So there was this female speaker on an elevator

[Skeptic Ginger]

Good lord. The events you people are talking about sound a lot more interesting than what really happened.

I *believe* Rebecca's point, when she brought it up on her video, was essentially that behavior like Elevator Guy's is part of what's keeping women from coming to skeptic/atheist events. ...

Since the guys in the skeptic/atheist groups don't get that, attracting women to these events will remain a struggle.

If that's the case then Rebecca failed to make her case and I don't buy her conclusion.

Of course, what Rebecca actually did and said has been lost in the ensuing howls of outrage from the (mostly) skeptical men who feel their right to ask for sex is being threatened.

Perhaps you've failed to notice how many female forumites in this discussion don't agree with Rebecca's conclusion.

And Richard Dawkins is being a jerk.

Or not, depending on your point of view.

Of course, Rebecca is an outspoken feminist (thanks to skeptic and atheist men), so everything she says and does is to further her man-hating agenda. And all the people who put their names on the bottom of Stephanie Svan's open letter to Dawkins are just humorless bitches who can't laugh off their own rapes and assaults.

I don't think this has anything to do with a man hating agenda. I think it has to do with how Rebecca views herself. I'll leave it at that.

Sheesh.

Sheesh is right. There are a few assumptions/conclusions in your post I don't think are correct.

 

[PGH]

Think of it this way: An elevator isn't particularly big, its doors close quite firmly, and when you're between floors, there's no easy way out and no easy way to get away from someone. If you followed someone into a small room and then closed the door behind you before using what sounded to them like a pick-up line, I would imagine they would feel a lot less safe than if you said word for word the same thing in a room full of people.

If someone is that scared to be with men on elevators they probably shouldn't ride elevators. If the point is that it's possible that a woman can be raped or otherwise attacked on an elevator..well women can be and are raped and attacked in most anyplace you can think of, sadly.

A man certainly carries no fault and bears no extra responsibility for the act of being on an elevator with a woman.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

You don't feel her calling out Stef McGraw in her speech was bullying behavior?

No. Like PZ says, "always name names".

 

[Darat]

I haven't actually given my opinion on sex. (I'm all for it, BTW.)

Yes you have - both the parts of your post that I highlighted were you setting the rules for sexual interaction with other people. E.g. "...If you're coming to a skeptic or atheist conference to get laid, you are part of the problem. You're actually part of several problems..." You are saying that certain social activities such as meeting friends or going on a trip are OK but sex isn't.

If you view Elevator Guy's actions as acceptable discourse between adults, there's not much common ground for us to talk about it. If you think it's unreasonable to view his behavior as worrisome, then I have to wonder where the line of "too far" falls.

Well we don't have an objective recording of the event to be able to refer to that would enable us to see the actual interaction which is what I would need before I could get that specific. However in the general it would appear that there is not much common grounds since I consider sex just a part of the usual human social interactions and you seem to believe that sex has to be treated in a unique manner.

And all of that is perfectly fine. However -- and this might just be my opinion -- before acting on that, establishing that the feeling is mutual is a better way to go. This is true for any action you want to take with someone else.

If I was wondering if you wanted a cup of tea I wouldn't expect to have to go around the houses to avoid mentioning a "cup of tea"! So what is a better way to establish if there is a mutual desire to have sex or a cup of tea than to ask the other person or persons?

You could say that's exactly what he did when he propositioned Rebecca in the elevator. But waiting until she's in a place where he could easily force himself on her with no one around to intervene and no easy escape... well, I'll leave it as "creepy." Probably unintentional on his part, but there was no way for her to know that.

Again if there is evidence that this behaviour is an indicator of risk I can understand a reaction of "being worried" or alarmed, but I wouldn't expect "creepy". I'm looking for the rationality behind this but so far haven't seen it.

And that's the whole point of all this. Be aware of how you're coming off to someone else, and be sure that's how you want to come off.

I understand your point and to a large extent agree but I also want such reactions to be based on rationality and evidence.

 

[Information Analyst]

I don't necessarily disagree. I'm just pointing out that someone who wants to get to know her better and is uncomfortable approaching her in a crowd will end up behaving the same way as someone who is using the secret code for sex. Is "don't take this the wrong way" part of the secret code? (I have to ask because I didn't get taught these tricks and still occasionally put my foot in it..how much worse it must be for a guy with this handicap.)

I'm only watching all this, bemused, from the sidelines, but that's the bit that seems to jar in all this. Of course, as a commited sideline occupant, I had no idea who Rebecca Watson was 24 hours ago, but observing her Wikipedia page I note that she is American, and am aware that the alleged incident occured in Dublin, so I can't help feeling there may be some cultural confusion at play here, and not just because almost everyone's saying "elevator" for something that - in the locale in question - is actually a "lift." Ireland - like the UK - simply does not have the same ritualised dating culture and patterns that America has, and perhaps this really was a case of an American assuming a certain intent where none actually existed. Certainly to me, from a UK perspective, "don't take this the wrong way," is almost certainly laying cards on the table to indicate that what follows really isn't a cheesy pick-up attempt.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Perhaps you've failed to notice how many female forumites in this discussion don't agree with Rebecca's conclusion.

Perhaps you've failed to notice how many male forumites in this discussion do.

Your point?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Certainly to me, from a UK perspective, "don't take this the wrong way," is absolutely laying the cards on the table to indicate that what follows isn't a cheesy pick-up attempt.

If you're a sexist attention-whore, "don't take this the wrong way" definitely means "take this the wrong way and report it to as wide an audience as possible as though it was actually meant the wrong way; then pubically shame and/or boycott anyone who sees it differently."

 

[Humphreys]

See above... I agree with others that the sexist/misogynist implications applied are questionable, but I thought it was pretty clear why someone might be uncomfortable in that situation. It doesn't have to be generalized to the extent of your hypotheticals.

I get uncomfortable when strangers talk to me on the street, or when I spot a harmless spider. Discomfort is not always rational, and the problem is not always with the creator of the discomfort.

Man+Beer+Elevator != Alarming Potential Rape Situation

I think I'll stick with Dawkins.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Maybe I misinterpreted it but to me, it came off as; The skeptic community has some nerve standing behind RD, who uttered a few sentences about a situation where she felt uncomfortable, when there's women who have it far worse. Unless her genitals are being mutilated, don't complain. Really? So by that notion, unless you are being religiously persecuted in a violent manner, don't complain. You don't like the religious dominance in the US, get over it, people are getting their heads cut off in other countries.

Wow the straw in this thread is thick.

A guy hitting on gal is not the tragedy it is being made out to be. I imagine the guy was creepy. But claiming it was objectifying woman and it's keeping women from wanting to attend atheist and skeptical events? Seriously? This incident is supposed to be the evidence for that conclusion?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Perhaps you've failed to notice how many male forumites in this discussion do.

Your point?

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.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Wow the straw in this thread is thick.

A guy hitting on gal is not the tragedy it is being made out to be. I imagine the guy was creepy. But claiming it was objectifying woman and it's keeping women from wanting to attend atheist and skeptical events? Seriously? This incident is supposed to be the evidence for that conclusion?

I think what Watson was trying to get at, is that in the past being hit on and feeling objectified has been a constant problem at atheist conventions, and actually has acted as a deterrent for many females that might have otherwise attended. She was using this as an example of the sort of conduct she wants to see stop, as part of her effort to create an environment where female skeptics feel comfortable coming to skeptic activities.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...
Seriously, though, and I am not trying to keep the discussion going but you got me curious. Could something like this actually divide communities?

Take a break then come back and re-read your own:

post #93

 

[Darat]

I think I can express at least part of the problem in gender-irrelevant terms.

...snip....anguage that they would like to walk away, like taking a few steps.

It makes sense to me that attempts to get more personal are more welcomed (or at least better received without discomfort) in a scenario that allows for an easy decline and exit. It is a subtlety that not everyone will pick up on (took me far too long, myself) but it's good advice.

Totally understand and agree with your point but it seems that the complaint in this specific instance goes well beyond that "social uncomfortableness".

 

[Phlebas]

Wow the straw in this thread is thick.

A guy hitting on gal is not the tragedy it is being made out to be. I imagine the guy was creepy. But claiming it was objectifying woman and it's keeping women from wanting to attend atheist and skeptical events? Seriously? This incident is supposed to be the evidence for that conclusion?

So what does keep women from wanting to attend these conferences?

 

[Antiquehunter]

I seem to recall there was a discussion of a planned walk-out against one of the speakers who had some sort of loose connection to some distasteful criminal (I really can't remember the details, nor do I care to.)

I wonder if there will be an exodus when RD takes the stage? Or when RW gets the mic?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So what does keep women from wanting to attend these conferences?

Dr. BUZZ0?

 

[Humphreys]

So what does keep women from wanting to attend these conferences?

Disinterest?

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Certainly to me, from a UK perspective, "don't take this the wrong way," is almost certainly laying cards on the table to indicate that what follows isn't a cheesy pick-up attempt.

I thought that as well as it's a standard phrase to use when you know that something you are about to say could be taken a different way to what you intended.

 

[latsot]

It's astonishing that many of the skeptics here don't apply their thought to the plight of women in western societies. Here's a clue: if some women say they're frightened of men, then we men should take notice and change our behaviour rather than claim that women are over-reacting.

Do you know why? It's because WOMEN ARE *********** FRIGHTENED and the only possible way to help them not be frightened is to constantly remind ourselves of stories like this.

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?

 

[Lamuella]

If someone is that scared to be with men on elevators they probably shouldn't ride elevators. If the point is that it's possible that a woman can be raped or otherwise attacked on an elevator..well women can be and are raped and attacked in most anyplace you can think of, sadly.

A man certainly carries no fault and bears no extra responsibility for the act of being on an elevator with a woman.

I don't think it was his physical existence in the elevator she was objecting to.