Facing Up to Atheism’s MRA Problem

[rug]

May 5, 2014
By Adam Lee

We’ve known for a while that there’s an ugly strain of aggressive anti-feminism within the larger atheist community. Now it appears that we know where they congregate: the “men’s rights activist” subgroup on Reddit ran a survey of their members, which found that the vast majority (94%) identify as atheist or religiously indifferent.

That came as a surprise to me, although the other numbers were more or less what I’d have expected. MRAs are overwhelmingly white (98%), between the ages of 17 and 20 (87%), and “strongly conservative” (84%). The only political issue they strongly support was marijuana legalization (94% in favor), while a variety of other causes (same-sex marriage, transgender rights, abortion, socialized medicine, minimum wage increases, gun control) attracted only single-digit support, giving rise to a political philosophy that could perhaps best be described as “libertarian only as it affects me”.

Since this is a voluntary survey, the results could be skewed by self-selection or outright fraud, so we shouldn’t put too much weight on them. Still, these numbers are broadly consistent with other surveys of the same demographic. Russell Glasser sums up my thoughts:

So most MRA’s are irreligious, which doesn’t mean that most irreligious people are MRA’s. For example, if 16% of the population are atheists, and .16% of the population are MRA, then they could be 100% irreligious and still represent only 1% of of that group. But still: ick.

He suggests that the reason the MRA crowd is so dominated by atheists is that, if you’re a member of pretty much any of the world’s major religions, the patriarchy is built right in. The assumption of women’s inferiority and subjection is already established there, and men who want an excuse to feel superior to women needn’t make any special effort. On the other hand, the misogynists who aren’t religious don’t have that convenient excuse, so they have to explicitly argue for it – and that pretty much sums up what the MRA movement is all about.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/2014/05/facing-up-to-atheisms-mra-problem/

[djean111]

1. There’s an ugly strain of aggressive anti-feminism in every group, methinks.

My grandson likes Reddit, but says not to take it seriously, the radical or ugly parts are just people saying stuff online they would never say (or do) in person.
Since, IMO, actual "atheism" doesn't involve a shared set of anything else, any more than a group of people who don't believe in Santa Claus share other behaviors, I don't think it productive to group MRA's in that way and announce it is atheism's problem.

[cbayer]

4. Actually, the group of people who don't believe in Santa Claus do share something.

They generally share the ability to distinguish what is clearly a fiction from religious beliefs, which are not necessarily a fiction.

And those that insist on comparing religious beliefs to beliefs in Santa Claus, leprechauns, sky fairies, etc, also share something. They compromise a sub-group of atheists who are best described as anti-theists.

MRA's are not atheism's problem, but there is a problem within organized atheism concerning women that should not be disregarded, imo.

It may actually be getting better, as there hasn't been much internet storm about it lately, and that is a good.thing.

[maddezmom]

2. Meh, old time fundies of any strain of religion seem to be the real MRA's

They just don't post on reddit or blogs, they are mainstream.

[cbayer]

3. Continuing to deny that this is an issue just feeds it.

There is an opportunity here to address this and be different than the groups that have gone before, but there is tremendous resistance and denial form with the community, which is dominated by a very clear demographic.

His encouragement to confront and stifle those who exhibit this kind of behavior should be taken seriously.

[MellowDem]

15. Creating "issues" with false data just feeds the religious left...

their 8 minutes of daily atheist hate. Sure, scientific surveys show atheists are far more progressive than many groups that are considered to the left and religious, but let's try and conflate atheism, a lack of belief, with MRA and sexism.

Meanwhile, the main Abrahamic religions are all explicitly, clearly sexist, and clearly are behind much of today's sexism, and yet the religious left defends their worship of such bigoted texts with some of the most offensively stupid apologetics.

None of it has anything to do with atheism, it's correlation, not causation.

My own theory why a sub reddit MRA group would trend atheist? Reddit is young and online. MRA groups from what I have seen, use mostly secular arguments. If you're religious, there's no need to join an MRA group, your anti-feminist material is right in your own holy text, no need for secular reasoning, however bad it is, and your holy text takes precedent anyways.

[LostOne4Ever]

18. Your theory wins the interwebz! (nt)

[cbayer]

21. Really? His theory is BS and born of his own tremendously high point of privilege.

Do you also deny that there are issues around sexism within organized atheism?

That's very disappointing.

[LostOne4Ever]

26. Okay I lied, one more reply

My comments in the other post cover anything I need to say here. I am just making one last post to say I hope you and all other mothers on DU have a happy mother's day.

[cbayer]

28. And a very happy mother's day to you as well.

[MellowDem]

54. The article is what's the BS theory...

Your defense of it is religious privilege. I didn't make up a bullshit poll and claim it as evidence, which is intellectually dishonest.

The very phrase "Atheism has an MRA problem" is dripping with religious privilege and demonization.

Atheism isn't an organized anything. Organized atheism is a nonsensical, undefined term. But it's a handy way to smear all atheists.

[cbayer]

20. The religious left has atheist hate? REally?

Can you source that or is that just part of your belief system.

Are you one of the deniers about the actual instances of sexism that has occurred within organized atheism.

Let me guess - you are the picture of the atheist demographic. White, male, straight, college educated, employed and, overall, very privileged. Am I right?

It's takes a lot of cognitive dissonance, intellectual dishonesty and a good dose of childhood indoctrination to deny what has been widely reported by actual women in organized atheism and actual female bloggers who have been harassed by this group.

The point is not whether they dominate. They point is that they exist, need to be identified and need to be dealt with.

Now, maybe you could take that chip off your shoulder for just a moment or two and recognize that there is a problem here that needs to be addressed.

It's not my holy text, by the way. Even though I have told you this over and over, you can't seem to get that beam out of your eye in order to recognize that I am not a believer.

[MellowDem]

52. Yes it does...

Quite a few on the left still don't even understand what atheism is, and use the exact same right wing talking points about atheism, even on here, and the article is another smear job against some boogieman that doesn't exist. These articles are posted fairy constantly in this forum from places like salon and huffington.

This article is complete, unmitigated bullshit, someone taking a completely unscientific poll of an MRA sub reedit and concluding "atheism has an MRA problem", which only isn't nonsensical, or makes about as much sense as saying "non-stamp collectors have an MRA problem", but such an obvious attempt at demonization that your defense of it makes it hard to take you seriously.

I've never claimed sexism doesn't exist among atheists (you'll have to define what organized atheism is before I can take a position on that) so take your bullshit strawmen away. I've only said atheism, itself, has nothing to so with sexism. If a certain group that is known for having lots of atheists is sexist then they should be called out, but saying "atheists" makes about as much sense as looking at Boko Haram and saying "theists have a sexism problem".

This is unlike religion, which many make thousands of claims and proclamations about genders, many of them explicitly sexist. Atheism is in no way comparable or similar.

I've already told you before I fit the atheist demographic, explicitly, so your "guess" is more sneering, condescending snark. I understand that my demographics, in the US at least, makes up most atheists, and I even try to find out why. I'm fine with owning up to my own privilege, unlike you and your constant defense religious privilege. You don't even see it.

And I was using the Royal "you".

[cbayer]

57. MD, I just can't talk with you anymore.

The degree of your dogma and prejudice are so severe that trying to have a discussion with you makes me feel like I do when I talk to fundamentalists.

I'm going to put you on ignore so I am not tempted to respond at all.

I wish that you find some peace and solace in your life.

[Brettongarcia]

5. This is literally the most inept and mis-representative "survey" I've ever seen seriously reported

1) The group "surveyed" is 17-20 years old (87%).

2) They are a very, very tiny group.

3) By its own description, the parameters of the survey were grossly unscientific. Relying on a tiny sample of self-reporters

In no way does this even remotely represent atheists.

In no way could this even be construed as factual.

[djean111]

6. No, they do not. I think it a very bendy stretch to call this an atheist problem.

Also think it a stretch to classify people as atheists and proceed from that point.
I am a woman who happens to be an atheist, not an atheist who happens to be a woman. There is a big difference there.
I make zero decisions based on whether or not I believe in a god or whatever. Zero.

[cbayer]

7. I agree that this in no way represents atheists.

The problem seems confined to some (not all) organizations that are composed primarily of atheists and websites.

