The Other McCain

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

‘I Was Drunk. After That, It All Gets Kind of Blurry. … I Know We Had Sex.’

Posted on | September 15, 2014 | 45 Comments

The headline is a quote from atheist Alison Smith, describing her hookup with atheist Michael Shermer at a 2008 atheist conference in Las Vegas, in a BuzzFeed article headlined:

Will Misogyny Bring Down The Atheist Movement?

My headline is better. Just sayin’ . . .

Also, the BuzzFeed headline is asking the wrong question. It should be, “Will Feminism Bring Down The Atheist Movement?” The problem is not necessarily that atheist men are feral swine — are we surprised? — but rather that women are attending conferences with these feral swine and expecting to be treated like ladies. Or treated like “equals,” even if they are manifestly not equal.

Men started this atheist conference — known as “The Amazing Meeting” — paying their own money to fund it, and then the women showed up and wanted to change the rules. The atheist women complained that they were not adequately represented on the panels, despite the fact that, y’know, the big-name attractions were all men who had done actual work that mattered to the atheist movement.

And then, in 2008, this “incident” happened: Alison Smith, 26 at the time, met the eminent atheist Michael Shermer, 54 at the time, at a party during this conference in Las Vegas. Even among the feral swine of atheism, it seems, Shermer has a reputation as an aggressive lecher. Anyway, Smith and Shermer left the party at the Flamingo, when to another party at Caesar’s Palace and then, after Smith got sloppy drunk, she and Shermer returned to the Flamingo and ended the evening in Shermer’s hotel room, where he boned her.

As I said, are we surprised?

The BuzzFeed article goes on and on about how this drunken Vegas hookup  in 2008 is emblematic of A Larger Problem, namely the “misogyny” in a movement which is and always has been male-dominated. But some men in the movement wanted to attract more women (so they could get them drunk and bone them, obviously) and it seems that, when young atheist women did begin showing up at these events, they did not consider it particularly flattering that feral swine like Michael Shermer wanted to bone them.

Having written about this last year (“No Love for the Godless,” American Spectator), I don’t have much more to say, except to point out the obvious question: Why would these women assume that an egalitarian ethos must prevail in the atheist community? Doesn’t this egalitarian assumption reflect the pervasive influence of feminism in our culture — especially in our higher education system — so that every “movement” must now also be a feminist movement? Every institution is expected to operate on a de facto feminist quota system so that unless a certain percentage of seats are filled by women, the accusation of sexist discrimination is automatic.

These egalitarian assumptions are illogical and, while I certainly don’t endorse the misbehavior of feral swine like Michael Shermer, I’m amazed that these atheists — who pride themselves on their strictly scientific view of the world — don’t have the brains or courage to challenge the quota-minded radical feminist assumptions that some atheist women are attempting to smuggle into their movement.

Of course, all these atheists are going to hell, which will be a very equal place, because there will be so many feminists there.



45 Responses to “‘I Was Drunk. After That, It All Gets Kind of Blurry. … I Know We Had Sex.’”

  1. T.C.
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:01 pm

    Wow. She was 26? And the old lecher was 54? High five! Woot!
    So was she a good-looking 26 or was that the reason he got really drunk?

  2. Quartermaster
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:03 pm

    Since I have not seen a pic of her, I can’t respond on that. However, I’d say that I would have to get pretty soused to want to have sex with a Feminist. All the higher intellectual functions scream warnings about such things.

  3. Quartermaster
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:05 pm

    Hell will be equal? Hardly. Jesus strongly implies that the final punishment will be different for everyone. This is to be expected as God is quite patriarchal.

  4. RS
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:09 pm

    1950: I had a drunken tryst in a hotel room. I keep it to myself and pretend it never happened.

    2014: I had a drunken tryst in a hotel room. Let’s post it on the internet and try to draw extraordinarily tenuous anthropological conclusion from a single, individual human mistake. Life imitates The Onion.

  5. robertstacymccain
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:12 pm

    Speaking as a 54-year-old man …

    No, forget it. I plead the Fifth.

  6. texlovera
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:12 pm

    “Of course, all these atheists are going to hell, which will be a very
    equal place, because there will be so many feminists there.”


  7. RS
    September 15th, 2014 @ 12:24 pm

    Legitimate question: Could you point me to those verses? Thanks.

  8. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:05 pm

    Sometimes things are best not said or posted.

    Which is why drunk blogging is definitely not recommended except by experts (like Stephen Green).

  9. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:05 pm

    I guess you have not lived till you have partied with the Skepchicks!

  10. Kirby McCain
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:06 pm

    Sounds like Smith is suffering from fucker’s remorse. How long before bragging to your buddies about boning these shameless sluts is a crime? And anyone described as eminent on the left is usually a swine.

  11. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:06 pm

    What ever happened to “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”?

  12. Kirby McCain
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:08 pm

    I know where the panties are buried!

  13. nickdqwk
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:29 pm

    Don’t take my word for it but have heard that Shrillery Clinton would make an attractive atheist.

