"Richard Dawkins has lost it: ignorant sexism gives atheists a bad name"

[mr blur]

He may have convinced himself that he’s the Most Rational Man Alive, but if wants to be the face of a welcoming movement, he’s doing a terrible job

I became an atheist on my own, but it was Richard Dawkins who strengthened and confirmed my decision. For a long time, I admired his insightful science writing, his fierce polemics, his uncompromising passion for the truth. When something I’d written got a (brief) mention in The God Delusion, it was one of the high points of my life.

So, I’m not saying this is easy, but I have to say it: Richard Dawkins, I’m just not that into you anymore.

The atheist movement – a loosely-knit community of conference-goers, advocacy organizations, writers and activists – has been wracked by infighting the last few years over its persistent gender imbalance and the causes of it. Many female atheists have explained that they don’t get more involved because of the casual sexism endemic to the movement: parts of it see nothing problematic about hosting conferences with all-male speakers or having all-male leadership – and that’s before you get to the vitriolic and dangerous sexual harassment, online and off, that’s designed to intimidate women into silence.

-snip-

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/richard-dawkins-sexist-atheists-bad-name

A particularly sloppy and misleading screed in The Guardian, I thought.

This insistence that atheism is "a movement" and that we must all be perfect and "welcoming" misses the point. I don't need "a movement" and fully accept that atheism means 'no gods' and nothing else. All atheists don't have to share my values, political beliefs, colour, gender, race...they don't have to do anything. It's not a fucking club!

It's as bad as these people who whitter on about going to 'atheist churches'. No -one put Dawkins in charge of atheism; he obviously doesn't want to be in charge of atheism. He's a bloody smart scientist and writer who doesn't hold back from saying that he thinks religions is ridiculous and dangerous; well, so do I. I don't give a damn if people don't find him cuddly and PC-friendly.

"...gives atheists a bad name"? Well no-one ever said to me "I don't want to talk to you, that Richard Dawkins was rude about a Muslim woman!"

I can understand people being made nervous by his intellect but all this , "Oh he was rude to a woman! He's a bad atheist!" deflection just pisses me off.
</rant>

[Lordquinton]

1. compared to the pope he's a paragon of virtue

Typing that I realized how entrenched our descriptions of good deeds are in religious context.

[mr blur]

2. Yeah, but the pope always gets a free pass - even from some "atheists"!

You know?: "Oh he's not perfect, nobody is, but he cares and he really tries hard to make a difference and no he hasn't changed anything but it's not his fault, his hands are tied and he drives an old car and blah blah drone.."

So, we're supposed to hold Dawkins to higher standards than the fucking pope, a man who heads an incredibly wealthy cult that enshrines institutionalised homophobia and misogyny? Because he's smart?

[bvf]

7. Count me among those who until recently

gave the pope a free pass.

After looking at the bigger picture, I've changed my mind.

[Curmudgeoness]

12. Besides the wealthy cult,

the Pope is infallible. He is God on Earth. I think that trumps Dawkins on the perfection scale.

[Hissyspit]

3. Yeah, dumb article.

[LiberalAndProud]

4. I think he has been a pioneer in bringing the idea of disbelief

Last edited Fri Sep 19, 2014, 09:03 AM - Edit history (1)

into the public sphere, even as Madelyn Murray O'Hair was before him. (Please note that she was female.) Do I perceive in him a leader? Only to the degree that he speaks publicly and often eloquently about disbelief, and condemns religiosity with sharp wit.

Having said that, it does disappoint me that disbelieving doesn't automatically liberate us from old and passe ideas about gender. I'm not surprised or even appalled. The fight for gender equality is just that complex. Dawkins requires some enlightenment, but so does almost everybody -- no not almost everybody; everybody.

[onager]

5. Adam Lee does this a lot.

He's had a Dawkins hate-on for some time now. And I refuse to link to any of his other, similar crap. It's easily searchable.

Dawkins reminds me of a whale moving majestically thru the sea, attacked by hordes of toothless piranhas. Or something like that.

He isn't the only one. Some very ugly allegations have been leveled against many prominent atheists/skeptics in the past few years.

Just my opinion - some of this is purely opportunism and self-marketing:

"Hey, atheism needs new leaders to replace these tired old guys! So I will modestly step forward and appoint myself your new leader. Thank you!"

