RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (7) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Hints and Allegations< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
stevestory



Posts: 10371
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,21:48   

I heard a few vague things about this shermer/myers/whoever dustup, but I can't find a quick rundown of what happened. Soembody help a brother out.

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,22:02   

Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 14 2013,21:48)
I heard a few vague things about this shermer/myers/whoever dustup, but I can't find a quick rundown of what happened. Soembody help a brother out.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....grenade

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
stevestory



Posts: 10371
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,22:16   

WHAT THE FUCK.

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,23:02   

These two fill in most of the story after the "grenade" post:

Shermer's lawyers

David Silverman tweeted:

Quote
David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

I liked a @YouTube video from @mrdeity
http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....GVOQk?a  Mr. Deity and the Hat
View media

   Reply
   Retweet
   Favorite

David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

Mr. Deity and the Hat: http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....6PGVOQk  See @mrdeity @ #aacon14


I list his twitter source of the youtube (at least the top one works) because Silverman is president of American Atheists.  The shots taken at Myers by Mr. Deity begin a little after the five minute mark.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2013,23:25   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 15 2013,05:02)
These two fill in most of the story after the "grenade" post:

Shermer's lawyers

David Silverman tweeted:

Quote
David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

I liked a @YouTube video from @mrdeity
http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....GVOQk?a  Mr. Deity and the Hat
View media

   Reply
   Retweet
   Favorite

David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

Mr. Deity and the Hat: http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....6PGVOQk  See @mrdeity @ #aacon14


I list his twitter source of the youtube (at least the top one works) because Silverman is president of American Atheists.  The shots taken at Myers by Mr. Deity begin a little after the five minute mark.

Glen Davidson

Brian Dalton should know better than to present false equivalences. Rape is not an extraordinary claim, let alone a miraculous one! Idiot.

Is he also implying that PZ made it all up? To what end?

Myers is not trying to get Shermer convicted. Also pretty sure he would have known that if he gets sued, he will almost certainly lose.

With his "personal responsibility" remark, what is Dalton saying? It is okay to have sex with women who are too drunk to consent? Women shouldn't drink at all? Both?

Contrary to received wisdom, women do not generally lie about rape and sexual assault.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,03:36   

Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent.

It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night.

There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense.

I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol.

Edit to add:
I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time.

Edited by midwifetoad on Aug. 15 2013,04:56

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,07:33   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36)
Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent.

It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night.

There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense.

I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol.

Edit to add:
I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time.

What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things.

This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc.

Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage.

But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it?

Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,08:15   

Regardless of the truth or untruth of the event... it is being handled very, very badly.

I have seen people's careers destroyed because of claims like this. This includes the victim and the accused.

First we have to consider the source of the claim... oh wait, we can't because there isn't one.  Second we should consider the evidence of the claim, oh wait, there isn't any.  Third, we should consider the person reporting the claim, because we can't do anything else... and the person reporting the claim is known for being a shock jock and drama promoter.

Now, I don't know what happened in the original event.  Myer doesn't know what happened.  The only two people who know what happened are the ones being accused and the one doing the talking to Myer (if such a person even exists).

These things need to be handled very carefully.  Not just for the victim, but for the accused as well.  

As  a small culture, we should be promoting responsible methods of reporting such incidents... immediately.  We should be promoting a social culture of dealing with the situation, making sure that victims get the support that they need and that perpetrators get the support or punishment (as required) that they need.

My previous comment on the subject was that Myer has well and truly stuck his foot in his mouth and that's still true.  He's interfering in a legal situation and should have realized that legal action might have been taken.  

In my opinion (that and $4.50 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks) is that Myer, instead of naming names and promoting this drama, should be promoting the development of personal responsibility and support within his culture.  He doesn't do that because, (again, in my opinion) that doesn't generate blog hits.  

So far, in the past week, I've seen no fewer than 9 accusations against Shermer, several against Lawrence Krauss, and a list of names of prominent atheists and skeptics who (it was claimed) all had been accused of sexual harassment.  Maybe it's all true.  Maybe none of it is.  Maybe some of it is.  No one knows.  The accuser is never named.  The accused never gets a chance to comment (which would just feed the flames anyway).  And NONE of these claims have been substantiated in any way, shape or form that I'm aware of.

There's two fundamentally different issues here.

The first is sexual harassment and rape.  These are wrong.  

The second is the handling of claims and accusations by certain people within the atheist/skepticism community.  THIS (and only this) is the area that I'm talking about.

OK, I'm done.  If you have evidence and logical arguments, you may very well change my mind about certain things.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,08:20   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)
 
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36)
Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent.

It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night.

There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense.

I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol.

Edit to add:
I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time.

What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things.


No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise.

 
Quote
This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc.

Allegedly about those conferences.  Thus far no evidence has been presented.

 
Quote
Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage.

Which is why it is important to know your limits and your intentions before deliberately impairing your own judgement.

Note that I am not blaming the victim of non-consensual sex.  If someone commits that crime, they should be punished severely.  This is advice for avoiding the situation in the first place.  In an ideal world, there would be no risk of that happening.  We don't live in that world.
Quote
But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it?

Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate.

You are ignoring Dalton's other key point.  PZ Myers publicly accused Michael Shermer of rape based on second or third hand hearsay.  Myer's blog is popular enough that this accusation will be returned in Google searches for Shermer.  This kind of accusation is legally defamation per se.

Dalton is noting that the so-called skeptics at Pharyngula are accepting those claims without any evidence.

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:27   

On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:50   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,10:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I don't know.  In a normal situation, then I would agree.  But (in my opinion) anything dealing with FtB is not normal.

To be perfectly honest, if Myer, Laden, and Mcreight all told me it was raining... I would still go check.

It's not the events that I'm having a problem with.  I don't know what happened with Schermer and Krauss or any of the others.  It's the reporting of accusations in a very public way by a group of people who claim to have anonymous sources and who have been (in my opinion) less than honest about other events.

With the volume of people who support FtB, it would be almost child's play to destroy someone's career on totally made up statements.

I admit to having a bit on confirmation bias here, but it is also my firm belief that is Shermer had accused PZ of rape then the FtB crowd would be demanding extensive evidence.

A think that Greta is conflating two things.  The first is that yes, harassment and rape are unfortunately common and that if there are a lot of people accusing someone, then it may be more likely to be true.  The other is that publicly accusing people in this manner, regardless of the truth of the issue, is OK and should be done.  

The first is good, the second is not.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
socle



Posts: 322
Joined: July 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,10:51   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,10:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I 100% agree, FWIW.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2825
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:18   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

No eating here, K.  I agree with you.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2564
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:31   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I guess this would be the wrong time to make rude responses to "eat me alive".

I just read it. I also think she's pretty much spot-on. If it walks like a douche, et cetera.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,11:47   

Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 15 2013,18:31)
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,08:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I guess this would be the wrong time to make rude responses to "eat me alive".

I just read it. I also think she's pretty much spot-on. If it walks like a douche, et cetera.

Hehe, I realised what I had done as soon as I had posted it. But I was too lazy to edit.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,13:45   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,11:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I agree with her that reporting rape stigmatizes the victim.  That needs to change.

I don't believe she refutes the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" response (which I haven't actually read anyone use in this case).  While sexual assault is unfortunately common, sexual assault by a particular male is not.

And while I might even give some credibility to her multiple witnesses argument, all of the "witnesses" are anonymous in this case.

PZ screwed up.

  
BillB



Posts: 388
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,14:00   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Aug. 15 2013,16:27)
On the Bathroom Wall, cubist posted a link to Greta Christina's blog entry in which she discusses the situation.

I know you will eat me alive, but for once, I think she's 100% right.

I agree.

  
BillB



Posts: 388
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,15:05   

Quote
what did she expect?


What should she expect.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,18:33   

The degree of skepticism should be proportional to the consequences of being wrong.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/know.......=38&y=4

Edit to fix

Edited by midwifetoad on Aug. 15 2013,18:36

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
RDK



Posts: 229
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,22:13   

PZ was wrong in the way he went about it.

It's kind of sad to see how low-quality Pharyngula has become over the years.  If the comments section on his latest "grenade" debacle are indicative of his blog's fanbase, the kind of feminists and social justice warriors he's attracted are many orders of magnitude worse than the nutcases at Uncommon Descent.  Full of people who don't understand law, consent, or even how to form a logical thought properly.

The biggest problem seems to be inability to understand that advising people to be safe when alcohol is involved is not the same as "blaming" the victim, if the victim even exists in this case.  Nobody can stop a rape from happening but the rapist, but at the same time the world is a scary place so to not take precaution opens yourself up for some pretty nasty things to happen to you.

It's like getting into a car without having a seatbelt on and then acting indignant when some asshole crashes into you and you go flying through the windshield.  No shit the other guy should have been a better driver, but you also didn't take a necessary precaution.  This is the real world we live in, not fantasy feminism land.

--------------
If you are not:
Leviathan
please Logout under Meta in the sidebar.

‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2013,23:13   

I agree, RDK.

I hardly go over to Pharyngula these days.  PZ seems more interested in being the Big Bad Alpha Atheist rather than a scientist and it's all an ego trip for him.

Every time I hear him speak I cringe at his inability to present a coherent idea.  Compare the brilliant clarity of Hitchens to the fumbling oatmeal mush of PZ.  

I think PZ peaked about 10 years ago and is in a slow decline to irrelevance.  Too bad, really.  There was a time he could spark a discussion, but not any more.

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,01:42   

Quote (RDK @ Aug. 16 2013,05:13)
PZ was wrong in the way he went about it.

It's kind of sad to see how low-quality Pharyngula has become over the years.  If the comments section on his latest "grenade" debacle are indicative of his blog's fanbase, the kind of feminists and social justice warriors he's attracted are many orders of magnitude worse than the nutcases at Uncommon Descent.  Full of people who don't understand law, consent, or even how to form a logical thought properly.

The biggest problem seems to be inability to understand that advising people to be safe when alcohol is involved is not the same as "blaming" the victim, if the victim even exists in this case.  Nobody can stop a rape from happening but the rapist, but at the same time the world is a scary place so to not take precaution opens yourself up for some pretty nasty things to happen to you.

It's like getting into a car without having a seatbelt on and then acting indignant when some asshole crashes into you and you go flying through the windshield.  No shit the other guy should have been a better driver, but you also didn't take a necessary precaution.  This is the real world we live in, not fantasy feminism land.

Well said.

Just my two cents about teaching the youngsters that the world is a scary place:

For more than a decade - starting at university - I was politically active. My experience is that although generally young females might be wary of predators, they don't expect that behaviour from their comrades-in-arms, especially not from an admired celebrity. They are the good guys, right? So the girls are way too trusting, and deeply traumatised when they are assaulted, maybe more so than it would have happened with a complete stranger.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:19   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 15 2013,14:20)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)
 
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36)
Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent.

It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night.

There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense.

I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol.

Edit to add:
I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time.

What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things.


No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise.

 
Quote
This is not about being alone on a street. We are talking about TAM, Skepticon etc.

Allegedly about those conferences.  Thus far no evidence has been presented.

 
Quote
Anyway, the anecdote related was not about getting deliberately blind drunk. It's not that hard to get someone more drunk than they intended when they have had a couple of glasses, especially if you have the status advantage.

Which is why it is important to know your limits and your intentions before deliberately impairing your own judgement.

Note that I am not blaming the victim of non-consensual sex.  If someone commits that crime, they should be punished severely.  This is advice for avoiding the situation in the first place.  In an ideal world, there would be no risk of that happening.  We don't live in that world.
 
Quote
But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it?

Dalton's segment was highly inappropriate.

You are ignoring Dalton's other key point.  PZ Myers publicly accused Michael Shermer of rape based on second or third hand hearsay.  Myer's blog is popular enough that this accusation will be returned in Google searches for Shermer.  This kind of accusation is legally defamation per se.

Dalton is noting that the so-called skeptics at Pharyngula are accepting those claims without any evidence.

I am not ignoring his point about the sources. I disagree with it, but what I AM saying is that his response was highly inappropriate.

Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault.

I already said that Dalton's comparison to the Gospels is stupid, but if it were not his response would STILL have been highly inappropriate.

Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that?

This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies.

Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:24   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 15 2013,14:20)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 15 2013,08:33)
 
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 15 2013,09:36)
Of course it's not all right to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give informed consent.

It is also perfectly legal to stroll down any street in any neighborhood on any Saturday night.

There are laws and there are rules of decency. There's also common sense.

I asked my wife about this. Her question was what did she expect? If the accusation is true then Shermer is a pig,  but it's not surprising  that such men exist. A good chunk of literature is devoted to what happens when you mix men,  women and alcohol.

Edit to add:
I'm not blaming the victim, but I think it's fair to point out that bad people exist; preditors are over-represented among alpha males and celebrities; this is well known and frequently in the news; and finally, it is possible for a bad person and a foolish person to occupy the same room at the same time.

What you are saying is that men can party but women can't. This is not the right way to go about things.


No, he's making the point that, while burglars are responsible for robberies, leaving your doors unlocked is still unwise.

Where "leaving your doors unlocked" is drinking wine at a conference.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:31   

You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Quack



Posts: 1959
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,04:32   

This case brings New York vs. Strauss-Kahn to mind.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:27   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:19)
Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault.


There are public service announcements here on the east coast warning people not to leave their cars unlocked or the keys in them.

When my teenagers go into the city, both their mother and I give them (no doubt too long) lectures about how to take responsibility for their own safety.

This is not specific to any particular type of crime.

Quote
Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that?


There's no way of knowing that.  Some of the material quoted in the cease and desist letter suggests that Myers got the information from a friend-of-a-friend, other statements suggest it was from someone he knows personally.  In either case it is hearsay.

And while I don't believe that Myers is necessarily making it up out of whole cloth, nothing in his behavior over the past few years suggests to me that he can be trusted not to respond with hyperbole.

Quote
This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies.


You are treading dangerously close to libel yourself here.  The issue isn't about "most accounts of rape", it's about posting anonymous defamatory claims in a public forum.

Quote
Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore.

Leaving aside whether or not skeptic conferences are more or less safe for women than any other venue, the fact that Myers blog isn't a court of law does not excuse his behavior.  If Shermer really did what was claimed, I'll volunteer to help nail his testicles to a wall.  Until that's proven, though, anonymous hearsay is defamatory libel.

Do you really want to live under a justice system that allows anyone to be subject to these potentially life-destroying accusations, without evidence or recourse?

Edited by Patrick on Aug. 16 2013,09:28

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:30   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:31)
You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit.

It's a good thing no one that I've seen in this discussion is saying that, then.

There's a difference between "The world can be a dangerous place -- here are some ways to protect yourself." and "Do this or you're responsible for the actions of evil people."

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,08:50   

Regardless of the truth or not of the claim... Shermer is now basically untouchable.  Even if he is fully exonerated and FtB is shut down due to legal action... I don't know how Shermer's reputation and activities can survive this.

I know people who have had this happen to them.  No evidence, no trial, no nothing.  Just an assumption of guilt and boom... no career, no wife, nothing.  It's all gone.  For a claim that may or may not have been real.  No one knows, nearly 20 years later, whether he was involved in a sexual assault or not because it never went to trial and no evidence was ever presented.

PZ has basically destroyed Shermer... in just a few paragraphs.

So far, I have seen two types of people arguing about this incident.  One the one hand are the people who assume that Shermer is guilty.  On the other hand are people who want to see evidence that he is guilty.

If PZ had said "Shermer is a murderer", then people would have laughed it off... demanded to see evidence... then ignored it when none was forthcoming.

Sexual assault/rape is fundamentally different from other crimes though.  Half the people seem to think that the victim is always telling the truth and half seem to think that the victim is lying.  There doesn't seem to be an 'innocent until proven guilty' status for sexual assault.

Of course, in this case, we don't know because we have no idea who the victim is.  We don't know when this happened.  We don't know where it happened.  All we have is a claim by PZ.

PZ doesn't like Shermer.  We know that.  PZ could be making this up.  PZ could believe the person, but that person is making it up.  There really could have been an assault.  Heck, the woman could have willingly said yes, but then regretted it in the morning.  No one knows (and we'll likely never know).

What we do know is that PZ's actions have likely destroyed the reputation of someone... without evidence.  Maybe PZ does have evidence, he just chose not to post it.  But if there was evidence... then he should have gone to the authorities and encouraged his friend (or friend of a friend) to go to the authorities.



BTW: All this stuff probably needs to get moved the BW.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,12:24   

I assume she is telling the truth from her point of view, and I assume it is not acceptable to have sex with someone too drunk to resist.

I differ for the woman and from PZ in that I also don't think it is acceptable to get too drunk to protect oneself in public. It just isn't acceptable. I have no sympathy for drunk drivers and I don't like being with people who are drunk. Never have. and this is one of the reasons. People think they are excused from the consequences.

I note that she didn't mention alcohol. I wonder why.

I can accept being wrong in this case if I am wrong. But the  common M.O. in the auxiliary accusations seem to involve alcohol.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:30   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 16 2013,14:27)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:19)
Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault.


There are public service announcements here on the east coast warning people not to leave their cars unlocked or the keys in them.

When my teenagers go into the city, both their mother and I give them (no doubt too long) lectures about how to take responsibility for their own safety.

This is not specific to any particular type of crime.

You have not responded to the point I made. Read it again.


Quote
Quote
Myers' source is not hearsay, this is corroborated testimony by women he knows personally. Now you can argue that to us it is hearsay, but... really? PZ Myers is making it up? Do you really believe that?


There's no way of knowing that.


There are plenty of ways of weighing it up. Please tell me what you think PZ Myers will gain. Bear in mind that the reaction to his actions is largely negative, even hostile, and that he would have been aware of this. Please also tell me when you have ever come across PZ Myers fabricating quotes.

Quote

 Some of the material quoted in the cease and desist letter suggests that Myers got the information from a friend-of-a-friend, other statements suggest it was from someone he knows personally.  In either case it is hearsay.


The cease and desist letter is wrong, unless you now think both PZ Myers and Carrie are lying.

Quote
And while I don't believe that Myers is necessarily making it up out of whole cloth, nothing in his behavior over the past few years suggests to me that he can be trusted not to respond with hyperbole.


So you are saying you think it possible that PZ altered the
testimony? Seriously? Please give me an example where he has done this before.


Quote
 
Quote
This is not completely news about Shermer, btw, and I see no reason to be skeptical about a woman's corroborated claim that she was raped. Most accounts of rape are not lies.


You are treading dangerously close to libel yourself here.  The issue isn't about "most accounts of rape", it's about posting anonymous defamatory claims in a public forum.


What you think the issue is is noted.

You are still implying that PZ may have altered the woman's testimony, and that the woman may not exist or is not credible.


 
Quote
Quote
Myers' decision was not about court standards of evidence and conviction, but about warning women to avoid a man who already had some reputation amongst quite a few skeptic conference-attending women as a predator, operating in a world where we have good evidence that a microculture of assault (including rape) and rape apology already exists. See Karen Stollznow and Ashley Paramore.


Leaving aside whether or not skeptic conferences are more or less safe for women than any other venue, the fact that Myers blog isn't a court of law does not excuse his behavior.  If Shermer really did what was claimed, I'll volunteer to help nail his testicles to a wall.  Until that's proven, though, anonymous hearsay is defamatory libel.


The amount of respect arguments conflating the law with "the right thing to do" deserve is zero. Especially in the case of rape.

Also, the woman is not anonymous to PZ Myers nor is her testimony hearsay. Unless you are saying that PZ made it up or altered her testimony.

It might have been hoped that skeptic '-cons' were better than other '-cons', but they plainly are not. "They are doing it too" is of course no excuse. Harassment at '-cons' is a big problem. Organizations failing to deal with harassment is a big problem. That the American skeptics are not any better is not something to leave aside.  The evidence of harassment within the skeptic movement is directly relevant to assessment of the rape claim.


Quote

Do you really want to live under a justice system that allows anyone to be subject to these potentially life-destroying accusations, without evidence or recourse?


Shermer has recourse, and as PZ Myers surely knew when he posted, Shermer will probably win any libel suit.

As for Shermer's life being destroyed... I doubt it. It's not Shermer who will get less cushy speaking jobs at conferences.

There is evidence. There is testimony as to Shermer's conduct, and not all of it is anonymous either.

How about living in the world we actually live in, Patrick? Where at least 1 in 6 women experience sexual assault in their lives. Where if a woman is raped, in whatever country in the world, she will have a hard time getting her peers, let alone the police and courts, to believe her? Where the public response to rape is "what did she do to allow it to happen?" and "what about the lives of the perpetrators?"
Where first-hand testimony of rape (corroborated by more than one person), and multiple lines of evidence, are automatically dismissed as "no evidence" or "hearsay".

Where hardly anyone expresses sympathy for the victims. At best there is 'if this is true, the accused should be castrated.'

Where the lives deeply affected are far more often the lives of women raped than the lives of accused.

Where if we tell of a man who goes out to a bar and gets drunk and then is followed home and assaulted for his wallet, the overwhelming reaction is condemnation of the assailant not "men shouldn't go out to pubs and get blind drunk" or "I don't believe it happened". Of course, because it is fucking ridiculous to be hyperskeptical about someone getting assaulted. However, the same people, good people too, react to testimony of rape with victim blaming and denial.

How about living in a world of rape culture, institutionalized and deeply ingrained in even some of the most enlightened? I wonder what that would be like?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:49   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 16 2013,14:30)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,05:31)
You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit.

It's a good thing no one that I've seen in this discussion is saying that, then.

Brian Dalton did exactly that.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,14:55   

Driver, everything you said is true.

However, nothing you said is evidence.  

Did PZ make this up?  I don't know.  You don't know.  He may not even know (he may be being duped).  That's the problem... no one knows.

Do these people exist?  I don't know.  You don't know.  PZ may not even know (from a friend of a friend).

What we do know is that PZ excels as a shock-jock.  Without any corroborating evidence, I find it difficult to trust him.  I will say that I find it curious that this happens right before his book is due to be released.  I just find it curious... I really hope that he wouldn't stoop to this level to garner blog hits and some media attention.  And this also does what PZ wants to happen, that is a divide in the atheism/skepticism community.  I'm willing to bet large sums of money that anyone who supports Shermer... or at least doesn't immediately support PZs position... will be cast as a 'rape apologist'.

An accusation of rape is serious.  Florida has life imprisonment for rape.  Making an accusation like that is not helping the victim in any way.

He could have easily said, "Shermer is a slime ball.  I don't trust him. I don't think any of you should trust him. And I don't think anyone should go to a conference where he is in attendance."  And then taken this claim to the authorities.

A lot of people I am reading are saying, "But the authorities don't do anything."  And "it's all blame the victim."  

None of which means that PZ gets to be judge, jury, and prosecuting attorney.  None of which means going to the authorities is still what should be done.

Like I said, I agree with all that you have said.  That's not the issue.  The issue here is that PZ has done something dramatically stupid and just plain wrong.  This tactic will not help the girl, you say it won't hurt Shermer, it will get PZ lots of attention, and none of it will do a darn thing if Shermer is raping people at cons.

The only thing that will prevent that is to get a judge and jury enough evidence to put Shermer behind bars.  To do that, will require lots of pain and suffering from the victim and it will suck and it's not fair to them.  But we don't have any other way of doing it.  Well, there's this thing that PZ did...

I'm not saying that lots of women haven't been raped.  It's true.  There are also cases where no sexual contact occurred and the woman still cried rape and put a man in jail for years.  There are cases where a woman said 'yes', but later regretted it and claimed rape.

Is that what's going on here?  I don't know.  No one knows.  

We, as a culture, do have to do a better job in investigation of these claims.  We have to, as Patrick said, educate women AND men about these things.  We have to quit blaming the victim. But we also have to get to the truth of the matter.

And yes, sexual assault is treated very differently.  Because it's the only one that can be consensual until after the fact. I guess you could choose to get beat up and then file assault charges...

Anyway.  Take that as you will.  I'm open to logical arguments and discussion.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:14   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 16 2013,14:50)
If PZ had said "Shermer is a murderer", then people would have laughed it off... demanded to see evidence... then ignored it when none was forthcoming.

They are not equivalent for many reasons, the most tangible of which is that rape is 2 to 3 orders of magnitude more common than murder in the USA.

What evidence do you demand to see to confirm to your satisfaction that people have been raped at American skeptic -cons?

But, bad analogy as it is, let's go with it: What if John published a testimony of Harry trying to murder someone, in an environment where several murders have been reported, Harry has a reputation for aggression, and several other people have said that Harry tried to assault or even kill them? Would people laugh it off then?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:37   

Quote
What you are saying is that men can party but women can't.


I don't recall giving men a pass.

I can hold two concepts to be true at the same time.

People who take advantage of the vulnerable are despicable and worthy of shunning.

People who voluntarily make themselves vulnerable in situations that are well known and well understood by adults cannot get full sympathy from me.

I despise salesmen who take advantage of the elderly and mentally handicapped, but if people want to be treated as adults, they need to accept responsibility for self protection.

I come from this from my training in special education. From that I learned that people who claim victimhood in these situations will never be accepted as adults. It's a tough lesson and a tough world, but it's the world we live in.

In Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche DuBois says:
Quote
Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.


It's not terribly surprising that she gets raped.

One does not have to agree with or like predators to believe that adult human beings need to take care of themselves and not expect the world to protect them like children.

For heaven's sake, good children's literature teaches that children can't depend on the kindness of adults, not even adults charged with your care.

But to trust an alpha male celebrity? Give me a break.

A false dichotomy has been raised.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:54   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 16 2013,20:55)
Driver, everything you said is true.

However, nothing you said is evidence.  

Did PZ make this up?  I don't know.  You don't know.  He may not even know (he may be being duped).  That's the problem... no one knows.

Nothing *I* said is evidence. However, evidence exists.


Quote
Do these people exist?  I don't know.  You don't know.  PZ may not even know (from a friend of a friend).


PZ says he knows the woman, who contacted him directly.



Quote
I will say that I find it curious that this happens right before his book is due to be released.


Riiiight. It's not that people would email him when all this shit started coming to light, but rather that PZ jumped on the 'rape in the American skeptic movement' bandwagon. His master plan is to alienate the majority of American atheists.


Quote
 And this also does what PZ wants to happen, that is a divide in the atheism/skepticism community.


Oh please. PZ wants a divide? There is a divide. A 15 year old posts a picture on Reddit and gets hundreds of rape comments. Reddit is a cesspool. The Slymepit... exists. Rebecca Watson gets thousands of abusive tweets and emails for saying "guys don't do that." Women have left the skeptic and atheist movements. Atheism Plus... exists, because some people could not tolerate the sexism and other phobic behaviour in atheist forums. Sexual harassment at atheist and sexism -cons is a big problem.

Despite the ridiculous narrative, NONE of this is down to PZ Myers.

Quote
An accusation of rape is serious.  Florida has life imprisonment for rape.  Making an accusation like that is not helping the victim in any way.


The victim asked PZ to publish it to warn women.


Quote
He could have easily said, "Shermer is a slime ball.  I don't trust him. I don't think any of you should trust him. And I don't think anyone should go to a conference where he is in attendance."  And then taken this claim to the authorities.


Yeah, about that "taking it to the authorities". Catch up then get back to me.



Quote
None of which means that PZ gets to be judge, jury, and prosecuting attorney.


Agreed, but irrelevant. PZ published a testimony, not held a court hearing.


Quote
 none of it will do a darn thing if Shermer is raping people at cons.



It's an alert. It should make some difference.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,15:58   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 16 2013,21:37)
In Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche DuBois says:  
Quote
Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.


It's not terribly surprising that she gets raped.

The saddest thing is you are not even aware what you are doing here.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,16:01   

Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it.

You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best.

The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.  

Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,16:10   

Obviously all this should be moved, but I hope it can be moved to its own thread rather than the Bathroom Wall. Even though it is OT for the forum, it is an important topic.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,17:03   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,22:01)
Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it.

You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best.

The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.  

Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence.

Glen Davidson

Glen, if you think FTB ethics should be dictated by the ethics/practical considerations of American broadsheets, you are in for many jolts and disappointments if you continue to read the posts there.

I'm sure Myers would publish any response from Shermer, if his legal counsel allowed it.

You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,17:30   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,17:03)
 
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,22:01)
Actually, it makes it worse that it's "believable," because people might believe it.  Larry Flint got away with saying that Jerry Falwell had sex with his mom in an outhouse (something like that) because it was such a preposterous lie that no one would believe it.

You don't get to just make accusations against people without having credible evidence to back it up.  If PZ has anything like that, we most certainly haven't seen it, and his original account makes it sound like third-hand knowledge at best.

The fact is that you don't publish that William Kennedy Smith is a rapist, even though we have first-hand testimony (not hearsay) of the alleged rape (the trial was televised)--because he was never convicted.  That's how responsible journalists act, unlike yellow journalists and tabloid trash.  

Responsible journalists will write about allegations and charges when they're formally made, typically not before.  And then they give the "other side" a chance to respond.  PZ simply accuses without providing credible evidence.

Glen Davidson

Quote
Glen, if you think FTB ethics should be dictated by the ethics/practical considerations of American broadsheets, you are in for many jolts and disappointments if you continue to read the posts there.


Your sentence is illogically constructed, since the mere fact that you and many other FTBers practice scurrilous rumor-mongering has nothing to do with what I "think" should be done.  I am not surprised that many people think that they are above law and decency.

Worse, it is a rather disingenuous claim, that I should think FTB ethics ought to be dictated by the broadsheets.  I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.  Examples were given of journalists who don't act as defamers, not as who should set the ethics.


 
Quote
I'm sure Myers would publish any response from Shermer, if his legal counsel allowed it.


I am not sure of it, nor do I care about his printing something after first writing an unsupported accusation.

 
Quote
You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence.


No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay.  If you and the rest would quit lying about what we say and think, you might for once actually begin to understand our position.  So long as you fabricate our positions and shoot those down, you simply practice more scurrility.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,19:01   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30)
I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.

Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape, your point may be of value to conservatives, but not so much to those seeking social justice.

Quote
 
Quote
You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence.


No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay.


No we do not only have hearsay.

Testimony IS evidence. To dismiss even the anonymous testimony requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up, and also ignores the corroboration of the testimony.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,19:16   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)
     
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30)
I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.

Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape,


Evidence?  

No, you've given up any pretense to dealing honestly with evidence.

       
Quote
your point may be of value to conservatives, but not so much to those seeking social justice.


I know the SJW prattle, parrot.  Make a case or STFU.

I really don't need to hear about how wonderful all of you socially aware bigots are.  You would never allow yourselves to fall due to unsupported accusations, but you think that you're the particular elites whose word should be law.

   
Quote
   
Quote
       
Quote
You are one more person asserting that the testimonies as to Shermer's behaviour are not credible evidence.


No, you're just making up lies as you go along.  The point isn't whether or not a person of whom we lack even the identity is or is not credible, the point is that we can hardly know whether or not she is because all we have is hearsay.


No we do not only have hearsay.


I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay, although it's pretty clear that evidence and honesty aren't troubling your "objectivity."

     
Quote
Testimony IS evidence.


Oh my God, really?  

You're a real expert in these matters, I can see.  You know that testimony is evidence.  Something that wasn't in contention, illiterate wonder.

     
Quote
To dismiss even the anonymous testimony requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up,


Another insipid lie.  Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others.  We don't know what the case is because we only have an anonymous charge, a problem that one illiterate chowderhead seems not to recognize as any sort of difficulty for bringing up what are, in consequence, unsubstantiated rumors.

     
Quote
and also ignores the corroboration of the testimony.


And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim?  As stupid as your whole "case."

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,22:00   

Glen,

Quote
I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay


If you mean "information not substantiated", there are several sources. If you mean "report of another's words by a witness", then you didn't look properly.



Quote
Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others.


Yes, but to put my reply in context again, to dismiss the anonymous testimony as hearsay requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up.



Quote
illiterate


Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error?



Quote
And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim?


You would just have to accept that PZ Myers had no good reason to lie. Anyhow, the reports are not all anonymous. You didn't look properly.


Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,22:28   

[quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,22:00][/quote]
 
Quote
Glen,

   
Quote
I didn't see evidence beyond hearsay


If you mean "information not substantiated", there are several sources. If you mean "report of another's words by a witness", then you didn't look properly.


Why would I be referring to the shifted goalposts of an echo chamber?  Do you think that I care as little about truth and justice as you do?

I mean testimony that can be checked out, at least something at the investigatory phase.  Not you trusting your demi-god PZ.


 
Quote
   
Quote
Clearly there are any number of scenarios that are possible, that Myers made it up, that the woman purportedly making the charge made it up, that someone seriously misunderstands what constitutes rape, and presumably others.


Yes, but to put my reply in context again, to dismiss the anonymous testimony as hearsay requires an assertion that PZ Myers may have made it up.


Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach.  Because, heaven forbid that we should even question anything PZ says.  

And I don't even care about your specific concern that the holy rumor-monger PZ might or might not make something up, because we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur.


 
Quote

   
Quote
illiterate


Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error?


No, you don't read properly, assuming that you're not always lying with your endless errors and goalpost moves.


 
Quote

   
Quote
And just how stupid would I have to be to accept anonymous corroboration of an anonymous claim?


You would just have to accept that PZ Myers had no good reason to lie.


Again with the idiot-level reading.  That's not the only possibility, and I don't trust the self-righteous PZ any more than I do you.

 
Quote
Anyhow, the reports are not all anonymous. You didn't look properly.


We're talking about  a single charge, mangler of truth.  I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues.

 
Quote
Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad.


Here's a thought:  Respond by making up the near-total lacunae of both evidence and clear thought in your sucking up to your favorite alpha male working for his and your petty bourgeois privilege, instead of making more baseless charges.  If you could make a case, you would, but instead you parrot your slogans and your inability to contemplate that anyone could ever question your vindictive shock-jock, PZM.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:03   

Aren't the authorities and courts not public fora the right venues for this?

I do understand that victims may feel it traumatic, but "telling PZ" will only likely prolong things and it will end in the courts anyway?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:43   

Glen,

Quote
Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach.


It appears that your demi-god is the law, since you can't shake leaning on that authority. Anyhow, I did not say that PZ is "beyond possibility of reproach". I said give me a good reason why he would lie.



Quote
we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur.


On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim.

In the "debate" between Oxfordians and Stratfordians, we could say that we are not in any position to find out what really occurred, but that one requires acceptance of some sources and commonplaces, and the other is a conspiracy theory with no evidence for it whatsoever.

Your hyperskepticism also amounts to giving credence to a conspiracy theory for which no evidence is presented.



Quote

   
Quote

     
Quote
illiterate


Sorry, did I make a typo? Some unforgivable grammar error?


No, you don't read properly, assuming that you're not always lying with your endless errors and goalpost moves.


Ah, the insult you are looking for is "semi-literate". Also has a nice double meaning. Glad to be of help.


Quote
I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues.


I am talking about Shermer. There are several sources as to his conduct.

Besides which, the climate is rather relevant.


Quote

   
Quote
Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad.


Here's


- more salad.





Rich,

The case was reported to an organization already, who were apparently not helpful.

No-one is trying to get Shermer convicted.

You are aware that very few rapists are convicted, US or UK?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:57   

I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2013,23:57   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 17 2013,01:16)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)
       
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30)
I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.

Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape,


Evidence?  

This is just history denial. I thought we might be able to take it as a given that feminists and other civil rights advocates have usually had a point.

I found this article for you:

http://moourl.com/9uiur......r....ur

By all means, do tell me how it is all fixed now.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:03   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57)
I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers.

Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:10   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,00:03)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57)
I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers.

Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said.

So I'm going to be honest, and possibly look foolish, forgive my ignorance in advance.

Shouldn't she be seeking legal action?
Presumably she doesn't want it happening to others, which is why she told PZ?

Again, *I can't know what it's like / I'm not her / insensative male and all those caveats.

Someone has done something wrong and I don't think anyone here is equiped to know who it is.

I suspect it will end up in courts anyway.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:26   

[quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,23:43][/quote]
 
Quote
Glen,

   
Quote
Well, gee, I wonder if any court would accept that PZ is beyond question and any possibility of reproach.


It appears that your demi-god is the law, since you can't shake leaning on that authority.


Well, I didn't expect truth or decency from you.  My "demi-god" is the means of getting to the truth that has been honed into an adversarial system that actually tests so-called evidence.  Not the law, which needs to conform to it.  It's shameful that truth is such a missing ingredient your spiel.

As far as the law goes, well, what else can we use at this time, other than your blatant disregard for honest methods of ascertaining truth?  Even were the law changed, it's unlikely that it would affect this matter.  Not that you have shown any indication of thought about this or other matters, save following your vengeful god.

 
Quote
Anyhow, I did not say that PZ is "beyond possibility of reproach".


Really?  Like that was the point.  You expect me to accept the word of a gutter snipe, who lacks regard for the methods that actually have a good chance of ascertaining the truth.  Since you don't actually care about truth, though, this is not surprising.

Quote
I said give me a good reason why he would lie.


Oh I see, I'm asking you to meet the 'burden of proof,' and you cleverly (ha) pretend that I have the burden of proof to show that Myers is lying.  When I didn't say that was even what was happening, no matter how many times you dishonestly suggest that this is what counts.  So, you've failed egregiously once again to even contemplate what matters, instead shifting the goalposts to fit your prejudices.


 
Quote

   
Quote
we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur.


On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim.


That's another mindless strawman that you bleat out with brazen stupidity.  I didn't claim that it was an exceptional claim, barely-literate one, I wrote quite the opposite, that it is believable, which is why you need to provide the "multiple lines of evidence" for it before simply throwing out unsubsatantiated accusations.  You provide nothing except more innuendo, more attacks, more blithering.

 
Quote
In the "debate" between Oxfordians and Stratfordians, we could say that we are not in any position to find out what really occurred, but that one requires acceptance of some sources and commonplaces, and the other is a conspiracy theory with no evidence for it whatsoever.


What a wonderful disanalogy.  It shows what a vapid and ignorant way of "thinking" that you have.

 
Quote
Your hyperskepticism also amounts to giving credence to a conspiracy theory for which no evidence is presented.


Oh nice, SJW name-calling, "hyperskepticism."  Actually, it's just skepticism, we're asking for substantive evidence, and you come up empty of anything but blather and lies instead.


 
Quote

Ah, the insult you are looking for is "semi-literate". Also has a nice double meaning. Glad to be of help.


No, that would be the truth, rather than an appropriate use of hyperbole for your poor grasp of anything written that doesn't fit your preconceptions.  

Passive-aggressive dishonesty from you, I see.


 
Quote
     
Quote

Again with the idiot-level reading.  That's not the only possibility


If PZ Myers published the testimony without altering it, he is the publisher not author of the account. Only if he altered it or made it up is it not the woman's testimony. If it is the woman's testimony, it is not hearsay.


My God, you're an ignorant twister of the truth.  It isn't "testimony" at all in the legal sense, it's just hearsay.  It doesn't become testimony even if PZM were beyond any kind of question.  Here's a simple piece on hearsay:

 
Quote
In keeping with the three evidentiary requirements, the Hearsay Rule, as outlined in the Federal Rules of Evidence, prohibits most statements made outside a courtroom from being used as evidence in court. This is because statements made out of court normally are not made under oath, a judge or jury cannot personally observe the demeanor of someone who makes a statement outside the courtroom, and an opposing party cannot cross-examine such a declarant (the person making the statement).


http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay....hearsay

That's just how it is, there's nothing being done to make sure that the woman's statements are correct in this case, hence it's not "testimony," except in the equivocal sense.  

What is more you did more goal-shifting, because the issue wasn't whether or not this was her "testimony" (which it isn't, by legal definition), but whether or not it was true.  We don't know that, even if we trust PZ completely, and, given how he changed his "grenade" post, he looks slippery there, as well as in other matters.

So you fail to understand what hearsay and testimony are, and dishonestly shift the goalposts.  A lot of social justice there.  


 
Quote

   
Quote
I'm not biting at the bait of your dishonest shift to other issues.


I am talking about Shermer. There are several sources as to his conduct.


Yes I know, you dishonestly shift from the actual matter at hand, which is the unsupported allegations of rape in one case.  I never once claimed that Shermer wasn't a cad or the like (nor that he didn't rape, for that matter--we hardly have evidence that can adjudicate that matter), which he may very be, but of the utter lack of decency  and legality of PZ's accusations.

 
Quote
Besides which, the climate is rather relevant.


And hardly sufficient to make up for your complete lack of any kind of legally-acceptable evidence for the charge.  


 
Quote
   
Quote

     
Quote
Thanks for all the additional material in your last post, Glen. You clearly like to decorate your meat with lots of salad.


Here's


- more salad.


Even if you weren't simply trying to trash by idiotic name-calling what you can't refute, it would be a whole lot better as salad than as your prevarication and indecency.



 
Quote

Rich,

The case was reported to an organization already, who were apparently not helpful.

No-one is trying to get Shermer convicted.


That's the point, ignorant troll, you're not bothering with credible evidence, but you smear with disregard for truth.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,00:36   

[quote=Driver,Aug. 16 2013,23:57][/quote]
 
Quote
   
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 17 2013,01:16)
   
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,19:01)
           
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 16 2013,23:30)
I'm talking about following the law, rather than not giving a whit about being decent.

Since the law and the process of law tend to uphold the status quo, and demonstrably so in the case of rape,


Evidence?  

This is just history denial.


BS, as usual.  

The truth, though, is that you'd need to explain "uphold the status quo."  Since I know the endless lies of PZ-type SJWs, I naturally assumed that you mean some dishonest fuckwitted notion of "rape culture," which, of course, is the implication to which I was responding.

In a sense, of course, the law does uphold the status quo, especially your bourgeois privilege.  In the case of criminal law, though, I should only hope that they would stick with demanding legal evidence, rather than capitulating to the rumor and innuendo that you use to "convict" others.

 
Quote
I thought we might be able to take it as a given that feminists and other civil rights advocates have usually had a point.


Since the actual issue was defamation without credible evidence, I fail to see how feminists and civil rights activists had any point against that.  Not that you didn't attempt to shift the goalposts yet again, par for your disregard for truth and evidence.

Quote
I found this article for you:

http://moourl.com/9uiur......r....ur

 
Quote
By all means, do tell me how it is all fixed now.


By all means, ignore what's at stake and shift the goalposts yet again.

Glen Davidson

ETA, this has gone far enough for me, Driver will do anything but forthrightly tackle the importance of evidence, shifts the goalposts constantly, and twists the truth as normal practice.  She's ignorant and resistant to learning from those of us who don't talk without knowing about which we're discussing.  

And I've certainly caught her out in a host of ignorant claims and less than honest tactics, quite enough for any intellectually honest person to recognize that there's no more reason to deal with any more of this drivel and dissembling.  I'm out of this thread for a considerable time (week or more), with an estimated 90% certainty.

This is why so many in the skeptic/atheist community have turned against Myers' and her tactics.

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,01:32   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,00:10)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,00:03)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,05:57)
I'm not trying to stir the pot, and if true it is horrendous, but reporting it to an organization isn't the same as reporting it to the police. I can imagine doing that may be emotionally very hard so I can understand why it may not happen, along with stigmatization, but I do know the efficacy of the police (as low as it may be) is more than that of conference organizers or blog writers.

Again, the woman isn't seeking any legal action. Read what she said.

So I'm going to be honest, and possibly look foolish, forgive my ignorance in advance.

Shouldn't she be seeking legal action?
Presumably she doesn't want it happening to others, which is why she told PZ?

Again, *I can't know what it's like / I'm not her / insensative male and all those caveats.

Someone has done something wrong and I don't think anyone here is equiped to know who it is.

I suspect it will end up in courts anyway.

Haven't posted in a long time, even if I still read a bit (and that Gary G thread is something else), but if the allegations have substance, PZs actions may have caused harm to the woman and/or any case against Shermer.  

Maryam Namzie had a good post up with reasons for reporting cases such as this (http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2013/08/09/report-them/), but I get a 404 error and it seems to be down so I can't quote directly.

I copy & pasted from comment 28, Aug 12, the following bit:
Quote
Telling someone who has already gone public with a case of sex assault or abuse or rape to report the perpetrator is not dismissing her claim. It is in fact taking it seriously. However poor the law is, it is a real option for people to get some sort of redress and hearing that is unavailable elsewhere. Even if the issue is addressed at one’s workplace or on a million blogs, the woman in question has the right to be heard. Perpetrators – however we dislike them – also have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

That the system is unfair or that violence against women is ignored are not excuses for disregarding available options and pressing for justice. If everyone decided to take things in their own hands, we wouldn’t have had positive changes in the law because people fought for and finally got justice that was initially denied. Trying the case on blogs and via boards of various organisations is not the way to get real redress and justice.


PZ has had a hard-on for Shermer for years.  If someone (prob Poppy from later comments both of them made around the web) sent PZ this email from this person, PZ could have seen the blood from Stollznow & Poppy's articles and decided to pile on as usual.  

Notice though that at least one that seems credible (Stollznow) and one that is a bit more iffy to me (Poppy) have both been shoved in the back in light of the bigger "Shermer=rapist" brouhaha.  Not good for them, not really good for anybody but PZ and Co (such as a few others who are repeating the "well-evidenced rapist" claim, as well as the "Krauss=pedophile supporter" (if not serial harasser) claims.  Their blog hits have gone up, so they'll get money and attention, but the people with real issues (assuming they are real, all we have is PZs testimony, which was the point of the Mr Deity gospel allusion (?)) will probably suffer for it.  Any attention which might have gone to those two women has really been thrown away and onto PZ and Co.  Depends on what happens, but it all seems like an ideological witch hunt, along with an ego trip.

All we can do is speculate and wait and see (and point and laugh or get sick at some of the people involved).

Now, that's from someone who used to support PZ (but not his commenters) for years, but who has watched him go downhill (or maybe he just got more blatant with his behavior, or I just noticed it more as my own attitudes have grown), and who wouldn't trust him as far as I can throw him one-handed.  Take it for whatever you want.

Whether anything will go to the courts...who knows.  PZ ignored (as far as we can tell) the C&D;  whether the lawyers think it is worth pursuing is anyone's guess, or even if either party wants to go that route.  Some people on PZs blog have been saying that PZ abandoned the woman, who will have to get a lawyer now.  Still, nobody other than two (or maybe three) people and their lawyers know what's going on.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,01:58   

Glen,

Quote
following your vengeful god.


Content free and classy.




Quote

 
Quote
I said give me a good reason why he would lie.


Oh I see, I'm asking you to meet the 'burden of proof,' and you cleverly (ha) pretend that I have the burden of proof to show that Myers is lying.


The rational default position would usually be to provisionally believe an allegation of rape. In this instance, we have  separate sources that say Shermer has sexually assaulted someone, plus the climate, plus the reports of other unbecoming sexual behaviour by Shermer.

Quote

   
Quote

     
Quote
we're not in any sort of position to find out  what did occur.


On the contrary, there are multiple lines of evidence by which we can provisionally believe what is, all things considered, an unexceptional claim.


That's another mindless strawman that you bleat out with brazen stupidity.  I didn't claim that it was an exceptional claim


I didn't say you did. It is an unexceptional claim, we are agreed.

Quote
I wrote quite the opposite, that it is believable


This is not the opposite, but go on.


Quote
which is why you need to provide the "multiple lines of evidence" for it before simply throwing out unsubsatantiated accusations.


Non-sequitur. Why does PZ Myers need to provide multiple lines of evidence before publishing the testimony of a person he knows and trusts who said she was raped by a man who has a reputation for being rather sleazy?

PZ is not a court. He is not trying to establish guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. He is not an American broadsheet, either. He is relaying a woman's warning from a climate of sexual harassment.

Or, PZ lied. In which case, yes, you rather do have a burden to say why he is lying. Which you can deny, sure. After all, PZ is a known liar, right? Creationists are always saying he lies. Also, PZ obviously wants to be invited to less of those  cushy paying gigs at skeptic conferences. He wants to encourage atheists not to buy his new book. Why wouldn't he make stuff up about Michael Shermer?


   
Quote
What a wonderful disanalogy.  It shows what a vapid and ignorant way of "thinking" that you have.


What  a stinging rebuttal.


   
Quote
 
My God, you're an ignorant twister of the truth.  It isn't "testimony" at all in the legal sense, it's just hearsay.


Once again, there is no court of law here.


There are two issues, yes. To tackle them both is not goal-shifting.

One is: was PZ wrong to publish the report? You first said he is wrong because journalistic ethics, and now you are obsessed with the law.

The other issue is: Should we believe the report? You say no because it is not established in a court of law, and because we have no way of knowing, and furthermore PZ might have lied.



   
Quote

the utter lack of decency  and legality of PZ's accusations.


Probably defamation, yes. There, we are agreed about illegality.

Utter lack of decency? If he believes the allegation to be true, the decent thing to do is to publish it.


Quote
Even if you weren't simply trying to trash by idiotic name-calling what you can't refute


I wasn't calling you a salad. I will call your statement an amusing display of a lack of self-awareness.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:03   

Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Cubist



Posts: 493
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:18   

It's worth noting that what PZ posted was not an accusation of rape, and, in fact, could not be an accusation of rape. Anybody who didn't actually read the thing, but instead relied on second-hand descriptions of its content, or (even worse) hyperbolic misrepresentations of its content, could easily get the (quite erroneous!) impression that what PZ posted was an accusation that Shermer raped a woman… but anyone who actually read the thing would know that the woman in question stated that someone intervened before events progressed to the point of nonconsensual sex.

So if one regards that Pharyngula post as an accusation aimed at Shermer, the accusation would not be Shermer is a rapist, but, rather, Shermer is kinda skeevy/creepy.

But okay, let's ignore the actual content of that post, and let's say that that post realio, trulio was an flat-out, explicit, no-foolin' accusation of rape. Just how much damage would such an accusation do to Shermer? Looking at other cases, including those in which the rapist in question wasn't just accused but was, in fact, convicted of rape, it's not particularly difficult to find examples of accused and/or convicted rapists who really didn't suffer all that much in the way of consequences from having been accused and/or convicted. For instance, how much harm has Roman Polanski suffered as a result of his having been convicted of rape in a court of law? Well, he can't travel to just any old place he feels like at any time. And some people have unfavorable opinions of him. But beyond these relatively minor consequences of a purely social kind, exactly what harm has Polanski suffered as a result of his rape conviction? And hey, how about the Steubenville rapists? The whole town rallied behind them, and ran their victim—the girl they raped—out of town. Somehow, I'm having trouble seeing any real harm done to these convicted rapists as a result of their having been convicted of rape…

So.

You say that Shermer will suffer harm as a result of what PZ posted? I'm skeptical of that proposition. Got evidence to support it?

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,03:58   

Quote (Cubist @ Aug. 17 2013,09:18)
It's worth noting that what PZ posted was not an accusation of rape, and, in fact, could not be an accusation of rape. Anybody who didn't actually read the thing, but instead relied on second-hand descriptions of its content, or (even worse) hyperbolic misrepresentations of its content, could easily get the (quite erroneous!) impression that what PZ posted was an accusation that Shermer raped a woman… but anyone who actually read the thing would know that the woman in question stated that someone intervened before events progressed to the point of nonconsensual sex.

So if one regards that Pharyngula post as an accusation aimed at Shermer, the accusation would not be Shermer is a rapist, but, rather, Shermer is kinda skeevy/creepy.

"
Quote
At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me.
"

It is the update on that post, the second report, that is not an accusation of rape. The first report is of rape.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
RDK



Posts: 229
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,09:55   

Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

--------------
If you are not:
Leviathan
please Logout under Meta in the sidebar.

‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:15   

Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:16   

page bug.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2135
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,10:27   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 14 2013,21:02)

I liked Mr. Deity and the Hat: I also liked the afterword.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,15:31   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03)
Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer?

PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist.

Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him.

Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things.

I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories.

For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.  

Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember).

Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,15:41   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things.

The same with Watson and her "threats" - she gets trolled for being loud and obnoxious, but everyone who writes to her is automatically evidence that they are atheists or skeptics.  It's politcal to just accept that they are since it fits the narrative being spread.  

About the only thing I would say that we can say, is that a lot of the people who commented were assholes.  

It's no problem for someone to say anything they want on the internet - I'm a one-armed Eskimo living in Topeka and I worship Cthulhu.  Obviously (I hope) that's too outrageous to believe, but a lot of people fell for the Tom Johnson/Wally Smith affair and apparently didn't learn to be skeptical.

From what I've seen, the atheist and skeptic movements (and there are a lot of different ones of each, they are not monolithic) are pretty fairly representative of society at large.  I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society - all I see is such "evidence" as you state, and other hyperbolic emotionalisms, misrepresentations, ignoring of countering evidence, etc.  And all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:08   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:31)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03)
Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer?

PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist.

Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him.

Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things.

I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories.

For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.  

Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember).

Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself.

Oh, I thought you knew something.

Yes, PZ Myers has criticized Shermer for being a libertarian, and a global warming skeptic. The recent back and forth was over some sexist remarks that Shermer refused to own. Myers has also praised him for articles, books, videos, and debate performances.

Anything that suggests PZ Myers has a grudge against Shermer?

As far as I can tell, there wasn't an entry about Shermer since January.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....shermer

Also, I know that SJW is intended as a perjorative, but why? What is wrong with social justice?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:47   

Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,17:50   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)
   
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)
   
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
     
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things.


Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists.

We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes.

Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.


   
Quote
I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society


It probably isn't. What is your point?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:04   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47)
Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no?

I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others.

If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:08   

Here is the timeline for the whole thing, not just regarding Shermer.


Quote

May 23rd, 2012
Pseudonymous commenter Miriamne, Michael Shermer, JREF
Prior to the current spate of naming, a comment left at Friendly Atheist names Michael Shermer as allegedly having harassed her, and “trying to sleep with a new young woman every TAM”.
[...]

July 29th, 2013

Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailant, JREF
Ashley details a recent sexual assault at a conference in a video on her Youtube channel, relating how a number of witnesses were present for an unwelcome groping at TAM.



August 6th, 2013

Karen Stollznow, unnamed assailant, unnamed organization
Possibly emboldened by Ashley Paramore’s stand, Karen Stollznow comes forward with her own story of having been serially sexually harassed and assaulted over the course of several years. (DOWN)

Ian Murphy, Ben Radford, CFI
Ian Murphy points the finger at Ben Radford as the serial harasser discussed in Karen Stollznow’s post, via Twitter.

PZ Myers, Ben Radford, CFI
PZ Myers updates a post linking to Stollznow’s blog several hours after Ian Murphy names Radford to verify that a number of others had named him as well in private emails.



August 7th, 2013

Carrie Poppy, DJ Grothe and Ben Radford, JREF and CFI
Carrie Poppy releases a series of email bombs about the Ben Radford case and describes the major events leading up to her leaving her job as Communications Director of JREF after being serially mistreated by DJ.

Sasha Pixlee, DJ Grothe, JREF
Sasha describes an incident when he first met DJ Grothe, wherein he suggests that he might drug Sasha and deliver him to his friends to “have fun with him”.

Jason Thibeault, Ben Radford, CFI
I point out that accounts regarding whether or not Radford was punished or even found to have sexually harassed Stollznow by the investigator are in contention, after a private message from Radford to someone who unfollowed him on Facebook is revealed in part in public.

Unnamed victims through Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Jen explains that one person alleged that Lawrence Krauss had harassed them, then later that a second person alleged he had assaulted them; and that this news came as no surprise as his name has long been whispered in the private back-channels at conferences between women wanting to protect themselves. (REDACTED)

Unnamed victims through Brian Thompson, Ben Radford and Michael Shermer, CFI and JREF
Brian Thompson, former employee of JREF, claims to personally know a number of women who have been harassed by Radford and Shermer, via Twitter. He specifies two instances of ‘being creeped at’, one of ‘being groped’.

Elyse Anders, Michael Shermer, JREF
Elyse describes some unwelcome salacious comments from Shermer after she drops a chicken tender at the TAM9 reception buffet.



August 8th, 2013

Matthew Baxter, Ben Radford, CFI
10:35am Central: Matthew Baxter, Karen Stollznow’s husband, in a comment on Blake Smith’s Facebook page, corroborates Stollznow’s story. Speaking directly to Ben Radford, he says that Radford persistently continued to contact Stollznow after being asked for years to stop. Baxter says that he and Stollznow have copies of correspondence backing this up. He also says that when Stollznow cut off communication with Radford, Radford called her “disrespectful.”

Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
After a vaguely lawsuit-threatening comment by Krauss on her blog, Jen redacts the previous post and begins referring to him as Famous Skeptic.

Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Eddy relates several of the stories that have floated around regarding Krauss’ questionable activities on a CFI cruise, and how he is frequently mentioned as an alleged serial harasser by the informal back-channel of women trying to protect one another from such harassment at conferences. The post is taken down the same day after Krauss comments almost identically to what was posted at Jen’s; the post is replaced with a statement by The Heresy Club that it was found to be in breach of guidelines. (DOWN)

[/I]Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI[/I]
Eddy Cara comments on his personal blog about the post that was taken down from Heresy Club, which he considered a “calculated risk”.

Unnamed victim via PZ Myers, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
PZ Myers reports that someone he trusts has claimed having been sexually assaulted by Krauss.

Unnamed victim via Stephanie Zvan, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Stephanie Zvan reports being told the same story as PZ regarding an assault by Lawrence Krauss, though it could be the same person reporting the same incident.

Unnamed victims via PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
PZ Myers posts accounts by sources he trusts regarding allegations of Michael Shermer’s witnessed and experienced predatory tactics and alleged sexual assault of women he coerced into a position where they could not legally consent.

bartmon, DJ Grothe, JREF
Former employee of JREF bartmon concurs with Carrie Poppy’s assessments regarding DJ Grothe.



August 9th, 2013

Unnamed victim through delphi_ote, Michael Shermer, JREF
A participant at the JREF forums corroborates the existence of allegations against Michael Shermer by unnamed alleged victims.

Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailants, JREF
Ashley details in a follow-up video the absurd levels of harassment she has since received for talking about her assault, despite not naming names. She uses this to explain why underreporting of harassment and assault is such an issue.

naomibaker, Michael Shermer, JREF
naomibaker relates her story about how she was contacted ostensibly by Michael Shermer’s wife asking if the story she told about a cheating husband without names was talking about Michael. She listed names that Shermer had apparently had affairs with, several of the names being recognizeable.



August 12th, 2013

Joe Anderson, Ben Radford, CFI
Joe Anderson corroborates Karen Stollznow’s story, stating that he was one of the folks deposed by CFI’s investigators about the behaviour he witnessed from Radford.

Karen Stollznow, Ben Radford, CFI
The original post by Karen Stollznow is taken down after Ron Lindsay sends a letter to Scientific American. Karen is told by SA staff that it was taken down due to legal threats, while Ron Lindsay claims to have only asked for corrections. The Google Cache version of the page now also 404s, but a copy still exists on Scrible.

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
Michael Shermer’s lawyer issues a cease-and-desist letter demanding that PZ remove the post containing the allegations and claiming that PZ did not hear directly from the alleged victim as he stated, pointing out an update suggesting that Carrie Poppy is responsible for putting the alleged victim in contact with PZ (no word on whether PZ actually spoke to the victim directly though); and claiming that PZ has a profit motive in blog hits. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on scribd.)

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The post where PZ Myers linked the relevant PDF disappears after getting 70 comments within the span of an hour or so. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on Google Cache.)

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The previous post is quickly replaced with this one stating that PZ has contacted Ken from Popehat.

Stephanie Zvan, Ben Radford / Ron Lindsay, CFI
Stephanie Zvan analyzes the differences and commonalities extensively between Ron Lindsay’s letter demanding corrections of SciAm, and Karen Stollznow’s original allegations. Most relevant is the fact that Lindsay concedes the harassment actually happened.



August 13th, 2013

Carrie Poppy, Michael Shermer, JREF
Carrie Poppy and PZ Myers publicly state that Carrie only put the alleged victim into contact with PZ, and that Carrie is not really involved otherwise, despite the assertions in the cease-and-desist letter.

rikzilla, Michael Shermer, JREF
rikzilla relates a story where Shermer propositioned his wife, calling her sexy and asking her to his room for private drinks while he was present.

Renee Davis-Pelt, unnamed assailant, JREF
Renee posts on Facebook that she was present to witness the assault described by Ashley Paramore that happened at TAM.



August 14th, 2013

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The deadline given to PZ by Michael Shermer’s lawyers to acknowledge receipt has elapsed. The post is still up.

Brian K. Dalton, unnamed assailant, JREF
In the comments on Ashley Paramore’s video, “Mr. Deity” corroborates Ashley’s story and regrets not doing anything at the time.

August 16th, 2013

Ian Murphy, Michael Shermer, JREF
Ian Murphy publishes an email exchange with Shermer wherein Shermer makes some comments, against his lawyer’s orders, about the allegations and his dealings with PZ Myers.


http://moourl.com/1suu3......3....u3

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:27   

Quote
all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert.


Are you implying that you understand Dilbert's boss, or that you don't understand what "privilege" and "hyper" mean?

Or, are you asking for simpler words? Or what?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:38   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:04)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47)
Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no?

I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others.

If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account.

All I asked about was the accusation by PZ.

So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,18:39   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:08)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:31)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,03:03)
Badger3k, what is this you know about Myers having a grudge against Shermer?

PZ has a long history of going after Shermer for various things.  He's a libertarian, that's pretty much a mortal sin for PZ (I've been broadly tarred with that label for being part of a forum);  I believe Shermer has spoken out against the type of tactics PZ uses, and IIRC PZ also spoke out against Shermer when he commented on the attacks and actions by people like Ophelia Benson (Shermer wrote an article on the witch hunts, Benson & Watson wrote against Shermer - well, Benson wrote a lot, and PZ chimed in several times as well in his own posts - last Dec).  I did a quick search of Shermer back on the Scienceblogs site, and found one from 2006 where PZ goes after Shermer for being an accomodationist.

Someone posted a bunch of links to the more recent anti-Shermer stuff, but I couldn't find it.  If you go to both the FTB and Scienceblogs Pharyngula site and search for Shermer, you'll see a few that promote him for one thing or another, but also a lot of disagreement.  I'm not sure when he started to really go after him - I think it was his politics some years ago, but when Shermer started speaking out against the SJW actions (and, a big maybe here, the atheism+ debacle), PZ (and his friends) got more strident against him.

Maybe it's just the emotional aspect, but from watching and reading him over...I don't know, 10 years maybe, if it goes back that far - at least sometime in the early 2000s, I've remembered more posts against something Shermer said or did than otherwise.  This is added in with things PZ has said against Libertarians (like Penn Jillette) and accomodationists, the "dictionary atheists" bit and other things.

I also remember PZ talking about allegations against Shermer some time ago (pre FTB).  I think this had to do with either the rep Shermer had - apparently he liked to sleep with the Skeptic Groupies, from what PZ and his friends have said - or some instance where (the third-or more-hand story of someone who slept with Shermer and the next day all they apparently got was an autographed book, and were upset by it.  Not sure what an adult in a one night stand expected).  A lot of things have blended together over the years, so take that into account (I could be wrong on some specifics or even generalities), and my own bias may be coloring my memories.

For Shermer, I'm not that fond of him myself - don't really care for his politics (his conversion story on his exposure to Ayn Rand sounds like some religious conversions, being just as lacking in critical thinking), and some of the attitude he displays towards some of the loons (both religious and alternative woo peddlers) comes off as soft to me sometimes.  

Sorry I couldn't provide links - I used to have some but that was a few hard drive crashes ago, but if you search both sites you might be able to see what I mean (or see if I have a different take on it than what you read).  Some of this comes from reading other sites and comments at other sites, and I rarely keep links to anything like that.  If you look up Skepticblog and look for Shermer on Libertarianism, you might find (a few years back) his conversion story and may even see my comments (I wasn't polite, if I remember).

Probably too much and not enough to help, but if you're interested do the searches and decide for yourself.

Oh, I thought you knew something.

Yes, PZ Myers has criticized Shermer for being a libertarian, and a global warming skeptic. The recent back and forth was over some sexist remarks that Shermer refused to own. Myers has also praised him for articles, books, videos, and debate performances.

Anything that suggests PZ Myers has a grudge against Shermer?

As far as I can tell, there wasn't an entry about Shermer since January.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....shermer

Also, I know that SJW is intended as a perjorative, but why? What is wrong with social justice?

There isn't a problem with wanting equality.  That's not what Social Justice Warriors want.  They want a privileged position where their ideas are the only ones worth having.  The normally tolerate no dissent or even discussion, and love to tar their opponents with everything under the sun.  They see the world through their ideology, and all the activities that I've seen on the big name SJWs, they are rather loathsome people.  When someone who was been raped says somthing against them, the first thing you see is "you weren't really raped".  They hold others to a standard they don't hold themselves.

These SJWs are the ones who want to force others to be with them or against them (re: Carrier's CHUD rant).  They want atheism, a simple lack of belief in gods, to carry all this other stuff that isn't appropriate (similar to theists insisting atheists have particular thoughts or values - or lack thereof).

Social justice is a good thing.  Social Justice Warriors are the new Keyboard Kommandos.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:08   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:50)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)
   
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)
     
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
     
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things.


Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists.

We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes.

Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.


   
Quote
I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society


It probably isn't. What is your point?

For the first part - significant # of atheists - let's see the evidence.  Do the study.  Let's see the results (be sure to include your methodology).  You've already limited your response to "atheists online" as opposed to "atheists in general", so it should be easier, although verification might be problematic.

If we go with your assumption that 10% of the posters are atheists, and if we go with 7 billion on the planet, with millions of atheists over the world, what fraction is that?

Now, is the internet infested with trolls?  I'd probably agree with that.  

However, how can you say that a significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny, and then agree with me that the problem is no worse than in society?  Are you making the claim that the society (we'll limit ourselves to American culture in general) is filled with misogynists and racists to a large degree?

If so, I disagree, and that is also where I disagree with the hysterical SJW trope of "the atheists and skeptics are filled with these rapists and misogynists who work to keep "the Patriarchy" in place."  Without that, all these chicken littles are doing is drawing attention to themselves, and every time the attack something that is not what they think it is, not only do they belittle the actual problem (such as actual sexual assault instead of "making me feel uncomfortable") and damage those who are actually working instead of blogging about it for their in-group on the internet.

Case in point - David Silverman was accused of racist actions by an ex-employee.  Only one of the SJWs at FTB actually looked into it and said something.  Since he was an ally, they (almost) all gave him a pass, saying things like, we need more information.  Yet give them a simple thing such as Brian Dalton saying you can refuse a drink, and they want to crucify him as a witch, saying he is blaming the victim and that it is ok to rape drunk women.  These extremists are not living in the real world.  That's the danger of the internet silo they have.  

The recent actions saying that storifying someone's public tweets is harassment. Yet when someone on their side records a ton of tweets that one of their opponents made (which if I recall correctly), that is ok.  Two legs good, four legs bad.  When you have some people who do vanity searches of their names and go to places where someone makes fun of them, then they make a blog post and point that location out (which may have received no attention otherwise)...and then claim that as harassment?  When an employee of CFI says that because she broke her ankle once, she knows how it feels to be blind?  WTF?  When someone says that internet comments or tweets has caused PTSD, minimizing those who really have it, such as soldiers or actual rape victims...WTF?

Sorry, got a bit ranting which is more towards the SJWs than the current one I was responding to, but we're talking loons who think that their first world twitter comments are as bad as the real victims throughout the world, sorry, these nutters need to be shunned into the corner and ignored until they grow up.  There's a lot more (the different types of feminism, the infantilizing of women, the rejection of women of color by people like Marcotte, the white knighting, the rejection of standards of evidence (aka, the "always believe the victim" trope, which assumes they actually are victims without evidence), the redefinition or misuse of terms such as "misogyny" or "privilege", the attempt to basically take over a gravy train on the conference circuit (which also has issues) - a whole lot more I'm not going to waste anybodies time here on.  There are other venues for that, or which have my opinions on record.

Sorry, rant over for sure now.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:13   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:27)
Quote
all the buzzwords, such as "hyper skepticism", "privilege", etc.  Like reading the pointy haired boss on Dilbert.


Are you implying that you understand Dilbert's boss, or that you don't understand what "privilege" and "hyper" mean?

Or, are you asking for simpler words? Or what?

They use buzzwords without understanding what they mean, or the correct way to use them.  When called on them, they scoff at "dictionary" definitions as if having consistent terms is something bad.  They seem to vie to see who can use the most buzzwords so they seem to be saying something, when in reality they are full of shit.

Example: Privilege is a sociological term used, and which is very flexible since it depends on the context and culture.  The SJWs use it as a bludgeon, where my being a causcasian male means I can't understand many of the things they talk about.

"hyperskepticism" is their buzzword which means "you are skeptical of things I like".  They reject any call for evidence of a claim when it supports them, but if the same situation is reversed, they'll make every demand for the same information they refused to give before.

Consistency is not part of the SJW canon.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,19:17   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,18:04)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47)
Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no?

I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others.

If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account.

Why is it rational to provisionally believe that Shermer raped and harassed women?  Do you believe that of all speakers at such things?  

Is there something about Shermer that makes you suspect he did it, or that the anonymous account that PZ says he obtained (probably through Carrie Poppy) has some veracity?  If someone said that they heard you raped a woman at a conference, would you be ok with them blogging about it and warning people away from you?

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:11   

OK, so what I'm getting here is that we aren't talking about the same thing at all.  I've been seeing this a lot on the internet with regards to this topic.

I am talking about the following.
1) There is an accusation made that a particular person raped a woman.
2) That woman is unknown to the wider audience.
3) There is no evidence for anything EXCEPT what PZ says.  He says there is a woman.  He says that she was raped by Shermer.  He says she's not interested in going to the authorities.  He says a lot of things.
4) As far as the rest of the universe is concerned, there is NO EVIDENCE that the alleged event happened.  We don't know who it happened to, when, where, what other factors may or may not have been involved.

I am ONLY talking about the fact that PZ accused someone of rape with no evidence.  PZ may have tons of evidence.  He may truly believe the person (or the friend of the person) who was raped.  But he very well may be being lied to.  He wasn't there.

That is why I think PZ has done an abominably stupid thing.  He can't even defend his actions without naming the claimant.  

He has stuck his neck out and it very well may be chopped off.

No, you say that keeping quiet is a bad move.  I can understand how you might be angry.  Especially if this is your friend.  But shouting out to the rest of the world (WHO DOES NOT HAVE YOUR EVIDENCE) is stupid and, very likely, libel.

I may believe that my friend was raped.  I know her.  I know the accused rapist.  But if I do not have evidence that would stand up in a court, then I shouldn't shout it out to the world.

I can say that this guy isn't to be trusted.  That I wouldn't go to a conference with him.  That I think he's a slime ball.  But anything beyond that WITHOUT EVIDENCE is libel.  

And honestly, testimonials are the absolute worst kind of evidence.  As I said before, we don't know what happened.  And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact.

That is why I would do the things that I said and NOT TELL THE WORLD.  And why I would encourage going to the authorities.  Regardless of the problems that police have with sexual assault crimes, and I don't deny that these problems exist, we (non-police, non-judges, non-juries) cannot take matters into our own hands.

And that is the real issue here.  Shermer cannot defend himself against an unknown accuser.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:17   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38)

So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened?


You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,20:51   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38)

So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened?


You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there.

I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event?

No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence.

Why won't you just answer the questions?  Also, using something other than one's screen name is generally considered bad form.  Indeed, the only people I've seen do are creationists right before they threaten to beat the fuck out of me because I'm "stupid".

So, OK, let's play your little game.

Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:29   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 18 2013,01:08)
Quote

If we go with your assumption that 10% of the posters are atheists, and if we go with 7 billion on the planet, with millions of atheists over the world, what fraction is that?

According to a 2011 survey, 64% of reddit users were American.

Quote
Now, is the internet infested with trolls?  I'd probably agree with that.


I agree that you are agreeing with that.


Quote
Are you making the claim that the society (we'll limit ourselves to American culture in general) is filled with misogynists and racists to a large degree?


Yes.

14% who don't approve of inter-racial marriage. That would be over 40,000,000 people.

20% of Americans say school boards should be able to fire homosexual teachers.

Some evidence of misogyny.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:40   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:51)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38)

So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened?


You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there.

I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event?

No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence.

[/quote]



So, OK, let's play your little game.

Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?

Of course it is evidence. You mean it is not sufficient evidence.

I posted the timeline up there ^^^^.

...I was not trying to offend you by using your name. Apologies. I am not going to threaten to beat you up.


Quote
So, OK, let's play your little game.

Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?



Whoosh.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,21:46   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,21:40)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:51)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,20:17)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,00:38)

So you agree that it is not 100% certain that the alleged event even happened?


You know what will really knock me down, Kevin? Ask me if I was there.

I think I've already asked you.  Do you have evidence of the event?

No, testimony of an anonymous person is not evidence.





So, OK, let's play your little game.

Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?[/quote]
Of course it is evidence. You mean it is not sufficient evidence.

I posted the timeline up there ^^^^.

...I was not trying to offend you by using your name. Apologies. I am not going to threaten to beat you up.


Quote
So, OK, let's play your little game.

Where you, Driver, present when the alleged rape happened?



Whoosh.

Driver, you seem to be playing some game.  I tried.  You apparently aren't interested in an actual discussion.

Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here.

"Whoosh" indeed.

You're right personal testimony is evidence.  And, you are right, I think that it is the absolute worst form of evidence there is.

On a jury, if the only prosecution evidence is eye-witness testimony, then I will not vote to convict.  I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.  And they might even think that they are telling the truth, but sometimes, they aren't.

Sorry, but that's the way it is.  Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.  

Let me ask you, is that sufficient to publicly accuse someone of a major crime?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:03   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:11)
 And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact.

Well, you have the resources at your fingertips. Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:19   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,03:46)
Quote
Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here.





 

What question did you ask me that prompted me to suggest a question you could ask me?

Quote
I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.


Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link.


Quote
Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.  


It's a first hand account, unless PZ Myers altered it or made it up.

And it is not "all we have here."

What else do we have?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
socle



Posts: 322
Joined: July 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:22   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,20:11)
And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact.

OgreMkV,

I'm not sure what this means.  Could you elaborate for me please?  Thanks.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,22:49   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,22:19)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,03:46)
 
Quote
Like I said, you are behaving exactly like the creationists that appear here.





 

What question did you ask me that prompted me to suggest a question you could ask me?

 
Quote
I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.


Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link.


 
Quote
Now all we have here is a (apparently) 3rd hand account.  


It's a first hand account, unless PZ Myers altered it or made it up.

And it is not "all we have here."

What else do we have?

From you link

Quote
The truth is, of course, that some women do lie about having been raped. That shouldn’t surprise us. People make false accusations about every type of crime, even murder, where it is excruciatingly difficult to do. If no woman ever lied about being raped, the gender might have some collective claim to sainthood.


Therefore... we cannot be certain until the facts are established.

What are the facts?

umm... there aren't any.  All we have is a 2nd or 3rd hand account (because PZ has indeed changed his story).

I don't understand what's so hard about this.  

Maybe there was a rape.  You don't know.  I don't know.  And despite what he's heard, PZ doesn't know.  Until it is established in a court that Shermer is guilty, then saying that he is... is libel.



socle: Rape is difficult because it's (AFAIK) the only crime that can be made into a crime after the fact.

Person says "yes".  Sex occurs.  Person regrets action, decides they were tricked, etc.  Charges rape.

I see, in the cases of the 8 false reports, they were fabricated.  Nothing happened.  This is possible, but I agree unlikely.  Although, I think that this report has much less impact than you think, because it's university over 10 years.

Anyway, no, what I'm thinking is specifically that someone chooses to voluntarily have sex, then regrets that decision later.

That would not be considered a 'false report' in this paper.  It would be considered a "Case did not proceed" or "insufficient information".  

Regardless, this is not the point.  A public accusation has been made.  It's serious one that could have devastating consequences to everyone.  Because of the way the claim was made, Shermer has no way to defend himself.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,23:51   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,04:49)
Therefore... we cannot be certain until the facts are established.


How certain?


Quote
What are the facts?

umm... there aren't any.  All we have is a 2nd or 3rd hand account.



I see. There are no facts, and all we have is the account relayed by PZ.

Have you ever posted or linked to information only for it to be ignored? Who does that?

   
Quote
Rape is difficult because it's (AFAIK) the only crime that can be made into a crime after the fact.


Wut? WUT?? What is going on in your head?


 
Quote
Because of the way the claim was made, Shermer has no way to defend himself.


That is completely untrue, isn't it?


   
Quote
(because PZ has indeed changed his story)


The account is a first hand account, in the woman's own words, unless PZ changed or made up the account itself.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2013,23:53   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 18 2013,04:03)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 18 2013,02:11)
 And it's a huge problem that sexual assault may very well not be sexual assault until after the fact.

Well, you have the resources at your fingertips. Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Well?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
coy_



Posts: 1
Joined: Aug. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,06:19   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 14 2013,23:25)
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Aug. 15 2013,05:02)
These two fill in most of the story after the "grenade" post:

Shermer's lawyers

David Silverman tweeted:

 
Quote
David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

I liked a @YouTube video from @mrdeity
http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....GVOQk?a  Mr. Deity and the Hat
View media

   Reply
   Retweet
   Favorite

David Silverman ?@MrAtheistPants 11h

Mr. Deity and the Hat: http://youtu.be/kMZ86PG....6PGVOQk  See @mrdeity @ #aacon14


I list his twitter source of the youtube (at least the top one works) because Silverman is president of American Atheists.  The shots taken at Myers by Mr. Deity begin a little after the five minute mark.

Glen Davidson

Brian Dalton should know better than to present false equivalences. Rape is not an extraordinary claim, let alone a miraculous one! Idiot.

Is he also implying that PZ made it all up? To what end?

Myers is not trying to get Shermer convicted. Also pretty sure he would have known that if he gets sued, he will almost certainly lose.

With his "personal responsibility" remark, what is Dalton saying? It is okay to have sex with women who are too drunk to consent? Women shouldn't drink at all? Both?

Contrary to received wisdom, women do not generally lie about rape and sexual assault.

Quote
But most important of all, a victim's choices are NOT the point. To see this, think of anyone who commented on a murder or non-sexual assault charge with criticism of the victim's intoxication level. Irrelevant victim blaming isn't it?


Whilst bad choices do not exonerate blame from a perpatrator, ignoring the bad decisions that someone made that lead them to be vulnurable to a perpatrator is not very smart. Mentioning that a victim was intoxicated and that it may have contributed to their likliehood of being a victim on that occasion isn't victim blaming. Victim blaming actually exists and when people misrepresent stating a fact such as "the victim was drunk" as victim blaming which would look more like "she deserved it because she was drunk", it invalidates the cases where victim blaming is actually an issue.

Quote
Whenever it comes to any other type of assault, people's first response is not to speculate on what the victim might have done to facilitate the attack. Think about that. We don't do this for any other crime, I don't think, let alone assault.


Every time a child is kidnapped/murdered we do the exact same thing. We want to know who was responsible for looking after this child. When someone gets burgled, we ask how they got in, we talk about how we can be "safer" next time. IF someone physically assaults you in the street, we immediately ask what led to them taking this action. We never (or the rational never) say that justifies the action, but we look for reasons why that person became a victim, probably to minimise the risk of it happening to us.

Quote
Most accounts of rape are not lies.


I'm sure that this is true, just because I find it difficult to believe that the majority of people who claim they have been raped would make it up knowing the consequences for the other person as well as themselves. However, I don't know this to be true. It would need some pretty awesome research methods to ascertain how true this is. I'm unsure how you could say this with such absolute certainty.

Quote
Where "leaving your doors unlocked" is drinking wine at a conference.


What people seem loathe to understand is that consuming alcohol makes everyone more susceptible to being a victim of a crime. Anyone getting so drunk that they lose their inhibitions/are unaware of their surroundings/cannot remember what happened becomes more likely to be in an accident or the victim or perpetrator of a crime. This isn't specific to gender, biological sex or even rape itself. If someone went out, drinking enough alcohol that they were oblivious to the fact that the people he saw as new drinking buddies were actually stealing his wallet, people would criticise his behaviour as well as condemning the thieves. In fact, they would be more likely to dismiss the actions of the thieves as opportunistic behaviour  rather than malicious larceny. The principle remains: some people are criminals - they seek to commit crime. There are steps we can all take to reduce our chances of being a victim to their crimes.

Quote
You know what is most wrong about this "if only she had not done X" stuff? It helps perpetuate the perception that women can always avoid rape if they are "sensible". This is patent bullshit.


You are less likely to be a victim of any crimes if you take some precautions that make you less vulnerable to being a victim of crime. Of course, that doesn't mean you will never be a victim of crime, but there are ways of minimising risk. Dismissing this concept actually "helps to perpetuate" the idea that people should not make responsible decisions because nobody should take advantage of their vulnerabilities anyway. An idea that belongs with the unicorns.

Quote
Where if we tell of a man who goes out to a bar and gets drunk and then is followed home and assaulted for his wallet, the overwhelming reaction is condemnation of the assailant not "men shouldn't go out to pubs and get blind drunk" or "I don't believe it happened". Of course, because it is fucking ridiculous to be hyperskeptical about someone getting assaulted. However, the same people, good people too, react to testimony of rape with victim blaming and denial.


As I said earlier, this isn't my experience at all. People will even go as far as to say he probably wasn't mugged at all and lost his wallet/fell over drunk.

Quote
However, nothing you said is evidence.


And this is the key point. What I want to know from people on this side of the argument is whether they want the evidence needed to take someone to court/convict them of rape should be of a lesser standard than that of other crimes? Ie you need pretty good circumstantial evidence to secure a murder conviction, should you need "okay" circumstantial evidence to convict someone of rape?

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,09:11   

coy,

For context, my comments about drinking and rape were in reference to Brian Dalton's video.

While we may comment on the circumstances of a crime, very few people would criticize a murder victim for being drunk. While you and midwifetoad seem to regard getting drunk at all as bad decision making/a lack of common sense, I am confident this is minority opinion. Then again, I live in a country of drunks. If everyone starts seeing getting drunk as a lack of common sense then perhaps I (now a teetotaller) can look forward to less repetitive mind-numbing conversations on social occasions.

If a drunk man comes home without his wallet then, yes, we do not require any evidence to assume he has lost it. Priors are always relevant. The priors are why we should not demand an extremely high standard of evidence to provisionally accept a rape allegation.

If a woman tells us she was beaten up last night, we do not tend to say she shouldn't have been drinking.

I see several problems with Dalton's "it's easy to say no" jibe.

1) First and biggest of all, it is sarcasm as part of a skit about rape allegations. The implication that a victim of rape is at fault for drinking is unavoidable. In the UK, for example, 6% of people think a victim of rape is mostly or completely responsible for the crime if drunk. This does not include all those who think the victim partly responsible for the crime.


2) The incident he refers to does not seem to involve asking if she wanted top ups.

3) The intention to have only enough drinks to be mildly buzzed can easily be subverted by others. Even light drinking affects both will and awareness.

4) It is not always easy to say no. Not only are politeness and pressure relevant (and in some cultures, such as Korean, drinking is very much expected), but quite a few people are alcoholics.

As for the allegations themselves, the key point is NOT that what I may have said in one post is not evidence. The key point is that evidence exists, and has been posted and linked to, despite the repeated claims that there is only an account published by PZ Myers and that all witnesses are anonymous.

Quote
What I want to know from people on this side of the argument is whether they want the evidence needed to take someone to court/convict them of rape should be of a lesser standard than that of other crimes? Ie you need pretty good circumstantial evidence to secure a murder conviction, should you need "okay" circumstantial evidence to convict someone of rape?


Well that is a legal question, and IANAL.

No-one "on this side of the argument" is seeking a conviction.

Greta Christina answers the version of your question that is relevant.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,09:14   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 18 2013,04:19)
Quote
I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.


Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link.

^ on rape and lying.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,11:30   

I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,11:54   

In the broader view, I just hope this doesn't do any harm to the pro science/anti creationist movement in general.

Apart from the discotute, I haven't read anything on the YEC blogs yet, but it's bound to turn up sooner or later.

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,12:03   

This has strong echoes of the Lord McAlpine affair in the UK a while back:

http://www.legalweek.com/legal-w....bel-law

  
RDK



Posts: 229
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,15:04   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:50)
 
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)
       
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)
       
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
         
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things.


Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists.

We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes.

Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.


       
Quote
I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society


It probably isn't. What is your point?

Reddit is 4chan-lite.  Anyone who believes that an online community with a notorious penchant for trolling and fuckery is representative of the skeptic community at large is a fool.

Does internet anonymity allow people to post purposefully mean-spirited content for shock value with little to no consequences?  Yes.  Does that necessarily mean the people who post these things have and act on these beliefs away from their keyboard?  I would think not.

--------------
If you are not:
Leviathan
please Logout under Meta in the sidebar.

‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,16:37   

Quote
I have seen people's careers destroyed because of claims like this.


Indeed:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news....al.html

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 462
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,17:13   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,00:14)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 18 2013,04:19)
Quote
I know too much about people.  You see, they lie.


Then you know the stats on false reports of crimes  and specifically rape. Excellent. This is a link.

^ on rape and lying.

I think that the issue is simple. Whether you like or dislike Myers, he repeated hearsay on a very serious crime where the accused has no way to clear their name. That is and should be illegal.

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,05:26   

Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

And then there are the women who accuse a guy or guys of rape or other sex related crimes even though the guy(s) never raped or even touched the woman.  

Yeah, rape sucks, but so do false, life ruining accusations/convictions.

Edited by The whole truth on Aug. 19 2013,03:29

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,09:31   

Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,11:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

How many men?

Is "assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Being persecuted for questioning evolution is a huge problem for all those people who are hounded and bullied out of academia just because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy.

Is bullying by evolutionists a huge problem?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,09:49   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Febble



Posts: 310
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,09:55   

Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,05:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

And then there are the women who accuse a guy or guys of rape or other sex related crimes even though the guy(s) never raped or even touched the woman.  

Yeah, rape sucks, but so do false, life ruining accusations/convictions.

There's "huge" as in "a huge problem for the victim", then there's "huge" as in "a huge number of victims".

I agree that a false accusation of rape can be as damaging to the victim as rape.

The question is which happens more often.

And therefore which is more likely in a contested case.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,11:11   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:31)
Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,11:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

How many men?

Is "assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Being persecuted for questioning evolution is a huge problem for all those people who are hounded and bullied out of academia just because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy.

Is bullying by evolutionists a huge problem?

If it happens once, then it has to be investigated and no presumption of innocence or guilt can be made until after the investigation is complete.

I honestly don't understand what's going on here.

Half the people seem to be "we'd like evidence, an instigation, if it's enough to publicly accuse, then go to the police"

The other half is presuming guilt and who cares if it destroys his career with unfounded accusations, we're preventing a rapist from getting someone else.

No, they aren't.  If someone is a serial rapist, then the only thing that will protect people is putting that person behinds bars.  Making a blog post will not change anything.

That's what I don't get.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,11:19   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
The other half is presuming guilt and who cares if it destroys his career with unfounded accusations, we're preventing a rapist from getting someone else.

No, they aren't.  If someone is a serial rapist, then the only thing that will protect people is putting that person behinds bars.  Making a blog post will not change anything.

That's what I don't get.

You can't consistently claim that making a blog post will not change anything while also claiming a career may be ruined.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,11:25   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
I honestly don't understand what's going on here.

It may help if you answer the questions in my two posts here.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,11:29   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:31)
Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,11:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

How many men?

Is "assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Being persecuted for questioning evolution is a huge problem for all those people who are hounded and bullied out of academia just because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy.

Is bullying by evolutionists a huge problem?

If it happens once, then it has to be investigated and no presumption of innocence or guilt can be made until after the investigation is complete.

So, the claims made at UD and various other creationist venues should all be investigated? And you will make no presumption as to innocence or guilt until an investigation is concluded? Who should do the investigating?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,11:33   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 17 2013,01:10)
Shouldn't she be seeking legal action?


Late to the thread and haven't finished reading it yet so maybe this is already said.

Richard, the principals have claimed to have checked and the state in question has a process that requires a report be filed in order to "activate" the statute of limitations on rape.  The SoL* for rape in that state is unlimited but the report must be filed within four years and that deadline has passed.  Legal action is no longer a possibility.

Additionally, there is also supposed to be a pair of emails in existence where Shermer has apologized for his behavior to the anonymous claimant.

Don't ask me for links; I read this several days ago and don't feel like digging back through all the hack-n-slash in order to find them.

*an unfortunate acronym

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,12:03   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,11:19)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
The other half is presuming guilt and who cares if it destroys his career with unfounded accusations, we're preventing a rapist from getting someone else.

No, they aren't.  If someone is a serial rapist, then the only thing that will protect people is putting that person behinds bars.  Making a blog post will not change anything.

That's what I don't get.

You can't consistently claim that making a blog post will not change anything while also claiming a career may be ruined.

Yes, because they are two separate concepts.

Do you honestly believe that stopping a serial rapist from going to conventions will stop the serial rapist from any rape?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,12:08   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,11:29)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:31)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,11:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

How many men?

Is "assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Being persecuted for questioning evolution is a huge problem for all those people who are hounded and bullied out of academia just because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy.

Is bullying by evolutionists a huge problem?

If it happens once, then it has to be investigated and no presumption of innocence or guilt can be made until after the investigation is complete.

So, the claims made at UD and various other creationist venues should all be investigated? And you will make no presumption as to innocence or guilt until an investigation is concluded? Who should do the investigating?

Are you really this dense?

The claims that ID proponents have made HAVE been investigated, by experts in the field... and the claims have been shown to be without merit.

As far as this case, I'm sure that, somewhere in the US, is an authority with the ability, knowledge, and experience (not to mention jurisdiction) to investigate the case.

As an aside, you may not be aware, but in the US, the state often has the authority to investigate crimes even if the victim doesn't want to push it.

If there is so much evidence that PZ feels comfortable with his public accusation, then there should be enough information to get the police involved, even if the victim doesn't testify.  Surely, one of the many anonymous people who have had their wine glasses filled will step forward.

Yes, I'm being snarky, because I cannot believe that this conversation is happening.

Is Shermer guilty, yes or no?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,12:30   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ Aug. 18 2013,17:37)
Quote
I have seen people's careers destroyed because of claims like this.


Indeed:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news.......al.html


That was a very interesting link Peter Henderson because that webpage had a link on it that led to another news story that encapsulated rape-culture perfectly.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news.......ED.html

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,12:40   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,10:49)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

My brother knows this guy that totally got anal-probed by aliens.

True story.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,13:47   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,18:03)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,11:19)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
The other half is presuming guilt and who cares if it destroys his career with unfounded accusations, we're preventing a rapist from getting someone else.

No, they aren't.  If someone is a serial rapist, then the only thing that will protect people is putting that person behinds bars.  Making a blog post will not change anything.

That's what I don't get.

You can't consistently claim that making a blog post will not change anything while also claiming a career may be ruined.

Yes, because they are two separate concepts.

Do you honestly believe that stopping a serial rapist from going to conventions will stop the serial rapist from any rape?

A high status person at a conference is presented with plenty of opportunity, and general validation. I'm sure you understand the concept of opportunistic crime. So with less opportunity, crime is harder to commit, and the risk of getting caught increases.

However what would change most is Michael Shermer would not be at skeptic conferences.

I will point out that I don't expect Shermer to be invited to less conferences. The purpose of the warning is to encourage people to adapt their behaviour around him, not the other way around.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,13:50   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 19 2013,18:40)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,10:49)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

My brother knows this guy that totally got anal-probed by aliens.

True story.

That's a third hand account.

However, if you posted the words of the guy who allegedly was probed as his words that would be on the face of it a first hand account, unless you (not him) fabricated it yourself.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:14   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,18:08)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,11:29)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 19 2013,17:11)
 
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:31)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 19 2013,11:26)
Driver asked:

"Is "sexual assault after the fact" a huge problem?"

YES. It is a HUGE problem for all the men who are falsely accused and/or prosecuted/convicted for rape or other sex related crimes just because some women decide that they didn't want to fuck a guy AFTER they willingly fucked a guy.

How many men?

Is "assault after the fact" a huge problem?

Being persecuted for questioning evolution is a huge problem for all those people who are hounded and bullied out of academia just because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy.

Is bullying by evolutionists a huge problem?

If it happens once, then it has to be investigated and no presumption of innocence or guilt can be made until after the investigation is complete.

So, the claims made at UD and various other creationist venues should all be investigated? And you will make no presumption as to innocence or guilt until an investigation is concluded? Who should do the investigating?


Are you really this dense?

The claims that ID proponents have made HAVE been investigated, by experts in the field... and the claims have been shown to be without merit.[/quote]

Every creationist claim of "no academic freedom" etc blah blah is investigated? And in each case it is rational to make no assessment as to the truth of the claim before investigation?

The claim that sexual assault "after the fact" is a huge problem has also been investigated by experts.

So, is sexual assault "after the fact" a huge problem?



Quote
If there is so much evidence that PZ feels comfortable with his public accusation, then there should be enough information to get the police involved, even if the victim doesn't testify.


This does not follow, and too much time may have passed.

A tiny percentage of rapes reported to the police end in conviction. A very small percentage of rape claims are shown to be false reports. It would be natural to conclude, unless we have other relevant information, that rarely does a rapist actually get convicted, even when the rape is reported immediately, and the victim is prepared to testify. Getting the police involved in this case now would be a waste of time.



Quote
Is Shermer guilty, yes or no?


I have already answered this question.


Quote
Are you really this dense?


If you operate under the assumption I am highly intelligent, you will read more carefully, and consider what the point of the questions I am asking at that time might be.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:18   

Lou Ogre,

 
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 18 2013,00:04)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2013,23:47)
Driver, was a woman raped by Shermer?  Yes or no?

I think it is rational to provisionally believe that Shermer not only raped at least one woman, but that he has sexually harassed others.

If I was planning to attend TAM and Skepticon with a woman, I would be damned grateful to PZ for publishing that account.


--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,16:58   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.  Second hand is when you tell that story to someone else.  Third, etc go out from there.

All we have are (at least) second hand stories.

Which, looking back is pretty much exactly what you wrote, so why you think they are first hand, I can't tell.  Not even if you take PZ as being completely honest (and if so, I work with a Nigerian prince who wants to talk to you), it's still second hand to us.  That's the point - what it is to us, the outsider.  Not what it might be to anyone else.

Didn't answer my question, though, you would have no problem if I went to a large blog and wrote that someone told me that you raped them?

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,17:48   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.

Yes.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact the reporter is anonymous.

This,

"At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. I can’t give more details than that, as it would reveal my identity, and I am very scared that he will come after me in some way. But I wanted to share this story in case it helps anyone else ward off a similar situation from happening. I reached out to one organization that was involved in the event at which I was raped, and they refused to take my concerns seriously. Ever since, I’ve heard stories about him doing things (5 different people have directly told me they did the same to them) and wanted to just say something and warn people, and I didn’t know how. I hope this protects someone."

is presented as a first-hand account, the content of an email written by the person who experienced the event. Her direct words. Unless PZ Myers forged the account, it is first hand.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,17:54   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Didn't answer my question, though, you would have no problem if I went to a large blog and wrote that someone told me that you raped them?

That would be a lie.

If someone you knew and trusted had told you that I raped them, and it were plausible we had met, then you should believe them. If I had raped them, it doesn't really matter what I wanted, does it? Being called a rapist would be a consequence of my actions.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,17:59   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,23:54)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Didn't answer my question, though, you would have no problem if I went to a large blog and wrote that someone told me that you raped them?

That would be a lie.

If someone you knew and trusted had told you that I raped them, and it were plausible we had met, then you should believe them. If I had raped them, it doesn't really matter what I wanted, does it? Being called a rapist would be a consequence of my actions.

Also, the rape claim regarding Shermer doesn't exist in a bubble. There is more than that account.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,18:55   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:48)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.

Yes.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact the reporter is anonymous.

This,

"At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. I can’t give more details than that, as it would reveal my identity, and I am very scared that he will come after me in some way. But I wanted to share this story in case it helps anyone else ward off a similar situation from happening. I reached out to one organization that was involved in the event at which I was raped, and they refused to take my concerns seriously. Ever since, I’ve heard stories about him doing things (5 different people have directly told me they did the same to them) and wanted to just say something and warn people, and I didn’t know how. I hope this protects someone."

is presented as a first-hand account, the content of an email written by the person who experienced the event. Her direct words. Unless PZ Myers forged the account, it is first hand.

Perhaps the subtlety is whats confusing you.  PZ has (supposedly, but for the sake of argument we can go with it) a first hand account.  He is giving it to us.  We are getting a second hand account.  It's simple.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:00   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:59)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,23:54)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Didn't answer my question, though, you would have no problem if I went to a large blog and wrote that someone told me that you raped them?

That would be a lie.

If someone you knew and trusted had told you that I raped them, and it were plausible we had met, then you should believe them. If I had raped them, it doesn't really matter what I wanted, does it? Being called a rapist would be a consequence of my actions.

Also, the rape claim regarding Shermer doesn't exist in a bubble. There is more than that account.

And you didn't answer the question, did you?

It's a simple yes or no answer.  Do you support people giving anonymous accounts naming people as convicted rapists?  We are talking legalities here, and you do know that to claim someone has done something, to avoid the legal issues PZ is in, they have to be convicted, right?

However, let's ignore that.  Do you think that I should go on a public blog and call you a rapist?  Yes or no?  Do I have that right?  Is it legal, is it moral, is it the right thing to do?

Remember, evidence has nothing to do with it.  

But, since you say all this is not in a vacuum, where is the evidence against Shermer?  Please be sure to include the names of the accusers, possible dates, reports filed with the police - you know, evidence.  All I here is hearsay.  I have no evidence one way or another.  All I see is a lot of people jumping on the bandwagon and repeating the same rumors (such as the "blacklist" these supposed SJWs passed amongst themselves but never passed out to anybody, for about a year, such was their concern for women).

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:03   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 20 2013,00:55)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:48)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
 
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.

Yes.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact the reporter is anonymous.

This,

"At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. I can’t give more details than that, as it would reveal my identity, and I am very scared that he will come after me in some way. But I wanted to share this story in case it helps anyone else ward off a similar situation from happening. I reached out to one organization that was involved in the event at which I was raped, and they refused to take my concerns seriously. Ever since, I’ve heard stories about him doing things (5 different people have directly told me they did the same to them) and wanted to just say something and warn people, and I didn’t know how. I hope this protects someone."

is presented as a first-hand account, the content of an email written by the person who experienced the event. Her direct words. Unless PZ Myers forged the account, it is first hand.

Perhaps the subtlety is whats confusing you.  PZ has (supposedly, but for the sake of argument we can go with it) a first hand account.  He is giving it to us.  We are getting a second hand account.  It's simple.

So when a newspaper publishes (gives to us) the words of a witness to an event, that is a second hand account?

If PZ had published the account as a guest post by "Jane Doe" would that be a second hand account?

Is a transcript of a conversation a second-hand account?

Is the transcript of an email a second-hand account?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:18   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,19:03)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 20 2013,00:55)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:48)
 
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
 
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
   
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.

Yes.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact the reporter is anonymous.

This,

"At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. I can’t give more details than that, as it would reveal my identity, and I am very scared that he will come after me in some way. But I wanted to share this story in case it helps anyone else ward off a similar situation from happening. I reached out to one organization that was involved in the event at which I was raped, and they refused to take my concerns seriously. Ever since, I’ve heard stories about him doing things (5 different people have directly told me they did the same to them) and wanted to just say something and warn people, and I didn’t know how. I hope this protects someone."

is presented as a first-hand account, the content of an email written by the person who experienced the event. Her direct words. Unless PZ Myers forged the account, it is first hand.

Perhaps the subtlety is whats confusing you.  PZ has (supposedly, but for the sake of argument we can go with it) a first hand account.  He is giving it to us.  We are getting a second hand account.  It's simple.

So when a newspaper publishes (gives to us) the words of a witness to an event, that is a second hand account?

If PZ had published the account as a guest post by "Jane Doe" would that be a second hand account?

Is a transcript of a conversation a second-hand account?

Is the transcript of an email a second-hand account?

Unless a newspaper reporter knows that a person has been convicted by a trial, then they always use "alleged" or "suspected" or other weasel words that prevent them from being sued.  Myer didn't.

So, you have decided that Shermer is guilty, with nothing more than a claim by Myers based on an anonymous report of rape and another anonymous report of Shermer refilling someone's wine glass.

You may trust PZ explicitly.  I don't.
You may think Shermer is guilty until proven innocent.  I don't.
You may think PZ is a hero.  I think he's more dangerous than Shermer.

And none of this has anything to do with whether Shermer is guilty or not.  PZ can't determine that.  You can't determine that.  Only a court can determine that... and it hasn't.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:29   

Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 20 2013,01:00)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:59)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,23:54)
 
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
Didn't answer my question, though, you would have no problem if I went to a large blog and wrote that someone told me that you raped them?

That would be a lie.

If someone you knew and trusted had told you that I raped them, and it were plausible we had met, then you should believe them. If I had raped them, it doesn't really matter what I wanted, does it? Being called a rapist would be a consequence of my actions.

Also, the rape claim regarding Shermer doesn't exist in a bubble. There is more than that account.

And you didn't answer the question, did you?

It's a simple yes or no answer.  Do you support people giving anonymous accounts naming people as convicted rapists?

No-one has said Shermer is a convicted rapist.

Quote
We are talking legalities here


You are. I am not.


Quote
Do you think that I should go on a public blog and call you a rapist?  Yes or no?  


If I have been named by other people on forums and conversations before, and a work colleague of mine attests that I have harassed several women, and that colleague says he has personally witnessed me groping two women and harassing another, and then you receive a report of rape by me from a person you know and trust, then you should definitely publish the report.


Quote
is it moral, is it the right thing to do?


Yes.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:52   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 20 2013,01:18)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,19:03)
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 20 2013,00:55)
 
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,17:48)
 
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 19 2013,22:58)
   
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,09:49)
   
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 18 2013,17:30)
I think my favorite part of all this is the argument that the report is neither second-hand nor anonymous because PZ knows the accuser.

Y'all enjoy that crack you're smoking.

A second hand report is a report about someone else's experience, yes?

A first hand report is a report in the words of the person who experienced it, yes?

So, either the account is first hand or PZ fabricated or altered the account.

No, a first hand account is where someone tells you something that happened to them.  Directly.

Yes.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact the reporter is anonymous.

This,

"At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me. I can’t give more details than that, as it would reveal my identity, and I am very scared that he will come after me in some way. But I wanted to share this story in case it helps anyone else ward off a similar situation from happening. I reached out to one organization that was involved in the event at which I was raped, and they refused to take my concerns seriously. Ever since, I’ve heard stories about him doing things (5 different people have directly told me they did the same to them) and wanted to just say something and warn people, and I didn’t know how. I hope this protects someone."

is presented as a first-hand account, the content of an email written by the person who experienced the event. Her direct words. Unless PZ Myers forged the account, it is first hand.

Perhaps the subtlety is whats confusing you.  PZ has (supposedly, but for the sake of argument we can go with it) a first hand account.  He is giving it to us.  We are getting a second hand account.  It's simple.

So when a newspaper publishes (gives to us) the words of a witness to an event, that is a second hand account?

If PZ had published the account as a guest post by "Jane Doe" would that be a second hand account?

Is a transcript of a conversation a second-hand account?

Is the transcript of an email a second-hand account?

Unless a newspaper reporter knows that a person has been convicted by a trial, then they always use "alleged" or "suspected" or other weasel words that prevent them from being sued.  Myer didn't.[/quote]

PZ Myers doesn't call Shermer a rapist in that blog post. I am not sure that he has said Shermer is a rapist at all. Please link to where he says that if he does.

Quote
nothing more than a claim by Myers based on an anonymous report of rape and another anonymous report of Shermer refilling someone's wine glass.


Plus the statement by Brian Thompson, Shermer's former colleague, the corroboration of the rape by a witness (anonymous) on PZ's blog, naomibaker's story, and rkzilla's story.

The statement by Brian Thompson carries a lot of weight, and I don't know of a reason he is not credible.

Quote
You may trust PZ explicitly.  I don't.


I've not been aware of him having a particular problem telling the truth, and I only see him personally losing out in the long run from publishing the account.

Give me a reason to think he fabricated it, and I might change my mind.

Quote
You may think PZ is a hero.


Actually, I don't.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,19:56   

Let's focus on ideas, not each other.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,20:09   

Ogre, why have we got this far and you still either don't know or won't acknowledge the actual evidence?

Also, are you going to put your big boy pants on and retract your claim that "sexual assault after the fact is a huge problem", since you can't back it up?

It is just another rape myth, along with 'women often lie about rape'.

Are you also standing by your assertion that we need to be 100% sure before making an assessment?

And... I realise both of you geniuses think I am an idiot, but I can tell you that you are wasting your time presenting loaded questions and then begging for yes or no answers.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,20:18   

Quote (RDK @ Aug. 18 2013,21:04)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,17:50)
   
Quote (Badger3k @ Aug. 17 2013,21:41)
       
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 17 2013,10:15)
         
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 17 2013,15:55)
         
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


The userbase of Reddit is not indicative of anything but the shitty userbase of Reddit.

What does Reddit have to do with this conversation?  I'm truly arguing in good faith.

What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing. That is not an exhaustive list, but it will do for starters.

That's one of the things that I am skeptical of.  The automatic assumption that anyone who posts is an atheist and/or skeptic.  That assumes that no one who is not one of those things would read or post on the forum/reddit/thread/YouTube channel/etc without being one of those things.


Okay, let's pretend I am not familiar with those subreddits, and go so far as to say maybe only 10% of commenters on r/atheism are atheists.

We would still then be talking about probably the largest atheist venue on the internet. A venue with a culture of rape and homophobic jokes.

Unless you have a reason for thinking that those 10%, atheist redditors all, are disgusted by the culture at r/atheism (and generally throughout reddit), and are unlikely to participate in sexism, homophobia, and the like, your immaculate skepticism gives birth to the same conclusion as the less meticulous of us have already made: A significant number of atheists on the internet embrace minority-bashing and misogyny.


       
Quote
I have seen no evidence that the problem is worse than in society


It probably isn't. What is your point?

Reddit is 4chan-lite.  Anyone who believes that an online community with a notorious penchant for trolling and fuckery is representative of the skeptic community at large is a fool.

No True Scotsman fallacy.

It isn't just reddit either.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,22:39   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,20:09)
Ogre, why have we got this far and you still either don't know or won't acknowledge the actual evidence?
Quote


There is no actual evidence other than a vague claim.  Claims are not evidence.  Evidence supports a claim.


Also, are you going to put your big boy pants on and retract your claim that "sexual assault after the fact is a huge problem", since you can't back it up?

It is just another rape myth, along with 'women often lie about rape'.
Quote


Honestly, I don't even know that it's a woman making this claim.

You provided a piece of evidence to support your claim.  It actually supports mine.  Maybe 'huge' is an exaggeration and if I said "huge", then I retract it apologize.

But we both know that it has happened.  If you deny this simple fact, then you might as well stop now because you don't live in the same reality as the rest of us.  

As far as the evidence, there are several papers here you might want to look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....of_rape  (ranges from 2% to 40% are listed), but it doesn't matter.

I'm going to say this carefully.  If it has ever happened even once, then it must be considered when investigating.  This is to ensure that the accused really is guilty.

You and willing to circumvent all the best practices based on essentially no evidence.  

I'm sorry, but that's just wrong.




Are you also standing by your assertion that we need to be 100% sure before making an assessment?
Quote


I believe the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt".  You might want to look that up.


And... I realise both of you geniuses think I am an idiot, but I can tell you that you are wasting your time presenting loaded questions and then begging for yes or no answers.

You're right.  We are wasting our time, because you have decided that he's guilty.

Let's not worry about evidence or whether the actual even took place or a fair trial or anything else.  Let's just publicly accuse him of a heinous crime and let it ride.

It must be nice to be so confident and so self-righteous.

If I was in a court and you could convince me that he engaged in rape in that instance, I'd be the first to throw the book at him.  But a single paragraph from an unknown person posted onto a blog of a known dram-blogger isn't evidence.

I don't know why you have such an emotional response to this case.  But it's obvious to me that you do.  You need to put that aside and look at this case.

Pretend it's a guy down the street that you don't know and he's been accused of a murder by an anonymous letter to the editor posted in the newspaper (not that they would, but go with me here).  With nothing more than a "he killed someone", would you be doing the same thing to him as you are now?

And don't say "there's a difference", because there's not. Just because one involves rape and one involves murder doesn't mean that the standards of evidence change.  I'll leave you with two thoughts and I'm done.

Innocent until proven guilty

Beyond a shadow of a doubt

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,06:14   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,18:09)
Ogre, why have we got this far and you still either don't know or won't acknowledge the actual evidence?

Also, are you going to put your big boy pants on and retract your claim that "sexual assault after the fact is a huge problem", since you can't back it up?

It is just another rape myth, along with 'women often lie about rape'.

Are you also standing by your assertion that we need to be 100% sure before making an assessment?

And... I realise both of you geniuses think I am an idiot, but I can tell you that you are wasting your time presenting loaded questions and then begging for yes or no answers.

"Also, are you going to put your big boy pants on and retract your claim that "sexual assault after the fact is a huge problem", since you can't back it up?

It is just another rape myth, along with 'women often lie about rape'."

They are NOT a myth.

By the way, are you aware that the number one sexual fantasy of women is the rape fantasy?

http://www.healthyplace.com/sex........ntasies

http://www.mamiverse.com/womens-....s-13889

http://www.lovepanky.com/sensual....ntasies

"Ogre, why have we got this far and you still either don't know or won't acknowledge the actual evidence?"

What evidence?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,06:21   

Ogre, you can say it isn't evidence a million times, but people's reports are evidence both in the sense of providing support to assertions and in the sense that they are evidence in a court of law. This is why credibility of witnesses is key.

All you can say against PZ Myers is "dram-blogger." Give me a serious reason to think he lied, not a catch-phrase.
Points you have dropped include the credibility of Brian Thompson. You have not given any reason why he is not credible.

On "rape after the fact", Lisak D, Gardinier L, Nicksa SC, & Cote AM (2010) very much DOES NOT support your claim that reports of rape after the fact are a  huge problem. Their meta analysis puts the figure at 2%-10%.

If it is as high as 10%, then 90% of reports would be genuine.

Show me where I have been irrational. Refute my points if you can. Don't just say "you have such an emotional response." That's not worthy of a scientist.

I'm glad you have dropped the 100% certain nonsense. If you want to understand my response to that ridiculous question, here.

Quote
Pretend it's a guy down the street that you don't know and he's been accused of a murder by an anonymous letter to the editor posted in the newspaper (not that they would, but go with me here).  With nothing more than a "he killed someone", would you be doing the same thing to him as you are now?


Why are you still coming up with this kind of crap, when we have been through this several times? What is your mental block here?

THIS is as near as we can get to an analogous case:

The murder rate in Sumweria is 100 to 1000 times higher than the murder rate in the USA. 1 in 17 men are murderers. Reports of assault by Schuman have been made in the past.

A work colleague of Schuman says he knows of many people who have been assaulted by Schuman and that he has witnessed assault by Schuman personally twice.

In a newspaper which has never been known to fabricate a quote, the editor posts what he says is the first-hand account of a witness to murder. The editor says he knows the witness and can vouch for them personally.

There is no body and (somehow) it is not possible to confirm the alleged victim is missing, so Schuman cannot be tried in a court of law. There is no chance of Schuman being arrested for this murder, and anyhow the statute of limitations deadline has passed.

The editor posts the account because Schuman attends events where there is plenty of opportunity for murder and assault, assaults are known to happen at these events, and in fact they are somewhat notorious for them. The editor wants people to be safe. Reliable studies show that 90%-98% of murder allegations are true. There is certainly no reason to think that most who come forward are lying. Remember that murder is 100 to 1000 times more common than in the USA.

Then the newspaper, which has never been known to fabricate a quote, publishes a corroboration by a witness. Finally they publish an account of Schuman trying to get someone drunk while making jovial remarks about violence. The analogy falls down here, but maybe we can say he is talking about extreme BDSM.

Meanwhile, other people come forward with reports of relevant behaviour by Schuman.

All of this when we have evidence of a murder-enabling climate and violent assaults have happened at these events.

I am not seeking a conviction of Schuman, so "beyond reasonable doubt" is not my criteria, but do I think he murdered someone? On the preponderance of the evidence, yes I provisionally accept that. I think it is wise to warn people of Schuman.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,06:32   

Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 20 2013,12:14)
By the way, are you aware that the number one sexual fantasy of women is the rape fantasy?

Are you aware that the number one fantasy of humans is violence? Watch almost any film.

What is your point?

Do you think fantasy = consent?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,09:30   

Easy folks. Emotional issue. Lets hope he facts come out and the guilty get their comeuppance.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
RDK



Posts: 229
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,11:54   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,20:18)
No True Scotsman fallacy.


I don't think you know what these words mean.

 
Quote
It isn't just reddit either.


What is it then?  The internet?

--------------
If you are not:
Leviathan
please Logout under Meta in the sidebar.

‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,14:42   

Quote (RDK @ Aug. 20 2013,17:54)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,20:18)
No True Scotsman fallacy.


I don't think you know what these words mean.


What you think about it doesn't matter.  It's not a matter of opinion.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Febble



Posts: 310
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,15:25   

Quote (The whole truth @ Aug. 20 2013,06:14)
By the way, are you aware that the number one sexual fantasy of women is the rape fantasy?

What are you implying here? That women enjoy being raped?

If so, let me explain something to you:  

To be raped is to be involuntarily forced to have sex.
To have a rape fantasy is to voluntarily imagine being involuntarily forced to have sex.

Note:  

The first is involuntary, and is done to you.  You have no control and it is dangerous.
The second is voluntary and you do it. You are in control and it is safe.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2135
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,16:43   

PZ likes to stir the shitpot to watch it bubble.

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,16:49   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Aug. 20 2013,22:43)
PZ likes to stir the shitpot to watch it bubble.

So did Charles Dickens. So what?

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,16:50   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 20 2013,22:49)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Aug. 20 2013,22:43)
PZ likes to stir the shitpot to watch it bubble.

So did Charles Dickens. So what?

That Victorian SJW.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
RDK



Posts: 229
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,21:06   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 20 2013,14:42)
         
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 20 2013,17:54)
           
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,20:18)
No True Scotsman fallacy.


I don't think you know what these words mean.


What you think about it doesn't matter.  It's not a matter of opinion.

It would be an example of NTS if I were to state that no skeptic would act in a misogynist way.  That's clearly not the case and I clearly never said that unless you can quote otherwise.

It's extremely odd that I should even have to explain this to you on this forum.

       
Quote
How many users on reddit? We're not talking about a handful of people.


Reddit is not just /r/atheism or /r/skeptic.

http://stattit.com/subredd....reddits
http://stattit.com/r....at....atheism

Now I wonder how many of those people would self-identify as "skeptics" or part of the "skeptic community"?  /r/skeptic barely even registers on the activity list.

Not to mention the fact that you can be an atheist without necessarily being a skeptic, and that the two communities may or may not have significant overlap.  It remains to be seen.

But that's not even the main point.  You seem to still be conflating troll culture with the skepticism community.  You asked this:

       
Quote
What is the biggest subreddit? How many subscribers?

How many  subscribers to r/skeptic?

I already mentioned, in the post that got lost, the 15 year old girl who posted  a picture of herself with Demon Haunted World. The reaction to her was not acceptable to many atheists. There is the divide. It exists because significant numbers of atheists and skeptics are publicly homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and/or rape-endorsing.


What percentage of the entire population of /r/atheism acted this way?  You said yourself it's a fairly big subreddit.  How many people acted in an overtly sexist manner?  How many people is that compared to the entire population of the subreddit, or even simply the people who posted in that thread?  Now factor in how many of them were trolls or sockpuppets.

This type of behavior is largely indicative of the 4chan / Reddit culture of trolling and shock value and not necessarily indicative of the skeptic community.  Reddit existed before /r/atheism and it's debatable as to whether or not that particular community even makes up a significantly large portion of the site's entire userbase.

Again, you act as if untoward behavior found in an internet community notorious and famous for untoward behavior is somehow representative of everyone who calls themselves a skeptic.  And honestly, if anonymous internet trolling is something you would truly consider "public" then I would say you're acting like you just discovered the internet yesterday.

I reiterate: only fools go to these communities expecting to find people who do not explicitly attempt to offend you.  That is a main theme of these sites.  You have this odd view of /r/atheism as a skeptic stronghold and not simply a troll den with an atheist flavor.

--------------
If you are not:
Leviathan
please Logout under Meta in the sidebar.

‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,07:04   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 20 2013,16:50)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 20 2013,22:49)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Aug. 20 2013,22:43)
PZ likes to stir the shitpot to watch it bubble.

So did Charles Dickens. So what?

That Victorian SJW.

A couple of questions:

1) What does "SJW" mean? I keep seeing it, but clearly I haven't spent time in the proper circles to get a clue.

2) Has anyone studied the apparent higher rate of assault at atheist venues and come to a conclusion as why the rate is so high?

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,12:51   

Quote (Robin @ Aug. 21 2013,07:04)
A couple of questions:

1) What does "SJW" mean? I keep seeing it, but clearly I haven't spent time in the proper circles to get a clue.

2) Has anyone studied the apparent higher rate of assault at atheist venues and come to a conclusion as why the rate is so high?

Social Justice Warrior.  

I haven't heard anyone claim there is an (apparent) higher rate of assault at atheist venues. Why would anyone think that?  There is an overabundance of sexual harassment and sexual assault everywhere.  

Why we are suddenly seeing several different atheist-skeptic leaders being named for bad behavior is a different question.

If that's what you really want to know, think about San Diego's Filner for an example.  Each of the (sixteen!) women who have named him as a harasser/assaulter had originally kept quiet for their own reasons - because they assumed they would not be believed, because they were afraid of repercussions if they spoke out, because they were thought that just warning their coworkers to stay out of his arm's reach (watch out for Filner, he's grabby) was better than publicly rocking the boat, or perhaps out of misplaced shame that she had done something to deserve the harassment.  

That was status quo.  But at some point in July, women who had heard more than one of the warnings about Filmer realized:
1) his behavior is seriously harmful, not merely a handful of possibly-misunderstood "jokes"or "harmless flirtation"
2) the reports were corroborated by multiple persons
3) the pattern of behavior is unlikely to stop spontaneously, since Filmer thinks he's doing just fine
4) the moral obligation of people who know Filmer is to warn other unsuspecting future victims, who weren't privy to the insider knowledge, to be careful around Filmer, and - they hope - to get Filmer to stop, and get help for himself.  

Once one or two people come to the moral realization that they must report publicly, it gives other victims the courage to come forward.  

So suddenly we have a compilation of reports which make it appear as if San Diego/atheist conventions are much worse for sexual assault than anywhere else.  It's not actually, though.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10371
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,14:25   

99% agree with hotshoe here, but i'll quibble with one part:

Quote

So suddenly we have a compilation of reports which make it appear as if San Diego/atheist conventions are much worse for sexual assault than anywhere else.  It's not actually, though.


The compilations make them seem like hotbeds of harassment, even if they're not. True. That's how we misperceive things. But that's not the same as saying they're actually not. For all i know they may well be areas of high harassment. Or not. These reports are not dispositive on the question. I wonder if they are. I don't know. I know the skeptics, like the libertarians, attract an unfortunate number of young, naive, privileged (and blind to it) white males. I was one.

   
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,14:52   

Thanks, point taken.  We don't actually know if any cluster of activity represents a "hotbed" or not, without more data.  Maybe it's not significant, maybe it is.  

Also good point about libertarian and/or skeptic males --> plausible correlation with higher sexual assault rates than some other populations. Youth and privilege, yes. And after all, no god, no rules, eh?

Well, I hate to think it's true of people I know, but it's at least plausible ...

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,16:04   

Quote (hotshoe @ Aug. 21 2013,12:51)

Social Justice Warrior.


Ahh! Thank you!

Quote
I haven't heard anyone claim there is an (apparent) higher rate of assault at atheist venues. Why would anyone think that?  There is an overabundance of sexual harassment and sexual assault everywhere.  

...

So suddenly we have a compilation of reports which make it appear as if San Diego/atheist conventions are much worse for sexual assault than anywhere else.  It's not actually, though.



Ok. It just seems like I keep hearing rumors or reports from these events every time there is one, but maybe I'm just not aware that it's no different at any other such venue. (shivers)

ETA: Redoing me coding

Edited by Robin on Aug. 22 2013,06:36

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,16:50   

Quote (RDK @ Aug. 21 2013,03:06)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 20 2013,14:42)
         
Quote (RDK @ Aug. 20 2013,17:54)
           
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 19 2013,20:18)
No True Scotsman fallacy.


I don't think you know what these words mean.


What you think about it doesn't matter.  It's not a matter of opinion.

It would be an example of NTS if I were to state that no skeptic would act in a misogynist way.  That's clearly not the case and I clearly never said that unless you can quote otherwise.[/quote]

My point was that significant numbers of atheists are misogynistic and bash minorities. Reddit is one example I gave of that. Your rebuttal that Reddit isn't a reflection of the atheist and skeptic communities "at large" could be interpreted two ways. The interpretation that Reddit isn't reflective of the entire skeptic community can be jettisoned because that never was the contention. The interpretation that Reddit r/atheism users aren't reflective of atheists away from the internet is a form of the no true Scotsman fallacy.

They identify as atheists. It is a large atheist community. Not a troll community. Significant numbers express misogynist, homophobic, and transphobic sentiments. Ergal there are lots of misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic atheists.

You are assuming that skeptics and atheists can't make bad taste jokes, or that if they do, it  doesn't really count, because the ones that do are trolls or "don't really mean it."
No True Scotsman.

reddit has problems that come with internet anonymity, but that doesn't mean that it is a hangout for non-atheist trolls, or that the views expressed are not the views expressed. Anonymity is not an excuse for bad behaviour.

With the 15 year old who got rape threats, nobody said anything against it, and these were some of the most upvoted comments.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 21 2013,17:02   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 16 2013,21:54)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 16 2013,20:55)

 And this also does what PZ wants to happen, that is a divide in the atheism/skepticism community.


Oh please. PZ wants a divide? There is a divide. A 15 year old posts a picture on Reddit and gets hundreds of rape comments. Reddit is a cesspool. The Slymepit... exists. Rebecca Watson gets thousands of abusive tweets and emails for saying "guys don't do that." Women have left the skeptic and atheist movements. Atheism Plus... exists, because some people could not tolerate the sexism and other phobic behaviour in atheist forums. Sexual harassment at atheist and sexism -cons is a big problem.

Despite the ridiculous narrative, NONE of this is down to PZ Myers.


I quote myself, so we don't get too hung up on whether r/atheism is a troll hangout where people pretend to be atheists or an atheist hangout where people troll.

Now we could have the same rejoinder that all the misogyny at the Slymepit is ironic or trolling or not meant or that there are no true atheists or skeptics there. Same with the tweets Rebecca Watson received.

You could even deny that there is sexism at skeptic and atheist -cons.

However, plainly to those who aren't in denial, there is a divide in the skeptic community and in the atheist community, and the divide is the same in both communities. Those who want to ignore minority issues and get on with pure not believing in god / not believing in the Loch Ness Monster; versus those who also want to tackle misogyny, racism, sexism etc in the movement and in society at large.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Mindrover



Posts: 65
Joined: April 2010

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 22 2013,10:19   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 21 2013,17:02)
However, plainly to those who aren't in denial, there is a divide in the skeptic community and in the atheist community, and the divide is the same in both communities. Those who want to ignore minority issues and get on with pure not believing in god / not believing in the Loch Ness Monster; versus those who also want to tackle misogyny, racism, sexism etc in the movement and in society at large.

The same could be said for most organizations.

In all honesty, the PZ/Shermer/etc discussion has long ago reached the point where the specifics are best left to the courts and\or authorities. I can only hope that we can step back from the percieved "witch hunt" and "apologist" camps and start to have a discussion on where we should go from here.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 22 2013,12:05   

Quote (Mindrover @ Aug. 22 2013,10:19)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 21 2013,17:02)
However, plainly to those who aren't in denial, there is a divide in the skeptic community and in the atheist community, and the divide is the same in both communities. Those who want to ignore minority issues and get on with pure not believing in god / not believing in the Loch Ness Monster; versus those who also want to tackle misogyny, racism, sexism etc in the movement and in society at large.

The same could be said for most organizations.

In all honesty, the PZ/Shermer/etc discussion has long ago reached the point where the specifics are best left to the courts and\or authorities. I can only hope that we can step back from the percieved "witch hunt" and "apologist" camps and start to have a discussion on where we should go from here.

+1

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 22 2013,13:38   

It IS the good guys vs the bad guys, isn't it? Just like in Egypt?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 27 2013,08:33   

Driver,

Please accept my apology for dropping the conversation.  Real life work consumed all my available time over the past two weeks.  If you'd like to continue, just let me know.

Patrick

  
David Holland



Posts: 17
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 27 2013,16:50   

This is why Louis left and he ain't coming back.

I have a hypothetical situation. Let's imagine that you're at a skeptic's convention and you see Schermer sitting in a corner with a bottle of wine and a woman you know and care about. You know this woman has lived in a bubble and doesn't know about the current situation. What do you do? If your answer is not: "Find some way to tell her about the accusations against Schermer." how do live with yourself?

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,13:44   

Quote (David Holland @ Aug. 27 2013,17:50)
This is why Louis left and he ain't coming back.

Who?  What?

I seem to be missing some backstory.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,13:56   

There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

One is a conditional statement.  One is stated as a fact.  One is done out of concern.  One is done out of malice.  Neither have any evidence* to support them.

Again, this is a matter for courts to decide... not us.  

There is a great many people that are confused.  Stating a public claim of illegal activity is wrong and not caring about women or that illegal activity are not the same thing.

If anyone has evidence*, then I'll be first in line to condemn his actions.  Without that evidence, then claims are just that "claims".  And no, an anonymous report from a third party about something that happened somewhere, somewhen is not evidence.  Maybe Myer has evidence.  Maybe this is an elaborate ploy to get Shermer in court despite the fact that the statute of limitations has passed (as has been stated by someone here) and get the actual evidence in a court of law.  Maybe not.  I don't know.  All I know is what I stated already.




*And by evidence, I mean evidence in a form that would be suitable to a scientific paper (i.e. verifiable, testable, falsifiable, and available to everyone) or a court.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1041
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,14:09   

Quote
AVfM (Robert O'Hara): ...But now we have this issue where PZ Myers is saying that someone confided in him, telling him that the editor of Skeptic Magazine raped her.

Amazing Atheist: Yes, and it drives me crazy to know who the person is, who made that accusation, and not being able to say - for reasons of, you know, I've been sworn to secrecy.

AVfM: Oh, so this person actually exists.

AA: Yes, this is a real person,

AVfM: Okay.

AA: This is a real person who actually exists. I know who it is. Unfortunately I cannot tell you. But I can tell you that I know this person personally and they are a, um, highly dubious source for this sort of information.

AVfM: Oh, okay. So they're not credible.

AA: PZ Myers is, um...I don't know what happened to PZ Myers...


Around 14:40

But...why should we believe this guy's claim that she's a dubious source of such information?

Yes, exactly.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,14:29   

Quote
But...why should we believe this guy's claim that she's a dubious source of such information?


For exactly the same reason we should believe the source is reliable.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,14:47   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

PZ Myers doesn't say Shermer is a rapist.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,14:54   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
If anyone has evidence*, then I'll be first in line to condemn his actions.  

Well, apart from the anonymous report there is the statement by Brian Thompson, Shermer's former colleague, who said he has seen Shermer grope a woman.

Then there is the corroboration of the rape by a witness (anonymous) on PZ's blog, naomibaker's story, and rkzilla's story. Other commenters at the JREF forums have confirmed the anonymous story too.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,14:55   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 28 2013,14:47)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

PZ Myers doesn't say Shermer is a rapist.

How would you characterize what PZ said?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,15:05   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 28 2013,20:29)
Quote
But...why should we believe this guy's claim that she's a dubious source of such information?


For exactly the same reason we should believe the source is reliable.

No.

Quote
I told her, "You’re lucky it wasn't me. I’d have busted your fucking nose and raped you."


Quote
I think we should give the guy who raped you a medal. I hope you fucking drown in rape semen, you ugly, mean-spirited cow


Quote
Rape isn't fatal. So imagine my indignation when I saw a chatroom called "Rape Survivors." Is this supposed to impress me? Someone fucked you when you didn't want to be fucked and you're amazed that you survived? Unless he used a chainsaw instead of his dick, what's the big deal? ... The word survivor applies to people who are alive after being stabbed 73 times with an ice pick or mauled by rabid wolverines, not to a woman who gets dick when she doesn't want it. Just because you got raped, you have to rape the English language? You vindictive bitch! Also, don't you ever get tired of being the victim? How many failed relationships are you going to blame on a single violation of your personal space?


TJ Kirk is not a trustworthy person.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,15:07   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 28 2013,20:55)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 28 2013,14:47)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

PZ Myers doesn't say Shermer is a rapist.

How would you characterize what PZ said?

http://moourl.com/fs914....14

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,15:24   

He uses the word "assaulted," which in the context of intercourse, is rape. Perhaps a quibble, but PZ adds the threat of "hurt," which would also be a felony.

So that's two felonies. A bit more than boorish bad manners.
If someone is accused of being a cad (perhaps making passes at married people) I would buy a lower standard of evidence.

I'm not sure what to make of this. It seems likely that Shermer will experience some stigma from this, perhaps deserved. But the allegations of felonies will float out there without resolution.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
David Holland



Posts: 17
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,16:04   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,13:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

One is a conditional statement.  One is stated as a fact.  One is done out of concern.  One is done out of malice.  Neither have any evidence* to support them.



Telling one person is good telling many is bad. Got it. You need to talk to James Randi about that mind reading thing you have going there. I think you have some money coming.

Have you read Myer's grenade post? It doesn't seem that way.

  
David Holland



Posts: 17
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 28 2013,16:09   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 28 2013,13:44)
 
Quote (David Holland @ Aug. 27 2013,17:50)
This is why Louis left and he ain't coming back.

Who?  What?

I seem to be missing some backstory.

Louis is an SJW. He's one of PZ's top attack minions, using sarcasm and humor to fight for social justice.

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,04:27   

[quote=OgreMkV,Aug. 28 2013,13:56][/quote]
Quote
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

Jesus fuck, this is stupid.  What goddamn unpleasant rumors are you quietly telling this person about?  Rumors about "that guy" having on more than one evening at more than one convention deliberately gotten a woman drunk enough that she could neither resist nor consent when he maneuvered her out of the bar and into a bedroom for sex.  In other words, rumors about "that guy" having committed rape. Why would you be coy about it?  Why would you risk being misunderstood about the serious risk you're concerned that your friend is taking by drinking with that - rumored - successful repeat predator?  

There is no moral superiority in saying "just so you know, there are unsavory rumors about that guy" versus "just so you know, there are rumors that guy is a rapist".

Except that first one will merely confuse her with not knowing whether she has to worry that he'll slither off and leave her stuck with the bar tab, or whether he'll embarrass her by shoving his hand down her dress in pubic, or whether the "unsavory" is something else she's not comfortable with. The second one might actually be specific enough to save your friend from rape.
Quote
... and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people ...

Now that you've realized it's moral to warn your friend that you've heard rumors that guy is a rapist, how can you stand to live with yourself if you deliberately withhold the same warning from tens of thousands of potential victims of that guy, people whom you cannot approach personally at the bar and quietly whisper a warning in their ears. You have an amplifier, you have a platform to allow the warning to reach thousands - how could you sleep at night if you refuse to speak loudly and another innocent is harmed because of your inaction?  

Quote
... who will promote and attack on command.
Since that bears no resemblance to what has happened in the Shermer situation, I have an idea why you bring it up, but it's not an idea which reflects well on your integrity.

Quote
One is a conditional statement.  One is stated as a fact.  One is done out of concern.
Okay ...  
Quote
One is done out of malice.
And that is either a delusion or a lie on your part, and definitely with zero evidence.  Since we know for certain that you're not a mind-reader, we know for certain that you have zero evidence for your claim that it was done out of "malice".

And here I thought you were all about the evidence.  Huh.  Silly me.

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,06:22   

Quote (David Holland @ Aug. 28 2013,16:09)
Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 28 2013,13:44)
 
Quote (David Holland @ Aug. 27 2013,17:50)
This is why Louis left and he ain't coming back.

Who?  What?

I seem to be missing some backstory.

Louis is an SJW. He's one of PZ's top attack minions, using sarcasm and humor to fight for social justice.

I suppose that is one way to characterize Louis. Another way would be to say that he was a long-time discussion participant here at AtBC and provided some interesting insight through Devil's Advocacy. Is he sarcastic and abrasive, yep...mocking and ridicule being a pretty solid form of shame against bigoted, erroneous, superstitious, or other basis of poor arguments.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4861
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,07:46   

I've obviously let things get out of hand here.

There will be a modicum of decorum and respect offered between participants in discussion here. People who cannot find it within their repertoire to do so will be invited to find other places to discuss things. One can be abrupt and rude about an idea or stance; personal castigation, though, is not going to be tolerated any longer. I really don't care if that turns AtBC into a whistling graveyard of past conversations that I wander through alone, enough is enough.

Am I clear?

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
BillB



Posts: 388
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,13:05   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 29 2013,13:46)
I've obviously let things get out of hand here.

There will be a modicum of decorum and respect offered between participants in discussion here. People who cannot find it within their repertoire to do so will be invited to find other places to discuss things. One can be abrupt and rude about an idea or stance; personal castigation, though, is not going to be tolerated any longer. I really don't care if that turns AtBC into a whistling graveyard of past conversations that I wander through alone, enough is enough.

Am I clear?

Seconded - not that I have any authority here...

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,14:49   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 29 2013,07:46)
I've obviously let things get out of hand here.

There will be a modicum of decorum and respect offered between participants in discussion here. People who cannot find it within their repertoire to do so will be invited to find other places to discuss things. One can be abrupt and rude about an idea or stance; personal castigation, though, is not going to be tolerated any longer. I really don't care if that turns AtBC into a whistling graveyard of past conversations that I wander through alone, enough is enough.

Am I clear?

No, you're not clear.

Might help if you gave some specifics on "personal castigation".

As far as I can see, there's nothing one might call "personal castigation" in recent posts, neither in my own nor in others' comments, and yet, you just posted about it ... so, logically, you must see it in recent posts; logically, or else why would you even mention it?

Please be specific: are you pointing at me? At David Holland? At Ogre? You can't be pointing at Driver, who has been unfailingly polite.  Yet, there is a difference between being unfailingly polite (a standard to which I could never aspire) and being so lacking in decorum that one deserves to be "invited to find other places" to go.

I ask out of genuine concern since I am a relative newcomer to this community and did not wish to get off on the wrong foot here.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,14:52   

I think my opinion is fairly well reasoned and polite, even if it is wrong. I reserve the right to be wrong or partially wrong.

My concern is that this discussion has been focused on one person who is alleged to be bad.

It seems to imply if you can just identify the list of bad men and call them to the attention of women, then women will be safe.

I think this is dangerously wrong. There is no such list and never will be.

A necessary element of safety is locking your house and your car and remaining in control of yourself while socializing.

I spent seven years in children's protective services. I investigated at least a dozen instances of sexual abuse by adults. I'm rather sensitive to the issues.

None of my cases and none known to me were resolved in what I would consider to be a satisfactory way for the victim. The criminal system and the protective services system just don't have the magic wand to fix everything. In many cases they don't even protect against repeat offences.

Children and people in institutions often can't protect themselves. They are victims in the same sense as victims of rape at gunpoint.

But that isn't necessarily the case in social situations among adults. I do not think locking doors absolves criminals of responsibility. But custom and the law advise locking doors.

It makes no sense to advise people that a certain person is known to be a burglar, and if you avoid that bad person, you will be safe. It doesn't hurt to know about specific bad people, but you will never have a complete list.

Someone asked if it is okay for men to party, but not women.

That is simply non-responsive to my argument. Of course it not okay for men to be pigs. I'm simply saying that there is not and never will be a comprehensive list of bad people. One has to maintain control of oneself, even while partying.

Any message that denies that is dangerous.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,15:18   

Quote (Driver @ Aug. 28 2013,15:47)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

PZ Myers doesn't say Shermer is a rapist.

So what if Myers isn't using the exact words. As far as he is concerned non-consensual sex is rape.  He passed on an allegation of non-consensual sex.  Therefore he passed on an allegation of rape.  Don't be a weasel with the words.  Myers certainly isn't.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....flavors

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4861
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,15:26   

Quote (hotshoe @ Aug. 29 2013,14:49)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 29 2013,07:46)
I've obviously let things get out of hand here.

There will be a modicum of decorum and respect offered between participants in discussion here. People who cannot find it within their repertoire to do so will be invited to find other places to discuss things. One can be abrupt and rude about an idea or stance; personal castigation, though, is not going to be tolerated any longer. I really don't care if that turns AtBC into a whistling graveyard of past conversations that I wander through alone, enough is enough.

Am I clear?

No, you're not clear.

Might help if you gave some specifics on "personal castigation".

As far as I can see, there's nothing one might call "personal castigation" in recent posts, neither in my own nor in others' comments, and yet, you just posted about it ... so, logically, you must see it in recent posts; logically, or else why would you even mention it?

Please be specific: are you pointing at me? At David Holland? At Ogre? You can't be pointing at Driver, who has been unfailingly polite.  Yet, there is a difference between being unfailingly polite (a standard to which I could never aspire) and being so lacking in decorum that one deserves to be "invited to find other places" to go.

I ask out of genuine concern since I am a relative newcomer to this community and did not wish to get off on the wrong foot here.

I believe I have clarified that in PM.

Anyone else who wants to discuss moderation is invited to do so via PM, email, smoke signals, etc. Just not here or any public forum I run. Doing so will be considered annoying and possibly excessively annoying. Read the rules.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,17:47   

Quote (Paul Flocken @ Aug. 29 2013,21:18)
Quote (Driver @ Aug. 28 2013,15:47)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 28 2013,19:56)
There's a fundamental difference between telling someone "You know, I've heard some unpleasant rumors about that guy.  Just so you're aware of those and are OK.  Let me know if you need any help."

and

"X is a rapist" stated on the internet to a readership of tens of thousands of people who will promote and attack on command.

PZ Myers doesn't say Shermer is a rapist.

So what if Myers isn't using the exact words.


Then Ogre hasn't read the post.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,18:48   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 29 2013,14:52)
I think my opinion is fairly well reasoned and polite, even if it is wrong. I reserve the right to be wrong or partially wrong.

I agree.
Quote
I spent seven years in children's protective services. I investigated at least a dozen instances of sexual abuse by adults
Thank you for trying to make things better.

Quote
That is simply non-responsive to my argument. Of course it not okay for men to be pigs. I'm simply saying that there is not and never will be a comprehensive list of bad people. One has to maintain control of oneself, even while partying.
I don't think anyone has ever suggested that we could have a "comprehensive list" of bad people.  But then, how many known-or-suspected rapists are actually at a skeptics convention?  How long would that list have to be t be at least somewhat useful?  

Men are not in fact usually rapists.  Abut six percent of US men will admit to having forced/coerced someone into sex (as long as you carefully avoid using the word "rape" to describe what they admit doing).  That's not a big percentage.  IF it were a huge convention with 1000 men attending, that's about 60 self-admitted predators.  But out of those possible 60 men, it's likely that only one or two of them will be looking for victims there - it's statistically impossible that every one of them is going to commit a rape at that convention. 57 or 58 or 59 of them, perhaps, have a different modus operandi and are not in fact a danger to the unknowing women we wish to warn at the convention.

Suddenly it's clear that publicizing a "list" with only one name on it - the name of the known-or-suspected man who has a specific history of predation at that specific type of convention - will result in orders of magnitude improvement in the safety of women who now know who is specifically dangerous to them there. Suddenly, they don't have to worry about all 1000 men, neither the 940 "good guys" who could never consider committing an assault, nor about the 57-59 "bad guys" who have committed an assault at some other time and place but who are not planning one there.  Now they only have to worry about one identifiable guy, plus maybe 1 or 2 more unidentified guys still dangerous.

I know what I want if I'm in a similar situation - I want my odds improved from 1/1000 of avoiding the guy who's dangerous to drink with, to 1/1 or 1/2 or 1/3 of avoiding that guy.  I have the right to know. Knowing who is on the (perhaps incomplete) list won't lull me into a false sense of security, but it will allow me - and all the women at the convention - to focus on the single most-likely danger and not to look upon every one of those 999 guys as potential rapists when they're not.

Everyone, men and women, will be more happy when the list is made public.  Everyone, that is, except the named known predator.  My heart does not bleed for him.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,20:00   

I do not object to calling attention to known predators,  but I'd point out that the allegation made is rape,  even if the word is not used. I have no idea where this will lead,  but it's a serious allegation.

I think you are wrong about what goes on at conventions,  and I think any impliication that people can trust strangers while highly intoxicated is dangerous. The odds get worse if the stranger is encouraging you to drink.

I have seen shit that is so evil you haven't read about it even in fiction.

Involving people you would never suspect.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,21:25   

Quote (hotshoe @ Aug. 29 2013,19:48)
Everyone, men and women, will be more happy when the list is made public.  Everyone, that is, except the named known predator.

It would indeed be ideal to have such a list, so that sexual predators could be barred altogether.  The problem is with the word I bolded in your final paragraph.

We do not have knowledge.  We have second or third hand reports from anonymous sources.  We have rumors and gossip.  We have, in some online fora, what looks very like a witch hunt.

PZ Myers himself recognizes that rape accusations are so serious that they "could have totally destroyed my career."

As a husband of a wife I adore and the father of daughters I would do anything to protect, I strongly empathize with the desire to do anything possible to prevent sexual assault.

As a person who values his reputation, I do not want to live under a legal system that would allow that reputation to be destroyed based on anonymous hearsay and unfounded accusations.

We need a solution that achieves both goals.  What PZ Myers did is not it.

  
hotshoe



Posts: 42
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 29 2013,23:54   

Quote (Patrick @ Aug. 29 2013,21:25)
It would indeed be ideal to have such a list, so that sexual predators could be barred altogether.  The problem is with the word I bolded in your final paragraph.

We do not have knowledge.  We have second or third hand reports from anonymous sources.  We have rumors and gossip.  We have, in some online fora, what looks very like a witch hunt.

PZ Myers himself recognizes that rape accusations are so serious that they "could have totally destroyed my career."

As a husband of a wife I adore and the father of daughters I would do anything to protect, I strongly empathize with the desire to do anything possible to prevent sexual assault.

As a person who values his reputation, I do not want to live under a legal system that would allow that reputation to be destroyed based on anonymous hearsay and unfounded accusations.

We need a solution that achieves both goals.  What PZ Myers did is not it.

Quote
It would indeed be ideal to have such a list, so that sexual predators could be barred altogether.  The problem is with the word I bolded in your final paragraph.

We do not have knowledge.  
That's not quite correct. You maybe don't have knowledge.  True, for you, this is a second-hand report.  But the multiple women whom Shermer preyed upon do know. They do have knowledge, first hand.  Women in skeptic circles have been warning each other for years about what Shermer did to them or their friend.  You say you do not know; fine, that's true for you if you say so, but the knowledge is definitely available out there.  The only problem is that it wasn't available to everyone who needed to know in order to protect themselves from him.  He could always count on another naive victim down the road because the knowledge we had was not being disseminated widely enough.  

We do have knowledge, same as we have knowledge about Catholic rapist priests.  We excoriate the church who moved rapist priests from parish to parish without notifying the parishioners about the danger.  We're furious, even though the accusations are third- or fourth-hand to us.  Even though no charges are ever brought to court, even though the accused never has a chance to defend himself in court and officially clear his reputation, we accept the truth of what the victims say happened to them.

Why is that, I wonder.  Why is it that atheists and skeptics are so willing to accept the word of SNAP representatives when they forward the story of a raped boy?  And yet, refuse to accept the word of a woman's chosen representative when she tries to share her own story in order to warn other innocent women?

Why? Surely it can't be that we are prejudiced against priests; surely it can't be that we are prejudiced in favor of charismatic atheist leaders.  Surely that can't be the reason why a skeptic grants the truth of the boy's rape but claims no knowledge of whether the woman was raped.

Quote
As a person who values his reputation, I do not want to live under a legal system that would allow that reputation to be destroyed based on anonymous hearsay and unfounded accusations.
Well, you may not live under such a legal system, but Shermer certainly does.  That's our US First Amendment rights at work!  The alternative is far more horrifying to contemplate: that a public figure (like Shermer) could use the courts to trample on your free speech rights any time you said anything about him that he claimed would harm his "reputation"!  Thank god I live in a country where the Supreme Court has specifically ruled on this issue and is protecting my free speech rights.

Quote
We need a solution that achieves both goals.  
Great.  I'm sure I'm not the only one who is eager to hear any suggestions that will improve women's freedom and safety while not doing whatever it is that you think we shouldn't be doing to men like Shermer.

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 30 2013,05:37   

Oh man, is this ever getting to be ridiculous. I've tried to stay mostly out of it but I've just got to say something.

Whatever happened to 'equality'? And I don't mean just equal pay for equal work. I wish I had a dollar for every time a woman has belligerently shoved the following rants in my face:

"I don't need a man!"

"I can take care of myself!"

"I'm equal and want to be treated like it!"

And much more.

Women are anxious to demand and proclaim their equality but most or all of them also EXPECT to be protected (and provided for) by a man or men.

And then there are the games that women play with men (and each other). Some of you talk as though women are all innocent little waifs. That's a laugh. Even women often get sick and tired of the games that other woman play.

And what's with the 'get her drunk' crap? I seriously doubt that anyone FORCED any woman to get drunk at any conference. If a woman can't control her own drinking or other behavior, that is NOT a man's fault. Equality comes with responsibility. Equality is not a gift of special treatment. If you want to blame someone, blame the parents of the woman for not bringing her up to ACT equal, which includes taking responsibility for her own behavior.

Yeah, I have a knight in shining armor in me too, and like Ogre, I would protect my daughter with my own life. I would also protect, without hesitation, any other woman that is being harassed or attacked. However, the situation at hand is NOT the same thing. No one is claiming that a man or men physically FORCED them into having sex under threat of harm and no one witnessed any so-called rape. And just propositioning a woman or asking her to have coffee is not rape or a bad thing. I have been propositioned by women many times, and often bluntly. Should I have cried rape every time? Should I have 'warned' other guys? Should I have made a big stink about it immediately or years later on the internet?

If this situation were reversed and it were a man doing the exact same complaining/accusing, would any of you feel sorry for him or protective of him? Would any of you push for publicly exposing and accusing the woman or women who allegedly took advantage of him? Would any of you say that 'she' got 'him' drunk and raped him?

If a man complained of being propositioned or offered coffee by a woman, in an elevator or elsewhere, would any of you jump to his defense and call for special protective measures and public warnings about the woman? Would any of you make a big stink about it on the internet?

hotshoe, driver, febble, or any others who are eager to crucify Shermer or any other guys, you need to learn the word 'alleged' because you don't KNOW what happened or if anything did happened. Shermer may be a creep and a cad but no one has produced any evidence of such or of any rape. Everything that has been claimed is either hearsay or could just be made up.

And no, I'm not defending Shermer because he's an atheist or a man. I've barely ever heard of him except for the rape accusations against him. I'm just fed up with all the unsubstantiated accusations, whining, and demands for special protection and treatment by radical, self-proclaimed 'feminist skeptics' who don't have a clue about personal responsibility, equality, skepticism, and evidence.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 30 2013,06:41   

TWT, I'm sure you think your all over the place misogynistic rant is rational.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2186
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 30 2013,09:00   

Quote (hotshoe @ Aug. 29 2013,23:54)
 
Quote
As a person who values his reputation, I do not want to live under a legal system that would allow that reputation to be destroyed based on anonymous hearsay and unfounded accusations.
Well, you may not live under such a legal system, but Shermer certainly does.  That's our US First Amendment rights at work!  The alternative is far more horrifying to contemplate: that a public figure (like Shermer) could use the courts to trample on your free speech rights any time you said anything about him that he claimed would harm his "reputation"!  Thank god I live in a country where the Supreme Court has specifically ruled on this issue and is protecting my free speech rights.

I think you need to read up on defamation. Whilst libel laws aren't as strict in the US as in the UK, they do exist. I don't know about the truth of the allegations, but what if they were false? Would you be happy living in a country that would protect someone to spread lies about you, without giving you any legal recourse?

We'll have to see how the legal side of things play out, and hopefully the result will be justice being done. In terms of making the sceptical/atheist community a better place, I wonder how much naming names has really helped.

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 30 2013,09:36   

I'm going to continue harping on the distinction between identifying and presumably isolating bad people,  and making the world safer.

I do know a little bit about institutionally condoned abuse of children,  and I despair at how little attention is paid to prevention.

What we do is equivalent to treating every case with antibiotics,  as opposed to applying public health measures analogous to immunization and sanitation.

It is fine and necessary to identify perpetrators, but it doesn't really reduce the rate of occurrance.

Prevention requires understanding the situations and events that allow abuse to occur and attempting to eliminate them.

I've thought a bit about preditors,  both professionally and personally. My daughter lived not far from Ted Bundy in Gainesville. Bundy was eventually caught and prevented from continuing, but he was not the last of his kind. And there are lesser versions who do not murder.

You can't tag or brand every evildoer,  and evil exists on a continuum. I challenge the figure of six percent,  whatever that was intended to apply to. From my discussions with women,  many if not most will have an encounter with something approaching date rape.

I could list a bunch of simple policies that would mimize institutional abuse of children, but I don't have magic answers for adults. I would merely point out that attempting to make women safe by shaming individuals looks to me to be as promising as solving the drug problem by locking up offenders.

Edited by midwifetoad on Aug. 30 2013,09:37

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Patrick



Posts: 608
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 30 2013,09:47   

Quote (hotshoe @ Aug. 30 2013,00:54)
 
Quote
It would indeed be ideal to have such a list, so that sexual predators could be barred altogether.  The problem is with the word I bolded in your final paragraph.

We do not have knowledge.


That's not quite correct. You maybe don't have knowledge.  True, for you, this is a second-hand report.  But the multiple women whom Shermer preyed upon do know.
. . .
You say you do not know; fine, that's true for you if you say so, but the knowledge is definitely available out there.

Is it available in any form other than rumor and anonymous accusations?  If so, please provide a link to the details.  If not, you are assuming that this hearsay is true, with no supporting evidence.

 
Quote

 
Quote

As a person who values his reputation, I do not want to live under a legal system that would allow that reputation to be destroyed based on anonymous hearsay and unfounded accusations.


Well, you may not live under such a legal system, but Shermer certainly does.  That's our US First Amendment rights at work!  The alternative is far more horrifying to contemplate: that a public figure (like Shermer) could use the courts to trample on your free speech rights any time you said anything about him that he claimed would harm his "reputation"!  Thank god I live in a country where the Supreme Court has specifically ruled on this issue and is protecting my free speech rights.


I said that I would not want to live under such a system.  Fortunately, I do not nor does anyone else in the United States.  There is legal recourse available to victims of defamation.

I am a free speech absolutist.  I would not support any attempt to limit PZ Myers' ability to publish anything he wishes.  I also recognize that such freedom means that people will sometimes cause significant harm to other people's reputations.  If those damaging claims cannot be supported, the libeled or slandered person must have a means to clear their name.

Would you really prefer a system where your life and livelihood could be destroyed by anonymous rumor and gossip published by any blogger with a sufficiently large following?