Compared to the rest of the tree of life, your sex life is boring

Man, the news seems to be Animals After Dark the last couple of days. As a sex-obsessed biologist, I can’t exactly complain. Here are some neat stories:

  • Male wasp spiders only get one chance at love, since females eat them after mating. How romantic. It used to be believed that males preferred larger, more fertile females, but it looks like what male spiders really dig are virgins. I guess it’s not a bad strategy when the first male to mate with a female is most successful. Well, as long as he remembers to snap off his genital inside of her to form a chastity belt. (What, did I make some of you uncomfortable? Look, I had to stare at a scary spider to read that article for you, so shush)
  • Move over, Mary. A female boa constrictor has given virgin birth twenty two baby snakes. Parthenogenesis – the development of an embryo without fertilization from a male – has been documented in reptiles before, but this case is unique. You’re probably familiar with how sex is determined in mammals – XX are female, XY are male. It many reptiles and birds, the homogametic (same sex chromosome) sex is reversed – ZZ are male, ZW are female. The surprising thing is that all of the virgin offspring were WW, which was previously thought to be nonviable. They are all essentially half clones of their mother, resulting in a duplication of just half of her genome. That, or God is sending an interesting message with his species choice for the second coming.

Why I care when the media represents atheists as sexist

This comment by Amber Surface from my earlier post was so spot on, I wanted to highlight it here:

What I find most disconcerting about pieces like this is that I know some young woman is sitting at her computer, wondering if she should even bother coming out of the religious closet.

She notes the similarities between her religion and new atheism. Her religion minimizes her contributions as a human being, but this article portrays the “new atheist movement” as doing the same. She can’t find a strong, female leader in her religion because of the patriarchal roots, but this article shows that she likely couldn’t find a female leader to whom she could relate, either. Her religion reduces her to chattel and objectifies her, but so do the new atheists with their “sexiest female atheist” lists.

She notes the differences. Her religion offers her community, but new atheism doesn’t seem to want to welcome her or provide a social network. Her religion is generally accepted by society and her friends and family, but new atheism obviously generates distrust and dislike.

The article in Ms., a largely respected and once incredibly progressively feminist magazine, illuminates these issues to help her decide. It doesn’t seem that difficult a choice once some journalist presents the arguments in this manner.

We have the potential to reach so many women when something like Ms. Magazine talks about atheism. I’m not even asking for editorials that try to convince people to become atheists. Right now I’d settle for honest representation of the atheist movement and acknowledgment that female leaders do exist. Making just one more person feel less alone in their disbelief is worth it.

But no, instead they’ve probably scared off the female atheists, not to mention ones who “aren’t religious” or who are generally skeptical of organized religion. And those new female allies are going to have a hard time finding blogs like mine when Ms. Magazine continues to delete (or moderate?) every comment that links to my rebuttal post.

Journalism at its finest.

EDIT: Some readers say comments are finally getting through moderation. I still can’t see any, but it may be an issue on my computer.

I was just contacted by Ms. Magazine about doing a guest post on the same blog about women in the atheist movement to “rectify” the lack of female atheists in the original article. Obviously I’m taking them up on their offer – now I just have to try not to screw it up.

Atheist Christmas Carol contest winners!

Today is the release of the American edition of The Atheist’s Guide to Christmas! It features a bunch of new authors, including yours truly. A week ago I started a contest to give away a couple free copies of the book:

Write new lyrics for an old Christmas carol that have a godless or scientific theme.

All of your entries were so brilliant that I had an extremely hard time picking the winners! Please forgive me if yours wasn’t chosen – it was tough. Here are the three winners who will be receiving copies of the book:

Winner #1: Chabneruk

To the tune of “The 12 Days of Christmas”:

“On the first day a big mess exploded loud and free – remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the second day the suns and the planets came to be. No lifeforms yet,
but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the third day volcanoes erupted ceaselessly. ‘Twas pretty hot, no lifeforms yet, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the fourth day the landmasses grew above the sea. No God involved, still pretty hot, no lifeforms yet, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the fifth day the first cells swam around with glee. Naaaature is hot! No God involved, weather now fine, lifeforms are there, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the sixth day there’s backbones and eyes for all to see. Pretty cool stuff, Naaature is hot! No God involved, weather now fine, lifeforms are glad, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the seventh day some lifeforms came ashore to pee. They had legs a-running, pretty cool stuff, Naaature is hot! No God involved, weather now fine, lifeforms are glad, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the eight day the lizards ruled the land and sea. Introduce extinction, legs a-running no help, pretty cool stuff, Naaature is hot! No God involved, weather rather cold, lifeforms are few, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the ninth day some pre-apes decided to stand free. Soon they were dancing, around camp fires, with legs a-running, pretty cool stuff, Naaature is hot! No God involved, weather still cold, lifeforms have fun, but remember the Big Bang Theory.

