Bullied or cajoled? AKA Have you stopped beating your wife lately?
In one of his recent videos, Thunderfoot makes the accusation that skeptic and atheist leaders were “bullied or cajoled” into speaking out against hatred against women (at the request of Skepchick Amy Roth). He was then rhetorically asked to explain what that language meant in a recent Petition to oust him from the community and to add modern feminism, with all its unscientific and neo-puritan trappings, to the programming and conduct of skeptic, atheist and secular conferences. For shame. This is yet another example of organized, all-dissent-shall-be-silenced, bullying.
Think of yourself in the place of a leader who gets such a Petition. If you refuse, you’re clearly a woman hater (since in those situations, feminism is said to be nothing more than equality between the sexes — a far cry what modern feminism teaches today). And who’s opposed to equality of the sexes/genders/races/and people of different sexual preferences, and a more inclusive environment for all? No one, as far as I know. Still, if you say nothing, it appears that you don’t care about women. And if you do agree to sign, then you’ve been trapped into supporting feminism, an amorphous and shape-shifting beast which is frequently anti-science (due to the bias those allegedly awful white males have been constantly injecting into the field), and you’ve betrayed the fundamental principles of the pro-science movement. I don’t envy the position that the recipients of such petitions find themselves in. While speaking out against hatred toward women is a good and noble idea, this is a trap, and we all know it. The leaders are stuck in a no-win situation, and that’s exactly what “bullied or cajoled” means.
It’s been eye-opening to see how modern feminism works up close. Is this the case in all communities, or is ours an exception?