I remember when I learned that the skeptic/atheist movement was full of harassing jerks — I was shocked. And then these people started getting exposed in every discipline, from literature and philosophy to physics, and it started to sink in that the entire world is a playground for assholes, which might have been a relief (whew, it’s not just my communities!) but is incredibly depressing instead.
Now add astronomy to the list. One of their most prominent representatives, Geoff Marcy, has been revealed to be a serial sexual harasser, someone who has wrecked women’s careers in astronomy. And it’s a familiar story: the women in that community all knew of his reputation, and it was an open secret.
“He’s had a long history of behaving inappropriately, especially with undergraduates,” said Kirkpatrick, who at the time was a graduate student at Berkeley studying astrophysics. “Women discouraged other women from working with him as a research advisor. It was just something that was talked about pretty frankly among the women in the department.”
Kirkpatrick, who has since left academia, continues to run the Women in Astronomy blog, through which she says three other women have approached her with accounts of their experiences with Marcy.
A blog post by a former student of Marcy’s reveals the same thing.
This should be surprising to very few researchers in the exoplanets community, particularly those of my generation or younger. Geoff’s inappropriate actions toward and around women in astronomy is one of the biggest “open secrets” at any exoplanets or AAS meeting. “Underground” networks of women pass information about Geoff to junior scientists in an attempt to keep them safe. Sometimes it works. Other times it hasn’t, and cognizant members of the community receive additional emails, phone calls and Facebook messages from new victims.
How can this kind of behavior persist? Everyone knows about it, everyone whispers to each other about it, but no one does anything about it…because he has power and prestige, and everyone also knows that if you challenge the Big Man all the other Big Men will close ranks and make your life hell, and shut down your career, and there will be the usual apologists for the status quo who will start whispering about you.
Everyone knows this, too, and they know where power’s bias lies. After the big reveal, in which an investigation exposed exactly how awful he had been for years, Marcy’s department head sent out this memo.
Dear Colleagues – this has been a day of drama and difficulty for many of us, each in our own way and with our own context. It is hard to process for those who know Geoff well. It is hard to process in relation to our colleagues here and elsewhere. And it is difficult for the department as a community. For those for whom these issues are triggering or raise strong passions, please seek support. This is very strong and emotional stuff, and it would not be surprising if more is yet to come, given its very public nature.
I have called a faculty meeting for next Monday at 1pm, and am willing to work to have some representatives of students and postdocs present for part of it (I know that some of you are talking to them). There is a need for our community to process this in a number of ways and forums over time. Clearly folks are organizing some of these already and I’ll try to help when such help is welcome. Mostly, everyone will need support from others and should offer support to others.
Of course, this is hardest for Geoff in this moment. For those who are willing and able, he certainly can use any understanding or support they can offer (this wouldn’t include endorsement of the mistakes he acknowledges in an open letter on his website). I ask that those who have the room for it (now or later), hear him out and judge whether there is room for redemption in all that will transpire.
The emphasis in that last paragraph is mine. I think this long drawn out event has been hardest for the women whose careers he derailed; I don’t have any sympathy for Marcy at all, especially not after reading his ‘apology’.
As some of you may be aware, concerns were raised with UC Berkeley regarding my conduct some years ago involving some women in our field. These complaints, which were raised last year, led to an official investigation by the University, which concluded three months ago. While I do not agree with each complaint that was made, it is clear that my behavior was unwelcomed by some women. I take full responsibility and hold myself completely accountable for my actions and the impact they had. For that and to the women affected, I sincerely apologize.
It is difficult to express how painful it is for me to realize that I was a source of distress for any of my women colleagues, however unintentional. Through deep and lengthy consultations, I have reflected carefully on my actions as well as issues of gender inequality, power, and privilege in our society. I was unaware of how these factors created unforeseen contexts and how my actions and position have affected others in ways that were far from what I intended. Through hard work, I have changed in major ways for the better.
