Creating a Safe Convention for Attendees

We had to adopt such a policy as well.

http://freeok.org/about/zero-tolerance-harrassment-policy/

squelch, quash?

Regardless of the policy, make sure their is a prompt response to any incident.  That doesn’t mean punishment.  It could include warnings, or maybe straightening out a misunderstanding.  My point is don’t let it linger.

I hate the sticker system. It feels like it actually creates opportunity for abuse as much as the opposite. It’s hard to explain, but having staffed a few anime conventions in my time, I feel that something like an “Ask Me” or “Hug me” sticker creates an in for some guys that normally wouldn’t have the guts to come on to a woman. And honestly, responding to “can I have a hug?” with, “no” enough times will result in social consequences. How may women will acquiesce to touching that they don’t want simply to avoid being labeled a bitch?

I like hugs from my friends, people who I am close with, and they certainly don’t have to ask first. But physical contact from people I don’t know makes me cagey and uncomfortable. However, being asked if they can touch me puts me on the spot in a way that I’m not equally comfortable with giving a yes or a no for fear of gaining an unsavory reputation.

The linked sticker system had an option for “Not unless we’re close friends.”

As an atheist widower, I was honestly thinking about starting to attend reson events with the hope of possibly meeting a likeminded person.  The more I read about these things, the more toxic the atmosphere sounds.

I have a hard enough time talking to women in the first place without wondering if I’ll be the next hated male in the blogosphere.

I am a long-time writers conference attendee and now workshop leader. We don’t have similar problems at our conference, but I notice that our conference attendees are probably 60% female. The culture is different. We aren’t “chum.” I think here we’ll go through some awkward years of boy’s club idiocy until the atheist culture itself finds a way to include more women.

Having strong common sense anti-harassment policies in place will make a huge difference.

Organizers also need to define the culture of their Con through there own actions and by good training with their volunteers. Staff set the “norm” at events like this. I would love to see Con’s also develop a strong ambassador program so that 1) attendees feel welcomed, not just processed, 2) staff seem approachable and willing to answer questions, and 3) staff are visible & plentiful so that if something comes up, help will be nearby.

Next line down:

Some people’s badges got fairly intricate (Red over green = hug me if you know me, but not if you don’t, etc).

SIHS and Jay, I really hope all of this doesn’t discourage you! You are part of our community and these conferences are for everyone.

JA:

   I was thinking the same.  Anyone reading the treads on PZ post ElevatorGuy or now on FA would, it seems to me, be very likely to conclude these meetings are glorified bars on a Saturday night, hunting grounds.  I never got that sense from reading the initial reports from the conventions, meetings, conferences, but reading these threads on PZ and now FA, things do indeed sound pretty toxic.

  I’ve never heard of the sticker idea, but it sounds very junior-high-field trip to me, not something  suited to adults attending a conference of some substance.  And too I wonder if folks are trying to regulate  adult conduct at events at which social hours, post session get-togethers in bars, etc. are not only commonplace, but part of the program, so to speak. [See any PZ pre-conference post about which bars the guys and gals will be meeting at post session.]   People get a slight buzz on, inhibitions tend to erode, and passes will be made [note: not assaults, passes], some of them at men or women would prefer not to be asked.  No regulation or set of guidelines or sticker system or having people sign The Pledge is going to end that.   Provided all involved accept that “No means No” [as apparently ElevatorGuy did], I don’t see it as much of a problem, and trying to prevent it by policy statements looks very much like trying to sweep back the sea.  

  Note again: I said passes, not groping, not assault, not rape, not stalking, not pawing unwelcomed.  

 No one is advocating for policies to get rid of people flirting at bars.

Excellent point.

Plus, sticker color codes for consent feels rather cheesy… and it encourages people to not bother to talk to each other.

I hope not, EMJ, but that’s not the impression I got reading the very very long threads post ElevatorGuy on PZ, or some of what appeared in the comments on FA’s earlier post.  Seemed to me that that was precisely what some [by no means all, but some] were suggesting.

