Two atheists get in an elevator
So here’s a hilarious atheist joke for you all:
Two atheists at a conference get into an elevator at 4 AM. The dude atheist, apropos of nothing, invites the chick atheist to go to his room with him. The chick atheist, who’s never even spoken to the dude before, is creeped out by this. (She says no.) She mentions the incident in a YouTube video. A shitstorm erupts in the atheist-o-sphere because, like, how could she possibly call an atheist dude a creep and aren’t women treated worse in Islamist Theocracies?
Then Richard Dawkins says,
Dear Muslima
Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and . . . yawn . . . don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you’ll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.
Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep”chick”, and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn’t lay a finger on her, but even so . . .
And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.
Richard
In a followup comment, Dawkins tops that bit of hilarity with this:
Rebecca’s feeling that the man’s proposition was ‘creepy’ was her own interpretation of his behaviour, presumably not his. She was probably offended to about the same extent as I am offended if a man gets into an elevator with me chewing gum. But he does me no physical damage and I simply grin and bear it until either I or he gets out of the elevator. It would be different if he physically attacked me.
Damn. That joke didn’t turn out to be really very hilarious at all. Maybe I told it wrong?
In any case, as you might already know (or have gathered), this whole thing actually happened over the past weekend. The atheist chick in question is Rebecca Watson, a popular blogger who calls herself Skepchick. The conference in question was the Center for Inquiry’s Student Leadership Conference. The part of Richard Dawkins was played by, well, Richard Dawkins. (You can find both of his comments quoted here.)
The incident has been hashed and rehashed endlessly in the atheist-o-sphere (and even out of it), but I think it deserves a tiny bit more re-rehashing. Mainly because it illustrates that some really creepy, backwards attitudes can lurk deep in the hearts of dudes who think of themselves as enlightened, rational dudes fighting the evils of superstition and, yes, religious misogyny.
The strangest thing about the whole incident is how supremely mild Watson’s comments on the creepy elevator dude were. Here is literally all she said about him, in passing, in her video (transcribed here):
So I walk to the elevator, and a man got on the elevator with me and said, ‘Don’t take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting, and I would like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?’
Um, just a word to wise here, guys, uh, don’t do that. You know, I don’t really know how else to explain how this makes me incredibly uncomfortable, but I’ll just sort of lay it out that I was a single woman, you know, in a foreign country, at 4:00 am, in a hotel elevator, with you, just you, and–don’t invite me back to your hotel room right after I finish talking about how it creeps me out and makes me uncomfortable when men sexualize me in that manner.
That’s it. That’s the whole thing. You would think that most guys would be well aware that accosting a woman you’ve never met before in an elevator at 4 AM is, you know, kind of a no-no. But, no, Watson’s comments suddenly became an attack on male sexuality and men in general. One critic put up a video lambasting Watson, ending it with the question:
What effect do you think it has on men to be constantly told how sexist and destructive they are?
Never mind that she didn’t, you know, actually do that at all. Nor did she even remotely suggest, despite Dawkins’ weird screed, that creepy dudes on elevators were somehow equivalent to genital mutilation or the general denial of women’s rights in Islamist theocracies. She merely suggested that guys might want to think twice before hitting on women who are alone with them in an elevator at four in the morning. Pointing out the creepy behavior of one particular dude is not the same as calling all men creepy.
Now, the atheist movement tends to be a bit of a sausagefest, pervaded by some fairly backwards notions about women. (Prominent atheist pontificator Christopher Hitchens, you may recall, seems to sincerely believe that women just aren’t funny. Not that he’s exactly a barrel of monkeys himself.) But some of the most vociferous critics of Watson have been other atheist women – including the one I quoted above.
Watson responded to this in the first of several posts she wrote about the whole weird controversy:
I hear a lot of misogyny from skeptics and atheists, but when ancient anti-woman rhetoric like the above is repeated verbatim by a young woman online, it validates that misogyny in a way that goes above and beyond the validation those men get from one another. It also negatively affects the women who are nervous about being in similar situations. Some of them have been raped or otherwise sexually assaulted, and some just don’t want to be put in that position. And they read these posts and watch these videos and they think, “If something were to happen to me and these women won’t stand up for me, who will?”
In a followup post, she noted:
When I started this site, I didn’t call myself a feminist. I had a hazy idea that feminism was a good thing, but it was something that other people worried about, not me. I was living in a time and culture that had transcended the need for feminism, because in my world we were all rational atheists who had thrown off our religious indoctrination so that I could freely make rape jokes without fear of hurting someone who had been raped.
And then I would make a comment about how there could really be more women in the community, and the responses from my fellow skeptics and atheists ranged from “No, they’re not logical like us,” to “Yes, so we can fuck them!” That seemed weird.
Watson began hearing from other women in the skeptic/atheist community who’d met far too many of that second sort of male atheist.
They told me about how they were hit on constantly and it drove them away. I didn’t fully get it at the time, because I didn’t mind getting hit on. But I acknowledged their right to feel that way and I started suggesting to the men that maybe they relax a little and not try to get in the pants of every woman who walks through the door.
And then, as her blog garnered more attention, she faced a virtual invasion of creepy dudes being creepy:
I’ve had more and more messages from men who tell me what they’d like to do to me, sexually. More and more men touching me without permission at conferences. More and more threats of rape from those who don’t agree with me, even from those who consider themselves skeptics and atheists. More and more people telling me to shut up and go back to talking about Bigfoot and other topics that really matter.
She didn’t shut up.
So here we are today. I am a feminist, because skeptics and atheists made me one. Every time I mention, however delicately, a possible issue of misogyny or objectification in our community, the response I get shows me that the problem is much worse than I thought, and so I grow angrier. I knew that eventually I would reach a sort of feminist singularity where I would explode and in my place would rise some kind of Captain Planet-type superhero but for feminists. I believe that day has nearly arrived.
Go read the rest of her post. Despite the creepy dudes and the misogyny and Richard Fucking Dawkins’ patronizing little screed – which led Watson to a moment of despair much like that of virtually every movie hero(ine) at the end of act two in the story arc – Watson ends it fairly hopeful. It’s kind of inspiring, really.
Posted on July 6, 2011, in creepy, feminism, hypocrisy, misogyny, oppressed men, patriarchy, rape, reactionary bullshit, sexual harassment, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 1,701 Comments.
@Ion actually, it does not say “in a relationship”. It says “known”. This guy, being at the conference and at a discussion group with her and at the bar with her until 4 am, would count as “known”.
What this seems to say is that the majority of women are assaulted by people they know and have been in relationships with. In other words, assault by strangers is actually a fairly uncommon occurrence…
This is true. And sad, and important.
But:
1) Women are frequently told out to watch out for strangers, and it sinks in. We’re not all students of the statistics.
2) If Skepchick had gone to elevator guy’s room, she couldn’t claim he was still a stranger to her–if he raped her, it would be counted as an “acquaintance.” This is a reason women can be rather offputtingly cautious about who we acquaint ourselves to.
Hmm. Maybe David could issue a proclamation along the lines of “commenters on Manboobz are hereby exempted from responding to specious nonsense, if they are so inclined”.
I’m all for that. It’d make things a lot easier.
Ion, I have yet to see an explanation of why we should give the elevator guy the benefit of the doubt. If you have one, go for it. He violated a very well-known social rule; people who do that rarely get the benefit of others assuming that they did so innocently.
If it’s such a well-known social rule, why was there such a backlash against Watson? I mean, if everyone had agreed the guy was wrong, things would have ended then and there. However, the sides seem pretty evenly split to me. It seems a lot of people don’t recognize this “well-known social rule”. And if so many people don’t recognize it, how do you know that those who do are right?
Specifically, “6 in 10 rape or sexual assault victims said that they were assaulted by an intimate partner, relative, friend or acquaintance“
Ion wrote, “It seems a lot of people don’t recognize this “well-known social rule”. And if so many people don’t recognize it, how do you know that those who do are right?”
Weren’t you the dude who said that if someone wanted to talk to you in an elevator at 4am, you’d be afraid they were out to steal your kidney?
1) Women are frequently told out to watch out for strangers, and it sinks in. We’re not all students of the statistics.
2) If Skepchick had gone to elevator guy’s room, she couldn’t claim he was still a stranger to her–if he raped her, it would be counted as an “acquaintance.” This is a reason women can be rather offputtingly cautious about who we acquaint ourselves to.
In that case, I have to say I’m sorry for women who think that way. Fear and paranoia is no way to live.
“@luke Oh, hey, you’re back. I had a question for you (though I may not respond immediately as I have to go to work soon. If so my apologies): Dawkins is also seeing significant blowback for his words, both from commenters and other atheist bloggers. Doesn’t that mean he made the same mistake Rebecca did, i.e. “doing it wrong”? You said the sign she did it wrong is she’s seeing blowback.”
Dawkins statement was intentionally provocative, and he’s is no stranger to making provocative statements.
If his intention is to convert deeply religious people to atheism, than yes he is doing it wrong too. What he is doing is preaching to the (atheist) choir. You will only like what he says if you already agree with him.
But for the purpose of lending support to people skeptical of the priorities of feminists, his statement was effective.
“Any feeling a woman has is paramount. Guys are dicks. full stop.”
I said “guys who are dicks about women’s appearence” not “guys, who are dicks about women’s appearence”. Loads of guys think I’m totally hot despite not meeting your stupid ‘alpha’ standard, and I’m pretty sure this applies to most other women.
Man I’m late to this party…
MRAL, I heartily second the person who said, “wait a bit before ‘calling out’ people in person”… confronting people face to face is quite a bit riskier than doing it on the Internet.
Also, I disagree that elevator guy is “a socially retarded idiot”. He waited until Skepchick was alone with him before he made his move; this suggests calculation rather than ignorance.
A woman gets a flat tire and pulls over after dark, she gets out to look at the tire. A man is walking down the street towards her, they are the only two people within earshot, she begins to “feel” uncomfortable and frightened. His very existence has made her “feel” uncomfortable and frightened.
Should the man immediately turn around and walk the way he came?
Should a mans every action be determined by the comfort level of any woman within his presence?
Are you sure you haven’t been indoctrinated into accepting misandry as a way of life?
“In that case, I have to say I’m sorry for women who think that way. Fear and paranoia is no way to live.”
Hang on, I thought we were supposed to be so paranoid that we never got drunk or wore anything sexy or flirted with anyone we didn’t immediately want to fuck or talked to a man or went anywhere on our own.
“Should the man immediately turn around and walk the way he came?”
No, but asking her out for a drink right then is probably a bad idea. :P
Well okay, just a lack of common sense. But still, it’s not dangerous. Some men are awkward. No harm done. DEAL WITH IT.
MRAL, that’s the point. The point isn’t how Skepchick dealt with the guy, it’s the huge deal the Internet then made out of it.
Weren’t you the dude who said that if someone wanted to talk to you in an elevator at 4am, you’d be afraid they were out to steal your kidney?
Yes I did, and regretted it ever since. It was meant to be a joke which just flew over everyone’s heads and was interpreted as something completely different than what I’d meant. All I wanted to say was there’s no way a woman would ever hit on me, and if one did, it’d probably be because she actually wanted to rob me or steal my organs or play a prank or use me as a patsy in some evil scheme or something. Like that Boston Legal episode where the hot lawyer woman pretends to like this dorky store salesman and hits on him, with the actual goal of getting information out of him to use against him at the trial where he’s a witness. Something like that. Now let’s just forget about it.
Did Dawkins ever retract his point after watching the video? I bet he just had a (completely reasonable) reaction after hearing about it, as a man he’s probably very sensitive to the “creepy” slur. Most men are.
In that case, I have to say I’m sorry for women who think that way. Fear and paranoia is no way to live.
Everyone has some level of fear. Hopefully, you’re afraid to cross the interstate in a ninja outfit at night. And hopefully you’re not afraid to go outdoors at all. Life is only a matter of calibrating what risks we want to take.
And deciding that an explicitly unwanted proposition from someone in an elevator at 4 AM is frightening (she didn’t even say “frightening”! Just “uncomfortable”!) is really not that unreasonable a calibration.
Anyway, this kinda gets back to what I said last night:
What should she have done, fucked him?
Because she said “no” politely. She felt uncomfortable–and said so after the fact, without revealing his identity or anything–but she said “no” in a way that was not “FUCK OFF CREEPO NO WOMAN WOULD WANT YOU.”
I feel like the MRA push here is not for her to have been more polite or understanding, but for her to have said “yes,” because, c’mon, the poor guy bothered to ask her, it’s the least he deserves.
No, you aren’t. That would involve empathy.
“Are you sure you haven’t been indoctrinated into accepting misandry as a way of life?”
Fuck you. I was verbally abused on the street by my rapist’s friends recently, and combined with my PTSD and depression it was super hard to even go outside, let alone get stuck at night.
