So you may have heard of Jen “Blag Hag” McCreight’s “new wave” of atheism, Atheism+. It has a great logo (which I personally think is awesome) and a catchy title which I give an A+; pun fantastically intended. If you haven’t, I direct you to her blog.
In case you didn’t know, Freethought Blogs has become a feminist-happy space. This was evident before and pronounced after Thunderf00t’s expulsion for not being feminist enough. The remaining authors on the Freethought blogosphere are either neutral or pro-feminist. Atheism+, or Atheism Plus, is (in my opinion) feminist secular humanism. “We want things right, our way.” The question is then rightly raised: if Atheism+ and secular humanism both operate under non-religious egalitarianism, why are they distancing themselves from each other?
- A+ is more than humanism. It is atheism, humanism and skepticism combined.
- Humanists are not all progressive; sometimes they disagree with feminists.
- The atheism label has power, compared to humanism.
- The humanist community puts effort in to create “church-like” communities.
To me, none of these reasons are particularly good reasons for a revolution. None of them warrant excitement for some radical change. Libby Anne gives a great breakdown here. But no, instead, Atheism+ is an extension of feminism; the next logical step in the expansion of their movement. A way to breathe new life into their social justice ideology. And it does so by riding on the success of the atheism movement- that is what is revolutionary. That is what’s exciting to Jen. She’s got more power on her side to push her ideals onto the world.
She edits in:
But really, people can use whatever label they want. Humanist, atheist, atheist+, whatever. I just want change.
Which reads like this: “I really want people to join my movement, but I can’t justify my fancy new label.” Richard Carrier goes one further (later in this post.)
Jen also responds to the criticism “But you’re hurting the atheist movement by causing a schism!” with this complete non-sequitur: “Is the Secular Student Alliance causing a schism because it focuses on students? Would there be such vitriol in response to someone starting an Atheist Knitting Club?”
No, it’s causing a schism because you’re deciding who, by your own ‘towering moral superiority’, needs to go away. More on this down below….
Feminism exploits and perpetuates the covert misandry that runs through society. You know, that misandry that makes you think when you see a woman hitting a man “Oh, he probably did something to deserve it”. The misandry that tells boys to “man up and get over it”. It’s also got the attitude “F–k you, I’ll take what (I think is) mine,” which should give you a pretty good idea of how it affects society.
I’ve always felt a bit off when I was told by a girl that guys getting kicked in the balls was funny. But never really thought too much about it.
Misandry: The Acceptable Prejudice says it best:
Misandry is an ideology whose assimilation has been so successful that most don’t even recognise it as an ideology. This is why sexism is regarded as a one-way street and any men who complain otherwise are mocked for being stupid or wet or both. Worse, it’s become the law, at least in regard to political correctness: our cultural guardians are completely blind to misandry, which literally doesn’t exist: there is only righteous ‘anger’ or a necessary and healthy ‘corrective’ to the crimes of men and patriarchy over the millennia etc. etc.
You have cases like Brian Banks who was sentenced to 6 years in jail for a rape that never occurred. I will state upfront that this was a case of racism and sexism. The “victim” admitted, 9 years after the prosecution, that she made up the whole thing but did not want to give back the $1.5 million that she won from the case. The extent of the feminist reaction is “that sucks.” At best. If it doesn’t fall squarely into their narrow worldview that women are the victims™, then it is the exception to the rule and deserves little discussion. Hell, it was probably a good thing since it shows potential rapists what can happen to them! It’s for the greater good! – as this young man picks up the pieces of his life. This is why I can’t take feminism seriously, as an egalitarian world view, and neither does Elly Tams, an ex-feminist (read her experiences here which far surpass mine) or TJ (The Amazing Atheist), here and a lot of other people (mostly MRAs, I suppose.)
“Say misandry and you’re out!” is the attitude of most feminists. Their doctrine forbids the existence of legitimate misandry. And they get away with it, because we let them.
By the way, this sexism being regarded as a one-way street isn’t exaggeration. From Finally Feminism 101,
Thus feminists reject the notion that women can be sexist towards men because women lack the institutional power that men have.
And this gem of a statement:
Either someone changed the definition of sexism, or I call bullshit. This pernicious justification is from where the adage “It’s only sexist when men do it” comes. Also, just a quick note on women “being dominated and exploited by men for hundreds and hundreds of years” – this is herstory: history, by feminists.
Modern feminism is an ideology. You must accept the dogma: the Patriarchy™ (and possibly all the other *-archies), rape culture, etc., lest your membership be revoked. Never mind that most of the definitions are touchy-feely and provide no logical link between their theories and the statistics. Just a dodgy explanation for them. Or, they fudge statistics or outright lie, in the case where they did a survey with a novel definition of rape to make a highly exaggerated rape statistic; you may have heard the horrifying statistic that one in four women are raped before they leave college.
It’s telling that of these 1 in 4, nearly half of them went on to have sex with their ‘assailants’ again. Only 27% of them actually labelled themselves as rape victims. Of the remainder, 49% said it was miscommunication, 14% said it was a crime but not rape, and 11% said they “don’t feel victimized”. If we only consider the women who they themselves consider to be rape victims, the figure drops to a more believable 1/14. Of course, one rape is one rape too many, but it’s important to tell it like it is. More information on that here.
Unfortunately, it didn’t stop the “One In Four” figure from becoming the ubiquitous figure to spearhead the women’s rape victimisation campaign. Examples here, here and here. I’ve become very skeptical of such “one in X” campaigns; they’re good for getting support, donations, and spreading the word. But skewing statistics which inevitably lead people to misunderstand the true nature of what’s going on does have a cost.
This information is not meant to imply that rape does not occur or should not be addressed, but only to show how self-serving feminists guaranteed that a travesty of justice for men be eclipsed by an illusive rape culture. Accurate representation of the issue at hand, crucial to determining a prudent response, is unlikely if the matter remains in feminist clutches. Equitable policies that strike the balance between deterring assailants and protecting fundamental rights can only be realized in the absence of feminism’s malign influence.
A-plussers and feminists pride themselves on excommunicating the “assholes”. I dislike mean people as much as the next person, but the way they brand and ostracise people is in diametric opposition to open-mindedness. They are less “against misogyny” than they are “against misogynists.” That’s the difference. To them, a misogynist is just an asshole who deserves nothing more than ostracism and ridicule, and can obviously never change.
The same bully tactics used by feminists have, unsurprisingly, surfaced in the same people pushing A+ forward.
Since, apparently it’s OK to be disrespectful to people and insult them, if you’re right. Bullying is fine, if you’re coming from a moral high ground. Call me a hypocrite on this one, but I learnt it from the feminism movement. (I was pro-feminist for a while.) It’s not alright, because very few people think they’re wrong. If they knew they were wrong they would no longer hold that belief (if they cared about their beliefs.) Ergo, it is not ideal to bully people into believing what we believe, (in my case-) even if the evidence is overwhelming. We all misspeak from time to time- but let’s not encourage it!
“Do you hate women? Don’t you see all these injustices towards women? Why AREN’T you a feminist?” are the favoured pressure tactics. “You’re just privileged, that’s why you can’t accept it.” Play on the guilt.
Another favourite tactic of feminists is to compare one degree of injustice to another. “Men are afraid of being rejected by women, women are afraid for their lives of being raped!” There are different kinds of injustices on all different levels. When war death statistics are brought up it’s like “so what.” Furthermore, feminists are increasingly saying rape is worse than any other crime, including murder. I guess by that logic if given a choice of rape or murder, you should definitely choose murder. Except logic is a manly dominated way of thinking, Dawkins (who is on the feminist hit list) explains:
I’m also sick of seeing responses along the lines of “Read feminism 101.” Common objections are not necessarily invalid ones- and it’s shown by the confused readers asking for further clarification in the comments sections of these 101 pages. Also, doesn’t it sound alarmingly like “Read the Bible?” Because it’s not grounded in reality enough to provide a quick answer with links to further references? Or maybe you just need to go away and come back once you “get it”. Either way, you have to digest some of the doctrine first. Just like original sin, you know? You just don’t get it. Go read Genesis, sheesh. I might do another post on similarities between religion and feminism. Hit me up if you’re interested. (Hit me up anyway if you’re particularly interested in something I write about and want me to talk more about it.)
So what about this gosh-darn Men’s Rights Movement? Those sexist pigs. Just listen:
So, what else does the men’s rights movement offer to women? How about esteem as a human being, from both men and women, as well as real self-esteem? Not because they happen to have a vagina, or a pair of fatty glands on their upper torso, or because some schmuck pretends to respect them so he can try to get between their thighs, or because they are regarded as a historical victim, or because their peers are afraid to dissent, but because they are fully adult, intelligent and independent human beings.
How about the thing so long promised by that ideology which is so prevalent, but never delivered, except in the socially engineered forced outcomes of affirmative action and female favoring advantage in law, employment, education and elsewhere?
Equality, the real thing. That’s what the men’s rights movement offers to women. Setting aside the flattery, the one-sided, selective examination of reality from those pious frauds flying the flag of feminism, the men’s rights movement is the only place in our culture where real equality is actually the goal.
(Bold mine, more here.)
Maybe that’s why some people are MRAs.
I’m not saying men are the “true victims” here. (Someone would definitely love to paint me that way.) I’m definitely not saying that the women’s issues that feminists address don’t exist. They do, but we should be more responsible in how we address them. We want real equality. The grown-up adult version. As Mark Simpson says, what we shouldn’t do is “set up a whole new school of whingeing victimology” but rather do away with this sexist dualism that currently exists in our culture. We need to rid ourselves of the “moral indignation, by turns spiteful and sanctimonious, that feminism has succeeded in constructing in academe and the media over the last twenty years.”
Feminism hurts women as well. In more ways than one. First and foremost, by denying the agency of women, (‘bad’ women are just slaves of the Patriarchy) they are contributing to oppression of women; Feminisnt explains:
Feminism is egalitarian in the same sense that Islam is a religion of peace. And while I want world peace, I certainly am not converting to Islam to achieve it.
And what am I doing about sexism? I’ll tell you what I’m not doing, pushing gender ideologues down people’s throats forcibly. In society and in academia. Also, not being a sexist. That always helps.
Only time will tell if Atheism+ makes a positive getaway. I guess that’s up to the movements’ proponents.
This post has been a little while in the making. If you enjoyed it, please show your support (I’m not asking for money! :))
Comment – voice your opinion. I’d love to hear it- whether you agree, disagree, whatever. Just be respectful is all I ask.
Share – this to friends and family who should read it.
Subscribe – for more writings.
Further reading: I’ll add links here to other things that cover this issue as I come across them.