Breaking News from Imaginary Backwards Land: Atheists “worship at the altar of feminism.”
The Scumbag Privilege Denying r/Atheism meme.
Paul Elam has apparently become something of a comedian – though not on purpose. In his latest post on A Voice for Men, he takes on the atheist community for being too in thrall to (wait for it) feminism.
I’ll let him explain:
[T]hey are too religious. Yes, I mean that literally. For when you wipe away all the bombastic bellowing about empiricism and the strident mocking of those who choose a life of faith, what you are left with is a population of people that surrender their reason and cognition as though they were at gunpoint; that hit their knees as fast as any Catholic…to worship at the altar of feminism.
His proof? Several years ago someone at Atheist Nexus posted a link to a Men’s News Daily column of his, and – get this! – some feminists responded!
You can go here to see all the horrible things these evil cultish feminist atheists said. Like, for example:
I guess I’m a feminist, but I really like men and these are some of the things I love about them:
Protectiveness is a positive trait in men that women who want to have babies look for. We also like passion and some recklessness, but you won’t get me to admit that to my daredevil husband…..
Confidence; men usually have more of it and it is mostly a postive trait.
The ability to make decisions quickly.
Physical strength and endurance are helpful in many family situations. Ahem.
Penises. You have them, lots of us like them. I know it’s not technically a “trait”, but I had to put that in.
You can practically taste the man-hate there!
Elam, I should note, ignores that comment. No, what’s got his underpants in a wad is this comment:
The whole web site mensnewsdaily.com is a sad overreaction to the growing equality of women in society.
Evidently he’s been stewing about this remark for more than two years.
In fact, if you go and take a look at it, the discussion on Atheist Nexus wasn’t … really … all that feminist. Yes, several people criticized Elam and mensnewsdaily as “extreme,” but one of those people also criticized radical feminists as similarly “extreme.” Some of the commenters explicitly identified themselves as feminist; others explicitly criticized feminism. Nonetheless, the discussion somehow managed to be the politest conversation about gender I’ve run across online in a long, long time.
Seriously. Go take a look at it. Then consider how Elam sums it all up:
Apparently they can’t even handle 50 years of loud mouthed arts majors without drinking the Kool-aide and going brain dead. There was scarcely a voice among them that did not wallow in the ersatz enlightenment so common to feminist ideologues.
And then he moves on to whatever this is:
Feminism, as far as ideology goes, has been very effective at using human reproductive realities to co-opt other movements. In fact, from the American Civil Rights Movement to Occupy Wall Street, feminism has progressed without paying its own way, but rather by sending women in to other social arenas and wheedling men into supporting them. The Borg would be proud if they had emotions. Resistance is Futrelle.
Ho ho! Futrelle rhymes with futile! Sort of! Lest Elam and co. become too overwhelmed with pride for this clever wordplay, I should note that some junior high schoolers beat him to the punch back in the late 70s. Or maybe it was grade schoolers. I really don’t remember.
I’m less clear about the rest of his argument about “human reproductive realities.” Apparently it’s a fancy way of saying that dudes only support feminism so they can get laid. Another highly original notion.
Elam’s other piece of evidence that feminism has taken over the atheist community? PZ Myers.
He quotes this evil athio-feminazi ideologue arguing that if male atheists want to get more women involved in the atheist community, they should:
Learn to shut up and listen. Seriously. You want women to find your organization pleasant and interesting and worth contributing to? Then don’t form panels full of men trying to figure out what women want, talking over women who try to get a word in edgewise, belittling women’s suggestions with jokes, and trying to determine how We Well-Meaning Men can give Those Women what we think they want. You are assuming an authority and presuming that it is in your power to give it to the minority, when what you should be doing is deferring to that minority and giving them your attention, letting them speak and shape your organization.
God – or, if you prefer, Imaginary Entity – forbid that male atheists actually listen to women explain why they might feel unwelcome in the mostly male (and not particularly feminist friendly) atheist community.
You really think feminism has taken over the atheist community? Take a look at Reddit’s Atheism subreddit, where, recently, a woman who recently described how she had been raped was attacked as a liar and a slut in a thread filled with rape jokes. Or go back a little further to the Elevatorgate brouhaha, where an atheist blogger who politely mentioned in a podcast that she doesn’t really like being hit on by strange men in elevators at 4 AM drew the ire of countless angry atheist dudes, including Richard Fucking Dawkins himself? (In case you want to revisit that bit of nastiness, I wrote about “Elevatorgate” in several blog posts; here are some reactions from decidedly non-feminist atheists.)
