About two months ago, I attended a "Safe Space Workshop" for LGBTQ allies on my community college campus. I met a lot of interesting people there. One of them made me a little nervous at first, because of her waist-length hair and ultra-modest, ankle-length skirt. I thought for sure that she would be trouble. My suspicions seemed to be confirmed when she said that she was a Christian.
She mentioned at one point that her daughter was bi, and that she had told her daughter that the rules were the same for a girlfriend staying over, as for having a boyfriend stay over. I was a bit surprised by that, and surprised even more when she laughed, "Yeah, I get into a lot of arguments, because I'm a very outspoken feminist!"
At the end of the workshop, I raised my hand and mentioned that I was starting an "atheists and friends" club at the school, and that if anyone there was a student and comfortable with signing the petition form, I would appreciate it.
"I want to talk to you about that--I think I could help you!" she said eagerly. So I went over to her side of the room and talked with her. Apparently she worked at the college, and was eager to help the new and unofficial clubs.
"I have an atheist son who says he's a Satanist," she smiled, rolling her eyes. "I don't think he is, he just says that because I'm very vocal about my Christianity."
"Well, I heard that the guy who founded that whole movement, started it as kind of a joke," I nodded.
She seemed, strangely enough, like one of the nicest, most open-minded Christians I had ever met. So a few days later, I went to visit her at her office, as she had wanted me to.
She was wearing another ankle-length skirt when I went to her office to see her.
"Oh, I have a question for the Gay-Straight Alliance club, too," I mentioned after some pleasantries, "We want to do a series on gay Christianity," sadly not my idea,"because so many people think that it's either/or, and I was wondering if you knew anybody who might be interested in talking about it."
"Sure, I would love to talk about it," she answered, smiling, "if you don't mind straight-up answers from the Bible."
"Oh, okay," I nodded, trying to hide my slight apprehension, for anti-gay Christians often love to say that their views are the only biblical views out there.
"You know that, in ancient languages, they didn't have as many words as we have today?" she asked, perhaps sensing what I was thinking.
"Oh, yeah, that makes sense," I said, recalling how other modern languages often don't have as many words as English, since the British had colonies all around the world at one time and picked up words from all over.
"There's this verse in Matthew, Matthew 19:12, where Jesus talks about eunuchs, and a eunuch, in those days, it didn't just refer to someone who's been cut, it also referred to genderqueer people."
"It did?" I repeated, fascinated.
"Yes, so when He talks about eunuchs, He says that some are born eunuchs, others are made eunuchs, because kings would have eunuchs to guard their harems, things like that, and some choose to be eunuchs for God. And in verse six, He says, 'What God has joined together, let no man separate,' so He was talking about eunuch marriages too. And He also says, 'He who is able to accept this, let him accept it,' so He was saying that His message was for those who understood it."
"Really?! Wow, I had no idea!" I have always been fascinated by the "roots" of the bible, especially when it contradicts everything modern Christians hold as sacred, and this has not changed now that I'm an atheist.
"Yes, and He also says, 'Those who are able to hear this, will hear this.' So He's saying that some people will understand what He means, and others won't."
"Wow, that's amazing!" I'm sure that I gave her a little hope that I might not be an atheist forever, since I reacted this way, but I really have no problem with some people's conception of Jesus. I just don't think God is likely to exist, with what we know now, and what we're probably likely to discover in the future.
I had heard something like Jesus endorsing same-sex marriage in the gospels, but it had never all been explained to me so clearly before, I suppose.
"I like to argue about this with people online," she laughed.
"Well, yeah, me, too," I admitted.
"Just get another name, and it's fun," she said.
We talked about bake sales for the Gay-Straight Alliance club, and she talked about all of the elaborate cakes she used to make for her children's special occasions. I wished all Christians who baked had her heart.
She mentioned her atheist son again, at another point in the conversation. "He's always like, 'Bill Nye! Neil DeGrasse Tyson!', and I'm like, 'I like those guys too!" she explained.
"Yeah, Bill Nye's kind of cute," I smiled, a little self-consciously.
"They're both pretty good-looking," she agreed. "I just tell my son, there's just so many universes, and so many galaxies, that it's very likely that there's a transcendent being in at least one of them," she said.
"I guess so," I nodded, not wanting to get into a debate with someone I liked so much already, and who could help two clubs I was involved in. She also had a point, though I'm not sure there is a "transcendent being" intervening in this world.
The topic somehow got onto the afterlife. "I mean, I hope there's an afterlife, it's a little scary to think about not existing," I said, getting a little emotional.
"You won't know it," she shrugged.
"I guess not."
As I left, she shook my hand and regarded me with a motherly smile. She wasn't condescending, though, so I didn't think of it as offensive. Maybe I reminded her of her atheist son or her bi daughter.
I was still shaking my head in disbelief as I walked out of there. It was amazing to me, that someone could dress like Quiverfull and be like Freedhearts (a pro-gay Christian site, which she hadn't heard of, and which I had suggested to her).
Wow, I thought as I left, I didn't know I could be so judgmental.
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys
I also have a Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Atheist-Journeys/1543588489197291?ref=bookmarks
Showing posts with label Feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Feminism. Show all posts
Friday, June 12, 2015
Friday, February 20, 2015
Feminism And Atheism: You Can Change The Label, But It Won't Change Me
I find it utterly ridiculous when other people try to tell me what I am, when they try to redefine or vilify the words I have chosen to describe myself.
I am an atheist, and I think of the time that atheist speaker Matt Dillahunty was interviewed for a Christian radio show. The host said that Dillahunty "denied Christ" and stated that he (the host) thought that atheism was the belief that there was no god, in spite of what Dillahunty says on his own show, The Atheist Experience: that atheism is a lack of belief in a god.
It made me wonder, what was he trying to say about Dillahunty? Was he trying to say that Dillahunty didn't even know what he was, or was he actually trying to put words in his guest's mouth? Was he trying to change what Dillahunty believes or claims, by changing the definition of the word "atheist?"
Or did he claim to know better than Dillahunty what Dillahunty actually believed?
There is a video on Youtube, that I have been unable to find since seeing it the first time, in which a preacher talks to his congregation about his experiences giving speeches at colleges. I paraphrase him here:
"I told them, 'You're not an atheist, because an atheist believes that there is no god, so you're an agnostic...But you're not an agnostic either, because an agnostic believes that the question of God's existence is unknowable...'" (I had never heard of this one! Apparently, he had already proved that this subject was knowable, somehow?) "'...So if you're not an atheist, and you're not an agnostic, what are you? Well, then, you're a seeker, and that's why I'm here today.'"
He got thunderous applause from his church congregation, yet I failed to see how calling someone a "seeker" would make them more open to his arguments for God's existence. He was trying to redefine their identities in such a way that changed their belief systems, or even their thought processes. It almost seemed as if he was trying to deceive people into thinking that they were "seeking" God when they weren't.
Atheists are subject to this kind of label-changing from Christians and other theists, this kind of vilifying, and also often judged by a radical fringe of their movement. And yet, many prominent atheists do these very same things to another vilified group: feminists.
For example, on Youtube alone*:
Jaclyn Glenn, when asked in an interview at the University of Southern California whether she considered herself a feminist, replied that she considered herself "more of a humanist," because she was for everyone's rights, not just women's rights (because she apparently thinks that one can't be for more than one cause at a time, or take more than one label at a time).
The Amazing Atheist thinks that it's okay to call a random woman a "stick with tits" (a Drunken Peasants Podcast reply to a video by Laci Green) because he considered her stupid (and no, I don't agree with reducing a "stupid" man to his genitals, either).
And Mr. Repzion thinks that feminists think it hilarious to see a woman beating up a man for ruining her clothes in a commercial, totally dismisses the idea of the gender wage gap (without at least providing evidence to explain it away, on "Re: Potty Mouthed Baby Feminists"), and reads tweets from radical feminists (for example, one promoting the idea that all men should be castrated) thinking that they represent many or most feminists.
*(I wanted to provide links to all of these videos, but unfortunately can't stand to see them again. They are readily available on Youtube with a simple search.)
Feminism, as feminist, atheist and sex guru Laci Green so perfectly explains here, is the belief that women deserve equal rights and privileges under the law. That is all that it is. Some feminists carry the idea further than that, as some atheists carry their unbelief to extremes and say that all theists are stupid, etc.
But that does not change the underlying idea, the actual definition, of either feminism or atheism, any more than the existence of fundamentalist Christians makes all Christians fundamentalists.
(I say more about feminism, what it means to me, and what I believe it is, or at least could be, in this previous article, The Reason I'm A Feminist (Is Not What You Think))
This is actually the No True Scotsman Fallacy, turned around to apply to the other person.
"A 'true' atheist says that there is no god--just like Psalm 14, isn't that convenient? You're a fool!" (I actually rebut this point here.)
"A 'true' feminist wants to subjugate and castrate all men, therefore feminism is dangerous and isn't necessary."
But the behavior of radicals does not make me radical. I may not be a feminist by some people's definitions, but that does not change anything about what I believe or what I stand for.
I stand for equality. I stand for women's rights. I believe in encouraging women and girls to dream big and reach their highest potential, and I find inspiration in the idea of being a good feminist role model. Beyond that, I can't guarantee that I will agree with every other feminist. I do not believe, for example, that all men should be forcibly castrated (though I do sympathize with the underlying desire to feel safer in a world where men are the stronger sex).
I find it amazing that atheists are an often vilified group, judged for the behavior of a few radicals, but many atheists don't want to be associated with feminism--because of the behavior of a few radicals! Since when have atheists let people's judgements of them interfere with being honest, and applying what they believe is an accurate label to themselves?
Perhaps they don't know or care what feminism actually is? Or perhaps they are okay with being judged for one thing but not another? They will stand with the godless, with the apostates, with the sinners...but not with the women, because that would be too aggressive. (And if you do stand with women, and are for women's rights, then I would daresay that, at least to a degree, you are a feminist yourself!)
I believe that the backlash against feminism, though fueled by the behavior of radicals, is originally caused by three things: guilt, fear, and sexism. Some would dismiss women's problems as simply ridiculous, or think that they would know better than women (or other women) how big or small their problems are. I also believe that, deep down, many people (not just men, as I know that women aren't all good, and men aren't all bad) know that women have gotten a raw deal, especially those women who wished to step outside of their traditional gender roles (e.g., feminists), and some people are afraid of the backlash from such treatment.
This is why I believe, for example, many white people are often uncomfortable talking about racism (guilt, if not for themselves, then for what their "group" has done) and those who do not think of themselves as feminists (and I'm not referring only to men here) are often uncomfortable talking about sexism. In either case, there is sometimes a tendency to pretend that the problem does not exist anymore.
And a lot of people get very upset if someone else uses the "wrong" term to describe themselves. That is true with both feminism and atheism. Certain Christians and theists get mad or correct people if "atheists" say that they simply lack a belief in God, and people who are against "feminism" especially become upset if a "feminist" states that s/he is merely for gender equality.
But why? Why does it matter so much how someone describes themselves? Is it not more important to focus on what people actually believe and stand for? By some people's definitions, I am not a feminist, because I don't believe that women are superior and that we should have "more" rights (though even feminists often don't agree on what exactly equality looks like). Likewise, by some people's definitions, I am not an atheist, because I don't claim to know for a fact that God doesn't exist.
And yet if I use the "wrong" term to describe myself, why is it a big deal? Why are some people offended? If we both stand for the same things, why does it matter? And if we don't, shouldn't we be focused on the issues instead of labels?
See also:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/ (Anything by author Libbey Ann regarding feminism is probably pretty good.)
http://www.secularwoman.org/bias_against_feminists
*(I wanted to provide links to all of these videos, but unfortunately can't stand to see them again. They are readily available on Youtube with a simple search.)
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourney
I am an atheist, and I think of the time that atheist speaker Matt Dillahunty was interviewed for a Christian radio show. The host said that Dillahunty "denied Christ" and stated that he (the host) thought that atheism was the belief that there was no god, in spite of what Dillahunty says on his own show, The Atheist Experience: that atheism is a lack of belief in a god.
It made me wonder, what was he trying to say about Dillahunty? Was he trying to say that Dillahunty didn't even know what he was, or was he actually trying to put words in his guest's mouth? Was he trying to change what Dillahunty believes or claims, by changing the definition of the word "atheist?"
Or did he claim to know better than Dillahunty what Dillahunty actually believed?
There is a video on Youtube, that I have been unable to find since seeing it the first time, in which a preacher talks to his congregation about his experiences giving speeches at colleges. I paraphrase him here:
"I told them, 'You're not an atheist, because an atheist believes that there is no god, so you're an agnostic...But you're not an agnostic either, because an agnostic believes that the question of God's existence is unknowable...'" (I had never heard of this one! Apparently, he had already proved that this subject was knowable, somehow?) "'...So if you're not an atheist, and you're not an agnostic, what are you? Well, then, you're a seeker, and that's why I'm here today.'"
He got thunderous applause from his church congregation, yet I failed to see how calling someone a "seeker" would make them more open to his arguments for God's existence. He was trying to redefine their identities in such a way that changed their belief systems, or even their thought processes. It almost seemed as if he was trying to deceive people into thinking that they were "seeking" God when they weren't.
Atheists are subject to this kind of label-changing from Christians and other theists, this kind of vilifying, and also often judged by a radical fringe of their movement. And yet, many prominent atheists do these very same things to another vilified group: feminists.
For example, on Youtube alone*:
Jaclyn Glenn, when asked in an interview at the University of Southern California whether she considered herself a feminist, replied that she considered herself "more of a humanist," because she was for everyone's rights, not just women's rights (because she apparently thinks that one can't be for more than one cause at a time, or take more than one label at a time).
The Amazing Atheist thinks that it's okay to call a random woman a "stick with tits" (a Drunken Peasants Podcast reply to a video by Laci Green) because he considered her stupid (and no, I don't agree with reducing a "stupid" man to his genitals, either).
And Mr. Repzion thinks that feminists think it hilarious to see a woman beating up a man for ruining her clothes in a commercial, totally dismisses the idea of the gender wage gap (without at least providing evidence to explain it away, on "Re: Potty Mouthed Baby Feminists"), and reads tweets from radical feminists (for example, one promoting the idea that all men should be castrated) thinking that they represent many or most feminists.
*(I wanted to provide links to all of these videos, but unfortunately can't stand to see them again. They are readily available on Youtube with a simple search.)
Feminism, as feminist, atheist and sex guru Laci Green so perfectly explains here, is the belief that women deserve equal rights and privileges under the law. That is all that it is. Some feminists carry the idea further than that, as some atheists carry their unbelief to extremes and say that all theists are stupid, etc.
But that does not change the underlying idea, the actual definition, of either feminism or atheism, any more than the existence of fundamentalist Christians makes all Christians fundamentalists.
(I say more about feminism, what it means to me, and what I believe it is, or at least could be, in this previous article, The Reason I'm A Feminist (Is Not What You Think))
This is actually the No True Scotsman Fallacy, turned around to apply to the other person.
"A 'true' atheist says that there is no god--just like Psalm 14, isn't that convenient? You're a fool!" (I actually rebut this point here.)
"A 'true' feminist wants to subjugate and castrate all men, therefore feminism is dangerous and isn't necessary."
But the behavior of radicals does not make me radical. I may not be a feminist by some people's definitions, but that does not change anything about what I believe or what I stand for.
I stand for equality. I stand for women's rights. I believe in encouraging women and girls to dream big and reach their highest potential, and I find inspiration in the idea of being a good feminist role model. Beyond that, I can't guarantee that I will agree with every other feminist. I do not believe, for example, that all men should be forcibly castrated (though I do sympathize with the underlying desire to feel safer in a world where men are the stronger sex).
I find it amazing that atheists are an often vilified group, judged for the behavior of a few radicals, but many atheists don't want to be associated with feminism--because of the behavior of a few radicals! Since when have atheists let people's judgements of them interfere with being honest, and applying what they believe is an accurate label to themselves?
