The Sexist

The Morning After: Offensive Bat Fellatio Edition

* Irish academic Dylan Evans has been accused of sexual harassment after discussing a paper on bat fellatio with a female colleague. Seems like a perfectly acceptable topic of conversation to me; at the same time, I'm not entirely convinced that this guy wasn't discussing bat fellatio in the creepiest way possible. The New Scientist report is vague:

It seems there was more to the grievance between Evans and the complainant than the fellatio paper incident, but an independent investigation found that Evans was not guilty of sexual harassment. The investigation stated that it was reasonable for the colleague to have been offended and that showing the paper was a joke with a sexual innuendo, but that it was not Evans' intention to cause offence.

Evans was censured by the University, which he says "may" prevent him from securing tenure. So what sort of behavior was Evans involved in beyond the bat fellatio incident? Here's an excerpt from his colleague's complaint:

Since he arrived at the school last year, Dr Evans has often come to my office, generally early in the morning and always uninvited, to talk mainly about himself.

On many occasions he used unwelcome patting, hugging, kissing on the cheeks and touching behaviour with me; he also used to make compliments on my beauty or the way I was dressed.

I told him that I do not appreciate compliments as they do not mean anything to me.

Some high-profile academics—like Tufts' Daniel Dennett and Harvard's Steven Pinker—have come to Evans' defense:

Dennett calls the punishment "an outrageous violation of academic freedom" and Pinker says the "absurd and shameful" judgment "runs contrary to the principle of intellectual freedom and freedom of speech, to say nothing of common sense."

Ah, the freedom to unwelcome-pat. Look: There are hundreds of contexts in which one can discuss a bat fellatio paper with a colleague. We should probably consider that before concluding that sexual harassment policies are killing our freedoms.

* The newly-crowned Miss USA, Rima Fakih, is "the first Arab-American and Muslim to win the title." Is this a sign of the widening of traditional American beauty standards, or an Islamofascist conspiracy?

* Meanwhile, some guy at the Huffington Post has called her a whore.

* Glenn Beck and the performance of femininity through fake tears.

Photo via Wikipedia Commons

  • Saurs

    "Chuck and Johnny…what did you personally do to rectify this situation? Were you chivalrous guys and did you step in on her behalf? After all, as discussed in the other thread, “real” men should man up and step forward and remind other men not to rape and harrass right?"

    Why are you continuing to misrepresent comments that went on under another post? Anyone so inclined can go back to them and see for themselves that the overwhelming majority of posters were complaining about chivalrous behavior, not demanding it. You and Eo (who are probably one and the same person) really ought to stop equating any decent act a man might commit for any reason with chivalry.

    As for Eo's contention in post #1 that this story concerns "entrenched expectations of chivalry"; that's ridiculous. Expecting dudes to keep it in their pants is not unreasonable nor an expectation "of chivalry." It's an expectation that people are going to act lawfully and politely and not try to grope us as every opportunity and leer and make weird suggestions about bat-fucking. Are men so incapable of nuanced behavior, in your estimate, that chivalry is merely defined as not sexually harassing people? Really, Eo? Get a new fucking line, dude. You hate men more than any radfem I know.

  • Eo


    You just need to follow the history of the american eugenics and progressive movements from the beginning of the 1900's to see the family tree. American eugenics, forced steralisations, jim crow, lynchings, the choice movement, same family tree. American progressive eugenicists inspired hitler, in fairness to margret sanger, she drew a line at hitles aggressive and barbaic cleansing techniques and favored her idea, that given free chioce and oppertuinity the poor and minorities would use planned parenthood more often then the white majority and chose to control their own populations. This is called volentary eugenics and that later became shortened to "choice". An american judge admitted that the only reason roe vs wade went through was to attempt to limit the growth of certain groups.

    What american campus feminists do today is very similar to what was going on during the lynchings. Every accused is guilty. Even when the investigations prove innocence
    Hofstra, Duke and this case for example, there are faminists insisting the falsely accused are guilty and calling for roll backs of due process and roll backs of due process disproportionatly effect black males.

    Feminist VAWA which is the most extreme roll back of civil right since jim crow, it disproportionatly effects black males who on the strength of an accusation alone find themselves an inmate in the american prison system. But of course.

    This is a good cause to support..

    African-Americans for VAWA Reform is a national organization of women and men, community leaders who have united to inform their fellow Americans of the devastating effects of the Violence Against Women Act on African-American communities.
    h ttp://

    Now, rather than becoming angry because I have information that doesnt conform to yours, find a good historian and research the american progressive movements and liberal family tree from the 1900s on. Learn what your education system doesnt tell you about Margret Sanger.

  • kza

    You realize that black women can choose not to get abortions right?

  • Eo


    Thats why its called volentary eugenics or "choice". How ever, there is a disproportionate number of services in poor and minority areas.. the idea being to make it easier for the "less productive" as Margret Sanger called them, to make the choice not to reproduce. It was unsucessful anyway as middle class women until recently have had fewer children. Thats neither here nor there though, the point was to illustrate the political family tree and connections between american progressivism, nazism, american eugenics, jim crow, lynchings and feminism.

  • kza

    There is no link between putting abortion clinics in an area where they are needed and nazis use some common sense.

  • Eo

    Kza, no you are wrong there. Hitler and Sanger communicated by post as did other american progressives , the american progressives/eugenicists supported hitler and hitler him self was inspired by various american racial cleansing ideas as the letter between himself and sanger illustrate. Hitler went on to disgrace the field of eugenics and the word eugenics was dropped out of use, this is why the term volentary eugenics was replaced by "choice".

  • Eo


    *as the letters between himself and sanger illustrate..

  • kza

    Um so he disgraced something she was in favor of so that means they are connected some how? huh

  • Eo

    Same political family tree Kza - the left, same objectives and interests in racial clensing. Rather than argue with me, read up that part of history.

    Heres somthing re. lynching a quote describing the propaganda that was used to stereotype balck men as rapists.

    "The brute caricature portrays Black men as innately savage, animalistic, destructive, and criminal -- deserving punishment, maybe death. This brute is a fiend, a sociopath, an anti-social menace. Black brutes are depicted as hideous, terrifying predators who target helpless victims, especially White women"

    If you take the racial references out of it, there is little difference from the feminist rhetoric thats used used to stereotype men and masculinity.

    The nazis also stereotyped jews as rapists of german women. There are many parallels, connections, shared history and methodology.

    Its just that you have to read about it outside of the mainstream educaton system, some historians put it all together but you wont hear any mention of sanger being a racist eugenisist in your his or herstory text books where she is inaccuratly depicted as a tirless advocate for womens rights.

  • kza

    White men were the ones calling black men rapists. And I don't know many great nazi female leaders.

  • Eo

    The progressive movement were made up of white men and women, white women made the false and convoluted rape accusations that lead to many murders of black men, men, women and children attended the public murders, it was like a night out.

    The KKK had a womens auxillery, it was a member of the KKK WA the collected Sanger when Sanger made her speech the KKK that time.

    Europen fascist regimes were voted in on a vote swung by the female vote, its no coinsidence that european fascism rose in the 1920s.

    Not that its all bad, we have fascism and nazism to thank for our good socialised health care and the welfare state.

    Your hate of the white man and attempt to exonerate the white woman is noted. There were many female nazis but not many leaders as back then female leaders were uncommon but Sanger, who was a woman was an inspiration to hitler. So is a way she did lead him, and she certainly lead the volentary eugenics and racial cleansing movement in the states for a while.

    I challange you to publicly condem the white women that made false and convoluted rape claims that lead to the murder of innocent black men.

  • kza

    “Marihuana is responsible for the raping of white women by crazed negroes.” —Hearst Newspapers Nationwide

    The raping of white women by black men was a myth created by leading newspaper figures of the day such as Hearst (male) who did not want hemp to be legal as it would interfere with his empire. So they engaged in a bit of yellow journalism and said that hemp aka marijuanna drove blacks crazy rapers of white women. Go back to that time and tell me how many newspaper editors were women.

    "Your hate of the white man..."

    I love myself. (I'm a white male)

  • Jen

    Eo, I just want you to know, that you are speaking absolute crazy talk. By assuming that the United States in any way ever had/still has enough power, strength, cunning and foresight to engage in eugenics is far too kind. You might as well be talking about alien conspiracy theories, because the "history" of American eugenics draws lines where there are simply none. I know you are probably too excited about thinking that the whole world is out to obliterate you to hear any reason, but please consider the fact that you are wrong!