Butterflies and Wheels

Not a merely inner struggle

Ophelia Benson — Sun, 26 May 2013 01:39:12 +0000

Tarek Fatah says it.

While ordinary Britons and non-Muslims around the world are bewildered by these never-ending acts of terrorism, the response of the leaders of the Islamic community is the tired old cliche — Islam is a religion of peace, and jihad is simply an “inner struggle.”

The fact these terrorists are motivated by one powerful belief — the doctrine of armed jihad against the “kuffar” (non-Muslims) — is disingenuously denied by Islamic clerics and leaders.

Yesterday, instead of calling on Muslims to shelve the doctrine of armed jihad, predictably, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) issued a quick press release claiming the “barbaric” attack has “no basis in Islam.”

Not true, MCB. As a Muslim, I can say without fear, the latest terror attack has a basis in Islam and it’s time for us Muslims to dig our heads out of the sand.

He says it. You don’t see that very often.

This was an opportunity for the Muslim leadership to confess they have failed and that the time has come to admit that jihadis cannot be fought without fighting the doctrine of jihad.

It is worth noting that not a single Muslim cleric since 9/11 has mustered the courage to say the doctrine of armed jihad is defunct and inapplicable in the 21st century. They rightfully denounce terrorism, but dare not denounce jihad.

If only they would.

Unless the leaders of British mosques as well as the Islamic organizations in the U.K. denounce the doctrine of jihad as pronounced by the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami, and distance themselves from the ideology of Qutb, al-Banna and Maudoodi, they stand complicit in the havoc that these jihadis are raining down on the rest of us.

They cannot have it both ways: promoting the teachings of Maududi and Qutb among Muslim youth, while concealing the same teachings from the rest of Britain.

If the Muslim leadership did denounce armed jihad, think what a blow it would be against “Islamophobia.”

Not running away

Ophelia Benson — Sun, 26 May 2013 00:05:19 +0000

Omar Bakri, founder of the banned UK Islamist group Al Muhajiroun, is excited about the “courage” of the guy who hacked Lee Rigby to death on a street in Woolwich.

What surprised me (is) the quiet man, the man who is very shy, decided to carry out an attack against a British soldier in the middle of the day in the middle of a street in the UK. In east London. It’s incredible.

“When I saw that, honestly I was very surprised – standing firm, courageous, brave. Not running away. Rather, he said why he carried (it out) and he wanted the whole world to hear it.”

No. That’s not courageous or brave. Nobody was going to hack him to death. The guy he hacked to death wasn’t given a chance to fight back. That’s not courageous, it’s not brave.

“The prophet (Mohammad) said an infidel and his killer will not meet in Hell. That’s a beautiful saying,” he said. “May God reward (Adebolajo) for his actions.”

That’s a disgusting thing to say. “Kaffir.” And he calls it a beautiful saying. It makes me feel ill.

Bakri said his organization Al Muhajiroun had nothing to do with the attack because members had not seen Adebolajo since 2005. However, Anjem Choudary, who took over the leadership of Al Muhajiroun when Bakri was exiled from Britain, has told Reuters Adebolajo attended the group’s events until about two years ago.

It seems to me people used to call Anjem Choudary a joke. He doesn’t seem to be much of a joke.

Cheap

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 23:47:20 +0000

Just a small side thing, about reading and disagreeing with an opponent fairly.

A reader pointed out to me a post by Damion Reinhardt at Skeptic Ink about a post of mine. Here’s how he paraphrases my post:

Her argument seems to be something like this:

Skeptics assent unquestioningly to moral propositions of the form “You must not [commit atrocities against humans]” without stopping to ask for further evidence.

Checkmate, skeptics!

I may have missed out a step there, but that seems to pretty much cover it. My answer to this is twofold.

Here’s what I actually wrote:

One of the things that proud or “movement” skeptics like to say is “you have to be skeptical of everything.” No sacred cows!

But I don’t think even proud or “movement” skeptics really believe that, apart from a few psychopaths. I can think of lots of things I think no one should be skeptical of, and I’d be surprised to get much disagreement.

you must not push small children in front of speeding cars

you must not punch a child in the face

you must not kill all the Jews

you must not commit genocide

you must not kidnap and imprison women

you must not force a woman to abort a pregnancy by first starving her and then repeatedly punching her in the abdomen as hard as you can

you must not set fire to people’s houses

you must not enslave anyone

They don’t match. What I wrote is not what he said I wrote.

Aps

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 23:21:55 +0000

Sorry, I had to make that earlier post private, because I was told it wasn’t a good idea. Sorry for any confusion.

Women leaving religion

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 19:52:54 +0000

Speaking of Quiverfull – one of the great panels at Women in Secularism 2 was the Women Leaving Religion one, with Maryam, Teresa, Vyckie and Jamila, moderated by Stephanie.

There was one part where Teresa was talking about the difficulties of leaving and of coming out, in particular the fact that her husband is still a believer, and they had always talked about everything – and she choked a bit on that word. Maryam reached for her behind the table. It wouldn’t have been visible to people much farther back (I was in the front row for a change). It made me get chokey. I love Maryam.

Photo by Monica Harmsen.

How to be a Real

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 19:04:30 +0000

Via Brian Engler via Vyckie Garrison – some Quiverfull wisdom by one “Von” on how to be a Real Man.

Real men marry. Real men seek the responsibilities (and joys!) that God has called them to and seek, actively seek: a wife and children. A wife and children that will require work on a daily basis; work to feed and clothe them, work to share in their joys and sorrows, work communicating, fixing, kissing… real men take those responsibilities seriously.

Real men marry, and lead spiritually. They realize that, however little they know about God and Scripture, it is their responsibility to step up to the plate and lead their family. To learn and to lead. Every day, all the time.