This is a movement that “worship[s] at the altar of feminism[?]” Not really seeing it, dude.
But again, congrats on the whole Futrelle/futile thing. Genius!
Like this:
Posted on February 8, 2012, in a voice for men, antifeminism, idiocy, misogyny, MRA, reddit, white knights. Bookmark the permalink. 407 Comments.
If you really, truly don’t want to behave like this any more MRAL, the only way you’re going to be able to do that is to leave. If you stay here, the cycle will not be broken.
There are lots of places on the internet where you can create connections with other people. Find a place which draws people with similar interests to yours. Lurk awhile, learn the culture and figure out if you’re comfortable there. Then, contribute, without lashing out the moment you have a bad day. The first time you do that, you’ll poison the well.
You have burned all of your bridges here. Go. Leave.
What won’t you do again? Specifically what. Are you apologetic for it? Why are you. What is wrong about what you did that you won’t do again?
You seem to be absolutely against actually owning up to anything. So far you either make excuses “I posted in haste” “I was angry”, you apologize for “not meaning” to be “a bad person” and now you’re saying “that stuff”…
I’ve already pointed out specifically one thing you’ve done that you absolutely should apologize for. So far you just seem to want to pretend I’ve never said anything. >_>
This is why nobody believes your “apologies” MRAL: you haven’t given any.
I’m sorry for talking about how people deserved to be groped. I’m sorry for making violent posts, even if I was trolling. I’m sorry for writing that long apology, which was sincere at the time, and then slipping back into my old habits. I’m sorry for being abrasive and difficult to get along with. I’m sorry for attacking Cassandra because I was jealous of her romantic success. I’m sorry for attacking Ozymandias because I was jealous of her romantic success. I’m sorry for attacking Pecunium, and Holly, and Quackers. I’m sorry for rejecting so many nice gestures, and then getting angry when other people got sick of it. I’m sorry for saying sorry so many times. I’m sorry for everything else.
Now, I’m going to leave, for good. This is the best I can do.
Please take the advice to see a counselor. That would be infinitely better than any website trolling, if you need someone to talk to.
I realize that is unlikely, but I wanted to say it anyway.
@ MRAL
Stop with the over dramatizing already!!
Don’t say, do! Go away, change and come back. Then people *might* take you seriously.
Get help, get a date, go for a walk.
Depression is anger directed inwards - you’re angry at yourself but you blame other people.
Er depression is not anger directed inwards happy. O_o
I agree with jumbofish. Most bad days*, I don’t have any anger, I just want to sit in a corner of a locked room and wait for my heart to stop beating or the world to explode, whatever comes first.
*today not being one of them, so sorry I sound overly dramatic.
Anyway, good bye and good luck, MRAL. I hope you seek help and I hope you get better.
Don’t come back.
Still not a her.
Yeah, I noticed he still didn’t apologize for the misgendering.
*exasperated sigh*
MRAL. GO. SEEK. THERAPY. YOUR SCHOOL PROBABLY WILL EVEN COVER IT. THAT IS WHAT YOU CAN DO. THERAPY. THERAPY. THERAPY!! GAH
And: you’re not a bad person, all right? Therapy will help. Really.
Having a difference of opinion doesn’t mean one is “decidedly non-feminist” (unless you are using a definition of “feminism” that deviates from the standard idea of promoting equality, respect, and rights for women). Agreeing with Rebecca Watson via-a-vis “Elevatorgate” is definitely not a litmus test to determine whether one is a feminist or not. You would do yourself and your readers a favor to not make such a departure from reason in order to pigeon-hole people.
But it is a pretty good indicator that you might be a total douchebag! Come on down, Bud, and claim your special prize.
I’m all for rights for women!! I’m just saying, I don’t think that making a short comment in a video about how you don’t want men who have never spoken to you in your life hitting on you in enclosed spaces in a foreign country at 4:00 am after you’ve put on a presentation earlier that day about how you don’t like being hit on at conferences should be numbered among those rights! You feminists are so dogmatic!
@Xanthe - If you ever want to actually get to know me and base your evaluation of my character on evidence and reason rather than merely making assumptions about someone about whom you know nothing, feel free to visit my blog, read, engage in conversation. It’s one thing to claim that you’re a freethinker: it’s another thing altogether to live it out.
@Bud:
No need. The fact that you think that David wrote the words “decidedly unfeminist” merely because of difference of opinion means… well, it means you are making assumptions about someone about whom you know nothing.
Seriously. You must know that you can say that someone doesn’t belong to a group based on their words, right? To simplify it like that means you either didn’t think it through enough, or simply assumed David was an idiot and earned the title of Douchebag. Cheers.
@kirbywarp - My comments were directed toward Xanthe’s comments, not David’s. Pay closer attention next time, and hopefully this confusion will be avoided.
@Bud:
What, this one?
“Having a difference of opinion doesn’t mean one is “decidedly non-feminist” (unless you are using a definition of “feminism” that deviates from the standard idea of promoting equality, respect, and rights for women). Agreeing with Rebecca Watson via-a-vis “Elevatorgate” is definitely not a litmus test to determine whether one is a feminist or not. You would do yourself and your readers a favor to not make such a departure from reason in order to pigeon-hole people.”
Like I said, no need to read your blog or get to know you better. You’ve flagged yourself quite well already.
@kirbywarp - Nice to see I didn’t escape judgmentalism when I left religion. Here’s the issue concerning us: you responded to my invitation to Xanthe by saying “no need” (indeed, why bother acquiring evidence before rendering a verdict?). My reply to you was a less-mean way of saying, “you’re coming across as a closed-minded judgmental goon and I’d prefer to not engage in discussion with you.” Naturally, the problem is compounded by the fact that communication via the Internet is limited, given that tone, inflection, body language, et cetera are lost entirely when we write back and forth to each other.
You are insistent on making sure I’m aware that you feel there’s no need to get to know me better. You are equally insistent on making sure I’m aware of the fact that you’ve already cast judgment upon my character. In a different situation - perhaps a scenario “IRL” or in a less hostile environment - we might have had success in engaging in a respectful and meaningful dialogue. Nevertheless, I wish you well. I think we’re actually on the same side. We both want to see a world in which women are seen as equals, shown respect and dignity, able to live without fear, and are able to succeed and live out their dreams to the best of their abilities. Hopefully we can find some clarity in spite of all the mud that’s been dumped in the water over “Elevatorgate” and similar issues.
@bud:
Nah, mate. I’m talking about how you said that one cannot call someone “not a feminist” just because they have a different opinion than you. To which I responded “you’re an idiot if you think that’s all David was doing.”
Prose aside, you aren’t doing yourself any favors by not actually reading what I’m writing, and taking on this whole wounded and arrogant air when I imply you’re being a douche. If you wanna dialogue on something, I’m up for it, but not before taking you to task on your first challenge; namely, “Having a difference of opinion doesn’t mean one is “decidedly non-feminist”.”
@kirbywarp - I never act wounded, so you can drop that rhetoric. Arrogant? Sure, I can be at times. Okay, let’s chat.
Honestly, I don’t know what David is thinking. He didn’t bother to explain why he considers me a “decidedly non-feminist atheist.” I’m not going to assume I know what he’s thinking. All I know is he brought up the tired old Elevatorgate issue and linked to my blog as representing the “opposing team,” as though I’m not on the same side as the feminists. The only evidence I have for his opinion is that I presented a view different than the view of those who supported Rebecca Watson wholly during Elevatorgate. This lead me to encourage David to consider that having a difference of opinion doesn’t mean one is “decidedly non-feminist.” Hopefully he’s not doing that (although if he isn’t, I fear his calling me a “non-feminist” is based on even worse reasoning).
Hopefully what I wrote is clear.
@Bud:
My apologies, I figured it’d be rude of me to jump to “you are actually wounded.”
As for Elevatorgate, you brought up five points:
1. Rebecca Watson is promoting a lifestyle of fear and weakness for women.
2. Rebecca Watson Doesn’t Use Her Head.
3. Rebecca Watson is simply wrong.
4. Rebecca Watson requires her sacrificial lamb.
5. Rebecca Watson gave good advice to men.
Now most feminists will probably agree with your point 5, which was your intention. The rest, however… urk. Please, read the transcript (printed below) and tell me again where exactly you see your first four points being demonstrated.
@bud:
I mean, god damn. Your brilliant solution to women feeling insecure: learn karate. No. You don’t get to shift the burden of responsibility for patriarchy and female oppression and rape culture to the women because they didn’t bother to learn self defense.
I don’t read boring blogs, and you, Bud, are very boring.
@CassandraSays:
Bud is either gone, writing up a very long response, or sitting in shock at my fantastic debate skills. My money’s on the latter. ^_^
Definitely your debate skills.
Wanker doesn’t know what hit him.
If the response also involves karate I will snicker.
@CassandraSays:
Luckily I’ve got a nice batch of Dr. Who to keep me company during the waiting period. No longer will people shoo me away, afraid of exposing me to spoilers, NO LONGER!
Aww, no way. Bud wrote a blog post! And it was posted after my last post to him in our little exchange! And I don’t get a mention at all!
http://dead-logic.blogspot.com/2012/02/who-wants-to-keep-talking-about.html#more
That’s brilliant.
From the post:
“Before some idiot trying to be clever stuck a “gate” to the end of the infamous elevator, I posted a comment on Rebecca’s video About Mythbusters, Robot Eyes, Feminism, and Jokes. You know, the video in which we first heard about Mr. Elevator Guy - the video that sparked Elevatorgate? My response to Rebecca’s video (and I don’t comment often on YouTube) was positive. I enjoyed it. It was the stuff that happened after that video - the stuff that became “Elevatorgate” - that I criticized.”
He’s trying to rewrite his own history! It wasn’t the flare-up he criticized, it was Watson! Who knows what he posted on the video, but dang if he seemed to have forgotten what Watson actually said later on.
*shakes head*
Sorry, Bud, I probably shouldn’t have described you as “decidedly non-feminist.” I probably should have just said you were really incompetent at being feminist.
Let’s say, for the sake of discussion, that I’m wrong. My criticism of Rebecca Watson is incorrect. It’s possible. I’m not perfect. Considering that we’re on the same side, and assuming we all consider ourselves freethinkers here, what benefit - aside from satisfying childish impulses - does insulting and belittling me have? How does the cause of feminism prosper if, instead of helping me understand how I was wrong like a decent freethinker would, you team up and turn this into an insult fest? I didn’t come here to argue or debate, but to converse. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you actually knew what being a freethinker means. You folks aren’t up to the task. So I’m out - not because I’m wounded, but because I’m better than this.
It makes you - boring, vaguely irritating, pedantic, tedious you - go away?
Uh, Bud, I hate to break this to you, but you seem to have the same problem a lot of our… “visitors” do. This is a site that mocks misogyny. SRS BSNS and “I’m better than you” meetings are down the hall to your left.
Thanks for stopping by!
Didn’t we all agree that I’m Better Than You meetings were to be held over in the Nobody Gives A Shit building from now on?
Um did you miss the subheading of the site?
misogyny. I mock it.
and you really think the solution to women feeling threatened is to learn karate? O_o
Yet another dude who wanders in and wants us to educate him-in the name of the feminist cause, no less-on how he wrong. Pass.
I read the whole thread with MRAL (he’s cycling through faster these days, and I see David has trained him to avoid personal attacks on people here, so he just attacks all women) last night, but didn’t trust myself to comment on it (and I swore off commenting TO MRAL a while ago).
So here I am back after a good night’s sleep-and able to say fairly briefly more or less what I was thinking last night.
1. MRAL is getting just what he wants from people here-attention (positive, negative, whatever).
2. Nothing has changed in the months since he “apologized” for being a troll-and the fact that people occasionally quote a good thing he said elsewhere (like happened here) just highlights the fact that he is still, for better or worse, trolling here.
3. Anybody who really thinks he needs to get off here and get help (as I do) might consider that the only way we have to change his behavior is to completely ignore him (Mythago said as much; I agree).
4. That solution is probably not achievable given that new people cycle in and out, and don’t know his history of attention-whoring, but I’d sure love to see one thread where he posted and nobody responded to him.
… Am I crazy if I don’t see either people ganging up (four total) or a bunch of insulting and belittling? Before his last post, I count four instances of direct name calling, and it was one each for four different people. Meanwhile, he directly insulted me through name calling once as well.
Also, apparently he went from “Honestly, I don’t know what David is thinking. He didn’t bother to explain why he considers me a “decidedly non-feminist atheist.”” to “Let’s say, for the sake of discussion, that I’m wrong. My criticism of Rebecca Watson is incorrect. It’s possible. I’m not perfect.” Good for him, I guess, but not if he’s gonna go through this whole “but you’re being sooo mean to me! It’s your fault that I have my fingers in my ears!”
You may have the vocabulary of an adult, bud, but you have the pride and ego of a kid. Come back when you fit the role of “freethinker” yourself.
Or David could ban him…?
and you really think the solution to women feeling threatened is to learn karate? O_o
Maybe kung fu instead? :p
@ bagelsan
Well in that case….
Just a comment from the previous thread … I know that this wasn’t said with any bad will in mind, but “spazzing out” is a bit ableist. The word “spaz” still has a lot of negative connotations for those who have epilepsy/cerebral palsey, and other related conditions.
Let’s call MRAL’s actions offensive and inappropriate and other words, but we don’t have to use a slur.
Thanks!
