The Other McCain

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

God and Man at #Skepticon: Atheist @RichardCCarrier Gets Banned

Posted on | June 21, 2016 | 60 Comments

Richard Carrier mocks Christianity at Skepticon 2011.

“I am a feminist because feminism is simply the belief that women should be treated as fairly as men, and there is no factual or rational reason to want the world to work any other way.”
Richard Carrier, 2012

“The accusations specifically against Richard Carrier are, sadly, not so surprising to the Skepticon organizers. . . . What has been made clear by the recent discussions is that our attendees’ well being and comfort is put at an unacceptable risk by Carrier’s presence, and so we are officially prohibiting Richard Carrier from attending any future Skepticons.”
Lauren Lane, “Keeping Skepticon Safe Richard Carrier to Be Banned,” June 20, 2016

Women who hate God also usually hate men and sex, and the influence of feminism has proved the undoing of the “New Atheist” movement, as Ph.D. scientist Phil “Thunderfoot” Mason said in a December 2015 video: “Make no mistake, it wasn’t the religious who effectively destroyed the atheist movement, it was feminists, who infiltrated, derailed and effectively destroyed what, until then, had been an exciting and vibrant new atheist movement.” This was a subject I wrote about a few years ago after Rebecca Watson denounced atheist men who “sexualize” her.

Atheist women are soulless monsters incapable of normal affection. Hate is the only emotion atheist women ever feel, and they especially hate atheist men who are “creepy” — a feminist synonym for heterosexual.

 

Richard Carrier has a Ph.D. from Columbia University and is the author of several anti-Christian books. He spoke at the very first “Skepticon” event in 2008 at Missouri State University, and returned to speak at the conference every year thereafter through 2013. Carrier was also a frequent speaker on college campuses, where his appearances were sponsored by the Secular Student Alliance. Even as he rose to prominence in the pantheon of New Atheist celebrities, however, Carrier’s fame as an anti-Christian was becoming problematic. In 2012, Carrier declared himself a feminist. Around the same time, when he was in his mid-40s, he began having extramarital affairs. In 2015, Carrier announced he was divorcing his wife of 20 years, explaining he “had a few brief affairs, because I found myself unequipped to handle certain unusual circumstances in our marriage.” At the same time he announced:

I am polyamorous.
I have, and will continue to have, multiple girlfriends who are likewise poly or aware of my being so, and that will be the way of my life from now on.

Being “polyamorous” is what used to be called “swinging,” which has always been a notoriously creepy scene full of dangerous perverts — voyeurs, exhibitionists, bondage/sadomasochism freaks, etc. Carrier’s divorce and “coming out” as polyamorous came a few years after the Rebecca Watson incident, which caused Vox Day to mock atheist men:

No wonder they’re so furious at God. He created all those lovely women with those beautiful breasts and they aren’t even allowed to even talk to them.

Whatever else feminism may include, it always includes implacable hostility toward male heterosexual behavior, which feminists condemn as “sexism,” “harassment,” etc. Not all feminists are lesbians, but all feminists condemn men’s sexual attraction to women. Any male who expresses admiration of female beauty is engaged in “objectification,” and any man who flirts with a woman is guilty of “harassment” if she decides his interest is “unwanted” or “unwelcome.” (See “The Queering of Feminism and the Silencing of Heterosexual Masculinity.”)

Men cannot even be allowed to talk to women, according to the ideology Professor Daphne Patai exposed in her 1998 book, Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism. This radical anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology has become increasingly evident in feminist rhetoric. “Feminism is about redefining our social value system,” Anita Sarkeesian explained in May 2015, and elsewhere proclaimed: “Feminism is about the collective liberation of women as a social class. Feminism is not about personal choice.” The feminist agenda of “the collective liberation of women” requires that male/female differences be eradicated. “The gender binary is an entirely artificial and socially constructed division of male and female,” Sarkeesian declared in a 2013 video, denouncing the “false dichotomy” of viewing men and women as “two distinctly separate” kinds of human beings. This attack on the “gender binary” and the agenda of “redefining our social value system” are aimed toward a goal Richard Carrier probably did not understand when he called himself a “feminist.”

