• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

So there was this female speaker on an elevator

Status
Not open for further replies.
Linking it to a broader concept of sexualization may be an overreaction, but I think only the very naive could imagine an invitation to one's private room to be for intellectual purposes. Allowing for context, I don't think her conclusion that it was a come-on was unwarranted. There are better points to be made here.
 
You just have to find a nicer way than inviting her to your room for coffee and conversation.
 
Linking it to a broader concept of sexualization may be an overreaction, but I think only the very naive could imagine an invitation to one's private room to be for intellectual purposes. Allowing for context, I don't think her conclusion that it was a come-on was unwarranted. There are better points to be made here.

There's also the context: she had just finished speaking about this very issue, and a few minutes later she gets propositioned in an elevator. If I give a speech about how much I hate onions, and on the way to my room someone intercepts me and tries to get me to eat a big heaping plateful of roasted onions, I have a right to conclude that said person doesn't give a crap about what I think or feel -- they just want me to eat their onions.
 
So how am I supposed to get sex, if I'm not allowed to ask for it?

I would say that it helps to become more closely acquainted with the person you hope to get sex from, before asking. In some circles, anyway.
 
The legitimate beef is equating what the guy did with "being sexualized".

She even admits that what he did was not overtly sexual, but because she could construe an invitation to continue a discussion in private as an attempted come-on, he should not have done it.

The irony is that, at many conventions and other such activities, I have invited and accepted invitations from other attendees to continue discussions in private -- as long as the invitations were same-gender. My refusal to make such an invitation cross-gender is sexualizing; making such an invitation is a sign that I was ignoring the sexual component because of a strong desire to talk substantively.

In other words, for at least some people, such an invitation may be a way of saying "I want to invite you into the same sort of intellectual rapport I have with my same-sex colleagues." The barriers that stop that from happening are, in fact, a form of sexism rather than the opposite.

The issue here is that they weren't having a discussion that could be continued. He followed her into an elevator at 4am after leaving a bar and invited her to his hotel room. That seems to have been more or less his introduction.

If I'm having a really great talk with someone and the bar is closing, then yeah saying "Let's keep talking at my room" can happen.

If it's someone I don't know, and "Come back to my hotel room at 4am" is part of the introduction when you've got someone alone in an elevator. While not inescapably sexual, I imagine you'd have to be dense not to find a sexual, and in this case, kind of creepy interpretation.

What I have a problem with are the dual threads attacking her, one group saying the invitation was not sexual, the other that he had every right to approach her with a sexual request, and no argument between the two of these groups because they both agree to condemn Skepchick.
 
You just have to find a nicer way than inviting her to your room for coffee and conversation.

When you have her cornered in an elevator, at 4am and she's just got done telling a crowd you were a part of not to do things like that.

Context is kinda important here.
 
I still don't think I quite grasp what the complaint is.

Don't hit on people at conventions? (Sexism because men are more likely to do it than women?)

Don't hit on me when I'm tired? (Sexism because men are more likely to do the hitting and therefore more likely to do it when it's not appreciated?)

Don't hit on me in an elevator? (Sexism because a man would not feel as vulnerable in an enclosed space?) Would the story not be told had he asked her outside the bar?

And I don't quite grok the difference between sexual attraction (okay) and sexual objectification (not okay) in this case, as it sounded like he was indicating an attraction to her (if anything). PZ Meyers said something about men thinking it's okay to make proposals which women are obliged to turn down, which would make sense if women never hit on men. But when is it hitting on someone and when is it indicating attraction?

I have to get this straight because I have a son in college and I'm likely to screw it up, otherwise. Just today I made the mistake of suggesting that if he wants to meet people that share his interests he should consider joining a club. I now realize that if he happens to meet a woman there who he was attracted to who shared his interests, he might do something horribly sexist like ask her on a date.

Linda
 
Haha, I read about this on Phil Plaits blog.

He's all a-twitter about the "potential sexual assualt" that occured.


Without taking sides, this post from a Reddit discussion of Phil's blog article made me think. I think it makes a valid point regarding how Phil expressed his POV (badly, in my view):

Here are Phil's own words, replacing the context with race & robbery instead of sex. See how this sounds.

