Sexual harassment accusations in the skeptical and secular communities: a timeline of major events

In the vein of the harassment policies campaign timeline, wherein the major players in the movement fought hard for harassment policies at secular events and largely won the day despite monumental pushback, I felt it prudent to get ahead of people trying to misinterpret the timeline of events and twist the timeline to their own ends. That harassment policies campaign actually contains a significant amount of back-story for a lot of these issues. It also includes a number of charges with regard to assaults that had been reported but not dealt with by the organizations in question. Take a moment to re-familiarize yourself with that timeline before returning here, please.

As a result of the community reaching a tipping point, with many prominent voices having been subjected to harassment for years on end, these past few weeks have become something of a watershed moment for our movements. It is important that the actions are documented, even where legal threats have removed the original claims. I will be updating this on the fly, as a living document, much as I did with the previous timeline. At the bottom is a list of links I’m already planning on including, that will be put into their proper positions as I go.

Please feel free to add important events in the comments, though I am not going back as far as WiS2 and documenting the controversy surrounding it unless it’s extremely relevant to this timeline. I am also not linking every single blog commentary unless it has important or unique events or pieces of context, though I am not against comments containing links to said less-directly-relevant commentary even if it doesn’t make it into the body of the post.


May 23rd, 2012
Pseudonymous commenter Miriamne, Michael Shermer, JREF
Prior to the current spate of naming, a comment left at Friendly Atheist names Michael Shermer as allegedly having harassed her, and “trying to sleep with a new young woman every TAM”.
July 29th, 2013

Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailant, JREF
Ashley details a recent sexual assault at a conference in a video on her Youtube channel, relating how a number of witnesses were present for an unwelcome groping at TAM.


August 6th, 2013

Karen Stollznow, unnamed assailant, unnamed organization
Possibly emboldened by Ashley Paramore’s stand, Karen Stollznow comes forward with her own story of having been serially sexually harassed and assaulted over the course of several years. (DOWN)

Ian Murphy, Ben Radford, CFI
Ian Murphy points the finger at Ben Radford as the serial harasser discussed in Karen Stollznow’s post, via Twitter.

PZ Myers, Ben Radford, CFI
PZ Myers updates a post linking to Stollznow’s blog several hours after Ian Murphy names Radford to verify that a number of others had named him as well in private emails.


August 7th, 2013

Carrie Poppy, DJ Grothe and Ben Radford, JREF and CFI
Carrie Poppy releases a series of email bombs about the Ben Radford case and describes the major events leading up to her leaving her job as Communications Director of JREF after being serially mistreated by DJ.

Sasha Pixlee, DJ Grothe, JREF
Sasha describes an incident when he first met DJ Grothe, wherein he suggests that he might drug Sasha and deliver him to his friends to “have fun with him”.

Jason Thibeault, Ben Radford, CFI
I point out that accounts regarding whether or not Radford was punished or even found to have sexually harassed Stollznow by the investigator are in contention, after a private message from Radford to someone who unfollowed him on Facebook is revealed in part in public.

Unnamed victims through Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Jen explains that one person alleged that Lawrence Krauss had harassed them, then later that a second person alleged he had assaulted them; and that this news came as no surprise as his name has long been whispered in the private back-channels at conferences between women wanting to protect themselves. (REDACTED)

Unnamed victims through Brian Thompson, Ben Radford and Michael Shermer, CFI and JREF
Brian Thompson, former employee of JREF, claims to personally know a number of women who have been harassed by Radford and Shermer, via Twitter. He specifies two instances of ‘being creeped at’, one of ‘being groped’.

Elyse Anders, Michael Shermer, JREF
Elyse describes some unwelcome salacious comments from Shermer after she drops a chicken tender at the TAM9 reception buffet.


August 8th, 2013

Matthew Baxter, Ben Radford, CFI
10:35am Central: Matthew Baxter, Karen Stollznow’s husband, in a comment on Blake Smith’s Facebook page, corroborates Stollznow’s story. Speaking directly to Ben Radford, he says that Radford persistently continued to contact Stollznow after being asked for years to stop. Baxter says that he and Stollznow have copies of correspondence backing this up. He also says that when Stollznow cut off communication with Radford, Radford called her “disrespectful.”

Jen McCreight, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
After a vaguely lawsuit-threatening comment by Krauss on her blog, Jen redacts the previous post and begins referring to him as Famous Skeptic.

Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Eddy relates several of the stories that have floated around regarding Krauss’ questionable activities on a CFI cruise, and how he is frequently mentioned as an alleged serial harasser by the informal back-channel of women trying to protect one another from such harassment at conferences. The post is taken down the same day after Krauss comments almost identically to what was posted at Jen’s; the post is replaced with a statement by The Heresy Club that it was found to be in breach of guidelines. (DOWN)

Eddy Cara, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Eddy Cara comments on his personal blog about the post that was taken down from Heresy Club, which he considered a “calculated risk”.

Unnamed victim via PZ Myers, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
PZ Myers reports that someone he trusts has claimed having been sexually assaulted by Krauss.

Unnamed victim via Stephanie Zvan, Lawrence Krauss, CFI
Stephanie Zvan reports being told the same story as PZ regarding an assault by Lawrence Krauss, though it could be the same person reporting the same incident.

Unnamed victims via PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
PZ Myers posts accounts by sources he trusts regarding allegations of Michael Shermer’s witnessed and experienced predatory tactics and alleged sexual assault of women he coerced into a position where they could not legally consent.

bartmon, DJ Grothe, JREF
Former employee of JREF bartmon concurs with Carrie Poppy’s assessments regarding DJ Grothe.


August 9th, 2013

Unnamed victim through delphi_ote, Michael Shermer, JREF
A participant at the JREF forums corroborates the existence of allegations against Michael Shermer by unnamed alleged victims.

Ashley Paramore, unnamed assailants, JREF
Ashley details in a follow-up video the absurd levels of harassment she has since received for talking about her assault, despite not naming names. She uses this to explain why underreporting of harassment and assault is such an issue.

naomibaker, Michael Shermer, JREF
naomibaker relates her story about how she was contacted ostensibly by Michael Shermer’s wife asking if the story she told about a cheating husband without names was talking about Michael. She listed names that Shermer had apparently had affairs with, several of the names being recognizeable.


August 12th, 2013

Joe Anderson, Ben Radford, CFI
Joe Anderson corroborates Karen Stollznow’s story, stating that he was one of the folks deposed by CFI’s investigators about the behaviour he witnessed from Radford.

Karen Stollznow, Ben Radford, CFI
The original post by Karen Stollznow is taken down after Ron Lindsay sends a letter to Scientific American. Karen is told by SA staff that it was taken down due to legal threats, while Ron Lindsay claims to have only asked for corrections. The Google Cache version of the page now also 404s, but a copy still exists on Scrible.

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
Michael Shermer’s lawyer issues a cease-and-desist letter demanding that PZ remove the post containing the allegations and claiming that PZ did not hear directly from the alleged victim as he stated, pointing out an update suggesting that Carrie Poppy is responsible for putting the alleged victim in contact with PZ (no word on whether PZ actually spoke to the victim directly though); and claiming that PZ has a profit motive in blog hits. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on scribd.)

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The post where PZ Myers linked the relevant PDF disappears after getting 70 comments within the span of an hour or so. (DOWN) (A cached copy exists on Google Cache. A second cached copy exists on

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The previous post is quickly replaced with this one stating that PZ has contacted Ken from Popehat.

Stephanie Zvan, Ben Radford / Ron Lindsay, CFI
Stephanie Zvan analyzes the differences and commonalities extensively between Ron Lindsay’s letter demanding corrections of SciAm, and Karen Stollznow’s original allegations. Most relevant is the fact that Lindsay concedes the harassment actually happened.


August 13th, 2013

Carrie Poppy, Michael Shermer, JREF
Carrie Poppy and PZ Myers publicly state that Carrie only put the alleged victim into contact with PZ, and that Carrie is not really involved otherwise, despite the assertions in the cease-and-desist letter.

rikzilla, Michael Shermer, JREF
rikzilla relates a story where Shermer propositioned his wife, calling her sexy and asking her to his room for private drinks while he was present.

Renee Davis-Pelt, unnamed assailant, JREF
Renee posts on Facebook that she was present to witness the assault described by Ashley Paramore that happened at TAM.

Dallas J. Haugh, Michael Shermer, JREF
Dallas posts a suicide note which includes allegations of rape against Shermer. It is taken down by a relative when he is secured and taken to a hospital; after he’s released, he reposts it.


August 14th, 2013

PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
The deadline given to PZ by Michael Shermer’s lawyers to acknowledge receipt has elapsed. The post is still up.

