Lots of it

This is the kind of thing (and maybe the actual thing) Jessica Meier must have been seeing, to think there’s ” too much money to be made playing the victim”:


Barbara A. Drescher As far as wanting it to stop, the attention and money (yes, there is money involved in appearing to be a victim–lots of it) must be pretty attractive, not to mention the addictive sense of outrage.

Isn’t she supposed to be some kind of skeptic? I know she used to work for the JREF until she…stopped working there. What on earth would make a skeptic credulous enough to think there is lots of money in “appearing to be a victim”? What money?

It’s just batshit, that kind of thing. No, there is not Lots of Money in talking about sexual harassment and the assholes who defend it. There really really isn’t.


  1. John Morales says

    I’ve seen Anita Sarkeesian’s Kickstarter used as an example of that contention.

    But yes, it’s just another aspect of the anti-feminist narrative.

  2. Sili says

    I’m not gonna hold my breath waiting for her to apply that sorta reasoning (and I am of course misusing that word) to the FFRF. Damn atheists, always playing the victim to get rich.

  3. kellym says

    Is Dreshcher claiming that Alison Smith falsely accused Michael Shermer of rape in order to make “lots” of money? Because I don’t see how being known as a rape victim is the path to riches. Or the path to career success, for that matter.

    As Dr. Pamela Gay wrote in a 2013 blog post, “Let me put this more clearly: Because someone witnessed a man in power [Michael Shermer] attempt to grab my boobs, I have been warned that I need to worry about my career being actively destroyed by others.”

    I would think there would be a hell of a lot more money in protecting wealthy, powerful, influential, popular, sexual predators. That’s what worked for the Catholic Church. Until it didn’t.

  4. Corvus Whiteneck says

    Surely an Official True Skeptic wouldn’t claim there was money in it, never mind provide a detail like a qualitative assessment of the amount of money in it, without — what’s that word again?… oh, yeah — evidence.

    I’ll just sit here quietly and wait for that evidence. I’m sure it will be forthcoming shortly…


  5. says

    There is money in appearing to be a certain type of victim, but you need quotes around the word “victim” and it involves being on Fox News and the like. Claiming to be a feminist and then attacking feminists is one way to do this. Drescher seems to be trying that method.

  6. says

    Having seen a commenter on another post mention victim, Fox, and moneymaking, let me perfectly clear: publicly making sexual harassment or rape allegations is a piss-poor moneymaker. And it’s nothing like the “victims” on the likes of Fox News.

  7. says

    The illogic…it’s mind numbing. She was also spouting this on a comment on that Oppenheimer piece saying that outrage sells. Interesting, because it seems like all she’s doing is trying to provoke outrage. Hmmm…
    Also interesting that was under a comment from Sara Mayhew where she was saying she’s been harassed. I don’t recall Drescher accusing Mayhew of raking in the cash. Hmmm…
    Drescher is a bit too obvious in her double standards.

  8. Contra says

    Well, expect some gosh-be-shucks hand wringing when the NEW Skeptic Blogs starts up real soon.

    It’ll feature Barbara Dresher, Loxton, Prothero, a whole new line up of writers for Shermer’s skeptic site.

    And you can expect they’ll be asking for donations, as the new Anti-FT blogging site.

    Maybe their new blogposts will bring them income if they do as they do on Facebook.

  9. says

    Good grief. In that FB comment thread, Drescher, Abbie Smith and Derek Colanduno actually engage in some classic ad hominem dismissiveness because Mark Oppenheimer went to Yale.

    I didn’t know Derek was hanging with the anti-feminists. But hey, if they’re allowed to make the arguments for financial motivations, then it’s obvious why Derek would say such dreck: Skepticality is the official podcast of Shermer’s Skeptic magazine. Derek is just trying to protect his meal ticket (as if Shermer has suffered any significant fiscal damage, yet – he even had his non-lawsuit paid for by others).

    Oh, wait… that’s actual evidence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *