Canadian Woman, Kidnapped in Somalia, is Raped Mercilessly by Her Über-Pious Muslim Captors

In an artless but still compelling summary of A House in the Sky, a new memoir by former hostage Amanda Lindhout, the piousness of her Muslim kidnappers is a recurring theme.

Lindhout was taken along with her ex-boyfriend Nigel, and held for ransom. Almost immediately, and almost casually, the warriors for Allah find ways to justify sexually assaulting her over and over.

[The kidnappers] put Nigel and Amanda in a room empty save for two mattresses. They announce themselves as jihadis, take what little money their captives have, then pull Amanda into another room, where one of them molests her. “This is wrong,” she tells him. “You are not a good Muslim.” He pushes her down. “You think I need this?” he says. “I have two wives. You are ugly, a bad woman.”

In those first days, they chainsmoke and plot, agreeing that their best chance of survival is to convert. [And they do.] Yes, the jihadis agree, the Koran forbids Muslims taking money from other Muslims, but this is a special circumstance. Yes, they agree, a Muslim may not rape a Muslim woman, but this is a special circumstance. Yes, a Muslim may not kill another Muslim, but here there may be no choice.

The jihadis didn’t kill Nigel and Amanda, but they did rape her nightly, often taken turns. Even as a Muslim, her body, her health, and her honor meant nothing to them.

Gotta love religion, and the rubber-band morality of so many who practice it.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

P.S. (added on Monday): Yesterday’s New York Times Magazine has a long excerpt from Amanda Lindhout’s book as its cover story. Salient passage:

It wasn’t until later that day, when a new man arrived, introducing himself as Adam, that it became clear they were after more money than we had in our pockets. Adam looked to be in his mid-20s, thin and serene. He wore an orange-striped polo shirt and Ben Franklin eyeglasses. He asked for the phone numbers for our families and told us that he no longer believed we were spies. “Allah,” he said, “has put it into my heart to ask for a ransom.”

More proof that a belief in ‘God’ excuses — and indeed, can be the inspiration for — any behavior, no matter how dark, criminal, or vile.

About Terry Firma

Terry Firma, though born and Journalism-school-educated in Europe, has lived in the U.S. for the past 20-odd years. Stateside, his feature articles have been published in the New York Times, Reason, Rolling Stone, Playboy, and Wired. Terry is the founder and Main Mischief Maker of Moral Compass, a site that pokes fun at the delusional claim by people of faith that a belief in God equips them with superior moral standards.

  • Stev84

    They could have temporarily married her to make it ok with Allah.

    • http://penciledinexistence.wordpress.com/ Carly Jurica

      Haha. That’s how some Christians who are dating and hot for some sex justify their fornication. Lol.

      • Anon

        Kidnapping and rape?

        • http://penciledinexistence.wordpress.com/ Carly Jurica

          Nope, I didn’t think that one through. Marriage, I meant. Except for Christians it’s not “temporary marriage,” but exchanging vows “before God” without any ceremony or witnesses or legalities and usually in the heat of the moment.

  • LesterBallard

    Call me a bigot, but fuck Islam.

    • closetatheist

      I completely agree with your sentiment, but lest we diminish how truly evil these people were we cannot merely blame the religion. These people choose to commit these atrocities whether or not their religion made it easy for them to justify their actions. So fuck these asshats and their religion. fuck it all to hell.

    • WillBell

      I think the point of this is that bad people do bad things regardless of religion, rather than bad people are extra bad because of religion. I fully agree with Pascal when he said for good people to do bad things it takes religion, but these weren’t good people to begin with.

      • Michael W Busch

        That quote isn’t from Pascal*. It’s far more recent – it’s from the American theoretical physicist Steven Weinberg. It’s also incomplete: good people do do bad things for reasons other than religion. For example: being raised in an authoritarian patriarchal culture that excuses and enables rape.

        These men did horrifically evil things, and need to be held responsible for them. But they did not start off any more bad than many other people. They assimilated a toxic culture that endorses horrible things. That culture must be changed.

        *Edit: Pascal did say something somewhat similar. Entry #895 in his Pensées goes “Jamais on ne fait le mal si pleinement et si gaiement que quand on le fait par conscience”, which the English translation I own renders as “People never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.” But the French word “conscience”, like the English cognate, doesn’t mean what the phrase “religious conviction” means – it’s broader and means more like “knowledge within oneself”. And that entry needs to be considered in the context of Pascal’s attempting to defend his particular Christian beliefs.

    • Kathryn Weirwood

      F anyone who uses Anything to justify torturing innocents. This isn’t a Muslim problem, this is a psycho problem. Does religion allow people to pardon themselves from their insane actions? Yes. But THIS event comes from broken, animalistic humans, not religion in particular.

      • Michael W Busch

        Do not equate being a kidnapper or a rapist with being “insane” or “psycho”.

        That wrongly stigmatizes mental illness / mental disorders. It also wrongly others the offenders – dismissing them as “just crazy” rather than holding them completely responsible for their choices and also confronting and changing the toxic cultures that formed their opinions and enabled their evil.

        • Kathryn Weirwood

          Hmm, I came to be snarky, but realized you are right. My argument against your comment would have been equal to me defending the use of “gay” in a derogatory because “I didn’t mean it against homosexuals”.

          I was wrong. I do apologize. It would have been far better to state that I find their actions to be indefensible by any means, and that these actions are committed by people of all (and no) faiths. The actions are not a religion problem, but inhumanism, enculturation of racial, religious, and gender inequality, and possibly violent sociopathy (though probably not the latter since there were multiple offenders).

          Now that I am aware of my own insensitive slip of tongue, I will endeavor to remove it from my vernacular. (And I hope you know I am being completely serious, and neither sarcastic or snarky. Thank you for pointing this out to me, and I extend the apology to anyone else I may have offended over the insensitive use of the word ‘insane’.

          • Michael W Busch

            Thank you for writing that.

      • LesterBallard

        And their religion and culture has nothing to do with it?

        • StatikSh0ck

          No it doesn’t otherwise you’d be hearing about hundreds of kidnapping and rapes every day in Islamic countries.

          • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

            Since women are punished for reporting rape in many countries, I don’t know how we’d have any idea just how many rapes occur in Muslim countries.

          • harbingerofdoom

            you do hear about hundreds of them, every day…every.single.day.

            • Danny Valentino

              According to Islamic law, the only way a man can be convicted of rape is if 4 adult muslim males testify against him. A woman who has been raped can face a jail sentence for having sex outside marriage. Go figure. If you don’t believe me check this story out. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/12/alicia-gali-raped-uae-jailed_n_3263593.html

              With odds like this women who are raped do no tell the police. No use at all and telling the police can mean a jail sentence for the rape victim. So you can see many rapes go unreported.

          • Bitter Lizard

            Hear that, feminists? Rape culture can’t exist unless everyone’s a rapist. By the way, I’m sure there are hundreds of rapes a day in Islamic countries regardless of whether or not we hear about them.

            • Michael W Busch

              Current demography says that there are tens of rapes per minute worldwide (of which something estimated at a bit over 1/4 are committed by Muslims). That is the extent of the problem, and it is in large part due to rape culture. Ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

              Society everywhere on Earth needs to change.

              • Bitter Lizard

                Thank you, I was too lazy to google statistics but pretty sure “hundreds of rapes a day in Islamic countries” was a pretty safe assumption.

          • Beet LeRace

            Given what we know of traditional muslim marriage and the general attitude of muslim men towards women, I would wager there are easily thousands of rapes per day in muslim countries.

            • Danny Valentino

              True that. A muslim man can never rape his wife, according to Islamic law, so you can imagine the impunity towards women that men feel there.

        • Kathryn Weirwood

          I corrected/expanded my statement, please see my reply to Michael W Busch. A Culture problem, yes, but there exist Moderate Muslims that do not condone or believe in actions like these, just as there are moderates in other religions where violent actions and oppression can be found. It’s not a religious problem because things like this are committed by people of all and no religions. I acquiesce to culture, but not religion. Nothing, not even religions I don’t believe in, are Black and White good or bad.

    • Dustin

      These kind of stories make me so fucking disgusted with people and their sick religion. This is such a fucking mental disease. This poor girl will be scarred for life. How can we let religions exist that allow people a justification for fucked up things like this? Un-fucking believable.

      • Michael W Busch

        No, being a kidnapper and a rapist is not “a mental disease”. It is being evil.

        Nor is believing in a religion that can be used to excuse evil. That is being wrong.

        None of those are the same thing as having a mental illness or a mental disorder. And it is very wrong to link them.

        I explained why in my earlier comment to Kathryn Weirwood. And it should not be necessary for that explanation to be repeated anywhere near as often as it apparently is.

    • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

      I’ll admit to being rather ignorant on the Quran but I’m pretty sure that rape is a no-no in that religion as it is in all the others.

      • anon 101

        It is okay to rape non-muslims. It is also okay to have non-muslim sexslaves.

      • LesterBallard

        You need to actually read the books (The Bible and The Quran).

        • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

          I have read the Bible. Twice. The whole thing, including all the begats. I can’t say it was worth the time or effort but it did make it clear to me that almost no Christians have. I have read enough of the Quran to know that I don’t have the stomach for it. There are better fairy tales to read. Last summer I read the Nibelungenlied. Far more interesting if you ask me.

          • LesterBallard

            Reading the Bible and Quran is worse when you know that people think that they are good, worthy, even wise books and live their lives according to them.

      • GubbaBumpkin

        I’ll admit to being rather ignorant on the Quran but I’m pretty sure
        that rape is a no-no in that religion as it is in all the others.

        I don’t understand this sort of comment. First you announce that you have no basis for the pronouncement you are going to make. Then you announce strong certainty in it anyway. You’re doing it wrong.

      • Michael W Busch
      • UWIR

        In cultures in which women are considered property, having sex with “someone else’s” woman is considered immoral. Whether that woman consents or not is irrelevant. Having sex with “your” woman is not considered immoral, and again whether she consents is irrelevant. What looks like prohibitions against rape are, at closer inspection, quite often actually prohibitions against fornication and adultery.

    • jumbybird

      I say fuck Christianity also!

      • C.L. Honeycutt

        Now now, no need to argue. We can fuck ALL religions.

        • Bitter Lizard

          Just be sure to use protection. There’s no telling where they’ve been.

  • Ahab

    Sick. Twisted. Those men repeatedly abused that poor woman and still considered themselves virtuous? If their god sees brutality and piety as compatible, I want no part of him.

    • Miss_Beara

      They kill girls and women and call it “honor.” They pour acid in women’s faces. Girls and women are raped and they are killed for it. Even after all of that, they still consider themselves virtuous.

  • Ian Reide

    Words fail. I am thinking that some people don’t deserve to live.

    • the moother

      Who are you that gets to decide who may live and who must die?

      • revyloution

        Someone with the means, that’s who I am.

        If I witnessed this type of attack, I would put down the assailant just as quickly as I would put down a mad dog.

        Respect must be earned, and if a creature has no respect for my life, then I have no respect for theirs.

      • MCINTJ

        a human being with empathy.

        • the moother

          Human beings with empathy do not hang around on the interwebz issuing death sentences.

          It’s mostly immature kids and all types of Murcans that do this.

          • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

            Unless Ian is a judge in a criminal system, he has no power to issue a death sentence. You are under the illusion that his post could cause anyone’s death. What an absurd notion.

            • the moother

              I’m just here to mop up sloppy thinking… You see, after making such declarations, the conversation goes no further… Whereas there is plenty to discuss on the issue without saying some people deserve to die and then turning one’s back on the issue.

              • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                Huh, I’m also just here to mop up sloppy thinking. In this case, yours. There is also a huge difference between “deserve to die” or “I wish ze was dead” and “someone should kill them” or “I’ll kill them”.

                One is wishful thinking, a denotation of the absolute awfulness of the person in question and a wish that their presence no longer pollute this world. The other is a violent threat, though it’s also probably just violent wish fulfillment.

                I sometimes wish certain people had died as children or never been born. Their presence on this planet made it a much worse place. I would never, however, advocate hurting or killing them in any way. I just wish they hadn’t been able to do the bad things they did- wishing they’d never been born is approximately the same. No one is deciding who may live and who may die. I read Ian Reide’s original declaration is such a light.

                • the moother

                  You know the difference… but can you be sure he knows the difference?

                  In any case, wishful thinking about others’ demise is rather immature anyway…

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  No, but I can’t be sure he doesn’t either. It doesn’t make sense to jump on him for “violent threats” when those probably didn’t occur.

                  And it may be immature, but so what? I actually don’t consider it immature to consider that the world would be a better place without some people in it, though dwelling on it isn’t healthy.

                • the moother

                  though dwelling on it isn’t healthy.

                  Well, that’s the point now, isn’t it…?