Note the tells. He doesn’t agree with each complaint; so there are some instance of harassment he thinks are justifiable? His behavior was unwelcome
; yeah, that’s an understatement. But hey, it was unintentional
! You have to forgive him, he didn’t really mean to stroke that student’s thigh. He was unaware
.
It’s all a lie. I don’t believe he was unaware
; he knew every step of the way that his desire for sexual gratification was being expressed inappropriately, to students.
If he were honest, he would have said he didn’t care. He was preying on students, without concern for their careers, and conscious that his status in his field would protect him from any repercussions. He knew this.
I wouldn’t accept an apology that didn’t fully acknowledge the depth of Marcy’s willful violation of his students’ working lives.
I think we also have to recognize that our communities have been complicit in this kind of behavior. It takes more than just finding the predatory individuals in our ranks and tagging them with a warning label — we also have to change the social structures that permit this kind of behavior to fester for decades, and only rarely penalizes the perpetrators.
Some smart words:
As such, defeating sexual harassment goes well beyond expunging people like Marcy from our ranks. It will require a fundamental restructuring of the way we do business, and a reeducation of our field—all of us—in matters related to the culture of science and academe. This will not be easy because our culture fosters a deep distrust and even hostility toward the “soft sciences” such as sociology and psychology that provide us with the best tools for addressing our pervasive inequities. But if we are truly interested in a meritocratic scientific community that makes full use of its talent pool to understand the Universe, we’ll see this as a worthwhile investment. Until we do, there will be more stories filling more inboxes as we collectively shoot ourselves in the feet.
Now if only sociology and psychology were also free of this taint…
I somehow managed to learn that in elementary school (but not from the teachers).
And they tend to vote Republican, which may explain the insanity of the GOP.
“While I might have blighted some women’s careers and inflicted lifelong emotional damage to others I confess I was unaware of…….bafflegab…………bafflegab…..so now I hope you all know how much I am hurt and offer full forgiveness…..smug.smug.”
It is to barf.
How long before Richard Dawkins defends this guy against the witch hunt?
The weaselosity of that one sentence is stunning. The use of drama right away, natch, the handy dandy code word for “those hysterical women”, while the difficulty, of course, is all on the part of the poor, bewildered men, who will have the arduous task of getting their dear colleague out of this little…problem. <snarl>
So, he just ambles about, radiating unintentional desires for sex, with no control whatsoever of his body. Amazing.
Oh, so now it’s not what you intended. Just what did you intend, Sir? What a jackass.
From the Buzzfeed article:
I expect hordes of people will soon be howling over the horrible, nasty, evil women who misunderstood poor ol’ Geoff, and utterly ruined his fine and great career, and women shouldn’t be doing astronomy anyway, can’t stand the heat, and all that.
I am looking for where he says he was just joking, or expressing his free speech, or something. But, yeah, witch hunt.
Hey, I have a new defensive line they can try: “we’re not as bad as catholic priests.”
PZ: “he knew every step of the way that his desire for sexual gratification was being expressed inappropriately”
I’m not so sure. I think a lot of these creeps have been swimming in their own kool-aid for so long they think they are Gods gift to all. They are so full of them selves that they honestly believe that any female would be honored to receive some “friendly flirting” from such a prime specimen.
To prey on women in a manner that you know is unwelcome takes a special kind of asshole, and while these also exist I think it’s much more likely that most simply doesn’t get it. Take Tim Hunt as an example, why would he say what he did if he knew how wrong it was? He was basically outing himself as a sexist jerk to the world, if he knew he was sexist and just didn’t care he would probably have the sense to keep it in his pants in a public setting like this.
Now you could argue that they must have known it was inappropriate simply from the fact that they have stayed under the radar for so long. And I agree that they must have known that it is “frowned upon”, but I suspect they on some level believe (or at least delude themselves into believing) that the women deep down want it.
Sorry, but if they have been through sexual harassment training, there is no excuse, no valid reason to keep up their bad behavior, or anybody to attempt to excuse it. Such behavior should be dealt with with appropriate work-place sanctions. And rape charges should be investigated.
