So the "Women in Secularism 2" conference has started, under the supervision of an organization called "Center For Inquiry".
The conference apparantely started with the the President/CEO of the organization giving a talk.
The talk essentially asked what the priorities of secular organizations ought to be, what a more strict definition of 'feminism' would look like and how secular people choose to self identify.
For a longer discussion, you can read the CFI post here.
It would seem that the leader of the Center for Inquiry had a lot of questions about organizations like Atheism+ that seems to overlap CFI goals but may not have clear focus.
The response from the crowd so far has been: "Wait, the leader of CFI is a white guy?"
And "Don't you understand how difficult my life is?"
...The way this sentence is worded makes it sound like someone just made it rain insults after learning the target suffers from depression.
It's rather strange that someone who has been 'bullied out of the movement' is successfully provoking responses from the leaders of secular groups. And managing to keep a blog up to date.
Somehow, the person who coined the term "Atheism+" has a larger profile than most, yet believes that she is no longer participating.
It makes one wonder what these Atheism+ people would do, if they were actually trying.
For an example of how an Atheism+ person "exits" activism:
And then there is LousyCanucks' response: "Does he not just have good sense enough to shut up because he's male?"
So far, so good at Center for Inquisition!
The conference apparantely started with the the President/CEO of the organization giving a talk.
The talk essentially asked what the priorities of secular organizations ought to be, what a more strict definition of 'feminism' would look like and how secular people choose to self identify.
Lindsay: Working for social justice sounds good, but who defines social justice; what does it include #wiscfi
— Center for Inquiry (@center4inquiry) May 17, 2013
For a longer discussion, you can read the CFI post here.
It would seem that the leader of the Center for Inquiry had a lot of questions about organizations like Atheism+ that seems to overlap CFI goals but may not have clear focus.
The response from the crowd so far has been: "Wait, the leader of CFI is a white guy?"
Very strange to open #wiscfi w a white male CEO lecturing women about using the concept of privilege to silence men.
— Rebecca Watson (@rebeccawatson) May 17, 2013
And "Don't you understand how difficult my life is?"
.@ralindsay Have you had people repeatedly tell you to kill yourself b/c they know you're a feminist atheist with depression? #wiscfi
— Jennifer McCreight (@jennifurret) May 17, 2013
...The way this sentence is worded makes it sound like someone just made it rain insults after learning the target suffers from depression.
.@ralindsay I was bullied out of this movement. You all could have had my passion, drive, strengths. But I was a loud mouthed woman #wiscfi
— Jennifer McCreight (@jennifurret) May 17, 2013
It's rather strange that someone who has been 'bullied out of the movement' is successfully provoking responses from the leaders of secular groups. And managing to keep a blog up to date.
Somehow, the person who coined the term "Atheism+" has a larger profile than most, yet believes that she is no longer participating.
It makes one wonder what these Atheism+ people would do, if they were actually trying.
For an example of how an Atheism+ person "exits" activism:
I'm going back into my cave of I Hate Everyone, Especially Skeptics. Goodbye
— Jennifer McCreight (@jennifurret) May 7, 2013
And then there is LousyCanucks' response: "Does he not just have good sense enough to shut up because he's male?"
Apparently Ron went over time. Adam Lee had a question but he hadn’t written it down on his card. Oops!
I have to disagree with a lot of this. Ron, what about when people are dominating the conversation and refusing to let women discuss these ideas by talking so damn much and not letting women actually do any talking themselves? Can a woman tell a conversation-dominating man to shut up and listen to them? That’s sort of the problem here, you know. The problem your conference is trying to defray.
So far, so good at Center for Inquisition!