I suspect that part of the problem [mentioned by some others on FA’s thread earlier] is that people have very different personal thresholds for what constitutes sexual harassment at conventions, meetings, etc. and other public places, and so, their differing assumptions clear in their own minds, they end up talking past each other.  

I hope you’re kidding.
Men and women know how to behave around each other. The majority of men know how to talk to women without harassing them. It makes no sense to split everyone up because some men can’t handle seeing a woman and not having sex with her.

Thanks for proving my point. You spend $65.00 on an ounce of expensive perfume and you think a stranger should not notice and compliment you on it.  Congratulations YOU are the problem and female humans like you. And you can bet the last thing I would do is ask a female human is if she wants to get a cup of coffee. We all have seen where that leads. Seldom do I see my wife do a face palm. You succeeded there.

P.S. Female human is used so not upset anyone.

Talking to a feminist:
1. Hi sweetheart. I am not your sweetheart.
I get it no pet names.
2. Hi girl. I am not a girl.
OK, I get it your all grown up now.
3. Your a lovely woman. You goddamn right I am a woman and don’t forget it.

All examples we all have seen. Like I said past ridiculous. And my wife of 27 years agrees.

So, speaking as someone who knows absolutely NOTHING about the actions that have caused all this talk lately, does anyone have any sense for whether or not the alleged perpetrators have gotten the hint over the past few weeks?

 That was the other aspect of what bothered me about it. It just feels silly and juvenile.

 Hugs not hate.

The sticker system sounds bad, but I don’t know if that argument fits.  That suggests the only reason people talk to each other is for physical contact, then we are in trouble as a society.

It’s disingenuous because I am not “no hugs for me.” Context, personal relationships, etc. matter. Creating an environment where human interaction is oversimplified to a binary either/or label with only a single option in between that puts women in an uncomfortable social situation isn’t something that is likely to feel welcoming to women. For that matter, some women might feel pressured to not choose the “no hugs” sticker because that alone could result in unwanted labeling.

How about we focus instead on a system where abusive behavior can be reported, recorded and dealt with rather than trying to color code what is appropriate behavior?

I really don’t buy this.  All this started over a female being asked by a somewhat drunk man to allow her to visit her hotel room at 4am.  Your examples sound more like straw arguments in comparison.

I would do my work while complimenting the women on how well the hour and a half they spent in the morning wasn’t for naught. I knew damn well someone would call a compliment inappropriate. You did not disappoint.

It started because some one made a big ado out of next to nothing. None of my arguments are straw men. All have seen them they are real. just as real as the person who stirred this shit up by publicly embarrassing someone for spite.

Well thanks, feminists, now I can’t go around sniffing women and calling them by diminutive pet names because all of a sudden that’s “creepy”! Well I AM TURNING IN MY MEMBERSHIP and I hope you all are VERY HAPPY that you have lost my valuable contribution.

“just as real as the person who stirred this shit up by publicly embarrassing someone for spite.”

I haven’t seen that side of the story.  Citation please.

The “big ado” was over the fact that she got a the waves a rape & death threats over “next to nothing.”

 You can come hang out with me then. I’m allergic to perfume, so I don’t wear any. You are in no danger of complimenting me on my smell.

There are always assholes. But this guy was not one of them. The people issuing threats are.

“the real problem, which is harassment, not awkward, but minor social faux pas”

The problem is that, for any given act, perspectives differ. Taking the original Elevatorgate incident as a case in point, the critical fault line seemed to be between people who thought that a polite invitation for coffee (which may have been literally that and nothing more), coupled with the straightforward taking of ‘No’ for an answer, was completely fine. On the other side, people who think that being asked a question that at least may indicate sexual interest while in a confined space with no easy way out is a problem. We don’t have anything like a universal common understanding of whether that was harassment or a minor faux pas.

In general we have a mixture of people, some of whom don’t want any advances (even if every one happily takes ‘No’ for an answer, you can imagine it’s going to get wearing after a few), and other people who want to be free to hook up. It’s not clear how you can satisfy both groups without some way of finding out which one a person is in without having to ask. Hence suggestions like sticker systems.