Brian K. Dalton, unnamed assailant, JREF
In the comments on Ashley Paramore’s video, “Mr. Deity” corroborates Ashley’s story and regrets not doing anything at the time.


August 16th, 2013

Ian Murphy, Michael Shermer, JREF
Ian Murphy publishes an email exchange with Shermer wherein Shermer makes some comments, against his lawyer’s orders, about the allegations and his dealings with PZ Myers.


August 22nd, 2013
PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
On a fundraiser page built by Emery Emery, the “Ardent Atheist”, to raise funds for Michael Shermer’s legal offense, Shermer himself comments in support, stating that he was aware of the effort and that any funds not used toward suing PZ Myers would be given to a charity of Emery’s choice. Of note: Benjamin Radford may have donated $40 to this fund under the nym “jaminradford”.


August 26th, 2013
PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
John Loftus claims to have personal email from Michael Shermer suggesting that he knows who made the accusations against him, and that if anyone else heard what Shermer told Loftus, Shermer’s innocence would be obvious. He then later walks all of that back when Shermer apparently suggests he DOESN’T know who made the accusation, and was just guessing. I cover this episode on my blog.


September 5th, 2013
PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
In an update on his legal offense fund for Shermer, Emery Emery states that they’ve reached the first goal of $5000 and that Michael Shermer “has no choice” but to sue PZ because the post is still up.


September 9th, 2013
Sasha Pixlee, DJ Grothe, JREF
Elyse Anders tweets that DJ Grothe is threatening legal action for defamation against Women Thinking, Inc., parent organization of More Than Men, where Sasha Pixlee posted his accusation that DJ Grothe made a tasteless rape joke. She also suggests that DJ is attempting to hold a WTInc project hostage as collateral. Update: The project is a study about vaccines that is awaiting publication.


September 10th, 2013
PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF
Michael Shermer tweets, then deletes, a photo of himself onstage in Germany in front of a sign that says “no drinks onstage” in German. Someone managed to get a screencap before it was removed. The tweet reads:

Skeptics in the Pub Köln “No drinks on stage”? What fun is that? I like to keep my glass full w/out my knowing it…

Sasha Pixlee, DJ Grothe, JREF
Elyse posts a full account of the nature of the legal threats against WTInc by DJ Grothe. Jamie Bernstein, ex member of WTInc, states that the vaccine study funding by JREF was halved to ~$5000 partway through, while the study was still in progress, but the organization completed the study without the extra funds nonetheless. This study has apparently completed the peer review process and JREF (and more specifically, DJ himself) has since been sitting on it for a year. DJ Grothe is evidently using this study as leverage in order to punish people he dislikes, e.g. Sasha Pixlee and Elyse Anders.

Sexual harassment accusations in the skeptical and secular communities: a timeline of major events

190 thoughts on “Sexual harassment accusations in the skeptical and secular communities: a timeline of major events

  1. 151

    Probably old news to Thibeault, but Zvan posted some new relevations about Groethe and Shermer, courtesy Carrie Poppy and Brian Thompson. Here’s the key bits:

    There is more detail on Facebook. From Poppy: “D.J. Grothe told me and others, repeatedly, that he (DJ) had personally witnessed Michael Shermer groping a female TAM speaker’s breast, unprovoked and against her protestations. She has confirmed this, since. D.J. continued to invite that speaker to TAM in subsequent years. D.J. has stated this much over and over. So please, do feel free to ask him yourselves.”

    From Brian Thompson, who also used to work for D.J. at JREF: “D.J. told me the same thing. He’s told several people he witnessed Michael Shermer groping a female TAM speaker, though this didn’t occur at TAM. The woman in question has chosen not to speak publicly about it, presumably so it won’t become the focus of her professional life. I don’t blame her. And I have every reason to believe that people in charge of both CFI and Dragon*Con’s Skeptrack are aware of the same incident. I didn’t see it, so I don’t know if it happened. D.J. certainly believes it happened, though, and so do others who have chosen to invite Shermer to events anyway. You’d have to ask them why they continue to do so.”

  2. 154

    I’m on the “fringe” of the skeptical community and have been considering greater participation. I switched from Catholicism to Atheism a few years ago due to the writings of many on this board and within the community and I’m better for it. No one knows me personally, but I feel like I know many of you.

    I only have a general idea of who Micheal Shermer is. He isn’t my hero or someone I look up to. If he’s a rapist, he should be taken to court. If he’s a sleaze, hopefully women will be able to pick up on that as soon as he pours them a drink.

    I am not a rape apologist. It’s an awful crime and can destroy someone’s life. Facing accusations from an unnamed person and various unidentified internet posters can also destroy someone’s life.

    Reading all of this, after the fact, is bizarre. It’s impossible to form an opinion as to whether or not this man is a rapist based on the second and third hand, often anonymous, generally vague accounts. Much of the evidence is pointless. Repeatedly refilling someones wine glass? I have girlfriends who assume drunk people have more fun and push me to drink more all of the time. At a local bar I have a bartender who I’ve asked to give me water when a close relative orders shots. She just likes everyone to drink. She’s not a predator and she’s not trying to get into my pants.

    However, I’m shocked that in this community a series of anonymous and/or second and third hand comments is enough to convict someone in the court of public opinion. What is to prevent anyone from making an accusation against another member of this community?

    This claim requires some evidence beyond a short description from an unnamed source who never mentions the word “rape”.

    This saddens me. What is to stop anyone here from claiming that I raped them or stole from them or punched them or…. anything?

  3. 155

    Susan Smith: If you go to the link under “Unnamed victims via PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF” above, you will find a thread where your exact objections are raised and answered multiple times. If you actually wish to understand why people hold the opinions they hold, reading a few pages of that would be a good start.

    I think at this point we should put together an index of responses to these questions, since they’re all so similar as to basically be working from a predictable script.

  4. 156

    Susan Smith,

    What is to prevent anyone from making an accusation against another member of this community?


    (How much credibility do you reckon an accusation* without merit would accrue in this community**?)

    * I think you confuse ‘accusation’ with ‘claim’; the two are not synonimous.

    ** I’m a long-time reader here but a very infrequent commenter; whether or not that makes me a member of “this community” is up to others, but I don’t consider myself one such.

  5. 157


    Tom Foss @129,

    If you go to the link under “Unnamed victims via PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, JREF” above, you will find a thread where your exact objections are raised and answered multiple times. If you actually wish to understand why people hold the opinions they hold, reading a few pages of that would be a good start.

    Perhaps, but “reading a few pages” would entail several hours, given there are 500 comments per page.

  6. 158

    Yes, sometimes learning requires time and effort. I realize that someone popping in after quite some time has passed and asking the same questions as every concerned Internetizen who preceded them hasn’t bothered with that time and effort and probably expects someone else to stop and answer their questions as though this were the first time anyone had thought to ask them. But there is, so to speak, a body of literature on this particular subject, and it’s not unreasonable to expect a person to familiarize themselves with at least a portion of it before entering the discourse.

    It’s certainly no more unreasonable than popping into an old topic and expecting other people to take their time and effort to answer your tired questions once more with feeling.

  7. 161

    […] For years leading up to PZ Myers’ clumsy disclosure of rape accusations, the debate of sexual harassment and “rape culture” within the skeptical/Atheist movement(s) was steadily rising to a full boil. I am a little frustrated by this debate because I don’t attend the events in question; I read the books, magazines and blogs and listen to pod-casts. In most instances I turn to these materials because I’m interested in science and philosophy, not necessarily because I want to read about gender and social policy (much less about the self-referential politics of skeptical advocacy organizations). But gender issues are now in the spotlight, and that is probably not a bad thing because the problem is real as evidenced by a number of documented, independent events. […]

  8. 162

    Jason, is there a screengrab for the Blake Smith Facebook thread? I can’t speak for anyone else, but it seems to be down for me.

  9. 165

    I find that “retraction letter” unconvincing. Dr Stollznow’s signature is noticeably missing. Also, it is not in the first person.
    Predictably, the pseudoskeptics are giddy over this. Radfords FB page-open for comments to a select few-has comments by several known skeptic-a-holes.

  10. 166

    Hmmm. Since it’s a photo, I’ll transcribe:

    In 2013 Karen Stollznow accused Benjamin Radford of stalking, sexual harassment, and both physical and sexual assault. She made these accusations in a complaint to Ben Radford’s employer (the Center for Inquiry), in a guest blog written for the Scientific American Mind website and to various individuals in private communications.

