• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A Friendly Place?

tsg said:
Pretty much how I feel.

I get annoyed every time this "Friendly Atheism" crap comes up because the paper can be summed up in two sentences: "Hey atheists, stop hating those who believe in god!" and "Hey atheists, stop hating those who hate you because you don't believe in god!"

The absolute last person I want to hear from about angry atheists is someone who has no interest in finding out why they're angry in the first place.
Click to expand...

Do you even know who Michael Martin, the author of the above paper, is, or what he's written?
 
tsg said:
I get annoyed every time this "Friendly Atheism" crap comes up because the paper can be summed up in two sentences: "Hey atheists, stop hating those who believe in god!" and "Hey atheists, stop hating those who hate you because you don't believe in god!"
Click to expand...
Huh?

I, for one, do not hate you for not believing in God.

So, what's your beef again?

DR
 
linusrichard said:
Atheists being friendly will do nothing to combat the stereotype of atheists being angry, bitter, etc. This is because that stereotype has no basis in reality but comes instead from the imaginations of anti-atheist Christians.
Click to expand...
I've seen this stated by several people in this thread, but I'm not sure it's really true. Sure, maybe you're friendly, and maybe I'm friendly, but check out a few atheist videos on YouTube and that angry, snarling stereotype isn't hard to find. Guys who seem to need to have a cigarette to speak, who can't express themselves without obscenity...

It may be true that most atheists are friendly and in the closet, but I think it's naive to claim that the stereotype has no basis in reality. Lots of folks who are out of the closet fit the stereotype to a T.
 
bokonon said:
I've seen this stated by several people in this thread, but I'm not sure it's really true. Sure, maybe you're friendly, and maybe I'm friendly, but check out a few atheist videos on YouTube and that angry, snarling stereotype isn't hard to find. Guys who seem to need to have a cigarette to speak, who can't express themselves without obscenity...

It may be true that most atheists are friendly and in the closet, but I think it's naive to claim that the stereotype has no basis in reality. Lots of folks who are out of the closet fit the stereotype to a T.
Click to expand...

Examples?
 
bokonon said:
I've seen this stated by several people in this thread, but I'm not sure it's really true. Sure, maybe you're friendly, and maybe I'm friendly, but check out a few atheist videos on YouTube and that angry, snarling stereotype isn't hard to find. Guys who seem to need to have a cigarette to speak, who can't express themselves without obscenity...

It may be true that most atheists are friendly and in the closet, but I think it's naive to claim that the stereotype has no basis in reality. Lots of folks who are out of the closet fit the stereotype to a T.
Click to expand...

You are walk into a pub, and the first thing you see is someone suddenly stand up swear loudly and headbutt another.

You do not know what precipitated this action the history or the people involved. You cannot draw any conclusions apart from making a decision to drink else where, or remain and see what transpires.

Is the person who threw the punch unfriendly, Violent and incoherent normally, or are you viewing out of context,

Rabid Atheists on youtube etc made a video and placed it in public media because something precipitated that action, I have been sought out in my local for discussions on physics Religion and politics (some perverse masochists even bring friends along for the match) as I am annauseatingly friendly and fun loving person, but in every belief system you have your tub thumpers, and I have been known to thump my tub when the situation warrants it, and relatively I'm just a street busker they've got a full blown military tatoo going on

Gotta go, I have blood forming in my caffeine system, and I am nearly out of smokes, women and children get the:talk034: out of my way I need stimulants... come to papa you slender tube of vegetation.

=^..^=
 
Last edited:
bokonon said:
Here's a few, but I've seen worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXGODGRoa-Y
Click to expand...

This qualifies as angry? It must be a usage of the word I'm not familiar with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyKV-mQmi_w
Click to expand...

This guy seems to be complaining about some free speech issue. But he is an atheist/irreleventist agnostic(?), and he's angry. So I guess that makes him an angry atheist, even though he's complaining about other atheists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l05rbHsdZro
Click to expand...

I have no idea what's going on here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCpdvK3F_Qs
Click to expand...

This guy is virtually unwatchable, but I wouldn't call him angry. He's promoting an atheistic position, but how does that differ from just about any other religious program on Sunday morning?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryV_IdNFnvg
Click to expand...

And this is someone complaining about Rational Response Squad getting banned from YouTube. He seems more despondent than angry.

Exactly what is it about these videos that is promoting the "angry atheist" stereotype? Because I have seen fire and brimstone preachers on Sunday morning television that make these look like a civics discussion on public access.

But let me ask you another question I think is more important: Do you know why these people are angry in the first place?
 
When most homosexuals were in the closet, often the only gay people that the straight community was aware of were those that fit the stereotype. I suspect that the stereotypical 'angry' atheist is equally representative of their group. Such individuals certainly exist and they often typify the group to outsiders just as flamboyant gay men and manish lesbians once did.
 
Beth said:
When most homosexuals were in the closet, often the only gay people that the straight community was aware of were those that fit the stereotype. I suspect that the stereotypical 'angry' atheist is equally representative of their group. Such individuals certainly exist and they often typify the group to outsiders just as flamboyant gay men and manish lesbians once did.
Click to expand...

That seems to me to be saying that complaining about "angry atheists" is like complaining about "flaming homosexuals". In other words, as long as they stay in the closet, keeping it hidden from view so as to avoid offending the sensibilities of the intolerant, nobody will mind. Screw that.
 
Beth said:
When most homosexuals were in the closet, often the only gay people that the straight community was aware of were those that fit the stereotype. I suspect that the stereotypical 'angry' atheist is equally representative of their group. Such individuals certainly exist and they often typify the group to outsiders just as flamboyant gay men and manish lesbians once did.
Click to expand...

I've known people for many years who are surprised to find out that I'm an atheist. I know others who probably don't know. This is not because I've hidden the fact from them but simply because I don't meet someone and say "Hi, I'm Steve. I'm an atheist".
 
tsg said:
That seems to me to be saying that complaining about "angry atheists" is like complaining about "flaming homosexuals". In other words, as long as they stay in the closet, keeping it hidden from view so as to avoid offending the sensibilities of the intolerant, nobody will mind. Screw that.
Click to expand...

yay, shag the out of sight out of mind issues, if I affront their sensibilities, then they really need to work harder at their beliefs, maybe go get themselves a faithlift at their local Religious retailer.

Is it called the don't ask don't tell principle, I am all for that however the damned fools keep asking.
 
Last edited:
tsg said:
That seems to me to be saying that complaining about "angry atheists" is like complaining about "flaming homosexuals". In other words, as long as they stay in the closet, keeping it hidden from view so as to avoid offending the sensibilities of the intolerant, nobody will mind. Screw that.
Click to expand...

I didn't see that analogy as one that should necessarily be extended to complaining about the people in question. I took it just to be making the point that the "angry atheists" were just the more visible ones and often those atheists would be the only ones which people were aware of, therefore creating the stereotype.

If anything, I would say that the analogy suggests that level headed, calm and friendly atheists making their views known more would combat the stereotype, in the same way that if more people were aware that plenty of the less-flamboyant people one sees every day are homosexual, the flamboyant stereotype would be less prevalent.
 
I had a bit of an epiphany on this which might slightly enhance this thread. It's around the whole Muhammad/Teddy Bear thing.

So I'm sitting in the pub, chatting about the this thing, and someone said 'well, you've got to respect other people's beliefs, haven't you'.

And after a moment of residual liberal humanist anguish I realised in a blinding flash (and almost immediately said, rather too loudly) that no, no I don't.

Whether it be demanding judicial murder over the naming of a soft toy, trying to punish consenting adults over what they do with each other's genitals or simply convincing generation after bloody generation of children that there's an inherent virtue in being able to convince yourself that made-up stuff exists.

I am under no obligation to respect any of that. Doesn't mean I'm going on a proselytising crusade, doesn't mean I don't respect any charitable or kind actions that people who happen to be religious perform (and yes, they do perform them, with sincerity and grace, just as atheists do), doesn't mean I'm about to get nasty. But your beliefs? Nope. Don't respect 'em. Find 'em ridiculous.

Free at last, free at last, thank...um...well, you know what I mean...
 
What Matt said.

What a lot of people said.

I don't want to defer to notions I find ridiculous.

And if people didn't share their opinions of my lack of belief with me or assume I shared their beliefs--I wouldn't have to. The atheists I know are among the nicest, funniest, and most honest people I know. It seems no matter what they say or do, people are dashing about criticizing their very right to say something and imagining all sorts of nefarious intent that I don't see at all. Even on a skeptics forum we see this. It seems that the "nicer" we are the more entitled some theists feel to that niceness-- they interpret as deserved respect-- a nod to the notion that faith is good. Faith is the opposite of skepticism to me, and I don't see anything good about excess credulity.

And when people come here and preach the "my woo is true" stuff, I think of them as invading my skeptics forum. If I'm going to be accused of being strident by people who do not know me, then I want the opportunity to practice my barbs on line to those who have decided to share their opinions about me with me. I consider criticisms of me an opportunity to share my reciprocal opinion of the critic. It allows me to a nice gentler atheist in the real world where irrational people can throw real things.

My favorite believers are the ones I don't know are believers. They behave in the manner many theists would like atheists to behave. They keep their beliefs (or lack thereof) to themselves.
 
Last edited:
tsg said:
That seems to me to be saying that complaining about "angry atheists" is like complaining about "flaming homosexuals".
Click to expand...
Yes
In other words, as long as they stay in the closet, keeping it hidden from view so as to avoid offending the sensibilities of the intolerant, nobody will mind. Screw that.
Click to expand...
No.

What Egg said. If more folks like FZ were known to be atheists, then the stereotype would not be so prevalent.
 
bokonon said:
Here's a few, but I've seen worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXGODGRoa-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyKV-mQmi_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l05rbHsdZro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCpdvK3F_Qs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryV_IdNFnvg
Click to expand...

As a fan of, supporter of, producer of (very small scale) digital media I personally believe that 99 % of you-tube sucks. That would be because about 99 % of the people doing video on you-tube should not be allowed to touch the equipment - even if they own it. And the part that doesn't is just not enough for me to wallow through the rest to find (so I let others do the wallowing and go when they come up with something worth the effort - though that even runs at under 40% successful).:)
 
Egg said:
I didn't see that analogy as one that should necessarily be extended to complaining about the people in question. I took it just to be making the point that the "angry atheists" were just the more visible ones and often those atheists would be the only ones which people were aware of, therefore creating the stereotype.

If anything, I would say that the analogy suggests that level headed, calm and friendly atheists making their views known more would combat the stereotype, in the same way that if more people were aware that plenty of the less-flamboyant people one sees every day are homosexual, the flamboyant stereotype would be less prevalent.
Click to expand...

And herein lies the paradox, because as soon as an atheist makes his views known, he is labeled as angry. "Militant" is just another word for "outspoken". "Be friendly" means "keep quiet about it". Somehow, I'm the one whose wrong for not tolerating the intolerance of others. Bollocks to that.

I mean, really, think about what you're saying here: If gays were more obviously less obviously gay, then the stereotype would be less prevalent. How are they supposed to act like everyone else yet make it known they are gay? Wear a sign?

The stereotype is inaccurate. But the intolerance of the sterotype is the problem. When someone attributes fundamentalist behavior to all Christians, everyone, atheists included, come out of the woodwork to say that it isn't true of all Christians. When atheists are outspoken, angry even, regardless of why, they are accused of reinforcing the stereotype. It's a BS double standard.

"Angry atheist" implies he has no reason to be angry. It's not just dismissing the argument out of hand, it's refusing to acknowledge there's even one being made.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom