some instant thoughts...
Stef McGraw Rebuts RW
Disagreeing is not rebutting. You can't rebut someone else's experience.
By your reasoning, Dawkins is part of the fallout.
Yes. It all
looks like fallout, rather than any attempt from McGraw onwards to understand what Rebecca was feeling and saying.
She did not say anything in her talk that could be interpreted as "don't hit on me" or "don't approach me in a confined space" or anything of that nature. Her examples of misogyny in the atheist community were emails, the worst of which came from men threatening to rape her. Nothing of the nature of elevator etiquite or how women in general should be approached by men.
So it's OK if it's not emails? I would have thought that intelligent humans could understand and extrapolate that intrusive and unpleasant approaches via any medium are unwelcome from any quarter.
a community where we can normally debate anything, has descended to a point where any opposing view can be shut out by labelling it "misogynistic" or by saying "you don't get it" or "thanks for mansplaining that to me".
That was my point about all "communities": physics, music, education, journalism, psychology, kayaking, etc, etc... If empathy fails at the first fence, people's deep unconscious feelings are exposed and so sensitive that these divides ALWAYS erupt.
What she is doing is presenting women as feeble, weak and precious creatures that need special protections. Dawkins treated her like he'd treat anyone else he disagrees with. PZ treated her like a feeble creature who needs a big strong man to protect her.
No, what she was doing initially is suggesting that someone might learn something from listening to her experience, that women have to put up with this stuff all the time
and if they dare to suggest that the (usually) men in question could learn something about another person's experience they are called "feeble, weak and precious creatures that need special protections... who needs a big strong man to protect her." You have made my point for me.
It might help if some of the men offended by her initial video go back to the start and try to imagine what it might feel like to live with the need to be alert to attacks in this way, and to ask, nicely, for it to stop, and to get trashed for it.
As I mentioned earlier, requiring Rebecca to be a saint and explain all of this patiently without retaliating against attacks indicates a wish for her to be a saintly figure - this, I believe, is where the madonna/whore stereotype comes from, along the lines of: "if you do as I tell you you're a saint, a perfect mother, but if you even once suggest that my reading of your feelings is ever so slightly off, you'll break the precious pure image I have created for you, be sullied, and I'll have to think of you as bad, then I'll hate you."
Thanks for the opportunity to think more about this - it's good exercise for the mind!