Personally, I think the sticker systems are a bit silly, and people should just be able to negaciate things like grown-ups, but Julie said above that:

“being asked if they can touch me puts me on the spot in a way that I’m not equally comfortable with”

Now, that being the case, how can you set up something so that she never has to be asked, but other people are still free to hug, snuggle, and wind up in bed?

 Yes, exactly.

You want a citation fort my opinion?

Tell you what, just show up and look cute. But please keep your mouth shut.

 Didn’t you start the conversation with me? So I would go to a free thought activity and be asked to be quiet. Sound about right?

 Oh for Pete’s sake…

Apparently part of the problem is also people who cannot differentiate between flirting or being asked out and being approached by a complete stranger who asks for permission to touch you.

I just watched her video again. The man never asked to touch her.  But don’t let me to point out your dishonesty.

 Considering all the pushback I’m thinking that not many people who need to get the hint have gotten it.

Not only that, but just because I am wearing a hug me sticker doesn’t mean I want to hug literally everyone, just like if I am okay with my close friend patting my ass doesn’t mean I want a total stranger doing it. I need to have the personal discretion to say no to hugging someone who doesn’t seem right to me, whether I am wearing a sticker or not, without it being an all or nothing thing. It seems like stickers takes that away. If I don’t want to hug, for example, those three creepy people in that corner over there, then I can’t hug anyone, or I am fair game? It seems more limiting to consensual behavior and not so much limiting of non-consensual.

Adding to that– if predators disregard the word “no” I highly doubt they will respect a sticker.

*you’d* not you’s

Given that they have stickers for religion, I’d say it’s a way to pick out people you want to talk to out of a crowd. I expect other special interest groups have stickers too.

 Out of nothing? Really? Your response is needed here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2011/10/02/elevatorgate-challenge-1/

The  problem wasn’t that he made a pass. If he had said exactly the same words in a different location where she wasn’t trapped, the whole thing would be a non-issue.

Stef McGraw

Well, the real root of the problem here is the social power imbalance between men and women, which is further multiplied in the case of popular male speakers and women new to the movement. Men have more power (as very well illustrated by the tendency of many people to remove all relevant context from the coffee invitation of legend, assuming the best of EG, and the worst of RW), and can abuse that power to a certain extent without consequence. 

I think that a policy of first, warning people not to be creepy, and second, to provide a means for people who’ve been treated badly to hold creeps accountable will help to balance the social power of the genders, and make men who are interested in women consider how those women feel about the way they’re being approached. Basically, it’ll help men to see women as equals, not as dick-stimulating life forms. 

Setting up specific rules of conduct is always going to favor predatory men, because all they have to do is find a way to technically behave within the rules while finding new ways to coerce, threaten, etc., and appear innocent to anyone who hears about it. We should be working to create an environment that produces actual respect, not a specified set of behaviors.

Why are badges with “don’t touch me” dots even necessary?  Isn’t “don’t touch me” a social default in this country?  Short of handshakes, I hope no one thinks that touching me is something they should do without asking.  

Actually, I never wear perfume. So how am I the problem?
And the rest of what you said is pretty much unintelligible.
Honestly, you’re not worth my time to talk to. You’re not actually replying to what I said, you’re just using this as a chance to vent your frustrations at women. All you did was laugh at my suggestion of asking to go out for coffee, but you didn’t explain why that’s laughable.
It’s as simply as talking to women like they’re people. That’s obviously something you don’t know how to do.

They DO know how to behave around each other. The vast majority of them understand. Most guys manage not to harass women. I don’t think we need to separate everyone just because some of them don’t get it.

‘[H]ow many women will give in for fear of being labeled a bitch?”
This attitude really bugs me. Ironically, feminism makes women out to be passive, helpless, agency-less victims with no control over what happens to them. It’s up to men to intuit psychically when “no” means “no” and when it doesn’t.

Women need to take ownership. Equality applies to responsibilites as well as rights.

 That is exactly why my wife does not care for the feminist movement.

