The Atheism+ Moment
The title of this post belongs to a moment of profound self-revelation from an obtuse regressive jerk. He is being ably handled elsewhere, but I wanted to say, “Speaking of emotions and queens...” My new work place has several openly queer people and it makes me so happy! This is not the most progressive area of my state (though far from the least), so I dunno... I’m so happy I’m wearing my sparkliest fake bling in celebration. ;u;
...deben lavarse sus manos despues de usar el baño. It’s one of the bits of Español I’ve picked up in my professional life. And per those words of wisdom, I must now wash my hands because I AM RETURNING TO WORK! Not sure how that will affect the blogging, but it probably won’t be much impact on that. I’m considering whether or not I should post my NaNoWriMo novel here as I write it this year, and kicking around some other notions. How do I entertain the thronging hordes at my virtual doorstep? I will decide with all due urgency.
It seems some antifeminists think the primary motivation of feminism is to hate children, like the witch from Hansel and Gretel. Observe John C. Wright, but not directly, because fuck giving him traffic yo:
“...Beale puts his finger on what feminists hate most. They hate being women, they hate being wives, they hate being mothers, they hate fertility, and therefore they hate babies with the hatred of Moloch”
Lamia is a figure from Greek mythology associated with infanticidal motherhood, which has been generalized into a class of monsters in Greece, Basque country, and Dungeons & Dragons sourcebooks, as well as being referenced in pop culture for a long time. I propose that when a straw feminist is specifically claimed as child hating, we refer to it as a “straw lamia.”
And on a tangential note, I’ve lately been pondering the ethics of dead baby jokes. For a while, atheists were joking about eating babies, in mocking reference to the outrageous beliefs sheltered fundamentalists hold about us. (Or some other reason I couldn’t find in a very cursory googling.) But some people who have babies may feel sensitive about this, and a very few times in recent history, babies have been eaten. Someone who was especially traumatized by such a news story could likewise be disturbed.
But dead babies, amirite? I’m not sure where to fall on this, but until I decide dead baby jokes are out, let me drop this revelation on you: Beyoncé is a secret atheist. How do we know? The chorus of “Bootylicious” includes the phrase “delicious baby.” Now you know. Yo Slick, blow. Holy craps. This was based on a mondegreen. My shame is great.
-
I’m going to edit this page some in the future, but for now a link to my early posts will suffice: (EDIT from 2026: All articles after this point in the archive were from the earlier version of A+ Blogs where it was organized differently, all together in one stream instead of individual blogs.)
I don’t know who you are outside of this article, but I feel ya. I do feel the need to clarify one thing from our side. You said
Considerations of class aren’t as prevalent amongst “Atheism Plus” as I’d be happy to see in a left-wing movement/organisation. It all comes across as being a bit too exclusively white collar.
To which I reply:
...look at me, the most active blogger on our baby network. The only reason I have time to blog is being chronically unemployed. Class oppression is the only kind I am routinely on the receiving end of, and the last two steady jobs I held were lost due to anti-union CEOs screwing over a bunch of us working poor. My parents were the black sheep of their respective families and I’ve never even come close to touching the low end of what’s considered middle class income here.
Nonetheless, we all have the luxury of choosing the labels we apply to ourselves (not so much the ones others apply to us), and de-prioritizing atheism seems quite reasonable right now. The brand – never well-loved – is rocketing into the sewer these days. And for someone who isn’t actively oppressed as an atheist, it isn’t very important to identify, is it? That’s why I want to move to the Czech Republic someday. There I’ll just be another random person with a basic understanding of that aspect of reality. Sounds sweet.
Greta Christina is busting heads again, and it’s brutal. The short version: Hemant “The Friendly Atheist” Mehta set off a bit of controversy by posting a video by a horrific misogynist scumsucker, which was on a topic unrelated to misogynist scumsucking. Mehta has since apologized, but the conversations ensuing have produced a bevy of defenses for the indefensible.
Greta’s post ends with a paraquote:
“...something Juan Mendez said at the last American Atheists conference (paraphrasing here): 'The atheist community is becoming more and more visible. In a few years, the whole world will be watching us. What do we want them to see?'”
To this, I have to say it is half past too late. I used to think “atheist” is just a dirty word because our presence is a reminder to the insecure that their faith isn’t shared by all. But now most of the time I see it outside of atheist circles, it is people talking about our frankly scary misogynists, or laughing at the pathetic joke Dawkins has become. We are coming out to the world ass first, whether we want to or not.
And Mehta’s post is exhibit A: he is on a religious blog network. He is the face of atheism to a good number of people outside of it. And he linked to horrific misogynist scumsucker’s youtube channel. Our reputation – already in the toilet – continues to circle the drain.
I have nothing positive to say to this, but I do believe atheism will keep expanding regardless of the things we do, and that when it becomes popular enough, these antisocial scumbags will undoubtedly drop it like a rock. May it be soon.
-
I’ve heard rumor that some internet bullies with too much time on their hands have launched a vloggy attack on A+, and that it is possible we may see an influx of trolls. I don’t normally tangle with trolls (see comment policy), but I’d like to ask one of the classic questions the harassed have been asking of the harassers in this atheist schism, and I will allow your answers to come through my filter if they’re honest. I may censor parts that are irrelevant jackassery, I am only interested in the answer to this question:
The substance of this article is lost media. It was never archived. What was even asking?
-
I went to interview at a pet store today, see if I can’t shore up my gay cred as a Pet Shop Boy. I’m not optimistic about my odds, a sad sack near-40 year old with skinny arms, the other two people robust youths with colorful hair. Perhaps the appointment was why I dreamt about working last night...
The substance of this article is lost media. It was never archived.
-
...Alternate title: “The Ways Sexual Minorities Harm Each Other.” I call it Part One though I have no specific plans for a Part Two etc., because this could go on and on and on. The LGBT (lately QUILTBAG) community is united by one thing: minority status with regards to some aspect of human sexuality or the social constructs associated with it. That is an unwieldy sentence, but even my painful escape clause almost certainly fails to include some part of the QUILTBAG in some respect, so diverse are we.
Diversity is good, right? Yes and no. A diversity of faiths or ideologies that include mutually hostile parties should probably not be forced to share a tent, though they should make good efforts to live in peace if forced by circumstance to do so. And this is what we see with the acronymish community: People sharing a tent who are sometimes mutually hostile to each other.
It’s not that Bisexuals and Genderqueers are analogous to Catholics and Laveyan Satanists. It’s that any given group of genderqueers may include both Catholics and Laveyan Satanists. That is difficult. On top of that and far worse, we are all products of our society, with internalized prejudices and hang-ups that cause us to discriminate against each other in terrible ways...
The rest of this article was not preserved, and is now lost media. Who knows what controversy I was courting?
-
Why only science? When it comes to the promotion of atheism, there is a great deal of focus on science – especially astronomy and different aspects of biology. “Look at the wonders of the natural world as viewed without blinders and be awed.” That would be fine if it actually worked for everybody, but it doesn’t. Some people can’t emotionally get outside their immediate lives far enough to give a shit about dinosaurs or comets, and this is not a character flaw. It’s just a difference.
Does atheism want to scorn and leave behind everyone who can’t orgasm over false-color images of nebulae? As much as I love certain sciences, I care too much about people who are not moved by them to harden my heart like that. And fortunately, there are other ways to reach such people.
I can’t speak for all of them, but many people who are not moved by science can be moved by art and the humanities. And there are plenty of angles to express atheist values in those fields. You can look at history and find inspirational (or at least interesting) freethinkers like Al-Ma’arri and Christopher Marlowe. In the most oppressive depths of xtian European history, you can look for the humanity peeking though the cracks, through primary sources and the wild designs hiding in the margins of all that Jeebus crapola. More recently, there have been great songs about rejecting god and the vast majority of art and society stands apart from religion. Good times, yo.
-
Comments