UPDATE: Ron Lindsay has apologized for his remarks. I have accepted his apology.
Parsing the Center For Inquiry’s Non-Statement about Ron Lindsay and the Women in Secularism 2 Conference
So CFI has issued a statement, in response to the controversy over Ron Lindsay’s opening remarks at the recent Women in Secularism 2 conference.
No. Correct that. CFI has issued a non-statement, in non-response to the controversy over Ron Lindsay’s insulting, contemptuous, patronizing, wildly inaccurate, grossly unprofessional opening remarks at the recent Women in Secularism 2 conference, in which he used his position of authority with the organization to scold the attendees and speakers, give them an ill-informed lecture on the history of feminism, and request that they talk about sexism and misogyny with more moderation and respect.
Background, in case you haven’t been following this:
A Blatant Misrepresentation — And An Insulting One: The Content of Ron Lindsay’s WiS2 Talk
He Treated Us With Contempt: The Context of Ron Lindsay’s WiS2 Talk
Here is their non-statement, in full:
Center for Inquiry Board of Directors Statement on the CEO and the Women in Secularism 2 Conference
The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values.
The Center for Inquiry, including its CEO, is dedicated to advancing the status of women and promoting women’s issues, and this was the motivation for its sponsorship of the two Women in Secularism conferences. The CFI Board wishes to express its unhappiness with the controversy surrounding the recent Women in Secularism Conference 2.
CFI believes in respectful debate and dialogue. We appreciate the many insights and varied opinions communicated to us. Going forward, we will endeavor to work with all elements of the secular movement to enhance our common values and strengthen our solidarity as we struggle together for full equality and respect for women around the world.
I would like to take a moment to parse this statement.
Center for Inquiry Board of Directors Statement on the CEO and the Women in Secularism 2 Conference
“The CEO.” Note that nowhere in this statement do they mention Ron Lindsay by name — even though this entire controversy was about his words and actions.
Translation: “The CFI board is going to start right out of the gate by declining to speak clearly and directly about this matter, and by prioritizing spin control over content. Also, we’re not going to make it easy for people to Google this.”
The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values.
Translation: “Gee, we’re awesome.”
The Center for Inquiry, including its CEO, is dedicated to advancing the status of women and promoting women’s issues, and this was the motivation for its sponsorship of the two Women in Secularism conferences.
Translation: “Gee, we’re awesome. We are especially awesome when it comes to women’s rights. See, we put on this conference and everything! We therefore are totally feminist and stuff. So stop yelling at us about how our CEO acted like a sexist asshole and treated the feminists in this movement with contempt.”
The CFI Board wishes to express its unhappiness with the controversy…
Okay. This is an important one.
“Its unhappiness with the controversy.”
Not its unhappiness with Ron Lindsay’s statement, or with the context of this statement, or with any of his follow-up statements. Its unhappiness with the controversy.
Translation: “The CFI Board wishes to express its unhappiness with the people who raised a shitstorm about this incident, and with the fact that so many people got so pissed off about it. This has been a huge pain in the ass for us, and we’re really irritated about it — but we don’t actually understand why people are so angry. Either that, or we don’t care.”
…surrounding the recent Women in Secularism Conference 2.
And this is another important one.
“…surrounding the recent Women in Secularism Conference 2.”
Surrounding the conference.
Not “surrounding Ron Lindsay’s opening remarks at the conference.” Not “surrounding Ron Lindsay’s subsequent writings defending these remarks.” Surrounding the conference.
I am going to spell this out as calmly and clearly as I can: The problem was not the conference. The conference was incredible. The conference was first-rate. The conference was one of the best I’ve ever attended… and I’ve attended a lot. The problem was with Ron Lindsay’s opening remarks, and with his subsequent writings defending these remarks.
So. Translation: “The CFI board wishes to use misdirection, equivocation, obfuscation, and corporate bafflegab to deflect attention away from the anger at Ron Lindsay, and to re-direct it towards the conference itself.”
CFI believes in respectful debate and dialogue. We appreciate the many insights and varied opinions communicated to us.
Translation: “The CFI board is taking the cowardly position of valuing debate on important issues that concern the community, without being willing to actually take a stand on these issues. To assist us in this endeavor, we are going to create false equivalencies and use the golden mean fallacy.”
Going forward, we will endeavor to work with all elements of the secular movement to enhance our common values and strengthen our solidarity…
And this is a really, really important one. Possibly the most important one of all of them.
“We are going to work with all elements of the secular movement.” “Enhance our common values and strengthen our solidarity.”
Translation: “Fuck the divisive feminists who want us to disavow the abusively misogynist element in this movement.”
Translation: “We are willing to work with all elements of the secular movement — including the ones who have been targeting a persistent campaign of hatred, harassment, abuse, and threats of violence, rape, and death towards feminist women in this movement. And including the ones who respond to this hatred, harassment, abuse, and threats with dismissal, denial, trivialization, hyper-skepticism, false equivalencies, derailing, changing the subject, and accusations of divisiveness. After all — some of these people are big names, or big donors to our organization, and we can’t afford to alienate them! We expect the feminists in this movement to make peace and play nice with the people who have been harassing, abusing, and threatening them — as well with the people who have been ignoring, denying, deflecting, and trivializing this issue. And we expect the feminists in this movement to stop making us uncomfortable with their demands that we take a stand on this.”
… as we struggle together for full equality and respect for women around the world.
Translation: “But really — we’re awesome! We’re in favor of women’s rights and stuff! We’re just not willing to actually do anything about it that’s in any way difficult.”
Translation of the entire non-statement: “We don’t see anything wrong with what Ron Lindsay said, or the context in which he said it. At any rate, we’re not willing to publicly acknowledge that we see anything wrong with what Ron Lindsay said or the context in which he said it. We are deeply unhappy that we have to deal with this controversy. We really wish this whole thing would just die down and go away. But we’re not willing to do anything at all in response to it. We are not willing to take even a symbolic action of censuring Lindsay, or asking him to apologize, or apologizing on his behalf. We are not willing to make any gesture at all indicating that Lindsay’s words and actions in this incident do not represent CFI, and that this is not the direction CFI intends to take in the future. So we’re going to issue a bland, equivocating, weaselly, double-speak statement that doesn’t address the issue in any substantial way, or even in any insubstantial and symbolic way.”
I’m currently writing a separate statement on what I’m doing in response to this, and what I’m going to suggest you do. But I wanted to get this out right away.