[djean111]

8. Agressive anti-feminism seems confined to atheists and websites? On websites?

I don't think so, not at all. Ever read anything about women over at the Freepers? God, country, guns, and keep wimmen in their place.

[cbayer]

9. No, sorry, I was not clear.

The aggressive anti-feminism being report from within the organized atheist movement seems confined to some groups and websites.

I did not mean to imply in any way that it was confined to atheists.

[djean111]

10. Okay. But I maintain that aggressive anti-feminism cannot be categorized as having much to do with

atheism at all. In fact I associate it more with religion, if I were to think about it. I do not think there is a correlation. Or that it can be classified an a problem for atheists. I don't think it has anything to do with atheism. In fact, I think using that poll or survey is about as useful as associating aggressive anti-feminism with eye color.

I guess I just do not, for my own purposes, group people into atheist and religious and proceed from there. I don't think about religion in "real life" unless it is pushed at me, um, aggressively.
I confess I don't see the point of atheists groups at all, unless to try and stem the tide of religious cant worming its way into government.

[cbayer]

11. There have been more than a few articles by women

within organized atheism on this topic.

I don't think the problem is necessarily worse than it is within other organizations which are predominantly controlled by men.

What I do think is that these relatively new organizations have the opportunity to do things differently. In particular, I think they have the opportunity to not be like the organizations that they have issues with.

However, there has been some significant resistance to the entire idea that there is a problem at all.

There have been a number of threads about this in this group in the past, if you care to look them up.

I agree that the poll is probably useless, but denying the problem is worse.

There are many like you that have no use for or interest in organized atheism, but it exists and is growing.

[LiberalAndProud]

12. I think this article should be taken with a huge grain of salt all around.

I always appreciate that our DU polls are accompanied with the "This is an internet poll" disclaimer.

I did find myself agreeing with the last paragraph of your OP. I do think that misogyny (for lack of a more concise word) is a built in component of our global society, and the influence of religious doctrines cannot be minimized when we discuss the issue.

[LostOne4Ever]

13. So much wrong here

If anything this is more a reflection of reddit than it is of any group.

I mean if there was a men's rights group meeting at an old folks home would you be surprised that the overwhelming majority of the attendees are over 65 years of age?

Just consider how many different factors at play here and you can see that this is hardly representative. MRA is a conservative position. Reddit is mainly used by younger people. So by going to the reddit's MRA group what you are polling is actually young conservative males.

Now consider that there is a correlation* between age and internet use and lack of religious belief. Similarly, consider that the right here in the US is dominated by the older members of the religious right. This will push secular conservative young men toward libertarianism.

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar/07/news/la-pn-millennials-liberal-views-pew-poll-20140306
http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2014/04/21/303375159/americas-less-religious-study-puts-some-blame-on-the-internet


So what did they get when they polled reddit? A poll showing a large number of secular young libertarians. This is hardly surprising.

We already know that in general people who have little or no religious affiliation are the most liberal/least conservative of all religion demographics in America. So obviously, this is talking about a minority position at best.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125021/Mormons-Conservative-Major-Religious-Group.aspx

To call this Atheism's MRA problem is laughable. If this is a problem with atheism, then it is a much bigger problem with every other group.

How about instead of finding some divisive and made up problem with one group or another we just admit that we come from a patriarchal society and work together to move past that.

*Mandatory "Correlation does not mean causation" warning to preempt the people who are going to chime in complaining about my post -_-

[cbayer]

14. I agree with you that this is pretty useless data and reflects pretty much just what you

say it does.

OTOH, this is an identifiable group that is most likely responsible for some of the rather heinous behavior that has been directed at female atheist bloggers and activists.

They should be identified, marginalized and ostracized from leading atheist groups. The author's solution is to make equality and feminism key principles of those organizations and to make it clear that misogyny will not be tolerated.

It's been an argument made before and is based on the premise that atheism and feminism have much in common and have a common foe in the misogyny seem and practiced in some major religious groups.

Unfortunately, it has been dismissed in some circle or even completely denied.

That's a bad move, imo.

[LostOne4Ever]

17. That should be the goal of progressives in all organizations

And for the most part that is what is happening.

Cultural problems require cultural solutions. MRA can only be fixed if progressives in every group stand up to sexism everywhere we find it, and push for equality. Whether it be as a participant at a political convention, or something as mundane as eating at a restaurant or even running a dating website for geeks and nerds. For instance, this guy has put out some great articles fighting sexism in nerd culture...yet its a site teaching nerds how to deal with dating:

http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2011/11/nerds-and-male-privilege/all/1/

I believe he has around 4 different articles on the issue.

That said, if it has been dismissed with regard to certain atheist groups, that might be in part to how articles like this one broach the issue. Calling this Atheism's MRA problem makes it sound like it is a problem endemic or inherent to atheism which is not only not true, but very very offensive.

Again, non-believers are arguably the most liberal and least conservative religious group in the US as according to the way they were sorted in that poll (the one I linked above). The article itself says the people identified OVERWHELMINGLY as conservatives meaning that they are a small minority amoungst nonbelievers/atheists.

Further still, its not inherent in atheism as no where in The Big Book of the Ever Questioning Atheist™ (coming soon to an imaginary book store near you!) does it say:

1. And thou shalt reject the EBIL feminist and become a gigantic MRA asshole.
2. So speakth thy not-gods the Flying Spegghetti monster, may his appendages ever be coated with olive oil
3. and the Invisible Pink Unicorn, blessed be her hoofs.
4.Ramen.

Sorry trying to inject a little atheist related humor here

All atheism means is a lack of belief in gods. We have no books, dogmas, or beliefs. We might pick up additional philosophies untop of atheism that do have those things like humanism, or progressism but atheism in general has nothing to do with the issue.

Speaking for myself, the article, if anything, makes the problem of sexism against female atheists worse as the first thing that goes through my mind reading this is "that is bullshit" and an instant need to debunk the study (as I did above) as opposed to making me want to hit the streets and fight sexism.

Rather, if this article instead had something about "Atheists taking a leading role in the fight against Patriarchy and Mysongyny" or something like that and instead talked about how progressive we are as a group and how other atheists are already fighting MRAs that would be a different story.

This article is self defeating at best, and counter productive and inflammatory at worst.

[cbayer]

22. Well, the fact is that progressive everywhere are not standing up to the sexism

that has been reported within the atheist community. IN fact, there is a tremendous amount of denial and overt rejection, as can probably be seen in this very thread.

You are rapidly becoming part of the problem by defending the indefensible. That's disappointing. You have an opportunity here to stand up for the women who have been harassed, dismissed and ostracized. Alternatively, you can just make sure your seat is available in the old boys club and not make any waves. That's what a lot of women in these situations do.

You may or may not be a part of the growing organized atheists movement, but there are, n fact, books, beliefs and a growing set of dogmatic beliefs. Continuing to say there is not is just denying what is actually happening.

There is an opportunity here to identify and address an serious issue. Many of the women and men within the community have been trying to do this, but they get the same kind of pushback as you present here.

I think the article may be purposely set up to garner the response you had, but if read through, I think it makes the point that this is an extreme example of what is a real problem and that it should be pretty easy to deal with it and a good step in the right direction.

[LostOne4Ever]

25. Last reply for this thread

Its been a frustrating week. From your choice of words, I am going to suspect it has been one for you too.

No where did I say there is not a problem with sexism. It is a problem. Its a problem in colleges. Its a problem in hospitals. Its a problem every where. Its a problem with buiness culture. Its problem with science culture. Its a problem in geek culture. Its a problem with the entire culture.

Everything you describe happens in all these places.

I said that. Its a cultural problem.

What it is not, is inherent to non-belief/atheism. Again, we don't have a book saying anything one way or another about it. There is no book that I and every other non-believer here has read and adhere to. There is no way to reach the conclusion "I am going to be a sexist ass" from "I do not believe in any god(s)."

One can be the most anti-MRA pro feminist in the world...and be a non-believer. An non-believer can also be the opposite of that. A non-believer can be a man, or a women. Just how it is.

Any books, dogmas, etc belonging to one atheist group or another belongs to that group and that group alone. Everyone should stand up and shame any member (and possibly the entire group itself) that promotes sexism. Yes, there are a lot of sexist atheist who need to be fought. But there are also a lot of sexist pottery collectors too. No one is saying that sexism is inherent or a problem of pottery are they?

