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.
NWO, I was saying just the opposite. Everyone knows women are natural gatherers, not hunters. A woman’s natural instincts are to crush a man up in a stone bowl with roots and herbs. Hardly an appropriate response to the situation.
@Bee
How will men know if a woman is too tired to talk?
How will men know if a particular woman doesn’t want to be hit on?
How will men know if a woman just got out of a bad relationship?
How will men so all the many things you all seem to mention, since as you all continually say all women are different?
I mean hell, even elevator guy asking to talk to the girl. On another occasion a different girl may have said, “I don’t want want coffee but I sure could use some sex!”
Is there a register where every woman is listed as to their individual tastes, at which time of the day, for each season, ect?
Firebee – You know what the whole Schrodinger’s Rapist scenaro kind of reminds me of?
I used to work at a boat rental dock. We’d ask people to leave their driver’s licence when they rented a boat, to try to guard against theft.
Most people said “of course, I understand,” and dropped off their licence. But now and then someone would get really angry that I was accusing them of being a thief. “How dare you imply that? I’m not a thief!”
And what I couldn’t say in so many words was: “You know you’re not a thief. But me, I just met you. I don’t know the first thing about you. So how the hell do I know you’re not a thief?”
It’s the same principle–you aren’t being suspected, you just aren’t being trusted until you’ve earned it.
(Also, people who got indignant about the “you think I’m a dirty thief!” thing were far more likely to try to steal stuff.)
In my experience, yes.
Women are socialised to care more about their appearance. Men, In a lot of cases, are taught that if they put effort into how they present themselves (including basic hygiene), that means they’re effeminate or gay. This seems to be changing, however.
“(Also, people who got indignant about the “you think I’m a dirty thief!” thing were far more likely to try to steal stuff.)”
Awkward guys, take note. Stop denying your privilege and accept that you are a Schrodinger’s Rapist. You are protesting too much otherwise.
Anyway, Holly, I agree completely, but some people don’t understand the difference between “suspected” and “not trusted.”
“(Also, people who got indignant about the “you think I’m a dirty thief!” thing were far more likely to try to steal stuff.)”
I have some strong suspicions that a parallel can be drawn here.
How will men know if a woman is too tired to talk?
How will men know if a particular woman doesn’t want to be hit on?
How will men know if a woman just got out of a bad relationship?
How will men so all the many things you all seem to mention, since as you all continually say all women are different?
You can’t know. So it’s okay to ask. It’s okay to hit on women and ask them out.
What’s not okay is to be upset when you hear “no.” When you hear “no,” just trust that there’s a good reason and leave it at that.
And what’s also not okay is to ask under situations where you do know it would be unwelcome or frightening–for instance, if the woman had just asked people not to hit on her, or if you were total strangers in an elevator where she couldn’t easily get away.
Thats a fine analogy Holly Pervocracy.
Except Schrodinger’s Rapist, is a rapist. Of that there is no doubt.
When you asked for ID was it followed with, because you are a thief.
Also you said… “It’s the same principle–you aren’t being suspected, you just aren’t being trusted until you’ve earned it.”
This imply’s “his” trust must be earned “her’s” his taken for granted.
How will men know if a particular woman doesn’t want to be hit on?
If that particular woman just GAVE A FUCKING SPEECH about how she doesn’t want to be hit on, that’s a pretty big hint.
Christ on a cracker, why do MRA’s find that so hard to understand?
Are we on 10? Anyway:
10. If you dislike or distrust women (or the individual woman you’re approaching), this will show on your face and in your voice. It is extremely creepy–super, high-level creepy–to try to get access to a pussy while disliking the woman it’s attached to.
Stop being obtuse, NWO.
Here, let me make it easy for you.
You’d go a very long way in doing the right thing if you follow this simple guideline:
“When talking to a female, always make sure to give her an easy escape route.”
“You can’t know. So it’s okay to ask. It’s okay to hit on women and ask them out.”
Which is fine Holly, except the article from that fine woman has accused the man of being a creep. Why is that OK?
Holly Pervocracy, Thats the problem. Men DO trust women. Women have been indoctrinated to distrust men.
NWO, you aren’t arguing in good faith. I mean, you haven’t been arguing in good faith for months, but this is really getting to me.
Are you really asking when it’s okay to hit on a woman because you’re curious to hear the answer?
Are you really concerned that men are never allowed to hit on women?
Are you really worried that men are all thought of as rapists, every one of you? Does this make you really (as in, actual fear, not pure ideology) worry about your safety or your expectation of justice?
Are these questions you ask things that you really want answers to, and are these objections you raise things that really bother you?
Or is your thought process more like “she posted something… find the flaw… quick, find the flaw… any flaw… I can win this!”
He hit on her after she made a speech about how she doesn’t like getting hit on at conferences. That’s creepy behaviour, and she was right to call him on it.
@caseymordred, “an easy escape route”
The hatred of men. This is your accepted indoctrination.
Imagine being indocrinated to be so hated and distrusted that you need to leave an escape route for someone else. Bet that would hurt, huh?
Are ya really sure you haven’t been indoctrinated?
Gotcha, is a woman feels a man is bad he is. Best lock all men up to avoid any foul play. No point in locking the barn after the horse got away, right?
and
How will men know if a woman is too tired to talk?
How will men know if a particular woman doesn’t want to be hit on?
How will men know if a woman just got out of a bad relationship?
How will men so all the many things you all seem to mention, since as you all continually say all women are different?
I think this is why every convo w/ NWO always ends up as 2 ppl talking on 2 different tracks xD Cuz I think what’s going on here is that ppl are talking that “here are things that are likely to make a woman uncomfortable and so she’s not likely to be amenable to your asking her out or she’d feel unsafe and leave”..
from those quotes above, I think what NWO is hearing is “if you make a woman feel uncomfortable, she will have you locked away”… in which case NWO’s reaction to this WHOLE THING is suddenly understandable, b/c he believes that the consequences of what a woman personally thinks about a guy, isn’t just that in her mind she thinks “ew creep, bye now” .. he believes it then goes something happens and the man is locked up…. xD
So suddenly having perfect knowledge of a woman’s thoughts (OR I suppose what he’s proposing is women have no thoughts he doesn’t approve of) becomes absolutely important b/c a negative thought or opinion by a woman of a man = lock men up. xD
that’s why Holly’s response of “you never really know what a person’s thinking, so go ahead and ask, you just might get a no” thing isn’t reasonable to him, cuz the result to him is “if you get a no, you get locked up” xD
at least that’s what I can tell… o_O
Men trust women?
Can I have your credit card number?
What article? o_O
I’m fairly certain that if that were true, NWOslave would have been locked up a long time ago.
Or is your thought process more like “she posted something… find the flaw… quick, find the flaw… any flaw… I can win this!”
that can’t be it Holly… NWO comes to his conclusions irrespective of gender, and he comes to them without previous bias..
WE’RE the ones who desperately need to find the flaws in what men say, hence why we keep arguing w/ NWO, if NWO was a woman and said everything he said, we’d be agreeing w/ him (much like how I agree w/ everything M. Andrea and DirtyWhiteBoi say xD)
In the past, I’ve taken a couple approaches to explaining this — which, I have to admit, haven’t necessarily met with a huge amount more success than the original article, but sometimes I get the “Oh, firebee, you are all reasonable and shit but this woman, she is hysterical and frightened and etc.”
This being, one, I’ve done the “Come on, think about it, if I don’t know you then obviously I don’t know how awesome you are — think about what you know about other people that you just see” and then try and analogize to something the person might find familiar — judgements that you make on the highway if they’re likely to be a driver, their preferred way of categorizing threats if they seem to be a self-defense hobbyist, things like that.
And then I’ve also gone from the other end and said — it’s not entirely about rape. It’s also about how when I’m in public I not only get to say no to surprise sex, but also to petition people, panhandlers, people who persist in demanding real-time book reports, et cetera. Some behavior which annoy me do also ring alarm bells for some kind of more serious intrusion, which is part of the basis for how and why I refuse them, but at base I have the right to be left alone even without extensive justification.
It seems like the stumbling block for both of these approaches is a question of entitlement, like implied in slave dude’s post above, the man wants to talk to you “=” the man gets to talk to you. One is not meant to let one’s concern for personal safety or one’s desire to be left alone interfere with serving one’s purpose as entertainment.
NWO, I’m a guy. But the thing is, I accept that I am privileged, and that I need to be ready to check it whenever a woman asks me to do so. As long as patriarchial society exists, privilege exists, there is no way a man can escape the fact that he is privileged and needs to check it.
I also accept that women fear sexual assault as a matter of course because of the disproportionate male perpetrator to female victim ratio, and thus they have every right to instantly scrutinize you and find you wanting.
You talk that “men trust women but women are taught to always distrust men,” well I think that’s an oversimplification, but even if it were true, so what? Because of the power imbalances, misandry is not morally equivalent to misogyny, so get that through your pretty little head already.