Creepy Elevator Guy

[Wiccan_Child]

So in my daily ramblings across the Internet, I came across a rather puzzling story. It started with a woman, Skepchick (aka Rebecca Watson), and her YouTube video detailing (among other things) her encounter with 'Creepy Elevator Man':

About Mythbusters, Robot Eyes, Feminism, and Jokes

(Skip to about 4:30) All fine there. On her blog, there was an explosion of comments. PZ Myers wrote an article on the subject on Pharyngula, which also had an explosion of comments (which were closed, and the broader subject reopened here). One of those comments was by Richard Dawkins:

Dear Muslima

Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and . . . yawn . . . don't tell me yet again, I know you aren't allowed to drive a car, and you can't leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you'll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.

Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep"chick", and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn't lay a finger on her, but even so . . .

And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.

Richard

(Warning: there's a lot of bad language in the other comments for that article on Pharyngula)

Now, his post should be quite clear: he's making the wry point that Skepchick's experience with sexism is a pale shadow compared with the sexism experienced by some Muslim women in the Middle-East (and elsewhere). After a flurry of activity, he later clarified his original post:

Did you just make the argument that, since worse things are happening somewhere else, we have no right to try to fix things closer to home?​

No I wasn't making that argument. Here's the argument I was making. The man in the elevator didn't physically touch her, didn't attempt to bar her way out of the elevator, didn't even use foul language at her. He spoke some words to her. Just words. She no doubt replied with words. That was that. Words. Only words, and apparently quite polite words at that.

If she felt his behaviour was creepy, that was her privilege, just as it was the Catholics' privilege to feel offended and hurt when PZ nailed the cracker. PZ didn't physically strike any Catholics. All he did was nail a wafer, and he was absolutely right to do so because the heightened value of the wafer was a fantasy in the minds of the offended Catholics. Similarly, Rebecca's feeling that the man's proposition was 'creepy' was her own interpretation of his behaviour, presumably not his. She was probably offended to about the same extent as I am offended if a man gets into an elevator with me chewing gum. But he does me no physical damage and I simply grin and bear it until either I or he gets out of the elevator. It would be different if he physically attacked me.

Muslim women suffer physically from misogyny, their lives are substantially damaged by religiously inspired misogyny. Not just words, real deeds, painful, physical deeds, physical privations, legally sanctioned demeanings. The equivalent would be if PZ had nailed not a cracker but a Catholic. Then they'd have had good reason to complain.

Richard

Again, his meaning should be clear. This shebacle was mentioned in this article on DailyKos, which is the article I originally found. The article apparently missed Dawkins' point, despite his clarification, and alleged that he was being viscously anti-Islam.

So, my questions are these:

1. Do you think Dawkins was genuinely being hateful towards Islam?
2. Do you think the point Dawkins made (or claims he was making) was valid? Namely, that Skepchick was a) overreacting to what may well have been an innocent offer of coffee, b) overreacting to what may have been an actual offer for sex, and c) overreacting to what she perceives as 'sexism', when there's so much worse in the world?
3. Do you think PZ Myers was right for lampooning the Elevator Guy?
4. What are your thoughts regarding the general explosion of comments and discussion on sceptics blogs, such as RDF and Pharyngula?
5. What are your thoughts regarding the incident itself? Do you think the man was genuinely asking her to talk over coffee, or was it a veiled offer for sex? Do you think she was right to feel threatened, or was she overreacting?

So, yea, let me know what you think!

(Again, various comment sections outside CF, such as on YouTube or Pharyngula, contain swearing, so caution is advised. I've placed this thread in Physical & Life Sciences because it contains the greatest number of sceptics, and it relates to the online sceptic community)

Other notes:
The conference Skepchick mentions, and the presentation she gives, can be viewed here:

‪Communicating Atheism (pt 1) Skepchick‬‏ - YouTube

(Warning: bad language) Alongside the speaker, Rebecca Watson (aka Skepchick), Tom Melchiorre, and Dawkins, you may notice our old friend Aron-Ra!

Skepchick wrote a rather scathing piece about Dawkins and the whole thing, viewable here (warning: bad language).

 

[Cabal]

Do you think Dawkins was genuinely being hateful towards Islam?

Not really. I don't think it was a full-on broadside against Islam, barring the name "Muslima". I know he's not a fan of moderates as he thinks they encourage the crazies, but if it wasn't for creationist fundies badgering him for flipping ages there probably wouldn't have been The God Delusion so...yeah, that backfired, folks.

I hope though this will help get rid of that tiresome trope that Dawkins only attacks Christianity and isn't brave enough to tackle Islam. Was never true in the first place, but maybe this will shut a few people up.

Do you think the point Dawkins made (or claims he was making) was valid? Namely, that Skepchick was a) overreacting to what may well have been an innocent offer of coffee, b) overreacting to what may have been an actual offer for sex, and c) overreacting to what she perceives as 'sexism', when there's so much worse in the world?

Well, no, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to things that are nearby that are bad but not "very bad" in the grand scheme of things. If there are too many of the little things around to harm then eventually the big things will never be dealt with.

And I think this is the issue that SkepChick was actually trying to deal with. Her remark about ElevatorMan wasn't really the issue, it's that she and other female skeptics have come across a fair bit of sexism in what is still a very male-dominated arena and that it's stopping more women with lots of contribute to these bigger issues like the ones Dawkins is talking about from putting themselves forward. I think the Elevator Guy and the response was the straw the broke the camels back.

Do you think PZ Myers was right for lampooning the Elevator Guy?

I wouldn't say he's lampooned him. I honestly can't decide who I think is right here, PZ or RD. One article I read about this was written by a guy, basically making the point that women are a lot more vulnerable to men (terrible reiteration of the argument, I know) and that ultimately women can't always be sure of a guy's intentions.

It does frustrate me to a point, I feel there's little room for misunderstanding and that innocent behaviour can be misinterpreted to the point where you're put in either the jerk or the potential-rapist category. But ultimately I guess that kind of uncertainty coupled with the risk to personal safety if you make a wrong judgement (no matter what the actual level of risk is) is not something I'll really know as a guy, so I'm trying to be a bit more self-conscious of how I behave, not that I think I was in particularly bad shape to begin with.

Do you think she was right to feel threatened, do was she overreacting?

If it was just that incident, then maybe. Given some of the things she'd encountered among members of the community before (mentioned in the last link of your OP), not so much.

 

[Resha Caner]

This doesn't really seem to belong in the science forum, but ...

I only watched the first video about elevator guy. Had he said the same thing at 11 PM in the bar with other people around, and if he had just asked her to his table rather than to his room, it wouldn't have seemed nearly as bad. But his timing was really bad - 4 AM alone with her in an elevator. Bad choice, dude. For all she knew he could have been stalking her all night and saw isolation in an elevator as his opportunity.

So, the guy did the wrong thing - not necessarily a horrible thing - but the wrong thing. With that said, the whole situation speaks to a larger societal problem. What was a woman doing alone in an elevator at 4 AM anyway?

Yeah, we should all be "civilized", "liberated", etc. All nice ideas. But that's not the world we live in. In the real world, the average adult male can overpower the average adult female. So, as "liberated" as she may feel at times, the truth is that the world has some creepy, very disturbed men and she needs to be smart about the situations she puts herself in.

- - -

It's interesting that you mixed Muslims and Richard Dawkins into this as well. I'm not sure which topic you're actually more interested in, but you won't get any warm & fuzzy comments from me about Dawkins, nor will you probably like my thoughts regarding the odd way the West views Islam.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Much ado about nothing IMO. Seems Rebecca was out late drinking and chatting, and for crying out loud, another party goer finds her attractive and asks to go to the room together... gasp.

Was the guy a creep, definitely! Should Rebecca be so surprised, no!

Much ado about nothing.

