Women at Atheist/Skeptic Events - Uncomfortable?

[hadespussercats]

Ah. Then the question becomes-- why weren't the numbers of men and women at atheist or skeptic events more even to start with?

That I can't tell you.

How likely do you think it is that the proportion of men to women at these events is equivalent to the proportions of men and women that are interested in spending a weekend immersed in this topic, hearing lectures on atheism, science, biology, etc.?

I think it's very likely. I see the same disparity at Avalon Hill strategy war gaming conventions. Why? Because women, by and large, don't like war games. Of the people that play war games, 95% of them are men. I bet it's hard to find a woman that likes to play Advanced Squad Leader, or Diplomacy.

I think we have to acknowledge the possibility that the reason there aren't more "Skepchicks" out there is because far fewer chicks have an interest in skepticism and atheism than dudes. I sense a real resistance here to even allowing that possibility to be entertained. I think that may be because a higher percentage of Ratz women are more interested in those egghead topics than the general population. A higher percentage of Ratz men are also interested in those topics than the general population too. We're just a nerdier and smarter group, I suspect.

Well, maybe fewer women than men are interested in skepticism or atheism. That's possible. But why would that be?

That question is a big derail from the OP, and likely unanswerable. But-- even if fewer women than men are interested in these subjects currently, I'd like to see more women becoming interested in the future. And that's part of what Skepchick is trying to accomplish. So she can't be all bad, in my book.

[Gallstones]

I
Again, I must

Believe me, double face palms coming your way quite often.... I am fascinated by the fact that you actually seem to believe that you make rational sense. Fascinating.

Interesting, because I can't make heads or tails about what your point is either.

Well, you may not be very bright. No shame in that.

I am not fascinated, more agog that you don't recognize your own lack of logic and your own hipocrisy.

LOL - "agog?" Really? I am pretty sure that's not what you meant, but if you're anticipating or curious with great excitement, then fine. Far be it from me to tell you what you're feeling about it. I'm more "aghast" at your poor spelling and general lack of writing ability, though.

So you are reduced to making cheap shots?
That's impressive debating Coito.

I do understand your outrage at my dreadful spelling errors as you have never made any yourself.
I have you to look to as a role model after all.

[Gallstones]

Has anyone been able to answer the questions in the OP to satisfaction?
I need to read those posts to educate myself on how I'm going so wrong.
Cause I keep trying and failing, being defective and suffering from a mental disorder and all.
Maybe if someone can make me some pictures? Words are just too hard.

[Gallstones]

Dorky men remain dorky because they lack maturity and courage and they are too fucking lazy or incompetent to put forth the effort to gain poise and confidence. The endearingness* of that wears thin really fast. Risk and practice, that's all it takes. Just as with anything else.

But that is just my opinion.




*I coined my own word. Fuck, that could mean my brain is working after all.
Meh. It didn't take much effort. Practically none.

[Gallstones]

The reason women don't attend these events in larger numbers may have more to do with practical concerns than it does with any alleged fears for safety or unwanted attention.

Until data is gathered, no one will know.
If a person really wants to know---and I do mean really wants to know as opposed to finding it interesting and merely a curiosity to discuss and fuck with people over--s/he would do what was necessary to get the data and not spend time arguing and whining on a forum site.


Notice: My spell checker says I spelled everything in this post correctly. I hope that is acceptable to the perfectionists who never make mistakes.

[Gallstones]

^^^^^
Display of emotion. Hope no one is offended or takes it personally.



That is a lie. I don't have that hope nor do I care.
So much about the course this thread has taken is ridiculous, if you don't laugh you aren't paying attention.


Spell checker likes all these words too.

[Gallstones]

I
Again, I must

Believe me, double face palms coming your way quite often.... I am fascinated by the fact that you actually seem to believe that you make rational sense. Fascinating.

Interesting, because I can't make heads or tails about what your point is either.

Well, you may not be very bright. No shame in that.

I am not fascinated, more agog that you don't recognize your own lack of logic and your own hipocrisy.

LOL - "agog?" Really? I am pretty sure that's not what you meant, but if you're anticipating or curious with great excitement, then fine. Far be it from me to tell you what you're feeling about it. I'm more "aghast" at your poor spelling and general lack of writing ability, though.

You know this kind of juvenile shit just makes you look desperate--right?

[Gallstones]

Ah. Then the question becomes-- why weren't the numbers of men and women at atheist or skeptic events more even to start with?

That I can't tell you.

How likely do you think it is that the proportion of men to women at these events is equivalent to the proportions of men and women that are interested in spending a weekend immersed in this topic, hearing lectures on atheism, science, biology, etc.?

I think it's very likely. I see the same disparity at Avalon Hill strategy war gaming conventions. Why? Because women, by and large, don't like war games. Of the people that play war games, 95% of them are men. I bet it's hard to find a woman that likes to play Advanced Squad Leader, or Diplomacy.

I think we have to acknowledge the possibility that the reason there aren't more "Skepchicks" out there is because far fewer chicks have an interest in skepticism and atheism than dudes. I sense a real resistance here to even allowing that possibility to be entertained. I think that may be because a higher percentage of Ratz women are more interested in those egghead topics than the general population. A higher percentage of Ratz men are also interested in those topics than the general population too. We're just a nerdier and smarter group, I suspect.

Fine.
Fewer chicks are interested in skepticism and atheism than dudes.


Now what?


We are an allegedly smarter (what does smarter mean?) group----except for me.
I'm not smart at all, but I have nothing to be ashamed of.
As far as anyone knows that is.



Spell checker and I are getting along just fine. I think I even managed proper grammar.

[Gallstones]

I
Again, I must

Believe me, double face palms coming your way quite often.... I am fascinated by the fact that you actually seem to believe that you make rational sense. Fascinating.

Interesting, because I can't make heads or tails about what your point is either.

Well, you may not be very bright. No shame in that.

I am not fascinated, more agog that you don't recognize your own lack of logic and your own hipocrisy.

LOL - "agog?" Really? I am pretty sure that's not what you meant, but if you're anticipating or curious with great excitement, then fine. Far be it from me to tell you what you're feeling about it. I'm more "aghast" at your poor spelling and general lack of writing ability, though.

Don't encourage the mentally defective person or she won't go away.
She might even engage in a monologue.
A properly spelled monologue however.

[hadespussercats]

You're not defective, Gallstones.

I know you're being facetious, but I needed to write that, because if you're defective, then I am too.

[Gallstones]

Assertion 1: there are still more men that women at skeptic and atheist events and part of it is because women are made to feel uncomfortable.

http://skepchick.org/2011/02/ai-the-weaker-sex/

I've been to atheist events, and I noticed how they were, well, sausage fests.

You have me at a disadvantage then, as I have never been to one of these events.

I have eaten sausage.

I used to make intensive efforts - affirmative action - if you will to include women, to invite women, etc. to local group events and meetings in my area.

I have to say, though, that I take some issue with the idea that women are "made" to feel uncomfortable. I don't think that any discomfort created by men is necessarily what keeps women away. I think that often women have no interest in showing up in the first place, and when they do show up a large percentage of women find little that interests them at atheist/skeptic meetings.

Those women, the ones you worked your affirmative action on ........pardon me .......did they relay any responses back to you that support your ideas about what women really feel and really think about attending atheist/skeptics events? What is your sample size?

To try to explain - I think that men and women are often interested, overall, generally speaking, not referring to every single person, in different kinds of things.

You don't say!

You'll find more men involved in say, "strategy war gaming" conventions and science fiction conventions than women. Why? Is it because women are "made to feel uncomfortable?" Or, is it because girls and women are, in our culture, not generally interested in strategy war gaming and science fiction?

I'd agree with this, but with one reservation; women would probably be interested in strategy war gaming if they were given more encouraging exposure to it while girls. IMO there will be overlap of interest in anything with both males and females even if the larger number of adherents are of one categorical class or another--male or female in this instance.

(How is my vocabulary and grammar so far--acceptable? Understandable? Or are you more interested in knowing why I do this at all? (<---I bet you don't understand what that means)

When it comes to atheist conventions and groups, local meetings and local organizations as well as national conferences, I would expect more males to attend because men are more interested in that stuff,

Why?

just as they are more interested in hunting and fishing and astronomy.

Really? can you substantiate this? Where, geographically, does your sample population (of men and women) reside? Can you give any details regarding the cultural practices of your sample population of men and women, that would be pertinent to a discussion about atheist/skeptics events and women, their comfort or discomfort; the reason for discomfort if there is some......am I on the right track?

Like that, "reside" for "live"?
I bee reding the dickshonayry.

Now, I know that I will immediately get someone responding to this who says, "I'm a woman and I love war games, astronomy, hunting, fishing and science fiction." I know you are out there.

Well fuck. Thanks a lot for closing that door.

Can you tell us why you felt it was important to close the door to a member here--who is a woman--to voice her exception to your stereotype? What does it threaten the topic?

Of course, since I am such a simpleton I am probably missing some obvious clues that any dolt would pick up with a glance. So I must beg your indulgence to explain things to me. I hope that is not an inconvenience and you don't have to steel yourself to ignore me.

I am merely pointing out that OVERALL the demographics of the devotees of such things, and the devotees of atheism/philosophy/debating/skepticism/science are overwhelmingly male.

Where did you get the data to determine what the OVERALL demographic of the devotees--who?---of athesim/philosophy/debating /skepticism [fuck this goes on] /[and]science from? Can we have a link?

Also, the phraseology is interesting to me.

No way! Sonofabitch--I too am interested in phraseology.

"Made" to feel uncomfortable. That implies that men are purposefully making women uncomfortable

Some are. Fact.

- shades of harassment, leering, ogling and catcalling.

Some do. Am I correct?

But, is that what is meant by the discomfort reported by women? My theory is that what is really happening is that women are uncomfortable merely because they are in an extreme minority at the events.

What kind of "theory" do you mean, the vernacular "theory" or the scientific "Theory"?

Also, on what do you base your theory that what is really happening is that women are uncomfortable for being an extreme minority? Of what pertinence is being an extreme minority to feeling uncomfortable? Also if you will, what do you mean by uncomfortable?

I mean - 10% women is about the average in my experience.

How many have you been to? Did you take attendance or a head count?

So, that paints a pretty clear picture that the women that do show up are engaging in an activity that is not preferred by women as much as men.

Unless one is mixing mud, it paints no such picture as there might be other variables, other constraints that are as status quo to adult females preventing them from attending atheist/skeptic/ [fill in the fucking rest yourself] events, in the cultures under discussion (what are they BTW? I'll wait, but not too long), as some other (or the very same) ordinary social factor enables male attendance?

Run on sentence you think?

You realize you have thrown down the gauntlet don't you?
Me, let it go? Oh, no no.
Watch your spelling old man.

[Gallstones]

You're not defective, Gallstones.

I know you're being facetious, but I needed to write that, because if you're defective, then I am too.

We are each defective in some way. Some of us just get the better defects while others make do with the ordinary.

[Gallstones]

With regard to this:

Now, I know that I will immediately get someone responding to this who says, "I'm a woman and I love war games, astronomy, hunting, fishing and science fiction." I know you are out there.

If you exclude these women from your study aren't you biasing skewing the statistics?

Me, not being very smart and not knowing anything about statistics and having no head for math [yes singular "m-a-t-h"] I do need these things explained to me in simple language, or with pictures. Thank you.

[Ronja]

You're not defective, Gallstones.

I know you're being facetious, but I needed to write that, because if you're defective, then I am too.

.

times a million

And thanks, Hades, for having the patience to continue with well thought-out comments also when the discussion heated up!

[hadespussercats]