“Women under patriarchy are raped or romanticized — often both simultaneously. Partly for this reason, radical feminists argue that, under patriarchy, heterosexuality itself is oppressive to women. . . .
“Apart from the pressure it puts on women to suppress the lesbian side of their sexuality, patriarchal norms of heterosexuality define masculine and feminine sexuality in such a way that the woman is an object for the man.”

Alison Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature (1988)

“It is women’s subordination within institutional heterosexuality which is the starting point for feminist analysis. It is resistance to this subordination which is the foundation of feminist politics.”
Stevi Jackson, Heterosexuality in Question (1999)

“Heterosexism is maintained by the illusion that heterosexuality is the norm.”
Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee, Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012)

“Gender is a hierarchical system which maintains the subordination of females as a class to males through force. Gender is a material system of power which uses violence and psychological coercion to exploit female labor, sex, reproduction, emotional support, etc., for the benefit of males.”
Rachel Ivey, 2013

“All women are prisoners and hostages to men’s world. . . . Each man is a threat. We can’t escape men. . . .
“Being around any man constitutes a threat to us, because they are our oppressors. Being wanted by a man and him treating you as if you were his is inherently violent.”

Radical Wind, 2013

“Heterosexuality and masculinity . . . are made manifest through patriarchy, which normalizes men as dominant over women. . . .
“This tenet of patriarchy is thus deeply connected to acts of sexual violence, which have been theorized as a physical reaffirmation of patriarchal power by men over women.”

Sara Carrigan Wooten, The Crisis of Campus Sexual Violence: Critical Perspectives on Prevention and Response (2015)

Once you understand feminist gender theory, you see that feminism is simply incompatible with heterosexuality. Feminists condemn men as “oppressors” who impose heterosexuality as an “institution” that enforces “women’s subordination” through “patriarchal power.”

Richard Carrier evidently never bothered to study feminism before swearing his allegiance to the movement. In August 2013, when one atheist blogger complained that feminists were “attempting to redefine flirting as sexual harassment and sexual intercourse as rape,” Richard Carrier responded by asserting how pro-sex the atheist movement is:

Indeed, many of my friends in the atheist community are polyamorous, or actively participate in the BDSM or swinging communities, some even have orgies and sex parties . . . at atheist conferences! . . .
Polyamory and swinging and even the attending of orgies requires more ethical behavior and more careful attention to boundaries and consent than traditional sexual relationships do.

That paean to the “ethical behavior” of orgy-goers was about two years before Carrier’s divorce and “coming out” as a polyamorist. (A memorable reaction to that disclosure: “Dr. Richard Carrier, PhD — A creepy, dishonest hypocrite.”) Carrier’s behavior at atheist conferences, however, had caused others to label him “creepy,” as he admitted in a June 2015 blog post where he confessed to what he called “failures” involving “bad flirtation” and situations where he “behaved awfully.”

Now, if you were in benefit-of-the-doubt mode, favorably disposed toward Richard Carrier, you might read his mea culpa as motivated by sincere remorse over a few incidents of behavior that was mildly offensive or inappropriate — “relatively small and correctable,” as he said. However, despite his claims about the wild swinging “pro-sex” attitudes of the atheist movement, Richard Carrier had become a target of feminists who were not favorably disposed toward him and who did not consider his misbehavior “correctable.” Carrier allegedly crossed the line after a speaking appearance at Arizona State University on April 3, 2015, when a student named Amy Frank said Carrier “sexually harassed me and touched me.” This was reported to the Secular Student Alliance, and Carter responded to the SSA by email:

“I did express interest in a student at an after event. And I recognized she did not appreciate that, and I apologized to her at the time. If she does want any further apology, I will definitely provide her one, so do relay that if that’s the case. But I don’t want to bother her by contacting her any further without her consent. I definitely felt bad about it. I thought the interest was mutual and I was very wrong. I won’t be doing that in future.”

SSA has a “zero-tolerance” policy, and responded by removing Carrier from their Speakers Bureau, although he continued to appear at SSA-affiliated events at Ohio State University (Nov. 16, 2015), University of California-Riverside (April 23, 2016) and Florida Tech (May 13, 2016).

Let us be clear that there is a difference between “expressing interest” in someone and “sexual harassment,” however, when a 45-year-old man is invited to speak on a university campus, for him to “express interest” in a student is inherently inappropriate. Here’s how Carrier describes it:

I did not touch her. Nor did the SSA tell me she had claimed so. And indeed, our interaction was more ambiguous than she makes out. Apart from publicly flattering her abilities as I would anyone as competent, we had one private conversation in which she expressed interest in opening her relationship with her then-boyfriend (or husband?), but noted he wasn’t sure about it yet. In response to that I mentioned that if she ever does, I’d be interested in dating her, and she should feel free to contact me if that happens. She smiled and said she would. That was the extent of our interaction that could be described as sexual harassment, and that only at quite a stretch. Amy also mentioned in that conversation that her then-boyfriend reads her private emails and messages. Implying I shouldn’t attempt to contact her. Even though I hadn’t said I would.

Question: Why would a college girl tell a 45-year-old man she was considering “opening her relationship” (i.e., polyamory)? Was this because Richard Carrier had a well-established habit of bringing up the topic of polyamory in cocktail-party conversation, as a sort of prompt to see if any women he’s talking to might be up for some action?

What does a middle-aged divorced atheist polyamorist consider “appropriate” behavior toward girls half his age? A commenter at Carrier’s blog, “Jimmy From Chicago,” raised this issue:

“Even if we’re to believe you and not believe her, you’re still the creepy middle-aged man who goes to the off-campus bar, hits on the students, and makes everyone uncomfortable. To do this at an event where you’re the invited speaker is unprofessional.”

To this, Carrier responded:

If you think ageism and infantilizing adult college students is better, I think we just have different values.
Meanwhile, I have many successful relationships with college students.

And furthermore Carrier added:

Except for some rare mistakes I have already publicly discussed, I only express interest in women when they have, or when they’ve made an indication it’s safe to. . . .
Their age and your age is completely irrelevant. That you think it is relevant is ageist; that you think young woman can’t make decisions for themselves and don’t want to be given the chance to, is infantilizing them.

So, girls half his age are fair game to the middle-aged atheist who has had “many successful relationships with college students.” It is “agesist” and “infantilizing” these girls to suggest that the age difference matters.

Far be it from me to play the judgmental pharisee here, and we know there are college girls who have no problem with a “sugar daddy” arrangement, but do we respect people who engage in such behavior? If slutty college girls actually are chasing middle-aged men, do we respect the girls? And if middle-aged men are chasing slutty college girls, do we respect the men? Even if such behavior is mutually consensual, it’s still not praiseworthy. The problem in the 21st century is that feminism has created a New Double Standard, where women’s can never be criticized for their sexual misbehavior (because that would be “slut-shaming”), yet men’s sexual misbehavior can destroy their careers.

So, Amy Frank made her complaint to the Secular Student Alliance, and this damaged Richard Carrier’s reputation, but her accusation was not made public until this month, when Amy Frank discovered that Richard Carrier was involved in Camp Quest, a summer event for atheist kids. This prompted Amy Frank to go public — big time:

Richard Carrier, the man who sexually harassed me and touched me a year ago after speaking at ASU is now an official employee of this organization. Camp Quest and the Secular Student Alliance are partners, and fully aware of what transpired last year. I’m not even close to being his only victim, and there are even more victims of other speakers of the SSA.
Want to know why he continues to be involved after being banned from being an SSA speaker? He is dating the wife of the Executive Director of the Secular Student Alliance. This woman is the head of Camp Quest.
Corrupt people continue to destroy what could be wonderful organizations. I am officially BOYCOTTING the national Secular Student Alliance until their leadership is completely dismantled. Students deserve to have an organization capable of handling sexual harassment and assault, with no conflicts of interest. Not only is abuse fairly common at SSA events, but the organization itself goes out of their way to undermine the reports of its very own members’ trauma.
I’ve held my tongue far too long. No more sweeping this shit under the rug. Time to own the fuck up and face the music. The victims have had enough.

Some would find the words “victim” and “trauma” here a bit much. However creepy and inappropriate Richard Carrier’s behavior may have been, what “trauma” is involved in brushing off a guy’s pickup line?

Ah, but remember feminist theory? All women are victims of “a hierarchical system which maintains the subordination of females as a class” through “violence and psychological coercion.” Feminism is about “resistance” to “women’s subordination within institutional heterosexuality.” Therefore, if a middle-age atheist guy tries to pick up a college atheist girl, she is a “victim” who suffers “trauma.”

THE PATRIARCHY IS OPPRESSING HER!

The many traumatized victims of Richard Carrier’s oppression have united, and he has now been banned from attending any future Skepticon, and his posting privleges at Free Thought Blogs have been suspended. He is now persona non grata in the atheist movement. This renders highly ironic the subject of a campus speech Richard Carrier gave in April:

Is Feminism Evil? What Feminism Really Is
& Why Movement Atheism Needs More of It

The internet has spread a mythology of sexism and misogyny that is now predominantly embraced by atheists, impeding understanding, and progress towards women’s equality. Like racism in the South, anti-feminism is now spread not always explicitly, but often through code words, fake concerns, and subtle bigotry. And its effects are being felt within movement atheism.
Feminism is about understanding and fighting this, and finishing what the Enlightenment started. Resistance to this is not rational, as we can see by the illogical and ill informed ways atheists attempt to claim they do not harbor outmoded sexist ideas, and thus end up perpetuating the very sexism they claim doesn’t exist. Personal stories, documented facts, and published science verify all of the ways women are still being treated unequally, and what to do about it.

Yes, feminism is evil, Dr. Carrier. You learned this too late.




 

Comments

60 Responses to “God and Man at #Skepticon: Atheist @RichardCCarrier Gets Banned”

  1. NeoWayland
    June 21st, 2016 @ 6:52 pm

    I still think you’d be better off concentrating on one thing at a time rather than lumping everything you disagree with into one sticky mess that no one dares touch lest they be permanently corrupted.

    For the record, many polyamorous folks are into long-term relationships. Casual flings are frowned on.

  2. concern00
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:01 pm

    Coming out as polyamorous? Is there even such a thing? Surely this is just admitting to the world that he’s one sleazy SOB.

  3. jimmyfromchicago
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:10 pm

    Carrier’s creepy. Still. “atheist women” != feminist, and “feminist” doesn’t always equal “social justice warrior.”

  4. Eternity Matters
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:14 pm

    Great take-down of feminism and atheists. They love to pose as being moral, but it is really just a front for them to feel good about whatever their made-up morality du jour is.

    And do any of these skeptics ever see how their non-stop moralizing is irreconcilable with the materialistic worldview? On their own reasoning the universe is nothing but matter in motion (ignoring where it “miraculously” came from, of course). So at no point did colliding molecules produce something called morality. It would just be a fiction of our evolution.

    If that sounds like nonsense, it is because it is nonsense. But it is the (il)logical conclusion of their worldview. Their worldview can’t ground a transcendent morality yet they can’t go three sentences without sounding like a whiny, bad preacher.

  5. Guest
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:23 pm

    “I’m telling the truth. I swear to God!” – Richard Carrier

    I am very shocked to discover an atheist with no scruples.

  6. RS
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:25 pm

    Marginally related: I note he calls himself Dr. Richard Carrier based upon his Ph.D. N.B. only douchebags do that outside of academic contexts. My wife has one and never introduces herself as “doctor.” The appellation “doctor” (or professor) is only used with students in class or in a professional setting. People who use them otherwise typically are very insecure in my experience and tedious in the extreme.

