A tiny group of gallant men (and “their women”) go underground to fight the evil gynocratic overlords. Is this the plot of a terrible dystopian potboiler from 1971, or a description of how most MRAs see themselves, and the world, today?
Turns out it’s both. I found this pic in the Blue Pill subreddit, and now I really, really want to read this book.
Here’s a book review from someone who did.
Ann, fwiw I agree with you. Katz was unnecessarily rude.
@Katz: you could have told GrumpyOldMan to stop talking about religion (since it bothers you), but you had to be an ass about it. It felt like you were silencing an opinion.
gilshalos, maybe someone read it and removed the end bit! I can see myself doing that. 😛
I never got the idea of Bran choosing not to go with Arthur. He talked about bonds and helping the world – but he would lose all the memories he had, he’d be starting from scratch.
Mind you I couldn’t fathom why Dorothy would go back to black-and-white Kansas, either, which tells you about my mindset.
I adored Alan Garner’s two Alderley stories. For some reason the part when Susan and Colin are in the mines is my favourite section.
I have this edition of Moon. Love that cover, never seen one I think compares.
Seconded. Esp. since the conversation in question was quite specific, and not about christianity or christians in general.
Also… love this thread, bc now I have a ton of books to discover! WHTM comment threads feed my Goodreads ‘to read’ list.
Yeah, have to say I agree, arubakeru, Tracy.
Grumpy Old Man’s last comment explained he meant a particular set of Christians. Some of his proceeding remarks could have easily been taken as referencing all Christians.
I understand Katz’s reaction. There was a commenter here a number of months ago (as the regulars no doubt recall) who insisted no one can be a real feminist and be religious (particularly Christian, Jewish or Muslim). From remarks others have said, this sort of thing has happened before and lead to a mass exodus.
On Susan in Narnia, I thought she just underwent a loss of faith and interest in material things. I also didn’t think she would never get to Heaven, just that she would need to change first. Maybe I misinterpreted
Apparently whoever tried making that point never heard of any religions that worship female deities.
Zolnier, I think that commenter hadn’t heard of a lot of things
Skye, that’s pretty much how I read it about Susan, too, though I don’t think I thought ahead to what was supposed to happen to her, apart from dealing with the fact her parents and siblings had all just been killed in a train crash!
Kittehserf, yeah, that would be a lot of pain to deal with.
I would actually appreciate it if people stopped using the term “asshole atheist.” I’ve requested that before but my request didn’t really lead to anything. The intent might not be to call us all assholes but it really sounds like that’s exactly what it’s doing. It makes me feel like my opinions are unwanted and unwelcome every time. Atheists are frequently called assholes just for expressing our opinions, including when those opinions aren’t insulting to others and that is bigoted.
I realize that there is a lot of overlap between the insufferable and smug segment of the atheist population and the manosphere. But please don’t let that fact cause us to forget that atheists actually are a minority and marginalized population. At least it is in the US. For example, being an open atheist has been known to count against parents in custody disputes, many people would not vote for an atheist political candidate and about half the US population thinks you can’t be a moral person without belief in a god. We shouldn’t be treated as an exceptional minority category that doesn’t require any intersectionalism or sensitivity.
I really wish that if commenters are going to use the term “asshole atheist” they would make sure to at least qualify it to make sure it is clear the term is not meant as a generalization against all atheists. I do have a few suggestions for alternate terms that would be clearer and inoffensive.
Reddit style atheists
Manosphere atheists
Sam Harris type atheists
Atheist reactionaries
May I suggest Amazing Atheists for the list? God I remember when he was on TWTG, kind of weird to find out what else he did.
The statement that you can’t be a moral person without a belief in a god is an interesting one. I say that one can be an immoral person even with a belief in a god, such as the Inquisition torturing innocent women because it believes that the women were witches for instance.
The statement that you can’t be a moral person without a belief in a god is an interesting one. I say that one can be an immoral person even with a belief in a god, such as the Inquisition torturing innocent women because it believes that the women were witches for instance.
Ooops. My post was posted twice. Sorry.
I think the idea that atheists or other non religiously inclined people can’t possibly have a moral compass says more about whoever’s proposing it than said non religious people.
Oh, honestly, you guys. Where is this “you have to respond nicely to people who are being insulting to you” attitude coming from? In the first place, you’ll find that I responded to him twice before and he kept doubling down; in the second place, his actual opinion was that anyone who disagrees with him is just “not following their beliefs through to the logical conclusion;” and in the third place, “be polite to people who are being insulting to you because everyone should be allowed to share their opinions” is not and has never been how we operate around here.
WWTH: Sorry, I must not have seen when you mentioned that before, but I will stop using that term. Actually makes me kind of uncomfortable too for the same reason; has anyone got an alternate term that doesn’t include the word “atheist?”
Anti-theist?
Regarding Susan and Narnia
http://grotesqueanddecadence.tumblr.com/post/21272759751/the-problem-of-susan-by-neil-gaiman
Katz,
I believe that if there is a god it cannot be as perfect as we’re told. That doesn’t mean I think that this god would be bad, or good. It would be something in between, like us, and zie would be a limited being.
But if God is omnipotent what GOM said makes sense (to me at least). I’m aware that you don’t like reading this sort of opinion and I will shut my mouth on this matter (starting now). But you didn’t tell GOM to stop talking about a sensitive issue. You said:
“Mmm, no, I generally avoid getting into religious discussions, but as is generally the case when one says “there are only two possible explanations” about a complex topic, you are wrong. There are many possible explanations, and if I brought in ten Christians of different stripes, you’d get ten different ones.”
Which looks like engaging in the debate to me.
Yeah, he doubled down on his statement. And *then* you started being rude. You didn’t say why you thought he was wrong, you called him an asshole atheist (he’s said he’s not an atheist btw) and then you silenced him in a way that, personally, I think is gross.
You want to be that kind of person because in WHTM politeness is not a rule? Fine. But I don’t think he deserved it and that your response was way out of line. I get to have an opinion, too.
I really don’t get that particular short story. Bits with Susan dwelling on having to identify her siblings was great though.
arubakeru, the issue (and what I’ve been addressing all along) is not his opinions about God. It’s his opinion about Christians and people with those religious beliefs. Namely, that anyone who holds a different opinion than him about theodicy is just not being logical enough. There’s no point in trying to have a discussion with someone who has already decided, without actually hearing them, that all other opinions are wrong and illogical and probably the result of the religious thought police.
IMO human beings are too limited to assert something with absolute confidence. So I agree with you when you say that it is wrong to decide that you speak the truth and anyone that disagrees with you is illogical.
That said, you didn’t actually try to give GOM your opinion. You decided he would never change his mind and that he should be punished for it.
He also wasn’t referring to all Christians to begin with. I read it as him just stating his opinion about a certain branch (I think, not an expert) of thought.
Good, because that’s all I was saying. That was my opinion and I shared it.
I understand why you didn’t like his comment, but I also understand why Ann got so pissed. I didn’t understand all the rudeness, though. As I said, it felt like you were silencing him. If you were not, you weren’t clear about your intentions.