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.
http://i749.photobucket.com/albums/xx134/ami_angelwings/Magyc%20Cards/McdonaldsZombies.jpg
sometimes something that would make great flavour text inspires a card, this is one of those times! xD
Damn you’re quick, Ami!
Awesome.
I am so stealing that for my blog.
Although now I regret not phrasing that as “we’re just kind of hungry…”
I think this particular blog post is worth reading:
http://www.true-equality.net/archive/2011/07/04/shockwaves-strike-the-skeptic-community-as-an-act-of-such.aspx
“Uhh… you’re just dumb and stupid and wrong! Yeah! *high-fives from the others*”
unreal man: Thank you for that link. For a second I was afraid I was the only sane one left.
@ Ion.
This blog is not the best place to look for sane people. Many of those you are arguing with practically live here. They spend vast amounts of time every day commenting and patting each other on the shoulder. Over time, you get a kind of inbreed of opinions which is toxic for free thought and open discussion.
At the risk of sounding repetitive, I think it all goes back to the “entitled Nice Guy” issue.
They are afraid of the whole issue of creepiness and defining it thereof, because they feel that if women are allowed to define what creepiness means to them, it could be leveraged into making it so that anyone who isn’t ‘alpha’ is out of luck altogether. Only even more so than it allegedly already is.
Given the amount of nerdiness probably present at these skeptic conferences, I think there might be a huge “Entitled Nice Guy” segment being the loudest here.
“This blog is not the best place to look for sane people. Many of those you are arguing with practically live here. They spend vast amounts of time every day commenting and patting each other on the shoulder. Over time, you get a kind of inbreed of opinions which is toxic for free thought and open discussion.”
That is an excellent assesment of this site.
Just read that “true equality” blog post.
First off, people who disdain leftism don’t get to say what equality is.
Second, equality is often used to deny that men are born with privilege and that women suffer more than men do, so we have to be careful of that sort of false egalitarian thinking as well. Just because you don’t like it being held over your head doesn’t mean that male privilege is false.
Third, maybe women aren’t angels, but not because men aren’t satisfied with their poor widdle egos going unfulfilled. Don’t like it, guys? Too bad, so sad. 🙂
Fourth, look at that silencing language at the end. Oh no, how can a woman possibly have a chip on her shoulder, when she has to follow a rape schedule (learned that term on another site about the issue, it means the various ways women schedule their lives to ensure safety while in public). If you can’t understand what it’s like because of your privilege, then know your place and stay out of it.
Maybe not all men are rapists, but all men are Schrodingers Rapists. Case closed.
Doctress Julia is right. When is a woman allowed to feel uncomfortable? Never, until after she’s been physically assaulted. Then — she should have seen the warning signs. Ugh.
Wow, feminists like to talk about privilege a lot. Here’s one you might not have considered – sexual privilege. It means a woman can simply sit back and wait for guys to come to her, accepting or rejecting them as she sees fit. Meanwhile, a man has to do the work, the approaching, the making sure he’s presentable and makes all the right moves, and still runs the risk of being labeled a creep. Who’s got the privilege in this case? And wouldn’t women, who can for the most part get a date or a sexual partner whenever they want, have an awful lot of privilege to check before commenting on guys who can’t catch a break? Funny how that issue never gets brought up. Meanwhile, we’re told that all men are potential rapists. Nice.
“It may be an important issues to Rebecca, but it is of no interest to Dawkins and most of the skeptic community.” So now, “most of the skeptic community” means men? Of course, statistically, that might be true, but it is shit like this sexist nonsense that creates that issue in the first place. The skeptic/atheist group full of sexist, racist, imperialist douches will whine and whine about how they can’t get anyone but cis het white men to join, or how they can’t get enough members, but they are the ones feeding that nonsense. You know that atheist group with the sexist guys from my undergrad? It failed within less than a year because it could not keep enough members. This was a campus full of atheists, from my point of view. I was a member of a leftist group that had a meeting on Easter Sunday with full attendance because no one really gave a shit about easter, a queer student group that had a subset of snarky atheists (the queer atheists actually had a meeting of the LGBT student groups on week that focused on queer people and atheism, but not a single person there wanted to join the atheist campus group), and a philosophy department where finding a theist was the hard task. If what you mean by the skeptic movement and what people in it want it to mean is rich, white, cis, hetero men who are okay with racism, imperialism, transphobia, sexism, etc. don’t be surprised when people call it a sexist movement and want nothing to do with it.
@caseymordred
Who are you trying to convince with that sermon ? You only confirm the image that feminists are frustrated man-hating bitches, and all you accomplish is that anyone who is not already converted to your religion thinks that your are raving lunatic.
Do you actually want to convince people seeing it your way, or are you just addicted to whining, hating, and playing the poor victim ?
Ion, are you one of those guys who thinks that women should love you just for existing?
You whine about having to do anything at all, or rather that women apparently have it easier…tell me, do you not think it a woman’s right to instantly hold a man to scrutiny for whether he is worthy of her attention? What hoops SHOULD a man have to jump through?
Or do you, as I suspect, believe that woman have a unique obligation to be unconditionally loving?
luke: Enough of your privilege denying. You were born with privilege because you are a man, there is no escaping it. The only way to make peace with it is to be willing to listen to women when they tell you that you need to check it.
As long as the institutionalized patriarchy exists, privilege will exist, and the need to be willing to check it when requested will be neccesary.
You don’t get to decide that you are a decent person. It’s others who make that judgement.
caseymordred: You’re attacking straw men and dodging the issue, a fairly popular technique I’ve noticed among feminists. Instead of playing the “You’re just a hateful misogynist for disagreeing with me!” card, tell me whether you think women have sexual privilege over men, considering that it’s much easier for them to find a willing partner and men have to do the approaching in the vast majority of cases.
It doesn’t matter, because as men, we can’t really complain about “misandry” or “female privilege” because of the power inequalities.
If you can’t handle that any given woman can and will look down her nose at you, then yes you are a misogynist.
@caseymordred
protip: If you don’t wont’ people to write you off as a loonie feminazie, don’t use words like ‘check your privileges’ and ‘patriarchy’.
In other words: “You’re wrong because we say so, end of story. If you want to be less wrong, listen to what we tell you to do”. Well, forgive me if I don’t jump to execute those orders, your highness. Maybe I just don’t agree with you and/or give a shit what you think?
@caseymordred
For some reasons you assume that men always feel safe in public. Trust me, they don’t. They are just less vocal about it than women.
What exactly is my male privilege, that I’m more likely to become a victim of a violent crime than a woman? Your whole privilege argument is based on a imaginary man.
Ion: not what I tell you to do, because I’m a guy too. I just am not a privilege denier.
Thomas: Naturally, I am not the best person to ask about that sort of thing. Maybe some of the others will wake up and want a piece of this action too.
You could also ask your mother, sister, girlfriend, or other close female associates.
Of course, even that might not be reliable, because of internalized misogyny.
Believe it or not, self hating women do exist.
Ion: not what I tell you to do, because I’m a guy too. I just am not a privilege denier.
Then who? A bunch of nutcase feminists? What makes them the all-knowing authority on how I should behave? Listen to yourself. You’ve become so pussified you can’t even think anymore. You’re like “Oh, please, great mistresses, tell me what to do and I shall obey!” Grow a pair.