Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The war of atheism
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4888 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 121 of 526 (513298)
06-27-2009 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by greentwiga
06-27-2009 2:18 AM


Re: Agnosticism?
I don't have two definitions; sorry if it seemed that way. I meant that deists personally believe that there is/may be an ultimate creator who set the universe in place and flipped the switch. However, they do not believe in a present personal god like theists.
But this is just my take on things. If I am wrong, let Percy or RAZD smite me dead!

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by greentwiga, posted 06-27-2009 2:18 AM greentwiga has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 122 of 526 (671642)
08-28-2012 5:35 PM


Atheism+
A proposal has been made for a new wave of atheism. A movement that is not centred around the simple lack of belief in god, but one which cares about social issues and is openly atheistic. This is the main difference, as far as I can see, between Humanism and Atheism+ - it has atheism in the title, attempting to appeal to those that have identity with the atheism term already. Atheist plus what?
quote:
Atheists plus we care about social justice,
Atheists plus we support women’s rights,
Atheists plus we protest racism,
Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia,
Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism.
The history has been, in short, the claim that sexism (and other isms) was a problem in the atheist movement (citing evidence such as disproportionate number of white male speakers at 'atheist events' and lower numbers of female attendees at conferences). Out of this, feminist issues have been discussed a lot in atheist circles, dividing the atheist community quite sharply. The comments sections on blogs on this issue are often hostile and rude in tone.
Out of this, Jen McCreight proposed this 'new wave', which has been drawn to the name Atheism+, though there were quite a few alternative names suggested. This was meant to be atheism, but which is inclusive, concerned about equality etc.
Unfortunately, as it came out of the sexism/feminism internal 'war', each utterance or action from one side simply made the divide widen. And now that one 'side' (which has mostly centred around some blogs over at freethoughtblogs.com) has proposed this idea - it has been met with a variety of criticisms.
Here is a professional writer giving a fair account of things for more detail.
hooah presents his own objections, which I think gives evidence to the existence of a 'deep rift':
I'd love to discus it on a different thread where it is on topic because I feel completely different based on how those who claim to be A+ act, not what they claim A+ is. In short, if you aren't completely and 100% supportive of feminism or feminism isn't your number one goal, they label you as misogynist, homophobic etc.
This is hyperbolic, I think. The commenters at places like Pharyngula are notoriously unpleasant to anyone that doesn't agree with certain dogmatic principles, but I don't see the behaviour as necessarily being indicative of Atheism+
The only way to ensure this isn't what Atheism+ becomes is to join the conversation, I suppose, and see if it can be directed.
Look what they (freethoughtblogs) did to thunderf00t, for example.
What did they do to him? Invite him to join their network? Kick him off their blog network? What else did they do?
What did thunderf00t do to them? Ridiculed one of their chief concerns. Wrote really badly, and exclusively about one issue - his beef with other bloggers on the same network. Then he used a security exploit to receive the emails they were sending to one another after he had been kicked off. Then he forwarded the contents of some of those mails to third parties (1 I think confirmed, it is unknown if there were more). And then posted parts of those confidential mails onto his new blog.
The people being ostracized, or rather not being included are homophobic, misogynistic etc., atheists.
Name one.
Why would I have to name one? I don't know of any, and even if they don't exist, that just means that nobody is being ostracized.
There is a HUGE difference between not having feminism or homosexual equality as your NUMBER ONE goal for the freethought movement and being homophobic or misogynist.
Yes there is. The assholes aren't the ones who don't have feminism as their primary focus - its the people that criticize those for whom it is.
Feminazi's (Skepchic, here's looking at you)
As thunderf00t said:
quote:
I’ve been around on the internets a LONNNG time, and its been my experience that the more people use terms like MISOGYNIST, RACIST, BIGOT and FEMINAZI, the less valid their arguments are likely to be.
Of course Feminazi appears to have been coined by a friend of Rush Limbaugh and popularised by him too. It makes you look really dumb for typing it out, so I politely suggest you refrain in the future.
and now their friends (PZ, Matt Dillahunty for example) are throwing around the misogynist term left and right for anyone who slightly disagrees with them.
I can think of numerous examples of people that those people have criticized without calling them misogynist, so again this must be hyperbolic. Do you have any examples in mind of this happening?


Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:11 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 124 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:34 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied
 Message 140 by roxrkool, posted 11-02-2012 11:14 PM Modulous has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 123 of 526 (671646)
08-28-2012 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Modulous
08-28-2012 5:35 PM


Re: Atheism+
This is hyperbolic, I think.
My opinion, that is shared by A LOT of other atheists,could hardly be construed as hyperbole. A lot of what I take from this is from comments on particular blogs, ya know, from the mouths of active atheists and their take on shit.
The commenters at places like Pharyngula are notoriously unpleasant to anyone that doesn't agree with certain dogmatic principles, but I don't see the behaviour as necessarily being indicative of Atheism+
It's not just Pharyngula, it's ALL of FtB (FreeThoughtBlogs) and Skepchic.
What did thunderf00t do to them? Ridiculed one of their chief concerns. Wrote really badly, and exclusively about one issue - his beef with other bloggers on the same network. Then he used a security exploit to receive the emails they were sending to one another after he had been kicked off. Then he forwarded the contents of some of those mails to third parties (1 I think confirmed, it is unknown if there were more). And then posted parts of those confidential mails onto his new blog.
I'm curious if you have listened to his side of the story. It is a VERY polarizing issue. It is causing otherwise supposed rational people to act very irrational. I tried as I might to get the whole story, and in the end it appeared as though they set him up. Even now, the likes of PZ and crew are trying to shun him from everything atheist movement related. I see no reason to disbelieve his side of the story and I have stomached just about as much of it as I can.
Why would I have to name one? I don't know of any, and even if they don't exist, that just means that nobody is being ostracized.
You said that the people being ostracized were being ostracized because they actually were homophobic or mysogonists. I asked you to name one who actually was. tehn, i went on to point out that dissenters are being ostracized from the freethought movement by some of the biggest names by way of being called mysogonist or homophobic simply for not kissing feminist ass or man hating. I am watching it happen. I read skepchic blogs and I see how they are treating people. i see how Richard Carrier is treating dissenters.
its the people that criticize those for whom it is.
Who is criticizing those people? WHY is the freethought movement becoming a feminist movement? THAT is my beef with this whole thing. If I wanted to join a feminist movement, I'd do so. If I wanted to talk about feminist issues, I'd join a feminist movement. EVERY FUCKING ATHEIST CONVERSATION is turning into man hating feminist shit. Look what happened at TAM: Amy Roth (AKA Surly Amy) was reduced to tears because of a fucking T-Shirt....worn by another woman...because it said "I'm a skeptic, not a skepchick" and made the whole goddamn thing about HER since there wasn't any actual harrasment going on.
I can think of numerous examples of people that those people have criticized without calling them misogynist, so again this must be hyperbolic. Do you have any examples in mind of this happening?
DJ Grothe (President of JREF) labeled a sexist
Greta Christina also calls DJ Grothe a mysogonist/sexist
I am having trouble finding what he even said to be labeled as such, but from the sounds of it, it is something along the lines of stating that all this sexism shit is driving people away from TAM. I'll try and hunt it down, but chances are that it was a Twitter/FB conversation.
Last, but most certainly not least, here we have RW herself insinuating very blatantly that if your are not A+ and "just atheist, you are a misogynist and racist.
Rebecca Watson writes:
My one other concern, ever since the A+ branding has caught on, is for humanism. You see, personally, I’m happy to leave atheism to the misogynists and the racists, and continue to define it as a simple lack of religion. I’ve long seen atheism as a broad and somewhat boring label, and I’m content to continue seeing it that way. And I’ve long seen secular humanism as the natural path for those atheists who are ready to move beyond the conclusion that there’s no such thing as a god: Sure there’s no god, but what are you going to do about it?
(bolding mine)
Long story short, it is a fact that the atheist movement IS getting splintered by feminism and feminist sympathizers. Go to Skepchick and see how many big name people (David Silverman, Matt Dillahunty and Phil Plaitt to name a few) to write about "hate" that women receive. It's all but driven me away from giving a shit about this entire movement and involvement in ANY of the community. Again, good job skepticunts.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2012 5:35 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 7:41 PM hooah212002 has replied
 Message 127 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2012 8:17 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 124 of 526 (671647)
08-28-2012 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Modulous
08-28-2012 5:35 PM