Right. As I've said before, go and get yourself a track record comparable to a Dawkins, a Hitchens, a Shermer, etc. and I'll listen. Otherwise you are just trying to promote yourself far beyond your pay-grade.

And some of it is an attempt to hijack atheism/skepticism to specific political ideals. Which IMO is never going to work.

I actually know some atheists who are conservatives and Republicans. They will probably never become Democratic Party liberals, though some will cross party lines and support Dems. Especially when their candidate is a theocratic loon. e.g., Todd "Real Rape" Akin in Missouri.

Some of them have seen this "Dear Leader" stuff going on in the internet atheist community. So far they just scratch their heads in bafflement and go right on being atheists.

[trotsky]

6. It's a formula that works.

Attack Dawkins, and you get all the believers who hate him happy because now they have another reason to hate him. (And in their minds, then dismiss his criticisms of religion.)

Carries right over to DU - by attacking Dawkins, in their minds they neutralize his arguments against religion. Because Koresh knows they can't do that with their own counter-arguments.

[DavidDvorkin]

8. It works with some believers, too

They're the ones who say something along the lines of, "I'm an atheist, but I'm embarrassed by Dawkins, and I think he should keep his mouth shut."

[Gelliebeans]

9. You are right

There is an ebb and flow to how things work here.
There is a lot of tit for tat also.

[Rainforestgoddess]

10. If I want a movement, I'll have a bran muffin (n/t)

[onager]

11. And to that, all I can say is...

[Curmudgeoness]

13. I don't know what this bullshit is all about.....

and that’s before you get to the vitriolic and dangerous sexual harassment, online and off, that’s designed to intimidate women into silence.

I have never had another atheist try to silence me, online or off. No atheist has tried to intimidate me. Where do people dream this up?

The only intimidation I have ever gotten was from believers. And that is a fact.

[AlbertCat]

27. I don't know what this bullshit is all about.....

Neither do I.

I don't for a minute think Dawkins hates or even looks down on women. He may look down on A woman he thinks is being silly, but I doubt seriously his problem is she's a woman. I'll bet he looks on being female as a biological condition.... like being male is. He is a biologist after all.

He DOES work in an old-world English Scientific atmosphere that has been for centuries dismissive of women, and is I'll bet a bit behind the times in that respect. But from the way Dawkins is criticized, you'd think he was Phillis Shlafly!

[Curmudgeoness]

31. I get it...

It is like our problem with Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter has nothing to do with that they are women, but that they are ignorant.

[NastyRiffraff]

14. I don't agree with Dawkins on everything

but then there isn't a single human being that I completely agree with on every little thing. He was instrumental in making me realize that I'm an atheist, after reading The God Delusion.

I have no idea what The Guardian's agenda is here; there is no atheist "movement" that discriminates against women. If you want sexism, just look to the Catholic church.

[Brainstormy]

15. I may not agree with Dawkins on everything

but I've yet to discover what I don't agree with him about.

[Act_of_Reparation]

16. This looks like an unpopular position, but Lee is right.

Dawkins has lost it.

And I say that in the most respectful way I possibly can, because his contributions to getting most of us out of the closet cannot be understated.

That said, he seems to have trouble recognizing the limitations of his expertise, and he should probably stick to commenting on shit he's qualified to speak about.

[LiberalAndProud]

17. Is being wrong the same thing as losing it?

He's wrong on the topic of women more often than he's right, but "lost it" seems overly harsh.

[Act_of_Reparation]

19. Not necessarily. But he keeps doubling down on his inane opinions of women and feminism.

He's not an expert in the social sciences. A rational person would realize this and defer to the correct authorities when making statements under the purview of that subject. But he doesn't do this. He keeps blathering on, and rather unironically, about "rationalism" and "science" while remaining completely -- and willingly -- ignorant of the mountain of research piled against him.

He's essentially demonstrating a behavior he himself professes to despise in the religious. Frankly, he should know better.

[LiberalAndProud]

20. I'm not disagreeing.

Good thing he's not our messiah. It really is depressing to consider how deeply attitudes about women are ingrained even sans religious tripe.

I need a pulling-out-my-hair icon.

[mr blur]

21. Have to disagree with you there.

I don't think he has inane opinions of women and feminism.
But we'd agree, I imagine that, even if he did it would have nothing to do with atheism. Or with you and I as atheists?

