The Skepchick Posse
The dust may be settling, opinion may be indicating less than overwhelming support (especially from women, ouch!), Watson may be in her new cave, with her new hairdo1, licking her wounds – if the new heights (or lows) of derisive, malicious sourness in her new “dating advice” video are any indicator – and at this point, I think there is only one unanswered question yet to be settled –
Was PZ Myers the elevator guy?
It was a question posed in jest in several places, even here, and it is one of those rare, ridiculous ideas that stops seeming so outrageous the more you think about it. It would certainly not even come close to being weirdest thing that reality has ever thrown at us, and there has to be some other kind motivator for The Naked Emperor’s kowtowing other than just raw stupidity. Because, even at this point, most of us still don’t want to believe he is a stupid guy. Amusing distraction no2?
But back to the matter at hand – the sheer pants shitting terror that the Skepchick posse appear to be able to evoke at will in those that they deign to frown upon. Is it at all in proportion to reality? It’s high time we had a look.
Let’s start with a few of the more common web metrics public access tools’ results for skepchick.org –
| Metrics | Unique visitors per day (avg. est.) |
| Google Ad Planner | 900 |
| Quantcast* | 420 (310) |
| Compete* | 770 (570) |
| VisualiseTraffic** | 2190 |
| Average | 1070 |
.
* – Give results only for US visitors. Factored up by Visualise’s estimate that 74% of visits are from US.
** – Does not specify unique visitors.
Not exactly breathtaking is it? It is even more amusing that once the Watson camp is done laughing at my tiny penis, questioning my virility and poking my insecure and threatened masculinity3, the next jibe is invariably “who cares about your shitty little blog anyway?” Which is great, because I no longer crack champagne corks when my readership breaks these stratospheric Skepchick heights. Doesn’t happen every day, but it’s kind of ho-hum when it does. And if a worthless asshole like me can have this happen, then it says an awful lot more about Skepchick than it does about my shitty little blog. You have to remember my readership is not a result of blog and forum spamming, TrueBelievers, conscious men or my making a regular high profile nuisance of myself in the atheist / skeptic public space4.
Even more fascinating insights can be found at Alexa. Whilst they don’t provide actual headcounts, they do do extensive and highly detailed other monitoring. Here’s a nice history comparing Skepchick against some other common community sites –
You have to wonder about the spike in July – some kind of shrewd new marketing move no doubt. But again, overall, it’s nowhere near the same ballpark as Randi or Dawkins, and it struggles to even outdo SensitiveLand. Where it gets more interesting is when you throw ScienceBlogs into the picture –
Now this really does highlight the utility of keeping chumps like PZ in a state of perpetual semi-arousal and leading them around by the balls. You have to remember, stupidity and cunning are not mutually exclusive. And when those that you feed off are too dull-witted to understand that were it not for the community positions they hold, they would be dropped like a steaming turd, all the better. This is why Dawkins is such a very, very naughty boy – he figured all this out by himself.
So all of this really does support the fact that Watson lives in a house of cards. She is utilising that very same tactic favoured by various fundies and other ideological maniacs the world over, such as those currently attempting a coup d’état of the Australian education system. I call it the frill-necked lizard strategy – the ruse of inflating your threat by the trickery of presenting yourself many times larger and more menacing than you really are. This deception is what makes their efforts to poison both Google and the web with such fraudulent exaggeration on such a massive scale look all the more staggering. This tiny minority of batshit insane psychopaths5 is actually managing to subvert our entire reality space. Unreal.
In this regard they have more in common with fundies and Obama birthers than the atheists who they are doing this hatchet job on. This forced air of reasonableness in the face of our brutish, neanderthal and rape loving opposition. Sweetness versus monstrosity. TRUTH versus EVIL. It’s just so churchy. Barf.
And PZ, you’re still a fucking disgrace.
1 – At least she hasn’t hacked it all off like teevee rape victims do.
2 – Allow me my flights of fancy. There is no way possible that I could ever say or do anything to rival the nonsense, derangement, offensiveness and slander hurled our way by the Watson / Skepchick apologists anyway.
3 – Aka “The Naked Emperor Special” – http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/07/two_awful_no-good_terribad_mis.php
4 – BTW ladies, you did remember to pay all your bills at a recent conference around north California? Horrible rumours going around about that. Oh no – anecdote. Have to remember the mantra, “anecdotes are not evidence”. Nevermind.
5 – Nice language because I’m wearing my politeness pants.
grey lining 
July 27, 2011 at 9:41 pm
First? Well, I came here so successful troll is successful in that regard at least.
July 27, 2011 at 9:53 pm
Needs Comic Sans to make it complete.
July 27, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Too much of a cheap ass to pay WordPress for a font library. Maybe you could ask Skepchick if they could put a “donate” button for me on their page?
July 27, 2011 at 10:05 pm
I suppose this might be considered funny. If your sense of humor is about as advanced as that of a drunk frat guy with a learning disability, that is.
July 28, 2011 at 12:00 am
Learning disabilities do make an individual stupid you ableist fuck.
July 28, 2011 at 12:24 am
I think slow motion car accidents are funny. That’s why I love Becky’s vids. I just can’t get the “oh fuck, oh no she isn’t going too… oh dear” cringe anywhere else.
July 27, 2011 at 10:18 pm
Who are you?
July 27, 2011 at 11:24 pm
Me? I’m a nobody sugar. That’s what makes my point so delicious. I am a common as muck nobody. Don’t hurt yourself trying to understand why that’s so amusing.
July 27, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Someone’s got their panties in a twist, and it’s you.
July 27, 2011 at 11:14 pm
Do I need to hold my breath until someone makes a coherent comment?
July 27, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Maybe you should have made the effort of following the whole mess from the beginning, or at least read some résumé. It’s not about EG and RW’s feelings regarding the encounter anymore.
And your last sentence, right there? That’s what Dawkins said, and he got chastisized for it, which is one of the main complaints we are having about the whole mess (well that and RW’s dick move towards Stef McGraw).
Toodles!
July 28, 2011 at 2:59 am
In other words, JollyNerd, you are an ass.
You come here riding your white stallion, make grand statements, insult, and in the end you don’t have a single fucking clue what we’re talking about. Not my job to educate you, there’s plenty of places, including here, where you can see what’s the beef.
Well played, you are indeed jolly.
July 28, 2011 at 3:58 am
“Does that justify the wave of misogyny that has arisen since?”
Ok, let’s change that from “insult” to “libel” and “gross exageration”.
But really, and without name-calling, I would urge you to understand what it is we are talking about. Franc has posted timelines of Elevatorgate in another thread around here. Check it out. Maybe then you’ll see that nobody initially questioned RW’s feelings or even her video. It’s the followups that got the ball rolling.
July 28, 2011 at 12:20 pm
The other point you miss jollynered, either deliberately or out of genuine ignorance, is one I keep repeating here. This is not a “one off” incident – it is the latest installment in a deliberate, coordinated campaign to slander the entire atheist community, much to the theists delight, and stretches back years.
July 28, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Jollynerd, my apologies. But I do expect whoever lands here to be a few rungs up the food chain from ‘tardbook. If you are new to a discussion, most folks attempt to at least get the gist of the background before diving in and repeating points that have been dissected a 1000 times already. Honestly? What do you expect? A red carpet and a box of chocolates? I can’t re-summarise every point in previous items in each new post. That’s what links are for.
July 28, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Oh for fucks sake. Do I have to hold your dick for you while you pee too? I AM SORRY if my writing is either TOO SUBTLE or too HURTFUL for you to be able to deal with (you need to decide which). The link IS IN the above article –
[there has to be some other kind motivator for The Naked Emperor’s kowtowing]
which in turn links back to other articles. What the fuck do you want? How about you tell me the level of stupid I should be writing at? You are quite honestly the first person that’s been here complaining I don’t reference enough – the complaints are always I do it too much.
July 29, 2011 at 12:59 am
jollynerd,
Sorry for the misunderstanding then. You say all this with the Watsonesque conviction that you matter or someone cares. Here’s something more your speed then –
Pretty sad if you have to waste time in potholes like mine just so you can set up an indignant, final word hissy fit.
That’s the problem with you new, new atheist neo-puritans – all gas, no substance. Should have spotted you straightaway by your incapacity to follow a basic article that no one else seems to have any trouble understanding. You must be a Pharyngulite I guess.
July 29, 2011 at 1:53 am
Jolly, do you actually have anything of substance to add, or are you just working through your derailing manual? PZ monkey-see-monkey-do? I’m sure he’s flattered.
And it’s nice of you to troll along pretending you’re not one of the pwned too –
http://icantbelieveitsnotbuddha.tumblr.com/post/7344318822
Quote you: “All I can say say is: well done, Rebecca. You have a sympathetic male ear here.”
burp
So all of the previous assumptions about your cluelessness are on the money. I’m done with you peabrain.
July 29, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Jolly, is PETA aware of your romantic interests? Inquiring minds need to know.
July 29, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Jollyturd, why don’t you just file a report to the Pharyngula HQ on your pitiful excursion? Congratulations, by the way, you made a real ass of yourself. I truly had a great time watching you trip at every step down a path of your own making. You have no class either. What a failure, poor guy. Now, back under that rock, please, for all our sakes.
July 30, 2011 at 12:00 am
jollynerd: Hey, whoever runs this blog. Feel free to kick me out.
Why in the hell would I want to do that? You’re a walking menagerie of examples for pretty much every Watsonesque stupidity I have written about here.
Blabber away. It’s all good. It shows folks I’m not exaggerating. In fact, I was almost going to accuse you of being yet another Watson sock – but you’re in Winnipeg and she spoke in Glasgow a day or two ago. You certainly sound as poisonous as each other, dribble in the same cup as it were. I guess it rubs off if you wallow in the same pity pit.
July 30, 2011 at 12:11 am
jollyturd says: “And it’s not my fault I’m a dog fucker either – my therapist will back me up on that. Those types of urges are different and you can’t compare them with EG anyway – because it’s fully consensual (and I’m usually the bottom).”
I say – provide a video or it didn’t happen. I hope you are not being sarcastic. You would be a much more interesting person if these statements were true, so I want proof. If you were being sarcastic then you are just a moralizing nit wit.
July 30, 2011 at 8:16 am
Turdie wrote:
“Oh, and Raimondo, accusing me of having no class after calling me ‘Jollyturd’, an ironic masterpiece. Bravo.”
Well, thank you, DoodyBoy. I’m very proud of that too. It’s the first thing you say that I agree with. There is hope for you yet…
July 30, 2011 at 11:04 am
Raimondo, don’t respond to Turdie with turdie. Let Leland exhaust himself (assuming he isn’t really Becky – the language is too spot on to remove that suspicion). It is a useful living example of what I am talking about.
July 31, 2011 at 12:38 am
Leland, you could have just said “no, PETA are unaware”. The rest is just gratuitous – everyone already knows you’re an ass.
July 27, 2011 at 11:55 pm
Don’t hold your breath franc… it will make you turn blue!
Thanks for this recent addition. I too wonder who the elevator guy was. I suspect that he was not TWatson’s “type”. Maybe he was too short for her, or had to little facial hair… or whatever her preferences are. If he had been her “type” she may have replied “Yes… I will have a coffee… and a muffin as well.”
July 27, 2011 at 11:59 pm
There actually are more important things yes. This blog makes that exact point too –
http://www.unifreethought.com/2011/07/dear-rebecca-watson.html
How Watson wastes time attention whoring and pushing personal vendettas (coming up to the second anniversary of when she first went bigtime with this nonsense with GC) while letting issues that count slide. But I suspect you’ll never see anything you don’t want to see. This is the defining RW apologist characteristic.
July 28, 2011 at 12:16 am
You can breathe now. I think anyway, is that presumptuous of me?
To me, the weirdest and funniest part of this thing is the obsessed PZ Myers. He spent yesterday, at least, running around to blogs and twitter feeds critical of his pseudo-daughter Watson and making comments that were rude and bizarre. Of course, rude is no stretch for him, or for the flying monkey squad of frequent posters on his blog. Doesn’t the man have anything else to do? Like publish an article? Or a book? How many books does he have, by the way? How many did Dawkins have by the time he was PZ’s age?
It’s also funny the way that the Watsonians accuse Dawkins and others (including PZ’s *actual daughter* who apparently does not agree with him) of trying to “speak for all women.” They say this as if it is a bad thing, and it is; but it’s exactly what Watson was doing with her “Don’t DOOO that” speech. The lack of self-awareness and mendacity, and the willful misunderstanding and avoidance of the real arguments from the opposition is just appalling.
(PS: I could be wrong, but I think the “number of books published by PZ Myers” is zero. At least I can’t find any.)
July 28, 2011 at 12:40 am
PZ has lost it. He blew in here, fired off a pile of nonsense that had already been addressed in blogs he claimed to have read but obvioulsy didn’t then vanished. Did the same routine at ERV –
http://scienceblogs.com/erv/2011/07/dawkins_coup_de_grace_in_vegas.php
then vanished again. The closest thing to an argument beyond “don’t argue my brain is bigger than yours” is cyclic babbling about “threatened masculinity”. I mean wtf? This *is* PZ Myers isn’t it. *The* PZ Myers???
What the hell is this? Why is Wtason such a special pet anyway?
July 28, 2011 at 8:16 pm
My theory is that it enhances PZ’s standing with his hysterically misogynostically & self-referenced termed: “Trophy-Wife”.
And it is all my own theory.
And I own it.
July 28, 2011 at 12:40 am
Also, it’s funny that PZ’s own not-pseudo-daughter seems to disagree with him:
http://lacrimae-rerum.org/?p=66
Byebye heritage, ya think?
July 28, 2011 at 12:42 am
Damn Ox, didn’t read you to the end.
July 28, 2011 at 12:48 am
No problem, Phil. I wanted to leave a link to her blog, but wasn’t sure how (these interwebs don’t always dance to my tune!), so thanks for that.
July 28, 2011 at 12:56 am
Just copy/paste the URL you want in your message, it will auto-format.
July 28, 2011 at 1:26 am
The comments are great, but just tell us what we already know. The point-of-order gang are are needing to repeat the same things *again* because, to quote Becky, people “just don’t get it”. And the apologists are doing what they always do – just horking up more blobs of substance free and meaningless bile.
The point of this post, that no one is addressing, is that Skepchicks web presence and importance in the scheme of things is somewhat, ahem, overstated. To put it into perspective –
* catchthefire.com.au who are an Australian site that blamed our Victorian bushfires on relaxation of abortion laws get just over half as much traffic as Skepchick
* so does Americannaziparty.com
* Theflatearthsociety.org gets 3 times as much
* And Foreskin-restoration.net is a precise fit, hit for hit
So, really, with Skepchick it’s all bluster, bravado and bullshit. And it has no reflection in the real world whatsoever. Just like the anti-abortion maniacs (at least outside the US), they use sheer volume of noise to create an illusion of that which they are not – a majority view. Time to put the bitch on a leash, before it ruins the whole community beyond repair.
July 28, 2011 at 1:33 am
Which is all relevant…how?
Nobody has said, “you must believe us, because our traffic is so vast”. What you’ve done is a classic example of a strawman argument, complete with charts and tables, all mustered to skewer an argument nobody has made…and then to cap it all off, you tag it with the labels “sluttery” and “Babylonian whores”.
We’re laughing at you, guy. I thought you’d hit the nadir before, but you just keep digging.
July 28, 2011 at 2:20 am
It’s relevant because yes, that’s exactly what was inherent in what Rebecca actually said in her very first vid—that oh she needs to make a fucking PSA announcement because misogyny is rampantly trafficking in elevators and elsewhere in the atheist community in the first place. Which it isn’t, not by her example or any others that have been offered as example since then. PZ it is you that people are laughing at, you’re so naïve about gender issues, which is fine, but don’t go castigating the rest of us, women and men alike, who aren’t, just because we don’t agree with your simplicities. Why in the hell would you want to be as self-serving as Rebecca is in what she’s tried here? She’s a whining little ninny on this, who hasn’t thought beyond her own extremely bigoted personal understanding of and preferential agenda for feminism, or she would’ve understood that what she was doing was deliberately furthering and foisting on undeserving mostly feminist guys her own ridiculous, tunnelvision paranoia stereotype. What she was doing from her initial post constituted false allegations and blaming her victim (elevator guy) for fuckssake. You’re a bright guy. You should be able to understand stuff when it’s been repeatedly explained to you like this.
July 28, 2011 at 8:25 pm
I am sure that he does.
It seems to me that a far more powerful influence is in command of his rational faculties.
What that is, only he can say.
But he chooses not to so do.
Another foot in the grave of critical thinking.
July 31, 2011 at 10:13 pm
It took Elevatorgate for you all to see PZ for who he is? Are you guys sure you’ve been following his blog?
Well, at least you all finally quit drinking the kool aid. He is an atheist ideologue, not a skeptic or a critical-thinker.Atheism is an ideology, just like feminism, left-wing politics, etc. That’s why I could never be a part of the skeptical movement. It’s a joke because you can’t just be a skeptic. You have to swallow all the other garbage that it purports to scrutinize rationally.
I’m female, too. I don’t get it. Posing nude for calendars and handing out in the bar until 4 a and then acting so indignant that someone assumed she was the slutty type. If you’re going openly reject the sexual oppression of religion, don’t make up your own ridiculous hangups because it makes no sense!
The woman is butt-ugly! Maybe this is her way of advertising that someone actually wanted to do her.
July 28, 2011 at 2:26 am
I wonder which “we” you are referring to. The “we” that includes me is laughing at the self described “liberal feminist atheists”.
It is so strange to see the normally abusive, insulting, and raving PZ Myers become “Mr. Nice Guy” when it comes to offending the ears of skepchicks. It is the ultimate irony that you use every insult in the book short of full blown obscenity to describe those you disagree with, and yet you insist the “weaker” sex can’t take care of themselves.
To paraphrase PZ – “Hey you moronic, misogynistic, bigoted, sexist atheist men…. don’t you know your speech offends these sweet innocent women?” Ummmmm…. why does this not make sense to mt Mr. Myers. Perhaps you can explain it to me.
July 28, 2011 at 3:14 am
Is it me or did PZ just make an argument by “our traffic is so vast” in the same post he pretended he never does such a thing?
Specifically this:
“We’re laughing at you”
The implication to me is that PZ is trying to tell you that you are alone and that the great bulk of people (“we”) are opposed to you. It’s not “I am laughing at you.” because “I” doesn’t imply the authority of a large group of people.
Certainly PZ and his followers have made such “arguments” before but I was amused that he might have done so in the very post he denied doing so 🙂
Or maybe that shouldn’t count? Close? Maybe?
July 28, 2011 at 3:45 am
Good point. PZ really relies on the backup of the sycophants over at his blog. It’s probably a big culture shock for him to have to read so many comments that disagree with him, while being unable to put the commenters in his dungeon!
July 28, 2011 at 4:30 am
Hi there PZ. Remember your ‘Disillusionment’ post? The one where Shaw plummeted down hugely in what you thought of him? That’s what’s been coming to mind when I think about you in this whole elevatorgate thing. I have to just acknowledge that you’re not the logical and analytical person I thought you were. I used to think you were one of the best.
While you otherwise have always scrutinized, put actual harm/threat over ‘offended feelings’, professed freedom of thought, and put an excellent eye to claims and stats, you don’t do any of that when it comes to feminist ideology. Instead of being into the factual side of it (equity feminism), you are into the emotional, faith-based, confirmation-bias-enhanced side of it (gender feminism).
I used to think highly of you, despite knowing that your commentors were mostly frothing idiots. Now I just think of your wasted potential because of how well I’ve seen you tear apart other ideologies/claims/assumptions, etc. It’s like you’ve wilfully leapt into a pool of stupidity just because the pool is filled with your friends’ and fans’ pats of approval.
Leave the cult, PZ. We have cookies, coffee, and reality. Hahah, yeah right. What am I, an optimist or something? You’re stuck too deep in the faith that seems like it believes in an intrinsic male-sin that needs lifetime atonement or something.
On a more cheerful note (well for anyone who is not a fan of Pharyngula commentors and fundie-feminists that is), I have some animated anagrams at http://scentednectar.blogspot.com/2011/07/i-do-love-good-anagram-or-two.html and most of them are re-arrangements of the letters ‘PHARYNGULITES’. Found some anagrams that seem to fit that nasty cluster of kooks really well. 🙂
July 28, 2011 at 2:35 pm
Well, it’s either that or PZ has expended so much energy pushing this populist shtick for political reasons that he is now well and truly painted into a corner and there simply is no dignified way to extract himself from it. So he has become the archetypical Right Man – there is no greater terror than losing “face”, admitting error (and therefore, fallibility) and gracefully backing out. Very sad.
July 28, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Oh, and some of those anagrams are beautiful SN. Quantum sardonics at it again.
July 29, 2011 at 8:39 am
Franc: I really hope that it’s a matter of saving/maintaining face rather than him really believing the deeper parts of the ideology. I keep holding out a hope for him, but it’s probably time to just give it up. I was overly impressed by his potential, having seen him analyse studies and claims and then debunk the fuck out of them. I had no idea he had emotional boundaries as to what he is or isn’t willing to scrutinize.
Oh well, here’s another funny (or not so funny) anagram I found. If you rearrange the letters of “PHARYNGULITES”, it becomes “UGLY RAPE HINTS”. Maybe if PZ would change the name of his blog, they’d stop seeing rapists everywhere. Yeah, that’ll work. 🙂
July 29, 2011 at 12:49 pm
Well, let’s make an assumption here. Most of us agree that PZ is not stupid when he makes a conscious effort to not be stupid. OTOH, we are dealing with a nonsense lasagne from the Watsonites, with layer upon layer of hypocrisy, double standards (can’t work out if they want to be sexual creatures or not), venom, bile, slander, propaganda and good old fashioned attention whoring. Try as I might to find anything on their side that is above the level of a child having a tantrum, I can’t. Or perhaps more appropriately, their theatrics are more like the RIAA whining about piracy. Catastrophising trivia to ram home a premeditated agenda. Repeated requests for substance by providing evidence of actual atheist misogyny (read: hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women) are met with silence. What is argument with lack of substance? Nonsense. So PZ is buying into it because –
Even after all of PZ’s public stupity thus far, I am disinclined to believe it’s the first. Most of us don’t believe PZ to be that stupid at all. So it’s 2 and he just tried to jump on what he perceived to be the populist bandwagon, spitting on friend and supporter alike, only to find it’s spectacularly backfired on him. I think he really has backed himself into an awful place, and is now trapped by his hubristic pride that won’t let him escape. Right Man.
Hey Emperor, if you’re reading with your testicles swaying in the breeze, can I ask you one final thing ? Apart from trashing your reputation like a kamikaze, has this dumbness really been of benefit to anyone at all?
July 29, 2011 at 5:42 pm
There is an (admittedly remote) third possibility:
He is being blackmailed.
July 29, 2011 at 7:22 pm
I think the third category mentioned by Michael is indeed a possibility, though I think it might be a sub-possibility under # 2. Neither 1 or 2 being true would rule out the other being true simultaneously. But if I had to choose I’d choose the first. Here’s what he had to say on gender wars stuff almost 2 years ago.
http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/whats-with-all-the-wimps?commentId=2182797%3AComment%3A559873&xg_source=activity
At the time I thought his one-liner drive-by seemed illogical, or fallacious, or whatever. I haven’t studied logic though so can’t really say for sure, but his statement seemed to me to convey the concept that anyone who questions having their masculinity maligned thereby proves their unmasculinity. Seemed like such an addlepated, pat, boiler-plate thing to say I couldn’t really even understand it though. I’m not sure I can yet, and I’ve been thinking about it every so often since then. It still fits his current modus operandi, I think. But maybe it was a bogus account at that site, I would have no way of knowing.
July 29, 2011 at 9:12 pm
Only the TRUE Messiah denies his divinity!
July 29, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Due to the time I spent in the radfem cult during the 80s, when we pretty much had a “No Boyz Allowed” sign on our treehouse, I am a bit fascinated by modern day male radfems (and apologists), so I came up with a bunch of guesses as to their psychologies.
http://scentednectar.blogspot.com/2011/04/mangina-video.html
July 28, 2011 at 7:05 am
PZ Myers. You’re a smart man. Could you understand that the whole thing is a subjective issue? Some women would like the proposition for coffee, some would not. Some women would even like the proposition for sex, some would not. Some women like RW would get upset, some would be flattered, some may get turned on or turned off, some may be indifferent. So for the men and women who may like it, we should not be telling them what not to do. There is no law against it, no one is being harmed from it. Imagine telling a whole gender what not to do, while the other gender can do it. That sounds almost religious to me. We are free from that religious way of thinking, not free from thought.
But for you or RW to start using sexism to combat [apparent] sexism is not the way to approach it. It’s sexist for RW to assume that because it was a man asking her for coffee (in her own words), that it’s a proposition for sex. Had it been a woman who asked her, we wouldn’t be discussing this. And let’s assume that it was a proposition for sex, then so what? All she had to do was say “no”, which is fine. It’s not like the guy pulled his penis out. We are human and both genders make welcomed and unwelcome propositions for sex from time to time (yes, even on an elevator, except for RW it was for coffee).
It’s sexist for you to start throwing “ad HIMinems” at men who disagree with you. Yes, there will be dumb comments from both men and women on this issue, but it would be better if you address those particular people directly, rather than making blanketed gender statements.
I do have to thank you and RW. If I ever go to an atheists’ convention, I am going to use the elevator line as a joke, and it will help me in making another friend with this humorous situation, when I say it to a woman who agrees with me on this issue. Yes, there are a lot of women who disagree with you on this issue, my sister is one of them. (hence the subjectivity of this issue from both men and women).
Best Regards.
*Ad HIMinems: https://greylining.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/our-dynamic-and-expanding-vernacular-thanks-becky/
July 28, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Here is what I would think PZ Myer’s HYPOTHETICAL response would be:
“Yes, I was wrong. It’s a subjective issue. The situation is so twisted up because there’s so many different point of views, and grey areas, which made it so easy to confuse one for another. But now I see that I was wrong, and some other atheists’ were right (not all, because some of them were on that side of the argument for the wrong reasons). RW did have a right to voice her opinion but she shouldn’t have spoken for all women, because different women have different views on this. RW is not a bad person, but I hope she progress pass this, and understand the difference between real sexism, and what she thinks is sexism based upon her own experiences, confirmation bias, and her own pre-existing sexist ideas towards men, that all invites for coffee are propositions for sex if it comes from a man.
July 29, 2011 at 8:49 am
I’m one of those women who sometimes takes such offers up. I occasionally am the one making them. If an offer is without hostility, and if any “no” answer they get is taken as a “no” without them trying to make you change your mind, then what is the problem? Are we a religion with sexual moral rules on nonharmful interactions? Or are we logical types who can see the difference between harm and zero harm?
PZ has called what EG did harassment and pressuring. It was neither.
As an aside, I took 6 elevator rides today, and no even offered me water, much less coffee. 🙂
July 29, 2011 at 11:36 am
Nectar, I’ll buy you a coffee, but only if you promise not to laugh at my inadequate penis.
July 29, 2011 at 10:43 pm
Franc, penises of all sizes have their own particular fortes. You might want to comfort yourself with the knowledge that the narrower and shorter it is, the better quality blowjob it will get. Always. This is an absolute fact (or so I believe, anyways). Evidence: more room inside the mouth means that a tongue can dance all over it during the event, in a way that average to big guys will NEVER get to experience. And with all that going on, another benefit is that you’ll never even notice that she’s not been letting it get near her gag reflex area. In case I haven’t made this very clear, the smaller the penis, the more wanted by some of us women for non-gaggy oral, and you’ll get way better quality oral than the average/large guys. Win/win. Just saying. 🙂
July 30, 2011 at 1:24 am
Truth be know, I don’t know how big my erection is. When it pumps up, the blood pressure drops to my brain and I pass ou,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
July 30, 2011 at 4:19 am
Well, ok then. If it’s in the category where it’s so big that you pass out from it taking over too much of your blood, there are um, different sexual fortes you would have from the smaller ones I mentioned above. After maybe giving you something to keep your blood pressure up, that is! 😀
July 30, 2011 at 11:34 am
Maybe we could just hold hands and discuss Jessica Valenti?
July 31, 2011 at 1:44 am
Hmm, maybe not. Talking about her would just dry me up like a desert, if you know what I mean. It would leave me unable to function for at least a week afterwards too. Maybe we should just drop the whole sex part of it, and just have coffee. We can talk about the state of the world, the weather and the price of eggs. Damn, I hate when this happens! 🙂
August 1, 2011 at 1:59 am
No Chumpy, you weren’t forgotten about. Just your robo-elitism is a chore. Like mowing the lawn.
July 28, 2011 at 2:34 am
And another childish, missing-the-point post from PZ, who is making an ass of himself all over the internet. Rebecca Watson is the one who tried to put down another blogger by saying that her (Watson’s) blog had umpty thousand hits.
Once again, the great man has nothing better to do than chase every mention of his name everywhere (how often do you Google yourself anyway?) and drop in with a puffed up, but content-less comment.
By the way, didn’t you post just yesterday on another blog “But sorry, I’m really done with this whole issue, which I think is a non-issue to begin with.”
http://3menmakeatiger.blogspot.com/2011/07/your-dogma-is-chasing-my-karma.html#comments
Looks like you were talking out of your ass again.
July 28, 2011 at 8:35 pm
It takes an age to build a good reputation, but an instant to destroy it.
PZ has done this very thing over this issue, by his very utterances, and irrational tribal nature.
His reckless seeking of feminist street-cred hath wrought him as much.
Another “hero” bights the dust.
July 28, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Yes, up until recently I had a good opinion of PZ, even if the comments on his blog did go over the top a lot.
His slide with me started with the “dictionary atheist” thing, wherein he made the assertion (emphatically, and with a lot of profanity toward those who didn’t agree) that atheism was more than non-belief in a deity, that there were other qualities that go along with it. These “other” beliefs and qualities required by PZ of a real atheist smacked of dogma to me, and even one or two others on his commenting squad objected. There was quite a heated discussion over it, although of course PZ did not alter his opinion one bit.
July 29, 2011 at 11:46 am
@Oxzimmaron:
Yes, the dictionary atheist business seemed sort-of OK, something with which I could live, until he spat toxic venom at anyone who rationally opposed his position instead of pointing out their supposed logical errors. (A reliable indication that there are zero errors in the opposition’s points!)
But the straw that really broke this camel’s back was his bonkers black-and-white Orwellian distinction:
Female Genital Mutilation BAD, and worth fighting for one’s life against.
&
Male Genital Mutilation GOOD, or at least so trivial as to even warrant ANY discussion.
In fact, it was worse than this. For a while, PZ seemed to actually SUPPORT non-consensual male infant genital mutilation!!
That is a hideous crime against half of humanity, and PZ appeared to support this outrageous crime!
If he were Joe Average from Nowheresville, this attitude could be held to be bordering on a form of mental illness, as the only other option available (ignorance) is automatically ruled out.
July 28, 2011 at 4:17 am
Great post. I agree (reclaim the elevator! http://tonyryan.org.uk/?p=602 )
Time to put the Skepchicks back in their den.
July 28, 2011 at 4:31 am
Hey, I just found this:
Watson should be glad that “elevator guy” didn’t do any of these other things.
…or did he?
July 28, 2011 at 7:31 am
LOL!
July 28, 2011 at 7:25 am
That video is too much. I had to fight retching fits to go through it, and I had to take pauses to catch my breath from all the hyperventilation that she seems to trigger. Her condescension and spitefulness are laid down THICK AND HEAVY. And she is ugly — inside and outside. Good luck with the red hair, babe. You still don’t look so great. How desperate must “elevator guy” be to make a pass at HER?
July 28, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Well, I personally think that making this at all about Watson’s looks would be a cheap shot, but the fact remains that 1.) she herself is not above such cheap shots, as she’s shown repeatedly in this episode and 2.) she really, really must have an inflated opinion about her level of physical attractiveness.
July 28, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Well this is the whole issue in a nutshell. Everything I have written is false and merely a desperate scream for help because I know that I will never bed an Aphrodite like Becky in real life so I just spit and snarl at the world in bitter rage instead. It’s true – I read it on the internet.
July 29, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Cheap shot? I wouldn’t say so. Watson is the one who, on the one hand, “pretties” herself up with the red hair, while on the other making sure to let everyone know that they better not make a pass at her in ways that are not 100% Watson®-Feminist®-approved® and up to her complete and capricious discretion. Make up your mind, Rebecca. We all take our risks in life. If you don’t want risks, have the courage of your convictions and become a nun.
July 29, 2011 at 5:29 pm
She already has a range of bad habits…
[Cue Groans]
July 28, 2011 at 9:10 pm
I’ll let Bugs Bunny provide the PZ synopsis.
July 28, 2011 at 11:31 pm
You know what’s funny about PZ’s “we’re laughing at you” comment? That’s kind of what people are doing here at him and his band of mad jesters. It’s too bad to see that someone who mercilessly mocked people who embraced irrational bullshit for their own political ideologies become — or perhaps reveal himself to be — one of them. Sweet Nectar pretty much said it all, and the anagrams were just brilliant.
*eats radfem meat*
[+5 Rads/Sec]
July 29, 2011 at 8:57 am
You might need an antacid after eating that many radfems. They don’t digest well. They tend to turn on you. 🙂
July 30, 2011 at 12:08 am
[pops a RadAway and a Pepcid] All better!
Oops I guess I said “Sweet Nectar” and not “Scented.” Perhaps you’re scented sweetly, and that explains my silly mistake. 🙂
July 30, 2011 at 1:06 am
S’alright. Although, over at that cesspool Pharyngula last year, there was this one creepy woman who called me that on purpose. I think she was hoping to get a rise out me in order to make some sort of sexism point (although I’m not sure what exactly), but since you are not that weirdo, Skeptifem (not to be confused with Skepchick), and since you didn’t use it in the way she did, all is totally well. 🙂
July 31, 2011 at 2:49 am
Just a quick note – a pile of comments got purged from here. It was not in response to the idiot concerned actually wanting me to ban him (or her). More the side effects of the tantrum they threw when they decided they didn’t want to play anymore – purging was just the quicker option.
July 31, 2011 at 9:47 pm
Wow! This post you linked captures the raw pain one inevitably must go through in early adulthood.The black and white lens he views the world with was smashed with reality. The ideology he has cultivated blinded him from imagining that RW could do no wrong. The pedestal he enthusiastically built with devotion for Becky, simultaneously elevated his expectations. But she didn’t just fail to fulfill his hopes and dreams, her utter lack of appreciation for all that he has “done” for her is what really hurts. The goddess he worshiped has effectively humiliated him and undermined his whole sense of what is good and righteous. Disillusionment and bewilderment has turned to rage. The only thing he can do to save face is to publicly announce his indignation with “f-you and the movement you rode in on!”
The comments range from “please do go!” and “don’t let the screen door hit you”. How surprising @@
Interesting how this scenario is a recurrent theme in the human experience. The process of maturity is a painful and unavoidable one.
July 31, 2011 at 9:53 pm
my comment makes no sense! I was responding to the link to the CFI student member “Dear Rebecca Watson, Fuck You!”. It was a reaction to her using her speech to humiliate Steph McGraw.
July 31, 2011 at 10:27 pm
Could I give a speech at a convention titled, “The Secular Left’s War on Masculinity?” You poor godless gentlemen are horribly abused and oppressed by the matriarchal feministas that have infested your community.They are the ones who are responsible for the hostile atmosphere towards the other women in your movement, too.
August 2, 2011 at 12:31 am
“Infested” is a good word. The below is just for shits and giggles, mainly to make me feel better rather than to argue a point…
Feminism as a parasite:
* Cannot survive on its own, so attaches itself to larger host movements to propagate itself
* Saps vital nutrients from the host, slowly draining its energy
* Can and often does grow large enough to kill the host
August 2, 2011 at 5:58 pm
[…] At least this way, we’ll be able to finally segregate your traffic from the mass of ScienceBlogs in general and see exactly how big a phenomenon you really are on your own. Is this to going to be an anticlimax? A la Skepchick? […]
August 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm
[…] it is a nice way to brush off all the nonsense and insult the Naked One hurls at you when you question his infallibility. You get the feeling that anyone that is still in […]