Last sunset over the Pacific for awhile. (I’m leaving tomorrow.) Nice that it was a spectacular day and evening.
I haven’t seen any sea otters in years though. That’s no good. I used to see lots.
Ceci n’est pas un blog post. It’s just a little diary notation.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
I’m reading Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow. It begins amusingly with his telling us how he and Amos Tversky discovered – during a seminar of Kahneman’s at which Tversky was a guest speaker, their first collaboration – that even statisticians are bad at intuitive statistics.
He tells us about the resemblance heuristic, and starts with a question.
As you consider the next question, please assume that Steve was selected at random from a representative sample:
An individual has been described by a neighbor as follows: “Steve is very shy and withdrawn, invariably helpful but with little interest in people or the world of reality. A meek and tidy soul, he has a need for order and structure, and a passion for detail.” Is Steve more likely to be a librarian or a farmer?
First, of course I knew the obvious answer was the wrong one and I could see that “librarian” was the obvious and therefore wrong one – but I think I would not have chosen librarian even if I hadn’t known the obvious answer was wrong. I can tell you why.
It’s because I frequent libraries a good deal, and I think about things like “what would it be like to be a librarian/farmer/acrobat?” I already know that being a librarian would not be a good fit for someone who is very shy and withdrawn, because librarians spend much of their time interacting with strangers, and besides, colleagues. I also know that farming can be very solitary and even that some people choose it for that very reason.
That’s not actually why librarian is the wrong answer; it’s because there are twenty farmers for every one librarian, and I wouldn’t have considered that at all, so I would still have been wrong, but I would have gotten the right answer for the wrong reason.
I’m a terrible intuitive statistician. I’m confident of that.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Inscribed permanently above the front door.
This be none other than the house of God
That amuses me.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
I’m reading comments (that is, Reasons) on Adam’s petition. They’re heartwarming. I recognize some of the names, but most I don’t. That’s good.
As a relatively new father of a girl, I wish for the world in which she will grow up to be as inclusive of people of all genders for the betterment of humankind.
—
I have two young daughters that Are skeptics and i want them to be comfortable and welcomed in skeptical communities.
—
It is bad enough that churches hold women as inferior to men. If the secular movement wishes to be a group representing people from all walks of life, it cannot tolerate those who dismiss, and worse, threaten potential allies.
I omitted names in case people don’t want to be named here. But Crommunist won’t mind.
The idea that atheism specifically must not make the changes and accommodations of underrepresented groups that EVERY OTHER COMMUNITY IN THE WORLD is making is, frankly, ridiculous. The only people who would be opposed to making improvements are people who believe that this community is perfect (i.e., people who have a ‘just friends’ relationship with reality).
Ed Brayton won’t mind.
I support this petition because the entire atheist/secular community needs to stand up and condemn these vile attacks on those trying to bring attention to a real problem. There is a serious conversation to be had on how to best increase diversity in our communities, but that conversation cannot take place with those who scream “witch hunt” and “atheist cult” and “you all just hate men” and other hyperbolic nonsense at those who are trying to affect change. Still less can it be had with those who deride those women who have rightly spoken out on this issue as “bitches” or “professional victims.” And it certainly can’t be had by those who think the right response is to publish the addresses of those women, or who send rape and death threats to them. It’s time that we all took a strong stand against such behavior in our communities.
EllenBeth won’t mind.
As the President of a Humanist organization and a feminist that has been on the receiving end of a sustained campaign of vicious harassment simply because I had the audacity to speak up, it is imperative that we stand as a community against this behavior.
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest, Al Stefanelli thinks it’s all just too too funny.
Seattle, WA – In what is being described as a Googlesque move, seven male and two female well-known atheist leaders formed a consortium and purchased the rights to the “He Man Women Haters Club” from the producers of the Our Gang comedy series. They renamed it and issued free memberships by default to all two-hundred-million plus avowed atheists in the world.
