What, are we all five years old now?

I don’t get it.

Most people in the skeptical community have gotten involved in the so-called “Elevatorgate” (having come to hate the use of the suffix “-gate”, I prefer to call it the D-W event) involving Rebecca Watson and Richard Dawkins. I’m not going to get into the Dawkins issue, even though he was a bit of a major asshole.

What I don’t get is that after four long comment threads on Pharyngula, one and an ongoing one at Skepchick, one at Blag Hag, and probably countless elsewhere, people are STILL trying to say that nothing bad happened because Rebecca wasn’t actually threatened, let alone assaulted. Somehow, none of the people defending this notion realize that not only is there a difference between being threatened and feeling threatened, but also that one does not have to necessarily be threatened in order to feel threatened.

Oh, wait, that’s right. She shouldn’t feel threatened because she had the right to reject. She controls the sex, after all, she’s a woman! It’s not like he could have done anything in an elevator, which is a closed and confined space…I mean, it’s not like elevators have a STOP button or anything, why, that would be preposterous!

Seriously. Are my fellow men all five years old or something?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to What, are we all five years old now?

  1. DB says:

    I guess I got you banned from Greta’s place. Sorry about that. If you think it would help I could write to her and say I didn’t feel insulted by anything you said to me. That’s actually true. Debating feminists is like cleaning up monkey shit — it’s not a job you go into figuring you’ll come out with clean hands. So I expect it and it’s not a problem to me at all. I understand feminists get very over emotional and that combined with an inability to articulate why they believe what they believe leads to frustration and lashing out.

    At any rate she’s crap at banning people apparently because she claimed to have banned me by IP and I posted almost a day after that (I didn’t know she’d “banned” me of course at that point). She’s also confused saying I was previously banned from that site by IP but I’ve never used any other IP to access the site and don’t recall her banning me (or anyone else for that matter). So I bet you could probably just skip a week and go back there.

    I wonder if you only got banned because she wanted to falsely demonstrate some sort of dispassionate “neutrality”. Don’t think that’s fooling anyone.

    I do apologize if I offended you btw. Don’t think I did, right? It’s not like you’re some hysterical woman who has a fit over a man saying the slightest negative thing to them.
    (joking!)

    Seemed like you were enjoying yourself to me. I feel bad at being the proximal cause of your being cut off.

  2. DB says:

    Btw nobody has the right to impose their irrational emotional state (“she felt threatened”) on others personal liberty. Maybe I’m afraid of the number 13. That doesn’t mean I get to stop everyone else counting to twenty. And when those irrational emotions are explicitly prejudicial as in this case or a fear of black people let’s say, or a disgust of the handicapped, or thinking gay people are icky — then that person is a bigot and their emotions can be and ought to be considered invalid by a right thinking society.

    I’ve not seen any feminist ever counter that simple liberal expression of what went on there. If you think you can then have a crack at it (you didn’t seem able over at Greta’s).

    • lordsetar says:

      “Btw nobody has the right to impose their irrational emotional state”
      It is irrational to feel threatened when someone one has not interacted with asks one to come to their hotel room for “coffee” at four in the morning in the elevator?

      I guess it would also be irrational to feel threatened if I were to declare myself a wallet inspector and ask for your wallet in an elevator at four in the morning…

  3. Being male is more heritable than being homosexual or even being obese, perhaps the guy should be given a break. His smooth approach may actually succeed one out of every ten or twenty times, and we know how powerful intermittent reinforcement is. Perhaps it is that one in ten female that should get the blame. I’ve seen women reward worse cads.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s