Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Atheism and misogyny

188 replies

Dworkin · 29/12/2011 14:30

Some men sink to a new low when it comes to sexually objectifying a 15 year old girl on reddit. Sick and nasty stuff.

skepchick.org/2011/12/reddit-makes-me-hate-atheists/

OP posts:
MillyR · 30/12/2011 15:00

Dawkins whole argument seems to come down to the notion that words are just words, and people have the 'privilege' of finding them offensive or not. But it really isn't worth discussing because they are just words.

Most of his anti-religious argument collapses then, doesn't it? Why does he complain about church schools all the time? They don't beat the children; they just tell them words that Dawkins doesn't agree with.

Original poster
Dworkin · 30/12/2011 15:05

Dawkins' final go with the spade in the hole comment:

"I sarcastically compared Rebecca's plight with that of women in Muslim countries or families dominated by Muslim men. Somebody made the worthwhile point (reiterated here by PZ) that it is no defence of something slightly bad to point to something worse. We should fight all bad things, the slightly bad as well as the very bad. Fair enough. But my point is that the 'slightly bad thing' suffered by Rebecca was not even slightly bad, it was zero bad. A man asked her back to his room for coffee. She said no. End of story.

But not everybody sees it as end of story. OK, let's ask why not? The main reason seems to be that an elevator is a confined space from which there is no escape. This point has been made again and again in this thread, and the other one.

No escape? I am now really puzzled. Here's how you escape from an elevator. You press any one of the buttons conveniently provided. The elevator will obligingly stop at a floor, the door will open and you will no longer be in a confined space but in a well-lit corridor in a crowded hotel in the centre of Dublin."

She was propositioned in an elevator at 4am in the morning, in a hotel in Dublin. Wasn't a woman recently burned to death in an elevator - there was no escape for her. Hotel corridors are usually empty at 4am in the morning.

Dawkins is an atheist and he is also misogynistic and racist.

OP posts:
lollygag · 30/12/2011 15:11

Hotels are dangerous places.Wasn't it in a hotel that Dominique Strauss khan was falsely accused of sexual assault?

Original poster
Dworkin · 30/12/2011 15:14
Hmm
OP posts:
chibi · 30/12/2011 15:14

do you have important evidence that could exonerate Strauss-Khan? I was under the impression that the prosecutors had decided that the evidence against him wasn't robust enough to be able to secure a conviction, and so dropped the case

which isn't quite the same as there was a false allegation - i imagine they would prosecute the woman who made the complaint, and that he would sue otherwise

but if you have any info not available thus far do please share

lollygag · 30/12/2011 15:18

Although forensic tests found unambiguous evidence of a sexual encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a French politician, and the woman, prosecutors do not believe much of what the accuser has told them about the circumstances or about herself.

Since her initial allegation on May 14, the accuser has repeatedly lied, one of the law enforcement officials said.

Senior prosecutors met with lawyers for Mr. Strauss-Kahn on Thursday and provided details about their findings, and the parties are discussing whether to dismiss the felony charges. Among the discoveries, one of the officials said, are issues involving the asylum application of the 32-year-old housekeeper, who is Guinean, and possible links to criminal activities, including drug dealing and money laundering. [emphasis mine - ed.]

chibi · 30/12/2011 15:26

none of which demonstrates that her accusation is false, only that, as I said previously, prosecutors did not feel that the evidence was robust enough to secure a conviction, and so dropped the case

oh, and she may have lied about other stuff. so what. that doesn't mean her allegation was false. it may mean she may be considered an unreliable witness by a court, but it doesn't invalidate anything and everything she says.

there is a distinction

lollygag · 30/12/2011 15:29

Chibi,
You are right.I shouldn't have used the word false.I should have said 'not backed up by any proof'.

Original poster
Dworkin · 30/12/2011 15:39

Surely you mean, lollygag, not backed up by enough proof.

OP posts:
chibi · 30/12/2011 15:41

again, 'not backed up by any proof' isn't quite the same as 'evidence of insuffiently degree of robustness towards securing a conviction in a court'

chibi · 30/12/2011 15:42

ooh snap dworkin Smile

this is derailling a bit from the general thrust of the thread, apologies

vesuvia · 30/12/2011 15:56

Richard Dawkins : "But my point is that the 'slightly bad thing' suffered by Rebecca was not even slightly bad, it was zero bad."