Perhaps they don't know or care what feminism actually is? Or perhaps they are okay with being judged for one thing but not another? They will stand with the godless, with the apostates, with the sinners...but not with the women, because that would be too aggressive. (And if you do stand with women, and are for women's rights, then I would daresay that, at least to a degree, you are a feminist yourself!)
I believe that the backlash against feminism, though fueled by the behavior of radicals, is originally caused by three things: guilt, fear, and sexism. Some would dismiss women's problems as simply ridiculous, or think that they would know better than women (or other women) how big or small their problems are. I also believe that, deep down, many people (not just men, as I know that women aren't all good, and men aren't all bad) know that women have gotten a raw deal, especially those women who wished to step outside of their traditional gender roles (e.g., feminists), and some people are afraid of the backlash from such treatment.
This is why I believe, for example, many white people are often uncomfortable talking about racism (guilt, if not for themselves, then for what their "group" has done) and those who do not think of themselves as feminists (and I'm not referring only to men here) are often uncomfortable talking about sexism. In either case, there is sometimes a tendency to pretend that the problem does not exist anymore.
And a lot of people get very upset if someone else uses the "wrong" term to describe themselves. That is true with both feminism and atheism. Certain Christians and theists get mad or correct people if "atheists" say that they simply lack a belief in God, and people who are against "feminism" especially become upset if a "feminist" states that s/he is merely for gender equality.
But why? Why does it matter so much how someone describes themselves? Is it not more important to focus on what people actually believe and stand for? By some people's definitions, I am not a feminist, because I don't believe that women are superior and that we should have "more" rights (though even feminists often don't agree on what exactly equality looks like). Likewise, by some people's definitions, I am not an atheist, because I don't claim to know for a fact that God doesn't exist.
And yet if I use the "wrong" term to describe myself, why is it a big deal? Why are some people offended? If we both stand for the same things, why does it matter? And if we don't, shouldn't we be focused on the issues instead of labels?
See also:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/ (Anything by author Libbey Ann regarding feminism is probably pretty good.)
http://www.secularwoman.org/bias_against_feminists
*(I wanted to provide links to all of these videos, but unfortunately can't stand to see them again. They are readily available on Youtube with a simple search.)
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourney
Thursday, August 21, 2014
The Reason I'm A Feminist (Is Not What You Think)
"Feminism" is a nowadays a dirty word to a lot of people, as it is sometimes associated with victimhood, perceived slights and controlling what others can and cannot say. It often has a bad reputation, and with merit. But it can also be used as a force for good, as it has been in my life.
Feminism is not just about legal rights and linguistics, or about what society is doing wrong. I consider myself a feminist not because of the crimes I perceive to be committed against me, but because of what I aspire to be. Feminism is my inspiration to become a better person and a better woman--and feminism specifically says that as a woman, I can become a success, I can achieve my goals, and I can become more confident and comfortable in my own skin. Feminism makes such inspirational ideas accessible to women who would otherwise wonder how exactly these ideas would apply to them in our society.
Whenever I have to make an important decision or settle on a course of action, my first thought is, "What would a strong woman do? What would a confident woman do?" These questions are what give me the courage to do what is necessary. I also think of taking a stand as "summoning my inner feminist." Without feminism we would not have the idea of female empowerment, and my life would be very different.
Feminism can make the timid woman braver, the self-critical woman more accepting of herself, and the shy woman more outspoken. I am living proof of that. I would not have this blog if it were not for feminism. Different people are motivated by different ideas or concepts. I am motivated by the idea of being a strong, feminist woman. Feminism has given me something to aspire to, and a philosophy to live by.
I carry myself like a feminist role model, not necessarily with the intention to crush the patriarchy or shatter the glass ceiling. I define success and happiness on my own terms, with money and power being only one factor, and try to help people and animals whenever I can. That's what I believe should be synonymous with the word "feminism."
I believe it is entirely appropriate to refer to oneself as a feminist when discussing women's issues, as when discussing animal rights one may refer to herself as an "animal rights activist," "animal lover," or "pro-animal rights." When discussing women's issues especially, I don't believe that this term is exclusionary at all, as using the term "animal rights activist" when discussing animal welfare would not preclude one from being for human rights.