                  Let’s stop those thoughts before they come rambling out of our moths into general conversation. Or stop them before our fingertips type them into public blogs.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  *Shrug* We can agree to disagree on this one. Unless you’re as powerful as, say, Henry VIII, I don’t see anything wrong with such comments or thoughts.

                • the moother

                  I think we do agree though… You say these thoughts aren’t worth dwelling on…, so do I.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Then we do agree :)

          • themootherclueless

            You’re a lazy hypocrite to make such an overreaching generalization. Stop being lazy and and actually research the numbers, the ages, and the nationalities of posters before making such a worthless and asinine comment.

            • the moother

              lol… someone made a login just to insult me… how mature of you…

          • cipher

            Moother, I always agree with you, but I’m afraid I can’t this time. I’m a raging liberal, but I’d have no problem imposing a death penalty for this.

            I’ve been calling for the death penalty for female genital mutilation for years.

            • the moother

              We can’t always agree on everything, no. But on death sentences, there is nothing less effective than the state using murder as a deterrent for murder/rape/mutilation. Violence does not prevent violence – It only sullies the authority of those that impose the punishment. In fact, this fire-with-fire tactic may well indeed have the opposite effect than the deterrence it is supposed to provide.

              It might satisfy a primal urge for vengeance but, since the Magna Carta, on through Machiavelli and then Hobbes, we have learned that vengeance is not justice. Nor is it a deterrent or a rehabilitation…

              • cipher

                Violence does not prevent violence – It only sullies the authority of those that impose the punishment.

                I no longer believe that to be the case. I’m not at all convinced that it fails completely to serve as a deterrent. I do want to be clear that I don’t necessarily support the death penalty in cases of capital crime – too often, there are conflicting accounts, police and prosecutors lie and/or present evidence selectively to enhance their reputations, DNA evidence is suppressed or simply not examined, and of course, the system is wildly racially biased.

                However, there are crimes that, in my view, are so life-destroying that they cannot be dealt with in any other manner. The above would be an example, and as I said, FGM is another. I would also support it in cases in which children are abducted, especially for sexual purposes (and for all crimes involving sexual slavery). And yes, I know the perpetrators were often victims themselves – I find that as the years go by, I simply don’t care.

                And in cases in which the perps weren’t former victims, they’re simply congenital psychopaths, and we’d do humanity a service by removing them from the gene pool.

                (I should also mention that in addition to being a raging liberal, I happen to be a colossal prick.)

                • the moother

                  Lol @ the disclaimer.

                  FGM will leave this world sooner or later. That rests on the inevitable enlightenment of its proponents, not on their punishments. You might also consider what imposing this strict sentencing might achieve more directly. It might lead to the hardening of hearts and more direct denigration of the women it seeks to protect.

                  It’s possible that imposing our moral high-ground through draconian punishments on under-developed moral systems will even lengthen the time it takes to “civilize these barbarians” (so to speak) thus leading to more FGM rather than less.

                  Also, to have any real, lasting effect by removing people from the gene pool we’d have to slaughter an awful lot of dudes… so, zapping a few here or there will have an infinitesimally small effect. It would probably be totally unproductive in getting those with borderline-bad genes to behave.

                • cipher

                  It might lead to the hardening of hearts and more direct denigration of the women it seeks to protect.

                  As for the latter, I doubt it would work that way. Regarding the former – I don’t care about their hearts. I care that they stop doing it.

                  Also, to have any real, lasting effect by removing people from the gene pool we’d have to slaughter an awful lot of dudes…

                  Every little bit helps!

                • cipher

                  Oh, and regarding FGM disappearing “sooner or later” – that may be, but young girls are being consigned to lifetimes of horrific pain now – that’s all I really care about in that situation. I’m not at all concerned with the civil rights of the perpetrators.

                • the moother

                  You are correct. But children are also suffering right now in Syria. What are we to do? Bomb Syria? Absolutely not. This is not the best investment we can make with our cash reserves. We can save 50 times as many lives by spending the same amount on long-lasting insecticide treated mosquito nets:

                  http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/08/27/syria_intervention_cost_military_strikes_are_a_highly_cost_ineffective_way.html

                  By the same calculation, and it’s heartbreaking to have to say it, buying mosquito nets is a better investment than trying to stop FGM. Although we will end up spending money both so all is not lost.

                • cipher

                  Syria is a different type of problem. And of course we should spend the money on mosquito netting (isn’t Bill Gates contributing a fair amount of that?).

                  But Moother, you aren’t going to change my mind on this one.

                • the moother

                  Oh, I’m hardly trying to change your mind. Just pointing out that there will always be suffering in the world and some problems are (economically) better to tackle even though they lack the visceral disgust that FGM and war deaths provoke in us.

          • SwimmingTowardsPie

            Human beings with empathy do not hang around on the interwebz issuing death sentences.

            Maybe so. But people who have empathy *really* don’t mercilessly rape and torture innocents.

            Empathy is defined as being able to put oneself in the shoes of another, correct?

            Pray, tell me – how does one put oneself in the shoes of someone who commits such a monstrous act?

            • the moother

              Well, we could try put ourselves in the shoes of people are uneducated and live in a country that is largely uncivilized and has little infrastructure to speak of. Couple that with being immersed in the most backward religion that exists today.

              That’s a decent start.

              Now, these people do not live in very different conditions to Europe in the middle ages or to many other cultures at many other times in the history of the world. We were all barbarians once.

              And it’s not that these folks deserve to die (or not to live, but we know what he really means). They deserve a long prison sentence at the very least. But modernity and morality have forsaken them and I think that, if they deserve anything else at all, it’s the education and enlightenment they are so sorely missing.

      • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

        Because Ian does not have magical powers, what he thinks does not cause anyone’s death. Therefore he isn’t “deciding” anything. It was just a thought, not an action.

        • the moother

          Seems to have a definite yardstick as to who deserves what… Most moral people arent in the habit of deciding the fate of others unless they have the title of judge or jury.

  • William Mercado

    Rape was committed by all sides but overwhelmingly by Serbs against Muslim (Bosniak) women.

    http://www.womenundersiegeproject.org/conflicts/profile/bosnia

    • Terry Firma

      Ah yes, the old “the other side does it too” rebuttal. Thanks.

      • C.L. Honeycutt

        I have a “Creation Science” book on my shelf in which the authors actually answer the question of whether their own quote mining is ethical by excusing it on the grounds that “scientists do it more.” I really don’t grasp how anyone thinks this excuse doesn’t make it clear to everyone that the speaker is dishonest trash.

    • Michael W Busch

      Which was horrifically evil and similarly the produce of a toxic culture, but does exactly nothing to decrease the crimes of Lindhout’s kidnappers.

    • http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/ PsiCop

      So two wrongs make a right? Wow. Thanks for clearing that up for me! To think all this time, I thought that was fallacious thinking. What a fool I’ve been! It turns out, all the horrible things other people do, grants me license to do any awful thing I can think of! Wahoo!

      (OK, so I’m not serious about that last sentence.)

    • closetatheist

      I really hope your point is not the point you seem to be making….

    • ShoeUnited

      So your point is that this balances the scales then? What a way to blow your wad on morality and toss it in the gutter.

    • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

      Also wrong. What’s your point?

  • pillbucket

    inb4 cries of Islamophobia.

  • Soren

    Some Christian is going to read this and go, “Islam, what a violent and disgusting faith,” but when they see a similar situation in which the rapists are Christians instead of Muslims, they’ll say, “Whoa, those aren’t REAL Christians!”

    • viaten

      And of course other Muslims will say “but they’re not ‘true’ Muslims”.

      • Gera

        And yet we Atheist are the ones without moral.

        • viaten

          And you never hear them say “Atheists don’t have ‘true’ morality”, they skip over that and go right to “Atheists have no morality”.

        • Lea Tapp

          Oh really? Because atheists and skeptics have been sending rape and death threats to women in their own community for a while now. This community is rife with anti-feminists and rape culture denialists. Our major orgs have been caught covering up instances of harassment and assault. Atheists have claimed “good without God”, but we have not demonstrated that.

          • ronald rittenhouse

            do you have some evidence of this? I would like to read about this

            • Michael W Busch

              do you have some evidence of this?

              Your lack of awareness of this problem, and apparent hyper-skepticism as regards the all-too-common problem of misogyny, are not helpful. Please correct them.

              Here’s one of many articles explaining what you need to learn: http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/10/sexism_in_the_skeptic_community_i_spoke_out_then_came_the_rape_threats.html . Google will refer you to many more, as will the authors Bitter mentioned.

              Edit: And the same applies to those who up-voted ronald’s comment.

              • WroteForLuck

                Better yet, Google “Slymepit”. Be skeptical, check out both sides.

                • Lea Tapp

                  The “sides” consist of anti-feminists vs. people who think women are humans. The slyme is a pro-misogyny site with no regard for the facts or basic human decency. There is no equivalence to be found between these supposed sides.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Oh trust me, I have. It’s, well, a slimepit. It’s one of the corners of the Internet I prefer not to venture to, due to the ridiculous numbers of people saying that I’m not a real person and don’t deserve to be treated at such.

              • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                Please correct them? Hyper skepticism? Are you serious? This person doesn’t know what you’re talking about. Neither do I. It’s come out of the BLUE for them. I’ve also heard that the atheist community is rife with the opposite, yet I reject that too. Second of all, WHAT THEYRE ASKING FOR *IS* THE EVIDENCE.

                If it’s such a common problem for people to be simply “unaware”, even so many women, maybe the issues aren’t as rife as you thought? From what I have read, no one claims this is an underground thing, so there’s really no plausible way to claim that everyone else is simply unaware.

              • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                You do realize you’re not making a convincing case by calling people “hyperskeptics” implying its obvious or something and we are denying it when it’s clearly not obvious to us? It shows “Okay, this person is claiming this is an apparent problem yet Im somehow missing it anywhere I go? Definitely implausible”

                basically anytime someone goes “Wth, how are you claiming to not see X” it makes the target even more suspicious.

                I’m just saying…not that there is a way for you to convince anyone who hasn’t already bought this because there -is- no issue of most A/S people being sexist or anti-womens rights and pro-harassment or harassers themselves, sending threats, etc.

                You’ve literally replied saying “Oh, you havent heard of this? You see, this is the problem! You don’t see this happening and won’t take the word of some person on some blog one day? Wow, you are a hyper skeptic! Even though you asked for evidence Im just going to say you’re being hyper skeptical.”

              • ronald rittenhouse

                I was unaware and now I know a little more about this. Thanks for the link, it was interesting and disheartening. I would never expect this type of behavior from atheists, but just because your intellectually mature enough to understand that there is no deity it doesn’t mean you are emotionally mature enough to outgrow sexism or any other form of bigotry.

            • Bitter Lizard

              I suggest you Google the blogs from Greta Christina, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, Jen McCreight, etc. They talk about this all the time.

              Edit: I have no idea why this post is so controversial. I was legitimately trying to be helpful to ronald, who was asking for something to read about this.

              • Kafkaesque

                I’d like to point out that all of those writers you mentioned are very controversial figures within the skeptic movement, specifically because they talk about this stuff all the time, and those who disagree with them are invariably branded as rape deniers and misogynists. I’m fairly agnostic about the schism in the community, but I wouldn’t mention those people as impartial chroniclers of the problem.

                • Michael W Busch

                  they talk about this stuff all the time,

                  No, they don’t – as you can readily learn by reading their respective blogs. e.g. Jen talks about biology, genetics, mental illness, and Pokemon. Greta talks about fashion, secular meditation, surviving cancer, and writing dirty stories. And so on.

                  They all do spend a fair amount of time confronting misogyny and rape culture. But that is simply because there is far too much of both.

                  And it should not be controversial to say “don’t be sexist”.

                • Kafkaesque

                  No, it shouldn’t, but I’m saying they’re more controversial and polarizing than that, and are on one extreme end of a heated debate in the community and I just wanted to point that out in case people would like to be aware there’s an opposing viewpoint. And I only said they talk about it all the time because those are the words the person I responded to used.

                • Kafkaesque

                  And someone downvoted me literally two seconds after I posted. Please take the time to read what I’m saying in full before disagreeing. Thank you.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  Oh goodness, I am afraid we wont get anywhere with this, especially that they’re seriously claiming that you want actual feminists who simply want equality to leave so that people who dont consider women humans too can take over. LOL.

                  Yet, people who consider themselves feminists have been shamed by them. Some kind of freaky, elitie community they have over there…tbh at any time, if their community said anything that came to mind 24/7 there would be something that would get them thrown out in all of them. Their dogma boils down to everyone being scummy, not good enough, etc.

                • Michael W Busch

                  Your tone-trolling is noted.

                  As is your use of the Golden Mean fallacy. That there is disagreement does not mean that the people at both extremes are necessarily wrong. There are people who object to efforts to fight sexism. Those people are wrong to do so. The people who fight sexism in all forms are right to do so.