The group consists of Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor, Co-presidents, Freedom from Religion Foundation, Ronald Lindsay, President, Center for Inquiry; Rebecca Hale, President, American Humanist Association; David Silverman, President, American Atheists; David Niose, President, Secular Coalition for America; August Brunsman, Executive Director, Secular Student Alliance; D.J. Grothe, President, James Randi Educational Foundation and Elisabeth Cornwell, Executive Director, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.
The consortium, known collectively as the “Bi-hemisphere International Trust for Collective Humanism” or B.I.T.C.H, has renamed the He-Man Women Haters Club. The new name they have chose is ‘Atheists.’
Geddit? Bitch? Funny, right?
WCNN Interviewed David Silverman about this bold move. Silverman responded with,
“We’ve been long considering how we can exert enough pressure on atheists to convince them to embrace misogyny. The boys and I were sitting down for hours already over beers and chips, trying to find a good way to redefine atheism as a club for misogynists only, preferably white ones, but we’re not picky.
“Then the girls came back from making us some sammiches, and joined the discussion. Annie suggested that we look at the way Google sort of gave everyone who has a gmail account a membership in Google+. Brilliant, right?
“Well, then Elizabeth suggested we try and buy the Little Rascals thing, you know, and then just rename it Atheism and then include all the atheists. We looked at each other, and suddenly realized this was a great idea.”
The move was largely successful, mainly because most of the world’s atheists are clueless about what goes on with atheism on the Internet. This didn’t stop a small but persistent group of radical feminists on the Internet, who immediately opposed the idea. A petition was set up on Change.org in the form of a letter written by Adam Lee, an atheist blogger, who stated in the letter that atheism is being dominated by white males. Lee suggested that if this doesn’t stop, it will usher in the zombie apocalypse. Lee, incidentally, is a white guy.
Amanda Marcotte, another white atheist, appealed to her social network to,
“Fight back against pressure to define atheism as a club only for misogynists”
Hahahaha – see? No I don’t either, but I’m sure it’s really really funny if you do see.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Avicenna has a brilliant post about Saudi Arabia’s way with executions and foreign domestic workers.
Be warned – it’s ferocious stuff. The place where it all happens has several names.
Saudi Arabia is one of the biggest travel destinations on the planet. It is every Muslim’s duty to go on pilgrimage to Mecca and why not see the sites while you are there?
And one of the sites is the beautiful Qasr al-Masmak, which is an old medieval fort which is next to the Grand Mosque. But when you go visit there is something else to see.
A few hundred metres away is a plaza between the mosque and the fort. It’s ringed by a few benches and has palm trees. Sometimes there is a souk (Market) there. But to the more trained eye there is one thing you should notice.
There is a single drain in the middle. You will be advised to visit during the week (Saturday to Thursday) and avoid it on Friday. It’s not the rush really. You see this place goes by many names. Al Safa Square or Al Dirah Square. The Square of The Grand Mosque. The Chop Chop Square.
You are now standing on the execution ground for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where around 2 people a week meet their gruesome and public end. It is one of the last places you can witness an execution or public punishment. It is also where judicial amputation takes place. If you were to go on Friday you can expect front row seats to such a spectacle, in the same vein as the women who used to take their knitting to the guillotine. And it’s also where Rizana Nafeek, a Sri Lankan maid; was beheaded on Wednesday. At the time of her alleged crime she was a minor who shouldn’t even be HIRED let alone executed.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
In Pakistan – a guy gets ten years in prison and a large fine for misquoting a Hadith.
After a trial spread over 14 months and conducted in an uneasy environment, Additional District and Sessions Judge Raja Pervez Akhtar jailed a blasphemy accused for 10 years and imposed a fine of Rs200,000 on Tuesday evening.
…
Convict Ghulam Ali Asghar, a resident of Chinji village in Talagang tehsil, was booked on Nov 17, 2011, on a charge of blaspheming the Holy Prophet (PBUH) by misquoting a Hadith in Punjabi language.
