The Misogyny Of Atheism

Yeah, that’s a beauty of a title. I didn’t make that one up. A blog called ‘Cutting It Straight’ put up this short post. I want to talk about this given it’s relevance to some episodic rumblings in the atheist community – whatever that is supposed to be.

Their post was short, so here it is entirely.

The Misogyny of Atheism

“How can a progressive, important intellectual community behave so poorly towards its female peers?”

Because atheism’s fundamental intellectual commitments (if pursued consistently) lead inexorably to such behaviour.

This article (not for kids to read, by the way!) shows the fundamental incoherence and hopelessness of atheism, because it displays the logical devaluation of the individual that inevitably results from naturalistic materialism. See, if human beings are merely animals and there is no transcendent, objective morality, “might makes right”–and men, being stronger than women, dominate in the jungle of naturalistic materialism. On atheistic grounds, how would that be wrong? (How is there any right and wrong to begin with, anyway?) If evolutionary theory is right, men increase their chances of reproductive success by objectifying women, using them as means to an end rather than valuing them as individuals.

But, if there’s a God and he made gender and sexuality for a purpose–and if men and women are made in his image and derive their value from him–then, and ONLY then, we have a basis for the inherent equality of men and women. The answer to this behaviour, then, is the Gospel.


Did you get that? Not believing in a god is a fundamental intellectual commitment. That means that pastors who stop believing in a god will end up being misogynists. Go figure. Without active belief in an imaginary friend we’re all fucked.

Apparently my thoughts are supposed to be incoherent and full of hopelessness, all because I don’t believe in gods. I’m also meant to be misogynistic. Well, fuck me, how did I get to be egalitarian? I must be doing this atheism stuff all wrong. If only there were a guide book, perhaps weekly meetings so we could all get the same world view to go with our lack of belief in magic sky daddy.

But wait, there is more:

if there’s a God and he made gender and sexuality for a purpose

Now those are some big questions. First we have ‘if there is a god’ and then ‘if _he_ made sexulity for a purpose’ – it doesn’t get better than that. Whatever comes next you can be certain is prattle. To prove it the author follows up by saying only through a god is there a basis for inherent equality. Read it again, inherent properties change depending on what god you believe in. Yes, they wrote inherent. Webster’s says that inherent means: existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute. Clearly that word does not mean what he thinks it means.

This is not to say that there are no misogynists who are also atheists. Nor is it to say that there are no misogynists who are also religious. There is no proven link between the two, though there is strong evidence for correlation on the latter.

I don’t know about you, but I’m counting on people being much more reasonable than their gods. I want them to be egalitarian despite their gods not because of them. Am I asking too much?



  1. Summary: Morality & ethics stem from & only Exist in religiosity. BA ha ha ha. It’s so funny cus some of the most vile stunted vomit inducing husbands i’ve known have been church goers.

    Without religiosity, i presume this is a Christian blathering, there can be no
    Moral realm? Explain to me them
    How it is then how Buddhists & taoists managed to come up with the whole peace onto all, violence onto none deal? An alternative non deistic faith system which is somehow ripe with morality far more progressive and kind than anything ever found in the bible.
    God created gender for a reason? So all women are breeders and if not then sinners? And the barren women are hiccups? We already know all the fags are going to hell for their proclivities never you mind that the lovely gay couple next door has faithfully loved each other for over two decades volunteering every weekend at a local victims of abuse center, while the hetero mess down street are heading for their third divorce with their 3 degenerate kids, nightly drinking, physical fighting and sunday church. It blows my mind that still they try to
    Marry morality to the bible when there is evidence everywhere that it exist universally irrespective of God. I am one half of am atheist couple, and nowhere do i feel as much an equal as with my
    Husband, a man who respects my mind & agency, and doesn’t tell me who
    I should be, when i should get pregnant
    Or whom i should love.

  2. This is all very polarised thinking is it not? On the one hand we have non-religious people saying that religion treats women badly, as inferiors, as objects, whatever. Religious people deny this (including the women) and decide to fight back with the same accusation against, specifically, atheists.

    Your penultimate par sums it up well enough. Partly because a) society is patriarchal! and partly because the majority of people! whether male or female! religious or otherwise have a deep, or any, understanding of what constitutes either sexism or misogyny.

    But there again, how many times do we hear that feminists are hairy-legged men-hating lesbians who want to destroy men, take away their privileges and usurp their position of power?

