|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
 Posted - 07/12/2012 : 17:15:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
I tend to agree most of what Dave has said on the issue, especially about how important an issue it is, though I tend to agree with Kil about the reason why the # of women at TAM this year has gone back down to the norm. |
Just to be clear: I agree completely that the number of women who had registered for TAM 2012 by the time that DJ Grothe had made his fateful comments was down was most likely to due a combination of the crappy economy and the recent WIS conference.
However, because of DJ Grothe's comments and behavior, we now have at least a dozen (just what I've seen) public declarations from people (not just women) that they will not be going to TAMs in the future, or they will no longer support JREF via membership, or both. This is, of course, not the desired outcome when one it trying to grow a fundraising event.
Anyway, my point is that there are two different issues that need to be kept distinct.| Harassment is a problem, but I don't think it has a huge impact on whether women come or don't come to a conference because most women fall into two camps: the first that just takes the potential for harassment for granted and tries not to worry about it, and the second which avoids environments where there is an even slightly increased change of harassment like the plague. |
What's more interesting is that harassment policies seem to be becoming more of a basis upon which people base their convention-going choices, regardless of the perceived or real levels of harassment which might occur. With so many skeptical/atheist conventions adopting such policies, some people are actively seeking them out, and if the convention organizers can't seem to pull one together or publicize it, these folks take that as a bad sign in general. If convention X can't do what conventions W, Y and Z have done and done easily, what does that say about convention X's management competence?
This is probably more of a concern with pay-to-register conventions, at which convention goers are paying customers, and expect to receive a certain level of service in return. If the organizers appear inept when it comes to implementing a harassment policy, what else might they screw up in terms of ensuring that their customers will be happy with what they paid for? What if there's an ice shortage at the authors' meet-and-greet? Will the staff react quickly and decisively, or will they flail around and make excuses? These sorts of things are running through some people's minds nowadays. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2012 : 17:38:05 [Permalink]
|
By the way, commenter Magicthighs is a good example of what I was talking about:Up until a few weeks ago, when DJ Grothe needlessly blamed "some female bloggers" for a decline in women registering (I wonder if the actual attendance is down by the way, there have been no updates on that), I really wanted to visit TAM some day. After DJ's lashing out I couldn't care less about attending. Now, I'm simply disgusted by them, and I wouldn't dream of spending a dime on TAM, and I'm sure as hell never going to donate to them again. This PR disaster is a massive fundraising fail. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2012 : 21:07:33 [Permalink]
|
Samantha Vimes drop a Calvin & Hobbes reference:Certainly, when a conference decides to withdraw anti-harassment policies, it does seem to be greenlighting boorish behavior, and should expect a drop in female attendance… followed by a drop in attendance by men who were actually hoping for female company rather than a Get Rid Of Stinky girlS clubhouse. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2012 : 07:04:42 [Permalink]
|
Ironically, the back of Harriet "SkepDoc" Hall's T-shirt allegedly reads, "I'm a skeptic, not a 'skepchick' not a woman skeptic just a skeptic."
Way to kick people when they're down, Doc! |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2012 : 22:44:15 [Permalink]
|
Still more comments about what I will now hyperbolically dub ShirtGate...
From Ray Moscow:The t-shirt thing invites an infinite variety of slogans in response, for example:
‘I feel safe at TAM, because I carry a concealed weapon.’
‘I feel safe at TAM, because I know MMA.’
‘I feel safe at TAM, because I’m already sleeping with its organisers.’
‘I feel safe at TAM, because that’s one place the police are never going to look for me.’
‘I feel safe at TAM, and who gives a shit about those who don’t?’ From Kaoru Negisa:“I feel safe at TAM because Harriet Hall does, and that’s enough for anyone, right?” From Bernard Bumner:We wish to demonstrate how safe and inclusive TAM is by pointing and laughing at all of those people who felt unsafe and excluded. From Carlie:Holy crap. And she [Harriet Hall] has to know that’s not just a cutesy word, it’s the official title of an actual blog collective. She’s not just dissing a type of person who thinks differently than she does, but is targeting actual specific people. It’s the same as if someone walked up to her wearing a shirt that said “Respectful Insolence sucks”. From Ophelia Benson:Yeh. And she wore it while giving her talk. Yeesh. From Improbable Joe:And she’s dissing an organization that just wrote JREF a decent-sized goddamned check. “Thanks Skepchick, we love your cash now STFU about all those woman issues that don’t really matter because it isn’t Bigfoot!” From celticwulf:Improbable Joe: But didn’t you notice that they specifically thanked Surly Ramics, not Skepchick…meaning that the fact Amy did it as part of Skepchick doesn’t matter, it’s only her Surly Ramics that does. It's these last few that point out the important part of all of this: Dr. Harriet "SkepDoc" Hall made a conscious decision to use her visibility at TAM to take a huge public dump on a specific group of women who have taken it upon themselves to support the JREF and TAM and helping women get to TAM specifically, for years.
As Kil noted, it's unbelievable how unhinged some people (like Dr. Hall) have become over what should be a non-issue. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 01:03:22 [Permalink]
|
| Well maybe she does actually feel safe at TAM. |
 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 09:50:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Well maybe she does actually feel safe at TAM. |
If that were all the shirt said, one might be able to take the message that charitably. But probably not, because it would still need to be placed in the proper context of the discussion over the last couple of months, and so it would still read as a slap-in-the-face of those who have said that they wouldn't feel safe there. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 10:31:18 [Permalink]
|
I wonder if Rebecca will be invited to speak next year, after how it turned out this year. Whether it can be considered her fault or others I don't see her invitation being the asset. Especially that she accepted and then changed her mind. If she doesn't feel safe attending as she claimed why did she accept in the first place? I think it was handled very poorly by Rebecca.
Also.
I had attended TAM 7 and I'm very disgusted that any TAM has been accused or labeled as an overtly misogynous playground by those who attend where women should be fearful to attend and how women should not support or be a member of the JREF. I'm also a bit put off that Rebecca did nothing, that I've heard from her, to minimize or refute such scandalizing with her ability to do so, which it think would have been to her benefit(imo). Sadly a missed opportunity on her part and lost benefit for both. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 11:22:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
...it would still read as a slap-in-the-face of those who have said that they wouldn't feel safe there.
|
And a lot of people misconstrue this whole idea of "TAM is not as safe as it could be," which somehow gets translated into "TAM is unsafe."
The best analogy I've heard yet for understanding this situation is a fire evacuation plan. Fires are rare, yet it makes sense to have a fire evacuation plan. Not having a fire evacuation plan could lead to more human harm in the event of a fire. Therefore, plans make for good policy and help instill a sense of confidence in an organization's ability to respond to negative situations. Here's my rundown of the "conversation" thus far:
FTB: "Fire evacuation plans are a good idea. We recommend that all skeptical events have one."
DJ Grothe: "All this talk of fires scares away attendees. Plus TAM has never, ever had a fire."
Stephanie Zvan: "Actually, there have been a few small fires at TAM. Remember that trash can that caught on fire?"
DJ Grothe: "Yes, I put that fire out myself. At no time did anyone feel unsafe."
FTB: "Ok, but you just said...never mind. The point is, because there was no policy in place, we now have no record of the fire, no investigation into the cause of the fire, and no reason to think another fire might happen again. Are you currently training your staff to know what to do in the event of a fire?"
DJ Grothe: "We have a robust fire evacuation plan printed in our literature. It reads: 'TAM hates fires and would never put its attendees at risk of a fire.'"
FTB: "But that's not really a plan..."
Russell Blackford: "Is there any evidence that things burn?"
MRAs: "Look, it's the fire department's job to handle fires. If you are on fire, call them. What's so hard to understand about that?"
FTB: "Wait, what? You're saying it's the victim's responsibility to alert the fire department? What about the responsibility of the organizers..."
MRAs: "#FTB bullies say TAM is infested with arsonists!"
FTB: "What? Nobody is saying that! Arsonists do exist, sure. But we have no reason to think TAM is any worse than the general population in that respect. Look, it's really simple..."
Thunderf00t: "I will continue to offer to light friends' cigarettes for them and you can't stop me!"
Paula Kirby: "The firestasi see fires everywhere because they love to pretend they are all victims of fire, just like the Nazis."
FTB: "Ok, now this is just getting bizarre..."
Harriet Hall's T-shirt: "I feel safe from fires at TAM (even though it still doesn't have a fire evacuation plan in place)"
FTB: 
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 07/14/2012 11:25:19 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 11:39:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by sailingsoul
I wonder if Rebecca will be invited to speak next year, after how it turned out this year. Whether it can be considered her fault or others I don't see her invitation being the asset. Especially that she accepted and then changed her mind. If she doesn't feel safe attending as she claimed why did she accept in the first place? I think it was handled very poorly by Rebecca. |
Keep events in chronological order, SS:
1) Watson planned to be at TAM.
2) Watson and Grothe planned SkepChick stuff together for TAM.
3) Grothe publicly blamed Watson (in part) for lack of women pre-registering for TAM.
4) Watson no longer felt safe enough to go to TAM.Also.
I had attended TAM 7 and I'm very disgusted that any TAM has been accused or labeled as an overtly misogynous playground by those who attend where women should be fearful to attend and how women should not support or be a member of the JREF. |
Nobody is saying that TAM is any more misogynist than any other convention. Watson has developed a following of passionate haters, and Grothe throwing her under the bus would only encourage those assholes more. That's why she withdrew.| I'm also a bit put off that Rebecca did nothing, that I've heard from her, to minimize or refute such scandalizing with her ability to do so, which it think would have been to her benefit(imo). Sadly a missed opportunity on her part and lost benefit for both. |
She has specifically refuted that notion more than once, including in the article linked to in the OP.
Quit blaming the victim. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2012 : 11:42:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Russell Blackford: "Is there any evidence that things burn?" |
Okay, that line was IRL LOL-funny. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Rebecca Watson Not Appearing at TAM