Eirik van der Meer,
Some people know what they are doing is wrong, but are also aware they will almost certainly get away with it because what they do is considered if not normal, then at least something most people just silently accept as the norm.
If you were a woman, you would have known about the playground for sexist assholes starting some time in elementary school, and extending throughout your entire life. Exceptions would stand out as anomalies.
For some, misogyny is not a consciously adopted attitude. It’s more like a habit. Still no excuse.
I notice the way they say they are not condoning his “mistakes”. Why mistakes? Why not crimes? Because that is what they are, crimes. It is against the law to have sexual contact with someone without their consent, and even if the women didn’t say no, that does not mean consent, especially when you have control over their entire future.
Mistakes, hell.
A (not-close) friend of mine is an astronomy prof at a relatively well regarded university. One of his astronomy colleagues is known as “el gropo” because of his harassment activities. They got rid of him but without exposing him, so he can go grope somewhere else. Shuffling them along is disgustingly common. I’m glad this jerk at least got some negative publicity.
Eirik van der Meer @ 6:
*sigh* Well, that didn’t take long. They know exactly what they are doing, they do it because they want to, and because they can. What might look to cluelessness to you is nothing more than arrogant privilege. Why, doesn’t anyone care how fuckin’ noble they are, letting women into the clubhouse at all? Even if they are a serious problem in the lab, a la Hunt, what with him unable to unglue his eyes from the tits, and them, always going and falling in love…with him, of course. Yes, here you have highly educated, intelligent men, who for the life of them, cannot figure out what harassment is, how to comply with harassment policies, or, gods forbid, how to have professional relationships in a professional setting. Yep, super intelligent, nobel material and all that. They just stumble over those women things, gods know, it wasn’t their idea to let them out of the fuckin’ kitchen!
And as for this:
No, it doesn’t take a special kind of asshole. Regular men, mostly regarded as non-assholes do this all the time. And yes, assholes do it too. It’s called privilege. It’s called entitlement.
One of my former students is an astronomy grad at UC Berkeley and was delighted at Marcy’s fall from grace (despite the insincere breast-beating and many expressed sympathies for Marcy). My student was also completely unsurprised by the allegations, since Marcy’s behavior was well-known within the university, but grad students have little (if any) clout and colleagues are passive collaborators who are content to look the other way until the truth comes out — at which point they declare that they are “Shocked! Shocked to find out that gambling is going on in here!”
“el gropo” because of his harassment activities. They got rid of him but without exposing him, so he can go grope somewhere else.
He’s a parish priest somewhere out of the way?
Well, shit! Being interested in exo-planet research, I’ve followed Marcy since his early days at U.C. Santa Cruz and have attended several of his talks. I have had a great respect for his professional achievements without, of course, knowing anything about his personal life. Now this. With his lame “apology”, he’s dead to me now. Cal needs to seriously consider their response to this or their reputation will suffer as well.
Larry@15: Their reputation as a defender of assault was pretty well sealed already.
The Buzzfeed story indicates that Marcy may have been shuffled from UCSF previously. The whole system is Catholic-style corrupted.
So tired of male heteros shoving their sexuality in our faces. We get it; you like pussy. Get over yourselves.
Larry @ 15:
This isn’t anything to do with Marcy’s personal life, though. This is about his professional life – that is the problem. I know you didn’t intend to provide cover for Marcy at all, in any way. Please pardon me for using your phrasing to deliver a reminder to everyone – that unthinking sexism that is at the back of all our brains thrives on unclear or inaccurate language to provide cover for, and to enable behaviour like Marcy’s.
I’m not sure if this is a helpful comment but in my own field of bioscience and genetics there is active back channelling where women warn others about serial harassing “too big to fail men.”
Well, that was a nauseating display of apologia for this creep, and Marcy’s own not-pology is a classic of the form, with every sentence dripping contempt for his victims even as he cries his crocodile tears.
