Religion

Brettongarcia

(2,262 posts)

122. Actually?

Thu Oct 9, 2014, 09:45 AM

Oct 2014

I probably SHOULD have specified that we're talking mostly about New Atheists. But?

I'm just borrowing a natural convention that was now and then adopted by many of the half dozen articles you and others (Ms. cbayer?) have insistently presented on this matter of Dawkins etc.. Most of these articles slide now and then into the seemingly natural standpoint that "atheists" - most atheists in our own time - are in effect New Atheists.

So when they condemn "atheists," NA's are actually their implied target.

Seems like a reasonable connection. Though for that matter, the authors themselves should have clarified it. Their often (if not always) qualified condemnation of just "atheists," is a little confusing and inaccurate. And I'm sorry I simply borrowed their language for a moment. Without explicitly noting some inherent confusions that might come from it.

You might likewise have noted some conceptual problems with your own articles, as you posted them.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

131 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Atheism’s shocking woman problem: What’s behind the misogyny of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris? [View all] cbayer Oct 2014 OP

Why does every atheist always have to answer for these two jerks? arcane1 Oct 2014 #1

Did you read the article by any chance. cbayer Oct 2014 #4

I read it. The title doesn't reflect the article. Feral Child Oct 2014 #10

She may not have written the headline, but it is a bit cbayer Oct 2014 #12

I suppose you've made some valid points. Feral Child Oct 2014 #23

Your position is just fine and i hope that you will embrace those that see it differently. cbayer Oct 2014 #50

I've not attacked anyone. Feral Child Oct 2014 #65

It's been nice talking to you and I respect your position for the most part. cbayer Oct 2014 #68

"We don't agree about there being leadership in organized atheism. There clearly is..." cleanhippie Oct 2014 #82

Of course there;s not. rug Oct 2014 #83

"Atheism, by it's very nature, rejects leaders, dogma, or unity. " YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #19

you've made a compelling argument.. frylock Oct 2014 #20

Rather laconic response. Feral Child Oct 2014 #21

If you've got a bus, I'll throw dawkins under it. AtheistCrusader Oct 2014 #24

I've recanted. Feral Child Oct 2014 #25

As such, it does. That doesn't mean that individual atheists might not have their 'gurus'... LeftishBrit Oct 2014 #64

+100 nt Starboard Tack Oct 2014 #130

If you are a male who values science, but found proportionately few women in that field - then what? Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #67

Do a search. You'll find hundreds of those posts in this Group alone. rug Oct 2014 #77

Because they're the Athi-Popes? Ken Burch Oct 2014 #102

Sorry, name's already taken. okasha Oct 2014 #105

Not "antipope"..."Athi-pope"-as if athiests had one of their own now. n/t. Ken Burch Oct 2014 #121

"Christianity's shocking child-rape problem" is a great example of the logical fallacy Fortinbras Armstrong Oct 2014 #117

If atheism has a "shocking" woman problem... trotsky Oct 2014 #2

Yes, calling the atheist movement anti-women based on some word scramble sentences Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #7

I didn't realize there was an atheist movement. Kalidurga Oct 2014 #3

Well, there is, but I don't think there is any expectation that you join it. cbayer Oct 2014 #5

Another hit piece on Dawkins Lordquinton Oct 2014 #6

Hit piece? Do you take issue with Amanda Marcotte? cbayer Oct 2014 #8

The Pope is even worse than Dawkins Lordquinton Oct 2014 #15

We have threads about the pope. We have threads cbayer Oct 2014 #16

You know, you really should check your link with reality. It seems to be missing. mr blur Oct 2014 #29

Check my link with reality? Are you suggesting that your take on what is going on with women cbayer Oct 2014 #31

There are numerous threads daily on that. rug Oct 2014 #79

Some things need to be hit. rug Oct 2014 #78

This is baloney. Atheism has no woman problem. There is no dogma concerning women. BillZBubb Oct 2014 #9

So all those female atheists who are complaining loudly and eloquently cbayer Oct 2014 #13

There are no "spokepeople" or "leaders" for atheists. That is baloney. BillZBubb Oct 2014 #22

These are two of the most influential atheists around. Leadership is irrelevent. kwassa Oct 2014 #30

Nonsense. BillZBubb Oct 2014 #36

Why? Because you say so? kwassa Oct 2014 #44

And that is exactly the problem, isn't it. cbayer Oct 2014 #51

Sounds like you are agreeing Starboard Tack Oct 2014 #131

Unfortunately, it's not baloney. Just google it. cbayer Oct 2014 #32

It is baloney, and it isn't patronizing to say someone is misguided when they are. BillZBubb Oct 2014 #37

It's very telling when one calls women who are complaining of misogyny "misguided". cbayer Oct 2014 #40

What??? procon Oct 2014 #28

What?? There are lots of organized atheist associations. cbayer Oct 2014 #34

What is the problem? BillZBubb Oct 2014 #38

Well, since I have no idea what you mean by that question, cbayer Oct 2014 #41

Thank you for such a convincing and succinct response. procon Oct 2014 #47

One thing I have found is that no matter how many labels one applies to cbayer Oct 2014 #49

Pat Buchanan and I both call ourselves Catholics Fortinbras Armstrong Oct 2014 #119

I am in agreement with you. cbayer Oct 2014 #120

"the purest form of atheism"? rug Oct 2014 #80

Is it only my vocabulary that provokes your intolerence? procon Oct 2014 #99

You remind me of the members of the Catholic hierarchy Fortinbras Armstrong Oct 2014 #118

"There was an immediate uproar among female atheists" AtheistCrusader Oct 2014 #11

Indeed, PZ has been particularly vocal about this. longship Oct 2014 #35

Nice to see you longship and particularly nice to see that cbayer Oct 2014 #39

Always nice to see you, too. longship Oct 2014 #42

I am glad to hear that your summer has presented you with things more cbayer Oct 2014 #45

as others have tediously pointed out, atheism, the lack of belief in gods, Warren Stupidity Oct 2014 #46

I fully concur. longship Oct 2014 #48

Renouncing religion isn't the same as renouncing the culture it exists within. hunter Oct 2014 #14

That's exactly right, cbayer Oct 2014 #17

The movement to organize exists edgineered Oct 2014 #27

I disagree. I see great potential in organized atheism. cbayer Oct 2014 #33

Exactly. Yet a lot (not all, certainly, but a fair number) of self-described atheists.... YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #18

It's a very small group and not at all representative of atheists in general. cbayer Oct 2014 #43

I think they are in a different sect from me. rurallib Oct 2014 #26

Lol, i got your joke. cbayer Oct 2014 #52

I've been looking on the web for the ratio of male atheists to female atheist but have found no.. BlueJazz Oct 2014 #53

The most reliable and believable demographics show that males constitute about two thirds cbayer Oct 2014 #54

The thought did cross my mind was perhaps the ratio you quoted might be a lot closer ... BlueJazz Oct 2014 #56

I'm not so sure it has to do with women wanting a "god" cbayer Oct 2014 #57

Good points. Your words ring true. I DO know that when I go to my other country (Australia) BlueJazz Oct 2014 #59

Australia is very, very interesting when it comes to religion. cbayer Oct 2014 #60

Here's some raw data. rug Oct 2014 #81

Yes, I was absolutely correct in my assumption. Except everything was Ass-Backwards. BlueJazz Oct 2014 #85

This was the subject of the sermon at atheist church Hari Seldon Oct 2014 #55

Welcome to DU and to the religion group, Hari Seldon. cbayer Oct 2014 #58

So what is it about atheism that makes Richard Dawkins a misogynist? immoderate Oct 2014 #61

There is nothing about atheism that make RD a misogynist. cbayer Oct 2014 #62

Yes, I will allow that RD's personal sensibilities are somewhat provincial, however... immoderate Oct 2014 #63

Here is the issue, imo. cbayer Oct 2014 #72

I think the article title does rather suggest that: muriel_volestrangler Oct 2014 #73

You and I both know that titles are written to attract attention cbayer Oct 2014 #74

I do find the misogynistic tenets edhopper Oct 2014 #66

I know you are being sarcastic, but no one has suggested cbayer Oct 2014 #69

I was mocking the title edhopper Oct 2014 #70

I think most male dominated organizations are at risk cbayer Oct 2014 #71

Typically males do better at science and math; at school and in the professions Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #75

Your premise is entirely wrong and your analysis overtly sexist. cbayer Oct 2014 #76

+1 rug Oct 2014 #86

"For math, science, boys lead on achievement tests while girls do better on classroom grades" Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #87

Please present the evidence to support your #2 assertion. cbayer Oct 2014 #89

Standard statistical surveys say there are far more males than females in science professions Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #90

What 6 or 7 recent repeated DU attacks on male atheists are you referring to? cbayer Oct 2014 #91

Attacks on Richard Dawkins, and by extension, male atheists; as sexist Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #92

How is criticism of Richard Dawkins an attack on male atheists in general? cbayer Oct 2014 #93

In at least four of these articles by Rug, the aim was to hint that Atheism in general was sexist Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #94

You must be rather sensitive to infer that. rug Oct 2014 #95

Read your own articles. Including, at random, the present one: Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #96

Specifically, he's referring to "new atheism" not atheism. rug Oct 2014 #107

You are making an accusatory claim without evidence. cbayer Oct 2014 #98

Clearly these articles are attempting to generalize Dawkin's example; to condemn all atheists Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #101

I was looking for a broader brush but you beat me to it. rug Oct 2014 #115

Actually? Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #122

Does the posting of articles about atheism, by atheists, disturb you? rug Oct 2014 #123

Having these re-posed by anti-atheists bothers me. Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #124

Ah, so you feel problems within the atheist community should be discussed rug Oct 2014 #125

When any given community criticizes itself, before others, that is considered higher criticism. Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #126

Good. I'll continue to post "higher criticism". rug Oct 2014 #127

That is good only if, for YOU the re-poster and most of your readers, it is also self-criticism. Brettongarcia Oct 2014 #128

That's unabashed rubbish. rug Oct 2014 #129

That's one reason I enjoyed working in Public Health. In general their was more gender equality, imo pinto Oct 2014 #97

Good point. I think that for whatever reason there is more balance cbayer Oct 2014 #100

The same problem does not exist within religion edhopper Oct 2014 #108

Even more reason to make sure that this doesn't happen to atheist groups. cbayer Oct 2014 #110

Yes edhopper Oct 2014 #111

It is wonderful to agree with you, edhopper. cbayer Oct 2014 #112

I still think edhopper Oct 2014 #113

Agree with that. cbayer Oct 2014 #114

Yeah edhopper Oct 2014 #116

Have Heard a Lot About This RadicalGeek Oct 2014 #84

Welcome to the religion group, radicalgeek. cbayer Oct 2014 #88

Thank you RadicalGeek Oct 2014 #106

I agree with you. cbayer Oct 2014 #109

Sadistic bullies tend to rise to dominance in loosely-organized "movements" carolinayellowdog Oct 2014 #103

Once again RadicalGeek Oct 2014 #104