tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post6363434072625180617..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Social graces, who needs em?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger289125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-82985502290584929642011-09-02T04:16:33.244-05:002011-09-02T04:16:33.244-05:00Thanks for the re-post Murphy.Thanks for the re-post Murphy.Andrew Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13046615662375765416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-76050303854040503662011-08-15T07:18:13.137-05:002011-08-15T07:18:13.137-05:00(reposting)
Hey Andrew. I actually live an Alice ...(reposting)<br /><br />Hey Andrew. I actually live an Alice Springs at the moment, which is smack bang in the middle of Australia, but it is 1500-2500km away from any capital city, so when travelling to Sydney it might as well be another country :P<br /><br />I did see your post, but much like you, I thought that the conversation had gone on for long enough and I had to decide where I should spend my time. The only reason I respond to ydgmdlu at all was that for some reason, he seems to be making this allot more personal that it needs to be.<br /><br />However, it seems you do want a response. The first thing that comes to mind is that I hope (if you identify as being a skeptic) you recognise that simply relying on someone (in this case Giliell) who makes a claim that something is a well established fact on an internet message board, doesn't actually make it a well established fact as a matter of reality. That requires evidence, not hearsay.<br /><br />Andrew: <i>I then made a choice about whether it was worth taking the time to go back to the original video, transcribing what she said, and posting here to back up what I originally said. I decided that it probably wasn't worth my time.</i><br /><br />(youtube link removed to see if it would skip the spam filter) here is the important part as far as I can tell starting around 4:40 to 5:05<br />Watson: <i>At the bar later that night, actually at four in the morning, we were at the hotel bar. 4am I said, you know, I’ve had enough guys, I’m exhausted, I’m going to bed. So I walk to the elevator and <b>a man</b> got on the elevator and said “don't take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting, and i'd like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?”</i> <br /><br />Not 'the' man. Not 'this' man. Not 'that' man. But 'a' man. Entirely non specific. Doesn't sound to me like they were in any way even casual acquaintances. Certainly no indication they were previously part of the same group. Now granted she does say “<b>we</b> were at the hotel bar” but as I stated to in my previous comment to you, I have to assume given the context of the video (and just social interaction in generally), that when she refers to “we” or says goodnight to “everyone” she was talking about her friends like AronRa and DPR Jones etc, not the entirety of the bar. Especially considering she switches from using “we” at the beginning to “a man” later on. Either way, there’s really nothing specific in her wording that should lead us to think that her and elevator guy were actually hanging out as a matter of course.<br /><br />So first of all, we only have Watson's side of the story (that these events even happened at all in fact), and secondly, even based on her one sided retelling of things I don't see anywhere where she even attempts to establish this specific nuance of the situation as a “fact”.<br /><br />As far as I can see, this so-called “fact” isn't <i>well established</i> at all, but rather <i>well speculated on</i>, in discussion forums such as this one. All she did in her initial video, was just make a really vague statement aimed at all guys about the irony of being hit on, when earlier during the day in her panel with AronRa, she generally remarked that she disliked being hit on by guys at conferences.(youtube link removed to see if it would skip the spam filter) also with no explicit indication that the elevator guy actually attended said panel. As far as I can see everything after that has basically been internet message board conjecture. By all means, if you wanna transcribe the rest of her original video be my guest, but I doubt you'll find anything useful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-22320850776986017642011-08-15T07:15:43.097-05:002011-08-15T07:15:43.097-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-22007992219061057842011-08-15T07:13:50.869-05:002011-08-15T07:13:50.869-05:00Unless you think that the very fact that she recog...<i>Unless you think that the very fact that she recognised him as 'someone who was in the bar earlier listening to me' means she can no longer call him 'a stranger'. </i><br /><br />As I said, the spamfilter seems to have eaten the first half of what I wrote, where I transcribe what she actually says in her original video, and she doesn't say anything like you claim she does. It still hasn't appears yet, so I'll see if it will let me repost it now, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Blogger can be kindof craptastic sometimes.