Month: August 2012

What Atheism Plus Might Mean for Atheist Organizations

Greta Christina69 Comments

Atheism Plus logo
What would it mean for an atheist organization to be on board with Atheism Plus?

What would it mean for an atheist organization to be on board with the principle that atheists should care about and work towards other forms of social justice… and still primarily be an atheist organization?

As most readers here know, Jen McCreight recently proposed a new wave of atheism — an “atheism plus” wave that explicitly focuses, not just on atheism, but on the intersections between atheism and racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and other social justice issues — externally in what issues we take on, and internally in how we deal with our own stuff.

So what would it mean for an atheist organization to be on board with that? Either overtly — by putting an Atheism Plus logo on their website, for instance, or by endorsing and working with the Atheism Plus organization once it’s formed — or de facto, by adopting the Atheism Plus principles in how they operate?

I don’t think it means mission drift. I don’t think anyone expects the Secular Coalition of America to start lobbying about racial profiling, or for American Atheists to do a billboard campaign about drug policy. I think it’s fine for atheist organizations to keep their focus on atheism. (Note: This question has a somewhat different answer for skeptical organizations, and I’ll take that on in a separate post.)

What I think it would mean, at a minimum, is that atheist organizations would keep their own houses clean. At a minimum, it means they would pay attention to social justice issues with their own internal matters: hiring, event organization, community structure, etc. They would pay conscious attention to questions like:

How is the diversity among our own staff?
How is the diversity among the speakers at our events?
Do our events appeal to a diverse range of people?
Are our events affordable? Do we make scholarships available if they’re not?
Do we have child care available at our events?
Are our events accessible by public transportation?
Are our events accessible to people with a variety of disabilities?
Do we have an anti-harassment policy at our events and conferences?
Does our community provide day care, counseling, economic support during financial crises, and other forms of support commonly provided by churches/ mosques/ other religious institutions?
Do we have a mechanism in place for educating members of our community who are acting insensitively or offensively towards marginalized people? If these education efforts are not effective, do we have a mechanism in place for eventually ejecting these people from our community?
Does our public messaging — our billboards, our bus ads, our TV ads, our YouTube videos, etc. — offend or denigrate marginalized people?
Does our public messaging — our billboards, our bus ads, our TV ads, our YouTube videos, etc. — reflect a diverse range of atheists?

This list isn’t meant to be exhaustive, by the way: I welcome suggestions in the comments, and will update this post with the ones I especially like.

None of this constitutes mission drift, even in the slightest. Any more than it would be “mission drift” for an exclusionary golf club to change its policies and include women and Jews and people of color. This wouldn’t transform them into a radical-left political organization. Their mission would still be, “facilitate and promote the game of golf.” They would simply be expanding the reach of that mission to a broader population.

Now, that’s just the minimum. It could certainly mean more than that — without getting into mission drift. It could mean, when deciding which issues to focus on, making a conscious effort to focus attention on atheist/ religious issues that are of particular concern to marginalized people. Such as:

The effects of the Religious Right on birth control legislation.
The effects of the Religious Right on sex education in the public schools.
The effects of the Religious Right on recognition and acceptance of trans people.
The ways that faith healers and other religious charlatans take advantage of poor people.
The failures of religion in addressing mental illness — and why secular approaches to mental illness are better.
The effects of the Catholic Church on AIDS in Africa.

This list isn’t meant to be exhaustive, by the way: I welcome suggestions in the comments, and will update this post with the ones I especially like.

None of this would constitute mission drift. It would be entirely on mission. It would just broaden the range of people being targeted by that mission.

And in fact, many organizations already do this. Many atheist organizations, for instance, have taken up the banner of same-sex marriage. They recognize that the opposition to same-sex marriage is (a) grotesquely unjust, (b) overwhelmingly religious, and (c) increasingly unpopular, especially among young people — and they have taken up this fight as their own.

Why should organizations do this? Other than it being, you know, the right thing to do? I explain that here: Why Atheism Plus Is Good for Atheism. In a nutshell: Doing this will make an organization stronger, and more appealing to a broader base. Yes, it will put some people off: an atheist organization is never going to appeal to all atheists. To quote myself:

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of atheist women… and also be inclusive of people who publicly call women ugly, fat, sluts, whores, cunts, and worse; who persistently harass them; who deliberately invade their privacy and make their personal information public; and/or who routinely threaten them with grisly violence, rape, and death.

(many similar examples snipped, regarding people of color, trans people, poor people, and mentally ill people)

There is no way to make an atheist movement that fits everyone. So we have to decide: Who do we want to make it fit?

(snip)

Where do you think the future of this movement lies?

It’s totally fine for atheist organizations to focus primarily on atheism: on fighting for atheists’ legal rights, on fighting anti-atheist bigotry, on creating atheist communities, on persuading people out of religion. But it’s important for these organizations to remember that not all atheists look like Richard Dawkins. It’s important for these organizations to remember that they’re fighting for all atheists. Including the ones who aren’t yet in the movement. Including the ones who are afraid to come out of the closet, or even to call themselves atheists. Including the ones whose marginalization makes them more reluctant to come out as atheist, and to pile another stigma onto the one(s) they already have. And including the ones who aren’t atheists yet… but who could be, who would be, if the atheist community and the atheist movement were answering their particular needs, and if they saw it as being more about them.

What Atheism Plus Might Mean for Atheist Organizations
{advertisement}

8 Atheist and Agnostic Scientists Who Changed the World

Greta Christina23 Comments

It’s common knowledge — or it should be — that atheists are among the most reviled and mistrusted groups in America. We consistently come in at the bottom of polls about who Americans would vote for, who they would trust, who they want to marry into their families, who they think shares their view of how the world should be.

lightbulb
But it’s also the case that non-believers — not atheists as a group, but certain individual atheists and other non-believers — are among our most respected and beloved heroes. Not everyone knows that these people aren’t religious, of course… but they aren’t. And scientists are among the most admired of those heroes. Maybe it’s because scientists are more likely to be non-believers than the general population… and the more advanced in their field they are, the more true that becomes. Or maybe it’s because great scientists — American or not — embody the old-fashioned American values of exploration and curiosity, the willingness to question and the passion for truth, persistence in pursuing dreams and courage in the face of adversity. (These values aren’t uniquely American, of course — but when people gas on about the American character, these ideals do tend to turn up in the conversation.)

So here are eight non-believing or agnostic scientists, whose work and lives and stories can inspire anyone — atheist, religious, or other.

*

Thus begins my latest piece for AlterNet, 8 Atheist and Agnostic Scientists Who Changed the World. To read more, read the rest of the piece. Enjoy!

8 Atheist and Agnostic Scientists Who Changed the World

Why Atheism Plus Is Good for Atheism

Greta Christina192 Comments

Atheism Plus logo
I’m going to lay this out there: I think Atheism Plus is good. And I don’t just mean “good” in the sense of “morally right.” I mean “good” as in “good for the health and future of atheism.”

As most readers here know, Jen McCreight recently proposed a new wave of atheism — an “atheist plus” wave that explicitly focuses, not just on atheism, but on the intersections between atheism and racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and other social justice issues — externally in what issues we take on, and internally in how we deal with our own stuff. I’ve already chimed in briefly with a “Hell, yes, I’m on board.” I now want to start talking about why.

I don’t just think the principles of Atheism Plus are morally right. I do think that, and I think that’s the most important thing about it. But I also think it’s good for the future of atheism. And I think atheism will be stronger if more atheists support it.

Much of the pushback on the Atheism Plus idea has come from people saying that it’s divisive: that the atheist movement has to include everyone who calls themselves an atheist, and we can’t expect every atheist to line up around the same social justice issues.

There is no nice way to say this, so I’m just going to come out and say it:

There is no way for an atheist movement to be inclusive of everyone.

