What do you think about misogyny in the skeptical and athiest communities?

[Actionsquid]

Do you think she's been groped and fondled without consent at 'sceptic' conferences?

I have absolutely no way of knowing, as I wasn't there. However from what she says, it sounds like the skeptical "movement" is really important part of her worldview and inspiration. It's doesn't seem like she has a ton of motivation to attack people in it by just making up claims of getting manhandled.

But again, this is part of why I started the thread as I wanted to hear from those who consider themselves part of the skeptical community.

Also, if people in her community are capable of writing stuff to her like like "“honestly, and i mean HONESTLY.. you deserve to be raped and tortured and killed. swear id laugh if i could”, for expressing opinions they don't like then I believe they also could be capable of dishing out unsolicited groping, yes.

 

[Jimi H.]

What kind of community is that? The Youtube/blog community?

The amount of trashtalk in such online-communities is significant, regardless of the issue and the gender, believe me. So, she needs be specific or the argument kinda falls to pieces, namely that sceptics (or, the sceptic community) are more prone to sexual harassment.

And let's be honest here, it seems the comment you refer to was made on behalf of her saying that male ciurcumcision was not as bad as female. I would agree with her in that case btw, but I don't see why that topic or the offending poster has anything to do with the 'sceptic community', he's just an obnoxious individual poster, isn't he?

 

[Actionsquid]

What kind of community is that? The Youtube/blog community?

The amount of trashtalk in such online-communities is significant, regardless of the issue and the gender, believe me. So, she needs be specific or the argument kinda falls to pieces, namely that sceptics (or, the sceptic community) are more prone to sexual harassment.

Well, how about:
I started checking out the social media profiles of the people sending me these messages, and learned that they were often adults who were active in the skeptic and atheist communities. They were reading the same blogs as I was and attending the same events. These were “my people,” and they were the worst.

That seems pretty clear to me.
*shrug*

 

[Jimi H.]

Well, she's not going to get into conflict with people on religious forums if she spends all her time on sceptic forums, is she?

I'll say it again though, if she knew who these people were, and felt threatened by them, she should report them to the police.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

What a bizarre thread! It took me a while to understand what was going on, and who these sick raping sceptics were. Personally, I'm tired of machismo and I don't understand why rape etc is ever a laughing matter, so I was curious what this was about.

That said, there was little to her personal story, I kinda agree with Dawkins here, because it turns out her beef was that someone invited her for 'coffee' after an event!?:

'Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep"chick", and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn't lay a finger on her, but even so …'

I think that was sarcastic, and I can see why it was called for. Seriously, relax! And I might ask: How do you think it feels to a man when a woman looks at him like he's some sick rapist, when he makes a rather polite pass? It's not a nice experience, I think many men tried that, and it's very unpleasant. Maybe Skep'Chick' (yawn, who cares about her gender except herself?) is just not comfortable in such situations, maybe that's her problem?

Let's have a reality check, shall we? Here's what actually happened:

Then women started telling me stories about sexism at skeptic events, experiences that made them uncomfortable enough to never return. At first, I wasn’t able to fully understand their feelings as I had never had a problem existing in male-dominated spaces. But after a few years of blogging, podcasting, and speaking at skeptics’ conferences, I began to get emails from strangers who detailed their sexual fantasies about me. I was occasionally grabbed and groped without consent at events. And then I made the grave mistake of responding to a fellow skeptic’s YouTube video in which he stated that male circumcision was just as harmful as female genital mutilation (FGM). I replied to say that while I personally am opposed to any non-medical genital mutilation, FGM is often much, much more damaging than male circumcision.

The response from male atheists was overwhelming. This is one example:
“honestly, and i mean HONESTLY.. you deserve to be raped and tortured and killed. swear id laugh if i could”

(Snip)

In June of 2011, I was on a panel at an atheist conference in Dublin. The topic was “Communicating Atheism,” and I was excited to join Richard Dawkins, one of the most famous atheists in the world, with several documentaries and bestselling books to his name. Dawkins used his time to criticize Phil Plait, an astronomer who the year prior had given a talk in which he argued for skeptics to be kinder. I used my time to talk about what it’s like for me to communicate atheism online, and how being a woman might affect the response I receive, as in rape threats and other sexual comments.

The audience was receptive, and afterward I spent many hours in the hotel bar discussing issues of gender, objectification, and misogyny with other thoughtful atheists. At around 4 a.m., I excused myself, announcing that I was exhausted and heading to bed in preparation for another day of talks.

As I got to the elevator, a man who I had not yet spoken with directly broke away from the group and joined me.

As the doors closed, he said to me, “Don’t take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting. Would you like to come back to my hotel room for coffee?” I politely declined and got off the elevator when it hit my floor.
A few days later, I was making a video about the trip and I decided to use that as an example of how not to behave at conferences if you want to make women feel safe and comfortable. After all, it seemed rather obvious to me that if your goal is to get sex or even just companionship, the very worst way to go about attaining that goal is to attend a conference, listen to a woman speak for 12 hours about how uncomfortable she is being sexualized at conferences, wait for her to express a desire to go to sleep, follow her into an isolated space, and then suggest she go back to your hotel room for “coffee,” which, by the way, is available at the hotel bar you just left.

What I said in my video, exactly, was, “Guys, don’t do that,” with a bit of a laugh and a shrug. What legions of angry atheists apparently heard was, “Guys, I won’t stop hating men until I get 2 million YouTube comments calling me a ‘cunt.’ ” The skeptics boldly rose to the imagined challenge.

Sexism in the skeptic community: I spoke out, then came the rape threats. - Slate Magazine


It's a little different than what you're willing to believe, isn't it? Let's look at this from a female point of view:

1. I don't care who the ___ the man is or what his credentials are. Anyone who thinks a woman should be raped for any reason is lower than dog s***. In this case, the man decided this woman should be raped because she spoke the absolute truth: Doing a circumcision on a man is not the same as completely removing sexual organs, nor does it make it excruciatingly painful and even debilitating to have sex from that point forward. If you're a circumcised man and have ever enjoyed sex, congratulations, you're 1000X or more in better shape than a woman who has had "the partial or total removal of her external female genitalia," often without anesthesia or even with sterile medical devices, all because societal standards absolutely fear and hate your sexuality.
2. If a woman is giving a heartfelt talk for 12 hours about how she doesn't want to be sexualized, the appropriate response isn't to then sexualize her - especially by cornering her when she is alone and then asking her to go into her hotel room. By all means, approach her in a public space and tell her that you appreciated her views - or be willing to debate those views of which you did not agree. We don't expect you to be a bobble-head doll, nodding in agreement with statements you dislike. However, if you're the guy who approached this woman and asked her for some private time with her in her hotel room after she made such a speech against doing just that, you're coming off as a jerk who wants to stick his cock into the mouth that was so passionately speaking. Believe me, we're perfectly ducky having an honest disagreement and engaging in discourse. We also love being sexual creatures. At the same time, we are also extremely aware that we live in a society that believes if a woman is being sexy for one person, she should be treated as if she's sexually available to all people. We've even reached the low where a woman who wears a short skirt is considered raw meat to be "upskirted" - entirely without her consent - because some men take a thrill in sexually invading her privacy without her permission. Go to some of the sites, including a few on Reddit. It's entirely the thrill of invading women without their consent that gives these creeps a thrill. If this guy was going to approach her in a private and confined area so he can try to get into an even more private and confined area with her, all after ignoring every single thing she had said for 12 hours, this guy was either uncaring or completely deranged.
3. Never, for the love of your mother, approach a woman in a confined space such as an elevator, or in an area where she is alone and potentially vulnerable (such as dark parking lots, empty hallways, many jogging paths, etc.). Believe me, we are raised since early childhood to be on the lookout for potential dangers - all from men - and all for some very solid reasons based in reality. I can say I have personally gotten off of elevators before my floor when some creepy people have come on board and I have had male friends stay with me past their floors for entirely the same reason. I'm also pretty sure you know this. If I were your daughter, I somehow doubt you'd be telling me that it's perfectly swell to have a man approach me while I'm alone in an elevator and do EXACTLY what I had specifically spent 12 hours stating that I didn't want.
4. Never forget that our reality is different from yours. Google the number of girls and women who have disappeared along interstates, from truck stops, while walking or jogging alone, etc. This problem is so prevalent that the FBI has actually started its own task force specifically for these disappeared females. (Another poster included a link in another thread about the "highway of death" in Texas, near where I was living, all due to the dozens of women and girls who were found raped and murdered just off its roads.) Then Google the statistics about rape, including the number of women who are raped in this country. Look at the FBI's statistics on the number of women who were truly raped (92-98% of all rape cases) yet who don't press charges or are otherwise unable to prosecute the rapist. If this woman had allowed the man to enter her hotel room because she honestly believed they were "just going to get coffee," what do you think would have happened? Every single person reading this thread knows that if she had been raped or otherwise assaulted, it would have been assumed she was "asking for it" or otherwise had "buyers remorse" and not a goddamn thing would have ever happened to the man. Clothing equals consent in our society (hence the "slut walks"). An invitation into a hotel room would have been translated into "No means yes and yes means anal."
5. *** If you're ever unsure about how to treat a woman, just ask yourself how you'd like to be treated by a much larger openly gay male - or by any man if you were in prison. If you'd feel uncomfortable if he made cat calls at you, sexaulized you or approached you in an area where you were alone and potentially vulnerable, how the hell do you think we feel? Exactly.

Now speaking from a little personal experience:

I've been in secular humanist/agnostic/atheist groups my entire adult life. I also regularly post on sites which are more liberal/secular, etc. I had once (naively) assumed that if religion was removed, all the reasons behind institutionalized misogyny would also be removed and that I could post freely. So far, I have heard:

• That I must be a stuck-up bitch/cunt/whore if I decided not to go out with one particular person, or be the token female among a group of these like-minded men.
• That I should "whip my tits out." (This is especially true at Star Trek / Sci-Fi conventions, all by "scientifically minded" sci-fi fans).
• And my personal favorite: "You have such nice, cock-sucking lips."

While I appreciate the fullness of my lips and the (many) pleasures they can offer, this last one was not complimentary. It served only to silence me and remind me that while I was trying to offer an objective opinion, a man who was listening thought only to shut me up by sticking his cock in my mouth.

The thing is, this works. When women know that we cannot contribute nor speak our mind, we end up silenced and afraid. I've had people even try to track me down on the Internet and find my current address and phone number. I've been spammed. I've been stalked. I know all to well how very real the threat of rape can be. That last sentence could be spoken by virtually every woman over the age of 30 that I know.

Misogyny isn't unique to the secular/liberal areas, but it's infinitely more common than any of the males on this forum will ever truly understand. I suspect many (scientific and introverted) men simply don't know how to approach women and have become almost pathological from near-constant rejection. I've learned to avoid many of the secular or even sci-fi sites because I got sick of hearing how certain female politicians should be raped or what a bitch I was for not wanting to discuss which Star Trek character had the biggest boobs.

This is reality.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

I have absolutely no way of knowing, as I wasn't there. However from what she says, it sounds like the skeptical "movement" is really important part of her worldview and inspiration. It's doesn't seem like she has a ton of motivation to attack people in it by just making up claims of getting manhandled.

But again, this is part of why I started the thread as I wanted to hear from those who consider themselves part of the skeptical community.

Also, if people in her community are capable of writing stuff to her like like "“honestly, and i mean HONESTLY.. you deserve to be raped and tortured and killed. swear id laugh if i could”, for expressing opinions they don't like then I believe they also could be capable of dishing out unsolicited groping, yes.

Now that I've given Jimi a piece of my mind, let's look at the other side of the equation:

The woman who had these experiences - and speaking from my own personal experiences - have been in the secular communities because that's the place mostly likely to welcome secular/scientific women who are also generally feminists (whether or not they like that term, which we can discuss at some other point).

Now look at who's going to be posting on the religions forums:
1. Probably not feminists and scientific types.
2. Women who have been raised to accept that they are substandard and should be meek and obedient.
3. Women who have heard since childhood that they are responsible for sin, the fall from paradise, etc.
4. As a general rule, many of them believe that bad things can't happen to them if they act/look/dress a certain way.
5. This last rule is condoned in the bible, which states that a woman who is raped inside a city should be treated as an adulteress because she didn't cry out - ie, even Western religion places the blame of rape on the woman.

Of these two groups, who's the more likely to get spammed or threatened? The ones who speak their minds and rise to a challenge or the ones who nod in agreement with everything a man says and does? As long as a woman "knows her place," violent misogyny will often be spared. It's the ones who speak out that are treated the worst, often using religion as its justification. Misogyny is epidemic in the bible and certainly epidemic in religion. Look at the religious types who believe women should not even be allowed to testify about their own health needs. Any woman who actually rises to the challenge of male religious authority (such as Sandra Fluke, Margaret Sanger, all the way back to Joan of Arc) is going to be treated with violent misogyny and possibly even death. Misogyny may be very widespread in the secular community but it's an applauded part of the heritage of the religious community.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

I'm very late to this thread.

