Skepticism and Secularism Have a Serious Sexual Harassment Problem

Slate via Web Archive ^ | Aug. 7, 2013, at 10:01 AM | Amanda Marcotte

[Pan_Yan]

Most mainstream media stories about women in the growing skeptic/secularist/science education movement (the boundaries between the three are pretty porous) usually begin with articles and videos asking, "Where are all the women?" But people within these circles know that there are actually a lot of female leaders, and the real woman problem is sexual harassment.

As Rebecca Watson, a major writer and speaker on the skeptic/atheist circuit wrote in Slate last year, the amount of sexual harassment aimed at women over even the tiniest suggestions of how to make the movement more female-friendly is absolutely stunning.

...

This sort of thing isn't just a problem because women deserve better than this, though that alone is reason enough for leaders in the skeptic community to do more to combat sexual harassment within their ranks. This is also a problem because this movement, despite what the haters may think, needs women. Feminism and secularism are tightly entwined movements, as they share a common foe: the religious right. To deny the importance of feminism means ignoring some of the biggest fights to defend science and religious freedom, such as the battle over reproductive rights.

[Pan_Yan]

So I ran across this article (Science, 'whores' and dissent) while browsing Al Jazeera. That article linked to this article. The author is clearly a radical feminist but her rather scathing post about rampant sexual harrassment in the atheism community apparently didn't go over well since it got yanked with an unfriendly editors note by Slate.

Interesting.

[Viennacon]

Slate is essentially a communist outfit. They’ll throw feminists under the bus if necessary.

I just want to ask.

Who would sexually assault a feminist? I’d think Janet Napolitano occasionally spikes her own drink with rohypnol, the situation is so desperate.

[MrEdd]

Nothing unusual or unexpected here.
Atheism, unlike mere agnosticism is intellectually difficult to defend. The bulk of the atheists out there cling to it because it gets rid of moral laws.

I am hardly shocked that people who are denying that there is a higher moral authority over them...don't want to be constricted by any sexual mores. That is often the root of their atheism.

D’nesh D’Sousa has a chapter on this in his book The End of Racism.

[Pan_Yan]

What gets me is the whole idea that a woman on the skepticism lecture circuit would be surprised that men with a virulent hate for any moral code would treat her like meat.

[Jeff Chandler]

The concept of consent is merely the last of the Judeo-Christian inhibitions to be discarded.

[Tax-chick]

a major writer and speaker on the skeptic/atheist circuit

That's a funny description!