One part of the OP really made the sheer depths of Marcy’s depravity clear to me:-
That misogynist arseholes like Marcy are given the time of day by anyone just goes to show how poisoned by sexism and unfettered male privilege our society truly is. This stuff isn’t complicated – the only circumstance where it is acceptable to stroke a woman’s thigh (or anyone’s thigh, or have any form of sexual contact with any other person) is when that person unambiguously invites you to do so, preferably by verbally stating their desire that you touch them in that fashion. It is hardly taxing to expect a supposedly responsible adult to adhere that this most simple and consistent of rules.
Of course, there are circumstances where even such a clear invitation would still be insufficient, such as when you hold a position of power over the career or life prospects of that person, and so cannot be sure that any consent was given freely and without perceived duress. In such a circumstance, it is even easier to know the proper way to behave; it is never acceptable to sleep with (or have any sexual contact of any kind with) persons over whom you hold power. A relationship in which there is such a clear power gradient is not a relationship between equals in any meaningful sense, and so should never be pursued. Again, this is hardly difficult stuff – it couldn’t be much easier to remember.
There really is no excuse for the actions of creeps like Marcy, nor for the poison spewed by the misogynists who rush to the defence of arseholes like him every time their abuses are dragged into the light.
Marcello S @ 17;
I think you are missing the point a bit here, Marcello S. This isn’t about heterosexuality per se, this is about sexually predatory behaviour and how it harms individuals and poisons entire fields of endeavour. While the majority of the offenders are undeniably heterosexual men, that is not to say that this is a problem only with regard to heterosexuals and men – it is not helpful or accurate to pretend that there is simply no such thing as sexually predatory gay men, or sexually predatory women. Such predatory persons are less problematic in so far as they receive less cover form our society due to not benefiting from cis/het male privilege, but that does not make the actions of such persons somehow harmless or acceptable.
Predatory behaviour is toxic irrespective of the gender or sexual orientation of the predatory individual – it would not suddenly be OK if Marcy were gay or a woman, anymore than it would suddenly be OK if Marcy were not White or was a Trans* person. Not being a member of the unfairly privileged social group should not offer a person a pass for this sort of thing.
I’m surprised that the department message is not in Angry Man quotes.
The way it completely ignores the damage done to the victims leaves me speechless.
@jupitaur #11: This is disturbingly similar to what the various churches did with their “bad apples”.
Let someone else have the problem without attracting attention and bad publicity?
Gregory, male heteros are socialized to engage in this kind of predatory behavior which is why it is such a widespread problem. It has everything to do with male heterosexuality and I’m sick of it.
I don’t know who is pretending that only male heteros sexually harass others or that sexual harassment from non male non heteros is permissible or why you addressed this remark to me.
Marcello S @ 24:
Actually, it has everything to do with male privilege and a sense of entitlement. It also has a lot to do with exerting power. I do agree with you to the point that being hetero is an aggravating factor, as the sexism we all swim in is geared toward heterosexuality in the main. That said, I felt your initial comment was seriously missing the mark, and for what it’s worth, I do not, in any way, like being referred to as “pussy”. I don’t like any woman being referred to as “pussy”. I don’t like women in general being referred to as “pussy”. Before you attempt to defend your use of that word, please, just don’t. I grew up hearing the word pussy, it was quite popular in the 1970s. It’s also a way to objectify, denigrate, and humiliate women, so just don’t use it, please.
Privilege allows men to get away with sexual harassment. Heterosexual socialization is what teaches them to do it. What point am I missing here?
The other tell: “It is difficult to express how painful it is for me to realize…” These guys’ ‘apologies’ are always, at heart, about how had it is for them, not for their victims.
Yeah, STEMbros on psychology-“that’s not science, it’s too girly you girl. Muh science is hard, rigid and unyeilding“.
It sounds like Marcello is using slightly different words than usual to describe the very same masculinity culture that we often talk about on this board, and is throwing the “pussy” term back at those who use it. I can’t imagine there was ever a time when anyone liked referred to as pussy.