Judge Raja Pervez Akhtar acquitted Ghulam Ali Asghar of the allegation levelled under 295-C (the section which forbids blaspheming the Holy Prophet [PBHU]), but imprisoned him for ten years under 295-A (which forbids outraging religious feelings) and also imposed a fine of Rs200,000. The convict will have to undergo an additional jail term of six months if he does not pay the fine.
Ten years in the slammer. For misquoting something from a very old collection of sayings.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Adam Lee has a petition to the Leaders of Atheist, Skeptical and Secular Groups: Support Feminism and Diversity in the Secular Community. Please, if you agree with it, take a minute to sign it and share it.
We, the undersigned, are atheists, skeptics and nonbelievers who value free speech and rational thought and who seek to build a strong, thriving movement that can advocate effectively for these values. We’ve chosen to put our names to this petition because we want to respond to a video created by a blogger calling himself Thunderfoot. In this video, Thunderfoot attacks named individuals who’ve been active in promoting diversity and fighting sexism and harassment in our movement. He describes these people as “whiners” and “ultra-PC professional victims” who are “dripp[ing] poison” into the secular community, and urges conference organizers to shun and ignore them.
We hold this and similar complaints from other individuals to be seriously misguided, false in their particulars and harmful to the atheist community as a whole, and we want to set the record straight. We wish to clarify that Thunderfoot and those like him don’t speak for us or represent us, and to state our unequivocal support for the following goals:
We support making the atheist movement more diverse and inclusive.
And (to speak for myself for a moment) we’ve noticed that cyberstalking and harassing and impersonating and smearing a tiny selection of feminist women and a tinier selection of feminist men (aka “manginas”) is not a good way to do that. Why not? Because it puts people off.
We support the people in our community who’ve been the target of bullying, harassment and threats. Outside the conference environment, there are prominent members of the atheist community (including most of the people named in Thunderfoot’s video) who’ve been subjected to a vicious and persistent campaign of online harassment, including obsessive streams of slurs and invective, threatening messages, sexually-tinged taunting, and malicious impersonation on social media, all carried out with the goal of bullying them into silence. We stand shoulder-to-shoulder in support of the people who’ve been harassed in this way, and forcefully and unequivocally condemn those who’ve carried out the harassment. Unless they change their ways and make amends, they have no place within the movement.
To put a stop to this bad behavior once and for all, we need to change the culture of the atheist movement so that sexism isn’t condoned or defended, just as racism and homophobia aren’t condoned or defended. We’re grateful to the leaders of the movement who’ve spoken out against harassment, and we encourage all atheists and skeptics, regardless of their influence or prominence, to do likewise.
Over here! I’ve been subjected to that campaign. A lot. On the one hand, of course, it’s great, because it shows how hugely important I must be, or they wouldn’t pore over my every word. On the other hand, it gets creepy after a year or so.
Adam has a post about this, too.
You may have heard that the video blogger “Thunderf00t”* recently published a video titled “Why ‘Feminism’ is poisoning Atheism“, which he’s been sending to the heads of atheist and skeptical organizations. In this video, he attacks named individuals who’ve been active in promoting diversity and fighting sexism and harassment in our movement, describing them as “whiners” and “ultra-PC professional victims” who are “dripp[ing] poison” into the secular community, and urges conference organizers to shun and ignore them. He’s also claiming that prominent members of the atheist movement who’ve previously spoken out against harassment and misogyny didn’t do so of their own free will, but were coerced into making these statements using nefarious means he declines to specify.
Although I don’t expect that anything will come of this effort, I think it’s important that ignorant and destructive statements like this not go unanswered. Therefore, I thought it would be worthwhile to demonstrate the depth of support within the secular community for measures to increase diversity among our representatives, institute anti-harassment policies at our gatherings, and other moderate and reasonable policies for making everyone feel welcome and broadening our appeal.
