Just in case you haven’t heard enough about the Amazing Atheist’s racist douchebaggery:
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Just in case you haven’t heard enough about the Amazing Atheist’s racist douchebaggery:
It’s frustrated me that so many of the youtube atheists whose videos I used to watch turned out to be anti-feminists, but I think the most confusing thing is how TJ became such a big name among them. I understand thunderf00t’s appeal, although it dried up for me when he got away from cool science clips and satisfying but not particularly deep in retrospect takedowns of creationism. I could sort of understand Pat Condell’s in a “you are three beers and a chat in the garden after 10pm away from being less a grumpy, old, pretty racist man and more an actual fascist – and maybe this is me being really forgiving because I’m 17 and desperate for atheist voices” kind of way. I can see why a lot of them who seem to have drifted out of favour would have been big. But TJ? What the fuck does he actually have to offer? I dropped him even before I realised that Condell didn’t need the beers. I have no idea why anyone anywhere gives a fuck what he has to say about anything. I know his nom de rant is “The Amazing Atheist” but he isn’t actually amazing – that’s just branding. Urgh.
Anyway… I suppose I should watch the clip?
@1- I dunno. You summed it all up pretty well and have rendered any need to watch it moot.
Guess who did 97% of the talking (said Marcus, using interpretive dance)
Marcus: let me guess, it’s the default-human who did all the talking about issues that affect the begrudgingly-accepted-as-human.
Numerobis@#4: wow, you’re good!
@#3 Marcus
See, the guy with the baseball cap, that’s what he does. He talks on camera. By himself. He does it every day, probably has a hard time not doing it. I don’t remember watching him before with a guest on his video. I will cut him some slack, he probably is not a professional interviewer.
The guy with the shiny head, he writes stuff. I have not heard of him before, but I read the blog post that P Z linked to earlier. When he is motivated, he can write a post like a man whose ass is on fire. I could not stop reading, and that was one of the longest posts I have read in a while. I even read enough of the comment to understand that he was not going to give any ground to the bigots that showed up there. He is not a man to get into a written dispute with.
So I am not particularly surprised about which one did most of the talking.
and #4 numerobis
Since both of them are very talented in their own chosen means of communication, and both of them are on the same page here, why do we need to label folks default and begrudgingly-accepted?
Well, you know, we’re all doing what we can.
@K E Decilon
While I’m sure you’re talking specifically about the social justice community here, I’ve woken up to a continuing discussion of yet another murder of a black man at the hands of the criminal gang who supposedly protect and serve the American public. At least, I thought it was a continuing discussion at first – actually it’s an entirely new discussion, as there was another murder while I slept. It may be fair to argue that our acceptance of black people’s humanity, in social justice communities, is not begrudging, but sometimes I don’t think it’s accepted at all outside of it. When people will deny and deny and deny that a cop did anything wrong when there’s another man murdered in front of his partner and their child, how can we claim that they’re accepted as equally human?
Sure, we get it, woo, go us. They’re still being murdered.
Just saw that story, it never ends.
@#3 Marcus Ranum
Guess who did 97% of the talking (said Marcus, using interpretive dance)
Except that’s bullshit, as Martin speaks for 60% of the video, which you’d see if you watched it. I take your larger point about suppression of the voices of people of colour, but why lob untrue accusations at a video discussing this very issue?
Aside from all the normal cringing I got from watching “Amazing Atheist’s” video, it made me wonder, again, what PZ has against the “Dictionary Atheist” thing? I know this is a bit far-afield of the topic at hand. Martin’s article was dead on, AA is a typical clueless, whiny, white male, and an atheist. Doesn’t all this proud atheist racism in the community show us, yet again, that atheism is not necessarily the result of a logical, rational examination of one’s ideal and beliefs? There are (apparently) tons of irrational and bigoted atheists around.
Humanism, while not a perfect community, either, at least has the clearly defined concept that (should) exclude racism, sexism, etc. True, it’s not always applied and the community is also largely white guys, but atheism has no such clearly defined concepts. To assume it does leaves us wondering where the hell AA and his ilk get their ideals from. It certainly wasn’t from a logical rational examination of facts and beliefs.
When they came for the black people, TJ did not speak out, because he was not black.
@ revwubby #10. If you are truly interested then if you look on the left of the page there’s a search box where most if not all your curiosity will likely be satisfied.. Use the phrase dictionary atheists.
Pretty grossed out to see no one here is allowed an opposing viewpoint. “Freethought” my ass. Jesus.
You are allowed to have an opposing viewpoint but on the other hand we on the morally better side are allowed to point out the sheer stupidity of that viewpoint.
I must be hallucinating, because I just read back through the handful of comments here, and I’m pretty sure I saw opposing viewpoints being expressed.
#13 Is a bog-standard script most likely learned and regurgitated from one of the danker parts of the internet. A place that is soooo skeptical, soooo rational, that its denizens need never attempt to confirm the claims they’ve been fed.
From the Wiki article. Yep, real freethought is occurring. Funny how the opposing viewpoint, like AA, always tries arguments from their authority….