Or am *I* missing something?
Male privilege and the way in which men are socialized in a heteronormative society are two different things. That should be obvious just from the terms I’ve used. And I’m not referring to anyone as pussy. I’m referring to pussy as pussy, but if you folks don’t like the word I will stop using it.
Yes, you will, or you will find yourself banned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pussy
Thanks, chigau. That will clear things up hopefully.
Marcello S
Did you read the Wikipedia article?
@Marcello S #30
They are diffeent things, but they are connected. Male privilege stems from the way men are socialised in our patriarchal society. Heterosexuality is not the cause of anything, it is only laterally connected in the sense that our patriarchal society holds it as the only acceptable sexual orientation for “true” men and that the same society tends to measure the succes of “true” men by how much sex they get.
I do not understand what you are trying go say, but it comes across as if you are simply saying that heterosexuality is the problem. It is not. The culture is the problem.
If our culture were neutral with regard to sexual orientation and gender, but present racism were still present, would you blame “whiteness” for the exploitative behaviour of priliveged white people? That is just stupid.
Your attitude makes also no sense whatsoever with regard to the solution to the problem. We can change the socialisation in our culture, and that is in fact what feminists in general are trying to achieve. What do you propose? Change the sexual orientation of heterosexual men? From what you wrote I cannot deduce anything that makes even the tinies of senses.
Marcello S @ 24;
I would argue that the way our society constructs privilege around certain forms of the performance of heterosexuality in men is problematic, but that is not the same thing as the base fact of being male and heterosexual. Socialisation is not inescapable destiny, and thus arguing that mere existence of male heterosexuality itself is the problem (as you appear to be doing) is counterproductive.
As Charly observes @ 35, changing the socialisation of heterosexual men in our culture, and the way society constructs masculine gender performance, is a reasonable and achievable goal. Changing the sexual orientation of heterosexual men, or somehow pushing male heterosexuality into some equivalent of the closet, is not. If what you are advocating is the former, then feminism is already working toward the goal of changing the toxic expressions of the socialisation of sexuality. If you aspire to the latter, then you will find few people who agree with your goals here.
Your post @ 17 seemed to be equating expressions of male heterosexuality with harassment, and thus by implication excluding harassment originating from women and LGBTQ persons. It seems I misread the context of your remarks in that instance.
Here’s an interesting detail. The astronomy department chair who sent out that e-mail talking about how hard it is for Geoff Marcy, is Gibor Basri, UC Berkeley’s Vice Chancellor for Equity and Inclusion.
Also, everyone is describing it as “sexual harassment”, which is correct. But when the actions are described, it’s “unwanted massages, kisses, and groping.” Which sounds like sexual harassment AND sexual assault.
Siggy @ 38:
It is. It’s also another case of serial sexual assault in which there will be no consequence. I’m sure Marcy won’t view this as being consequence free, but there hasn’t even been so much as a slap on the wrist here.
I’m not going to explain the joke to you nerds. You are making me strongly consider taking my talents elsewhere.
You know, Marcello S, I’ve been sexually harassed by gay men, so you can really take your “holier than thou” attitude and go home.
In other words, you communicate so badly, that nobody can understand your drivel….Bye.
Marcello S @ 40:
You have no talents, and as for your “joke”, I got it, but as I said to you upthread, it seriously missed the mark. It was not applicable to this situation, and there’s also the matter of sexual harassment and sexual assault being serious subjects, not good fodder for shitty jokes. So please, take your lack of talents where it will be appreciated.
Assuming this Marcy guy is hetero, I’d say it is 100% applicable, but like I said I’m not going to explain an obvious joke. You people are bores.
Marcello S @ 40:
I fail to see any fit subject for humour in this situation. Women were sexually harassed and assaulted by Marcy, and women as a group are suffering similar harassment at the hands of other entitled misogynists every day. It is one of the great social scourges of the age, but it is hardly funny.
