AIBU to have a bit of a crush on Richard Dawkins?

[grottielottie]

He is fantastic and I am so glad he is able to disscuss the issue of faith schools and bring up the issue of discrimination against non beleavers in school choice.

Did a very good job at not laughing at the sixthform students too.

He's earnest, certainly, but the accusation of smuggery is received opinion with a dash of bollocks.

Please supply evidence of smug.

Rofl at OP! I've heard a great many things about RD, but not that he's fanciable! Guess there's a first for everything!

I could never find anyone attractive who has such a cold, clinical demeanour and approach to life. But then I am an arty-farty type, so I love to engage with life and all its emotional messiness. And yes, he's definitely holier-than-thou: an extremely unappealling characteristic.

Each to their own, I suppose.

Am I the only one who thinks his voice sounds a bit like Alan Statham?

(actually that was totally gratuitous; I just love Green Wing! )

"I could never find anyone attractive who has such a cold, clinical demeanour and approach to life. But then I am an arty-farty type, so I love to engage with life and all its emotional messiness."

Again, where's the evidence for this? He displays all kinds of awe at the wonders of nature, the sheer joy he expresses in his writing on the genome is plain to see and great to read. It's such an old, baselss attack, perpetrated originally by those who, losing the argument, would attack his nature rather than the arguments he made and it's now leaked into public received thinking. I ask once more: where's the evidence?

Oh, and being rational is not the opposite of being warm. That there's a false opposite.

HERACLES! GET OFF YOUR BLOODY SOAPBOX and stop putting words into my mouth! I am talking about whether or not I fancy the man, and I have said no. That's all!

Quoting you is "putting words into your mouth"? Surely it's the exact opposite?

Why is yours an opinion and mine a soapbox? Oh right, because you disagree with me. I forget, I forget...

"Oh, and being rational is not the opposite of being warm. That there's a false opposite." Is this what you mean by quoting me? Where exactly did I say anything about his 'rationality'?

You are being VERY presumptuous indeed, Heracles. The reason why I commented on (not "attacked" as you said - how tabloid of you) his nature is because the point of this thread is discussing whether or not RD is fanciable. Did you notice that in the thread title?

I do not have to sit here and justify why I don't fancy Richard Dawkins and I'm jolly well not going to. How preposterous - do you have nothing better to do with your time than to argue so pointlessly about something so subjective which doesn't affect you in the slightest? The fact that you would even challenge that is what makes your point of view a soapbox - you are twisting my words to make your own point.

I think YABU, can't be doing with him at all. i think what you believe or don't is your own bloody business. I don't appreciate being lectured at by Jehovas witnesses, by the same token I don't appreciate being lectured at by Dawkins. I don't give a shite that your an atheist, go away and be a bloody atheist. I actually had an argument with my sister last week for stating that the ahem "theory" of evolution is a theory fgs.

He is so not fanciable either.

""Oh, and being rational is not the opposite of being warm. That there's a false opposite." Is this what you mean by quoting me?"

No, I meant the bits where I quoted you. Is English your second language?

"The reason why I commented on (not "attacked" as you said - how tabloid of you)"

I didn't say you attacked him, I was explaining the origin of the cliche. Go read it again, or get someone to read it aloud for you. A wee tip: it makes sense if you go top to bottom, left to right.

"do you have nothing better to do with your time than to argue so pointlessly about something so subjective which doesn't affect you in the slightest?"

Says the woman vehemently defending her "why I don't fancy Dawkins" post. Priceless.

"The fact that you would even challenge that is what makes your point of view a soapbox"

No, it means I disagree with your reasoning. To whit:

I don't fancy him coz he's cold and clinical

I don't think he's cold and clinical.

GET OFF YOUR SOAP BOX! I'M BEING OPPRESSED, I'M BEING OPPRESSED! WITNESS THE VIOLENCE INHERENT IN THE SYSTEM and so on.

For such a lighthearted thread you're ever so determined to have a fight, aren't you? Meow.

Aaaaanyhoo, back to the thread. Isn't he married to Lalla Ward, late of Dr Who fame? He must have something going for him; I remember her being rather pretty when I were young. I'm off to see if I can find a contemporary picture of her now, see how she's holding up; yes I'm that shallow.

