Richard Dawkins: How The Mighty Have Fallen

[EmilyinEverton]

Once revered public intellectual & free speech 'champion' Richard Dawkins appears to have a hand in cancelling feminists whose speech threatens to expose male sexual misconduct.

Dawkins comments on rape made his attitude towards women clear years ago.

Agreed. But assisting in silencing & intimidation of women is whole other level of abuse.

Agreed. Watson has spoken about this a lot in the past and we've had several threads on FWR. Dawkins is like many other left leaning misogynistic pricks who think women are public property and are affronted by being told they are sex pests when they assume they are gods gift and every woman should be gagging for them. (they Irony of him being such an out there atheist).

I had no idea and had actually thought Richard Dawkins was an ok bloke as a fellow atheist.

Yeah, while I never agreed with him on all his views I never expected this level of appalling anti women behaviour or that his marriage that he spoke so fondly of was so 'open' if indeed his wife new of his affairs.

What's also so galling is his exploitation as an ally of the gender critical movement as a fig leaf for his misogyny.

It often feels like there is no rock bottom with men. Even the few you think are ok turn out to be the very same arse wipes as the rest, just better disguised.

Well said. A trust deficit towards men is the unfortunate consequence of 'mild mannered' wolves in sheep's clothing like RD. Men like him really have a lot to answer for as to why relationships between men & women in general are so strained.

What were his views on rape?

I have actually just been off googling his views on rape as I knew nothing about this.
From what I can see, back in 2014 when writing on twitter about this issue he phrased things very badly but actually seemed to mean rape is always awful but rape with overt threat of violence (ie at knife point) is even worse.
I am surprised that a writer couldn’t have used his words more sensitively and clearly but not with the actual opinion.
He was then shouted down by those who felt no such distinction should be made and left twitter in umbrage.
Have I missed something?

That Norman Finkelstein stood up for what is right, once again.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JewsOfConscience/comments/1qto30i/dr_norman_finkelstein_who_has_long_been_embattled

My crush on him just got more intense.

Ok, I’ll have a look too. When I can face it. I assumed he was saying that rape is natural or something.

Here's a really informative article about RD's views on rape.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-atheist-movement-needs-to-disown-richard-dawkins-999/

He's certainly consistent on being on the right side of history.

This is an old one and I could only find it on again on Daily Motion.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2yv9vu

I see what you are saying, but my gut response is that you describe several crimes, rape and violence and threats. If the rape with a knife is ‘worse’, that may infer that rape after drugging the victim is better.
A rape with violence from a stranger leaves a terrible impact on the woman.
Rape in your own home, your safe place, by a loved one, leaves a terrible impact.
Raped without your knowledge, while drugged leaves a terrible impact. Women raped by people they know and trust in their home are left with no safe place, no safe people.

It makes me angry when people say some rapes are worse than others. Some rapes are accompanied by other terrible crimes. The rapes are terrible regardless of the additional crimes alongside them.

I’m not interested in what Rebecca Watson has to say. She’s a major critic of JK Rowling and clearly has a chip on her shoulder.

I also don’t think it was wise of Dawkins to use rape as an example but he never said anything that isn’t represented in courts. If you rape someone at knife point you get a longer sentence than if you don’t use a knife. Both are bad awful crimes.

Shooting the messenger much?

RW's views can either be confirmed or not. That you aren't even willing to entertain facts lest they came from someone that didn't hero worship JKR points to cultism.

I’ve also noticed that quite a few people who were free-thinking enough to read Spiked or the Daily Mail a few years ago now refuse to even read someone who’s disagreed with JKR, or is only published by The Guardian.

Feminism needs to be heterodox or women get caught in the Left = public property Right = private property divide. Standing up for your rights as a woman needs intellectual engagement over tribalism, because the tribal bastards are always looking for ways to get women on side long enough to grab power and put us back in our place!

I think women who are victims will often create a hierarchy, "it was bad what happened to me but at least..." That's completely different to people external creating their own hierarchy of bad and less bad. Especially when it's based on no real evidence/nothing scientific but presented as if it's being rational and objective. Eg the men saying that Giselle Pelicots assaults weren't that bad because she was asleep. It's a complete refusal to engage with what makes those crimes so awful dressed up as objectivity

Men like Hawkins can be particularly bad for this because they fall into the hubristic fallacy that because they consider themselves objective and rational people, everything they believe is objective and rational or they wouldn't believe it.

Arrogant man.

He is an Evolutionary Biologist and much of what he writes has been coloured by what he sees as speaking the truth. He lost a great deal when he said there were only 2 sexes.
None of which makes him a nice person or a feminist.

There are only two sexes.