RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

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



Posts: 610
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: 1045
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: 4902
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: 4902
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: 610
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: 2196
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: 610
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?

  
  202 replies since Aug. 14 2013,21:48 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (7) < 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]