<br /><br /><i>You'd have to show me evidence of anyone making it out to be a 'horrendously misogynistic situation'.</i><br /><br />You mean such as bloggers like Amanda Marcotte saying things like this “In sum, men who corner women know what they're doing. And yes, they are relying on the fear of rape to grease the wheels towards getting laid.“<br /><br /><i>But we're going round in circles now, as that's been pointed out already many times. </i><br />agreedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-58343304649632588462011-08-15T06:47:02.843-05:002011-08-15T06:47:02.843-05:00No, as set out in the original story, he was there...No, as set out in the original story, he was there to hear her give the speech about not creeping girls out, or whatever, but he hadn't been introduced to her, hadn't made any initial conversation with her, hadn't made any contact with her at all. He was definitely still a stranger to her. <br /><br />Unless you think that the very fact that she recognised him as 'someone who was in the bar earlier listening to me' means she can no longer call him 'a stranger'. That would be a nit-picking complaint - it didn't make him any more trustworthy or any less creepy when it came to the lift scenario, so would make no difference to the semantically understood use of the word 'stranger'.<br /><br />"I haven't actually seen any compelling evidence to the contrary that this is the horrendous misogynistic situation people are making it out to be."<br /><br />You'd have to show me evidence of anyone making it out to be a 'horrendously misogynistic situation'. It's other people's reaction to the original blog that has been misogynistic. But we're going round in circles now, as that's been pointed out already many times.Andrew Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13046615662375765416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-78834726447303613162011-08-13T00:10:35.217-05:002011-08-13T00:10:35.217-05:00Sorry if there is a double post. Blogger seems to ...Sorry if there is a double post. Blogger seems to be spamboxing my comments.<br /><br />By the looks, the first half of what i wrote is still missing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-68418354164540871572011-08-13T00:08:31.144-05:002011-08-13T00:08:31.144-05:00And really, even if this was a demonstrable fact, ...And really, even if this was a demonstrable fact, none of this clears up the issue that I initially pointed out to you. I still see a massive contradiction in people arguing on the one hand how horrible it was that she was cornered and propositioned by a complete stranger late at night, whilst on the other hand claiming that they were actually acquaintances hanging out at the bar together and so he should have known better. I don't see how you can have it both ways. The premises are clearly contradictory to the others position.<br /><br />Either the guy was a stranger or he was an acquaintance. If you're going to embark on a witch hunt, at least try and keep the story consistent rather than re-enacting the Monty Python Holy Grail angry mob scene of “she turned me into a newt... but I got better...” And I don't necessarily mean you personally here Andrew so please do take this as a personal attack. Without rereading the nearly 300 comments, I can't remember if you originally claimed they were complete strangers or not, but allot of other people have. It just seems to me that as an overall group situation, nobody can actually agree on any common facts and without the introduction of new evidence, the story still changes each time a new message board comment is posted. It reminds me allot of Christianity, where they all claim to worship the same god, but can't agree on any of the facts beyond that which is why there are thousands of denominations, some of whom even war with each other.<br /><br />It seems unfortunate, that there has been so much BS conjecture, witch hunting, name calling, and baseless sensationalism involved in the discussion of this particular topic, that you and I will probably never really know the true facts of what actually transpired in that late night hotel bar or elevator. <br /><br />It is entirely possible they were hanging out at the bar together and that he should have known better, but there is no evidence I can see to actually establish that as fact. Its how the null hypothesis at the centre of the scientific method works. Its how our judicial systems work. I'm not necessarily saying 'innocent', I’m just saying that based on the poor evidence available, the most accurate conclusion I can come to is 'not guilty'. <br /><br />And thats pretty much how I still feel about the wider issue as well. If you think there is actually demonstrable tangible evidence to label this guy as the sexist, misogynist, predatory objectifier, who actively tries to use the fear of rape to passively force women into having sex with him as some people on this very message board have claimed, then by all means, please present said evidence.<br /><br />I just don't see it myself. However I look at it, the facts are really very simple at face value. He asked her (in a slightly loserish way) to conversation over coffee, she said no, he went away without a fuss. I haven't actually seen any compelling evidence to the contrary that this is the horrendous misogynistic situation people are making it out to be. If like others you wish to reinterpret events, personally assign subtext to parts of it, and read meaning from between the lines which isn't necessarily there, all based on nothing more than a one sided vague ironic “don't do it guys” statement made halfway through an 8 minute youtube video, that’s up to you I guess, but until the time real evidence is shown, I’m simply not willing to take part in a hysterical internet lynch mob.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-89001917417142379612011-08-13T00:07:34.183-05:002011-08-13T00:07:34.183-05:00Hey Andrew. I actually live an Alice Springs at th...Hey Andrew. I actually live an Alice Springs at the moment, which is smack bang in the middle of Australia, but it is 1500-2500km away from any capital city, so when travelling to Sydney it might as well be another country :P<br /><br />I did see your post, but much like you, I thought that the conversation had gone on for long enough and I had to decide where I should spend my time. The only reason I respond to ydgmdlu at all was that for some reason, he seems to be making this allot more personal that it needs to be.<br /><br />However, it seems you do want a response. The first thing that comes to mind is that I hope (if you identify as being a skeptic) you recognise that simply relying on someone (in this case Giliell) who makes a claim that something is a well established fact on an internet message board, doesn't actually make it a well established fact as a matter of reality. That requires evidence, not hearsay.<br /><br />Andrew: <i>I then made a choice about whether it was worth taking the time to go back to the original video, transcribing what she said, and posting here to back up what I originally said. I decided that it probably wasn't worth my time.</i><br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKHwduG1Frk here is the important part as far as I can tell starting around 4:40 to 5:05<br />Watson: <i>At the bar later that night, actually at four in the morning, we were at the hotel bar. 4am I said, you know, I’ve had enough guys, I’m exhausted, I’m going to bed. So I walk to the elevator and <b>a man</b> got on the elevator and said “don't take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting, and i'd like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?”</i> <br /><br />Not 'the' man. Not 'this' man. Not 'that' man. But 'a' man. Entirely non specific. Doesn't sound to me like they were in any way even casual acquaintances. Certainly no indication they were previously part of the same group. Now granted she does say “<b>we</b> were at the hotel bar” but as I stated to in my previous comment to you, I have to assume given the context of the video (and just social interaction in generally), that when she refers to “we” or says goodnight to “everyone” she was talking about her friends like AronRa and DPR Jones etc, not the entirety of the bar. Especially considering she switches from using “we” at the beginning to “a man” later on. Either way, there’s really nothing specific in her wording that should lead us to think that her and elevator guy were actually hanging out as a matter of course.<br /><br />So first of all, we only have Watson's side of the story (that these events even happened at all in fact), and secondly, even based on her one sided retelling of things I don't see anywhere where she even attempts to establish this specific nuance of the situation as a “fact”.<br /><br />As far as I can see, this so-called “fact” isn't <i>well established</i> at all, but rather <i>well speculated on</i>, in discussion forums such as this one. All she did in her initial video, was just make a really vague statement aimed at all guys about the irony of being hit on, when earlier during the day in her panel with AronRa, she generally remarked that she disliked being hit on by guys at conferences.(this is the video she talks about him posting at around 5:00 http://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa#p/u/10/W014KhaRtik also with no explicit indication that the elevator guy actually attended said panel) As far as I can see everything after that has basically been internet message board conjecture. By all means, if you wanna transcribe the rest of her original video be my guest, but I doubt you'll find anything useful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-67807525318176249072011-08-13T00:05:24.231-05:002011-08-13T00:05:24.231-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-43691228351766933762011-08-13T00:04:56.600-05:002011-08-13T00:04:56.600-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-74851075788349469982011-08-12T16:03:41.350-05:002011-08-12T16:03:41.350-05:00Dawkins isn't so good anyway, so some people m...Dawkins isn't so good anyway, so some people may be willing to throw him under the bus for that reason too.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12168752419786681178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-60392035711640944412011-08-09T06:45:26.219-05:002011-08-09T06:45:26.219-05:00You're back from Australia? Hope you had a goo...You're back from Australia? Hope you had a good time.<br /><br />In case you missed it:<br /><br />Murphy: "It was only just several post ago that I pointed out this contradiction to Andrew Ryan (who conveniently chose not to comment on it, but rather continue complaining about coffee)"<br /><br />Well, you disputed something I said:<br /><br />Andrew: "She tells everyone she's tired and wants to go to bed."<br />Murphy: "Eh, and here I was under the mistaken assumption that half the complaint arose from the fact that she was propositioned by a complete stranger and that didn't make any effort to previously talk to her at the bar."<br /><br />I then made a choice about whether it was worth taking the time to go back to the original video, transcribing what she said, and posting here to back up what I originally said. I decided that it probably wasn't worth my time. Sue me.<br /><br />But now Giliel's answered for me:<br /><br />"It has been established that EG was part of the group of people who hung out at the bar where this whole issue was a topic of discussion. He was there to hear that she was tired and going to bed and that was the moment he chose to seperate from the group, too."<br /><br />Perfect, thanks Giliel.Andrew Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13046615662375765416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-30794169759259485332011-08-06T10:46:31.016-05:002011-08-06T10:46:31.016-05:00@ydgmdlu
I'm not exactly sure what your proble...@ydgmdlu<br />I'm not exactly sure what your problem with me is, or why you've seemed to personally single me out amongst the other people in the thread arguing the same points. I really should just drop this, but you seem to be trying to make this as personal as possible, so I feel I must once again reiterate a few things.<br /><br /><i>What is ironic is how Murphy has completely undermined his position by admitting that he would be more worried about his hypothetical daughter than his hypothetical son. He tries to brush away that worry by claiming that it's irrational, but why does he think so?</i><br /><br />I thought I was clear (but obviously not clear enough) that I believed it was basically social conditioning. I know its not the correct position to hold, but it is basically the position that our society holds, and thus the condition that i've been raised to hold. This is probably an excellent example of the whole “male privilege” thing everyone keeps mentioning. Now, perhaps in this context there are actually some legitimate concerns that makes sex more perilous for girls, such as the possibility of teen pregnancy, and that most sexual assaults are committed by males, but as a matter of equality and respect, actively treating girls as somehow “precious” is wrong, and unfortunately I sometimes do have to remind myself of that. I was simply trying to be as open and honest about myself in this discussion as possible when presented with a well thought out question by Giliell, and I think its unfortunate that for some reason you've decided to twist that to your own ends of trying to personally make me look like the most ignorant misogynist that a strawman will allow for.<br /><br /><i>Murphy and guys like him don't think about that; thus they continue living with cognitive dissonance. They can condemn predatory behavior in one context but passionately defend it in another. </i><br /><br />Again, way to go with putting words in my mouth. Cognitive dissonance? Well I don't know about that, but I personally don't think I’ve “passionately defended” predatory behaviour at all. My point in all of this has simply been that no matter how hard you and others have tried to desperately re-frame the facts, with all manner of sensationalism and wild hypotheticals which didn't actually take place, time of day not withstanding I don't see how asking a girl to coffee, and then leaving without a fuss when she declines the offer, classifies as predatory behaviour. Now, maybe I am wrong, and its a fact that the guy really is some kind of horrible predatory monster, all I can say is that those facts are yet to be presented to me. I'm not saying there aren't predators out there, but in this particular case, all I see is a guy that whilst being tackles, can't really be accused of anything further than lacking social graces (to refer back to Russell's original post).<br /><br /><i>No matter how nice they may seem, most boys really do feel that sex is a top priority in their relationships with girls. </i><br /><br />I can't help but think its just as sexist the way you keep assuming that for girls, sex isn't a top priority in a relationship and/or that they don't sexualise and objectify men too. I understand that you want to support people (in this case women) who are sometimes treated as less than equal. That’s fine, because I want a world with equality too, but as a foundational premise, your image of all women being perfectly innocent eunuchs, frankly boarders on the disturbing. Perhaps you shouldn't be spending so much time devising clever insults toward me because of my social misunderstandings (i'll admit I certainly do have a few), and spend some time examining your own.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-32374247264237054042011-07-25T02:47:52.768-05:002011-07-25T02:47:52.768-05:00I have one self declared Christian moralist in my ...I have one self declared Christian moralist in my organisation - which is a university. She lacks social graces - budging into people's office, evedropping and lately evil. Because of her wonderful Christian love, she has suceeded in driving away her assistant (who is a non Christian and has far high qualifications from her) and two clerks who she aledged leaked assignment answers to students (which was not proved). The evil un-Christian thing she did to me was to evesdrop my conversation and bad mouth me to my best friend. Now both of us (my bff and I) are not on speaking terms. The Judas witch goes to the Baptist church in Penang, Malaysia.Adaml11600https://www.blogger.com/profile/15488556774704996744noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-37382483843289645042011-07-21T22:21:18.186-05:002011-07-21T22:21:18.186-05:00What is ironic is how Murphy has completely underm...What is ironic is how Murphy has completely undermined his position by admitting that he would be more worried about his hypothetical daughter than his hypothetical son. He tries to brush away that worry by claiming that it's irrational, but why does he think so? What if there's really a good reason behind that worry?<br /><br />Everyone knows the cliche of fathers telling their teenage daughters that "boys are after only one thing," but this aphorism has never been debunked and relabeled as a myth. No matter how nice they may seem, most boys really do feel that sex is a top priority in their relationships with girls. Some boys pathetically beg for it. Others occasionally tease their girlfriends about it as a subtle way of goading. A small number become aggressive, abusively pressuring their girlfriends to have sex, which becomes part of a very underreported statistic. Within this subset are the date rapists who drug their victims. These rapists don't even need to be aggressive or manipulative.<br /><br />The point is that while a small number of all men actually are rapists, many more men who only desire sex will find ways to take advantage of women, be it through drugging or psychological manipulation. So this is yet another thing that women have to fear, on top of the typical notion of rape as sexual assault when the woman still has her full physical and mental faculties. And again, this is not a reasonable fear for men to have in general.<br /><br />Murphy and guys like him don't think about that; thus they continue living with cognitive dissonance. They can condemn predatory behavior in one context but passionately defend it in another.Fei Menghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17534941709876911424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-6265247712024702112011-07-21T04:24:56.236-05:002011-07-21T04:24:56.236-05:00Really disappointed I didn't get a reply Traci...Really disappointed I didn't get a reply Tracie. Even if you disagreed.Rod Kellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12385050721938319930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-23519141125730777022011-07-18T02:52:01.939-05:002011-07-18T02:52:01.939-05:00In a society where women are constantly harressed ...In a society where women are constantly harressed for sex even after politely declining richard dawkins should be slammed for his bigotry and silencing tactics.<br /><br />Which is exactly what it is, women have the right to complain about sexist rubbish and they should!A socialist open to criticismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14619402773454709868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-1291991324027366252011-07-17T14:52:38.008-05:002011-07-17T14:52:38.008-05:00@VigilanteNighthawk
Reading my post again and your...@VigilanteNighthawk<br />Reading my post again and your reply, I notice my post was a fail. I'm sorry, I tried to make several points and I didn't make them well. I'll try again.<br /><br />I don't deny that you had a very tough youth, much harder than mine. I tried to explain the concept of privilege which you rejected.<br />A lot of people's reaction when hearing first about privilege have the initial reaction of "what's that supposed to mean, I have plenty of shit in my life and X has it much better than me".<br />That's not what the concept of privilege is about, it doesn't claim that every white heterosexual man has it always better than any black lesbian.<br />You have to look at it more like in a scientific experiment: If all factors between two people are the same except X (gender, race, sexual orientation), and one person has it better than the other just for X, that's privilege. <br /><br />"My apologies if it came across like I was saying that I thought the women in this thread were accusing all men of being rapists"<br /><br /><br />My fault again.<br />This is a claim that's been commonly made by others, not by you, I should have made that clear.<br /><br />"My issue here is that it is becoming the expectation of one individual to be responsible for the emotions of another."<br /><br />It doesn't. But just because it's not your responsibility doesn't mean you can't do anything about it.<br />It's not your fault that women feel threatened on a street alone at night. But now you know something that you can do, a small thing that will make their life a little better. Just one tiny little gesture. It doesn't change anything about the real bastards out there, but it changes that one situation for that one woman.<br /><br /><br />" The woman's fear is understandable, but the solution of treating women with kid gloves instead of as potential actors in their own defense is what really bothers me. "<br />It doesn't. I don't feel treated like a delicate little flower if somebody acts with a bit of consideration.<br />Of course, it's placing the whole responsibility again on the women to learn martial arts. It smeels too much of "if women only did X (dress modestly, don't drink...). It smells too much of "if women only were strong enough it wouldn't happen"<br />I think we all know that women can defend themselves, but again, it's not a solution, because it will probably just mean an arms race. I know it's a very American idea and I come from a different culture.Giliellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17863240646094904253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-90947376954304854512011-07-17T11:16:30.341-05:002011-07-17T11:16:30.341-05:00I have to say I agree with Martin, Russell and Tra...I have to say I agree with Martin, Russell and Tracie (and some other posters here).<br /><br />Sorry folks, people agreeing with RW are not "overblowing" anything. They're trying to use this incident as a teachable moment. Male privilege is a problem in the skeptical community just as it is in other segments of society. Hell, it's even a problem on the political left. <br /><br />The male privilege isn't so much in EG's advances towards RW (even though that incident by itself shows that he could stand to gain more understanding on the issue). And, no, he's not a rapist. But, anyway, the male privilege showed itself in<br /><br />1. Richard Dawkins' dismissive response to RW about the ordeal and<br /><br />2. comments from many others in the skeptical community (I would surmise most of them male). When she shows that she was uncomfortable with the situation, what would have been helpful is for us to just state, or at least learn that "OK - I see where you're coming from. I'll be more mindful of those things in the future". Instead we get the same kind of defensiveness that shows whenever the subject of male privilege is broached as we do whenever the subject of white privilege, or straight privilege, or religious/Christian privilege is broached. That defensiveness is understandable, but I would challenge us males to try to be less defensive and just listen a little more. <br /><br />3. Unlike Dawkins, who actually showed a willingness to hear out another point of view, some are basically trying to dismiss RW as an easily-offended drama queen, which, is exactly what some of us are talking about when we talk about male privilege.<br /><br />I'm not a cad in any way, shape or form, but I too am a product of a culture that objectifies women in so many ways, and I'm still in need of unlearning a lot of it.Kyle Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04569432667084294505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-81450512820578341302011-07-17T10:19:37.974-05:002011-07-17T10:19:37.974-05:00If I'm choosing a babysitter for my child, all...If I'm choosing a babysitter for my child, all adults (since this is generally the demographic responsible for said) are potential child abusers, whether physically or sexually, until I obtain references, criminal background checks and am otherwise reassured they mean my child no harm.<br /><br />Am I an "ageist" or "misanthropist" for feeling this way?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02264246774960686625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-82418805725908397222011-07-17T01:13:55.307-05:002011-07-17T01:13:55.307-05:00I had a rather amusing idea for a possible solutio...I had a rather amusing idea for a possible solution :P. <br /><br />If you could convince the gay members (or the straight members who are secure) to make tactless passes at those individuals who show themselves to be particularly inconsiderate I think it would not only be fairly amusing, it would highlight how uncomfortable those situations can be. Granted it would not be an exact example, but it would still (hopefully) be enough to jar a few into realizing how badly they come across.<br /><br />Just an amusing thought, though I think I'd get a kick out of seeing the shock on some lechers face :P.Daemon6https://www.blogger.com/profile/06379313038024703056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-86553453780772676412011-07-16T15:20:54.611-05:002011-07-16T15:20:54.611-05:00the blog is dead, long live the blog!
I've be...the blog is dead, long live the blog!<br /><br />I've been lurkin at AE for months but it took the AE team's position on this to make me signup and post, don't know whether that's a good thing or not. I think part of the problem blogging has brought is that everyone thinks that they should be the one on the podium telling everyone else exactly what is wrong with the world and how it should be fixed. Too much hot air inflating way too many egos.<br /><br />So now i'll go back to lurking, i'm way too cool to be posting on a nerd site anyway :P<br /><br />Luvs ya all and stay skepty x4LeafShamrockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05389281481107290538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-12475447987329061422011-07-16T14:53:02.278-05:002011-07-16T14:53:02.278-05:00As an off-topic note:
This whole debacle has had ...As an off-topic note:<br /><br />This whole debacle has had a surprising benefit (at least in my opinion). It completely ruins the assertion that atheists assign "prophet status" to our visible representatives :P. <br /><br />There are very few within the atheist community who are so widely known for their staunch stance against religion and theism. Yet, unlike the religious, when our "luminaries" cross unacceptable lines they get railroaded :P. <br /><br />Personally, I think this is absolutely fantastic! If you're a public figure and a visible representative of a movement there should be absolutely no point in which the views you express are accepted uncritically.Daemon6https://www.blogger.com/profile/06379313038024703056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-29863364465264301282011-07-16T14:41:13.207-05:002011-07-16T14:41:13.207-05:00@Gilliel
Never did I once say that I feared sexua...@Gilliel<br /><br />Never did I once say that I feared sexual violence. I just feared every other form of violence. I did go to a public high school, and it was the town I lived in, not the school, that was the problem. I went to that school in fact not because my parents were religious, but but because the regular school system was just unsafe. They couldn't afford to send me to a private high school, but I was fortunate enough to be in honors classes where I was largely isolated from those who would cause trouble. My privilege now is having enough money to live in a safe area, not being male. <br /><br />Furthermore, you miss the point that I *still* have those instincts ingrained in me. Strange people (yes, people,including violent women) still make me nervous. The point, however, was that I'm not making my emotional hang ups other people's problem. Yes, I don't have to deal with fear of rape. I just fear everything else, including potential death. What I'm saying is I know exactly what it is like to fear for my safety, including to fear for my very life, and yet somehow because I don't have to fear ONE form of violence, my experiences in this issue are somehow irrelevant.<br /><br />"But then again you seem to suppose that the actual attacker is unarmed."<br /><br />I'm speaking as both a victim of violence and a martial artist. I can tell you, I'm not worrying about what I'll have to do to someone when when someone approaches; I'm mentally preparing myself to fight or run if necessary. Part of the training is getting over your natural desire to not harm others if it becomes absolutely necessary. <br /><br />I know if the attacker is armed my chances are slim at best. It's not about being able to magically able to stop yourself from being harmed. What it does do, however, is give you a sense of what steps you can take, even if it sadly enough surrendering. Even if everyone woman carried a gun, it still wouldn't be a guarantee. After all, once someone has drawn on you, if you don't have your gun drawn, you're still effectively screwed. NOTHING is a guarantee, but knowing you can do something instead of nothing does help make you feel safer, which is the issue we are discussing here. <br /><br />"Elevators actually count among those things."<br /><br />I agree, and I can understand RW's discomfort. I'm not denying that at all. In fact, I do think EG was stupid for doing what he did. I'm more concerned about your street scenario. <br /><br />"There's nothing bad in not having thought about it before, but screaming "you think all men are rapists" when we tell you how uncomfortable it makes us, that's a problem."<br /><br />My apologies if it came across like I was saying that I thought the women in this thread were accusing all men of being rapists. My disagreement here is the expectation that men should now be on the look out for any possible opportunity that could make a woman potentially feel uncomfortable when the man in question is simply minding his own business.<br /><br />If I'm alone on a street late at night, I'm looking for potential threats. I'm looking for any potential place an attacker could be hiding. I'm looking for any potentially suspicious person who could attack me. I'm probably not even going to notice the woman in question. If I do and I notice I'm making her uncomfortable, I will take steps to avoid making her uncomfortable. My issue here is that it is becoming the expectation of one individual to be responsible for the emotions of another. The woman's fear is understandable, but the solution of treating women with kid gloves instead of as potential actors in their own defense is what really bothers me.VigilanteNighthawkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14250214218022298972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-16881149025113316212011-07-16T14:10:16.859-05:002011-07-16T14:10:16.859-05:00Murphy: "It was only just several post ago th...Murphy: "It was only just several post ago that I pointed out this contradiction to Andrew Ryan (who conveniently chose not to comment on it, but rather continue complaining about coffee)"<br /><br />Well, you disputed something I said:<br /><br />Andrew: "She tells everyone she's tired and wants to go to bed."<br />Murphy: "Eh, and here I was under the mistaken assumption that half the complaint arose from the fact that she was propositioned by a complete stranger and that didn't make any effort to previously talk to her at the bar."<br /><br />I then made a choice about whether it was worth taking the time to go back to the original video, transcribing what she said, and posting here to back up what I originally said. I decided that it probably wasn't worth my time. Sue me.<br /><br />But now Giliel's answered for me:<br /><br />"It has been established that EG was part of the group of people who hung out at the bar where this whole issue was a topic of discussion. He was there to hear that she was tired and going to bed and that was the moment he chose to seperate from the group, too."<br /><br />Perfect, thanks Giliel.Andrew Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14538930429790154512noreply@blogger.com