Skeptics I no longer have any respect for.

[Tiberius]

[KichigaiNeko]

tired here too mate but wanted to get back to you on this.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Your take on Dawkins is interesting. I look forward to seeing why your respect for thunderfoot is so low.
I don't know the other two but given your story on Rebecca Watson, I'd have to agree on all points.

[DeistPaladin]

Rebecca Watson
Also known as "The Skepchick", Rebecca Watson is a blogger on skepticism among other things. She also does a few podcasts apparently, although I've never listened to them. In the last year, she's managed to solidify her position among quite a few fellow skeptics as a radical feminist bent on alienating anyone who has the audacity to disagree with her. Her two offenses are:

1) Elevatorgate - Ms Watson was in an elevator in a hotel in Dublin at 4am, with a man who had apparently been at the hotel bar with her and all the other skeptics who had attended some skeptical conference. The man said he liked her views, and asked whether she wanted to come to his room for some coffee. She politely refused, the man went to his hotel room alone (as any gentleman would), and that should have been that.

Except that Ms Watson made a video blog a few days later saying the man had made her feel "uncomfortable" and asked men "not to do that"...because apparently asking people for coffee is creepy now...who knew? Anyways, the internet asploded, Dawkins made some funny sarcastic comment about overreacting, and the skeptic community was split into three groups: those who think Watson is a hero (sorry, heroine) for standing up for the rights of women not to get hit on in elevators, those who think Watson is a feminazi who wants men to be seen and not heard (and also not seen), and the rest of us, myself included, who were watching from the sidelines saying "WTF, it's just coffee."

My wife talked to me about this case and helped me to understand it. She managed to do it in a way that didn't sound like male bashing. I'm going to try to pass it on.

Women are terrified of being raped, stalked or sexually harassed. This is not just hypersensitivity but due to a very real danger. I've heard various statistics that suggest about 1 in 4 will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime. A wary woman does well to be suspicious of a male stranger that approaches her in a confined area.

For men, this is a difficult fear to fully understand, since we're not as physically vulnerable to being raped. An invitation to coffee seems innocent enough, right? What we don't realize is that from the woman's perspective, every male stranger is a potential attacker. He asked her in a confined space. She had nowhere to run. His intentions may have been innocent but he may have unwittingly creeped her out just from the circumstances. Also, his invitation to HIS ROOM rather than a public area like the hotel was another source of creepyness.

For men, it's important to realize this fear exists and to always make sure when we approach a woman that she's not in a confined space or in any other situation where she feels like she can't say "no" with no consequences.

For women, please understand our difficulty to understand your legitimate fears. You will do better to calmly explain them in the way I just have rather than just assume we're insensitive jerks.

[Tiberius]

I should add that according to Rebecca Watson herself, his request started with the words "Don't take this the wrong way". That alone should be a pretty good indicator that whatever followed wasn't meant in a creepy way, but was probably a perfectly innocent request. Watson in her infinite wisdom took it the wrong way.

[DeistPaladin]

I should add that according to Rebecca Watson herself, his request started with the words "Don't take this the wrong way". That alone should be a pretty good indicator that whatever followed wasn't meant in a creepy way, but was probably a perfectly innocent request. Watson in her infinite wisdom took it the wrong way.

Anytime someone says "blah blah blah but..." you can ignore the part that comes in front of the "but".

Here's the two things the guy did wrong:

1. Hit on her in the confined space.
2. Invited her to his room, not a public place.

[leo-rcc]

My take on Dawkins can be found over various posts on this site, let's just say I think RD is a good biologist, not a good spokesperson for anything related to philosophy or maintaining a business/charity.

Rebecca Watson was and still is someone I don't come in contact with much, unless she does something that has the atheist community on Youtube or Facebook up in arms about it. I have no idea who is right or wrong in the whole elevator incident, but I do know that she blew the whole Reddit thing ridiculously out of proportion and tarred every male atheist with the same brush. So much for skepticism.

[Tiberius]

Exactly, I still respect Dawkins as a biologist. I just don't respect him as a skeptic / atheist much anymore.

Rebecca Watson is a drama queen.

[theVOID]

I should add that according to Rebecca Watson herself, his request started with the words "Don't take this the wrong way". That alone should be a pretty good indicator that whatever followed wasn't meant in a creepy way, but was probably a perfectly innocent request. Watson in her infinite wisdom took it the wrong way.

Anytime someone says "blah blah blah but..." you can ignore the part that comes in front of the "but".

Here's the two things the guy did wrong:

1. Hit on her in the confined space.
2. Invited her to his room, not a public place.

Be careful with that word 'Wrong', because you're using it extraordinarily clumsily.

There is nothing at all inherently wrong with asking any person to do anything in any situation, it's all relative to the values of the people in a particular context - In the case of Rebecca Watson is was the wrong action to take should you desire the achievement of either (i) Furthering a conversation with Rebecca Watson, (ii) Sleeping with Rebecca Watson.

Whether the man in question desired (i) or (ii) is unknown, yet you immediately take to this conclusion and subsequently condemn this man without evidence of intention.

Furthermore, you make another questionable assumption that even if he were to be hitting on her this is in and of it's self wrong, yet the only possible 'bad' done to Rebecca was to make her uncomfortable - Would you say the act of making another person uncomfortable is necessarily wrong? If not, what is special about this particular case of making a person uncomfortable?

If there is anything at all to be learned it is that; If a man does not wish to appear creepy to Rebecca Watson (and some other women) then he ought not to ask them her (them) for a coffee in confined space.

[Justtristo]

Richard Dawkins
Start off with possibly the most well known atheist in the world. I used to respect Dawkins a lot; he was one of the people who got me to be more open about my atheism, to start a blog, to even start these forums. I used to hold his book "The God Delusion" in high regard, and indeed I got a copy signed when I met him a few years ago.

That book is ironically one of the reasons I've lost most respect for him. If you read it as your first book on atheism, or even on philosophy, you think it's brilliant. If however, you start to read other books on atheism, or delve into philosophical thinking even more, you realise that "The God Delusion" is a pile of crap. It tries to make several philosophical points, as well as commenting on various theological ones as well. The problem is, Dawkins has no training in philosophy, and certainly no training in theology either...and it shows...really badly.

The other reason I lost a lot of respect for him was over his handling of the "Richard Dawkins Forums", which were at one point in history, one of the largest internet atheist communities. Long story short, the admin team were crap, a load of things broke and weren't fixed, and then instead of pulling his act together and saving the community (of thousands I might add), he decided to shut down the forums completely. That said, we gained a fair few members that way, so it wasn't a complete loss.

While I broadly agree with you about Richard Dawkins being unlearned in philosophy, which is disappointing. However his “ignorance” of theology I can forgive easily.

Whatever his faults the impression I get from his writings, he seems like a decent minded British Liberal (rather like Bertrand Russell) and I like that. Also I respect him because he really irritates theists (especially Young Earth Creationists). Not to mention his ability to explain in layman's terms about evolutionary biology.

On Rebecca Watson, I believe thesummerqueen summed it up best that her behaviour is typical of women who have had bad experiences with guys. It was not like she was sexually harassed or worse assaulted by this guy.