However little they know about anything, and however much their wives know about everything, it is still their responsibility to be the boss. God said so. It’s theirs because penis, and it’s not wives’ because not penis.

Real men can really admit they have real problems; and know that that is what wise counsel is for. Their father, their father-in-law, the elders of their church, other wise men… real men aren’t (too) afraid to go to these men and admit that they have struggles, and listen to, and act on, their advice.

That’s a new one (to me). I haven’t seen that particular piece of contempt before. Women aren’t even good enough to talk to when men have problems. Not even that. Not even though the problems could be domestic or relational, and women are generally thought – even by Quiverfull types – to be good at that. No, it has to be father, or her father, or wise men. Wise men.

Real women marry, hopefully young. They know they are called to marriage in their youth, to a husband in his youth, and are not afraid of this.

Real women who understand that they are not called to ‘a career’ but a house. They are called to love their husbands, bear and love their children, and keep their house.

And none of this pesky modern shit about deciding that for themselves; none of that actually thinking about one’s life and how one wants to live it; no sir; real women are “called” to do one kind of thing and not all the others. End of story (in every way).

Real women realize the marriage is more important than the wedding. They don’t bankrupt their new husband or father, or delay their marriage for months while things are ‘planned’ to be just perfect. Real women marry and bear children; they don’t spend the rest of their life poring over their wedding pictures.

Real women obey their husbands over their fathers. While the honor that the young woman owes her parents is lifelong, and includes obedience to all of his lawful commands, she realizes that she now has a much more direct authority in her husband.

Real women are not afraid of submission. Well, maybe they are, but they do it anyway. They strive to give to their husbands the same kind of submission that the Church owes to Christ.

That’s Quiverfull! Maybe they are – maybe they do have qualms – but they do it anyway! They obey and submit. Booya, that’s what this is all about. Obey, god damn it!

Real women know that they are often called to listen when they would like to speak. That is more important to build their husband up than to put him down with their latest spiritual point.

Ha. Haha. Hahahaha. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

The actual photo

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 16:53:33 +0000

I should post the real photo, because that was actually about something, something that matters. It’s Brian’s photo.

Photo by Brian D. Engler

Left to right: Stephanie, me, Brianne, Maryam, Jason, Kate, Miri, PZ, Ashley. All Freethought bloggers, you see. All in the one place so we thought what fun to get a picture, and of course Brian obliged. Freethought bloggers for international solidarity with atheist bloggers.

From an optics point of view

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 25 May 2013 01:04:48 +0000

Dan Fincke did a great post a couple of days ago about WiS and the bizarre inappropriateness of the opening remarks.

It was especially troubling, from an optics point of view if nothing else, that he chose to do this specifically to feminists, a group defined primarily by the women associated with it. That he broke with traditional form of being a host rather than a critic when the event’s speaker roster was set to be all women and his audience was predominantly women sent a message, whether he intended it or not. It was that women don’t deserve the same basic respect and civility that is routinely afforded to your average conference speakers and participants. A crowd of women can get a stern talking to and skeptical querying about issues they are probably oblivious to in lieu of a welcome.

Yes. That is indeed a big, big, big part of the problem.

I’ve talked to quite a few people about this since getting back from DC, some of them people who go to a lot of conferences (unrelated to secularism or feminism). Nobody could think of a single instance of anything remotely like the reception we got. The normal thing is to welcome participants and say a little about the conference. The normal thing is not to decline to welcome participants (because participants were welcomed the year before) and then scold them. That’s not normal procedure. We’re not being weird or petty in saying that. It’s not normal; it’s special treatment.

Well why do we get special treatment? What’s different about us?

Oh right.

No, really. As Dan says, that sends a message, whether it’s intended to or not. A conference of women has to be lectured by a man before starting, so that they don’t make a mess of everything.

Particularly galling was Lindsay’s inability to adequately define privilege before criticizing it or to adequately explain how it works well in helping us analyze injustice against marginalized people before talking about potential abuses of it. As a philosopher, I am bothered by Lindsay’s laziness in understanding concepts before criticizing them and his blindness about feeling like he was in a position to criticize the concept to an audience of feminists without even taking any time to treat it in its strongest and most useful senses. This was, remarkably, an astounding instance of privilege induced blindness itself. It is staggering and upsetting that he managed to do that to open a conference on feminism.

That bothered me too, and it seemed uncharacteristic. It was so thin – so inadequate – so vulgar, even. It was a Fox News version of feminism. For cryin out loud, that’s the best you can do? Just a parody version to poke at? And you’re implying that we plan to talk nonsense like that? That is insulting.

Ron Lindsay was an egregious violator of civility principles by being such a disrespectful host and then poisoning the well against Rebecca Watson in his post replying to her counter post to his talk and to his first blog defense of it. And this is especially upsetting given that only this past spring he signed a civility pledge meant to set a standard for others in the community to follow. This pledge gave a ton of instruction to people engaged in emotionally upsetting fights, including to people who were on the receiving end of awful interpersonal abuse. I believe in the ideals of that pledge. I believe that even though it demanded people do difficult things that they are vital things that must be done if the movement is to have healthy debates about serious philosophical differences in the future.

And Ron Lindsay showed that he could not stick to the pledge the first time that he felt like someone made an uncharitable reading of his words in a very heated, public dispute after he signed it. The first time! He is asking women, specifically Rebecca Watson, to be bigger than a torrent of abuse that includes rape threats, death threats, sexually degrading photoshops, a website devoted to monitoring their every misstep, etc. And he cannot handle civil criticism from that same woman that was not a fraction as abusive to him as what she has had to endure. And he showed this thin skin while being the host of a conference where she was a speaker and it was his obligation to respect the position that that role put him in as a host. This was an abuse of his position and an embarrassment.

