Help Send Women to The Amazing Meeting 9

April 23, 2011

Surly Amy is on a mission to send as many women as she can to The Amazing Meeting 9 in Las Vegas this summer.

How can you help?

Buy a limited edition TAM9 surlyramic.

Donate directly to the cause by going here.

How can you apply to attend TAM9?

If you’re female and (honestly) unable to pay the registration fee, the application is here. If you were given a grant, you’d still be responsible for your own travel and lodging, but I’m sure lots of people would at least be willing to share a hotel room.

TAM is an incredible experience every year, and the more women we can get involved in the skeptical movement, the better off we all are. Thanks to Amy for spearheading this fundraiser and the Women Thinking Free Foundation for running the application process.

April 23, 2011

Religious Woman Sues Kansas for Trying To Save Her Life

April 23, 2011 Speaking in Los Angeles Tomorrow

"If you're a perverted Baptist pastor"

K. Ramsuer

Son of “Shaking Head Prophetess” Admits ..."

"Oh, well, that makes sense."

Synfandel

Son of “Shaking Head Prophetess” Admits ..."

"I was surprised that no one had posted it already."

Rob P

Son of “Shaking Head Prophetess” Admits ..."

"Looks like the mods gave his account the hook. He's gone now."

NOGODZ20

Jehovah’s Witnesses Will Finally Join Australia’s ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

Lydia Burris

I really wish I had the time and money to go to this. I live in PA so getting to Las Vegas would be really difficult for me. I am going to start saving now and maybe next year I can take my daughter.
Melanie

It’d be awesome to be able to attend. Living in Vegas but being unable to afford to go is so frustrating!
Vanessa

I would love to go! Though even with the grant, I wouldn’t be able to afford travel. 🙁
Blah

This is so sexist. Why only women?
Erik T

If the goal is to get more women involved in the skeptics movement, is this initiative working to get women to the conference who wouldn’t normally have attended for reasons other than money issues? If it’s just a grant to help women already into the skeptics world who can’t afford it, that doesn’t seem to make much of a difference to the point Hemant ended on.
William Brinkman

The goal is to get more women to attend and benefit from TAM. It might not bring in women off the streets and into skepticism, but it is a chance for women interested in skepticism to attend, network, participate, and learn about the greater movement.
enneract

Sucks if you are a guy and can’t afford to go, huh. Nobody to hold your hand.

Cue unpopular viewpoint…

Sexism is sexism, and trying to compensate for the overall lack of females in the skeptical movement by selectively boosting the participation of the ones already interested is completely sexist.

If the money was going to somehow raise awareness amongst females for events like TAM, that might not be so objectionable, but that does not seem to be the case here.

In before I get called anti-woman or something for calling this out.
William Brinkman

If you want to help men and women go to TAM, then donate to the TAM Forum Grant.

As an individual, Amy is free to spend her money as she wishes, and she is free to ask other people to help her.

If you’re really upset about this, organize a counter-drive to donate as much money as she raises to the Forum Grant program.
Vanessa

Let me help you poor guys out. Here’s a definition of sexism:

The belief that one sex is naturally superior to the other and should dominate most important areas of political, economic, and social life.

Okay, now do you see anything about women being superior to men in this instance? If you do, please point it out. But I don’t see it. It’s simply a way to encourage more women to participate in a male dominated event.
Anon

Complaining that this is sexist is like complaining that breast cancer research is sexist because it only helps women.
Kaleena

Thanks for pointing this out!
The Picard

There are other definitions of sexism such as: discrimination on the basis of sex. This actually does apply here, just sayin’.

Sure, I’d like to see more women get involved with skepticism but I’m not sure this is the way. It’s like “ladies night” at TAM or something. It’s not like women are being barred from attending in some way and we need to level the playing field.
Vystrix Nexoth

Cue unpopular viewpoint…

Just because you’re unpopular doesn’t mean you’re right.

Sexism is sexism, and trying to compensate for the overall lack of females in the skeptical movement by selectively boosting the participation of the ones already interested is completely sexist.

Perhaps you should start a group that will help males fend off this sexist imbalance.
stogoe

I really “love” the sexism arguments here complaining about reverse sexism or something. It’s just like the arguments against affirmative action – “we’ve treated you as less than human for centuries, denied you any and all opportunities to create and hold onto wealth or pass it to your descendents, still pay you less for the same work as any white/male person, but starting…Now! we all have to be treated completely equally. Even though my starting point is fifteen miles further along than yours, giving you any benefit over me, even a tiny one, just because my race/gender crushed yours for hundreds of years (at least), well, that would be racist/sexist and you said you didn’t want racist/sexist treatment any more. Neener neener.
blah

@Vystrix

Your definition of sexism is not the normal one most people use.

You would say that a “whites only” bar is racism even if the owner does “believe that one race is naturally superior to the other and should dominate most important areas of political, economic, and social life”

The definition of sexism most people use is “discrimination on the basis of gender or sex”. Which this clearly is.

@stogoe:
When a group of people has been treated unequally for a long period of time the correct thing to do is to treat them equally. It is just as unethical to treat them “better” as it is to treat them “worse” for the same wrong reasons. To paraphase a famous quote: “Separate, but better, is still unequal”

@Vystrix

Just because you’re unpopular doesn’t mean you’re right.

In this case he is though

Perhaps you should start a group that will help males fend off this sexist imbalance.

Why not support groups that offer equal treatment for all instead of forming a “males sexist imbalance” group?

still pay you less for the same work as any white/male person

Not directly related to our conversation – but you may be interested to know it is not just males who pay women unequally. Women in management positions are also more likely hire a male over a female – even with identical resumes and they do tend to pay males more.
This does not excuse either men or women – but it is a data point.

Also – to fend off a potential an ad hominem attack: I’m a gal 🙂
Vystrix Nexoth

Sexism (like racism, etc) is a river. One has to swim against the current just to stay in the same place. To stop swimming is to keep drifting ever further downstream. Even if the river slows or stops, we’ll still need to swim back upstream to get back to where we should’ve been all along: equality. We’re so used to being downstream of it that it seems foreign.

Likewise, to use an even hand is to keep the status quo. To change the status quo, one must use an uneven hand. Thus, Surly Amy, Affirmative Action, etc are using uneven hands. (But so would the hypothetical group that helps males fend off such efforts. Alas, it seems I was too subtle in making that point, hoping the reader would have made the connection themself.)

And you say we must not swim, as though the waters were still.
Tredat

Hahahah, they have to pay women to go, hahahaha.