    These accusations and complaints against Benjamin Radford were false and Karen Stollznow retracts them. Radford was disciplined by the Center for Inquiry on the basis of them. One of Stollznow’s minor complaints (that Radford briefly stood in front of her during an argument when she wanted to walk past him) was the result of miscommunication during their relationship, but the accusations of sexual harassment, stalking, sexual assault, unwanted emails and the like were and are categorically false.

    These serious and polarizing false accusations created divisiveness within the skeptical community. Most of the outrage directed at Radford as a consequence of the false accusations came from people with no knowledge of Radford’s and Stollznow’s relationship, who uncritically repeated the false accusations.

    Stollznow cannot fully undo the damage Radford’s career and reputation cause by her false accusations, but this retraction is a sincere effort to set the record straight. Karen Stollznow and Ben Radford ask that bloggers and others that have repeated these allegations against Radford please remove them from their sites and not repeat them. Any blogs or other published references to these false accusations only serve to perpetuate the harm to both parties.

    This issue has unfortunately detracted from the success that both Benjamin Radford and Karen Stollznow have worked hard to achieve in skepticism and public science education. Both Ben and Karen wish to move on with their lives and careers and put this matter behind them and that their friends and colleagues also let the matter drop.

    There’s no confirmation on whether or not Stollznow agrees with this statement. PZ Myers claims Radford wrote the entire statement, and posted it without getting Stollznow’s signature, but says nothing on that question.

    There are a number of ways to interpret this letter. Accepting it at face value is tough to square against the words of Blake Smith, Matthew Baxter, Ian Murphy, Joe Anderson, Ron Lindsay, and DJ Groethe via Carrie Poppy. Deceiving all these people would be an impressive conspiracy.

    Another hypothesis is that Stollznow was forced to agree with the statement due to legal pressure from Radford. If this hypothesis is correct, then Radford could use public statements made about him and Stollznow in order to antagonize her further, compounding what’s already coming from skeptics/atheists in the community friendly to Radford.

    In short, think before you post.

  11. 167

    Another hypothesis is that Stollznow was forced to agree with the statement due to legal pressure from Radford. If this hypothesis is correct, then Radford could use public statements made about him and Stollznow in order to antagonize her further, compounding what’s already coming from skeptics/atheists in the community friendly to Radford.

    In short, think before you post.

    In other words, “shut up about me or the dame gets it.”

    Really nice people we’re dealing with here.

  12. 169

    Tony! The Fucking Queer Shoop! @137

    I find that “retraction letter” unconvincing. Dr Stollznow’s signature is noticeably missing. Also, it is not in the first person.

    Agreed. I did see someone claim on Radford’s FB page that Stollznow had signed a copy which was then notarized, but the version Radford posted was clearly not that copy. Right now, all we have is Radford’s word.

    If Stollznow did agree to the letter, though, that would be quite a pain. Multiple blogs would have to re-post what they said about Radford, then append that letter. In the short term, such an act would only draw more attention to the claims, further polarizing the skeptic/atheist community, a rather ironic state of affairs.

    And I suppose it would finally prove that some things are not #UpForDebate.

  13. 172

    Hey, fresh news, this time in the form of a rant from Brian Thompson via Surly Amy. It’s long (and worth the read, he’s a funny guy), so I’ll just excerpt the key paragraphs:

    I grew particularly disgusted with the boys’ club attitude I saw among skeptical leaders and luminaries. The kind of attitude that’s dismissive of women, sexually predatory, and downright gross. When I first started going to skeptical conferences as a fresh-faced know-it-all, I started hearing things about people I once admired. Then I started seeing things myself. Then I got a job with the JREF, and the pattern continued.

    There’s a particular guy popular with the skeptical crowd who writes books, gives talks, and wears bicycle shorts. What’s not to love? Well, a female friend of mine told me she didn’t like it very much when he locked eyes with her from across a room and pointed to his dick. When I started working for the JREF, my boss described this same guy as an “old school misogynist”. Then a friend told me this same skeptical celebrity had groped another speaker at a conference. Grabbed her breast without invitation. Sexually assaulted her. Then my boss told me that not only did this assault happen, but that he witnessed it and intervened. The woman who was assaulted won’t name names for fear of being dragged through the mud. Another woman I know has told me that this same guy assaulted her. Others have confirmed her story to me. I believe her. But she’s remained anonymous for much the same reasons.

    I’m tired of this. I’m tired of hearing about sexual predators like Mr. Bicycle Shorts, who has yet again been invited to speak at the JREF’s annual conference. I’m tired of hearing things like what I’ve heard from [redacted]. That my old boss grabbed his junk in a car and said he would be “presidentially displeased” if [redacted] didn’t give my old boss a kiss.

    I’m tired of people like Richard Dawkins, whose lashing out at my friend Rebecca Watson for having the nerve to talk about what kind of male attention makes her uncomfortable has led to years of the most heinous abuse being flung at her and her colleagues. Heinous, woman-hating abuse from enthusiastic members of this broken little community of freethinkers.

    Pardon my Yiddish, but oy, that shit’s fucked. And it’s also fucked that people are afraid to speak out about their stories for fear that it will become the focus of their careers or that their privacy will be destroyed or that they’ll be sued or that they’ll somehow damage organizations that do a lot of good work.

    This makes me sick, and it makes me mad. So of course I’m going to help Karen speak up and fight back.

    Here’s the situation in a nutshell: Karen used to work with another writer and investigator named Ben Radford at an organization called CFI. Karen says Radford continually harassed and abused her. She brought the situation to CFI, which found Radford guilty of some of Karen’s charges. Then they let him off with a slap on the wrist. Karen blogged about this. Radford sued her for defamation.

    Based on the evidence I’ve seen, my own experience with Radford’s dishonest and creepy behavior, and the assurances from friends of mine who know more about this situation than I do, I’m willing to believe Karen. And more than that, I’m willing to put my money behind her efforts to fight back in court. Because she deserves the chance to make her case instead of having to fold under insurmountable financial pressure. Defending yourself in court isn’t cheap.

  14. 173

    Brace yourselves, there’s some big news from Pamela Gay:

    On Wednesday, I learned that there are at least two audio recordings of a meeting at a non-profit. In this meeting my mistake was discussed and now there is the chance that audio could go public.

    And at this point, if it did, I’d support it because it would mean I could speak the truth frankly without fear of being sued for libel or slander by people with more resources than I have. It might mean that every few months, I wouldn’t have to deal with someone going, “there is this rumor” or getting out of the blue emails saying, “you know…”.

    My mistake was not reporting that a drunken man in a prominent role tried to grab my breasts.

    I’m writing this blog post to try and get out the truth, to get my story out before the internet gets ahold of this truth and of me, and before I am judged by the court of the blogosphere. […]

    In talking with other women, I’ve been assured I did nothing wrong. I protected myself, and moved on. The thing is, in all the years since 2008, I’ve had a stream of women coming to me saying, “Me too,” and sometimes they say, “Me too, only it was worse and no one intervened.” I have lived with that guilt – lived with knowing that I did nothing but maybe if I had done something …

    There’s a lot more there. Based on the contents, I speculate Grothe intervened and prevented Shermer from assaulting Gay, and has made no secret about that in private. For that, good on him. However, Grothe has also been telling people nothing happened, and helping promote Shermer. Those two contradictions have started rubbing up against one another, to the point that Grothe has backtracked, is now stating the event never took place, and is threatening Gay.

    Thanks to kellym for spotting this.

  15. 174

    The president of the James Randi Educational Foundation, DJ Grothe, has threatened to “try to ruin [the] career/life” of Dr. Pamela Gay unless she denies the incident occurred where Grothe prevented Michael Shermer from groping her.

  16. 179

    Biiiiig info drop, coming up. Hopefully Thibeault resets the timeline after these, but until then (and two at a time, to avoid the mod queue):

    Will Misogyny Bring Down The Atheist Movement?: Long and comprehensive piece on sexual assault allegations in the skeptic/atheist community, with plenty of formerly-secret details revealed. Michael Shermer, Emery Emery, Penn Jillette, DJ Grothe, and even James Randi coming out looking worse for it.

    PZ Myers has a short response, mostly pointing to…

  17. 182

    More articles rolling in:

    The crooked, twisted story of the wanton kid by PZ Myers: “It’s always the changing story that gives the liar away. We have a couple of accounts of the night in question, when Michael Shermer is accused of taking advantage of a young woman at a conference, and both of them come straight from Shermer himself.”

    Dawkins Throws Himself on a Grenade by Stephanie Zvan: In which Richard Dawkins engages in rape apologetics to defend Michael Shermer.

  18. 183

    This timeline is long in the tooth, but well linked. I’m of two minds about whether or not to separate out the Shermer-related stuff onto its own timeline, like I did with Stollznow/Radford.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *