Why the Petition Matters

Earlier this week, I posted a petition asking the leaders of atheist and secular organizations to support feminism and measures to improve diversity and stop harassment. The petition went up at 9:30 PM on Thursday night, and as of this writing, on Saturday night, it has around 1,300 signatures and is still accumulating more at a healthy clip. I think that's a very good response, and I'm grateful for the attention it's gotten and the many messages of support people have left along with their signatures. If you've signed already, thank you! You're the people who give me hope for the secular community.


Of course, not everyone is impressed. Here's a troll comment that was posted on Change.org:

"I'm signing this petition because why the fuck not? The First World Problems-contingent in the atheist movement is hemhorraging fans anyway, as demonstrated by the anemic support for this petition. You'd think their putative millions of fans would make a bigger impact. Or maybe they're just lazy."

So, this particular hater thinks that 1,000+ signatures in a day for an anti-sexism petition is "anemic support". But that begs the question: compared to what?

I can suggest a point of comparison. Let's examine the site that's probably the largest and most prominent den of sexist and misogynist atheists, a forum that proudly calls itself the Slymepit. I did a WHOIS lookup, which shows that the domain name was registered on July 3, 2012. And in all that time, how many members does that forum have?

Total posts 49115 • Total topics 204 • Total members 495

So, in less than 48 hours, my little petition has attracted more than twice as many supporters as the Slymepit has garnered in six months. Granted, some of the signatures came from obvious trolls like the one quoted above, but on the other hand, we also can't assume that everyone who's registered on the Slymepit supports its goals.

This is the same pattern we see elsewhere. The AtheismPlus.com forum, which was registered on August 19 last year, has 2,400 members, almost five times more people than the slime. The r/atheismplus forum on Reddit has 2,600 subscribers, whereas the r/antiatheismplus one boasts the grand total of 250. In every case, the atheists who support social justice are the large majority, whereas the hateful trolls are a minority - vindictive and vociferous, yes, but a small minority nonetheless. They can harass and bully individuals, but they have no broad appeal or power to shape the direction of the secular movement.

And this matters all the more because of something I didn't even know about when I created the petition, something that Stephanie Zvan brought to my attention: later this month, there's going to be a meeting of the heads of secular and freethought organizations, appropriately called HEADS. Among other things, they'll be discussing issues of feminism and diversity in our community and what steps atheist groups should be taking to address them.

This makes it even more important to prove that there's strong grassroots support for making the secular community a more diverse, welcoming, and inclusive place. It shows our leaders that this is something the rank and file wants, by large margins, and it means that going into the HEADS summit, those who've already spoken out against sexism will have the wind at their backs. An ever-greater focus on social justice is the future of the atheist movement, and that's a development to be welcomed!

Image credit: Shutterstock

Algorithmic catastrophe: How news feeds reprogram your mind and habits

The most powerful editors in the world? Algorithms.

Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • According to a Pew Research poll, 45% of U.S. adults get at least some of their news from Facebook, with half of that amount using Facebook as their only news outlet.
  • Algorithms on social media pick what people read. There's worry that social media algorithms are creating filter bubbles, so that they never have to read something they don't agree with and thus cause tribal thinking and confirmation bias.
  • The Charles Koch Foundation is committed to understanding what drives intolerance and the best ways to cure it. The foundation supports interdisciplinary research to overcome intolerance, new models for peaceful interactions, and experiments that can heal fractured communities. For more information, visit charleskochfoundation.org/courageous-collaborations.
  • The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Keep reading Show less

Psychological gym experiment proves the power of mind over matter

It isn't mind over matter as much as mind properly working with matter.

DENVER, CO - MAY 16: Brian and Monica Folts workout on treadmills at Colorado Athletic Club Tabor Center on May 16, 2018 in Denver, Colorado. The couple runs marathons and compete in Ironman triathlons and train on on treadmills. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post via Getty Images)
Mind & Brain
  • A new Stanford study finds believing you have genetic predispositions for obesity and low exercise endurance changes your physiology.
  • Participants told they had a protective obesity gene had a better response than those told they did not, even if they did not actually have the gene.
  • Runners performed poorly after learning they did not have the gene for endurance, even if they actually have the gene.
Keep reading Show less

Why this 2015 NASA study is beloved by climate change skeptics

The findings of the controversial study flew in the face of past research on ice gains in Antarctica.

NASA
Politics & Current Affairs
  • A 2015 NASA study caused major controversy by claiming that Antarctica was gaining more ice than it was losing.
  • The study said that ice gains in East Antarctica were effectively canceling out ice losses in the western region of the continent.
  • Since 2015, multiple studies have shown that Antarctica is losing more ice than it's gaining, though the 2015 study remains a favorite of climate change doubters to this day.
Keep reading Show less