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of atheist women… and also be inclusive of people who publicly call women ugly, fat, sluts, whores, cunts, and worse; who persistently harass them; who deliberately invade their privacy and make their personal information public; and/or who routinely threaten them with grisly violence, rape, and death.

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of atheists of color… and also be inclusive of people who think people of color stay in religion because they’re just not good at critical thinking, who blame crime on dark-skinned immigrants, who think victims of racial profiling deserved it because they looked like thugs, and/or who tell people of color, “You’re pretty smart for a…”.

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of trans atheists… and also be inclusive of people who think trans people are mentally ill or freaks of nature.

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of atheists who are mentally ill… and also be inclusive of people who think mental illness is just a failure of willpower.

An atheist movement cannot be inclusive of poor atheists… and also be inclusive of people whose basic attitude to systematic poverty and economic injustice is, “Screw you, Jack, I’ve got mine.”

Repeat, for many more marginalized groups that I don’t have time to list here.

And an atheist movement cannot be inclusive of atheists and potential atheists who are women, people of color, trans people, poor people, mentally ill… and also be inclusive of people who think that welcoming these people into the movement just isn’t a very high priority. The movement cannot be inclusive of atheists and potential atheists who are women, people of color, trans people, poor people, mentally ill… and also be inclusive of people who think sexism, racism, misogyny, transphobia, poverty, mental illness, and other forms of marginalization are trivial or non-existent problems that we can’t be bothered with.

There is literally no way to make the atheist movement inclusive of all these people. So we have to ask: What are our priorities? Continue reading “Why Atheism Plus Is Good for Atheism” →

Why Atheism Plus Is Good for Atheism

Is "Atheism Plus" Just Secular Humanism?

Greta Christina22 Comments

Since Jen McCreight’s piece proposing a new wave of atheism — and her follow-up, on the suggestion that we call this new wave of atheism “atheism plus” or “A+” — one of the most common objections is that “atheism plus” already exists… it’s called humanism.

I’m working now on a piece about this “atheism plus” thing (tl;dr — I’m for it), and it will address that question, among others. But on that particular question, I’m largely going to say, “What Ashley F. Miller said.” If you have this objection — or think the topic is worth considering and discussing — go read her piece.

Is "Atheism Plus" Just Secular Humanism?

Runway Recap: Working It

Greta Christina14 Comments

Spoiler alert: This post contains spoilers about last Thursday’s episode of Project Runway: Season 10, Episode 5, “It’s My Way on the Runway.” If you’re a fan of the show and you haven’t seen it yet — you stand warned.

Awesome! I’ve been wanting to write about fashion and work/ professionalism for a while, and this week’s Runway gives me the perfect chance.

“Appropriate work wear” is obviously a pretty flexible concept: it depends on what kind of work you do, what part of the country/ world you live in, whether you’re ambitiously climbing the ladder or are happy to stay in the job you have. But in this challenge, “workplace” was being pretty universally defined as “urban office.” And in most urban offices, the qualities most people want their workwear to express are: Competent. Organized and put-together. Powerful, but also approachable. Conscious of the prevailing social standards. Professional (obviously).

And with the exception of a few very specialized workplaces, one of the main qualities of successful and effective workwear is “not too sexual.” In most workplaces, and certainly in most offices, overt sexuality is seen as a distraction. Women especially have to be careful of being seen as “sleeping their way to the top.” It’s a fine line (and one that’s pretty much impossible to walk): women who dress too sexy are seen as sluts and bimbos and aren’t taken seriously, and women who dress too primly are seen as unfeminine, ballbusting killjoys. So while some degree of feminity for women’s officewear is accepted and indeed encouraged, it has to dial way back on the va-va-voom.

And it was fascinating to see how this week’s contestants — and judges — interpreted these concepts…. or failed to.

