I’m so proud of my dad!

My dad is one of the major reasons I’m an atheist. Ever since I was little, he instilled a healthy skepticism of religion in me. For one, he thought it was very important not to indoctrinate me in any particular faith. We never went to church and I was never taught about Christianity, unlike him or my half brothers (whose mom won out on that argument). I was left to my own devices. And when you’re gobbling up Greek mythology and fantasy novels, modern religions just didn’t seem too different in my head.

He also had his nuggets of wisdom. “No man is killed for any reason more than in the name of God,” was a frequent saying of his. And when a younger me asked why we didn’t go to church, he responded “You don’t have to go to church to be a good person. Plenty of people who go to church and are praying the loudest have also done the worst things.”

Despite this, I never heard him call himself an atheist. I’m not sure if he even knew it was an appropriate label for himself until I started the Society of Non-Theists at Purdue. I had noticed that now that I was more vocal about my atheism, he was also becoming more vocal in his criticisms of religion. Not long ago he saw I had a copy of Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, and I mentioned it was a really good read. Armed with a Kindle, he read it and loved it. The criticism of religion has definitely increased even more (Dawkins has that effect on people).

I just saw him, and he said I would be proud of him. He was grocery shopping and a man in a suit came up to him. He said he recognized him from when he coached high school basketball, so my dad stopped to talk. He then asked if he could have a minute of his time and tried to give him a pamphlet about Christianity.

Dad: Sorry, but you’ll just be wasting your time on me.
Guy: Why’s that?
Dad: Because I’m an atheist.

The guy was flustered and wanted to debate, but my dad just went along with his grocery shopping.

This is the first time I’ve heard him used the dreaded “a” word, and to practically a stranger no less. One way to increase acceptance of the non-religious in our society is to let people know that every day, good people are atheists. We’re fathers, we’re basketball coaches, and we do our grocery shopping at the same place as you. It may have taken him 64 years to do it (yesterday was his birthday!), but it’s never too late.

And yes, I am very proud of him.

Bus driver refuses to take woman to Planned Parenthood

Why? Religious reasons, of course:

A former bus driver has sued the Capital Area Rural Transportation System, charging that the nine-county transit service discriminated against him based on his religion when he was fired for refusing to drive women to a Planned Parenthood clinic in January.

Edwin Graning, who was hired as a driver on April 1, 2009, was “concerned that he might be transporting a client to undergo an abortion” when he was assigned to take two women to Planned Parenthood, according to his lawsuit, filed this week in U.S. District Court in Austin.

Graning is seeking reinstatement, back pay and undisclosed damages for pain, suffering and emotion distress. He is represented by lawyers from the American Center for Law & Justice, founded by evangelical Christian leader Pat Robertson.

Joanna Salinas, an Austin lawyer who represents the Capital Area Rural Transportation System, said, “CARTS denies that it discriminated against Mr. Graning because of his religion, and we are looking forward to responding to the lawsuit in court.”

The system, operated under an agreement among participating counties, offers bus service on fixed routes and through requested pickup for residents in the nonurban areas of Travis and Williamson counties and in all of Bastrop, Burnet, Blanco, Caldwell, Fayette, Hays and Lee counties.

After he was dispatched to take the women to Planned Parenthood in January, Graning called his supervisor “and told her that, in good conscience, he could not take someone to have an abortion,” his lawsuit said. The women’s names, their location and the clinic location were not included in the lawsuit. Planned Parenthood also provides health care services unrelated to abortion.

Graning, a Kyle resident, is “an ordained Christian minister who is opposed to abortion,” the lawsuit said.

His supervisor, who is not named, responded by saying, “Then you are resigning,” the suit said.

Graning denied he was resigning and was later told to drive his bus back to the yard and then was fired, the lawsuit said.

It is not religious discrimination if you are refusing to do your job. If you were a Muslim bus driver you would be required to take people to a bar, and if you were a Jewish bus driver you would be required to take people to a butcher that sells pork. If you don’t want to perform your duties, don’t pick a job that’s going to require you to act against your religious beliefs. The same goes for pharmacists who don’t want to provide birth control because of their own moral convictions – don’t become a pharmacist if you can’t be a pharmacist because of your ethics.