If I was making someone afraid and threatened, I would leave them alone. That’s the reason I don’t hit on complete strangers in lifts, or approach people changing their tires at night. When I walk outside I keep my head the fuck down.
“Should a mans every action be determined by the comfort level of any woman within his presence?”
Only if he cares how women feel. There’s no law against it. If he wants to go around making people nervous and afraid, he can carry on with no obstacles.
MRAL: It bothers me a lot because I cannot shake the impression that “USian” is vaguely derogatory and borne out of politically correct shit.
So, to bring this back to topic, It creeps you out.
ithiliana: Politically Correct had a definition, in Russia. It was the descriptor for how things ought to be, according to Leninist/Stalinist theory. So it was poltically correct to say well-to-do farmers were Kulaks,and against the revolution, and that collectivising the land would increase production.
There were political theorists, in the US, who attempted to discuss the ways in which we (as a nation) were engaging in it (present example, the security theater of the TSA in the “Global War on Terror”: much [most, in fact] is non-effective, but it’s not politcally correct to say so). The Right got ahold of it, and began to use it as a club.
“there’s no way a woman would ever hit on me”
Women do actually hit on men sometimes. Really.
Wait… didn’t you also say that a woman asked to hang out with you once in the bit where you were pounding your chest about not being a mangina? Doesn’t that count?
Wait… didn’t you also say that a woman asked to hang out with you once in the bit where you were pounding your chest about not being a mangina? Doesn’t that count?
After I’d made the first move, yes. Reading comprehension.
If a woman actually hit on me I think the universe would implode. Really. The odds are better that I’d win the lottery. And I’m not even that ugly anymore. That’s how universal the rule is.
Look, it no longer makes me personally angry. Things are looking better. But it’s still the truth.
There’s a distinct empathy gap in guys who can’t understand why a woman would be afraid of a stranger in an an elevator at 4 AM asking her to come back to his room… but can totally understand why a man would be afraid to have some very mildly mean words said about him.
Just found another interesting bit of post that might be relevant:
“The way men and women interact on a daily basis is the way they interact when rape occurs. The social dynamics we see at play between men and women are the same social dynamics that cause men to feel rape is okay, and women to feel they have no right to object. And if you accept those social interactions as normal and appropriate in your day to day life, there is absolutely no reason you should be shocked that rape occurs without screaming, without fighting, without bruising, without provocation, and without prosecution. Behavior exists on a continuum. Rape doesn’t inhabit its own little corner of the world, where everything is suddenly all different now. The behavior you accept today is the behavior that becomes rape tomorrow. And you very well might accept it then, too.”
http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/another-post-about-rape-3/
I feel like the MRA push here is not for her to have been more polite or understanding, but for her to have said “yes,” because, c’mon, the poor guy bothered to ask her, it’s the least he deserves.
I feel like the feminist push here is to get this guy convicted of attempted rape. He probably thought about it, right?
I mean hey, as long as we’re making shit up…
I always have to laugh at songs like Super Bass or Taylor Swift’s stuff, movies like Bad Teacher. Like that dynamic ever happens in real life.
Luke, Ion, unreal- remember, the Book of Mordred forfeited the debate. He should be ignored until he decides to resume the debate with a response to our lengthy posts that were ignored.
Oh, right. After you boasted about acting like a five year old.
Seriously, tho, Ion, I feel bad for you. It sounds like you have had to work up this whole whining asshole persona just because you felt like you weren’t worth the dirt on anyone’s shoe. Is this the kind of person you feel you really are? Or does it not matter because it results in you getting tail?
I feel like the feminist push here is to get this guy convicted of attempted rape. He probably thought about it, right?
Nope! The feminist push is that he made her uncomfortable, he shouldn’t have done that (but it’s a “tsk tsk” shouldn’t, not a “legal action” shouldn’t), and she had the right to say he made her uncomfortable.
Now tell me what the MRA (or at least your) push is for–how she should have acted, so I won’t have to guess and maybe guess wrong.
“I feel like the feminist push here is to get this guy convicted of attempted rape. He probably thought about it, right?”
You feel ridiculous things. No one ever said anything about this guy other than ‘creepy’ (the heinous insult).
“I always have to laugh at songs like Super Bass or Taylor Swift’s stuff, movies like Bad Teacher. Like that dynamic ever happens in real life.”
You don’t believe women hit on men? You should meet some of my friends…
Oh, MRAL. Sometime, somewhere, a female person has hit on you. And probably, your self-loathing prevented you from noticing. That’ll get better. Your self-awareness is shot at this point; it cannot be relied upon.
Look, I don’t think Ion is saying this guy made a prime decision. It was pretty stupid, I mean, she had just basically said she didn’t want to be hit on. It’s pretty funny, actually. Did the guy have Asperger’s? It wouldn’t surprise me. But the point is that he has a moral right to approach her, even if it’s at a really weird time. She has the right to say no. They both exercised their rights. But people are bitching and moaning at him for no reason.
Yeah, should she just have kept quiet? Because it’s so evil to describe behavior as creepy.
As always the level of misandry to my comment intensifies further enforcing your indoctrination. The comment’s to my scenario range as always range from strawmen to ad hominem’s, to should she have fucked him, to social dynamics of men beieving rape is acceptable.
The correct response should have been, the woman was “wrong” to feel frightened or uncomfortable. The man was merely walking, existing in time and space. That was his crime.
Ion, have you noticed how most of the commenters here engage you as though you were arguing in good faith, even though they know you aren’t? That’s what makes this blog a special place.
There’s a distinct empathy gap in guys who can’t understand why a woman would be afraid of a stranger in an an elevator at 4 AM asking her to come back to his room… but can totally understand why a man would be afraid to have some very mildly mean words said about him.
Hmm, let’s see… guy labeled a creep for politely and respectfully expressing interest in another human being versus woman who felt ‘uncomfortable’ because a guy expressed interest in her. Who should I feel bad for?
The man was merely walking, existing in time and space. That was his crime.
If he’d been merely walking, there would have been nothing to talk about. Asking someone to your room is not how I walk.
At least Ion and MRAL are vaguely talking about things in reality. You’re just off in MEN ARE CASTRATED AT BIRTH BY THE FEMOCRACY fantasy wankland.
Ion, have you noticed how most of the commenters here engage you as though you were arguing in good faith, even though they know you aren’t? That’s what makes this blog a special place.
What I did notice is how most of the commenters are ignoring parts of my posts, misreading me, or responding to things I didn’t say. And that’s what makes this blog a “special” place…
MRAL: They are “bitching” (nice sexist slur there btw) because it should not be a given that a man is ever entitled to a woman’s attention. Your point about it being a moral right to approach is wrong.
Hmm, let’s see… guy labeled a creep for politely and respectfully expressing interest in another human being versus woman who felt ‘uncomfortable’ because a guy expressed interest in her. Who should I feel bad for?
Frankly, both if his intentions were pure. I feel bad for both of them that they live in a world where sexual assault and harassment so prevalent that male sexual attraction often *is* a threat. It would be nice if the story could have ended with “he asked me, but I was tired and didn’t feel like it, so I said no, and we both went on with our lives, no big deal.” The reason it didn’t, however, has more to do with our culture than with evil women not giving men the benefit of the doubt.
However… we have no proof that his intentions were pure, and that when the room door shut behind them, he’d be gracious about giving her some coffee and letting her go on her way if that’s what she wanted.
MRAL, you insist on assuming that Elevator Guy didn’t know that what he was doing was creepy, that he didn’t know better. You refuse to consider the alternative: he did know that what he was doing was creepy. He did it on purpose, because he thought the creepy way was the way to go.
You’re basically making excuses for Elevator Guy.
Nope! The feminist push is that he made her uncomfortable, he shouldn’t have done that (but it’s a “tsk tsk” shouldn’t, not a “legal action” shouldn’t), and she had the right to say he made her uncomfortable.
Now tell me what the MRA (or at least your) push is for–how she should have acted, so I won’t have to guess and maybe guess wrong.
She should have said ‘no’ and thought no more about it. If she’d done that, this whole conversation wouldn’t exist. Although maybe it’s a good thing it does, because it really exposes the “eww, get away from me, creep!” attitude that many women have towards guys who express interest in them.
How does he have a “moral” right to approach her? What the fuck?
Luke, Ion, unreal- remember, the Book of Mordred forfeited the debate. He should be ignored until he decides to resume the debate with a response to our lengthy posts that were ignored.
Nobody’s under any obligation to answer your idiocy.
