Atheist community being torn apart by war between feminists and misogynists

A short time ago, I ran across an article that lambasted Richard Dawkins for downplaying a fellow atheist, a woman who had made a blog post about feeling threatened by someone accosting her in an elevator at a skeptic's conference. There are a number of articles, the crux of which is pretty much "Richard Dawkins doesn't get it", but here's the response of Rebecca Watson, the who raised the initial concern.

I didn't think too much of that, apart from snickering a little bit at Dawkins' cluelessness, but then last week I came across another weird article, titled "Rape is never funny", which was another atheist attacking other atheists, who were making deeply offensive remarks at the women in their community. Following that article back, it sourced posts on rationalia.com that mused "Would it be Immoral to rape a Skepchick?"

It appears that some people in the atheist community are coming to the realization that more than a few of their fellow skeptics are profane, arrogant, misogynist and hateful.

What's worse, they're proud of it, "standing up to censorship."



Who'da thunk it? Oh. We theists have, having put up with garbage like that, in the name of "non-belief", for years.

Skepchick has responded with a series of posts from males in the humanist community decrying the oafish behaviour, showing no small amount of surprise that their fellow atheists would treat others so poorly.

Rape is never funny, and anyone who debases another human being in a manner that they are in the rationalia.com threads should be utterly ashamed of themselves. Though I am not an atheist, I fully support the campaign at Skepchick to wipe out hate in their community, no matter how deeply it is entrenched.

Atheism is about not beliving in god-nothing else. I think homosexuallity is wrong and i don't like feminists.

Well lets suppose it is true, which its not.

All this opposed to being torn apart by lies, deception, child rape, emotional torture, money grabbing, political control, power fiending, a history of genocide/torture/abuse, covering up disgusting crimes/protecting criminals, facilitating disgusting crimes etc....

Anyway, let me explain that it is theists that have made Dawkins the 'poster boy' of atheism.
I am agnostic but will speak for atheists when I say they do not care what one person says or does because their beliefs speak for themselves.

Originally posted by HumanCondition
Well lets suppose it is true, which its not.

All this opposed to being torn apart by lies, deception, child rape, emotional torture, money grabbing, political control, power fiending, a history of genocide/torture/abuse, covering up disgusting crimes/protecting criminals, facilitating disgusting crimes etc....

What do atheists and theists have in common that leads to poor behaviour? Oh yeah, human beings.

Jerks... they're everywhere.

Anyway, let me explain that it is theists that have made Dawkins the 'poster boy' of atheism.

I think that Dawkins would beg to differ.

because their beliefs speak for themselves.

What beliefs?

I think a lot of the atheist community does share similar views at the moment, but because they are reluctant to believe in religion (which is really a philosophy to follow) they don't see the merits in writing some philosophy for themselves to follow.

This will, of course, result in different opinions on things among the Atheist community. That is not a bad thing, but I think it might surprise those who say "Being an atheist is just about not believing in God" but on the inside thought it was about so much more.

I think they will be surprised when the universe actually calls them on that.

But surprise to me! I didn't see this coming, I thought they were going to unite under some kind of new age messiah or something. Wow, today is all about things I didn't see coming.

Atheists are just as stupid and controlled as those who buy into religions...they are still being controlled by those religions...

Cannot wait till all of the fools get cleaned up by a good dose of Realization...that all sides have been had.

Misogyny, feminism and atheism all stem from the same pile of poop.

Acting as if Theists don't joke about rape or aren't sexist is pure falsehood. Even in my Paganism, we have our sexism issues. Don't play this bull# as if it shines a favorable light on you- it doesn't.

Originally posted by cetaphobic
Acting as if Theists don't joke about rape or aren't sexist is pure falsehood. Even in my Paganism, we have our sexism issues. Don't play this ******** as if it shines a favorable light on you- it doesn't.

How does the fact that Pagans have sexism issues have any bearing on theists?

At any rate, it has nothing to do with snootiness, it's calling attention to some abhorrent behaviour in a community that claims to be above people like that, with the note that, if you're a theist, hateful atheists come as no surprise.

We should ALL do what we can to stamp out such obscenity, whether it is directed within the community or outside of it. It's not okay to ignore atheists telling theists that they should just "go off in a corner and die", but complain about them doing it to fellow atheists, and that applies to all other groups, as well.

reply to post by adjensen


I'm not saying to ignore issues in the atheist community. What I am saying is that you shouldn't focus so much on their issues that you can't even see your own.

I think its funny how Theists think branding a bad human emotion with Atheism will give them advantage on dismantling something, sadly, "Atheism" is not going to be dismantled by such petty insults since humans emotions exist everywhere not just people who doesn't believe in a deity.

"Omg Atheist hates Apples? see they hate apples too!, see they are not perfect"

Atheist are just less blind than Theist.

Originally posted by cetaphobic
reply to post by adjensen

 

I'm not saying to ignore issues in the atheist community. What I am saying is that you shouldn't focus so much on their issues that you can't even see your own.

And what I'm saying is that we should focus on people, as a whole, and stop focusing on this "us versus them" mentality when it comes to issues of hate.

reply to post by adjensen


Then my issue isn't with you. My issue is with people like this:

Originally posted by conspiracy88
Misogyny, feminism and atheism all stem from the same pile of poop.

Gee, atheists are caught in between two warring factions and have nothing to do with the conflict....

And who gets bashed but the atheists.

Irony in action.

Originally posted by adjensen
A short time ago, I ran across an article that lambasted Richard Dawkins for downplaying a fellow atheist, a woman who had made a blog post about feeling threatened by someone accosting her in an elevator at a skeptic's conference. There are a number of articles, the crux of which is pretty much "Richard Dawkins doesn't get it", but here's the response of Rebecca Watson, the who raised the initial concern.

I didn't think too much of that, apart from snickering a little bit at Dawkins' cluelessness, but then last week I came across another weird article, titled "Rape is never funny", which was another atheist attacking other atheists, who were making deeply offensive remarks at the women in their community. Following that article back, it sourced posts on rationalia.com that mused "Would it be Immoral to rape a Skepchick?"

It appears that some people in the atheist community are coming to the realization that more than a few of their fellow skeptics are profane, arrogant, misogynist and hateful.

What's worse, they're proud of it, "standing up to censorship."

Who'da thunk it? Oh. We theists have, having put up with garbage like that, in the name of "non-belief", for years.

Skepchick has responded with a series of posts from males in the humanist community decrying the oafish behaviour, showing no small amount of surprise that their fellow atheists would treat others so poorly.

Rape is never funny, and anyone who debases another human being in a manner that they are in the rationalia.com threads should be utterly ashamed of themselves. Though I am not an atheist, I fully support the campaign at Skepchick to wipe out hate in their community, no matter how deeply it is entrenched.

edit on 30-7-2012 by adjensen because: oopsies

Well, I'm neither an atheist nor a leftist (socially, at least). However, Skepchick is full of # on a number of levels. For one, do you even know what the original controversy was about? Skepchick stayed up late into the morning drinking with some people at a bar; she then announced she was done for the night and that she was going up to her room. Afterward, an atheist approached her in an elevator, asking her to come up to his room for coffee. She declined and that was it.

That's it... That's what happened. So what the # is everyone whining about? If anything, this whole ordeal shows that Skepchick may be a misandrist or some kind of fascist. Why shouldn't a guy be able to approach and proposition her? Is she 10 years old? Is she a delicate flower that needs to be protected from the cruel world? Does she think all men are rapists? Does she expect men to read her mind? The mind boggles. This lady is nuts. I would dread being anywhere near her. I'd be afraid to make eye contact with her for fear of having the police called on me.

What makes this even stranger is during this controversy this lady was advertising and selling a calendar that featured sexy photos of "intellectual" women (called skepchick calendar). I don't know if she was in it herself, but I find it funny that Skepchick will whine about being seen in a sexual way, or not taken seriously, and then turn around and help create, advertise, and sell a calendar that sexualizes "intellectual" women.

