This incident has historical context (a detailed summary is here, on SUIRAUQA's blog). It started when prominent Skepchick Rebecca Watson, a friend of Roth's, posted a video where she mentioned in passing an incident at an atheist conference in Dublin, Ireland. She described how a conference attendee got into an elevator with her alone at 4 AM, and rather heavy-handedly asked her to come back to his room with him. In this video, Watson tells the story (without naming names) in a lighthearted way, and ends by saying "Guys don't do that — it makes me uncomfortable." She attributed this discomfort to "being sexualized," as well as feeling vulnerable because she was alone in an elevator at 4 AM with a strange man who was hitting on her. She did not at any point call this man's behavior "sexual harassment."

Advertisement

Later, prominent atheist and pop science author Richard Dawkins wrote a comment in response to Watson's video on evolutionary biologist PZ Myers' blog. Dawkins decided to satirize Watson's stance by pretending he was Watson writing a letter to abused women in the Middle East and Africa:

Stop whining will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and...yawn...don't tell me again, I know you aren't allowed to drive a car, and can't leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you'll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.

Advertisement

The message was clear: Dawkins believed Watson's concerns were stupid. With such a prominent skeptic denigrating Watson's point of view, it's not surprising that many in the atheist community took up (virtual) arms against her and the other Skepchicks. It was as if they had received a blessing from the Atheist-in-Chief. And so the online trolling about "elevatorgate" blew up bigger than ever.

Watson spoke up publicly in her own defense, remarking in USA Today that she no longer felt safe in the atheist community. That's when TAM organizer D.J. Grothe noticed that the number of women signing up to come to TAM had dropped from its previous high of 40% in 2011 to 18% for 2012 (when I spoke to Grothe, he noted that the 2012 con wound up being about 31% female in the end). On Facebook, he speculated the drop in female attendance "may be due to the messaging that some women receive from various quarters that going to TAM or other similar conferences means they will be accosted or harassed." He added:

I think this misinformation results from irresponsible messaging coming from a small number of prominent and well-meaning women skeptics who, in trying to help correct real problems of sexism in skepticism, actually and rather clumsily themselves help create a climate where women - who otherwise wouldn't - end up feeling unwelcome and unsafe, and I find that unfortunate.

Advertisement

Shortly thereafter, Watson announced she wouldn't be attending TAM because of this "blame the victim" rhetoric. Other Skepchicks followed suit.

Advertisement

Amy Roth was one of the only people from the Skepchick group at TAM this year.

Official response:

Though TAM had a sexual harassment policy in 2011, in 2012 it did not and Grothe does not think it will in the future. To deal with harassment at the 2012 con, the TAM organizers hired a professional consultant who deals with what Grothe characterized as "boundary issues" and "security concerns" in corporations. Nobody at the con was notified that this consultant was available, though his presence was alluded to on the TAM site FAQ like so:

How does JREF handle safety concerns?

The Amazing Meeting, while a private event, is held at the South Point Hotel Casino and Spa, which is open to the public. The safety of our attendees and speakers is a priority. If an attendee encounters a problem within the conference area, they should report the situation to TAM staff or hotel security. JREF has also engaged an independent consultant on these issues, with decades of experience handling security, boundary and safety concerns, to assist us in dealing with any matters should they arise at the event.

Advertisement

Analysis:

In the past, Grothe has worked closely with feminists to make TAM welcoming to women, and Watson has spoken at the con, but in 2012 the con became yet another melee in the war between the skeptics. Though some would cast this as a war between sexism and feminism, it isn't that simple. There are women and feminists on both sides of the debate. The divide is between people who believe feminism is integral to skepticism (Watson) and those who think it's irrelevant (Dawkins).

Advertisement

As for Grothe, he sees the issue as a matter of priorities. He believes the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF), the nonprofit that runs TAM, should focus exclusively on its mission, which is debunking pseudoscience and promoting skeptical responses to the paranormal. Both Grothe and JREF's founder James Randi are gay, and Grothe talked about how it wouldn't be appropriate to lobby for gay rights when he's speaking as a JREF representative. Feminism, like gay rights, is simply not part of JREF's mission — at least, for Grothe and many Dawkins-style skeptics.

One of the main differences between the Readercon and TAM communities is the public positions their most famous members have taken. In the science fiction community, prominent authors have spoken out against sexism and harassment. In the atheism community, prominent thinkers like Dawkins have effectively spoken out in favor of belittling people who believe there is sexism among skeptics. Certainly there are counter-examples. Some in the TAM community, like PZ Myers, have become outspoken Watson supporters. But when the world's most famous atheist takes a position against something, it inevitably influences how the community responds. If Dawkins had never taken a public stance against Watson, it's likely that "elevatorgate" would have unfolded a lot differently. The skeptics community would still be full of fierce debates over feminism — but perhaps neither side would feel shamed, silenced, or bullied.

Advertisement

The Result:

Many atheist meetings (though not TAM) have created anti-harassment policies. TAM 2013 will continue to retain its outside consultant to deal with boundary issues, and Grothe promises that if any harassment (sexual or otherwise) occurs it can be reported to him or the consultant. They will investigate and, if necessary, ban harassers from TAM or take other action. The Skepchicks, including Amy Roth, as of this writing have no plans to attend TAM again.

Advertisement

DefCon: Sexist and Anti-Sexist Pranks

The Incident:

In 2011, security staff at DefCon designed a humorous "scorecard" game that required conference-goers to, among other things, get women to "show their tits" to staff in order to win. One woman attendee, KC, characterized it like this:

[A man] tried to get me to show him my tits so he could punch a hole in a card that, when filled, would net him a favor from one of the official security staff (I do not have words for how slimy it is that the official security staff were in charge of what was essentially a competition to get women to show their boobs).

Advertisement

KC vowed to change things this year, so she invented her own humorous game, based on rugby penalty cards.

She called them "consent cards," to emphasize that they were about flagging non-consensual behavior. Red cards were for a "creeper move" that was harassing or "wildly inappropriate;" yellow were for a "creeper move" that was "mildly inappropriate." Green cards, which KC didn't think were entirely necessary, were a "thank you" for not being creepy. (When I asked why they weren't necessary, she shrugged: "Not being an asshole should be its own reward.")

Advertisement

The idea, KC explained to me over tea at a San Francisco cafe, was that people could hand the cards out in any situation they felt was appropriate. Basically, it would be an easy way to tell somebody — in public, with lots of people watching — that their behavior was crossing the line. "The strength of the cards is that they're not very confrontational," she said. "You can end the conversation by handing the card out and calmly walking away." She made thousands of the cards, and she and her friends gave them away to anyone who wanted to use them. For the most part, she said, the experiment worked. A lot of women thanked her, but a lot of men did too. The worst complaints she got, she said, were from the security staff. Some of them proudly displayed the cards they'd been given on their name tags. "That's fine — let them make themselves visible," KC said. "That way we know who to avoid."

Advertisement

One DefCon attendee, Schuyler Erle, said on Twitter that using the cards got him punched:

Advertisement

That was the only violence reported. KC said most people were thrilled to have the cards. The most common negative response she got was, "If you don't like DefCon, why don't you just stop coming?"

Official response:

When DefCon organizer Jeff Moss heard that KC was planning to make the consent cards, he offered to pay for them. But the money wasn't needed. KC had raised so much money through crowdfunding for the cards online that she was able to make many thousands more of the cards than she'd been planning to make.

Advertisement

Analysis:

As the Ada Initiative's Valerie Aurora noted in an eloquent post on the topic, DefCon is a place where people go to network for jobs. Telling a woman not to come is like telling her to miss out on job opportunities. It was precisely for this reason that KC wanted to make the consent cards in the first place. She wanted to network without being asked to show her tits.

Advertisement

In this way, Defcon resembles Readercon more than it resembles TAM. Both Defcon and Readercon are explicitly about networking and making business connections, while also having fun. TAM is about socializing with a community, but it isn't a community that is based around an industry like computer security or publishing. For women who want to work in computer security, not going to Defcon isn't really an option. It's one of the best places for hackers to meet potential employers, from Twitter to the NSA (yes, both were recruiting at DefCon in 2012).

Advertisement

Photo by vissago

KC's way of coping with sexism at DefCon worked for a couple of reasons. One, she knew the community well and realized that turning anti-sexism into a game would be an effective way to communicate. And two, the cards translated well into media stories about sexism at DefCon, which also helped raise people's awareness about the issue. Because she used these aggressive, satirical cards, KC did not come across as a victim. She came across as smart and funny, willing to respond to the security staff's 2011 game with a game of her own. It was a good example of a social hack — something that hackers could appreciate and maybe even learn from.

Advertisement

The Result:

KC isn't sure whether she'll do the cards next year or not, but she said she has hundreds of them left and will definitely use them for something. My hope is that she can get them integrated into the famously awesome DefCon convention badges somehow. The Ada Initiative, a nonprofit devoted to furthering the participation of women in computing, is trying to work with conventions like DefCon to implement sexual harassment policies.

Advertisement

With conferences like these, every year offers a chance to reinvent community. Events that fail one year can lead to great successes in the next — and vice versa. What ultimately unites the geek communities of Readercon, TAM, and Defcon is that they aren't changing purely because women are attending them in record numbers. They are also changing because the men attending them have different priorities and values than they did even a few years ago. Women and men are changing these geek spaces together. No gender is doing it alone.