Having said that, what a pile of poop! Your entire premise is false and an attempt up smear skeptics. Please. Everywhere you used the word skeptics, insert conspiracy theorists and everywhere you used the word misogyny insert paranoid schizophrenic.

Do you identify yourself as psychotic? If not, why not?

See what I did there?

ETA: let's say your premise isn't false; it's completely true. That is, skeptics are, to a one, sexist pigs. Does that change true believers' lack of actual evidence?

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

I read and re-read the Slate article three times to make sure I wasn't misreading or forming knee-jerk responses.

A couple of thoughts:

1). Why do we believe her? Sorry, just because she's a she doesn't earn special dispensation
2). What are the other sides of her stories, if any?
3). She mentions receiving hate mail/messages from a forum deducted to hating female skeptics. Do you really believe there is a forum by skeptics, hating other skeptics? I'm guessing the hate is/was coming from conspiracy types, not skeptics
4). What she refers to as sexism imply isn't. It's ham-fisted, crude, distasteful and totally uncalled for. A crappy pick-up attempt, sexism isn't.
5). Am I the only one who feels her brand of sexism is central to her very existence? She seems very preoccupied with others' interest in her. What I mean is, she was sitting at a bar, at a skeptics event, talking about "sexism" of skeptics? Really?
6). She wanted and sought out special treatment from event organizers to comfort her concerning "sexism" at an event focusing on skepticism? Is she not a grown adult? Take appropriate action. Call out the offenders, call the police, leave; whatever is needed. No, this doesn't excuse whatever offensive behavior she's upset about.
7). Dawkin's response to her either means he's a) a crude pig, or b) she spends a lot of time on gender "issues" where there isn't any and it's quite tiresome.
8). I've had plenty of women express hateful, disgusting sentiments to me over my thoughts on message boards. Is that "sexism" too?

Getting hit on my unsophisticated geeks isn't sexism. Me claiming (and I don't!!!) the the lovely and talented RenaissanceLady has nothing valuable to say because she's a woman, is. My suspicion is she has issues with men that run far deeper than sexism.

 

[Actionsquid]

Now speaking from a little personal experience:


I've been in secular humanist/agnostic/atheist groups my entire adult life. I also regularly post on sites which are more liberal/secular, etc. I had once (naively) assumed that if religion was removed, all the reasons behind institutionalized misogyny would also be removed and that I could post freely. So far, I have heard:

• That I must be a stuck-up bitch/cunt/whore if I decided not to go out with one particular person, or be the token female among a group of these like-minded men.
• That I should "whip my tits out." (This is especially true at Star Trek / Sci-Fi conventions, all by "scientifically minded" sci-fi fans).
• And my personal favorite: "You have such nice, cock-sucking lips."

While I appreciate the fullness of my lips and the (many) pleasures they can offer, this last one was not complimentary. It served only to silence me and remind me that while I was trying to offer an objective opinion, a man who was listening thought only to shut me up by sticking his cock in my mouth.


The thing is, this works. When women know that we cannot contribute nor speak our mind, we end up silenced and afraid. I've had people even try to track me down on the Internet and find my current address and phone number. I've been spammed. I've been stalked. I know all to well how very real the threat of rape can be. That last sentence could be spoken by virtually every woman over the age of 30 that I know.



Misogyny isn't unique to the secular/liberal areas, but it's infinitely more common than any of the males on this forum will ever truly understand. I suspect many (scientific and introverted) men simply don't know how to approach women and have become almost pathological from near-constant rejection. I've learned to avoid many of the secular or even sci-fi sites because I got sick of hearing how certain female politicians should be raped or what a bitch I was for not wanting to discuss which Star Trek character had the biggest boobs.

Sorry about those experiences, and thanks for the first-person accounts. They're appreciated.

 

[Actionsquid]

I'm very late to this thread.

Having said that, what a pile of poop! Your entire premise is false and an attempt up smear skeptics.

Dude. No.

You are ascribing motives to me that I don't have; please don't do that. I have no problem at all asking the same question about UFO conferences or ghost hunting conferences or, well, any so-called community.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

RL, I'm very sorry to hear what's been said to you. I truly am. I'm a husband to a wonderful wife and a father to two wonderful kids. I take my responsibilities very seriously: raising my son to be a man and my daughter to be a woman. There is nothing more important I can do than to model a faithful, hardworking family man for my son and teach my daughter how real men should treat her. That is, with respect and dignity.

There are many good men out there; I'm quite sure you know a few! Don't let those douchenozzles tar us all.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Dude. No.

You are ascribing motives to me that I don't have; please don't do that. I have no problem at all asking the same question about UFO conferences or ghost hunting conferences or, well, any so-called community.

Ok, fair enough! Consider me duly reprimanded

ETA: said with good humor and zero schmuck-factor

 

[RenaissanceLady]

I read and re-read the Slate three times to make sure I wasn't misreading or forming knee-jerk responses.

A couple of thoughts:

1). Why do we believe her? Sorry, just because she's a she doesn't earn special dispensation

Well, some of us followed the story and the responses online, as it was happening. Some of us also read Dawkin's response, which indicates he certainly believed her - and behaved terribly thereafter. She's also a rather well known host of her own skeptic site who was pretty widely trolled at that time. So, why not believe her - and why do you think she isn't one of the overwhelming majority of women who tell the truth about sexual misconduct.

Whether or not you mean to, you're coming across as another "blame the victim" type.

2). What are the other sides of her stories, if any?

Did you read Dawkin's response? Did you read any of the responses as they were occurring? Did you try to post support for her after this happened, only to get threatened, spammed and trolled? That's a good gist of what the mentality was at that time. If you're wondering what the response was of the man who got into the elevator with her, as far as I know, he as remained anonymous.

3). She mentions receiving hate mail/messages from a forum deducted to hating female skeptics. Do you really believe there is a forum by skeptics, hating other skeptics? I'm guessing the hate is/was coming from conspiracy types, not skeptics

Again, she has her own site by and for female skeptics and was widely trolled on that site.

4). What she refers to as sexism imply isn't. It's ham-fisted, crude, distasteful and totally uncalled for. A crappy pick-up attempt, sexism isn't.

Seriously? OK, I'll bite. Let's say you spent 12 hours saying you felt uncomfortable when women marched up to you and commented on your balls. Then, after this speech, a woman marches up to you, cornering you in an elevator and deliberately comments on your balls. Would you say it's simply "in poor taste" or would you admit that it takes a a whole lotta misandry to reduce you to the sum of your male genitalia after you specifically said you hated that? I'll say that it takes a hatred of the other sex to deliberately reduce another person to that sexuality, leaving room for nothing more.

5). Am I the only one who feels her brand of sexism is central to her very existence? She seems very preoccupied with others' interest in her. What I mean is, she was sitting at a bar, at a skeptics event, talking about "sexism" of skeptics? Really?

So, she should have commented on this.... where, exactly? Would you have preferred she simply kept her mouth shut and not have addressed a problem that is apparently widespread?

6). She wanted and sought out special treatment from event organizers to comfort her concerning "sexism" at an event focusing on skepticism?

Please explain to me how equal rights and civil rights are "special treatment." I'm left with this icky taste in my mouth that any legitimate concerns by women are considered to be "special treatment" because men do not have nor are able to understand those concerns.

Getting hit on my unsophisticated geeks isn't sexism. Me claiming (and I don't!!!) the the lovely and talented RenaissanceLady has nothing valuable to say because she's a woman, is. My suspicion is he has issues with men.

Translation:
A) Commenting that she doesn't like being told that she should be raped means she has "issues with men."
B) Commenting that she feels uncomfortable when men overtly sexualize her, even cornering her alone to do so, means she has "issues with men."

By this definition, if a gay man told you that you should be gang raped - and you objected to that comment - it means you obviously have "issues with gay men."

Gotcha.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Sigh.

Another translation:
1). How dare you disagree with me! I'm a woman and we ALWAYS have the correct view point
2). You disagree with me?!!! You're one of THEM and I'll do my best to shut you up with straw man arguments!!!

Basically, I'm entitled to my opinions, as I see it, without being falsely labeled.

Gotcha.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

RL, I'm very sorry to hear what's been said to you. I truly am. I'm a husband to a wonderful wife and a father to two wonderful kids. I take my responsibilities very seriously: raising my son to be a man and my daughter to be a woman. There is nothing more important I can do than to model a faithful, hardworking family man for my son and teach my daughter how real men should treat her. That is, with respect and dignity.

There are many good men out there; I'm quite sure you know a few! Don't let those douchenozzles tar us all.

Well, it's nice hearing you say that.... but... What if Rebecca Watson was your daughter? If your daughter was told she should be raped, would your idea of support be to tell her that she "has issues with men"? If she then was overwhelmingly spammed and threatened, would you blame her?

