In September 2014, I wrote a review challenging a pattern of misrepresentations and smears in the atheist movement that had started to leak into mainstream media. One of the main culprits, PZ Myers, responded by alleging that I defend, provide a haven for, and support rapists, and he has repeatedly refused to apologise for this defamatory smear.
I will continue to address both of these issues – the wider misrepresentations and smears, and the specific smear against me. As I do that, I will regularly update this page as a resource, with context and links to a chronology of some of the actual work done within the atheist movement and the harm and injustice caused by PZ and some of his associates.
I am confident that we will move beyond these smears. The first step is to stand up to them and correct them. I hope that some of PZ’s associates (and maybe even PZ) will read what I have actually written here, and will not rely on the misrepresented versions reported elsewhere.
Contents
Note: for an overview, all you need to read is Sections 1 and 2, Key Posts and Recent Posts.
1. Key posts
2. Recent posts
3. The World Atheist Convention in Dublin
4. Promoting atheism, reason and science
5. Promoting inclusivity and ethical atheism
6. Promoting social justice through secularism
7. Misrepresentations of the atheist movement
8. Recent misrepresentations in mainstream media
9. Ophelia Benson misrepresents my review
10. Adam Lee’s misleading Guardian article
11. The smears start to be directed against me
12. PZ Myers concocts the smear that I defend rapists
13. Some associates of PZ join in with his smears
14. Demythologising the rifts
15. General observations
16. My emails to FreeThought Blogs about PZ Myers
17. Atheist Ireland dissociates itself from PZ Myers
18. Defenders of PZ respond to Atheist Ireland dissociation
19. PZ Myers starts to criticise his own commenters
1. Key posts
- November 2013 – Richard Dawkins’ nuanced memoir and the unjust personal smears against him. I reviewed Richard’s memoir and analysed smears against him by Daniel Trilling, The Times, Huffington Post, Salon, PZ Myers and Rebecca Watson.
- August 2014 – The demonising of Richard Dawkins, and the normalising of casual defamatory smears. My response to various issues including a Guardian article smearing Richard by Eleanor Robinson, who the day before tweeted that she won’t rest until Richard is known as a widely reviled sockfucker.
- 17 September 2014 – Recent media misrepresentations of the atheist movement, and the role of PZ Myers in the culture of demonising people. I analyse several sensationalised articles about the atheist movement, and express concerns that misrepresentations and smears are leaking into mainstream media.
- 21 September 2014 – Adam Lee’s misleading Guardian article about Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the atheist movement. My review of Adam Lee’s Guardian article about Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the atheist movement.
- 2 October 2014 – Another week, another set of misrepresentations and personal smears. Having defended people against misrepresentations and smears, and on returning from lobbying for atheist and secular rights at the OSCE human rights meeting, I returned to find myself the target of similar misrepresentations and smears.
- 7 October 2014 – The smears get increasingly serious as PZ Myers crosses a new line. My response to PZ Myers publicly alleging that I am defending rapists (that’s rapists, plural) because certain people comment on my blog.
- 13 October 2014 – PZ Myers has failed five times to justify his smear that I am defending and providing a haven for rapists on my blog. Extracts from Twitter conversations in which PZ fails to substantiate or withdraw his defamatory smear.
- 29 October 2014 – Anatomy of a smear – how PZ Myers concocted a new smear when challenged about his previous smears. A review of PZ’s ten different responses to my criticisms before he finally crossed the line into making a seriously defamatory smear.
- 1 November 2014 – Yet more misrepresentations in PZ Myers’ post refusing to withdraw or apologise for his smear. My response to PZ’s public refusal to retract or apologise for his smears, even after quoting many of the opportunities that I have given him to do so.
- 16 December 2014 – The hurtful and harmful smears of PZ Myers, “The Happy Atheist” A summary of PZ’s years-long pattern of smears that led to my original criticism
- 27 December 2014 – PZ Myers publicly hates and despises people, not merely their ideas or behaviour From Alain de Botton and Karen Armstrong to Christians generally, some of the people who PZ publicly hates.
- 3 January 2015 – PZ Myers’ new defamatory smear that I support rapists. PZ goes beyond accusing me of defending rapists, by saying it is accurate and forthright to accuse me of defending and supporting rapists.
- 25 January 2015 – My third email to FreeThought Blogs about their complaints procedure regarding PZ Myers. My attempts to ask FreeThoughtBlogs how to make a complaint to them about PZ’s behaviour.
- 9 April 2015 – Atheist Ireland publicly dissociates itself from the harmful and hateful rhetoric of PZ Myers. Statement published by Atheist Ireland.
- 10 April 2015 – Friendly Atheist Hemant Mehta says it is no wonder Atheist Ireland wants nothing to do with PZ Myers. Supportive statement by Hemant Mehta.
- 11 April 2015 – PZ Myers defenders are now smearing the integrity of Atheist Ireland committee members
- 28 July 2015 – PZ Myers and the Little Shop of Hatred. PZ Myers criticises his own commenters for attacking Ophelia Benson in the way that he has for years encouraged them to attack outsiders.
2. Recent posts
- 28 July 2015 – PZ Myers and the Little Shop of Hatred
- 20 April 2015 – My response to Ashley Miller’s open letter to me
- 17 April 2015 – Richard Carrier’s latest smears are poorly researched, insulting to women activists, and defamatory
- 15 April 2015 – My comments policy and Atheist Ireland – my response to part of MA Melby’s criticism
- 11 April 2015 – PZ Myers defenders are now smearing the integrity of Atheist Ireland committee members
You have now read enough to have an overview of the issues. If you want further background context and details, feel free to read the remainder of the post.
3. The World Atheist Convention in Dublin
The World Atheist Convention in Dublin in June 2011, hosted by Atheist Ireland, adopted the Dublin Declaration on Secularism and the Place of Religion in Public Life.
The World Atheist Convention also formalised the restructuring and relaunch of Atheist Alliance International, as a truly international advocacy group for atheism and secularism.
Atheist Alliance was founded in America in 1991. It gradually added new affiliates, including groups from other countries, and in 2001 changed its name to Atheist Alliance International. In 2011 it agreed to split into two separate organisations.
- One would be named Atheist Alliance of America, and would consist of the America-based affiliate groups of the previous AAI.
- The other would retain the name Atheist Alliance International, and would consist of all of the groups from every country, including America, all involved as equals.
Atheist Alliance International now has UN consultative status, and does a great deal of patient, hard, sometimes dangerous work to protect atheists and promote secularism in the developing world, with its often overt theocracies, and to protect and advance secularism in the developed world, which is typically more democratic.
4. Promoting atheism, reason and science
While many of the examples of work here refer to work done by Atheist Ireland, please see that as reflective of similar work done by many local, national and international atheist groups and advocates around the world, some in considerably harder circumstances than we face in Ireland.
- February 2013 – If you believe in both science and religion, you are not doing either properly – Debate at UCC.
- September 2013 – Teaching about atheism in Irish primary schools. Interview on CKNW Vancouver.
- October 2013 – Does God Exist? Debate with David Glass in Newtownabbey.
- November 2013 – Religion Harms Society. Speech at The Oxford Union.
- March 2014 – Do we need God for morality? Debate on BBC Radio Ulster Sunday Sequence.
- August 2014 – Why I am openly atheist and secular. Contribution to Freedom From Religion Foundation Out Channel.
- October 2014 – Is Islam a religion of peace? Debate at NUI Galway.
- October 2014 – Is there a god? Talk with Hindu Swami Purnananda at UCD Philosophy Society.
5. Promoting inclusivity and ethical atheism
Again, while many of the examples of work here refer to work done by Atheist Ireland, please see that as reflective of similar work done by many local, national and international atheist groups and advocates around the world, some in considerably harder circumstances than we face in Ireland.
- July 2012 – Why atheist and skeptic groups should be inclusive, caring and supportive. In which I argued that people on both sides of recent disagreements had been victims of unfair personal attacks, and suggested ways to address the problems.
- August 2012 – Speaking out against hate directed at women. As part of Amy Roth’s series on Skepchick, I analysed online sexual harassment of women in various communities and the need to tackle this problem.
- August 2012 – A draft Manifesto to promote Ethical Atheism. In which I proposed ways to promote reason, critical thinking, science and atheism; natural compassion and ethics; inclusive, caring atheist groups; and fair secular societies.
- August 2012 – 1,500 Women Speakers Worth Listening To. Over 1,500 women, from around the world with different areas of expertise, who would make excellent speakers at atheist, skeptic, scientific or human rights events.
- January 2013 – Thunderf00t’s inflammatory video of misleading personal attacks on atheist feminists is not helpful. In which I defended the atheist community generally, and Amy Roth, Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers and Melody Hensley in particular, against various allegations.
