A+ (atheism plus), For A Third Glorious Age of Total Agreement


New Atheism” was built on the backs of heavyweights who had all written hard hitting best sellers. The social fabric was shaken by the approach of Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins and Dennet, appropriately dubbed no less than ‘the four horsemen’.

Now a series of bloggers, with conspicuously few achievements between all of them have decided that the community needs to be cleansed of subversive thought by expelling everyone who disagrees with them, and they are the ones to do it with a new movement called ‘Atheism Plus‘. The properties they most associate with folk like the horsemen are ‘old’ ‘white’ ‘male’ and ‘privileged’ (see below). Indeed a New Statesman article frequently quoted by the Freethoughtbloggers who started this, states quite clearly that:

“Atheism+ is a reaction against the “New Atheism” of Richard Dawkins”.

However they somehow manage to completely overlook the fact that the horsemen achieved their level of notoriety and recognition through ability and hard work, culminating in a series of best selling, ground shifting books: The God Delusion, God is NOT Great, Letter to a Christian Nation and Darwins Dangerous Idea to name but a FEW. The results of this can be seen when looking through the adword statistics where it actually turns out that Richard Dawkins alone is bigger than Atheism!

The Beatles may have been more popular than Jesus, but looks like Dawkins is now more popular than Atheism!

Dawkins, just so we are clear, has the prestigious academic title of Fellow of the Royal Society. That might not mean much to many, but it’s one of the higher awards given out by the Royal Society to people who made ‘ a substantial contribution to the improvement of natural knowledge, including mathematics, engineering science and medical science”.
Seriously is there anything in the entirety of the ‘Atheism Plus’ movement that can even approach this level of accomplishment?

So the founders of ‘Atheism plus’ have decided that, despite their lack of any real achievement, that the real thing atheism needs right now is to throw the likes of the horsemen under the bus and to form a splinter movement (click, its sooo appropriate).  That’s right the ‘Atheism plus’ will be gloriously free of older white men, irrespective of their actual contributions or achievements.

Jennifer McCreight, the founder of ‘Atheism Plus’ says what she thinks about old white men. Oddly enough ability and achievement don’t seem to factor into this equation at all!

So what are the founding principals of ‘Atheism plus’?

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.

So ‘Atheism Plus’ gets off to this incredibly bad start where of their guiding principals, 2-4 are subsets of 1. Why that is becomes obvious when you see what’s bottom of the list of the ‘Atheism Plus’ manifesto. Bottom of the heap, no. 5 of 5 is ‘the use of critical thinking’. Yup critical thinking is bottom of the pile for ‘Atheism Plus’. I find it even more amusing as I am an atheist because of critical thinking (1. methodology, then 2. conclusion, y’know the logical way of doing it), whereas they start with the assertion that they are ‘Atheists Plus’, then later decide that critical thinking is a good thing. Conclusion before the methodology? very ass backwards!

Now enter the fray another Freethoughtblogger, held to be one of the more sane and rational FTBers (apparently), one ‘Richard Carrier’. Richard sets the standards high by asserting:

” And Greta Christina and others have taken up the banner: Atheism Plus: The New Wave of Atheism. I am fully on board. I will provide any intellectual artillery they need to expand this cause and make it successful.”

..and that would be all very fine and well if the rest of Carriers blog wasn’t so ridden with wildly over the top polarizing rhetoric of eradicating and purging dark evil impurities that threaten our purity of essence (as someone has noted, it sounds more like Mccarthyism and Ayn Rands hate child). Indeed, I can say without a hint of hyperbole or exaggeration that is more Third Reich like than ‘Third Wave of atheism’ like. Whats that? Godwins law I hear you say? Well judge for yourself! You really have see it to believe it…..here’s some highlights!

“Don’t assume that because someone else did that, that it’s covered and you can give it a miss. No, we need to show numbers. So speak out wherever you see these two sides at loggerheads, and voice your affiliation, so it’s clear how many of us there are, against them. And this very much is an us vs. them situation. The compassionate vs. the vile. You can’t sit on the fence on this one. In a free society, apathy is an endorsement of villainy.”

and

“Those who don’t, those who aren’t shamed by being exposed as liars or hypocrits, those who persist in being dishonest or inconsistent even when their dishonesty or inconsistency has been soundly proven, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.”

(yeah thats the way to win hearts and minds with your intellectual artillery!)

and

“I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less? Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.”

and

Yes, it does. Atheism+ is our movement. We will not consider you a part of it, we will not work with you, we will not befriend you. We will heretofore denounce you as the irrational or immoral scum you are (if such you are). If you reject these values, then you are no longer one of us. And we will now say so, publicly and repeatedly. You are hereby disowned.

Yup, it’s real unashamedly divisive, brazenly polarizing totalitarian ‘you’re either with us or against us’ type stuff. But the really disturbing thing here is that if you do not entirely back ‘Atheism Plus’s dogmatically stated priorities, you are to be marginalized, excluded and attacked. To many of those who have escaped cults such as Scientology, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormonism this is the sort of viciously vindictive talk of retributional tactics that would likely give you flashbacks! It is this stated desire that people rather than ideas should be targeted that I find most disconcerting. OBEY OUR DOGMA OR BE DECRLARED A SUPRESSIVE PERSON! (you really should read this article, it is frighteningly similar to Carrier vision for ‘Atheism plus’).

But Carrier with his ‘intellectual artillery’ really doesn’t seemed to have thought this one through. So lets see, if American Atheists do not rename themselves ‘American Atheists Plus’, and identify themselves as ‘Atheists Plus’, Carrier will ‘know who to avoid’?
Well that’s an interesting proposition because it turns out that Richard Carrier and Greta Cristina are both scheduled to speak at the 2013 American Atheist convention in Houston.

Oh yes, it’s time for very red faces to take their list of world class achievements (/sarcasm) and ‘intellectual artillery’ and eat a very very VERY juicy slice of humble pie.

Given that American Atheists are NOT going to rename themselves as ‘American Atheist Plus’, or identify with this splinter group, this puts Richard Carrier and Greta Christian in a very difficult situation. Personally I think Carrier should write to David Silverman (a good guy!), the head of American Atheists in exactly the same terms he wrote to someone on his blog who said that they would remain, ‘just an atheist’

‘Atheism Plus’  should really stick with his guns here and tell these inferior ‘American Atheists’ what they think about them.

If they had any dignity or commitment to their ‘third glorious age’ of ‘Atheism Plus’, they would lead by example and write to David Silverman telling him that he, and his organization, is to be marginalized and excluded as there is no room for fence sitter in their new empire of pure ‘Atheism Plus’ and they will no longer be attending any conferences run by these mere inferior ‘atheists’. Indeed, personally I would encourage them to hold with their beliefs and splinter off with their pious, self-righteous, holier-than-thou ‘witch hunting’ sect.

But I’ll wager their commitment to ‘Atheism plus’, despite all their pompous rhetoric, is paper thin, and that we will not rid ourselves of these Mccarthyism type atheists so easily. I’ll wager the parasites will realize that without ‘New Atheism’, which let us not forget was born from the achievements of people with actual ability, y’know hard hitting heavyweights types, they cannot survive.  I expect that they will now start trying to weasel their way out of this by any and all means necessary as long as the conclusion is ‘no, it’s okay for ME to attend mere atheist conferences, its just everyone else who should shun and marginalize these mere inferior atheists’

I guess we will have our answer soon enough about Richard Carrier and Greta Christinas commitment to ‘Atheism Plus’ by whether they pull out of the American Atheist convention or not.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

463 Responses to “A+ (atheism plus), For A Third Glorious Age of Total Agreement”

  1. Ursus cetacea Says:

    The thing that strikes me most about the way they define themselves isn’t the divisiveness (As dreadful as the concept appears to me) but rather its the fact that they think that any rational atheist would be AGAINST social justice, women’s rights, critical thinking and skepticism. That regular atheists would be FOR racism, homophobia and transphobia. It’s so nonsensical. They’ve erected a strawman of vanilla atheism that everyone can hate. It’s the Christian strawman atheist touted by a new group and it makes me want to leave the community well alone and just ignore all of it.

    • Kris Says:

      The whole thing with thunderf00t set one of my feet out the door and this “Atheism+” crap got my other foot out. Good job “leaders” of the freethought community. Good on you for ostracizing an already ostracized group of people just because they aren’t feminists FIRST and atheists second.

      • True Colors Says:

        You won’t be missed. Later.

      • mimi Says:

        I’m a feminist FIRST and atheist second, and I still agree with you. This is some really weird stuff.

        There are some troglodytes and trolls on atheist boards, but to make it seem as though there is this huge sexism/racism problem that keeps out potential atheists is just not true. In order for this to be true atheists would have to be more intolerant and discomforting than the community they are living in-not likely if you ask me!

  2. hellsrage Says:

    Sounds like a bunch of dicks made a clique and went back to being children.

  3. Thunderf00t Says:

    some random statements about how ‘Atheism plus’ is being received around the web.

    Atheism+ is an ideological purge; nothing more and nothing less. And it has fuck all to do with atheism.

    Atheism + is just some smug nonsense dreamed up by the more egotistical and self-absorbed bloggers at the increasingly inappropriately-named Freethought Blogs network.

    A+ is the Tea Party of atheism

    It’s all very People’s Front of Judea vs. The Judean People’s Front.
    I can’t say it encourages me to get involved in the organised atheist community.
    Splitters!

    You make Atheism + sound almost laudable, when in reality it seems to be the product of some deep rooted personal animosities reminiscent of socialist groupuscules.

    Atheism+. Because Bright didn’t fail hard enough.

    Atheism+. Its like atheism and Mccarthyism bastard child, BEGIN THE WITCH HUNT!

    New New news from the Ministry of Free Thought. Double Plus Good Atheists have Misogyny down by 100% ……… Misogyny has always been down 100%

    • oolon Says:

      Haha random! Is this random like your 100% on target graph on FtBs had no conformational bias? I’d like a copy of the ThunderDictionary please so all my assertions can be true too…

      • Ron Murray Says:

        > I’d like a copy of the ThunderDictionary please so all my assertions can be true too…

        So right now, they’re not true?

      • Randy Says:

        If you’re referring to his results from his YouTube survey, which he presented as a graph, I believe his point was that he has a greater reach than FtB, and that his views were demonstrably in line with more individuals than the opposing views presented at FtB were at the same time. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

        • dougal445 Says:

          errm. ! No! The youtube poll was to demonstrate nothing more than than that the ftb view was not representative outside of ftb.
          For evidence i point you to thunders original post about the poll at ftb, and if that was beyond your comptehension skills i point you to the youtube video where thunder explains this to people who like yourself missrepresented the claims he made for the poll.

      • dougal445 Says:

        please indicate where thunderf00t said his youtube poll had no cpnfirmational bias.

    • HuntingGoodwill Says:

      Didn’t I tell you a couple of threads ago?

      Once Americans see something nice, they want to have it, kill those who currently have it, put a McDonald’s on it and sue everyone who disagrees with “America #1!”.

      It’s a freaking stereotype, but here we go again.

      Once Hitchens and Dawkins stuck out their heads long enough on American soil (TV/print/radio/web) to reach millions, give them hope, a face to what they believed in, a voice that was so penetrating the debate, that even Faux News had to invite them on air, the pseudo-rational parasites waited long enough for Hitchens’ body to get cold, so that they can spit on his grave and start a smear-campaign over Dawkins too?

      I know it’s all about the money and the fame, but that’s THEIR, “Abrainism +”‘s opinion.

      These parasites of the movement don’t get it; Hitchens and Dawkins were invited over and over again, because no matter how imbecile the arguments of the opponent were, no matter how ass-backwards the rationalization for his/her belief were………..they respected Hitchens and Dawkins.

      Because no matter what they thought of them, no matter what they thought of science and their Atheism, they knew who they were dealing with: really intelligent people, who stood behind an idea and who knew how to communicate it.

      And what do the parasites do? The pseudo-feminists/romanticizing Communists like Myers want to take over the “party” and find some new Fuhrer to create this new, improved, Atheism 1984+.
      After all, we know that nothing can be good and just, right and useful, unless a bunch of intellectually retarded Americans repackage it and turn it into Real Patriotic American Atheism+.

      With veiled attempts of turning Hitchens/Dawkins/Dennett & Harris, into Sturmbandfuehrer and concentration camp fans, who were out on a mission to pollute the minds of real 1984+ Atheists and flood the market with fake, Chinese jewelry!!!!!!!!

      Sorry, you will need more than that, asshats.
      We don’t believe you!

      All you want is to dine on the achievements of others and like the good parasites you are, make the movement sick and die, while trying to capitalize on said people’s achievements, by forming little AntiDefamationLeagues, where you can sue every convention that allows speakers who get paid with the money YOU think you deserve.

      No thanks! Go fuck yourselves and play in traffic.

      And a astronomically huge LOL@Carrier: his intellectual “missiles” of stinking diarrhea.

      We won’t let irrational morons destroy the movement and belittle the achievements of the original “Four Horsemen”.

      If they want it, they can have it: Atheists 1984+, you can officially go and fuck yourselves.
      We won’t let you destroy this thing with your little self-centered mental diarrhea.

      Welcome back to reality and find yourselves some REAL jobs.
      Just……..do the rational people of this world a favor and SHUT THE FUCK UP! :)

      • charmingdevil Says:

        Annnnnnnd this is why this splinter movement is so dangerous. The damage is already done, and now people are looking for scapegoats, and what a convenient one people will find in splitting down traditional national lines, or conservative/liberal ones, or any other of the old camps. It’s not just the intellectual featherweights of atheism+ that are going to do the damage, it’s people like our friend here who are going to blame the split on ‘Americans’, (relying on ridiculous national stereotypes) who are going to create EVEN FURTHER infighting among atheists at a time where their hold is already tenuous.

        In the end, I don’t think atheism+ is going to really go anywhere without some signature achievements or literature. But what they will do is further fragment the atheist community. But they won’t do it alone. It will be with the cooperation of fools like you.

        • HuntingGoodwill Says:

          I guess the whole “setting the premise” thing after the first paragraph went an AU over your head, huh?

          I’ll quote myself:

          ————————————————————–

          “Once Americans see something nice, they want to have it, kill those who currently have it, put a McDonald’s on it and sue everyone who disagrees with “America #1!”.

          It’s a freaking stereotype, but here we go again. ”

          ————————————————————–

          That post was a prime example of sarcasm, describing a parody of stereotypes associated with the USA, while those who created the parody don’t even get that their “creation” is an unintentional parody.

          Like McDonalds selling HAMBURGERS to Americans, which were food brought over by immigrants from HAMBURG/GERMANY and now are being sold, worldwide, as the most american thing ever.

          Now you’ve got the “Atheism+” stereotypical “we’ll do it the American way!!!” response, complaining about “old white men” running the show and preventing anybody from taking part, while people like Hitchens and Dawkins, both not being born or raised in Texas, talked about (religion-made) racism, sexism, opportunism, lies, deceit and hate for intelligence and science.

          Which renders “Atheism+” into a f**king parody, while claiming “originality” and being the New Wave of Real Atheism.

          Is it more clear now, or do you need a Bible-length explanation of every paragraph in my post, “fool”?

          • charmingdevil Says:

            Uh huh. So your reduction of this movement to splits that fit favorably along your preconceptions of national stereotypes is acceptable becaaaaauuuuse….you admit they are stereotypes? How in the world is Atheism+ even doing it the “American Way”? They certainly aren’t forming their criticism along national lines, and I don’t think their concern is that it is non-American, or that it’s not ‘theirs’ enough, as much as they erroneously believe that traditional atheism contradicts their other major leanings (the cesspool of social justice online activism). Hell, what you describe as ‘The American Way’ is so broadly defined that ANY group that splintered between the traditionalists and a new wave could moan about said new wave being ‘The American Way.’ Either way, you know that no one country or continent has a patent on atheism, yes? That you couldn’t realistically compare Hitchens and Dawkins making their arguments in America to American burger stands, because atheism is not the cultural heritage of Europe alone? That there were atheists in America before Hitchens and Dawkins ever came along (no disrespect, I think they did a lot to help.)

            You know, I don’t know why I bother. My original point still stands. This splinter group is going to cause splits unrelated to it as traditional atheism looks for scapegoats to explain it, aided by people like you, eager to find a reason to complain about your original bogeymen. Which I think is more dangerous in the end, since I don’t really expect this whole atheism+ thing to go anywhere on its own merits.

          • HuntingGoodwill Says:

            You still don’t get it. Yes, the premise is set on stereotypes and the parody the “Atheism+” creates is, that it follows said stereotypes.

            The typical bi-polar approach to everything; Democrats vs. Republicans, North vs. South, McDonald’s vs. Burger King, Coca vs. Pepsi, black vs. white, etc…

            Followed by the “either you are with us or against us!”-mantra.
            As if there were no shades of grey in between.

            Dawkins doesn’t fit that and no way in hell did Hitchens.
            But now you’ve got people who are trying to create their own anti-rational Apartheid and monetize it.

            Just in case you still haven’t realized it, the “old, white men” who were supposedly crippling the movement so bad were *coincidentally* both from the UK and both the most prominent figures of the movement. Hmmmm, coincidence, hmmmm.

            And if you still don’t get it, then show me the international figures in “Atheism+”……….after all, the US population constitutes for roughly 5% of the world’s population, yet all of the members of this New World Order in the realm of Atheism are coincidentally belonging to a single group of Americans.

            All of them WHITE, ENTITLED PSEUDO-RATIONALISTS, who belittle the problems of people elsewhere and whine about t-shirts and elevators. If it was a parody, I’d laugh my ass off. But it’s not. It’s actually their First World-no problems having-teen angst-world. And this shit is so pathetic, it goes even beyond me being able to ridicule it.

      • charmingdevil Says:

        Alright, first off, you are taking national stereotypes, assuming they actually reflect the nature of the country, and basing your criticism of this group off that fact. So you are essentially basing your criticism of Atheism+ off the idea that Americans will naturally corrupt anything they are introduced to. And you tell me I don’t get it when I say the big danger is people like you splitting traditional atheism down old lines of national and political discourse? If anything, atheism+ is much more compatible with the far left than the far right, which means that if anything America is one of the least compatible places for them. And if you didn’t notice, they aren’t very popular. Saying that they’re the result of American national attitudes is sort of like saying the Klan is the result of American white supremacist attitudes. They are, but their bile is hardly restricted to one country, and they’re ridiculed by the public at large. And are you really so sensitive to national pride that the idea of Hitchens or Dawkins being criticized is something you automatically think is a slight to your nation? I don’t think they’d be very happy about being dragged into that sort of paranoid nationalism. Dawkins/Hitchens atheism was pushed forward by thinkers from the UK, but I would hardly say that it was a uniquely British atheism, and they found followers all over the world precisely because rational thought cuts through national barriers. Unfortunately so does irrational thought and the desire to be outraged. So while Atheism+ may have Americans as its most prominent figures right now, I think you’re kidding yourself if you don’t think that they have fans outside their home country. Especially since they are so interwoven with other international movements (Feminism, social justice, etc.)

    • Name (will not be published) Says:

      I don’t have much of anything to add, but,

      “It’s all very People’s Front of Judea vs. The Judean People’s Front.
      I can’t say it encourages me to get involved in the organised atheist community.
      Splitters!”

      I wrote that!

      (Not the Monty Python sketch, but that comment.)

    • Raymond Says:

      Thunderf00t, my cyber friend, you are indeed correct about these Atheist plus Tpartiers, I mean ur point about Carrier’s with us or agin us, and those who say marginalise those who disagree, and ur point about the 5 things they’re for with 4 being boiled down to one actually, social justice, while atheists reject religion’s social injustice already. I like to refer to the Atheist plusserTprty folks as as the Four horses asses of the Apocryphal-ists.

  4. John W. Loftus Says:

    I disagree with how you frame this debate. Noneteless, my take on it can be found here:

    http://www.skepticblogs.com/debunkingchristianity/2012/08/26/atheism-has-existed-for-decades-theres-nothing-new-but-the-hate/

    Cheers

    • oolon Says:

      You might want to check it out… Or you might conclude John is completely without credibility when ‘PZs divisiveness’ has driven him back to religion…

      http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/i-went-to-church-today.html

      I found this as someone in true Poe’s law fashion was lampooning the ‘other side’ as all heading back to religion due to the FtBs ‘war’. Surely no one would be that stupid…. Well yes no matter how daft a proposition you can come up with someone will fit it somewhere :-)

  5. John W. Loftus Says:

    Here is a good response to Atheism Plus:

    http://www.skepticblogs.com/musingsfromtheskepticalleft/2012/08/25/hot-off-the-presses-sb-responds-to-atheism/

  6. BreadGod Says:

    Jen McCreight doesn’t understand that the “old atheism” she mocks so much was built upon a thousand years worth of scholarly study. You can’t create a new atheist movement simply because you were mistreated by a couple assholes at an atheist conference. It would be like if I created a new atheist movement simply because someone called me a fatass.

    • Mike Paps Says:

      It would be like if I created a new atheist movement simply because someone called me a fatass

      We’ll call that Atheist XXXXL

    • Kyle Says:

      I agree with the whole thousand years of scholarly study thing, but I think you’re unfairly belittling Jen McCreight by saying she was just mistreated by a couple assholes. I’m not with Atheism+, but I can see that it’s a reaction to widespread hateful and misogynistic attitudes in the atheist community. There are dozens of examples among the comments found right here on this post.

  7. Gabriel Says:

    After I read some of Carrier’s replies to the comments, I can only think of Nietzsche’s statement: “he who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster”. It saddens me to witness such division between atheists. Of course atheists may have different values, but this Atheism+ is just…dogmatic.

  8. Scented Nectar Says:

    Their main agenda is to control the speakers’ circuit, and who gets to be a public figure or not. Same as before this re-branding attempt. There’s not a sincere bone among them. Mission drift becomes mission infection.

    • theGomezSymbol Says:

      Pretty clearly about the web hits and speaker invites. I think you and I briefly chatted about this on your blog a month ago or so, and how none if this nazitheists had done anything significant enough to earn them even an appointment as stable boy/girl to the horsemen :)

      • Scented Nectar Says:

        My crappy memory doesn’t remember chatting, but it sounds about right, if by nazitheists, you mean the feminazi-atheists. My fave name for them is femtheists. :)

        I see absolutely no qualifications of most of these A+theism people to speak on behalf of any group, or about any relevant topic. Yet they want to refer speakers (and I assume they will be including themselves, since they’ve spoken before) to events.

        All they themselves do is blog about their mental health problems and/or feminist persecution fantasies. If they want to speak about those things too, and it sure seems like they DO want to make sexism the chronic topic when they speak at events, that ironically takes them from being figurative professional victims, to literal ones.

        • theGomezSymbol Says:

          Exchanged comments, though I think I could have been logged in via my LJ acct.

          And yes, agreed on the qualifications (or lack thereof). I did read Greta Christina’s book, and I thought it was a good piece, though she didn’t go off the deep end in it like I’ve read in her blog. Still waiting for PZ’s long-promised “magnum opus”, though I’ll be looking at reviews before I give the man any of my hard-earned money. As far as Ophelia’s written work is concerned, thanks but no thanks…

  9. The Devil's Towelboy Says:

    Another take from a long term observer –

    http://greylining.com/2012/08/23/this-week-in-ftbs-year-zero-atheismplus/

  10. Moriarty Says:

    Dare I suggest anyone not signed up as a card carrying member of the A+ Ubermensch does not attend the 2013 American Atheist convention in Houston?

    Or any other convention or meeting their fascist little group are attending come to that.

    • Ursus cetacea Says:

      That’d work if that wasn’t their goal. As Scented Nectar pointed out, it’s about exclusion of people who aren’t part of the clique, I would say everyone that can go, should go, show the numbers, avoid their talks or not, but show what we are all interested in and get the community to wake up to the fact that it’s not a dichotomous conflict but rather a community with a spectrum of interests.

      • Moriarty Says:

        I seriously doubt their clique on its own is big enough to make a convention cost effective, if the word gets around their presence is driving away attendees they won’t get invited.

        Them being invited is validating their bullshit.

        I could be wrong but I for one will no longer attend anything any of them are at, ever.

        • Ursus cetacea Says:

          Hrm, yes I see your point now, I’m a convention n00b, never been to one myself due to personal constraints on mobility. What about just ignoring any talk they present? Do they look at the numbers within the individual talks and see which ones are popular and which are ignored? They must do surely. So it gives the opportunity to still see what you want. Though I suppose it won’t be quite as effective as a full scale boycott of anyone associated with it. The trouble is I can’t help but see this as playing into the dichotomy rather than tearing such a system up.

        • CommanderTuvok Says:

          Perhaps it is time for conference organisers to pull their invites to have these bullies and troublemakers as speakers? Of course, I would oppose any ban on them turning up as attendees, but if they feel so beligerent towards the current atheist/skeptic conference circuit, they can suck it up in terms of speaker roles and panels.

        • anon Says:

          If you want to ban them you’re not better than they are.

          Let them spout their bullshit. Its the quickest way to get everyone to realize how crazy they are.

          • CommanderTuvok Says:

            I said I would oppose any ban. That doesn’t mean we have to give these people speaking roles. Why should we? They have made it clear they regard as sub-par.

    • xx(@SisterChromatid) Says:

      PZ said he won’t speak at any conference where Abbie Smith is a speaker. I bet the same goes for Thunderf00t. Clearly the secret to keeping the A+ folks at bay is to invite their enemies to speak at conferences. I suspect that hating Thunderf00t is an implied requirement of their cult– as is shunning Paula Kirby and declaring Grothe a misogynist (and calling for his resignation).

      Other unspoken aspects appear to be that members must think of PZ and Rebecca as “moral examples” and “dear leaders”; they must also avoid parody sites and must publically declare that the cult’s “enemies” are their enemies. If you cross them, they will attempt to destroy you. They are clearly looking for people to hate so they can whip themselves into a frenzy of imagined superiority as they pretend they are about social justice for all. Most people can read between the lines and see that the A+ “movement” has very little to do with social justice and very much to do with a hypocritical group thinking they are fit to issue mass judgements against others. The whole group of them seem to confuse random trolling on the internet as being somehow caused by the people they have decided are enemies– (and if you disagree, you must be a misogynist, of course). And FTB/skepchick bloggers are all stuck in this mess and must remain silent or jump on board the crazy train. tsk

      • Vicky Caramel (@MrsVickyCaramel) Says:

        I agree with your views on what they are, but not so sure about how to deal with them. They do so much to stifle debate and silence criticism… it would be nice to draw them out into the real world.

        • snowrunner Says:

          Actually drawing them out will just reinforce their ego.

          The best idea I can come up with is that if people like PZ are speaking for people to either get up and walk out or get up and turn their backs on them. That’s a much clearer message on how the community at large is perceiving them than “drawing them out” or even try to “discuss” with them.

          Reality is that you CANNOT have a factual / rational debate with someone who debates emotionally, because whatever you say will either be perceived as a direct attack OR as you not understanding the issue. The last year should have been a pretty good representation of this.

  11. Jimbo Says:

    Great to see someone else associating the A+/FTB/Skepchick behaviour with McCarthyism. That’s exactly what it is.

  12. Jimbo Says:

    And Thunderfoot, please don’t let people pressure you into not commenting on this stuff. People like yourself, Dawkins, Harris and Paula Kirby tried ignoring FTB and Skepchick for more than a year and it did not work.

    The absence of any strong opposition has given a lot of people the impression that they have credibility. Now that all of the aforementioned people have spoken, combinied with this A+ fiori, we can see their credibility fraying at the edges.

    Really need yourself and others to keep the pressure on. There has to be a pushback.

    • oolon Says:

      Ignoring them did not work in what way? You might find that this would ‘work’ fine if you or anyone else *continued* ignoring….

      “The absence of any strong opposition has given a lot of people the impression that they have credibility”

      Hehe I’d agree with you there – a stab to the heart of ‘slime pitters’ everywhere :-) … But… But… Lots of people read Phawrongula… Honest!

    • Jimbo Says:

      “You might find that this would ‘work’ fine if you or anyone else *continued* ignoring….”

      For how long? Give them another year of sustained growth?

      Ignoring them didn’t make them go away for the last 12 months, why would it work for the next 12? FTB and Skepchick have done nothing but grow their number of supporters over the last 12 months.

      They have a simple formula of pretending the only comments they get are misogynistic in nature while ignoring all valid criticism. That works on the ordinary commenter like you and I. It doesn’t work when Paula Kirby, Thunderfoot, Dawkins and Harris step in.

      For the first 12 months after Elevatorgate we had heavy hitters like PZ Myers on one side and ordinary commenters on the other. Noobs see that and choose sides accordingly. There needs to be some pushback.

      • oolon Says:

        …and if they carry on growing and no one ‘pushes back’… What happens Jimbo that means you need to be pushing at all?

        • Jimbo Says:

          Sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you’re on about now.

          • oolon Says:

            You seem to be under the impression that ignoring them allows them to grow… Well so what? Moths are attracted to flames from your point of view. Why are you bothered if people are attracted to their brand of bullshit rather than the slimepitters brand, or TFs brand or whatever floats your boat?

          • Acathode Says:

            oolon: Is that your stance on religious bullshit also? Or is it only “atheistic” bullshit that we should keep ignoring?

          • oolon Says:

            Right so now we need a new non-holy war on factions within atheism because we disagree slightly… I’m sure any fundies reading this may laugh themselves into a paralytic state, which is probably the only way your war will move atheism forward.

          • Jimbo Says:

            “Right so now we need a new non-holy war on factions within atheism because we disagree slightly”

            WTF? Who created the factions? A bunch of power hungry people tore the ateist and skeptical movements apart for their own gain. The factions are already there. They created them, not us.

          • oolon Says:

            “tore the atheist and skeptical movements apart”…

            No they fucking didn’t – there is no one atheist and sceptical movement you blithering moron. There are many atheist and sceptical movements (Note the ‘s’) – the FtBs lot are part of many different ones and now with atheism+ they may even start their own. Although ‘their’ is still not accurate as AronRa at least is no fan it seems…

          • Jimbo Says:

            OMFG, learn to read will you.

            “A bunch of power hungry people tore the ateist and skeptical movements apart for their own gain.”

            This time with emphasis:

            “A bunch of power hungry people tore the ateist and skeptical MOVEMENTS apart for their own gain.”

  13. justnorrik Says:

    It has the feeling that a small group is determined to taint the use of the word “atheist” as much as they can… This tainting process is much like the bully system theists use to control who can run churches and who can’t, so atheists will have denominations now?

    • oolon Says:

      Yeah its all a conspiracy by the fundies really – 50 years ago they bred a Peezus specifically to undermine the nascent godless movement.

      • justnorrik Says:

        I don’t see any conspiracy, so I guess I missed that one.. I simply pointed out the use of rhetoric by the “A+” crowd is very similar if not identical in nature than that used by religious zealots to divide and conquer those who seek to disagree within the community…
        One can use peer pressure of the within group to pressure those on the outside group to come back to the “flock”.. People don’t like to be rejected, ignored or exiled and the use of a threat to that end is the same method of many religions to retain it’s members..

        • oolon Says:

          That is going to work really well on sceptic-atheists right? A group that when pushed to conform will do exactly the opposite… Hence idiocy like phawrongula and the other ‘parody’ sites set up just because some egocentric nutters think FtBs are forcing them to conform to some greater ideals.

  14. Peter Ferguson Says:

    As far as I am concerned, A+ is essentially an attempt by FTB to feel more important than they are; to have something that is theirs. I read all their posts regarding A+, especially Carrier’s blog. A+ failed at the first hurdle; they openly proselytise an ‘us v them’ mentality and it this could not be clearer with how they dealt with Carrier. I messaged both Greta and Jen concerning his comments, especially calling people ‘retards’ and douchebags for not falling into line. Greta simply said she emailed him and is not responsible for what people say about A+, Jen expressed similar sentiments: http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag/2012/08/responding-to-common-misconceptions-about-atheism/. Although it is true they cannot control what people say; they do, however, have the ability to publicly denounce such behaviour and their unwillingness to denounce Carrier for his ableism shows they are more concerned with their clique than they are with the values they claim to have.

    • snowrunner Says:

      Seriously?

      ———————————-

      9. You’ve started a cult!

      If I start wearing a silly hat, distributing pink jackboots for uniforms, and getting Kool-Aid to provide refreshments at all events, then you can start worrying.

      ———————

      She thinks this is what makes a cult a cult? Wow, they are even less able than I though they were if that is what they truly belief.

  15. Rant In A-Minor Says:

    A+ is little more than an exercise in auto-fellatio by underachieving egomaniacs with a burgeoning messianic complex …

  16. CommanderTuvok Says:

    I’m glad so many have called out the BIG STRAWMAN that the FfTB (aka AtheismPlus) group have pushed and promoted.

    Richard Carrier let the mask slip and revealed the ugly truth. They are determined to push the notion that if you are not a fully committed member of Atheism+, then it is impossible to be a humanist, to believe in equal rights for women, to be a feminist, etc.

    You know what this tactic reminds me of? Theists who state you can’t be moral if you don’t believe in God. Also, like theists, they have erected barriers to criticism and opposing POV’s. Many of the FfTB articles on the issue have moderation automatically in place, and any comment that asks too many difficult questions of them, does not make it though.

    Finally, we have the issue of “victimhood”, something that theists are very good at. Apparently, after a year of insulting, demeaning and throwing shit at those they don’t like, as soon as someone stands up to them, they cry like babies. Bullies, pure and simple. The funny thing is, they are so full of cognitive dissonance and arrogance they can’t see why they have provoked such as reaction.

    Ophelia keeps on banging on about how many former associates and friends she has lost in recent months. Yet, she still can’t figure it out. She hasn’t looked in the mirror!

    The development of AtheismPlus has sprouted because of the hostile reaction the Baboons got at TAM2012. Here, they realised that a large portion of the atheist/skeptic community are fed up with their bullying and harassment. They thought they could get the majority on board with their McCarthyism, but now they find themselves laughed at and mocked (like Surly Amy). They really don’t like the taste of their own medicine!

    Hence, we now see the final, desperate gambit – a huge false dichotomy. “Us = good, everyone else = bad”. Nothing in-between.

    I urge everybody to challenge the Baboons at every opportunity. When one of their number gets one of their hit-pieces in the press (like New Statesman), hit the comment boards. Reveal the truth, cite the evidence, shine the harsh light of truth of these nutcases and how hypocritical and nasty they are.

    Sensible and intelligent people will see through this bullshit of theirs.

  17. CommanderTuvok Says:

    Oh, and I will also point out the the AtheismPlus movement is riddled with privileged, American, middle class, white, and educated members!!!

    So, they are obviously racist bigots, or summat!!!

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      Yes, but they’re not all men, so it’s okay. (sarcasm)

    • oolon Says:

      And that is one of their major aims… To get more non-‘white privileged american white men’ to stand up for atheism… And your problem with that is…?

      • CommanderTuvok Says:

        “To get more non-’white privileged american white men’ to stand up for atheism”

        …and to do that, the AtheismPlus movement has demonstrated it has a problem with ageism. That particular prejudice has not escaped our notice. To do that, fellow humanists, feminists, skeptics, atheists have been attacked and slurred for trivial reasons – usually for disagreeing on just one contention. To do that, the people behind AtheismPlus has infantilised women, and now appear to want to infantilise non-whites as well.

        So, why would any “non-white privileged american white men” want to join that motley bunch! Have you asked James Onen what he thinks? He thinks you’re a bunch of idiots. But good luck on your quest, it won’t take long for everybody to realise you are searching for tokens to boost your own credibility.

        • oolon Says:

          So you have no problem with it but find it impossible to articulate clearly as it would involve you agreeing with the evil empire in some way… What you don’t like is how they are going about it and you have 20:20 vision for any splinters in their eyes.

          How about you quit whining about how others are going about it and do something yourself?

          • oolonthewhiner Says:

            LMAO, so olon,the king of whiners, the one who has one thrid of the comments here whining, is now accusing others of being hypocrites for whining.
            Dont look in the mirror much do you oolon!

  18. Ciaran Says:

    There seems to be a pretence that the ‘old white men’ were not heavily supported by the A+ atheists until Elevatorgate. One of the A+ crew even had a Dawkins ringtone at that conference.

  19. The Devil's Towelboy Says:

    Richard Carrier’s new book –

  20. CommanderTuvok Says:

    Appropriate meme –

  21. Kaylakaze Says:

    Their tactics are becoming more and more Fox News-like, though when I think back, it started very FN like too. It’s as if Douchy and the other Fox and Freaks came on one morning and were like “We just got the rules of the Democrat National Convention and, surprisingly, there’s no rule against animal sacrifice!” “Not only that, there’s not even a rule against HUMAN sacrifice!” “You know, some people are saying that this means they’re planning satanic rituals at the convention” “Yes, I’ve heard that.”

  22. JT Says:

    Richard Carrier has lost his mind. He was the only blogger over at FTB that I still read. I’ve now stricken him from my favorites folder and, with that, am now completely FTB-free.
    Some people have been suggesting that those of us who do not subscribe to Atheism Plus (the vast majority of atheists) avoid any conferences where the horde are speaking. I agree with this strategy. It’s the only thing that will work.

    • oolon Says:

      Hehe one bad post in your opinion and his whole body of work is now anathema to you. How wonderfully free you must feel now you have got your head right up there….

      • Palindromemordnilap Says:

        If a blog you frequented endorsed Hitler, would you continue to go to it? This is an exaggeration, but the basic idea is the same,

        • eikonoplast Says:

          One bad post about something really contentious. If JT wants to quit reading the guy, his method would be in keeping with science.

          • eikonoplast Says:

            Curses… foiled again! By my own logic, you must stop reading my replies, Oolon. Here’s another attempt at my rebuttal quote:

          • eikonoplast Says:

            HA! ok… at 37:07, he says what I’m trying to quote. I think the ads on the video are blocking my attempt to link to the time on the vid.

          • oolon Says:

            Unfortunately I listened and you are saying that because x theory by Einstein (Etc) was proven wrong once then it is useless? Err yeah in the field of mathematics or physics you are right…. But I’m not even saying that — I’m saying that just because *One* of Einsteins (Or whoevers) theories was proven wrong or that he even theorised once that bunnies control the internet (A stinker of a theory!) you don’t write off all he creates due to one stinker. Get it? JT is not being ‘scientific’ in his comment… At all.

      • Randy Says:

        Is this not the marketplace of ideas? There are plenty of atheist blogs, ranging from average folks to scientists and philosophers, in a wide range of subject areas. We cannot read them all. If one goes sour, there are suitable alternatives. Unless we have some particular business reason to follow a blog, there are plenty of other things to be interested in. For me, that’s been the sole upside to this splintering; atheism is much bigger than I thought.

        Readers are leaving FtB blogs because they’re being told that a lot of good people aren’t welcome, and the manner in which they’re being told is essentially via flamewar.

  23. robotanna Says:

    Wow someone’s really mad that for once a movement is looking to center on something other than white men

    I heard that like, not making everything center around and be about white men is like, reverse racism, which is the same thing as racism or something! How terrible, and like, bad and stuff.

    • CommanderTuvok Says:

      When AtheismPlus organises a conference, we’ll see how many evil white men turn up. A lot, I imagine. It will certainly be a sea of “white”. How horrible. They obviously must be sooooo racist!!!

    • svanveer Says:

      Ughhh.. have you read anything Thundef00t wrote ? The movement does not need to center on any race, gender, age-group.. just on people that bring true weight in the scale to advance ATHEISM.. not on divisive people with no accomplishments to show for who want their own agenda to overshadow what atheism is about.

    • Anonymous Says:

      I direct you to Paula Kirby’s discussion of the subject. In case you’re all TL;DR, she points out that no one’s been stopping the women from being a larger part of the community but themselves.

      • ffffffffffffffff Says:

        The “Sisterhood of the Oppressed” letter is an amazing read. Really, it can apply to a lot of other issues, like claims that there’s a lack of LGBT people prominent in atheism, sports, etc. The best way to tackle that is to try and simply be an active member yourself, etc.

    • Acathode Says:

      Except their movement has f all do social justice, feminism, or humanism, or anything else that’s actually good.

      If A+ was just “hey, we are a gang of atheists that are also going to focus on feminism and other similar stuff!”, they would get thumbs up and encouragement.

      But they are not, A+ is a group that says “Hey! We are the good guys, and if you’re not with us that means you are EVIL! You got it? Anyone not A+ is a racist woman-hating scumbag that can go fuck themselves with porcupines!”.
      The whole social justice thing is just a tool that they use so that they can paint it as “A+ = good, everyone else = evil”. In reality, most people involved with the atheism community are not racist, nor misogynistic, nor homophobic, they just happen to disagree with FTB and SC.

      The main purpose of A+ is a power grab, it’s an attempt to gain more influence so that they for example can put pressure on convent organizers on what speakers they should or shouldn’t have, get harassment policies against fake jewelry in place, or just plain bully people into silence.

      • mdevile Says:

        That’s really not it at all. It’s a group of people who identify as atheists who want to be more active with social justice issues. We acknowledge that not everyone in the atheist community wants to focus on those issues, so we want a space and group where we can have those discussions and promote diversity, without dealing with harassment and being accused of wasting time and resources on the things that matter to us.
        Again, we don’t expect everyone to care about the same issues or in the same way, and you’re more than welcome to not be a part of it. Nobody’s going to judge you for not being part of the discussion unless you come over to specifically whine that we shouldn’t be having the discussions in our own spaces. Nobody, except Carrier, was calling for a with us or against us mentality. The discussions I’ve seen on Greta Christina’s blog, and in Jen’s follow ups were more along the lines of “nobody is insisting that you join, but if you do, these behaviors won’t be tolerated”.
        We

        • Acathode Says:

          “As for the next steps on how to get rid of that garbage, I’ll make another post with my ideas soon. … I know I’d love for people to start wearing A+ pins and Surlyramics so I know who I want to chat with.” – Jen McCreight

          Because not wanting to speak to the racists, sexists and homophobic A-less garbage really isn’t judgmental…

          Carrier just happened to say what all of them were thinking, but really, it’s not hard to read between the lines or the comments and tweets from the other A+ supporters either.

          FTB have a long history of falsely accusing their critics of being racists, misogynistic, and similar, when in reality all the critics did was to not agree with everything that was being said. When these people now are starting a movement to exclude “the misogynists, racists and homophobes”, it really is hard to see it for what it is, a movement where they want to exclude anyone who dares criticize them.

          If the A+ thing was coming from a more reasonable source, where for example civil discussion between disagreeing people were possible without any part being labeled a misogynists who should shove a rotten porcupine up his ass, A+ would not be met with this kind of hostility.

          But it isn’t, A+ is coming from a bunch of hate-mongering, self-righteous drama-queens, with a (poorly) hidden agenda underneath the thin veneer of “social justice”.

          • mdevile Says:

            Because not wanting to speak to the racists, sexists and homophobic A-less garbage really isn’t judgmental…

            Are you trying to imply that we should want to speak to the racists, sexists and homophobes? Like, in an attempt to win them over or something? Or are we supposed to seek them out and let them spew misogynistic, racist and homophobic grossness at us because it’s their constitutional right to be hateful and apparently our constitutional duty to shut up and deal with it?

            Also, how is wanting to chat with people who clearly show that they belong to a group you’re also affiliated with suddenly a terrible crime? Wouldn’t that be like saying going to, say Comic Con, and seeking out your fellow Batman fans makes you a judgmental asshole for dissing on the Wolverine fans?

            Carrier just happened to say what all of them were thinking, but really, it’s not hard to read between the lines or the comments and tweets from the other A+ supporters either.

            You know, normally I’m skeptical about people who claim psychic powers, but you seem legit. That’s amazing.

            FTB have a long history of falsely accusing their critics of being racists, misogynistic, and similar, when in reality all the critics did was to not agree with everything that was being said. When these people now are starting a movement to exclude “the misogynists, racists and homophobes”, it really is hard to see it for what it is, a movement where they want to exclude anyone who dares criticize them.

            Links please? I’m not saying that it’s completely impossible for false accusations of misogyny, racism and homophobia to have happened, but what I’ve seen tends to be more along the lines of: *-ist statement is made, called out, person refuses to admit that x statement is *-ist, or even better, waves the flag of magical intent thus making *-ist statement totally not -*ist anymore; person is called *-ist

            If the A+ thing was coming from a more reasonable source, where for example civil discussion between disagreeing people were possible without any part being labeled a misogynists who should shove a rotten porcupine up his ass, A+ would not be met with this kind of hostility.

            I guess I just don’t understand all of the hostility towards something that no one is forcing anyone to be part of.

            But it isn’t, A+ is coming from a bunch of hate-mongering, self-righteous drama-queens, with a (poorly) hidden agenda underneath the thin veneer of “social justice”.

            Please elaborate on the hidden agenda.

          • Acathode Says:

            No, what I’m saying is that the people FTB label as misogynists and racists are not people that are actually racists or misogynistic. They have a long history of falsely accusing people who disagree with them of being misogynists, and now when they have gone out and created an anti-misogynists etc movement.

            Hell, they even have a history of harassing people IRL, like the nutcase Greg Laden, who even tried to get Abbie Smith fired and thrown out of her school, because she dared to disagree with FTB and SC, or in FTB terms, was a misogynistic gender traitor? Do you really need to get it spelled out that the people they are excluding will be people who disagree, and not actual misogynists?

            Well, in case you actually needed it spelled out, you’re in luck! Carried even went and did it that for you, to make it crystal clear what these people are all about.

            Was that point really that hard to understand?

            As for examples of false accusations;

            Do this experiment: Try going onto Myers blog and politely ask for evidence of some of the claims they are making, like the quite extraordinary claims of rampant misogyny within the atheism community.
            BAM, you’re now an officially FTB-labeled misogynist. You might think it’s rude behavior, but really, skeptics asking for evidence on a skeptic site = woman haters?

            Or how about the whole Rationalia forum and all their members, who PZ Myers claimed to be misogynists because one guy made a rape joke in a thread no one cared particularly about or had even read before Myers post? You can find Myers post under the name “Rationalia isn’t”. Ironic isn’t it, AronRa complaining below about how he’s getting hit by the urine that’s really meant for Myers & Co, while Myers is fine pissing over a whole forum over a post that few of them even read?

            How about Watson calling McGraw a misogynist just because McGraw disagreed with her about elevatorguy in a blogpost? You know, that whole thing that really blew Elevatorgate up, because quite a lot of people were not OK with Watson abusing her privileges as a speaker at a con to try to shame people in the audience that she had internet drama with?

            McGraws post that caused Watsons response:
            http://web.archive.org/web/20110717162845/http://www.unifreethought.com/2011/06/fursdays-wif-stef-32.html – Misogynism, really?
            You can add stclairerose’s video there to, she also apparently is a misogynistic gender traitor because she didn’t completely agree with Watson.

            How about the common idea that MRA = misogynists and scum of the earth, which you find all over FTB? From what I’ve seen, there’s quite a few reasonable and sane MRAs out there. Obviously there are some scum MRA too, genuine misogynists and all that, but guess what? The feminists got their own nutcases as well.
            It’s not exactly hard to find quite a few of them advocating things like murdering all males, or enforcing mandatory castration, and other batshit crazy stuff. Shouldn’t that make feminists the scum of the earth as well, if you actually wanted to not be a complete hypocrite?

            How about Myers calling Sam Harris a racist and a slew of other bad names? If you actually read what Harris writes, it’s pretty clear that he’s not racist, even though his ideas are controversial.