 

[hollyda]

My fiance and I have actually been discussing this for the past few days. Here's the thing: Rebecca Watson spoke at this event and cited how she specifically doesn't like it when men hit on her at conventions like this. She has also received a number of rape threats. The man was an attendee at the conference, and decided that even though she said she doesn't like it when men hit on her at these things, that she wouldn't mind it so much if he did.

Was he creepy? Maybe, maybe not. But he was rather insensitive, especially considering that she has been the recipient of rape threats and had made herself perfectly clear on whether or not it was OK to approach her.

Dawkins, IMO, was a douche. Yes, of course, there are much worse things in life than being uncomfortable for a few minutes, but the right to be uncomfortable is not something dependent on where you were born and into what sort of environment you were raised. Everyone has the right to be uncomfortable, and to express said discomfort. From what I understand, Rebecca Watson didn't go on a tirade about this issue -- she spent a few seconds discussing her discomfort on her blog and otherwise dismissed. PZ Myers thought the issue was worth discussing on his blog, and that's his prerogative.

As a woman, had I received rape threats, made it clear I did not appreciate being hit on at conferences, stayed up chatting, headed back to my room alone at 4am in a strange city, and then had a guy follow me back to the elevator specifically to ask me back to his room...yes, I would have been uncomfortable. And if Dawkins thinks that's an unreasonable reaction, he can go fornicate with himself.

Source
Source
Source

 

[AlexBP]

1. Do you think Dawkins was genuinely being hateful towards Islam?

I think that compared to a lot of the hateful filth that pours forth on the internet from Dawkins and many other outspoken atheists, this is small potatoes. Thus I have difficulty getting worked up about it.

 

[USincognito]

Rebecca takes herself too seriously.
She's a notorious party girl in Skeptic circles.
She's supposedly has been married for 2 or 3 years and this attendee should have known that.
Dawkin's comment was innocuous and made a point - see my first response.

 

[razeontherock]

Here's the thing: Rebecca Watson spoke at this event and cited how she specifically doesn't like it when men hit on her at conventions like this. She has also received a number of rape threats. The man was an attendee at the conference, and decided that even though she said she doesn't like it when men hit on her at these things, that she wouldn't mind it so much if he did.

Bingo

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Not really. I don't think it was a full-on broadside against Islam, barring the name "Muslima". I know he's not a fan of moderates as he thinks they encourage the crazies, but if it wasn't for creationist fundies badgering him for flipping ages there probably wouldn't have been The God Delusion so...yeah, that backfired, folks.

I hope though this will help get rid of that tiresome trope that Dawkins only attacks Christianity and isn't brave enough to tackle Islam. Was never true in the first place, but maybe this will shut a few people up.

It always struck me as such a vacuous criticism of him

Well, no, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to things that are nearby that are bad but not "very bad" in the grand scheme of things. If there are too many of the little things around to harm then eventually the big things will never be dealt with.

And I think this is the issue that SkepChick was actually trying to deal with. Her remark about ElevatorMan wasn't really the issue, it's that she and other female skeptics have come across a fair bit of sexism in what is still a very male-dominated arena and that it's stopping more women with lots of contribute to these bigger issues like the ones Dawkins is talking about from putting themselves forward. I think the Elevator Guy and the response was the straw the broke the camels back.

True, though there's something so... hysterical about the whole thing that means I just can't take her that seriously. I had read a lot of the articles before I finally heard her say what he actually said, and I was surprised it was so mild. "Don't take this the wrong way, I find you really interesting, would you like to talk over coffee?" or something like that. Maybe women do find that threatening, I don't know, but I, personally, would be quite tempted to take him up on that offer!

I wouldn't say he's lampooned him. I honestly can't decide who I think is right here, PZ or RD. One article I read about this was written by a guy, basically making the point that women are a lot more vulnerable to men (terrible reiteration of the argument, I know) and that ultimately women can't always be sure of a guy's intentions.

It does frustrate me to a point, I feel there's little room for misunderstanding and that innocent behaviour can be misinterpreted to the point where you're put in either the jerk or the potential-rapist category. But ultimately I guess that kind of uncertainty coupled with the risk to personal safety if you make a wrong judgement (no matter what the actual level of risk is) is not something I'll really know as a guy, so I'm trying to be a bit more self-conscious of how I behave, not that I think I was in particularly bad shape to begin with.

