The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The Misogyny of Atheist Dudebros and the Godless Misandry of Lesbian Tumblrinas

Posted on | November 23, 2015 | 102 Comments

Sarah is a 20-year-old social work student with a radical feminist Tumblr blog — adorned by a rainbow-colored Wicca pentagram — who hates men almost as much as she hates God:

Overzealous atheists are 9 times out of 10 annoying racist misogynistic dudebros but in my opinion it’s totally justified for same sex attracted people to hate organised religion as a tool that has been used to oppress us for centuries.
Like yes to a certain extent it’s people just using religion to justify their already existing homophobic attitudes, but to say that religion (particularly christianity) doesn’t perpetuate homophobia is just a denial of reality for the sake of not stepping on any toes. F–k anyone’s Sky Daddy who apparently dictates who is and isn’t worthy of dignity and humanity.

That rant caused another Tumblr user to remark that “you really hate non-religious men,” and Sarah further amplified:

Actually I think a very large number of men are already misogynistic and racist and anti-theism is something that attracts men who are already predisposed to those traits because it gives them a sense of power and righteousness as well as a persecution narrative. (Think Richard Dawkins and The Amazing Atheist.)
But you’re absolutely right, the intro wasn’t the point of the post so I’m not sure why you’re ignoring everything else I’m saying in order to focus on how I’m such a big mean man hater.
I find it interesting that all it takes is for me to mention misogyny and I get accused of man hating. You’re reaching buddy.

Sarah’s blog was previously called “lesbolution,” and before that it was “grrrlfever,” but now it’s “frequentlypolitical.” These name changes, we may suppose, indicate the ideological shifts resulting from her increased feminist consciousness. “The personal is political,” as Carol Hanisch said, and studying the Tumblr blogs of young feminists offers a glimpse into the process by which their personal problems affect their radical politics and vice-versa. Sarah’s discourse suggests certain questions:

  1. Is Sarah correct that men like Richard Dawkins embrace atheism because it justifies their own prejudices?
  2. If the need for “a sense of power and righteousness as well as a persecution narrative” inspires men to become atheists, doesn’t a similar need inspire women to become feminists?
  3. Why would a lesbian feminist object to being called a “big mean man hater”? Isn’t feminist ideology merely an elaborate rationalization of such hatred? Indeed, didn’t Carol Hanisch coin the phrase “the personal is political” to justify the agenda of a movement based on mobilizing women’s anti-male rage?

No one at Sarah’s university would ever ask such questions. Academia today is off limits to Christians, who are quite nearly banned from employment in the faculty. The Christian student in the 21st-century university never encounters a professor who shares his faith, for the same reason he never hears a professor speak a word in favor of capitalism, patriotism or heterosexuality. Perhaps not every member of the faculty is a Marxist lesbian, but if any university employee dared suggest that there is anything wrong with being a Marxist lesbian, angry mobs of student protesters would demand that this employee — whether a tenured professor or a janitor — immediately be fired. Academia is now a Temple of the Cult of Social Justice, the major idols of which are Equality, Science and Progress, and whose Sacred Rites of Devotion are sodomy, abortion and treason (not necessarily in that order).

Academia long ago chose sides in the Culture War, and our universities are now actively engaged in the systematic destruction of Western civilization. Bill Buckley tried to warn us with God and Man at Yale, but few heeded the voice of the prophet crying in the wilderness, and the intellectual apostasy has overtaken us. Behold! Now we have “Christian” bloggers on Tumblr who insist that God should bless their lesbian weddings. This blasphemy involves a diabolical phenomenon known as “Side A theology,” a heresy whose original author goes by various names, among them Beelzebub and Mephistopheles.

Well, neither the atheist misogynist dudebros nor Sarah the radical lesbian feminist believe in all that Bible stuff, but they all believe in Progress and at the rate we are progressing now, I think we shall soon reach our destination, at the end of a certain well-known highway that is proverbially paved with good intentions.





 

Category: Sex Trouble

Comments

102 Responses to “The Misogyny of Atheist Dudebros and the Godless Misandry of Lesbian Tumblrinas”

  1. JackLo
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 5:20 pm

    She should have stopped with, “9 times out of 10 overzealous atheists are annoying…”. That’s been my experience with 9 out of 10 of them, and some are downright insufferable, and vile. See @sensiblysecular for further evidence of atheist you’d love to mash.

