The Evolution of Sara Mayhew's Latest Lie

Once upon a time, that time being March of this year, Rebecca Watson participated in a panel discussion of Reddit at SXSW with Gawker’s Adrian Chen and Slate’s Farhad Manjoo. The panel is best known for Imgur founder Alan Schaaf’s apparent inability to understand that Q&A time is for questions, but it also garnered a certain amount of the standard Rebecca/woman-ha-opinion-a hatred. This time, it involved Wikipedia vandalism in addition to the standard Twitter mob.

Rebecca tweeted about the Wiki vandalism: “I point out bigotry on Reddit at SXSW. Redditors vandalize my wiki page, send me insults, and attack other women w a similar name. They mad”. Many responses called Rebecca a liar, denying that making a small (incorrect) change to a quote, like a small graffiti tag, constituted vandalism.

One person went a different route. Continue reading “The Evolution of Sara Mayhew's Latest Lie”

The Evolution of Sara Mayhew's Latest Lie
{advertisement}

More Corroboration of Shermer Groping Incident

[Late note: This post now makes it clear that Grothe’s intervention was successful in stopping the grope from being completed, taking this incident from assault and battery to just assault. See the comments for my thoughts on why the language used likely led to an assumption otherwise. –SZ]

Someone else stepped forward to say that they’ve been aware of the incident with Shermer groping a female TAM speaker (though not at TAM) for a couple of years. It isn’t anyone you’d expect it to be.

Screen cap of Facebook comment. Text provided in the post.

Barbara A. Drescher: Okay, people. Something occurred to me this morning that is a likely reason Carrie restricted her FB account. I’m sure that someone pointed out to her how easy it is to show that what she’s doing is driving by a personal vendetta and not concern for women or victims.

It IS easy. Just think about the incident she’s leaning on (the groping — hey, we could call this “gropegate”, but DON’T), who witnessed it, when it happened, and who organized the next TAM. HINT: it wasn’t D.J. But if D.J. is a misogynist, then so is anyone else who invited Shermer after witnessing the incident. In fact, according to everything said by that camp, so is anyone who invited Shermer after HEARING about the incident.

(FTR, the alleged victim described the incident to me herself a couple of years ago; it’s not the big secret that Carrie is making it out to be. It just hasn’t shown up in a blog post with names attached.)

The comment thread is here. It is a long trip down a deep rabbit hole, particularly toward the end. What stands out to me, as jaded as I’ve gotten on this topic, is that the people commenting there think this is helping…something…somehow.

So that’s two people who have heard a witness describe the sexual assault in question and one person who says the person who was alleged to have been sexually assaulted agrees that it happened. Both the witness and the person to whom the victim spoke are what I would qualify as hostile in this case.

What more evidence do you think people will require?

More Corroboration of Shermer Groping Incident

I Got It Wrong

I made a mistake, and I owe Christie Wilcox and this community an apology. When I wrote this post, I mistook being part of a set of events as they unfolded as being the same thing as having a full enough view of those events to know that I could comment on them without getting her perspective. I should not have done that. As a result, I published an account of her actions that has not fully stood up in the face of further scrutiny. For that, I am truly sorry.

There are other issues at play here, including when a pattern of nonconsensual sexual behavior becomes a community matter and how various competing interests affect that process, as well as the impact and importance of harassment that targets men, but they deserve their own consideration separate from any apology. I will be listening much and thinking much as those questions are discussed, but I don’t plan to comment on them now.

I Got It Wrong

Why I Spoke

Maryn McKenna has a very good piece up at Superbug about the online science communication community (most specifically the part of the community that focuses around (is focused by?) the ScienceOnline conferences. There’s one paragraph in the post that I think I have some responsibility to respond to.

Second, there have been blog and Twitter threads emerging over the past 36 hours in which additional accusations of harassment and inappropriate behavior, not by Zivkovic, have been made public by other science writers. Some of these have been launched not by the alleged harasser or victim, but by third parties trying… something: mistaken helpfulness, malice, who knows. And there are other such conversations happening in private channels, which I know because I’m enmeshed in several. These are troubling, and potentially toxic, too. Overall, I perceive in the science blogosphere (your networks may vary) a loss of security and safety; many expressions of mutual trust, but an at least equivalent number of expressions of uncertainty.

While I’m not the only person to have said something, I appreciate McKenna’s uncertainty about my motivations. Not everyone has shown that.

McKenna also isn’t the only person to use the word “toxic” with regard to my post yesterday. [Details of that post are now redacted at the request of parties involved.] Yes, I’m looking at the criticisms. Yes, I’m considering them. As of yet, I don’t agree. Why? Because from my position, the situation was already toxic. Continue reading “Why I Spoke”

Why I Spoke

More About Bora (Updated)

If you consider Bora a friend, you may want to sit down before reading this latest post. It will take away all the “justs” that may have been trying to make you feel better this week.

No, it wasn’t just talk. No, it wasn’t just a lack of communication. No, it wasn’t just a question of bad boundaries between personal and professional relationships. There are no “justs” left.

Update: Bora has resigned from Scientific American.

More About Bora (Updated)

I Have No #RipplesOfDoubt

There’s a hashtag being used on Twitter right now, and plenty of discussion off the hashtag, for people to discuss the fallout of Bora Zivkovic inappropriately combining personal and professional interactions, up to and including sexual harassment in more than one case. They’re talking about doubt in their own work, in the reasons why their work was promoted, in the reasons their work wasn’t promoted, in how this will affect gender relations in the science writing community going forward.

Reading those, I feel I have to tell a story. Continue reading “I Have No #RipplesOfDoubt”

I Have No #RipplesOfDoubt