To paraphrase Mandy-Rice Davies : "He would say that, wouldn't he".

Nice bit of mansplaining there, Richard.

Original poster
Dworkin · 30/12/2011 15:57

Here's my opinion on atheism and misogyny. I believe that some men eschew religion on the grounds that it limits their views on sex. They cannot partake of the 'anything goes' attitude that is prevalent in our pornified rape culture today. I think this is why there exists such a subset of misogyny in a group of people who are presumed to be intelligent and logical.

I think that those who are misogynistic couldn't possibly have the intellect they purport to have.

OP posts:
solidgoldbrass · 30/12/2011 16:05

I think it's mainly true that a lot of 'activist' men (whether that's atheists, vegans or general lefties) are sexists and feel entitled to be sexist because, after all, they are Nice Guys fighting for the oppressed so what's a little light misogyny, eh? Time enough for all this wimmins lib stuff when all the menz are contented. So what happened to that 15 year old girl was very unpleasant. But it's not athiesm that made those knobs treat her like that. It's the fact that they are knobs.
I am also rather impressed by her refusal to run off boohooing and vowing never to use the nasty Interweb again. Go girl!

lollygag · 30/12/2011 18:26

Oh,you mean Mandy-Rice Davies the prostitute.

chibi · 30/12/2011 18:46

i don't know that that is true, and even if it were, why would that invalidate what she said?

your throwaway comments hint at some v skew-whiff assumptions, lollygag, are you ok?

lollygag · 30/12/2011 18:50

What? You thought Mandy Rice Davies just had a thing for much older bald men?

chibi · 30/12/2011 18:57

i have no idea, you should ask her. in any event, even if she was the prostitutiest prostitute who ever prostituted...what, exactly?

you keep dropping these little nuggests as though it was SHAZAAM but really it's a bit more like plop

lollygag · 30/12/2011 19:08

And yet you still reply.

heartofthesun · 30/12/2011 19:36

solidgoldbrass, I think that is very, very perceptive of you. Left-wing males do think that a little misogyny is excused by dint of them being left-wing.
They actually make me despise them more than the outright sexist pigs because of this.
Anyway, back to the opening post, I don't get what point is being made here: so not having a belief in a god endows somebody with a virtuous nature? Confused.
All not believing in a god is well, not believing in a god! Doesn't mean to say the person is nice or kind or gentle.
I am an atheist. Does this mean to say that I share everything in common with other atheists? Of course not. Does it mean to say that I actually like other atheists? Of course not. Richard Dawkins is a prick. I actually sense that the Archbishop of Canterbury is a nicer person.

A person should never be fooled into thinking that a person's religious faith (or lack of) makes them a good or bad person.

Rerevisionist · 30/12/2011 19:56

You're a bit harsh on Dawkins. He tries quite hard & does his best to be scientific, and his material is quite good. (But he's no good on racist cults; and also he's no good on deficiencies in biological sciences). As regards the Archbishop of Canterbury, you could log onto the C of E synod site and download some recordings of debates. For vacuity and lack of imortance they are difficult to beat. And remember he's a political appointee.

Wamster · 30/12/2011 20:09

I name changed a few days ago to 'heartofthesun' for reasons (not to hoodwink others here but for other reasons) but am now Wamster again.
I don't know Dawkins or the Archbishop personally, so I can't really say if one is a nicer person than the other, so perhaps it is a bit harsh, but it's just a feeling about him that I do not like.
I suppose my main point is this: all atheism means is lack of belief in a god and that that it is no rule of thumb about how good they are as people.
As an aside, it is funny how things change and this thread is a prime example of that change i.e. atheists were once the 'bad guys' now-judging by the theme of the opening poster- they are somehow expected to be the 'good guys'.
I mean it is hardly comment worthy to start a thread here that a bunch of men who are supposed to dislike women have acted appallingly; the reason why the opening post is attention-grabbing is because atheists are supposed to be all-round good guys. I think so, anyway.

lollygag · 30/12/2011 20:14

Good post,Wamster.

Rerevisionist · 30/12/2011 20:32

Dawkins is a Darwinian; his atheism is a sideline. And Rowan Williams (imho) is a worthless tosser.

Is 'Dworkin' the noted Andrea Dworkin? Just curious.

lollygag · 30/12/2011 20:34

If it is she's coming from beyond the grave.

Swipe left for the next trending thread