Justin Vacula · @justinvacula
4th Feb 2013 from Twitlonger
@daylightatheism
Where in my Twitlonger response did I suggest something to provide evidence for your claim "Justin Vacula says he doesn't see any evidence that atheist women are sexually harassed?"
Here's what I said:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/ktlald
First, my response to you is largely about conferences. I never claimed that there is no evidence to suggest atheist women are never harassed. I even grant, in my response to you, that harassment may be happening, but it's not to the magnitude that people are making it out to be. I wrote,
"While there may be some instances of harassment at conferences, I wouldn't imagine, and haven't seen reason to believe, what it is a "major problem" and/or anything different than what would be expected from a random group of strangers meeting."
What else did I say?
"I'll listen to complaints from people who say they are uncomfortable, unequal, unwelcome, etc. [...] I continue to hear that people are harassed at conferences (or that this is a common problem which needs to be addressed), but I don't see any evidence of this - and instead see conferences failing to acknowledge these things happen (and come forth saying noone registered complaints or otherwise expressed satisfaction on post- anonymous surveys)."
This is about conferences - and the evidence doesn't suggest there is a common problem which needs to be addressed. Please provide evidence of harassment women face at conferences is what I am asking.
"I'll listen to people who claim to receive 'hundreds of rape and death threats from atheists' when they show evidence of this (they have not)."
Time and time again, people like Rebecca Watson make these claims. We don't see these 'hundreds of rape and death threats from atheists' although she thinks that a blog post about a stupid MSpaint (which I don't condone) is worth writing and publicly sharing [while also, for whatever reason, taking swipes at Shermer and Paula Kirby]. FYI, I don't think that this image is constructive and would never send Rebecca or anyone else an image like that. It's completely inappropriate no matter how much people dislike her.
Who the hell knows who sent that image? Rebecca is trolled across the internet (it's not something exclusive to the atheist/skeptic community by any means - she has an Encyclopedia Dramatica page, wrote articles in Slate and Salon, and has been featured elsewhere). Your guess is as good as mine. There's no reason to even suggest an atheist, or an atheist who attends conferences, sent her that image. Maybe it's someone from Reddit or 4chan. Who knows?
Hell, I even had people sending me messages saying nasty things and photoshopping me in the past... As you likely know, someone recently placed a poster with me aside Hitler, Stalin, and Mao on Public Square in Wilkes-Barre. (http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013/01/14/a-new-smear-campaign-targeting-me/) I have no idea who did it...and we have no idea who sent Rebecca that mspaint horror.
It sucks that Watson gets photos like that, but this is much different than being sexually harassed at a conference - two things which you appear to be conflating while you strawman my post. The internet, as we all know, is a nasty place. I don't know why people think the trolling (which Rebecca even acknowledges it is) in her post is going to go away or is anything 'special.' Rebecca is not the only person on the internet who are targetted by trolls...and it's not all women, either.
Do you think that anti-harassment policies at conventions are needed because of Rebecca Watson being trolled on the internet? I don't see con policies as stopping this behavior (or relevant in any way to this behavior) nor do I see an end to the trolling. Again, I don't approve of the message sent to Rebecca Watson (nor do *gasp* people in the Slymepit). This, though, should go without saying...
Anyway, please stop the strawmanning and just have the recorded discussion already instead of making excuses and demanding your ideological opponents jump through hoops and bounds.
Thanks.