He's sold out as a scientist and lost all credibiliy for his extreme views. But then it pays better to write a bestseller and court publicity than to do some decent research as an academic. He's a clever bloke but I have no time for him.

How come "I don;t believe in God and this is why" an extreme view and "I believe in God, I think allowances should be made for my beliefs in the wider society but I can't/won't provise any supporting evidence for my faith" not an extreme view?

I laughed when I spotted this thread because I can see the animal attraction too .

YANBU!

I had a crush on Alan Titchmarsh when I was in my twenites.

I don't have an actual crush on Richard Dawkins but I can definitely see why you do. For his age, he is gorgeous and his mind, well, perfection!

As long as you are not a Christian fundamentalist.. YANBU. Bit odd though maybe...

YA definitely NBU. He's a charming, handsome (and obviously brainy) man, what's there not to fancy??

Heracles - you aren't Richard Dawkins in disguise are you? You seem to be taking this whole thread rather personally...

:)

Is it my cold, clinical demeanour that gave it away...?

flockwallpaper

Part of the remit of his university post is to educate the public.

"Part of the remit of his university post is to educate the public."

Not any more it ain't. The mantle has passed on to some mathematician guy who is also an atheist but spends his time DOING HIS JOB, aka talking about science. Not drilling on and on ad nauseam about religion.

YABU. With his views on believing only in the existence of that which can be measured, I'd hate to be married to him. Love as just a cocktail of chemical reactions, anyone?

He's also got a horrible, fey voice. Not high on my list of desirable attributes.

Smug smug smug. We need an objective discussion about faith schools if one is to happen, not a deliberately contraversial Dawkins ego trip. (I enjoy his written work, mainly cause I don't have to watch him.)

I'd be smug if I were married to Lalla Ward. :)

But seriously, he isn't smug, not about atheism. He's not cold and clinical, he's just logical. Rational. I think a lot of women hate this about as lot of men - that they argue in logical, rational steps and look for "fixes" and solutions and rational answers, rather than responding emotionally, discursively, intuitively, i.e. in a "female" way.

This doesn't mean we are unemotional or unintuitive, of course - just that we can see when there is no point to it.

Sorry if that sounds like Mars/Venus bollocks, but it does seem to fit.

Of course, I'm sure there are men who dislike RD for similar reasons and I know there are a lot of women who like him.

I think Dawkins has valid points. But he is controversial in England. He has opened up a taboo subject

Wow, am impressed this thread is still going; I'd thought it was hitting a dead end.

Heracles - what an essay you wrote! Pity I wasn't around earlier to enjoy it. Lucky1979 has it down pat - there's something of the RD sock monkey about your posts. In any case you clearly got confused and mixed up my 'why I don't fancy him' post with others' 'why I hate his attitude to religion' posts. Bless.

UQD - I hear your more reasonable description of why you don't find him cold. But when I think 'warm', I think George Clooney, Rusty Lee, Lenny Henry - anyone who exudes joie de vivre and has an infectious laugh. I just don't get that with RD at all. He's almost at the opposite end of the spectrum.

"This doesn't mean we are unemotional or unintuitive, of course - just that we can see when there is no point to it." Interesting point you make. Can you explain? It's just that I think people who talk about separating out the emotional world from the 'non-emotional world' do so because they're more likely to get 'hijacked' by their emotions and so are less at ease with certain levels of emotion than people who are more intuitive. Hope that doesn't sound patronising, it's just a theory I have which so far seems to ring true, but like all theories, needs examination. Funnily enough I'm doing a second reading of 'Emotional Intelligence' at the moment - an excellent, comprehensive study of emotions and their role in human life. I highly recommend it. So this whole issue of how different people understand their and others' emotional worlds is very much at the forefront of my mind right now.

Christ, if you think that's an essay you must struggle to finish a pamphlet, never mind The God Delusion. "Bless."

Rofl! Despite your school playground-style insults you do make me laugh!

eh - how does a thread about the fancibility of RD become a bun fight?

since when is "evidence" required to be produced when someone has an opinion that someone is "smug"?!