That’s why I say if you agree, please sign.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Avicenna reports on the progress of the case against the guys who raped and murdered Jyoti Singh.
Manohar Lal Sharma has been named as the Defence Lawyer for the Delhi Rape/Murder case which he is planning to plead “not guilty” to. And boy is he a real piece of work. Remember how Anil from AVfM said “women have it better than men”? I probably have to apologise to him (And to Astrokid), because Sharma has it figured out.
Well Manohar Lal Sharma is all about women. In his infinite knowledge about the female body has analysed the case meticulously and found that in his experience there are no rapes of “respected ladies”. In addition the male companion was wholly responsible for the incident as the unmarried couple should not have been on the streets, particularly with such a weed since he was incapable of defending her against six armed dudes. It’s his fault for being so bad in a fist fight and it’s her fault for not checking his ability to fist fight.
“Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady,” Sharma said in an interview at a cafe outside the Supreme Court in India’s capital. “Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect.”
It was Jyoti Singh’s fault, in other words, because she was the kind of dirty slutty woman who isn’t respected.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Where’ve I been? Writing my column for the Freethinker, which was due…today, which by rights I generally take to mean the end of the previous day since it’s 8 hours later over there, but this time I didn’t manage it.
It poured with rain here last night and then it stopped, so now it’s all clear and whitecappy and gorgeous.
Ron Lindsay requests input for the annual meeting of heads of secular organizations.
I’d like your input on these two questions: 1. What specific steps do you think
secular groups should take to increase diversity within our movement, in
particular with respect to the participation of minority groups? 2. As you are
aware, there are some stark differences of opinion within the movement about the
appropriate understanding of feminism and how feminism (however defined) should
influence the practices and mission of secular organizations. How do you think
these differences can best be narrowed or resolved?
Personally, I don’t think they can be, but others are more optimistic. Chime in if you feel like it.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Chris Stedman spoke out against marginalizing atheists before the Sinema post, too. He did it for Melissa Harris-Perry’s page at MSNBC a little over a week ago, asking why blame atheists for the Newtown shootings.
The interfaith memorial service in Newtown featured expressions from multiple faiths, including remarks from President Obama that reflected only a theistic perspective.
A non-religious perspective was absent, and this, I think, is a problem. Especially since, in the human search to place blame for this tragedy, nontheists like me have become a target.
A number of influential political and religious public figures have used this heartbreaking massacre as an opportunity to blame or marginalize nonreligious people, and to decry religious pluralism and the separation of church and state.
He gives several examples and then says what’s wrong with them. He does it well, too.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Saudi Arabia beheaded a Sri Lankan domestic servant today. She was convicted of murdering her employer’s baby.
Rizana Nafeek smothered the infant to death after an argument with the child’s mother, her employer, said the ministry in a statement carried by SPA.
She was beheaded in the Dawadmi province near Riyadh.
Nafeek who was only 17 when the incident occurred in 2005, had always maintained that the baby had choked to death when drinking from a bottle.
Allah is great, merciful.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Credit where it’s due: way to go Chris Stedman. He has a post at CNN’s religion blog – CNN! lots of eyeballs! – saying Kyrsten Sinema shouldn’t treat the word “atheist” as a contaminant.
Seriously, way to go!
Preamble: Synema’s a None, and some have called her a nonbeliever or atheist. But…
Sinema doesn’t actually appear to be a nonbeliever. In response to news stories identifying her as an atheist, her campaign released this statement shortly after her victory: “(Rep. Sinema) believes the terms non-theist, atheist or non-believer are not befitting of her life’s work or personal character.”
As a nontheist, atheist and nonbeliever (take your pick), I find this statement deeply problematic.
It is perfectly fine, of course, if Sinema isn’t a nontheist, and it is understandable that she would want to clarify misinformation about her personal beliefs. But to say that these terms are “not befitting of her life’s work or personal character” is offensive because it implies there is something unbefitting about the lives and characters of atheists or nonbelievers.