    • One of the oldest forms of socio-political manipulation. Remember “A u vas negrov linchuyut”?
      It’s a double edged sword. Psychological projection as self-defence at one end (based on self-interest), and obscene levels of ignorance (and/or also self-interest) on the other.
      Franco often alluded to the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy trying to ‘control’ Spain. For Iran and Russia the villain is the West. Slave traders proposed slavery meant freedom. Extremist Muslims also propose that forcing women to live under black duvet covers is also liberating, just not liberating enough that men should do the same.
      And let’s not forget that rape is/was almost exclusively the responsibility of women. She tempted him, she led him on, she wore revealing clothing, she wasn’t careful, she didn’t watch her drink closely and let him drug her, she let him into her living room, she didn’t scream loud enough, she didn’t fight him off.
      Egregious as it is, we have to admit it’s terribly clever and effective. If you look at French historical crime passionnel statistics, you’ll see that in 95% of cases men were acquitted (OF MURDER). Conversely the exact reverse of that accounts for female acquittals, meaning only 5% of women were acquitted of committing similar crimes.

      • are you Russian

        • No, technically French and Spanish, but I don’t identify as having any particular national characteristics of any one country.

          • why are you phoeneticalling in Russian….

            • Do you have a better method? If I just wrote it in English it wouldn’t be automatically associated to the USSR. I also often refer to Franco as the Generalisimo. Equally, “Die Juden sind unser Ungluck!” has a more illustrative impact than “Jews are our misfortune.” The original form is much more aggressive than the translation.

    • I can’t gleam your point, i like everything you said, but i couldn’t tell what it was exactly? is it that society is patriarchal and women are treated with some degree of misogyny whether it be by atheist or religious males? hence forth both sides can technically speaking lay claims to the argument that the other side is misogynistic?

      • Basically yes, yes and yes. But my main point is also that people have no understanding of sexism and what can be construed as such, let alone misogyny.

        So because people don’t understand what they are talking about, they throw around ill-founded and damaging accusations, just to make a point, which in some cases is way short of the mark.

        That a woman at an atheist conference was raped is not a measure of atheism. It is a measure of a patriarchal society, objectification of women etc etc. Not believing in a god is not synonymous with believing in equality for women or even understanding the issues. Equally, religious people may well believe in equality. I know some feminists who are religious, it doesn’t do it for me, but if they are happy who cares. To me, it doesn’t work, but for them they can reconcile their beliefs.

      • I think you mean glean, darling- not gleam. Unless you’re an avid fan of Swarovski crystals. All that vodka must be confusing you; let’s be honest, Roughseas’ comment wasn’t that complicated, was it?

        • I use my phone to type. No need to be so aggressive. Calm yourself plz

        • It was too me which was why i asked, but if you need to be honest then be, bird.

          • Is this a transliteration?It makes no sense. If you’re still in Russia there are good courses I can recommend.

            • Look at how vicious you got all cus of a few jokes. Get a hold of yourself, it’s not becoming. Trying to relentlessly insult me, my spelling, my education, my english….what else. Calm the fuck down, if i was only kidding about you being a pretentious prick
              Earlier, i sure am convinced of you being just that, now. I am
              Officially disengaging from this ridiculous conversation, bye bye bird, insult away.

              • Of course! You’re so right! It was all ME bothering about phonetic spelling! I must have been on a bad LSD trip. How else could I have seemed like such an undereducated imbecile? 😀

    • I can’t gleam your point, i like everything you said, but i couldn’t tell what it was exactly? is it that society is patriarchal and women are treated with some degree of misogyny whether it be by atheist or religious males? hence forth both sides can technically speaking lay claims to the argument that the other side is misogynistic?

  3. you are not asking for too much

  4. Feminists have been infiltrating atheist groups for some time now and have taken over many. They are using the atheist groups to further their supremacy agenda.

    • Infiltrating?

      The agenda is equality, by the way.

      • Darling, too much Russian ‘gleaming’ and one could seriously go blind 😛

      • lanceleuven
      • September 15th, 2014

      “Feminists have been infiltrating atheist groups for some time now and have taken over many. They are using the atheist groups to further their supremacy agenda.”

      That all sounds a bit far-fetched to me. Have you got any evidence? And what is their “supremacy agenda”?

      • atheism+

          • lanceleuven
          • October 3rd, 2014

          Ah, fair enough. I didn’t know that counted. It just seemed like a half-baked ramble that enjoyed an ephemeral bounce around the FTB echochamber before fizzling out. I wasn’t aware that it had any traction with the mainstream feminist movement (if such a thing exists).

      • R.Ambrose
      • September 30th, 2014

      Those damned feminists. How dare women seek equal rights! And curse the men who support them!

      This actually sounds pretty biblical to me. Who knows what will happen if women start defiling men’s workplaces and gatherings… especially with period blood. I’ve heard it attracts bears.

  5. The scope and depth of misogyny is directly proportional to the scope and depth of its cultural supports.

    At the end of the day, it is the individual who must take full responsibility for how one acts. If one treats another individual according to assigned gender values – and I don’t care what gender is doing the assigning – and tries to avoid taking full responsibility for assigning those values, then one is acting to support gender discrimination. If one supports assigning values that empowers the male more than the female on this gender basis, then one is practicing misogyny and can and should be held accountable. And this privileging is rampant in the West.

