Categories
creepy feminism hypocrisy misogyny oppressed men patriarchy rape reactionary bullshit sexual harassment threats

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.

1.7K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ion
Ion
13 years ago

No one in this thread has said that women are entitled to be rude.

they (men) all seem to have the same pathetic stance that just because they’re supposedly nice, that women should therefore return them the same courtesy.

What makes you think you have the right to her attention or her civility? Or the right to even want it?

To want pleasantness and to disapprove of unpleasantness from a woman is misogyny.

(On responding whether it’s misandry to disprove of unpleasantness from a man): of course it is not misandry. Don’t get mixed up with false egalitarianism that says that actions done by both genders are the same.

I’ll leave you to your echo-chamber sausage-fest.

Let’s see if she sticks the flounce!

Hmm, so this is what being part of the bullying majority feels like.

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

And Bee, GET OUT OF MY HEAD!

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

Ion, you’re always part of the bullying majority. You just come here to work out your inferiority complex.

unreal man
13 years ago

@ Bee
To women who complain about getting hit on I would say the following:

Would you prefer nobody ever approached you – no matter what outfit you wear and no matter how you pose? Never any attention or attraction?

If you can say yes with honesty then you can complain about being hit on but if not, then you’re just being selective. That however is exercising privilege.

Thomas
Thomas
13 years ago

“I kinda hate to draw universal conclusions from one specific situation that involves three people, but MAN it seems to me like there’s a problem with women being listened to and taken seriously. ”

Lol. Yeah, nobody paid attention to Rebecca, that’s why this total non-event was discussed on several blogs with literally thousands of comments.

caseymordred
caseymordred
13 years ago

Perhaps an entry from the Feminism101 blog could help clarify my position:

“That ‘+ power’ portion of the equation is one of the most important parts. This is not to say that the disenfranchised cannot be prejudiced, because many of them are, but without power, they are not actually working within the systematic framework of advantage created by the majority to privilege themselves. Thus it is only “racism” if the person is capable of using that framework; otherwise, it is prejudice.” – Kristi (Failure to Communicate): Prejudice

http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/

Point? The point is that misandry is not really morally equivalent to misogyny.

Ion
Ion
13 years ago

Bee and Johnny: Both your scenarios are based on your personal interpretation of events (he insulted her intelligence, he disrespected her, he ignored her talk, he’s a creepy creepy stalker) and you draw conclusions based on those interpretations and on, I daresay, a pre-formed opinion of Elevator Guy. This is what I meant earlier – just you because you interpret something a certain way doesn’t mean that your version is the right one, or that your judgement is more correct than everyone else’s.

Ion
Ion
13 years ago

Ion, you’re always part of the bullying majority. You just come here to work out your inferiority complex.

…and flounce failed. Are you going away this time, or will you be back in 5 minutes when you’ve thought of another insult?

mediumdave
13 years ago

…you threw in for reasons I can’t guess at.

Oh, I think you can guess at it perfectly well.

OK, the not saying “mangina” is progress. Your therapist is correct about why it’s offensive, MRAL.

I would say that I’m surprised at the lack of empathy being displayed by other MRA’s on this thread, but frankly, lack of empathy is part of the package.

Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
13 years ago

The point is that misandry is not really morally equivalent to misogyny.

In other words, men need to hold themselves themselves to a higher standard as punishment for being men. In other words, men are treated differently for being men. In other words, that’s not the dictionary definition of feminism.

Again, go hang out with the mentally challenged radfems, you’d fit right in.

unreal man
13 years ago

@ Thomas
Yep. Poor Rebecca. All these men always after her. Her life must be such a nightmare that so many people are constantly asking her out. Life for attractive women is such a nightmare you know.
What this discussion is lacking, is some genuine heterosexual women. I think that would make for some interesting opinions on what’s actually going on.

Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
13 years ago

Medium Dave, do you honestly agree with Mordred’s position here? I am asking you straight up, no slimy wiggle room.

caseymordred
caseymordred
13 years ago

Are you really calling Feminism101 “radfem?”

Donsie
Donsie
13 years ago

Actually the misandry that has come out in a lot of the comments and blogs supporting Watson has made me sick. I pointed out that this Schrodinger’s Rapist idea being bandied about is miandrist and pretty ugly and I’ve been lambasted to the high heavens. I’m turning in my feminism card (I was uneasy about the whole idea in the first place). If the feminism I see all over the interwebz is anything to go by then the movement can fuck itself. It’s really feeling lazy, hateful, self-congratulatory, and full of people who are spoiling for a fight. When so many seem to set out hoping to encounter something they can cast as offensive so they have some blogfodder I think the movement is probably a waste of time. It’s a pity because outside of a tiny liberal back-patting sphere it’s a shitstorm to be a woman and no one has ever heard of male privilege.

Sorry, basically I’m just seriously disappointed in the nasty hatemongers calling themselves feminists lately.

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

OK, Ion, how do you interpret the scenario Bee and Johnny put forth?

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

unreal man, we call this the fallacy of the false dilemma. It is a classic logical fallacy.

Try again.

Ion
Ion
13 years ago

What this discussion is lacking, is some genuine heterosexual women. I think that would make for some interesting opinions on what’s actually going on.

I doubt you’ll find any here, or hetero men for that matter, based on what I’ve seen. Myself, MRAL, and the occasional ‘troll’ are just about the only representatives.

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

Ion, that wasn’t what I was asking. What I was asking was, would you go for it? You too, unreal man. You’re the one with the vast knowledge of how things really work in the real world. Would you be Elevator Guy?

Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
Men's Rights Activist Lieutenant
13 years ago

Are you really calling Feminism101 “radfem?”

Yeah, that’s not a response to my post.

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

What does being genuinely heterosexual have to do with anything? Don’t you mean “traditional” het women?

Are you Elevator Guy, Ion?

Ion
Ion
13 years ago

OK, Ion, how do you interpret the scenario Bee and Johnny put forth?

I interpret it as using loaded language to create a bias. Making assumptions about the character and motivations of Elevator Guy which are not clearly borne out by the facts. Basically, it’s a straw man scenario.

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

Ion has found us out, hellkell, No Real Men here, just fags and feminazis.

Bee
Bee
13 years ago

Unreal man: You would have to ask Rebecca Watson about that, I suppose. I don’t even know if she’s complaining about being hit on so much as she was complaining that it’s something that’s overwhelming and off-putting in formal atheist group settings. (I’ve only heard of her the past couple days, so I admit I don’t know much about what she thinks about anything.)

My thoughts are: If you want to express interest in someone — man or woman — do it in a way that’s not extremely insulting to their intelligence (i.e., complimenting them on what they said, when you obviously weren’t listening), disrespectful of their time and effort (i.e., implying that the time they spent in panel was worthless because you, at least, weren’t paying attention to what they said), and completely opposite to their expressed desires. That’s kind of the floor. And I’m not even saying you can’t be an asshole and do all the above if you want to or don’t know how to do any better. I’m just saying that it’s unlikely to be successful, and totally understandable that the person who is having their intelligence insulted, their time and effort disrespected, etc. would be frustrated to the extent that they might air their frustration in an unscripted vlog.

Johnny Pez: I can’t help it! It’s so comfy in here. I think I’m gonna do a little redecorating later though. Where’s the remote?

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

So, Elevator Guy himself wasn’t really Elevator Guy, he was just some dude who put the moves on this chick, and she got all bent out of shape, like chicks do.

Huh. Women.

Ion
Ion
13 years ago

Ion, that wasn’t what I was asking. What I was asking was, would you go for it?

You mean, would I politely say I enjoyed her talk and invite her to a cup of coffee in my room? Yes. And whether she accepted or refused would be fine with me and I’d think no more about it. I would also assume that as a mature adult, she’d consider the invitation, accept or reject the offer, and think no more about it either. At least that’s how adults operate in my world. That answer the question?

I certainly wouldn’t be expecting to find myself spoken about on her blog as ‘creepy and sexualizing’. And if I was, my reaction certainly wouldn’t be “oh no, what have I done wrong?” but rather “what’s her problem?” But that’s because I don’t allow random people to pass judgement on me. Which, as I understand, women don’t like either – it’s just fine when they do it to men.

1 25 26 27 28 29 69