Why so many "anti-feminists" in the atheist community?

[Esquilax]

But *ALL* lives matter, but the second anyone points that out, the feminists scream racism.  It isn't just black lives that matter, it isn't just female lives that matter, it isn't just gay lives that matter, it's ALL lives.  Most people are on board with egalitarianism, it's just the online vocal feminists who are screaming and whining at anyone who doesn't put *THEIR* lives at the top of the pile.

Consider it like this: "all lives matter," is the end goal, whereas "black lives matter," is one step toward reaching that goal. It's fine to say "all lives matter," and that's still a true thing, but you need to consider the world you actually live in too, which is one in which specific groups that comprise "all lives" are treated as though they matter less. In order to properly get to "all lives matter," you need to put those things that are defying that paradigm into focus. Basically, if you want to get to a stage where "all lives matter," is a systemically true part of society, you need to fix those elements of society that make it untrue, and the reduced importance of black lives, in so many ways, is one of those elements. This isn't exactly a crazy statement. Two things can be true at the same time, and "all lives matter," is no less true just because we need to specifically say that black lives also matter. Universal tolerance is, by definition, not a zero sum game.

And you fundamentally know that, because despite your complaints here that it's selfish and "whining" to draw attention to specific issues rather than broad strokes egalitarianism, that sure as hell didn't stop you from focusing in on specific male issues a few posts back, and you were right to do that. I don't understand why other people, doing exactly the same thing only for a group that you're not a part of, is somehow subtracting from the overall goals of egalitarianism, while your focusing on the issues of a group you are a part of suddenly makes it valiant and a worthwhile addition to those same goals.

It's all very well to say you're for egalitarianism, but if you then insist that nobody can act in specific areas to reach that goal you're essentially positing that the only viable plan to reach an egalitarian society is exactly one step, and that step is "be equal." You aren't exactly starting from scratch here, there are specific inequalities, within all demographics, that require redress to get there.