First, let’s snark about the failures. That’s always more fun, right? If you’re putting together a professional yet fashion-forward work outfit, here’s what not to do. Continue reading “Runway Recap: Working It” →

Runway Recap: Working It

Atheism Plus: The New Wave of Atheism

Greta Christina161 Comments

If you’ve been getting worn down and discouraged by the seemingly-endless barrage of misogyny and trolling and hateful stupid in atheism and skepticism lately… read this. And then this. For me, it was like a shot in the arm.

I’ll be writing about this in more detail in the next couple/ few days. For now, I just want to say: Yes. This. So much this.

From Jen McCreight’s How I Unwittingly Infiltrated the Boy’s Club & Why It’s Time for a New Wave of Atheism:

I don’t want good causes like secularism and skepticism to die because they’re infested with people who see issues of equality as mission drift. I want Deep Rifts. I want to be able to truthfully say that I feel safe in this movement. I want the misogynists, racists, homophobes, transphobes, and downright trolls out of the movement for the same reason I wouldn’t invite them over for dinner or to play Mario Kart: because they’re not good people. We throw up billboards claiming we’re Good Without God, but how are we proving that as a movement? Litter clean-ups and blood drives can only say so much when you’re simultaneously threatening your fellow activists with rape and death.

It’s time for a new wave of atheism, just like there were different waves of feminism. I’d argue that it’s already happened before. The “first wave” of atheism were the traditional philosophers, freethinkers, and academics. Then came the second wave of “New Atheists” like Dawkins and Hitchens, whose trademark was their unabashed public criticism of religion. Now it’s time for a third wave – a wave that isn’t just a bunch of “middle-class, white, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied men” patting themselves on the back for debunking homeopathy for the 983258th time or thinking up yet another great zinger to use against Young Earth Creationists. It’s time for a wave that cares about how religion affects everyone and that applies skepticism to everything, including social issues like sexism, racism, politics, poverty, and crime. We can criticize religion and irrational thinking just as unabashedly and just as publicly, but we need to stop exempting ourselves from that criticism.

Changing a movement seems like a mighty task (especially when you lack a witty name – the Newer Atheists doesn’t have a great ring to it). But the reason I’m not throwing my hands up in the air and screaming “I quit” is because we’re already winning. It’s an uphill battle, for sure – in case you’ve forgotten, scroll up and reread this post. But change is coming. Some national organizations accepted anti-harassment policies with no fuss at all. A lot of local or student groups are fabulous when it comes to issues of diversity and social justice. A number of prominent male leaders have begun speaking out against this surge of hate directed at women. I’m working with others to hopefully start an atheist/skeptical organization specifically focused on issues of equality. And although the response from the haters is getting louder and viler, they’re now vastly outnumbered by supportive comments (which wasn’t always true). This surge of hate is nothing more than the last gasp of a faction that has reached its end.

There will inevitably be people who use this post as evidence of some gynocratic conspiracy and will hunker down even more (for examples, check the comment section in a couple of hours – odds are good you’ll find some). There will be organizations, conferences, communities, and individuals that will never care about diversity or equality or social justice. There will be some that continue to devote their free time to harassing and threatening the rest of us instead of going outside for a walk or reading a book. Though these people claim to love reason, no amount of reason will ever get them to admit that they’re wrong. So to them, all I have to say is have fun as you circle jerk into oblivion. Keep unintentionally or intentionally excluding women, minorities, and progressives while cluelessly wondering why you’re losing members, money, and clout. The rest of us will be moving on.

And from her follow-up, Atheism+, on the suggestion that we call this new wave of atheism “atheism plus” or “A+”:

It’s perfect. It illustrates that we’re more than just “dictionary” atheists who happen to not believe in gods and that we want to be a positive force in the world. Commenter dcortesi suggested how this gets atheists out of the “negativity trap” that we so often find ourselves in, when people ask stuff like “What do you atheists do, besides sitting around not-praying, eh?”

We are…
Atheists plus we care about social justice,
Atheists plus we support women’s rights,
Atheists plus we protest racism,
Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia,
Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism.

Yes. This. So much this.

And if you want a real happy-making time… read the comments. I am not kidding. There are hundreds as of this writing… and as of this writing, they are overwhelmingly positive and supportive. Including lots of people delurking to say, “Yes, I want in.” I, for one, am feeling better about this community and this movement than I have in a good long while.

I quote once again from Jen:

If you’re ready for this new wave of atheism, now is the time to speak up. Say that you’re ready. Vocally support organizations and individuals that are already doing it right. Vocally criticize the inappropriate and hateful behavior so the victims of such actions know you’re on their side. Demand that your organizations and clubs evolve, or start your own if they refuse.

The Boy’s Club may have historically ruled the movement, but they don’t own it. We can.

Atheism Plus: The New Wave of Atheism

Fashion Friday: "The soaring heights and the greedy, murderous depths": ceepolk

Greta Christina5 Comments

I’m taking a semi-break from blogging this week: mostly doing reprints, event announcements, cat pictures, street art pictures, reposting interesting comments, and so on.

So for this week’s Fashion Friday, I’m re-posting this comment that ceepolk made on last week’s Fashion Friday piece on fashion and money. It was an exceptionally insightful, extraordinarily beautiful piece of writing, and I thought it deserved more attention, so I’m pulling it out in this post.

I get you about fashion. I love it. I’ve always loved it. for as long as I can remember I have engaged with clothing – as a child I would look at coffee table books of fashion, the history of fashion, and current magazines. I wanted to be a fashion designer when i grew up. And I was poor. Well, I still am.

i get you about how fashion is art and art costs money. I have tried to explain to people that the extensive wardrobes they worry about maintaining and changing every season taints their perception of what clothing is worth and why I always, always refuse to make anyone a single piece of apparel, period, because fashion is a complex skill and skills cost money. I’m happy they love the whateveritis that I’m wearing that they think is beautiful, and that some of them are gobsmacked when they discover that I made it, but they ruin the conversation quickly by expecting me to use hard won years of skill and practice to make them something and they offer to pay for the cost of materials (and often estimate a price that isn’t even half that.)

I’m happy to see a post on the deeply complex implications of fashion. I have never found a clear answer that ties up all of the influences, intersections, and interstices in grosgrain ribbon in the colour of your choice (mine shall always and forever be imperial purple no matter what Pantone declares is in this season.) Fashion, more than any other art, has taught me how to enjoy something that is inherently and permanently problematic. And the best I can do is this –

Alexander McQueen was an artist. He combined the beautiful and the political in ways that make my heart pound and my skin shiver. I can say the same thing about a lot of artists. I never stop being aware that fashion is and has always been steeped in classism and sexism and racism, that fashion has unbelievable influence on our individual self-image and regularly shapes the image of human beauty.

A color wheel and a sartorial task that requires it is is better than most drugs as far as i’m concerned. The woman who made my panties is exploited and at risk of violence and rape that she has to endure just to keep that job, and she has that job because white western capitalists have dismantled every worker protection fought and won here. I move through cosmetic, fabric and yarn stores in a meditation that I think a lot of artists can understand. I engage with it and everything starts to flow in a series of beautiful moments, because i love these things. Millions of people over centuries have suffered and died because a certain cloth, a certain shade of a certain hue, a certain shell or stone or animal bone was the object of desire. I love the finished work of fashion, and I love making clothing, I love being able to look at a finished garment and *see* the structure and components that make it.

Fashion is as true an expression of humanity as any art could be, because it expresses the soaring heights and the greedy, murderous depths in every thread, no matter what you wear or how it came to exist.

Fashion Friday: "The soaring heights and the greedy, murderous depths": ceepolk

Camp Quest Fundraising Contest Extended — As Is My Singing Pledge To You!

Greta Christina6 Comments

The deadline for the Camp Quest fundraising contest has been extended to September 3! So I’m re-posting this piece from a few days ago — to remind you that the contest is still happening, and my singing pledge is still on. Remember: the more money Team Awesome wins by, the more songs I’ll sing!

Raise money for Camp Quest — the kids’ camp for children of atheists, freethinkers, humanists, and other non-supernaturalists — and watch me make a singing fool of myself! Plus there’s a matching offer on the table from the Stiefel Freethought Foundation — so all your donations, up to $50,000, will be automatically doubled!

Last year, about eighty zillion bloggers teamed up against PZ Myers in an epic battle between good and evil, to be determined by who could raise the most money for Camp Quest. PZ was crushed by the Army of Awesome — and this year, he seeks revenge! So we’re doing it all over again. (This year’s Army of Awesome includes me, Hemant Mehta of Friendly Atheist, Jen McCreight of Blag Hag, JT Eberhard of WWJTD, Adam Lee of Daylight Atheism, Sikivu Hutchinson of Black Skeptics, Matt Dillahunty of The Atheist Experience, Cuttlefish of Digital Cuttlefish, C. L. Hanson of Letters from A Broad, The Chaplain of An Apostate’s Chapel, Phil Ferguson of Skeptic Money, and Dale McGowan of The Meming of Life.)

Now. You may remember that, in last year’s fundraising contest, several members of both teams made assorted wild promises about ways that we would make public spectacles of ourselves if our team won. Team Awesome prevailed, as the good and the righteous always do… so as a result, Jen McCreight learned to ride a bike on camera, JT Eberhard shaved his head and waxed his legs, Adam Lee grew a beard, Matt Dillahunty did an episode of The Atheist Experience in drag.

And I did karaoke. For the first time.

I’m not going to do that again. (Shudder.) However.

I was completely inspired by Crommunist’s songfest in the Secular Student Alliance blogathon. For every $10 donated to the SSA during his round of the Blogathon, Ian recorded a song requested by the donator — and wound up performing a total of 22 songs. (What can I say? Guy is hardcore.)

Now, of course, Ian can actually sing, which puts the whole thing into a different perspective. I can only sing okay. But I was inspired… and when I was thinking what wild promise I could make for this year’s Camp Quest Fundraising Battle to the Near-Death, I decided, “What the fuck.” (Also, I would like a second shot at this, and would like y’all to know that I can actually sing okay when I’m not singing through a shitty microphone in a noisy bar at the tail end of a weekend-long conference when my voice is shot.)

So I hereby make this pledge to you.

If Team Re-Defeat PZ — a.k.a, Team Awesome — wins the Camp Quest Fundraising Contest, I will sing, and video it, and post the video on this blog.

I’m not going to do karaoke again. Fuck that noise. But I will sing, on video, a capella, in the privacy of my own home. And I will post the video to this blog.

And I’ll go further than that. Continue reading “Camp Quest Fundraising Contest Extended — As Is My Singing Pledge To You!” →

Camp Quest Fundraising Contest Extended — As Is My Singing Pledge To You!

Greta's Interview at The Matthew Filipowicz Show!

Greta ChristinaLeave a comment

I’ve just done a cool interview at The Matthew Filipowicz Show. In the radio show/ podcast thing, we talk about why atheists have to fight for our rights, even though we have laws protecting us; anti-atheist discrimination in high schools, workplaces, custody battles, and more; whether atheist anger is legitimate; my ultimate goal as an atheist activist; what kinds of activism I want atheists to engage in; and more. And, of course, we talk about my book, “Why Are You Atheists So Angry?” — now available in audiobook form on Audible, iTunes, and Amazon; in ebook editions on Kindle, Nook, and in multiple formats on Smashwords; and in print through the Richard Dawkins Foundation bookstore and from the publisher, Pitchstone Publishing.

The program also has author Jill Richardson talking about how the drought has revealed the dangers of America’s over-reliance on corn — plus discussions/ rants about voter ID laws, systematic disenfranchisement, Paul Ryan, and more. It’s a good time. You can stream it or download it. Check it out!

Greta's Interview at The Matthew Filipowicz Show!