            I could go on and on, there’s just so much to dig from when it comes to FTB/SC calling people misogynists…

            As for their agenda, well, Carrier spelled it out pretty clearly, didn’t he? His post alone should make you realize where the hostility is coming from.

            However, if that’s not enough for you, take a look at the history of FTBers harassing people IRL, trying to get them fired/thrown out of their school, trying to shut down their blogs, and trying to DMCA people into silence. Is that not enough for you to realize that these people have no qualms about using underhand methods to silence their critics?

    • SH9999 Says:

      Atheism is for anyone.

    • Vic Says:

      “Wow someone’s really mad that for once a movement is looking to center on something other than white men”

      Yes, look at how black atheists, latino atheists and female atheists were never allowed to attend. Did you remember that last convention with the big sign up front “Entrance only for blonde, blue-eyed people”.

      Oh, wait.

    • DS Says:

      Oh hey the insane mod of LGBT popped in for a visit with a wonderful red herring, her calling card!

  24. Lilandra Nelson Says:

    You consistently choose to ignore that there are 38 Freethoughbloggers. There are 3 American Atheist state directors including your friend Aron Ra.There are 4 including Aron and PZ who have been debating Creationism since the internet was little more than discussion boards.There is a group of military atheists that are fighting for atheist civil rights in the military. Even Carrier is a well known and respected Biblical scholar. Some of them have been instrumental in organizing Skepticon and Secular Student Alliance.
    Two have called you their friend and defended whatever they could about you -Aron and Christina Rad.

    I doubt you can honestly say that they have accomplished “conspicuously few achievements between them”. Even if you throw in the fallacious appeal to snobbery that Dawkins is somehow so accomplished that he has eclipsed all other atheists; you still cannot honestly state that they have “conspicuously few achievements”. Not taking away a thing from Dawkins, but you have to dismiss the accomplishments of so many to try to make a point. The only possible explanation for the oversight is personal animus clouding your ability to reason.

    Does every blogger at FTB agree with every other blogger’e every statement? Emphatically no. That would be impossible in any group of freethinkers. It is hardly The Third Reich. Every one of them and you are fallible human beings, making it irrational to endorse their every statement. Shame on you.

    • xx(@SisterChromatid) Says:

      Do you think the FTB folks have achieved as much as those they’ve declared to be enemies– Dawkins, Grothe, Kirby, etc,? Thunderf00t.

      Do you think any blogger there is “allowed” to support Thunderf00t or “allowed” to disagree with PZ? It’s quite obvious that the loudest people at FTB feel superior to many people who have achieved more than them– so they conflate comments with online trolls into hatred they feel for people like Grothe and then they work their followers into rabid righteousness to fight straw men– without any thoughts of “social justice” as far as I can see. If you disagree with their rabidity you are labeled a “gender traitor” or misogynist” and the frenzied horde descends. FTB bloggers rely on PZ’s popularity for their own hits and income, so they are forced to be silent if they don’t agree with the crazy that is going down there.

      It looks ugly and hypocritical from the outsider’s perspective. Don’t all authoritarian regimes imagine themselves to be on the side of right? Who polices the self-appointed judges?

      The shame you direct at Thunderf00t might be more usefully directed at your “leaders”– and yourself. Shame on YOU for attempting to pull manipulative FTB stuff here. Thunderf00t is not the one who started witch hunts, attempted to destroy careers, called people “vacuous bags of shit” nor engaged in conspiracy to defraud. He didn’t issue rape threats nor does he a misogynist. He isn’t the one forcing people to choose sides nor is he the one calling for the shunning of people who don’t jump on the bandwagon to support his pet cause.

      • Lilandra Nelson Says:

        You don’t know enough about me to judge. I have publicly criticized the way Thunderf00t was treated at first by some at FtB in the Pharyngula forum. I was roundly insulted for the effort in the forum. Dillahunty defended him at first at FtB until TF couldn’t even find the time to read one email from him. The thing escalated to the point where me and Aron felt like we were in the middle of a pissing match.

        I stopped defending TF because he has stubbornly refused to acknowledge there is any hatred directed at women in the community. He has also refused to give a damn about who he pisses on in the process. Did he show an ounce of consideration for his friends Aron and Zomgitts, who post at FtB, when he dismissed everyone as having “conspicuously few accomplishments”.

        It is preposterous to ask whether Dillahunty, PZ, Aron, Zomgitts, Greta, JT Eberhard, Justin Griffith, atc. are as or more accomplished than any other atheist activist. There are people that labor away unknown actively fighting for atheist civil rights everywhere. The movement is not restricted to the Four Horseman
        .
        It will live on past any of us. Don’t believe the haters.

        • CommanderTuvok Says:

          “I stopped defending TF because he has stubbornly refused to acknowledge there is any hatred directed at women in the community.”

          You are right. Bluharmony, Paula Kirby, Sara Mayhew and Abbie Smith have all been targeted by hate. Others too.

          But I guess, you don’t class hatred from the FfTB and Skepchicks as “proper hatred”.

          Further, there is the logical fallacy that opposing the Baboons = support for hatred of women. It does not. The majority of the atheist/skeptic community who the Baboons have antagonised, bullied and harassed actually condemn the “hatred of women”, are by and large Liberal/Left, abhor racism and bigotry, etc. But they also believe nobody is above criticism and satire, for they are not infants, but adults.

          • Lilandra Nelson Says:

            “You are right. Bluharmony, Paula Kirby, Sara Mayhew and Abbie Smith have all been targeted by hate. Others too.”

            You are going to have to take that up with TF, he is the one stating that there is essentially no hate against women in the community. I haven’t made one statement as to only a certain group experiencing hate that would be ridiculous.

          • xx(@SisterChromatid) Says:

            The “hatred directed at women” do not come from Thunderf00t, Grothe, Kirby, or Harriet Hall. And yet the supporters of the A+ cult all seem to blame them and imagine they are part of the cause. FTB is very confused about who the “enemies” are and they make new enemies every day as they vilify those anyone who tries to stop the insanity.

            TF didn’t say there wasn’t hatred of women in the community. He rightly pointed out that the problem seems hugely exaggerated– and the evidence is pretty much non-existent .We have theft at atheist meeting do we need anti theft policies? Are there fewer incidences of harassment where policies are in place then before the policies? To me it seems that Surly Amy really had to stretch to make the t-shirt incident into “harassment” to feed those eager to believe there’s a real problem. What is the very worst incident that has happened?– something we can document and see the evidence for. Go ahead– bring it forth– we have years of atheist conventions to look at. Who was the perpetrator? Would a harassment policy have helped? Did the perpetrator(s) get whatever it was they deserved? Is blaming Thunderf00t, Grothe, Kirby etc. worthwhile in achieving whatever it is you imagine you are achieving? I don’t even think you guys know what the heck you want– you are just eager to blame someone else so you can feel righteous and bond within your crazy little group. It looks like you guys are the haters– you are manufacturing enemies in order to unite people under your cause. You pretend to be about social justice, but what social justice makes so many enemies so fast? FTB enemies seem far more socially just than FTB to me.policy do anything

        • dougal445 Says:

          while Aronra and Christina have ‘implied’ a disagreement with thunder on the ‘mysoginist’blog, as far as im aware they’ve reffrained from joining in with the ftb chorus. Lets see how they react to this atheism plus nonsense.

        • dougal445 Says:

          “I
          have publicly criticized the way Thunderf00t was
          treated at first by some at FtB in the Pharyngula
          forum. I was roundly insulted for the effort in the
          forum. ”

          This is an excellent example of the sort of thing that goes on at ftb that is getting peoples back up. Not just thunderf00t but anybody who doesn’t entirely agree. The latest move, as described by Carrier indicates that ftb are just going into overdrive with this sort of behaviour, this selfrightous self agrandising censoring, divisivness. A lot of decent atheists are saying ‘NO. THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT ME”

        • dougal445 Says:

          “I stopped defending TF because he has stubbornly refused to acknowledge there is any hatred directed at women in the community.”

          Lilandra, did you give a specific example of someone IN THE COMMUNITY directing HATRED towards WOMEN for Thunderf00t to “acknowledge”?

          I think at the heart of this, in part, is the following:-

          1) Is there hatred directed towards wormen, or is it directed to an idea (expressed by a women)?

          2) is there hatred directed to women in general, or is it directed to a women who is disagreed with rather than her ideas? (I agree this would generally be wrong, but still not the same as directing hatred towards women in general)

          3) Is hatred genuinly being directed at women or are we dealing with trolls? (Again trolls are not pleasent, and it would be much nicer if they didn’t exist, but I don’t think this genuinly represents hatred towards women and should not be conflated with decent people who have real concerns on an issue)
          Men and Women are afflicted with trolls, although men and women may have different “triggers” eg “rape” for women, while rape is dispicable and using “rape” as a trigger is also dispicable, we are still dealing with trolls, as appossed to actual hatred towards women (ie. male or female has nothing to do with it)

          4) If there is actual hatred, genuinly directed at women in general, is it coming from “the community”?

          I have to say that at present I am unable to point to a specific example of this. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen,

          Further the other major issue here is that (I think i can reasonably generalise and say that) we here are not mysoginists, racists, etc that we are all for equality.
          However FTB’s line (generalisation) seems to be if you do not totally agree with us you are one or all of the above.
          (HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE. . . NOT)

          Now I’ll repeat what I have said before:
          Thunderf00t’s original post on Mysoginy” made some valid points, and some stupid points as well (“getting permission signed in triplicate to bite someones leg in the bar”, for example).
          I think overall his post was “misguided” and I don’t think making clear publicly known harrassment policies (If sensibly worded) is a bad idea.
          However in that same post he pointed to the very problem that a lot of people see going on at FTB (the abuse of dissenters, The we are right, anybody who disagrees is wrong, the censorship etc, All of which appears to have gone into overdrive according to Richard Carriers Blog) and ironically the reaction from FTB, culminating in Thunderf00ts dismisal from FTB, totally demonstrated these points Thunder made.
          I personaly, while recognising the problems above, thought Thunderf00t had gone off the deep end and was blowing it out of proportion, until I saw Richard Carriers blog.
          It seems to me now that Thunder was absolutly right about how “serious” this issue was at FTB.

          On a more personal note Lilandra.

          My comment to your post on Ace Of Clades, RE “Aron’s Wife”
          It was blown out of all proportion to my original intent, I didn’t mean it as a criticism, more of an observation. My apolagies if it was taken the wrong way.

          • dougal445 Says:

            Just realised i’ve miss interperted part of what Lilandra said.
            ie “hate directed at women in the community” as opposed to “hate directed at women, FROM the community”
            Must be conflating something in that was said by Rebecca Watson”, Sorry, I retract that part of my response. But the rest stands

        • DS Says:

          It’s that the hate isn’t endemic like it’s made out to be, and is barely worthy of mention, let alone this 2 year-long tirade against the horribly oppressive man-theists.

        • Christopher Camp Says:

          1.) Thunderf00t is talking about a group of bloggers. He did not say that everyone on Freethoughtblogs was a non-achiever. Only an individual too emotionally attached to the FTB hivemind would interpret criticism of one or several FTBloggers as criticism of herself/himself.

          2.) Thunderf00t did not ‘stubbornly refuse’ to accept that sexual harassment exists in the so-called community. He wanted evidence that others failed to provide. I think to say that ‘groping’ and ‘drunk fumbling’ is as widespread as FTB and Skepchick would have us believe it to be, is begging the question. It is not unreasonable to ask for evidence that is a little more than just a few unsubstantiated anecdotes.

    • Moriarty Says:

      With Christina Rads recent conversion to the femdamentalist groupthink her credibility is in the toilet outside of FtB now and Aronra has been conspicuously silent since the A+ dogma manifested.

      It will be interesting to see which side of the divide Aronra comes down on.

      • oolon Says:

        Try reading here – like most of us he agrees with the tenets of A+ but doesn’t agree with labels.

        So why ‘dogma’ of A+…? You understand what the word means I suppose? Richard Carrier seems to be the hate figure of choice here but he clearly said – argue, correct or refine what it is or GTFO. Maybe you jumped to GTFO and didn’t read the rest.

        • Geoff Says:

          You can’t be serious. Have you read the comments section of that mess of his? He’s clearly not interested in being “corrected” or having his manifesto “refined” by anyone who doesn’t already agree with him, and if you can’t see that, you’re a douchebag.

        • dougal445 Says:

          oolon.
          Richay carriers position amounts to this:
          If i fail to convince you, you are a douchebag, GTFO.
          If you fail to convince me, you are a douchebag, GTFO.
          Oolon, can you really not see the problem with this? Or are you a dishonest liar? If so GTFO!

          • oolon Says:

            His position was not quite the set-in-stone Hitlerian missive your side painted it as… I was not that happy with his stance in that one post. He has since backed down and apologised. Wow what a dictator eh. Clearly not interested in being corrected according to Geoff… Try harder next time.

    • CommanderTuvok Says:

      We know what happens when an FTBer dares to stray “off message”, as Justin Griffith did.

      Anyway, I always use the term FfTB (FreeFromThoughtBlogs), or “Baboon”, which doesn’t refer to people like Aron Ra. There is another term, the FC5 (Fainting Couch 5), that refers to PZ, Ophelia, Greta, Black Svan and Lousy Canuck.

      Most people don’t have gripe with half of the folk at FTB – it is just certain individuals and their lackeys.

      So, arguments about “not all the people at FTB are idiots” is whataboutery. The criticism and satire has always been aimed at those Baboons and Skepchicks everybody knows about.

      • Lilandra Nelson Says:

        “So, arguments about “not all the people at FTB are idiots” is whataboutery. The criticism and satire has always been aimed at those Baboons and Skepchicks everybody knows about.”
        What you mean when you say something is irrelevant to what he meant when he dismissed the accomplishments of everyone at FtB. He chose his own words.

        • Kaylakaze Says:

          “he meant when he dismissed the accomplishments of everyone at FtB. ”

          Either he didn’t or the blog post has been edited.

          As for the woman hate issue, I’m pretty sure he meant “hate towards women BECAUSE they’re woman” as being nonexistent, because, as someone posted on the blog post about civility, it’s important that if someone who is otherwise intelligent says something seemingly REALLY stupid, it’s best to give them a benefit of a doubt and assume they mean what they likely meant and not what they actually said unless they state otherwise. It’s very easy to see how one could say “there is no hate against women” and assume that the listener will understand that they mean “because they are women” as an unspoken clause.

        • HuntingGoodwill Says:

          If you don’t want to be accused of Fox News-ism, then re-read Thunderf00t’s message and the paragraph regarding the “accomplishments”, ergo, “qualifications”.

          And once you realize your error, be rational enough to recognize the role Hitchens and Dawkins had. Those two in particular.

          Maybe, just maybe, you will realize WHY you used the phrase “civil rights for Atheists” and in which context you want to put that in. Tricky? Yes. Does it make sense? No!

          Btw, I personally like AronRa A LOT and don’t like Thunderf00t that much. Guess I like Lord Dracula more than Chimp Charly. But that doesn’t change the fact that Thundef00t was not only right to defend himself, but that him actually “rocking the boat” unintentionally brought up the real issue to the surface.

          And lets be clear here for a minute:

          ATHEISM is NOT an American invention. Neither does it matter that Hitchens and Dawkins are not American.
          We don’t need AMERICAN ATHEISM either, ok?
          With all the “feeling offended” bullshit and calling for “constitutional rights” and “freedom of speech”, while trying to portray anybody who doesn’t follow the party line a “racist”, “misogynist”, “rape-culture-supporter”, “Nazi”, “Communist”, “anti-capitalist”, etc… O-K?

          This is the “American Way” to do it and all you will achieve is to FUCK IT UP.

          If you want to add a “+” to Atheism, call it Atheism + Rationalism, ok?
          But since that fFTBlog gang & Skepwithoutdicks lack the capacity to think rationally, don’t add the “+”, mmmkay?

          And these guys are turning this whole thing into a farce, ok?
          What should I be concerned with?
          The women from Sudan living in the UK or Germany, who have been oppressed and mutilated as children, or a pseudo-feminist from the US, who wants to sell jewelry and hates t-shirts and men, because they don’t have vaginas?

          Seriously? Is that what you are defending?
          Defending it RATIONALLY?

          Rethink that please.

    • Badger3k Says:

      38? Seriously? Their main feed gives a handful of people, and 9 out of 10 times it’s the usual suspects that are famous for setting to tone that many people know them by. Perhaps they need to rewrite the code for the site (or get someone competent this time), and then they need to start speaking out against the extremists -after all, isn’t that the usual refrain – if you don’t speak out against something, you are for it? It falls upon the 30-odd minor blogs to make themselves heard. Are they part of this gender-feminist wet dream or not?

  25. Pete UK Says:

    Has Richard Carrier been reading Mein Kampf? Replace A+ with Aryan and Carrier’s talk of cleansing, or kicked out as he terms it, and you have what appears to be the makings of a megalomaniac.

    “Those who don’t, those who aren’t shamed by being exposed as liars or hypocrits, those who persist in being dishonest or inconsistent even when their dishonesty or inconsistency has been soundly proven, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.”

    Could almost be the words of Hitler himself, in fact if you read Carriers ranting in the style of Hitler it becomes quite frightening,
    I feel sorry for those who have been sucked into this regime of cleansing, just like Hitler’s followers did between the World Wars, maybe they should take a step back for a while and view this uprising from the outside, then perhaps they might see A+ for what it is.

  26. JEM Says:

    They are starting the purge. Poland, beware

  27. John Q Public Says:

    Teddy Roosevelt’s argument about putting “In god we trust” on money comes to mind…. In a NY times editorial(1908ish), his argument boils down to(and I’m paraphrasing) “it cheapens both the validity of the currency and the validity of the divine”

  28. PirateFish (@ThePastaApostle) Says:

    “That which we call a Rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet…”
    except if it’s a Stink Rose, because that’s a garlic, or as is the case here; an AtheistPlus.

  29. anon Says:

    Those clowns at FtBs couldn’t be skeptical to save their lives.

    Thunderf00t vs the fembots:

  30. Dynamite Says:

    This is what happens when you try to herd cats…

  31. Mike Paps Says:

    I think FTB may have alienated many of it’s supporters with this move. Much of the criticism of “new atheism” is that it’s become in the perception of many an almost dogmatic religious organization with Dawkins as pope of his anti-theist followers. It’s likely many if not most of those critics will be as much, if not more critical of A+ since it is far more like a religion (intentionally), does in fact have dogma, and has leaders who are far less worthy of being followed.

  32. Steve Yoder Says:

    Dan Fincke made a call for civility in his blog and he and those agreeing with him were roundly attacked for doing so. Some even claimed that personal attacks were part of their debate arsenal, while others considered a call the ‘rise above’ to be self-righteous.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithhammers/2012/08/24/no-hate/

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      He is SOOO going to get kicked off FtB for that post.

      • eikonoplast Says:

        I dunno… I read into the comments, and he’s being incredibly clear and sensitive, while he rebuts angry posts about him “thought-policing victims” and whatnot. He’s opened up a lot of work for himself, though.

        • Kaylakaze Says:

          What I meant is I thought his post was clear, sensible, and reasonable. The exact reasons why one would get kicked off of FtB

    • Biohazard Says:

      Thanks for posting this link to Dan’s post Steve (saved me the trouble). I thought Dan’s “No Hate” post was excellent and spot on. Unfortunately, as you noted, it looks like many (note I didn’t say *all*) on FtB want to stick with the “othering” and name calling strategy.

  33. Kaylakaze Says:

    The ACA is standing behind A+, which really isn’t much of a surprise since they were bought by FtB and Martin Wagner is like glued to PZ’s ass.

    • Badger3k Says:

      Is that an official position or just the one spouted off by Matt “read my bible and believe” D? If it is, then I guess I and my group will be skipping the bat cruise this year, and I won’t be joining the group. If this is true, I wonder when they will purge the membership rolls? Do you have evidence for this?

  34. John W. Loftus Says:

    Let me try this again just in case it went into the spam folder for having two links.

    ———–

    I would really appreciate it if people threw their weight behind Skeptic Blogs. No drama. Just hard hitting critiques of religion and the paranormal. We’re just getting started

    We may interact with FtB’s from time to time, as I’m strongly inclined to do today, but not that much. I could call it the “No Drama Atheist Network Blog.”

    We have a mission statement and posting policy:

    http://www.skepticblogs.com/debunkingchristianity/2012/08/09/welcome-to-skeptic-blogs/

    And we have several more bloggers to add in the next few weeks as we get around to it, some really great bloggers!

    If you are tired of the drama subscribe by email, like us on Facebook, and visit us often.

    Cheers.

    • Vic Says:

      Thank you for the message and the link. I will spread the word.

    • operatoroscillation Says:

      “We may interact with FtB’s from time to time, as I’m strongly inclined to do today, but not that much.”

      That’s actually a good idea, John. If we marginalize FTB the way they want to marginalize everybody else, we’d be just like them. I don’t want that. I hope nobody else wants that. When bloggers over there have good insightful things to say, we’ll praise it. When they shame and bully dissenters, we’ll call them out on it.

  35. Alex Says:

    Atheism+ in a nutshell: http://imgur.com/CVwfV

  36. Aron Ra Says:

    Atheists are a herd of cats because collectively we don’t agree on very much. I am not personally acquainted with any atheist whom I haven’t openly disagreed with. I argued with Dillahunty on our interpretation of scriptural indications of the trinity. I disagree with Dawkins’ inaccurate references to evolution as “Darwinism”. I don’t like being casually disregarded as an “old white guy”, I wish some skeptics and humanists didn’t voice such disdain against overtly atheist activists. I’m sorry that Tyson doesn’t like that label, but the fact is that shoe fits. And I have already posted to FtB that I disagree with Carrier’s use of a divisive ultimatum with regard to ‘atheism plus’. I’m behind the whole aspect of it, I have been for years, but I disagree with the label for the same reason I disagree with Dawkins wanting us to call ourselves ‘brights’. On certain specific points, I have disagreed with Ayaan, Hitchens, Tyson, and several others for whom I also have enormous respect –on other points or for other reasons. I even disagreed with Carl Sagan once! When I met Penn Jillette, all I wanted to do was argue with him. On the Ardent Atheist podcast, Zomgits got so pissed at him, that she walked off the show. I’m mad at myself that I didn’t take her seat next to Penn and bogart that open mic when I had the chance. Wouldn’t it be great to argue with Penn Jillette on a live podcast? When Krauss and I first spoke to each other during the MSF charity last year, that is exactly what we did. Even my first face-to-face encounter with P.Z. was intentionally confrontational. In both of those instances, the matter was settled immediately with no need of further escalation, and we all get along fine now. That is how it should be.

    Go ahead and categorize me as someone with no notable accomplishments. Of everyone you’ve collectively insulted, I may be the only one without defense on that charge. But don’t accuse me of hive-think. Whenever I’ve had a mic in front of me, and someone asks me about Thunderf00t, I’ve had to preface my reply with the clarifier that we don’t agree on everything. Should that just be my whole reply from now on?

    I keep telling you this, but you never listen. It’s perfectly alright to hold your own opinion; no honorable person would fault you for that, unless you’re wrong, which you have been a couple times, and are too stubborn to admit it. It’s the back-handed way you go about it that is the problem. Even when you have a point, it’s inappropriately incendiary. These disagreements should be kept quiet until you can confront that person. It wouldn’t matter if it were broadcast live, but it should at least be a real-time two-way dialogue. Your way can only escalate, polarize, and piss people off. How do you imagine that this is doing anyone any good? You’re certainly not accomplishing anything for yourself this way. All you’re doing is forcing avoidable conflicts and all you’re gaining are high-fives from haters, people who have no compunction about unjustified judgements made against the very people who try to support, defend, or befriend you.

    • CommanderTuvok Says:

      Aron Ra, you have a very refreshing outlook to debate and confrontation, unlike some of the FC5, who have suggested “shunning”, and resort to the most base of insults (“racist”, “misogynist”, “gender-traitor”) in an attempt “win” any argument.

      The fact is though, “debate” with the likes of PZ, Opheliar, Greta, Black Svan, Watson, etc. has been impossible. There are banhammers, moderation tactics, edited comments, memory holes in play. Then, if you happen to oppose them on just one matter of contention, they assume you disagree with them on EVERYTHING, and so you are classed as a “misogynist”, “racist”, “gender traitor”, etc.

      BTW, I don’t know anyone from the “Pit” who has much of a gripe against yourself. so don’t take criticism of FTB as meaning criticism for yourself.

      • oolon Says:

        Utter shit – I totally disagreed with Stephanie’s post on bluharmony and argued at length although at times not particularly well. I was not at all happy at Greg etc intimating mental illness to put down bluharmony and was quite rude about it.

        The fact that bloggers on FtBs make mistakes, repeat slurs and yes even bully makes them normal humans just like you and me. Since you put your “win” in scare quotes you are quite right – if someone does resort to such insults to try and win then they have lost…

        They are fricken bloggers on ‘an’ atheist network… They want to create their own movement to further goals that they happen to believe in… You don’t need to join in – so what’s your beef Tuvok?

        • CommanderTuvok Says:

          Oolon – now that is a voice of privilege speaking.

          As somebody “on message” over at FfTB, you don’t have to worry about moderation, banhammers, censorshipship, etc. Many people who want to take the FfTB crew to task are the subject of those measures.

          It feels nice to be able to post and debate on a forum without being censored, eh, oolon! Most opponents of FfTB don’t get the same courtesey.

          So remember that privilege.

          • oolon Says:

            I rarely bother to comment when I agree, being a contrarian in nature. So my ‘privilege’ at FtBs is to be thought of as an annoying whiner as I’m usually arguing the other side. No censorship has been applied to me. Stephanie warned me I was near to banning so I walked away for a bit. Greg Laden got a little hot under the collar (We are not on speaking terms any more apparently) and I said I can see why you lot like to wind him up so much… Still no censorship or banning…

            I even got called a ‘rape apologist’ on Thunderdome… And.. When I explained how that was an incendiary term to use and throwing it around minimises it… I got an apology… Gasp! That is surely not possible on Pharyngula the feminazi-nun hideout!

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      And you don’t think many of your friends at FtB are guilty of polarization and escalation? It may be true that not everyone at FtB agrees on everything, but we’ve seen what happens when “certain people” are questioned. It’s easy to tell one side to calm the fuck down, kiss and make up, while ignoring what the other side (the side you’re ultimately beholden to) has done.

      It may be true that not every FtBer should be painted with the same brush, just like it’s true that some Republicans don’t hate gay people. But when I say Republicans hate gays, I don’t quibble about those that may not because they’ve voluntarily associated themselves with an organization that does. By being a member of FtB, you’ve associated yourself with a group whose leaders/management have a track record of hypocrisy, strawmanning, lying, exaggerating, suppression of dissent, and demonization. If you get grouped in with them, it’s a natural outcome (lying down with dogs, fleas, and all that). It may not be fair or accurate, but it’s a natural consequence.

    • snowrunner Says:

      Looking from the sidelines and at the behaviour of the FTB crowd (and if you’re silent you are part of that crowd who flies the same banner as you to some degree at least) is that you cannot have a factual / rational discussion with them about the problems. I mean, the whole t-shirt gate is amusing to no small part and utterly descriptive on how they deal with any kind of criticism. It’s all personal attacks for them, not a factual disagreement. It really IS more like a religion / cult than it is about skepticism.

      The way Skepchick has gone about this also tries to play the moral card over and over and over.

      If you can get them and their prominent opponents on one table and do a live podcast, please do, maybe THAT would clear the air, but I predict that you will never be able to the FTB / Skepchick crowd to agree to that unless they can stack the event in their favour.

    • anon Says:

      Aron, you’re right that Thunderf00t is taking this too personal.

      But you know you’re not the one hes mad at. If your wife is still mad fine, but don’t lose friendship over this.

    • Thunderf00t Says:

      Aron, I think if you read this blog your will find that it’s nothing to do with you, unless you are one of those at FTB who are promoting this form of McCarthyism type atheism. Last time I checked you were not, nor do I suspect you would ever have anything to do with such a movement.

      As has been mentioned above it’s the Atheism Plus people who are explicitly using terms like ‘you are either with us or against us’, not I.

      • Aron Ra Says:

        Thank you, Thunder. However you would do well to choose your words more carefully. Not only is your pissing match getting urine on my wife and I -again, but your comment that the FtB collective has “conspicuously few achievements between ALL of them”, although subjective, does not appear to be factually accurate, and does not reflect well on you either.

        • Thunderf00t Says:

          errr, Aron, the ‘conspicuously few achievements between ALL of them’ refers to the creators of ‘new atheism’. I’m not so sure I see any other way to read it. You seem to be getting very upset about something that was quite clearly never said.

          I mean really Aron, how you got this:
          “Now a series of bloggers, with conspicuously few achievements between all of them have decided that the community needs to be cleansed of subversive thought by expelling everyone who disagrees with them, and they are the ones to do it with a new movement called ‘Atheism Plus‘.”

          to be about you and your wife is quite honestly beyond me.

          • Aron Ra Says:

            I understood that the “conspicuously few achievements” you referred to did not necessarily refer to me or Lilandra. I knew who you meant. As I said, you comment is subjective, and thus impossible to prove, but in my own subjective impression, regardless how I might feel about them otherwise, I could not in good conscience make a judgement like that against that entire collective. I don’t think that is an accurate assessment, nor a fair one regardless of the context of your particular complaint.

          • Randy Says:

            Thunderf00t, I think sometimes your enthusiasm blurs your message a bit. Aron Ra (who I don’t read but who seems reasonable in these comments) took offence at something you said. If this result is unwanted, then at that point it no longer matters who is right about interpretation. Just fix it.

            Think of it as empirical communication, versus theoretical, a lesson I learned the hard way.

          • Sorry it is late Says:

            Sorry, but using/choosing your “own subjective impression” to take personal offense seems rather disingenuous, as it serves to ignore the crux of issue, “[they] have decided that the community needs to be cleansed of subversive thought by expelling everyone who disagrees with them”. That is offensive and an attack on all critical thinkers, a far far bigger brush than one could ever accuse Thunderf00t of using. Publicly admonishing Thunderf00t and not those who attacked him [first] and persist on attacking all non-compliant critical thinkers seems a bit like the appeasement of the AntiThunderf00t+ crowd.

        • The Devil's Towelboy Says:

          Aron Ra Says: Thank you, Thunder. However you would do well to choose your words more carefully.

          You are part of the same network. You are a participant. You also do nothing about attacks at individuals that are beyond mere words – critics have their personal details posted, have their employment threatened, are subjected to DMCA’s to either censor or extract personal details for the purpose of real world harassment. Yet you do nothing. That makes you complicit. You sir, are a whore who’s principles can be purchased, who for trivial personal benefits will whistle and look the other way.

          Cut your sanctimonious bullshit. You are a common slut for sale.

        • Dougal445 Says:

          Thunder! Aron!

          Now soften your hearts and talk nicely to each other!

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        I can see where some may think you’re referring to all FtBers if they don’t read carefully. Maybe an update addendum stating that you aren’t referring to everyone at FtB would go a long way to smooth things with those not involved.

      • dougal445 Says:

        Aronra, why is thunders “pissing match” gettting urine on you and your wife?
        I presume that means your getting heat from other FTBers?
        If that is the case, isn’t that indicative of the very problem a lot of people are seeing at FTB?
        If that is the case, Isn’t that a good reason why people (friends) would suggest you dissassocate yourself? (crap! That sounded like richard carrier. Didnt it?)

    • Marlo Rocci Says:

      This is why joining Freethought blogs was a mistake for you, Aron. You’re going to be hung by the noose they’re making for themselves. And trust me, it won’t be long before you face their ire also. Once the blamestorming begins, everyone is going to get hurt.

    • Johnnis Says:

      These are turbulent times, because people whom I’ve respected and admired for some time shows a side of them I’ve never seen before.

      Lies, name calling, fallacies and claims that are obviously not true are in the mix of this. And all this is fueled by feelings. Hurt perhaps more than anything.

      So I am pleased to see that you Aron Ra, first of all speaks up, and second, that you don’t join the ranks as so many have done before you.

      Thanks
      A boy like me still need heroes

    • Jimbo Says:

      Aron Ra, as far as I’m concerned you’re tainted by the company you keep. You are proping these guys up by being associated with them, both monetarily and in terms of their credibility.

      Please do the right thing and leave FTB.

  37. Moriarty Says:

    “All you’re doing is forcing avoidable conflicts”

    Firstly, Who is it that has the “either with us or against us” dogma?

    “and all you’re gaining are high-fives from haters”

    Secondly anyone who isn’t signed up to the FtB accepted truth is a “hater”?

    Well colour me disappointed

    • Aron Ra Says:

      You should note that I never stated, implied, or believed that “anyone who isn’t signed up to the FtB accepted truth is a hater.” Don’t pull words out of your ass and try to put them in my mouth.

      Who has the “either with us or against us” dogma? The answer is BOTH Richard Carrier AND Thunderf00t -who keeps telling me that I should quit FtB every time he disagrees with something one of them said. He’s always wanting me to take sides on matters best ignored or not worthy of notice. I obviously don’t agree with everyone either, there or anywhere else, but I’m not going to do what Thunder says for the same reason I won’t do whatever FtB says. We’re individuals; otherwise most of us wouldn’t be there. The majority of participants in that forum are innocent of the generalizations made against that collective here. Many of us are trying to do what we can to have a positive impact. Not everyone is that lofty, I grant you. But I can’t be bothered with petty politicking, and I have already wasted too much time -arguing against both sides- on these trivial squabbles. Ask Thunder. He knows that I have.

      • snowrunner Says:

        [quote]Who has the “either with us or against us” dogma?[/quote]Yes they both do, but who started with this line of argument and was deeply resilient to any criticism? Does that make TF more right / better? Nope, but how would you suggest he (and others) try to counter the attacks they are exposed to?

        • Aron Ra Says:

          My wife and I have tried to negotiate with both sides -hotly, I don’t want to go into details. Suffice to say that it didn’t go well. My problem is that I am more “associated” with Thunder than I am with FtB, and (in the words of one of his other personal friends) “he is getting hard to defend”.

          • snowrunner Says:

            Yeah I can see that as a problem. I am mostly watching this for amusement ever since Watson went to kick this one off last year and as I am not from NA it is…. amusing to me.

            As for TF…., I don’t know him (personally), though I think in your case maybe it would make sense to remove yourself from both sides publicly and let them slug it out on that end. Though how that would go over in the community I can’t say.

            On the other hand, as an outside observer, my feeling is that for TF it’s really the feeling of being cornered by a bunch of people with very big microphones that lead to the escalation on his side. I am not quite sure if I would act / react any different if I’d be in his position.

            I think the entire community is losing on this one and the quicker the community as a whole resolves this (even if that means to send part of it off into the A+ sunset), the better.

          • Richard Says:

            Aaron, even if you assume the vast majority of atheists are humanists with secular human moral values, the idea of taking a dogmatic approach is wrong. On this one, TF is right. You know as well as i do that TF has obviously humanist persinal values. There are grey areas in harassment and pretending there are nit is intellectually dishonest. To be honest, i found lots of atheists including you and TF quite arrogant. But atheist + is being sold in a far to arrogant dogmatic way. I was a humanist before deconverting btw. Our society is primarily secular humanist. As TF made is clear, rape messages are not “ok”. Howver he put them in the same troll category as people telling him they wish him dead. I think he is trying yo be rational about the issue. PZ is continuing to misrepresent his position. FTR, i dont stand with any of you unconditionally. I NEVER participate in draw Mahammad day for example. I unxerstand its intent but intentionally offending ppl’s religion isnt ok to me. You wont be able to broker the gap; atheist + is conceived as a dogma. The thinking is like a religiin unwillimg to discuss opposing views. The idea of “brights” was also arrogant but AP proves its b.s. I think being a secular humanist is fine. Sad that eventually thevdogma police will try to destroy thatblike they are subverting feminism. I certainly agree with a great dealnof feminist concerns.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        Where has TF publicly told the atheist community as a whole that they were either with him or against him? He may have suggested that you bail on the failboat, which, to me demonstrates that he respects you and feels you’re better than what they do. If he “keeps coming” to you, that means he hasn’t written you off as a “them” even though you haven’t sided with him. Isn’t that the exact opposite?

        If one group starts lying, strawmanning, exaggerating, being needlessly sensationalistic and theatrical, and polarizing, should not someone with knowledge of it stand up and say something? Is that person then equally at fault? It sounds like the MSM’s idea of “balance” aka “Both Sides!”

      • bismarket Says:

        I expect you’ve already had a lot of, “I love your work but” & here’s just another guy with a computer thinking his opinion matters? I could of course be totally wrong & cynical & you may even have the time to read this, but it’s true mate (UK) i do have enormous respect for you & what you’ve done/do, but i wouldn’t be honest to myself when i get this opportunity to address you if i didn’t say i think your making a huge mistake having anything to do with FtB, i believe it’s a divisive movement & there are people who are mainly involved in it because of ego’s & fear of losing some imagined reputation & the chance of free trips around the World to “Speak” at conventions. I could be wrong on some of that, i am always trying my best to think critically but even though i’m no TF Fanboi, i can see his point & think what he did re; eMail stuff turned out to be a wise move. I don’t expect a reply due to you not having the time to answer everyone, but i do hope at least you take me & my concerns seriously, as i know i’m not the only person that thinks this way☮

  38. Anonymous Says:

    When you start adopting a stance of “my way or the highway” in any arena, be it religious, anti-religious, political, or another similar area of our society, you automatically breed weakness into your philosophies. By refusing respectful discourse and ignoring the facts presented by others who are qualified and proven, you, in effect, stagnate thought. Like Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, and a plethora of religious movements out there, it appears that the members of “Atheism +” have missed the entire point of non-association with the organised religious movements.

    Not being involved with a “herd mentality” group is the only way to free your mind and learn to accept the differences we all share. If they are not ready to admit that they might be wrong about something, they could be wrong about anything and their credibility to those who are free thinkers suffers.

  39. Allison Says:

    I fully support “social justice” and “womens’ rights” and oppose “racism” and “homophobia”, but I want absolutely nothing to do with this stupid clique that the Fainting Couch brigade has concocted.

  40. dougal445 Says:

    i am absolutly astounded by carriers blog. cant believe i commended his critique of thunders post on mysogony ovet pz’s misstepresentations.
    I’ve said it before but i’ll say it again. I take back and apolagize for my dissapproval of thunders conduct regarding ftb. It seemed at the time he was blowing it all out of proportion. It seems he was right all along.

    • Marlo Rocci Says:

      Welcome to the Dark Side. We have cookies.

      • dougal445 Says:

        i have not joined any ‘side’.
        I call it as i see it, poing by point.
        While i have been appreciative of thunderf00ts work for years, i dont always agree with him, thats fine tho.
        i still think while he made some valid points on his original mysoginist post, i think it was largely misguided. But the ftb response was ridiculous and ironically confirmed some points thunder made. On this current issue, ftb are just crazy. In your parlence, i’d say FTB have fallen to the darkside.

        • dougal445 Says:

          p.s.
          For Aronra, lilandra, christina etc.
          While i use the generalisation ‘ftb’ I don’t mean to include those who haven’t jumped on the ftb crusade bandwagon. I still respect the position you guyx appear to hold.

          • operatoroscillation Says:

            Christina isn’t much better than the other FTB’s. She tried to pressure GirlWritesWhat into an apology for something she didn’t even do, then made really bad pedophelia analogies when called out on that fact.

        • dougal445 Says:

          p.s.
          For Aronra, lilandra, christina etc.
          While i use the generalisation ‘ftb’ I don’t mean to include those who haven’t jumped on the ftb crusade bandwagon. I still respect the position you guys appear to hold.

  41. Kaylakaze Says:

    Yay! I managed to get myself banned on the ACA blog after they slandered and maligned me and then banned me so I can’t correct the record.

    • oolon Says:

      WTF is the ACA blog and what has it got to do with this?

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        Atheist Community of Austin. Only one of the most well known atheist groups on the internet. And Bloggers at FtB who are 100% behind A+.

        • oolon Says:

          So some people who say they are behind A+ were nasty to you and you are miffed about it… Therefore what? A+ is bad? How does that follow….?

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            No, my point being that ACA has lost credibility. A+ is bad for a variety of reasons. It doesn’t need such help.

          • oolon Says:

            Right I’ll remember that, if I create any community or movement — be nice to Kaylakaze or I lose credibility.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            No, you should be nice in general or lose credibility.

          • oolon Says:

            Cool so the slimepitters have lost a lot of credibility – Thunderf00t has little left by now… Bad examples though as they are not nice in a very childish and unproductive way.

            Richard Dawkins makes a good case for not being nice – in fact you could say it was a defining feature of the new atheist movement… Want to rethink that statement?

    • Vic Says:

      “I managed to get myself banned on the ACA blog after they slandered and maligned me and then banned me so I can’t correct the record.”

      Is your father a member of a workers union? How long have you been in contact with the KGB? What is your KGB rank? What is your mission in the US? ANSWER ME YOU DIRTY COMMIE

  42. headoffury Says:

    Atheism XXX: ‘Come Join Us At The Strip Joint’

  43. oolon Says:

    I thought a line had been drawn on all this crap… Or is Thunderf00t trying to shit another river of poop to draw a new line in?

    http://thunderf00tdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/ftb-and-the-conspiracy-to-defraud-drawing-a-line-under-this-pointless-crap/

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      This is a whole new crap from FtB

      • oolon Says:

        Drawing a line under something usually means moving on… So why not ignore more ‘poop’ from the lot you don’t like? Unless you are totally obsessed with all their poop… I’ll probably get told off by FtBs hive-mind for oppressing a minority group – but coprophilia is not something to aspire to.

    • Marlo Rocci Says:

      Not quite. Thunder is addressing an entirely new issue. From my perspective, the majority of the atheist community is with Thunder on this one. Most people are not as radically liberal or as radically feminist as FTB. Even those that are question the exclusionary tactic being expressed. One can be a feminist and still desire to engage with the MRAs in a constructive manner without banhammering. it’s called maturity. They should try it.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        Please don’t claim FtB A+ers are radically liberal or radically feminist. They are neither.

        I am both radically liberal and (maybe not so, depends on how you’d define, I guess) radically feminist and they are a disgrace.

  44. kennykjc Says:

    These FTB’ers are so far up their own ass it’s not even funny. I don’t bother giving them the traffic anymore.

    • oolon Says:

      Good for you… I think Kenny has hit on the solution to the problem rather than obsess over every little detail of FtBs and the bloggers every bowel movement why not click ‘ignore’?

      • Vicky Caramel (@MrsVickyCaramel) Says:

        One could well say the same to you and your frantic attempts to dominate the comments here. But I’d never tell anybody they should just click ignore any more than I would tell somebody that they have to sign up to a vauge list or gtfo. Nor would I respond to something somebody says by saying they are privileged, or a gender traitor, or a misogynist.

        And nor would I just declare you to be wrong but say that I haven’t the time to refute your arguments… because I WANT to refute your arguments. If only you would say something that has some substance.

        Yeah I know the crowd over there consider us ‘haters’, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who has some serious concerns about the intentions and motives of those behind A+. And I have grave concerns that they might be able to organize PR so that they could be seen as representative of Atheism. They don’t represent me, and judging by the amount of ‘haters’ there are a lot of people concerned.

        The way to put out the fire is to identify and address some of those concerns rather than pissing on random comments, because right now now it just looks like you are trying to stifle any criticism, which happens to line up with one of my major concerns about a group which is trying to introduce dogma into Atheism.

        • oolon Says:

          Vicky, I’m at times just taking the piss… If that really is your evidence of stifling debate then I think you’ll find there are a lot more piss takers your side? In fact that is something I probably agree with to an extent on your side – childish piss-taking can be fun and ridicule of peoples positions can be instructive. FtBs seem a solemn lot at times.

          Like a few on here — you have ‘concerns’ about FtBs ‘motives’… Now it has been like shooting fish in the barrel taking the mick since a lot here have been likening FtBs motives to Hitler!

          Are your concerns similarly daft or are you just worried they will claim to ‘represent’ you somehow? Surely the differentiator of Atheism+ is really useful for you in that regard?

  45. Steve Williamson (@SteveW68) Says:

    • oolon Says:

      But they are group-think central over there? This must surely be part of a disinformation campaign to hide the real intent while the 2nd Panzer division positions itself outside Thunderf00ts house ready to exterminate all opposition!

    • Marlo Rocci Says:

      Sounds like Mccreight is losing control of the candle she lit. She won’t stand behind what she herself said once the bigotry of it is made apparent. Hating old white men is still hate. enjoy your backlash, you’ve earned it.

  46. Ron Murray Says:

    I’ve been comparing the progress of A+ to the events in “Animal Farm”. Currently, they seem to be at the beginning of Chapter III.
    The real excitement will be when one of the leaders (Snowball) gets thrown out of the Movement for incorrect thoughts. Who will it be, I wonder?

    • xx(@SisterChromatid) Says:

      It looks like it might be Carrier… for being too obvious about the actual intentions of atheist plus. It’s bad to make the cult look like a cult when they are aiming to look like a civil rights movement fighting for vague social justice (that involves people not wearing t-shirts that hurts their feelings– ha!)

      • oolon Says:

        Hehe Poes law I just lampoon this opinion above and someone expresses it!

        • Thunderf00t Says:

          oolon, currently you have 17 out of 108 posts. Give or take thats one comment in 6.

          Look, honestly, clearly you have issues about trying to stand up for freethoughtblogs, but this is starting to look rather compulsive obsessive. Give it a rest dude.

          • oolon Says:

            Great so… How many articles on your blog are about FtBs? What are our relative word counts? Splinter meet Plank… Yes I’m calling you a plank :-)

        • xx(@SisterChromatid) Says:

          According to the time stamp I posted before you… not that I read your posts (here or all the other places you deposit them.)

          As Thunderf00t suggested, give it a rest– go fight for social justice or whatever it is you imagine you are doing at FTB.

          • oolon Says:

            Yeah I suppose I only have two options…

            I can conclude that I pissed Thunderf00t off with my jibe about his “random comments” or whenever he sits down to write another FtBs missive all he can hear is Mrs Doyle echoing in the depths of his brain saying ‘Go on, Go on, Go on”…. Apologise and move on TF!…. Of course that he did not try and shut down the commenter that made a rape threat is a co-incidence… The commenter sock-puppeting him and making him look a fool did not need to be slapped down… But me? Well I pissed him off so yeah I need a good talking to!

            Or… He really cares for my mental health and wants me to get some help. This must be the truth as the great TF could never get his bunny harness in a twist over a few comments? Awww Phil you big softie come here and give me a big ((((*hug*)))).

  47. Benjamin Osborn (@BHGOzzy) Says:

    Anyone else wanna join me in a bowl of popcorn and watch these idjits get their asses handed to them?

  48. John W. Loftus Says:

    Sorry but one last link, the one where I call on FtB’s to come away from that slime pit, the one where I tell atheist convention organizers to kick them to the curb if they refuse to speak where an “unapproved” atheist does:

    http://www.skepticblogs.com/debunkingchristianity/2012/08/26/if-you-are-tired-of-the-freethought-blogs-drama-we-are-the-refreshing-alternative/

    • gsenski Says:

      I would have loved to see AronRa move over to skepticblogs but I give up on him. He seems to have an Albatross around his neck.

  49. Thunderf00t Says:

    meh, oolon, your life to waste trying desperately to defend the clearly indefensible by volume of spam. Enjoy!

    • CommanderTuvok Says:

      The irony is that he supports and posts on a number of blogs (Baboon, FC5) that would have banhammered the equivalent of oolon by now.

      We can be thankful that at least Osama Greg Laden hasn’t popped his greasy head over here yet.

    • oolon Says:

      Dammit I missed this… I refer you to my comment above your Bunnyness…

      http://goo.gl/i8jGy

      Now I’m off to obsess over you and hate-fap to the picture of your bunny that I’ve blown up to life size above my bed… Cos I’m that obsessed over you baby!

      (BTW hate-fap was a new thing to me until the REAL Thunderf00t taught me a thing or two on your last post… I only worship the real thing)

  50. gaytality Says:

    it’s always amusing when white people get uppity about other white people.

  51. Marlo Rocci Says:

    Whether or not you are an atheist does not necessarily tie into your views on economics and the status of women. Atheism is just the non belief in any gods. Atheism+ is just a liberal political party trying to seize atheist gatherings for their stump speeches. FTB and the ACA have ceased to exist in my realm. I no longer value anything they have to say.

    • eikonoplast Says:

      You hit the nail on the head. I’m a follower of lots of Atheist vlogs on Youtube, but I also like GirlWritesWhat, who calls herself anti-feminist. I don’t know her stand on atheism, but if you went by her vlogs, she’s sourcing scientific articles on sex and genetics, etc.

      Apparently she posted on ZOMGitsCriss’s blog on FTB, and soon after, got DCMA’d at Youtube, in an attempt to get her to give over her personal info in her challenge to the unsubstantiated plagiarism claim.

      GirlWritesWhat is not, to my knowledge, part of the atheist community, but if she were, FTB would have catapulted her and members would have Doc Dropped on her by now. In regards to any atheist movement, Atheism +, as you said, is the equivalent of creating a political party within the movement.

      When I read about Todd Akin, or Paul Ryan, etc, I wonder why FTB/Skepchick, and this Atheism Plus movement (which is clearly emerged from past tussles with dissenters to their bid for hegemony) bother? Maybe because it’s easier to chastise the choir from the bully pulpit, then go out and fight.

      Talk about fiddling while Rome burns. And during an election year! Months away!
      Isn’t it a good time to be deconverting theists instead of marketing their new brand?

      • Vic Says:

        After getting involved with zomgitsCriss on yt and being honoured with a blog post in repsonse to her video, GWW was called a ‘gender traitor’, demeaning comments were made on her appearance, they quote mined her several times and called her arguments “sick and revulting” while at the same time saying “one couldn’t watch this shit more than 5 seconds”.

        I don’t agree with GWW on many things (esp some positions based on evol pych and it’s a pity she got the attention of a few crazy masochists on her yt channel (which she doesn’t ban, bc she allows different opinions)), but the A+ crowd behaved once again how they did in the past. With shaming, name-calling and dismissing any disagreements as ‘hate’, misogyny, part of rapist culture etc.

        And that’s really telling.

      • operatoroscillation Says:

        GirlWritesWhat is an atheist.

  52. Palindromemordnilap Says:

    This is how I picture A+ as ending up:

    http://childrenwithprivilege.tumblr.com/post/28924995472/so-today-i-sat-my-six-year-old-cousin-down-to

    • Altair074 Says:

      Ohhh, love it, love it, love it! I think the A+ guys would do it with men and mansplaining instead of white and whitesplaining, but it’s awesome!

  53. Rat Bastard Says:

    What I wanna know is, who the fuck gets to decide who’s an A Plusser or not? Screw that, I’m gonna call myself an A Plusser, and still sneak looks at women’s tits when they’re not looking.

  54. deceptikub Says:

    How long do you give this Atheism+ thing before it’s unraveled by infighting?

    • rjmx Says:

      About a year or two, I think. Maybe less; it’s hard to tell, but it’s bound to happen. Once they’ve shut the rest of the world out*, they’ll have to turn on each other. It won’t be pretty, but they can’t help it.

      *The irony is that they think they’re shutting us _in_.

  55. Paul Coddington Says:

    I guess they called themselves A+ because The Sith was already taken. Only a Sith deals in absolutes…

  56. Marlo Rocci Says:

    The sad part is that if you examine the rules they require to be “in”, Hitchens would have been out. Can you imagine what Hitch would say about these people? He’d gut them verbally and leave their entrails to the buzzards.

    • Anonymous Says:

      Hitchens = Old, white male.

      • Vic Says:

        Anonymous is right here.

        To the people who are ‘fighting the good fight and stand for women’s rights and social justice’, having a certain gender, belonging to a certain social class or having a certain skin colour will actually make you an ‘enemy’, regardless of your actions, your behaviour or your thoughts.

        It’s how equality works, you see? Certain people just have to be silenced because of the way they are.

        And considering Hitchens’ vigor, he would have been labelled the ‘king of rape and woman abuse’ in no time.

  57. Marlo Rocci Says:

    The difference that Thunderf00t is pointing out between FTB and the four horsemen is that the 4h were widely published and respected men in their field, even if their ideas sometimes stirred controversy. FTB bloggers are essentially activists who occasionally self-publish. They are famous among themselves only. Say “Greta Christina” or “Aronra” outside of atheist circles and you would get “who?” thrown back at you (sorry Aron).

    Now these activists assert that they can take the leadership mantle away from the remaining horsemen. More than that, they assert they have the right to exclude undesirables. I never heard Hitchens suggest anyone be thrown from a convention. Quite the opposite, he asked to be challenged. He enjoyed the opposing house raising it’s arms against him.

    So what are we left with in FTB? Cowards. They see that they are being challenged and they are scared. Their response is to exclude and censor. We need people like Hitchens.

  58. dougal445 Says:

    i don’t think christina has joinec the groupthi k. I still find her posts reasonable and well balanced. Like aronra who has also spoken against harrassement and mysogyny they seem to have fallen short of completely endorsing ftbs line and actions.
    I think the vast mamority of us are against harrassement, for equality etc but don’t neccerrsarily entirely agree with the ftb take on it. The problem is the way ftb treats / dismisses / insults these people.

  59. Marlo Rocci Says:

    I just stepped over to the #atheismplus twitter thread. I found probably 80% negative comments about atheism +. The few positive comments seemed mostly of the FtB group itself. Even those that favor a+’s poltical goals find organizing an exclusive clique to be distasteful.

  60. Copyleft Says:

    Funny story: I recently ran across a fanatical Tea Party activist. She explained to me that the Tea Party was automatically right about everything because they stand for the virtues of patriotism, freedom, and justice.

    Therefore, she explained, anyone who dissented, doubted, or disagreed with them was automatically Wrong and Bad because they were setting themselves in opposition to freedom and justice. Also, they hated America. By definition, you see. Because the Tea Party owns the virtues of patriotism and freedom, and they get to decide who is in favor of those virtues and who is against them. They do this by measuring your level of agreement with the Tea Party, which determines your virtue.

    And I said,”Richard Carrier? is that you?”

    The argument “We are right because we stand for good things, and everyone else is wrong because they oppose us and therefore stand for bad things” has, amazingly enough, been used before. Throughout all of human history. In fact, ANYONE of ANY ideology can use it.

    It’s not surprising that people continue to use this argument today. It IS surprising that they’re trying it on a community of rational skeptics, and hoping that rational skeptics will fall for it.

    • oolon Says:

      So when Richard says atheism+ consists of people who…
      1. … believe in being reasonable
      2. … believe in being compassionate
      3. … believe in personal integrity

      How could you possibly disagree… Wait a mo.. Hmm yeah I see what you mean…
      1. People who… Think FtBs are creating atheism+ to invade Poland and liken Carrier to Hitler… Are not Reasonable.
      2. People who… Laugh at women crying just because they don’t like them and orchestrate campaigns of hate… Are not Compassionate
      3. People who listen in to private email lists and repeat lies just because they paint their opponents in a bad light…. Have no Integrity.

      • Copyleft Says:

        I can disagree because the new Atheist Tea Party does not own those virtues, and does not have the right or the authority to determine that only those who agree with them are reasonable, compassionate, and possess integrity.

        Do I need to make my parable simpler, or are you missing the point deliberately?

        Myers recently posted a response to the question “why do you insist that everyone who disagrees with you is a misogynist?” In essence, his reply was “Because they ARE. Because I said so.”

        This is not the position of a rational or skeptical person, but rather that of a believer defending dogma.

        • Vic Says:

          “Paula Kirby tweeted:
          Atheism+: opposing ageism, racism and sexism. Old white men need not apply.”

          Do you feel that? It’s the fuzzy warmth of inclusiveness.

        • oolon Says:

          Copyleft…. Err that is really your problem? They are saying they ‘own’ the virtues by saying to be in their group you need to agree with these things? How do you feel about anti-racist groups saying you need to not be racist to join… I’m assuming you are not racist so that must really piss you off when they take ownership of *your* virtue eh?

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            No, they are saying that only those in their group have their virtues. Learn to read.

          • Copyleft Says:

            It’s more like a racist group claiming to oppose racism and insisting that anyone who points out their lie is racist themselves, actually. But thanks for pretending you don’t get it. It’s easy to SAY you embody reason and compassion and integrity–it’s even easier to say that anybody who disagrees with you is opposed to those things.

            Sadly, it’s also easy to spot what a big fat dishonest dodge that is.

          • oolon Says:

            Kaylakaze, you have obviously not read what has actually been written about it. A number of people their side clearly state that plenty of people have the same virtues and they don’t *have* to join (AronRa said as much). If they don’t join they lose the inherent virtue that they possess, or they never had it! That is such a daft thing to believe that it would seriously be someone’s position I worry for your rationality.

            Copyleft, you have stretched my analogy too far… Basically you don’t like their brand of feminism/etc so they are not *real* feminists/etc as far as you are concerned. I’m sure you have a really interesting litany of wrongs committed by them to prop up this fantasy.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            They can say whatever they want. Their actions speak more loudly and clearly.

          • oolon Says:

            Hehe Kaylakazes statement is very telling… I ignore what they actually say clearly in the open on their blogs and believe unsubstantiated balls spread by their detractors. This makes perfect sense in Kaylakaze’s tiny mind as primary source is never the best for making a conclusion – its always better after going through the rumour mill.

  61. Fabricio Says:

    Oh, Hitchens, save us from all this drama!

    Wait… he’s dead, so… fuck…

  62. oolon Says:

    Atheism+ is an attempt to organise an American-style franchise (McDonalds, Disney, Levi) that seeks to launch a crusade against the religions of this world.

    Atheism, or lack of dogmatic belief, is growing as rational thinking and common-sense takes hold across the world. But it is not enough that we simply approach common problems like misogyny, racism, social inequality et al, with the razor of a rational mind.

    We atheists need to unite behind a tangible unassailable ideology (rather than the lack of one) to effect change and further the Atheist agenda.

    Down with the douche bags! Atheist power! Atheist power! Hail PZ!

    • Vic Says:

      Paula Kirby: Atheism+: opposing ageism, racism and sexism. Old white men need not apply.

      Oh hey, I would help, but I don’t fulfill the membership requirements.

    • Commander Tuvok Says:

      Oolon, you are the douchebag.

      • oolon Says:

        Dammit looks like Tuvok has been sockpuppeted too… Double dammit and it looks like the fool who is obsessed with Greta is the culprit. Fuck off back to the timchannel and carry on obsessing over her nude photos.

    • oolon Says:

      I think I have a tear in my eye…. Thunderplank calls me out for ‘obsessively posting’ and nicely justifies my piss taking. Previously only Thunderf00t himself was worthy of a sockpuppet…. Now I have one of my very own.

      Thanks guys you’ve made a sad internet troll very happy. I must be doing something right to be this annoying to people!

    • oolon Says:

      Cool! I must be really annoying :-D

      http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/08/27/mencallmethings-whining-annoying-cunt/

      At about the same time I was sock-puppeted on Gretas blog too… Actually I may not be laughing if I was not anonymous! Good move there on my part and up yours to John Welch and Michael Kingsford who tried to say I should be out, loud and proud with my real name. Not when the slimepitters/TFs fans are out for the lulz.

    • rjmx Says:

      Hah. I _thought_ you’d decided to start telling the truth at last, toolong.

  63. Examples of Darwinist “Free” Thought Blogging | Uncommon Descent Says:

    [...] HT: Thunderf00t on A Plus Atheism [...]

  64. bedlin88 Says:

    I would rather be a C.H.U.D then associated with this sudo-facist atheism + nonsense. I am not defined by their labels and I take offense with Carrier’s attempt to label me or anyone else. What exactly gives him the right to speak for anything? Did I miss the part where the atheist community elected him or anyone else our leaders? I do not have or have seen any evidence that would make me believe that a god/gods or supreme being exists. That’s what makes me an atheist but it does not define me, I suspect it doesn’t define any other atheists either. Atheism + is all stuff and nonsense.

    • oolon Says:

      Sorry you obviously missed the memo, Dawkins promoted him to supreme-atheist and he is therefore infallible. I’m afraid your dissent has been noted and passed to the Ministry of Love, expect an invitation to room 101 presently…

  65. kbonn Says:

    I agree with AronRa here, for the most part, who cares about this? Thunder, you have a large audience, get back to the important shit. Most people know and understand that PZ treated you wrong and broke his word to you. Your focus on making sure everyone knows this, led you to do some things that were unfortunate. Richard Carrier’s post and comments that followed really only show one thing, Richard Carrier is extremely important to Richard Carrier. Who cares? Why bother with him? He is an ass. You can do better than this. You points about FtB have been made, you do not have to dwell on it.

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      Wow. I think you just invented militant apathy.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        (or at least radical apathy. Maybe that’s more accurate)

        • kbonn Says:

          Not really, I just find the common complaint that certain FtBs are full of themselves, rather pointless if all you do is post about them.

          • HuntingGoodwill Says:

            So I guess if I follow your logic, informing people about the fallacies in their “holy books” is pointless, unless you “do something about it”? Maybe you should consider rational thinking. Using that tool, you would have arrived at the conclusion, that information is necessary for the formation of opinions, ergo, point of views and selecting a course of action for those who were “not in the know” before.

            I for example was not aware of PZ Myers’ idiocratic ideology and pseudo-Communistic “line drawing” over there at ffFTBlogs, until a couple of more or less outspoken bloggers/vloggers made me aware of it.
            The idiot-to-useful information-ratio at ffFTBlogs was pretty high to begin with, so I stopped reading their “contributions” except for some selected few people.

            So being that I’m neither a “Skepwithoutdick” nor a “Thunderrapist”, I didn’t know what was going on, ’til after I was made aware of the whole “Elevatorgate” and recently “Shirtwearinggate” debacle and the roles the aforementioned persona played.

            So yeah, it was great to learn how far the irrationality goes, because until that point, I STOPPED CARING about ffFTBlogs and people like PZ Myers and Rebecca Wat(son)daughter (no rapist!), but after learning these new facts about their lack of intelligence and the pointless nonsense they pester the whole movement with, I realized I need to actively distance myself from their mental diarrhea.

            I draw the line where AronRa and Cris come into play, because they still have the chance of behaving rationally and distancing themselves from this nonsense.

            But yeah, all-in-all the message is clear:

            By people “just posting” these facts, I was able to realize how irrational, moronic and straight out mentally retarded many of the people in the movement are and where their beehive is.

            And I’m thankful for that, because I know I won’t waste neither time nor money to support irrational pseudo-feminists and wannabe-Communists, when I myself am a quite rationally thinking Atheist.

    • operatoroscillation Says:

      “you have a large audience, get back to the important shit”

      Why don’t you pass that message on to Richard Carrier himself? I’d much rather listen to him talk about Bayes Theorem, or early Christianity and Ancient Roman Science than this feminist hate speech he’s doing.

  66. Novus Neanderthal Says:

    I’ve used BlockSite Plus in Firefox to block FtB and skepchick, both to avoid nonsense and to avoid sponsoring them with ad impressions. Critical thinking is nearly sacrosanct to me, and to value conclusions above all disregards the necessary “willingness to criticize oneself”. Anyway, so I now miss out on Aron Ra’s blog which is a sacrifice… however I’ve been rather ambivalent about Cris’ blog, ever since she took that unbelievably ignorant bigoted position that Neanderthals were clearly inferior to us because they lacked imagination, which she claimed was evidence by their lack of cave paintings.

    Anyway, I think if Aron Ra extricated himself from FtB to avoid perpetuating this sociopathic rancor through implied consent or support caused by his continued participation at FtB, it would be the death-knell of nonsense. Aron Ra still has respect and if he excused himself and told both sides to grow up and keep civil, then “people” might get it into their thick skulls that civility is necessary to communicate any rational argument.

  67. Atheism+: Fighting Over Vaporware | StealthBadger.net Says:

    [...] the hate she, some of the FTBers, the skepchicks, and some women have been getting from idiots like Thunderf00t, then this is not going to go well. Don’t form movement that exists solely to react to an [...]

    • Novus Neanderthal Says:

      If you can’t make your point without calling those you disagree with “idiots”, then where is your rationality? Thunderf00t is a scientist, and if at any point the FtBers, skepchicks, etc sat down and constructed a well reasoned argument without ad hominem attacks/fallacies, Thunderf00t would have considered it and responded in kind. He has conceded to superior reasoning before, and no doubt can do so again in the future. However, Thunderf00t’s original statements were never even addressed civilly in a logical, rational manner… he was just attacked by a mob.

      Consider the psychology of this situation. Thunderf00t’s attempt at logic and reason was met with irrational hostility and belittling. How do you expect a single person to respond to an angry mob? I think Thunderf00t’s blog posts are grounded not in hostility, but in disbelief that this irrationality exists in the rational community. So, Thunderf00t pointing out the madness and making fun of it makes sense psychologically, since there was no productive way for him to deal with it rationally.

      It is nonsense to dehumanize Thunderf00t while demanding him to be the bigger person. This is where I can’t disagree more with Aron Ra’s comments… first stop “them” diminishing Thunderf00t’s humanity before making demands on Thunderf00t’s humanity. I think Thunderf00t deserves an apology for how he was treated… all human beings deserve to be treated like human beings, and you can’t demand others treat you as a human being while you continue to refuse to treat them like human beings. And before you say what about Thunderf00t apologizing, remember FtB drew first blood, so it is their prerogative to apologize first.

      • StealthBadger Says:

        I just wanted to stop by and thank you for the hits. I probably wouldn’t have gotten so many without your ranty comment. Never mind that I never would have seen your comment without all of those hits. Given that, I will happily respond, though I consider it unlikely that I will be back. As someone who has been watching thunderf00t’s progress on YouTube and elsewhere for quite some time, I gave up on his ability to handle constructive criticism about two years ago.

        First, be careful how you point to scientists as paragons of rationality, especially when they’re talking about subjects outside of their specialty. Just as atheism is not a guarantee of being skeptical, being a scientist is not a guarantee of rationality (again, especially when navigating unscientific situations). Also, your one-sided characterization of what happened at FTB (as a certain physicist would say) is not only beyond “not right,” it’s not even close enough to the truth to be simply “wrong.”

        (BTW, you seem to have “rational” and “rationalize” confused. If the process is post hoc, then it’s rationalization and has no bearing on the merits of the original decision or course of action)

        Second, thunderf00t did not use logic and reason. He attacked with bombast and pearl-clutching (I really was waiting for him to pull out the fainting couch). He was not attacked by a mob, and certainly he was inconvenienced to a far lesser degree than when his commenters swarmed TamTamPamela. This is the Internet, and far from the angriest corners of it. Did he get some negative comments? My heart bleeds for him, given that he only has his many supporters here and on his YouTube channel to fall back on. I think he’ll live.

        Third, I’m not dehumanizing thunderf00t at all; that’s a pathetically laughable claim. Lots of human beings are idiots about many things, and he is definitely one of those when he attempts to speak on any non-mechanistic (i.e. wicked) problem. Just making this clear: I have nothing but respect for the man in his field of competence, but I recognize that expertise in one field is not necessarily transferable to another.

        I see no need to apologize for anything, because the fact that the Atheism+ had to screw up this badly for him to write probably his first someone-accurate post (yes, I mean this one) in quite some time is either a strong illustration of the saying that a stopped watch is right twice a day, or an example of the amazingly simplistic degree to which complex human problems have to be broken down before thunderf00t is capable of grasping them.

        Have a nice week!

        • Novus Neanderthal Says:

          Well, as admittedly faint praise, your blog is better than most of FtB, so you are welcome. Any reasoned argument is typically better than an unreasoned conclusion. I still think throwing out the idiot card is throwing away the prize. That being said, I do prefer the JREF forums.

          Thunderf00t as a scientist was not a declaration about all scientists, but was meant to clearly frame his previous behavior… he has previously shown himself more than willing to stop to understand and weigh the merits of a counter argument, without sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting, “ni ni ni ni ni!”.

          As for the dehumanizing and diminishing, it wasn’t directly aimed at StealthBadger personally… most the post wasn’t, including the apologizing bit. I think the point was pretty clear. Calls for social justice must employ social justice.
          As for me being wrong… we’ll just have to disagree on that. The “you just don’t get the internet” type response is not consistent with the summary justice wielded against an individual, Thunderf00t, by persons of authority at FtB and their circle, a mob. Counting anonymous commenters and subscribers as supporters, on a personal level, is as nonsensical as counting all trolls as viable personal threats.

          I don’t think I even used the word rationalize anywhere… I think I used both rational and irrational properly. I am perfectly capable of mixing up rational with rationale, but I didn’t catch that happening.

          Live long and prosper…

  68. skmind Says:

    What is particularly silly is that the list looks made up in a hurry, and then considerable effort is being made to demonize someone who does not completely and immediately agree with its completeness and correctness.


    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.

    So if I say, I cannot be a member because Atheism+ does not say

    Atheists plus we fight pedophilia and child rape

    Is that another vote for douchery, or somehow it is included in Point 1 above?

    After all, women’s rights and gay rights are specifically spelled out, but not children’s rights.

    • Fabricio Says:

      Oh, but no children were ever harmed in Atheism Less’s elevators. So, you see, that’s aparently very important.

      Also, atheists are very homophobic, do you remember “Charlie Checkim” that called The Atheist Experience? You see, he was an atheist, and he was as homophobe, so atheists are homophobic, and never stood for gay’s rights. Do not let Atheism Less fool you!

      Also, transgendered people are also not welcome in Atheism Less movement, because… well, I’m pretty sure some point in time, a trans person was offended by some T-shirt or something. Probably by Richard Dawkins, that British prick. Very bad stuff.

      So, you see, Atheism Plus is good, because it adresses those concerns, and like the programming language C++, it is very confusing but compiles very quickly, so its must be very good. What I’m trying to say is, that’s in no way a bad idea, because group thjinking is good and so and so.

      I hope that I made my point clear in why I think Atheism Less is less good than Atheism Plus, and Atheism Plus is plusgood than Atheism Less. Or something.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        I find your slurs against C++ appalling, claiming it’s confusing. We need an Atheism++ to weed out such people. :-)

        • HuntingGoodwill Says:

          I’m glad he wrote about C++ and didn’t mention Python. It being a rapist phallic symbol and stuff!!!

          • Palindromemordnilap Says:

            “It being a rapist phallic symbol and stuff”

            Speaking as a python enthusiast,

            The fuck?

  69. Biohazard Says:

    As I see it, Atheism +, is atheism plus a particular set of leftist ideologies.

    I *fully* support/believe in race/gender equality, gay and transgender rights etc.. I condemn the use of racist or sexist slurs or name calling in general and I think the trolls that post rape threats are scum. 

    However, despite all this I would no doubt be “othered” by many A+ people simply because I am am a classical liberal (moderate libertarian) and not a leftist.

    When someone talks about “social justice” I hear forced wealth redistribution and attendant leftist thinking on a variety of subjects.

