So there was this female speaker on an elevator

[latsot]

You said that no women advertising implies no women available. Are you now saying that you didn't mean that?

Yes, I'm saying I didn't mean that. I phrased it in a clumsy way.

 

[Antiquehunter]

I'm not clear on the "little if any interaction with her", either. She'd been discussing issues in a bar. From what's been said my impression is that he was part of that group, which can mean anything from sitting in a big crowd unnoticed behind her in silence for the last ten minutes through to spending a hours engaged in discussion with her whilst others watched and chipped in.

I've pointed out we don't have all the details, but we do know that the first conversation between EG & RW took place on the elevator. There was apparently no conversation or communication of any kind between the two of them at the bar. I think it makes a contextual difference (a quite important one) if this is someone who stood in a circle around Rebecca and listened to a conversation (without participating) for a period of time, or whether he eavesdropped or watched from across the room and waited until she left to follow her into the elevator.

 

[PGH]

Latsot if it were just me I'd forget it. But I see that maybe a few people agree with me in regards to the argument we're having. That might mean I have a point, it might not.

But I don't want you to be new here and feel unwelcomed. Trust me I have not been here long myself and already there are a few people who don't like me, probably more than I know. I'd hate for you to feel that way.

So welcome. The JREF forums have A LOT to teach about debate tactics, argument styles, use of logic and all sort of other things I often hate to have to use when I just really want to call somebody stupid. I've learned tons in a very short time here and I hope that maybe you can enjoy the same experience.

Sorry for the threadjack everyone.

 

[latsot]

Oh well, I'm sure you won't be told. PGH is right though, you need to choose your words with care when others can go back an read what you've read.

Your concern is noted, well done.

 

[zooterkin]

Which might be relevant if she had.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Rebecca lived in the UK with her English husband.

 

[latsot]

Latsot if it were just me I'd forget it. But I see that maybe a few people agree with me in regards to the argument we're having. That might mean I have a point, it might not.

But I don't want you to be new here and feel unwelcomed. Trust me I have not been here long myself and already there are a few people who don't like me, probably more than I know. I'd hate for you to feel that way.

So welcome. The JREF forums have A LOT to teach about debate tactics, argument styles, use of logic and all sort of other things I often hate to have to use when I just really want to call somebody stupid. I've learned tons in a very short time here and I hope that maybe you can enjoy the same experience.

Sorry for the threadjack everyone.

Ah, it's a local forum for local people

I'm not exactly new here. Thanks for your concern, but I think I'll be OK all the same.

 

[Morrigan]

Yes- but important to note that we do not know whether or not the man was actually an attendee, if he was an attendee, if he had heard Rebecca's talk. We assume that he was not part of the conversation in the bar with Rebecca, since it was mentioned there was no interaction between them in the bar, but we do not know if they guy was part of the group standing around Rebecca & overheard her annoucement, if he was eavesdropping into the conversation / watching across the room (creepy) or just there.

But apparently he said he found her "talk interesting" and wanted to "continue the conversation"... so presumably, he did hear her say she didn't like being sexualized, and yet creepily propositioned anyway? If this is the case, to me, the worst part isn't the creep factor, but the sheer gall and disrespect towards her.

 

[gnome]

And that helps you for this particular woman, in this particular circumstance. The next one will have different rules, and the one after that will have different rules, and so on. Men are expected to know them all, somehow.

My whole point is that the most useful of suggested rules cover a majority of situations and apply to many women--and in fact, can generally be extended to people in general. One doesn't need to know Rebecca personally have a better idea of how to approach that kind of situation.

 

[Antiquehunter]

@Morrigan - but its unclear if this was in relation to the day's meeting (many hours before 0400h) or something in the bar. Splitting hairs to a degree, but somewhat important.

For me the creep factor is magnified if this guy 'stalked' RW after the talk, watched from across the room, and timed his move accordingly. Don't know if this actually happened or not.

If he stood around as part of a group of 6 - 8 people and 'held court' for awhile, then waited to get on the elevator to get up the gumption to ask the question where he wasn't doing so in front of a bunch of strangers, then it is somewhat less creepy.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Ah, it's a local forum for local people

Not exactly. It's more like the forum has a lingua franca that everyone is expected to adopt to communicate here -- solid logical arguments, and a willingness to self-correct and to refine earlier statements.

Generalizations tend to come under close scrutiny, and terms need to be well-defined.

 

[AvalonXQ]

But apparently he said he found her "talk interesting" and wanted to "continue the conversation"... so presumably, he did hear her say she didn't like being sexualized, and yet creepily propositioned anyway?

Do you believe him, or not?
If you believe him -- then he wanted to continue the conversation over coffee, and didn't want her to misinterpret his interest as sexual. That is, he wasn't sexualizing her.
If you don't believe him -- then what evidence do you have that he heard her say that she didn't like being sexualized?

 

[gnome]

@Seismosaurus

I've thought it over more, and I've come to the conclusion that if we both were able to see what happened exactly, that one of us would probably change our mind about the appropriateness of his behavior. So maybe arguing further is kind of academic. I think we see the scenario differently in our minds.

