No contest. Laci always wins.
The youtube comments, as always, are something else. Here’s one of the milder comments.
Hope this vid gets put down for violating youtube rights. You put footage up of a video that was taken down for violating rights.
So this person is less concerned about Pepper harassing women than he is about Laci reporting it. Oh, man, is that ever familiar.
Shit is hitting the fan for Sam Pepper. The Independent and Mashable have picked it up, and the BBC interviewed Laci a few hours ago. She’s blown the lid off of one of the most ridiculously creepy and horrifying (I have to say alleged until he’s convicted I guess) sexual predators on Youtube or perhaps anywhere. The video by the anonymous young woman in Laci’s video description was particularly gut wrenching.
Sam Pepper is a fucking monster. He needs to go down and he needs to go down hard.
He needs to go down and he needs to go down hard.
My initial reaction was: “WOW! Filming yourself committing a crime, then posting it!! How incredibly vulnerable he is!” and then I started realizing that that’s really the issue – this pus-filled blister feels like he’s able to do this kind of shit because so far he’s gotten away with it, and so far he’s been getting positive feedback for it. What he ought to be getting is a ride in the back of a cop car. It’s an illustration of how much privilege he thinks he’s got that it doesn’t appear to occur to him that he’s posting evidence of himself committing felony assault.
I can just picture one of the Shermer defender-bots jumping up and saying, “WELL? Where’s the EVIDENCE!?!”
thelastholdout @ 1:
No, he is not a monster. He is a regular person, and while it’s always tempting to stick someone doing terrible things in a box labeled “not human”, it is not helpful to do so. It’s not helpful because it allows people to ignore and deny all the terrible shit people do, and all the terrible ways people behave, and all the terrible attitudes a whole lot of people hold.
Othering. Please don’t do that.
I’ll split the difference. He’s a human who chose monstrous behavior an should be held accountable for that choice. A bit long to say, but I hope it’s accurate enough.
Bronze Dog:
It is, and I appreciate you doing so. People are quite capable of committing monstrous acts, but they are still very human, and for anyone else tempted to go the othering route, it’s good to keep in mind that Laci Green mentioned just a small amount of people who are doing very similar things.
Can we call the effort to expose and call out these types abuses “pig shaming” or is that insulting to the porcine?
God, I just watched the video of Pepper’s victim recounting, anonymously, in horrifying detail, his assault against her.
Well, I know this is the kind of comment that doesn’t fly around here, but fuck it. Someone just needs to beat the shit out of this punk ass douche.
Martin @10:
Yeah. You’re right. Doesn’t fly.
I personally want *less* violence in the world. Not more. We humans have this tendency to try resolving conflicts or securing justice through violent means. That’s not a good thing and violates the human rights of others.
Well, one of these days, he’s going to handcuff himself to a woman whose response will be to wrestle him to the ground and acquaint his face with the pavement. I for one will not weep over the violation of his human rights.
What… what the fuck did I just watch @ 5:20? Jesus.
Presumably Michael Nugent thinks Laci should shut up until Sam Pepper and the others mentioned are convicted.
Fortunately, Michael Nugent is not the boss of the internet.
Good on Laci Green for calling out Sam Pepper and others like him. Even if this was perpetrated with actors, as he claims, it is sending out the wrong message, as she pointed out.
@14 “Presumably Michael Nugent thinks Laci should shut up until Sam Pepper and the others mentioned are convicted.
Fortunately, Michael Nugent is not the boss of the internet.”
“This is a pattern that I have also noticed in some criticisms of me in recent days. Some people do not respond to what I have written, but instead paraphrase what I have written into something else, and then respond to that paraphrasing, sometimes with a personal smear.” – M. Nugent, FWIW
When did making up what someone thinks and then putting them down for that become ok? I’m talking about people from all viewpoints of the issue. This only escalates things needlessly.
@15 “Even if this was perpetrated with actors, as he claims, it is sending out the wrong message, as she pointed out.”
Exactly! The YouTube comments prove it. Even if some people think it’s funny just to troll the comment section by making phony excuses for sexual assault. Nobody is entitled to cross the line to assault and harassment just by calling it a “social experiment”. We might get the idea that putting them behind bars for a few months is just a social experiment they need to grin and bear.
@Felix:
You’re absolutely right. We shouldn’t wait until they’re convicted, we should instead wait until allegations have been reported to the police and …. wait, processed through the legal system?
Here you go, his own quoted words. See 5(c), which I found by going to a random post of his (keywords: michael nugent report police) and searching the subsequent first result for the word “report”:
Emphasis mine, if that’s not clear.
