Dawkins: At War With The Feminists?

[Atheist-Lite]

I don't think it is possible to defend Dawkins words in this instance. Whilst his sharp scathing wit is well known I feel very uncomfortable about it being turned on the fair sex in this way. It doesn't sit well with my regard for and knowledge of universal female oppression. I would have thought someone like Richard would have, should have, displayed both more sensitivity and a greater self-reflection here?

[Animavore]

Richard Dawkins was once sexually assaulted according to TGD.

[Gallstones]

Richard Dawkins was once sexually assaulted according to TGD.

Oh well, carry on then.

[devogue]

If anything I think that Rebecca Watson does more harm than Dawkins - her pathetic whining and trivialising about what is "damaging" is just unforgiveable when you consider the harm real assault does.

Dawkins is right to attack her self-indulgent crap.

[Animavore]

As you know - I was propositioned, quite lewdly, in a fast moving car I couldn't really just get out of by Gay John. I would ask gay people not to do that, please. It objectifes me and is damaging.

[Rob]

I usually consider myself progressive and even a feminist of sorts. According to the response to this small debate however, I must be a misogynistic pig. Furthermore, I am fine with how I am. I actually don't see the "elevator guy" as a potential rapist and I dislike those who insist on labeling him as such. To do that means that anytime you see a beautiful woman who you would like to get to know you are being sexist. This of course is where the term male privilege often appears.

[Animavore]

The article said she was propositioned but by her own words on the vid he said he was interested in what she had to say and would like to know more and asked her for coffee. She said, 'No'. He said, 'Ok'.
I'd like to see someone try prove he was 'propositioning' her.
Anyway, all she said was, 'Please don't come up to me like that' or words to that effect. I think Dawkins is overboard here.

[devogue]

Anyway, all she said was, 'Please don't come up to me like that' or words to that effect. I think Dawkins is overboard here.

I don't think it's that Dawkins is responding to - it's the silliness of this:

http://skepchick.org/2011/06/on-naming- ... onference/

She's fucking nuts.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Dev,

All Rebecca said in the video that started all of this was that she was creeped out by being asked by a guy, in a hotel elevator, at 4am, in a foreign country to go back to his room with him. If you can't see how that might be intimidating for a woman, there is something wrong with you. OK, the guy fancied her, probably thought that they had a lot in common (he was attending the same atheist convention after all) and was, in all probability, a little dunk - so he thought he would chance his arm. However, he picked a very inappropriate time and place to do so. He had been in the hotel bar with her and her friends but had not approached her then - instead he followed her into an elevator and tried to chat her up in a confined space - DUH!

She didn't overreact to the incident in her video. She simply mentioned it in passing as an example of how there is sexism and misogyny within the atheist/skeptic community, the same as anywhere else.

I don't agree with everything she comes out with but I think Dawkins was way OTT in singling out this incident for ridicule. I can easily see how she was genuinely worried when this man approached her in this manner and why she felt that she needed to say, "Hey, you blokes out there, please don't do things like this," which was all she really said on the subject in her video.

[Ayaan]

As a woman, I can say that I would have been pretty uncomfortable in that situation. The guy had very bad timing. However, when she turned him down, he backed off. Most women I know would have gotten off the elevator, had a chuckle about how clueless some guys can be, and had a laugh about it later with their girlfriends.

[Gallstones]

Looks and talks like a totally frigid, man hating, loony. I could barely watch this video for the hysteria

[anna09]

As a woman, I can say that I would have been pretty uncomfortable in that situation. The guy had very bad timing. However, when she turned him down, he backed off. Most women I know would have gotten off the elevator, had a chuckle about how clueless some guys can be, and had a laugh about it later with their girlfriends.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Any sane rational woman (with no alternate agendas) would think, "okay, that guy's a drunk asshole, whatever" not "ALL MEN ARE PIGS AND EVERY MAN AT THIS CONFERENCE NEEDS TO FEEL LIKE SHIT BECAUSE THIS HAPPENED TO ME!!!" It's forced every male atheist speaker to mumble something about how truly AWFUL her situation was and if anybody says anything else they're automatically a misogynist. I have to commend Dawkins for being the only one to point out the pettiness of this "issue".

I never liked Watson. I hate how she repeatedly protrays american female atheists as being meek little victims being oppressed by the EVIL MEN. It's actually embarassing.

[Gallstones]

From PZ's blog

Here's exactly what she said:

Um, just a word to wise here, guys, uh, don't do that. You know, I don't really know how else to explain how this makes me incredibly uncomfortable, but I'll just sort of lay it out that I was a single woman, you know, in a foreign country, at 4:00 am, in a hotel elevator, with you, just you, and—don't invite me back to your hotel room right after I finish talking about how it creeps me out and makes me uncomfortable when men sexualize me in that manner.

[anna09]

If anything I think that Rebecca Watson does more harm than Dawkins - her pathetic whining and trivialising about what is "damaging" is just unforgiveable when you consider the harm real assault does.

Dawkins is right to attack her self-indulgent crap.

[Gallstones]

I consider myself sane and mostly rational and I think Dawkins was wrong and Rebecca Watson did nothing outrageous or deserving of his ridicule.

It has been a fact, in my lifetime and in Richard's, that women in the western world suffered violence at the hands of men--their partners and fathers--and had no legal recourse. Similar in extent to what some women still suffer in some non-western cultures. It hasn't been that long, for those of you who have no experience of that. And it hasn't been that long--because it still happens today--that women are blamed for the violence they experience at the hands of men, even though they do have legal recourse now. So attitudes are not that changed yet.

And for a person who has survived a sexual assault, the attitudes of some of the people they encounter after, even when good intentioned, reinforces the emotional trauma. So pardon us for being sensitive, OK?