Atheists turning to cult behaviour?

[dyresand]

Well I don't know any examples of vandalism by atheist groups. I for one consider mockery, insulting, or threat of sexual assault to be trouble which is really out of hand, and one that the law will find hard to control.

Becaue it shouldn't. In America, people are allowed to say things other people don't like, as they should be. All countries allow you to say things of which they approve, the measure of free speech is how much you can say of which the government does NOT approve. Threat of sexual assault (or other violence), of course, can be prosecuted if the identity of the person making the threat can be ascertained, which is why such threats are almost entirely confined to anonymous venues. It's a shame such people are out there, but predictable the internet would have more than its fair share of them.

Theists tend to vandalize atheist bill boards while atheists have enough respect not to deface a theist one.

[Alex K]

Bullshit, Jenny A. Read up on the history how it played out

What is bullshit? What Watkins said happened? My reaction to it? What Dawkins did next?

First of all the name is Watson, so that gives me the impression you aren't excessively informed about the story, and yet your knee jerk reaction is that probably the so rational good man wassurely right, and the woman involved probably hysterical again. You may not have meant that, but that's exactly how it sounds, and it's the type of thing that triggers my rage mode. Anyways, I remember it happening roughly like that: in the end of a video that was about something else, Watson made a quick remark how she was approached in that damn elevator when she was alone and tired, and that it made her feel uncomfortable, and she advised maybe not to do that. Whether you agree with that is beside the point now, it was a very minor side remark in some video, I had watched the vid back then and had instantly forgotten about it. The frustrated male atheist internet however exploded with rage, and that's when the really nasty threats starte. After probably days of all the blogs going up in a flame war, this huge outrage was long about something else entirely, namely droves of people harassing her full time while she really didn't do anything. At that point, clueless Richard Dawkins comes barging in on some of these blogs or forums on his high horse of disinterested rationality, and decides to scold this silly woman for starting an internet war because of some harmless guy. To illustrate his position that her concerns are ridiculous, he wrote that ingenious "Dear Muslima" letter with which he both outed himself as a huge hypocrite on matters of activism, and also basically, though his ignorance, poured gasoline on the flames of these harassers. And that's that. I say that as someone who has all of this guy's books and have been a fan since before he wrote TGD, he's sometimes acting like a giant buffoon, and when he's criticised for it, his default explanation is that these people are either irrational, or out to get him. He wrote "There's a witchhunt, I'm not exaggerating", because people criticised him. That was a disgrace, too.

[Mister Agenda]

And I'm not saying an all male leadership implies misogyny. I went to a few atheist conventions where the women speakers were not taken seriously, not a bit. Isn't this sexist?

It IS sexist. You went to the convention you're speaking of and I didn't. What did you do about it? Even if you just complained to the organizers, that would be something. Approaching one of the speakers who wasn't taken seriously to reassure her that some people at least took her seriously and asking for her input on how the situation could be improved and taking that feedback to someone with influence over how things are done at that convention would be another.

---

I hope that can explain my skewed opinion. As such a lot of people here look up to Dawkins and Harris, and I hoped they'd set a better example.

A lot of people here? I'm not so sure that's true. Maybe you could do a poll.

[Jenny A]

What is bullshit? What Watkins said happened? My reaction to it? What Dawkins did next?

First of all the name is Watson, so that gives me the impression you aren't excessively informed about the story, and yet your knee jerk reaction is that probably the so rational good man wassurely right, and the woman involved probably hysterical again. You may not have meant that, but that's exactly how it sounds, and it's the type of thing that triggers my rage mode. Anyways, I remember it happening roughly like that: in the end of a video that was about something else, Watson made a quick remark how she was approached in that damn elevator when she was alone and tired, and that it made her feel uncomfortable, and she advised maybe not to do that. Whether you agree with that is beside the point now, it was a very minor side remark in some video, I had watched the vid back then and had instantly forgotten about it. The frustrated male atheist internet however exploded with rage, and that's when the really nasty threats starte. After probably days of all the blogs going up in a flame war, this huge outrage was long about something else entirely, namely droves of people harassing her full time while she really didn't do anything. At that point, clueless Richard Dawkins comes barging in on some of these blogs or forums, and decides to scold this silly woman for starting an internet war because of some harmless guy. To illustrate his position that her concerns are ridiculous, he wrote that ingenious "Dear Muslima" letter with which he both outed himself as a huge hypocrite on matters of activism, and also basically, though his ignorance, poured gasoline on the flames of these harassers. And that's that. I say that as someone who has all of this guy's books and have been a fan since before he wrote TGD, he's acting like a giant buffoon.

No I'm not particularly informed about this little spat or Watson, though I've read her blog a couple of times in the past without much enthusiasm. So given the reference, I just went to her blog and read and what I read there informed what I said. And no my knee jerk reaction isn't that Dawkins is right. I read her point of view first and wasn't overly impressed with either her or Dawkins as regards the elevator incident and their mutual reactions to it and each other.

I don't think feminist complaining about propositions (regardless of hour) that don't include threats (even if they are socially inane, stupid, or even insensitive) particularly made in public places as opposed to say calling in the wee hours, merit the fuss she made. I've fielded those in a variety of circumstances including in the back alley leading out of a hotel at two a.m. and while misguided the man was inept he was not evil. Her's doesn't sound dangerous either.

I agree, her over-reaction certainly wasn't justification for Dawkins remark. But it does reflect his age as much as anything. If it ignited anything, that anything was just waiting for a match. Or as you note, it was already burning.

As for the harassers, yeah they're stupid, and dumb, and sexist, and a number of less kind names, but they aren't anything new or even remotely limited to atheism. They are there wherever men are in the majority and a woman says boo about feminism. I wish it weren't so, but I also wish we could stick to discussing comments made about teen holding atheist books, and not minor incidents in elevators. Or better yet get more women on panels.

[Mister Agenda]

Well yes, I could always just go somewhere else. And that's what I have done for now. But it doesn't make the problem go away, and I'm hoping something can be done about it.

Enough people going somewhere else can have a big impact on an organization or event, especially if the people left behind 'get' why people are leaving.

[Alex K]

Way to miss the point, the only reason, literally, why anyone is still talking about that stupid elevator thing is because of the harassers and Dawkins. No one made a fuss about it, she didn't make a fuss about it. People keep saying that, and it's so completely missing the point. I'm still mystified what over-reaction you are talking about.

[dyresand]

Way to miss the point, the only reason, literally, why anyone is still talking about that stupid elevator thing is because of the harassers and Dawkins. No one made a fuss about it, she didn't make a fuss about it. People keep saying that, and it's so completely missing the point. I'm still mystified what over-reaction you are talking about.

[Mister Agenda]

Blimey, I should bloody well think so. How could he write that?

I mean, he's just a guy. But I thought he had more sense than that.

Not an excuse for him, but a lot of people's brains sort of fossilize in old age. Not dementia, but a certain rigidity and resistance to change and insenstivity. There's a reason why the word 'curmudgeon' is so often preceded by the word 'old'.

[Alex K]

Me no understand, dyresand.

---

Blimey, I should bloody well think so. How could he write that?

I mean, he's just a guy. But I thought he had more sense than that.

Not an excuse for him, but a lot of people's brains sort of fossilize in old age. Not dementia, but a certain rigidity and resistance to change and insenstivity. There's a reason why the word 'curmudgeon' is so often preceded by the word 'old'.

A fossil with a zillion followers and a hundred big ones on his bank account. No fun...

[Mister Agenda]

No, he's describing an age contingent - doesn't matter which generation they come from. -Respectfully, a Millennial.

Point well-taken. I suppose I'm starting to enter into old curmudgeon territory myself. Apologies, O, my Queen.

I have missed you.

And I you. I hope we'll be seeing more of you here. It's not been as fun without you.