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
Pecunium
13 years ago

MRAL : Ok, I can see that. I apologise for thinking it was limited to women.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Magpie: I never did, alas!

I glomped onto some of his earlier films after LOTR (ditto Viggo and Sean) and saw other films he was in, but never thought to try to track down his series.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Caseymordred : What you think they need instructions, snicker!

HOw dare you tell them what they should do!

Erm, does this mean if we evil people start ordering them to post long incoherent rage filled posts attacking fymymsysnets, they’ll run away??????

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

@ithiliana

Worth a try.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Nobby: I googled and there are some, but decided people could look on their own if they wanted.

I’m afraid I’ve not heard of Greta Christina (though I may have seen links to her work).

Given my age and general inclinations and professional requirements, I’m much more familiar with feminist and intersectional works published in academic journals and books than the feminists who are posting in blogs–although I support that in theory, I find feminist blogs generally unsatisfying for srs feminist work. I also am a pagan though I sometimes identify was a wiccan but a solitary one (I really really dislike joining group offline), and am not too interested in feminist atheists (or for that matter marxist feminists)–there’s not enough time to read it all, and I follow the areas I most enjoy/teach (I can remember when I could buy all the books published in the US by feminists in a year on a clerical salary–but today is much better).

ithiliana
13 years ago

Johnny Pez: OK! Let’s give it a try since heck we could easily hit 1500 before I drag myself to bed…which I meant to do an hour plus ago.

*coffcoff*

**climbs up on soapbox**

***sets random undergarments on fire and flings them at the crowd***

OK, Attention all TROLLS: I hereby ORDER you to post a whole lot on Manboobz, all the time, night and day, ranting nonstop about all the injustices that we women/feminists (amazing how you seem to think they’re the same thing) in frantic, incoherent prose that either repeats the same thing over and over, or totally contradicts earlier posts.

Do it NOW.

I ORDER you.

Do not stop even if your fingers are bleeding.

p.s. MRAL, just wanted to say though I think we’ll continue to disagree quite often, I do not consider you a troll, and as others have said, am glad that you are feeling better.

And someday we should continue the Game of Thrones discussion.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Speaking of incoherent:

“that we women/feminists have inflicted on you”

Darn parenthetical confused even me.

Nobby
13 years ago

@Ithiliana Ah, I suppose if you’re not as into the blogosphere you may not have run into her. She does do quite a lot of work outside blogging, mostly for atheism itself at the moment, i believe, but she at the very least is very supportive of Skeptchic and others working to make atheism a more gender-equal movement (and she’s probably only not posted about this incident yet because she’s apparently on vacation). But if you have some spare time I find her stuff is pretty good.

Pecunium
13 years ago

Nobby: What do you mean you don’t think I’d use it… just look at all the people who have accused me of committing logical fallacies..

Lessee… I’ve been accused of ad hominem, ad verbosioum, misunderstanding/use of Occam’s Razor, weak syllogism, and tu quoque: hrmn… I guess the folks who read me don’t have a very good list; that or they misunderstand the meanings of the fallacies and have to quote those they’ve seen reference when other call people out; and they just aren’t in the most creative of environs, because there are a lot more ways to commit fallacy than just those. Oh, and of being a “pseudo-intellectual”, and merely paying attention to trivia which are both a bit nonsensical.

The former because I’ve never claimed to be an intellectual (whatever that means) and the latter because (even if we stipulate that my critiques of the logical structure of people’s arguments is trivial, it’s not all I do).

I’m surprised I’ve not been accused of begging questions, or equivocation. The first because it’s easy to do (so easy that it’s not seen as mendacious; it’s just presumptively lazy, i.e. one hasn’t examined the premises clearly enough to see the presumptive answer built into them). I have probably engaged in it, at least weakly.

The second because it’s also not that hard to do when working off the cuff/without a net (i.e. in rough draft, which is what I do when comment blogging), and it’s possible I might do it, though I try not to. Usually, when one is engaged on non-feuding interchange, equivocations are treated as question begging, because it’s usually possible to read the equivocated term as being non-equivalent and so have it become just a bit of sloppy, rather than mendacity.

Thomas
Thomas
13 years ago

@ithiliana

OK, at first I want to clarify two things: a ) I’m almost as handsome as Sean Bean and b) I’m not boring. Apart from that…

I travel a lot by train and it’s easier to get into a relaxed conversation with an older women, because the assumption that I’m hitting on her is less likely to cross her mind. Honestly, I don’t hit on strangers of any gender and any age on the train, but I like to talk to people. Still, young women perceive my approach to strike up a conversation this way. I’m not ironic or anything, I really had the most interesting conversations with women much older than me and I had the feeling they enjoyed talking to me, too.

And Now for Something Completely Different…IMHO, Mortensen is way hotter than Bean. Did you see Eastern Promises? The scene in the steam bath is really intense. He’s complete naked, as vulnerable as a man can be, and he fights for his life with his bare hands. The violence in Cronenbeg’s movies is not a joke. There’s no aesthetic of violence like in a John Woo movie. It’s brutal, realistic and almost unbearable. Also, in every interview I saw with Mortensen he was eloquent and thoughtful. He even bought Aragorn’s horse after the LOTR was shot, because he became so attached to it. I’m straight and I have a crush oh him.

Nobby
13 years ago

Well, are you saying you would use it? Or just that you’d be accused of it? Because we both know those are quite different things.

Pecunium
13 years ago

Nobby: Of course I would use it; just look at the evidence man.. all those people can’t be wrong when they say I am fallacious.

Could they?

XD

Plymouth
Plymouth
13 years ago

In completely off-topic news, ahhhhh, I am beating my head against a metaphorical brick wall. I am trying to reteach myself MATLAB, which I haven’t worked with in over 10 years and it is not coming back as fast as I hoped. I need to learn it by next week. Funtimes!

NWOslave
NWOslave
13 years ago

feministe comment section.
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/07/07/comment-of-the-day/#comments

Heres a good one

bellereve 7.7.2011 at 11:36 pm
Ok, I don’t mind doing a little educating for those who are genuinely wanting to learn. (Of course, I don’t begrudge other women for being exhausted with these types of questions from men).

“So, here you go. This is the abridged version:

1. Never approach women in confined, secluded spaces, or spaces that are otherwise difficult to exit/walk away from.
2. A woman who does not smile or make eye contact with you, who moves away from where you are sitting or standing, who is occupied with a book or a phone call, who turns her head the other way, or who does not greet you or engage in small talk, is likely not interested.
3. Even if a woman DOES smile, say hello, or seem friendly, it is still possible she is not interested, because women are socialized to be polite to men.
4. And whether she acknowledges you or not, never assume a woman is single, heterosexual, attracted to you, interested in meeting new people, or even open to conversing with strangers.
5. If you have ANY doubt as to whether approaching a woman is appropriate/welcomed in a given situation, simply refrain from doing so.”

Priceless as always. Mirrors perfectly the comments here. Anything a man does according to this screed will be oppressive. And it mirrors what has been said here.

How can a woman dictating a man’s every action be considered proper and moral, while a man dictating a woman’s every action be considered controlling you ask?

The default position of perfection of course. A woman’s opinion, based on her feelings at any given point in time is the rule. Misandry is the standard accepted way of life in the modern age.

Please re-read your comments, as well as the ones from your beloved faction, and tell me how any man can possibly speak to any woman anywhere at any time and not be considered oppressive depending on what a woman feels at that moment or even later on in time? Do keep in mind, men aren’t perfect, so you can’t judge us by your perfection.

ithiliana
13 years ago

@Thomas: I don’t even find the younger Sean Bean that attractive (ex; Caravaggio)–as opposed to the older Bean (Boromir, Odysseus, etc.), so it’s very much the older, lived in body, the laugh lines, the sense of comfort as well as total hotness I get from his persona!

Oh. Dear.

Even more striking than petty differences are the differences between people who like to talk to strangers on trains (and other forms of public transit) and those of us who like to use the time to read, think, sleep, and tend to snarl and smack when people (of ANY age or ANY gender) try to talk to us.

On to more fun topics–I did not see EP (I don’t think it ever came to our area–we had to go into the metroplex to see History of Violence, which we did see)–but I have certainly read a great deal of praise for his work in that film (as well as some trenchant criticism of Cronenberg’s portrayal of Russians, by Russians, although most note Viggo’s work as different because he did the research).

He not only bought the horse he worked with in LOTR (and the description of the training that they both went through for that one little scene near the river is amazing to anybody who has worked with horses), he bought the horse he worked with in Hidalgo!

And he rode with to support a Trail of Tears ride, as I recall (it’s been a few years since I read that). The younger (hobbit) actors have talked a number of times about his influence on them in regard to social justice issues.

Did you see his interview with um….oh good grief, who is that talk show dude–Viggo came with Peter J. and Elijah when Two Towers was coming out, and had “no blood for oil” handmade t-shirt, and sort of totally derailed the PR purpose (if that’s what it was) of the show — it was amazing.

We can definitely agree on our appreciation for Viggo!

ithiliana
13 years ago

Dang, still too tired: “petty differences between men and women” that shold have read.

*headdesk*

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

Ithiliana, I’d have to go with Viggo. Exene Cervenka was one lucky woman.

Nobby
13 years ago

Just got to make this juxtaposition all the clearer. David’s example of mysogeny:

“Agreed. Rebecca Watson is a thundercunt. She and her feminazi friends and their white knight self-castrating “male” supporters can go jump off a cliff. He “sexualized” her. Bullshit. Arrogant bitch.”

NWO’s example of misandry:

“Ok, I don’t mind doing a little educating for those who are genuinely wanting to learn. (Of course, I don’t begrudge other women for being exhausted with these types of questions from men).”

So, yeah. “Arrogant bitch/cunt/self-castration/jumping off cliffs” vs “man, explaining can be tiring!”

… So, yeah. This is why I don’t read NWO’s comments anymore.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Nobby: Definitely not into the blogosphere.

I came into online social networks in 2003, encouraged by fellow aca-fans to join LJ. I became immediately addicted to the LiveJournal model (which is being carried on at DreamWidth).

BLogs–I read some on my feed, but generally have not (UNTIL YOU ALL HERE SUCKED ME IN) participated in conversation–I’d post occasionally, but just didn’t get into it. I mostly read blogs by women about feminism and race, feminism and sexuality, feminism and academia, etc. But I don’t participate that often, because, meh, the conversations are nowhere near as good as I get on LJ/DW.

I do a lot of my intersectional work in my classes and scholarship and on campus, and post about it on my DW/LJ, but don’t really get into the blogs. Personal preference only.

ithiliana
13 years ago

So close to 1500!

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

So what you’re saying, ithiliana, is that you hate blogs and you think all bloggers are stupid stupidheads.

ithiliana
13 years ago

Yes, yes, I do! I am saying that.

Except for THIS blog for some reason I have not yet figured out.

WHAT HAVE YOU DUN TO ME??????

ithiliana
13 years ago

Becuz clearly by every scientific and objective principle, LJ/DW are BETTER, neener neener neener.

Johnny Pez
13 years ago

I think maybe my next Ami card story ought to focus on a certain immortal witch.

1 58 59 60 61 62 69