Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
s_pepys said:
Shermer, Kirby, and the others have no idea what it’s like to be hunted and harassed, because “our side,” the people who are speaking out against harassment, don’t do this to them.
Click to expand...

What?!? "Our side"? There is no "side"! Nobody is defending the person who sent an obscene picture to Rebecca. Yet, she is pretending that there are people who are on this guy's side...and not only that, but Michael Shermer, Paula Kirby, et al are those people!

I also like how Shermer is treated like some kind of a sexist pig, just because he said that perhaps women don't like to be as public about their skepticism as men do.
 
theprestige said:
I think that RW is being trolled, plain and simple.

She's not the object of sexist, dehumanizing attacks because of some sexist undercurrent in the skeptic community. She's the object of such attacks because she has drawn attention to herself, and then made it extremely clear exactly what kinds of attention is the most distressing to her.

She's said repeatedly that this kind of treatment bothers her. So naturally the trolls make sure to give her exactly the kind of treatment that bothers her the most. Not because they're sexist, but because they're trolls.

These attacks aren't evidence of sexism. They're evidence of trolls.

I'm sure if Michael Shermer made a huge point of how much pictures of dead puppies bothered him, his inbox would soon be overflowing with pictures of dead puppies. And from this we would certainly not conclude that there was a huge anti-puppy undercurrent in the skeptical community.
Click to expand...

Yep, pretty much.
 
Axiom_Blade said:
What?!? "Our side"? There is no "side"! Nobody is defending the person who sent an obscene picture to Rebecca. Yet, she is pretending that there are people who are on this guy's side...and not only that, but Michael Shermer, Paula Kirby, et al are those people!

I also like how Shermer is treated like some kind of a sexist pig, just because he said that perhaps women don't like to be as public about their skepticism as men do.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's been a false dilemma from the start. If you disagree with RW you are a misogynist. Oh, and she wants you to get a sex doll. No, I'm not kidding.
 
a, quite telling reply to ms watson. ophelia benson also replys a bit further up. agreeing with vitriol against shermer and kirkby.

http://skepchick.org/2013/02/objectified/

I just wanted you to know that I admire and respect everything you do as a leader. If you ever have ideas about how we can better support you, I know a world of female scientists/skeptics who are feeling very helpless about all this and want to do more. But I’ll also keep thinking myself so the burden of solving this doesn’t also fall on you.
 
skepticism has been hit by a lorry of nuts driven by rebecca watson and is dying in the road!

someone call a doctor before its to late!
 
Foolmewunz said:
... thus assuring that there will be more such trolling messages this week and next, giving her material for her next slow news week when she needs to bask in her oppression, again.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

The very thought that someone like Shermer or Dawkins isn't getting serious hate mail is absurd. Her qualifier, of course, is the escape clause. "Yeah, well I said, no one is sexualizing them in the hate mail." No, you guys merely want to see them anally raped with spiny animals on public blogs and forums, so that's not hate mail, that's civil discourse.
Click to expand...

Dawkins was trolled, sexually, by South ParkWP, before Elevatorgate. Beat that, Rebecca!

Watson needs the trolls. They've benefited her by getting her paid speaking engagements, making her, literally, a professional victim. Denying her this is the best reason to stop trolling her.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Scott said:
Dawkins was trolled, sexually, by South ParkWP, before Elevatorgate. Beat that, Rebecca!

Watson needs the trolls. They've benefited her by getting her paid speaking engagements, making her, literally, a professional victim. Denying her this is the best reason to stop trolling her.
Click to expand...

pz gives his opine.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/02/04/woman-is-a-dirty-word/

....and yes glenn beck is an ********. so is pz. they are peas from the same pod at either end of the fanatical politics spectrum. imo. some of the other comments are frightening.

lxxx
 
Aren't some people confusing the forum atheismplus and the whole movement ?
It seems A+ is just an unnecessary rebranding of secular humanism, whereas the forum atheismplus seems to be a very badly moderated forum for like-minded people.

I never went to this forum, and after reading this thread i don't intend to, but i don't see anything in the definitions of A+ that would be incompatibe with my secular humanism.

Or maybe i missed something ?
 
alcorfr said:
Aren't some people confusing the forum atheismplus and the whole movement ?
It seems A+ is just an unnecessary rebranding of secular humanism, whereas the forum atheismplus seems to be a very badly moderated forum for like-minded people.

I never went to this forum, and after reading this thread i don't intend to, but i don't see anything in the definitions of A+ that would be incompatibe with my secular humanism.

Or maybe i missed something ?
Click to expand...


The A+ forum is all that's left of what was supposed to be a "movement."
 
alcorfr said:
Aren't some people confusing the forum atheismplus and the whole movement ?
It seems A+ is just an unnecessary rebranding of secular humanism, whereas the forum atheismplus seems to be a very badly moderated forum for like-minded people.

I never went to this forum, and after reading this thread i don't intend to, but i don't see anything in the definitions of A+ that would be incompatibe with my secular humanism.

Or maybe i missed something ?
Click to expand...
I don't believe that A+ is simply secular humanism. To begin with, the A stands for atheism. Secular humanism does not preclude a belief in a deity. But that's perhaps a nit pick. IMO: A+ is actually feminism +. Not that I'm against feminism but it does seem that feminism is the priority and skepticism and atheism are subordinate. Again, JMO based on what I have seen and I concede that I don't spend my life over there so I could be wrong.
 
RandFan said:
I don't believe that A+ is simply secular humanism. To begin with, the A stands for atheism. Secular humanism does not preclude a belief in a deity. But that's perhaps a nit pick. IMO: A+ is actually feminism +. Not that I'm against feminism but it does seem that feminism is the priority and skepticism and atheism are subordinate. Again, JMO based on what I have seen and I concede that I don't spend my life over there so I could be wrong.
Click to expand...


I agree but would add that A+ isn't just feminism (and Atheism), it's more like Social Justice + (some) Atheism.
 
alcorfr said:
Aren't some people confusing the forum atheismplus and the whole movement ?
It seems A+ is just an unnecessary rebranding of secular humanism, whereas the forum atheismplus seems to be a very badly moderated forum for like-minded people.
Click to expand...

Jen McCreight created Atheism+ as a "third wave" of atheism last August. She said:

Jen McCreight said:
I don’t want good causes like secularism and skepticism to die because they’re infested with people who see issues of equality as mission drift. I want Deep Rifts. I want to be able to truthfully say that I feel safe in this movement. I want the misogynists, racists, homophobes, transphobes, and downright trolls out of the movement for the same reason I wouldn’t invite them over for dinner or to play Mario Kart: because they’re not good people...it’s time for a third wave – a wave that isn’t just a bunch of “middle-class, white, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied men” patting themselves on the back for debunking homeopathy for the 983258th time or thinking up yet another great zinger to use against Young Earth Creationists.
Click to expand...

Basically, A+ was supposed to be the elite, enlightened atheists, and they could kick anybody they didn't approve of out of their clubhouse. Of course, instantly people asked "Atheism and liberalism? How is this different from secular humanism?"

Jen responded with

Jen McCreight said:
Dear smug humanists: My critique of the atheist movement included you. Your groups are infamous for being mostly old, white, men
Click to expand...

So, from the very start, A+ has been hostile to established communities (e.g. secular humanism), and was intended to kick out and ostracize all of the "bad", politically incorrect atheists.

Atheism is not a club, though, and you don't get to kick people out. All you have to do to be an atheist is not believe in gods. You're welcome to get up on your soapbox and denounce other atheists, but you can't claim that they're not "true atheists" just because they don't live up to your social justice values, or whatever.

Anyway, all A+ has accomplished is establishing an insular elite, that few know of, and even fewer pay any attention to.
 
patting themselves on the back for debunking homeopathy for the 983258th time or thinking up yet another great zinger to use against Young Earth Creationists.

I have to admit, she's kind of got a point there.
 
The worst thing for me about this whole A+, FTB, RW brouhaha has been that I apparently am not a feminist. I always used to think I was, but apparently not agreeing with specific ideas about patriarchy theory and rape culture means that I am actually a misogynistic pig.

This was made clear to me one day when I was reading a thread on another forum about women's rights, and an MRA started trying to hijack it by pointing out all the issues men had. I made a simple post telling him that yes men also face certain issues, but that doesn't lessen the issues that women face, was not a reason to ignore those issues, and it would be more appropriate to start a different thread about his concerns. I was then viciously attacked. Oh, not by the MRA. Nope. By the "feminists" of the board. Even acknowledged that being a man doesn't make everything sugar and rainbows is a grave grave sin, even when you are telling someone not to hijack a thread dealing with women's issues.

:mad:

It was then I realized that I had made a category error. Posting on an atheism board didn't actually mean I was posting on a skeptical/rationalist board.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
patting themselves on the back for debunking homeopathy for the 983258th time or thinking up yet another great zinger to use against Young Earth Creationists.

I have to admit, she's kind of got a point there.
Click to expand...

Well, she's got a point, if you think that the battles against homeopathy and Young Earth Creationism have already been won. I don't believe that they are.
 
theprestige said:
patting themselves on the back for debunking homeopathy for the 983258th time or thinking up yet another great zinger to use against Young Earth Creationists.

I have to admit, she's kind of got a point there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, as if she has something new to add to humanism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom