Skepchick Warring with Dawkins Again

[Audley Strange]

As atheism becomes more popular, the less of a monolithic movement it can be: Cats don't herd easily. As more people can find like minded others locally, the internet will be less of a necessity. As it becomes more mainstream, it will lose value as an in-group: No matter how popular Beiber gets and stays, his fan base will never be a family like the Grateful Dead's, or ICP's for that matter.

But even before that happens, we have the matter of the unknown folks, maybe just doing their last year in college who have intelligence, wit and charisma to spare and can draw a bigger crowd than any of our current crop.

People who are atheists love that line don't they? "Cats don't heard easily". Then they go on and herd and start claiming there is an "atheism" and start meeting up in little clubhouses and make rules, define the "other" and slowly try and develop a political and moral framework for their flock of True Atheism. Almost like they needed a religion or something.

Yes, we seem to try to heard ourselves and each other. But we end up in smaller and smaller packs. So, we're either like cats, or we're too dumb to be fully functioning sheeple.

Ah well that's because being an atheist is not, to most of us here, a thing in and of itself. We are, it seems to me, atheists as a function of us being cynics.

[Robert_S]

Ah well that's because being an atheist is not, to most of us here, a thing in and of itself. We are, it seems to me, atheists as a function of us being cynics.

Me? I just could no longer be arsed to keep trying to hold on to some kind of ever shifting anti-logical murky henotheistic hodge-podge mess of a concept of an ineffable concept after I realized I was trying rather than just believing.

[JimC]

As atheism becomes more popular, the less of a monolithic movement it can be: Cats don't herd easily. As more people can find like minded others locally, the internet will be less of a necessity. As it becomes more mainstream, it will lose value as an in-group: No matter how popular Beiber gets and stays, his fan base will never be a family like the Grateful Dead's, or ICP's for that matter.

But even before that happens, we have the matter of the unknown folks, maybe just doing their last year in college who have intelligence, wit and charisma to spare and can draw a bigger crowd than any of our current crop.

People who are atheists love that line don't they? "Cats don't heard easily". Then they go on and herd and start claiming there is an "atheism" and start meeting up in little clubhouses and make rules, define the "other" and slowly try and develop a political and moral framework for their flock of True Atheism. Almost like they needed a religion or something.

Or they join Ratz, because they've learned not to give a shit...

[Hermit]

Ah well that's because being an atheist is not, to most of us here, a thing in and of itself. We are, it seems to me, atheists as a function of us being cynics.

Speaking for "most of us"?

Speaking for myself, I am an atheist because I have a problem believing in entities the existence of which cannot be tested. That does not make me a cynic any more than my problem in believing in the existence of the ether or phlogiston.

[Azathoth]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

[Bella Fortuna]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Most interesting. I'm going to need to read more of that person's posts...

Edit: I think I just discovered who she is - turns out to be a FB friend of mine for some years now. Small world.

[Robert_S]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Richard and Rebecca sitting in a tree...

Everything I've seen so far leads to the probability that they're both right about each other most of the time.

Actually, they're both making enough drama for a good Jerry Springer episode.

[Cormac]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Myers:

For instance, I will not participate in any conference in which Abbie Smith is a speaker. If I’m invited, and later discover that she is also invited, I will politely turn down the offer.

I could find myself spending a lot more time at home, which wouldn’t be bad at all, except that she doesn’t get invited out that often, and her coterie of slimy acolytes are virtual non-entities, too. It is a positive aspect of the growing atheist movement that it tends to be progressive, egalitarian, and not particularly supportive of shrieking over-privileged children.

Now I have to stroll out to a bäckerei for coffee and pastries.

Well, he's got that bit right anyway. He just doesn't yet get that this is a perfect description for him, Watson, and his coterie of nutjob assholes.

I also note his bitchy comment, putting Abbie Smith* down because "she doesn't get invited out that often", and apparently her friends and supporters are "virtual non-entities" too. The implication here is that Myers thinks himself to be the opposite - he expects to get invited regularly, and he feels that his friends and supporters are prominent entities.

What an asshat.

[DaveDodo007]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Myers:

For instance, I will not participate in any conference in which Abbie Smith is a speaker. If I’m invited, and later discover that she is also invited, I will politely turn down the offer.

I could find myself spending a lot more time at home, which wouldn’t be bad at all, except that she doesn’t get invited out that often, and her coterie of slimy acolytes are virtual non-entities, too. It is a positive aspect of the growing atheist movement that it tends to be progressive, egalitarian, and not particularly supportive of shrieking over-privileged children.

Now I have to stroll out to a bäckerei for coffee and pastries.

Well, he's got that bit right anyway. He just doesn't yet get that this is a perfect description for him, Watson, and his coterie of nutjob assholes.

I also note his bitchy comment, putting Abbie Smith* down because "she doesn't get invited out that often", and apparently her friends and supporters are "virtual non-entities" too. The implication here is that Myers thinks himself to be the opposite - he expects to get invited regularly, and he feels that his friends and supporters are prominent entities.

What an asshat.

Lol this was so fucking funny. In his haste to defend beccypoos he left himself open to claims of hypocrisy. Virtually every online atheist and skeptic jumped on him immediately. Even this lying sack of shit realized that he had been caught with his pants down, he quickly changed his mind about boycotting a event because you didn't agree with the other speakers. This was a bad thing now because it put the organizations in a difficult position. Lol, he had been giving organizations shit for almost two years but now he doesn't want to have them being forced into making a difficult decision, yeah right. I mean I'm finding this hilarious but what does his 'trophy' wife think about him throwing his reputation and maybe putting his job on the line for Watson. Don't even his kids have a say "dad this is fucked up." Fuck it that's their problem I'll just enjoy the lulz.

[Boyle]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Oh snap!

And to think all this started from an improvised talk and a slightly uncomfortable coffee invite. Usually in my circles that shit is ended with a "That talk was tantentially related," and a "Yep, he could have chosen a better time to ask."

[Robert_S]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Oh snap!

And to think all this started from an improvised talk and a slightly uncomfortable coffee invite. Usually in my circles that shit is ended with a "That talk was tantentially related," and a "Yep, he could have chosen a better time to ask."

all the people I've spoken to outside of atheist circles say much the same thing when I describe it to them. It's not a big deal. Watson didn't make it a big deal in the original video. It was a remark at the end. That Watson was quick to call it objectification rather than being oblivious or inconsiderate is also not a big deal.

It became a huge fucking deal when people made it one because they wanted a huge fucking deal.

[Cormac]

I will just leave this here

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... dards.html

Oh snap!

And to think all this started from an improvised talk and a slightly uncomfortable coffee invite. Usually in my circles that shit is ended with a "That talk was tantentially related," and a "Yep, he could have chosen a better time to ask."

all the people I've spoken to outside of atheist circles say much the same thing when I describe it to them. It's not a big deal. Watson didn't make it a big deal in the original video. It was a remark at the end. That Watson was quick to call it objectification rather than being oblivious or inconsiderate is also not a big deal.

It became a huge fucking deal when people made it one because they wanted a huge fucking deal.

She posted that video to show off and the create drama where none existed. Whatever ensued is on her own head.

[Audley Strange]

The drama did not happen until after Rebecca Watson, facing polite disagreement from some quarters used her position to call out, on stage, two people, both women, who disagreed with her. IIRC she derailed her own talk to do this, at which point people posted the video. From there it was pointed out that a guy saying "girls don't do that" would be considered sexist. From that it went from being an uncomfortable moment to potential rape all of which was gleefully reproduced by Rebecca Watson as if there was some problem other than her.

[Robert_S]

The drama did not happen until after Rebecca Watson, facing polite disagreement from some quarters used her position to call out, on stage, two people, both women, who disagreed with her. IIRC she derailed her own talk to do this, at which point people posted the video. From there it was pointed out that a guy saying "girls don't do that" would be considered sexist. From that it went from being an uncomfortable moment to potential rape all of which was gleefully reproduced by Rebecca Watson as if there was some problem other than her.

IIRC, she made a video a week later, before those talks, about the hateful responses she got.

Oh, by the way, does know where I should look for the original context for the Dear Muslima bit? I know it was on PZ's blog at Scienceblogs but the comments section is all gone. I think the comments before it would be enlightening.

[DaveDodo007]

The drama did not happen until after Rebecca Watson, facing polite disagreement from some quarters used her position to call out, on stage, two people, both women, who disagreed with her. IIRC she derailed her own talk to do this, at which point people posted the video. From there it was pointed out that a guy saying "girls don't do that" would be considered sexist. From that it went from being an uncomfortable moment to potential rape all of which was gleefully reproduced by Rebecca Watson as if there was some problem other than her.

IIRC, she made a video a week later, before those talks, about the hateful responses she got.

Oh, by the way, does know where I should look for the original context for the Dear Muslima bit? I know it was on PZ's blog at Scienceblogs but the comments section is all gone. I think the comments before it would be enlightening.

It was the one titled 'Always name, names.' I remember even posting in the comment section something about 'was that really Richard Dawkins' or something like that.