  14. RKae
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:55 pm

    You know the old saying “Heaven doesn’t want me and Hell’s afraid I’ll take over”?

    I’ll bet the feminists have taken it over. Satan abdicated to them, because he knew they could make Hell worse.

  15. RKae
    September 15th, 2014 @ 1:56 pm

    The internet. That’s what happened.

    Nothing stays anywhere.

  16. Art Deco
    September 15th, 2014 @ 2:07 pm

    I think this is her:

    who pride themselves on their strictly scientific view of the world

    No, who have a pretense of that.

  17. Rosie’s Back on the ‘View’, Healthier, Happier… | Regular Right Guy
    September 15th, 2014 @ 2:30 pm

    […] ‘I Was Drunk. After That, It All Gets Kind of Blurry. … I Know We Had Sex.’ […]

  18. Steve Skubinna
    September 15th, 2014 @ 2:38 pm

    I believe it has been solidly established that if the woman has had so much as one drink, then any subsequent sexual activity is by definition rape. So why isn’t Shermer sweating in jail, the vile rapist?

  19. Steve Skubinna
    September 15th, 2014 @ 2:39 pm

    What happens on the Internet, stays on the Internet.

  20. Steve Skubinna
    September 15th, 2014 @ 2:42 pm

    Bet the feminists kept Satan around, because of the proven punitive aspects of spending eternity riding on Satan’s Barbed…

    uh, never mind. I forgot what I was going to say.

  21. Zohydro
    September 15th, 2014 @ 3:05 pm

    I don’t think that’s her… At the Buzzfeed piece there are some pictures: chubby goth chick with tattooed arms—???

  22. M. Thompson
    September 15th, 2014 @ 4:51 pm

    Feminism, in practice, seems to be about understanding that women can do what they wish, and not have to worry about the consequences.

  23. HamOnRye
    September 15th, 2014 @ 5:09 pm

    That’s only for the bastions of higher learning. Unfortunately for our feral swine riders Due Process is still in force outside the reservations of female utopia.

  24. Quartermaster
    September 15th, 2014 @ 5:58 pm


    But if that servant says in his heart, ‘My master is delaying his coming,’ and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and be drunk, the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more. Luke 12:45-48

  25. DeadMessenger
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:06 pm

    Dear Mrs. McCain,

    You may want to consider replacing all your husband’s underwear with pairs two sizes smaller. Just a thought…


  26. K-Bob
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:12 pm

    I’m surprised it’s “male dominated.” Wasn’t the head of some big atheism movement for years and years a nasty, cranky, unsmiling woman?

    I’m not Googlin’ it. I’d rather find a way to shove it out of my memory banks so I can re-use the space.

  27. K-Bob
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:14 pm

    It’s like “The Blob!”

  28. DeadMessenger
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:18 pm

    Revelation 20:12-13
    Luke 12:42-48
    Matthew 11:20-24
    Hebrews 10:28-29
    2 Peter 2:20-22
    James 3:1-2

    Of course, not all these are Jesus speaking, but the Matthew one is, and it’s the most telling of the lot, imo.

  29. DeadMessenger
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:20 pm

    And phones with video capability also happened, creating a perfect storm of stupidity when combined with the internet.

  30. RichFader
    September 15th, 2014 @ 6:39 pm

    Sex with atheists. Arguing with atheists. They’re both drunk and blurry, you don’t remember the details the next morning, all you know is that it hurts.

  31. Southern Air Pirate
    September 15th, 2014 @ 7:39 pm

    Remember this woman?

    Dig a little deeper and she is mentioned in this Buzz feed story and is mentioned as well as here (note this is a website of a man who claims to fight the mysigonists online and protect women, yet he uses mysigonist tactics against women that don’t tote the party line and seems to be very cat friendly). She started to attack those with more credentials than herself over the idea that women can’t be safe at the these meetings. Ms. Hensley even resorts to use of sexist and mysigonist language in attacks against fellow women (see here as examples:, then others rose to “attack” Ms. Hensley. How was this attack manifested? By using her own language against her and pointing out her hypocritical actions of protesting mysigonists by being a mysigonist.

    Yet isn’t in any stories by even the science media mentioned is that Ms. Hensley is one of the feminists who is protesting that there are women in the Skeptical/Atheistic community that aren’t saying they feel unsafe at these meetings. This rape incident, if it happened or was a moment of “buyers remorse” (the woman in question won’t talk about it more), started a wholesale multi front attack on the movements by the feminists. That those who are asking questions and trying to use the tactics of free thought, logic, reasoning, and similar things the skeptical/atheists claim to believe in. The honest questions of can thier superstars be corrupt people or that maybe someone is blowing something out of proportion can’t be asked since that would destroy the narrative that one needs religious mumbo jumbo to be moral and ethical (nope but they haven’t come up with a good idea of where morals and ethics come from for a community) and the feminists won’t let go of the idea that everyone with a pen is guilty of a sex crime.

