I've seen at least two competing mythologies about how this went from awkward pass to epic internet **** storm.
So you think the Phawrongula account is a lie?
In the Pit version of the myth, it all kicked off because Rebecca went after Stef at the
CFI con. This makes perfect sense from their perspective, since that was how the Pit
first emerged.
In the SJW version of the myth, it's basically all
Dawkins' fault for posting the
Dear Muslima missive. This makes perfect sense from their perspective, because all that is wrong with society must be laid at the feet of the most privileged.
Dawkins' missive had a significant repercussions, as did Watson's infamous on-stage callout, but I do cannot subscribe to either of these mythologies. I view the conflict between
identitarian callout culture warriors and
cultural libertarians as nigh inevitable in any space peopled mostly with liberals and progressives. The potential for explosive combustion exists in two sets of competing values, any given controversy can light the blue touch paper.
Seriously? You are citing an opinion piece on Breitbart?
Well, finally the problem you are having emerges.
First you didn't get it that the vlog wasn't the problem.
Then you didn't believe it.
I posted a link.
Then you dismissed it as RW just calling someone out, ignoring the content of the callout.
Then you tried to make it about a straw man that I owed it to you to find the earlier links. (This is all in addition to the fact the evidence of what happened is easily found all over the Net even all these years later.)
And now you can't seem to assess the facts for yourself:
1) The sexual harassment is everywhere debate begins with many people in the JREF community taking sides. Some say the incidents were few and far between, some said the incidents were rampant. No evidence of more than a few occurrences and a couple repeat offenders is produced.
2) The vlog is posted. RW perceives herself the victim of "objectification".
3) McGraw and StClair comment they didn't see what the issue was on the elevator.
4) RW attacks McGraw at the student atheist event.
5) A blog back and forth ensues between RW and McGraw.
6) PZ Myers posts a blog accusing people of not being empathetic enough about the sexual harassment going on at skeptic and atheist events, and not being empathetic with RW's experience, apparently missing the significance of the attack on McGraw at the student atheist event.
7) Dawkins writes his Dear Muslima reply in PZ's blog post.
8) (I'm not sure if this happened before or after the Dear Muslima reply) Myers becomes an activist atheist creating the A+ movement, he moves his Pharyngula blog to the Freethought Blog site where they promptly decide to ban anyone who doesn't agree with them.
I think that about sums it up. If anyone thinks I have the order of something wrong, let me know.
So, make up your own mind, Damion. The RW side see themselves as persecuted victims. No doubt that is what they believe. Their confirmation bias has given them selective memory issues about the events.
Myself and others don't believe sexual harassment is under every chair at skeptic and atheist events. We think they are exaggerating by claiming benign and minor interactions are harassment.
It detracts from the real issues like the real rape culture where high school girls are raped when they are unconscious and whole groups of people think it's just kids partying.
Yes, there aren't enough women in STEM fields and there is some lingering sexism that needs to be addressed. Sometimes offensive casual sexual conversation, mildly sexist shirt prints, and a stupid comment that girls make bad lab partners because they cry when criticized occur. But can't we just point this stuff out without crucifying the men who lack awareness or don't know any better? Are those offenses really deserving of being so thoroughly demonized?
Exaggeration and fanaticism are not helping the feminist cause.