So much so that he’s now withdrawn the most insulting thing he wrote in that post – but only that, and no more. The only slightly less insulting things are left unwithdrawn.

By highlighting his anxieties with the worst instances of feminist activism as though they were the most central and pressing concerns related to feminists Lindsay inadvertently sent this message: When I think about feminism the first thing that comes to mind is how feminists act counter to rational ideals. Given feminism’s vital accomplishments, feminism’s hugely important substantive goals, and the long history of women being misogynistically mistrusted as inherently irrational, Lindsay could not have sent a worse signal.

It was a good way to incite an even bigger torrent of abuse against us though. I don’t think he intended that, but he sure as hell didn’t give it enough consideration to cause him to re-think.

Invoking the Kindly Ones

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 19:54:22 +0000

So Arizona State Representative Juan Mendez gave a secular invocation in the state House of Representatives on Tuesday. (Invocation. Honestly, what a word. Normally the legislators in Arizona call up spirits every morning. “Hellooo. Hellooooooo, is anyone there?” Then one day there’s a slip-up and one legislator talks sense for once.) Well we can’t have that.

American Atheists announced Friday that it has demanded an apology on behalf of all non-Christians for disparaging remarks made by Arizona state Senator Steve Smith on Wednesday. Smith’s remarks were in response to the secular invocation offered by state Representative Juan Mendez on Tuesday in the state House of Representatives.

Smith, a conservative Christian, opened Wednesday’s House session with not one, but two prayers, the second in “repentance” of the secular invocation offered the day before by Mendez. Smith invited the other lawmakers present to join him; about half of the sixty did. Smith said, “When there is a time set aside to pray …, if you are a nonbeliever, don’t ask for time to pray.”

Religious test for office. Dude, that’s a no-no. You’re not allowed to do that.

“Opening the legislative sessions with prayer is disenfranchising to anyone who is not Christian as demonstrated by Representative Mendez’ attempt to balance this outdated practice with a secular alternative,” said President David Silverman. “But for Senator Smith to say that a fellow lawmaker’s secular choice requires ‘repentance’ is reprehensible. His statement excluding nonbelievers is one of the most un-American remarks I have ever heard from a public servant and is a perfect example of why there should not be any prayer sponsored by government. Senator Smith should be ashamed. He owes Representative Mendez an apology. He owes non-Christians an apology. He owes the American people an apology.”

“For Smith to suggest that Mendez’s expression of Humanist beliefs requires our government to pray for repentance is really awful and insulting. I’m incredibly disappointed,” said Seráh Blain, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition of Arizona.

Stop trying to exclude and disenfranchise us! It ain’t right!

Don’t just tell the grunts

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 19:31:39 +0000

Obama gave a commencement speech at the Naval Academy today, and used the occasion to tell them to quit saying “shut up and listen” to their superior officers. No no I’m kidding, he used it to tell them not to do sexual assaulting.

President Obama used a commencement speech before Naval Academy graduates on Friday to urge them to follow an “inner compass” and to warn that rising numbers of sexual assaults in the military threatened to erode America’s faith in the armed forces.

No, it doesn’t “threaten to”; it’s already done it. It’s not so much eroded as gutted my trust in the willingness of the people who are in charge of the armed forces to do a god damn thing about rampant sexual harassment. They act like the Vatican and I don’t trust them at all.

The president praised the military as the nation’s “most trusted institution,” but took note of the recent cases in which service members have been charged with sexual assault. He said those people “threaten the trust and discipline which makes our military strong.”

“We need your honor, that inner compass that guides you,” the president said, essentially using the platform at the Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium to scold those who have strayed from that direction recently. “Even more than physical courage, we need your moral courage — the strength to do what’s right, even when it’s unpopular.”

Good, but also tell the people in charge do what they’re supposed to be doing. And could you make it so that crimes are not dealt with in-house? That’s not asking too much.

No harassment here! Nothing to see!

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 19:04:07 +0000

Why would anyone think otherwise??!

That fake account appeared a lot on #WISCFI during the conference, too. I don’t think I saw any other fake accounts of any other speakers; just that one. I’m special. I don’t know why, particularly, but I am.

Twitter deleted the account on Monday, but of course the genius behind it just created another one.

But that, as we all know, is not harassment. It’s dissent, it’s criticism, it’s disagreement.

Bridges

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 18:28:39 +0000

No not bridges between atheists. Not bridges between atheists and People of Faith. Not bridges between the Boy Scouts and ~~faggots~~ their friends in the gay community. No, bridges. The kind that carry cars and trucks across rivers.

Yesterday evening one such bridge carried one such truck across the Skagit River, some 90 miles north of Seattle (where I am). It was a big truck, with an oversize load, and the load whacked into one of the overhead girders – and that span of the bridge fell into the river.

Fell into it, right then, right after the truck whacked the girder. I spent an hour last night staring at the tv with my mouth open. There were two vehicles visible in the water, but no one (except perhaps the rescue people in boats, who could perhaps see to the bottom, as the river is only ten feet deep there) could be sure there weren’t more under the water. This morning though it’s reported that there were only two and that all three people involved are ok.

Well, Mount Vernon, Washington is not Minneapolis. This isn’t as big a deal as the collapse of a big urban bridge. On the other hand, the bridge is on I-5, which is the only freeway between Seattle and points south, and Vancouver, so it is a big deal.

It’s great, isn’t it? The world’s richest country and we don’t maintain our bridges.

How stereotypical environments

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 01:21:34 +0000

There was that panel Saturday morning.

One question Greta gave us was “does affirmative action work?”

I don’t think I started by saying it depends what we mean by “work” but I think I did indicate that that’s what I meant. Maybe I started with “Yes in the sense that” and went on from there. I think it does work in the (familiar) sense that if you always see X job or vocation or career full of all or mostly men (or white people or rich people and so on) then if you are not a man (or white etc) you will conclude, without deciding to conclude it, that you’re not supposed to be there.