 

[zooterkin]

This. (ETA: And Paul's post above.) It seems to me to be way too much focus on "skeptical personalities" these days by the so-called "skeptical movement/community". Yes I know people have to make a living so that will involve a level of publicity but it really does make me glad that I'm not part of it.

Are you sure?

Dawkins (unfortunately) is alternately being beaten like a ginger-haired stepchild

 

[latsot]

Of course its odd, the usual conventions are to get to know someone- singles bars aren't usually always about sex usually its about meeting for a possible relationship.

I find your view about these social settings more weird than a socially inept person making a pass in a lift. People don't imo advertise for casual sex. It just happens when 2 people meet at the correct time in the correct circumstances, usually when there's alcohol consumed

Look. Please try to understand, everyone. My point isn't that women or men do or don't advertise for casual sex. Clearly some do, some don't, it's not important.

My point was only - and repeatedly and unchangingly - this: if someone *isn't* advertising availability for casual sex - whatever this might mean - then propositioning that person, especially in a confined space in the dead of night, is quite likey to be construed as an aggressive act. And especially and particularly if that person is a woman, because she has more to be scared of than do men. So my advice if you want to get your end away is not to do that. Respect the person you're approaching by getting to know them and finding out what they want. It might turn out they want casual sex, but you're less likely to find that out by propositioning someone in a lift than you are by having a drink and a conversation with them.

That's just my advice. It isn't a watered down version of my point, it's my suggestion on how to act, assuming that my point is true.

My main point is still, contrary to some of the awful things people have written here, that we don't get to complain if women *aren't* advertising their availability for casual sex. It's just hard luck. Most people manage to do pretty well for sex regardless.

Everything I've said has been making broadly this point. I've tried to say it from different points of view, which might seem as though I'm changing my point. I'm not, I stand by what I've said.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I was in an elevator at TAM V with Dr.Buzzo.

Are you still seeing a psychologist?

 

[Antiquehunter]

Are you still seeing a psychologist?

He was a hoot 'n a holler. I hope he's OK wherever he is.

By the way Scrut - that is Dr. Buzz0 to you.

 

[sgtbaker]

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?

Please explain the straw, you posted that you agreed with Mr. Dawkins because you met him once and he was a nice enough guy and I explained why I disagreed. You respond by calling it a straw and then go off on a rant about something else. Did Dawkin or did he not compare the incident in the elevator, which RW herself, originally stated was not a huge issue, to the plight of Muslim women? Okay, I get it, you and RD set the standard for what the rest of us are and are not allowed to feel uncomfortable about but for argument's sake, let's just say that we are actually individuals who have a wide range on what bothers us. If something bother's an individual, are they not supposed to voice a complaint because someone else has it worse?

The funny thing is, in her original complaint, she just said, "don't be that guy." She certainly wasn't intending on it becoming this tragedy. It was the response that turned into a tragedy; as if she is not allowed to feel uncomfortable in a situation that might not make everyone uncomfortable. Maybe you don't get hit on like she and those she said wrote in do. That, in no way, means it doesn't happen. It's an odd thing that some women like to feel like what they say is more important than their bra size. I mean really! How dare she.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Surprisingly common - Girl breaks up with guy at bar. Next night comes in, finds someone totally unsuitable, leaves almost immediately. Comes in next night and wants either high-fives or absolution from me for her daring, in-your-face or OMG! so stupid! act

ETA: me as in random bartender who is there to listen to her.

To the women of TAM: If any of you have just broken up with or are mad at your boyfriend/husband and want to teach him a lesson, I'm available to assist. You'll find me at the bar.

 

[AvalonXQ]

The funny thing is, in her original complaint, she just said, "don't be that guy." She certainly wasn't intending on it becoming this tragedy. It was the response that turned into a tragedy; as if she is not allowed to feel uncomfortable in a situation that might not make everyone uncomfortable.

No, but other can disagree that the behavior was incorrect, especially if the situation is viewed as one that won't make most people unreasonably uncomfortable.

Can we understand the difference between saying "this is incorrect behavior" and saying "I don't like it when this happens to me"?

When Watson is saying the former rather than the latter, it is reasonable for people to disagree and to base that disagreement on whether her reaction was generally justified or specific to her.

 

[johnny karate]

My point was only - and repeatedly and unchangingly - this: if someone *isn't* advertising availability for casual sex - whatever this might mean - then propositioning that person, especially in a confined space in the dead of night, is quite likey to be construed as an aggressive act. And especially and particularly if that person is a woman, because she has more to be scared of than do men. So my advice if you want to get your end away is not to do that. Respect the person you're approaching by getting to know them and finding out what they want. It might turn out they want casual sex, but you're less likely to find that out by propositioning someone in a lift than you are by having a drink and a conversation with them.

As relates to this specific incident, this presumes the man in question was propositioning Rebecca for sex. We don't know that for sure. All we do know is this guy was perhaps socially awkward.

It's a little unfair - and unjustified - to cast him in the role of sexual predator looking to jump Rebecca's bones at first opportunity.