  2. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:02 pm

    Academia is now a Temple of the Cult of Social Justice, the major idols of which are Equality, Science and Progress, and whose Sacred Rites of Devotion are sodomy, abortion and treason (not necessarily in that order).

    Wow, that’s brutal.

    Brutally accurate.

  3. Dana
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:06 pm

    The obvious problem for Sarah is that she intends (I assume) to go into social work, yet she has just admitted a thorough prejudice against half of the human race; how can she be hired for any position which requires her to serve males without prejudice?

  4. RKae
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:25 pm

    Equality: a myth and impossible goal (see: perpetual motion machine).

    Science: an utterly compromised and prostituted concept that doesn’t at all mean what it used to.

    Progress: a forced march to nowhere.

  5. RKae
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:26 pm

    Atheists needn’t be overzealous to be annoying.

  6. RKae
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:28 pm

    So science was ruled by religion up until 1973 when they suddenly (and with no evidence) declared homosexuality “not a mental disorder.” Am I right on that? Science never oppressed homosexuals – just religion?

  7. Quartermaster
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:28 pm

    That the sort of Femtrash coming out of those programs. That sort works really well at so called “child Protective Services” rescuing poor children form cis-heteronormative Patriarchal oppression (AKA destruction of families and children).

  8. Quartermaster
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:29 pm

    These days, religion oppresses science. That’s why they can get real mental illnesses removed from the DSM and introduce fake trash in its place.

  9. Quartermaster
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:31 pm

    They just need to “be.”

  10. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:34 pm

    Equality, science and progress are each just as socially constructed as is gender; but somehow the fact that “we” made up these ideas doesn’t negatively impact radical/elite opinion of their validity/efficacy.

  11. RKae
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:37 pm

    Actually, gender works because we didn’t invent it; we merely recognized the difference between people and decided to roll with it.

    Equality is the opposite idea. We recognized the difference between people and decided to fight it.

    It’s not working out too well.

  12. concern00
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:56 pm

    I don’t use religion to justify my homophobic attitude, I just use facts, science and medicine. Speaking of which, Taki has a ‘great’ article on ‘bugchasers’ today.

    #TriggerWarning gross homo behaviors
    http://takimag.com/article/the_power_of_hiv_positive_thinking-_jim_goad#axzz3sMVOJjBv

  13. RS
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 6:58 pm

    Actually I think a very large number of men are already misogynistic and racist and anti-theism is something that attracts men who are already predisposed to those traits because it gives them a sense of power and righteousness as well as a persecution narrative. (Emphasis supplied.)

    Let us ponder that sentence for a moment and bask in its patent absurdity. I seem to recall that the primary objection to Evangelical Christianity among Feminists is Evangelical Christians refusal to excise certain “problematic” portions of Ephesians, Chapter 5 which vex feminists to no end. (They like the “be nice” parts, in fairness.) It would seem to me, based upon those six offending 3.5 verses in Ephesians 5, that Christianity provides both the “sense of power and righteousness,” not to mention a decent “persecution narrative” more so than Atheism which merely provides an excuse for an early tee time on Sundays. Alternatively, if both Theism and Anti-theism provide such incentives and a theological prop for being “bad, bad, bad” males, then religion is irrelevant, isn’t it.

  14. Fail Burton
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:03 pm

    One thing secular liberals have made a mistake about is in thinking this ideology is in any way concerned with secularism or liberalism. The true problem resides in being any of the following:

    A. Male
    B. Heterosexual
    C. White

    There’s your devil in lesbian liberation ideology and one which keeps them awake with night terrors.

    On a side note, is there any way to calculate what percentage of gender studies courses have lesbians as administrators and teachers? There seems little better way of exposing what modern “feminism” really is than pointing about how what should be 1.5% is actually over 50%.

  15. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:08 pm

    Sorry, still not on board with this gender is not socially constructed nonsense.

    1. Gender is a signal.
    2. Signals are expressed in language.
    3. Language is socially constructed.
    4. Thanks for playing.

    Its such an elementary matter, how can it be such a point of contention?

  16. RKae
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:18 pm

    Men and women are fundamentally different. This is nature’s doing, not ours.

    All gender differences (in every culture across the globe) are outgrowths of this and recognition of this; as I stated: rolling with it instead of fighting it.

    I could also do a dick move like claiming to be amazed that people don’t comprehend that something is “an elementary matter.”

  17. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:43 pm

    Maybe PD doesn’t have kids? As a mother to kids of both genders, I don’t see how a parent could believe gender is a social construct.