Honestly, people who use anything having to do with making conference attendees feel safe as a launching pad for anti-feminist diatribe really bug me.

If you don’t know what it’s like to be hunted, or to have to worry about being hunted, it’s prudent to listen to the experiences of those who do.

“Do you have anything productive to contribute to the conversation about
sticker systems, or are you here to try and silence those who do?”

I do not want to silence anyone. I want the paranoia to stop. Thanks to you guys my wife will never attend. By extension neither will I. Thanks for the hyperbole ladies.

Two down. How many left to go?

 You feminists on here are just as hate filled as any thumper I have ever met.

Well I’m sorry if this is hard for you to hear, but not all compliments are appropriate. If you respect women, you’ll respect how they react to what you say. If you offend one of them, you might want to apologize or rephrase what you said. If you offend women often, you might want to rethink your attitude. Here’s a tip for starters: Don’t treat women as though they’re all superficial. Like I said, treat them like they’re people.

No You and my wife are leaps and bounds different from what I see. My wife has been beside me all day with this. She thinks your all prudish paranoid snobs with a superiority complex. See I was trying to be nice.

“I’m not a Jew. This is not 1936” what the fuck is wrong with you? “I will not be labelled”. Yes you will. You’re a fucking idiot.

I’m very glad your wife is there to support you. It is still quite irrelevant.
You may think that me and your wife are very different, but that does not mean that your are not stereotyping women.
“You spend $65.00 on an ounce of expensive perfume…YOU are the problem and female humans like you.”
“I would do my work while complimenting the women on how well the hour and a half they spent in the morning wasn’t for naught.”
That’s stereotyping.

And the only people anyone is trying to ostracize are people who don’t treat women with respect. That’s it. No one said you can’t compliment women, but if you don’t know how to respectfully compliment women, that’s your own problem.

Man, you’re an idiot.

Thumper? What is that exactly. If you mean what I honk you mean you’re a bigger turd than I originally thought.

 I was not trying to insult any one. If I did I would hope they give me the benefit of the doubt, that it was not intentional. Can you say the same?

So there are people who feel the need to put signs on themselves to tell others how they want to be treated. And they think whenever we all get together we should al have them. 

All I have to ask of these people is… how the fuck do you get through an average day on the street? Do you break out crying if someone you meet hugs you on the subway? Do you scream “rape” if someone talks to you at the gas station? Do you refuse to take the lift up to your flat if someone else is getting on it?

I’ve been to all 4 Skepticon conferences, I’ve contributed and supported it since its inception. I’ve never heard of these indiscretions you speak of. Not a single one. All the Atheist I know are 100% supportive of equality for women. So what’s a feminists worth her salt to do? Stand up for herself just like a man does.

These multi-colored stickers and combinations of them is very juvenile. It degrades the ethics and common sense of attendees. If this is primarily about the speakers, then the organizers and well behaved speakers could end this in a heartbeat. Put it to them straight. Exploitation and intimidation due to their status as speakers will not be tolerated.

You can’t protect every one’s overly embraced sensitivities.

As for post conference parties, a perpetrator can be ejected, or one who feels victim can leave or call the police if some law has been broken. I don’t attend those, those are often for the elite of the conferences.

This is much to-do about nothing….all this bickering about bruised sensitivities within the Atheist community is non-sense, and will cost you supporters, attendees and contributors.

It’s just a way to clarify what type of behavior they consider acceptable. What’s wrong with that?

The repeated straw man argument here is that these women are “screaming rape” over every little thing. Actually, no one screamed rape, they just pointed out harassment. We know the difference. The problem here is that many guys do not seem to understand what appropriate behavior is. For example, why do you think it would be silly if I got mad about someone hugging me on the subway? It is absolutely not appropriate to hug someone you don’t know without permission. 

And just because harassment isn’t rape does not mean it’s acceptable. It’s intimidating, humiliating, and can lead to rape in some situations, so it does need to be stopped.

I, and the fifteen people standing here beside me as I write this,  agree with what you’ve written here. 

