She certainly comes off as weird in her writing but that particular image could really just be a mixed up link.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
THR: Investigation regarding Neil DeGrasse Tyson Following Sexual Misconduct Allegation and Response
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
She certainly comes off as weird in her writing but that particular image could really just be a mixed up link.
This is the problem with allegations with such a massive time gap between the incident. You need evidence to exonerate the accused but none for the accusation to take hold and damage to a person's livelihood regardless if it's factually based or not.
And where would be get it from? The investigation is pointless as people have already drawn their conclusions.
And where would be get it from? The investigation is pointless as people have already drawn their conclusions.
I'm not going to say stupid shit like "I always knew" or anything, but the guy consistently comes across as an arrogant prick so I will say I am not surprised. many times that attitude doesn't suddenly stop when it comes to sexuality. there are plenty of other cool fun nonrapist scientists to look up to who don't live on twitter pissing on other people's superstitions and the like
I think the "well I always thought x" are wrong because it's kinda kicking someone while they're down.
At the same time, arrogance and smugness are not virtuous traits. You can't be surprised when someone--in a position of power/wealth/success who embraces those traits--is the victim of schadenfreude when they take a tumble.
I would be more inclined to believe that if the rest of it wasn't Geocities Alex Jones. A large portion of the blog is twisting a video he did about getting children interested in science into having a complete alternate meaning, she insinuates he abuses not only women but men and children?
It's like if someone accused Fred Rogers of touching kids and did a YouTube video breaking down "Won't You Be My Neighbor" to reveal how it's secretly about diddling.
Edit: She actually defends posting the picture of Egyptian hieroglyphics to a commenter on her blog. It seems that was intentional, which makes it even weirder. It's at the bottom of this page:
https://tchiya.wordpress.com/about/
Last edited:
NB: the blog post in the OP is highly problematic and not useful as evidence here. I'm not rejecting her claim but she's clearly not communicating in a rational fashion. If she was indeed violated then she has my total support and sympathy but uh - yeah - I suggest folks taking her at her word read the blog. It doesn't prove or disprove anything but it's pretty jarring to put it mildly.
An aside though:
Cosmology is in a celebrity hole and skepticism is actually frighteningly cowed.
Dumbass Lawrence Krauss already took himself out after being accused of credible sexual misbehavior from assault to inappropriate language — Richard Dawkins continues to put his foot in his mouth about lots of religions but is in trouble for perceived Islamophobia (to be fair he criticizes all of the major faiths but is particularly clumsy on Islam) and Richard Carrier appears to be a repeat sex pest and the problem is, they all appear to be guilty of at least some of those accusations. I doubt they offend in much greater numbers than their philosophical opponents, but there's a brigade and media machine that goes after these guys - atheists and scientists with precise organization and money. And it's like shooting fish in a barrel because it turns out that basically everyone in public life seems to have some sort of problematic behavior or allegations thereof.
So the reality is that despite the fact that there simply aren't that many public skeptics, they're a critically endangered species because, they're all incapable of keeping their hands or bigotry to themselves and an already hushed and suppressed voice in public discourse is further diminished through a series of own goals. Meanwhile there's no equivalent organized activity going after the "other side"
Hitchens was probably the most erudite and compelling public skeptic of his time, but his weird and blinkered obsession with Iraq and other adventurist neoconservative antics was already poisoning the veracity of his arguments and distracting from his stated goals before he passed away.
More women should be spotlit as voices for skepticism and serious social philosophy and science because there's basically nobody left to speak truth to religious pseudoscience and creationist bunk except the openly racist ones. And Texas continues to almost single handedly define what our kids learn in school, and invariably with destructive and dangerous intent.
People are literally afraid to admit or espouse atheism in the public sphere and yet exist in absolutely massive numbers, cowed by etiquette and the unceasing attacks from theists and deists who all fucking hate each other (often calling for each others' deaths as persons and faiths) but not as much as they hate basic tenets of science or debate.
Last edited:
I'm willing to believe her for now. A lot of her weird style of expression could be a result of years of pent up anger at seeing someone you hate so intensly rise in fame and gain international adoration.
The incident wasn't in 2014, it's alleged to have occurred in 1983 or 84, the blog post is from 2014.
The blog post is also quite something. Not really sure what to make of that.
OP
OP
I thought the opposite. I felt like the blog post's "frenzy" was a sign of the pain and PTSD she suffered. I have seen many survivors that have ended up behaving similarly. Rape really destroys people's lives.
the victims?
I'm a man but i'm not gonna be "woe is me I have a bad rap due to rapists"
Hey don't forget Brian Greene, he's got the charisma of a baked potato but his stuff is pretty interesting.
OP
OP
Oh ok, yes, I am worried about the survivors as well, all of this really angers me though.
That's absolutely possible but she's also rambling about pretty weird things. This isn't really a question about her truthfulness, it's a public accusation of a very serious assault, so it's a really really bad way to present it that doesn't do her any favors and pollutes the conversation and the recollection itself. She should provide what facts she knows and what she remembers to either law enforcement or one of the parties investigating it. This isn't a court of law, but it could end up there and she is harming herself and potentially other victims with this approach. And if she's behaving this way because of the trauma she describes, all the more reason to take it offline to either law enforcement, counsel or counseling .
The vast majority of assaults go unreported and unpunished. The math is on her side, but she needs to make sure the facts and their clarity stay on her side too.
Keep in mind (more so for some of the other responses describing criminal investigations) that this is Fox/National Geographic investigating for the purpose of whether or not to keep Neil as the host of Cosmos. So similarly as to what happened to NBC, CBS, PBS and other stations/channels with hosts having sexual harassment/assault accusations, if they do a proper investigation they will interview the victims and/or witnesses along with the accused, probably through an outside group/third party. Then based on the outcome they will make a business decision based on recommendations and/or their "bottom line". Ultimately they could just decide Neil deGrasse Tyson isn't worth the trouble or that he is worth a PR hit regardless of the investigation outcome.
Yep.
Even if NDT is found innocent, it's likely he will be dropped from Cosmos 3. The same thing happened to Elmo's actor/puppeteer, which was not able to continue playing Elmo (he actually stepped down), even though the investigation was dismissed and went on to do other roles outside Sesame Street.
Besides, as great as he was on Cosmos 2, I'd like new hosts to rotate.
As I have mentioned before, I am really not a fan, and I think he's literally the most excruciating panel moderator of all time, but the contribution of science education and scientific literacy is arguably way more influential and important to the inspiration and perhaps creation of the next Einstein, Newton, Crick or Pascal. Carl Sagan created more scientists than UC Berkeley and MIT combined.
Huh, this is one of those "well I guess that's not a surprise" moments for me if the accusations have merit. When I worked at a place that produced academic lectures the guys who worked with him said he definitely came off as a playboy. Not hard to see how that kind of attitude would lead to unwelcome encounters.
This is definitely true, but it's also used as an argument for believing accounts that simply aren't credible. Memory is tricky, and trauma can do a lot of stuff, but if someone's account isn't coherent and doesn't jive with facts, I don't see what actionable steps should be taken unless you're playing the "well most rapes are probably genuine, so let's have every questionable one be assumed true."
We all live and die by our preconceived notions, but man that blog is out there. Everything from the terrible Papyrus banner to the weird pseudo-religious framing to the fact that she believes in straight nonsense don't engender a lot of credibility. Feels like this would definitely be a "see if more women come forward with accounts" type deal.
This is definitely true, but it's also used as an argument for believing accounts that simply aren't credible. Memory is tricky, and trauma can do a lot of stuff, but if someone's account isn't coherent and doesn't jive with facts, I don't see what actionable steps should be taken unless you're playing the "well most rapes are probably genuine, so let's have every questionable one be assumed true."
We all live and die by our preconceived notions, but man that blog is out there. Everything from the terrible Papyrus banner to the weird pseudo-religious framing to the fact that she believes in straight nonsense don't engender a lot of credibility. Feels like this would definitely be a "see if more women come forward with accounts" type deal.
Very disappointed in him if true.
His presence and prominence has had a powerful impact on young black children interested in STEM fields. There are very few who have achieved his level of visibility, whose general intelligence is unquestioned.
People that are like, "what did he do" really are clueless as to what his example meant to so many.
His presence and prominence has had a powerful impact on young black children interested in STEM fields. There are very few who have achieved his level of visibility, whose general intelligence is unquestioned.
People that are like, "what did he do" really are clueless as to what his example meant to so many.
I think it's a fair point, and certainly true of Sagan. I've never perceived the same effect from Tyson, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
It's always seemed a bit odd and maybe even pernicious that the most prominent researchers and academics aren't as well known as popular scientists.
Yeah I agree. The "I knew it" posts are disgusting, in large part because it implies that it is possible to "know it" if you are shrewd enough or something.
People asking what did he do are getting at the cult of personality behind him. As someone somewhat affiliated with the education of science in a broad sense ( history of science is my tertiary field) the approace he engendered, aphilosophical/anti liberal-art/ science as a collection of facts, is itself a problem. It only seems to be an unquestionably good thing if you have a fairly shallow understanding of science. It's the same issue all academic communicators face, but unlike Sagan, who I also have problems with, NDT simply doesn't have much in the way of academic or philosohpical chops needed to navigate this.
Poor understandings of science and scientism are more dangerous to science than outright rejecting it.
Oh fuck off with this "decent men a bad name" shit. It's the same tired shit we saw being thrown out by Kavanaugh defenders
So what are you saying, don't investigate? How many #MeToo allegations were from things in the past? A lot.
I didn't read her posts but I will say you can take the most logical and rational person put them thru a traumatic event and it's very likely it will be near impossible for them to recall or discuss anything surrounding that event in a logical manner without years of therapy. Cosby accusers sounded "all over the place" too.
Because so much time has passed in cases like these I usually wait to see if others come forward and I believe other women have. Now the behavior with others may not be as extreme or potentially others were ok with it (as in the case of Louie CK and Sarah Silverman) . These type of people usually have a pattern of inappropriate behavior that only gets revealed because they are famous and people who have buried things for years feel empowered to share when they see what others may have went thru , which also comes with shame wishing they had reported this earlier potentially saving victims after them.
For people upset about those who had a feeling I get that but there is also some coorelation in how people represent themselves that often can align with certain negative and harmful behaviors. It's a natural subconscious bias we carry as humans that allows us to protect ourselves. Is it 100% right , probably not but subconsciously it's better safe than sorry.
I have no idea what happened but the whole situation no matter the outcome is disappointing.
