Michael Shermer accused of raping woman at conference

[the_antithesis]

Ooh, I hates that Frank Farmer.

[Poison Tree]

this seems a little schetchy.

At a conference, Mr. Shermer coerced me into a position where I could not consent, and then had sex with me

While I was waiting to fall asleep last night I kept trying to figure out what that phrase means. "could not consent"; In what situations would a person be unable to consent? The only two I can think of is that they were underage (but, obviously, Shermer couldn't coerce someone to be underage) or the person was drunk/high. But maybe "could not consent" is was not actually the intended phrase, at least not in the legal sense. Being "coerced into a position where I could not refuse" would seem a more natural description, but is distinctly not what was written.

I'm weary over the distinction between the person making the accusation being "vouched for by one other person" Myers trusts and the person's story being vouched for.

[GSOgymrat]

If a colleague came to me and said she was sexually assaulted by another colleague I would encourage her to go to the authorities, go to management or support her to speak out on her own. I would not get on my blog and say "hey, I can't tell you who told me this, but..." This is just gossip parading as public service.

[surly74]

https://twitter.com/surly74/status/365866611527254017

[Shiranu]

I am glad I have no idea who either of these people are. I am all for an atheist... movement (insofar as seeing rationalism become something to be proud of), but so many of these modern atheists just seem to be ultra-drama queens.

[the_antithesis]

I am glad I have no idea who either of these people are. I am all for an atheist... movement (insofar as seeing rationalism become something to be proud of), but so many of these modern atheists just seem to be ultra-drama queens.

Wouldn't surprise me if this was entirely fabricated by Myers himself for the attention and maybe to make himself a bigger dog in the skeptics' race or something. like I said, it's just not classy to post gossip. PZ Myers has become  PereZ Hilton.

[surly74]

I think Myers banned me from his twitter. he asks me a question then doesn't give me a chance to respond. If you read the conversation I wasn't argumentative towards him.

just typical of what he does. dissenting rational opinions aren't welcome.

[hillbillyatheist]

He accuses you of defending a rapist, and cries about the victim. The problem is he's assuming guilt.

We don't know if Shermer is guilty or not. All we have is a he said/she said thing; but if you stand for our system of innocence until guilt is proven you're part of our "rape culture" to idiots like PZ.

He's a person who gives credence to the term "feminazi" (not to be confused with good feminists fighting for legit causes who get slurred with that term from fucks like Rush Limbaugh)

[Nonsensei]

I think Myers banned me from his twitter. he asks me a question then doesn't give me a chance to respond. If you read the conversation I wasn't argumentative towards him.

just typical of what he does. dissenting rational opinions aren't welcome.

Its very typical. PZ is engages in full blown sculpting of public discourse. He commonly bans people from his forums/twitter and then pelts them with questions after they cannot respond. You are far from the first person to be treated this way. This sort of intellectual cowardice invalidates everything he says.

The only people he permits to speak freely on his webspaces are those who unquestioningly support him.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Myers is just another Atheism+ loon who acts like atheism is a religion.

As others have said, he endorses free speech just so long as it agrees with him and the invented ideology he's endorsed of atheism+. He's no longer an interesting person to listen to any subject, even evolutionary biology and science per se, because his hypocritical and contradictory rants have rendered his character completely untrustworthy. And that's an aside from the fact that, again, as others have rightly pointed out, his blog is a haven for extremists in the PC/ultra left brigade who chastise and condemn those who even give the slightest hint of disagreement.

I mean, check this shit out: http://www.theblockbot.com/

"Don't be sexist, don't be a dick". Anyone remember that from atheism+? Fucking. Morons.

Fuck him.

As HBA says, we don't know all the facts, but he is presuming guilt and acting as though there's been a great injustice. Maybe there has. But equally, mabe there hasn't.

So much for skeptical thinking. Just the buzz words of 'woman raped by famous guy!' Is enough for PZ to get all hyped up for a publicity stunt.

And for anyone under any illusion as to the character of PZ:

http://sguforums.com/index.php?topic=33873.0

[Colanth]

The "could not consent" (or refuse) claim doesn't ring true.  He could have drugged her, but coercion?  Neither does the fact that she contacted "one organization that was involved in the event", but not the police.  I'm not saying that she wasn't raped, this SHOULD have been investigated.  But if it's, as it seems to be, past the statute of limitations, very few police departments would investigate now.  Even if they prove, beyond any doubt, that it was rape, they can't do anything about it, so it's a waste of resources from a police viewpoint.

