Elevatorgate - why companies have training on harassment.

Elevatorgate has been sweeping the skeptisphere, it seems like forever. It started with a Rebecca Watson video complete with tip that an unknown guy asking a woman to their room for coffee at 4:30 is creepy.

Then the internet thing takes over...A response from a college student McGraw that Watson is just wrong to deny men and woman have sexual feelings. Then Watson uses the response to illustrate the faces of sexism as a prelude to a talk about the Republican war on women. Then McGraw and her supporters complain that Watson was harassing her by naming her because McGraw couldn't respond right away. People started conflating a brief encounter in an elevator that Watson used to illustrate how not to meet women with attempted rape. Men start protesting they can *NEVER* approach any women if they have to consider context. Richard Dawkins chimes just to be a douche. Ongoing posts from Watson sticks to the topic of feminism in the sceptic community.  Follow up post from McGraw sticks to talking about how unfair it was to use her as an example of sexism.

Frankly I'm not seeing her point. I went to see if McGraw would actually come up with an reason why she should not be considered to be sexist based on her comment. There was a lame, "transcribing is hard and I didn't think it was important" excuse. Religious people don't think they're cherry picking the bible either. Yes, especially if it takes away from your point that Watson is frigid and ruining it for the girls that go to conferences to get laid. Regardless of what McGraw thinks about a power iniquity, this episode sent many people to *her* website to see *her* response. This was her opportunity to present a good argument about why her comment was not sexist/anti woman and she didn't have one.

I've been slowly transitioning my sceptic/atheist sites from male voices to female voices. I tried Skepchick several years ago and found it too...lite. I'll try it again. I can't give up Pharyngula because PZ is such a good writer-whether you agree with him or not, he has actual points to think about and backs them up (sometimes unsuccessfully). BlagHag for sure. McGraw for sure not.