Yes there are men and women inside their respective groups fighting sexism. I am not pushing back against them.

What I AM pushing back against is this attempt to link atheism with sexism when it does not exist. To do so is to smear every single non-believer including the non-believers who have been the victims of sexism and those who are fighting against it.

Put the shame and the blame where it belongs: on the MRA reddit group.

[cbayer]

27. I am in agreement with most of what you say here.

But I am tired of seeing organizations that are predominantly inhabited by straight, white men deny that there is a problem within their own organization. By refusing to even acknowledge it, they promote it.

I have been a member of such organizations and watched this from the inside. It's pretty sickening, but it's certainly not impossible to address it.

Of course these specific organizations experience sexism. As you say, it is pervasive and to be expected. What I'm saying is that there is an opportunity here to do something proactive and set an example that runs counter to the many institutions that these organizations reject.

Indeed, let's put the shame and blame on the MRA reddit group and denounce them loudly. And let's do it using the resources available, like the atheist, humanist, secularist groups that are composed primarily of progressive/liberal people.

[okasha]

53. Except for a very few,

the responses on this thread--including, sadly, those of at least one woman--remind me strongly of the Navy's initial responses to the Tailhook incident. It never happened. Ooops, it may have happened, but it happens all the time outside the Navy, too. And yeah, well, it did happen, but most of the girls are okay with it. Massively, massively ingrained privilege.

Just one more reason I refuse the "progressive" label.

[cbayer]

56. Exactly. I understand why that happens, but it is very frustrating to watch it happen

here and in this context.

But I am also seeing more members openly recognizing that there is an issue and showing a willingness to address it, which is a good thing.

[Lordquinton]

16. Faked survey

the author of it retracted it shortly after it was put out there.

As for actual problems with sexism, hows the whole female priests thing going in the Catholic church?

[cbayer]

23. So the fact that the RCC doesn't have female priests justifies your denial of

the problem of sexism and even misogyny within the atheists community?

How very white/male/straight of you.

[Lordquinton]

42. How very offencive of you to say that

We've had this discussion before, the sexism within the atheist community is no different that what you find in the culture at large, while the sexism within the catholic church is enshrined in both the bible and their dogma. Same with Judaism (Most aren't so bad these days but look at how Orthodox jews react to women) and Islam.

[cbayer]

44. I agree, it is no different than what you can find pretty much everywhere.

That's not the issue. One of the biggest and most justified criticisms that many involved in organized atheist groups is aimed at the sexism and outright misogyny found in many religious groups.

This seems to me to create an opportunity to show that it doesn't have to be that way and to take an active stance against it within the atheist organizations and the community at large.

There has been a rather consistent and often strident denial of it's existence within the community.

Pointing out that "they do it too and they are even worse" doesn't address the problem at all.

This particular group need to be shunned at the very least and openly defied at best.

This isn't about bashing atheists or the groups that represent them. It's about seizing the opportunity to set a better example.

I really don't see how that's offensive, but I'm willing to listen to why you perceive it as such.

[Lordquinton]

47. No, what was offencive was your accusation that I was defending them

I'm not, I'm pointing out that someone here is posting with an agenda with trying to show how horrible atheists are to make their position look better. There are some who claim it's not an issue and thy are an embarrassment. There have been several threads (by the same person, I might add) about sexism in the atheist community, and every time the issue of sexism in religion is brought up it gets buried so fast you'll get whiplash.

[cbayer]

49. My apologies. I jumped to an unwarranted conclusion about what you were saying.

I see that once again I have stepped into something having nothing to do with me. You have an issue with another member and it really has nothing to do with me.

I think the sexism within both religious and secular organizations should be addressed. It's hard to do that here is the motives of those bringing it up are suspect.

The sexism and misogyny within some religious communities is indeed glaring and requires a lot of attention and work if it is going to be addressed. It's not nearly to that degree within the atheist community, but it does exist and perhaps because it seem more "fixable", it gets unwarranted attention.

[rug]

24. Here's the survey.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2014/04/13/but-how-do-you-know-the-mras-are-atheists/

You got a link to a retraction?

BTW, Tu quoque is a schoolyard fallacy.

[intaglio]

29. Using internet poll to establish anything is ridiculous

A quote from this report

The Men’s Rights subreddits ran a demographic survey of their members recently. Courtney pointed me to the results. They’re listed here. The survey is still open, but as of the time I loaded it, there were just over 3,000 responses. While that is a self-selecting sample, 3,000 responses from 88,000 subscribers isn’t a bad return.

Emphasis mine

Given that only the MRA redditors were surveyed and given the number of trolls that august group has I think this survey may be dubious at the very least.

[rug]

30. You can take that up with the powers that be at Freethought Blogs.

[intaglio]

31. Oh FFS they're aren't any "Powers" at FTB

They're a group who formed to be free of the influence of bigoted Free Thinkers and they are a co-operative; P Z Myers has no more influence than Greta Christina or Ophelia Benson

[rug]

32. Sure there are. It's a proprietary site as heavily moderated as any political blog.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/rules/

Myers is one of its administrators.

[intaglio]

33. And it is still run as a cooperative

Admin, as with all blogs, refers to those with the permissions to allow changes to software, appearance and content. That admin function is carried out with the agreement of the cooperative which is discussed in a private back channel. Are you trying to imply there is some sort of secretive cabal?

Oh, "Political"? What political party. True, virtually all the bloggers at FTB are left wing all support LGBT rights but the primary focus is, guess what, free thought, skepticism and atheism. If you wish to term them "Political" I'm sure you will be happy for me to refer to all the Catholic and Christian blogs as political

[rug]

34. And the cooperative in turn has its powers tha be.

And those powers include what contributors will be invited to join as well as which ones will be kicked out, (surely you remember the recent Thunderfoot fiasco), which posters will be allowed at post and which will be banned, and what posts will stand and which will be erased, et cetera.

It's hardly an outpost of cooperative free thought interrupted by singing Fuck Kum Ba Ya.

And yes, it's highly political. Mostly their politics are good but it's political nonetheless.

[intaglio]

35. Ah, so it is a co-operative run by a cabal

O-kay - Seriously, do you take your theories from Thunderf00ts selective quotations?

Thunderf00t was invited to join FTB then misrepresented himself, acted deceptively and stole private information which resulted in a transgender member of FTB being outed and their physical address being published as well as the name they used in the real world. additionally the private e-mails and physical addresses of various female contributors were published which left them threatened by various vindictive arseholes. He got this information by being able to access the back channel as of right by being a member of FTB. He was kicked out - BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF ALL FTB BLOGGERS (I believe unanimously) for being a misogynistic issuer of lies who had broken every written and unwritten rule of decent human behaviour in the on-line world.

He then organised a campaign stating how unjust it was that he was kicked out

As to the terrible powers available to the FTB admin (exactly the same powers as Admin has at DU by the way) bloggers are free to examine IP addresses and have trolls banned from their own blog posts, just like everywhere else. Posts by garbling fools are often left in place but, like every other site, the really foolish and nasty ones are removed or, on Pharyngula and if PZ is at a loose end, disemvowelled. Blog posts are not edited except in the instance of Thunderf00t where they were expunged because of their content.

FTB site still remains cooperatively run although there are now a very few limits on how much access new bloggers have to the back channel

[rug]

36. No, it's a cooperative run by Myers and a few others.

The governing word being run, not cooperative.

[intaglio]

37. Evidence please

and do not quote that toe-rag Thunderf00t or his allies who have claimed that consistently but with no supporting evidence.

Cooperatives are governed this is so true - they are governed by their members. Those members do grant certain privileges to those responsible for the day to day administration of the cooperative. At the time of Thunderf00t's misrepresentations and unethical acts there were, I believe, fewer than a dozen FTB bloggers so, yes a small group of about a dozen people did act to remove a nasty and deceptive piece of work from their site.

Oh and I suggest you put your thesis to Prof. Myers yourself - being Minnesota nice he does suffer fools gladly, in the main. I cannot guarantee that the Horde will be as pleasant.

[rug]

38. Why don't you just have that nice Dr. Myers just contact me? I'm sure we'll have a lovely chat.

I suffer assholes even less gladly than I do fools. Be sure to send him this link.

Meanwhile, the evidence is in the links I already gave you.

If you still think it's anything less than a profit-making proprietary website, point me to any discussion where the commune decided how to divvy up the ad profits.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freethought_Blogs

[intaglio]

39. Did the Dominicans not teach you to read for comprehension?

"Started by" does not mean "governed by" any more than "for profit" means it cannot be "a cooperative". So I repeat evidence please.

Oh, and if you think that disagreeing with other FTB bloggers is a sure pathway to a tentacle lashing then look at the case of Taslima Nasrin.

Oh and as I have absolutely no influence with Prof Myers you will have to write to him yourself with your unsupported insinuations

[rug]

40. So much so that I am aware when someone reforms statements into ones that better suit their purpose.

Meanwhile, I'll just wait for you to provide proof it is a benign little cooperative of free thought. That is your assertion.

[intaglio]

41. Try checking the blogs

Firstly the copyright info shows that copyright is retained by the writer of the blog. Secondly, unlike a message board, profits are awarded to the individual blogs on a click through basis. Thirdly any writer is free to leave and blog elsewhere, a couple have done this and no great problems or complaints about FTB. Fourthly the Thundertwit affair required those blogging on the FTB site to agree to his expulsion - everyone agreed, no-one complained; this was recorded by the individual bloggers at the time.

Now compare the FTB situation with the commercial group Patheos.

You just hate without support

... and as I say read for comprehension

[rug]

45. Try checking the ad revenue.

You just defend without ability.

[rug]

59. Try this for derailing and distraction.

hows the whole female priests thing going in the Catholic church?

[Lordquinton]

43. I think you're in no position to be quoting fallacys at anyone

Given that any straight forward question you get is given one instantly.

What do you have against straight answers?

[rug]

46. My position is in front ou you waiting for your answer.

[Lordquinton]

48. No, it's not

You give one line replies that make no sense, or deflect and attempt to derail the discussions.

[Dorian Gray]

19. The MRA

movement is perplexing to me. I'm glad that the author at least had the decency to point out that the numbers could be skewed bc of self selection or fraud. And even if the numbers are correct, it's a very small subsection of the community.

The MRA community bugs me immensely.

[AtheistCrusader]

50. Tell you what. if I EVER meet an atheist activist that is also a MRA

I'll be sure to tell him where to get off.

Till then, I think these people are more or less sasquatch. Or primarily MRA's that have found a group to hide behind.

But I keep my eyes peeled.

[nil desperandum]

58. Indeed

Of course the article itself actually indicates what's really going on, all of the respondents are 17-20 year old males who overwhelmingly support one single political cause marijuana legalization.

If I didn't know better I would suspect that this article was complete satire.

At 17 these guys aren't even allowed to vote so 25% of the age groups that responded are non-voters with zero political effect on any issue and the other 75% represent a group of high school seniors to college sophomore who like smoking weed...wow a bunch of stoner teenage males who don't care about women's rights and are more concerned with their own selfish desires. Usually revelations this in depth requires decades of research and millions of dollars.

Maybe for his next article he can let us know about religious folks over 75 who are concerned about social security payments...

[AtheistCrusader]

51. But reddit is only like... 90k people, total.

And this is a subset of them. And that's an online community with... sexism issues.

You might find similar results running a survey at Something Awful, (where I do happen to be a member) and sexism runs hot and cold, depending on the subforum. (And then there's the /B 4chan offshoots, and hang on to your ass in there. I mean seriously... Issues.)


The survey may have a correlation issue, between redditor's that are male, atheist, and also sexist assholes.

You might also find a lot of them like pizza.

[rexcat]

60. Another issue...

86% conservative and 11% independent, mean age of survey participants 20 yeas old and 98% white and does not appear to be a "scientific" survey, more like a blog request or something.

The people who responded to the survey fit the norm of the white male atheist community in general therefore the only logical conclusion anyone can come to is all male atheists have a MRA problem. Good fucking grief! Anyone who could say this survey is reflective of the atheist community overall has their head up their tailpipe.

[cbayer]

61. It's far, far from any kind of scientific study.

It doesn't meet even the most basic demands.

But it is a point of information and an opportunity to take a stand.

I do not for a minute think that they represent the norm of the atheist community, but that's why it may be important to shine a light on them and clearly identify them as not being just that.

The author and no one here that I have seen has reached the conclusions that you proffer.