Once upon a time, a one Justin Vacula went to the Women in Secularism 2 conference in Washington DC.
Despite many thinking that Vacula would be the troublemaker, it turned out that the "feminists" found much more wrong with the President of CFI, Ron Lindsay (more here, here, here and here)
That same Vacula is now raising money to go to the the next conference, this time the show is in Ireland.
The conference is titled "Empowering Women Through Secularism 2013" and rolls out the usual suspects. Ophelia Benson, PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson.
Presumably the event is happening with the speakers it has because Michael Nugent has something to do with the organization.
His tweets betray his interest in their opinions:
PZ Myers especially seems to be the one CC'd the most on Michael Nugent's whereabouts.
But you can't fault Michael Nugent - one is led to believe that he actually wants to put the genie back into the bottle.
The trouble comes when the others open their mouths - in a post titled "Stalking", Ophelia Benson describes Justin Vacula's campaign to visit the event in Dublin:
Then apparently PZ's two cents about Russell Blackford:
To round things off, in the Skepchick universe, if you aren't aware, Richard Dawkins is a racist.
The ultimate question here is, what exactly is harassment?
According to the "social justice" warriors, Twitter/Tumblr "feminists", and "FreeThought" bloggers, this article itself is harassment.
This article:
However it is a safe bet that none of this criticism will surface on their online properties for two reasons:
Despite many thinking that Vacula would be the troublemaker, it turned out that the "feminists" found much more wrong with the President of CFI, Ron Lindsay (more here, here, here and here)
That same Vacula is now raising money to go to the the next conference, this time the show is in Ireland.
The conference is titled "Empowering Women Through Secularism 2013" and rolls out the usual suspects. Ophelia Benson, PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson.
Presumably the event is happening with the speakers it has because Michael Nugent has something to do with the organization.
His tweets betray his interest in their opinions:
Eight choices we can make to help move beyond the rifts in the atheist and skeptic communities bit.ly/153Ly9M
— Michael Nugent (@micknugent) March 15, 2013
@pzmyers Eight choices we can make to help move beyond the rifts in the atheist and skeptic communities bit.ly/153Ly9M
— Michael Nugent (@micknugent) March 15, 2013
@opheliabenson Eight choices we can make to help move beyond the rifts in the atheist and skeptic communities bit.ly/153Ly9M
— Michael Nugent (@micknugent) March 15, 2013
PZ Myers especially seems to be the one CC'd the most on Michael Nugent's whereabouts.
But you can't fault Michael Nugent - one is led to believe that he actually wants to put the genie back into the bottle.
The trouble comes when the others open their mouths - in a post titled "Stalking", Ophelia Benson describes Justin Vacula's campaign to visit the event in Dublin:
He’s raised more than enough already.
So this is how it’s to be. I can’t go anywhere now without being followed by a dedicated harasser.
Note this is Ophelia's post in its entirety, as she apparently doesn't care to explain her libel to new readers.
Meanwhile the hero of Pharyngula is voicing his opinion about other secularists.
First, his opinion of DJ Grothe, Michael Shermer, and Ron Lindsay:
Yes. RT @improbablejoe: criticism is usually when a "leader" expresses contempt for women, as Grothe, Shermer, and now Lindsay have all done
— PZ Myers (@pzmyers) May 26, 2013
Then apparently PZ's two cents about Russell Blackford:
I think he's just a lying fuckhead at this point. RT @spokesgay: @pzmyers Yep. He's lost his ever-loving mind over this. Severely.
— PZ Myers (@pzmyers) May 26, 2013
To round things off, in the Skepchick universe, if you aren't aware, Richard Dawkins is a racist.
The ultimate question here is, what exactly is harassment?
According to the "social justice" warriors, Twitter/Tumblr "feminists", and "FreeThought" bloggers, this article itself is harassment.
This article:
- Documents the words of PZ Myers, Ophelia Benson, and Rebecca Watson
- Dares to disagree with the threat narrative of the holy trinity
This article should go straight to the top of the Skepchick "Page 'o hate", Benson's "harassment" updates, or PZ's "I get email" blog posts.
However it is a safe bet that none of this criticism will surface on their online properties for two reasons:
- This article is not authored by one of a high profile, so they have no publicity to gain from slandering it.
- The article is just cogent enough to give them pause.
Returning to the real world, we have an opportunity to return to our question.
What exactly is harassment?
It needs a stricter definition than mere disagreement.
How's this: Harassment is a conscious effort to label your opponents as racist, sociopathic woman haters.
Harassment is coercing people into resigning for the crime of disagreeing with your political opinions.
Does that definition work?
Who exactly are the harassers?