I did a little research and found that false accusations of rape are rarer than I thought.  I had heard before that 85% of supposed rape victims later dropped the charges or recanted.  But, the FBI seems to say otherwise:

The FBI also recently found that 100% of their shootings were justified, so I don't have 100% confidence in their findings.  I DO know that VERY few rapes and sexual assaults are even reported, but that has nothing to do with the percentage of false claims.  (And recanting isn't always due to the fact that the original charge was bogus.).

[Nonsensei]

The "could not consent" (or refuse) claim doesn't ring true.  He could have drugged her, but coercion?  Neither does the fact that she contacted "one organization that was involved in the event", but not the police.  I'm not saying that she wasn't raped, this SHOULD have been investigated.  But if it's, as it seems to be, past the statute of limitations, very few police departments would investigate now.  Even if they prove, beyond any doubt, that it was rape, they can't do anything about it, so it's a waste of resources from a police viewpoint.

Except it really isn't. It would be worth law enforcement's time to investigate this rape as a preface to investigating whether or not this alleged rapist has raped other women more recently.

You know, if this actually happened.

Which based on what we have been given so far, I doubt strongly.

Im sure PZ is smart enough to figure out that even reports of rapes beyond the statute of limitations can be useful to law enforcement. The fact that he decided not to report it and instead used it as a piece in his blog or whatever tells me that this is crap.

[hillbillyatheist]

Two other things.

if somebody commits a crime against you and you don't bother to report it for years, and thus its too late to prove it, tough shit. shoulda thought about that back when the trail was hot and proof still existed. trying to blame the stupid choice not to go to police on rape culture and that the accusation shouldn't be questioned because of rape culture is just insane. Its this shit that makes me cringe at the term feminist. people wonder why that term has such baggage. This is your answer.


secondly unless shermer forced the drinks down her throat, or snuck roofies in her drink or tried to fuck her when she was stone cold drunk and out of it, its not rape in my book


(in case anybody didn't catch it the accusation is that shermer "got some chick drunk" and fucked her.)

If you on your own accord drink alcohol and get tipsy and then make choices you later regret like consenting to fucking somebody, then I think personal responsibility is in order.

please note I'm NOT suggesting its okay to fuck some passed out drunk chick who can't consent. or even so much as touch a woman who does not explicitly say that its okay.

But if they do say to you, yes its okay, then later regret the choice, in my book thats on her. She can regret her choice to have sex or whatever but it ain't rape.

Now all that said, all of my points are still moot because of current laws saying it is a rape. Even if she's just tipsy and later regrets giving consent she can claim it was a rape. (at least if I understand the laws right) Thus, I do not recommend sleeping with any woman or even touching any woman who has so much as has one drink. It simply isn't worth the risk. if she later regrets letting you touch/sleep with her and decides to call it a rape, you're in deep shit.

[LikelyToBreak]

When the book Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus first came out I read it.  One of the things I remember from it, is that women like exciting men, especially when they are on vacation.  Aren't conferences sort of like vacations.  Anyway, I can suppose of a situation, like hillbillyatheist suggests, where a someone gets tipsy and does something they later regret.  And then decide in their head things happened differently then they did.

That being said, this is a very serious charge, which can't be overlooked.  Regardless of how we feel about the parties involved.  We can't un-ring the bell.  Either PZ Meyers was lied to, or he made a lie up, or Michael Shermer is a rapist.  I don't have enough information yet for me to decide.  I try to get as much information as I can before making a decision.  I have not decided which of the a fore mentioned possibilities is the most likely to be true.  

I think saying, "I don't know."  is okay.  We have only heard from one party some serious accusations without having heard from the other side.   We have also not been able to cross-examine the accuser or possible perpetrator either.  

Frankly, I am a little ashamed of you that have made up your mind on this with the scanty evidence we have.  Freethinkers, should be open to all sides of an argument, rather you like one side or not.  Yes, I recognize we have to make decisions without having adequate information all the time, but we can at least try to get it and to be objective as we can when we do.  We owe it to ourselves, to do so.

Personally, I think this is a case of someone doing something which she later regretted, but I won't rule out other possibilities, just because I like Michael Shermer more than PZ Meyers.

[hillbillyatheist]

LikelyToBreak , Not sure who you're directing your "I'm ashamed of you" at but in my mind I always try to presume innocence, till guilt is proven.

unless proof can be offered than shermer is innocent. the end.
proof no longer exists? too bad. she should have reported it when it happened if it did. The only other option would be to just take her word for it and thats a very scary thought indeed. We no longer would have one of the things we count on in our free society. That we're innocent till proven guilty.