Atheist Nexus

The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

A few nights ago, I was at a party for an atheist friend of mine. A contingent from the Hampton Roads Heathens (an atheist group from the Virginia Beach area) were going to be there as well as a few people from the Elizabeth City Freethinkers group, of which I am a member. I had been excited about this party for weeks-you see, my fiance and I recently moved to a tourist town where we know next to no one and this seemed like a great way to meet some like-minded people and maybe organize some other activities between the two groups. The party itself was loads of fun, and we met plenty of interesting characters, but shortly before we left there was an incident that left a bad taste in my mouth and made me do some thinking about feminism and the atheist movement.

A small group of us (me and four other men) were talking to the hostess's 15-year-old son about the theoretical possibility of laying down one's atheist beliefs for a girl. They were all more or less telling this kid that chances were good that he would meet a Christian girl and wind up losing, if not his atheism, then at least his conviction. That, according to this group of men, was what happened to everyone and it would happen to him. I chimed in and said that I was raised atheist, and neither I nor anybody I knew had ever had any such moments, and that the young man we were speaking to (or, at this point, about) was very smart and reasonable and I felt it was likely that he would be able to keep his head in spite of his hormones. At this point, one of the men turned to me, and in a very patronizing voice, said "honey, you just don't understand". This was followed later by calling me sweetie in the same tone of voice.

Not surprisingly, this situation has several parallels with the last time I experienced a moment of blatant, condescending, sexism at an atheist gathering. I was engaged in a discussion, once again with a group of men, about historical preservation (I am a trained archaeologist and am familiar with Section 106 and other laws pertaining to the subject). At one point, one of the men with whom I was arguing turned to my future fiance and said "she's talking again". Everyone was taken aback, and he wrote a long letter of apology to the group later that night.

These two experiences have given me a small insight into what it does and doesn't mean to be atheist. These days, the atheist and secular humanist movements are very closely tied, to the point that they are often indistinguishable. While the two philosophies do intersect within what has been dubbed the "New Atheism", one can easily be an atheist without any of the other humanistic philosophies. However, I don't believe that either of the men were so quick to use this sexist, condescending, language because they don't consider themselves to be humanist, but rather because racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry are ideas that are so deeply ingrained that people who are otherwise reasonable, and would otherwise speak out against this behaviour, still have not managed to completely purge them from their worldview. Most Americans, or Westerners in general (atheist or not) would probably deny having sexist views, but still, with a little bit of liquid courage and the confidence instilled by the sense of camaraderie brought on by being apart of the majority (in this case, being male) words can slip out. "Little" things, things that one doesn't really mean, things that are only used because they have become part of our language. This is the kind of thought process that allows reasonable people who consider themselves to be humanists to use this belittling and offensive language, forgetting that language is powerful, and that it is not just a tool we use to communicate, it can also control and influence how we think, and ultimately behave.

My initial reason for wanting to write this essay was anger. Ok, more than that. It was impotent rage. The kind that starts at the top of your stomach and sits in the back of your throat where you can almost taste it, knowing there is absolutely nothing you can do, at least at the moment. I was deeply offended by one small word, a word that is a term of endearment when used correctly. It is a word that a strange man at a party could never use in the proper sense to a woman he has never met. I am sure that he had no intention of offending me when he chose to use that word, which brings me to my ultimate conclusion. While we, as secular humanists, atheists, New Atheists, or whatever term you go by, may on one hand believe that we have progressed so far as to have eliminated racism and sexism from our personal philosophies, yet on the other hand use the terminology in exactly the way that is most hurtful and demeaning. If we are to be participating in a movement based on equality and celebration of diversity, we need to be more guarded in our use of language. Using sexist language, especially in the presence of a fifteen year-old boy, is unacceptable and inexcusable for anyone, but this group should be held to a higher standard than that. It is far more insulting and at the same time, far more surprising to hear such language casually tossed about by an atheist than by, for example, a Christian. Considering that atheists in general are a group that often feels persecuted by the religious majority, it seems only fitting that we should be more willing to check ourselves for prejudice, and more conscious of the meaning behind the words we use.

Views: 7

Tags: atheism, bigotry, feminism, language, philosophy, prejudice, sexism

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by TNT666 on March 5, 2011 at 6:59pm
I've often had major problems with secular humanists because they rose from the very essence of Christianity, removed god, and replaced him with human dominion over the earth, and placed human valuation above all, which is in Christianity, is the 2nd only power to god. I am fundamental odds with this method of valuation because it is based on Homo sapiens perceptions, and our perceptions are so faulty as to be worth nothing. Barring a few exceptions such as homosexual marriage, humanist have the same value system as Christians, fundamentally, they are moralists. Even tho they say their "moral" is "a personal thing", they are constantly accusing others of behaving immorally. This very duality has cause a new schism on the other website, accusations by moralists. IMO that's an inherently flawed view of life on Earth. To my mind, to call oneself atheist and not reject religious institutions is nonsensical. But unfortunately, recent atheist converts came over "reality" on those very terms, as the New atheists would have everyone believe: "atheists are just as moral as theists". I am sickened by this attitude. Morality is completely dependant on which group is dominating a society.
Comment by Emily Dale on December 8, 2010 at 6:46pm
Karen, regarding "converted atheists", I would say everyone is born atheist, so any religious person is just that- a converted atheist. However, people who consider themselves atheist after they are sentient adults have probably put a lot of thought into it and have avoided being sucked into whatever religion is the norm where they are from. I guess some people just get tired of swimming against the current? It's not really a concept I can wrap my head around, either, as an ethical decision.
Comment by Karen Loethen on November 27, 2010 at 12:29pm
I completely agree that an atheist would NEVER "give in" or change their mind over a "TRUE LOVE". "Converted atheists" are simply atheists in unhealthy ethical dissonance....
I can't speak for anyone else, atheist or not, but being as ethical as possible at any given moment is one of my main reasons for being an atheist...so the "converted atheist" doesn't strike me as honest.
Comment by Glen Rosenberg on November 23, 2010 at 1:44pm
Emily, I agree with you. By the way, I am a lifetime atheist and I have never seen an atheist fold as a result of passion or love. One compromised in pretended observance. I have also heard of experiements in sensory deprivation conducted by our government and the result is that atheists are more difficult to break down and to brainwash.
Comment by Emily Dale on November 23, 2010 at 1:30pm
Thank you Glen, I absolutely agree. Atheism does not equal humanism, but within the context of both situations I think both men would have said "yes" if you asked them if they were secular humanists, who do, in theory if not in practice, share principles of equality and egalitarianism. It is much harder to break yourself of a language habit than it is to say that you philisophically agree or disagree with an idea.
Comment by Glen Rosenberg on November 23, 2010 at 1:06pm
Atheism is not a philosophy. In general, atheists are better educated, more cultured, tend to favor equality and egalitarianism, have fewer children and represent a reasonable wager. It may be that there are value differences between deconverted atheists and lifetime atheists.
Atheists can still suffer the bigotry residue of the culture. Your objection is meaningful. If and when theism becomes minority it will take a great deal of effort to replace the bankrupt ethics of religious culture with reasonable ethics and values.

Support Nexus

Click to Buy Amazon items and help A|N

Advertisements

Heathen's Guide

Your Ad Here

Helpful Items

 

Search Atheist Nexus:
Translate page:
 
Social Networking Links:
 

Latest Activity

Steph S. added 2 discussions to the group Wildlife
19 minutes ago
Steph S. added 2 discussions to the group Geek & Nerd Haven
28 minutes ago
Steph S. added 2 discussions to the group Health & Fitness
33 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Unforessen consequence of Obamacare
52 minutes ago
Steph S. replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Unforessen consequence of Obamacare
1 hour ago
Steph S. liked Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Unforessen consequence of Obamacare
1 hour ago
Steph S. replied to Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion 11 year old climate activist Xiuhtezcatl Martinez in the group Climate Concerns
1 hour ago
Steph S. liked Ruth Anthony-Gardner's discussion 11 year old climate activist Xiuhtezcatl Martinez
1 hour ago
Steven Craig replied to Steve's discussion networking in the group Ohio Atheists
1 hour ago
Steph S. commented on Loren Miller's status
1 hour ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Unforessen consequence of Obamacare
1 hour ago
Mr Peterdactyl commented on Talgin's photo
1 hour ago
booklover commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
2 hours ago
booklover commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
2 hours ago
Idaho Spud liked Joan Denoo's discussion Baloney Detection Kit, (Dr. Michael Shermer)
2 hours ago
Idaho Spud commented on Sentient Biped's group Godless in the garden
3 hours ago
Idaho Spud commented on Sentient Biped's group Godless in the garden
3 hours ago
Loren Miller replied to John Hutcheson's discussion Everybody Draw Mohammad Day, Who's playing?
3 hours ago
Debra Stevenson replied to James M. Martin's discussion Breitbart Group Claims "New Evidence" Hitler Was Gay in the group LGBTQI Nexus / Gay Atheists
3 hours ago
Debra Stevenson replied to John Hutcheson's discussion Everybody Draw Mohammad Day, Who's playing?
3 hours ago

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Brother Richard.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service