And that doesn’t automatically give your idiocy value.
But it does seem instructive that in a lengthy comment thread discussing why a guy might want to re-think his attitude that he is entitled to a woman’s attention in a time, place, and manner that is a bit off-putting (not to mention after she has spent quite some time articulating her dislike of this behavior), we have a cadre of defenders of this behavior….arguing that they are entitled to have their petulant whims satisfied.
MRAL, there’s a ton of “reason” behind it… but at this point, most of the discussion (in places other than here, which is most places) is about Skepchick’s response to his behavior. I’ve seen very few people defending the elevator guy’s behavior (other than here, interestingly).
So Ion, that suggests that virtually everyone involved in this discussion does understand that it’s inappropriate for a man to corner a woman in a tiny space in the wee hours of the morning and proposition her. For that matter, I think you understand it too.
You refuse to consider the alternative: he did know that what he was doing was creepy.
What possible motive could he have for purposely being creepy? Since he accepted rejection gracefully, it makes no sense. Being creepy is guaranteed to drive away women.
Ion, have you noticed how most of the commenters here engage you as though you were arguing in good faith,….
well, I don’t.
mediumdave, I may have been too hasty in acribing bad faith to Ion’s arguments. Thinking it over, it seems to me that Ion genuinely doesn’t understand the woman’s reaction, because he is incapable of putting himself in her place. That’s also why he and the others keep making excuses for Elevator Guy’s behavior. They identify with him, but are incapable of identifying with Watson.
Holly, I think what NWOSlave was referring to earlier was his theoretical “man meets woman” scenario:
“A woman gets a flat tire and pulls over after dark, she gets out to look at the tire. A man is walking down the street towards her, they are the only two people within earshot, she begins to “feel” uncomfortable and frightened. His very existence has made her “feel” uncomfortable and frightened.
“Should the man immediately turn around and walk the way he came?
Should a mans every action be determined by the comfort level of any woman within his presence?
“Are you sure you haven’t been indoctrinated into accepting misandry as a way of life?”
The interesting thing about this situation, NWOSlave, is that the person being approached already has the problem of a flat tire after dark. That’s not a great position to be in, whether you’re male OR female.
Now, if your scenario was more like this:
“A woman was standing in line to get a coffee around noon…”
or “A woman was feeding pidgeons in the park…”
The person being approached wasn’t already at a disadvantage in both of those scenarios, and thus feeling afraid of whoever approached them would be a little much.
Context is what’s important.
I did say “most”.
As if that were even possible! When people are boorish toward you, do you just forget about it? Probably not. What you probably mean is, “she should have said nothing about it, i.e. should’ve let the boorish person off the hook to spare his feelings. And by extension, all other atheist men, or whoever else might be crying over this situation.
If all these men would simply follow the cardinal rule of “If you want to talk to a woman, do it in a way that she has an escape route,” things would go a lot better.
Holly Pervocracy, Trying to justify your misandry still makes it misandry.
Your comment was in direct response to my comment for the scenario I presented. Her response was wrong. She felt afraid and “creeped out” because he was a man. This is misandry, the fear and hatred of man.
You justify you misandry with more misandry, strawmen, ad hominem’s and such nonsense as, “You’re just off in MEN ARE CASTRATED AT BIRTH BY THE FEMOCRACY fantasy wankland.”
Your approval of her “feelings” of him being a creep are justified by the dictates of her approval of time/setting. His “feelings” of not being a creep for the time and setting are inconsequential.
She is justified in considering him a creep by her dictates.
He is not justified to not being considered a creep.
Misandry. She is right by whatever she feels about any man at any point in time. She felt he is a creep, she is justified by you in judging a man by whatever standard she puts forth at any time.
I see zero point arguing in good faith with the willfully obtuse.
She felt afraid and “creeped out” because he was a man.
No, she felt afraid and creeped out because of how he’d acted. If he’d just stood there, being all mannish, it’s very unlikely she would have responded that way–and impossible that she’d have gotten widespread sympathy for it.
He didn’t just stand there.
Hellkell: Yah. Sometimes you can’t help it, tho… >>
Are you MRAs just projecting? Because Watson never called the guy hisownself a creep, she said his behavior towards her felt creepy and sexualizing. There is a difference.
I think you all hear the word creep and it makes you think about all the times your behavior could be tagged as creepy and you can’t handle it.
@Molly Ren
There was no disadvantage.
You are taught to fear men.
He was simply “there.” and this caused fear/discomfort.
Had she not been taught to distrust, fear and hate men she would have been thinking, “thank god a man is here to assist me since I seem to be in a bit of a pickle.”
Misandry dictated her actions and she felt uncomfortable.
“Had she not been taught to distrust, fear and hate men she would have been thinking, ‘thank god a man is here to assist me since I seem to be in a bit of a pickle.’”
I am probably just a paranoid person, but I wouldn’t think that about anyone coming to help me in such a scenario, man or woman. I’d probably lock myself in the car and call AAA on my cellphone. :P
Now, if I’m in a Starbucks waiting in line for a coffee, and a man stands behind me? I’m not scared of *that*. If a guy comes up to me in a grocery store, I’m not scared of that either.
Context. It’s important. Really.
@Holly Pervocracy… “No, she felt afraid and creeped out because of how he’d acted. If he’d just stood there, being all mannish, it’s very unlikely she would have responded that way–and impossible that she’d have gotten widespread sympathy for it.”
Notice the contempt in which you say, “all manish.” This is misandry, hatred of all things “manish.”
The sympathy she recieved further illustrates the rampant misandry you approve of. A man can be deemed a creep by a woman and she will recieve sympathy. He is a creep because she decided his actions were unacceptable, her feelings at any point in time for any reason dictates his status. This is acceptable misandry. She is right to feel that way, he is wrong because she said he is wrong.
Okay, I’ll throw the MRA trolls a bone here:
Just for the sake of argument, from their perspective, perhaps they view a woman’s insistence on safety over considering whether or not a man is harmful or just awkward to be a lack of empathy on their part.
Wait… does NWOSlave think women can’t change tires?
I mean, *I* can’t, but I’ve also never owned a car. (Public transit all the way, baby.)
God, NWO, you really hate elephants today.
I said “all mannish” sardonically, to illustrate that simply being a man is not an offensive action, or indeed an action at all. I said it to illustrate how silly someone would look if they said “he’d been all mannish” at me!
But you don’t really think this, do you? You weren’t actually hurt by the word “mannish” and you didn’t really pick it out as something offensive to you as a man. You pre-decided–like, before I was even born, I think–that women hate men, and you’re just looking for confirmation.
At this point, you’ll find it every time a woman says “I like snowcones” or “nice weather out today.”
@Molly Ren
Context is not important. This is nothing but an excuse. If it’s dark out your fear of a man is justified? You’re taught from birth to fear/hate men. Every TX show, commercial, movie, billboard. It’s everywhere, man is evil.
@Holly Pervocracy
Excusing your bad behavior, while condemning a man behavior based on a womans feelings. Isn’t this misandry?
By the way, NWO, do you know why we started baiting you with “you hate elephants”?
Because you repeatedly accuse people of hating things that they don’t hate, and refuse to take any answer. It’s very frustrating when I say “I don’t hate men” and your response is “you liar, you secretly hate men.”
So if you’re frustrated by the fact that you don’t actually hate elephants, that you never even mentioned elephants, that the conversation you were trying to have wasn’t about elephants, and that you have no way of proving you don’t hate elephants–this is what we call “a taste of your own medicine.”
You elephant bigot you.
Oddly enough, I was in Slavey’s flat-tire scenario once… as the person with the flat tire. Only I was on a bike, but it was a dark, lonely highway and it was a woman to stopped to see if I needed help.
I assured her that I was fine and didn’t need help, but instead of leaving she stayed and made sure I was OK. I didn’t feel threatened, and that’s partly because of socialization… but OTOH I. personally, don’t have a history of being harassed by women. I’ve hardly ever been catcalled, leered at, propositioned inappropriately; any of that stuff. I’d bet a ton of money that every woman alive, including Skepchick, has had a history of being harassed by men.
NWOSlave, you missed the part where I said, “I am probably just a paranoid person, but I wouldn’t think that about anyone coming to help me in such a scenario, man or woman. I’d probably lock myself in the car and call AAA on my cellphone.”
I’ve been walking home myself after dark (I worked as a waitress for a while, so I’d get home around 1am), and in the day time, which for some reason inspired some people to offer me rides. I would turn down “free rides” from women as well as men.
I’m non-biased: I distrust everyone equally. ;)
Well, alrighty then, I guess that settles that.