My Photo

The Out Campaign

Atheist Blogroll

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2005

« Live-blogging the Rapture | Main | Atheism, Sexism, Etc.: An Update »


Timothy (TRiG)
I think the word sexism implies intent.

And I think you're wrong. If sexism implies intent, what new word will we have to invent for unintentional sexism?



I think the word sexism implies intent
No. No, no and,
The problem is that most people don't think of themselves as sexist. They think that, well, of course women and men are equal! - but if a woman walks around in a shirt cut like that, of course men are going to leer at her and she's got no right to complain. Or, naturally women deserve to compete with men when they can but really we all know only exceptional women can do that, it's just a fact. And so on. Nobody sets out thinking, "Today I am going to behave like a misogynist jackass." It would be much easier to combat sexism if that were true.


Man, ugly chicks certainly are sensitive. Get over it. Atheists have a credibility problem and are considered humorless automatons. Way to perpetuate that stereotype. Men love attractive women. It is selected from an evolutionary standpoint. What a bunch of whiny beyotches you come off as.

Greta Christina

Nice, Pentimental. What a charmer. You must be a real devil with the ladies.


I do quite well, actually. The hyperbole is necessary to illustrate the ridiculousness and complete lack of sense of humor of your position.

Your entire blog is devoted to sexuality, McCreight initiated Boobquake, and, the two video bloggers being discussed are quite comfortable with their pulchritude and sexuality. Laci Green hosts a show called Sex, ferrchrissakes.

You can pretend all you want that people are not judged by appearance. It makes you appear foolish and bitter. Farrah Fawcett said it best:

God made man stronger but not necessarily more intelligent. He gave women intuition and femininity. And, used properly, that combination easily jumbles the brain of any man I've ever met.

Illustrating that attractive women can be an incentive to viewership of ideas is common sense. Getting your knickers in a knot over it is just plain ridiculous.

Greta Christina

Way to miss the point, Pentimental.

Your argument seems to be that using physically attractive women as bait can be an incentive to some straight male atheists... and that female atheists should therefore just suck it up and deal with it. However, it is also the case that doing this is clearly a disincentive to many female atheists... especially when it's done any attention to women's other qualities.

So when you say, "Let's go ahead and use physically attractive women as bait for straight men, without any mention of their other qualities," you are essentially saying, "It is more important to draw male atheists into the movement than female ones. Male atheists are the ones who count -- female atheists are only important if they can attract men." Which is a repulsive and indefensible position.

And when you use ugly, sexist, personally insulting language to make that point, you simply make it clearer that this repulsive and indefensible position is the position you are defending.

I strongly suggest that you read the comment policy on this blog. Criticism of ideas is accepted and even encouraged; personal insults are not. Any further use of that sort of language will result in you being banned from this blog.


Ohhh, not the dreaded ban! Gasp! Clutching my pearls! No, it is not implying that male Atheists are more important. That is almost a Christian leap of logic there. I say any means necessary to get the message out. Sex sells. Intelligent women sell too. We have you. That's great. But, you betray your intelligence with this indignant rant about sexism that just was not there.

You've done harm to the "cause" of female Atheists with this manufactured outrage over a relevant point. You also failed to address these bloggers own introduction of sex and sexism into the fray. Why?

Greta Christina
I say any means necessary to get the message out. Sex sells.

I am going to say this one more time, and then I am going to give up: Sex sells -- to whom?

The point of my anger, and Jen's anger, was not that Eller acknowledged that attractive spokespeople make a movement more appealing. The point was that he said that attractive WOMEN make a movement more appealing TO MEN... without saying anything about these women's other characteristics, such as intelligence and wit. When this happens, the clear message is that women only matter for our looks -- and that drawing men into the movement is what's most important. The clear message is that it doesn't matter if female atheists are alienated, as long as we have enough pretty ones around to get more men involved.

Lots and lots and LOTS of atheist women are complaining about this sort of attitude. We have been complaining about it for some time. (Including many conventionally pretty ones -- the idea that only ugly women care about the objectification of women is total bullshit.) It is not manufactured outrage. It is real. And lots of women are reporting that they are put off from participating in the atheist movement because of it. This is a serious problem that a lot of people in the movement -- of all genders -- are concerned about.

And your response to this problem is to use sexist, ugly, personally insulting language about the women who speak up about it; to insult our appearance (once again making our appearance the central issue); and to patronizingly tell us that we have to just suck it up, this is the way of the world, and we need to have a sense of humor about it.

Making it crystal clear -- once again -- that you see the concerns of female atheists as trivial. To the point where you will direct grossly sexist and personally insulting language at a prominent female atheist in her own blog, in which you are a guest.

And we should listen to you... why, exactly?

Oh, and P.S.: I didn't address the fact that many female bloggers (including myself) often write about sex because I fail to see the relevance... and you haven't explained why it's relevant. An interest in discussing sexuality does not equal using sex to sell. And it definitely does not equal reducing ourselves to nothing more than our sexuality, as bait for drawing straight men into the movement.


Nah, it's pretty much manufactured outrage. Sorry no one ever appreciated you for your looks. You certainly can rail on about nonsense. Wait, let me clutch my pearls so you can ban me. I admitted my first post was hyperbole, but, you can't move beyond that. You have a very narrow-minded view of men. It is rather disgusting, actually.

You are as egotistical as the average Christian, but you have made man hating your god. Whether or not you use certain words, the theme is evident. Can I go back in time and ask you to the prom?


You have a very narrow-minded view of men.

If we were to judge only from these posts of yours, that view would indeed be as narrow as a strand of hair.

Greta Christina

Pentimental: Thank you for sharing. But you seem intent on arguing with ideas I haven't expressed, don't hold, and have, in fact, spoken vehemently against. You seem intent on ascribing experiences to me that I have not had. And you want me to "move beyond" your use of venomous, hateful, misogynist, personally insulting language: which you have not apologized for, which you are continuing to use, and which, in fact, you defended as "necessary."

I knew from the beginning of this conversation that I would not convince you of anything. As is usually the case with any debate, the point is not to persuade one's opponent, but to persuade the audience. I engaged in this one mostly to demonstrate, to anyone who might still have a glimmer of doubt, exactly what it is that feminists are talking about when we talk about sexism and misogyny, and why it's important that we keep talking about it. I have now done this, and am moving on. I have more interesting things to do than to be your straw man of feminism. Like re-organizing my storage closet. In the words of Bad Willow: Bored now. Thank you for sharing.


Wait, you don't want comments to be hijacked, but you want me to provide a dissertation to refute your manufactured outrage. You pontificated for paragraphs what your positions were. If anyone is guilty of ascribing motive, it is you. Penis envy?

Greta Christina

Pentimental: Thank you for sharing.

Classic Timberland Boots

Nice, and thanks for sharing this info with us.Good Luck!

beijing Kungfu show

Your article looks good, I like bits and pieces of daily life, like a movie.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe/ Donate to This Blog!

Books of mine

Greta on SSA Speakers Bureau

  • Greta Christina is on the Speakers Bureau of the Secular Students Alliance. Invite her to speak to your group!

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Powered by Rollyo

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Atheism

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Sex

Some Favorite Posts: Art, Politics, Other Stuff