[Act_of_Reparation]

23. Oh, no doubt.

But we do have a problem in that some people -- particularly those named after upholstery -- cannot or will not make that distinction.

[enki23]

24. It has plenty to do with us as atheists

Just as it has something to do with Christians when they fail to be vocal and up front about the evil bullshit that spews from people who, whether they like it or not, are publicly associated with Christianity.

[AlbertCat]

28. the topic of women

I wasn't aware he'd discussed this broad topic.

Badda bing!



Seriously, when has Dawkins given us his opinion of "the topic of women "??? I am unaware of that article or book.

[onager]

18. Carolyn Porco, Sam Harris dragged in along with The Dawk

CAROLYN PORCO is being accused of misogyny now? WTF? Carolyn "Cassini Mission" Porco? World famous interplanetary scientist? Technical advisor on the 1997 movie "Contact" (and rumored to be the model for the Evil Atheist female protagonist)?

Amazing. The link below is to Harris' Twitter feed a couple days ago. (I don't do Twitter or Facebook, so I just find this stuff on the web.)

A real misogynist asshole shows up to equate feminism with Nazism. For those who can't tell the difference between "misogyny" and "disagreeing with women on the internetz."

Sam Harris ‏@SamHarrisOrg · Sep 13 - Alright, fans of pointless controversy, you win. My next blog post will address my alleged sexism and misogyny.

Carolyn Porco ‏@carolynporco · Sep 13 - Ha! You too, eh? Can't wait to see what you write.

Noel Plum hits the nail right on the head, IMO:

Noel Plum ‏@noelplum · Sep 13 - Problem is the "misogyny" accusation is thrown around like confetti. Well poisoning at its best

https://twitter.com/SamHarrisOrg/status/510876747697385472

[Act_of_Reparation]

22. I wouldn't say Sam Harris got "dragged" into anything

Harris said some painfully stupid shit, and like Dawkins he keeps reflexively doubling down on that stupid shit. Porco got dragged through the mud because she didn't like people throwing the word "misogynist" at her friend.

I happen to agree with her on that. There's a difference between being ignorant and being hateful, and misogyny is certainly more closely related to the latter of the two. But part of the reason some people are so jumpy with the dreaded "M" word is because misogyny is a real problem, both on the internet and in real life. Sam's opinions on the gender imbalance in the atheist movement are largely based on ingrained societal attitudes towards women, attitudes that are reflected by actual misogynists. It might not be fair to the ignorant, but this is the environment misogynists have created. The sooner we deal with these toolbags, the sooner there will be more patience for people who legitimately fuck up.

[onager]

25. Nugent again: Adam Lee's Misleading Guardian Article...

Round 2! Lee's article nicely dissected.

Contains a link to Jerry Coyne's latest at WEIT. Check the Comments there - Dawkins himself shows up, and so does Adam Lee.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2014/09/21/adam-lees-misleading-guardian-article-about-richard-dawkins-sam-harris-and-the-atheist-movement/

[trotsky]

30. Nicely done.

Why it's almost like he reads DU.

[valerief]

26. Sometimes, I wonder about the Asantaist Movement. You know, people

who have no reason to believe there's a real Santa. How does the Asantaist Movement handle their sexism? After all, Santa is supposed to be a male, so that must mean something.

Oh, you say there's no such Asantist Movement? But what about their shared lack of belief in Santa? You say they just don't believe in Santa and go on about their business?

Farout...

[enki23]

29. We'll get back to you when people hurt other people because of fucking Santa.

Hey, fuck it. You're free not to believe in a god even if they force your kid to undergo the fucking rituals. You're free to not to believe in a god whether or not they make you say you believe to get a job. You're free to not believe in a god even if you're coerced into going to church. You're free to not believe in the god that they use to justify slavery. You're free to not believe in the god they use to justify unequal pay and unequal status for women. You are free to not believe in the god they use to justify taxing the poor and coddling the rich.

You're free to not believe in a god right up to, and beyond the point at which they're applying the hot pokers to make you say you do. So why do you care? Right? Why hang out here on an entire website devoted to "social justice warriors" who give a fuck about politics, and the issues that define it?

Dictionary Atheism: The position whose purest form claims the only freedom an atheist should want is the freedom from fucking brain probes and mind control lasers. See: tinfoil-hat atheism.