  7. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:28 pm

    http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2015/12/16/18/pg-16-teeth-1.jpg Did Richard C Carrier get banned over too much mojo or poor dental hygiene?

  8. RS
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:38 pm

    The existence of morality is something which continually flummoxes the materialist, simply because what humans generally consider “moral” behavior is at odds with the Darwinian evolutionary imperative. The Materialist will respond with some nonsense about “cooperation,” but cannot answer the question why morality obtains when survival–whether individual or species–necessitates that it be jettisoned. Stated differently, what evolutionary benefit to proscriptions against murder, theft, lying and the like is there if those activities can guarantee my own and my descendants’ survival? I’ve often asked atheists whom they’d rather meet in the midst of a food riot? The devout Christian for whom morality is transcendent and independent of exigent circumstances or the materialist whose “morality” is tempered by the machinations of Darwinism? Not surprisingly, they’ve all changed the subject.

  9. Eternity Matters
    June 21st, 2016 @ 7:57 pm

    Great question to ask them!

  10. NeoWayland
    June 21st, 2016 @ 9:16 pm

    I’m not disputing that the guy is a major scumbag. And yes I agree with RSM, a one-night stand with a girl half your age isn’t about the relationship, it’s about sex.

    But blaming polyamory? You might as well blame him for being male. Or being “white.” Or for wearing shoes.

  11. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 21st, 2016 @ 9:49 pm

    Shoes are not the issue.

  12. Daniel Freeman
    June 21st, 2016 @ 10:03 pm

    The number of self-proclaimed feminists who are willing to publicly disagree with SJWs can be counted on one hand, and IIRC this particular Dick proclaimed himself the “intellectual cannon” that would white-knight for m’lady Atheism+ and shoot down all those nasty anti-feminists for her.

  13. NeoWayland
    June 21st, 2016 @ 10:09 pm

    Neither is polyamory.

    His behavior is. Sex without an emotional connection is just another form of masturbation.

    I bet he can’t tell you all the names of the “girls” he has had “relationships” with.

  14. Daniel Freeman
    June 21st, 2016 @ 10:31 pm

    My bad, it was “intellectual artillery.” Still, what a douche.

  15. Finrod Felagund
    June 21st, 2016 @ 10:35 pm

    I’m about 2 years older than this guy. I wouldn’t get involved with a college student because I don’t have a lot in common with them– they don’t even remember Bill Clinton’s Presidency.

  16. robertstacymccain
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 12:22 am

    What is the difference between (a) screwing whoever you want to screw, and (b) polyamory? Well, calling it “polyamory” sounds intellectual — by giving it a fancy name, you make it seem like a sexual orientation in its own right. But is “polyamory” anything different than fucking around? Not really. What horny teenagers do is fucking around, but when a 45-year-old Ph.D. does it, he calls it “polyamory.”

    Pardon my use of Anglo-Saxon, but for some reason,, it has a healthy honesty to it that the Latinate “polyamory” lacks.

  17. concern00
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 12:54 am

    Couldn’t agree more. His claim to be ‘polyamorous’ is just an attempt to intellectualize his sleazy and perverted behavior. I’m sure he’d love to have his ‘P’ added to the alphabet soup.

  18. concern00
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 12:54 am

    I thought Bill was one of their sexual gods…

  19. DeadMessenger
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 1:16 am

    I vote mojo.

  20. DeadMessenger
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 1:23 am

    I’m going to go out on a limb here, NW, and state for the record that I believe that simple observation of human nature dictates that it is not “many” polyamorous folks that are into long-term relationships. But rather, it is “many” that are whorish pervs who apply god-like attributes and worshipful significance to their own inappropriately over-sexualized ego. Perhaps there are a few who are into long-term relationships. Statistics dictates that.

    Then again, define “long term”. There is the straw man, I think.

    Note: I’m exercising my First Amendment rights here while I still have them. This is my opinion, and I’m simply sharing it.

  21. DeadMessenger
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 1:26 am

    …his posting privileges banned at Free Thought Blogs

    Posted without comment.

  22. DeadMessenger
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 1:39 am
  23. Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Blind Faith Edition
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:01 am

    […] Other McCain –God and Man at #Skepticon: Atheist @RichardCCarrier Gets Bannedsubmitted by The Daley […]

  24. Did Atheist Reddit Save Her Soul? : The Other McCain
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:19 am

    […] recent downfall of Richard Carrier — banned from Skepticon because of sexual harassment allegations — inspired widespread celebration not only among feminists within the atheist community, but […]

  25. thesickmanofeurope_com
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:35 am

    “…I’ve often asked atheists whom they’d rather meet in the midst of a food riot? The devout Christian for whom morality is transcendent and independent of exigent circumstances or the materialist whose “morality” is tempered by the machinations of Darwinism? Not surprisingly, they’ve all changed the subject…..”

    Why would they change the subject?
    Surely their answer should have been: “I would rather that everyone else was a devout Christian….I of course will be free to behave in my own best Machiavellian interest.”

    So when I say:
    “..t is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God….”
    Or that
    “..money does NOT bring you happiness…”

    Would you believe me?
    Who benefits the most from your devout Christian belief?

  26. Quartermaster
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 8:53 am

    You can get Vox Day’s book “Irrational Atheist” free at his blog. It’s an excellent book that shows that atheism has no morality of its own, it is a parasite on Christianity.

  27. Quartermaster
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 8:57 am

    As a practical matter, what RSM cites is polyamory. You may like your definition, but both a and b are polyamory to the slugs that engage in swinging.

  28. Grandson Of TheGrumpus
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:13 am

    While yellowed teeth can be indicative of poor brushing habits, it is also the possible that the person was on daily tetracycline therapy for an extended period of years.

    By his age, he would be among the group where therapy to prevent a reoccurrence of acute rheumatic fever was accomplished by daily doses of tetracyclines— primarily to protect the heart muscle.

    It is no longer the medication of choice due to the emergence of a large number of resistant strains of rheumatic fever.

    It was also the therapy of choice for severe chronic acne and rosacea. I knew a child under tetracycline therapy for acne, (…so severe it completely covered her entire face, scalp, chest, and upper back… this regardless of her hygiene, which was good… from before her 15th birthday to a few weeks after her 19th birthday).

    BTW, besides the unbleachably yellowed teeth, under UV light your skeleton will brightly glow a pretty shade of yellow?green!

  29. DrGreatCham
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:23 am

    I remember debating him on Prodigy many years ago. He was a smarmy light-weight then, and still hasn’t learned a thing since.

  30. marcus tullius cicero
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:45 am

    …to be an amoral person you have to first, convince everyone that you are an atheist!

  31. Peregrine John
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:57 am

    Male feminists should pay attention to the name of their chosen ideology. Etymology matters, boys. I’ll believe it’s about equality when the name reflects it, and not before, mostly because if it became about equality the name would perforce follow.

    In other news, the pen name “Radical Wind” always makes me want to fart.

  32. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 10:20 am

    There’s a difference between anonymous or ultra-casual sex and polyamory.

    Polyamory isn’t necessarily an open relationship, it’s a committed relationship.

    As for what Carrier claims, in his case it’s the justification not the reason.

  33. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 10:30 am
  34. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 10:35 am

    *shrugs*

    I know of one poly relationship that has lasted more than 18 years. I don’t know that many marriages that lasted a third that long. And it’s scary to think of the marriages I know where one or both partners has had affairs.

    I’m not saying polyamory is normal, I’m saying that it’s not harmful. It should be up to the people involved.

    Unless the people involved are using the term to cover some pretty scuzzy behavior.

    ETA: Just in case you hadn’t noticed, I’m exercising my rights by stating an opinion. As per my usual, I am not saying there is THE Right Way, I’m saying that people should choose for themselves and accept the consequences.

  35. Jim Christian
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 11:07 am

    Feminism is a predatory hate ideology wielded by women to gain educational, employment and financial and “social justice” advantage from men. That’s all it is. It was never about equality, ever. It was about handing privilege over to women, period. More privilege they hold today I might add, than men EVER held, in the West, anyway. And gradually, they coerced the men into handing it all to them. At the same time, they welcome a culture, Islam, that will give short shrift to the notion of feminism, proving that feminists ain’t all that bright.

    And now, it’s over. Enjoy the decline, Gents.

  36. Watcher’s Council Nominations For 06-22-16 | Stately McDaniel Manor
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 11:51 am

    […] Other McCain –God and Man at #Skepticon: Atheist @RichardCCarrier Gets Banned Submitted by The Daley […]

  37. Joe Joe
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:47 pm

    I consider polyamory a grave sin under any conditions, but I do want to jump in here and say there is a difference between three people who care about each other (and may live together) and a couple picking up 3rd or 4th partners on the road for a one-off. It sounds like Carrier was doing the latter.

  38. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:52 pm

    But being male* and white sure don’t help his case.

    * Cis hetero

  39. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:55 pm

    Instead of just taking a bite of the cake and then moving on to the next piece, you savor it for a while and then move on to the next piece. Because sometimes the cake gets stale and you would prefer a more recently baked cake.

  40. Joe Joe
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:56 pm

    Feminism and atheism are ultimately incompatible because feminists are moralists. Their morality is built on its own peculiar tenents (women are the default sex, men are some very negative aberration); their own particular cosmology (goddess worship was primary and godess-hood was stolen by inferior male gods who co-opted and/or destroyed it); their own particular communion of “saints” (Margaret Sanger, the suffragettes); their own particular “sins” including the “original sin” of being born male (and white); and their own particular forms of retribution from public shaming to publish banishment.

    Atheist males are actually trying to escape moralist systems. The only thing they truly have in common with feminists is their shared antipathy to Christianity. The feminists actually have more in common with Islam and, if given the option, would love to enforce their own mirror image of sharia law on males.

  41. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:57 pm

    Liz Taylor has a series of marriages that were polyamory in nature. I agree Neo that is different than ultra casual sex, and divorce is a lot more common now a days, but there is something about making a commitment and sticking to it.

  42. Atheist Internet Date Beggar Update | Rotten Chestnuts
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 4:57 pm

    […] from “Skepticon” for sexual harassment.  Guess that whole “beg your blog readership for a date” thing didn’t work […]

  43. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 7:35 pm

    Agreed.

  44. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 7:38 pm

    I understand your belief, but I appreciate you acknowledging that a committed relationship is considerably more than a string of casual sexual play dates.

  45. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 7:44 pm

    *nods*

    Some of the poly groups I know have made a commitment, just not one recognized and protected by law.

    That’s one of the things that got me into trouble with the gay marriage crowd. They were pushing for same sex marriage, but they never seemed to be interesting in extending marriage rights to poly marriage or group marriage.

  46. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 8:40 pm

    Nonsense, now a days you can get married and get a divorce (a pre up makes it that much easier). The group marriage stuff is nonsense, but you could do that too with powers of attorney. You just make the case that the government should stay out the marriage business.

  47. NeoWayland
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 8:59 pm

    ?You just make the case that the government should stay out the marriage business.?

    Yes.

    Prior to the 1930s, marriages were registered, not licensed.

  48. THE LATEST WATCHERS OF WEASELS IS UP! - Angry White Dude
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:40 pm

    […] Other McCain –God and Man at #Skepticon: Atheist @RichardCCarrier Gets Bannedsubmitted by The Daley […]

  49. BooBoo75
    June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:53 pm

    Robert I am deeply in awe that you coined “auto-beclownment”. I am also going to use it frequently in the future.

  50. Jacqueline Mathias
    June 23rd, 2016 @ 2:27 am