  6. The article would be laughable, except that the irrationality of it is dangerously widespread and scary. And the more each side feels threatened, the more forcefully they come out against the other. It becomes a battle — instead of a human community that accepts differences.

  7. They made such a logical fallacy there. Not to mention that their Bible is full of misogyny. It’s true that there’s also atheists who have such awful thoughts and opinions about women or just other people in general, but I like to think that most atheists and even liberal Christians think for themselves and do their best to support equality of everyone. Sigh… Never will this world be equal.

  8. Good point. Thanks for liking my blog smarty cat

  9. This is exactly the type of thinking that has led me to create my page. It is this kind of poison that only goes to show that religious ignorance and intolerance can no longer be… tolerated!

    A simple Google search on “morality” shows that morality does not exist because of religion. There are examples of morality all over nature; to think that it can only come from the bible is naive and ignorant at the very least.

    Granted, the bible has provided a moral code for thousands of years. However, that moral code has become grossly outdated and society has since evolved to the point of being able to generate and police better forms of morality. I actually have a post in the works about this very same topic on my page, I’ll be sure to include this! Thanks!

    • Thanks for commenting. I believe that even cursory research will show that identical or better morality existed in the world before the god of Abraham gave the heberews anything to run with.

      The world was not on the verge of extinction by immorality when YHWH decided to flood it. In fact they seemed to be doing quite well… Just not big fans of YHWH. In fact they bzelieved in the morality of other gods. The bible only provided a ripoff of other moral codes… Why else say no murder or lying or theft. They weren’t new concepts, not even carving in stone was new. Hammurabi had ethics and law before the bible and it is mentioned in the phrase “eye for an eye”

      The golden rule predates the bible and is the basis of all morality codes in religions… IMO

  10. The entire article is presupposes that if people do not have a metaphorical or actual authority standing over them with a big stick to punish them when they do wrong, they will act like animals. This is, to put it bluntly, crap. People are born with an inherent sense of fairness and decency, and altruism comes naturally to us. I’d say that if you need to be threatened with punishment to do good, you are not in fact a good person. Or to follow the maxim of Marcus Aurelius:

    “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memory of your loved ones.”

    • R.Ambrose
    • September 30th, 2014

    Great post. What I find so funny is that Christians think the Bible contains God’s laws and therefore forms the basis of morality. Clearly, many of these Christians have never read the Bible. Either that, or violence, misogyny, and prejudice are considered moral. In my opinion, and I have indeed read the so-called “Good Book,” the Bible’s violence alone could give George R.R. Martin a run for his money.

    Likewise, the Bible is simply rife with misogyny. There are myriad examples, but this is one of my favorites: “Suppose a man comes across a virgin who is not engaged and overpowers and rapes her and they are discovered. The man who has raped her must pay her father fifty shekels of silver and she must become his wife because he has violated her; he may never divorce her as long as he lives” (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

    Since Deuteronomy contains several laws to this affect, I assume God would be cool with me raping a woman as long as I marry her, right? Then again, Deuteronomy 22:13-21 says that if a man finds out his wife is not a virgin she must be stoned to death. So… should I rape the woman, marry her, and then stone her to death?

    Women were created for men, according to the Bible (1 Corinthians 11:9), and God seems to sanction treating women as property (Deuteronomy 20:13-14; after killing your male enemies you can take women and children as “spoils”), so clearly the Bible is the pinnacle of egalitarianism.

    Right. I can definitely see how the Bible forms the basis for all moral behavior.

    • Thanks for commenting. Yes, it’s very easy to see how the bible wants us to be moral agents. sigh

    • Disillusioned
    • October 12th, 2014

    Some people are excellent wordsmiths, able to eloquently cloak their rationalized failings in reason and logic. The author of “Misogyny and Atheism” appears to be one of those people.

  11. I don’t know why Misogyny has a foothold on what appears to be a significant minority of Atheist men. I suspect this minority will shrink in the future as more Atheists come out.

    Why do I think this? Because I have visited three Atheist countries: Norway, France, Holland and I don’t see any outward evidence of persistent Misogyny. In fact, quite the opposite – these are very egalitarian and happy societies.

    But, who knows? Misogyny just makes me sad no matter who is engaging in it because it is unfair and there is no good reason for it.

    • It’s part of the game we play in life. There were never any rules but those we made up. Sometimes we get it all wtong

      • Evolution gives most of us inclinations which turn out to be survival tools: empathy, compassion, etc.
        Evolution has found a way to keep men and women enjoying each other’s company – at least long enough to make more men and women. Sometimes I think we need to let evolution do its thing. Cheers!

  12. Thank for the link!

  1. September 18th, 2014
  2. September 30th, 2014
  3. October 2nd, 2014

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: