Im wondering if any female atheists have encountered the perception by non secular people that they are promiscuous or have loose virtues since their usual belief is that atheism is an immoral position?

Tags: Sexuality, promiscuity

Views: 301

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I haven't encountered that, but I have been prejudged as "materialistic" and having no deeper meaning for existence based solely on the fact I'm an atheist and not for any other reason.  As an aside, I was once in the military (years and years ago) and many of the males assumed I was a "loose" woman with no standards because there was an assumption that all women in the military were promiscuous.  I'm not sure why that was, but it was definitely the experience I encountered.  Anyway, perhaps younger, single, atheist women might have come across the assumption that they're promiscuous?  

That's interesting, Deb. I was also in the military and was a member of a squadron that transitioned to include females during my tenur so I was able to see the effects firsthand. The first women were given a huge amount of respect and were also welcomed with total acceptance. It was actually a very heartening and positive experience to see walls dissolve. I don't recall any perception of the women being promiscuous prior to an opinion having been formed based on their behavior. Perhaps if a women is assertive in one aspect of her life, it opens her up to speculation and parallels being drawn in others including her sexuality?
Terms like "loose virtues" have already framed the discussion in the sexual restrictions of religion. Concern with such terms is letting them define what a woman's choice of sexual activity can be.
Since the discussion is regarding the perceptions of theists, of course the framing of the question has to reflect their values and not the reality of our regional and societal mores. I don't think the use of a term to convey context nor the term itself have any effect on what defines a woman's choice.

I have not run across it, but I was older and married when I finally admitted I was an atheist.

On a related issue, one thing I have found is that many of the people who are judging others' sexual morality from their own "Christian" viewpoints are  often the ones later discovered to be having affairs with multiple people while they are married. They will come up with all sorts of excuses, but the fact is that they are violating their own promises to their spouse.

One of the "best" examples of such a good Christian was a lady who had her much-older husband in a nursing home. She was drunk, and saying how I make her "so mad" because I don't believe in her delusions, all the while she was making passes at my husband. Golly gee! I'm glad she told me she was a Christian, because I sure couldn't tell from any part of that!

I'm not a psychologist, but doesn't the repression of anything cause a greater desire towards whatever is being restricted? The Ted Haggards and Jimmy Swaggarts of the world are living proof of this.

I think your analysis is about right on.

I also notice a good deal of hypocrisy in the whole morality of theists. It seems that if you look too hard at any of the ones who puff out their chests about their "Christian morals" and talking of the "immorality" of everyone else - society, atheists, feminists, gays, a particular ethic group, or anyone else, that I'll often find that they are engaging in sexual behaviors that violate their own morals, or are unsafe or downright exploitative of their partners - often in violation of an outright promise of some type and their own religious teachings. The probability of this is proportional to how much they rail about it.

This goes from anyone from the Ted Haggards to the Catholic priest scandals.

I've heard the argument made that the Christians we might consider to be the worst, (Westboro Baptist, etc.) are actually standing on the firmest doctrinal ground. If that's true, then the hypocrisy of their followers is inherently condoned.

As much as I abhor the actions of Westboro Baptist Church, the things they do really are in accord with the book they say they believe in. It's the "moderate" Christians who give their approval to these actions, by holding the Bible up as the ideal. I have not heard of any sexual misbehavior by the Westboro people. The Westboro Baptist Church shun former members, including of their family members, who do not or no longer accept their Church's teachings, and Fred Phelps' teachings. The Bible says to "shun" the apostate, not to "love" him and bring him back into the "fold" so he can repent.

It's too much to hope for, but the moderate Christians should be able to see that these Westboro wackos are doing what they say should be done.... and it's ugly.

I never did encounter that when I was younger (not now in middle-age either.) My daughter hasn't either.  I know a hell of a lot more religious people who have had sex not according to the 'rules' of their religion.  I obviously don't think anyone's sex-life is anyone's business, but a lot of religious people claim to follow what their religion dictates, and obviously don't. 

I've experienced that, yeah.  It's not often, but it happens, and I think maybe it happens more on the internet or when people speaking to me in person aren't yet aware that I'm one of those atheists they're railing against.  Other young atheist women definitely get it worse than me due to the intersection of their (lack of) faith and race.  I get the feeling that a lot of religious people let me slide under their whore-radar because of preconceived notions that Asians are sexually modest.  It would probably be a different story if I were a black or latina atheist.

The only time someone seriously said that to my face was with a crazy campus preacher who was trying to make some point about being a "loose woman" if you wear t-shirts and jeans, and he singled me out specifically with his Angry Pointer Finger of Doom.  (He said he supported ankle-length skirts.  When he came back the next year with a female sidekick, she was wearing jeans and he dropped that bit from his routine.  *ahem*)  He was craaaaazy, because really, if you're going to rant about college girls showing too much skin, it'd only be logical to point out the one in the midriff-baring halter top instead of the one in baggy t-shirt and jeans.  My reply was, "Wow.  I must be the loosest virgin ever."  It was hilarious.

...Now that I think about it, though, I regret not being witty enough to also slip in a comment about equating the loose-ness of one's shirt to the loose-ness of one's morality.  Or maybe I should have made a joke about how he chose the college preaching gig in order to perv on women young enough to be his daughters and he was angry at me for showing the least amount of cleavage that day.  He did have a tendency to bring up how many sexual conquests he had before he "found Jesus"...

It seems like the titillating nature of the topic draws in the creepier theists. I think your reply was pretty good and I lol'ed at whore radar.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

Latest Activity

Christopher Cosgrove commented on Loren Miller's blog post Seth Andrews - "The Ultimate Question"
15 minutes ago
Christopher Cosgrove shared Loren Miller's blog post on Facebook
26 minutes ago
TNT666 replied to Dr. Terence Meaden's discussion THE ORIGINS OF US ALL—BY DNA GENETIC ANALYSIS in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago
Christopher Cosgrove liked Loren Miller's blog post Seth Andrews - "The Ultimate Question"
1 hour ago
Atheist Exile replied to Dr. Terence Meaden's discussion THE ORIGINS OF US ALL—BY DNA GENETIC ANALYSIS in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago
Atheist Exile liked Dr. Terence Meaden's discussion THE ORIGINS OF US ALL—BY DNA GENETIC ANALYSIS
2 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Dustin Roy's discussion Islam and Nazism
2 hours ago
Atheist Exile replied to Dr. Terence Meaden's discussion THE ORIGINS OF US ALL—BY DNA GENETIC ANALYSIS in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
2 hours ago
Michael Penn replied to Christine's discussion Annual visit with the BA in-laws
2 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Russell Pangborn's discussion Atheist Reasoning on Gun Control in the U.S
3 hours ago
Tom Sarbeck replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion Why Atheists can't be Republicans
3 hours ago
Gregory Phillip Dearth posted a status
"My second edition of "Tools for Debating Atheism" is now available on Kindle. Much better than the 1st edition... http://j.mp/1zsZBb5"
4 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service