The Atheism Plus "movement" -- good, bad, ugly?

[Badger3k]

Not Dillahunty! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo................!!!!! Don't tell me he has joined those fuck-me-I'm-a-nice-guy atheists?

Yes, but to be fair he's not been entirely unreasonable in his words as compared to some he's supporting.

He's the moderate Christian to the more extremist Westboro Baptist Atheists, but I hope he remembers his own words, since he's technically an enabler. He's also grown a bit famous for (IIRC) saying that it didn't matter if Elevator Guy existed or not (commonly called "facts don't matter") a while back on his blog (also IIRC).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Read 'em and weep:

http://ohioatheist.wordpress.com/2012/0 ... -facebook/

His whole "mass-blocking" tantrum made me think that he really, really needs to take some time off. I haven't listened to the show since the last school year ended, but others have said he's made comments on being burned out. This insanity and dickishness could be a symptom of that, as well as his new marriage - lots of changes, plus a wife who takes sex advice from Amanda Marcotte (from what I hear, again hearsay). Others have suggested that Matt is falling back to his evangelical/fundamentalist mindset out of habit and finding a new dogma to believe in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[hadespussercats]

Is Amanda Marcotte a bad person to take sex advice from?

IIRC, she cooks a mean berry tart. which is the sort of thing that usually bodes well for the boudoir.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Not Dillahunty! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo................!!!!! Don't tell me he has joined those fuck-me-I'm-a-nice-guy atheists?

Yes, but to be fair he's not been entirely unreasonable in his words as compared to some he's supporting.

He's the moderate Christian to the more extremist Westboro Baptist Atheists, but I hope he remembers his own words, since he's technically an enabler. He's also grown a bit famous for (IIRC) saying that it didn't matter if Elevator Guy existed or not (commonly called "facts don't matter") a while back on his blog (also IIRC).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Read 'em and weep:

http://ohioatheist.wordpress.com/2012/0 ... -facebook/

Hmmm. I stand corrected. Oh well.

Oh, well.


His "it doesn't matter if EG actually existed" claim just shocks me. It's like saying it doesn't matter whether the Maine was a belligerent act or not. The stupid, it BURNS.

[Badger3k]

Is Amanda Marcotte a bad person to take sex advice from?

IIRC, she cooks a mean berry tart. which is the sort of thing that usually bodes well for the boudoir.

I hope I had the name correct - she (used to?) run a feminist blog that was interesting, then she worked for Edwards, and somewhere around that I remember her going off the deep end into radical thinking. Again, this is hearsay, but apparently in the ACA podcast "godless bitches" (somehow no one complains about the sexist name) they mentioned something about taking their medical advice (sorry, I think this is more accurate than sex advice) on reproduction maybe (?) from Marcotte, who is not even close to being qualified (as well as, in my opinion, a bit of a nutbag - I can't remember what went on, but I never paid her any attention after that, so maybe she got better).

All this is second hand, so take that into consideration. I've never considered it worth my time to see if it was true or not, but since I had heard it I wanted to put it out there, with hopefully enough warnings. You can look up the Godless Bitches podcast yourself, it was in the first 2-3 I think. I have them, was waiting to listen to them as I had too much to listen to already (I think I was catching up with The Bible Geek at the time) and after hearing some talk, decided to just forget about it. I still have them. If they are followers of the same brand of feminism as Matt (and I see no reason why they aren't), then it would be like listening to Ken Ham. Might be fun and filled with facepalms, but I have better things to listen to.

Just my opinions, and I could be 100% wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Badger3k]

Yes, but to be fair he's not been entirely unreasonable in his words as compared to some he's supporting.

He's the moderate Christian to the more extremist Westboro Baptist Atheists, but I hope he remembers his own words, since he's technically an enabler. He's also grown a bit famous for (IIRC) saying that it didn't matter if Elevator Guy existed or not (commonly called "facts don't matter") a while back on his blog (also IIRC).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Read 'em and weep:

http://ohioatheist.wordpress.com/2012/0 ... -facebook/

Hmmm. I stand corrected. Oh well.

Oh, well.


His "it doesn't matter if EG actually existed" claim just shocks me. It's like saying it doesn't matter whether the Maine was a belligerent act or not. The stupid, it BURNS.

For someone who wants to lay claim to the "skeptic" label, it was a bit offputting. On the one hand, it makes the difference to whether or not the claim is real, and therefore the whole affair is a manufacturversy. On the other hand, he has a point if you look at it as "whether this one is real or not doesn't matter since it happens to other people".

Of course, that never touches what I see as the real lesson of elevatorgate, which is Watson's attack on Stef, her claims of rampant misogyny, litteraly too many rape threats to be able to send her file through email (a tweet she just made yesterday) which she is certain are all from atheists/skeptics (and are too many to even send one as an example - the only one I saw was respectful and had no rape threat, or any kind of threat, at all), etc. Asking for evidence is bad - my own guess is that we'd look at them, say "trolls" to 99%, and our response would be "ignore them".

Maybe "ignore them" is an issue, though. But the way to change the world and try to eliminate trolling....forming a clique and a "safe space" echo chamber just doesn't seem to be a good plan of action. Maybe it's just me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

For someone who wants to lay claim to the "skeptic" label, it was a bit offputting. On the one hand, it makes the difference to whether or not the claim is real, and therefore the whole affair is a manufacturversy. On the other hand, he has a point if you look at it as "whether this one is real or not doesn't matter since it happens to other people".

But that point doesn't justify the shitstorm and the claims of "rampant sex harassment and misogyny in the atheism movement", as you get to here:

Of course, that never touches what I see as the real lesson of elevatorgate, which is Watson's attack on Stef, her claims of rampant misogyny, litteraly too many rape threats to be able to send her file through email (a tweet she just made yesterday) which she is certain are all from atheists/skeptics (and are too many to even send one as an example - the only one I saw was respectful and had no rape threat, or any kind of threat, at all), etc. Asking for evidence is bad - my own guess is that we'd look at them, say "trolls" to 99%, and our response would be "ignore them".

I suspect that 99+% of the rape-threats, if they are actually happening, may be coming from outsiders bent on jacking this thing up. Meaning, theists who want to see atheists fighting ourselves instead of them.

Maybe "ignore them" is an issue, though. But the way to change the world and try to eliminate trolling....forming a clique and a "safe space" echo chamber just doesn't seem to be a good plan of action. Maybe it's just me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I quite agree.

What really gets me about this elevatorgate business is that it is dragging the sexual revolution back to the fucking stone age. I have more to say on that, including some quotes from the authors of The Ethical Slut, after a little while here (I'm at work).

[hadespussercats]

Is Amanda Marcotte a bad person to take sex advice from?

IIRC, she cooks a mean berry tart. which is the sort of thing that usually bodes well for the boudoir.

I hope I had the name correct - she (used to?) run a feminist blog that was interesting, then she worked for Edwards, and somewhere around that I remember her going off the deep end into radical thinking. Again, this is hearsay, but apparently in the ACA podcast "godless bitches" (somehow no one complains about the sexist name) they mentioned something about taking their medical advice (sorry, I think this is more accurate than sex advice) on reproduction maybe (?) from Marcotte, who is not even close to being qualified (as well as, in my opinion, a bit of a nutbag - I can't remember what went on, but I never paid her any attention after that, so maybe she got better).

All this is second hand, so take that into consideration. I've never considered it worth my time to see if it was true or not, but since I had heard it I wanted to put it out there, with hopefully enough warnings. You can look up the Godless Bitches podcast yourself, it was in the first 2-3 I think. I have them, was waiting to listen to them as I had too much to listen to already (I think I was catching up with The Bible Geek at the time) and after hearing some talk, decided to just forget about it. I still have them. If they are followers of the same brand of feminism as Matt (and I see no reason why they aren't), then it would be like listening to Ken Ham. Might be fun and filled with facepalms, but I have better things to listen to.

Just my opinions, and I could be 100% wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, right?

Well, sex advice is different generally from medical advice, you're right.
I enjoy AM's writing. I disagree with her on certain important points. But the rest of this sounds like it isn't really my business.

I don't know the Godless Bitches. I'll have to check that out.

[Audley Strange]

Oh, well.


His "it doesn't matter if EG actually existed" claim just shocks me. It's like saying it doesn't matter whether the Maine was a belligerent act or not. The stupid, it BURNS.

I wouldn't say it shocked me. I think there is this paradigm that sees the reaction to Ms Watson's claim as a litmus test in and of itself without context. As I have pointed out before it is the same sort of thinking that feminists were involved with during the whole "We believe the children!" stupidity of the wave of false child abuse scandals in the late eighties.

To me it and the elevator incident exemplify the innate error of claiming their ideological position is compatible with, if not the ultimate result of skepticism. They are either lying or fooling themselves. To suggest that claims of victimhood outweigh the need for evidence that such claims should be considered true should cause anyone to be concerned at the lack of perspective and critical thinking necessary to believe such.

I may be misanthropic but I genuinely find it difficult to believe that they cannot see that, but it seems evident they cannot. This leads me to think one of two things.

They are actually just thick.

They are being disingenuous.

So, oh well, is about all I can left to muster. This is not the first time I've seen Stupid libero fascist Feminists insinuate themselves into something irrelevant to their cause and I doubt it will be the last. It usually ends in tears. I just don't understand how people who claim to be smart and critical can be so easily fucking duped. If they want a community let them have it. I won't be part of it not because I'm against parts of their beliefs but because I really do not want to be associated with such sickening, self congratulatory idiocy. I find such behaviour deeply offensive. However that is my problem and I do not expect the world to conform to that, so the only reasonable thing left to do is not put myself in a position where I'm being deliberately offended.

I know it's a novel idea yeah?

Oh well.

[Badger3k]

Is Amanda Marcotte a bad person to take sex advice from?

IIRC, she cooks a mean berry tart. which is the sort of thing that usually bodes well for the boudoir.

I hope I had the name correct - she (used to?) run a feminist blog that was interesting, then she worked for Edwards, and somewhere around that I remember her going off the deep end into radical thinking. Again, this is hearsay, but apparently in the ACA podcast "godless bitches" (somehow no one complains about the sexist name) they mentioned something about taking their medical advice (sorry, I think this is more accurate than sex advice) on reproduction maybe (?) from Marcotte, who is not even close to being qualified (as well as, in my opinion, a bit of a nutbag - I can't remember what went on, but I never paid her any attention after that, so maybe she got better).

All this is second hand, so take that into consideration. I've never considered it worth my time to see if it was true or not, but since I had heard it I wanted to put it out there, with hopefully enough warnings. You can look up the Godless Bitches podcast yourself, it was in the first 2-3 I think. I have them, was waiting to listen to them as I had too much to listen to already (I think I was catching up with The Bible Geek at the time) and after hearing some talk, decided to just forget about it. I still have them. If they are followers of the same brand of feminism as Matt (and I see no reason why they aren't), then it would be like listening to Ken Ham. Might be fun and filled with facepalms, but I have better things to listen to.

Just my opinions, and I could be 100% wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, right?

Well, sex advice is different generally from medical advice, you're right.
I enjoy AM's writing. I disagree with her on certain important points. But the rest of this sounds like it isn't really my business.

I don't know the Godless Bitches. I'll have to check that out.

When I first heard about it, I liked the idea. I generally like Jen and Tracie on the ACA, and figured a podcast by them and Beth (Matt's wife) might be interesting. If they have gone the same version of feminism as Watson and company, then I'll pass.

ETA (if this works, haven't used it before) - I think it was her. Someone over at the Slymepit brought up her extreme reaction to the Duke case (innocent until proven guilty never entered her mind), but I'm still not sure of all the facts on that, so I really can't say much regarding that, except to say punishing someone before they go to trial (even "suspected" terrorists who are American citizens) is wrong.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Oh, well.


His "it doesn't matter if EG actually existed" claim just shocks me. It's like saying it doesn't matter whether the Maine was a belligerent act or not. The stupid, it BURNS.

I wouldn't say it shocked me. I think there is this paradigm that sees the reaction to Ms Watson's claim as a litmus test in and of itself without context. As I have pointed out before it is the same sort of thinking that feminists were involved with during the whole "We believe the children!" stupidity of the wave of false child abuse scandals in the late eighties.

To me it and the elevator incident exemplify the innate error of claiming their ideological position is compatible with, if not the ultimate result of skepticism. They are either lying or fooling themselves. To suggest that claims of victimhood outweigh the need for evidence that such claims should be considered true should cause anyone to be concerned at the lack of perspective and critical thinking necessary to believe such.

I may be misanthropic but I genuinely find it difficult to believe that they cannot see that, but it seems evident they cannot. This leads me to think one of two things.

They are actually just thick.

They are being disingenuous.

So, oh well, is about all I can left to muster. This is not the first time I've seen Stupid libero fascist Feminists insinuate themselves into something irrelevant to their cause and I doubt it will be the last. It usually ends in tears. I just don't understand how people who claim to be smart and critical can be so easily fucking duped. If they want a community let them have it. I won't be part of it not because I'm against parts of their beliefs but because I really do not want to be associated with such sickening, self congratulatory idiocy. I find such behaviour deeply offensive. However that is my problem and I do not expect the world to conform to that, so the only reasonable thing left to do is not put myself in a position where I'm being deliberately offended.

I know it's a novel idea yeah?

Oh well.

I think there is a huge level of immaturity at work with those folks. The whole elevator thing reminds me of some things addressed in The Ethical Slut, which was written by old-school feminist women (as opposed to fucking GIRLS, which is how I see these A+-ers), talking about mutual respect and breaking free of the twisted sexual roles that have been imposed on all of us. I probly should quote more of it, and probly will later, but I'm feeling tired and lazy and really should be napping on my lunch instead of posting Bollocks on the interwebs:

When you say "no," do so clearly and kindly. Please do not fall into
the trap of putting down people who find you attractive- they must be
total idiots to have come onto you, right? Being politely asked is a
compliment, not an insult. When we are embarrassed because we need to
say no to a polite inquiry, let's just own our own embarrassment. It's
not the other person's fault if she thinks you're nifty.

And this, for me, puts the whole elevator thing in a nutshell, and starkly illuminates the infuckingcredible batshittery of elevating an invitation for coffee at a conference to this internet/meatspace shitstorm and coup d'etat. The son of a bitch, by her own admission, said, "don't take this the wrong way", paid her a very nice compliment, and said he'd like to get to know her better. Why? Because he found her interesting -- ANOTHER compliment. What does she do? Wig out, vlog it into cyberidjitspace, and wage war in as public and damaging fashion as she possibly can against everyone who says "hey, waitaminit...".

[ralu]

Hi Rationalia.

I was getting a bit annoyed at all of this and started out writing a post detailing this idiocy and drama. A tale of the egos, an in depth look at the root cause of the hypersensitivity, the vitriol etc. Well, It was becoming very difficult, just describing that level of stupidity is herculean task. So I took the dog for a walk. Took a step back from the computer and had a revelation of sorts. PZ Myers, Greta Christina, Ophelia Benson and Jen McBreight... They don't really have much to write about.

Oh, I would write a blog about feminism today but, um LOOK OVER THERE PENN JILETTE SENT A CRUDE FACEBOOK MESSAGE
Oh, I would write about social justice today, um RATIONALIA HAS A JOKE THREAD
Oh, I would write about feminism issues today but, um SOMEBODY POSTED ON AN MRA SITE

Either they have the attention spans of gnats or they're stalling. I think even they realized it was getting a bit stale, and people were beginning to wise up. Change was needed, but ideally something that wouldn't be too much work for them. A new club solves those issues. They can talk about rules, what positions they are for and which they are against (again and again), the opposition to it without ever really saying a damn thing insightful intelligent or enlightening about the causes they so strongly advocate. Best of all, it can be anything providing it makes them look nice.

Just take a look through the history of these blogs. Fuck all except drama and harassment policies. Occassionally PZ will vaunt himself up to the intellectual heights of calling creationists dipshits and republicans cunts. I think the best Blog Hog has managed on feminism is a short article about what an annoying whiny victim character she finds Sansa Stark to be.

Now there's an entire forum full of space for them, and their drone commenters to fill with their alleged brilliance. Guess what, its very slow.

Just a theory anyway.

[Pappa]

Hi ralu, welcome to the forum.

[ralu]

Cheers. Very refreshing reading through this thread.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Quite astute observations, ralu.

[Audley Strange]

I think the best Blog Hog has managed on feminism is a short article about what an annoying whiny victim character she finds Sansa Stark to be.

What? Really? Sansa Stark? A fourteen year old girl who watched her prince charming kill her dog, her father, who was imprisoned and kept as a pawn and a toy by a sadistic mommy's boy, who was physically and mentally humiliated and almost raped is a whiny victim character? Yeah I guess she was lucky no one wore a "It's Grim up North" T-shirt to Joffrey's Name Day Tournament, that would have been a real reason to whine eh?