misogyny

[DaveC426913]

Nah, I think you’re inserting an argument that’s just not there. I never suggested that atheism and sexism is correlated.

Well, you did, even if you didn't mean it that way.

Are you an atheist and have you ever been accused of being sexist? You seem like you’re taking this personal.

My stake in this is that I don't like flawed assertions.

Anyway, it's cleared up. I don't wish to derail the discussion.

 

[wegs]

No, I didn’t. I wouldn’t post something that I don’t believe. You’re inserting something I never posted. Or inferred.

Nowhere did I suggest that atheism leads to sexism or is somehow correlated.

 

[DaveC426913]

All right. I over-read into it.

 

[billvon]

No. Religion is organized and taught.

Yes. And then people come to their own conclusions about it. Some accept it; some don't.

No one teaches organized atheism.

You've never heard a Dawkins lecture?

 

[wegs]

You've never heard a Dawkins lecture?

lol True.

 

[parmalee]

OK then I didn't misunderstand you.
1] There is no such thing as an atheist movement. Every atheist comes to their own personal conclusion for their own personal reasons.

2] It is as significant to say there exists sexism within the group of blue-eyed people. Unless you think there is a correlation between sexism
and specifically atheism. If so, I'd be curious as to the relationship you see.

C'mon, you're being kinda obtuse here. While there may not be an "atheist movement" as cohesive and organizational as most religious traditions, surely you're familiar with New Atheism <<<, and some of what that entails?

Moreover, no one has really suggested that there is any sort of correlation between sexism/misogyny and atheism, buuuuuttt:

For example, (Sam) Harris said in 2014 that new atheism was dominated by men because it lacks the “nurturing, coherence-building extra estrogen vibe that you would want by default if you wanted to attract as many women as men.”

This resulted in an exodus of women from the movement who decided that the “new atheist” label was no longer for them. (I know of many diehard atheist women who wanted nothing to do with “new atheism,” which is a real shame.) Harris’ attempted self-exoneration didn’t help, either — it merely revealed a moral scotoma in his understanding of gender, sexism and related issues. ...

Just consider a recent tweet from one of the most prominent new atheist luminaries, Peter Boghossian: “Why is it that nearly every male who’s a 3rd wave intersectional feminist is physically feeble & has terrible body habitus?” If this is what it means to be a “reasonable person,” then who would want to be that? Except for the vocabulary, that looks like something you’d find in Donald Trump’s Twitter feed. The same goes for another of Boghossian’s deep thoughts: “I’ve never understood how someone could be proud of being gay. How can one be proud of something one didn’t work for?” It’s hard to know where to even begin dissecting this bundle of shameful ignorance.

More recently, Boghossian and his sidekick James Lindsay published a “hoax” academic paper in a “gender studies” journal (except that it wasn't) in an attempt to embarrass the field of gender studies, which they — having no expertise in the field — believe is dominated by a radical feminist ideology that sees the penis as the root of all evil. ...

Along these lines, the new atheist movement has flirted with misogyny for years. Harris’ “estrogen vibe” statement — which yielded a defense rather than a gracious apology — was only the tip of the iceberg. As mentioned above, there have been numerous allegations of sexual assault, and atheist conferences have pretty consistently been male-dominated — resulting in something like a “gender Matthew effect."

https://www.salon.com/2017/07/29/fr...ages-how-new-atheism-slid-into-the-alt-right/

 

[wegs]

Moreover, no one has really suggested that there is any sort of correlation between sexism/misogyny and atheism, buuuuuttt:

https://www.salon.com/2017/07/29/fr...ages-how-new-atheism-slid-into-the-alt-right/

I wonder if much of this has to do with many men (''new atheists'') following the red pill/men's activism narratives, which promote MGTOW and anti-feminism. I don't think atheism correlates with that (or causes it), as much as it's just a coincidence that the two philosophies seem to be pairing together.

 

[DaveC426913]

... surely you're familiar with New Atheism <<<, and some of what that entails?

Never heard of it.

 

[origin]

You've never heard a Dawkins lecture?

I have heard snippets I think. I think he is kind of nutty.
You surely aren't proposing that the atheism is taught like religion, are you? That position would be indefensible. I am sure there are probably atheist support groups or some such nonsense, but there's are no atheist churches or schools that teach the tenets of atheism. Sure there are teachers or people that present there view on atheism or even try to get people to become atheist, but that is not like the religious institutions.

For crying out loud there is not that much that can be said about atheism that would take more than an hour or so. The atheist bible would be something like: "In the beginning there was God. Nuh-uh! The end." The whole bible could be written on a 3 x 5 card.

I assume most atheist or agnostics are like me. I very, very rarely talk or even think about being an atheist, except for these online discussions where people bring it up.

I say believe what you want just don't try to impose a belief, that contradicts evidence, on me.

 

[wegs]

''New Atheism'' is about activism, it seems, and not about ''passive'' disbelief.

https://www.gotquestions.org/new-atheism.html

 

[billvon]

I have heard snippets I think. I think he is kind of nutty.
You surely aren't proposing that the atheism is taught like religion, are you? That position would be indefensible.

?? Right; there's nothing formal to teach.

But atheists do get together and worship. More than half of the people at the church I go to (a Unitarian church) are atheists. And the church is quite organized; they even have a daycare center and a preschool for kids. Atheism is discussed quite a bit, and it's not just "there's no God! Bye."

I am sure there are probably atheist support groups or some such nonsense, but there's are no atheist churches or schools that teach the tenets of atheism.

See above.

For crying out loud there is not that much that can be said about atheism that would take more than an hour or so.

Given that there are thousands of posts here about atheism, probably covering millions of words, that's provably not true.

I say believe what you want just don't try to impose a belief, that contradicts evidence, on me.

You'd probably be quite happy at our church, then.

 

[DaveC426913]

For crying out loud there is not that much that can be said about atheism that would take more than an hour or so. The atheist bible would be something like: "In the beginning there was God. Nuh-uh! The end." The whole bible could be written on a 3 x 5 card.

Exactly. Except in the presence of believers, people have no reason to talk about things they don't believe. Or form opinions about, beyond natural skepticism.
People who don't believe in unicorns don't have a club for not believing in unicorns.
People who don't believe in faeries or in Leprechauns don't spend much time thinking about the non-existence of faeries or Leprechauns. Nor do they organize meetings to discuss these things.

The number of things to not believe in in the universe has no upper bound.


*(It's unfortunate that it looks like I'm mocking or minimalizing the concept of God by comparing it to Leprechauns, unicorns or Santa. It's not intentional mockery. For a skeptic to describe his/her stance to a non-skeptic, one needs to analogize with something that most people generally agree probably does not exist in the absence of sufficient evidence. Apologies for the appearance of disrespect.)

 

[DaveC426913]

?? Right; there's nothing formal to teach.

But atheists do get together and worship. More than half of the people at the church I go to (a Unitarian church) are atheists. And the church is quite organized; they even have a daycare center and a preschool for kids. Atheism is discussed quite a bit, and it's not just "there's no God! Bye."
See above.
Given that there are thousands of posts here about atheism, probably covering millions of words, that's provably not true.

You'd probably be quite happy at our church, then.

I'm not sure what to call them except hypocrites in the nicest possible way. United is not an atheist religion.
If they are gathering under the United banner, they are gathering based on the religion, not on their lack of belief in God.

 

[DaveC426913]

Given that there are thousands of posts here about atheism, probably covering millions of words, that's provably not true.

The only thing said is "You're making the extraordinary claim, show us the evidence."

L.Ron Hubbard created a religion. A lot of people have criticized it. The fact that a lot of people have had to speak out against this charlatan (because so many were supporting him) does not mean that Hubbard-bashing has become its own religion. Criticism of an unfounded assertion does not qualify as a world view.

Same can be said for any other claims that don't withstand analysis.

 

[billvon]

I'm not sure what to call them except hypocrites in the nicest possible way. United is not an atheist religion. If they are gathering under the United banner, they are gathering based on the religion, not on their lack of belief in God.

?? Right. It's not an atheist religion, or a Christian religion, or a Hindu religion. Its tenets are based on beliefs from all of those. You'd be welcome anyway, even if you think everyone there is a hypocrite.

The only thing said is "You're making the extraordinary claim, show us the evidence."

Oh, far more than that has been said.

Criticism of an unfounded assertion does not qualify as a world view.

I didn't claim it did. I was responding to your assertion that "there is not that much that can be said about atheism that would take more than an hour or so." That is provably false.

 

[DaveC426913]

?? Right. It's not an atheist religion, or a Christian religion, or a Hindu religion. Its tenets are based on beliefs from all of those. You'd be welcome anyway, even if you think everyone there is a hypocrite.

I was a member of the United for many years. I really enjoyed the community and the singalongs (minister was a hippy-dippy musician.)

A Very Bad Thing happened (unrelated), causing us to leave in disgust.

But years later, I tried going to another United to see if I could regain that sense of community. Unfortunately, I felt like an impostor.
I can see God as a positive philosophy, especially when it brings people together for a common good. I just don't think it has to be literally real.
I think I would very much enjoy your church.

 

[parmalee]

I wonder if much of this has to do with many men (''new atheists'') following the red pill/men's activism narratives, which promote MGTOW and anti-feminism. I don't think atheism correlates with that (or causes it), as much as it's just a coincidence that the two philosophies seem to be pairing together.

Yeah, I don't think there's much of a connection between atheism and misogyny, just as there's no real connection between music and misogyny, or gaming..., or medicine..., or tech..., or... But when people organize... I mean, seriously, what the hell is an atheist convention? Perhaps I'm being hasty in my assessment, but I just don't see myself attending one of those.

That said, just how many people really align themselves with such a "movement?" Most sources name Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett as the figureheads. Apart from Dennett, they're all a bit nutty (or got nutty, as with Hitchens). But Harris is by far the worst. Think of the most cringeworthy remark you can make on any subject--but especially re: gender or race--and Sam Harris has probably said it. Seriously, when Joe Rogan--former host of Fear Factor and professional obese thumb--embraces you, it's time to seriously rethink your life choices.

But it (sexism and misogyny) is hardly intrinsic, and certainly not unique, to atheistic culture (I guess) or religious ones, for that matter. Consider medicine and the medical industry, for instance: Viagra is bigger than Jesus and the Beatles combined--and I don't mean in that everyone loves it or everyone's buying it, but rather, everyone's pushing it. One would think that erectile dysfunction is the leading cause of death. The medical industry is like a case study in phallocentrism. (My mother had a knee replacement ~15 years back which has caused her nothing but trouble. Why? 'Cuz my mother is 5'2" and 100 pounds, and the knees were made for ~6', ~160 pound men. Where matters pertaining to women's health are even acknowledged or funded for research, it's almost invariably pertaining solely to reproductive health, 'cuz, you know, that's all that matters.)

 

[DaveC426913]

But it (sexism and misogyny) is hardly intrinsic, and certainly not unique, to atheistic culture (I guess) or religious ones, for that matter.

I think the issue is that, in many religions, the sexism is encoded in the practice.
Such as cardinals not being allowed to be female.

Sure, there's a pervasive culture of passive sexism worldwide (including theists, atheists, agnostics, musicians, medicine, gaming, tech, etc.), but some structures have it actively institutionalized.

 

[parmalee]

I think the issue is that, in many religions, the sexism is encoded in the practice.
Such as cardinals not being allowed to be female.

Sure, there's a pervasive culture of passive sexism worldwide (including theists, atheists, agnostics, musicians, medicine, gaming, tech, etc.), but some structures have it actively institutionalized.

I would argue that in medicine, at least (of the given examples), it is also very much actively institutionalized. And with some of the others, it certainly has been in the past.

 

[wegs]

Sure, there's a pervasive culture of passive sexism worldwide (including theists, atheists, agnostics, musicians, medicine, gaming, tech, etc.), but some structures have it actively institutionalized.

Like the US government, and why the US hasn't yet had a female President?