Day 2

Today, an Essay

PICS OR IT DIDN’T HAPPEN

There are some funny, illogical, things going on in the world today. Did I say funny? Oops, I meant to say pathetic. Pathetic and ugly, even. Let’s look at one of the things that crops up periodically in the world that is pleased to call itself “skeptics”.

Many prominent “skeptics” in the past few years have been outed as sexual predators, behaving inappropriately with students, colleagues, or conference attendees…anywhere young women turn up in their sphere. Whisper networks warned many women speakers at such conferences as The Amazing Meeting or other skeptical conferences about some of the leading lights of the skeptical world. Many conference organizers were aware of these whisper networks, but chose to keep it quiet because these men were such big draws.

Now the secrets are out, and how has the skeptical world responded? Pretty much as the rest of the world responds to news of women being harassed. Prove it. Prove it again. Prove it one more time. Pics or it didn’t happen. Right. Because men take videos of themselves sleazing all over young women, or because all young women come with built in body cameras to register the unwanted attentions of men who don’t recognize limits. What? They don’t have body cameras? That must mean they wanted it, because if they didn’t, why wouldn’t they want to establish proof that the male world was as sleazy and dangerous as they claim on #MeToo?

This is not the only interesting aspect of this story, however. If you pay any attention to the bloggers and journalists within the skeptic’s world, you might notice that there is another group of people that are coming forward with claims of abuse. Many young men have come forward about the abuse they suffered at the hands of priests. The response of the skeptical world? Elevate the claim, boost the signal, make sure everyone hears about it, believe the victim. Not one of the “skeptics” that have been telling women abused by other “skeptics” is telling these young men “pics or it didn’t happen”. Which is good, because that is a truly awful thing to say to someone who has been brave enough to step forward and identify a popular, charismatic individual as a sexual predator.

It is, of course, appropriate to have evidence before you run out and start locking people up for sexual misbehavior (or any other crime). The problem is, there is no amount of evidence that will convince many of these people that the men they respect, admire, and like could possibly behave this way. The skeptical movement is behaving much like the religious groups who find their priest, minister, rabbi, or imam accused of a sexual crime. They are circling the wagons, blaming the victim, calling the accusers liars, and attempting to smear the people who stand up and move forward to say “enough is enough”. They are not asking for evidence, because no amount of evidence ever convinces them. They are asking the women to sit down and shut up – or, to use internetese, STFU.

There are several things to unpack when you think about this double standard. Part of it is, of course, the difference in attitude when the accused is someone else, especially someone you already feel little respect for, and when it is one of your own. Part of it could be something else, as well. I have noticed for some time that I rarely hear of the women and girls that are abused by men of God, even though there are many that have been in that situation, and have reported their abuse. In the movie Spotlight, detailing the telling of the story of priestly abuse, there is one moment where a woman’s name is mentioned as a survivor, and the news team expresses surprise at the presence of a female on the list. The individual they are interviewing informs them that, yes, women are among the abused. That is the very last you hear of women in this particular film, or the story they ultimately printed, other than a small glimpse at the very end of two young girls who are playing in a room waiting while their mother files a report on their abuse. Women disappear from the picture.

I have asked myself for a long time what the reason is for the disparate treatment. Of course, I’ve already mentioned the obvious, us vs. them answer. But that doesn’t explain the disappearance of women from the church scandal story. I came up with several possible hypotheses.

First, it is possible that we simply value females less than we do males. Next, I considered the possibility that we might feel the impact is different for the two sexes. People might think it is more traumatic for the males, since some people have suggested to me that sexual abuse or harassment is a validation of a woman’s womanhood, while for a young male, it is stripping his manhood from him. Third, there is the possibility that we simply believe males more than we do females. There is also the possibility that it is seen as more unusual, and that sexual harassment and abuse is such a normal part of the lives of females that it is hardly news. Finally, it occurred to me that many people might find the predation of adult males on juvenile males more titillating, which would sell more papers, generate more clicks, and earn more revenue.

There have been no studies that I am aware of to sort out the reasons behind the disparate interest in abuse of females and abuse of males, so I am left with my hypotheses sort of dangling in the air. I cannot say with any certainty which one, if any, is correct. My final conclusion is a sad one. I suspect that it is a combination of all of the above. This is the culture into which we are born and raised, male and female, and we come to regard it as normal. If it is normal, then I think we should all strive to become a bit more abnormal.