It reminds me of the whole paedophile thing in the UK and Ireland, where if you so much as look at someone's child you're branded a dirty great child molester. Now obviously molesting a child is one of the worst things you can do, and defending your child is a natural parental instinct, but sort of "assume everyone's evil" reaction makes me yearn for the good old days.

If it was just that incident, then maybe. Given some of the things she'd encountered among members of the community before (mentioned in the last link of your OP), not so much.

Sorry, which one were you answering?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This doesn't really seem to belong in the science forum, but ...

I only watched the first video about elevator guy. Had he said the same thing at 11 PM in the bar with other people around, and if he had just asked her to his table rather than to his room, it wouldn't have seemed nearly as bad. But his timing was really bad - 4 AM alone with her in an elevator. Bad choice, dude. For all she knew he could have been stalking her all night and saw isolation in an elevator as his opportunity.

So, the guy did the wrong thing - not necessarily a horrible thing - but the wrong thing. With that said, the whole situation speaks to a larger societal problem. What was a woman doing alone in an elevator at 4 AM anyway?

Coming back from late-night drink at the hotel bar, it seems. I don't think it's that surprising that she'd encounter someone in the elevator with her, and there's a 50-50 chance it'd be a male, and since the hotel was rented out for the conference, the odds are he knew of her - maybe he was just starstruck? Though I can see why she would find it kinda creepy.

Yeah, we should all be "civilized", "liberated", etc. All nice ideas. But that's not the world we live in. In the real world, the average adult male can overpower the average adult female. So, as "liberated" as she may feel at times, the truth is that the world has some creepy, very disturbed men and she needs to be smart about the situations she puts herself in.

True, but is it a reflection of hysteria in our society that a man can't ask a woman to a genuinely innocent cup of coffee?

It's interesting that you mixed Muslims and Richard Dawkins into this as well. I'm not sure which topic you're actually more interested in, but you won't get any warm & fuzzy comments from me about Dawkins, nor will you probably like my thoughts regarding the odd way the West views Islam.

I brought the whole Muslim thing in because one of the articles I cited thought he was attacking Islam.

 

[Jazer]

there's a 50-50 chance it'd be a male,

For some reason they do not complain if they are propositioned by a female. Maybe it is a double standard or they do not feel as "creepy" if another women hits on them.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

For some reason they do not complain if they are propositioned by a female. Maybe it is a double standard or they do not feel as "creepy" if another women hits on them.

Maybe the unconscious threat of rape isn't there when propositioned by a woman - even though rape by women, on either men or women, is quite real.

 

[Cabal]

It always struck me as such a vacuous criticism of him

Quite.

True, though there's something so... hysterical about the whole thing that means I just can't take her that seriously. I had read a lot of the articles before I finally heard her say what he actually said, and I was surprised it was so mild. "Don't take this the wrong way, I find you really interesting, would you like to talk over coffee?" or something like that. Maybe women do find that threatening, I don't know, but I, personally, would be quite tempted to take him up on that offer!

In and of itself, sure, it seems innocuous - but I really don't think that's the entirety of it given that it took place within the context of the other times she'd been propositioned, threatened with sexual assault and that she'd already made it clear that such behaviour wasn't acceptable. It takes on a bit of a different spin. The guy probably wasn't a closet rapist, just somewhat obnoxious.

I think that's something men really aren't used to - the near-constancy of this kind of attention (obviously not talking about myself of course, I'm swatting the tidal waves of ladies away with a stick because of my Adonis-like physique and knowledge of quantum electrodynamics), so the one time we pluck up the courage to be spontaneous and ask a girl we like out, probably not always in ideal circumstances, of course we know it's not a big deal, but to a girl who gets that kind of thing all the time and knows that such events can sometimes be a precursor to something worse....well, obviously it's going to be perceived differently, and that's something to be aware of.

