Summations Only

I also consider myself a strong atheist and believe exactly as you do. Well said.

Interesting. I had no idea all this drama was unfolding in the atheist world.From your description, I have no interest in aligning myself with the Atheist+ movement. Why? Because my atheism has absolutely nothing to do with feminism, racism, or homophobia. It's about knowing there is no supernatural. Period. I don't have to be a feminist, non-racist, homo-friendly, flaming liberal to be an atheist. They are completely separate, albeit compatible, systems of belief and/or knowledge. I'm an atheist regardless of what other beliefs I hold.This movement reminds me of when someone told me I couldn't call myself a Democrat and work in the mining industry because a 'real' Democrat would never rape the planet.

Don't get me started...

I never knew calling a woman a "female" was an insult.In fact, I'm feeling decidedly unworthy to call myself an Atheist, much less a female... er, I mean a chick, a damsel, a lass, a tootsie, (crap!) I mean a slutty, unmasculine feminist Atheist doxy, after reading the Announcements portion of the Information and Answers forum. Sheesh!A comprehensive list of approved replacement words for the unfortunate "female" appears to be in order.

You know, I read about this *elevatorgate* episode previously, just before I stopped reading Pharyngula, and I honestly didn't see the big deal at the time. I still don't. In fact, that might have been the last straw for me on Pharyngula, come to think of it.Maybe I'm missing part of the story or something... Which is quite likely since I can hardly get through 5 posts on the subject before I feel mired in the dramatics and stop reading.

I see.So Elevatorgate wasn't that some guy picked her up in the elevator (creeping her out), but that some people (mostly men) thought she shouldn't have responded the way she did and therefore abused her over the internet.That's a bit more of the story that I did not know.I think it's easy to get caught up in drama that unfolds on the internet when you are not actually speaking to people face to face. Anonymity gives a lot of people courage to do and say stupid things.

So I've been digging into this drama a bit more and found what appears to be a fairly unbiased summary of the ordeal: http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/...1/elevatorgate/ My understanding and knowledge on Elevatorgate has improved, but my original impression has not changed. I remain skeptical of RW in general, and I really don't agree with her or her followers' opinions on feminism. I particularly dislike the attitude that if you don't agree with her version of feminism, that you are a "gender traitor." Or in effect, not a *real* feminist.

Based on what I've read, what they appear to be saying is that if you don't agree with their logic, you support everything they abhor. And that makes you a misogynist, rape supporter, racist, and other horrible things.

Yes. I read a bit of Richard Carrier's blog and he basically stated that the Atheists who subscribe to Atheism+ are more rational and more moral than those who do not.We already know what happens to movements who think they are more moral than the rest of the masses...they create (not become) "others." Outcasts. I understand that all humans are susceptible to superiority complexes, but it's still a bit disheartening to see it happening to atheists.It also really bothers me that this movement is essentially politicizing and religionizing (for lack of a better word) atheism, particularly since we've fought so hard to explain to people that Atheism is not a religion. I guess we were wrong.Edited by roxrkool, : 'become' changed to 'create'

Despite high ideals and noble intentions, we humans do have a tendency to take things to the extreme. And what results is that we become the very thing we fought so hard to overcome.Social justice issues are worth fighting for, but not at the expense of another group of people, including wealthy, white, privileged heterosexual males.

Well said. Exactly what I was thinking.

I have already shown you. In her elevatorgate video she says that elevatorguy sexualized her [by propositioning her]. And by definition, sexual Objectification IS one of the basic manifestations of misogyny. Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.

And for the second time:By definition, sexual objectification IS one of the basic manifestations of misogyny.Are you under the impression that RW doesn't accept the definition of misogyny as defined by Feminist Theory?

Discussing anything with you is like entering Bizarro world.You calling her experience "accurate" hardly makes it so. I have neither seen nor read anything that convinces me RW's experience in the elevator constitutes misogyny. Therefore, I have tentatively concluded that it IS extreme to characterize the elevator proposition, if that's what it was, as sexual objectification and thus, misogyny. However, RW and you are free to believe what you want.

Come on, Crash. You need to actually comprehend what people are writing instead of what you think people are writing.My position is, and has been, that RW accused elevator dude of misogyny by "objectifying" her (in the elevatorgate video). You asked people to stop putting words in her mouth and asked for proof of that. I simply pointed out (several times) that, according to feminist theory -- NOT my own definitions -- sexual objectification IS misogyny, therefore, RW did in fact accuse elevator dude of misogyny.I personally do not agree with RW's assessment of the alleged incident.As for myself, speaking of my own experience as a woman, I have not ever accused any community of misogyny. If you have interpreted my own experience in such a way, that is then your opinion. Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.