Religion
Related: About this forumAtheism - Sexism = Atheism +
Being an atheist is a hassle, but being a lady atheist can be the pits. Not only do you have to deal with Christians saying you’re going to hell all the time, your beliefs will undoubtedly put you in close proximity with “enlightened” male unbelievers who will unabashedly hit on you and maybe even make rape jokes because, well, there’s no God to punish them. Atheist blogger Jennifer McCreight became well versed in godless misogyny when in 2010 she devised a stunt called “Boobquake” via her blog that called on women to dress immodestly for a designated day (April 26) in response to Iranian cleric Hojatoleslam Kazem Seddiqi’s claim that things like female cleavage and bare legs cause earthquakes. Of course, Boobquake went viral. The unfortunate by-product was that Jennifer’s instant internet fame resulted in a deluge of hateful, misogynistic emails from fellow nonbelievers.
7 hours ago
By Harry Cheadle
Once again she took to her blog to respond, authoring a post that called for a “new wave” of atheism that concerned itself with feminism and social justice. And again Jennifer’s ideas exploded all over the insular, male-dominated world of atheism blogs. This led to her setting up an online forum that concerns what has come to be known as “Atheism+.” She plans to continue what she’s doing without compromise, despite objections from the same sort who said nasty things about her boobs. I called her up to see how the fight was going.
VICE: When did you begin getting hassled by sexist atheists?
Jennifer McCreight: When I first started going to atheist conferences, I was warned to avoid certain speakers because they were known for going after younger women. I was often approached after I gave talks, and people would make really lewd, sexual comments to me or basically be talking to my chest.
Then you wrote the post that begot Atheism+.
I basically said that we have to fight back against this. We need to make our own space where we don’t tolerate that kind of discussion or people trying to silence each other with really hateful things. I was actually surprised to see that people were excited about it.
http://www.vice.com/read/atheism-sexismatheism-00003000-v19n10
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
dmallind
(10,437 posts)Because of course we all know that believers never hit on women inappropriately, fearing the reliably dispensed and post-modernist attuned wrath of God perhaps?
resulted in a deluge of hateful, misogynistic emails from fellow nonbelievers.
How many? In what ratio? Is that a greater or lesser ratio than those received by female believers who seek to fragment their groups?
I was warned to avoid certain speakers because they were known for going after younger women. I was often approached after I gave talks, and people would make really lewd, sexual comments to me or basically be talking to my chest.
Is this behavior unique to atheist groups, or more prevalent there?
Wonder why these questions are never answered or even considered in these frequent repostings? Kinda funny when the ratio question is the standard flash-card response to the far less serious problem of Catholic hierachy boy-buggering, and the "old hat" response follows it up. One would almost suspect hypocrisy - if suspicion were not so.... redundant.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)problem in religious groups both in the past and currently.
How many hateful, misogynistic emails would she have to get to convince you they are a significant problem? Would it have to be more than women in other male dominated organizations have gotten?
Whether it is more prevalent, has the same prevalence or even less isn't the issue. Whether it exists in religious organizations is not the issue either. It does and they should also take it seriously.
Why is it so difficult for you to consider that this may be a problem which will hurt organized atheism/secularism/humanism? One of the goals of these organizations is to provide acceptance and support of atheists who may have felt unable to safely express their points of view. Why would anyone be resistant to examining complaints by those who feel unwelcome or even unsafe?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)for "organized atheism/secularism/humanism" is deeply moving. And total horseshit. If you want to dance a jig and say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...atheists can be sexist pigs too and that PROVES there's a god!!" be my guest. But please stop pretending you care.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)How is this different AT ALL from the last 5 or so times you posted this?
rug
(82,333 posts)I'll remember that gif when you talk about the RCC again. I'll probably have to use it in this very thread.
You know, if you find this ongoing news discomforting, you can always hide the thread.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)That would be the difference between this discussion of sexism and my discussion of it in the RCC. You have never addressed the issue and dealt with the problem. I just posted yesterday acknowledging that it exists.
My problem is that you are posting the same thing over and over again as an OP. Another difference between this and the RCC. When have I ever started an OP about the sexism of the RCC?
rug
(82,333 posts)The difference is, this story is not an excuse to bash atheism, unlike the posts about the RCC.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)gives a damn about "Atheists +." Truly. How utterly...well...unremarkable.
rug
(82,333 posts)
dimbear
(6,271 posts)In that moment of immediacy and clarity, you notice the ashtray is almost full.
Priorities. They can be a bitch.
rug
(82,333 posts)When you complain to others, they talk about ashtrays.
And casually toss around the word bitch.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)It's the new prudery that's going around.
rug
(82,333 posts)Keep going. Her credibility increases with each word you type, even as yours lessens.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)When I was in Paris I took the elevator to the top of the Eiffel Tower, by the time I reached my destination my ass was black and blue from all the pinches I had to endure.
I've been grabbed, groped and molested by men since I was a teenager, since I was the only girl in my family I learned how to defend myself at an early age and was able to incapacitate more than one would-be rapist.
Most of them were probably christian, although it's quite possible there may have been an atheist or two in the mix.
I guess I should have polled them in advance.
rug
(82,333 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Tell you what, rug, just for you I'll try to bring it up next time.
rug
(82,333 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Or maybe I'm just an ungrateful bitch who doesn't appreciate your heartfelt concern.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Sexual harassment is not acceptable anywhere, and, FWIW, the incidence of open harassment in southern Europe has decreased significantly over the years.
Women standing up to it is just what you described as the solution, so why is there so much hostility towards this brave women who is directly standing up to it? Particularly from another woman?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Your blatant misrepresentation of my post is insulting and not worthy of a response.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)See you around the campfire.
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)far from divisive but its too bad some religious will use it as a new color to paint all atheists with.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I find atheist+ to have some pretty positive messages, particularly about social justice and equality. I'm not sure what you mean about religious using it as a new color, though.
DagoRed
(10 posts)what's so incredibly bizarre to me is the number of atheists who STILL seem compelled to shout "Shut Up" at the movement whenever it comes up. At worst, A+ will go the way of the "Brights" (not my hope, but always a possibility)...but when people were debating the Brights label, they weren't met with these constant calls to silence their discussions (i.e. dead horse graphic, trolling, etc.), as A+ seems to attract.
This difference leads one to infer ulterior motives behind the naysayers comments. It's like A+ has turned a significant section of the atheist movement into the Nixon White House after Wood-stein broke Watergate.
I get it (we ALL get it), some of you are tired of hearing about A+. It's not your issue and you don't think its a problem. Fine - but why does it still compel you to keep knocking it down whenever it comes up? Frankly, if a person wants to keep posting a thread about their love of watching paint dry, that's their prerogative. But getting annoyed with them is about as rational as shouting at the wind. All the protesting of A+ simply makes people like me, who aren't deeply invested in the discussion, wonder what it is that makes this such an emotional issue for the naysayers, if this issue (as they all like to claim) is so minor, inconsequential, and like whipping a dead horse. I will refrain from quoting the famous but tired quote form Hamlet, but all this constant protesting of A+ is beginning to deliver the exact opposite message than the one being explicitly stated in the complaints.