    RSM, if you look harder at this whole topic there is some more to add for your book about crazy feminists. The problem is where to start and where to go because it’s all very circular and incestuous with respect towards who hates who and who is a white knight. The whole thing really is a beautiful bit of confusion. Very similar to Smitty’s write up of Gamers Gate over the weekend.

  32. Mike G.
    September 15th, 2014 @ 8:06 pm

    So she was “Ghost F…..never mind.

  33. ‘I Was Drunk. After That, It All Gets Kind of Blurry. … I Know We Had Sex.’ | That Mr. G Guy's Blog
    September 15th, 2014 @ 8:55 pm

    […] ‘I Was Drunk. After That, It All Gets Kind of Blurry. … I Know We Had Sex.’. […]

  34. RS
    September 15th, 2014 @ 8:57 pm

    Thanks to you and QM above. I’ve read the passages briefly and am reserving most comments until I’ve had a chance for a more in depth review. I note they were all familiar to me. While I can see where the conclusion regarding a “hierarchy of punishment,” I note that in Revelation 20, where all a “judged according to his works,” the end result of that judgment is the same. No reference is made to a Dante-like afterlife. Also, in some of the Epistles, the writers are combating various heresies which were arising, as well as the beginnings of a professional clerical hierarchy. The passage from James is an example, I think.

    Anyway, thanks for the cites. Stuff for my personal study time.

  35. Federale
    September 15th, 2014 @ 9:04 pm

    “When they attended conferences, Stollznow says, “the psychological abuse turned physical and he sexually assaulted me on several occasions.'”

    So she repeatedly returned to the same conference to be repeatedly raped? Sounds like she wanted to be raped. Hey, lots of girls have that fantasy.

  36. Steve Skubinna
    September 15th, 2014 @ 10:48 pm

    Damn that pesky Constitution! How long will we suffer under its dead hand?

    I mean, dude, it was written, like, a hundred years ago.

  37. Steve Skubinna
    September 15th, 2014 @ 10:49 pm

    You are probably thinking of Madelaine Murray O’Hair, who was indeed a shriveled joyless hate filled person.

    She came to a very bad end, probably unrelated to her atheism.

  38. Charles G. Hill
    September 15th, 2014 @ 10:55 pm

    “Why would these women assume that an egalitarian ethos must prevail in the atheist community?”

    They were just happy to be boned by feral swine who wouldn’t tell them that they couldn’t abort the produce from said bonings.

  39. K-Bob
    September 15th, 2014 @ 11:06 pm

    Yeah, that’s the name I remember. Dang it.

  40. Wombat_socho
    September 16th, 2014 @ 12:21 am


  41. Bob Belvedere
    September 16th, 2014 @ 8:46 pm

    Phil Donahue had a thing for her, I believe. /sarc

  42. K-Bob
    September 16th, 2014 @ 9:11 pm


  43. Adam G. Yoksas
    September 17th, 2014 @ 2:27 am

    Laugh all you want at the atheists, but from what I can see, the atheists were able to quickly and effectively purge the feminist schism in their ranks in just a couple of years. In fact, I’m becoming more convinced that the “gender war” is going to be fought on Dawkinite ground, on evolutionary biology ground, and that conservatives will play no serious part in the future of this issue. Why? It’s really simple.

    Dawkinites aren’t polite, and they don’t want your conservative politeness. They aren’t chivalrous, and they don’t want your conservative, C.S. Lewis style chivalry. They aren’t stuck on the notion of traditional, Biblically-derived manners that conservatives have been stuck on for a long, long time when it comes to women. They tell it like they see it, and they don’t care if it comes off as rude, or crass, or unholy, or “ungentlemanly.”

    Conservatives have been fighting a conventional war against feminism (legislation, think tanks, the pulpit, party politics). Atheists have been fighting a guerrilla war against feminism (snappy YouTube videos, performance art, blogs, screeds) and it looks like it is working for atheists, and not working so well for you conservatives.

    But it goes deeper. You see, atheists hate that whole “man up” baggage conservatives have been dragging around just as much as they hate the religion that gives rise to it. But this gives them weapons of argument that conservatives are too “proper” to use: biting satire. Crass cynicism. Darwinistic arguments for female subconscious motivations. Their responses are witty and funny…not dull and moralistic. And they aren’t afraid of sacrificing the conservative sacred cow, the family, to win the war against feminism.

    And it looks like it is working for them against feminism…far better, we might say, than the conservative argument (with baggage attached) has been working for conservatives for the past fifty-odd years since second wave feminism got started.

  44. Bob Belvedere
    September 17th, 2014 @ 7:12 am

    ‘Shudder’, indeed.

  45. Daniel Freeman
    September 17th, 2014 @ 10:31 pm

    It turns out that your Twitter account can be suspended if a damsel is distressed by it. No other criteria necessary. Leave it to Thunderf00t to provoke such a perfect display of feminists’ emotional fragility, cultural hegemony, and intellectual bankruptcy.