I’d be half-interested in hearing what poliltimmy thinks the difference between “It’s not racist because my black friend agrees with me” and “It’s not misogynistic because my wife agrees with me,” but just in the train-wreck type of interest.

That is exactly it. It’s not the ordinary awkward approach. It’s that uncomfortable intimacy followed by the “hey, what’s your problem? Why so uptight?” The related non-sexual sexism is the blonde joke or equivalent followed by “hey, it’s only a joke. What, you have no sense of humor? Why so sensitive?”

Your self image seems to be wildly at odds with how you appear from this side. Do you really not realize what a troll you appear to be?

 Never did I mention anyones body or even elude that I would be so brash.

 OK I had enough. I know all about ‘creepy’ men and being called a liar afterwards. Though it is more common, women do not have a monopoly on it, and neither do you.

“I know all about ‘creepy’ men and being called a liar afterwards”

Why does this not surprise me.

Good, I was worried that the idiot was drawing some kind of equivalence between feminists and men who hit women. He’s already claimed victim status equivalent to a Jew in Nazi Germany because of he way some of the women have questioned him.

Finally the Caps here, I thought we were missing a troll.

You call people names and I am the troll?

 No I’m not a saint. I am a woman with opinions. That do not match yours in any way shape or form. You are a man hater. Period. We are both rape victims. I do not look at every man as a potential rapist.  I do not live in fear.

Poliltimmy, I am going to ask, respectfully, that you consider this. The probable reason you do not live in fear is now that you are no longer a child, you know the risk of that ever happening to you again has decreased significantly to the point that it’s negligible. Consider too that for girls and women, there is no such substantial decrease in risk with age. We are as much (or nearly as much) at risk at the age of 25, or 40 as we were at the age of 6 or 10. There is actually an increase in risk of SA for young women. We’re still targets even as adults. That doesn’t go away. The vast majority of women never get to feel completely safe, because our risk never disappears, but we have to go about our lives anyway.

Even though we have that shared trauma and I am sympathetic to that on so many levels, I’m still going to disagree with you. It isn’t a matter of seeing a victim in the mirror. It isn’t a matter of not having moved past bad things which have happened to us. It is a matter, for most women, of knowing we’re still at extremely high risk, regardless of our age.  The risk for males decreases significantly with age, giving you the opportunity to heal, and to feel safe again. The risk for females does not, so even if we do manage to heal, many of us have a really hard time ever feeling safe again. I hope you can understand.

 I do understand and hope you and others can find your way past it. I also understand some people are not as strong as others and will never get past it. But the people your afraid of will not let a sticker deter them. The power that is at the core of what they fear will IMO, will be attracted to those that have the most fear. The badges may point them out and make ‘hunting’ them all that much easier. And I will say again I wish that was not true.

Before we reach column death, I will say that A. The experiences of one woman do not overrule the experiences of other women, and I will then direct you here–

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

Not sure that pointing out to your husband that he’s a useless fuckwit of a troll makes me a man-hater. But then again I have no idea what a ‘man hater’ is. Perhaps you mistook me for a haberdasher and meant to call me a man hatter? Either way your husband is a troll and unless he has some kind of organic brain syndrome has no excuse harassing and insulting women simply because they have concerns about safety, or for any reason really.

It is as difficult to give someone who uses terms like man hating feminists the benefit of the doubt as it is to give benefit of the doubt to someone who uses language like white peple hating civil rights activists or straight people hating LGBT’ers. Standing up for your own rights does not equal hatred. Calling out someone who disparages you based upon the fact that you stood up for yourself is not hatred.

A lot of the anger you are seeing is coming from the fact that just about any time someone mentions (primarily) women not feeling safe in certain situations, it ends up becoming an “explaining feminism 101” situation, instead of an “acknowledge the problem and find solutions” situation. That is emotionally exhausting, not to mention very frustrating. Imagine if someone was trying to address the issue of able-ism or racism at atheist conferences, and constantly finding themselves being attacked for acting like a victim or for creating problems or for hating able bodied white people. Would you expect them to be the very model of public decorum?    

