Richard Dawkins and male privilege

Richard Dawkins and male privilege(blogs.discovermagazine.com)

9 points by alphadog 14 years ago | 2 comments

maqr 14 years ago |

Dawkins says: "No, I obviously don't get it. I will gladly apologise if somebody will calmly and politely, without using the word fuck in every sentence, explain to me what it is that I am not getting."

Phil Plait, the author of this article, failed to articulate an explanatory response to Dawkins.

I don't get it either and this article isn't helping me understand why Dawkins is wrong.

ldh 14 years ago | |

I pretty much agree. I'm not blind to the fear that some women have in situations like this, and I don't doubt that the guy's behavior came off as creepy. And I think Richard Dawkins came off like a jerk and needs to soften his position slightly even if he is trying to make a point.

On the other hand, I think that there's been an overreaction here. Plait says:

"Oh my. I have tried and tried to see some other way to interpret this, but it looks to me that he really is comparing a potential sexual assault to someone chewing gum."

Here he makes a similar leap to the one he perceives Dawkins making, IMO. Comparing what seems to amount to just a creepy but harmless come-on to a "potential sexual assault" is a bit much. There was no sexual assault. I understand it was a scary situation for her, but is it valid to simply imagine a scary scenario, stick the word "potential" in front of it, and demonize the man for it while we lash out at anyone questioning the claim?