Some really good responses here: Dear Richard Dawkins… - Skepchick

(probably has norty swears etc etc)

It reminds me of the whole paedophile thing in the UK and Ireland, where if you so much as look at someone's child you're branded a dirty great child molester. Now obviously molesting a child is one of the worst things you can do, and defending your child is a natural parental instinct, but sort of "assume everyone's evil" reaction makes me yearn for the good old days.

To a point, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be calmly set straight either, and I think this is pretty much how SkepChick was trying to play it before the internets asploded. Someone made the point somewhere that if RD was really so annoyed about the attention this incident was getting, the last thing he should have done was wade in with an incendiary remark.

Sorry, which one were you answering?

The Privilege Delusion - Skepchick

 

[Resha Caner]

True, but is it a reflection of hysteria in our society that a man can't ask a woman to a genuinely innocent cup of coffee?

Not really. I'm saying he chose a very bad setting to ask his question. In a different setting, the question might have been received in a different way. Hollyda hit home that point better than I.

But it is an interesting reflection of our society that men are perplexed when women react in such a way to the "innocent" request. And that is my 2nd point. It is only a recent development of "englightened" Western society that a man would even consider such a thing ... and then claim it was innocent.

I not trying to promote an idealized view of the past. I realize nasty things happened to women in the past as well. It's the difference in mores between past & present that I find interesting. That difference was, in large part, created by women who wanted to be "liberated." It seems there is now somewhat of a retreat from that position as women realize that the enlightened ideal of a future civilized world isn't going to happen. Instead, the result is that men have shed many of their past responsibilities (sadly they did it with glee), leaving those of a more diminuitive physical constitution somewhat exposed to predators.

Now, stepping off the soapbox, I'll repeat that past systems weren't ideal either, but (to be cliche') maybe we've thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

I brought the whole Muslim thing in because one of the articles I cited thought he was attacking Islam.

He was. Again, hollyda said it well. I don't know why Dawkins ever thought that was relevant in the first place. As was pointed out, at least it demonstrates his evenhandedness. From one perspective, he is equally critical of all religions. From my perspective, he is equally a jerk to everyone.

I'm not totally disagreeing with his point. It just wasn't relevant to the discussion. With that said, from my perspective Islam (despite the way the West has tried to "enlighten" Islam just as it labored to "enlighten" Christianity) is misogynistic.

 

[Jazer]

Maybe the unconscious threat of rape isn't there when propositioned by a woman - even though rape by women, on either men or women, is quite real.

Well perhaps she was uncomfortable with the way someone touched her when she was a child. The whole point is how she had a creepy feeling. In a way I do not blame her. If a man gets to close to me and wants to start to touch me I do not like it at all. It feels kind of repulsive to me. I guess she can not help the way she feels.

 

[sandwiches]

This doesn't really seem to belong in the science forum, but ...

I only watched the first video about elevator guy. Had he said the same thing at 11 PM in the bar with other people around, and if he had just asked her to his table rather than to his room, it wouldn't have seemed nearly as bad. But his timing was really bad - 4 AM alone with her in an elevator. Bad choice, dude. For all she knew he could have been stalking her all night and saw isolation in an elevator as his opportunity.

So, the guy did the wrong thing - not necessarily a horrible thing - but the wrong thing. With that said, the whole situation speaks to a larger societal problem. What was a woman doing alone in an elevator at 4 AM anyway?

Yeah, we should all be "civilized", "liberated", etc. All nice ideas. But that's not the world we live in. In the real world, the average adult male can overpower the average adult female. So, as "liberated" as she may feel at times, the truth is that the world has some creepy, very disturbed men and she needs to be smart about the situations she puts herself in.

I don't get this at all. I must be missing a big part of this scenario. Asking someone for coffee at 4am after a night of drinking in an elevator is creepy... because...?