“We should be working to create an environment that produces actual respect, not a specified set of behaviors.”

I don’t know if it is possible to agree with someone more.

Finding a way to function around the fear and finding balance means different thing to different people. For an increasingly large portion of women, it means confronting sexism where we see it, refusing to let it go unchallenged, refusing to allow business as usual, because it isn’t working. If a person doesn’t have it in them to confront sexism, I do not see that as weakness, all I ask is that they not disparage those of us who do have it in us.

Adding– and denying that harassment takes place in order to keep discussion of system development from occurring is unnecessary.

Someone else made the point elsewhere in thread that a sticker system which relied upon color coding would not take into account people who are colorblind, which made me have to stop for a second and check my able-ist assumptions. So there is that to take into consideration, too.

Here’s a better idea, at the conventions, we can build a fence, maybe 150 or 100 miles long and we can put all the men behind it.  And have that fence electrified ’til they can’t get out.  In a few years, they’ll die out. Do you
know why? They’ll all just rape each other, since they’re men, and  eventually they’ll all die out.

There is a one in six chance that I will be raped someday. I don’t like those odds.

Neither do I, and until those odds change, it’s stupid to act as if they don’t exist.  Which is why, when it’s possible for me to be seen as ‘Schrodinger’s rapist‘ (a complete stranger, who may or may not be a rapist), I’m not hurt or surprised.  I do what I can to avoid or minimize awkwardness, because I know that I’m one of the ‘good guys,’ and the easiest way to show that is to treat others the way they want to be treated.
My personal guess (for those who side with the men’s entitlement) is that they think “I’m one of the ‘good guys’, so that makes my actions okay.”  Like you said – it’s a matter of a lack of empathy with people who want to avoid becoming victims.

I can understand the idea of Schrodinger’s rapist and I see how risk can come into play when people decide how to react to men they don’t know. But I think it is important to consider what would happen if we had the same standard for other groups. Should we have Schrodinger’s Criminal? A larger percentage of black Americans have been arrested for crimes than white Americans. Should black Americans be okay with women clutching their purses closer or crossing the street when they walk past black citizens, because of their race? Should we have Schrodinger’s terrorist, where we assume that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists and so Muslims should be understanding if we put them through more airport security? Didn’t we have a discussion about this with Sam Harris recently?

I agree that there is a difference between awkward flirting and flirting that pushes the bounds into being inappropriate. I do think that awkward or more homely looking guys are much more likely to be called creepy for doing the same things that more socially confident or more handsome guys do, but I think we could solve that problem if we had a general understanding of what is appropriate and what isn’t in flirting, regardless of who does it.

 Why are we talking about this? What the hell. The OP had nothing to do with Rebecca Watson. Didn’t even mention her name.

 What’s wrong the third option? I’ve said that to someone before and they thought it was hilarious and we had a great conversation later.

I’ll try to keep an oppen mind, but the other responses here are pretty discouraging.

Persephone merely asked you to keep your mouth shut because it seems like crap spews out every time you open it.

Since like about forever, christians have said that atheists enjoy swinging, uninhibited sex because we don’t believe in their god, we don’t believe in the “eternal” consequences of what we do with our boy parts and girl parts, and we want to live as selfishly and hedonistically as possible. 

So, apparently, a lot of young guys from christian environments have taken this propaganda at face value. They become atheists and then try to figure out how to get their share of the action promised to them, in a backhanded way, by their pastors and Sunday school teachers. “Hey, let’s go to atheist conventions! I bet we can meet a lot of atheist chicks there who will put out for us!”

They go to these gatherings, try to chat up these chicks in, say, hotel elevators, and then discover that the clergmen and other church authorities in the religions they left behind totally lied to them about atheist women’s easy virtue. No, they discover, it doesn’t that way at all. Instead many of these godless bitches have refused to act according to the porn-like movie script as imagined by christians, and instead they have started to organize against these atheist men for “sexual harassment.” 

If these atheist guys want someone to blame, they really should complain about the false advertising about atheists’ sex lives they received from the pulpits in their youth.