Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Lorentz]

The post referenced in the Chronicle is from Vacula on Skepticink and is this one.

I read that article by Vacula. The phrase that really struck me there is a quote from Amanda Marcotte's piece:

But [...] a not-insubstantial percentage of atheist men have convinced themselves they can both not believe in a god and somehow still conclude that women were put (by who?) here on Earth for the purpose of pleasing and catering to men

Never mind the strawman approach, apparently an Eiffel tower-sized Wicker Man works better. Has anyone here ever personally encountered an atheist man who appeared to think that women existed to please and cater to men? There are probably one or two out there, but "a not-insubstantial percentage"?

Seriously ms. Marcotte?

That level of intellectual dishonesty crosses the line for me, to where I wouldn't want to engage in any discussion with xir/xim/xit.

I'm happy to engage Apostle or Quint when they find time to respond to my posts. I have no reason to doubt their intellectual honesty, even while I cannot understand how they match their worldview to reality.

But mr. Myers, ms. Marcotte and much of their commentariat? I don't think anything productive can come from a discussion with people who are that intellectually dishonest.

 

[Lorentz]

Do you think women exist to serve men?

I ask because you seem to be defending that quote.

Heh. At this point I'm sure you must be taking the piss.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Heh. At this point I'm sure you must be taking the piss.

Sexist .

 

[Empress]

Sexist .

Exactly.

It's comments like that that are the reason I, as a woman, don't feel welcome and safe at the JREF.

Oh wait. I do.

 

[squealpiggy]

Do you think women exist to serve men?

I ask because you seem to be defending that quote.

Well for one thing Vacula is paraphrasing the Marcotte article he was responding to. The phrasing used was identical.

Secondly the whole point of the article was that you don't need to believe in god to think that women exist to serve men in the same way that you don't have to think that women exist to serve men to believe in god.

These two beliefs are not dependent on one another.

Thirdly of course I believe that women exist only to serve men. To think otherwise would be ridiculous! Now if you'll excuse me I have to put my son to bed and do the dishes before my wife comes home or I'll be in trouble...

 

[tsig]

Well for one thing Vacula is paraphrasing the Marcotte article he was responding to. The phrasing used was identical.

Secondly the whole point of the article was that you don't need to believe in god to think that women exist to serve men in the same way that you don't have to think that women exist to serve men to believe in god.

These two beliefs are not dependent on one another.

Thirdly of course I believe that women exist only to serve men. To think otherwise would be ridiculous! Now if you'll excuse me I have to put my son to bed and do the dishes before my wife comes home or I'll be in trouble...

I see if PZ is again it you're for it no matter what.

At this point I'll leave you all to your daily two minute hate.

Here I'll help you out.

PZ HATES BIG BROTHER, PZ IS BIG BROTHERS' ENEMY, ALL OF US HATE PZ.

 

[squealpiggy]

I see if PZ is again it you're for it no matter what.

At this point I'll leave you all to your daily two minute hate.

Here I'll help you out.

PZ HATES BIG BROTHER, PZ IS BIG BROTHERS' ENEMY, ALL OF US HATE PZ.

We are at war with Thunderf00t. We have always been at war with Thunderf00t.

 

[H'ethetheth]

I see if PZ is again it you're for it no matter what.

At this point I'll leave you all to your daily two minute hate.

Here I'll help you out.

PZ HATES BIG BROTHER, PZ IS BIG BROTHERS' ENEMY, ALL OF US HATE PZ.

You seem to be under the impression that Vacula believes "women were put here on Earth for the purpose of pleasing and catering to men."

Did you read anything he wrote beside this quote, because it's seems pretty clear to me he doesn't believe that.

e.g.

...Sure, this might be the case because many atheists happen to be sympathetic to Marcotte’s causes of reproductive freedom and pro-choice positions (myself included), but not simply because they lack belief in any gods.

(emphasis mine)

There are certainly atheist activists who object to some ideas that atheist bloggers [...] hold… but I find it very hard to believe that these same people believe that women were put on Earth to please and cater to men. How does Marcotte arrive at this conclusion?

 

[Stout]

Well for one thing Vacula is paraphrasing the Marcotte article he was responding to. The phrasing used was identical.

Secondly the whole point of the article was that you don't need to believe in god to think that women exist to serve men in the same way that you don't have to think that women exist to serve men to believe in god.

These two beliefs are not dependent on one another.

Agreed, however I'm reading Marcotte as working from the assumption that most men are lapsed Christians who, while abandoning the belief in god, haven't abandoned the biblical teaching that women were put on earth to serve men.

One belief stemming from the other.

As a stand alone, Vacula's comment does seem strange.

 

[AlBell]

Once these folks get a strong leader (to replace PZ) they can set up a new GDR with modern technology and pharmacology for DHS (or should I say Staci) to keep the plebes in line.

Damn right they don't want an armed populus and would love to have a registry of all guns.

I'll provide the first list of progrom material: old white xian males, old white males, old white xians, other xians, other males ... and then they have a problem designating the next group to be purged, but there will be one.

 

[Lorentz]

Once these folks get a strong leader (to replace PZ) they can set up a new GDR with modern technology and pharmacology for DHS (or should I say Staci) to keep the plebes in line.

Damn right they don't want an armed populus and would love to have a registry of all guns.

What does this have to do with guns of a sudden?

Incidentally I do not want an armed populace and am glad we have a registry of all firearms.

 

[Jono]

Do you think women exist to serve men?

I ask because you seem to be defending that quote.

But but... that quote ["I fail to see how refusing to believe in God leads to the ‘logical conclusion’ of abandoning the belief that women exist to serve men."] doesn't claim or purport that women exist to serve men.

What it does highlight, and correctly so, is; simply getting rid of a theistic dogma does not by default get rid of misogyny. For me, that part was and is clear. Why isn't it self evident for PZ Myers & Co?!?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Why isn't it self evident for PZ Myers & Co?!?

Because in the world they've built around themselves, unless you fall over yourself trying to put distance between you and a disagreeable concept, you must be tacitly endorsing that concept.

He needed to add some redundant qualifiers like "Not that I'm endorsing that at all, it's a horrible practice and those who do it should be ashamed/hung, some of my best friends are subservient women" in order to pass muster.

 

[Jono]

Because in the world they've built around themselves, unless you fall over yourself trying to put distance between you and a disagreeable concept, you must be tacitly endorsing that concept.

That is (in my personal experience) something which clusters of extremists/radicals/CT's tend to have in common (regardless of their beliefs). It is the same darn 'mode of absolutes' where they only differ on how to dress up for dinner. I recall someone once saying that zealots, regardless of their convictions, are rarely correct.

I guess I shouldn't be alltogether surprised to see Myers' commentators screaming bloody murder over Vacula and publically detaching themselves from the term "skeptic" over a mind-ghost of their own creation, at least not considering how their minds appear to be disproportionately haunted even by their own shadows.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Never mind the strawman approach, apparently an Eiffel tower-sized Wicker Man works better. Has anyone here ever personally encountered an atheist man who appeared to think that women existed to please and cater to men? There are probably one or two out there, but "a not-insubstantial percentage"?

Seriously ms. Marcotte?

Setting aside the question of whether or not atheism is lousy with sexists (for which no proof was given in the article, or anywhere else), she undermines her own thesis. Apparently feminism does not flow logically from atheism, if there are so many anti-feminist atheists.

She herself claims that she is using atheism as a means to an end, in the fight for feminism. While there are plenty of religious worldviews that are coherent with feminism, from deism to Wicca, the appeal of atheism is that it is wholly rational and evidence-based. However, the feminist ramifications of the non-existence of God, while being obvious to her, seem to be lost on many of her fellow atheists. Atheism seems to be a very poor tool for aiding the liberation of women.

Her argument is "There is no god...therefore, women are equal to men." That doesn't seem logical. In fact, it sounds like a non sequitur.

 

[Lorentz]

Her argument is "There is no god...therefore, women are equal to men." That doesn't seem logical. In fact, it sounds like a non sequitur.

Careful! If PZ or his horde see this one sentence, they will conclude you're a raging misogynist who thinks women are less than men!

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Careful! If PZ or his horde see this one sentence, they will conclude you're a raging misogynist who thinks women are less than men!

All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore...women are equal to men.

 

[squealpiggy]

Agreed, however I'm reading Marcotte as working from the assumption that most men are lapsed Christians who, while abandoning the belief in god, haven't abandoned the biblical teaching that women were put on earth to serve men.

One belief stemming from the other.

As a stand alone, Vacula's comment does seem strange.

You mean when taken out of context and dropped into the poisoned well that is Skepticink?

 

[AlBell]

What does this have to do with guns of a sudden?

As you quoted me, nothing. You forgot to include my last paragraph.

Incidentally I do not want an armed populace and am glad we have a registry of all firearms.

Your choice. What country are you in?

 

[Lorentz]

As you quoted me, nothing. You forgot to include my last paragraph.


Your choice. What country are you in?

The Netherlands. Visit Amsterdam sometime. You might enjoy the lack of freedom.

p.s. Taking your last paragraph into account I still have no idea what guns have to do with anything. Police, I could imagine being relevant, if PZ and co turned out to be secret genocidal maniacs (which I do not for one second believe).