Given the fact that there are several regulars at Pharyngula who are rape survivors and/or have suffered various forms of sexual harassment, perhaps it would be for the best if you took your ‘talents’ elsewhere. Their trauma and suffering is not a joke, and doesn’t exist as source material for your questionable sense of ‘humour’.
Even if that were true, there are worse things to be. Like being the kind of person who thinks their personal amusement is more important than the dignity of those subjected to sexual harassment, for instance. Perhaps you should reconsider your priorities in life?
Marcello S
Bless your heart and have a nice day.
What joke? If you joke falls flat, YOU are the problem, not the audience. Keep your day job.
Marcello S, your talents are undoubtedly many, as they always are by people who waste no time in proclaiming how much more talented they are than everybody else around. I have no doubt that if you take them to a more appreciative audience, they will profit from your mind boggling insights and rib cracking jokes to no end. Please do not hesitate not to waste these magnificent gifts ouf yours on pharyngula commenters, it is more than clear that you are better than this and we are an unappreciative audience of intelectual midgets with no sense of humor and incapable of understanding the finer points of your superb reasoning and expertly delivered jokes.
/sarcasm
If you actually provided some clarifications and/or appologized for needlesly offending people, most here would understand that. But your childish and petulant stomping of feet and balling of fistst is just laughable.
Oops, I assumed good will from someone who turned out to be an asshat. Sorry everyone!
smh
Okay, this is me with the dangerous channeling of the hive-mind, but here goes:
I agree with all the criticisms of Marcy’s (not/a)oology. I also think Davidgeelan said something particularly wonderful right here:
However, I’m going to use that to say something a little different: I find Marcy’s not-pology painfully disappointing, but not nearly as abhorrent as the department head’s call for everyone to hold a Marcy-Love-In.
Why?
Because assuming (arguendo – let’s not be too quick to dismiss the power of priors in our analysis) that this period WAS actually difficult for Marcy, that’s a good thing. It **is** fucking difficult for someone to actually admit that they’ve hurt people, and it’s even more difficult to change a long-standing pattern of behavior.
That doesn’t require one selfishly redirect attention to themselves, but in this case part of the problem is that the behavior was highly selfish and attention-seeking in the first place (sexual attention is still attention, even if it does happen one-on-one and not in the same very public manner as internet attention).
Therefore, if someone actually has engaged in selfish behavior that hurt other people, what we should see as a first response is not a generous understanding of the harms one has caused and a cogent analysis of the full range of harmful behaviors and how they’re totes not okay and so going to stop now. That should make us suspicious not merely of selfish, callous, harassing behavior, but of thorough-going, premeditated evil. One doesn’t learn all that quickly, and if one has all that analysis at the ready when caught and called out, it means one very likely had that analysis at the ready **before** getting caught…and chose to ignore it.
No, this shows exactly the hallmarks of a selfish person moving marginally away from past hurtful behavior.
I am not in any way saying that one shouldn’t feel disappointed with the (not/a)pology, and I’m not saying that it’s really a much better apology that it actually is (it’s not). I’m just saying that humans being humans, the kind of jerks who engage in most of this behavior in the first place simply aren’t able to write an apology that centers victims and shows none of their past selfish tendencies.
Nerd:
This:
was a play on “So tired of male homos* shoving their sexuality in our faces. We get it; you like dick.** Get over yourselves. Or so I assume. Not much of a joke.
*may substitute gay agenda
**may substitute cock
I work in UC Berkeley’s astronomy department. On Friday, during my lab’s lunch, the professor I work for announced this to us. I was not at all surprised by Geoff being the one found guilty. What’s even worse is that the Title IX office concluded their investigation three months ago and just sat on it without telling anyone. I wasn’t aware of the full extent of Geoff’s behavior (I knew of women that were creeped out by him), and lots of people are furious about how both the university and the astronomy department handled this. The whole situation is just fucked, and it’s really shameful that no substantial punishment is being handed out for this.
