How do we attract Skepchicks to sign up here?

[SteveB]

I don't want to rehash the fucking elevator thing again, but Dawkins' Muslima response wasn't to Watson's video, it was to PZ's reactionary commentariat saying the elevator guy was a potential rapist, objectifier and misogynist. The commenters were trying to make out like what he did was the worst thing in the world and Dawkins brought in some perspective and said how it's not a big fucking deal.

You have me defending Dawkins now.

[Robert_S]

I don't want to rehash the fucking elevator thing again, but Dawkins' Muslima response wasn't to Watson's video, it was to PZ's reactionary commentariat saying the elevator guy was a potential rapist, objectifier and misogynist. The commenters were trying to make out like what he did was the worst thing in the world and Dawkins brought in some perspective and said how it's not a big fucking deal.

OK, I remember that. I remember PZ going on about "Decent human beings". That didn't exactly sit right with me.

You have me defending Dawkins now.

Trolled.

[charlou]

I don't want to rehash the fucking elevator thing again, but Dawkins' Muslima response wasn't to Watson's video, it was to PZ's reactionary commentariat saying the elevator guy was a potential rapist, objectifier and misogynist. The commenters were trying to make out like what he did was the worst thing in the world and Dawkins brought in some perspective and said how it's not a big fucking deal.

You have me defending Dawkins now.

Is it not cool to defend Dawkins now?

But yah .. it wasn't about a simple "don't do that guys" comment.

[SteveB]

Well he's the one that shut down our little Oasis of Clear-thinking forum.

[charlou]

nah .. it moved on

[lordpasternack]

I don't want to rehash the fucking elevator thing again, but Dawkins' Muslima response wasn't to Watson's video, it was to PZ's reactionary commentariat saying the elevator guy was a potential rapist, objectifier and misogynist. The commenters were trying to make out like what he did was the worst thing in the world and Dawkins brought in some perspective and said how it's not a big fucking deal.

You have me defending Dawkins now.

Did you not read my quoted emails to Dawkins where that point is quite implicit, that he wasn't responding directly to Rebecca - but where I also ask Dawkins to apologise to Rebecca for not being clearer about the identity of his target? He appeared to intend to direct his ire towards her, I'm pretty sure he didn't so much as take the precaution of watching the original video before shooting his mouth, and he never apologised to Rebecca or attempted to clarify his words…

All he appeared to be interested in by that stage, was casting around for legitimate reasons to dislike her, and begrudge her an apology.

[JimC]

Charlou here, by the way. Leaving the baggage behind if that's okay with you guys.

[Twoflower]

Hey Charlou, welcome back

[colubridae]

But dill is almost personal. I demand that all who have made pickling derogatory statements about dill retract them. And also boil fairly new potatoes with dill, then serve it with dill. Dill is a weed! Not fior smoking. Dill seed is junk.

Sorry tero. Have to take exception to that, dill seeds are nom.

[MiM]

Charlou here, by the way. Leaving the baggage behind if that's okay with you guys.

Hi Charl...RiverF

[MiM]

The picture of them we've been getting from some of our regular posters is a bit one-sided. I think we'd benefit from a wider range of viewpoints on gender issues.

Also, there has to be more to them than just their stance on feminism. For me, this site is actually more of a fun community than a serious debate place. There is the occasional drama and very occasional gross stupidity, but overall we are a very accepting and welcoming bunch.

Just invite them to read this thread. Yeah, sure, you're a welcoming bunch. After the OP, it's just more sneering.

Or you could try a provocative and inviting question, like Would it be immoral to rape you?

Robert is not the only one to question Pappa's wisdom on the rape joke PZ. I myself have stated that he should not have posted the OP, and that the natural default position would be a self imposed life time ban on him making any derogatory references to, or about, Skepchicks ever again. And I stand by that. So we do not all think alike here, far from it. Robert was the very first poster on that thread to question Pappa's judgement on this matter and his attempt at reconciliation is a genuine one.

I am a memberof this site and shall continue to be. I am responsible for my words and my words only. If I had to be a member of a site where everyone's opinions had to reflect mine, then I might be wanting quite a while to find such a place. Over at Pharyngula, you have diasgreement, just like on any other site, sometimes even vociferously so. I did enjoy reading the Dungeon page. You certainly don't hold back when laying into your critics. I actually found it quite humorous.

But back to the matter in hand. Robert is trying to engage positively and so should be encouraged. He is not Pappa. Just because they are both members of this site does not mean they think alike. Certainly not when it comes the Skepchicks. I myself have visited their site and some of what they say I agree with and some I don't. I maintain an open mind on issues I have yet to form an opinion on, and femimism is no exception, though I agree with it as a general principle.

Just for the record, I believe in absolute free speech. But I also believe that with rights come responsibilities. I myself would never make a joke about rape for example, because that would be unacceptable to me. But I defend the right of anyone else to do so if they wish. They should not of course, but I am only responsible for my words and not anyone elses's. I am truly moved by the number of Skepchicks who have been raped, but even if I did not know that, I still would not make jokes about it. Also, the amount of abuse Rrebecca gets on a regular basis is just unbelievable. There is no excuse for it at all. Disagree with her as much as you want, but do not tell her she needs to be raped to loosen her up.

I hope you can see therefore that we are not all clones of Pappa who are rape enablers or apologists. Not saying he is now. Just making a point for the sake of argument. Members here are irreverent as opposed to malicious. Not that that excuses bad jokes. I however do not judge. I have a self imposed life time ban which prevents me from doing so. I respect individuals. I do not respect ideas. But I never conflate the two. I have nothing against you or Skepchicks or Pharyngula or anyone else for that matter. I engage positively with all who wish to. No tribalism for me. No sir. Although I am a member of this site, I see myself more as a private individual. I am under no moral or legal obligation to pander to groupthink, intentional or otherwise, here or anywhere else.

Indeed my views on this issue on this site are in the minority, but it bothers me not. All I am doing is exercising my democratic right to self expression. I am open to reason and have no problem in modifying my views as such. I can engage perfectly rationally with others, even though they may not agree with me, or I with them. Anyway, I suggest you accept Robert. He is genuine and open. He is not Pappa and does not think it right to make jokes about rape. Which is why he called him out on it in the first place.

I am not completely sure this is true: "Indeed my views on this issue on this site are in the minority"

[JimC]

Some humour is black...

Some jokes are tasteless, hurtful and funny...

Some people think repressing expression is an answer...

Tribal identity trumps clear thinking, most times...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ah well. With some of the posts tonight I got the feeling he would have been welcomed for real conversation, and that the negativity on this side at least could be got past.

He's missing out on getting to know some great people, that's all I can say.

I don't think he's interested in that .. it doesn't fit in with his sensationalist tabloid use of people to maintain his ego.

He has met at least three of us in person.

[Bella Fortuna]

Ah well. With some of the posts tonight I got the feeling he would have been welcomed for real conversation, and that the negativity on this side at least could be got past.

He's missing out on getting to know some great people, that's all I can say.

I don't think he's interested in that .. it doesn't fit in with his sensationalist tabloid use of people to maintain his ego.

He has met at least three of us in person.

I'm one of the people he's met. So? Why would that make a difference to him?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ah well. With some of the posts tonight I got the feeling he would have been welcomed for real conversation, and that the negativity on this side at least could be got past.

He's missing out on getting to know some great people, that's all I can say.

I don't think he's interested in that .. it doesn't fit in with his sensationalist tabloid use of people to maintain his ego.

He has met at least three of us in person.

I'm one of the people he's met. So? Why would that make a difference to him?

Okay, four.

Just sayin' that he knows we're not cockroaches. At least you and Ayaan aren't, and I'm pretty sure Robert isn't.

And that's a solid 75%.