There is no one word to encompass everything as far as human and animal rights are concerned. Even the word "humanist" implies a philosophy that is beyond human rights, and could even be construed as exclusionary to animals.
Most people in society would not advocate against women's rights, or for actually harming women (at least, not on purpose). But rather than making the concept of feminism unnecessary, I believe that this actually means that most people are feminist to a degree, though they may not choose to describe themselves as such or not wish to be associated with its negative aspects.
Of course if others choose not to use the title of "feminist," I do not blame them. The word will always have negative connotations for some, and others may be motivated by a different ideal.
As human beings, and, if we choose to describe ourselves as such, as feminists, it is our responsibility to try to communicate as clearly as possible; however there will still be some who accidentally or purposefully misunderstand our intentions. If, after trying to communicate that we are not against men, but pro-woman, and that such a term does not exclude also being pro-man, some still choose to twist our words, that is no longer our problem.
A movement should not be defined by outsiders. A few men, or women, who misunderstand our intentions does not take away what feminism is. Feminism is merely the empowerment of women and girls--or at least, it can be. It should be. I believe it can be saved, and that it is worth saving. That is why I think of myself as a feminist.
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys
Feminism is not just about legal rights and linguistics, or about what society is doing wrong. I consider myself a feminist not because of the crimes I perceive to be committed against me, but because of what I aspire to be. Feminism is my inspiration to become a better person and a better woman--and feminism specifically says that as a woman, I can become a success, I can achieve my goals, and I can become more confident and comfortable in my own skin. Feminism makes such inspirational ideas accessible to women who would otherwise wonder how exactly these ideas would apply to them in our society.
Whenever I have to make an important decision or settle on a course of action, my first thought is, "What would a strong woman do? What would a confident woman do?" These questions are what give me the courage to do what is necessary. I also think of taking a stand as "summoning my inner feminist." Without feminism we would not have the idea of female empowerment, and my life would be very different.
Feminism can make the timid woman braver, the self-critical woman more accepting of herself, and the shy woman more outspoken. I am living proof of that. I would not have this blog if it were not for feminism. Different people are motivated by different ideas or concepts. I am motivated by the idea of being a strong, feminist woman. Feminism has given me something to aspire to, and a philosophy to live by.
I carry myself like a feminist role model, not necessarily with the intention to crush the patriarchy or shatter the glass ceiling. I define success and happiness on my own terms, with money and power being only one factor, and try to help people and animals whenever I can. That's what I believe should be synonymous with the word "feminism."
I believe it is entirely appropriate to refer to oneself as a feminist when discussing women's issues, as when discussing animal rights one may refer to herself as an "animal rights activist," "animal lover," or "pro-animal rights." When discussing women's issues especially, I don't believe that this term is exclusionary at all, as using the term "animal rights activist" when discussing animal welfare would not preclude one from being for human rights.
There is no one word to encompass everything as far as human and animal rights are concerned. Even the word "humanist" implies a philosophy that is beyond human rights, and could even be construed as exclusionary to animals.
Most people in society would not advocate against women's rights, or for actually harming women (at least, not on purpose). But rather than making the concept of feminism unnecessary, I believe that this actually means that most people are feminist to a degree, though they may not choose to describe themselves as such or not wish to be associated with its negative aspects.
Of course if others choose not to use the title of "feminist," I do not blame them. The word will always have negative connotations for some, and others may be motivated by a different ideal.
As human beings, and, if we choose to describe ourselves as such, as feminists, it is our responsibility to try to communicate as clearly as possible; however there will still be some who accidentally or purposefully misunderstand our intentions. If, after trying to communicate that we are not against men, but pro-woman, and that such a term does not exclude also being pro-man, some still choose to twist our words, that is no longer our problem.
A movement should not be defined by outsiders. A few men, or women, who misunderstand our intentions does not take away what feminism is. Feminism is merely the empowerment of women and girls--or at least, it can be. It should be. I believe it can be saved, and that it is worth saving. That is why I think of myself as a feminist.
What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)