Why yes it is and yes it does, but I wouldn’t have expected Stedman to say so. I like having my expectations overturned. (Well, sometimes. Some expectations. Others not so much.)
Prominent individuals like Powell rightfully decry anti-Muslim fear-mongering in politics, but few speak out against those who wield accusations of atheism as a political weapon.
Whether people don’t see it or simply aren’t bothered isn’t clear, but it remains a problem.
I respect Sinema’s right to self-identify as she chooses, and I don’t wish to speculate about her religious beliefs. But while I celebrate that she is comfortable enough to openly identify as bisexual, I find her response to being labeled an atheist troubling.
Why not instead say that she’s not an atheist, but so what if she was?
The 113th Congress is rich with diversity. As an interfaith activist, I am glad to see the religious composition of Congress more closely reflect the diversity of America. As a queer person, I’m glad that LGBT Americans are seeing greater representation in Washington.
But as a proud atheist and humanist, I’m disheartened that the only member of Congress who openly identifies as nonreligious has forcefully distanced herself from atheism in a way that puts down those of us who do not believe in God.
We are Americans of good character, too.
Yeah!
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Another interesting item from The Righteous Mind. People don’t vote on self-interest all that much – that is, “self-interest is a weak predictor of policy preferences.” [p 85]
Rather, people care about their groups, whether those be racial, regional, religious, or political. [p 86]
Or all those in sequence, which confuses things; or all those in sequence plus others plus all those not so much in sequence as in competition all the time, waxing and waning depending on which is most salient at any particular moment. That’s my gloss, not his, but I think it has to be right, since we’re all part of all the groups he named plus a bunch of others, and they’re not all equally salient at every moment.
But anyway, the basic idea is useful and suggestive. A lot of us have experienced our atheism becoming less salient while our our membership in the gender group “women” has become more so, lately. We’ve experienced this so strongly that many of us express considerable hostility to the atheist “movement” as such.
Why is this? I don’t even need to explain it, do I. It’s because big chunks of the atheist movement have taken to using a fairly large number of women as verbal punching bags, using gender-specific words and sexual disgust as boxing gloves. That makes our gender group a lot more salient while it makes our atheism group seem hostile.
I wonder how that’s going to work out over the long haul. I don’t know, and I wonder.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
The Washington Post tells us there are some eccentric petitions on the White House’s petition site. That’s not really very surprising.
There’s a petition to designate the Catholic church a hate group. Yes well that’s not going to happen, but the idea itself isn’t crazy. The Catholic church does foster certain kinds of hatred. It’s silly to deny that.
The “We the People” petition was filed on Christmas Day and was prompted by Pope Benedict XVI’s Dec. 21 year-end address to Vatican administrators in which he denounced gay marriage as a threat to Western civilization.
The petition blasts Benedict for “hateful language and discriminatory remarks” and for implying “that gay families are sub-human.”
Well? Is that inaccurate?
Atheists and secularists could file a similar petition. What about Protestants? Muslims? Jains? Would that fly, or has the pope’s interfaith work immunized him?
I don’t know. I merely watch from the sidelines.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
I went to the Monarch Grove this afternoon. That’s the little grove in (brace yourself for another “grove”) Pacific Grove, very near Point Pinos and the lighthouse, where migrating Monarch butterflies gather for a rest on the trip. It’s very cool.
They’ve moved to the other side of the path. They used to clump in some trees on the south side of the path, but now they clump in a Monterey Pine on the north side.
After looking at them there through the binoculars for awhile I took the docent’s advice and went down the little hill where she said they were fluttering around, and so they were, as well as perching singly on pine trees and a bottle brush tree.
They’re butterflies. Butterflies. Fragile as kleenex, and they fly thousands of miles.
Wonderful life.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
It turns out the gangrape of Jyoti Singh Pandey was as much her fault as it was the rapists’. A self-declared “spiritual guru” called Asaram Bapu says so.
Addressing his followers recently, Asaram said that when the girl encountered six drunk men “she should have taken God’s name and could have held the hand of one of the men and said I consider you as my brother and should have said to the other two ‘Brother I am helpless, you are my brother, my religious brother.’
She should have taken God’s name and held their hands and feet…then the misconduct wouldn’t have happened.”
Because with genuine rape, the body has a mechanism to shut that whole thing down. Because if you call on “God” and call your rapists “brothers” then the rapists will stop. Period. That’s a fact, and there are no exceptions. Also, it’s a fact that all women know, with certainty, so any woman who is raped clearly wanted to be raped (or she would have done the things she knows with certainty will prevent the rape). So there’s no such thing as rape.
Jyoti Singh Pandey’s father made her name public yesterday.
Badri now cherishes the memories of his daughter. He remembers her dream of being a doctor.
He said: “I told her I can’t afford to pay for her to do such subjects but she was determined. She wanted to be a doctor and earn lots of money and go overseas a lot.”
When Badri first moved to Delhi in 1983 he earned just 150 Rupees a month – the equivalent of £1.70 today.
But he sold some land to pay for his daughter’s studies and saved as much as possible from his 5,700 Rupees (£65) a month he now earns.
Badri said: “It’s hard living in Delhi on my wages, very hard. But Jyoti always said she would change all of that. She wanted to change our lives once she got a job.”
Jyoti had only just finished her four-year course in physiotherapy at college outside Delhi. She was doing an internship when she was attacked.
That’s the end of that.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Sixteen years ago, in India, there was an extended gang-rape…by 42 men, to be exact, over a period of 40 days.
In the Suryanelli case, a 16-year-old was abducted by a bus conductor who raped her, then passed her onto others, some of who were powerful and well-connected in Kerala at the time.
She was then discarded with no money and in no condition to return home – she couldn’t sit or stand because of her injuries.
And then?
35 people accused of raping her were convicted. But the Kerala High Court, three years later, reversed that decision, holding only one person guilty. The grounds for this verdict were criticised by many people.
Her family and the state prosecutor both appealed to the Supreme Court in 2005 against the High Court’s verdict. Nothing happened after that.
The family survives on her parents’ pensions. The victim was given a job as a peon in a government department but in February, she was arrested and suspended for financial misappropriation.
Now the Supreme Court has decided to hear her case.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Oy. I saw some of this on Twitter yesterday, but was too disgusted and short on time to say anything about it beyond Twitter. But Stephanie said anything, and said it damn well.
Summary: Greta bought a pair of dress shoes for professional occasions. Can you guess what came next?
Only months after rattling her cancer beggars cup,@gretachristina goes shoe shopping http://t.co/cROPjI0Ehttp://t.co/L6WIT35E#atheismplus
Remember, e-beg for money when there’s a cancer scare then go out and buy some really expensive shoes when you get the ok!
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Update: I changed the title. It was meant as angry irony, but – well I can see why it didn’t work.
And in Uttar Pradesh – a teenage girl resists “eve teasing” and the guy who was “eve teasing” her, i.e. demanding sex from her, throws kerosene on her and sets her on fire.
She died.
The girl, who suffered nearly 90 per cent burns, was rushed to the District Hospital and later she was referred to Aligarh Medical College for better treatment.
Mourning the death, the girl’s father said that the police had not taken action against the culprit who had used his influence to harass his daughter.
“I had complained to the police. If they had acted then, my daughter would not have had to suffer so much pain. I am a weak man, and the culprit is powerful. Also, I am a poor man, and my tea stall is all I have to sustain my children with,” said the victim’s father.
“Teasing” is not the right word.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
The barmaid asks Mo a crucial question.
And wham, he falls into her trap.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
