Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Rebecca Watson---and Why We Still Have a Long Road Ahead

In the last week or so, there has been many articles and blog posts circulating the web in regards to the incident that occurred between the feminist, Rebecca Watson, and the infamous "man on the elevator." My original post regarding this incident can be found here.

I have spent some time reading views that support Rebecca, and those that do not, which is the subject of this post. I agree that the behavior of the "man on the elevator" was inappropriate, but the reaction to this incident by one of the so-called "enlightened" men of this age was also rather disappointing. It saddened me to read how Richard Dawkins trivialized the experience of Rebecca Watson in a rather sarcastic comment he made on PZ Myers' blog:

"Dear Muslima
Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and … yawn … don't tell me yet again, I know you aren't allowed to drive a car, and you 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.
Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep"chick", and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn't lay a finger on her, but even so …
And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.
Richard"

Although I find Professor Dawkins remark disheartening, I understand why he made it. Notice how Professor Dawkins highlights the "chick" part of "Skepchick." This was the subject of my previous post, and in a response to the comments against his comment, Professor Dawkins claimed  that all the man in the elevator did was that:

"He spoke some words to her. Just words. She no doubt replied with words. That was that. Words. Only words, and apparently quite polite words at that."

What he implies by the above statement is that words don't really matter--which is silly.  Words DO matter.  As Foucault would say, "Everything is political."  This is illustrated when claiming that "All MEN are created equal"--when in the times of slavery, this only applied to white property owners, which meant that they had an image of a white man who owned property--excluding women, children, African slaves, and everyone else as being part of humanity.   Even today, when a boss uses the phrase, "I am going to hire the best man for the job," he already has a bias, as he has an image in his mind as to what kind of "man" he is going to hire.   

Words DO matter, and Professor Dawkins seems to contradict himself when he highlights the word "chick" (as if the word mattered) and then says what the man in the elevator said was "just words." (i.e., they DON'T matter)  Regardless, a woman who labels herself as a "chick" (it makes no difference how she views it) is going to be viewed and treated as a "chick" (i.e. brainless and fluffy) by men in elevators, and men such as Professor Dawkins. This is how the matrix works, and how it works against women.

Men such as Dawkins, and Mr. Hitchens are said to be more "enlightened" than most, which is why so many were taken aback by his remarks--but I have my doubts as to how "enlightened" they really are. They may claim to support the rights of women, and may stand up for the rights of women--but the insidiousness of the Abrahamic doctrine that women are "sexual objects" is still in their thoughts, even if they don't think so. This was illustrated by Professor Dawkins' sarcasm, and also by Mr. Hitchens in his book,"God is Not Great."

In his book, Mr. Hitchens spoke about the late professor A.J. Ayer,* whom he viewed as upstanding moral man, when in fact, he had broken "every sexual commandment" there is to break. Mr. Hitchens swept aside Professor Ayer's acts of "disrespecting the sexual code," i.e. disrespecting women, as he qualified the man as an outstanding moral figure by listing his virtues as a loving parent, an excellent teacher, and a man who fought for human rights and free speech--as if disrespecting women (especially his own wife) in this regard was meaningless. Mr. Hitchens said nothing about the rights and feelings of the women Ayer had used and abused during his life, but I do not believe Mr. Hitchens meant to disrespect women intentionally. What his statements do illustrate however, is how insidious and pervasive this patriarchal view of women is in society, as even men such as Mr. Hitchens, and now Professor Dawkins, see nothing wrong with men objectifying women, and say nothing in defense of the women who are hurt and abused (such as Professor Ayer's wife, and Rebecca Watson) in this manner. If this were a world where women were as valued as men, even Mr. Hitchens, and Professor Dawkins would see Professor Ayer's behavior, and the behavior of the "man in the elevator" as inappropriate. It is when women are objectified, that such behavior is seen as "acceptable" by society --and this, it seems, is still how Professor Dawkins, and Mr. Hitchens view women as well. 

 

It certainly illustrates that society as a whole (as Rebecca herself labels herself as a "chick") has a long way to go.....

* God Is Not Great, p. 186