Skeptic Conference Battles Sexual Harassment Allegations

[rug]

July 14, 2012 08:15 PM EDT

The skeptic conference this weekend in Las Vegas has reportedly seen a drop in attendance by women, and the reason may be due to sexual harassment allegations. Several atheist groups have put policies in place in the last few weeks to combat the growing problem of unwanted sexual advances occurring at conferences.

The annual conference, includes panels and workshops with such names as "Promoting Skepticism at the Local Level," "The Future of Skepticism Online: Crowd-Sourced Activism" and "Promoting Skepticism in Classroom Settings." Interestingly, these types of discussions are clearly looking to promote the "religion" of skepticism, and even works to indoctrinate high school kids.

Last year, women made up 40 percent of the attendees at The Amazing Meeting (TAM), and this year it is expected to be at 31 percent of the 1,200 attendees. Although the organizers of the skeptics, atheists and humanist gathering point to other possible reasons, like the fact that women are "caretakers" and cannot get away, some believe women are shying away from the conference due to unwanted sexual advances.

Several female skeptic bloggers have made it clear that they will not be attending, as reported by the Washington Post. Rebecca Watson, for example, canceled her TAM appearance because "she does 'not feel welcome or safe.'"

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981474118

Scheduled workshops:

http://www.amazingmeeting.com/TAM2012/workshops

[longship]

1. Thanks to DJ Grothe

The issue at the core is that the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF) president DJ Grothe utterly failed on this. He should have taken immediate action to remedy the growing reports of women being targeted at TAM.

When multiple attempts to engage the JREF on these issues resulted in more denial, Rebecca Watson took the action she did. Other of the Skepchicks will attend, however.

I fully support Rebecca's action and I condemn DJ Grothe for being a jerk about something that could have been easily remedied. DJ Grothe should step down as JREF president. I put all of this on him and him alone. He literally turned this into a very big problem.

on edit: I find the characterization of skepticism as a religion to be very offensive. Whoever wrote that apparently doesn't know what skepticism is. Many, if not most, skeptics are non-religious. Calling it a religion is just wrong on so many levels.

Skepticism can be fairly characterized as a support for science, methodological naturalism. N.B., not necessarily philosophical naturalism.

[MineralMan]

2. You seem to have posted a very similar post about the same

organization a few days ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121835567

[rug]

3. It's ongoing.

[skepticscott]

4. This from the poster

who whines and complains that stories about Catholic priests raping young boys and the church covering up and abetting those crimes are old news.

[rug]

7. This from the poster

who whines and complains about news coverage of sexual harassment within the atheist community after reading or posting hundreds of stories about the Catholich Church sex abuse scandals.

You can always post Penn State stories and try to forge a connection.

[skepticscott]

8. Oh, and where did I

"whine and complain about news coverage of sexual harassment within the atheist community"? Like to point everyone to those posts? I assume you'll either be getting back to us on that soon, or admitting that your statement was a big fat lie.

And btw, there ARE hundreds of stories about Catholic priests raping little boys, and about their superiors covering up and abetting their crimes. Plus some we'll probably never hear told.

[rug]

9. Good, I'm glad you'tre not whining when you see this story.

I'll keep you posted.

[skepticscott]

10. You do that

because I'd hate to have the whole group think you were a big fat liar. Especially the ones here who think you're so wonderful.

[skepticscott]

11. Wow, no links yet

about my alleged "whining and complaining" about news coverage of sexual harassment in the atheist community.

Guess we should get you a fire extinguisher for your trousers.

[rug]

12. Here you go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=35890

Although incensed diversion is a better descriptor.

[skepticscott]

13. Funny, I don't see any

whining and complaining about news coverage of sexual harassment in the atheist community in that post.

Guess you're going to have to put your trousers out yourself. Rounds are over.

[rug]

14. Of course not. You just couldn't stop yourself from bringing in an extraneous topic.

[cleanhippie]

21. He's not one to miss a chance at beating dead horses.

[immoderate]

5. Somebody doesn't know what a religion is.

--imm

[cbayer]

6. Not clear what you are saying here. Do you mean this doesn't belong here?

[immoderate]

15. Well, I knew what I meant when I posted it.

But I can't figure out what it was.

--imm

[cbayer]

16. You're killing me here!

[immoderate]

17. I remember it being the killer comeback...

It would be very strong once I make the connection. Uhm...

--imm

[immoderate]

18. Oh! Yeah! The article at the link has this drivel...

Interestingly, these types of discussions are clearly looking to promote the "religion" of skepticism, and even works to indoctrinate high school kids.

It's as fraudulent as calling atheism a religion. It's stretching a term until it has no meaning.

Now where did I put that bong?

--imm

[onager]

19. Much more complex than "allegations"

The author of that piece sure didn't do much homework.

e.g., here's an article Paula Kirby web-published on 1 July 2012 which has ignited several giant Internetz brushfires.

If the name "Paula Kirby" sounds familiar, she's a longtime atheist/skeptic who got into an argument over sexism with Rebecca Watson at the 2011 World Atheist Convention in Dublin - yep, that's the very same convention at which the famous "Elevatorgate" incident happened to Watson.

Kirby published her article, Sisterhood of the Oppressed, on Google Docs:

The situation at the conferences has been exaggerated and distorted beyond all recognition, and any number of skeptical male attendees and one conference organizer in particular have been scandalously maligned in the process.

What's more, the whole furore has only made matters worse for women: firstly, by effectively telling them they'd have to be mad to risk getting involved in skepticism; secondly, by consistently sending out the singularly unhelpful message that they are victims and will face nothing but oppression; and thirdly, by reinforcing all the negative sexist stereotyping that many real feminists have been working so hard over many years to overcome...

Frankly, when I see precisely those characteristics being paraded with pride by people who have the gall to call themselves feminists (and to dismiss those who disagree with them as misogynist), I am utterly disgusted.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02RDDb71N8Xc2EwYmw5T2Z4eDg/edit?pli=1

Finally, as I've ranted before, this is a very complex issue. So here are two very detailed timelines, coming from opposite sides of the issue. Make up your own mind:

We're not being oppressed: http://phawrongula.wikia.com/wiki/Freethoughtblogs_timeline

Yes, we're oppressed: http://ohthehumanityofitall.blogspot.ca/2012/07/deep-rifts-or-humanity-of-it-all-part-1.html

[cbayer]

20. Very interesting. Sound like some of the feminist wars we have going on right here

on DU.