Being alone in an elevator with a black person late at night is uncomfortable for any white person, even if the black person is silent. But when the black person mentions money? There’s no way to avoid a predatory vibe here, and that’s unacceptable. A situation like this can lead to a mugging; I just read in the news here in Boulder that a few days ago a relatively innocent situation turned into assault. This isn’t some rare event; it happens a lot and most white people are all-too painfully aware of it.

I can understand that it’s hard for black people to truly grasp the white person's point of view here, since black people rarely feel in danger of being robbed by whites. But Jen McCrieght's post, and many others, make it clear that to a white person, being alone on that elevator with that black person was a potential threat, and a serious one. You may not be able to just press a button and walk away — perhaps the black person has a knife, or a gun, or will simply overpower you. When there’s no way to know, you err on the side of safety. And what makes this worse is that most black people don’t understand this, so white people are constantly put into situations ranging from uncomfortable to downright scary.

Ergo, black people had better take special care to be less black, because black people are scary.


http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/ihbt5/is_richard_dawkins_in_the_wrong_here/c23rcgh

Phil's original article: Richard Dawkins and male privilege
 
Last edited:
I still don't think I quite grasp what the complaint is.

Don't hit on people at conventions? (Sexism because men are more likely to do it than women?)

Don't hit on me when I'm tired? (Sexism because men are more likely to do the hitting and therefore more likely to do it when it's not appreciated?)

Don't hit on me in an elevator? (Sexism because a man would not feel as vulnerable in an enclosed space?) Would the story not be told had he asked her outside the bar?

And I don't quite grok the difference between sexual attraction (okay) and sexual objectification (not okay) in this case, as it sounded like he was indicating an attraction to her (if anything). PZ Meyers said something about men thinking it's okay to make proposals which women are obliged to turn down, which would make sense if women never hit on men. But when is it hitting on someone and when is it indicating attraction?

I have to get this straight because I have a son in college and I'm likely to screw it up, otherwise. Just today I made the mistake of suggesting that if he wants to meet people that share his interests he should consider joining a club. I now realize that if he happens to meet a woman there who he was attracted to who shared his interests, he might do something horribly sexist like ask her on a date.

Linda

Ready, aim, kill it with fire, people! :D

The time and circumstances do matter though; drunk is not the best time to hit on a person, nor drunk-and-alone-in-elevator...
 
And thousands of bars and clubs are forced to close down all over the world ...

...and thusly many people are never born... including the person who would have eventually invented the cheap, renewable energy source... all because a skeptic looked too good one night in Dublin...
 
Just watched the video -- what the hell did she do that was even remotely criticizable? I don't get it at all.

A lot of people seem to be employing the following chain of (flawed) logic:

1. Rebecca Watson said something about a particular experience she had.
2. It resulted in multiple 1000+ comment threads at multiple blogs, often with heated discussion.
3. Therefore, Rebecca Watson is guilty of "overreacting" and "making a big deal" out of this experience.

Watson, as far as I know, has not put in an appearance in any of this weekend's comment threads. So I fail to see how she is responsible for "making a big deal" out of this, except in the trivial but-for sense that the discussion was kicked off by something she said. To the extent that this topic has become "a big deal" (whatever that means in a community that has lengthy online discussions about practically everything), it's because people are apparently interested in discussing it -- including many of the people who insist that they're not interested in discussing it because it's so much ado about nothing.
 
I still don't think I quite grasp what the complaint is.

Don't hit on people at conventions? (Sexism because men are more likely to do it than women?)

Don't hit on me when I'm tired? (Sexism because men are more likely to do the hitting and therefore more likely to do it when it's not appreciated?)

Don't hit on me in an elevator? (Sexism because a man would not feel as vulnerable in an enclosed space?) Would the story not be told had he asked her outside the bar?

And I don't quite grok the difference between sexual attraction (okay) and sexual objectification (not okay) in this case, as it sounded like he was indicating an attraction to her (if anything). PZ Meyers said something about men thinking it's okay to make proposals which women are obliged to turn down, which would make sense if women never hit on men. But when is it hitting on someone and when is it indicating attraction?

I have to get this straight because I have a son in college and I'm likely to screw it up, otherwise. Just today I made the mistake of suggesting that if he wants to meet people that share his interests he should consider joining a club. I now realize that if he happens to meet a woman there who he was attracted to who shared his interests, he might do something horribly sexist like ask her on a date.

Linda

If your son sees a speaker at a conference his club goes to. And a good chunk of that speaker's talk is "Don't hit on me at a conference, I'm here as a professional, and I don't like it". Then your son follows her into an elevator at 4 in the morning and asks her to his room, right then in the middle of the night, he has just made it clear that he desires sex with this woman and he is either incapable or unwilling to understand her very clearly stated boundaries.

That's likely to make her pretty uncomfortable.

Just a pro-tip.
 
I still don't think I quite grasp what the complaint is.

...

I have to get this straight because I have a son in college and I'm likely to screw it up, otherwise. Just today I made the mistake of suggesting that if he wants to meet people that share his interests he should consider joining a club. I now realize that if he happens to meet a woman there who he was attracted to who shared his interests, he might do something horribly sexist like ask her on a date.

You're right. You don't grasp it.
 
Ready, aim, kill it with fire, people! :D

The time and circumstances do matter though; drunk is not the best time to hit on a person, nor drunk-and-alone-in-elevator...

I totally get the part where she felt uncomfortable.

It didn't seem to form the basis for her complaint, though. Maybe I'm wrong. I just got the impression that it was something about hitting on her which was objectionable. The time and place just made it a bit creepy. Otherwise, why bring all the stuff about sexual attraction vs. objectification?

Linda
 
All the Knights of Chivalry coming to defend Rebecca Watson from Dawkins' posts on PZ's blog didn't seem too concerned about coming to the defense of Stef when she was publicly called out by Rebecca.

That is the double standard that pisses me off.

If a famous man disagrees with me...I get men rushing to come to my defense.
If a famous woman uses her position of power to call me part of the problem and promoting misogyny...I get crickets.

I don't have an issue with Watson's initial post. I do not like to be in an elevator alone with a man, even if he does not talk to me. I do in fact feel uncomfortable. The way she reacted to other women who disagreed with her who were NOT keynote speakers at a conference and who do not have a posse at the ready...that I DO have an issue with.

And the fact that so many men ignore it.

What have I learned? Never post a disagreement with Rebecca Watson. I will pay dearly for the affrontry.
 
Last edited:
Storm in a teacup.

I once had a woman be very rude to me because I was walking down a street behind her and apparently had caused her stress and fear.
As I was barely aware she was even there, I was more than a little taken aback.
I accept many people- not all women - are afraid of assault in public places. I do regret that, but there's a limit to my responsibility for what other people feel. The question is where that limit lies. I think Rebecca and I would draw different lines- and by the interest aroused by this, it seems a lot of folk disagree about where the line lies.

Lifts are odd places- a confined space, nothing to look at but the floor indicator and
lengthy, somewhat embarrassing silences. I've been known to deliberately break these by talking nonsense, or making light hearted chit chat. It usually gets smiles- sometimes people talk back, often acknowledging the unnatural embarrassment of being in lifts , shoulder to shoulder with total strangers. Some, no doubt think I'm a jackass. (I've occasionally wondered myself...)

Maybe I scared some of them. Never thought of that before. I have no way to know , unless someone puts a vid on U-Tube about it.

That said, I would never ask a total stranger (and they don't come stranger than Rebecca) back to my room at 4am. That was pretty damn thoughtless behaviour, in a lift or out of one. Seriously tacky.

But not illegal, or by many standards very odd.

I tend to side with Dawkins in this, and with what Skeptic Ginger has said in the other thread- yes, the guy was distinctly out of line. An apology was in order- even a sober, morning after apology. Not total recompense, but better than nothing.

But to elevate this to a presumption that one person's idea of correct behaviour for half the human race should be a de facto standard - that's way out of line, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom