Dogma's Demise
New Member
Lately a group of atheists have been trying to start a new atheist-related movement called "Atheism+", "Third Wave of Atheism" they call it (apparently dissatisfied with the Dawkins-style "New Atheism") which is not just about secularism or debunking religions or skeptical thinking, but also: feminism, anti-racism, anti-homophobia, diversity and social justice.
Uh whatever :roll: Look it's not that I necessarily disagree, but I just don't see the connection between atheism and some of these issues, at least not a strong one.
I can see how it can be loosely related to homophobia and sexism (both encouraged by religion, although not exclusively). But diversity? Social justice?
Also, I think it's a terrible criterion to be grouped by. Look, the minimum we should all be interested in (at least in my view) is getting religion to stay out of politics, that is something that I think is in the interests of most atheists (not all obviously, you still have crazies like S.E. Cupp who think the Christian Right is the best thing ever made since sliced bread) beyond that, the more you add into this "movement" (if you want to call it that) the more you will turn people away.
For one thing, define diversity. In the absence of a precise definition I can only speculate WTF that means, from something I can agree with (equal rights for people of all races, religions, gender, sexual orientation) to "hey let's actively promote mass immigration from countries where many people don't share any of our values" (which obviously I don't agree with, fuck that).
Now social justice is even more problematic. It involves things like progressive taxation, income redistribution and sometimes even property redistribution. None of these things are any bit even remotely related to atheism and none of them are evidently the optimal path society should take. It's not set in stone, there's an on-going never-ending debate about these issues with leftists wanting as much as possible and rightists wanting as little as possible (or none at all), but PZ Myers thinks he's figured it all out to the point where anyone with a contrary opinion doesn't even deserve a platform in his "movement". This isn't free thinking, this is dogma.
Also the "founders" of this "movement" has shown their hypocrisy several times over.
For example they say the "atheist community" needs to be more welcoming to women. Fair enough. But see here is one scenario they present: A woman joins an atheist group, she quits because she doesn't feel comfortable there. Why she doesn't feel comfortable there? Because there are too many men in it... :roll:
I don't know about you, but we have one word to describe someone who doesn't like being in a group because there are too many men in it: sexist! It works both ways you know. Yet these people think it's the "white male privilege" (whatever the fuck that means) that's at fault here. Indeed, they already expressed dissatisfaction that the "New Atheism" is represented by old white men such as Dawkins or Hitchens. (Uh, HELLO? Did you forget about ZOMGitsCriss, young female???)
Then we have Rebecca Watson complaining yet again that people try to pick her up. :roll: Yes, apparently now asking someone "what's your name?" on the street is an issue that all true feminists needs to be concerned about. While Skepchick supporters can go on conferences and tell us how the male brain is really a female brain damaged by testosterone and her co-Skepchick can whine about a T-shirt that says "I'm a skeptic, not a skepchick, not a female skeptic, just a skeptic". Jesus Fucking Christ! :roll:
Atheism+ is seriously misguided. I don't see how anyone can take it seriously.
Uh whatever :roll: Look it's not that I necessarily disagree, but I just don't see the connection between atheism and some of these issues, at least not a strong one.
I can see how it can be loosely related to homophobia and sexism (both encouraged by religion, although not exclusively). But diversity? Social justice?
Also, I think it's a terrible criterion to be grouped by. Look, the minimum we should all be interested in (at least in my view) is getting religion to stay out of politics, that is something that I think is in the interests of most atheists (not all obviously, you still have crazies like S.E. Cupp who think the Christian Right is the best thing ever made since sliced bread) beyond that, the more you add into this "movement" (if you want to call it that) the more you will turn people away.
For one thing, define diversity. In the absence of a precise definition I can only speculate WTF that means, from something I can agree with (equal rights for people of all races, religions, gender, sexual orientation) to "hey let's actively promote mass immigration from countries where many people don't share any of our values" (which obviously I don't agree with, fuck that).
Now social justice is even more problematic. It involves things like progressive taxation, income redistribution and sometimes even property redistribution. None of these things are any bit even remotely related to atheism and none of them are evidently the optimal path society should take. It's not set in stone, there's an on-going never-ending debate about these issues with leftists wanting as much as possible and rightists wanting as little as possible (or none at all), but PZ Myers thinks he's figured it all out to the point where anyone with a contrary opinion doesn't even deserve a platform in his "movement". This isn't free thinking, this is dogma.
Also the "founders" of this "movement" has shown their hypocrisy several times over.
For example they say the "atheist community" needs to be more welcoming to women. Fair enough. But see here is one scenario they present: A woman joins an atheist group, she quits because she doesn't feel comfortable there. Why she doesn't feel comfortable there? Because there are too many men in it... :roll:
I don't know about you, but we have one word to describe someone who doesn't like being in a group because there are too many men in it: sexist! It works both ways you know. Yet these people think it's the "white male privilege" (whatever the fuck that means) that's at fault here. Indeed, they already expressed dissatisfaction that the "New Atheism" is represented by old white men such as Dawkins or Hitchens. (Uh, HELLO? Did you forget about ZOMGitsCriss, young female???)
Then we have Rebecca Watson complaining yet again that people try to pick her up. :roll: Yes, apparently now asking someone "what's your name?" on the street is an issue that all true feminists needs to be concerned about. While Skepchick supporters can go on conferences and tell us how the male brain is really a female brain damaged by testosterone and her co-Skepchick can whine about a T-shirt that says "I'm a skeptic, not a skepchick, not a female skeptic, just a skeptic". Jesus Fucking Christ! :roll:
Atheism+ is seriously misguided. I don't see how anyone can take it seriously.