Why can’t some religious people understand the concept that their religious rights end where my rights begin? You can feel free to believe in whatever you want. You cannot, however, force me to believe the same thing or follow the same rules. And that’s exactly what’s happening in situations like this – religious people are denying services to people so those people don’t do something “immoral.” It’s not the bus driver who’s getting an abortion, or the pharmacist who’s taking the birth control. They’re policing what you do with their religious standards.

Not to mention that only 3% of Planned Parenthood services are abortion services. From pure statistical likelihood, it’s more probably that this man has stopped these women from getting Pap smears, breast examinations, STD tests, or birth control. Good job, sir.

(Via Religion Clause)

I like to harp on Indiana, but…

…it’s one of five states where human evolution is mentioned directly in the state curriculum for school. I want to be proud that Hoosiers didn’t manage to mess this up, but I’m too overwhelmed by the fact that thirty-two states don’t mention human evolution in their curriculum at all. How can the US expect to produce competent biologists and doctors when children aren’t learning the most fundamental and important biological principle?

It’s even more depressing when I think about what my evolution education was like. Pretty much one or two days out of a whole year of AP Biology. I don’t remember discussing it at all in freshman biology, which is the class everyone is required to take. That’s enough to make us green? No wonder Americans don’t accept evolution.

(Via Why Evolution is True)

Vatican: Ordaining women as bad as pedophilia

Oh, Vatican. Can you ever say something without shoving your foot in your mouth? It’s great that you revised your laws to make disciplining sex-abuser priest easier, but you couldn’t just stop at that, could you?

But what astonished many Catholics was the inclusion of the attempt to ordain women in a list of the “more grave delicts,” or offenses, which included pedophilia, as well as heresy, apostasy and schism. The issue, some critics said, was less the ordination of women, which is not discussed seriously inside the church hierarchy, but the Vatican’s suggestion that pedophilia is a comparable crime in a document billed a response to the sexual abuse crisis.

Ah, yes. Women with power – just as bad as child molesters!

Not to mention heresy and apostasy are also lumped with pedophilia. Anyone who has spoken out against Catholicism? All you former Catholics? Same level as child molesters. Congratulations.

Interview about the aftershock from boobquake

I was recently interviewed by my local newspaper about the way boobquake is still affecting my life. It actually came out on Sunday, but I was so busy with TAM stuff that I missed it. Here’s the Q&A session from the article:

Photo by John Terhune, Journal and Courier

Question: What are you writing for the HarperCollins book?

Answer: It is a tongue-in-cheek piece about atheist Christmas toys. I had a piece on my blog where I photoshopped an atheist Barbie because a female Episcopalian minister made a minister Barbie doll. I thought, “I want an atheist Barbie doll,” and I made it with all of these atheist stereotypes, like with a baby in a paper bag. So (the editor) saw this and asked me to write a new piece for the book. It is really cool and will be out this fall.

Q: Is this a launching point for you to do this humorous take on skepticism?

A: Definitely. That is how my personality is anyway. People see me as a more aggressive atheist, because I am outspoken, but I like to do it with a hint of humor. I do plan to keep blogging and talking about this and writing more in the future.

Q: Tell me about The Amaz!ng Meeting.

A: It’s the annual meeting of the James Randi Educational Foundation. They educate people to debunk paranormal, supernatural things. I am going to be talking about boobquake there. I am personally excited because there are a lot of celebrities talking there, like Richard Dawkins, Penn and Teller, and Adam Savage from MythBusters.

Q: Do you go to this every year?

A: No, this is my first time and my blog readers raised the money for me to go. … I put up a request for donations to cover the trip because some of my readers said they would donate if I did. I got $1,600 in 10 hours. I am donating the extra money …

Q: Is there a time when science should not question people’s beliefs based in culture or religion?

A: I don’t think science can answer why or ethical questions. When science finds something to be factually true, it should be religion that changes to accept it, not the other way around. There are people who believe they can ignore science because it does not fit into their religious belief. I don’t think that is how the world should work.

Q: Knowing what you are capable of, would you ever use your platform for another issue to rally people?

A: The boobquake Facebook page has over 100,000 people as fans. So I have occasionally sent out links on articles I think are interesting or pieces about women’s rights in Iran. When I started my blog, I thought no one would ever read it. It was just for my friends. But now I know people read it, and I have some influence.

Q: What have you learned about people from this?

A: People are sort of starting to get fed up with ridiculous claims when they are not supported and especially when they are hurtful. When you use humor to go after these claims it is a very effective way to go after them.

Q: Have there been any drawbacks from boobquake?

A: It is a little humorous that I do have other academic accomplishments, and this is what I am internationally known for. But I figure I am still young and have a lot of time to make accomplishments in my research.

Q: Are people at University of Washington aware of you?

A: Yeah, I’ve actually been getting e-mails from people who are students and professors or Seattle atheists saying, “If you need a friend, we are totally here.” And that is totally cool since I don’t know anyone there, I already have people offering friendship.

I think this also serves as a perfect example as to why I blog instead of post videos to YouTube. Do I seriously talk like that, or is some of that transcript error? Sheesh ;)

I do like one of the comments on the article though:

Sorry, but I am a Christian. I will not be reading your chapter in a book and I will not be rooting for you. You sound like a thinking sort of gal, though, so I will be praying for you.

Yeah, go central Indiana! And to think I chose my words very carefully for this piece. Just imagine if that person went to my blog.

Women and Feminism at TAM8

I’m not going to go too in depth recapping all the talks at TAM8 for three main reasons:

  1. Hemant already did a wonderful job liveblogging all of the talks, which you can find here, here, here, here, here, and here,
  2. I was livetweeting most of my reactions all day
  3. I lost my pen after the very first session so I didn’t take very good notes.Whoops.

But I do want to comment on women and feminism at TAM8, especially since this was a bit of an issue last year. Keep in mind this is just my experience from a single TAM, since it was my first time going. Even though I remember all the blog posts from last year, I can’t fairly compare it to past events.

The conference wasn’t perfect, mainly because skeptics don’t live in a little bubble sheltered from society. The good definitely outweighs the bad, but I still need to point out the bad. So, let’s get it out of the way.

Sexism

The one annoying thing I saw was the perpetuation of the Sexy vs. Smart binary in talks. The stereotype goes that women can sexy/attractive/beautiful and stupid/ditsy/unscientific, or they can be smart/witty/scientific and frumpy/plain/ugly. This myth annoys the hell out of me, especially because it’s so common. It simply is not true – you can be hot and smart, and you can be “plain” and stupid. I hate people assuming I’m an idiot because I like to talk about sex or wear a low cut shirt now and then. And I’m not even very feminine – I can’t even imagine how often “conventionally” attractive and feminine skeptics and scientists have to deal with this.

The main perpetrator was Michael Shermer, who included the following video in his talk:

Oh, gee, using hot airhead women as an example of people who aren’t critical thinkers! Uhhh…no. The only way this contributed to his talk was by making me uncomfortable. If that was his goal, he succeeded.

And while I fell in love with Harriet Hall, she did the same thing. [EDIT: Apparently my memory is faulty and this only occurred sometimes in her talk, and Barbara Drescher makes a good point as to why this is acceptable in McCarthy’s case] Whenever Sometimes she mentioned Jenny McCarthy in her talk as an example of someone saying something stupid (which Jenny McCarthy certainly does often), she would include a picture of her bending over in a bikini or some other scantily clad outfit. Why was this effective? Why not use a photo of Jenny McCarthy in a suit?

Because we’re programmed to go “Ha, look at that stupid bimbo!” or something along those lines. We associate beauty and sexuality in women with ignorance. It was used for cheap laughs, and the audience delivered. If we’re judging someone based on their intellectual merit, we shouldn’t be using irrelevant bikini photos as pot shots.

Attendees

I don’t have the exact numbers (maybe the JREF will release some info), but there were a lot of women at TAM this year. Still not an equal 50/50, but getting there – maybe 60/40. I definitely did not feel out of place.

Speakers

From a quick glance at the program, it seems like men definitely outnumber women. Not hugely so, which is an improvement, but it was still noticeable. Now, I don’t think you can necessarily blame TAM or even the skeptical movement for this. When sexism permeates society like it does, there are a whole host of reasons why you may not see women in as prominent roles. By the time you’ve reached the level of accomplishment to be invited to speak, a whole slew of other institutions and people have had the chance to drag women down, thus limiting the number of qualified women.

And according to a conversation Hemant had with Jeff Wagg, JREF does try:

Jeff Wagg of JREF points out that they’ve actively reached out to women. Last year, 8 women were invited to speak at TAM. 2 said yes. 1 of those women had to cancel. It’s not like they’re not trying.

Even though men outnumbered women, the ratio wasn’t that horrible. Still looks way better than most science departments I’ve seen.

The real interesting data comes out when you break the speakers down into categories. I’ve divided the various events into talks (solo speakers), panels and interviews, and extra workshops:The ratio of men to women was 3.5:1 for talks, 2:1 for panels, and 1:1 for workshops. Why? Any answer I could give it purely speculative, so I’ll leave it for the discussion as to why you think this is. It is interesting to note that the less individual contribution required, the more equal the gender ratio.

I have to note that I absolutely loved all the female speakers, and that seriously is not me being biased. I’m not the type to like someone by default just because they have certain genitalia or chromosomes or hormones or whatever (side note: whoever told you sex was simple was wrong). Their talks were some of the best at TAM, so don’t let anyone tell you that women are being invited to speak just to fill some quota. Since people are always asking me for awesome female skeptics to follow, here’s their information:

Content

One great thing about TAM was that it had not one, but two sessions explicitly devoted to exploring women’s issues. The first was Feminist Skepticism Workshop with Rebecca Watson and the Skepchicks. As you can imagine, I was really excited for this workshop. I think it did an excellent job at showing how feminism is compatible with skepticism, and how various skeptical issues affect women.

I also loved Vagina Craft Time. Here’s me with my angry felt vagina: And while that seems silly, it did serve a purpose. One, it was a nice intermission to all the serious information. Talking about rape and sexism for two hours can be taxing on anyone, so it was nice to have some light hearted humor injected in. Two, it forced the audience to form small groups. While we were in groups, we discussed a skeptical issue that was assigned to us and how it affected women. After craft time was over, everyone had to share what they discussed. Without this fun activity, it would have been very difficult to force people to participate.

I think, though, it may have been a little too silly at times. For example, after each major serious topic, Rebecca inserted silly cat photos to lighten the mood. I’m all for silliness, but random lolcats after seriously discussing rape just didn’t sit well with me. Make your serious point without undermining it, and then inject humor later. From the awkward half-laughter in the audience, I think others agreed with me. The lady sitting next to me even commented, “Great, who’s going to take feminists seriously now?” after the first lolcat. I wouldn’t go quite that far, but I agree that it was a bit in bad taste.

The other event at TAM was the Women in Skepticism Panel with Rebecca Watson, Carol Tavris, Jennifer Michael Hecht, Pamela Gay, Ginger Campbell, and Harriet Hall. It was an excellent discussion of what it’s like dealing with male dominated fields and sexism and a female skeptic. It was really nothing new to me since I’m familiar with the issues, but it would have been excellent for anyone in the audience who maybe hadn’t thought about this before.

Summary

Before I went, I admit I was a little nervous. I had been warned about the low number of women, some sexist jokes, and hordes of creepy stalker guys that would follow me around. Maybe it’s because I started with my guard up or maybe it’s because TAM is improving, but I really didn’t think it was that bad. At least, not any worse than any non-theist club meeting or biology conference I’ve been to (…which probably isn’t much of an endorsement after all, hmm). I’m definitely looking forward to going back in the future. And I’m sure with the way things are quickly improving and all the hard work the JREF is putting in, it’ll be even more awesome and comfortable for women next year.

But I’m just one woman. If you were at TAM, what did you think? Men are welcome to comment, but I’m especially interested in how other women felt. Were you comfortable? Did you run into any other incidents of sexism? Do you have any suggestions on how TAM could improve in the future?

TAM8 Part 3 – One last fangirling

The real story from Saturday night was the Skepchick Bordello party. I didn’t really have a costume, so I just wore a low cut shirt to fit in with the Bordello theme. Thankfully a reader stumbled into me and gave me an extra Sheriff pin he had, so I was all set. One of the first people I ran into was Mary Myers, who may be better known to you as “The Trophy Wife.” She was super sweet, totally unlike her husband, who we all know is a huge dick who eats babies in his free time.A fellow party goer asked for my my autograph along with a drawing of a pair of boobs. I obliged. I think this may become my autograph standard, though hopefully a little nicer than after I’ve had three beers.
I also got to meet a bunch of the Skepchicks, including Rebecca, Maria, Carrie, and Amy. Speaking of which, I also bought two new Surlyramics, one for me and one for my mom. Amy, you’ve gotten me addicted!The Skepchicks sure know how to throw a party, because the costume contest concluded in attractive scantily clad young women making out with each other. And the male skeptics rejoiced. Twitter probably crashed at that moment from all the happy tweets.

Me: You missed it.
Hemant: What?
Me: A bunch of hot girls were just making out with each other.
Hemant: Whaaaat?! Noooo!
Ashley: *comes up and pecks me on the lips while his head is turned*
Me: Aaaaand you missed that too.
Hemant: Damnit!!Other perks of the party involved Phil from Skeptic Money doing a cold reading on me. Even though I know he’s not really psychic and I understood his tactics, it was still pretty neat and unsettling. In a couple minutes he was able to get out the name of my ex boyfriend who broke my heart and all sorts of details on him. Very weird. Phil, you should totally make a video about how you do it. But in lighter news, here’s Hemant and Sean Faircloth (executive director of the Secular Coalition for America) playing Rock Band:Eventually Hemant and I headed back because I was starting to freak out about my talk (aka, the beer was losing its effect). We ended up getting some late night breakfast food with some of our new random TAM friends before going to sleep. I got about three hours of sleep before my talk. I think this is still more than most people.

After the Sunday papers I finally got a chance to say hello to James Randi when he wasn’t busy with something. Randi is seriously one of my new favorite people. Not only is he so adorably small that I just want to hug him or smuggle him away in my suitcase, but everything he says is witty, intelligent, and assertive. And did I mention he was adorable? They had to get a milk crate for him to stand on so he could be tall enough for the speakers podium, and he literally went “Weeee!” when stepping up. I want him. Or to at least be like him when I’m 81.
One of my friends bought a deck of Tarot cards for various famous skeptics to sign, and they decided that I was now internet famous enough to make the cut. While shuffling through the deck to find a sex related card appropriate for boobquake, my friend Jamie tried to get my attention.

Jamie: Uh, Jen, I think Simon Singh is waiting to talk to you.
Me: What.
Simon Singh was one of the few famous skeptics left that I was a little too shy to approach, but then he went out of his way to find me to tell me how much he liked boobquake and my use of humor. I seriously can’t express how flattered I am that all these people I look up to want to talk to me. And to think that I’m only 22. Hopefully I have many years of skepticism, TAMs, and humorous activism ahead of me!

That night some of us headed out to the strip just to say we could. It was pretty, but that’s about all I can say since I don’t gamble. We did have a delicious dinner in Caesar’s Palace where Hemant lost his battle against an epic stack of pancakes, and our dinner conversation mostly was about Ron Jeremy and snuff films. We are all kind of weird, if you haven’t figured that out yet.

We returned to the Del Mar lounge and played the lovely drinking game Never Have I Ever for a couple hours. Let’s just say we have enough blackmail on each other that none of us will ever be brave enough to actually use it. Actually I think that’s all I safely can say.

And while I just spent a whole day flailing about all the famous people I met, I just want to say meeting all of my readers was just as cool. Thanks to everyone who said hello, asked for photos, listened to me be awkward, etc. Without all of you I wouldn’t have even been able to go to TAM! It was an amazing networking experience, a ton of fun, and educational. And I’ll be getting to the educational parts in my next posts!

(Thanks to Hemant and Jamie for some of these photos!)