Re: Atheism+
Let's take a look at what Richard Carrier does have to say about Atheism+, shall we?
Being with or against Atheism+
Who do you think that blog post is directed towards? Who is the vitriol directed at? Religious folks don't even know what regular old atheism is, let alone atheism+.
Here is his initial post on the subject: The New Atheism+
Feel the love in his responses to dissenting voices. In response to one person saying "I'll stick with the original atheism, thanks" he says "So, one vote for douchery. Got it". Yes, now you are a douch if you are "just" an atheist.
Atheist "leaders" ostracizing atheists from atheism movements/activities/groups. Let that sink in.
In another response he says the following:
RC writes:
I explain Atheism+ means being an atheist who is against sexism and racism and endorses the values of reasonableness, compassion, and integrity.
I conclude by asking are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less and its sexism and cruelty and irrationality?
Tom states they pick option B.
I point out that this makes them a douchebag.
Identify where at any point I am wrong.
So again, if you don't adopt this new label, you are a douchebag misogynist sexist homophobe. And a douche.
Here's my overall point: 99% of the atheists I've interacted with already were against all the things this atheism+ movement is supposedly about. However, if you don't re-label yourself, you get accused of being FOR all those things.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2012 5:35 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 125 of 526 (671648)
08-28-2012 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 7:11 PM


Re: Atheism+
hooah212002 writes:
Last, but most certainly not least, here we have RW herself insinuating very blatantly that if your are not A+ and "just atheist, you are a misogynist and racist.
Rebecca Watson writes:
My one other concern, ever since the A+ branding has caught on, is for humanism. You see, personally, I’m happy to leave atheism to the misogynists and the racists, and continue to define it as a simple lack of religion. I’ve long seen atheism as a broad and somewhat boring label, and I’m content to continue seeing it that way. And I’ve long seen secular humanism as the natural path for those atheists who are ready to move beyond the conclusion that there’s no such thing as a god: Sure there’s no god, but what are you going to do about it?
(bolding mine)
No, there is no such insinuation there.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:11 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:46 PM nwr has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 126 of 526 (671649)
08-28-2012 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by nwr
08-28-2012 7:41 PM


Re: Atheism+
Then what does that bolded sentence say to you?

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 7:41 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 8:30 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 127 of 526 (671651)
08-28-2012 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 7:11 PM


Re: Atheism+
My opinion, that is shared by A LOT of other atheists,could hardly be construed as hyperbole.
If it is not hyperbolic do you have evidence of someone being labelled a misogynist for merely not having feminism as their number one goal?
It's not just Pharyngula, it's ALL of FtB (FreeThoughtBlogs) and Skepchic.
Really? I hadn't noticed.
I'm curious if you have listened to his side of the story
I've read his posts at FtB, his wordpress blog and his vlogs on the issue.
It is a VERY polarizing issue.
Yes, I think I alluded to that.
Even now, the likes of PZ and crew are trying to shun him from everything atheist movement related. I see no reason to disbelieve his side of the story and I have stomached just about as much of it as I can.
I think it is perfectly acceptable to call for social consequences for someone who invades your privacy and disseminates confidential information to third parties - don't you?
You said that the people being ostracized were being ostracized because they actually were homophobic or mysogonists. I asked you to name one who actually was.
And I said, I didn't know any specific names, but if there were none, it would not harm my point.
i went on to point out that dissenters are being ostracized from the freethought movement by some of the biggest names by way of being called mysogonist or homophobic simply for not kissing feminist ass or man hating.
You did, but I see no reason to believe you just because you claimed it.
i see how Richard Carrier is treating dissenters.
I can only assume you are referring to his comments in this blog post. He did post a limited apology for some of the names he was calling people.
Who is criticizing those people?
I'm pretty sure you're aware that some people have been criticising atheists who want to focus on feminism, deriding them with names like feminazis or skepticunts and stuff.
WHY is the freethought movement becoming a feminist movement?
Freethought is about freeing our thoughts from controlling influences, be it religion or political dogma or even the feminist's 'Patriarchy', which they view as a cultural hangover that harms men and women. It seems perfectly in line with freethought philosophy to try and free us from the 'conventional wisdom' regarding gender roles.
But freethought isnt't becoming a feminist movement. It's just one of the focuses of some of the members of the freethought community.
EVERY FUCKING ATHEIST CONVERSATION is turning into man hating feminist shit.
I've not seen 'man hating feminist shit' anywhere. I've seen feminism, sometimes confrontational feminism put forward, sometimes the person putting it forward is a bit lame or a bit of a dick. But I've not actually seen any particular misandry going on.
Look what happened at TAM: Amy Roth (AKA Surly Amy) was reduced to tears because of a fucking T-Shirt....worn by another woman...because it said "I'm a skeptic, not a skepchick" and made the whole goddamn thing about HER since there wasn't any actual harrasment going on.
Are you sure it was because of a T-Shirt or just listen to the 'FTBullies are feminazis!' version of the story? Here's the other side to the story
DJ Grothe (President of JREF) labeled a sexist
What is it that is said, that gives you this impression?
Greta Christina also calls DJ Grothe a mysogonist/sexist
Where?
I am having trouble finding what he even said to be labeled as such, but from the sounds of it, it is something along the lines of stating that all this sexism shit is driving people away from TAM. I'll try and hunt it down, but chances are that it was a Twitter/FB conversation.
It was in the skepchick post you linked to:
quote:
Last year we had 40% women attendees, something I’m really happy about. But this year only about 18% of TAM registrants so far are women, a significant and alarming decrease, and judging from dozens of emails we have received from women on our lists, this may be due to the messaging that some women receive from various quarters that going to TAM or other similar conferences means they will be accosted or harassed.
Long story short, it is a fact that the atheist movement IS getting splintered by feminism and feminist sympathizers. Go to Skepchick and see how many big name people (David Silverman, Matt Dillahunty and Phil Plaitt to name a few) to write about "hate" that women receive. It's all but driven me away from giving a shit about this entire movement and involvement in ANY of the community. Again, good job skepticunts.
A rational analysis with some indisputable insight.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:11 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:57 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 128 of 526 (671652)
08-28-2012 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 7:46 PM


Re: Atheism+
hooah212002 writes:
Then what does that bolded sentence say to you?
It says that RW is leaving plain atheism, in favor of A+, and that she hopes (perhaps encourages) others of like mind to join her.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 7:46 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:03 PM nwr has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 129 of 526 (671655)
08-28-2012 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by nwr
08-28-2012 8:30 PM


Re: Atheism+
Leaving plain atheism to....????? Yes, misogynists and racists. Do you not see those two words there?

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 8:30 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 9:37 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 130 of 526 (671659)
08-28-2012 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 9:03 PM


Re: Atheism+
hooah212002 writes:
Do you not see those two words there?
So what?
She neither says, nor implies, that only misogynists and racists will remain.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:03 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:44 PM nwr has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 131 of 526 (671660)
08-28-2012 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by nwr
08-28-2012 9:37 PM


Re: Atheism+
That is exactly how I read it: atheism (as opposed to atheism+) is for racists and misogynists. Atheists (as opposed to atheists+) are A-ok with racism and misogyny. Otherwise, why bother saying it?

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 9:37 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 11:17 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(4)
Message 132 of 526 (671661)
08-28-2012 9:53 PM


not just NARCs, now we have NARAs
Love it.
Now it is not just Not A Real Christian, it is also Not A Real Atheist.
Too funny.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 133 of 526 (671662)
08-28-2012 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Modulous
08-28-2012 8:17 PM


Re: Atheism+
I severely overestimated how little I give a shit about this. I thought I was up to a serious discussion about it and I obviously am not. I'm just not that interested in it (the whole atheism/religion thing) anymore. You have obviously followed it closer than I have, I'll give you that. Even though I can't provide evidence (not that it doesn't exist, it's just not readily available and I don't feel like digging it up), I still very much am tired of the discussion due to it constantly being about how poorly woman are treated or "white male priviledge" as if feminists issues are MORE rampant in atheist circles than everywhere else.
I concede. Sorry to have wasted your time.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2012 8:17 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by bluegenes, posted 08-28-2012 10:58 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(2)
Message 134 of 526 (671664)
08-28-2012 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 9:57 PM


Re: Atheism+
These people who seem to be trying to get together some kind of organized atheism are just learning what I could have told them at the start. You can have skeptics organizations, and humanist organisations, and religious organizations, and all kinds of organizations based around peoples beliefs, but you can't organize a bunch of people who don't necessarily have any beliefs in common.
As for the atheist+ "movement", it may as well open up to theists who share the same politics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:57 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by nwr, posted 08-28-2012 11:24 PM bluegenes has not replied
 Message 137 by jar, posted 08-29-2012 8:56 AM bluegenes has not replied
 Message 138 by Modulous, posted 08-29-2012 5:38 PM bluegenes has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 135 of 526 (671665)
08-28-2012 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by hooah212002
08-28-2012 9:44 PM


Re: Atheism+
She used a common idiom, which does not have the implications that you are claiming.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 9:44 PM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024