    Justice for everyone, yes, absolutely, as best as we can possibly work it out. “Social justice”, not so much.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice#Criticism

    Also I have a visceral disgust for the concept of demanding loyalty oaths (especially from supposed freethinkers) and really do not react well to being threatened (see: Carrier).

    The difference is while I disagree with many of my leftist “friends” politically, I would not shun them for their beliefs and am more than happy to work with them on things we do agree with (the things I listed above plus atheism and science education for example).

    • SK Says:

      When someone talks about “social justice” I hear forced wealth redistribution and attendant leftist thinking on a variety of subjects.

      What do you hear when someone talks about the following?


      women’s rights, racism,homophobia and transphobia

      Also do non-leftists never talk about these things, and social justice?

    • SK Says:

      “As I see it, Atheism +, is atheism plus a particular set of leftist ideologies.”

      Yes, I got that.

      Thanks for answering a question. I only wish I had asked it.

  70. Anonymous Says:

    Atheism + or Atheism 卐 ?
    You decide!

  71. abrotherhoodofman Says:

    Well done, mate.

    Please keep blogging, and keep honing your writing skills, because you’re learning rapidly and each one is better than its predecessor.

    Your oratory skills are of course superior, and beyond any criticism.

  72. abrotherhoodofman Says:

    By the way, thunderf00t:

    How about a post on Atheism-PUS ?

    Now there’s an appropriate name! Feel free to use it.

  73. Mike De Fleuriot Says:

    Looking at the new crop of atheist aka A+’ers I hope that this is not the future of atheism. Because while some of things they are for are worthwhile, generally all of those thing are already covered by the old atheism. Which means that it’s not those things that are important to them, but rather who is actually leading the field that is important to them. These new A+ folk all want to be rock stars like the 4h’s, without the hard work.

    This is a new problem that atheism is slowly coming to realise, with the internet, speakers will have to constantly produce new material, unlike the old atheists who wrote one book, and let that slowly spread through the concious of the public. Now one talk, is cammed onto youtube before the speaker has finished book signing. And when he appears at the new venture, everyone there knows what he is going to say. You want an example? Hitchens and his North Korea speech, look at everyone of his debates, and that comes up, and he was one of our best. The Ftb crowd want part of the action, but they are starting to notice that everything that they say, everyone knows already, which means that they are not making as much impact as they believe they should be. So this atheism+ thing is an attempt to get people to accept them as leaders of the movement, because they have nothing else to offer.

    How many times must we listen to Greta telling us Atheists, why we are angry? Did you not know why you are angry with those who think your atheism is of the devil? Are we really that dumb that we need to have the golden rule explained to us time and again? Can we not develop it to improve others lives, or do we need the “skills” of these leaders to tell us how to be good Atheists?

    It is time for talk to be put on the back burner, and action, real human impact action, to be brought forward and used to make a better life for everyone.

    (little ps, notice that none has even attempted to find out these asshole women haters are the way they are. You have to know the cause of a problem before you can fix it, that is if you claim to have the ability to fix it.)

  74. dadge Says:

    In the very first comment (“The thing that strikes me most about the way they define themselves isn’t the divisiveness (As dreadful as the concept appears to me) but rather its the fact that they think that any rational atheist would be AGAINST social justice, women’s rights, critical thinking and skepticism. That regular atheists would be FOR racism, homophobia and transphobia. It’s so nonsensical.”) Ursus totally misses the point. It’s not nonsensical at all. The term atheism implies nothing about one’s attitudes. Of course it’s possible to be an atheist racist or atheist homophobe, duh. And it’s because a lot of atheists have demonstrated themselves to be less than right-on that this subgroup has decided to break away.

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      “And it’s because a lot of atheists have demonstrated themselves to be less than right-on that this subgroup has decided to break away.”

      Demonstrate your claims.

    • Kris Says:

      “And it’s because a lot of atheists have demonstrated themselves to be less than right-on that this subgroup has decided to break away.”

      Name ONE. The ONLY incident to date that anyone has heard of is elevatorgate. And guess what? That is the word of a known feminist against NO ONE else’s. These people are turning the freethought/atheist movement into a feminist movement like acceptance of atheism is already widespread.

      Yes, there can be atheist racists or atheist homophobes, but guess what? There are barely any. Definitely not enough to warrant derision among our ranks by ostracizing one another who don’t happen to disagree about feminism being a more important issue. If I wanted to discuss feminism, I’d :gasp: join a feminist movement. Likewise for the other issues. Atheism still needs to be fought for.

  75. dadge Says:

    Another thought. As well as being a secularist and a critic of religion, Richard Dawkins is active in the British Humanist Association. I’m sure he wouldn’t have any problem with Atheism+.

    • kbonn Says:

      But he disagreed with Rebecca Watson once and thought she over-reacted in regards to “elevator-gate” so he is an enemy.

    • Kris Says:

      Atheism+ has shown no motive for anything other than feminism in anything other than mission statement. Also, the same people who are tagging along with it are the same people who are sucking RW’s cock and dismissing anyone else who isn’t a feminist as a misogynist or homophobe just because they disagree. They’ve yet to tackle ANY issue other than feminism, but they’ve went towards feminism with a vengeance.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        I’m getting annoyed that people keep saying they’re feminist. They are not. They are a parody of feminism. Everything about them is about infantilizing women. They’re not trying to empower anyone but themselves.

  76. Steve_N Says:

    HOLY FUCKING JUMPING JESUS and MOTHER OF GOD!
    Atheism+ is simply the WORST idea for the furtherance of atheism/skepticsm/rationalism I could ever conceive of.

    I fully expect it to be someday seen as the WORST IDEA OF THE 21st CENTURY!

    And…btw, it must be admitted that now, coming out the other side, that Thunderf00t suddenly looks and smells like the FINEST ROSE vs the recent and somewhat nightmarish FTB squabble.

  77. AV Says:

    I care about social justice. But there are many (conflicting) ways to do it.
    I support women’s rights, and mens rights as well. Equality means to adress problems for both sexes.
    Atheists plus we protest racism, and thats include prejudice agains white people as well, ie “old white men”.
    I do fight homophobia and transphobia when I see it, but I also reject bad generalisations against vanilla cis people. Who you sleep with doesn’t matter, ever.
    I use critical thinking and skepticism, and that includes statements by feminists.

    So I think I’m not let on board their movement.

    Base the idea on Elevatorgate and the later debacle was a mistake and then Carrier killed the baby in the cradle. Noone in his/her right mind will associate theme self with his idea of the movement. If they don’t distance them self from Carrier the idea will be dead as a fish before christmas.

    • Altair074 Says:

      Thank you, you wrote what I feel and think about A+ better than I could have done.
      They only wish to support only one side of every issue and call themselves champions of social justice because of that.

  78. DS Says:

    Atheism+ doesn’t go far enough. We need Atheist DoublePlusGood in order to TRULY make it an inclusive movement.

  79. mikelorrey Says:

    A+ is the Taliban of atheism.

  80. True Colors Says:

    Yeah, we’ve been down this road before.

    Lyndon Johnson ideologically purged the Democratic party when he supported Civil Rights legislation. The South, strongly Democratic since Lincoln (evil slave-freeing Republican), left the Democrats, joined the Republicans, now purely the Conservative Party, and haven’t returned.

    Any Democrat miss those guys? Anyone feel like the party is weaker due to a lack of KKK members?

    Same thing happened in 1912: The progressive wing of the Republican party supported Roosevelt. Shenanigans at the Convention led to Taft’s nomination despite Teddy receiving more votes. Bye Bye progressive Republicans.

    I will pause for a moment to allow the numbnut fans of Thundef00t to say stupid shit, take the analogy literally, and whine about comparing this to that…done? No? Well, you’re fucking idiots, so I won’t wait around.

    This is a similar process. In a decade no one will give a shit that the knuckledraggers were left behind. Plus, you will feel more comfortable with the wacko religious tards haggling over the definition of rape and drawing fine lines around the boundaries of sexual assault.

    Since this blog has renamed itself “The Place where a dumbass whines about his former employers,” the transition will be a little tougher for you, clearly you can’t get over a break-up, but time heals all wounds.

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      I find it comical that the randomized icon for you looks like a swastika.

      • abrotherhoodofman Says:

        That is funny!

      • True Colors Says:

        Yes, I imagine you would, that’s sort of the level you folks exist at. That’s incoherent as all hell, but a I’m sure a gaggle of dolts have laughed, not really understanding why, “HAHA, Nazi…derp, feminazi…”

        I think it’s funny that yours looks like an anus under assault from a bad case of hemorrhoids. How meaningful.

    • abrotherhoodofman Says:

      You crack me up, True Colors.

      Atheism-Pus has a name. And that’s about it.

      In a decade, the suppurating zit of Atheism-Pus will have long since popped, and vanished, no longer besmirching the good face of Richard Dawkins’ New Atheism.

      Atheism-Pus is like the twenty-pound saddle bags a lazy wife adds to her formerly trim figure, two months after a shogun wedding.

    • Acathode Says:

      A+ is not about “Us vs Them”, it’s not about splitting “the movement”, and it’s not political maneuvering for more power! Nope, not at all! How could anyone get such a stupid idea?!

      It’s only a process “similar” to when “Lyndon Johnson ideologically purged the Democratic party”….

      Yeah… I won’t even bother saying anything else, you’re sinking your own ship so much better than anyone else ever could.

      • True Colors Says:

        Oh please, no one is kicking anyone out of anything, any more than Southern Democrats were “forced” to leave the Democratic Party. In fact, folks like Robert Byrd renounced their very clearly racist pasts and moved on.

        You’re welcome to do that. What’s being ostracized is a worldview. As long as that regressive, primitive position is held, you will find yourself marginalized as society progresses.

        Not that complicated, despite your idiot’s paranoia.

        And by the way, you’re welcome back at any time, you just have to stop being an asshole.

        • Acathode Says:

          Well… the irony is that looking at the responses you are getting outside of FTB, the ones being marginalized are the A+ers, which is actually why I’m kinda positive to it. The A+ers are more or less ostracizing themselves, the rest of us just have to kick back and enjoy the show, and laugh when you make fools out of yourselves.

          Gotta suck for the other A+ers though, here they are, trying their best to clean up and do damage control after Carrier dropped his “You’re either with us or against us!”-turd, only to have another too honest A+er come and drop the same kind of turd, again. As I said, I appreciate your honesty, with friends like you and Carrier, the A+ doesn’t even need enemies.

          As for “welcome back”, I was never in, I don’t consider myself part of any atheistic community, I’m from Sweden, so the whole notion of being atheistic community seems rather pointless to me when the almost whole population is either atheists or areligious.

          The only reason why I even found these sites out is because I’m interested in how religious people think, I’ve only met something like 10 persons in my lifetime that actually were religious in any deeper sense of the word.

          • True Colors Says:

            Time will tell. I’ll bet you that the passage of the years does not reflect kindly on the other side.

    • Fabricio Says:

      Because “ideological purges” is what atheism should be about, right?

      How about some gulags to follow? It’s not like atheists never done it before, right Comrade Stalin?

      • True Colors Says:

        What a reasoned response. Again, no one is kicking you out. No one told progressive Republicans in 1912 that they could no longer be Republicans, it was just the case that the existing party adopted a position that was so horrible that the Roosevelt wing was forced to leave.

        A+ is essentially the Bull Moose Party of atheism, it’s just a destination for folks who are sick of the regressive stupidity of folks like the proprietor of this blog. Likely it will be absorbed into a broader social justice movement, with that movement growing to feature many of the elements the atheists bring to it.

        You’re welcome to join, you just have to abandon your barbarism.

        • abrotherhoodofman Says:

          With you as the judge and jury, correct?

          Please, True Colors, enough of the juvenile, playground philosophy.

          Get a job in the real word, work productively alongside people you don’t agree with politically, realize how stupid you were when you were young, and then get on your knees and blow me.

          (Okay, the last part is optional.)

          • True Colors Says:

            The definition of a bad internet argument is relying on assumptions about the real world nature of commenters. I’m a lawyer, I’m doing fine. I am also obviously a progressive. I both grew up and now live in a Bible-belt red as red can be state.

            Save your sanctimony. It’s this type of horseshit thinking that gets you ditched.

        • Fabricio Says:

          I’d rather not to partake in any activities from groups that promove “ideological purges”, thank you very much. I’d rather stick with this barbaric concept that people should not be “ideologically purged” from any movement.

          Because if I want “ideological purges” and bigotry, I would join a church and try to get some money and political power from it, thank you very much.

          • True Colors Says:

            I disagree. I’m glad racist Southerners are no longer involved in the Democratic party. I am similarly glad to be rid of the lame, childish petulance of TF and folks like you.

            Bad ideas are bad. Science regularly purges poor ideas. That’s called progress. People who believed the world was flat and that phlogiston explained fire are gone. It is the duty of the true follower of rational methods of inquiry to send away poor thinking without pity. You guys are getting the boot now, sorry.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            Quite the opposite. It’s your people, and your lack of progress and rationality that are getting the boot. Same result I suppose, but let’s be clear about who the non-scientific side are.

          • True Colors Says:

            Nope. We’re leaving willingly. That’s why I gave you two examples. In terms of process, this is more like the Progressive Republicans abandoning the Party after the convention in 1912.

            This is the scientific side. Throughout history science has had a profound impact on social progress, both directly and indirectly.

            On the direct side, we have genetics proving that racial bias has no biological basis. Indirectly, the generation of scientists that have shown the world’s holy books to be incoherent compendiums of fairy tales have undermined the barbaric, primitive moral rules contained therein.

            If you cannot see the radical social implications of adherence to the scientific principle, there’s a fog obscuring your reason close to as powerful as that lingering in the minds of the believers.

  81. melvinvines Says:

    Jehovah’s Witnesses are Christians, not a “Cult”.

    • ffffffffffffffff Says:

      Christianity itself is a cult. A well-marketed one, believed by many gullible people and firmly entrenched in society, but it’s still at the end of the day a cult that worships a narcissistic deity with a fetish for brutally killing his subjects.

  82. Craig Talbert Says:

    Plus-sized atheists don’t seem to be aware of the principle of maximum parsimony, or the works of Milton Rokeach.

    Does anyone want to come up to my place for coffee?

  83. maxamillion Says:

    To be ahead of the curve ++Atheism would be more appropriate No?

  84. Anonymous Says:

    What?

    No mention of the “white supremacist” kind of atheism that is allegedly the one Dawkins advocates?

  85. Kurt1 Says:

    At first I didn´t bother enough to comment, but what the hell. As usual you hit the spot, this A+ sounds exactly like McCarthyism and the third Reich combined. Diversity, social justice, opposing misogyny, homophobia and racism – that’s what that was all about, too! I heard PZ is already building a death camp in his garden, where he plans to torture and kill off all the unpure atheists not labled with a big red A+ on their jacketts.

    While I agree, that picking sides is pretty silly, most of what I read on the FtB network regarding A+ is very exciting. It’s an attempt to unify atheists with similar interests, which overlap a great deal with secular humanism.The sad thing is the necessity of such a movement, but there seem to be a lot of atheists out there, who don´t get, that threatening people is wrong, and that social justice issues are relevant topics to be concerned about. On the other side, a lot of ahteists did not feel welcome in the community, because of the white, privileged majority. Your approach seems to be: well thats their problem – while A+ says: you are welcome here.

    That A+ opposes new atheism is a misconception ( http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/08/23/nice-article-on-atheism-in-the-new-statesman/ )

    Why you feel the need to discredit the A+ crowd by comparing their founders to the four horsemen is beyond me. It´s characterassassination instead of attacking their ideas, which, as you know, is a cheap shot and says more about you than your opponents. You adorn yourself with borrowed plumes because you have accomplished even less than thouse you criticize.

    No one is forcing anyone to join, there is no A+-gestapo walking around hanging everyone who disagrees.

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      Maybe you should have actually read before commenting so you would know the ACTUAL reasons people have a problem with A+.

    • Acathode Says:

      “On the other side, a lot of ahteists did not feel welcome in the community, because of the white, privileged majority.”

      Nothing says welcome to a new atheistic PoC like a bunch of white, privileged FTB commentators shouting “SHOW A ROTTEN PORCUPINE UP YOUR ASS!” when he/she happens to ask something like “whats this elevatorgate all about?”…

      When I discovered FTB (and the elevatorgate drama) a few months ago, my jaw hit the floor, the more I read, the more disgusted I became. The pure hatred and vitriol that is proudly displayed and encouraged at FTB is a stain of shame on the whole community that otherwise pride itself with it’s ability of rational though and discourse.
      Heck! These people even go as far as harassing people in real life by attempting to get them fired and thrown out of their education. And you think these people appear more inviting to minorities?

      • Kurt1 Says:

        Yeah, and the posts by TF here are all cuddly and friendly and by no means just asshurt overreactions because they kicked him off the network. No! They are scientific, having graphs and quotes and stuff.

        I read the post by TF (most of it anyways, it´s terribly written). I read some of the comments as well. I read a lot of the A+ posts and comments on FtB. Most people were as positive about the whole thing as I am. The whole counter argument here seems to be, that you don´t like the founders very much. That and that some people there are being mean to some people who call them “cunt” and “whore” and that – as we all know – justifies making up shit about them and comparing them to totalitarian regimes.

        And don´t get started with elevatorgate. That one person suggesting “don’t do that” can cause so much unwarranted outrage is ridiculous. All this raging against feminism in the skeptical movement and the assholish behaviour of it´s “critics” is one factor of what got A+ started.

        If you don´t like it, fine! Go on with your life, not being part of that community. But stop whining that Jen turned you into a newt or that FtB is out to destroy atheism, because thats simply bullshit.

        • Kaylakaze Says:

          This post demonstrates that you are a moron not worth listening to. Your reading comprehension abilities are atrocious and your “it’s terribly written” snipe is ridiculous childishness.

        • Acathode Says:

          The posts here might not be cuddly, but they sure as hell don’t come close to the vitriol you find at FTB. I’ve yet to see a more disgusting person than Greg Laden in this “new atheism” community-thing, and the fact that he was, and still is, cheered on and defended by a large crown of people at FTB makes them almost equally disgusting.

          With that said, just so you can understand where I’m coming from, I will say that I don’t particularly agree with TF or his handling of his FTB kick. I think his posts both prior and after his kick was of poor quality and I think he could have handled it a lot better. Still, I think his hearth is in the right place, and I understand his anger over what he perceives as a betrayal and a knife in the back from Myers.
          The main reason I comment here though, is that I know that unlike FTB, my comments here will not be censored, nor will I get banned and then labeled a racist misogynist for simply disagreeing.

          As for the “cunt” thing, that’s touches a thing I forgot to mention, the hypocrisy. They throw a hissy fit if someone say “cunt”, but calling Dawkins “Dick” is fine. They start A+ in the name of fighting sexism, racism and ageism, only to turn around and say “Old white males are not welcome!”, and so on.
          If these people were religious, it would be fun watching their hypocrisy, another “lol creationists!” on the heap, but seeing as these people are supposed to be skeptical, rational, freethinking atheists, it’s just so damn sad!

          Also, the reason why the voices at FTB are positive, it’s quite natural, after a year of banning anyone who does not agree with the FTB party-line, it’s only to be expected. Go outside the echo-chamber though, and you quickly will come face to face with a lot of people in various stages of rejecting A+.

          It seems you aren’t equipped with the capabilities to handle people disagreeing yet though, since you insist that we stop criticizing A+ and instead “go on with our lives” (now that’s a winner argument worthy of a creationist!), so maybe you ought to take that step back into your comfortable echo-chamber instead?

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            To be fair, that “old white males are not welcome” thing I think was tweeted by Paula Kirby, a feminist woman who the FtB crowd bashed (Myers called her a Fox News feminist) because she didn’t agree with them. I don’t think she’s a part of A+ and was tweeting that as a snipe.

          • Acathode Says:

            Kaylakaze: Ah sorry, my mistake, I guess it was a parody of McReight’s tweet to the “smug humanists” on how they were “infamous for being mostly old, white, men”?
            I hope you can understand my confusion.

            Still, the point stands, one of the things that bother me about FTB and their brand of feminism is the hypocrisy of it all. I found the exact same kind of hypocrisy in the Swedish feminism movement, and I see a lot of similarities between them and FTB, which is probably one of the reasons why I find them so disgusting.

        • Kurt1 Says:

          Calling Dawkins a “Dick” is not ok. If someone does so, call him/her out, no one is perfect. But assuming, that people at all times live up to their own standards is naive. No one is saying, that old, white men are not welcome. Myers is an old white male.

          I disagree in some cases with commenters and contributers on FtB, I am not banned for some reason. I don´t doubt that there are a lot people that got banned or censored, though. That does not change the fact, that a lot of people are positive and excited about A+.

          I have no problem at all with anyone critizing anything, as long as there is a clear argument other than “I don´t like that folks”. I am completely disagreeing with TF, thats why I posted a comment in the first place. Why do I think his post is badly written? You mean other than the random italics and capital letters?

          1) The assumption is, that A+ is opposed to new atheism.

          This is wrong, a claim made by a third party, refuted by PZ and Jen and probably others.

          2) Most of the A+ “leaders” are not as important as Dawkins, Dennet, Hitchens and Harris. Therefore they are not worth listening to.

          This is simply silly. It´s an argument from authority and it implies that these thinkers would be opposed to A+. Neither Dawkins, Dennet nor Harris have made any statements regarding A+ yet. At least I am not aware of any. To make it worse it´s not even his own authority.

          3) “So ‘Atheism Plus’ gets off to this incredibly bad start where of their guiding principals, 2-4 are subsets of 1. Why that is becomes obvious when you see what’s bottom of the list of the ‘Atheism Plus’ manifesto. Bottom of the heap, no. 5 of 5 is ‘the use of critical thinking’. Yup critical thinking is bottom of the pile for ‘Atheism Plus’.”

          This is stupid. There is no hierarchy, because it is not numbered. “Social justice is an issue, the emphasis lies … ” is more what it is about. The various points are connected with an “and” and not with “first that, than that and if we have time we get around to critical thinking”. The points made in this guideline are of equal importance. And the list is not complete.

          4) Picking out Richard Carrier and one comment by Jen out of context as representative of the whole FtB crowd.

          I don´t like the misrepresentation, as I said above. Also read the link I posted below. For Kaylakaze it is too late anyways, he already admitted to disagree because he does not like the folks over there.

          • Acathode Says:

            I think you misunderstood. I don’t really mind if people call Dawkins a dick, or a cunt, that kind of language is fine with me. So I have no reason to call anyone out if they use those words. What I do have something against is hypocrisy, and that’s what I’m calling FTB out on.
            They think “cunt” is a really bad word, and react extremely strongly to it, but they do not react to “dick” in the same manner at all, that to me reek of hypocrisy.

            As for your counterarguments:

            1) Yes, there has been some tries to do damage-control on Carriers “us vs them”-post, but you have to realize that FTB has for a long time polarized everyone into a Us vs Them, long before Carrier made his post.
            When FTB now starts up A+, just writing some fancy words on how good and nice they really are is not convincing enough. Especially not when the same kind of Us-vs-Them mentality shows up all over the place, you just need to look up a bit to read True Colors talk about “purging” to get quite a good idea on why a lot of people simply don’t buy it yet.

            2) I agree, that’s not a great argument. It’s ironic though, that Myers have shunned both Harris and Dawkins, and would probably have Hitchens also if he wasn’t dead.

            3) I agree that it’s not a good argument, it is however quite ironic. The ordering of the list fit the image of FTB many critics of Myers etc have, ie. FTB is about feminism etc and not very much about critical thinking. In other words, I’d take that as a joke/jibe, and not a real argument.