- April-May 2013 – Atheist Skeptic Dialogue. This was an unsuccessful attempt to address various disagreements through online dialogue. It was moderated by me, Monette Richards and Skep Tickle.
6. Promoting social justice through secularism
Again, while many of the examples of work here refer to work done by Atheist Ireland, please see that as reflective of similar work done by many local, national and international atheist groups and advocates around the world, some in considerably harder circumstances than we face in Ireland.
- April 2013 – Should priests report child rape? Debate on RTE with a priest who insists that he would not report the rape of a child to the Gardai if he heard about it at confession.
- June 2013 – Dublin Declaration on Secularism Empowering Women 2013. Adopted by Atheist Ireland’s international conference in Dublin on Empowering Women Through Secularism.
- October 2013 – Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Without Discrimination. As part of the ESC Rights Initiative and Equality and Rights Alliance, Atheist Ireland argues for protecting the rights of the vulnerable in an ethical secular state.
- July 2014 – UN Human Rights Committee tells Ireland to stop breaching the human rights of atheists and minority faiths, and vindicates all of the complaints raised by Atheist Ireland when we briefed the Human Rights Committee in Geneva.
- August 2014 – The Catholic belief system in Ireland and human rights abuses from child abuse to symphysiotomy. Powerful extract from the closing address of Nigel Rodley, Chairperson of the UN Human Rights Committee questioning Ireland.
- September 2014 – Atheist Ireland Submission to UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The same process (under a different treaty) as the one where we briefed the UN Human Rights Committee on Civil and Political Rights in Geneva.
- October 2014 – Atheist Ireland’s human rights recommendations now online on the OSCE website. Includes our formal statements plus the Dublin Declarations on Secularism and Religion in Public Life 2011 and on Secularism Empowering Women 2103.
- November 2014 – Atheist Ireland’s achievements in 2014. Atheist Ireland’s 2014 breakthroughs in international lobbying at the UN and OSCE, and ongoing national lobbying on secular education and healthcare.
7. Misrepresentations of the atheist movement
- August 2013 – Richard Dawkins and Islam: Debate on BBC Radio with Daniel Trilling. I debated Daniel Trilling of New Statesman (soon to be editor of New Humanist) about Trilling’s criticism of recent comments by Richard Dawkins about Islam.
- November 2013 – Richard Dawkins’ nuanced memoir and the unjust personal smears against him. I reviewed Richard’s memoir and analysed smears against him by Daniel Trilling, The Times, Huffingtom Post, Salon, PZ Myers and Rebecca Watson.
- June 2014 – Are New Atheists Shallow and Dangerous? I debated Dr Robert Grant of TCD Philosophy Department on Newstalk Radio’s The Right Hook, presented by George Hook.
- July 2014 – Are New Atheists Shallow and Dangerous? I debated Dr Robert Grant of TCD Philosophy Department for a second time, this time on BBC Radio Ulster’s Sunday Sequence.
- July 2014 – The most recent example of some people uncharitably misinterpreting Richard Dawkins. I analysed some smears against Richard Dawkins based on some tweets that he published.
8. Recent misrepresentations in mainstream media
- August 2014 – The demonising of Richard Dawkins, and the normalising of casual defamatory smears. My response to various issues including a Guardian article smearing Richard by Eleanor Robinson, who the day before tweeted that she won’t rest until Richard is known as a widely reviled sockfucker.
- 17 September 2014 – Recent media misrepresentations of the atheist movement, and the role of PZ Myers in the culture of demonising people. I analyse several sensationalised articles about the atheist movement, and express concerns that misrepresentations and smears are leaking into mainstream media.
9. Ophelia Benson misrepresents my review
- 18 September 2014 – If you respond to what I have actually written, I will be happy to discuss it. My response to misrepresentations of my previous post by Ophelia Benson.
- 19 September 2014 – The atheist movement is global. It is not defined by the mostly American ‘deep rifts’ disagreements. My response to a further response to my article by Ophelia.
- 19 September 2014 – The LBJ legend and my email to PZ Myers. My response to some tweets by Ophelia.
- 25 September 2014 – PZ Myers’ unfair and hurtful misrepresentations of Richard Dawkins’ comments about being abused as a child. My second response to Ophelia’s analysis of my review.
10. Adam Lee’s misleading Guardian article
- 21 September 2014 – Adam Lee’s misleading Guardian article about Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the atheist movement. My review of Adam Lee’s Guardian article about Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the atheist movement.
- 22 September 2014 – The nine issues that Adam Lee’s response to my criticism fails to address. My response to Adam’s response to my review.
- 23 September 2014 – Adam Lee’s legitimate anger about harassment is unfairly misdirected at Richard Dawkins and the atheist movement. My response to Adam’s second response to me.
- 24 September 2014 – Adam Lee rejects my analysis that his comment seems to accept his Guardian article included some misrepresentations. My response to Adam’s third response to me.
11. Personal smears start to be directed against me
- 2 October 2014 – Another week, another set of misrepresentations and personal smears. Having defended people against misrepresentations and smears, and on returning from lobbying for atheist and secular rights at the OSCE human rights meeting, I returned to find myself the target of similar misrepresentations and smears.
12. PZ Myers concocts and intensifies the smear that I defend rapists
- 7 October 2014 – The smears get increasingly serious as PZ Myers crosses a new line. My response to PZ Myers publicly alleging that I am defending rapists (that’s rapists, plural) because certain people comment on my blog.
- 13 October 2014 – PZ Myers has failed five times to justify his smear that I am defending and providing a haven for rapists on my blog. Extracts from Twitter conversations in which PZ fails to substantiate or withdraw his defamatory smear.
- 29 October 2014 – Anatomy of a smear – how PZ Myers concocted a new smear when challenged about his previous smears. A review of PZ’s ten different responses to my criticisms before he finally crossed the line into making a seriously defamatory smear.
- 1 November 2014 – Yet more misrepresentations in PZ Myers’ post refusing to withdraw or apologise for his smear. My response to PZ’s public refusal to retract or apologise for his smears, even after quoting many of the opportunities that I have given him to do so.
- 3 January 2015 – PZ Myers’ new defamatory smear that I support rapists. PZ goes beyond accusing me of defending rapists, by saying it is accurate and forthright to accuse me of defending and supporting rapists.
13. Some associates of PZ join in with his smears
- 17 October 2014 – Thank you to Latsot for apologising for alleging that I defend rapists. PZ Myers, can you please also apologise? My response to Latsot, an occasional guest blogger on FreeThought Blogs, who repeated PZ’s smear, apologised, then withdrew his apology.
- 27 October 2014 – My Twitter conversation today with Latsot, who like PZ Myers has falsely accused me of defending rapists. A twitter conversation that illustrates the difficulty of communicating reasonably with the people making these false allegations.
- 31 October 2014 – Why Stephanie Zvan’s defence of PZ Myers’ ‘haven for rapists’ smear is not reasonable based on the evidence. My response to Stephanie’s interpretation that encompasses even the police and prosecution provide a haven for rapists.
- 3 November 2014 – Once upon a time, there was an apology, a non-apology and a retracted apology. SpokesGay, a frequent commenter on FreeThought Blogs, apologises to me, then withdraws his apology after Ophelia tells him he is wrong.
- 6 November 2014 – On satire, sea lions, civility and smears – please support the primacy of reasonable dialogue. A new parody Twitter account Mick the Sea Lion parodies me for being polite, which is apparently now a bad thing.
- 9 November 2014 – You can block your tweets, but you can’t block your conscience – Latsot adds to the PZ smears. In which Latsot calls me a monster and actually crazy, and calls Ashling O’Brien a lying wanker.
- 1 December 2014 – Is PZ Myers sexist? Am I fascist with a seedy past? It depends on whether you ask Charitable Theo or Uncharitable Theo. How Theophontes judges PZ charitably and judges me uncharitably.
- 9 December 2014 – The pattern continues – like PZ Myers’ smear about rapists, Theo fails to apologise for his smear about fascism. A response to Theo’s three comments on my previous post.
14. Demythologising the rifts
- 20 October 2014 – Demythologising the rifts part 1 – the women in atheism panel at the World Atheist Convention in Dublin. The first in a series of posts about how the recent rifts between some mostly American atheist bloggers and activists actually happened.
- Note: I am not sure when, or whether, I will have time to complete this series of posts.
15. General observations
- 17 November 2014 – “Do your belly dance.” “Get off my stage. I’ve got work to do.” What if PZ Myers judged others’ sexism as he judges himself? An analysis of some behaviour by PZ over the years that he and his colleagues might consider sexist if done by somebody else.
- 21 November 2014 – Be a cyber buddy not a cyber bully – advice from young Dublin people that some adults might also consider. Review of a booklet produced by young people for young people who are affected by, or who witness, online bullying.
- 24 November 2014 – PZ Myers updates his story about the threatened false rape allegation made against him. The implications of PZ’s response to part of my recent post about what would happen if he judged others’ sexism as he judges himself.
- 16 December 2014 – The hurtful and harmful smears of PZ Myers, “The Happy Atheist” A summary of PZ’s years-long pattern of smears that led to my original criticism.
- 27 December 2014 – PZ Myers publicly hates and despises people, not merely their ideas or behaviour From Alain de Botton and Karen Armstrong to Christians generally, some of the people who PZ publicly hates.
- 17 January 2015 – The violent rhetoric of Pope Francis and PZ Myers. A response to PZ Myers criticising Pope Francis for using violent rhetoric.
16. My emails to FreeThought Blogs about PZ Myers
- 3 January 2015 – My first email to FreeThought Blogs about their complaints procedure regarding PZ Myers
- 12 January 2015 – My second email to FreeThought Blogs about their complaints procedure regarding PZ Myers
- 25 January 2015 – My third email to FreeThought Blogs about their complaints procedure regarding PZ Myers
- 27 January 2015 – FreeThought Blogs manager Ed Brayton made similar complaints about PZ Myers’ pattern of behaviour
- 30 January 2015 – For PZ Myers, the idea of responding justly to complaints is literally a joke
17. Atheist Ireland dissociates itself from PZ Myers
- 8 April 2015 – Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s important speech about religious bigotry and persecution, and PZ Myers’ defamatory smear against her
- 9 April 2015 – Atheist Ireland publicly dissociates itself from the harmful and hateful rhetoric of PZ Myers
- 9 April 2015 – Atheist Northern Ireland supports Atheist Ireland’s dissociation from the rhetoric of PZ Myers
- 10 April 2015 – Friendly Atheist Hemant Mehta says it is no wonder Atheist Ireland wants nothing to do with PZ Myers
- 11 April 2015 – Secular Policy Institute asks why are “shock jock” bloggers invited to lecture at major secular conferences?
18. Defenders of PZ respond to Atheist Ireland dissociation
- 11 April 2015 – PZ Myers defenders are now smearing the integrity of Atheist Ireland committee members
- 15 April 2015 – My comments policy and Atheist Ireland – my response to part of MA Melby’s criticism
- 17 April 2015 – Richard Carrier’s latest smears are poorly researched, insulting to women activists, and defamatory
- 20 April 2015 – My response to Ashley Miller’s open letter to me
19. PZ Myers starts to criticise his own commenters
- 28 July 2015 – PZ Myers and the Little Shop of Hatred. PZ Myers criticises his own commenters for attacking Ophelia Benson in the way that he has for years encouraged them to attack outsiders.
This a great resource.
Thank you.
The people trying to smear you were hoping you would be like others they smeared. That you would just let it be because it would take time and resources to fight against a large group of bloggers.
Phew! That’s quite an effort on your part, and I thank you for it.
Since Ophelia Benson will very probably read your post, I can save her the trouble of actually understanding it by summarising the part she will be most interested in: it’s 2,039 words long.
I’ve been smeared by Myers as ‘dangerously obsessive’ and by Benson as ‘sick’ and a ‘stalker’. Yet when I met you face-to-face in Dublin you trusted me.
Thank you Michael, for this, and for all your hard work which stands out like a beacon.
Michael. PZ Myers, Ophelia Benson, Stephanie Zvan, and Adam Lee are really going to hate you for providing all these facts and citations to back your argument!
In fact, I can already hear Adam Lee crying and sobbing, while the others are sharpening their knives.
Q.E.D.
I look forward to part 2 of Demythologising the rifts.
Michael,
A truly impressive effort and one that was badly needed.
Really well done. My hat is off to you, sir!
Shows how fast things are moving: I’d almost forgotten about Adam Lee.
I’m sure I can do that again.
It would be nice to think some of the other prime movers in this cult might soon be forgotten – but the Satanic abuse hoax didn’t stop Beatrix Campbell’s political career.
Joining the Green Party did that.
One of the interesting recent developments is that FTB bloggers have recently ditched a cornerstone of feminism: that rape is rape and any attempt to grade it is utterly unacceptable.
Yet in defence of one of their regulars they’ve started to accept mitigating factors and promises not to do it again, while brushing aside trifling details about the victim’s suffering, which is something entirely separate from the feelings of the perpetrator.
It would be nice to think they’re burning bridges with the genuine feminist movement as well as atheism and skepticism.
A commenter called “theophantes” at Pharyngula’s Thunderdome is claiming that their comments are being blocked at this site. Redact names if you have to but don’t fall into the habit of using the same tactics that FtBloggers do.
Excellent Resource. Thanks for taking this on Michael.
A commenter called “theophantes” at Pharyngula’s Thunderdome is claiming that their comments are being blocked at this site. Redact names if you have to but don’t fall into the habit of using the same tactics that FtBloggers do.
Theophantes needs to remember that Irish libel laws are more stringent than in the USA.
This is a typical FTB tactic: accusing those complying with local laws of providing a haven for rapists and rape apologists.
America isn’t the world.
You need to go back years further to really do justice to Myers ranting attacks on other atheists. The list of his victims is so long I lost track well before so called elevatorgate. I’ve always felt that in bending over backwards to be ‘tolerant’ to all points of view we allowed poison to spread in our midst. He should have been banned from the convention circuit many years ago.
I think the bar was set too low when we were welcoming anyone who could slap down creationists.
It was like calling someone a ‘skeptic’ just because they didn’t believe the Loch Ness Monster came from outer space.
A rejection of creationism is a minimum requirement for atheism, not a shortcut to leadership.
And the stuff with the crackers was pathetic attention seeking. If that had happened in the UK nobody would have given a shit.
I’ll admit I used to be a bit of a fan of Myers. He did actually write some very good pieces ( many of which, of course, were recycled and used to make up “The Happy Atheist”). I didn’t even mind Crackergate that much because I agreed with the point: to show that nothing ought to be sacred (I think people forget that he trashed pages from the Koran and The God Delusion as well as the cracker.) It was around the time of his slam of “dictionary atheists” that he started to lose me. I have a big problem with people who try to bend clearly defined words and language to their own ends, no matter which side of the political spectrum they are.
After that he just got worse and worse, and there seemed to come a point where he decided that the low-level infamy he could glean by slamming and slurring fellow atheists was his best shot at getting attention, since it was becoming really clear that he wasn’t going to make it as any sort of “fifth horseman”. His poor old nag fell at the first fence.
@GerardO and Shatterface –
Did theophantes provide anything like evidence for the claim that FTBer’s comments are being blocked here, such as a screen-cap of the comment awaiting moderation (as is often done at The ‘Pit)?
Did theophantes provide anything like evidence for the claim that FTBer’s comments are being blocked here, such as a screen-cap of the comment awaiting moderation (as is often done at The ‘Pit)?
I’m guessing witnesses will come forward in the fullness of time.
@GerardO,
Don’t ask Michael to redact libelous comments, ask libelers not to libel.
Blueshift Rhino @16,
One comment that he claims was blocked here is #424 on this thread:
http://web.archive.org/web/20141103203954/http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/10/06/thunderdome-55/comment-page-1/
I suspect that our host blocked it because of the unsubstantiated, libelous slurs against named individuals.
Mr. Nugent, let me join the chorus of voices in lauding you for this substantial effort you have taken to document the unethical actions some in the US atheist community have taken on others in the name of what they perceive to be social justice. The right way to respond to bullies is to stand up to them, and that’s exactly what you are doing. Too many in the A/S communities have decided to acquiesce or to ignore and hope it goes away, and it would have been so easy for you to do the same. I hope that other big names in the A/S communities see what you are doing and lend helping hands.
Does anybody know whether Stephanie Zvan of anybody from FreeThoughtBlogs answers my question?
In light of Zvan’s article distinguishing one rape (Ogvorbis’ self-confessed rape of children) to another alleged rape, is she saying there are GRADATIONS of rape
Again, it my contention that her article makes it clear that she thinks there is, but I have not seen any criticism or pushback in the same way Dawkins was blasted for saying that legally, there are gradations.
Re: Theophantes
I have tried to post comments at various FTB blogs and they don’t make it through “moderation”. NEVER.
Michael’s forum is far more honest and open that the cesspit that is FreeThoughtBlogs.
Anyone who really can’t see that there are gradations of rape, just as there are gradations of any other form of assault, is being really, really obtuse. They also seem to be so obdurately dim that they see pointing this plain fact out as somehow saying that some forms of rape are okay, which is not the case at all. Myers made the same fat-headed error when Dawkins described the relative “mildness” of the abuse he experienced at school.
It’s the absolutist mindset in action. Like fundamentalists, these people find shades of gray too difficult to deal with so they repaint reality in black and white. Which makes them both stupid and dangerous.
@Patrick:
I get the same impression. As well as being terminally obtuse, as expected from teophontes, the comment did contain as yet unproven accusations against at least two named persons, plus a reiteration of the familiar slurs against Michael’s blog. In any case, it can be found at the link you provided (trigger warning: festering idiocy).
In case you are missing it, Michael, someone is running a parody Twitter account under the name MickTheSealion.
For those who don’t recognise the term, Sealion is a term of abuse for any man who insists on pursuing an argument politely. No, really, that’s a thing now: attacking someone for being calm and rational. Politeness is the New Rape.
I don’t know whether the account holder is aware of the racist connotations of contracting the name Michael to ‘Mick’ when addressing an Irish man they don’t know though.
Anyone who really can’t see that there are gradations of rape, just as there are gradations of any other form of assault, is being really, really obtuse.
It’s an article of faith on FTB that all rapes are equally bad and anyone who suggests otherwise is a rape apologist. Zvan is now arguing otherwise.
Whether you accept her argument or not, this is precisely the line of argument they’d burn Dawkins at the stake for.
Michael
Thanks for this. I am sure you’d far rather spend your time fighting the good fight and leaving this nonsense behind, but in the end I think your efforts here will pay off. Like many here I once liked Pharyngula and a number of other FTB bloggers and read Dr. Myers’ blog daily. Dr. Myers is an excellent writer and can be hilarious and insightful when he wishes. Like you, I’ve met him in person and he was (and I suspect really is) kind, pleasant, open and just a nice fellow. But something happened along the way. A few years ago I got fed up with the biliousness of Pharyngula and the way it strayed from where Dr. Myers is strongest – in his critiques of religion and his excellent essays on biology. I think he and others in the Horde (as I think they call themselves) got full of themselves and came to see their way of thinking as the only acceptable way. That is always a bad thing but it is especially bad when the self-righteousness turns to the ugliness of demonization of those who disagree. That relentless, pervasive ugliness drove me off reading blogs, discussion boards, attending conferences (when I could), etc.
So I’ve dropped out of atheist/skeptic scene and focused on other things I’m interested in. I popped in recently only to see the same old ugly…but noticed some push back from Dawkins, Harris and others. That got me to pay closer attention. It was through looking closer that I found your blog and have read up on the campaign against you. It is gratifying to see so many standing up to them, at last.
Your efforts though tedious and which come, I am sure, with personal pain are not going unnoticed and I think will help tremendously.
Thanks
@Patrick –
Copying and pasting what you claim to have posted elsewhere is *consistent* with the post being under moderation, but doesn’t come close to the same level of evidence as a screen-cap. Granted, a screen-cap can be faked, but the skill and effort involved does wonders for weeding out untrue claims by the lazy.
With that said, if the post in question were actually attempted here, I would not be surprised if it never made it out of moderation, as it includes repetitions of the all-too-familiar smears with zero added content.
I briefly thought this was either a slur, or a diminutive, but Michael Nugent uses that himself as his Twitter handle, and he’s addressed as “Mick” in the the interview he linked to recently. Maybe he can settle that somewhere, but I’m going with the assumption its not only a non-issue but a nickname he uses himself.
Dr. Myers is an excellent writer and can be hilarious and insightful when he wishes.
I think it’s easy to give the impression you are hilarious and insightful when you are going after the ‘right’ people and your audience shares exactly the same prejudices.
Genuine humour springs from humility and a sense of ones own absurdity, not spotting the outsider and setting the dogs on him.
@Shatterface 28: Pretty sure Michael C is not referring to Myers’ attack posts but rather the more restrained and thoughtful pieces he occasionally used to write. They do exist, and I was fairly impressed with them too.
I’m going to assume that the FTB “leaders” are not just being dishonest and propose an explanation. I get the impression that they have no trust in the decency of people who do not share their exact beliefs, and further, that much of that distrust is based on projection of their personal failings. It seems that they have so little trust they fear that allowing Joe/Josephine Public the luxury of nuance legitimises rape in his/her mind, or sets things off down the slippery slope. This can be seen in the concept of splash damage where it is assumed that, irrespective of the intent of the speaker, gendered slurs are somehow going to give support to misogynists within earshot. This is a ridiculously jaundiced view of humanity most of whom, at least in my experience, understand that genitalia-based insults are simply using the fact that genitalia are not something you’d eat your dinner off. But the SJWs can abstract sexism out of anything.