                  I only said they talk about it all the time because those are the words the person I responded to used.

                  Bitter’s usage means “they talk about the problems of sexism a lot”. Yours has the implication of “they don’t talk about anything else”. Not the same thing.

                  And I decline to continue to indulge your derailment.

                • Kafkaesque

                  I didn’t say they didn’t talk about anything else; I meant it the same way the person I responded to meant it, that they’re controversial because they often talk about sexism in a polarizing way. I apologize for being muddy in my wording, but please don’t imply I’m trying to derail anything. Thank you.

                • Kafkaesque

                  In any case, thank you for your responses. I hope somebody reads the exchange and takes an effort to learn more about the debate. Enjoy your afternoon.

                • Kristin

                  What exactly do you mean by saying they are “talking about sexism in a polarizing way?” A lot of people in the skeptic/atheist community find it polarizing to even talk about sexism–the sexists sure try to make that argument. You sound a lot like you’re saying that any one who points out what they see as sexism (or does it a lot like the writers you claim are “controversial”) are the actual problem and should just STFU.

                  No, the sexists are the problem. The people who say, “we shouldn’t talk about sexism because it is polarizing” are the problem.

                  “Talking about that is just polarizing” is shorthand for “people should just shut up about it because it makes us look bad.” It was the argument the Catholic Church used for decades to try to get abuse victims and their allies to shut up.

                • Lea Tapp

                  Of course it is polarizing. It divides the misogynists from the people who consider women humans. That is not a bad thing. What you are saying is that you’d rather feminists leave so that the bigots will feel comfortable. That’s not happening.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  Just to be fair, I was originally the one who said “all the time” when first mentioning these bloggers, but I didn’t mean it in a disparaging way nor did I mean to imply that they didn’t talk about other stuff. “All the time” in this case just meant “frequently enough that you’ll probably see it if you browse for a few minutes”.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  I didn’t mean to imply that they were “impartial”, whatever that means, simply that if you didn’t hear about the sort of things Lea was talking about, going to those blogs would be a pretty good place to start hearing about them. And for the record, I’m sure I don’t agree with any of them on everything, but I do agree that sexism is a problem and we should be vigilant to call out those atheists who are embarrassments to the rest of us.

                • Kafkaesque

                  Fair enough. Like I said, I’m agnostic on the issue thus far. I simply don’t want someone reading this to think there’s definitely and unmistakably a horrible sexism problem in atheist circles. It’s a controversy, one which those writers are on one side of.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  You’re wrong. There isn’t a controversy. There is definitely and unmistakeably a horrible sexism problem in atheist circles. It doesn’t seem to be worse than society at large, but atheist women tend to be more vocal about trying to fix it, so it’s not shoved under the rug as well as in the greater society. If you mean to say atheist circles aren’t worse than other circles, you are probably right. That really isn’t saying much, though.

                • Kafkaesque

                  Of course. Sexism isn’t controversial. It exists everywhere. I’d like to say that clearly. But there is a controversy involving those specific writers and their treatment of the subject.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Your words didn’t say that :/ It’s the Internet, so you have to be very specific about what you mean. We have no context or body language cues to figure out what you mean if it’s different from what you said.

                • Kafkaesque

                  I’m not sure what you mean. I feel I was fairly clear about what I meant. I certainly don’t think I ever came across as implying sexism itself was controversial. But ultimately it’s on me if I didn’t express myself clearly enough. Thanks.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  The impression I got from your post is that the idea that atheist circles contain sexism is controversial- some people say there is sexism, some say there isn’t, and we’re still looking to figure out which side is right.

                  How to deal with the sexism that is unquestionably present is somewhat controversial. However, since a lot of people against Greta and Jen and Rebecca and Ophelia and other people who tackle sexism do argue that sexism just isn’t a big problem, I’m generally on board with what these women say about it. Not always, but usually.

                • Kafkaesque

                  Yes, I think your impression wasn’t at all what I would have liked to make clear. Again, ultimately my fault.

                  Basically I was angry about the story about the woman who was raped in Somalia, and, in that context, was a little offended by the person who said “atheists and skeptics have been sending rape and death threats to women in their own community for a while now”. It hit my eyes wrong.

                  So when someone asked for more information and was given the names of those writers, I wanted to point out that their viewpoints were controversial. It was a visceral reaction.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  There are probably some unfair accusations of “sexism” amidst the many justifiable ones (some people would probably call me sexist for using the word “douchebag”, which I think is silly). But to me it boils down to which side we’d rather err on: having a movement that is a little oversensitive in some cases, or having one that can rightly be called hypocritical because it calls out religious misogyny while being silent on instances of misogyny from its own.

                • Kafkaesque

                  I think that’s very reasonable. We seem to be on the same page, more or less. Thanks!

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  I don’t need to choose either… why can’t I be for an unhypocritical movement that isn’t nasty at all?

                  if these people on here are who you are calling “oversensitive” they’re more than that. Its malicious condemnation and prejudice of their own, the things they want implemented, like “schroedingers rapist”, etc… witch hunting and what not.

                • Lea Tapp

                  No, there is no controversy, just people claiming there is. They do the same thing creationists and climate change deniers do. They lie like rugs.

                • Kafkaesque

                  Oh please.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  If you’re claiming most atheists see and agree, nnnt. You people claim most aren’t aware and thats a huge problem while also claiming the opposite.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  You live in your own world. I agree it’s not a controversy… most atheists don’t even know that people are making claims like this, so there’s not enough participates going “wtf, not true” to make it a controversy. Only people that have encountered your chunk are aware.

                  Earlier someone said a big problem was unawareness among us atheists, yet its also somehow many of us doing it. Numbers don’t add up, obviously.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  its sort of like the WBC. In their own experience, they encounter all these people combatting them, and they think that America in general has even heard of them, yet so many dont know what the WBC is.

                • Lea Tapp

                  Exactly how much sexism is enough for you to consider it a horrible problem? Is there a base amount of sexism and harassment that women in this community should be expected to tolerate?

                • Kafkaesque

                  All genuine sexism is a problem.

                • Lea Tapp

                  Is genuine sexism anything like legitimate rape? Be careful.
                  You’re showing your true colors.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  You’re strawmanning us. No sexism should be tolerated, but you guys are saying its rampant among atheists in particular and even affecting communities as a whole rather than simply acknowledging the existence of sexist people. I’d hope no one would say that there are no sexists, but the atheist community is not rampant with these misogynists you speak of, and I havent been living under a rock. Ive been out there.

                • Lea Tapp

                  It is not controversial to say that women should not be harassed and hounded out of the community. Don’t be so dishonest.

                • Kafkaesque

                  You’re intentionally twisting my words to win debate points because you’re dishonest and horrible.

                • Lea Tapp

                  LOL! This may be a debate for you, but for me it is my life. Unlike you, this is not something for me to only be interested in when it is convenient for me. I’ve twisted nothing. You’re just so very, very wrong that you cannot defend your claims. How nice for you to be able to be impartial, as if that is a good thing. Are you impartial to all bigotry that does not touch you directly or is it just women that aren’t important to you?

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  What an obvious strawman… he never claimed or showed he was impartial to sexism..one can be angry whenever they see sexism and still think your claims about the atheist community are bogus. I am one of those people. And yeah, you definitely twisted it. That’s why you stated it. You knew that was nothing like what he said.

                • Kristin

                  Are you honestly saying that the claims about sexism in the atheist/skeptic community are all bogus? (That is a pretty extraordinary claim–do you have extraordinary evidence to back that up?) There are many writers who write a lot about this utilizing a lot of good evidence–and you just ignore it all as “bogus?” You’re saying that all of them, and all of their evidence is just lies, all the time?

                  Stop being an apologist for the sexist assholes in the skeptic/atheist movement.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  Exactly… she’s intentionally twisting it. Just like the people on there. “We’re just saying women are people! YOU DISAGREE WITH THIS!” Uh, no. Nice try though. Same with this. “You’re saying its controversial to say that women shouldn’t be hounded out of the community!”

                  Uh no. More like, the more fucked up ideas and claims that many women are even being hounded out because they are women. So far I’ve come across 0 myself, yet its such a huge problem.

                • C.L. Honeycutt

                  Considering at least two of the women on that list – a list of only four people – have been hounded for a couple of YEARS for saying completely noncontroversial things that equate to, “Please have enough empathy to understand that women are physically weaker than men,” you might want to actually read something before being sarcastic about it.

                • AntonioPeYangIII

                  [I'd like to point out that all of those writers you mentioned are very controversial figures within the skeptic movement, ]

                  According to whom? The slymepit?

                  From what I’ve seen, the writer you are mentioning were simply raising their voices over the long-standing issue of sexism in the atheist community. They “talk about this stuff” because nobody else wants to. And in return, they get harrassed or – in the case of Jen, who only recently came back – literally bullied off the net.

              • UWIR

                “I suggest you Google the blogs from Greta Christina, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, Jen McCreight, etc. They talk about this all the time.”
                Greta Christina has stated that George Zimmerman is a vile, worthless being whose every action is evil (or, at the very least, every action of the evening of Trayvon Martin’s death), and that his acquittal was completely and utterly unjustified. And she has stated that she does not want anyone who disagrees with any of this to read her blog, link to her blog, or in any way interact with her. So, unless you know what ronald’s position on this matter is, you are being disrespectful of her by advising him to read her works. Jen McCreight is the founder of Atheism Plus, an echo chamber of bigotry and lies that bans people for disagreeing with them. Rebecca Watson has made clearly sexist comments. I am not familiar with Benson, but that’s at least three out of four people that you list that have serious credibility problems.

            • Lea Tapp

              Make Google your friend, genius.

              • ronald rittenhouse

                I did google it and found the sexism to be a very small problem among a very estranged group of people. Really there is no need for the bitterness. I immediately goggled it, but since you seemed to have more experience with the issue I asked for some insight from you. It’s called having a human conversation. It seems that you are a jaded and defensive person and you probably didn’t receive my question as coming from a place honesty but maybe a as trap to lure you into an argument. Next time some one asks for your help in discovering some information they are unaware of it would be a good idea to take a more helpful and polite tone.

          • Nathan Lunde-Berry

            Feminism should get the hell out of atheist circles asap. Fuck you. As if women in the west aren’t the men of the east by this point.

            • C.L. Honeycutt
            • Michael W Busch

              Your misogyny is unacceptable. Cut it out.

              And your lack of awareness of the continuing problems of misogyny in the various cultures you lump together as “the west” and advocacy of horrifically false analogies are quite offensive. Correct them.

              Edit: Also, what Feminerd said. And your apparent racism is also unacceptable. Cut that out too. And the same goes for the people who up-voted your comment

            • Bitter Lizard

              And I’ll reiterate: as strongly as I disagree with Lea’s statement about not criticizing religion, she has a point when it comes to certain atheists being misogynistic douchebags.

              • Lea Tapp

                How can we expect that criticism to be taken seriously when we don’t actively practice what we preach?

                • Bitter Lizard

                  The phrase “atheism” includes everybody who is not a theist–it’s a word like “non-racist” or “non-homophobe” or “non-misogynist”. So saying atheists shouldn’t criticize theism because some atheists are misogynists is essentially the same thing as saying non-racists have no right to criticize racism as long as there are non-racists who are homophobes. It just makes no sense. There’s no reason we can’t criticize both theist and atheist misogyny. To quote Feminerd above: “We can, and must, do both things simultaneously.”

            • RobMcCune

              I’d rather get rid of racism and misogyny first.

            • Lea Tapp

              Thanks for being honest about being a bigot. We aren’t leaving, Sunshine. You can behave like a decent person or you can gtfo.

          • Tom

            Atheism doesn’t automatically confer morality; you’ve got to figure that out yourself, and some atheists fail to do so. What these religions are denying, however, is that atheists have even the possibility of developing morality without it being imposed by a religion, which is patently false.

            • Lea Tapp

              of course it doesn’t. That is not an excuse for an atheist community to display shitty morals. We can’t just say it. We have to show it.

          • Marv

            please go ahead and separate your feminism from atheism, the two arent mutually inclusive.

            Edited with a more accurate phrase with robs help :P

            • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

              Ah, not so much. Feminism is the radical notion that women are people too. As such, they should be treated like people in all ways.

              While skepticism and atheism definitely don’t automatically lead to feminism, they certainly aren’t mutually exclusive. Secular humanism is a very popular philosophical outlook for many atheists (myself included) and feminism is entirely compatible, indeed required, to be a secular humanist.

              • Bitter Lizard

                Just to be clear, I’m all for us “cleaning our own house” in terms of calling out the misogynists in our own ranks, and I think this level of self-criticism is healthy. I do take objection to Lea Tapp’s implication above that we basically have no right to criticize all the horrible bullshit religion causes until we “clean our own house”. That’s complete nonsense. It’s like saying we can’t criticize racists until all non-racist people are perfect.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Oh, well yeah. But the posts just above, by Marv and Nathan Lunde-Berry, required an answer. The way to deal with misogyny in atheist circles is to deal with it while still engaging in criticism of the outside culture, not to say that feminism just isn’t important enough to talk about or that atheists can’t be feminists. Nathan’s racism is also coming through loud and clear, and I should have said something about that originally as well.

                  Lea Tapp is wrong, but those two are far more wrong than she and in much less defensible ways. She, at least, has a point though she could have expressed it more clearly. Why are the misogynist acts of religious people given so much prominence to explain why they are bad people or why religion doesn’t make them good people, but the misogynist acts of atheists are more swept under the rug/women are told not to split the movement? Now, granted, sexual harassment and rape and death threats are a whole bajillion times less bad than gang rape and kidnapping. They exist on the same spectrum and express similar ideas about women, but they are not at all comparable acts.

                  EDIT: Oh bother, she said that exact thing (clean house before criticizing others) down below. No, I disagree completely with that. We can, and must, do both simultaneously. Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  I agree with every word of this, and I’m sympathizing a little more with what motivated Lea to make her (still extremely wrongheaded) statement as I see how many sexist atheists we have even here on Hemant’s blog. It seems like anti-misogyny should be one of the leading reasons for anti-theism. I seriously don’t get it.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Yeah. I think she’s wrong, but I sympathize and empathize both with what makes her feel that way. This happens every single damn time feminism comes up, too. Not necessarily these guys, but it’s always someone. It’s disheartening.

                  And then we pick up our mood and once more into the breach, dear friend!

                • Lea Tapp

                  Are you a woman? Do you think me expected to be safe in this community means I am expecting “perfection”. Do you really think the number of people this treatment alienates within our community will not be missed when we need allies to further political and human rights issues? Are we so cheap that you’d rather whine about someone else’s community rather than fix our own? Do you really think that’s a great idea? Look, you don’t tell people not to drink and smoke while you have a beer in one hand and a cig in the other. We can wail about the evils of religion all day long, but what will the point be if we can clearly be seen to be hypocrites? My point is this: Do you want to score points or do you want to actually change things?

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Not that it matters, but yes, I am a both female-sexed and gendered.

                  And I think it is terribly important to fix the sexism in the atheist community. I just think it cannot come at the exclusion of battering away at sexism in the greater community as well, nor at the expense of fighting racism and homophobia as well. Did you miss that I said we must do both?

                • Lea Tapp

                  I didn’t say we could not do both. Clean our house first does not mean criticize others never.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  Then perhaps there’s just some confusion regarding your statement, “Right now atheists need to clean their own house before we tell other people to clean theirs”. All Michael, Feminerd and myself have been arguing with you about is that we think we should criticize misogyny of both the atheist and religious variety, rather than just the former. And all three of us have called out atheist misogynists on this thread. Maybe we aren’t as far apart as you think we are.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  I’ve read this three times and I honestly can’t figure out exactly what you’re objecting to in what Feminerd wrote.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  I’m a woman… I -feel- safe. But that’s not relevant. How I feel isn’t relevant. Point is whether or not those feelings are premature..they are not. I feel and am generally safe in the community. If you’re not a troll, I do expect you to keel over of ulcers from anger and anxiety over imaginary issues, though.

                • Eucliwood Hellscythe

                  That is my only solace, that at least in your harmful dogma and BS, you suffer of yourself. I’d rather it weren’t so, but it is, so I will take some solace in that.

                • Goape

                  Logic is immune to hypocrisy. A doctor that smokes is well within their rights to tell you not to because it’s bad for you. A preacher who tells someone that prayer was ineffective would be a hypocritical conundrum who is correct.

                  But your main concern doesn’t seem to be with hypocrisy; you seem to be scolding the atheist and skeptic communities for daring to address issues other than their own. That there exists flaws in the atheist or skeptic movements doesn’t somehow preclude those movements from elucidating other obvious flaws in the rest of society. It just means that a bit of multitasking is required.

                • Kareem Jordan

                  An atheist committing an act of misogyny is just a person committing an act of misogyny. When a religious person treats a woman like shit in the name of their religion, it shows that religion itself is either the cause of used as justification for that act.

                • Lea Tapp

                  So, No True Scottsman is OK if we use it? We do have communities and we can easily set ourselves aside from rotten apples just by having standards and calling out behavior that does not meet them, especially when another atheist does it.

                • Kareem Jordan

                  No true scotsman would be me saying that misogynist atheists aren’t atheists. I’m saying the opposite. Anyone who doesn’t believe in a diety is an atheist. That includes the conspiracy theorist, the holocaust denier, the racist, the thief, the guy who believes aliens built the pyramids, and even the misogynist.

                  I was responding to this sentiment: “Why are the misogynist acts of religious people given so much prominence
                  to explain why they are bad people or why religion doesn’t make them good people…” and explaining the difference of pointing out how a doctrine affects a person and how calling out an atheist for being a misogynist (which should absolutely be done if the person is one) doesn’t really reflect on atheism as a whole.

                • Marv

                  The issue I am sure a lot of atheists have with the Atheism+ movement is that its proponents say you must have these certain ideals and if you don’t have these ideals we tell you to have you are misogynistic rape culture promoting patriarchal scum. There is a vast difference between promoting equality within atheism and promoting radical feminism as a prerequisite to be part of the atheist identity.

                • Lea Tapp

                  First, if we do not respect women in our community all we are doing is appropriating these women’s suffering in order to bludgeon religion with it. It shows that we don’t really give a damn about these women. We just want to use them to score points. That’s not ethical. So we look like hypocritical idiots when we complain about the ethics of others.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  That’s why doing both simultaneously is important. It’s equally self-serving and incredibly dangerous to require the atheist movement to be perfect before criticizing others.

                • Lea Tapp

                  Where did I ask for perfection? I think treating women like people is a pretty low bar.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I know, right? But it is actually a pretty high bar, and it’s worth calling out people failing at it even harder than atheists are.

                • Kareem Jordan

                  What does that even mean? Seriously? I know it sounds nice, but there has never been one single standard to treat a person. Can we drop the catch phrases in exchange for clear and decisive speech.

                • Lea Tapp

                  Kareem, that is clear. If it is OK to treat people without consideration for treating them as fully human and equal, what is your position on discrimination on the basis of color, lack of religion, or sexuality? Is it only women who’s humanity should not meet a certain standard or are there other kinds of bigotry that are OK too?

                • Kareem Jordan

                  That didn’t address my post at all. I’m asking what is this one standard of treating people like human that we’ve all agreed on when I wasn’t looking? If there is none, then why be vague and cute as apposed to clear. People generally treat other people like shit, so I would be much better to state what you believe, what you want, what you’re fighting for instead of using a bumper sticker slogan.

                • CottonBlimp

                  I do treat women like people. Or, at the very least, I think I do, and legitimately care to hear if I haven’t. I agree, it is a pretty low bar.

                  Saying I don’t have standing to criticize evil because of the actions of people I can’t control, people I not only don’t associate with but find actively repulsive; that’s a higher bar.

                  I agree that we are responsible for “atheist culture”, but I don’t really see how anyone gains by approaching misogyny in skeptic circles as being distinct from misogyny in religious culture or the world at large.

                  I also know that my numerous privileges make criticism of misogyny in heavily religious countries much easier for me than the actual victims, which I take as an obligation to act, not to ignore.

                • Bitter Lizard

                  If you look at some of what I wrote in this discussion, you’ll see that I agree there’s a risk of hypocrisy in calling out theist misogyny if we aren’t calling out atheist misogyny as well. I’m with you there. But I think the notion that we can’t call out theist misogyny until there are no nontheist misogynists is ridiculous.

                • UWIR

                  “So, No True Scottsman is OK if we use it? We do have communities and we can easily set ourselves aside from rotten apples just by having standards and calling out behavior that does not meet them, especially when another atheist does it.”

                  Such standards would not be standards of atheism, they would be standards of a group of atheists. It’s not a No True Scotsman (one t, by the way) fallacy to note that there are standards inherent in the definition of “Christian”, but not in the definition of “atheist”.

                  “First, if we do not respect women in our community all we are doing is appropriating these women’s suffering in order to bludgeon religion with it.”

                  You are engaging in massive equivocation in regards to the first person pronoun. If I want to discuss myself and other atheists, with regard to their atheism, it makes sense to refer to myself and other atheists in the first person plural. But when discussing some attribute that I do not share with other atheists, it makes less sense to speak in the first person. The “we” of atheist, and the “we” of people who oppose sexism are two completely different we’s. There’s absolutely nothing hypocritical about one of those we’s criticizing theists for something that the other we is guilty of.

              • martha_xyz

                @Feminerd : you are mistaken. Feminism is a radical notion , which wears the mask of equality of sexes, but its real agenda is to have more and more rights for women (more than equal), making men as second class citizens , gang up on all the financial resources, and silencing anybody who argues with them logically.
                Wakeup.Gone are the first wave feminism – equalists. Here since last five decades – we have second and third wave feminism. Educate yourself. Why our more and more marraiges are failing. Why one third of father’s are now living separate. Good men now afraid of committing themselves due to alimony fear. We women do not want quality, where it does not suit us, are we prepared to be treated equals in child custody matters, alimony payments, frontline wars. No. We oppose ERA, and then say that we want equality.
                The radicals have hjacked the feminism since 1970s. This movement has gone awry. Whenever I see any feminist leaders, her words smell like Nazi leaders hate speech to me. They no longer look like a loving leader to emulate. They are hateful, vengeful, monstrous and crybaby, constantly bitching kind of personalities. They want endless rights with no responsibility.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  The second wave of feminists is why you, if you are married, can have a credit card in your name and not your husband’s. It’s why you can put your name on the title of your house or car. It’s why women are increasingly known to be perfectly competent scientists, mathematicians, inventors, engineers, CEOs, accountants, doctors, lawyers, and other high-status professions. Second wave feminism is why we started tracking things like domestic violence. Second wave feminism is why marital rape is illegal. Second wave feminism is why sexual harassment is illegal now. Were there man-bashing elements to it? Yes, unfortunately, there were. That’s one of the things third-wave feminists have struggled to throw off, because people are people. Feminism is about helping men and women reach their full potential as people without worrying about stupid stuff like genitalia.

                  You want to know one of the formative elements of third wave feminism? Watch the Anita Hill hearings. Watch a bunch of old white men grill a black woman about her experiences of sexual harassment before confirming the man who hurt her to one of the highest positions in the US, and tell me that everything is wonderful now. Watch the senators denigrate her experiences and deliberately shut out testimony that would have confirmed her story. Watching that energized women. Third wave feminism is why medical trials now routinely include women. Third wave feminism is tackling slut-shaming, rape culture, continuing the fight against domestic violence, continuing the fight for accommodations for parents (yes, both male and female parents) in parental leave, subsidized daycare, part-time and rational full-time schedules, living wages, public education, and more.

                  Why are marriages falling apart? The simple answer is that it’s really complicated. Feminism definitely contributes, but that’s not a bad thing. Women dependent on husbands for money is a bad thing. Women shackled to abusive or uncaring men, or even just men they no longer love, is a bad thing. Men shackled to abusive or uncaring women, or just women they no longer love, is also a bad thing. As for custody and alimony- feminists would love to see both parents treated equally. They really would. We could start by making sure rapists can’t sue for custody and that people convicted of domestic abuse are denied custody. As for battlefields- who do you think has been fighting to see women given the opportunity to serve on the front lines? The misogynists? We won that fight, dammit, and I will not let you claim that feminists opposed equal opportunity in the military when they actually fought long and hard for it.

                  So you, with your stereotyping of feminists as hateful, vengeful, crybaby bitches, can just fucking shut it. If you have logical arguments against feminism, trot them out, because what you have right now is a lot of unjustified whining and stereotyping right out of the 1880s (the only women working for suffrage were bitter, hysterical, and unable to get a man, they said).

                • martha_xyz

                  second wave and third wave feminism is also why Valarie Solenas types of craps took birth on this planet.Those craps asserted that ‘male is just a walking dildo for satusfaction of females. He should eradicated[sic]‘.
                  This feminism also why: if a man commits adultery out of marraige , then I can sue him . But If I as a female commit adultery out of marraige, then he cant sue me, he can sue only my lover. I do not see it as equality.
                  If planet is so good for our men, then why are they doing suicide multiple times of the females?
                  Let us also check the fact that as per official statistics, Domestic Violence on males is being perpetrated in half of the households, and they have no support.
                  Let us also remember that when Erin prezzey who established first shelters for batterred women from Domestic Violence, she said that half of the women who came there are themselves abusive and are very much violent. Then at that time, why Ms Erin Prizzey was given bomb threats, does not that assert her very statement- that many among us are too violent.
                  I am very clear that Feminism is just hate psychology . It promotes a gang of people , who cant fight on merit, but just suffer from victimhood syndrome. They constantly cry how the world is unfair to them. And they constantly ignore the fact this world is equally cruel to the other side too. Millions of men, including my grandfather, was killed while fighting on frontlines of World War II. If grandmother was not sitting idle, and was taking care (an important step) of us nicely at home; then grandfather was also not sitting idle at front. He gave his life. Billions of males have given their life since time immemorial , while protecting their tribe. And no , just by having females on power the violence will not stop, as is clear from the those of Hillary Clinton , Queen Victoria who are equally started cruel wars.
                  You sound as if, feminism is a God’s word and nobody is allowed to criticise it. If you are an atheist, then please do not appoint a new uncriticisable God to yourself that is ‘feminism’

                  Feminists want free easy pass to everything without any duty on their side. Their main weapon is crying victimhood. They have spread propaganda, lies, hate and nothing else.
                  Andrea Dworkin, the feminist, was equally mentally sick as much the male supremacists. Feminazis are a real piece of hypocrisy.
                  You yourself do a favour and WATCH this youtube channel
                  http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat
                  AND UNDERSTAND THAT WHY THERE ARE SO MANY WOMEN WHO OPPOSE FEMINAZIS VEHEMENTLY,and then you will start on a journey of enlightened and become free of this iditotic PARASITIC hate-psychology.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  If you were to retype your post in English, with proper paragraph breaks, I would read it. I am not struggling through an ungrammatical wall of text that I am quite sure will just enrage me.

                • AntonioPeYangIII

                  [Why our more and more marraiges are failing. Why one third of father's are now living separate. Good men now afraid of committing themselves due to alimony fear. We women do not want quality, where it does not suit us, are we prepared to be treated equals in child custody matters, alimony payments, frontline wars. No. We oppose ERA, and then say that we want equality. ]

                  Now where have I heard all of these arguments before…

                  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Men's_rights_movement#Various_claims

              • martha_xyz

                @Feminerd: There are Good men, Bad men. There are Good women, Bad women.
                But, Feminism tries to make everybody believe that There are no Good Men and there are no bad women. They “generalize” our beloved fathers (men) as “all are evil”. I have got as much lovable men around , as much lovable females around me. There are cunning men and cunning women both around me. Feminism is the worst nazi thing to happen on this earth.
                DO NOT TRY TO MIX ATHEISM ALSO WITH THIS HATEFUL FEMINISM.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  No. Feminism says that everyone is a person, and that we shouldn’t treat them differently based on genitalia. That’s all. There’s nothing special about a penis and nothing icky about a vagina. There’s nothing special about a vagina and nothing icky about a penis.

                  Also, your stupid Godwin is not appreciated. If you have any actual arguments, feel free to use them. Otherwise, shoo.

                • UWIR

                  “No. Feminism says that everyone is a person, and that we shouldn’t treat them differently based on genitalia. That’s all.”

                  So, are people who support Affirmative Action for women not feminists? Are all feminists committed to eliminating policies that favor women when there are mutual accusations of domestic violence? Does No True Feminist say that women should have a greater voice in discussions regarding feminism? If feminism is nothing more than advocacy of equality, then why are there so many other issues that are put under the banner of feminism, such as paid maternity leave?

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Affirmative action helps make up for people not treating people like people. So yeah, I favor it in very specific and narrow circumstances. If we could get rid of misogyny instead, that’d be better.

                  Mutual accusations of domestic violence should be investigated as well as they can be. However, given that most DV is one-directional and even when mutual inflicts much more serious injury on the female participant, how would you suggest looking at it?

                  Women should be listened to, as any marginalized group, when speaking about their own marginalization. I’d expect a bunch of Hispanics to be very annoyed if a bunch of white people tried to tell Hispanics about Hispanic experiences, though white people can still clearly be allies and pro-diversity and equality. Same goes for men- they can be very valuable allies and feminists, but they do not and can not know what it is like to live as a woman (unless they are trans* or genderqueer, of course). So of course women are going to have a greater voice; if you want to be a male ally, though, I suggest you add your voice to the discussion though, because it will be welcomed. Somehow, given your post history, I doubt that (full of racist and misogynist bullshit).

                  Why do you think that uniquely-female medical problems should be ignored? That’s hardly equality. I actually advocate for paid parental leave for both parents, so *shrug*. Paid maternity leave for the medical bits (it takes about 2 weeks to recover fully from an uncomplicated labor and delivery), several months for each parent paid parental leave.

                • UWIR

                  “Affirmative action helps make up for people not treating people like people.”

                  No, it doesn’t.

                  “So yeah, I favor it in very specific and narrow circumstances.”

                  Then, by your own definition, you’re anti-feminist.

                  “However, given that most DV is one-directional”

                  That’s disputed.

                  “and even when mutual inflicts much more serious injury on the female participant”

                  That’s an overgeneralization.

                  “Women should be listened to, as any marginalized group, when speaking about their own marginalization. I’d expect a bunch of Hispanics to be very annoyed if a bunch of white people tried to tell Hispanics about Hispanic experiences, though white people can still clearly be allies and pro-diversity and equality.”

                  Not what I asked.

                  “if you want to be a male ally, though, I suggest you add your voice to the discussion though, because it will be welcomed. Somehow, given your post history, I doubt that (full of racist and misogynist bullshit).”

                  Two lies in a row! You say that my voice would be welcome, and then you make completely unfounded accusations of “racist and misogynist bullshit”. Obviously, neither I, nor anyone who disagrees with you, is welcome in your world.

                  “Why do you think that uniquely-female medical problems should be ignored?”

                  I never said they should, liar.

                  So, feminism, as practiced by you, is not the idea that “everyone is a person, and that we shouldn’t treat them differently based on genitalia”, but rather that it’s okay to be a lying, arrogant, closeminded asshole in defense of leftism, and simply sling accusations of racism and misogyny at anyone who doesn’t go along. I don’t know how you got it in your head that this is acceptable behavior, but it’s not, and by linking feminism with such disgusting behavior, you are simply making things harder for women.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  You got banned from LJF for racism. Your posting history is available by clicking on your name. I leave it for others to determine the accuracy of my claim, but I’m quite confident in it.

                  The rest of it is your standard response pattern. “Nuh uh” with no facts or logic to back it up. I’m sure your next post will be to claim that I must rebut your “nuh uhs” with well reasoned novels, and continue to do so until I run out of patience with you, at which point you will claim victory without having done one lick of research or actual argumentation.

                • UWIR

                  “You got banned from LJF for racism.”

                  No, I wasn’t, liar. Also, when someone says that you are hurting women because you are associating feminism with being an arrogant asshole who doesn’t tolerate anyone disagreeing with her, bringing up another woman who purports to represent feminism while being an arrogant asshole who doesn’t tolerate anyone disagreeing with her, really just proves my point, and shows once again how little grasp on reality you have. Saying “You got banned from LJF for racism” is just as legitimate as a creationist saying “Oh, yeah? Well, here’s a creationist blog that you got banned from for lying.” It’s a just plain idiotic line of argument. Furthermore, as LJF’s banning of me was based on outright lies about my posts and Libby Anne’s caprice, your using the fact that I was the victim of a smear campaign against me constitutes blaming the victim, something that you supposed feminists say you’re against, until it’s in your interests to engage in it yourself. I was the one who brought the banning to your attention is the first place; you first claimed that Libby Anne doesn’t ban people for disagreeing for her, and when I pointed out that you were wrong, you simply switched to claiming that it was my fault, and making up claims of racism to justify it.

                  “The rest of it is your standard response pattern. “Nuh uh” with no facts or logic to back it up.”

                  More lies. I back up my statements, when I think it will actually do some good. Of COURSE I’m not taking the time to write up a rigorous response to you. YOU’RE AN ASSHOLE. Instead of discussing the matter civilly, you’ve called me racist and misogynistic, refused to back those claims up, and then accused me of not backing up my claims. Why should I waste time backing up my claims when you’ve already clearly established that you’re a complete and utter asshole who has absolutely no interest in actually listening to what I have to say? You want to claim that somewhere on the internet there is evidence that I am racist and misogynistic, but refuse to say what it is? Okay, then, I’m going to argue that somewhere on the internet there is evidence that DV cases that solely involve man on woman violence are the minority, but refuse to say what it is. Until you actually back up your claims, I have absolutely no obligation to back up mine. YOU were the first to abandon the principle that claims should be backed up. YOU were the first to resort to personal attacks. And now you’re whining that I’m not wasting my time writing up arguments that you’re just going to dismiss out of hand? Fuck you.

                  “at which point you will claim victory without having done one lick of research or actual argumentation.”

                  What bald hypocrisy.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I saw the posts you got banned for. They were unquestionably racist. The fact that you don’t see them as racist is meaningless- they were. And that posting history is available to everyone. You will note, however, that I have refrained from calling you a racist or a misogynist. I have said you have made many posts that were racist and misogynist, and they were. I’ll let people draw their own conclusions from there.

                  And yeap, you’re responding exactly how I expected. “Why do I have to back up my posts with facts? Won’t insults do?” Whining isn’t attractive in 2-year-olds, and it’s even less attractive in grown men.

                • UWIR

                  “I saw the posts you got banned for. They were unquestionably racist.”
                  So, just sticking with argument by assertion, are you?

                  “The fact that you don’t see them as racist is meaningless- they were.”
                  The fact that you claim they are racist is meaningless. The only thing that matters is whether they are racist, which is a matter that you adamantly refuse to offer any evidence for.

                  “And that posting history is available to everyone.”
                  And the websites that assert that DV is bidirectional are available to anyone.

                  “You will note, however, that I have refrained from calling you a racist or a misogynist. I have said you have made many posts that were racist and misogynist, and they were.”
                  So, refuge in nitpicking?

                  “And yeap, you’re responding exactly how I expected. “Why do I have to back up my posts with facts? Won’t insults do?” Whining isn’t attractive in 2-year-olds, and it’s even less attractive in grown men.”

                  Again, bald hypocrisy. You are the one resorting to insults, not me. If you want to join the world of adults and back up your claims, let me know. Otherwise, go away. Until you either back up your outrageous claims or apologize for your complete lack of basic decency, I owe neither you, nor your posts, any respect at all. You don’t get to make deeply offensive posts and then complain about people not wasting their time trying to argue with you.

                  You claim I’ve made racist posts. Prove it. Piss or get off the pot.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I really don’t understand how you could fail to understand my point. One’s name is a rreflection of one’s culture. There is no “name your child ‘Trayvon’ ” gene. So, giving preference to Trevor is more accurately described as discriminating on the basis of culture, rather than race.

                  “You realize that your last statement is weird, right. Why would the color of someone’s skin make them more likely to shoot someone without cause?”
                  That’s a dishonest way of phrasing it. I said that we need to consider the hypothesis that black people are less likely to be justified, not that black skin causes them to be less likely to be justified.

                  “The only reason I can see to believe that is if you believe that knowing the color of someone’s skin tells you anything about them other than the way they look. You do know that’s pretty much a definition of racism, right?”

                  Libby Anne seems to think that knowing the color of someone’s skin tells her something other than the way they look, namely that black people are more likely to be convicted of murder. Is Libby Anne racist? The FBI says more murders are committed by black people than white people. Is the FBI racist? Or are you just spouting bullshit?

                  Constant questioning of a study showing unconscious bias in police officers- far more likely to shoot at black people than white people, even when white people had guns and black people nothing or something innocuous in their hands.

                  Constant recitation of the racist apologetic of “it’s not race, it’s culture!”, which means it’s race. A white person in the same bad neighborhood is treated less badly than a black person. To wit: people stopped and frisked in New York City.

                  So, yeah. A great many racist posts. I skipped the misogynist ones, but there was a lot of calling people names for daring to disagree with you that feminism was evil and awful.

                • UWIR

                  So, now you’ve moved on to the Gish Gallop? Let’s look at the first quote. First, was it cited by Libby Anne as the reason for my banning? No, it was not. So, right away, your claim that I was banned for racist post is shown to be a lie. Next, is it racist? No, it is not, and you didn’t even try to present an argument for how it is. It’s not enough to simply quote me and then declare the quote “racist”. Simply declaring statements you don’t like to be “racist”, rather than actually presenting a counterargument, is not a legitimate tactic. It’s a tactic of bullies and cowards. You have revealed that the post on which you were basing your claim that I wrote racist posts is, in fact, not racist. At least, not by any reasonable, mainstream meaning of the term, rather some bullshit Atheism Plus-type redefinition of the term. Therefore you have shown yourself to be either a liar or so divorced from reality as to not be capable of engaging in a reasonable discussion. And on the last quote, you could have had a discussion with me. You could have answered my questions. But you aren’t interested in having a discussion. You’re just interested in dismissing anyone who challenges you as a “racist”. A woman was kidnapped and viciously raped. And your response to this is to see an opportunity to hijack the thread to promote your radical Atheism Plus agenda of redefining the word “racism”.

                  “Constant questioning of a study showing unconscious bias in police officers- far more likely to shoot at black people than white people, even when white people had guns and black people nothing or something innocuous in their hands.”

                  That’s a lie. That is not what the study showed. And questioning a study is “racist”? Seriously? Your attitude of “Anything that I say has to be accepted without question, or else you’re a racist” is disgusting, and is an anti-skeptical worldview. Also, to be quite frank, smrnda’s responses to my questioning that study were really quite idiotic.

                  “Constant recitation of the racist apologetic of “it’s not race, it’s culture!”, which means it’s race.”

                  In other words, “This claim could, in certain circumstances, be used to justify racism, therefore you’re racist”. Yet again you show yourself to not understand basic logic.

                  “So, yeah. A great many racist posts.”

                  Then why can’t you come up with even one?

                  “there was a lot of calling people names for daring to disagree with you that feminism was evil and awful.”

                  You just can’t stop lying, can you?

                  You’ve made a bunch of ridiculous claims about my posts being racist, but you didn’t challenge Truthspew’s actually racist post at all:

                  And another little secret. People think Black and Latino people commit more crimes. Not true – most of the MAJOR crimes are committed by, you guessed it, WHITE people. We’re the biggest criminal class out there when it comes to murder.

                  Why is that? It sure looks to me that you’re the racist.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I’ll let your post speak for itself. Bye!

                • AntonioPeYangIII

                  [But, Feminism tries to make everybody believe that There are no Good Men and there are no bad women.]

                  Are you freakin’ serious?

                  I tune into Rebecca, Ophelia, Greta, and the Feministe blog, and a handful of other feminist sites in my country, and not once did I ever hear them even attempt to push this argument across.

                  [Feminism is the worst nazi thing to happen on this earth.]

                  Godwin’s Law, mate. Thanks for playing.

              • Marv

                Quick edit to my above statement, instead of saying mutually exclusive i was attempting to say “not mutually inclusive” you dont have to have both at the same time. I have issues with the feminists inside the atheist movement calling themselves atheism+ who are attempting to force their ideology on all other atheists, and who say if those atheists cant conform to their version of atheism they should just get out. I am all for letting people believe what they want to believe. When you try and force it on the rest of us is when I take issue. Same thing that keeps me away from religion.

                • C.L. Honeycutt

                  Speaking as someone who isn’t associated with Atheism +, you’ve very typically misrepresented the idea.

                • Marv

                  I base my opinion on observations of their key leaders and members actions. They are a VERY vocal and visible group and have no problem letting you know that if you don’t agree with them you are absolutely not entitled to call yourself an atheist.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  That is correct, they aren’t automatically mutually inclusive. However, if you don’t see racism, sexism, homophobia, trans*phobia, ageism, ableism, and every other discrimination out there as problematic, I probably won’t get along with you very well. I don’t want to kick you out of the atheist movement, of course, but I won’t trust you very much nor feel very safe in any convention or meeting you are running. Your attitude actually drives non-white, straight, cismale people away from atheism, because by upholding the status quo you are perpetuating a distinctly unwelcoming environment for the rest of us. Atheism is one thing I care about, but it isn’t the only or even most important thing. Don’t make me choose my activism.

                • Marv

                  The issue most of us are taking with the feminism trying to take over our conventions is that we see ourselves as rational and accepting individuals of all creeds and when a group of people start telling us that we are holding up a rape culture and harassing their members when we disagree with them (you are talking about a group who rarely take things at face value here) and then proceed to call everyone sexist there is going to be a backlash.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Have you actually done the “shut up and listen” thing? They have a lot to say, and the charges of sexism don’t come out until you just dismiss the facts presented you without even looking at them or putting them in context.

            • C.L. Honeycutt
              • Marv

                ಠ_ಠ

            • Michael W Busch

              No, they aren’t – as Feminerd said. And it should not be necessary for you to have this explained to you. Cut out the sexist bullshit.

              • Marv

                Calling an Atheist sexist because he or she doesn’t believe they should have to follow feminist moral guidelines in order to be considered an atheist(someone who doesnt believe in a god or gods[thats it, nothing else]) is kinda hilarious.

              • UWIR

                Issuing orders to other commenters is incredibly arrogant.

            • RobMcCune

              Mutually exclusive you use that phrase, I don’t think you know what it means.

              • Bitter Lizard

                I said almost exactly the same thing verbatim, but thought, “Naw, somebody else is bound to do it anyway.”

                • RobMcCune

                  Feminerd handled that guy so well I figured there was nowhere else to go.

              • Marv

                Hah, good call mate. My 5am brain was not working at peak efficiency. Edited to “not mutually Inclusive” Which i think is far more accurate for what i was going for.

            • Lea Tapp

              Really? Without a god to declare women inferior what exactly is your rational basis for considering them so?

              • Marv

                “Atheism is the idea that there aren’t any Gods. Once you start to attach moral teachings and dressing them up as atheism, and then demonize anyone who disagrees, you have the beginnings of religion, even fundamentalism. By all means, moral integrity is important, but do not hi-jack something that can’t logically have moral teachings under the guise of evolution or improvement, when it is, in actuality, paranoid, self-serving dogma.”

          • Eucliwood Hellscythe

            We haven’t demonstrated the opposite either. First of all, generalizing atheists as people who send death and rape threats, etc, is so dishonest and incorrect. You havent come across anywhere near most atheists. Its no different than people who think they can generalize a nation or a race – huge demographics -. So to say that atheists are amoral or have no morality is absolutely ridiculous. The only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief in a god. Other than that, we are individuals.

            • Bitter Lizard

              I think you’re sort of doing what she was in her worst moments with this response. Let’s all calm the fuck down before we kill each other. And then, y’know, let’s fucking kill each other. Because it’s funnier that way.

          • Tracy Robinson

            Being amoral and atheist has no link. Atheism is just a word used by theists to describe people who “reject god” or another way of saying “non-believer”. Being amoral stems from your upbringing and peers. Sexism is little different than racism in that the targets are disdained by the assailants for their physical appearance. An atheist acting amorally is just an asshole. A theist acting amorally is performing gods will. Also, people need to learn to distinguish between trolls and sincere posters.

            • Eucliwood Hellscythe

              Indeed.

          • martha_xyz

            @LeaTrapp: what is wrong with being anti-feminist and rape culture denialist? You are talking as if feminism is a new religion, nobody can deny this new Allah, otherwise feminists (the new jihadis) will kill the denier.
            see karen strughan(female and divorcee ) channel on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat) who is bigtime anti-feminist. I am female myself, and totally against Modern Feminism. So how does that myself make me of not respecting women.

            READ CAREFULLY:
            “Feminism can not claim to speaking on behalf of all women. Criticising feminism, is not same as criticising women. Praising women does not mean praising feminism.
            Stop behaving like a jihadi, Feminism is not a new God, whom nobody can criticize.

        • ARTL

          Indeed.

      • http://springygoddess.blogspot.com/ Astreja

        Why aren’t any of the “true” (fill in the blank) doing anything about the alleged phonies in their midst? One would think that the True Scotsmen™ would be a wee bit more protective of the integrity of their porridge.

        • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

          THANK YOU! I think this every time someone tells me some version of “we aren’t all like that”. If people would spend half as much time talking to the creeps in their own community as they do yelling at anyone who criticizes those creeps (even though no one said that they were all like that), they might accomplish something.

        • harbingerofdoom

          The same reason that good, decent atheists are not standing up against the militant , egotistical, narcissistic, superiority complex atheists of today, that are turning atheism into their own religion. Yes that are turning Atheism into a religion

          • kokonut

            Atheism is abstinence of any baseless assertion of deities. It’s the rejection of all religions that try to pander on threats of afterlife torture and fuzzy feelings in place of proof.

            If you think atheism is in any way, shape or form a “religion” then I would enjoy helping you relearn the definition of words so that you may better function in life.

          • anon 101

            This is BS. There is a lot of infight among atheists about the goals of the movement and the proper means to achive them. Please pay attention to reality before commenting.

            • Bitter Lizard

              There certainly seems to be a greater percentage of atheists who bitch to other atheists about rudeness than there are Muslims who confront other Muslims about terrorism and honor killings.

              Calling someone a “fucktard”: the atheist version of 9/11.

          • Samrat Patil

            let’s say atheism IS turning into another religion, what’re the lies you’ve found it’s been propagating? I agree with your egotistical and having a superiority complex argument. Some of us do. But militant and narcissistic. Care to explain?

          • ragarth

            And by ‘good, decent atheists’ presumably you mean the ones that shut up and help you preserve your fantasy that atheists are evil, amoral and nonexistent? Atheists stand up to other atheists all the time… on things that actually matter. We stand up to each other for the rights of minorities, equal treatment of women, and bad behavior. It seems to be the rare Christian that stands up to other Christians for these things.

          • militantatheist

            Yes militant atheists with all their WORDS. Incredibly harmful. Nobody kills in the name of Atheism.

          • Bitter Lizard

            You mean how we accurately identify stupid people as stupid and evil people as evil? Yep, totally the same thing as raping and killing someone. Religious apologists have such an acute sense of moral perspective.

          • http://springygoddess.blogspot.com/ Astreja

            Harbinger, I’m an occasionally raucous anti-theist who supports separation of church and state and opposes religious privilege in civil society… But if you ask someone who knows Me IRL, they’d probably also use the words “good” and “decent.” I challenge the religious on the Web because many of the ideas they espouse are neither good nor decent — Not to be an insufferable loud-mouthed schnook who makes elderly church ladies cry.

        • viaten

          The moderates don’t want to deal–some might even think “just as well to leave it.”–with extremists if they’re are significant in number and have already demonstrated what they are willing to do. And some will say, “We will do something, eventually.” Sometimes they do, sometimes they keep saying that.

        • Lea Tapp

          Right now atheists need to clean their own house before we tell other people to clean theirs.

          • Shane

            The problem is that “atheists” are a group of unassociated people. Therefore, atheists aren’t a group governed or defined by a set of principles. The only reason atheists have actually organized is to combat the negative stereotypes from theists. Without that common threat, sharing a commonality of atheists would be pointless.

            Your comparison is akin to comparing all blacks together in terms of the Civil Rights Movement. Their commonality, aside from skin color, was their oppression from racist and unsympathetic whites. Outside of that, they wouldn’t need to organize for any reason.

            The hypocrisy that the OP is pointing out is that religions are specifically binding themselves to a doctrine, sometimes one heavy in peaceful ideologies. If religion wants to espouse itself as peaceful it can, at the very least, practice what it preaches. The most vocal opponents to religious hypocrisy should be followers themselves.

          • Bitter Lizard

            Yeah, until we’re all perfect the rapists should be off the hook.

          • Asshat Mcgee

            My house is clean. There is no ‘we’. I have nothing to do with other atheists, I am not an ‘organized’ atheist. I just do not believe in god(s). I have no ‘message’ or ‘culture’ in regards to my atheism.

          • Michael W Busch

            And now you go too far.

            Bigotry and evil actions must not be given any sanction regardless of what group the person committing them may belong to.

            • Lea Tapp

              Then what are you doing to make sure our community reflects this passion for social justice you espouse?

              • Michael W Busch

                I take a little bit of an issue with your including me in the phrase “our community” – I am not a member of any atheist organization. I merely read and comment on a number of blogs by authors who happen to be atheists. I am a member of communities of blog commenters.

                And in those venues, I try to call people on bigotry whenever I see it – although I not do so as well as I could, and it took me far too long to realize the importance of doing so.

                • Lea Tapp

                  So you have no dog in this fight. You are neither a woman nor do you consider yourself to be a part of this community. Then don;t sit on that high horse and preach to me. I have reason to be invested. I do claim accountability for my part, how ever small, in this community. I don’t need you to armchair quarterback.

                • Michael W Busch

                  No, I am not a woman. I am a cisgendered straight able-bodied neurotypical white male who is accorded far too much privilege for the sake of those accidental attributes. But I have a great aversion to seeing anyone be harmed by bigotry. So I try, however inadequately, to help confront and dismantle sexism, ableism, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and all other forms of bigotry and unwarranted social privilege.

                  I did not intend to preach to you, and if I did I apologize. I only wanted to make the point that it is essential to confront bigotry no matter where it is.

                  And to avoid putting my foot in my mouth any more than I have already, I am done.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  You’re wrong, you know. Michael W Busch absolutely has a dog in this fight. He wants everyone to be treated as people- men, women, people of color, poor people, gays and lesbians, trans* people, queer people, old people, young people, neuro-atypical people, and everyone who stands at the intersections of any of these categories. That is what you claim to stand for. That is what you fight for.

                  Michael is a person. Thus, he is part of this. We all are. Don’t exclude people based on something as completely irrelevant as vagina or lack thereof.

          • http://springygoddess.blogspot.com/ Astreja

            We shouldn’t have to tell someone to clean house, Lea, if they’re already complaining about people they’d rather not have in their family. I’m just wondering where the complaining stops and the cleaning begins.

        • cipher

          Because for most people, group identification takes precedence over any notion of morality.

      • Renegade

        yeah , religion cannot be blamed in this case , In islam or in christianity both religions have banned the rape and have punishments for it (in islam its more severe than Christianity ).
        So dont make it a religious matter , ppls use religion to justify themselves , this bastard saying that he was told be God is just bullshit , they deserve death That islam has set a punishment for rape .

    • Anon

      Where are these mythical christians raping muslims? I’ve heard of muslims moving into christian communities and the rape/sexual assault rate skyrocketing, muslims abducting and grooming young girls for gangrape, mulsims forcing children to marry.

      You’re mythical evil christian seems to be nowear to be found

      • Beatrice Goutfer

        evil Christian nowhere???

        And the pedophile priests? And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

      • stop2wonder
        • Beet LeRace

          Oh geez, the 2 comments…

      • deviant24x

        What about the Castro brothers? (Ariel Castro and his brothers) They went to church all the time.

      • Cassiopeia

        ‘I’ve heard of muslims moving into christian communities and the rape/sexual assault rate skyrocketing, muslims abducting and grooming young girls for gangrape,’

        Cite your sources.

      • Michael W Busch

        Where are these mythical christians raping muslims?

        Bosnia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_Bosnian_War , as another commenter mentioned. Also some areas in sub-Saharan Africa. And pretty much any place where there is a large Christian population and a significant Muslim one.

        This does nothing to diminish the evil of what happened in this case. What it does do is show just how pervasive and harmful rape culture is.

        I’ve heard of muslims moving into christian communities and the rape/sexual assault rate skyrocketing, muslims abducting and grooming young girls for gangrape, mulsims forcing children to marry.

        Citation needed. Repeating unsupported xenophobic rumors is not helpful – it is pure bigotry.

    • Biorn

      Or, alternatively, a Christian reads this (me) and goes “There are some truly sick people in this world.” But when I see a similar situation in which the rapists are Christians instead of muslims, I’ll say, “There are some truly sick people in this world.”

      • C.L. Honeycutt

        Keep in mind that the type of Christian Soren describes is publicly seen (including here) a couple of dozen times more often. They dominate the conversation.

      • Michael W Busch

        Not sick. Merely evil.

    • kwwn

      Christians don’t hate muslims. They hate your lies and deception. Especially the poetic prose, called the Koran written to deceive all muslims. This is year 2013 bro. Law: you reap what you sew. When all innocent infidels are killed, muslims will begin to kill each other. Muslims will never find peace

  • more compost

    I am NOT defending Islam here. Not not not.

    These were brutal people using a religion as cover for violence and hatred. Kind of like the way most “christians” do.

  • http://MY.EMAIL.IS.yohocoma.at.yahoo.com/ yohocoma

    White European Christians, of course, have never and would never employ such elastic religious thinking when they want to do bad things. And haven’t you heard that America has moved beyond religious hypocrisy? We are super-advanced people, perhaps admittedly slightly marred by some human frailty, but on a completely different dimension from that of these backwards brown-skinned Muslim zealots (desiring their resources and geopolitical control is completely coincidental to our constantly making war on them – they’re just extra-bad people who need to be straightened out). I mean, these people are medieval.

    Americans don’t take advantage of their power position to rape foreigners, honestly. Our Tomahawk missile strikes won’t hurt nearly as many people as what is described here by Amanda Lindhout, and our media will make sure that the strikes are not described anywhere as starkly or graphically as Lindhout’s ordeal (at the hands of those savages!) is by the NY Post.

    Thus, it’s also completely coincidental that stories of Muslim cruelty tend to filter widely throughout Western culture in these recent years. America: superior culture (totally modest attitude about it though), clean technological persuasion, the best of intentions, and even our religion is mostly anodyne and irrelevant now, if somewhat goofy. You see, the West has evolved.

    So come on! Muslims are WAY worse, and we should keep focusing on them and their religion.

    (Note: If Dawkins were in Parliament, I wonder if he would have contributed to its remarkable self-restraint from attacking Syria.)

    • LesterBallard

      I don’t know of any beheadings in the US, or young girls being shot because they want to go to school, acid thrown in women’s faces, shit like that. Where would you rather live as a woman, Afghanistan or the US?

      • Eliot Parulidae

        The US does not experience those things because of a strong secular government, which Christians constantly complain about. Christian behavior in Uganda, Jamaica, and Russia shows what happens when you turn ‘em loose.

        • LesterBallard

          True, which is why I say fuck Christianity.

      • Tom

        “A lot better than something truly awful” is necessary, but not sufficient, to qualify as “good.”

    • Taz

      Muslims are WAY worse, and we should keep focusing on them and their religion.

      Are you claiming that this blog focuses on Islamic hypocrisy as opposed to Christian hypocrisy? That’s patently false.

      • Tom

        Um, I think sarcasm? Just maybe?

        • Taz

          I know it was sarcasm. My comment makes sense in light of the sarcasm.

          • Tom

            Oh, yeah – my apologies, I misread it.

    • http://parkandbark.wordpress.com/ Houndentenor

      Dawkins is on Twitter. Why not ask him yourself what he thinks about Syria rather than putting words in his mouth?

      • Spuddie

        I am still in awe that he is married to the one of the best Doctor Who companions ever and Douglas Adams introduced them.

  • DougI

    Thank god she was raped by morally superior Muslims who are devoted to a religion of peace rather than immoral, godless Atheists. If Atheists raped her then there would be no justification for it.

    Religion isn’t so much a belief system as an excuse system. Now when a fundy insists morals come from god just remind yourself that these rapists felt morally justified because of their religion.

  • Nemo

    As an atheist myself, can the commenters please not bring Christianity into this discussion, unless some Christian fundamentalist attempts to claim the moral high ground? What Christians believe and do is irrelevant here.

    • http://MY.EMAIL.IS.yohocoma.at.yahoo.com/ yohocoma

      What Christians believe and do is irrelevant here.

      Really? Christianity is the dominant religion of the culture producing the Lindhout narrative (which is essentially about the badness of another culture, one that this culture bombs and invades a lot). It takes a lot of naivete to believe that these stories, and their discussion, take place in some kind of aseptic, rational vacuum. The context should always be examined.

      Just look at some of the reader comments already – “fuck Islam”, etc.

      • LesterBallard

        I’m sorry; did you criticize me when I said Fuck the RCC recently?

      • Terry Firma

        For every post on this blog that criticizes Allah worshippers, there are a dozen or more that lay into sundry Bible thumpers. Your suggestion that at the Friendly Atheist, we somehow bathe the latter group in warmth and kumbayas, points either to an inability to count, or an inability to read — or both.

        Maybe you have us confused with Jihadwatch?

  • Eliot Parulidae

    My thoughts are with her and I hope that she makes a good psychological recovery from this terrible ordeal.

  • Chris

    Muslims are not the problem. These people are the problem. The fact that they get to waste matter by existing and continuing to do what they do angers me to the point of wanting to devote my life to ending their purpose in this universe.

    These are humans treating other humans as if they were piles of dirt. Not only are they the embodiment of all that is wrong with the world, they epitomize the highest form of degradation an intelligent being could achieve.

    • Bitter Lizard

      Observing that “Islam contributes adversely to a culture where rape is tolerated and the victims are punished” is not the same thing as saying “all Muslims rape people”. One of those statements is obviously true, and the other is not.

  • Chaucers Left Testicle

    I think it’s been well established that the majority of these so-called Jihadists aren’t ‘real’ Muslims, hasn’t it?

    • TheLump

      Is this your interpretation or is this what you think other Muslims believe?

      • Chaucers Left Testicle

        Whenever things of this awful nature come to light the news is awash with Muslim people claiming that they don’t believe in x, y or z, and that a good Muslim wouldn’t behave in a reprehensible manner.

        My own views on their faith are inconsequential.

        • TheLump

          Everyone’s views on faith are consequential. Mine, yours, everyone’s because we use our views to influence those around us and thus provide consequences. That aside, In my experience, all systems of belief tend to hop on the “no true Scotsman” line of thinking. Rereading my original question now, it looks a bit snarky. This was not the intention. I meant it straightforward. (text without tonal inflection can be a pain sometimes)

          • Chaucers Left Testicle

            That’s okay, I understand your point and no offence was taken.
            I do think, as you say, the moral majority tend to pin their faith or chosen belief system on the ‘not in my name’ mantra but it doesn’t work and doesn’t assuage people’s ire when something horrific takes place.
            My views on Islam are mixed, if I’m being honest, and not based on half as much knowledge as I would like, which is why I tend not to broadcast them. I do believe that any faith which offers its acolytes mandate for violence is abject, and obviously that includes Islam, but I’m also very apprehensive of Christians and their holier than thou attitude which seems to be based on ignoring their own nefarious scriptures in favour of casting a spotlight over those of other denominations.
            Morality is personal and not unique to humans, yet we seldom see higher primates attacking each other over whose magic tree is better.
            To my mind any faith or belief system should be about acceptance, non-violence and the betterment of mankind – nothing more. Anything negative should be, in this day and so-called enlightened age, consigned to the annals of history or treated as nothing more than a relic or point from which to grow.

            • TheLump

              Well put.

  • anon 101

    The problem is that in Central Europe and Scandinavia 80 % of rapes are committed by Muslim immigrants. Yet we are told that we (the non-immigrants) live in a misogynistic rape culture and have to get better. The reality is that we (the non-immigrants) life in a society that treats women relatively well but we are importing via refugees a misogynistic and rabid rape culture into Europe without even acknowledging the fact.

    • Tom

      Yeah, I’m gonna have to call out a big ol’ “CITATION NEEDED” on a claim like that 80% figure, and we DO live in a misogynistic rape culture and have to get better. Though, based on personal and thus anecdotal evidence, I’m willing to entertain the idea that you may be onto something about that “importing rape culture” thing, from places that seem to have a rape culture significantly worse than ours.

  • jumbybird

    Screw religion, what the heck was she doing in Somalia? I’ll be condemned for saying this but I blame the victim, it’s not perfect and you have to be careful where you go in this world.

    • Bitter Lizard

      Yup, rapists gotta rape, so to hell with women for making themselves so damned rapeable. You really deserve more condemnation than you’re getting.

    • Michael W Busch

      Learn this lesson:

      The victim is never to blame.

      You should be ashamed of yourself.

  • Lubo Faisa

    Yeahh… as a Canadian in East Africa at the moment and one who has been to Somalia more than once, she definitely somewhat initiated the confrontation, even if she did so in a polite manner. I highly doubt she was just sitting in her hotel room, reading the paper as they stormed in, and the fact that the article doesn’t specify the events that led up to her being raped leads me to believe more so that that is the case. She probably asked locals for dangerous parts of the city as the capital (still dangerous) is somewhat navigable. She found what she was looking for I guess. Not deserved of course, but definitely easily preventable. She understood her risks.

    “Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada advises against all travel to Somalia. If you are currently in Somalia despite this advisory, you should leave immediately. There is no resident Canadian government office in Somalia, and the Government of Canada cannot provide consular assistance to Canadian citizens in distress in Somalia.” – Travel Advisory from the Canadian Government you are given via email before arrival to Somalia.

    http://travel.gc.ca/destinations/somalia

    • Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

      Yeah, blame the victim. You should probably stay in Somalia.

      • Lubo Faisa

        She was a renegade journalist who was trying to make waves by defying common sense and safety guidelines. Not her fault for getting raped obviously.

        “Bored with her life and fresh off a New Year’s Eve epiphany, a 24-year-old Canadian named Amanda Lindhout quits her job as a cocktail waitress and decides to become a journalist. To get famous fast, she’ll start in Afghanistan, landing in Kabul in May 2007. She moves on to Iraq in January 2008, and is held hostage for several hours in Sadr City before paying off her captors.”
        She went on to go to Somalia, partially due to the lack of competition from more established journalists.

        Again, not her fault for getting raped obviously, but this is kind of a stupid, West-centric, overprivileged, and condescending worldview to have towards third world countries. Instead of using common sense for your own safety, you utilize the other country and its struggles to further you yourself and your career, without having much of an authentic interest in anything but spicing up your own life, for you (as opposed to, say, learning something being your goal, which is similar but a bit more authentic). And they’re all interchangeable countries to you– let’s try this country, and if not that one, let’s see if the next one makes me famous. It’s like people who are ignorant of a foreign culture but want to go to India to have some sort of profound experience so they can be a master of both worlds, but meanwhile they ignore the harsh realities of the country because their own desires are to serve themselves because all travel is mystical and world changing, blah blah blah. Without the proper education or precautions, it then ends up mortifying your family.
        She is far from the only one to do something similar.

    • IHateFatChicks

      And you would be correct.

  • oanda

    gotta love the morality of the people who post the picture of a rape victim.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      It’d be too hard to work out that she wrote a memoir about her kidnapping and rape and has posed for pictures since then?

  • Podd Socks

    how disturbing.

  • Bitter Lizard

    I’m already seeing on this thread the regurgitation of “What about the Christians?” following criticism of Islam, much like we always hear “What about the Muslims?” following criticism of Christianity. I’m also hearing the usual moral equivalence of atheists being rude on the Internet to theists raping and murdering people.

    A note of clarification: Christianity and Islam and all other forms of theism are fucking terrible, and so are the atheists who defend them. They are all part of the problem.

  • Miguel

    I love how people in the comment section decide to focus on the religious issues and fight over those instead of focusing on the human rights issues and criminal acts that were committed against this Canadian couple.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      I love how some superior people like to tell us through the way they stick their noses up that they aren’t able to grasp the idea of someone not bringing up every facet of an issue every time it’s mentioned.

  • Charlie Red

    Because they are not considered “real ” Muslims they will not denounce their actions.

    Foolish.

  • Sk3ptec

    Islam is not a religion, it’s a political structure (with a little superstition thrown in). We all know this. The goal is world dominance. Crediting Islamic acts to all religion is lazy, cowardly, and transparent. People do these things because they are corrupt, soulless, disgusting people. Not because they are religious.

  • Spuddie

    How is that theistic based “objective” morality working out here?

  • Rachel Warner

    The offenders need to be napalmed.

  • Bobbala

    Islam is a license to sin by the god of this world. Everything Jesus called sin, allah is pleased by, if it advances islam. Even the good a muslim may do is only to those he judges worthy, as a good enough and “right kind” of muslim, to serve his own pride.

    Islam is literally anti-christ and satanic.

    • Michael W Busch

      Islam is literally anti-christ and satanic.

      No, it isn’t. There is no Christ and there is no devil. Islam is simply wrong, and far too often used to justify evil.

      And your xenophobia and incredible degree of misinformation regarding Islam is noted.

      • Bobbala

        Note this …

        Matthew 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
        Matthew 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
        Matthew 5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
        Matthew 5:47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
        Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

        • Michael W Busch

          The Bible says nothing about the teachings of the various forms of Islam. After all, Islam was invented about 500 years after the youngest texts that went into the Bible were written. Go read the Qu’ran and some of the hadith, or at least Wikipedia’s summary articles on Islam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam , to correct your lack of knowledge.

          Nor does quoting the Sermon on the Mount do anything to support your assertions that there is a Christ and that there is a devil.

          So your comment was a remarkable non sequitur.

          • Bobbala

            I defined islam. You defended it, while disregarding the actual practice of it. It is a factually true statement that muslims may do anything to advance islam … lie, cheat, steal, rape, rob, kill, … even eat pork. There is no answer in islam to Matthew 5.

            Trust me. Al queda knows the quran better than wikipedia. If you’re not islamophobic, they’re not doing it right. “Moderate muslims” know this better than anyone. This explains the deafening silence from the muslim world at “bad muslim” atrocities. The only target ahead of the jew is the muslim that does not support the jihad, enough.

            Your statement that there is no Christ or devil is axiomatically moronic, as you have no way of knowing such a thing, outside of actually being the Creator. I’ll play. Present the evidence of your search.

            • Bitter Lizard

              Belief in Jesus is actually a requirement in Islam, where is he is viewed as a messenger of God. So they’re right there with you, buddy.

              • Bobbala

                Christians depend on the work of Jesus to make them acceptable to God.
                Muslims depend on their own works to make them acceptable to allah.
                They deny Christ. I rely on Christ. That’s the difference.

            • Michael W Busch

              I did nothing to defend Islam. As I said before, Islam is wrong and is far too often used to justify evil.

              What I am doing is objecting to your xenophobia and to your incredible degree of misinformation and lack of knowledge as to what Islam actually teaches. You did not “define Islam” – you have been saying things that are flatly wrong.

              For example: it is not “a factually true statement that muslims may do anything to advance Islam”. That is a complete misrepresentation of the Shi’a concept of تقية / “taqiyya”, which says that Muslims may deny being Muslim or do things against the teaching of Islam if they are doing so to avoid significant persecution. For example, it was invoked to justify Muslims pretending to be Christian to avoid the Inquisition in Reconquista-era Spain. Taqiyya is not a license to “do anything to advance Islam” – it is only a license to do things Islam prohibits if doing so is necessary for the individual welfare of the Muslim concerned. Nor is it a concept advocated by the majority of Muslims, since somewhat less than 20% of Muslims are Shi’a and Sunni Islam doesn’t endorse the idea. Ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya .

              Re. there being no Christ and no devil:

              You have the burden of proof exactly backwards. You’re the one claiming that those entities exist. Provide evidence for their existence (and no, the Bible does not count). Otherwise, they are as nonexistent as any of the millions of other gods people have invented and that you correctly reject.

              It also happens that Islam reveres Jesus (technically, Isa bin Maryam) as a messenger of God – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam , and asserts that Shayṭān is an evil tempter of humanity – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_%28Islam%29 . So your assertion that Islam is anti-christ and Satanic is doubly mistaken.

              Please go and actually learn what you are objecting to. And I am done.

              • Bobbala

                Your argument is with its practitioners and Mo. Read the article.

                So you stipulate that you have 0, no evidence, nothing to base your decision. You are just making a blind conclusion. God does not obey you, ergo he does not exist. Is that correct? I just want to be clear.

                Jesus is God, not just a messenger.

              • Bobbala

                Does the prosecution rest …

              • Bobbala

                Look, will you at least stipulate that your entire belief on the existence of God is that you know nothing and you have no need to hear any other evidence because they are wrong?

                How’s that logic working for you?

              • Bobbala

                … not even an “OK smarty pants, I’m an agnostic … You win. I don’t know. What makes you so sure about this Jesus? ‘

  • Men’s Rights are Human Rights

    This Lea Tapp person is a good example of the type of people who write and read these feminist-atheist blogs. Bloggers like Rebecca Watson, Greta Christina and the FTB crowd all write about the mnor infractions again them and try to make it out as mass mysogony. They berate and ban anyone who doesn’t agree with them. If you disagree strongly enough they’ll doxx you and attempt to have you fired.

    There is also the issue of men’s rights. When these people wanted atheists to get involved with social issues most people said “great, I’m in”. The problem is most atheists had very different ideas of what is a social problem. There were those who wanted to focus on issues effecting men. The feminist-atheists seem to think that helping men is mysogony. Some even deny that men can be raped.

    I think the problem with feminists is that they’re so closed into their little shell that they just dont see the problems men have. It always has to be about women with them.

    These people are actually much more dangerous to their “opponents” than anyone is to them. No one tries to get them fired, no one has ever laid more than a blog post on them.

    • Bitter Lizard

      Great. Just what this thread needed. I’m getting some popcorn.

    • Michael W Busch

      You appear to have confused “men’s rights” with “being a misogynistic authoritarian bigot who is never held responsible for harassment, death threats and rape threats, and never has his unwarranted social privilege challenged”.

      Don’t do that.

      • Bitter Lizard

        Men’s Rights Activists make me nostalgic for old-fashioned alpha male misogyny. Old school misogynists would laugh at these guys and tell them to “man up”.

  • pauleky

    Jeez…I hope to see half of the number of comments here when homophobia rears its ugly head in the atheist community. Not holding my breath.

  • Henry

    Just another reason that ALL religion should be illegal and destroyed completely. Once humanity gives up this silly belief in a invisible deity and realizes that religion is just a means of CONTROL by a select few, then we can truly grow as a species.

    • Michael W Busch

      Outlawing religion does not make it disappear – as the experiences of Revolutionary France, the early Soviet Union, and some parts of the history of the People’s Republic of China illustrate. And even if it did, that’s just replacing one coercive authoritarian system (“you must believe in [insert religion X]“) with another (“you cannot believe in any religion”).

      Religious beliefs are wrong. But for them to disappear requires education and persuasion over a long period of time. It also requires a secular society that prevents both religion and irreligion from being forced on people.

    • Bobbala

      Religion is man’s attempt to make himself acceptable to a Holy God.

      Christianity is man’s reliance on the work of Jesus Christ to make him acceptable. Just think Him, not me.

      Luke 9:23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

      • Greg G.

        Luke 9:23 is the version that came from Mark. Luke also has a version that is found in the Gospel of Thomas that Christians hardly ever bring up:

        Luke 14:26 “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple. 27 Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. NRSV

        • Bobbala

          There is no gospel of Thomas.

          Always go back to the original text. Translations invite error. The King James is preferred among English speakers, only because its mistranslations are generally known. It is not superior in itself. Keep your guard up. You got one mistake by a human translator making you think Jesus is the one that is pro-death.

          Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

          You don’t hate life itself. You hate your old sinful life. That is why you must be “born again”. This is not anything to do with re-entering your mother’s womb as Nicodemus thought .

          Luke 8:20 And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.
          Luke 8:21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.

          John 3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?

          John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

          John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

          John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

          Luke 24:5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
          Luke 24:6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
          Luke 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

          • Greg G.

            Do you not read anything outside or the Bible? The Gospel of Thomas is discussed and quoted in ancient writings and some fragments were known. A Coptic version of it was found in the Nag Hammadi find.

            Here’s a couple of pages that show Mark got his information from Thomas and not the other way around:

            Mark’s Use of the Gospel of Thomas
            Mark’s Use of the Gospel of Thomas Part Two

            Now where is the original text of anything in the Bible? The Bible was written before there was an English language. All we have are copies of copis of coiers of copis with increasing errors.

            If you’re going to talk about the Bible, you should actually learn where it came from, how it was assembled, and whether the ancient church knew anything about where their writings came from.

            Nicodemus’ mistake was because Jesus must have been speaking Greek because there is a homonym that sounds like it could mean “again” or “from above”. No other language has such a pair of words. Jesus was incapable of making himself understood or a Greek writer made up the story. There goes John 3:16 as it is part of that story.

            The Greek word translated as “life” is psychē. It is more like the essence of life itself that animates the body. There is nothing in the Greek to indicate the verse is about the past life. You should stop listening to preachers that just make stuff up.

  • Eucliwood Hellscythe

    Oh my goodness. No doctrine can justify this crap..its so obvious yet it keeps happening. And the “you are an ugly bad woman” stuff… just mind boggling…and making an exception for their rules here just to do bad things to them. What a load of crap.

    …okay. I read the comments and people used this article to lie about a forum they don’t like. Seriously? “Oh look, a rape! Another time to bring up the slymepit!” What’s the reasoning? How do you that smoothly? Do you say “I bet the pit would approve of this?” What boggles my mind is when people claim its right wing, or MRM, or misogynist. Yes, us pit women sure hate ourselves and even though most of us are left, we sure are right wing. Not many mras here, and people that think both sides have rotten apples, but the pit sure is an MRM place.

    The fuck.

  • Abhra

    Come on, their prophet himself was a rapist, and that too a paedophilic one. They are fundamentalist Muslims because they believe in the fundamentals of Islam.

  • KidDerby

    Personally…I could give a flying fuck about religion. It kills more people than disease does. If you do harm to another person…there is NO ESCUSE…you, sir, are a guilty motherfucker!

  • Mr Hajj

    muslims are good people. it’s their false prophet Mohammed who sold them out his moon crescent god and the idolatrous black stone crone-goddess. A legacy of violence from a prophet of lust carried on after his death. A deceiver of the muslim people with hidden agendas while preaching peace. Poetic prose from a mad man suffering from delusions in a cave and syphilis died from the poison of his own genocide. He stole everything he knew from the pagans, jews and the christians to make himself god just like satan.

  • Trish

    We’re all created by one god. God did not create bad… We are victims of circumstance.

  • Guest

    Tell me again why this women was in Somalia or in this area of the world? O, she and her idiot boy friend thought these were nice average like normal people. In this region of the world stupidity and nativity can cost your life. Sorry, I got zero sympathy for her. The Saracens are heathens and this is to be expected. Enjoy liberals, your people in action. Besides, captured by any third world heathen Army and look like this, you’re going to be a sex slave. Reality sicks idiots! They don’t do PC morons…

  • Guest

    In the modern day world Islam kills more people then bad water. Not religion in general… I just ain’t seen any Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus or Christians out blowing themselves up for their faith. When you do let me know…

  • matt

    NO true christian will ever do this to a woman of another faith. No where in the Bible
    is the true follower of CHRIST permitted to do this.There is no verse in the Bible that encourages Christians to do this.How many verses in the koran encourage this on women of another faith? probably ,many.