• 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.
Cavemonster said:
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.
Click to expand...

That sort of scenario I think would be reasonably obvious. The problem is that it wasn't the scenario which she described. Rather she mentioned that this incident happened after a lively and protracted discussion in a bar amongst a group of men and women, which he indicated he wanted to continue with her. She didn't indicate that he asked for sex or that he was persistent. The complaint seemed to be that she didn't want to be hit on at conferences...I think. I don't know the content of her talk, of course, but she doesn't give the impression (in her mention of sexual attraction vs. objectification) that she doesn't think men and women in general shouldn't be attracted to each other. Just that men shouldn't act upon that attraction in some circumstances, which includes conferences where women are trying to be taken seriously. It's just that this seems to ignore the social aspects of these conferences (which, if you believe the TAM reports, are considerable) where I can see the lines being considerably blurred. Isn't Rebecca usually involved the Skeptichick party at TAM? I don't get the impression that that party involves arm's length professionalism.

Linda
 
Dunstan said:
You're right. You don't grasp it.
Click to expand...

Well, you could be helpful and clarify it for me. It should be relatively easy to explain it to me, given that I am an attractive women trying to be taken seriously in male-dominated fields, who has been hit on inappropriately in all sorts of situations.

(The bit you quoted was a bit of a joke. I suppose I should have put in a smiley, but I didn't really think anyone would seriously think that asking for a date would be sexist. :))

Linda
 
Calculon said:
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.
Click to expand...

Whoa, hey now. I totally get where Watson was out of line. I personally think (and could be very wrong) that it was a reactionary response which is not always the best way to go about things.

McGraw said all the same things that people are having trouble with now. - That Watson was talking about all men, all elevators and all flirting. Instead of one guy being a bit disrespectful & creepy in a really bad choice of location. It was the perfect opening for a clarification and that is how it was used.

Using the words of an audience member to portray a negative is leaning towards rude and I personally (YMMV) would rather that tactic not be used. But if it were Ray Comfort in the audience and PZ MYers reading from the creationist intro add-on to The Origin of Species, there would have been more applause than jeers. The skeptical/atheist movement has it's share of fearlessly outspoken leaders and occasionally course firebrands. To take Watson to task for being rude within the ranks is to give those within the ranks special privilege and protection. Which isn't really what this scene is supposed to be all about. At least until everyone figures out that damned DBAD thing.
 
fls said:
That sort of scenario I think would be reasonably obvious. The problem is that it wasn't the scenario which she described. Rather she mentioned that this incident happened after a lively and protracted discussion in a bar amongst a group of men and women, which he indicated he wanted to continue with her. She didn't indicate that he asked for sex or that he was persistent. The complaint seemed to be that she didn't want to be hit on at conferences...I think. I don't know the content of her talk, of course, but she doesn't give the impression (in her mention of sexual attraction vs. objectification) that she doesn't think men and women in general shouldn't be attracted to each other. Just that men shouldn't act upon that attraction in some circumstances, which includes conferences where women are trying to be taken seriously. It's just that this seems to ignore the social aspects of these conferences (which, if you believe the TAM reports, are considerable) where I can see the lines being considerably blurred. Isn't Rebecca usually involved the Skeptichick party at TAM? I don't get the impression that that party involves arm's length professionalism.

Linda
Click to expand...

If he had genuinely wanted to talk further, he could have said, "hey, let's catch up tomorrow for coffee/breakfast/morning tea, I'd love to discuss this further". Instead he asked her to his room at 4am. After she had explicitly said she was going to bed and didn't like to be sexualised. Heck I find it creepy being stuck in an elevator with a strange guy in the early evening, let alone in the middle of the night. It's a confined space and genuinely intimidating.
 
fls said:
That sort of scenario I think would be reasonably obvious. The problem is that it wasn't the scenario which she described. Rather she mentioned that this incident happened after a lively and protracted discussion in a bar amongst a group of men and women, which he indicated he wanted to continue with her. She didn't indicate that he asked for sex or that he was persistent. The complaint seemed to be that she didn't want to be hit on at conferences...I think. I don't know the content of her talk, of course, but she doesn't give the impression (in her mention of sexual attraction vs. objectification) that she doesn't think men and women in general shouldn't be attracted to each other. Just that men shouldn't act upon that attraction in some circumstances, which includes conferences where women are trying to be taken seriously. It's just that this seems to ignore the social aspects of these conferences (which, if you believe the TAM reports, are considerable) where I can see the lines being considerably blurred. Isn't Rebecca usually involved the Skeptichick party at TAM? I don't get the impression that that party involves arm's length professionalism.

Linda
Click to expand...

He had not spoken to her at all prior to getting into the elevator with her.
 
bookitty said:
He had not spoken to her at all prior to getting into the elevator with her.
Click to expand...

Has she clarified that? Her original comments implied (but did not state) that he was one of the many people talking with her at the bar.

If he were part of that group, even if he had only been listening to what she and others were saying up to that point, it's not unreasonable to want to continue the conversation.
 
fls said:
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
Click to expand...
We have a similar view of the issue as I have been arguing in the other thread.
 
fls said:
Well, you could be helpful and clarify it for me. It should be relatively easy to explain it to me, given that I am an attractive women trying to be taken seriously in male-dominated fields, who has been hit on inappropriately in all sorts of situations.

(The bit you quoted was a bit of a joke. I suppose I should have put in a smiley, but I didn't really think anyone would seriously think that asking for a date would be sexist. :))

Linda
Click to expand...

I honestly didn't think it was a joke. I mean, I knew it was sarcasm, but it's exactly the kind of sarcastic strawmanning comment I've been reading for days: Pharyngula and other places have been full of comments to the effect of "OH NOEZ! Feminists think it's rape for any man to initiate a conversation with a woman, ever, under any circumstances! Good thing not everyone agrees with them, or THE HUMAN RACE WOULD DIE OUT!!!!!!" That's only a slight exaggeration.

So yeah, my humor detector may be a bit fuzzy on this topic.

Can I assume, then, that you actually do appreciate the distinction between what Watson and others have been saying, i.e. "please be considerate of women's concerns and avoid propositioning women in circumstances when it could be considered threatening," and the distorted version that she's been accused of?

And so therefore, you actually do know how to advise your son on the difference between acceptable ways to approach women, and creepy/threatening/disrespectful behavior?

And if so, what is it that you want me to clarify for you?
 
Giraffe107 said:
If he had genuinely wanted to talk further, he could have said, "hey, let's catch up tomorrow for coffee/breakfast/morning tea, I'd love to discuss this further". Instead he asked her to his room at 4am. After she had explicitly said she was going to bed and didn't like to be sexualised. Heck I find it creepy being stuck in an elevator with a strange guy in the early evening, let alone in the middle of the night. It's a confined space and genuinely intimidating.
Click to expand...

Oh yes. I agree that it was an uncomfortable situation for Rebecca and he handled it poorly, regardless of his intentions. I didn't get the impression that Rebecca was complaining about the social awkwardness of male skeptics, though. If it really would have been okay for him to hit on her in less creepy circumstances, then why the need to go on about misogyny and objectification?

Linda
 
bookitty said:
He had not spoken to her at all prior to getting into the elevator with her.
Click to expand...

Okay. It wasn't clear one way or the other. On the other hand, she did indicate that he was supposed to know what the group had been discussing and that she had stated that she was tired, so she must have thought he was participating in some way, even if it was only by listening.

Linda
 
Dunstan said:
I honestly didn't think it was a joke. I mean, I knew it was sarcasm, but it's exactly the kind of sarcastic strawmanning comment I've been reading for days: Pharyngula and other places have been full of comments to the effect of "OH NOEZ! Feminists think it's rape for any man to initiate a conversation with a woman, ever, under any circumstances! Good thing not everyone agrees with them, or THE HUMAN RACE WOULD DIE OUT!!!!!!" That's only a slight exaggeration.

So yeah, my humor detector may be a bit fuzzy on this topic.

Can I assume, then, that you actually do appreciate the distinction between what Watson and others have been saying, i.e. "please be considerate of women's concerns and avoid propositioning women in circumstances when it could be considered threatening," and the distorted version that she's been accused of?

And so therefore, you actually do know how to advise your son on the difference between acceptable ways to approach women, and creepy/threatening/disrespectful behavior?

And if so, what is it that you want me to clarify for you?
Click to expand...

I guess that was it. I didn't realize that the gist of her talk had been about the social skills of male skeptics - i.e. that they come across as creepy. I had been under the impression that her talk had been about feminism and skepticism. I thought she was complaining about being propositioned, rather than being propositioned awkwardly. It feels less like objectification if it's done skillfully?

Linda
 
fls said:
I guess that was it. I didn't realize that the gist of her talk had been about the social skills of male skeptics - i.e. that they come across as creepy. I had been under the impression that her talk had been about feminism and skepticism. I thought she was complaining about being propositioned, rather than being propositioned awkwardly. It feels less like objectification if it's done skillfully?

Linda
Click to expand...

Here is Rebecca's talk at the conference (she starts at about 2 minutes in):
http://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa#p/u/7/W014KhaRtik
 
Cavemonster said:
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.
Click to expand...

Ringadingabingo. Right on the money. Works both ways too. If I just got done saying "Don't hit on me at this conference, I'm here as a professional, and I don't like it". and then a woman right after comes up and hits on me, I would think she's trying to get my goat/screw with my head/be rude/or purposely be impolite, and then I would have to wonder if it's because she is anti-men or anti-me.

ETA Another possibility I should probably consider is that she is drunk out of her mind and doesn't even know what she is saying.
 
Last edited:
fls said:
I guess that was it. I didn't realize that the gist of her talk had been about the social skills of male skeptics - i.e. that they come across as creepy.
Click to expand...

By "her talk," do you mean the one at the conference prior to the Elevator Incident? I don't know the specific content, other than that she mentioned in her subsequent video post about not liking being treated as a sexual object. ETA: I see it's been linked above.

I had been under the impression that her talk had been about feminism and skepticism. I thought she was complaining about being propositioned, rather than being propositioned awkwardly. It feels less like objectification if it's done skillfully?

Linda
Click to expand...

I don't think that's it. At least, not if you mean "skillfully" in some suave, pick-up artist sense.

(Interestingly, many people in these various threads have implied that Watson wouldn't have complained if Elevator Guy had been a George Clooney (or whoever) lookalike -- yet as far as I know, she hasn't said anything about Elevator Guy's appearance or general attractiveness, just his tactics.)

I assume that she doesn't have a problem with men expressing interest in her per se. If Elevator Guy had approached her in a crowded hallway in the afternoon and said something not-terribly-smooth like "gosh, I think you're really swell. Would you like to go on a date with me?" I doubt we'd be having this discussion.

In other words, I think it has to do with being courteous and respectful, by not putting someone in an uncomfortable position, than with being "skillful."
 
chran said:
Haha, I read about this on Phil Plaits blog.

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

There was no assault, potential or otherwise! End of story.
Click to expand...

Every time two human beings get within three feet of each other there's a potential sexual assault. There are thousands of potential sexual assaults just in one crowded train car alone! :boxedin:
 
chran said:
So how am I supposed to get sex, if I'm not allowed to ask for it?
Click to expand...

I've heard there's this thing called online dating sites.

Is there any situation where you don't think it's appropriate to ask for sex?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom