Comments on: Communicating Atheism

By: sailor

sailor — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 22:37:47 +0000

“By the way, Dawkins looks equally bored with each of the panel members. It’s only in hindsight that we interpret his response to Rebecca differently.”

I am not surprised, I just watched the section with Rebecca, so missed the rest. His body language does say something about his personality. It goes with his Rebecca sarcasm.

By: Lynn Wilhelm

Lynn Wilhelm — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 19:00:20 +0000

By the way, Dawkins looks equally bored with each of the panel members. It’s only in hindsight that we interpret his response to Rebecca differently.

By: Lynn Wilhelm

Lynn Wilhelm — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:58:12 +0000

I don’t think Rebecca hijacked the panel. As Rorschach said, she needed to add that after the panel on sexism. Since seeing that discussion, I agree that there are other points not addressed. In communicating atheism, sexism must be addressed–especially inadvertent sexism. I think most men simply don’t realize what they are saying and I’ve been happy to see that some men seemed to see the light a bit during these discussions.

And like Giliell I watched Rebecca’s video the day it came out. I never thought it would erupt as it did.

I still think Dawkins owes her (and us) an apology/explanation about why his comments were inappropriate. I’m not holding my breath, but I’m still holding out hope.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 15:57:50 +0000

Rorschach: Yes there is a point to this, and I suppose I could have specified what it was but chose not to. But since you ask: If you read the comments on this blog and don’t know who any of the actors are, you might be very surprised to see that this Rebecca Watson character is … well, as depicted in the video. I think understanding the entire discussion does sometimes come down to hard to define context and I wanted this discussion to be a bit more enriched than it is.

Also, the “Imma rape you bitch” emails are worth noting, as they are key to the discussion.

Thanks by the way for your post on Twatson-talk. I like ERV a lot, she’s a good colleague and a blog-friend, but I might have to start calling her a [rest of sentence deleted because I don’t feel like lowering myself to that level at the moment … perhaps some other time] so she gets the point.

By: sailor

sailor — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:57:33 +0000

Greg if you are still holding your breath waiting for a Dawkins apology, you have a great lung capacity!
It was interesting t watch the two side by side. It was hard to work out whether Dawkins was bored or embarrassed with his twiddling thumb routine

By: Rorschach

Rorschach — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:24:09 +0000

Is there a point to this ? We’ve covered that a while ago I thought. Although Aron Ra is one cool customer, I have to admit ! Rebecca (and I) felt like Paula Kirby needed to be corrected on what she said on the earlier panel, and that’s what Rebecca did when she had the opportunity as a speaker/panelist, given that I wasn’t given the mic earlier and time had run out anyway on the previous panel. The whole “she hijacked the panel to talk off topic” bullshit is such utter rubbish. Kind Regards !

By: Giliell

Giliell — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:08:01 +0000

I did watch it, back the very day Aron Ra uploaded it. In the comments I wondered what those men were thinking when Rebecca told about those e-mails, especially the “I want to fuck you fanmail”, whether they had ever thought about how different those things must be for a woman than they are for a man.

I also watched Rebecca’s original video the day it came out. I didn’t think it particularly noteworthy. Hearing about EG for the first time, I thought “ughh, really guys”.

I wouldn’t have betted a dime on this becoming the major topic in the atheist community for the next weeks.