Dawkins sounds off. Lots of atheists upset.

Monty Burnz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Exunctly - you wanna see real hypocrisy, look no further. Don't listen to that old man in the vatican with his hypocritical archaic views - look at me doing exactly the same. Genius, Dick, just genius.

I wouldn't be so quick to dish out accusations of hypocrisy, to be honest. Let he who is without sin, and all that. Can any of us say we are entirely free of hypocrisy?

MrPudding

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Yay to defending a guy you don't know in a situation you didn't witness - is that any odder or OTT compared to anything RW has done?

Well, we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty...

MrP

MonkeyBalls

Spectacularly stupid and overblown responses.

Here's what some journalist named David Alan Green wrote:

"this is surely a disgrace"

"Can Richard Dawkins still credibly pose as a champion of rational thinking and an evidence-based approach? In my opinion, he certainly cannot".

What a hyperbolic, odious little prick.

MonkeyBalls

Off topic, but, it's always the.....homelier women who are obsessed with sexual objectification. Hmmm.

Delirium

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

Off topic, but, it's always the.....homelier women who are obsessed with sexual objectification. Hmmm.

what's your point?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Whatever about the actual incident, the overall discussion has got me curious about the overall "atheist" community. The comments I saw somewhere that male atheists often think "women, nah not as logical as us" -that's an attitude you really don't see on this forum, would be disappointing if it were prevalent generally amongst male atheists

Ickle Magoo

MrPudding wrote: »

Well, we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty...

MrP

Wot? So someone isn't guilty of being rude or cutting you off or blocking you from passing until they've been charged in court. Hardly. Some serious straw grasping going on at this stage.

MonkeyBalls wrote: »

Off topic, but, it's always the.....homelier women who are obsessed with sexual objectification. Hmmm.

Like it's men who can't get any that are obsessed with women and sex and their right to accost women in any scenario? Hey look, we can all play the crass generalisation game...yay! :pac:

pH

All I know is that if she'd been wearing a burka and accompanied by a responsible man (husband or father) then this wouldn't have happened.

Is this what it's come to now honestly?

sink

pH wrote: »

All I know is that if she'd been wearing a burka and accompanied by a responsible man (husband or father) then this wouldn't have happened.

Is this what it's come to now honestly?

Only if you are saying men are incapable displaying some tact, and women need to be protected from inconsiderate men. It's like the Islamists argument that men are incapable of not raping women.

Here's an idea why don't some men just use better judgement as to how and when to hit on women.

liamw

sink wrote: »

Here's an idea why don't some men just use better judgement as to how and when to hit on women.

Any tips?

sink

liamw wrote: »

Any tips?

Well not with your first sentence in an hotel elevator at 4am in the morning with a complete stranger who you have only been a distant admirer of. I think that was RW's original point.

Kate10

What a load of rubbish.

I am a woman, an atheist and a feminist and I have never heard such utter nonsense in my life. Yes I have been very uncomfortable on many occasions because of the attentions of the opposite sex, starting when I was about 15 and started to realise that some much older men (i.e. one or two of my Dad's friends) were looking at me differently (ick). At around the same age I was walking into town at lunchtime with school friends when a man tried to grab me between my legs ..broad daylight crowded street etc (clearly a nut job). I have often been out at night in a club or pub where some guy has behaved in an aggressive and unwelcome manner - ass grabs etc. My sister was propositioned by her married boss on a work night out. In my first job my boss discussed with another senior male colleague how well I looked at a work party and asked what I was going to wear to the next one, all the time staring at my boobs (well hidden under shirt and suit jacket!).

So like all women I know what it is like to have uncomfortable (or worse) encounters with members of the opposite sex. So what? Newsflash ..some people are d*ckheads. That's it. End of message. It does not mean anything larger for male - female relationships or politics. And this particular incident sounded like nothing at all. This guy propositioned her at 4am in an elevator. She said no. End of encounter. If this encounter has some large significance I am missing it. To try to link this to rape and threats of rape is beyond pathetic.

I for one do not want to live in some antiseptic world, where people are terrified to say or do anything for fear that it falls foul of the pc police. If some guy in whom I have no interest propositioned me at 4 am I would either be flattered, or irritated depending on the circumstances. I certainly would not be thinking about it the next day, and sure as hell would not try to make a political statement out of it.

Richard Dawkins was dead right.

pH

sink wrote: »

Only if you are saying men are incapable displaying some tact, and women need to be protected from inconsiderate men. It's like the Islamists argument that men are incapable of not raping women.

Here's an idea why don't some men just use better judgement as to how and when to hit on women.

I'm afraid not, this is a result of equality, of society allowing the womin folks walk around at night unsupervised, an equality long fought for by women.

Women can now live with men without being married, have one night stands, have kids, all without being supervised by a man - occasionally a man may ask a woman a question like this, be turned down and nothing else happens - I honestly can't see the problem with it (yea I know "OMG IT'S IN A LIFT IN A 5 STORY HOTEL!!!!!!! IT COULD BE ANOTHER 8 SECONDS BEFORE THE DOOR OPENS- THINK OF THE POOR RAPE VICTIMS OMG!")

Any man in an elevator could in theory attempt to rape/drag you back to their room, not just those who've invited you back first.

Attempting to follow you her back to her room would have been creepy, physical contact, rubbing up against her also creepy, pestering her when she said no, getting angry, threatening her, taking out his penis - CREEPY, asking to see her breasts - creepy!, txting her picture of himself naked later - creepy too. Taking no for an answer and heading off to his room not so much (yea I know "OMG LIFT ....").

Byron85

Have any of you seen the letter sent to Dawkins from victims of sexual assault?? Talk about hysterical.

Kate10

smiles302 wrote: »

If I was in an elevator at 4 am and your second sentence to me is an offer to go back to your room. You don't sound like you are interested in conversation. You don't appear interested in me for anything more than my appearance. I'm wary of you not because you're male but because you're coming across as someone who sees women as sex objects.

Why? Couldn't he just be someone who respects women but enjoys casual sex? We don't all have to feel the same about everything. I am conservative about personal relationships but I can understand that there are many other people who do not feel the same way as me. So if someone propositioned me in similar circumstances, I would decline, and that would be the end of the encounter. I would not walk off in a huff feeling threatened and objectified. The whole thing seems silly to me.

Of course there are circumstances in which a proposition like this can have very different implications and overtones - e.g. implied threat, or if the man was in a position of power e.g her boss or something similar. But I understand that this was a single man and a single woman late at night in a hotel. Hardly shocking.

liamw

sink wrote: »

Well not with your first sentence in an hotel elevator at 4am in the morning with a complete stranger who you have only been a distant admirer of. I think that was RW's original point.

Awwww, poor RW was propositioned by a douchebag and declined.

Whoopdy fcuking do.

Kate10, thanks for your input into this from a females perspective that's still in touch with reality.

Ickle Magoo

Awww, poor atheists don't get secularism when they get access to all the trappings of the west - woopdy fukcin doo. Why can't they just get over themselves and be thankful for what they have and accept it's just no big deal, a fact of life, and most of all, they have no point or argument because other people think it's perfectly okay.

Can no-one see the utter hypocrisy in that stance - in this forum of all places?

Count Duckula

Of course, one thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is the 90% of the time the man doesn't give a **** how the women feels anyway. He wants sex so he asks for it. She can say yes or no.

If that makes her uncomfortable then that's her problem.

Ickle Magoo

So it's about selfishly arguing one should be able to pursue ones own interests with no thought to how that affects others - and anyone who dares complain about it is just ridiculous and silly and just spoiling it for everyone who like the status quo?

Jeez, that sounds familiar, what forum are we in again?

Dave!

Kate10 wrote: »

What a load of rubbish.

I am a woman, an atheist and a feminist and I have never heard such utter nonsense in my life. Yes I have been very uncomfortable on many occasions because of the attentions of the opposite sex, starting when I was about 15 and started to realise that some much older men (i.e. one or two of my Dad's friends) were looking at me differently (ick). At around the same age I was walking into town at lunchtime with school friends when a man tried to grab me between my legs ..broad daylight crowded street etc (clearly a nut job). I have often been out at night in a club or pub where some guy has behaved in an aggressive and unwelcome manner - ass grabs etc. My sister was propositioned by her married boss on a work night out. In my first job my boss discussed with another senior male colleague how well I looked at a work party and asked what I was going to wear to the next one, all the time staring at my boobs (well hidden under shirt and suit jacket!).

So like all women I know what it is like to have uncomfortable (or worse) encounters with members of the opposite sex. So what? Newsflash ..some people are d*ckheads. That's it. End of message. It does not mean anything larger for male - female relationships or politics. And this particular incident sounded like nothing at all. This guy propositioned her at 4am in an elevator. She said no. End of encounter. If this encounter has some large significance I am missing it. To try to link this to rape and threats of rape is beyond pathetic.

I for one do not want to live in some antiseptic world, where people are terrified to say or do anything for fear that it falls foul of the pc police. If some guy in whom I have no interest propositioned me at 4 am I would either be flattered, or irritated depending on the circumstances. I certainly would not be thinking about it the next day, and sure as hell would not try to make a political statement out of it.

Richard Dawkins was dead right.

I think I love you.

can I see your boobs?

Kidding!

magicbastarder

Dave! wrote: »

Kidding!

he wasn't really.

Rev Hellfire

Dave! wrote: »

can I see your boobs?

Is that code for "would you like a coffee" ?

axer

sink wrote: »

Here's an idea why don't some men just use better judgement as to how and when to hit on women.

I.e. make sure it is within working hours with prior permission and whatever you do - do not invite the woman for coffee no matter how politely you ask or no matter how you stress "please dont take this the wrong way"! Simple rules.

Kate10

: ) Ehh ...no. (see? It's easy!).

liamw

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So it's about selfishly arguing one should be able to pursue ones own interests with no thought to how that affects others - and anyone who dares complain about it is just ridiculous and silly and just spoiling it for everyone who like the status quo?

Jeez, that sounds familiar, what forum are we in again?

I don't think anyone is backing this man's actions; you'll notice I said it was probably inappropriate (if we take her word for it).

The point is, as Kate has pointed out, that stuff like this happens in life - there are douchebags and clueless d*ckheads with complete disregard for the consequences of their actions. This is sensitivity gone to a stupid level.

liamw

Kate10 wrote: »

: ) Ehh ...no. (see? It's easy!).

Make sure you blog about this little encounter now with Dave!

Count Duckula

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So it's about selfishly arguing one should be able to pursue ones own interests with no thought to how that affects others - and anyone who dares complain about it is just ridiculous and silly and just spoiling it for everyone who like the status quo?

Jeez, that sounds familiar, what forum are we in again?

And now you seem to assuming that everyone who posts in this forum must be an atheist who wants to upset the "status quo".

MrPudding

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Wot? So someone isn't guilty of being rude or cutting you off or blocking you from passing until they've been charged in court. Hardly. Some serious straw grasping going on at this stage.

No, that isn’t what I meant at all. We have a situation where person A asked person B if they wanted to go A’s room for coffee. Some people are assuming that by asking if they wanted to come for coffee that person A was in fact propositioning person B. Then someone else said something like “what if person A actually really just meant coffee?” Then you, I think, said something like “that is just making an assumption as well” which is absolutely correct. My point was simply that as a society we operate on a basis of innocent until proven guilty. I am not suggesting that you cannot form an opinion of someone without going to court, that would be fairly stupid, I am simply saying that when someone does something that can be interpreted in a “good way” and a “bad way”, I think it is better to interpret it in the “good way” (kind of preserving the principle of innocent until proven guilty) rather than the “bad way”. Of course, if you have supplemental evidence to show that the “bad way” applied then by all mean label it that way.

My understanding of this incident is that there is no indication, other than gross generalisations, that this guy had any intentions other than a coffee and a chat.

MrP

Count Duckula

sink wrote: »

It's like the Islamists argument that men are incapable of not raping women.

Do you mean feminist? Because they believe that too, seemingly.

Dades

Count Duckula wrote: »

Do you mean feminist? Because they believe that too, seemingly.

Okay some posts are starting to become "unhelpful".
(The above is an example)

We need no Mod intervention in this thread because we're better than that, right?
Let's keep it that way.