Help Me Go to Women in Secularism 3?


Yes, despite the shenanigans at last year’s Women in Secularism conference, I very much want to attend this year’s. Why? Well, there are a few reasons.

  • Have you seen the lineup of speakers? It’s outstanding:Lauren Becker, Ophelia Benson, Lindsay Beyerstein, Soraya Chemaly, Heina Dadabhoy, Barbara Ehrenreich, Debbie Goddard, Rebecca Goldstein, Candace Gorham, Melody Hensley, Susan Jacoby, Sarah Jones, Zinnia Jones, Amanda Knief, Leighann Lord, Miri Mogilevsky, Taslima Nasreen, Katha Pollitt, Amy Davis Roth, Mandy Velez, Lindy West
  • There is no conference like Women in Secularism for the networking. Each year I’ve attended, I’ve met women doing outstanding work. We’ve forged relationships that have helped all of us accomplish more for the atheist movement and our individual atheist communities, as well as have support when we’ve needed someone outside our own communities to talk to.
  • CFI is hosting Secular Celebrant training in D.C. the day before the conference this year. Minnesota Atheists have already agreed to sponsor me for the training fee. Given our work right now to change the law in Minnesota, this training is important to me as education in the type of training other groups offer and as education for the role I’m seeking as a certified atheist wedding celebrant.

However, I’m still not working. I have an odd set of skills, and I’m very publicly an atheist activist. While I can’t be sure this last fact has been a factor, I have had odd things happen in my search, such as a recruiter who was very eager to talk to me, then didn’t return my call or email. Whatever the reason, I can’t afford this on my own this year. This is where you come in if you’d like to. I have a donation button in the side bar under “Support Almost Diamonds” and another at the bottom of this post. I’m not going through Indiegogo or one of those sites, I’m still happy to offer rewards for donations. Here are the ones that came to me off the top of my head. Please feel free to suggest others in the comments.

  • $1 donation level–You will receive my thanks in a post just before the start of the conference. If you choose this level, please use the ability to add a comment with your donation to let me know what name you want to be credited under.
  • $10 donation level–You’ll receive my thanks as above. I will also produce a blog post addressing the argument of your choice. This can be a bad argument you expect I’ll refute or a good argument you think I can do justice to so you can link to it later when the topic comes up again. While you control the topic, my take on the argument will be my own. This will be delivered before the conference as long as I receive the topic by April 1. You can also use the comment function to request this, or you can email me using the email button in my sidebar.
  • $25 donation level–You’ll receive my thanks as above. I will also produce a blog post addressing the scientific paper of your choice in psychology or related topics. This is limited by my ability to access the paper, but I do have resources for that. While you control the topic, my take on the paper will be my own (with help from experts if I need it). I anticipate these will be delivered at about the rate of one per week, but it will depend on how much I have to educate myself first. First come, first served. You can also use the comment function to request this, or you can email me using the email button in my sidebar.
  • $50 donation level–You’ll receive my thanks as above. I will also produce a blog post addressing the men’s rights, anti-feminist, theist, or politically right-wing article of your choice. In other words, this is your chance to try to make my head explode, which is why it costs more. While you control the topic, my take on the paper will be my own (with help from experts if I need it). I anticipate these will also be delivered at about the rate of one per week. First come, first served. You can also use the comment function to request this, or you can email me using the email button in my sidebar.

What else might you want for donating?





Comments

  1. Radi says

    Donated.

    I am looking forward to a wonderful series of videos and blog posts from you and others about and at WiS3, and hopefully, no fuckery like last year from CSI honchos. I hope you all have a wonderful time there! Have some extra fun for me, please? :-)

    Unfortunately, I won’t be able to get to WiS3 because of a family obligation. A fun obligation, though – a one-week family reunion on the island of Crete, which I cannot divorce from Alistair McLean’s “The Guns of Navarone”, no matter how misogynistic I now know both the novel and the movie that is based on it, the movie FAR more so. But family vacation in Crete, followed by a week in England, where my sis lives, and hopefully a trip to Ireland AND Scotland in that week. But back on topic… I dearly wish I had the funds to do both Crete/England AND WiS, but I don’t.

  2. ajb47 says

    I hope you have a good time while you’re there. I look forward to reading about the interesting things you encounter and experience.

  3. thefemalearchetype says

    Donated. No need to specifically write a post of my choosing, I’m just really excited you are going to WIS again this year.

  4. Pieter B, FCD says

    No need to write one for me either, at least right now. Looking forward to seeing you (and everyone else in May).

  5. hjhornbeck says

    Mmm, this is rather convenient for me.

    At the end of my lecture, I hinted the next could tackle rape culture and objectification. Lately, though, I’ve been thinking of swapping the latter area for economic claims; I originally shied away due to the complexity of the subject, but I since think I’ve found a decent approach. And I can’t deny the massive amount of published data (ie. Becker [1957] and Weichselbaumer [2003]), the potential for computer simulations, the strategic value of covering those claims, nor that it’s an area I have some familiarity with (see Hornbeck [2013]).

    But that leaves me torn. I’d thought objectification lacked a solid body of data to back it up, but learned I was dead wrong there. There’s a very decent number of publications from psychology and the social sciences, yet a quick search of your archives comes up empty. It helps too that a foundational paper is publicly available:

    Fredrickson, Barbara L., and Tomi‐Ann Roberts. “Objectification theory.” Psychology of women quarterly 21.2 (1997): 173-206.

    So, how about blogging about either the above paper, or the ten-year review by Moradi [2008] linked just prior?

  6. hjhornbeck says

    Blah, that’s what I get for writing while distracted. Round two:

    There’s a very decent number of publications from psychology and the social sciences. At the same time, a quick search of your archives comes up empty suggesting you’ve never covered the subject yourself. It helps too that a foundational paper is publicly available:

    There, much better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>