The anti-Atheism+ crowd, the ones who go around complaining about it everywhere, like to suggest that everyone sees things the same way they do. In fact, they say this to each other a rather lot, reinforce the idea even.
Every once in a while, however, that idea comes up against a fresh audience. It did just that yesterday, on a MetaFilter thread dedicated to Annalee Newitz’s io9 post on conferences and conventions dealing with harassment. This being MetaFilter, the discussion was pretty good. In fact, it was better than I’ve seen MetaFilter on harassment, but they have been talking about the topic almost as much as the rest of us lately.
After a good chunk of mostly respectful and non-derailed talk, up showed Decani, whom some of you will recognize as Jack Rawlinson.
Re the only one of these three I actually know a lot about:
Though some would cast this as a war between sexism and feminism, it isn’t that simple.
You can say that again. And the only people casting it in that way are those on the Watson/Skepchick side.
There are women and feminists on both sides of the debate.
Aye, and plenty of them on the non-Watson/Skepchick side, too. And the numbers are increasing as Atheism+ spins ever further out into la-la land.
The divide is between people who believe feminism is integral to skepticism (Watson) and those who think it’s irrelevant (Dawkins).
No, it really isn’t. That shows an incredibly superficial reading of the situation.
Yeah, I know. It all looks so familiar, not to mention multiply debunked. But does it work on a novel crowd?
For that, you’ll have to read the rest of the thread. SPOILERS: At least until the flounce.