(For more info: http://www.pixeldiva.co.uk/thinks/spaz-is-an-unacceptable-term/)
Sorry, l meant “previous page” not previous thread…
@Molly Ren: He could, but since he hasn’t (moderation but then letting comments through), I’m betting that for whatever reason David isn’t going to do that.
@Hellkell: Bud struck me as another garden variety toll wanta be whose “game” is to approach a feminist or perceived to be feminist site, pretend to be a feminist (“I’m all in support of women’s equality, BUT…..) without actually showing any knowledge of the issues or even the basic rhetorics of feminisms, then proceed to mansplain how X proves that the silly women are doing it wrong, then when called on his trollshit, proceeds to be “why are you being so mean” and “don’t’ you want to edumacate me and convert me, lovely mansplainer that I am, to yer cause, because the more men the better” portion of the game.
Stale, cliche, overdone, and does not even deserve one star.
Ithiliana, exactly, and if he were a such the awesome freethinker as he seems to believe he is, he sure wouldn’t need us to school him. He could figure shit out for himself.
I did love the “I’m better than you,” which is always funny after such a display of ‘splainin.
Nah, I’m pretty sure bud was genuine. He just… can’t handle criticism, and got too wrapped up in “you aren’t being kind.” He holds to his label of feminist and freethinker dearly, without realizing that those labels are something you need to earn.
He got on the defensive right off the bat, so that probably didn’t help him at all.
@Kirby: So you’re saying Bud’s schtick wasn’t intentional?
Eh, OK, but that doesn’t make me change my evaluation, and I’m not wedded to purity based version of troll (“says things they don’t believe to get omg reaction.”). So he’s not a troll, and not a conscious misogynist, but that doesn’t mean much. I went and read his Elevatorgate post quoted above, and its reeking with male privilege and misogyny, and his post about his encounter here and his flounce, ditto.
He was mansplaining feminism to feminists, and that’s a dickbiscuit move in my book. And if he’s such a freethinker, why such stale, cliche rhetoric?
Oh… Bud thinks he’s tough.
It’s one thing to claim that you’re a freethinker: it’s another thing altogether to live it out.
Talk vs. Walk.
@kirbywarp – My comments were directed toward Xanthe’s comments, not David’s. Pay closer attention next time, and hopefully this confusion will be avoided.
The Part where you quoted Dave? That was directed at Xanthe? Perhaps the problem isn’t in whom you think you are talking to, as much as what you are attributing to whom. If you want to say something about the content of a post/comment it behooves you to respond to the actual words of the person you are speaking of.
@kirbywarp – Nice to see I didn’t escape judgmentalism when I left religion.
Nope. You carried it with you. The faults usually lie with us, not our stars.
assuming we all consider ourselves freethinkers here
This assumes that “freethinker” is some sort of club, where everyone is, “on the same side.”
It also assumes that your intent somehow makes up for your actions.
Neither of those is actually true, and this, “I didn’t come here to argue or debate, but to converse, is a cop-out. Conversation doesn’t mean no one gets to disagree with you. Conversation allows that people who disagree with you get to speak their minds. If you want a soapbox, use your own place.
And, being of the sort who thinks for myself, I formed some opinions about the Skepchick mess, and all in all I think, apart from your point number five, that you are all wet.
Seven months after Elevatorgate, after hundred of thousands of words spilled by misogynist trolls being rebutted, it’s almost a certain bet that someone who leaves a drive-by posting decrying Rebecca Watson is a douchebag. At this point it really is a litmus test.
Bud went on to prove it.
Bud made a big deal (on his blog) about how he was abused for merely having a different opinion, and that no one was willing to even talk to him because we are all knee-jerk reactionaries without an independent thought in our heads.
And how he’d gone and turned off the e-mail replies because it was pointless. He made this post quite some time after a number of detailed responses to his points.
So he’s intellectually dishonest, as well as a poser.
*sigh*
Apparently I, a knee-jerk reactionary without an independent thought in my head, was still able to make him turn on a fucking dime with his opinion of Rebecca Watson just by asking him to justify it. =_=
No one is a freethinker though-not truly. Our thoughts are the end results of thousands of inputs from the world without, within and Kirby.
So to claim one is a freethinker is basically saying to the world “I am a pretentious tool.”
@PFKAE: So to claim one is a freethinker is basically saying to the world “I am a pretentious tool.”
ESPECIALLY in the context of lecturing parts of the rest of the world about how much they fail as being a “freethinker” themselves (mostly because, shock and surprise, they don’t agree with Mr. Bud, er, Mr. Freethinker)!