            4) The reason Carrier’s post is picked up so much is that

            a) It took the rest of the high profile A+ers quite some time to even reject it, they waited around for quite some time until they came out in the open. A suspicious person with bad experiences of FTB might draw the conclusion that the rejection of Carrier was due to the enormous backlash his post received, and not because they actually disagreed with it.

            b) Carriers post is in line with the behavior FTB has showed for a long time (see (1)). It’s pointed to because it’s seen as typical for FTB, due to FTBs history of polarizing and hostility. A+ would be met with the same kind of objection even if Carrier had never made his post, it’s just that his post is such an excellent example of exactly the thing people see in FTB and A+. A few posts from other FTBers with “really, we are nice!” aren’t going to change people’s perception of FTB or their newly started A+ club.

            You also have A+ers who apparently didn’t get the message, ie. True Colors above, who keep talking about purging, or Carrier himself who still seem a bit into the whole “us vs them”, even after his apology…
            You can at this point start doing the “no true Scotsman” game, but you have to see why that won’t be very convincing?

            Also, if you want better arguments, there have been many, in other blog posts and on forums, they are out there if you do some searching. I’m to lazy to find and link them, apologies but it’s really late here and I need some sleep.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            I’m a “she” first of all. I’ve repeatedly stated that I’m in favor of the stated A+ goals, but that its “leadership” has proven to be, through their actions over the past year, completely untrustworthy, hypocritical, hyper-reactionary, dishonest, and unwilling to analyze data or demonstrate their assertions. So yes, I’m against A+ because of the people involved, just as I’d be against a Science Foundation put together by Pat Robertson.

          • Kurt1 Says:

            I am sorry, I should not have assumed a gender. If you really think that all those colourful adjectives describe the FtB crowd acurately, you are wrong. I don´t have the time to read everything over there, I read mostly pharyngula and the crommunist manifesto, but while I disagree sometimes no one there seems to be dishonest. Yes PZ said that TF could write about everything he wanted, he apologized, let it go. That does not change the fact that TFs actions did get him kicked off the network. One that he doesn´t want to be a part of anyways.
            Yes, some people have talked about complaining about a guy on twitter. Did they do it? Is it any of our business?
            Who is unwilling to analyze what data? Is this about TFs youtube comments. Because – speaking as a scientist – this is very weak data. Anyone claiming otherwise has simply no understanding of statistics.

            For me it is about the movement. I feel ashamed for some things fellow atheists do and say on the net. A culture where everything is ok, because it is trolling and for teh lulz and you need a thicker skin if you can´t handle it gtfo my internets… This is no movement I want to identify with. I do not care about the characterflaws of A+ figureheads, I don´t know any of them personally and nobody is perfect. I care about what they write, giving me new perspecitves to think about. I am capable of identifying dishonesty and hyper reaction myself. For example the outrage at Rebecca Watson is clearly an overreaction. It is still ongoing, by the way.

            @Acathode: i understand, that you don´t like the hypocrisi. You think calling people names is ok, I don´t. Most of the time anyways, sometimes it´s an accurate description.

            There is a “us vs. them” mentality on FtB and in A+. Just as there is a us vs. them mentality in the rest of atheism vs. religion. A+ is as opposed to misogyny as it is to islam or christianity. That is a good thing, I don´t want to associate with misogynists.

            PZ criticized Harris and Dawkins. So what, he was right to do so. Dawkins seems to have sexist tendencies and Harris is in favour of racial profiling because he is afraid some muslim will blow him into pieces. These are flaws we should be able to talk about. I am sure there are a lot of people who agree with Dawkins and Harris on these points, I don´t.

            It´s not a joke, it just makes him look stupid. It was inteded to be funny, I can see that, but because he is wrong in assuming a hierarchy it is still stupid, no matter of what the intent was.

            Your argument is, that they were not quick enought to denounce Carrier? Seriously? The whole thing started not two weeks ago…

            You can have your arguments, that you don´t want to be part of A+, nobody has any problems with that. There are people like Neil deGrasse Tyson who don´t want the atheist label attached, thats fine by me, their life, their rules. But the argument here seems to be, that A+ should not exist, that it is a bad thing, a cult, a smug club to feel superior, and the reasons for this arguments are all bullshit.

          • Acathode Says:

            Kurt1: “There is a “us vs. them” mentality on FtB and in A+. Just as there is a us vs. them mentality in the rest of atheism vs. religion. A+ is as opposed to misogyny as it is to islam or christianity. That is a good thing, I don´t want to associate with misogynists.”

            So now you are actually back in Carrier-land, where the A-less are misogynists that you don’t want to associate with? That seems to be what you are saying, since you’re basically stating that A+ is to atheism, what atheism is to theism, except A+ is about misogyny and not about belief in god.
            I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt though, since this is contrary to everything else you’ve said previously…

            Also, that seems an awful lot like a smug club where you can feel superior…

            Though let’s get one thing out in the open here, A+ is a reaction to the community’s rejection of the FTB style of gender feminism, not the rejection of feminism altogether.

            When FTB complain about the amount of misogyny in the atheistic community, what they really are talking about is the sheer number of people that do not buy their very special version of feminism.
            When “feminism” is written into the A+ rulebook, everyone knows and understands that what is really meant is FTB gender feminism, and not general feminism.

            Most atheists I’ve seen would easily fit under other forms of feminism (equity feminism for example). Yet these people are not welcome at FTB, or in A+, despite them being feminists, instead FTB often goes as far as label them misogynists or gender traitors. That’s not very honest, it devalues the meaning of misogyny, and it very much starts becoming a club of dogma and ideology with no actual moral high-ground to stand on.

            As for the rest, well, when it comes to shameful behavior, again, the worst offenders seem to be coming from the FTB side. Greg Laden actions is stuff that I previously expected only to see from crazy creationists. Other actions, like Amy trying to DMCA people into silence, is almost as bad.

          • Kurt1 Says:

            Are you daft? There are misogynists in the atheist movement. A+ is explicitly against misogyny. That does not mean, that everyone who does not want to associate with A+ is a misogynist. With no word did I imply any such thing.
            “A+ is as opposed to misogyny as it is to islam or christianity.” Opposed to social injustice in addition to religion. Which is quite logical, because a lot of social injustice is practiced in the name of religion.

            Find it smug if you like. I disagree with that as well, because I don´t think I am a better person as anyone else. Everyone has flaws, I wrote that here multiple times. I don´t call myself A+ because it makes me superior to others, I do it, because I don´t like a good bunch of assholes who call themselfs atheists (i.e. the “amazing” atheist).

            I have no idea who is welcome on what grounds in the A+ movement, because I don´t know anyone who got rejected.
            And again with the dogma and ideology. That is so infuriating, because it is so wrong. Yes, if you want to be a part of a community, you should share some of it´s values, else what do you want there?! That does not make it dogmatic, because these values are based on facts. For example that there is sexual harassment on conferences and therefore harassment policies would be nice. Closing your eyes and ears and shouting “Why do you want to damage our convention” is not an appropriate reaction.

            Read the FAQ by Jen, every one of your points is explained there.

          • Acathode Says:

            Kurt1: No I’m not daft, I read exactly what you wrote, and what you wrote was a direct comparison between the “us vs them” that exists between atheists and theists to the “us vs them” between FTB and the rest (which is apparently based on social justice issues).
            Atheism and theism are mutually exclusive positions, even direct opposite positions, so when you compare them to the “Us-vs-them” that exists with FTB and the rest of the community and make misogyny the deciding factor (compared to belief as the deciding factor as for atheism vs theism), you are quite strongly implying that the rest of the community are either misogynists or pro misogyny.

            Hence why I stated I did not think that this was really what you intended to say, since it went against what you talked about earlier. In that case, IMO you just used a bad comparison, misunderstanding cleared up now, case closed?

            (btw, read this way, “I don´t want to associate with misogynists” also comes across as “smug club” too.)

            Now, if you’re actually not smug, and do not want A+ to be a us vs them thing (where “them” is the rest of the atheists), ok, that’s nice. I really don’t have any reason to doubt your intentions, and I wish you the best of luck. However, me, and many others, have reason do doubt Myers & co.

            Their past actions do tell a story, and it’s not a nice one. I don’t think A+ will become what you aspire for it to be, I think A+ will become a FTB smugclub that is used by Myers etc to throw their weight around, to get certain speakers banned from conventions, to further influence what rules should be in place (no more “fake” jewelry and “offensive” tshirts?), and so on.

            When I read up on FTB and it’s history, the stuff that really stood out was the hypocrisy, the dishonesty, the vileness, and the impulse to silence people not agreeing with them.
            That to me stood out like red flags, and when they now start up A+, do you really not understand why a lot of people draw the conclusion that Myers and FTB will continue to be FTB, even if they relabel themselves A+?

      • Kurt1 Says:

        Probably you should read this: http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag/2012/08/responding-to-common-misconceptions-about-atheism/
        It will probably clear a lot of the “problems” you guys seem to have.

        • Kaylakaze Says:

          No. No it doesn’t. Nothing they can say will clear the problems we have with it. Our problems are a result of the actions that we’ve observed coming from these people over the last year.

  86. Atheism+? Says:

    [...] A fascinating new schism in the atheist movement. [...]

  87. icaro066 Says:

    Holy jebus, i dared read some of those freethought Borgs, sorry… blogs, and they’re nutty. I won’t be assimilated by them. It would be an honour to be rejected by them if i were somebody that matters out there. I don’t wish any bad for Pz myers, Richard Carrier and the other chicks. I only hope they get thunderfooted real good, so that their nonsence won’t destroy the word atheism.

    • True Colors Says:

      See, this is the point: you don’t want to be there, they don’t want you around, seems like the reasonable position is for both to go their own way. Why is everyone so emotional about this?

      You guys are like spurned lovers desperate to simultaneously stalk and insult the person that dumped your ass. All you do is talk about how much you hate the other side, but you’re crying your little asses off that they want to form a new club.

      Get on with your life, stop behaving like Thunderf00t, find someone new, like the MRA folks, to join up with.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        Maybe you don’t care that because of them and their splitter attitudes, the “atheist community” is being mocked. Some people do. Some people also care when a subgroup tries to take over the public face of a community and twist it to their own perverted ends.

        • True Colors Says:

          Go ahead, use the awesomeness of your comrades to fight back. I will laugh as TF and the rest of these morons try to convince the world that their infantile writing and childish petulance is the right path.

          The only people worth mocking are the folks that generate such sub-par material as TF and crew. Look through the blog posts on this site, it’s just like reading the diary of a pissed off teenager that just got dumped.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            Yes, because crying about someone’s t-shirt is the height of maturity. Because calling your standard internet troll assholes “the atheist community making rape threats” is the height of maturity.

            I see no difference between anything TF00t write and PZ or Jen or Greta, as far as writing style is concerned, except TF provides evidence for his claims.

          • AV Says:

            “We” are not the ones that claims there even is a “right path”. Thats what you FTB-folks don’t understand. Ok to distance yourself from those who are rude, but you brand them who disagree as misogynist and rape apologists. You have your undesputable “right way” of handle social issues.

            Through your self you know others.

          • True Colors Says:

            Example or it didn’t happen.

            You guys are really great at whining, not really great at providing substance for your arguments.

          • True Colors Says:

            Kaylakaze, in all seriousness, set aside any discussion of FTB, pretend like they don’t exist, can you truly not see the problems with Thunderf00t, both in terms of quality of argument and writing competency?

            He doesn’t back up his arguments, at all. He used a FUCKING POLL FROM HIS YOUTUBE page to “prove” he was right and Myers was wrong.

            Think about that for a moment. What has to be wrong with your brain to think that’s a legitimate approach? Don’t worry about FTB, just think about that–what would have happened if you tried that shit in a grad program or in a professional setting? He’s a goddamn embarrassment.

            Just look at this blog. It’s one contentless, aimless, malicious self-pity fest after another. Seriously, show me the most interesting sentence he’s produced on this blog. Find me something you learned, something that added to our discourse, something that was minimally educational. Just one fucking sentence.

            What have you gained from reading this blog? That some douchebag can’t get over a breakup? That’s about all I see.

  88. Credit Says:

    I find it hard to believe that people who support FtB cannot see what happens to dissenters. If you honestly don’t understand where the rest of us are coming from, do a little experiment.

    Create a puppet account on FtB. Pick an argument with someone (play devils advocate). Don’t troll, just disagree with something they wrote. Then see how long before you are labelled a misogynist, a racist, and are run out of town.

    Then come back and tell me those are the kind of people you want to associate with.

    • True Colors Says:

      So don’t associate with them, what’s the problem?

      • abrotherhoodofman Says:

        Because we would much rather squeeze and pop this little suppurating zit of a movement.

        What’s your problem?

        • True Colors Says:

          No problem at all. I will just laugh as you’re squished into nothingness by the wheel of time.

          Progress will happen, you will be left behind.

          • abrotherhoodofman Says:

            True Colors:

            “Left behind” ???

            Where have I heard that line before… let’s see… a series of religious books about the Second Coming, perhaps?

            You people are legends in your own minds.

          • True Colors Says:

            Where have you heard that line before? Probably generally on school buses, “Jimmy got left behind,” perhaps at doctors offices, “this will sting on your left behind,” but for you, specifically, I’d imagine you encountered the phrase most often in academic settings.

      • Fabricio Says:

        So, you dont’t really see the problem in an atheist, free-think group labelling people they disagree with?

        Why bother with the creationists, or the Christians, or the Muslims, or anything, then? Just do not associate with them, and bang – problem solved.

        • True Colors Says:

          It is the duty of every skeptical thinker to properly label bad arguments as bad. You’re wrong, history will prove you wrong, we’re just getting a head start on ignoring your horseshit.

          Freethought does not mean tolerating nonsense.

          • HuntingGoodwill Says:

            Your use of Nazi terminology doesn’t change our impression of the ffFTBorg much either. Is that you, Carrier?

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            We are labeling bad arguments bad. That’s the point. Your side isn’t willing to discuss arguments at all. Instead, your side strawmans, demonizes, and shouts down anyone that tries to ask a question or bring up a point of contention.

          • ffffffffffffffff Says:

            “Freethought does not mean tolerating nonsense.”

            Unless you’re the ones producing it, right?

          • True Colors Says:

            Then fine, offer up one these awesome arguments you have. Let’s see what you got. Provide the substantive disagreement with something offered by FTB folks.

            Of course you’re going to have to do a couple of things that will be difficult for your lot:

            1) actually show that someone at FTB said what you’re accusing them of saying.
            2) Respond to the argument in a coherent, rational way.

            Like Thunderf00t, you’ll probably just spout enraged, garbled nonsense based on a thorough misunderstanding of the argument to which you purport to be responding.

            Your arguments are shit. We will see they are shit as you try to make one. After viewing 1,000+ examples of your shit arguments, I save myself time by just calling them shit upfront.

            But who knows, maybe you have something, let’s see.

    • oolon Says:

      Bollocks – please really do what ‘Credit’ says… Just don’t be boring and bring your best arguments. If there is a pile-on of commenters shouting you down focus on the points made and ignore the rude comments that add nothing. If you find yourself repeating the same argument over and over then back off – you’ve lost and have become a boring troll.

      I’ve argued as have many over ‘there’, if you go in and actually have a point and can barely coherently argue it then you won’t be banned or censored. This lie is a bizarre one as it can be easily proven false… Just because a handful of people were banned for trolling or being boring does not mean everyone will. Be warned the Pharyngula lot are rude and crude so tone trolling will get you nowhere… Also read the comment policy as each blogger is different unlike the ‘All teh FtBz are skum’ meme propogated here.

      So do as ‘Credit’ says and make up your own mind.

      • Kaylakaze Says:

        I’ve never seen the FtBers MAKE an argument about anything. It’s never anything but hate and yelling.

        You should follow your own advice “If you find yourself repeating the same argument over and over then back off – you’ve lost and have become a boring troll.”

        • oolon Says:

          Why are you making it so easy for me? Anyone reading this just needs to look on the comments on pretty much any of the blogs to see lots of arguments without yelling (How do you yell on the internet anyway?)… As I said Pharyngula might not be a good idea if you treasure tone as they will be rude. Any other blog then yeah… Try this one for some reasoned arguments ->

          http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithhammers/2012/08/24/no-hate/

          … Lots of yelling and hate on there for Kaylakaze to fantasise about, not. 1…2…3…But…But… I was talking about the ‘other’ FtBs.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            As has been stated earlier, there are specific FtBers that are in discussion and certain ones that are not. Those that are in have been named so and for the purposes of shorthand conversation have been designated “the FtBers” even though not all FtBers fall into the category. So, yes, of course I was going to say “I was talking about other FtBs” because the fact that I was has already been established. It’d be like me predicting you were going to make a snide and self-righteous remark.

          • oolon Says:

            Accuracy is something that scientists and sceptics like Thunderf00t, you?, etc are supposed to like. But you are happy making statements that are clearly false because you cannot be arsed to say Pharyngula rather than FtBs…

            You don’t think it is incredibly rude to assign Nazi attributes (Assuming your lot really are that nutty to think that) to people who in your own words are not ‘part’ of the object of your hate? Especially when you probably agree with them such as Dan Fincke above.

            Are you the same Kaylakaze who said not being nice loses you credibility? Or are you a sock puppet/impersonator trying to lose Kaylakaze all hir credibility?

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            Again, chalk it up to semantic inaccuracy. What I meant there was if someone has an issue they would like addressed and point it out or ask a question, and you respond in a hostile and rude manner, you lose credibility. If you’re faced with rudeness, by all means, snipe back.

            And it’s not just Pharuyngula but Jen, Greta, ACA, Carrier, and probably several others. Therefore, as stated, we established (in the convo with Aron Ra) that not all FtBers are a part of the problem, but a significant portion of their most well known people are, therefore, as long as non-problematic people continue to wear their uniform and fly their flag, they shouldn’t complain if they take fire, even if they’re not the problem. It may be an over generalization and not accurate, but it’s language.

          • Kaylakaze Says:

            I just found where I had said that. In context, I was saying you should be nice in general as opposed to being nice specifically to me. So, my correction of what I thought I was discussing was incorrect, though I do think the correction stands as good advice on its own.

  89. Gallus Anonymus Says:

    when see this BS about 4 horsemen/privileged white males i always like to point out that Ayaan Hirsi Ali was 5th person in this group. she just couldn’t attend this meeting

  90. Gallus Anonymus Says:

    damn, this was suppose to be link to the video. i don’t know why it is posted with yt player. can i edit this. or someone edit this for me? sorry

  91. DS Says:

    I take substantial issue with Atheism+ deriding those who don’t view social issues through a post-modernist, ‘misandry don’t real’ lens as being regressive. It’s insulting, and postmodernism in general is based on solipsitic, near tabuila-rasa philosophies that have no place in a movement that was rejuvenated by the likes of Dawkins and Pinker.

    Like gay and black rights before it, this type of feminism is yet again trying to appropriate a movement and twisting it to their own ends.

    • HuntingGoodwill Says:

      You should also pay attention to the disgusting Nazi terminology they are using, while trying to create the impression that “their struggle’s” enemies are sub-humans. It’s like a bad impersonation of Nazi propaganda. I doubt they are intelligent enough to realize what they are doing, which makes it twice as dangerous for the movement.

      • oolon Says:

        Carry on HuntingGoodwill, you popping up and Godwinning FtBs will get you pegged as a covert FtB’er at this rate :-)

        • HuntingGoodwill Says:

          I doubt that. I have made my position pretty clear.

          a.) Ugly (both internally and externally) “feminists” who act like pseudo-intellectual teenagers do not equate to “Feminism” for me. I still laugh at “Elevatorgate”, “Shirtwearinggate” and “Atheism+-gate”.

          It makes me feel sick, when truly RATIONAL and INTERESTING women like Julia Galef or Abbie Smith speak about not wanting to be turned into an infantile again, and how a GROWN WOMAN should be able to talk GROWN MEN.

          Hear here: RATIONALISM (!!!).

          She didn’t try to sell me jewelry and “Atheism+ Pure Race Member” stickers either.

          b.) Using Nazi terminology and phrases (I am actually fluent in German, know some of the speeches of the Nazi elite, so I didn’t make that point up) is a stop sign for me. “Do not proceed. Intellectual retards ahead!”.

          c.) The attempt to “divide” the community (“you are either a brainless pseudo-feminist or a potential RAPEATHEIST!!!!!!!!!!! who wants slavery back and wants to call Obama “nigger!” and kill Jews, gays and transgender people in wheelchairs!”) was made on a level of (lets be generous) someone with an IQ of 85. Maybe an IQ of 90, but the person was sleepy or slightly intoxicated. That ain’t doing it for me, sorry.

          And the biggest joke is the attempt to turn Hitchens and Dawkins and Harris into RACISTS, who were a clear sign to “colored people” to not enter the debate.

          In fact I’m sure, people like PZ Myers and that Watson thing will make sure to have cages for “colored” people to put them in during conferences, to protect them from evil, old, white Atheists. “Do not feed (chicken, watermelons or any other racist food!)”-sign mandatory.

          Sorry, but I can’t take that nonsense seriously anymore.

          It needs to be ridiculed.

          • oolon Says:

            Again keep it up, nuttyness like this can only help FtBs, are you related to a Mabus? One tip though you need more CAPS and !!!! or you won’t get the point across ;-)

  92. oolon Says:

    Thunderf00ts ‘priorities for 2012′ post…

    1. Why Do People Laugh at Creationists.
    2. “OMG, The Bible says WHAT?!”
    3. SCIENCE BITCHES, IT WORKS
    4. Nailing the religious types in the 2012 elections.
    5. Build the community.
    6. Create a DVD
    …Dare I add…
    7. Obsess over FtBs cos they dissed my writing ability and kicked me off, to the detriment of all my ‘priorities’ above?

  93. icaro066 Says:

    So, True color is a teen racist also

  94. icaro066 Says:

    True Collor babbles:
    “It is the duty of every skeptical thinker to properly label bad arguments as bad. You’re wrong, history will prove you wrong, we’re just getting a head start on ignoring your horseshit.”

    Man, you’re clueless. It’s not the values. We all here shared them. The good ones. It’s the Borg mentality you have. And also the really sad mistake of wanting to assimilate atheism into a particular political Bias that wants to make women weak… hence the argument from victim you chics user out there

    • True Colors Says:

      And there is an example of the afore-mentioned horseshit. It seemed like you wanted to make an argument, but it came out sound like Nick Nolte looked in his mugshot.

      No one is assimilating atheism into anything, no one is demanding you think in terms of social justice, it’s just a clarification of priorities. If you don’t share those priorities, don’t hang out with the A+ers. The result will obviously be you standing on the wrong side of history, but you seem well-acquainted with wrongness, so you might prefer that.

      • icaro066 Says:

        Sorry true collors I’m not an English native speaker, so i don’t understand your Nick Nolte reference. I don’t hang out with the nuttys from A+. So don’t worry about me. I’m safe.

      • icaro066 Says:

        True Colors said:
        “but you seem well-acquainted with wrongness, so you might prefer that.”

        And How can you possibly Know that from de 3 or 4 very short posts i made about all this? Is it possible that your are just a deluded Know it all kind of person. Jesus, are you God or something?

  95. Name (will not be published) Says:

    FWIW,

    If anyone is still reading this thread, there is a lulzy post by FtB Stephanie Zwan here:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/08/29/legitimate-differences-of-opinion

    In which Ms. Zwan asks for data that backs up Equity Feminism so that we all can compare it with data that supports Gender Feminist theory.

    The thread progresses as a demonstration of FreeThoughtBlogger tolerance, skepticism, civility, ability to listen or read, and tolerate dissent and disagreement.

    FreeThoughtBlogs Skepticism: it ain’t what you think it is.

    • JustAnotherPerson Says:

      The question she poses is horribly flawed and smacks of someone who has little understanding of the difference between quantitative and qualitative research methods, the differences in the data they yield, and what this means for the over generalizability of critical studies.

      Very little of feminism research is done quantitatively. In fact, many hardcore feminists go as far as to argue that quantitative research will inevitably be influenced by the patriarchal system that devised it in the first place, often times so subtly that even the researchers themselves, perhaps ardent feminists themselves, would never be able to control for all the variables because the effects of the male hierarchy aren’t even completely known as it is impossible to observe the system from the outside.

      Because of all the qualitative research that is done, and because those results aren’t generalizable, you would never get a truly apples to apples comparison of the data. The result, even at the top, are very educated debates about anecdotes. To assert that there is this large body of data where x = such and such, and compared to y = this and that we can draw correlations is to largely not understand what the bulk of these studies look like. That isn’t to say that there are absolutely no quantitative feminist studies, they are just dwarfed by the massive body of qualitative study that is much more popular in the field.

      To me, asking someone to demonstrate one branch of feminism’s viability over another’s through raw data is like empirically asking to prove Methodists are superior to Baptist or that mint is better than pepper.

      • Copyleft Says:

        But chocolate IS objectively better than strawberry, you know… surely no one could deny that.

      • True Colors Says:

        “To me, asking someone to demonstrate one branch of feminism’s viability over another’s through raw data is like empirically asking to prove Methodists are superior to Baptist or that mint is better than pepper.”

        And that would be why no one takes you people seriously and why there’s a rush to make sure we aren’t accidentally associated with your nonsense. I should first note that this type of limp, relativistic “skepticism” is embarrassing coming from college freshman–so I hope you’re younger than that.

        Second, there isn’t a single study that indicates which view is right and which view is wrong, but there is ample data available to disprove the main assertions of “equity feminism,” essentially a libertarian take on feminism: the state is the lone source of oppression, remove legal and other governmentally created barriers to equality (right to vote, for example) and, presto, we’re now equal.

        In response, those of us who find glibertarianism to be a hilariously infantile doctrine, will point out that there is ample empirical data to show that claim to be incorrect. The state is but one potential source of oppression, and in a democracy, our fellow free citizens are often the most intense source.

        These are all claims for which data can and should be provided. There are plenty of laws on the books harshly punishing discrimination in the workplace, yet pay gaps exist (and endless studies have been to control for the obvious variables). Stephanie was asking for the equivalent factual basis of the libertarian position and SHOCKINGLY (I’m truly, truly nonplussed to encounter sanctimonious libertarians talking out of their ass without a hint of factual support) in that long ass thread, no one provided anything.

        It is a cop-out, the height of intellectual poltroonery, to say, “like, this is just philosophy, man, there’s no way you can settle this with ‘science’ and ‘empirical data’, it’s just my opinion, bro.”

    • True Colors Says:

      Looks to me like she tolerated a lot of idiots trying really hard to avoid answering the reasonable challenge she issued.

      If you think the libertarian feminist position is correct, there should be some empirical evidence to support your position. If you find yourself arguing that empirical evidence isn’t necessary, that’s a pretty solid way to determine that you’re really, really wrong about a social issue.

      We do not exist in the world of the forms.

    • icaro066 Says:

      Name (will not be published) Says:

      “FWIW,
      If anyone is still reading this thread, there is a lulzy post by FtB Stephanie Zwan here:

      http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/08/29/legitimate-differences-of-opinion

      In which Ms. Zwan asks for data that backs up Equity Feminism so that we all can compare it with data that supports Gender Feminist theory.”

      Asking for data? Isn’t that a privileged old white male thing?
      Who cares about ideological debate like that anyway? Data will always be manipulated in those debates. it’s not like They’re doing double blind experiments in there. So, who cares. People already have their position. Doesn´t matter what you throw at that debate, no one will change. it’s an ideological thing. Don’t pretend it´s a scientific debate.

  96. Copyleft Says:

    Hey, you should know by now that skepticism is only good for scientific stuff–it’s Absolutely Prohibited when it comes to feminist issues!

    Asking for evidence is something a misogynist fascist would do, ya know. Burn the heretic!

    • True Colors Says:

      You guys are hilarious. Read this post, then JustAnotherPerson’s.

      Yeah, those bitches are totally lame to ignore science; yeah, those bitches are totally lame for thinking science is relevant.

      Every post I read makes the decision for the A+ folks to leave you goofballs behind seem more reasonable.

      • abrotherhoodofman Says:

        Leave it you like, True Colors. But you’ll have to drop that backpack full of New Atheism you’ve shoplifted.

        Call yourselves Feminism+ or something. Atheism hasn’t one single thing to do with your juvenile politics.

        • abrotherhoodofman Says:

          “if” you like

        • True Colors Says:

          If you’re incapable of understanding the social-political ramifications of undermining the central tenant of the ideologies that have dominated Western Civilization since Rome, there no way to help you out, which is why the new goal is to leave and let your generation of dullards die out.

          It’s a paradigm shift, and we all should be well versed in the difficulties of one paradigm communicating with a primitive predecessor.

          • abrotherhoodofman Says:

            A paradigm shift to irrelevance is nothing to crow about. At least you can change your handle when the A-Pus dinghy floats adrift in its harbor, and you finally decide to jump ship and dog-paddle back to shore.

  97. lurker Says:

    Carrier has edited his blog. Anyone have a copy or screencap of the original?

  98. Randy Says:

    Oh dammit. Ya know its gonna be a bad day when the first thing you see is something that makes most MRA’s look sensible. I hope FTB dissolves soon. We dont need that big of a group acting like all of us are racist rapist bastards. Maybe we can keep the skepchicks from sinking the claws into any other groups. We dont need skeptic movements that put so little stock into skepticism as to promote homeopathic horseshit. Oh, im sorry. naturopathy. Because natural means its good for you.

  99. ffffffffffffffff Says:

    I think Athiesm Plus is a great idea. The people who get sucked in or advocate it are conveniently identifying themselves as douchebag clique-y types to avoid.

    It’s some kind of scary “declare your support or be ousted” cult version of secular humanism.

  100. JW Gray Says:

    Richard Carrier does not represent what this means to everyone. I also dislike his attitude and what he says for a large part.

    However, this group is a splinter group and in no way throws anyone out of the atheist grouping. People can self-identify as atheists all they want. The four horsemen can do their own thing and continue to do it.

    Read what Dan Fincke has to say about it for a more reasonable view of it.

    I also think you’ve missed the whole motivation about why they want to do this. Feminists in the atheist community attract a lot of hostility from atheists. They are fed up with it. They like the idea of associating with like-minded people. Nothing shocking about that.

    • Jimbo Says:

      Where are all the examples of FTB bloggers calling him out and rejecting his stance? The response has been extremely weak. A tweat from McCreight amost a week later disagreeing with his tone and harsh words! BFD.

      Carrier said what they were all thinking and the weak attempts made to distance themselves from him when they realised their strategy had backfired spectacularly.

      A+ is dead. It didn’t even get out of the starting gate.

    • Kaylakaze Says:

      Irrational “feminists” in the atheist community attract a lot of hostility from atheist feminists. And those same feminists attract a lot of hostility (often laced with much more hatred and abuse) from the irrational “feminists.”

    • Stretchycheese Says:

      I distrust the Atheist+ initiative because it was founded by the same people who exhibited a pattern of behaviour of public vilification of dissent, witch-hunting hysteria, hypocrisy, and groupthink, and who act like a bunch sanctimonious demagogues and drama-queens towards their critics. It’s not surprising that this kind of thing gets hostility. It’s not feminism that gets hostility, but a dogmatic radical feminism (i.e. misandry and infantalization of women and the tendency to wear “gender goggles” when looking at every social problem). I agree with Jimbo. Carrier’s article is a more honest and revealing portrayal of Atheism+. Identity politics has its dark side and dangers (e.g. “othering”, divisiveness, groupthink, etc…), and we’re seeing it in Atheism+.

  101. Enough Already+ Says:

    Although I would watch a video series called, “Why do people laugh at Atheism+”, I have actually grown tired of the anti-rational antics of this Scientology-like religion. I’ve watched a few noelplum99 videos and generally agree that the conflation of “stuff” with atheism is inappropriate, considering the many decades that atheism has struggled to not be associated with any “stuff”. This will harm communicating atheism outside atheism circles, which essentially means Atheism+ is throwing atheism under the bus in attempt to advance their own circle. However, I do not really identify with the atheist label so although I consider it a problem, I don’t consider it my problem.
    I also just listened to Truth and Oblivion’s recent podcast on YouTube where they examined the atheismplus forum rules. As a critical thinker and skeptic, I found these rules offensive… and as member of society, I found them sociopathic. It was a long podcast but worth playing in the background.
    Anyway, at this point I would rather listen to rants from VenomFangX than more proselytizing from A+ and their demands to stop questioning their beliefs.

    Incidentally, making skepticism more female friendly by eliminating critical thinking offends me as a dictionary feminist.

    The only thing I’ve really gotten out of this is that I learned a new word that I’ve never heard nor had use for before, “misandry”.

  102. Johnny Gutierrez Says:

    The people’s front of Judea will always be superior to Judea’s people front. Everyone knows this.

  103. lurker Says:

    Oh, dear. http://store.richarddawkins.net/products/non-believers-giving-aid-t-shirt

    • oolon Says:

      Seems Dawkins does not have a problem with a bunch of atheists trying to define their own movement within atheism. There’s a surprise! Wouldn’t quite get that impression from reading Thunderf00ts article on it….

  104. Weimaraner butler Says:

    I am glad someone has mentioned the A+ peoples stealing of Dawkins scarlet letter and his Atheists giving logo. It doesn’t surprise me though, considering they were planning to steal TFs money.
    That really pissed me off, but what pissed ,me off more is the way they want to hijack this movement.
    The idea that they would issue demands to con management that certain speakers not be invited to speak is disgusting. I wonder if Myers has the courage of his convictions– tell the cons that he won’t attend if Dawkins {obviously a sexist ;) } is speaking..see how that pans out.
    The cowards even waited til the one man who would (verbally and in print) leave them bleeding from the new arsehole he tore them, was dead before they tried to have their little coup.
    Everywhere I have looked, the vast majority of people are pissing all over A+–except on FTB and a few Blogs elsewhere, but in the various forums there must be half a dozen No ways to every yeah A+ comment.
    Apologies for my terrible grammar, I am a walking talking stereotype of a high school druggie dropout—leave the hedonism til after your school years kiddies.

  105. Εστέλιο Καλογήρου, Ψυχολόγος - Κοινωνιολόγος Says:

    Atheism is a revolt against the old Ruler/King and all His myths/laws designed to keep the People down… The Time is Now!

    Estelio Kaloguru (Psychologist – Sociologist, Greece)

    (please, keep me posted… milamou4u@yahoo.com)

  106. icaro066 Says:

    True Colors said:

    “If you’re incapable of understanding the social-political ramifications of undermining the central tenant of the ideologies that have dominated Western Civilization since Rome, there no way to help you out, which is why the new goal is to leave and let your generation of dullards die out.
    It’s a paradigm shift, and we all should be well versed in the difficulties of one paradigm communicating with a primitive predecessor.”

    Gosh. You’re so wrong. Forget all that. Fremasons are the only thing you have to worry about.

  107. icaro066 Says:

    JW Gray Says:
    “Feminists in the atheist community attract a lot of hostility from atheists. They are fed up with it. They like the idea of associating with like-minded people. Nothing shocking about that.”

    Naa. It’s just a strategy for conquering the Pulpit and say their shit in conferences. The only problem is, you dont’t have anyone really interesting like Sam harris ou Richard Dawkins.

  108. icaro066 Says:

    Stretchycheese Says:
    ” It’s not feminism that gets hostility, but a dogmatic radical feminism (i.e. misandry and infantalization of women and the tendency to wear “gender goggles” when looking at every social problem).”

    And don’t forget. Man are just womem damaged by testosterone

  109. SEO Company Says:

    It’s not feminism that gets hostility, but a dogmatic radical feminism (i.e. misandry and infantalization of women and the tendency to wear “gender goggles” when looking at every social problem).”

  110. geoforn Says:

    Has anyone been called an AINO (Atheist in name only) yet? Fundamentalists tend to give names like that.

  111. ND Says:

    “Ayn Rand’s hate child”
    Speaking for Rand-fans everywhere: we’re laughing at you over this one.

    http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12458&hl=

  112. Anonymous Says:

    Jebus, an Ayn Rand Bot. Thought i’d never see a live one.

  113. Osiris Says:

    I am a skeptic, I am also against social injustice. And I am also an Atheist. Atheism of course, has nothing to do with advocating against social injustice.

    Perhaps, instead of A+, they should call themselves the Atheist Justice League

  114. vjjlovr Says:

    What exactly is “Social Justice”? I have heard it described as a radical leftist redistribution of wealth, but have also heard it used in a religious context, eg like a religious requirement to give to the poor, etc.

  115. Johnnis Says:

    Sceptisism can be exercised without any learned skills. Critical thinking on the other hand, is like mathematics. We need to learn the tools before we can use them. Like for example argumentation theory. A useful tool in critical thinking is to recognize fallacies.

    Some atheists don’t have that knowledge (yet). It has to be learned. Some atheists don’t know what argument from authority is, (perhaps the most basic fallacy.) And atheism+ exclude those.

    And because of this lack of knowledge they are branded as vile.

  116. icaro166 Says:

    The Rules From A+ reminded me Ambrose Bierse

    From The Devil’s Dictionary (1911):

    “IDIOT, n. A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human affairs has always been dominant and controlling. The Idiot’s activity is not confined to any special field of thought or action, but “pervades and regulates the whole.” He has the last word in everything; his decision is unappealable. He sets the fashions and opinion of taste, dictates the limitations of speech and circumscribes conduct with a dead-line.”

    Do you think that if i Post this fine quote from a great American Journalist in the A+ Forum I´ll get Kicked?

  117. JamieD Says:

    I have a good idea. How about we don’t divide ourselves up into factions? I obviously hate to see Thunderf00t waste so much of his time on this nonsense, but at the same time I get why he feels he has to.

    For me personally, I’m not going to call myself “Atheist+”. It’s not going to happen. I just don’t believe in a God, is that OK? Can you just leave me alone with my lack of belief? I really do not see the need in a splinter group, but to each his own I guess, just don’t go looking to cause trouble for others.

    I think you’d be hard pressed to find people here who don’t believe in social justice, or women’s rights, or who don’t reject racism, or homophobia. Still, none of those issues have anything at all to do with Atheism. Atheism says nothing about a person other than their lack of belief in a certain aspect of the so called supernatural realm. It has nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with personality, it can tell you nothing else about a person at all other than that particular lack of belief.

    A person earlier in these comments said “I’m a feminist first and atheist second,” and I don’t even get that. Is the word Atheist even bloody necessary in the first place? Is what Atheism describes even a “choice” at all?

  118. Mike De Fleuriot Says:

    Lets come back in 360 days and see how A+ has progressed. I would think that would be the bright thing to do with it.

    • bismarket Says:

      That’s a good idea, we could have a poll maybe, just to see if anyone cares (or even remembers) what it was all about. PZ losing his free trips to “Speak” at conferences around the World. The fear of missing out on that Gravytrain must terrify him! lol☮

  119. Richard Says:

    I was a humanist when I was a Christian. I think the original feminist movement made a lot of sense but think dogmatic feminsm is simplistic. I think some women hating atheists probably exist. Nobody can tell whether the ppl rebecca is referring too actually disbelieved in God or not. Nibody syould care. I agree with you aboutvnot overreacting on them and dealing wity them on a case by case basis.

  120. Αθεΐα+ (⅝ x) 28 ημέρες μετά « On the way to Ithaca Says:

    [...] τω μεταξύ ο Thunderf00t είχε όλη την άνεση να αλιεύσει λαβράκια από τα σχόλια και να τα παρουσιάσει, σχολιάζοντας [...]

  121. bismarket Says:

    WOW, i’ll be surprised if anyone gets to read this, this one post probably rivals the entire FtB website, but here goes nothing – I don’t know if anyone has already pointed this out but re; White Male privilege. It was only at the last minute that Ayaan Hirsi Ali was called back to an emergency in The Netherlands that prevented her from taking part in the famous Four Horsemen “Thing”. That fact alone kind of destroys a lot of the shit they’re spouting about it at what i & others like to call No Thought Blogs™. I loathe these freeloaders with a passion only rivalled (i suspect) by your own☮

  122. Anonymous Says:

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many people expending so much energy to complain about perceived slights invisible to the bystander’s eye. It’s absolutely mountains from molehills. Tldr: for a community critical of emotional reactions, you guys sure are butt-hurt.

  123. hammer of dog Says:

    Wow. This post is, while not even being well written, amusing or in any way entertaining, is pure, over-the-top strawman building rhetoric. Unbelievable.

  124. Skinner Says:

    I have noticed a trend in this whole ordeal:

    1) People with an ideology usually disagree with each other. This happens among christians just as much as it is here.

    2) Some atheists are intentionally forming factions BY WAY OF creating new labels. Labels = group identity. While “Atheism” itself is a label, it is no more inclusive than “Theism” when applied to both Mormons and Shintoists. Groups like “Secular Humanism” and “Atheism+” imply an inclusive group identity, some form of social cohesion, and by extension creation organized factions. Because 5000+ years of history says that that’s what organized groups do.

    3) Some atheists are intentionally disregarding these labels, but appear to be unintentionally forming an opposition group under its own ignorance. They might consider themselves “real atheists” or the truly irreligious atheists.

    The point is that, by picking on the other side, *followers* of Thunderf00t and others are picking on the other side in a way that reinforces the factionalism that has arisen. I am not saying that we who don’t support Atheism+ should not question them, but we should try to become aware of, and avoid the namecalling and baseless arguments that keep arising again and again. Going “Waaaaahhhh, FtB cenz0rs us! You guys are terrible and you should feel terrible!” isn’t going to make things any better. Neither will spouting nonsense about how great Dawkins is.

    How about we start with quoting RELIABLE SOURCES and citing STATISTICS. That’s what irreligious atheists are supposed be doing, isn’t it? This is the internet, isn’t it? Not a coffee house in the 1700s. We don’t have to go on hearsay anymore. USE LINKS.

    I must commend the visitors from the “other side” for keeping a cool head in spite of everything.

    4) In their own territory, each side claims to have the ethical high ground and picks on the other side. SINCE WHEN IS ATHEISM ABOUT ETHICS? That’s a religion thing. We employ governments to handle that crap to arrest the people who don’t follow the rules. Stop it. Or cite psych-/neur-/anthrop-/sociology research to back up what you deem to be correct hominid behavior, even if your opponent doesn’t.

    5) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUPxRYWpglQ

    I don’t agree with all that she says, but she makes a damn good point near the end.

  125. Ray N Says:

    I really wonder after reading excerpts at Thunderf00t’s blog of an A+ proponent Richard Carrier, about Atheism Plus, if the Tea Party, Republicans, Rightwingers, the Religious Right and Bryan Fischer are trying to takeover the push for atheism movement&divide atheists as in the rightwinger tactics of wanting to take their ball&go home philosophy. It is so like the young Feminists versus old Feminists sexuality arguments of old. It’s time for we atheists to sing TheYoungblood’s Get Together song and tell the Richard Carrier types to FUCK OFF. His divisiveness is startling coming from an atheist.We do not need 35,000 sects of atheists,as the Xians are divided into. Thunderf00t, thank you for proposing a little sanity in this thing, and exposing Carrier’s exclusive ‘club.’

  126. Girlwriteswhat om Ateism Del 2 – Feministers försök att kapa rörelsen = A+ « Aktivarum Says:

    [...] De glömde: Strength through discipline! Strength through Community! Strenghth through action! Thunderf00t konstaterar “A+ (atheism plus), For A Third Glorious Age of Total Agreement” [...]

  127. Atheism+, Feminism, and “Liberal Humanist” Censorship Says:

    [...] missed one of the most hilarious stories in Internet history. A good starting point is probably right here, although honestly, a full 90 minute movie would probably not do this epic tragi-comedy [...]

  128. Paul Says:

    I’m deeply disappointed that the philosopher/historian Richard Carrier decided not only to join Atheism+ but also adopt their tactics of rhetoric (that is verbally attacking, ad hominem) and the us vs. them attitude even though he denies this several times. I really thought Carrier would be so much better than this, I guess I was wrong and it’s not my first time to be wrong….

  129. Quine Says:

    I find myself somewhat torn by my appreciation of AronRa at the Reason Rally and having a chance to talk to TF00t at the AA conference, after, but still think that this thread should be preserved for anthropologists of the future. I have written more about what this means for the politics of Atheism, here.

  130. Quine Says:

    The link in my prior comment dose not seem to work. Here it is in plain text: http://quinesqueue.blogspot.com/2012/09/social-politics-of-atheism.html

  131. b Says:

    Arrogance and stupidity are a bad combination of traits. Someone needs to tell the plussers that.

  132. Kleykens Benny Says:

    Come on people, what’s in a name!
    Brights? Atheism+? New-Atheism?

    Atheism is atheism is atheism, no matter what you call it.

  133. Mike Says:

    Atheism Plus: A bunch of frauds. Despite having atheist in its name it really isn’t atheism at all. Their goal is to subvert atheism with the religion of feminist indoctrination and bitch about non existent misogyny.

    To these people any legitimate questioning of feminists and female privilege is grounds for calling anyone a misogynist. Atheism Plus is really nothing more then an attempt at co-opting the meaning of atheism.

  134. Lily Says:

    Wow. I thought leaving 30 years of mormonismn and becoming an atheist would mean the end of all this type of bullshit. Flashbacks is right! I never would have thought that atheists could do some of the more distasteful aspects of religion better than religion! But at least religion gave me dances and potlucks! Where’s the potluck, A+?

  135. iain carstairs Says:

    Atheists, Atheists Plus, Freethinkers, Freethought Bloggers, Brights.. whatever – there is a guy in Indonesia in jail for being an atheist, and the whole worldwide movement of assorted thinkers, atheists, freethought etc etc couldn’t be bothered to sign a petition – several thousand more were needed – to bring his case up for review.

    Everyone is so busy attacking each other and giving step-by-step explanations of why they are so clever, saying “do the maths”, “FACT”, “it isn’t rocket science”, making zingers, and dismissing others from on high.. “at best, disingenuous.. at worst, very disingenuous” and winning their arguments on points: “ooh, straw man argument! one point to me. ooh, ad hominem! one point to you.”

    With friends like these, who really needs enemies?

  136. Free Directory Says:

    Free Directory…

    [...]A+ (atheism plus), For A Third Glorious Age of Total Agreement « Thunderf00t[...]…

  137. WilliamWallace Says:

    Holier than thou Atheists…
    or should that be UnHolier than thou Atheists?
    What’s this world coming to when even Atheists can’t get along?

    • Anonymous Says:

      “What’s this world coming to when even Atheists can’t get along?”

      Since when is ‘getting along’ a requirement for being an Atheist?
      I’d like to know because I live in a secular country where there is no such thing as a ‘secular’ country and on average we’re ‘not getting along’ just fine.

  138. green coffee bean extract Says:

    Include Fiber-rich Foods in the forth row. Two of the benefits of green Coffee Extract tablets.
    Click here to inform visitors that required me
    to my complaints about fat loss diet plan regimens can also eat eggs.

  139. TerrillYS Says:

    simply dropping by to say hey
    [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCi2eX0hvHE]click here[/url]

  140. quick rise bread recipe Says:

    This page really has all the info I needed about this subject and
    didn’t know who to ask.

  141. alanwheeler Says:

    I have been an atheist for over 30 years. However the worst thing about being an atheist is that there is no hope in an afterlife. That is why I created my own belief system that has current scientific knowledge as its basis but fills in the gaps that science cannot currently explain with religious answers. There is no deity and as science advances so will my beliefs. I would appreciate if you could check out my blog at
    bangism.wordpress.com

  142. harilbpzk@live.com Says:

    This piece of writing is in fact a pleasant one it assists new the web viewers, who are wishing in favor of blogging.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 21,793 other followers

%d bloggers like this: