On sexual harassment

(Yes, it's been donkey's years since I've posted here. I hope that will change.)

I read a lot of atheist blogs, and recently there's been a lot of discussion--well, discussion, mudslinging, tantrums, etc.--about sexual harassment at atheist conferences. Some women active in the secularist/skeptic/atheist movement have publicly addressed the issue and asked for policies to be put in place that would make it clear to conference-goers that sexual harassment will not be tolerated.

It seems to me that most reasonable people would find such policies to be a good thing. Alas, there are a good many sexists and misogynists--and not just men--who are whining and complaining about them. Objections fall into a few different groups: "A code of conduct will make even consensual sexual activities verboten, or too risky!"  "Goodbye spontaneity!" "Women: lying bitches!"

Yes, one of the fears is that women are malicious liars who want to get innocent men in trouble. Seriously.

I just love how women's discomfort and even fears are so readily dismissed. The head of one prominent skeptics organization went so far as to say that harassment had never been reported at that organization's conference, only to be immediately reminded by several women of incidents that had been reported--and never acted on.

Another common defensive maneuver is that whatever incident wasn't really harassment. Stupid women! It's all in their mind! And besides--you're ugly! Who would ever give you unwanted sexual attention!

Yes, these are the claims being made and the childish arguments being put forth. They pretty much add up to claiming the inappropriateness of asking men to forgo their self-perceived privilege to proposition women whenever and however they like. To make sexist jokes with impunity. To disregard women's dignity, comfort level, or desire to be seen as a full human being, not just T & A or a set of orifices.

There isn't a woman alive who has not been the victim of sexual harassment. I'm not talking about harassment in the legal sense necessary to prove, say, workplace harassment. I'm talking about women's everyday experiences out in the world. Take it from one who knows: you don't have to be drop-dead gorgeous to experience unwanted attention from men.

When my son was still an infant and I'd take him out in his stroller, it was quite common for some yahoo in a pickup truck passing by to yell at me such things as "Nice ass!" accompanied by a whistle. Does anyone reading this think that's a compliment? Because I sure as hell didn't. I thought, WTF is he doing yelling that at a woman pushing a stroller? And who gave him the right not only to judge my ass's pulchritude, but to announce it to me?

It's a way to put a woman in her place, to remind her that she is not a person with autonomy, but a person who exists in relation to Men. A person who does or does not please Men. A person (or "person") who has no right to go about her business without fear of having her privacy invaded and her body commented on.

Then there was the time when my kids were sick and I'd been up at night tending to them (sick myself) and had to run out to the neighborhood store for milk or bread or whatever. My daughter was old enough by then to leave my son in her care for the 15 minutes it would take me, so in a relative lull I dashed off. I got out of the car to be met with barking noises (clever, right? "You're a dog!") made by men in a truck in the parking lot. "Woof, woof, woof!" Gee, I didn't meet these dickheads' standard of beauty, I guess.

Another time I stopped at a convenience store and was hailed by some guy hanging around outside the store. I don't even remember what he said to me, but when I ignored him he said "BITCH!" Yes, that's right. A woman is a bitch if she does not not immediately gratify some dude's bid for attention.

I could go on and on. It must be a lot worse for a woman who is truly beautiful; I can only imagine how often men think it's perfectly swell to comment on her face or figure. I'm not saying that women never take it as a compliment, just that it grinds my gears that men feel so entitled to judge and proclaim.

Sometimes women just become inured to such assaults on their personhood, as a fish doesn't notice the water it's swimming in. Some women just resign themselves to it. Some women want to be "one of the guys" and join in with the chorus that women don't have a sense of humor, or are too sensitive, or should "grow a pair." (Telling, that ...)

Anyway, I'm happy that despite the jerks who have been trolling various atheist sites and complaining and insisting that harassment isn't a problem and that women are hysterical and liars and malicious bitches, American Atheists has come out with  a code of conduct for its conferences that makes it clear that sexual harassment will not be tolerated.

Of course there are howls that "just asking someone out could get you reported for harassment," etc., but this kind of reaction is to be expected. In point of fact, the new policy protects men and the gender-fluid as well as women, but the howling is mainly coming from men at the thought that their sense of privilege is being curtailed in any way at all.

 

Comments

[cindy]

Sexism in the atheist community-makes me wonder how many people who label themselves with the big red A also have a strong sense of values? Like, "Hey there's no God so I can do what I want without worrying about the wrath of hell." I know you have strong values, Kris, and suspect most atheists do as well, but I have always wondered if there were some who just gave in to every hedonistic impulse. Oh wait. That's the Catholics:)

[Kris]

I would say that most people in the atheist community have a strong sense of values. I think that a lot of nonbelievers came to nonbelief after a lot of thought, and self-reflective, thinking people usually aren't mindless hedonists. But the community is part of a larger society, so the same damn problems plague it. Also, there's a lot of overlap with the skeptical community, which has a lot of geeky types in it. And geek culture is known for its sexism. One of the things that's come to the forefront in all this is that the atheist community, as represented on the Internet as well as at conferences, needs to work at diversity, and to its credit, much is being done to do away with the "atheism is a bunch of old white men" thing. Freethoughtblogs is quite diverse in its bloggers, including people of color, quite a few women, transgender folks, and so on. And most of the leaders of the various atheist/skeptic groups now realize they've got a problem and are addressing, some more effectively than others. [Steps off soapbox.]