Geoff’s wife said some awful things: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/science/astronomer-apologizes-for-behavior.html
There’s been no regard for the victims from the department or the university. The way this has been handled is a total shitshow.
Caine, you’re right, it wasn’t much of a joke which is why i didn’t expect it to inspire Gregory’s walls of text and I still don’t get what is so offensive about the joke (though i get what you meant about the word ‘pussy’).
Chigau, your confusing responses, however, were not a surprise since that seems to be your thing.
Rachel @ 53:
Lovely, that. Of course it’s the fault of all those women who just fell onto poor Geoff, and of course they are hysterical! Internalized sexism is so nasty.
Siggy @ 37
There was a meeting earlier this summer presenting the results of a department-wide survey of the sexual climate within the astronomy department. Gibor was the one to present those results. You’d expect him to know better.
You know, I’ll never understand these women. Their husbands rape, their husbands harass, even if all had been consensula they’d still have been cheating on them and they act like everybody else is the guilty party.
I remember one time when my husband told me about something at work which he found funny and I really didn’t with respect to a female colleague. I told him that if she reported him for harassment she’D be totally right ’cause this is not OK. Fortunately she didn’t. But he apologized.
Marcello S @ 54:
It’s not offensive, it’s just off point. Gregory took it at face value, because threads which deal with sexual harassment and sexual assault are taken very seriously here, and obviously, Gregory wasn’t thinking in terms of a meme. I do see how that could have easily thrown you off, though.
Giliell @ 57:
It’s a depressingly common reaction – husband / boyfriend cheats (or much worse, like sexually assault or rape), and it’s the other woman’s fault. I’ve seen and heard that sentiment too often.
Caine
Yep. Because the poor guys just can’t control themselves. Always a woman’S job…
I’m confusing??‽?
Well, shit…
I thought I was clear™.
Giliell @ 60:
Fuck yeah. This is another aspect of sexism that is pervasive and pernicious. “What’s wrong with you, can’t keep your man home?” “What’s he not getting at home?” Then there’s the aspect that brands all women as potential home wreckers, brazen hussies, sluts, and on it goes. Everyone has this notion in the back of their head that women are inherently untrustworthy, that’s one the primary pillars of misogyny.
Caine @ 58;
This is exactly what happened. I may have been overly literal in my reading, and I don’t see much room for humour with regard to these issues. Perhaps I am being unduly dour, and if so I apologise.
@ 62;
And at the same time also casts women as the only people with any responsibility to moderate behaviour, both their own and that of men, because in the world according to misogynist nitwits men can’t be held accountable for their actions, since we are basically just mobile life support systems for autonomous penises. Where our little chaps lead, we follow – apparently utterly helpless to reign in impulses or demonstrate any self control whatsoever.
It is things like this that demonstrate that misogynists are invariably also misandrists to a far higher degree than any feminist has ever been.
Gregory Greenwood
The amazing thing about this is that it’s usually combined with a firm belief that men are also rational, super brilliant in science and overall much better suited to leadership positions than women.
No contradiction at all…
#61 – Chigau, clear with a trademark? Have you gone Scientologist?
Derek Vandivere @ 65:
It’s a Horde™ thing.
Giliell, professional cynic -Ilk- @ 64;
You would think it would lead to cognitive dissonance of brain-melting proportions, and yet the misogynist dude-bros seem to have no difficulty whatsoever believing both mutually exclusive narratives at the same time.
Gregory Greenwood @ #67:
The resilience of the brains of misogynists to normally brain-melting levels of cognitive dissonance are consistently surprising. You think they’ve finally reached the melting point, and yet somehow they carry on way past it. I must be weak, because just trying to imagine that level of cognitive dissonance gives me a massive headache…
Cross posted with the “rabbit hole” thread.
Marcy has resigned from UC Berkeley. Hopefully, no other universities will line up to employee him. Babysitting astronomical equipment by himself on mountain tops seems like a good place for his “talents”.