Question for Female Readers: What Could Be Done to Increase the Participation of Female Readers in Online Discussions of Origins?

[AlanFox]

@Eddie

Which itself was a nom de plume for an unknown person, who might possibly be a woman.

Well sure. Except Mike [surname redacted] is still blogging elsewhere and there’s zero evidence of female participation there.

[AlanFox]

@Eddie

Which itself was a nom de plume for an unknown person, who might possibly be a woman.

I don’t want to out anyone so I’ll let the matter drop.

[AlanFox]

@stlyankeefan

I never experienced the outright hostility that the first wave feminiats endured, but I did experience a lot of less overt sexism and general clueless behavior. Using a gender neutral screen name allows me to avoid this kind of stuff. So there are some advantages to the anonymity of the internet. I wonder if there are other posters here who do the same thing.

Absolutely agree with this. I’m not a fan of pseudonyms to the extent it enables irresponsible and inflammatory comment but my own experience of how female voices are discounted and shouted down on internet discussion sites convinces me that adopting a pseudonym to avoid such judgmental behaviour is is unfortunately necessary.

The conundrum then becomes insist posters use their real names unless they are female!

[stlyankeefan]

@AlanFox

The conundrum then becomes insist posters use their real names unless they are female!

Although anonymity leads to problems, there may be reasons male posters would not want to use their real names. I do not have unlimited academic freedom and I have colleagues at other universities who have less than I do. I enjoy being able to engage in discussions here without having to worry about what my dean would think of my ideas. I think everyone should be able to do that.

[AlanFox]

@stlyankeefan

I do not have unlimited academic freedom…

I understand that and a couple of academics I know have said the same. Easy for me, I’m retired.

[Eddie (Edward Robinson)]

@AlanFox

I don’t want to out anyone so I’ll let the matter drop.

I don’t want Mike Gene outed, either. I was just making the side-point that nothing in his writing indicates whether he (she?) is a man or a woman. I know at least one person who knows his real identity, and that person surely knows if Gene is a man or a woman, but as far as I can tell, nothing in the kind of arguments Mike Gene has made gives away his/her sex. And I think that’s the way Gene wanted it; he (she?) always said that he (she?) didn’t give his academic qualifications because he (w.l.o.g.) wanted his views weighed by the strength of his arguments rather than by his degrees; it makes sense that he would not want people to judge the strength of his arguments by his sex, either.

[CrisprCAS9]

@AlanFox

I’m not a fan of pseudonyms to the extent it enables irresponsible and inflammatory comment

@stlyankeefan

Although anonymity leads to problems,

Have you guys not seen Facebook?

[AlanFox]

@CrisprCAS9

Have you guys not seen Facebook?

Not for a while. I’ve been boycotting it for a few years now.

[stlyankeefan]

Good point. I avoid it

[SlightlyOddGuy (Matt)]

@thoughtful

It depends. Remember I am married to someone with high-functioning autism. It requires adaptation to not reacting to blunt honesty as if it is harshness. I suppose I generally assume others can filter their comments out of social politeness, so then I tend to view instances where it seems they don’t as harshness.

That’s quite an adaptation to develop, so kudos. I wish I was as thick-skinned. I left the Reddit r/debateevolution due to the overly negative tone and interactions I saw or participated in there, so I recognize when I see it here. You’re not alone in seeing that tone in responses to yourself.

[thoughtful (Valerie (non-scientist))]

@SlightlyOddGuy

You’re not alone in seeing that tone in responses to yourself.

Was thinking that you didn’t see my comments maybe last summer/fall, where I wasn’t as thick-skinned and was a little more hard-headed. Maybe a little over-excited. I thought of comparing my newfound interest in science and creationism to what Brian Welch just confessed and chuckled to myself. Brian 'Head' Welch Clarifies Comments on Christian Fanaticism