What, precisely, do you think allegations reported to police should result in? Do you also believe that allegations reported to police result in justice 100% of the time? Do you think that people cleared of wrongdoing by the courts are necessarily absolved of wrongdoing in the public square? Do you equate public opprobrium with judicial punishment?
Inquiring minds want to know!
On re-reading, I may have misinterpreted your original comment. If so, apologies. I’ve had a long day at work.
Given the accusations that have already come out about Pepper sexually assaulting and soliciting nude photos from under-age girls, I would be very surprised if he isn’t paid a visit from the local coppers before long, especially in light of the recent sexual abused scandals involving more traditional entertainers.
I think he got a lot more to worry about than being kicked off YouTube.
@PatrickG you’re right that of course, it’s silly to expect police work to result in 100% justice, or that reports to the blogosphere were generally counterproductive. Not every socially and personally destructive behavior like this so-called “light” harassment is actionably by police, and I want to clarify that I’m fully in support of raising awareness and using public/blogosphere attention against people who can be reasonably held accountable. Generally I believe that women do not make this stuff up, even when I know of a few cases when that happened. Statistically and psychologically it’s not reasonable to assume a significant chance of that over all cases (like two out of thousands). I’m not sure I can read Nugent’s statement (this one alone) as a general recommendation to “shut up until conviction”, but I acknowledge that he may hold that opinion. I’ve only recently even heard his name and had a look at his blog, so I don’t have a mental picture of more than a small fraction of his opinions.
Bleeeeerrrgggghghhhhh, that voice, those looks, that monumental assholery….i think my hate gland is about to burst.
Oh, and the video where he pretends that this was about showing that men can also be victims of sexual harassment….you have to got to be fucking kidding me.
Also, is it just me or does this kid have a serious drug problem?
If you search for his name + straight edge, there will be a couple positive hits
@Felix:
In responding to someone it is often necessary to paraphrase what they say. And often the only/most effective way to criticise a bad idea is to show the consequences of that idea (either by reductio ad absurdum or just directly following it to its logical conclusions by applying the idea to real situations in life). There’s a difference here in that Nugent was talking specifically about rape accusations rather than sexual harassment accusations and his idea is that bloggers (presumably third parties in general: Laci is technically a vlogger) shouldn’t name and shame someone or report these allegations publicly but should instead go to the police.
If Nugent thinks that publicly naming, shaming and reporting rape is harmful to victims (btw, Laci kept the victim’s anonymous), but fine and dandy for sexual harassment, where is the line? By that logic people should have been openly naming and shaming Shermer for years except for Alison who should have only gone straight to the police. No, that’s absurd it’s pretty obvious Nugent thinks that people should keep quiet about sexual harassment in general and report it through “proper” channels such as police or superiors. Since he himself is a leader of an atheist organisation on the one hand, and taking into account the years and years of documented failure of the “keep quiet, don’t name names but report” approach in helping actual victims, this is really a disgusting position to hold.
Holding Nugent to task is important: he should see that applying that principle of his is essentially silencing victims and allowing the perpetrators of sexual harassment and assault continue with impunity, since a large number of these cases are not prosecutable/ victims are not treated well by the justice system.
// meta: Your avatar seems to be insinuating you are Randi’s beard ^.^
Also: “No contest. Laci always wins.” Yes, Laci always wins =) – pretty much on all fronts. It’s great to see such intelligent, funny, charismatic and progressive women on one’s side of issues – I at least would like to be included on that side rather than the side of twerps like Sam Pepper.
Will she and/or her supporters be hounded by YouTube harassers the same way Rebecca and Anita are, or is there some other corner of YouTube where there are normal people? Are there enough YouTube commenters who have basic human decency to drown out the usual bile on her channel? Are insular communities like gamers and atheists just concentrated pockets of assholery? I hope so. God I hope so. Otherwise, the bile that’s about to come her way is going to make me hate the whole world so very, very much.
I came across this on the front page of Reddit and the comments are severely pissing me off. Lots of people going, “b-b-b-but EVIDENCE!” and “She associates with Anita Sarkeesian!” and “I don’t like the way she talks!” (because her speaking voice has some vocal fry, making it sound like she’s about to cry).
How is a dude that runs around grabbing random women’s asses on the street *not* an asshole?
Lucky for him that he isn’t in the UK. Operation Ivytree has been prosecuting numerous high profile show biz names and almost all of them have been convicted, and deservedly so. It isn’t funny, it isn’t original, it violates people, it is criminal at worst, immature at best, and has no place in society at all. No, on second thoughts, it isn’t even immature, it’s just straight wrong.
Oh Christ, that video really made me lose a significant amount of respect for humanity as a whole. How can that guy possibly have so many fans? It was genuinely painful to watch just the few clips Laci played.
When I read Tony @11, I found myself (very suddenly) recalling the vicious horror of high school days once again. This kind of assault was commonplace among the bully mentalities, almost always the more blunted men (but with howling laughter and support from some women present.) SP will be stopped by refusing him the shallow attention on which he gorges.
Tony@11., my gratitude for your statement regarding less violence in this world. Viciously harming those who harm us in some way is simply confirming and passing on the harm. Sam Pepper is a bully, a sort of adolescent level bully committing adult crimes. Too many folks affirm and support bullies by allowing them to have the stage. Thank-you, PZ/Laci, for bringing this to light for me. I had never seen the SP fellow before and will actively avoid him from today forward.
Quite some time I watched the below video of a Russian guy who made a record of touching 1000 women’s boobs. At the time, I thought it was mildly funny and didn’t much more about it. In the light of the Sam Pepper video’s, I am not so sure anymore…
Touching 1000 Girls’ Boobs In Public – Full Version
On the other hand, except for the first one perhaps in any case, almost all of them seemed to be with the women’s consent. Also, rather than doing a surprise attack (again: except the very first one) it seems like he first politely (?) asked off camera and them did it in a single slow, predictable movement without coercion.
What’s more: Many of the women used the opportunity to assert their own sexuality and sense of humour, sometimes even grabbing the guy himself on private places, or otherwise mocking the whole thing.
I’m a bit split, though: What do you people think? And please be gentle with me for asking… :-S
EDIT: Quite some time AGO…
EDIT … didn’t THINK much more about it.
sheesh!
And, yes, there’s also a lot of cringing, which makes you feel many succumbed to the social pressure of “Come on! You’ll be famous on YouTube!”
Petrander @ 31:
I think the big question which needs answering is: what is the point? Past that, does such a video make things better? Does it help to tear down sexism, or does it help keep the status quo in place? Does it give the guys watching it good ideas on approaching women, does it give the guys watching it a good attitude about women as people? And so on.
@31 Petrander
CONSENT. You said it yourself. CONSENT.
Fucking hell, how is this some kind of mysterious thing?
DO NOT TOUCH SOMEONE WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. MAN OR WOMAN.
TOUCHING SOMEONE IN A SEXUAL MANNER WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT IS THE CRIME OF GROSS SEXUAL IMPOSITION. FOR WHICH YOU CAN BE JAILED.
Jesus fucking Christ on a cracker.
I watched maybe 15-20 seconds of that video and a lot of those women looked uncomfortable and/or surprised. I give no shits if that guy asked for consent and got it because, when you approach someone with a camera in a crowded public place, you have a sort of power over them. You have the ability to record what they do and then do with it whatever you please with it. There are all kinds of people watching and lots of people, particularly women, are going to be hesitant to cause a scene. They may smile and go along with it in the hopes of getting it over with quickly because protesting may seem like an exercise in futility which is very likely to be given that we’re talking here about a man approaching women he doesn’t know and asking to touch their boobs. And who knows how much cajoling went into getting whatever consent he had? Any consent given under those circumstances I would consider to have been given under duress.
TL;DR I think it’s shit, even if he had consent.
Even if he had full consent, what is the purpose of the video? Let’s even say they were actresses who rehearsed it even. That touching female strangers like that is a cool or funny thing to do?
It doesn’t have to be sexual assault in order to be sexist. It’s a blatantly sexist video.
Really, petrander? You’re not at all able to figure out that this video you shared is really sexist and offensive?
I … it just boggles my mind.
This is a man who by all accounts, routinely uses his YouTube celebrity status to sexually prey on his young (often underage) female fans.
This is off topic, so if people wish to discuss it, there are probably better places (Lounge? – I’m guessing – I don’t post much and I’ve never Lounged). I am posting it here because this thread has many examples of a subtle sexism I’ve never seen talked about.
I am referring to the habit of referencing men by their last name, and women by their first name. To my mind, it portrays women as less than men. Men as important, women as friendly. Or something like that.
No one refers to Shermer as Michael, or Dawkins as Richard; so why, in the same context, is it ok to refer to a woman by her first name?
Equality means:
Pepper – Green
Laci – Sam
Ms. Green – Mr. Pepper
Sam Pepper – Laci Green
Pepper – Laci is an inequality. (Green – Sam is too, but you won’t run into it that way).
Thank you.
Now, back to the regularly scheduled program.
With regard to ambassadorfromverdammt‘s post, here are the current stats for this article (including this post, excluding sidebar content)*:
Laci: 21 ('salacious')
Green: 8
Sam: 16 ('same', 'same')
Pepper: 21
* The words in parentheses are each a false positive for the search, and have been subtracted.
nb: <code> used to hopefully keep things lined up.
Above corrected to separate first+last name (numbers as of previous post):
Laci: 17 ('salacious')
Green: 4
Sam: 3 ('same', 'same')
Pepper: 8
Laci Green: 4
Sam Pepper: 13
* The words in parentheses are each a false positive for the search, and have been subtracted.
nb: <code> used to hopefully keep things lined up.
And because I really feel I should post something more on topic after that:
Nice to hear that he was dropped from so many things so quickly (in particular, the YouTube video and the network*) after attention was brought to the matter. I’d say it would be nice to see that more widespread, but I suspect the major difference here is the self-recorded video evidence, which is harder to argue with than witness testimony (for those interested in doing so).
And damn, that anon victim’s account was horrible (in the sense of what happened to her, not that it was badly presented or anything like that). I’m happy to see she has comments turned off, because I don’t hold high hopes for what would have been there.
* I generally prefer the “you have N days to find a new job, or you’re fired. Until then, you can sit in that corner and think about what you’ve done” approach, because of the crappy safety net in the USA. But there are some categorical exceptions, like this.
petrander @31:
Why the uncertainty?
Did he have their consent? Did he have the right to touch them?
That’s the key question. That’s the only important question. If he didn’t have their consent, that’s sexual assault. Bodily autonomy is a right that all human beings have.
That word.
‘Seemed’.
That’s a weasel word.
Did he or did he NOT have their consent.
I watched the first few seconds of the video. There is no indication that he had their consent.
Your definition of ‘surprised’ is different than mine, bc watching the video I saw several women appear surprised.
Also, what does this video have to do with this thread? Off-topic posts are for the Lounge or the Thunderdome (and this one should have gone in the Dome if it *had* to be posted).
Oh, and don’t preemptively tell people to be gentle when you post a sexist video. Shit like that is NOT appreciated around here (and shouldn’t be appreciated anywhere, but we live in a sexist society where jerks think it’s alright to create such videos and others think it’s ok to post them).
The videos she links to are just heart-wrenching (and gut-churning).
ambassadorfromverdammt I agree in a professional setting. Introducing any of these women at a conference on a stage or addressing them at work, of course. That’s a classic example of micro-aggression. We should watch for it. But I think this context is different.
Casually, you refer to people by their first names because you like them and identify with them, and you referring to people by their last names because you’re trying to keep your distance from them. Pepper is just some jackass on YouTube. I don’t know him, and I want it to stay that way. I want to treat him as the perpetrator he is. The last name is DISREPSECT. The man is a criminal of the worst kind.
PZ is PZ, though, because he’s someone I’ve come to know over the years. He has a PhD. He’s a professor. But he’s PZ here because he’s one of us. Using his first name is a sign of respect. The gaming community is the same about Jerry and Mike (Gabe and Tycho.) Laci is Laci because I’ve seen her videos and she’s awesome and inspiring. I’ve come to identify with her. The shitheads rant about “Sarkeesian” or “Watson” on YouTube. That’s not an accident or coincidence. They’re use the last name to dehumanize them. Dehumanizing the target helps with harassment, and I refuse to play into that.
Anita is a gamer. Anita has a fantastic sense of humor and a razor sharp intellect. Anita is brave. And Anita is a real flesh and blood human being who has been treated terribly.
Regarding #31: I have been thinking long and hard on the different reactions to this -including my own. To be honest: My initial reaction at the time I first saw this was also in the line of “How sexist!”. But then I actually watched more than “the first few seconds” and started to discern some patterns. You see, I live in Denmark, originally being from the Netherlands, and women’s rights are actually something taken more for granted around here (though, even here, we’re not quite there yet). With regards to situations like this, well, boys make sexual pranks on girls and girls make sexual pranks on boys and no one really makes a lot of fuzz about it. This is one thing that I also recognize in this video. Now this is in Russia, so I don’t know how social justice is currently over there, but they were arguably better in communist times, ironically.
And “weasel words”? Really? Am I expected to write a Wikipedia article here? I am merely conveying my impressions and trying to come to terms with these, not trying to deceive here or defend deplorable positions. Please assume good faith!
Now let there be no doubt about it: Clearly, the premise of the video is male-oriented sexist. Full stop. Also, in those cases, where there was a surprise attack (or social pressure): Not OK, no matter how the victim took it. The very first victim was clearly taken by surprise. She didn’t take it that badly, fortunately, but that is no excuse. Perhaps the guys behind this realized this, because in many subsequent cases, the women clearly put up an act. It’s like they were being prepared and were suggested several possible responses: Act surprised, act aroused, fake-slap the guy in the face, or whatever they’d prefer. If this perception is correct, from that moment on, this is being changed from something being done to the women to something done together. In other words: There was consent!
So is all okay then? Well, not quite. Because there is still a little too much cringing to my taste. What’s more: I can easily imagine someone like Sam Pepper watching this back then and thinking: “Cool! I can do something like this and get loads of views too!” and then forgetting the whole “consent” thing. Also, in an American context, I can well understand how this provokes gut reactions in people engaged in social justice, given the state of affairs, especially in the light of the current developments in the atheist community. This is why I am forced to rethink my perception of this video, which I initially saw in a somewhat more positive light. And this is also, BTW, why this is highly relevant in this context.
petrander @48:
You’re doing it again. You’ve assumed a narrative that is not in evidence. We don’t know that the women were coached. We do not know that they gave consent. When you don’t know if there is consent, you do not assume. Without consent, this guy committed sexual assault. Your interpretation *could* be true, but given that it is extremely common for men to feel entitled to women’s bodies, the idea of a man violating a woman by grabbing her breasts without her consent is more than reasonable to me.
Need more?
How about the fact that multiple women have accused Pepper of raping them:
Sam Pepper is a rapist douchebag who has sexually assaulted multiple women. He does not value consent. I do not believe he had consent for the video of him touching 1000 women’s breasts.
Tony @49
Actually, I do rely on evidence. The body language and sequence of events is pretty clear and obvious to anyone not suffering from some form of autism. Now, I may not have absolute proof in the form of documentation, signed forms or whatever (though even these can be faked) , but I can see that for a considerable portion of participants there clearly was some form of consent and prior agreement.
Also, I am not sure why Sam Pepper’s misdeeds are relevant here. We clearly agree that he at least is a misogynist, rapist jerk. I no of no such evidence exists for the Russian guy in the video I linked. I may hope you would at least agree that someone is presumed innocent until proven guilty?
How can you be sure that what you think is the case, is the case, without true verbal consent?
Prima facie evidence you don’t get it. Look at the title of the thread. Anything to do with Sam Pepper is relevant, unlike your apologetics for a rapist.
That guy doesn’t have to be proven to be a criminal in order to be a piece of shit. Like I said before, each and every one of those women could have been actresses with full consent to be touched. It still makes that guy and those women responsible for making a sexist video which is harmful to society because it says “groping women is cool and funny”.
It’s a terrible video with a terrible message made by terrible people.
Agreed. He is also a Putin-supporter to make things worse.
Because I can see it in the body language and I am not autistic.
What are you talking about? I am not being apologetic about anyone! I am just like: Sam Pepper is a rapist, sure, but how about this guy?
But isn’t that really slut shaming? Isn’t it up to the women to decide what they do with their bodies?
For the rest, as I keep on saying repetitively: There are certainly doubtful cases here, but there are also many cases where women assess their own sexuality but putting up some act or even sexualizing the guy back. That I think is rather uplifting and puts those women back in power of the situation. You may not like their choice, but it’s still their choice.
I already touched upon this, but I think cultural context is important. In an American context something would cross the line that in some European context perhaps wouldn’t. I don’t know, really. It may explain why Richard Dawkins and also Matt “shirtstorm” Taylor have been totally clueless of the sexism they have been sporting on the international scene. But again: I am not sure. I’m just putting it out there and do not mean to offend anyone.
Nope. I’m not criticizing them for having something done to their bodies. I’m criticizing them for making a sexist video (assuming they are actresses).
In regards to my #54
General question for everyone: are words like “actress” and “waitress” sexist? I tend to think they are as they needlessly create a new word for when a woman is doing the same work as a man. I think I should have said “actors”.
petrander @ 53
Assuming the women in question all gave meaningful consent (something I doubt, for reasons I explained upthread), the criticism is not “those women should be ashamed of letting this guy touch their breasts on camera”. The criticism is “that video is sexist because it portrays a man asking women he doesn’t know if he can touch their breasts as if that is an appropriate way to interact with strangers.”
Saad @ 55
I concur that the -ess suffix is sexist and for the same reason. It’s also very binary.