    One reason is that when children are small, they spend far and away the majority of their time with mom. If social construction holds true, it seems to me that in infancy/toddlerhood, you’d think both sexes would then identify with the female gender. But yet, my son was boy-like virtually from birth, and my daughter was girl-like.

    Example: Being hot in FL, I used to take my toddlers outside in just their diaper. Once, I brought my 24 MO son in the house to change him, and found bugs (now mercifully dead) stored in there so he could play with them later. No pockets in diapers, you see.

    Two years later, I had taken my 24 MO daughter out in her diaper. When I took her in to change her, I found flowers stored in there for later.

    My son wanted trucks and to break things. My daughter wanted to dress up and sing.

    A friend had given me a huge box of boy and girl costumes before my kids were born. I left it in the nursery, and they could’ve played dress up in anything. But yet, my daughter went for ballerina and fairy costumes; my son went for fireman and football player.

    Not seeing any social construction there.

  18. RS
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:46 pm

    I recall taking our 18 month old daughter tent camping and it was a joy. No fidgeting around the campfire; did what we asked–the perfect kid.

    So 5 and a half years later we take her and our 18 month old son tent camping. He ate bugs. He ran into the creek. He did about a thousand other things which caused us to pack up and wait for another two years before trying it again.

  19. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:52 pm

    Eeyup. Pretty much my experience, too. And my mom once told me that I was the perfect, obedient kid, and my four brothers were like little criminals, always looking for trouble, lol.

  20. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:55 pm

    And I’d guess substantially over 50%.

  21. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:55 pm

    Men and women are fundamentally different. This is nature’s doing, not ours.

    Agreed. We simply describe nature’s variety.

    If we get too hung up on superficial stuff, this can get lost. Define man as bipedal and a clubfoot cripple throws a spanner in the works. Define him as thinking and any cognitive deficits present in the subject will spoil things. This isn’t a failing of any particular definition, its just part and parcel of the slippery nature of language.

    All gender differences (in every culture across the globe) are outgrowths of this and recognition of this; as I stated: rolling with it instead of fighting it

    True in a trivial sense.

    But so what? This is why I’m being snarky. If biological differences account for gender differences, then why are there intercultural differences in how gender roles are structured and expressed? Its simple: Gender is embedded in culture, along with language. Different culture, different expression of gender. Wear a skirt in Texas, you’re a sissy; wear a kilt in Glassgow, you’re fireannach. A clean-shaven man in the west is dapper; a beardless man in the islamic world… is asking for trouble.

    I could also do a dick move like claiming to be amazed that people don’t comprehend that something is “an elementary matter.

    Check out this emoticon:

    ?

    Do you like it?

  22. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 7:57 pm

    I rather say fake religion oppresses fake science.

  23. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 8:18 pm

    Your argument is bogus.

    A person with a clubfoot has something wrong with him. A person with a cognitive deficit has something wrong with him.

    A Texan wearing a skirt (unless he’s a highlander wearing his clan tartan to an event) is trying to attract inappropriate attention, and is therefore a freak, and has something wrong with him. A man passing on having a beard in a country where he could get his ass seriously killed for it is a freak, and has something wrong with him.

    Similarly, a male person claiming a gender other than male is a freak and has something wrong with him, and the reverse for women.

    People who have stuff wrong with them should seek treatment, and a person with a clubfoot or cognitive deficit likely has.

    The other examples involve freakishness for the sake of freakishness, and indicates some manner of personality disorder or mental illness, and at the very least should not be excused away by enabling idiots.

    On top of which, you’ve crossed the line from snarkiness to jerkiness.

  24. Ilion
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 8:18 pm

    People, people, people!
    .
    You believe yourselves to be conservatives — or, at any rate, anti-leftists.
    .
    Therefore, stop allowing the leftists to control your minds via the language you use.
    .
    The word is not “gender”, it is “sex”. There are no creatures, much less human beings, who come in “genders”.

  25. Daniel Freeman
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 8:46 pm

    Male and female are sexes, not genders.

  26. Daniel Freeman
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 8:57 pm

    how can she be hired for any position which requires her to serve males without prejudice?

    Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence.

  27. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:05 pm

    A Texan wearing a skirt (unless he’s a highlander wearing his clan tartan to an event) is trying to attract inappropriate attention, and is therefore a freak, and has something wrong with him. A man passing on having a beard in a country where he could get his ass seriously killed for it is a freak, and has something wrong with him.

    Inappropriate in a biological sense or in a social sense? Wrong in a biological sense or in a social sense?

    It ain’t DNA that makes a man put on a skirt or a woman wear flannel and combat boots; its ideas, imbibed through the culture.

    Likewise, it ain’t DNA that makes a man wear pants or a woman wears a dress; its ideas about how to get what you want through signalling.

  28. Daniel Freeman
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:07 pm

    BGS of GayPatriot has mentioned that HIV+ men now try to pass off refusal to have sex with them as discrimination. I don’t think he’s joking.

  29. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:10 pm

    “1. Gender is a signal.
    2. Signals are expressed in language.
    3. Language is socially constructed.
    4. Thanks for playing.”

    Not all signals are expressed in language. Gender is certainly not expressed entirely in language.

  30. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:17 pm

    “It ain’t DNA that makes a man put on a skirt or a woman wear flannel and combat boots; its ideas, imbibed through the culture.”

    Nope.

    Gender is biological. Variations on gender are cultural.

    Likewise with communication.

    The ability to speak and the propensity to communicate with various forms of language is biological. Linguistic variations are cultural.

  31. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:20 pm

    Signalling is communication between individuals.

    Communication between individuals without language?

    Not all language is written/spoken.

  32. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:23 pm

    Gender is linguistic
    Sex is biological

  33. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:24 pm

    There are practical aspects to gender differences that have nothing to do with signals, whether those signals are expressed in language or not. But I think we’re at risk of splitting hairs now.

  34. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:27 pm

    Re: practical aspects to gender differences that have nothing to do with signals

    if you propose, I will endeavor to dispose

  35. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:28 pm

    In stark contrast to the little girl, the little boy picks up the Barbie doll and uses the doll as a sword. This is not linguistic. This is not cultural. This is biological. Culture can have a profound influence, but biology is the foundation.

  36. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:31 pm

    So you’re claiming mental illness is imbibed through culture? If so, you’d be the only person I’ve ever heard of who thinks that. Stupidity, yes. Mental illness, no.

  37. DeadMessenger
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:37 pm

    You sound like Phoenix Wright.

  38. robertstacymccain
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:39 pm

    Anyone who has raised both sons and daughter understands this. Boys are simply more trouble — more rambunctious, prone to mischief — and this is not a “social construct.” While I understand and acknowledge that there is considerable variation and overlap (male and female are not polar opposite in their traits, and are both fully human), the average group differences are significant. These differences don’t seem so very apparent to academics and intellectuals, because sitting around an office — getting paid for reading, writing and talking — is something both men and women are capable of doing. But most of the world’s work is not done in academia, and the intellectuals can’t seem to understand why the rest of us don’t “get it” — why we don’t accept their egalitarian dogma.

    Anyways … that was a rant.

  39. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:40 pm

    Attire?

    Mannerisms?

    Pronouns?

  40. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:52 pm

    You can’t be maladaptive outside of any social context, can you?

    What’s insane in one culture may be de rigueur in another.

  41. Durasim
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:58 pm

    We don’t have to take BGS’s word for it. We now hear it from the HIV+ homosexuals themselves and their cheerleaders.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstrudwick/this-hiv-positive-guy-gave-the-perfect-slapdown-to-someone-w#.eor2mmdGY

  42. Finrod Felagund
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 9:58 pm

    If I was to signal with my gender in public, I’d get arrested.

  43. Benschachar
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:00 pm

    I gotta say, the bitch fight between atheists and radfems amuses me to no end.
    I just wish youtube didn’t think I was some anti-theist douche like AA or Dawkins.

  44. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:04 pm

    Q1: are statistical measures of average-ness (mean, median mode) socially constructed?

    Q2: are statistical measures of average-ness meaningful and useful?

  45. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:09 pm

    I assume you’re trying to make a point.

  46. Matt_SE
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:11 pm

    Of course…a social worker.

  47. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:12 pm

    Assume away

  48. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:19 pm

    What about the practical aspects to gender differences that have nothing to do with signaling?

    Go ahead: split them hairs

  49. Jason Lee
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:20 pm

    I think most of the people on this thread are going to go with the Merriam-Webster definition of gender.

    a : sex
    b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

    The SJW concept of gender is maladaptive — in most cultures.

  50. Prime Director
    November 23rd, 2015 @ 10:30 pm

    Most of you can be wrong about this one thing, that’s fine

    BTW You forgot this one from merriam webster:

    grammar : one of the categories (masculine, feminine, and neuter) into which words (such as nouns, adjectives, and pronouns) are divided in many languages