Quick Rebuttal to One Part of Atheism Plus
This will be a quick rebuttal to one part of this whole Atheism+ thing that has been circulating the atheist community as of late.
A common thing to say with this new Atheism+ thing is, “I agree with the concept and goals, such as being anti-racism and anti-homophobia, but I just don’t want a creed or doctrine of atheism.” That is a very valid concern and true for a lot of people. It is not true for me.
I do not agree with the radical approach to feminism that this movement takes (or radical feminism in general), despite myself being for actual gender equality. I also may not agree with their definition of social justice, animal welfare, and others. I may not agree with their stances on several political issues (as I am against affirmative action and very hawkish in foreign policy, not very progressive stances). Libertarian atheists (despite my extreme distaste for libertarian philosophy) may be very active atheists, and may even be pro-gay and all, but not agree with the Atheist+ idea of progressivism or social justice either.
Just because you’re an atheist that is not progressive does not mean that you can’t be for the civil rights of atheists. Even if you are against the civil rights of others, such is the case with atheists who are anti-gay (yes, they do exist). It’s not a case of strange-bedfellows. We would still stand up for the rights of minorities, even though minorities (i.e. blacks, Hispanics, etc.) are statistically more likely to be homophobic and may even be actively anti-gay.
We can fight these different battles, as they are all different battles and different movements, even if they may fall under the very wide umbrella of the “progressive” movement. And really, at that point, you might as well just say you’re a progressive or liberal atheist. No need for this new term and label, that is already covered by several other terms (e.g. secular movement, secular humanist, progressive, etc.), that is only dividing atheists.
Posted on September 11, 2012, in Religion/Atheism and tagged atheism plus, civil rights, humanism, progressive, quick rebuttal, quick rebuttal to one part of atheism plus, secular, secular humanism. Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.
BA,
I’ve been listening to you debate the A+ issue over the past couple weeks on Dogma Debate, and I have to say I’m slightly confused on a few of your objections. I personally am probably much more in agreement with David Smalley on the A+ issue than yourself, but I’m still on the fence as I don’t yet have enough information to make an informed decision, especially in regards to many of the same concerns you hold, such as where they stand on animal welfare. My biggest point of confusion lies on your claim of “radical feminism” that you believe has permeated (or even founded) the A+ movement. I was under the impression that most of the feminism in A+ is rooted in the dictionary definition, which is just a fight for equal rights and treatment across the board. Can you give me an example of what you mean by “radical feminism” in this context?
Thanks!
The people who initially came up with the idea, such as Jen McCreight of Freethought Blogs, believes that the atheist community is just full of rampant sexism, racism, and the like.
In her original post she says, “I was exactly what a Boy’s Club wanted. I was a young, not-hideous woman who passionately supported their cause. I made them look diverse without them having to address their minority-repelling privilege.” She stereotypes atheism as being nothing more than a “boy’s club” and group of “middle-class, white, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied men.” She says she wants diversity, but is inadvertently alienating these groups of people.
Then, when a female, atheist blogger said that she has not experienced misogyny in the atheist community, mainly because, as she puts it, she doesn’t assume that every man is a misogynist, McCreight and others denounce her comments as “blaming the victim” and told her that she’s “full of shit.”
Feminism so radical that they don’t care what dissenting women have to say.
Thanks for the response. As a follow up then, just for the sake of discussion then, what is your take on the rather nasty recent responses to Ms. McCreight? I’m specifically referring to the blatantly misogynistic responses (calling her assorted things like slut) on both her own posts and even on her father’s blog. While I can understand that she may be a bit overzealous in her feminism, I can’t help but wonder if the responses justify her feelings a bit. What are your thoughts?
Someone being trolled on the internet, especially because they hold certain beliefs close to them that are a very sensitive subject? Why, I’ve never seen that happen before!
In spite of the blatant sarcasm, I never get why people have such a problem with trolling and internet harassment (especially why that would make them stop blogging). I get harassing and threatening messages all the time for what I do. I just very recently received an email from someone who told me to enjoy hell while I’m raped by demons, all because I’m bi. I laughed at it (but that may be because I have a tougher skin than some people).
My fiancee, also an atheist activist, had a website built about her where some guy threatened to chop her head off and rape her nine-year-old daughter. Except for worrying that her family, friends, and coworkers might find out about it, we never really reacted much to it.
McCreight said she didn’t feel safe in the atheist community. Okay. That’s her feelings. A female atheist blogger by the name of Lucy Wainwright tweeted, and Richard Dawkins even retweeted this, that she has never experienced harassment or misogyny from other atheists. She said, “Maybe because I don’t assume they’re misogynists?”