Atheism+
 

...Damnit.

Unbelievable. Just...

You know what this accomplished? It shed a very bright light on the sexism, patriarchal aplogism, and what-have-you that is RIFE in the recent atheist movements.

...Fuck.

It's not about atheism. It never was.

That's new to you?

No. I was always skeptical about "atheist" movements.

But from what I have seen, there's a LOT of people who like to consider that there's a such thing as an atheist community.

On one hand, you have those that say there is one and for that, you tend to see them view it as a movement; whatever the goal may be (doesn't make sense to me, really. Many atheists tend to strike me as white knights for religion and those are the ones who like to claim there is a community).

However; it's fucking WEIRD to see feminist and queer atheists insist that Atheism+ isn't a worthy movement because this movement is trying to "redefine" what an atheist is. THAT'S fucking weird.

But then you get the typical patriarchal apologisms as well.

Lots of atheists are saying this movement is divisive. I would argue it's not. At least not in the sense that they're thinking. It's divisive; not because they would lose atheist supporters for their ideas. They wont. It's just that those people didn't agree with feminism and queer struggles to begin with. They NEVER had an ally in the first place. I see it as divisive because I don't think atheism or atheists should make a claim that equality is atheist in nature. The conflicting conclusions and hypothesis' on a god are from what I can understand, irreconcilable.

This SHOULD happen for atheism, but not only that; there has to be outreach with theistic feminist comrades and I just don't see that happening very soon if you're going to at one point tell them they're right about social inequalities but wrong about the idea of a god.

I think the thing that interests me about it is not so much what obviously happened, but the third side that wants to keep atheism separate from other social movements. Many say they are an atheist AND a feminist, but refuse to endorse A+ because of this misconception that A+ is trying to make it about non-belief or plant their flag on feminism.

To me, A+ is needed and important, but also; they're going to have to confront the issues that feminism and queer struggles aren't exclusive to non-belief and I really don't know how they're going to reconcile that without just basically being Secular Humanist with another name.

Holy shit. The hostility and apologetics for male privilege is fucking RIFE right now with these knuckleheads.

NO WONDER females felt it was necessary to start Atheism+.

Oh my god...

Fucking men's rights idiots.

I'm afraid to ask.

It really kills me when you have a group who speaks out about social justice but at the same time doesn't recognize the shit that's fucked up within their own community.

I can't help but think they should know better.

Like the influential feminist who is also transphobic or racist.

This is why I can't have heros.

After Elevatorgate I don't find it surprising at all, is what I'm saying.

I don't think they're going to have much success within an atheist movement because as you said, "atheism" is not a unified movement to begin with. Its not like feminism which has variety but has some kind of definition (a movement to seek the abolition of sexism) that leaves some self proclaimed feminists like Sarah Palin out in the cold. But I don't know if you can do the same for an identity that pretty much simply requires one not to believe in God(s). With a definition that broad there's bound to be a lot of assholes and they're not going to be too happy about being branded Atheism*.

Elevatorgate?

So a guy tried to hook up with a someone, she didn't go for it, and it became A Thing?

:p: Nice shoes, wanna fuck?
:confused:: No
:p: OK bye

THE END

How scandalous.(?)

I am not saying that Watson doesn't have a right to be anything from flattered to offended by getting approached. Not attempting to take anything away from her or call her names or anything of the sort.

Why is this a thing for anyone else to care about? This seems like the kind of thing you complain to / laugh about with your friends over drinks the next day. Not something "gate" worthy...

And how the fuck do you know a fucking thing about sexism? What the fuck makes you think it's at all appropriate for you to say that people are over overreacting?

Please explain what was sexist about approaching a person, expressing interest, and leaving them alone when they declined.

also lol http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqU9J...layer_embedded

I gotta agree with Jonathan here until I actually see that video which I can't find.

Would you like to start with the part where somebody said they felt they were sexualized and subsequently was shouted down by fucking privileged Crack Von Patriarchs like you think what you have to say matters at all, or the part where you think you're entitled any sort of explanation when you can easily educate yourself?

You're killing my soul.

When you call me Cracker Von Patriarch, does that give me justification to feel that I am being sexually and racially discriminated against? It makes me feel really uncomfortable, so expect an outpouring of community backlash any day now. Once the White Knights figure out what direction to charge in there will be hell to pay.

He didn't say he liked me, although who knows. For what it's worth I wish the guy in the video focused more on the ridiculous community reaction than zeroing in on Watson herself, although the more I look into this the more fascinated I am by what a non-phenomena it was/is

No, you're right, Versus. I was thinking of the times I've been propositioned that made me uncomfortable to make a parallel, but as I think about them it's obvious they were the ones in the wrong for propositioning so casually with nothing to hint at them any form of reciprocity. It's not just an innocent question, it's a stupid one.
I still don't think it's a sexist thing, though; I'm sure it can and does happen among feminists because it's indecent, not imposing.

Ah. Elevatorgate.

So this girl was having drinks with friends until 4 AM and she gets in this elevator to go to bed. A man comes in and starts talking to her. During this time, he asks if she wants to "come to his room for some coffee".

The result was that she felt objectified and sexualized by the experience and apparently it drew a line in the sand.

Now the problem here is that we have just her account and I'm not sure as to what it actually was as far as tone, inflection, and the totality of the situation. I don't know. However; there's a good point here. Did she know this man AT ALL? I'm thinking she did not. Was she inebriated? Possibly so.

What this tells me is that the man probably saw her as an easy target.

The conversation had to have lasted no longer than a minute and a perfect stranger asks you if you want to fuck in such a round about way?

Yes. THAT IS sexualizing her. He had no business asking her that after a minute of conversation. Hell, he could have very much used a predatory tone. I'm not convinced that this situation was entirely an innocent mistake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SqC_m3yUDU

How does a person establish that they are open to reciprocate? Apparently you can't walk up and ask directly, so how does this work without somehow causing an awkward moment?

It's called social cues and chemistry.

Wouldn't asking if someone wants to come back to your room to have coffee be a manner to socially engage a person to elicit cues and gauge interest? A clumsy attempt perhaps, but... what was he supposed to do? Use a third party intermediary?

"Pardon me, but my friend over there - yes the one looking at his shoes so as to not offend, was wondering if perhaps he might be allowed to speak with you if it is ok I mean"

Jon.

Are you a creep or something?

Who asks such a banal question as that? Do you know nothing of communication and manners?

Why the hell would you think it was appropriate to try and solicit sex from a perfect stranger that you talked to for no more than 45 seconds? Are you dumb?