah yes, more of the "Watson is a slut giving off mixed signals" meme.

If only she had said something so that the signals were no longer mixed. Something Like "I'm tired and I am going to bed." or will you now argue that men are too stupid to see anything but symbolism in that sentence?

I do believe that has to be a record number of straw men in a single thread.

 

[RandFan]

Because being left alone is out of the question? What if it was just coffee? Is the freethought community really so rude that they will follow one of the speakers into an elevator at 4 AM in order to ask for a one-on-one chat? Even after they had full and freely given access to the speaker at the bar for many hours beforehand?

I can not see someone ignoring Dawkins or Myers if they said "It's 4 AM, I'm tired and going to bed." Perhaps Watson has not made the same contribution. Fair enough. But is that the only reason that she would be exempted from fairly basic politeness?

ET: Please note that Dawkins did not compare EG to a skeptic following him into an elevator to ask for further private conversation. He compared it to a man chewing gum. Perhaps he hasn't experienced the former as often as the latter?

I'm not sure what prompted all of that. I'm focusing only on the symbolism of coffee. That's all. I've not taken sides on this. I think the discussion a good thing. I don't feel that we need to have a finding of fact as to who was in the right and who was in the wrong. Take that up with someone else.

If we need to consider the symbolism of one party's words then we should consider the symbolism of the other. Sauce for the goose. I'm tot trying to find equivalency, I'm trying to be find consistency.

 

[bookitty]

I do believe that has to be a record number of straw men in a single thread.

You're like a little butterfly, delicately hovering above the topic (just long enough to name a fallacy) without ever touching down.

 

[RandFan]

Hey, that's cute. If you highlight the winky smiley it looks like it has yellow hair.


Sorry Matt. I haven't been to a bar until 4am for a couple decades.

What Skeptic Ginger said. Now cats and dogs will start living together. Hell springs into existence and promptly freezes over. It could happen.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Fair question, then again we should wonder about the symbolism of coffee.

It's not a "fair question". It sounds like you meant well but I still have to protest.

I suggested a single woman leaving the bar at 4am indicated it should be OK to present a polite inquiry if there might be any mutual interest. Bookitty equated that with my saying the woman leaving the bar at 4am was a slut. And bookitty has little insight as to why this is a straw man.

No, not a "fair question".

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You're like a little butterfly, delicately hovering above the topic (just long enough to name a fallacy) without ever touching down.

See post #319.