If your daughter spent 12 hours saying that she hates being sexualized and wants to address sexism in the secular community, would you be just peachy if some douchebag corners her in an elevator and asks to go to her hotel room for a "cup of coffee"? If she complains, does that also mean she has "issues with men"?

Do you think these things can't happen to her? Would you blame her if these did?

I hope she doesn't read this forum, because you're sending some mighty mixed messages.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Again, straw man arguments. I meant what I said. I'm not going to have you put out red herrings and demand I answer hypotheticals.

Did YOU read what I wrote, or did you knee jerk spasm into reactions? I think I was quite clear that ham fisted, disgusting, out of line come-ons aren't acceptable. They also aren't sexism. Sexual harassment? Quite possibly. Sexism? No.

Not agreeing with you does not equal misogyny. Also. How dare you attempt to declare what I am, or am not with regard to my daughter. Are you a gender feminist who hates men? If not, I hope no men are reading this forum; you're sure sending mixed signals. See? We could do this all day.

Bottom line; because I disagree with you does not make me a sexist. Nor does it entitle you to make judgements about my patenting based on an online forum response. You can keep trying to shut me down with veiled sexist accusations. I still meant what I said, and no, I'm not a sexist for having an opinion.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

Sigh.
-
Another translation:
1). How dare you disagree with me! I'm a woman and we ALWAYS have the correct view point
2). You disagree with me?!!! You're one of THEM and I'll do my best to shut you up with straw man arguments!!!

Basically, I'm entitled to my opinions, as I see it, without being falsely labeled.

Gotcha.

You're entitled to your (overwhelmingly inaccurate) opinions.

When thousands if not millions of people read comments saying that she should be raped, how can you say we all misread this comments? THAT'S REALITY. Many of us watched this unfold, as it was happening. It's not my fault you somehow missed it.

You've hit the nail on the head regarding why women don't come forward when they've been sexually threatened, assaulted or raped. It can never happen to your good daughter - it's just the rest of us who had it coming or are lying because we're women and must demand to be believed, statistics be damned. Apparently even when thousands of us watch these comments as they're happening, it still means we're lying.

Damn.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

Again, straw man arguments. I meant what I said. I'm not going to have you put out red herrings and demand I answer hypotheticals.

Did YOU read what I wrote, or did you knee jerk spasm into reactions? I think I was quite clear that ham fisted, disgusting, out of line come-ons aren't acceptable. They also aren't sexism. Sexual harassment? Quite possibly. Sexism? No.

Not agreeing with you does not equal misogyny. Also. How dare you attempt to declare what I am, or am not doing with regard to my daughter. Are you a gender feminist who hates men? If not, I hope no men are reading this forum; your sure sending mixed signals.

See, we could do this all day. Bottom line; because I disagree with you does not make me a sexist. Nor ones it entitle you to make judgements about my patenting based on an online forum response. You can keep trying to shit me down with veiled sexist accusations. I still meant what I said, and no, I'm not a sexist for having an opinion.

Did you not read what I was saying? If a person doesn't want to be reduced to their sexuality - and that's exactly what happens - it's a sexist response. Not exactly rocket science, there.

I never claimed that disagreement equals misogyny or sexism. Sexist jokes and derogatory comments are misogynistic and sexist, just as anti-gay jokes and comments are homophobic.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Again, you're alo entitled to your overwhelmingly inaccurate characterizations of me and you're entitled to continue to put forth straw man arguments. You can keep putting forth generalizations I'm not making; that doesn't make them a reality. You've read a whole lot more into what I said, than what I actually said.

Seriously now, for someone who claims to know first hand about cyber stalking and threats; care to leave my daughter out of your points?

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Did you not read what I was saying? If a person doesn't want to be reduced to their sexuality - and that's exactly what happens - it's a sexist response. Not exactly rocket science, there.

I never claimed that disagreement equals misogyny or sexism. Sexist jokes and derogatory comments are misogynistic and sexist, just as anti-gay jokes and comments are homophobic.

Okay. We disagree. I said what I said, and I meant it. If you choose to read a whole bunch of crap I've not said into that, so be it. All I'm asking is for you to stay on target. Again, you can keep trying to force me to answer for things I've not said, and I'll keep refusing to do so.

I'm not going to be cowed over fear you might think I'm a shitty dad, or a sexist. Those are cheap, politically correct arguments, and I reject them.

If your wondering what I meant, or want clarity: ask. Don't assume then demand I answer for something I've not meant, nor said.