[Evan]

I think it's wise to use 'how people act at conventions' as a better background than 'how athiests act at conventions' when discussing this topic. I am a poker player and make regular trips to Las Vegas. It doesn't matter if it's a billiards tournament, an educators convention, a wedding party, or just a group of friends taking their friend out for their 40th birthday party -- I have seen men and women openly cheating on their spouses or significant others with a wink and a nudge. Yes, men are usually more vocal in addressing the cocktail waitresses and other women in demeaning ways that is assumed to be acceptable. I would concede that in a heartbeat. But you can bet they are not alone.

As far as a subset of Atheists who might give in to every hedonistic impulse, you are probably right to assume that there is such a group. However, they exist in the religious as well. It just requires more hail marys, confessions or counseling. The important thing to remember is the common thread: we are all human and thus all exhibit human behaviors. That is to say, human behaviors that have a context in the larger society, wanted or unwanted, desirable or undesirable, admirable or despicable.

When I, an atheist myself, attended a Unitarian Universalist congregation, I got involved in a few of the committees. One thing that they were working on was a Covenant of Rights Relations. This is essentially a voluntary pledge to follow certain guidelines of behavior to create a harmonious community. There are no explicit penalties for not doing so, other than causing discomfort with others with whom you sought to create community.

Sexual harassment is a tough subject because of a few of the borderline examples highlighted by Kris (would asking for a date be considered harassment by some). It is exacerbated, I'm sure, by the immersion in a group where one can feel unusually free to speak and interact with like-minded people without having to deal with the normal "you're going to hell" kind of response you may experience elsewhere. Just like any convention, when you get a bunch of people away from their home base, stimulate them with coverage of topics that they are passionate about and surround them with like-minded people also experiencing similar excitement...and you're bound to end up with the same kinds of behaviors I described seeing in Las Vegas.

I think having a committee which reviews reported incidents in a confidential matter could help reduce unwanted behaviors. Any incidents which cross the line of legal harassment should be reported to authorities by the offended party, should they choose to do so. But, short of that, a covenant and a committee who would field these complaints could address individuals involved in a confidential way should there have been a misunderstanding. If a pattern of unwanted behavior shows up with an individual, like any other community, that person can be subjected to penalties issued by that community. Whether those penalties hinge on a membership requirement is up to that group.

But, if there is a problem, there are steps that can be taken to solve or reduce that problem. Whatever steps are taken, they should be designed to clearly help ensure the focus is on the topics of the convention and not on Bob or Barbara's flirtations.

(I'm glad you are posting again Kris!)

[Kris]

Evan, yes, it makes sense to talk about how "people" rather than "atheists" act at conventions, except that it was one of the on-line atheist communities that got hit by the shitstorm over sexual harassment, and that's what I was addressing. Also, a lot of people in the skeptic/atheist communities were being exceedingly "skeptical" about women's honesty, proclaiming that women are given to lying about harassment just to dump on men. I'm here to say that overwhelmingly, that's just not true. Using your label as a skeptic to malign women as lying bitches--and "lying bitches" is a quote from more than one commenter on various blogs--unless they can come up with some impossible standard of proof is just disingenuous and wrong. And believe me, some of these people against harassment policies keep moving the goalposts when the matter of proof arises. Also, I didn't give a lot of backstory here on the offenses reported, but some of the incidents were pretty bad (camera on a monopod at ankle height with the "photographer" taking upskirt shots, for example). The two things that bug me the most are guys whining about how they won't be able to have any fun if anti-harassment policies are put in place (fun? whose version of fun, pray tell?)and the women who want to be in the boys' club, so they pooh-pooh harassment altogether.

[Evan]

I am bummed to hear how bad the incidents are. If I had seen the upskirt incident, i would have immediately reported that to legal authorities (after securing my own cell phone photo of his monopod setup). As far as the name-calling, that's really sad that people would put all this energy and passion into creating a blog about atheism and how religious people and organizations can be so callous and hurtful to others...then turn around and act just like them! A cruel irony to be sure. I'm truly sorry for your predicament.

I hope my suggestions about covenants and membership (shedding a layer of anonymity which the web can provide, sometimes encouraging people to say the first sensational thing that comes to mind instead of a well-reasoned statement) are helpful. If not exactly applicable, maybe something similar? I hope communications improve in your group. To me, it sounds like the first change might need to be the leader, if he was ignoring past transgressions of the kind you mentioned.

[Kris]

@Evan--Of course your suggestions were all helpful and reasonable, as I would expect! And many or most of them have already been put into place by the dozen or so atheist/secular/skeptical organizations that recently formulated sexual harassment policies. Some policies are at this stage "living documents" open to discussion and change. There's also been input from people who organize conferences and were aghast that some of the conferences I'm talking about had no policy. So really the reasonable people are winning this one, but at the cost of flame wars, name-calling, and threats. Oh, and I should add that the head of the JREF (James Randi Educational Foundation) wrote a piece in which he blamed those who noted sexual harassment and called for policies to be adopted as the reason women didn't attend The Amazing Meeting (JREF's con)in as great numbers this year--he claimed that drawing attention to the problem kept women away--that harassment really didn't exist but talking about it made women feel unsafe. As to fewer women in attendance, there are a number of possible reasons for that, including that there are just more choices now, such as the first-ever Women in Secularism con, which was of course open to men--TAM isn't the only game in town these days, plus TAM fell close to the Reason Rally. And some people did call for him to resign. But the good news is that many organizations, including American Atheist and Center for Inquiry, took the problem seriously and have done something about it.