On the tenth day the first priest invented idiocy. Gods everywhere now, they want us dancing, with legs a-hurting, oh, what a shame – aaall without proof! Gods getting pop’lar, weather now warm, lifeforms do pray, no one knows the Big Bang Theory.

On the eleventh day the churches controlled the minds unfree. Just one God, which one is right, they want crusaders, with swords a-slinging, oh, what a shame – aaall without proof! Monotheism, weather quite dark, lifeforms do pray, no one knows the Big Bang Theory.

*pitch upwards*

On the twelfth day the clever ones finally broke free! No more Gods, but atheism, science is right, tell the believers: “No swords a-slinging, no holy war, Naaature is hot!” Jen writes her blog, weather is sunny, lifeforms shall think and we all love the Big Bang Theoryyyyyy!”

Winner #2: Ray

To the tune of “Angels We Have Heard on High”:

We four horsemen honestly are
Unimpressed by Yaweh so far.
Explanation for creation?
Really, he’s quite subpar.

Chorus:
O-oh
You can wonder at the night
You can call yourself a “Bright”;
Not a smidgen of religion
Do you need for living right!

Harris:
If you think some cultural swill
Makes it right to torture and kill,
That’s perverse, not just diverse:
Maybe you’re mentally ill.

[Chorus]

Dennett:
Made by evolution are we,
Built to act beneficently.
Since we’re soulless, we control us:
We can be truly free

[Chorus]

Dawkins:
Nature’s strange selection machine
Need not make you nasty or mean
Or a creep. The nicest people
Came from a selfish gene

[Chorus]

Hitchens:
Humans shouldn’t cower or crawl;
Faith just makes us hateful and small,
We’ll start growing strong by knowing
God isn’t great at all!

Grand Prize Winner: Quester

Really, there’s no difference in the prizes, but every one of Quester’s songs cracked me up, so I thought they deserved special distinction:

To tune of “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”:

There’s Mercury, Saturn,
Neptune and Venus,
Jupiter, Earth,
Mars and Uranus,
but someone has morphed
our ninth planet into a dwarf.

Pluto’s a minor planet
according to the IAU.
Better not criticize them,
or they will redefine you, too.
Eris may be more massive
and Ceres trying to compete
but now that we’ve demoted Pluto
our solar system’s incomplete.

From 1930 to 2006
Pluto was planet nine
but a recalculation of it’s mass
put it’s status in decline.

Still, Pluto is special
Maybe soon IAU’ll agree
To re-redefine the moon Charon
and Pluto as a binary!

To the tune of “Silver Bells”:

Get yourself some ferrous metals-
nickel, iron, cobalt, steel,-
each of these
are attracted
to magnets.

They have north poles
and have south poles.
Opposite poles attract.
But can anyone tell me how magnets work?

Miracles. Miracles?
That might satisfy a clown posse.
Hypothesize. Experiment.
Maybe we’ll find out the truth!

Running current
through a wire
creates a magnetic field
so this may involve
moving electrons.

The Ampere model
of the magnet
presumes circular bound currents,
but who even knows what
that means?

Miracles. Miracles.
These mark the place we have stopped thinking.
Magnetic force? Magnetic fields?
Reality can blow us away!

To the tune of “Santa Claus is Coming to Town”:

“You better watch out
You better beware,”
Sedighi warns us
all to take care,
“women are immodestly dressed.”

“They corrupt chasity,
lead young men astray,
the power of their cleavage causes moral decay.
Women are immodestly dressed.”

Can miniskirts cause earthquakes
as Sedighi insists?
Let’s put this thory to the test!
What scientist could resist?

So, pull on short shorts,
or something tight-fit,
choose your best weapons
and laugh for a bit.
Maybe we can cause a boobquake!

Congratulations to Chabneruk, Ray, and Quester! Like I said, it was really difficult picking three, since you guys did an excellent job. Here are some honorable mentions that I also enjoyed:

Even though UncountablyFinite couldn’t get his camera to sync, I was impressed by his singing ability!

Elizabeth Anne also impressed me with her singing ability, and got bonus points for raunchy lyrics:

EdenBunny‘s songs make the Grinch in me giggle:

To the tune of “Oh Christmas Tree”

Oh solstice tree, oh solstice tree,
Leftover ancient ritual,
It seems to be
The masses re-
-spect it ‘cos it’s habitual.

Oh what a joy to kill a tree,
Expend much electricity,
Eventually, the waste will be,
Disposed of quite expediently.

Oh solstice tree, what fun to see
Your pointless luminosity.
Oh solstice tree, oh solstice tree,
Environmental atrocity.

To the tune of “Deck the Halls”

Fa la la la la, la la la la.
In our public education,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Answer reason with defiance,
Fa la la, la la la, la la la.
Totally ignoring science,
Fa la la la la, la la, la la.
Kids believe what they are to-old,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Earth is six thousand years o-old,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
God used melanin to da-amn,
Fa la la, la la la, la la la,
All the descendants of Ha-am,
Fa la la la la, la la, la la.

Schools can make religious pitches,
Fa la la la la, la la la la,
Kill the homos and the witches,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
We are normal and they’re o-odd
Fa la la, la la la, la la la,
Because that’s the word of Go-od,
Fa la la la la, la la, la la.

Good thing Ray won with his other song, because I think she momentarily forgot who was judging this contest:

To the tune of “Must Be Santa Claus”

Who’s got a beak and a bunch of arms?
Squid’s got a beak and a bunch of arms.

Who wins our love with its squiddly charms?
Squid wins our love with its squiddly charms.

Beak and arms, squidly charms:

Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo- cephalopods!

Who lies around in Jurassic shales?
Squid lies around in Jurassic shales.

Who’s inspiration for Lovecraft’s tales?
Squid’s inspiration for Lovecraft’s tales.

Beak and arms, squiddly charms,
Long time gone, Cthulhu ftagn:

Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo- cephalopods!

Who washes up on the ocean shores?
Squid washes up on the ocean shores.

Who likes to shoot spermatophores?
Squid likes to shoot spermatophores.

Beak and arms, squiddly charms,
Long time gone, Cthulhu ftagn,
Ocean wrecks, freaky sex:

Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo- cephalopods!

Who’s in the order called Teuthida?
Squid’s in the order called Teuthida.

Who’s also found in Spirulida?
Squid’s also found in Spirulida.

Who’s got a cell of enormous size?
Squid’s got a cell of enormous size.

Whose cell has won the Nobel prize?
Squid’s cell has won the Nobel prize.

Beak and arms, squiddly charms,
Long time gone, Cthulhu ftagn,
Ocean wrecks, freaky sex,
Teuthid taxon, giant axon:

Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo-
Must be cephalo- cephalopods!

And finally, Fredjs73 wins the award for “Putting Your Fantasies About a Blogger To Verse And Making Her Laugh Instead of Run Away.” A dangerous award to attempt, but exciting to win, I’m sure (his bashful pre-apologizing and my twisted sense of humor helped).

T’was the night before Christmas and all through the flat
Not a Guinness was pouring, from neither bottle nor vat.
The stockings were hung by the bedpost with care
While the fresh scent of Astroglide hung through the air.

The heathens were nestled all snug on the floor
While visions of Jager Bombs tormented them more.
Sweet Blag Hag in her blanky and I in the buff
Had just finished up from some lovin’ ‘n’ stuff.

When out on the street there arose such a clatter
I tripped o’er my cockring to see what was the matter.
Away to the door with my hands on my junk
For to not shock my old neighbor, Miss Gwendoline Funk!

I tore open the door and felt chills in me nuts
Without care, without worry for appearing a klutz.
When, what to my unsober eyes should appear,
But an ol’ rusted nineteen-ninety-nine blue Cavalier!

With a little old driver, so lively and wired,
I knew it a moment – it’s ol’ PZ Myers!
More rapid than vertebrates, his coursers they came
Through his full and grey beard he did call them by name.

“Now, Sepia, Architeuthis, Cuttlebone and Radula!
On Nautilus, Onykia, and smug Argonauta!
Go up to the porch to that uncircumsised guy!”
And once they had done so, what did I espy?

A bottomless case of both beer and vermuth
What treasure, what wonder and what generous couth!
Said PZ “Now, sir, you must tend back to Jen
For methinks she is waiting for some lovin’ again!

I reached in the case but more than beverage I saw
T’was a coupon for pizza, poutine and cole slaw!
I thanked him and smiled, both some horny and famished
When PZ he pointed, “To thy bed ye be banished!”

Away he then flew with his wet, squishy crew
Into the cold night back to blog and review.
But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight:
“Happy Christmas, now back to pleasure Ms. Jen McCreight!

Man, you guys were great! I’m looking forward to seeing YouTube videos of these pop up closer to Christmas. Well, maybe the last one doesn’t need animation…

Thanks to everyone who participated!

Happy Birthday to me

I’m 23 years old, woo! Sort of a nondescript birthday, really. I feel old in some social circles, young in others, and I still can’t get a rental car without paying special insurance. Not to mention I’ve been so excited about the magazine article and the book, the whole “Earth returning to the same position around the Sun” thing isn’t as exciting in comparison.

And honestly, I’m a little apprehensive. The last time my birthday fell on election day was when I turned 17. That was in 2004. You know, when George W. Bush got reelected.

Worst. Birthday gift. Ever.

So the fact that Republicans are aiming for a massive victory and too many of those are crazy Teabaggers… Well, I’m nervous. If there’s one thing I’m superstitious about, it’s that Fate exists and he takes sick pleasure in electing crazy people on my birthday.

American readers: For my birthday present, I want you to go vote, preferably for the lesser of the two evils.

And for everyone else… I dunno, leave me amusing comments so I can have a pick me up after the inevitable depressing election results tonight. Or tell a friend about any female atheist bloggers you like – after my last post, that would really make my day!

Does the media really care where the atheist women are?

I was so hopeful when I found Ms. Magazine’s piece “Will ‘New Atheism’ Make Room for Women?” It’s exciting enough when the media covers atheism (and is nice enough to put “New Atheism” in the silly quotes it deserves), but media coverage of female atheists is a rarity. Ms. Magazine has the potential to reach oodles of women who aren’t familiar with us atheist activists. If we want more women to be involved with secularism and skepticism and more atheist men to realize how many great atheist women are out there, we need coverage like this.

Then I actually read it.

To say it was disappointing is an understatement. It seems like this was the extent of the research the writer put into the article:

  1. Google “female atheists”
  2. Read titles on first page of results
  3. Play up posts that sound negative, downplay posts that are positive

Reading the articles you link to? Interviewing people? Pfft, what journalist does that? Writing a spin piece that will generate controversy and make atheists look bad will generate a lot more hits! Of course, I’m blogging about it… so congrats, Monica Shores, I guess you succeeded.

Just to prove I’m not some butt-hurt atheist afraid to acknowledge valid criticisms, let’s take this piece apart bit by bit, shall we?

If you’ve been following the rise of so-called “New Atheism” movement, you may have noticed that it sure looks a lot like old religion.

A warning sign after one sentence! The “atheism is a religion” trope is so overdone – if you really want to hear a rebuttal, go here.

The individuals most commonly associated with contemporary atheism—Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and Victor Stenger—are all male, white and, well, kinda old (69, 61, 68 and 75). Sam Harris, another popular figure who bears mention, has the distinction of being in his early 40s.

There’s no official definition of New Atheism, but the general consensus is that while atheists were once content to not believe in God by themselves, “new” atheists are determined to proselytize so that others join their disbelief. They can’t abide by tolerance of religion, because religion is so insidious a force as to warrant constant criticism. Though they dare not hope for eradication of religion outright, they have expressed the wish that a belief in God become “too embarrassing” for most people to admit.

Definite use of weasel words to put “New Atheism” in a negative light, but whatever, that’s the least of this piece’s problems. Let’s move on.

Given the immense harm many organized religions inflict on women through outright violence and institutional oppression, it seems women may have more to gain than men from exiting their faith.

Yes, exactly! Wow, is Ms. Magazine going to argue that more women should be atheists? Is it going to talk about atheist women who have made those arguments? Is it going to highlight female atheists who deserve more attention from the media?

Yet no women are currently recognized as leaders or even mentioned as a force within the movement.

Um… what? No leaders in the movement? How about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, highly successful author and woman’s right activist? Or Lori Lipman Brown, founding director of Secular Coalition for America? Or Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder and current co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation? Or Debbie Goddard, campus coordinator at the Center for Inquiry? Or Susan Jacoby, director of New York’s Center for Inquiry? Or Wendy Kaminer, Secular Coalition for America Advisory Board Member? Or Lyz Liddell, campus organizer for the Secular Student Alliance? Or Amanda Metskas, Head Director of Camp Quest? Or Ariane Sherine, creator of the Atheist Bus Campaign?

And those are just some of the “official” leaders. You just wanted forces within the movement? How about the dozens and dozens of female authors, journalists, bloggers, videobloggers, podcasters, and comedians who you just conveniently forgot about?

I think you get my point.

The lack of lady presence is so visible that Conservapedia commented on it by noting that Dawkins’ website overwhelmingly attracts male visitors.

Yeah, an article must be excellent when it’s using Conservapedia to prove its point.

One study-supported theory is that there simply aren’t as many female atheists as there are male, while another is that new atheism is “off-putting” to women. Earlier this year, journalist Sarah McKenzie suggested that women aren’t socialized to defend their beliefs with the same vigorous and “militant” zeal expected of atheists, and proposed that the movement make space for traditionally feminine characteristics like “story-telling [and] empathy.”

McKenzie’s article garned much less backlash than a similar piece by Stephen Prothero, who irritated female unbelievers with his call to promote the “friendly” and “gentler” voices of faith-abstaining women.

Or maybe Prothero was more criticized because his piece was published in USA today, which is the widest circulated newspaper in the United States, and Sarah McKenzie’s article was published in the Sydney Morning Herald, which has 2 million fewer readers than US Today. I simply hadn’t heard about her piece.

Atheist Ophelia Benson criticized Prothero’s assertion that women are “more apt to tell stories[…] than to argue” as being dangerously close to relegating women to “weakness and passivity.” In the Washington Post, Susan Jacoby tackled a few myths about atheism while expressing unhappiness with “Prothero’s view [that the movement consists] mainly of Angry White Men.”

Holy crap, the author finally mentions some female atheists! …Except she only does so in the context of them defending female atheists and rebutting sexist remarks, not all the other wonderful writing they’re known for. Because you know, the atheist movement doesn’t have any female “forces.” Just females who feel isolated for being female.

But the predominance of white male v
oices is one point Jacoby couldn’t and didn’t refute.

Um, maybe not in that particular article, or maybe not Jacoby… but the issue has been discussed endlessly. Yes, there seems to be a predominance of white males, but many of us have suggested ways to improve diversity, and it seems to be getting better, whether you’re looking at demographics of local groups or panels devoted to women’s issues at conferences.

A quick search for female atheists will pull up such depressing fare as “Dating Atheist Single Women” and “Top 10 Sexiest Female Atheists.” (There is also a list for atheist males.) Unfortunately, such an overtly sexist mentality is in abundance; the loudest complaints about the absence of atheist women seems to come from atheist males who want non-believing girlfriends. In one unintentionally hilarious and cringe-inducing post, a blogger’s musings on the small pool of atheist women devolve into racy pictures of actresses with helpful points like “I happen to like petite girls, but a lot of guys are into more curves,” and “I don’t know who this girl is, but she’s redheaded and hot” alongside a picture of a paid model clad in a “Thank God I’m an Atheist” t-shirt.

This isn’t even an accurate representation of her “quick search.” The first link is just some dating site, nothing that has to do with the atheist movement. The second list is pretty skeevy, but it’s also years old. When Common Sense Atheism made a similar list a couple months ago, there was an internet shitstorm of men and women alike calling him out for the sexist post. And you know what? He actually apologized and took the original post down. If that’s not progress, what is?

The third link about wanting non-believing girlfriends actually links to a dating-related post I wrote, and the rest of his discussion was asking how to make women feel more welcome. Not exactly a “wanting non-believing girlfriends” themed post.

And the fourth link? Congratulations for finding someone’s anonymous, personal blog that no one else reads as your example of a sexist atheist. You’re right – there are some atheists out there who are sexist, or shallow, or assholes. But there are also Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Scientologists that can fit in that category too. Maybe if that blog had belonged to one of those male “leaders” or “forces” of atheism and went uncriticized by the movement, then you’d have a point.

The rest of the links that a “quick search returns” are all pieces defending, promoting, or wondering how we can be more welcoming to female atheists. But that doesn’t fit her theme of “atheists are big fat sexist jerks,” so she apparently didn’t feel like including those.

Progressive bloggers have pointed out that prejudice is a major problem within the movement, but few mainstream articles have gone as far to suggest that sexism, let alone racism, among atheist males might be a factor in keeping women away. One rarely addressed aspect online and in print is the preponderance of scientists, particularly evolutionary biologists, whose rhetoric can occasionally become reductionist and cliched. (Daniel Dennett, one of the aforementioned movement luminaries, implied that women’s “biology” is the reason for their exclusion from church hierarchies, as opposed to the churches’ stigmatization of that biology.)

That progressive blogger? Greta Christina, who is very popular within the atheist movement. Why not mention her by name, call her an “atheist blogger,” or acknowledge that she’s a woman? That piece on racism? Rant from a random Christian blogger, rather then the recent panel discussion about Science and Faith in the Black Community that actually discussed what it’s like being an African American atheist. That third link? Random people on an internet forum. Again, apparently random people posting anonymously on the internet are a representation of “leaders” and “forces” of the atheist movement, but published female writers and leaders of organizations are not.

That final link “criticizing” biological and evolutionary arguments? Doesn’t actually refute or critique any of the things Dennett or Dawkins say, other than just generally being uneasy about evolution. As a feminist atheist evolutionary biologist…you’re going to have to do better than that.

Christopher Hitchens, the only non-scientist of the high profile bunch, is notorious for inviting accusations of misogyny and racism by alleging that women are fundamentally unfunny and referring to Wanda Sykes as “the black dyke.American Atheists, an organization founded by a woman, appears to have entered an era of leadership primarily provided by white males. They also overwhelmingly favor white men for their magazine covers and everyone with a picture on the website, male or female, is white.

Follow the link. Apparently currently having a female VP and 4 females on a 18 member board is entering “an era.” 4 out of 18 is far from perfect, but it’s hardly entering some patriarchal regime. I guess Shores has psychic abilities to predict what American Atheists’ leadership will look like for the next ten years. That or she’s just conveniently ignoring all the organizations who do have diverse leadership (see above) and finding the worst possible example to further her own viewpoint.

Of course, atheist women do exist, as do atheists of color, and at least one (Ayaan Hirsi Ali) has written a best-selling book. Yet since the long-gone days of Madalyn Murray O’Hare (once the best-known U.S. atheist), none have the visibility and name-recognition of Hitchens and Dawkins. Sadly, there’s little indication that atheists are receptive to the suggestion that they might benefit from diversifying in color or gender. But unless they commit to fostering true inclusivity, they may continue to invite “deconverts” with one hand while pushing many away with another.

I find it incredibly ironic that she links to my long list of awesome female atheists, yet doesn’t make the connection that it means there are awesome female atheists who are active, appreciated members of the atheist movement.

The post on color? Adam Lee invited Sikivu Hutchinson, a well-known female atheist of color, to write a post to raise awareness for his blog readers. The post on gender? One of PZ Myer’s many posts pointing out how we need to make atheism more welcoming to women. Yep, that’s really “little indication that atheists are receptive to the suggestion that they might benefit from diversifying in color or gender.”

Do you really have any evidence of that, or is that just what you think from a cursory Googling? How about the Science and Faith in the Black Community panel I mentioned? Debbie Goddard’s talk on diversity in the freethought community? Greta Christina’s piece on what atheists can learn from the GLBT movement? How about PZ Myers and Hemant Mehta (a very well known non-white atheist you somehow didn’t include) who defend atheist women so frequently that I can’t even link to all of their posts that do so?

The community has reacted overwhelmingly positively to these pieces. I may get some trolls when I talk about feminism, but the vast majority of the responses are positive. Hell, I’ve been asked to speak specifically about women and atheism for at least four upcoming conferences so far. That’s not being receptive?

Sure, there are some atheists who are sexist. I just wrote a massive post about it, though I clarify that I think atheists are still less sexist than other groups. There’s room for improvement, but the movement is only getting more and more diverse.

But you know what I think is part of the problem?

You.

Not just you, Monica Shores. But all of the media. You love to write pieces that spin atheism in a negative light to generate controversy. A schism or disturbance in a movement is news, isn’t it? Or maybe it’s more personal biases that make you create a rotten, distorted image of atheism. I can only guess. But you know why female atheists aren’t as well known?

Because you don’t talk about them, even in a piece about female atheists.

If you ask “New Atheists” who are actively involved in the movement – bloggers, writers, student leaders – who their favorite atheists are, their lists are quite diverse. We don’t just ramble off the names of the Four Horsemen like drones. I’d tell you how much I love Friendly Atheist, and Skepchick, and Greta Christina.

You are the ones who are only reporting about the men.

Maybe people would start associating female, or racially diverse, or younger people with contemporary atheism if the media actually started mentioning female, or racially diverse, or younger people. We’ve already published the books, given the talks, written the blogs, and garnered attention within our movement.

It’s your move to develop the association.