I think her reaction speaks to what I will lovingly refer to as the "nerd sex aversion syndrome." In my nerdy travels through conventions, LAN parties, DnD parties, etc and through trendier settings in night clubs, bars, parties, or even some casual encounters, I've noticed what I consider to be a big difference between "real" nerd culture and the vast majority of people in society. Nerds seem to have a natural aversion to sex higher than average for any given society, particularly women. Where as nerdier guys seem to have evolved to be less sexually aggressive. I'm not sure what I can attribute this to but the difference in reaction from romantic advances from the general population versus nerdy people is completely different.

Having dated both nerds and non-nerds, I can tell you that nerdy girls seem to be completely turned off by straight forward and direct men. Despite what we hear of the dreaded "friend zone," they prefer the friend-to-boyfriend route and much longer courtship. And yes, I know these are generalizations from anecdotes and I do realize that people differ and there are exceptions and blah blah blah.

For her to have seen an request for coffee in his room from a man as creepy is not surprising but, to me, speaks volumes for the ridiculous, strange place where sex is today. It's seen as a thing that no decent person should openly admit to desire. Why not? Now, I have no doubt the man hoped that his coffee date would turn into a sex romp, but I fail to see how this is creepy, in and of itself. That she was in a different area than what she's used to is irrelevant. I've had some of the most fun with strangers while traveling. That she's received rape threats is also irrelevant. So, no one can make an advance on her because some maniacs have threatened her? That's just silly. If she didn't want to go with him, she can say "No, thanks," and move on.

Again, to me this isn't surprising in the sub-culture she's in. There are many excuses my nerdy girl friends make for avoiding sex, contact with the opposite sex, and even contact with people sometimes.

Seriously, I think that it's sad that in this day and age a man asking you for a cup of coffee is seen as creepy.

 

[sandwiches]

True, but is it a reflection of hysteria in our society that a man can't ask a woman to a genuinely innocent cup of coffee?

Exactly. The whole thing is more than a bit melodramatic. A man asks you for coffee at his room after a late night of drinking or whatever and you think it's creepy and even feel "sexualized?" Wow... Really?

Science forbid people actually enjoy and desire sex...

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I think her reaction speaks to what I will lovingly refer to as the "nerd sex aversion syndrome." In my nerdy travels through conventions, LAN parties, DnD parties,

DnD parties? My DM barely allows alcohol

Seriously, I think that it's sad that in this day and age a man asking you for a cup of coffee is seen as creepy.

That's exactly the problem, isn't it - innocent things like that are instantly treated with suspicion. You can't ask someone to coffee unless you want sex, because it's such a clichéd excuse for a date or for sex. This probably comes in no small part from Hollywood, and if Hollywood is any accurate reflection of US culture, it's probably a bigger problem there than here in the UK - though we still have our fair share of hypocritical paranoia.

On the other side of the coin, if a girl wears a low-cut top, she shouldn't get all up herself if a straight male (or gay female) ogles her chest.

 

[sandwiches]

DnD parties? My DM barely allows alcohol

That's exactly the problem, isn't it - innocent things like that are instantly treated with suspicion. You can't ask someone to coffee unless you want sex, because it's such a clichéd excuse for a date or for sex. This probably comes in no small part from Hollywood, and if Hollywood is any accurate reflection of US culture, it's probably a bigger problem there than here in the UK - though we still have our fair share of hypocritical paranoia.

On the other side of the coin, if a girl wears a low-cut top, she shouldn't get all up herself if a straight male (or gay female) ogles her chest.

Even if he did want sex, I don't get what the problem is. Why is sex or the desire for it creepy?

Another thing is that this wasn't only treated with suspicion but the guy was apparently offending her sexuality as a woman and anyone else who thought her reaction was over the top were misogynists. All because of a cup of coffee.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Even if he did want sex, I don't get what the problem is. Why is sex or the desire for it creepy?

Another thing is that this wasn't only treated with suspicion but the guy was apparently offending her sexuality as a woman and anyone else who thought her reaction was over the top were misogynists. All because of a cup of coffee.

That's what irks me about the whole thing: it's an affront to her womanhood (really? love, get over yourself), and anyone who dares disagree with her, even politely, even if they're just discussing gender theory, is declared an intolerant misogynistic bigot.