Regarding my previous post. The problem the SJWs have with “rape grading” is also based on the principle that the seriousness of the crime is dependent on the subjective experience of the victim. That view may be slightly more understandable, but follow it to it’s conclusion and you end up in crazyland for all sorts of reasons.
Gerhard: Projection is one of the first things that come to mind when I read SJW diatribes. They tend to put into their enemies thoughts that would probably never ever be entertained by said enemies.
It is quite disturbing.
Shatterface:
It’s just JAQing off in marine mammal form. If they don’t feel confident the audience will buy the “but I’ve been threatened and harassed” dodge the SJW falls back on claiming that the questioner is a misogynist with ulterior motives. If you think that is an uncharitable take, visit the comments section of any article by Amanda Marcotte or any “feminist” with similar leanings.
If you think that is an uncharitable take, visit the comments section of any article by Amanda Marcotte or any “feminist” with similar leanings.
Trying to reason with any of them is like trying to talk down Begbie from Trainspotting when you’ve just spilled his pint.
For clarity, I have put two of Theophontes’ comments in moderation.
The first comment not only named names, but put the names in bold and added in brackets “(to name names)”, so I assume he or she knew it would not be published, and the follow-up comment doesn’t make sense without the first comment.
I will have a look at them when I get time, and see how best to enable the substantive points to be published here consistently with my commenting policy.
I’ve no problem being called Michael or Mick.
I’m sometimes called Mick in the media by people who knew me as Mick from my college days, or (as in the recent BBC radio interview) when there is more than one Michael on the panel.
I can’t remember whether I used the twitter name @micknugent because @michaelnugent was already used or because I wanted a shorter twitter name, but either way it’s not an issue with me.
@Michael:
The lengths some people will go to in order to score points never ceases to baffle me. I can almos hear theophontes thinking: “I’ll make a comment naming names, so that it doesn’t get through moderation and I can accuse Michael of censoring dissenters.” What a petty, small-minded attitude.
Thank you for this.
I am an atheist. I do not believe in a god or gods. That’s it, everything else I may do or think is outside of atheism.
It is bad enough being mischaracterized as an atheist by religious groups, without the likes of PZ Meyers and consortium going around and ascribing to me, as an atheist, all kinds of vile motivations.
When listening to PZ Meyers and the rest of the SJWs it reminds me of the story of Moses. There they are walking about for 4o years in the desert, they get to the bottom of a mountain, and Moses goes up and brings back ten commandments.
Seven of them are thought crimes, but is anyone going to try to tell me that they walked around for 40 odd years thinking that to lie, steal and murder was OK? They had to have a tablet with that written on it before they realized that was wrong? How was anyone left to reach the mountain if they thought all that time that there was nothing at all reprehensible about lying, stealing and murdering?
My own ethics are centred around what is known as “The Golden Rule” which had been articulated long before there were any Judeo-Christian texts. I don’t need any Meyers to tell me right from wrong, I had a family that taught me about that when I was growing up.
I am not saying that there are things which I have said or done which I have not regretted. Those things were however the exception and not the rule.
There is evidence to suggest that there are lot lower percentage of atheists in jail than believers. I could think of two reasons; atheists are on the whole smarter and don’t get caught as much, or that atheists have a sense of ethics which are internal and thus are more likely to abide by them.
If I go to an atheist conference I want to hear discussions about atheist issues. I don’t want to hear about feminist, LGBT, vegan or animal rights issues. Why should I care? I have enough issues as an atheist living in an otherwise overwhelmingly religious environment. If you want to talk about any other issues then create your own conference and I will decide whether or not I would like to attend.
Why should someone like PZ be allowed to speak at an atheist convention when all he is going to do is piss on my back and tell me it’s raining?
As far as I can see PZ is trying to drag atheism and me down into a quagmire of doctrinal religiosity.
If PZ and the SJW crowd are wanting to make it a case of being for them or against them then I am against them. They are well poisoners.
That’s a lot of complaints. Usually that many complaints would get you a court appearance. Are you sure you’re not just whining? Perspective makes most things small and irrelevant
Thanks-a-mundo for the blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Really Cool.