Over the last couple of years, as I have watched cultural marxists, and feminists especially, plunge the online atheist world into byzantine in-fighting, I have pondered the difficulty that even the most level-headed atheists have in finding the words to repudiate the malign influence of these minions.
This is not to say that atheists don’t or can’t object to the wickedness of PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Betson, etc -- for example, there is no shortage of umbrage evident in the Facebook group, Anti-Atheism+. However, in the absence of the moralistic language available to theists, level-headed atheists generally have to make do with epithets from psychology or epidemiology -- sick, perverted, disturbed, insane, sociopathic, cancerous, malignant etc. To make matters worse, Leftist atheists, mentally straitjacketed by political correctness into moral relativism, often find it difficult even to take a moral position at all, seeking as they often do, the mythical middle ground of conciliation, hand-holding, rainbows and unicorns.
But if there is one group of women that feminists hate with especial venom, it is conservative Christian women. The hatred feminists have for conservative Christian women is four-fold:
Firstly, feminism being almost the perfect expression of Leftism, conservative politics is to feminists as garlic is to vampires.
Secondly, in a similar vein, is the repulsion aroused in feminists by the the very sight of a crucifix pendant worn by a conservative Christian woman.
Thirdly, feminists reserve their most spiteful vitriol for women who “betray” their cause.
Fourthly, to return to my point about language, conservative Christian women have at their disposal an entire lexicon of religious epithets with which to blast feminists, without restraint by considerations of political correctness.
A good friend of mine is a conservative evangelical Christian woman who despises feminism. In a recent conversation, I said to her that although I don’t believe in Satan, the most accurate way I can describe feminism without resorting to epidemiology is to call it a satanic force. She replied that, as she believes in heaven and hell, she very much believes that feminism is the work of Satan. One might say we arrived at the same destination by different roads. Or that many roads lead to Truth.
This raises an interesting question about the apprehension of objective reality. If person A correctly perceives the dangers of a phenomenon through the prism of a supernatural world view, and person B is completely blind to its dangers because she does not apprehend its machinations in the secular, material world, then who perceives objective reality more clearly? The person whose belief in the supernatural gives her insight into developments in the real world, or the purportedly skeptical, rational person who is blind to the approaching danger?
After all, feminism is a particularly malign breed of cultural marxism. If some evil force were plotting to split any nation right down the middle, from the naval to the chops, to destroy the family as the building block of society, to consign entire generations to parentless childhoods, to condemn millions of men and women to failed marriages, or no marriages at all, to spoil millions of women in the flower of their youth and condemn them to decades of miserably aping a naturally masculine way of life... how would it achieve this?
If there be a Satan, feminism would be the prize weapon in his arsenal.
So, if you’re a conservative/libertarian atheist, and you’re casting about for the right words to repudiate feminism or cultural marxism, what lexicon do you reach for? Psychology? Epidemiology?
Try the Bible. It’s a jolly good read if nothing else.
This is not to say that atheists don’t or can’t object to the wickedness of PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Betson, etc -- for example, there is no shortage of umbrage evident in the Facebook group, Anti-Atheism+. However, in the absence of the moralistic language available to theists, level-headed atheists generally have to make do with epithets from psychology or epidemiology -- sick, perverted, disturbed, insane, sociopathic, cancerous, malignant etc. To make matters worse, Leftist atheists, mentally straitjacketed by political correctness into moral relativism, often find it difficult even to take a moral position at all, seeking as they often do, the mythical middle ground of conciliation, hand-holding, rainbows and unicorns.
But if there is one group of women that feminists hate with especial venom, it is conservative Christian women. The hatred feminists have for conservative Christian women is four-fold:
Firstly, feminism being almost the perfect expression of Leftism, conservative politics is to feminists as garlic is to vampires.
Secondly, in a similar vein, is the repulsion aroused in feminists by the the very sight of a crucifix pendant worn by a conservative Christian woman.
Thirdly, feminists reserve their most spiteful vitriol for women who “betray” their cause.
Fourthly, to return to my point about language, conservative Christian women have at their disposal an entire lexicon of religious epithets with which to blast feminists, without restraint by considerations of political correctness.
A good friend of mine is a conservative evangelical Christian woman who despises feminism. In a recent conversation, I said to her that although I don’t believe in Satan, the most accurate way I can describe feminism without resorting to epidemiology is to call it a satanic force. She replied that, as she believes in heaven and hell, she very much believes that feminism is the work of Satan. One might say we arrived at the same destination by different roads. Or that many roads lead to Truth.
This raises an interesting question about the apprehension of objective reality. If person A correctly perceives the dangers of a phenomenon through the prism of a supernatural world view, and person B is completely blind to its dangers because she does not apprehend its machinations in the secular, material world, then who perceives objective reality more clearly? The person whose belief in the supernatural gives her insight into developments in the real world, or the purportedly skeptical, rational person who is blind to the approaching danger?
After all, feminism is a particularly malign breed of cultural marxism. If some evil force were plotting to split any nation right down the middle, from the naval to the chops, to destroy the family as the building block of society, to consign entire generations to parentless childhoods, to condemn millions of men and women to failed marriages, or no marriages at all, to spoil millions of women in the flower of their youth and condemn them to decades of miserably aping a naturally masculine way of life... how would it achieve this?
If there be a Satan, feminism would be the prize weapon in his arsenal.
So, if you’re a conservative/libertarian atheist, and you’re casting about for the right words to repudiate feminism or cultural marxism, what lexicon do you reach for? Psychology? Epidemiology?
Try the Bible. It’s a jolly good read if nothing else.
I think you're being too extreme, G.
ReplyDeleteNot every feminist leans as far to the left as you'd like to think. I certainly don't despise conservative Christian women. Do I disagree with them on certain women's issues? Yes, of course, but it doesn't inspire hate.
There are several conservative Christian females in my family. We either agree to disagree and leave it as that, or explain our views to each other to provide a little insight as to why we support the things we do. It doesn't have to be as ugly as you describe.
Thanks for taking the time to read my blog post. This blog is something of a scrap book, and this post is not the fully fleshed out idea, but your use of NAFALT is somewhat valid. Feel free to comment further on my upcoming video or corresponding blog post on this topic.
ReplyDeleteAlso, what do you make of the Donglegate saga?
I wish I could say the church was mustering an effective resistance to feminism, but they seem complacent at best. Christians have a divorce rate of roughly 40%, hardly anything to celebrate compared to the national average hovering around 50%. Most of this stems from a complete failure to adhere to actual Biblical teachings with regard to divorce which required men and women to commit for life in order to form a stable union and family.
ReplyDeleteEven the Roman Catholic church has annulment factories for American couples who constitute some 90% of all annulments with plenty of shady lawyers to work out the legalese. A lot of us in the manosphere, particularly the Christian manosphere, wear our disdain for the modern church on our sleeves as we believe it has failed men consistently, contrary to feminists claims about it being some bastion of chauvinistic hate.
Man-up sermons are a regular feature from the pulpit, often delivered by beta priests who need the female audience to stay. The church has a solid female majority and certain Biblical messages about female responsibilities must go untaught if the priest would like to go unharassed (or at least not unpaid). The church is not nearly as strong a seed of resistance as people pretend, though I wish it was. A handful of us are trying to change it, one man at a time.