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 >  
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: 2139
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: 10402
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: 610
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?

  
  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]