Feminists have been going after Atheists for a while now due to a dearth of women in the ranks of non-believers. I think it’s kind of funny that they are blaming the men despite the fact that churches are now clearly majority female. The church gap is around the same as the college gap — about 60-40 favoring women. So, drawing from my recent post about cheating, it seems there’s a bit of a logic problem going on yet again.
Given that the male and female populations are roughly equal, and there are more female believers, doesn’t it then logically follow that there will be more male atheists?
Well, it can’t be that, because from a feminist perspective someone (always a man) is always at fault for any difference between the sexes. Therefore, in feminist logic, it must be because male skeptics are discriminating against women.
As far as whether believers or skeptics hold The Truth, I’m not going to get into that, because I personally don’t think we can ever know. While skeptics might argue that it isn’t fair to be asked to prove a negative, this isn’t a court of law, so I remain skeptical of skepticism, and generally of any dogma that asserts itself to have the absolute truth in theological matters.
However, I do think Atheism tends to be a more masculine mode of thought, because men do not have rationalization hamsters that are as powerful as women’s. Men are more apt to believe it when they see it, while women like to believe in socially approved stories, or “pretty lies” as Heartiste calls them (not to say they are necessarily lies, of course, but you get the idea).
However, there’s another issue here that is being ignored. Atheism is the rejection of religious fictions, but the entire premise of feminism is based on a religious fiction: equality.
Try asking someone to defend equality in rational terms, and watch them stump themselves. There is simply nothing about the idea that makes sense from a rational perspective. In fact, equal only makes sense in math, because no two things are truly the same. Although both are athletes, is a baseball player equal to a football player? Is a german shepherd equal to a poodle? These questions don’t really make any sense, because the idea of equality is a human creation to describe some quality that can’t actually be defined.
I’m convinced that the origin of the idea of equality lies in Christianity. Specifically, the Christian concept of spiritual equality:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Further, Jesus even specifically alluded to gender equality when rebuking some Sadducees:
23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
24 Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
26 Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
27 And last of all the woman died also.
28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
It was really a brilliant innovation. As far as I know, it is the first time in the history of religion that anyone ever proposed the idea of spiritual equality for all of humanity.
Today, that idea, which is a religious belief just like Transubstantiation and the Trinity, has become THE article of faith of the “secular” progressive West. Without it, the liberal democratic worldview collapses immediately.
Atheism and skepticism may be considered a common feature of the enlightened secular progressive, but if we are to be honest, there’s an inherent conflict between skepticism and this concept of equality, because it is in fact a religious belief.
So when feminists demand that skeptics and Atheists pay homage to equality, they are demanding that they make an act of faith, and believe in something that can’t be proven. It would be akin to Catholics saying “you know, you can keep calling yourselves skeptics, but you’re going to have to make a statement confirming the resurrection of Jesus Christ or we’re going to start doing really unpleasant things to you.” Actually, the feminists take a it a step farther, in that they demand not only that skeptics “believe” in what they want them to, but also that they stack their ranks with at least as many believers as skeptics.
Here’s a true gender inquisitor at work, stating her reasons for her “atheism:”
I share Natalie’s distress at the recent discovery that the atheist/skeptic movement has a not-small and certainly loud subset of participants whose sexism is so strong that they’d rather run women out of the movement altogether rather than endure the indignity of treating women like people. For me, being an outspoken atheist has always been firmly intertwined with my feminism, and in fact, really it’s the result of my feminism. I never really believed in a god of any sort, but the notion that atheism is important and should be talked about openly is one I only really developed because it serves the larger goal of creating a world that has true gender equality. Atheist activism for me has always been about the long game, because I believe that undermining religion’s death grip on power is what needs to be done for women to be truly equal.
I wonder whether Marcotte even realizes what an abuse of the entire concept of Atheism and skepticism this is… She “never really believed in a god,” but she is on a mission to create “true gender equality” — a religious calling if I’ve ever seen one.
Amanda’s screed also demonstrates why guys like PZ Myers – a feminist Atheist – are really fake skeptics. Like Amanda, PZ actually just hates Christian conservatives, but he holds beliefs that are every bit as irrational as theirs.
So, although I doubt feminists’ ability to ever comprehend the implications, the very demands they place on Atheists and skeptics contradict their stated lack of faith. It’s another one of those contradictions that have come to define the guiding philosophy of Western secular liberalism.