This thought irritates the bejesus out of a lot of people. That’s sad for them but that doesn’t make it not true.

Ok, they perhaps think, but you can’t do anything about it without a lot of Professional Victimhood and Social Engineering and paying attention and all kinds of shit we don’t want to do. The hell with that. Don’t do anything, because.

That’s called laissez faire, and it’s libertarian crap. The way things are right now isn’t just magically the best way they could be, so yes we do too so get to tinker with them. No we don’t want to draft everyone until all the numbers come out even, but we do want to get rid of obstacles, including subtle ones that take digging and research to discover.

I talked about that a little, via the work of a University of Washington psychologist whose name I couldn’t remember. She is Sapna Cheryan, and she works on things like stereotypes and environments. I said her research had found that tiny cues in a lab can make a difference to whether or not women feel as if they’re supposed to be there – something as small as a plant. Debbie Goddard expressed surprise at that but Elisabeth Cornwell next to me muttered that it’s true. It’s very interesting stuff. A title:

Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient
belonging: How stereotypical environments impact gender participation in
computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97,
1045-1060.

It’s optimistic research, really, because tiny inexpensive things can make a real difference.

So, we know this, so why pretend we don’t? Why pretend it’s all aready just everyone’s totally free preference? Maybe some day it will be, but we’re not there yet. (Actually it won’t be, because totally free would mean totally uninfluenced, and how the hell would that be possible?)

I enjoyed that panel. It was interesting and collegial and fun.

I’ll probably say more about it. I’m doing this slowly.

Another hilarious hashtag

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 24 May 2013 00:43:38 +0000

What is that hilarious hashtag? #vaculamustdenounce

Geddit? It’s a hilarious joke about Dave Silverman’s effort to get Vacula to say that harassment is bad. Yeah what could be funnier than that?

That’s only a sample of what was posted over the space of an hour or so. Busy!

Update to add a few more, because they’re so funny.

The one about American Atheists is especially weird. Woooooo; welcome to another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind.

Peeps talking

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 23 May 2013 20:17:46 +0000

Just because. I like the picture. I like the moment. Pieter Breitner in the kilt.

Photo by Brian D. Engler.

A melancholy part of modern life

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 23 May 2013 16:49:19 +0000

Mark Urban at the BBC explains the ways the Woolwich murder is different from other such murders – it’s not networked, it’s just a couple of guys with everyday tools, so it’s not the kind of thing that intelligence services can prevent; the guys look ordinary; there’s no way to prevent their “message” from spreading; responses have changed…

Governments have become better at calibrating their response to these acts and so has the public. After Boston and Woolwich, for example, they were careful not to leap to conclusions or to issue responses of the “War on Terror” kind that would have inflamed communal tensions.

There are still some who are defaulting to stereotypical responses to such situations, and certainly in Boston after the marathon bombings, I witnessed a small quantum of media-fanned hysteria, but in general people have become better at accepting that such incidents are a melancholy part of modern life and should not alter their view of other cultures or religions.

Excuse me. That last item is one thought too many. It’s pretty typical BBC bullshittery in its careful vagueness, but given our knowledge of typical BBC bullshittery, we can be pretty sure we know what it means: don’t think of the Woolwich attack as anything to do with Islam. If that is the thought, it’s one thought too many. It is anythiing to do with Islam. If it were Catholic fanatics doing this kind of thing, that would be anything to do with Catholicism. When anti-abortion fanatics murder doctors who provide abortions, that is anything to do with anti-abortion fanaticism, and sometimes with a particular religion that underpins or prompts the anti-abortion fanaticism. This incident on a London street is anything to do with Islam. The murderers said so themselves. Yes, other people follow a better Islam (one that ignores much of its own “scripture”); yes it’s theoretically possible to have a better Islam; but no, it is not the case that this murder has no implications for how people should view Islam.

Why would you open on such a hostile note?

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 23 May 2013 01:27:33 +0000

I’m belatedly listening to Citizen Radio on Women in Secularism 2. It starts 16 minutes in. It’s as good as everyone said it is.

Update. Great line. Jamie Kilstein:

If Ron LIndsay was opening an NAACP conference, he’d be the guy who’s like, “Welcome! WHERE’S WHITE HISTORY MONTH?”

American Atheists cares about feminism and social justice

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 23 May 2013 00:50:50 +0000

I mentioned PZ’s post about Silverman v Vacula on Twitter. (PZ is on his way to Romania. Jeez. I felt all exotic going to DC.) Dave Muscato also mentioned it. First he quoted this part.

How much do I appreciate it? With my dollars. My wife is going to sign us up for a lifetime membership in American Atheists while I’m away. It’s not a casual investment, so not everyone can do that, but you could send them a donation to let the organization know that you like a leader with a spine.

That’s a big deal, a lifetime membership. They get special treatment at the AA convention. (Like what? Well, I forget. A shout-out, I think. Applause. Admiration.)

Dave M went on:

The staff at American Atheists headquarters wants to take a moment, on behalf of our volunteers, Regional Directors, members, and atheists nationwide, to thank PZ publicly for his support of our president and our organization, and for standing up for positive values in the broader atheism movement.

One of the things that attracted me to working for American Atheists is our overwhelming dedication to equality, including feminism, within the broader context of the atheism activism work that we do but also in general. American Atheists was the first major atheist organization to adopt a harrassment policy for conferences, and it’s something we take very seriously. We care about all of our members and want everyone, atheist or not, activist or not, to feel comfortable at all times.

We are very proud to welcome PZ and his wife as Life Members. Although American Atheists’ mission is fighting discrimination against atheists, advocating for atheist civil rights, and addressing issues of First Amendment public policy, we care very much about feminism & social justice in the atheist activism movement and how these issues relate to and involve individuals involved in our collective efforts.

Yeah. Well, you know what? That makes me feel good.

Don’t bow your heads, but look around you

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 23 May 2013 00:26:10 +0000

Juan Mendez! Yes!

On Tuesday, May 21, Juan Mendez, a 28-year-old Democratic State Representative from Tempe, Arizona, was given the task of delivering the opening prayer for the afternoon session of the House of Representatives. Instead of offering a prayer, Mendez spoke of his secular humanist tradition, while asking those in the room to recognize their shared humanity.

Mendez said:

Most prayers in this room begin with a request to bow your heads. I would like to ask that you not bow your heads. I would like to ask that you take a moment to look around the room at all of the men and women here, in this moment, sharing together this extraordinary experience of being alive and of dedicating ourselves to working toward improving the lives of the people in our state.

This is a room in which there are many challenging debates, many moments of tension, of ideological division, of frustration. But this is also a room where, as my secular humanist tradition stresses, by the very fact of being human, we have much more in common than we have differences. We share the same spectrum of potential for care, for compassion, for fear, for joy, for love.

Well…I’m not convinced we all share the same spectrum of potential for compassion, but saying it may help to create the potential, so I won’t argue the point.

Stop pretending there are no assholes

Ophelia Benson — Wed, 22 May 2013 18:22:23 +0000

PZ has a post pointing out that Dave Silverman has been telling off Vacula and co on Twitter. David Silverman, a principled atheist, is the title. Commenters who don’t do Twitter found the discussion hard to follow and I just happen to have grabbed some screen shots, so I thought I might as well make them available.

Yeah.

Rebecca Goldstein on mattering

Ophelia Benson — Wed, 22 May 2013 17:52:47 +0000

Now enough kvetching, it’s time to say how great the conference was, and why.

As I mentioned on Saturday morning, Rebecca Goldstein’s talk was brilliant. Miri did an incredible job of liveblogging it, so you can just read her post to learn what RG said. Ditto Jason and his post.

From Miri’s:

In preparation for this talk, I polled some very prominent women and asked them if they ever feel that their gender undermines them professionally. Virtually all of them reported saying something in a discussion or meaning and being completely ignored–until the comment is picked up and reported by a man. Then, suddenly everyone jerks to attention.

Obviously it’s true that compared to more violent manifestations of misogyny, being ignored/interrupted/talked over is easy to dismiss because it’s an experience of privileged women. We privileged women can feel petty and ashamed voicing complaints about these things.

Indeed. Especially when an important dude comes along and says out loud that what we’re talking about is not just trivial in comparison to stoning (which of course is undeniable) but also just plain zero harm.

Happily, someone actually asked Maryam about that in the Q and A after her talk. Maryam is the ideal person to ask, obviously, because her focus is on the worst kind of oppression and violence. You know what she said? She rejected the whole idea. “I don’t like those comparisons,” she said firmly. We do get to talk about being dismissed even though other women are being beheaded. Yes we do.

Psychologists call these experiences “microaggressions,” and they cite evidence that for women (and other marginalized groups), these small attacks take a greater toll than the more outright expressions of misogyny.

Derald Wing Sue, a researcher on microaggressions, says that it’s easier for marginalized people to deal with the more outright expressions of bigotry because there’s no guesswork involved. You can easily dismiss them as bigotry.

While if you point out a microagression you may get called a Nazi McCarthyite inquisitorial witch hunter.

Here’s one bit that was a light bulb moment for me – it’s what I was talking to Dave Silverman about while doing all that gesturing.

4:35: What is it that keeps intellectually sophisticated people clinging to propositions about the world so improbable that they can be described–if you’ll allow me to use the technical terminology of epistemology–as crazy-ass shit?

These beliefs extend at least 30,000 years to Cro Magnon man, whose cave paintings are interpreted as expressions of spiritual beliefs. But the religions that still resonate with people were all originally forged during the period called “the Axial Age“–between 800 and 200 BCE. At the same time, secular philosophy and tragic drama emerged in ancient Greece. This period is called “the axial age” because these traditions still extend into our own age, including among the secularists who are the inheritors of Greek tradition.

What they have in common is a preoccupation with the issue of mattering.

Some lives achieve mattering and others don’t. Perhaps there’s something a person can do that will make the difference when it comes to his or her mattering. The question is, what is the human life that matters?

That makes a great deal of sense, and helps to explain a lot. I particularly liked it because the novel (her first) in which she presented the idea of the mattering map (see Miri’s post for more) is one of my favorite novels, I’ve read it many times, and the mattering map always struck me with its explanatory power. It doesn’t suprise me that it’s a Thing in social science now. (It did surprise Goldstein though.)

Tying it together at the end:

Back to microaggressions. What do they do? They undermine a person’s sense that they matter. And they’re even worse when they come from someone who matters to you, who can’t be dismissed as the ranting bigots and slobbering misogynists.

4:50: Without sensitivity to the will to matter and how it gave rise to religion in the first place, we fail to understand the secular ethical progress to which we are the heirs, and upon which we wage an assault, macro or micro, every time we undermine a person’s sense that he or she matters.

Yes. It applies to us as objects but also as perps.

She got a huge standing ovation. It was an absorbing, exhilarating, inspiring talk.

Do you thank the lord? I said, DO YOU?

Ophelia Benson — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:58:40 +0000

Good old mass media and conformity and assuming everybody thinks the same thing. Wolf Blitzer chats with a woman who just barely escaped the tornado and simply assumes that a lot of god-blather will be welcome.

At the end of the interview, Blitzer told her, “You’re blessed. Brian, your husband is blessed. Anders is blessed… I guess you got to thank the lord, right?” When the woman shrugged off the question, he repeated it, asking, “Do you thank the lord for that split-second decision?”

“I–I’m actually an atheist,” she responded. After the awkward laughter that followed, she added, “We are here and you know, I don’t blame anybody for thanking the lord.”

“Of course not,” Blitzer replied.

Awkward!

Not. Why should it be awkward? Unless awkward for Blitzer – that would be good.

And I do blame people for thanking the lord, because why couldn’t the lord just divert the tornado to a fallow field, instead?

In the lobby

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:53:11 +0000

I had no idea anyone was taking pictures. Candids!

Photo by Beth Zucker

I was talking to Michael DeDora about Imad and Waleed and the Bangladeshi atheists, or rather he was talking to me about them, since his office (CFI’s Office of Public Policy) works on these issues.

A beseeching gesture this time

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:47:13 +0000

It’s like this, you see…

Also by Monica Harmsen.

That’s the panel I was on.

If the pepper spray doesn’t work

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:43:20 +0000

Dave’s turn to demonstrate throttling techniques, this time from below.

Also by Monica Harmsen.

Just grab it

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:29:29 +0000

But we don’t want to let all this mishegas overshadow the brilliance of the actual conference, do we. No we don’t. So time to post some happy place stuff. Like pictures for instance.

Monica Harmsen took this. She’s a friend and a CFI intern.

I really don’t remember what I was saying to Dave Silverman that could be illustrated with a throttling gesture.

I know what we were talking about though: Rebecca Goldstein’s magnificent talk, and mattering, and the implications of mattering for atheism -

Maybe that’s where the throttling gesture came in. I was talking about the fact that for people who don’t feel as if they matter there is one obvious remedy, which is theism. Even if nobody else thinks you matter, God thinks you matter. God’s eye is on the sparrow. Maybe that’s actually an eye on the sparrow gesture.

Anyway, that’s the reception on Friday evening, after dinner with a bunch of friends and before a long talk with Michael DeDora in the lobby about all the threatened atheists all over the world and how his Office of Public Policy works on their behalf. Maryam arrived at the hotel while we were talking. I jumped up to give her a hug and then she went off to take care of her cold-and-cough.

#RDFbullies

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 19:43:16 +0000

Update May 21 see update below.

Oh good god. Really?

Three posts on CFI about the Women in Secularism Conference – May 17-19

That’s on the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science website.

But we’re the bullies. Never forget that. We use our immense ruthless power as bloggers to argue with other bloggers, while poor tiny powerless meek obscure humble shoemaker Richard Dawkins simply tries to stamp Rebecca Watson into the ground a little bit more by re-posting Ron Lindsay comparing her to North Korea.

We’re the bullies. How does that work again?

And no those are not “three posts about the Women in Secularism Conference” – that’s false advertising. They’re three posts about Ron Lindsay’s dislike of feminism and then his fury at uppity women who dislike his thrusting of his dislike of feminism on a conference that wasn’t meant to be about his dislike of feminism. Those posts aren’t about the conference at all. You won’t find out by reading them that Maryam Namazie was a speaker and on a panel about leaving religion. You won’t read anything about Rebecca Goldstein’s talk or Katha Pollitt’s or Susan Jacoby’s. You won’t see anything about Debbie Goddard or Jamila Bey or Amanda Marcotte. The posts are not about the conference! They’re about spite and anger.

There’s nothing about the conference on the website. Do a search and the above item is the only one you’ll find.

Brilliant. I guess Ron was so pleased with the results of his three blog posts at the conference itself that he felt it would be even better to trash the conference afterwards with the help of Dawkins. What’s he going to do for an encore? Post photoshops of all the speakers? Is it heads on goats time?

Update May 21 No, that last para is not right, because Ron didn’t ask RDF to publish those posts.

Also, I of course know perfectly well that he wouldn’t actually post photoshops of all the speakers. On the other hand – if you had asked me, I would have said he would never attribute “the most intellectually dishonest piece of writing since the last communique issued by North Korea” to one of the speakers, either. I would never have guessed beforehand that he would write a thing like that about a speaker at a CFI conference. So, yes, in a sense I know he wouldn’t post photoshops of us, but in another sense, I don’t really know that I do know that. Yet I feel as if I do know it, hence phrasing it as “I know perfectly well that” he wouldn’t.

At any rate, I freely admit that was hyperbole. But then so was North Korea, and I’m not the CEO of anything.

Quote of the morning

Ophelia Benson — Tue, 21 May 2013 17:38:18 +0000

Amanda Marcotte on a post of Stephanie’s:

(By the way, Amanda was at Women in Secularism 2, as you probably know, and she rocks.)

I’m sick of being targeted by people who confuse their own unwillingness to say stupid things with feminists using magical powers to stop them from saying it.

And if you throw that bottle at the wall it will break

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 20 May 2013 23:48:56 +0000

Now to look at some of the claims as claims. For instance in A Few Examples of “Shut Up and Listen”:

By the way, I am well aware that our communications director in his personal capacity quoted Myers approvingly. Obviously, I disagree with him on this point. The fact of that disagreement does not affect our working relationship. Paul is a great communications director. Are there limits to what CFI employees can say? Sure, but the restrictions are fairly loose. At CFI, we do not follow the rule “shut up and listen.” Generally, employees can express their opinions. There is one requirement, however. They need to supply reasons and evidence. Invoking their racial/sexual/ethnic/class identity, whatever it might be, is not considered a substitute for argument.

See, that was the problem in the talk, too. Very few people consider invoking racial/sexual/ethnic/class identity a substitute for argument, and it is insulting to imply that the people you’re addressing do. Insulting, patronizing, belittling…like a daddy talking to a chaotic hormonal teenager. Nobody invited to speak – to donate their time, as Susan Jacoby reminded us – is stupid enough to think that “I’m a woman” is a substitute for argument. That is not the point.

This is the point. Suppose employees are gathered together to express their opinions and one employee keeps getting interrupted and ignored. Suppose that employee says something and is ignored and then a few minutes later someone else says the same thing and everyone cheers and says how brilliant. Suppose things like that. Maybe it’s just One Of Those Things – or maybe the employee has a despised identity. Either way – it is possible to have a meta-discussion about the talking and interacting themselves, and about how the respective identities of the employees might be making a difference. That is not the same thing as invoking identity as a substitute for argument. That’s what “meta” means here – as Ron, a philosopher, knows perfectly well.

And – as I tried to tell Ron yesterday – “shut up and listen” is not a “rule” in any normal sense. Ok, he cites a post where PZ generalizes it into a rule – but even there it is surely clear that what is meant is “shut up for long enough to listen and take in what is being said” – not shut up and never speak again. Basically it’s just a sharper way of saying “stop interrupting” – and please don’t make me drag out all the studies of patterns of interruption between women and men.

Is saying “stop interrupting” generally seen as a Giant Law Ordering Everyone to Wait Forever While I Talk? Of course it isn’t. Is saying “dammit you keep cutting me off, it’s more of a guy thing, will you please just shut up for two minutes so that I can finish a sentence?!” generally seen as the opposite of an argument? No. It’s trying to create the necessary conditions to make an argument. Being interrupted doesn’t help, and being patronized and insulted doesn’t help.

He wants to pull the trigger

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:30:09 +0000

A right-wing radio host gives us a look at his inner world.

Fringe right-wing radio host Pete Santilli made disturbing comments about Hillary Clinton last week, calling for sexual violence against the former secretary of state because of her alleged involvement in a bizarre conspiracy theory.

“Miss Hillary Clinton needs to be convicted, she needs to be tried, convicted and shot in the vagina,” he said. “I wanna pull the trigger. That ‘C U Next Tuesday’ has killed human beings that are in our ranks of our service.”

Santilli alleged Clinton was involved in drug trafficking in Arkansas and the killing of U.S. troops overseas.

“I want to shoot her right in the vagina and I don’t want her to die right away,” he added. “I want her to feel the pain and I want to look her in the eyes and I want to say, on behalf of all Americans that you’ve killed, on behalf of the Navy SEALS, the families of Navy SEAL Team Six who were involved in the fake hunt down of this Obama, Obama bin Laden thing.

“That whole fake scenario, because these Navy SEALS know the truth, they killed them all. On behalf of all of those people, I’m supporting our troops by saying we need to try, convict, and shoot Hillary Clinton in the vagina.”

That’s what that guy thinks about.

3 weird

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:26:11 +0000

I’m ignoring it but this one is just too weird (and I saw it because someone replied and replies always obviate blocking).

justin vacula tweeted

@AmandaMarcotte @OpheliaBenson Get out, Amanda, you not welcome here. Take your dogma elsewhere (you too, Ophelia) #WIScfi

Two points

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 20 May 2013 18:26:11 +0000

Point one. From the Open Letter to the Secular Community, April 2:

Our Approach

Here are some things that we plan to do to make our online secular community a place where we can exchange ideas and views instead of insults. We hope that others may also find this approach useful.

Moderate blogs and forums. Any organization or individual engaged in blogging or administering a forum has an obligation to moderate comments. Slurs, threats, and so forth beget more of the same. Keeping our online spaces free of these elements creates a civil climate that makes it much easier for people to engage issues productively.

Point two. From comment # 214, by one “MosesZD”, on Ron Lindsay’s “Rebecca Watson can be compared to North Korea” post, May 18:

Mr. Lindsay,

Do yourself a favor and read Paul’s (PZ Myers) blog and how he’s trashing Vacula who is at your conference. Vacula is one of many people that he’s spent quite some effort and time demonizing and flaming over the years. Doing his absolute best to destroy Vacula over something

See how he describes Vacula and his inability to get interviews for Brave Heart Radio.

Why is this? Because PZ Myers, Watson, Benson, et. al., have spent close to two years lying about him and demonizing him because he doesn’t lockstep to their non-skeptical, non-atheist belief systems.

I don’t choose that comment because it’s the worst in terms of slurs and threats but because it makes a specific false accusation against me. I haven’t lied about Vacula. I have documented his harassment of me.

The hoof alone is twenty feet tall

Ophelia Benson — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:16:37 +0000

I’m back, by the way. I’m catching up. There’s a lot of reading and scrolling to do. (That was only four days? Really? Two of which were mostly travel? Really? It feels like…I was going to say a week but actually it’s more like some unknown unit of time that’s open-ended, it’s just Way More Than The Literal Hour By Hour Time. Could be a year. Big. A big unit. A big non-specific unit.) (Wait, that sounds…oh never mind.)

I even managed to fit some high-speed touristing in there. Would you believe it? What I mean by “touristing” here is just walking as far as I can to look at the outside of as much as I can. Museums and the like have to be done with enough time or there’s no point…although now I’ve said that I remember that I did go to the Natural History Museum on last year’s high speed touristing adventure…but more just to go inside and get a quick look than to do a proper museum visit. I went to Georgetown and the canal and along the river a bit, then up between the Watergate (god damn that’s an ugly “complex”) and the Kennedy Center (which like so many buildings in DC looks as if it had been built for a species three times the size of our own) and past GWU on Friday morning. Saturday lunch break I went to the Capitol – past the National Archive which is emphatically one of those buildings designed for a much larger species of human, and the whaddyacallit, the Commerce department building, with the giant Stalinist guy fighting with a giant Stalinist horse outside it. Dang, DC is weird-looking in places. To the Capitol, I say, or rather to the edge of where the grounds begin and then up One Street, past the DC appeals court, which I found oddly exciting, and past the Museum of Buildings which is itself a glorious and weird building. I consider that a pretty heroic feat of touristing with only an hour to do it in.

Then later on Saturday with even less than an hour I went just up to Thomas Circle and along two sides of Franklin Square.

In a way I wanted to stay in the hotel and do more high-speed talking instead, but…balance, people, balance. I believe in being a balanced nerd. No, I don’t really. More like, I believe in being two kinds of nerd as opposed to just one.

Interim post in flight

Ophelia Benson — Sun, 19 May 2013 21:37:53 +0000

On the plane, DC to DFW leg. To my surprise, I have free Wifi. I don’t know how that happened. (Then again the Wifi at National refused to connect, so it all comes out even.)

Sarah Moglia and I had a conversation with Ron later in the morning, shortly before I left. I’m not sure how much progress any of us made but at least we had a conversation.

Apart from that whole thing – the conference was amazing. I have so many terrific new friends – Sarah, Monette, Jason, Kim, Miri, Steve – and had so many good conversations with existing ones – Maryam, Melody, Michael DeDora, Debbie, Seanna, Steve W, Ania – oh shut up, I’ll make you all barf at this rate. But our Community is a good Community, don’t let anybody tell you different.

The panel I was on was fun, I thought. Maryam as always rocked the place. We took a solidarity picture with everyone holding a sign in support of the Bangladesh atheists.

Sunday morning

Ophelia Benson — Sun, 19 May 2013 13:11:10 +0000

I can’t begin to say how weird everything has become.

If you’ve been following the right blogs or perhaps Twitter you already know, but otherwise you don’t.

Oy.

Nevertheless – this conference has been FABULOUS. Just really brilliant. It’s way too late to do anything about that. Sorreeeeeeeee.

Some relevant posts.

Rebecca replies to Ron’s opening talk.

Ron replies to Rebecca.

Opening paragraph.

Rebecca Watson inhabits an alternate universe. At least that is the most charitable explanation I can provide for her recent smear. Watson has posted comments on my opening talk at Women in Secularism 2. It may be the most intellectually dishonest piece of writing since the last communique issued by North Korea.

PZ comments on the resulting situation.

The coffee is ready

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 18 May 2013 12:13:32 +0000

Oh and also – talk amongst yourselves. It looks so dead here when I’m busy elsewhere. Tell stories, complain, argue, explain, debate. Keep the lights on.

Twenty minutes before the first panel. Zoooooooooom.

Saturday morning at WiS2

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 18 May 2013 12:07:07 +0000

No time! I was going to do a quick post last night just to say Rebecca Goldstein’s talk was brilliant, but using the lobby Wifi means one sees all one’s favorite people right in front of one – so, in short, I had deeply interesting conversations with Amanda Knief and Michael DeDora and Seanna Watson and others and the post didn’t get written. So: Goldstein’s talk was brilliant. I’ll tell you why later – meanwhile Miri has a post.

Maryam is on in half an hour, along with others. It’s going to be amazing.

It’s too bad Ron elected to open the conference by using a lot of anti-feminist talking points like “sister punisher” and “privilege” and “shut up and listen” by way of telling us to be Good feminists. Sigh. A couple of people have said “sister punisher” on one or two occasions; it’s hardly a central platform of the demonic Secular Feminists. Telling us, essentially, not to be stupid and dogmatic and coercive wasn’t really a good welcoming intro. (Hint: we weren’t planning to be stupid and dogmatic and coercive, and we’re not children, and we’re not thick.)

So that was a sour note, and has caused a good deal of puzzlement and irritation, but other than that – it’s being amazing.

Having fun yet

Ophelia Benson — Fri, 17 May 2013 15:17:32 +0000

I’m hee-eere – in DC. Sorry for blackout day; technical difficulty due to obstincacy of travel notebook but I’m back now. PZ is over there finishing a post he started on the plane; lobby blogging.

Stephanie took this in the hotel restaurant last night. I don’t think she’ll mind if I share it.

That’s Jason and Simon. We were having a good time. I’m looking sarcastic on purpose. I wasn’t really being sarcastic.

Imad Day

Ophelia Benson — Thu, 16 May 2013 00:43:15 +0000

Maryam has a lovely message from Imad. (It was Imad day today, which I forgot to promote because of a deadline and a thing and another thing and an extended errand and leaving tomorrow).

I don’t feel sorry for anything I have said or for the actions I have taken part in, including the 20th February MASAYMINCH Movement, and the establishment of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Morocco – the first atheist organization in a country with Islam as the state religion.

Dear friends, we have a long way to go to break down those Middle Aged myths and ways of thinking, those oppressive and repressive rites in the name of religion or culture, those violations of human rights in the name of cultural relativism… We have to fight for this long awaited world, where people will live equally regardless of their gender, religious beliefs, or sexual orientations, where we will live in harmony with our environment, a world where wars and un-civilisation will only exist in history books.

I would like to everyone taking a stand on International Imad Day, everyone who supported me, everyone who cared about me, everyone who helped or tried to help by any means, everyone who spread the word, everyone who thought about me…

Special thanks to Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, Norwegian Heathen Society, Atheist Alliance International, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, all the friends who hosted me taking personal risks, everyone who supported and helped me by any means, Ahmed Benchemsi, Maryam Namazie, Daniel Salte, Kacem Al-Ghazali, Marjorie Bloom, Peter Breedveld & his wife, Diana & Roy Brown, and all the members of a so special club trying to change the world.

Keep supporting reason and free thought!

In Mickey Mouse we trust,

Imad Iddine Habib

15 May 2013

Love that guy.

See also Waleed Al-Husseini’s I’m Proud to be Atheist Facebook page, which has more about Imad Day.