Originally posted by adjensen

It appears that some people in the atheist community are coming to the realization that more than a few of their fellow skeptics are profane, arrogant, misogynist and hateful.

As in all of humanity.

Atheism is Lack of Belief in a God. Period!

It is not a behavior.

Originally posted by Sleepwalk7
Skepchick stayed up late into the morning drinking with some people at a bar; she then announced she was done for the night and that she was going up to her room. Afterward, an atheist approached her in an elevator, asking her to come up to his room for coffee. She declined and that was it.

Yes, that was it. Until she posted on it later, remarking that being alone with someone you don't know in an elevator at 4AM is not an environment that a woman wants to be hit on in. Her comment, specifically, was "Don't do that, guys."

For which she was pilloried by some in her community, including Dawkins, who insinuated that girls who have their genitals mutilated shouldn't complain, because "look at this poor girl over here, she has to fend off suitors in an elevator." His sarcasm failed to note that, if Rebecca felt uncomfortable in that elevator, it wasn't Rebecca's fault.

Even if someone thinks that she overreacted, they shouldn't just turn around and belittle her.

And they certainly don't muse whether or not they should rape her, just because she's so, you know, annoying.

I agree that many atheists are disrespectful, but calling atheists "poop" isn't really all that respectful either, don't you agree?

I think people see what they want to see, and believe what they want to believe.

In my opinion there is a huge ongoing smear campaign against atheism. Government agents are posting as atheist and trying to associate atheism with homosexuality and other wrong stuff.

Also, most of the so-called atheists are ex christians tired of being hated for their deviant sexuality, so they are angry with the christians and insult them.

I think they should call themselves something else and not give us a bad name.

adj

As it happens, I wasn't in that elevator with Rebecca, so I don't know whether she overreacted or not.

I thought the Thunderf00t vs P.Z. Myers thing, the subject of the OP video, was more interesting anyway. So, "free thought" doesn't mean thinking freely, says PZM. I'll buy that. I've always thought "free thought" as a synonym for movement atheism was a misnomer anyway, so it's nice to have confirmation from a prominent movement atheist.

But otherwise, I am remimded of a column William F. Buckley wrote when news of the affair between Ayn Rand and her married disciple Nathaniel Branden broke. Buckley and Rand were on bad terms anyway, so Bill was delighted (in a hate the sin, love the sinners kind of way, of course). These are the people, he observed, who tell us how to live well, by being just like them.

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. That's my take on it.

Originally posted by adjensen
Yes, that was it. Until she posted on it later, remarking that being alone with someone you don't know in an elevator at 4AM is not an environment that a woman wants to be hit on in.

Well, an environment that she, personally, did not want to be hit on in. That's one of the issues. Skepchick can't speak on behalf of every woman. Not every woman would react in the same way she did, nor would every woman decline the proposition. In fact, there have been a plethora of YouTube videos of women telling Skepchick to stop whining. Finally, I highly doubt that Skepchick would have declined the offer if it had been made by a man that she had admired or was attracted to. Or perhaps she would have still declined, but wouldn't have made this embarrassing video.

Her comment, specifically, was "Don't do that, guys."

Why not?

For which she was pilloried by some in her community, including Dawkins, who insinuated that girls who have their genitals mutilated shouldn't complain, because "look at this poor girl over here, she has to fend off suitors in an elevator."

Yes, because here in the first-world feminists don't have many genuine issues. In fact, one could argue that we're living in a time where sexism against men is more rampant than sexism against women (in the first world).

His sarcasm failed to note that, if Rebecca felt uncomfortable in that elevator, it wasn't Rebecca's fault.

I don't think this is a situation where anyone is at fault, since another woman may have reacted in a manner completely different from Rebecca. Another woman may have been flattered by the offer, but declined it anyway. Another may have gladly accepted. Another may have pepper sprayed the guy.

And they certainly don't muse whether or not they should rape her, just because she's so, you know, annoying.

This is a separate issue which can be chalked up as immature people being immature.