Shocking new allies: Atheists and Christian women!

[cbayer]

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/05/shocking_new_allies_atheist_and_christian_women/

Atheism and Christianity both have a history of mistreating women. Maybe it's time they work together

MONDAY, AUG 5, 2013 5:03 PM UTC
BY ELIZABETH STOKER

Pre-Christian Rome: a bastion of philosophy and intellectual discourse couched in sparkling white marble columns and bustling fora filled with busy men and women going about their daily errands with colorful diaphanous togas fluttering about their sandal-clad ankles.

Well, not really. The grittiness — not to mention the overwhelming odor — of ancient Rome has received decent play in film lately, from “Gladiator” to “Agora.” And that’s just the sensory texture of the empire. The notion that the pre-Christian Roman empire (or the pre-Christian Grecophone world, for that matter) was a hotbed of high-minded and rational intellectual discourse also seems to be gaining its due elements of nuance, though “Agora” would rather you think that early Christians were primarily a misogynistic, stone-lobbing bunch of brutes.

A number of people would have you think that, really, and not just about the early Church. And it’s not entirely untrue. But when it comes to explaining why early Roman Christians were, in some cases, inexcusably sexist, it is useful to note that they were likely that way before they became Christians, and merely clung to the tradition afterward, sometimes with new language for old ideas.

I point this out not to defend the reputation of ancient Roman Christians, but because the Church itself is often blamed for the generation of long-standing misogynistic attitudes toward women. While the Church has had a hand in perpetuating misogyny, the task was hardly a difficult one. This is worthwhile to realize because contemporary secular discourse sometimes suggests attempts at alleviating misogyny that center around the elimination of the Church, its ethics, its doctrines, and its influence. Consider this recent Salon piece by Katie Engelhart, rightly criticizing the new atheist movement for its de-facto diminishing of its woman luminaries:

more at link

[cleanhippie]

1. Nonsense. "Atheism" does not have a history of anything.

People who happen to be atheists may have a history of "mistreating" women, but atheism is nothing more than the lack of belief in a god and as such cannot "mistreat" anyone or anything.

Christianity (and other religions), OTOH, as an organized belief system, HAS "mistreated" and oppressed women for literally, thousands of years.

This is yet another false equivalence, the purpose of which seems to be to bring non-belief down to the level of irrational belief and patriarchal dogma.

Nice try, but fail. (directed at the author of this rubbish)

[trotsky]

2. Way to keep hammering that meme, cbayer.

Maybe you can indeed one day make reality match your narrative.

[rug]

3. A point frequently overlooked.

The struggle for full equality between the sexes will not be achieved by the elimination of the Church; nor will it be achieved by the denigration of women’s voices within secular movements. Engelhart is right to question the invisibility of women within the new atheist movement, and I hope her project is a fruitful one. Because the roots of sexism reach so deeply into our shared cultural history, they won’t be uprooted by a fractured front.

[cbayer]

4. Agree, and I would love to see some alliances here.

Could be formidable is both religious and non-religious women work together to address this.

As long as it is pinned to only some kinds of organizations, those that are trying to bring it into the sunshine will be kept divided - a particularly effective tactic for those that can't/won't see it.