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.
“Ion: not what I tell you to do, because I’m a guy too. I just am not a privilege denier.”
I see it clearly. Feminism is just another version of religious fundamentalism. Just the words have changed.
‘Satan’ becomes ‘patriarchy’.
‘Confess you sins’ become ‘check your privileges’.
‘Bible’ become ‘writings of Andrea Dworkin, Susan Brownmiller, Catherine Mckinnon end Sheila Jeffreys’
And ‘privilege’ is ‘original sin,’ yadda yadda yadda, I’ve heard it all before.
You think it’s that easily refuted? That pointing out a few surface similarities will prove you right? Come now.
“You’re all sinners who will burn in hell unless you confess your sins and accept Jesus as your lord and saviour”
=
“You’re all misogynists and potential rapists unless you agree that you’re privileged and accept the feminist view of the world”.
@Ion, if this is your pickup song, ur doin it wrong
He drives a DeLorean, therefore your argument is invalid.
Also, more realistically the approach goes something like this:
I am a woman who has only been asked out by a man. I’ve been approached by two women. Every other date I’ve had has been because I initiated. It’s not that women have ‘sexual privilege ‘ it’s that you’re going after traditional women who expect traditional gender roles. The men I’ve pursued have appreciated getting that attention, and it was all good. Gender roles aren’t written in stone and FEMINISTS are the people working to CHANGE those gender norms.
that should say ‘I am a woman who has only been asked out ONCE by a man.’ Oops.
That is fine work, Comrade Svilova. The Motherland has need of fine patriotic women such as yourself.
Seriously, I think it’s great that you initiated things from time to time. I wish more women did, it just seems very rare right now. And when they do, it’s sometimes so subtle you can’t even tell for sure if they’re just being friendly. If you assume a flirt which isn’t there and respond in kind – boom, you’re a creep again. But I’m actually all for equal initiation and pursuing.
That’s because women are conditioned by society to be demure and gentle and not speak up for themselves. You want that to change? Then stop denying your privilege and accept the existence of badly behaved females.
accept the existence of badly behaved females.
If by badly behaved you mean more assertive and less victim-y, then hell yeah I accept it. I wish I saw more of it.
See, Ion, you actually have some interests that align with the interests of feminists! 🙂
I feel like Ami right now. Yay, more unity and hand-holding, as feminists and trolls agree! XD
But you really wouldn’t like it at all, because then they’d have the right to place value judgements on your shortcomings, and as an Entitled Nice Guy you just can’t have that, can you?
That is to Ion.
Don’t they do that already? What would be the difference?
The difference is that you need to accept that it’s right for them to do so, and it’s wrong for you to want it to be any different.
Dear Zombie Rotten McDonald: **gives you a big old immoral witchy kiss**
Luke: You said: she was obviously ineffective in bringing accross her message in a way that is is accepted. And that is not the fault of the audience.
The the gentleman’s in the elevator failure to “bring across his message in a way that it is accepted” is NOT her fault either, but his? Am i correct?
If I’m not correct, why does he get a pass and she doesn’t?
The difference is that you need to accept that it’s right for them to do so, and it’s wrong for you to want it to be any different.
That just sounds like religious dogma again. Saying “I don’t agree with such and such behaviour/attitude/whatever” is not quite the same as saying “You’re wrong because I say so, and you need to do what I tell you because I know better” which is basically your message.
And by the way, would I not have a right to disagree with someone else’s judgment of me? Or is it only the women/feminists who have rights in your scenario?
Ion, you do seem to get upset at the idea that a woman might feel uncomfortable about a specific man’s actions and then might voice that discomfort by explaining why his behavior (not HIM) seemed creepy to her. But what are women supposed to do? Never feel discomfort despite how people around us behave?
The problem is, when we act without taking our personal safety into consideration, we’re told we were “asking for it” so women have been trained to monitor situations and determine what kind of risk level is indicated by the behavior of those around them. Like Doctress Julia, I’ve been leered at in elevators by strange men from my early teens, so it’s a situation that sounds familiar and has never made me feel comfortable.
Now that Watson’s spoken about this, maybe well-intentioned men will realize that it’s not a good place to hit on a woman. So it’s a win-win. Of course, guys who aren’t as considerate will still hit on women (and girls) in elevators, but at least Nice Guys have been informed that it’s not nice and Not Good Game.
The the gentleman’s in the elevator failure to “bring across his message in a way that it is accepted” is NOT her fault either, but his? Am i correct?
Exactly!
I say it in a so-called ‘dogmatic’ fashion because I’ve seen a lot of ENGs and they all seem to have the same pathetic stance that just because they’re supposedly nice, that women should therefore return them the same courtesy.
Among other things, the problem with that is, it also serves as a way to deny women the right to be less than pleasant if she so pleases.
So what if she’s sitting their with her girlfriends, tittering with each other about their day, being happy and proud to be female, and yes, set apart from the rest of us?
What makes you think you have the right to her attention or her civility? Or the right to even want it?
I will say it again so that there is clarity: Who are you to want what you want?
To want pleasantness and to disapprove of unpleasantness from a woman is misogyny.
Caseymordred is the biggest fucking idiot I’ve seen in a while. Honestly dude, you’re the one with these highly elaborate and supposedly universal ideas about how all women behave, not Ion.
You’re right. I am an idiot. I used ‘their’ instead of ‘there.’ I’m really embarrassed. I guess I’ve been awake too long.
we’re told we were “asking for it”
You guys keep saying this, but I don’t see any evidence of this nefarious attitude in, you know, real life. Strauss-Kahn’s life was almost completely destroyed based solely on the word of a highly inconsistent, drug-dealing addict with virtually no tangible evidence. No, we don’t know if he did it or not (I doubt it), but either way, you cannot say she was not taken seriously by ANY fucking stretch of the imagination. And he was a candidate for the Presidency! If rape charges are routinely swept under the rug, someone like him should have been able to avoid this whole debacle. Oh wait.
A whole slew of Duke lacrosse players were verbally eviscerated by society based on an allegation and nothing else. Look at Amanda Marcotte’s posts. She literally wanted to lynch them. Even after they were PROVEN (yes, proven) innocent, the woman basically got off without any consequence, be it legal or even societal condemnation. Seriously, I can’t even remember her name.
Stop living in the ’50s.