#gender atheism

[material-gay]

Unspoken assumptions in "queer" circles

Both homosexuality and heterosexuality are signs of close-mindedness.

Trans women possess a sort of divine, transcendent knowledge that is inaccessible to other people.

The more oppressed you are, the more correct your opinions are.

The less oppressed you are, the less your sexual boundaries matter.

The less oppressed you are, the more you're expected to acknowledge it by engaging in various forms of self-flagelation.

Every "cisgender" man should identify as either non-binary or pansexual as a sign of not being bigoted.

Talking about biological sex is haram.

Interfering with or discouraging someone from undergoing medical procedures is a cardinal sin.

"Essentialism" is when words mean things.

[vouam]

You can imagine what the qrts and replies look like

[sapphsorrows]

trans is an inherently spiritual belief. you believe that somehow, in an unfalsifiable way, you were born the wrong gender. i don't have to believe that. i have freedom of religion, and therefore freedom from religion. i am an atheist. i don't believe in god. i don't believe in weird spiritual gender woo. expecting me to refer to your spiritual gender instead of your biological sex is like expecting me to pray to your god and getting mad when i don't. sorry not sorry <3 i only care about material reality.

[nansheonearth]

This deeply held belief that even nonbelievers deep down hold the same belief happens both with the trans community and christianity. The idea that "radfems hate me now because now I'm a man" only works if you believe so hard that you're a man to the point where you extend the belief to people who don't believe you can change sex. It's the same way christians, from my experience, believe that atheists do believe in god but are just angry at him or want to rebel against him. Both have such strong faith that they can't even fathom others not believing at least a little bit at their core.

[she-is-ovarit]

There is more than what I can cram into this infographic.

[nando161mando]

via @chaser

[allindiarise]

Online pornography is being accessed by boys as young as eight, and one out of every three pornographic videos features explicit sexual violence or aggressiveness. This is just terrible. Mainstream pornography frequently depicts violence against women, such as strangulation and degradation, as the norm. Pornography is distorting men and destroying women's lives.

[liskantope]

Did I just make a half-joke in my last post about the 2010's brand of aggressive internet feminism being dead? Have I mentioned more than once in recent posts that the I consider it a happy development that the TERFish ideology seems to have siphoned away a lot of the visible "women are fragile because men are so terrifying" mentality in more mainstream feminism? Well, that was before I read the below post that is apparently making the rounds in the last few days about the "bear test" and the oh-so-nailed-it commentary on it claiming that the "bear test" illuminates exactly two fundamentally types of men:

This "bear vs. man" question is obvious to me a rhetorical sleight-of-hand playing on a convenient arrangements of cultural emotion-based ideas of what bears symbolize and how protective a man is supposed to be around his daughter having men in her life and so on. Treating it as a serious thought experiment leading to an obvious conclusion about the patriarchy or something would be annoying enough, but first post has to inject that familiar gleeful smugness about how the simple question is guaranteed trip us men up and expose our toxic mindset for all the world to see and illuminate the writer's perfect black-and-white view of gender relations. (It reminds me of the question designed to trip up atheists: "You're walking down a dark street at night and see some shadowy figures coming your way. If you were to discover that they are people who just came out of a Bible study, would that make you feel better or worse?" Except I think that old pro-religion argument, much as I've always hated it, actually rests on firmer ground.)

As for the follow-up social media post, it's nice to know that, as a man who sincerely believes probability-wise that the bear in the woods is a lot more dangerous to my hypothetical daughter than a randomly-chosen man is (an assessment supposedly no woman holds), I am now properly classified as one of those men who is more dangerous than a bear, or (to a more charitable reading) one of those men who is providing cover/excuses for / not doing his part to stop the men who are more dangerous than bears.

(I doubt very much that there's actual data around on chances of a young woman being attacked in the woods by a human man or chances of being attacked by a bear, but I'm willing to change my prediction if I learn that most species of bear ignore humans who wander into their midst like 99% of the time or something like that. Which would cast doubt on most cultural treatment of bears, of course and also kind of undermine the punchline of the "test".)

[redditreceipts]

Hi Varona, i may be dumb, but why atheism is a terf? can't figure it out

hey :)

so I've used the term "atheist" as in "a person who does not believe in or is agnostic towards the existence of any higher power or immaterial essence". That would include agnosticism towards things like a soul, karma, an afterlife, etc. I know that this is a broad definition, because some sources define atheism as the absence of a belief in god(s).

So is the gender identity belief compatible with atheism?

A transgender person is, according to the Oxford dictionary, "a person whose gender identity does not correspond with the sex registered for them at birth". So that would mean that some males think that they are women, and some females believe that they are men, right?

No, it goes further - the second assertion is that by expressing one's gender identity, or by only identifying as that particular identity, the person becomes that what they're identifying as. Many even go as far as to say that a person does not just become a different gender by identifying as such, but they also retrospectively change the reality of their gender category. So for example, if I say today that I identify as a woman, I am a woman - but if I tomorrow assert that I am a man, I will always have been a man, even if I was a woman yesterday. If you point out the inconsistency and draw parallels to the fact that we have always been at war with Eastasia, you are an evil TERF bigot nazi and deserve to be punched in the face.

A person can by virtue of their identity also lay claim on certain priviliges or services that are reserved for one sex. So there has to be a damn good reason for the assertion that by mere identification, you change your gender category, right? Because it isn't true for any other category. If you identify as Asian, you are not therefore Asian, and if you identify as working-class, you are not therefore working-class. So what makes gender identity different? Why are you a woman because you identify as such? What benefit does this definition provide?

I've searched the internet up and down, right and left for an answer. I have found none. What I have found instead are tons and tons of people accusing those who ask questions of bigotry, being a dick, being a TERF or a nazi. When they are asked to define womanhood themselves, they say that it is some nebulous concept, that there exists some kind of "gendered soul" or "gendered energy", that you possess or don't possess.

So yes, believing that by mere identification or assertion you become that thing is magical thinking. Believing that you will become a woman just by identifying as one, with no material referent, is no different than believing that you are the chosen people or that you will get rid of cancer by praying. It is, in the end, a spiritual or religious belief and therefore not atheist. If you think that you can change reality by mere assertion, then you are no more atheist or rational than a person who beliefs that the spirits of the earth try to talk to you.

And for the record! I personally do believe in some whacky shit like crystals or the energy of the moon. I am not an atheist. There are spiritual beliefs that I personally follow. The difference between me and a gender ideologue is that I don't want to make it a law that people can only cut their hair when the moon is waning or some bullshit like that. People can believe in whatever they want. But if they want to pass laws and socially ostracise people for not following their personal religion, that's where I draw the line.

These people are no better than conservatives who want to ban abortion because in their personal belief, life begins at conception.

[raspberryfem]

saw a post on my dash by a dianic witch complaining about atheists and i think it's funny & a bit sad that even in radfem spaces there's a clear bias against atheists and a clear belief in the stereotypical "reddit atheist/nu atheist." the op acted like calling witchcraft "woo" was some sort of misogynist slur. i am always thinking about how people of all different belief systems love to blame atheists for their own oppression (and their own insecurities) rather than, you know, the actual major hegemonic world religions. atheists on tumblr are not a threat to your witchcraft. we literally don't care. but acting like your religion can't be criticized bc it's "woman-focused" is ridiculous. every ideology can and should be challenged.

[sweetstarcollector]

Just watched a video of someone reading that “My Shadow is Purple” book. The basic premise is there’s a kid, and the kid has a mom with a pink shadow, a dad with a blue shadow, and the kid has a purple shadow. Why is this kid’s shadow purple? The book explains that this kid enjoys playing with girl toys and boy toys, enjoys dancing (with the pink shadows) and playing sports (with the blue shadows), so therefore the kid can’t be just pink or just blue. There’s one page where I think the author realized what they were implying and threw in a “also pink shadows can be strong and blue shadows can have emotions”, but the very next page is the kid saying that they must not be pink or blue because they like “sports, dancing, trains, ponies, glitter, and engines”. Not a single comment on this video was even slightly critical. Tons of people saying it described them as a non-binary person, that they wanted to read it to their kids. It’s so bizarre, it’s gender roles 2.0 being packaged as progressive. I remember when the push was for there to be no “boy toys” or “girl toys”, to the point some stores stopped separating them like that. Now, we’re telling kids that not only do “boy toys/activities/interests” and “girl toys/activities/interests” exist, but that the separation is so important that which ones you partake in literally determine your identity. It’s not just this book that does this either (Hello, “Jack not Jackie”). It’s just so strange.

[material-gay]

...but it's not a religion

[vouam]

(I believe this happened a few months ago, absolutely heartbreaking. Rest in peace.)

This tweet is currently going viral with (of course) a lot of men claiming ‘this is because of culture, not religion!’

They clearly lack critical thinking skills because while yes, the religion does not state women should be killed for showing their hair, she is still ordered to wear it by the Quran and threatened with Jahannam (hellfire). A woman revealing her hair is seen as a dishonour to the family - the exact motive for this case. Misogynistic culture obviously is a factor too. The entitlement to women’s bodies, control over their life or death, normalised violence. This case is clearly a result of both religion and culture.

Religion and misogynistic culture thrive because of one another. They use religion to justify their misogynistic cultural views and then claim ‘it’s culture!’ when something bad happens as a result.

In response to these comments from men, maybe do something about the mistreatment of women rather than play mental gymnastics because its culture not religion. Have some accountability. It’s still your culture and your religion, women are dying and you don’t care.

[sapphsorrows]

I don't get the point in being a Facts and Logic Atheist Skeptic if you're going to blatantly ignore the fallacies of the transgender ideology.

Everyone makes fun of the circular reasoning of Christians but no one makes fun of the very obvious circular reasoning of the trans movement. One of the reasons "what is a woman" is such a fantastic question is because they can't answer it. "What is a woman?" "A woman is someone who identifies as a woman." "Ok, well what is a that? When you "identify" as a woman, what does that mean?" It's very similar to asking a Christian "how do you know the Bible is true?" They say "the Bible is true because it's God's holy word." "Ok, well how do you know that?" "Because the Bible says."

Not only that, but transness in itself is an entirely spiritual belief. You're essentially trying to "fix" your body, which isn't even broken, to further reflect your soul. The idea of a soul is inherently spiritual. I find this especially true of nonbinary people who go through surgery and have their nipples removed. Many of them say "well, I wasn't supposed to have nipples" or "nipples make me dysphoric," and it doesn't make any sense. Nearly everyone on planet earth has nipples, what do you mean you weren't "supposed" to have them?

When you listen to trans people talk about their gender identity, it's extremely religious. Even with things like "trans joy," I can't help but think of the old sold "I've got the joy joy joy joy down in my heart." Well, I guess if JKR doesn't like it she can sit on a tack.

When they talk about their transition, they're "on a journey," they're "connecting with their gender." When they do finally transition, and cry because they "finally feel like their true selves."

What does that even mean? There is no "true" self, the self you currently have is your true self. You were never not yourself. You were never broken. Anyone who told you that you were was trying to sell you something.

The fact that most skeptic youtubers aren't even a little suspicious of this movements is very confusing to me. It's still possible they could be, but god forbid you say anything.

The trans community is one of the most toxic things I've ever been a part of. In my opinion, it's like Scientology on steroids. If you leave, you will lose friends, and you may become the victim of targeted harassment. If you even hint that you might be questioning it, you will be met with suspicion at best and outright hatred at worst.

In my opinion, it is one of the most popular, regressive and destructive cults currently operating in the US, and one of the reasons it's so dangerous is because it specifically targets mentally ill teenagers and gay kids. It sells the idea that something is wrong with them. It leads them down the path of medicalization and sterilization. In many ways, it's the modern day lobotomy.

This is the biggest medical scandal of our lifetime. If you're not at least a little bit skeptical, I worry for you.

[vampiremiffy]

religion IS misoginy

People have used religion to justify oppresion towards women since ever, men love to use Eve has an example of "women's innate evil" because she's the one who bite the forbiden fruit and tempted Adam to do the same, blaming women for all evil in humanity (despite being God, a male according to them, who created evil in the first place)but what men don't do is to blame other evil ON MEN

Cain was the first person to ever murdered someone, he is male, but nobody is blaming all men for this, or Judas turning up Jesus and therefor stealing him from humankind. Its "not all men" when men who we have all the proof that have existed because we are living among them are killing, raping, stealing, oppresing, but its "all women" just because in your fairytale religion is a woman who bite a fruit in a myth (despite AGAIN, God, a male, is the one who put the fruit there and knew they would eat it)

Religion is a tool to oppress, is to make us feel we are inferior to men and keep us in their power. Free yourself and stop submiting yourself to a religion who see you as less than

(i'm talking about the bible and christianity only because i was raised catholic and my country is mainly evangelical and christian, theres no big population of jews/muslims)

[mister-rad-boy]

Honestly the way that some trans people/TRAs talk about gender is so similar to Jehovah’s witnesses. Acting like people “discovering their genders” is some sort of spiritual awakening and that always bugged me about the whole movement even before I peaked. People trying to spread the good word of gender identity and acting like it was this big solution to their problems. It’s what led me away from religion and what ultimately caused me to peak on gender ideology.