Another Serious Post About Sex. This is no Laughing Matter.

Leave a comment

This story disturbed me to my core. I don’t have anything to say about this. I just can’t believe that attitudes like these still exist in the modern world. I don’t really have it in me right now to go in depth about the issues of rape and the law.  Below is a video that I saw.  Watch it for yourself and let me know what you think about this particular issue.  Maybe with enough discussion I can find the energy to really write about it.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZyPLgqK9sQ

A Look at Misogyny in The Skeptic Community

2 Comments

Alright, so there has been a lot of talk about sexism in the atheist/skeptic community lately. Most of this has taken place online and at skeptic conferences. Before I go into my opinions about this issue, I feel like I should give you a brief history about how this controversy started.

About a year ago, a prominent atheist blogger, Rebecca Watson, posted a video about her experience at a conference in Dublin. She talked about how she was drinking with some friends until 4 A.M. She left the bar and took the elevator to her room with a man who asked her if she would like to come to his room for “coffee.”

Rebecca Watson said that this event made her feel uncomfortable and sexualised. She said that the issue of sexism in the atheist/skeptic community needed to be addressed in light of this incident.

Several bloggers in the community addressed Rebecca’s position as an overreaction. They said that while the man in the elevator didn’t have the best judgment, Rebecca overreacted to the incident and that sexism in the atheist community was not as big an issue as she made it out to be.

Rebecca then called out one of these bloggers during a keynote speech she gave at another conference. This triggered more debate online, which drew in the attention of the bigger players of the community such as P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins. Myers agreed with Rebecca, while Dawkins pointed out that sexism in other parts of the world was far worse than the incident that Rebecca experienced.

This controversy caught the attention of many others in the community, including youtubers, The Amazing Atheist and Thunderf00t. The Amazing Atheist talked about the stupidity of the entire debate, while Thunderf00t brought up the over-exaggeration of sexism in the community.

Now I will give my opinion on these events. I would like to note that I do not hold any of these ideas in stone and am willing to debate and discuss these opinions with anyone who is willing to debate rationally.

First off, I am in the camp that says that Rebecca overreacted to the event.  I do feel like the man in the elevator was an idiot for hitting on her in an elevator, where she couldn’t walk away easily.  But, this man didn’t seem to push the subject, so I feel the subject could have ended at that moment.  I also think that Rebecca should have taken the high road when bringing up the issue.  This seems to be a simple case of social stupidity that could have been addressed as such in Rebecca’s videos and speeches.

Now in regards to the negative attention that Rebecca has received in light of this incident, I am sickened that people would mock her with threats of violence and rape.  That behavior is unacceptable in a civilized society.  However, in the internet culture, that behavior is relatively common these days; I myself have received a few threats of rape for my post about sexism in the GOP.  If these threats seem genuine, if the person making them gives personal information that shows serious intent, then they should be dealt with by contacting the proper authorities.  But, Rebecca addresses these as all being genuine to further an agenda.  I think that a little bit of common sense would show that there are other issues and causes to the behavior of these internet trolls.

Now when it comes to the opinions of other bloggers such the The Amazing Atheist and Thunderf00t,  I think that everyone is entitled to their opinion.  I also believe that opinion should never have any effect on policy or action when it comes to social issues.  Logic and reason must overcome opinions and feelings when it comes to issues like this.  And on that note, I wish to address a small but important issue that has recently arose from this debate.

P.Z. Myers has a blog called Freethought Blogs.  He recently banned Thunderf00t from this blog for rationally discussing this issue on Freethought Blogs.  Now while I understand that having a new voice come into a debate and criticizing a strongly held view can be upsetting, P.Z. Myers sunk to the level of an ignorant bigot in banning Thunderf00t through strawman arguments and gut reactions.  If issues like sexism are ever going to be worked out and solved, it is going to be thought rational debate and logical arguments.  Not knee-jerk reactions and emotional outpouring.  I am ashamed to call myself a future teacher if people like P.Z. Myers can hold the same title that I will soon hold.

In the end, I think that the issue of sexism in the skeptic community is something to be looked at so that people of all genders, creeds, sexuality, and races can be welcome.  But I feel like this issue has polarized the community, turning free thinking individuals into pluralized mobs that only react on empty emotion.

But what do you think?  Am I right, wrong, or neither.  Is sexism a rampent problem in the atheist/skeptic community?  Leave a comment and I’ll be sure to join in on the debate.

Is gender equality really the anti-viagra?

Leave a comment

The article that I will be talking about was published in 2011 in Psychology Today. You can read it for yourself here.

Now let’s create a summary of that this article says. This way we can address the points and go into detail later.

The basic premise of this article is that human beings are hardwired to be aroused by either dominant or submissive sexual behavior. This phenomenon tends to show itself in one or the other, a person is either dominant or submissive. It also says that research shows that the majority of men are dominant and the majority of women are submissive. The article then says that this phenomenon can create issues with modern feminists by inhibiting their sexual pleasure.

The first thing that I will say is that their research looks sound. I can’t bring myself to refute their data. It does seem like a majority of men are wired to enjoy dominance in the bedroom while women are wired to enjoy submissiveness. I do however have 2 issues with their explanation of this.
First: Dr. Ogi Ogas does not do a good job at clarifying the difference between majorities and absolutes. He does use the word majority in the article, but the public responce to this article shows that this distinction was not clear. I think that it should have been directly stated that all conclusions talked about only refer to the majority in a separate paragraph at the beginning.
Second: Dr. Ogas seems to have used some inflammatory examples and language. I can’t speak to his motives; but this seems to be done to generate controversy, or was done without realizing the controversy it would generate. The best example of this can be seen in this passage, “most men are aroused by being dominant, as evidenced by the massive cross-cultural popularity of dominance-themed adult Web sites for men. These include some of the most inventive and varied genres of male erotica, such as hypnotism porn (where Svengalis hypnotize woman into having sex), drunk porn (where men trick inebriated women into having sex), sleep porn (where men take advantage of sleeping women), and a wide diversity of exploitation porn (where women exchange sexual favors for school books, a ride, or a rent-free apartment).” While these examples are legitimate examples of male dominant pornography, they are also examples of the extreme. Had the article gone over a broad range, say from porn centered around a man being forceful in his movements, to porn centered around spanking and light bondage, to the extremes of exploitation porn; then this passage would have been less inflammatory.  This also makes it seem like the research shows that men are hardwired to want to rape, and women are hardwired to want to be raped.

I chose that extreme example because that was the exact conclusion a reader of this article came to.  Now, in a follow-up, Dr. Ogas clarified that rape is not something that should be condoned and that these dominance fantasies, where rape is the outcome, are the extreme that should be left to consenting role-play.  Another problem that I have with this article is the general conclusion that it comes to.

Now I will clarify that the article tries to clarify this conclusion.  It however fails to do this with any satisfaction to me, having a degree in English literature interpretation.  The article says that the changing american culture that has women finally gaining the equal rights they deserve as people has stifled our sexuality.  I think that Dr. Ogas has again used inflammatory language to come to a partial conclusion.

I personally don’t think that feminism is the cause of our sexual frustration.  I think that the problem that Dr. Ogas has found is not specific to any gender, but to our cultural perception of self.  As a society, we tend to see ourselves in the extremes.  If we have personality traits that differ from the social norm, we tend to make that our key personality trait.  We see ourselves in extreme terms; “I am a christian, I am an atheist, I am a homosexual, I am a feminist.”  What we fail to recognize is that we are a collection of all of our personality traits.  The problem that is addressed in the article is that many feminists have a problem reconciling their desires to  be respected as equals in life with the desire to be submissive in the bedroom.  This has nothing to do with feminism.

Let’s take two fictional people who are married, John and Jane Smith.  John works as an accountant.  He loves old western movies and is an outspoken defender of women’s rights in his office.  He enjoys throwing Jane on the bed during sex.  Jane is a regional manager in the company she works at.  She attends conventions of women manager to talk about the rights of women in the workplace and fights to change policies that limit the upward growth or women in the workplace.  She likes it when John picks her up and throws her on the bed during sex.  Dr. Ogas makes it seem like their sex lives would be inhibited when Jane has a conflict with being dominated by a man during sex while also being an outspoken feminist.  I say that if they both recognize that their behavior during sex is a fantasy role-play that they both enjoy while being equals outside of the bedroom, and that they are not defined by these traits, they should have no problem with their sex lives.  They should both recognize that this dominance and submissive side of themselves does not translate to anything but their sexual role-play.

So to conclude,  I think that Dr. Ogas saw this problem of people not recognizing that their day-to-day lives and their sexuality do not have to define them entirely.  He came to a partial conclusion, and failed to explain this points in a way that would not offend the general public.

But I want to know what you think.  Is feminism inhibiting sexuality?  Or, is it the way that we label ourselves that makes us unable to accept our sexuality?  Please leave a comment and let’s get this dialog going.

Violent metaphors

Thoughts from the intersection of science, pseudoscience, and conflict.

SecularVoices.org

Be Rational. Be Outspoken. Be Heard.

c0nc0rdance

Science and Reason

The Big Blog Theory

The science behind the science

The Liquid Culture Project

Dedicated to a Culture of Better Drinking

A System of Random Tangents...

General bug-bears and current affairs. I have also stuck some of my photos, creative writing and artwork on here. Feel free to have a nose around

Classroom as Microcosm

Siobhan Curious Says: Teachers are People Too

The Homeless Adjunct

The blog of Junct Rebellion, taking on the corporatized university of America

Why? Because Science.

Combating Stupidity Since 2012

Myles Power (powerm1985)

fun with SCIENCE!

Filthy Monkey Men

We did, in fact, evolve from filthy monkey men

Thunderf00t

Science and Education FTW!

The Skeptical Teacher

Musings of a science teacher & skeptic in an age of woo.

Talking to Stones

the spaces between words

Steve Grand's Blog

Artificial Life in real life