[link:http://skepchick.org/page-o-hate|

Those people should be charged.

Who are these people?

Follow the links and you get to here:

http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists

And then here:

Accommodationist, I suppose.

“Atheist organizing is no different from other power structures that deeply inform the ways in which women are subjugated — within secular context and within the context of organized religion,”

That's because people are investing more in the idea of Atheism than it represents. Mistaking a reflection of a patriarchal society with 'atheist dogma'.

There isn't any. Atheism is simply the non-belief in supernatural deities. It tells us NOTHING of social structure between men and women. Nothing of gender equality. It doesn't tell me how to wind my watch either.


If you want to address those problems with society, you have to go BEYOND Atheism(TM) into various philosophies. If you take a bunch of old guys in society, convince them that there is no god, they do not suddenly receive the enlightening benefits of believing in or accepting gender equality. Gender inequality/patriarchal society is predicated on a WHOLE LOT MORE than just religion. Something that does not evaporate instantly in the light of reason.

You don't magically cure the baggage of a patriarchal society by simply deciding you don't believe in a supernatural god. It's silly to even expect they would go hand in hand. These are separate and unrelated issues.

And further, if you want to 'enter into atheism with guns blazing' fuck it, you don't need to enter into a social remnant of patriarchy or any other -archy. Form peer bonds with WHOMEVER YOU WANT. You don't need Dawkin's permission to be an atheist. There is no inculcation, no initiation, no dues, no membership in 'Atheism'. You want to lead? LEAD. Take it. It's yours. You cannot BE stopped.

Do you not believe they exist? There is evidence.

"Is Atheism Just Another Old Boys Club?"


Nice try? Perhaps you (or the author) should rephrase that as "Are the current populist Atheist organizations just another old boy's club?"

Would have more weight that way, and I would not necessarily voice an objection.

that I perceive growing in society, that 'Atheism(TM)' is some alternate faith based magesteria that replaces religion. It doesn't.

If you take away all the baggage of religion, you are STILL going to have to get off your ass and gin up the philosophical muscles to tackle issues like gender equality/opportunity/sexism, etc.

You still have to tackle EVERY philosophical issue that religion has ever pretended to solve. That takes work. 'I don't believe in god' isn't some intellectual finish line. It's the barest beginning of the task before humanity.

Sexism and all the other isms can be challenged without reference to either theism or atheism.

And I agree the headline sacrificed accuracy for sensation.

This is a social ill, that goes quite beyond religion, and to the heart of society. (Though there are some religions that institutionalize sexism as a core bit of the faith itself)

So yes, it's much more than nonbelief. Nonbelief is a Boolean bit; true/false. If false, and you select a particular faith, it will more often than not have associated dogma that already tackles issues like this.

If you select true, then you have an empty sack, from which you have to proceed to additional philosophical venues. Secular Humanism? Naturalistic beliefs? There are a few to choose from, some of which will fill that sack with dogma that answers things like gender equality, some are silent on the matter.

For me, I selected a clean slate, I start with the axiom of self-ownership, which actually tells me everything I need to know about gender equality. Every single individual, irrespective of gender, owns their own voice, their own dreams, their own desires, and their own potential. Proceeding from self-ownership to things like non-aggression, I find that it is wholly inappropriate for me to attempt to hold anyone back from those dreams, aspirations, their voice, etc. It's taken a lot of work, a lot of lifting, a lot of wheel re-inventing, but it is entirely rewarding and worth it for each individual to discover. Discarding the option of religion and prepackaged dogma was just one step on the journey.

I encourage others to look beyond Atheism as a state or a destination. It's much much more, and simultaneously, a lot less, than that.

The good news is that it is being discussed early and in an honest and earnest way by some.

I think there is the chance here that this can be resolved in a way that hasn't happened in a lot of organizations.

That would be good for women and good for organized atheism, imo.

And in the end, good for men.

If leaders within atheist organizations would take a united stand against the incredibly ugly misogyny that is being expressed by what I guess is a small group of people, they could be formidable.

It permeates nearly everything in our society. Even when it permeates our own groups we can not let it stand. It is a real problem and we need to listen when we are told about it anywhere. These groups need to listen to these women and address their concerns and fix the issues in their own organization.

That said, atheism is not a religion, movement or organization. All it means is that we do not have any belief in any god(s). There are right wing atheists, and left wing. Some are skeptics and reject any unproven claim, and others who believe in other spiritual assertions...just not in any god(s).

We can form groups around certain issues that affect us, but no group represents all of us. There is no big book of atheism that says thou shall protest the pledge or thou shalt read thine Richard Dawkins.

Similarly, there is nothing that is inherently pro or anti patriarchy or pro or anti feminism about atheism. Nothing.

No where in the big book of atheism does it say Thou shall deny women their reproductive rights, or that shall force women to wear certain clothing, or that women are worth less than men, or any patriarchal bullshit like that. We have no doctrine set up to support or oppose patriarchy. That is up to the individual atheist.

Any issues with patriarchy that a group of atheists or a group devoted to promoting atheism or the rights of atheism has belongs solely to that specific group and its members. The Patriarchy of, lets say, The Ayn Rand Anti-theist Alliance* is in no way related to Secular Humanist United.*

So, no, atheism, itself, is not an old boys club. These groups that are oppressing or being exclusive of women need to be criticized and reform themselves so that women feel welcome and confident that the members realize that they are equals and treat them as such. But again their patriarchy is thier own and comes solely from the individual members of that group.

Patriarchy is not a characteristic of atheism itself.


*These are not real groups. I made them up.

You might start with your own house.

But, please, do continue. I appreciate irony.

Proceed.

I'll put the "sins" of the RCC in regard to being an old boys club against anything that has happened within the atheist community any day of the week.

You may want to rephrase that.

Besides, arguing which is the bigger pig sty misses the point. You really don't want to measure the pigs proportionately.

But you certainly use them to make a point about the "rampant" sexism in atheism.

And if you are a member of the RCC and give them your money and/or time, it is your house.

And by that respect, I would have to call the FFRF as my house. Gladly.

It is you that would not want to measure the pigs proportionately. You have the numbers and many more centuries of shit and pretty damn heinous crimes.

Although that didn't stop you from walking in and making yourself right at home.

How about next time you want to start a fight, you make sure it's about you?

And don't trot out that tired old bullshit about practicing Catholics being enablers of child rape. I can suggest a room where people will high five you for regurgitating that kind of tripe.

If you want truly want to measure the pigs proportionately, there's a very simple logarithm.

that the organization could be an old boys club.

i'm an atheist and i don't attend any organization or anything having to do with me being atheist.

There's a small discussion upthread about that.

But none of them are "new atheists", the ones going out and talking to people about their atheism.

Honestly though, this reminds of the shortage of women and "sexism" in the science fields. Its being overcome, and the sexism is never overt, its accidental. For instance culturally men have one way of communicating and women another, and scientists used to a male field will have a way of communicating when you know what you're talking about, that women may not have. So it takes a conscious effort to listen really to their different communication style and adapt to it to see if they know what they are talking about, otherwise you risk dismissing an expert because they communicate differently, an act of accidental sexism. Its an example of a good truth: sexism, racism and the rest aren't necessarily conscious decisions, we all have to be mindful of our actions to make sure we're not doing them accidentally.

she practically *was* the modern atheist movement for decades.