TAE and feminism

[DjVortex]

From your OP:

Yes, completely ignore my clarification that I wrote in the same post as the question.

[Lausten]

So, are you saying you didn't mean

I have noticed that The Atheist Experience crew has a very feminist ideology overall.

or that you think you have supplied sufficient evidence to back that up?

Maybe you could summarize, or highlight your most important argument. As you said, this thread is going nowhere. I don't want to point fingers of blame, I'd rather make it worthwhile. I don't care much for rehashing he said/she said stuff, but the topic of reverse discrimination and when tolerance is warranted or when intolerance should not be tolerated, etc. is important.

I think Tracie and Matt and the crew have refined their stances pretty well and do a decent job of stating them in a way that is hard to argue with.

Edit: I listened to the GB podcast, FYI, it is pretty good. I think you'll find they are in agreement with you on many issues. Here are the videos they are talking about. Why don't you watch them and see if you want to defend them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ
http://youtu.be/P-Nw3zyYpvs

[DjVortex]

Here are the videos they are talking about. Why don't you watch them and see if you want to defend them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ
http://youtu.be/P-Nw3zyYpvs

I am dumbfounded by your seeming inability to read. I linked to those exact videos two posts earlier. Now you are asking me to watch them?

Do you only read a couple of sentences from the beginning of a post and completely ignore the rest?

Do I want to defend them? What do you mean by that? That they are sexist in your opinion? What exactly is sexist about those two videos? Seemingly, as I said in my very first post in this thread (and which you also probably skipped), if you oppose feminism in any way, you are automatically a sexist. It doesn't matter what the arguments might be. This is precisely what I was talking about.

Let me guess: In the exact same way that you don't actually read my posts, you didn't actually watch those videos.

[Lausten]

you didn't actually watch those videos.

You are so right. You are so good at being right. However, this is the only thing you are right about.

This thread is about how the Godless Bitches and TAE team support a feminist ideology. You linked those videos as support for your argument. I have not seen any logic to your argument. You just keep making assertions and creating straw men. SO, I reserve the right to not click on your links. I have offered twice now to listen to your argument, if you would kindly restate it in some logical way, but you have refused.

What is dumbfounding is that your argument is based on a summary line of a one hour and twenty minute podcast that either you didn't listen to, or are not referencing. As I just said in my last post, I think you'll find it edifying. Yes, they have some mic problems, and they disagree amongst themselves, from your point of view, it will be difficult to sit through it. I'm asking that you listen to the content, not the delivery.

What is dumbfounding, is that you come to a website for shows that are well versed in the Socratic method and work hard to define their terms, and you make up your own definitions, avoid questions, and focus on meaningless details like; I didn't click on your precious links.

Do I want to defend them? What do you mean by that?

I don't understand what is confusing here. You linked them, you agree with them, why can't you tell me what it is about them that you find agreeable? Do you not see value in summarizing a 10 minute polemic into a few logical sentences?

What exactly is sexist about those two videos?

I'm going to spend some time and come up with an answer for this. Not for you, because I don't get that you are open to any opinion other than your own. It will be more of an exercise for myself. Tracie and the GB crew did a great job of educating me on this issue and if I can apply that here it will help me remember it in the future.

[dobbie]

Just for the sake of feedback, I watched both videos and liked them, probably because I'm a male chauvanist pig. Ha.

But seriously, he made good challenging points in the videos in my oinkish opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ
http://youtu.be/P-Nw3zyYpvs

[Lausten]

Thanks dobbie, did you listen to the podcast?

DjVortex: I see you are in a different time zone, so sorry for not waiting, but here ya go, in answer to "What exactly is sexist about those two videos?"

Let’s start near the end of “Failure of Feminismâ€

[dobbie]

Lausten wrote:

Thanks dobbie, did you listen to the podcast?

The "GB podcast"? I don't recall it at the moment. But I'll be happy to listen to it if I haven't done so already. Please provide the web link, if you will.

[Lausten]

The summary description of this podcast is what sparked the OP.
The videos are responded to in the podcast.
http://godlessbitches.podbean.com/2012/01/19/episode-22/

[dobbie]

I found the GB 22 podcast to be one-sided on the topic of feminism. But I’ll cut them a break and just say that they could’ve expressed themselves better.

In sum they gave about 5 minutes of good advice crammed into about 1 hour and 25 minutes.

Whenever one of the co-hosts didn’t necessarily agree with the group, she was was quickly silenced. That is, they immediately interrupted and talked over her in nice way.

They don’t like to be called “girls.â€

[DjVortex]

Lausten: You went to great lengths to argue why the AA is wrong in his claims and arguments, but you are missing my point. That was not my question. Nowhere did I say "I think the AA is right in these videos, can you tell me where he is wrong?" nor was it ever my intention. (Whether I fully or partially agree with the AA is a completely different issue.)

My question was: What exactly is sexist in these videos? Because that's what the summary claimed. The summary did not say "silly (and wrong) claims made by the Amazing Atheist." The summary said "silly sexist videos by the Amazing Atheist", which is a completely different claim altogether.

Does the AA have actual verifiable data to back up his claims, or is he pulling it from his behind? Neither option makes it a sexist claim. Is his claim that the concept of patriarchy is antiquated and does not exist nowadays wrong? Again, even he is wrong that doesn't make him a sexist. It simply makes him wrong.

Sexism would be treating women like second-class citizens, or having the ideology that men should be able to hit on (or just hit) women as they like because that's how nature has made us, or that women should not be given high governmental or corporate positions because they cannot think straight, like men do. It is not sexism to point out that gender equality issues go both ways.

Could you please start reading what I actually write, rather than putting words in my mouth?

[Lausten]

Could you please start reading what I actually write, rather than putting words in my mouth?

He did quite a bit more than "point out that gender equality issues go both ways". One of my paragraphs ends with "that is the definition of prejudice", did you miss that one? You're starting to back down from the some of the stronger words you used in the beginning and doing the "all's I'm saying is" thing.

Saying that we have moved beyond patriarchy and it is no longer necessary to identify one's self as a feminist is a sexist statement. Do you disagree with that?

Saying that women should be happy because men fight their wars for them, that they should be happy with their safe place in the home while men go take on responsibilities, that is sexist. Do you disagree with that?

[DjVortex]

You're starting to back down from the some of the stronger words you used in the beginning and doing the "all's I'm saying is" thing.

*sigh*

You keep putting words in my mouth and reading between the lines, and when I try to stop you from doing that, you start saying that I'm just "backing down". This kind of condescending attitude is just annoying.

This isn't a discussion (well, never was, really), so I'm stopping it now for good. Think whatever you want about it.

[Lausten]

Sorry to hear that. I feel you are doing much the same things that you are accusing me of. I don't think it is necessary to constantly comment on someone's attitude. That is sometimes the nature of discussion forums.

Most annoying is that you keep taking the crappy insulting things I say and responding to those and ignoring the straight forward questions and comments like "Do you disagree with this statement". It makes it hard for me to understand what you think is evidence for your point of view.

Here is a list of things that you have said:

I have noticed that The Atheist Experience crew has a very feminist ideology overall. The (perhaps semi-)official stance is that sexism is rampant (or at least somewhat prevalent) among atheist groups (at least in the US), and that it's a big problem that should be solved.
***
I was slightly appalled by TAE crew's official stance on the "elevatorgate" fiasco. Rather than doing what they should have done, in other words, take a neutral stance, they strongly and unanimously sided with the feminist party.
***
In other words, when the "anti-feminist" party was saying "this situation is ridiculous" referring to the particular example of someone asking someone else for coffee and that someone else overreacting, what the "feminist" party was hearing was "the whole idea of sexism existing among atheists is ridiculous". And of course the other way around.
***
I have watched all the amazing atheist videos, and I have yet to see something that could be considered sexist.
***
I think it's appalling that if someone dares to oppose the ideology of feminism, he is automatically labeled "silly sexist".
***
The sad thing about all this is that parallels can be easily drawn to other similar prejudices, such as:

- If you are an atheist, that means you are immoral and believe in evolution.
- If you oppose islam, you are a racist.
- If you oppose feminism, you are a sexist.

I see little difference.
***
But if an outspoken feminist woman complains about a man (possibly) hitting on her, then all hell breaks loose. This is a double standard.

Anyways, my point was not to discuss whether this was a legitimate complaint that deserved such a huge community reaction, but to express my distaste on TAE crew's reaction to it. In my opinion they should have remained neutral rather than showing such a feminist biases. Of course this is just my opinion.
***
I would like to make clear, that of course there exists sexism among men in atheist communities, sexism that shouldn't exist. And of course it is more prevalent among men toward women than any other possible combination. (Or, more precisely, people acting on their sexist views is more prevalent among men towards women. Ideologies that can be considered sexist is a slightly different topic.)

What is, however, often ignored and seldom discussed is the prevalent sexism and prejudices in the other direction.
***
In a similar way as racism is considered by most people to be possible only when a white person discriminates against a non-white person, most people consider sexism to be possible only when a male acts like a jackass towards a woman. Any other combinations are never considered sexism (or even if they are, usually significantly less so).

After these posts, the meta-conversation began and things broke down.
I have varying degrees of disagreement and a variety of responses to all of these. I would be willing to discuss any or all of them. If I took something out of context, then provide it. Ball is in your court.

[Lausten]

I'd love to hear what you think of the Amazing Atheist now. And what TAE is saying, http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2012/02/08/horrible-people-dont-realize-theyre-horrible/ as well as PZ http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/08/the-not-so-amazing-atheist-self-immolates/

[DjVortex]

I'd love to hear what you think of the Amazing Atheist now.

I see that regardless of your efforts in your previous post, where you apparently made an attempt to actually understand what I was talking about, you still don't.

Could you please show me the exact post where I said something along the lines of "I think the AA is right, can you point out where he is wrong?" On the contrary, I clearly explained that was not what I was asking, nor my point. (The question was "what exactly is feminist about the two referenced videos?" and my point was that TAE crew's feminist biases give me a bad taste in the mouth.)

Kazim's blog post in fact just reinforces my point. So the AA participated in some heated flamewar where he acted like a jerk and went completely out of line. Now kazim uses the official TAE blog as a platform to launch a personal attack against him.

Again, imagine that the situation had been reversed: Imagine that it was a well-known feminist that had acted like a jerk and posted some really insulting text towards men in the heat of the moment in some internet flamewar. Would we see a TAE blog post about it? I don't think so. (Sure, I could be wrong, but if it happened, I would be genuinely surprised.)

Sorry, but my original position stands.