Quantcast

Aug 16 2013

On Being Honored for Having Gotten Cancer

LLS-logoSo, this awesome and somewhat weird thing has happened. I’ve been named the 2013 Honored Hero by the Foundation Beyond Belief for the Leukemia & Lymphoma Foundation’s Light the Night Walk.

This is a slightly odd thing. It’s wonderful, don’t get me wrong: I’m touched by it, it makes me feel both proud and humble, it inspires me to work harder for this movement. But it is slightly odd. And it’s making me think more carefully about what it means to live an honorable humanist life, a life that’s worth being honored for.

A brief bit of background. In October of 2012 I was diagnosed with endometrial cancer. I got lucky, if getting cancer can ever be “lucky”: the cancer was Stage 1, caught early, and they’re pretty sure they got all of it. I didn’t need chemo or radiation. All I needed was to get my uterus and ovaries cut out, and then to recover from the whole “having a major organ cut out” thing. I do have a genetic condition, Lynch Syndrome, which greatly increases my risk of getting certain cancers (including this one). Emotionally this feels a bit like having a time bomb in my body, but on a practical level, it mostly just means I have to get a colonoscopy once a year and get the pre-cancerous doodads scooped out before they turn ugly.

So that’s the first bit of background. The second bit: the Foundation Beyond Belief is once again supporting the Leukemia & Lymphoma Foundation’s big annual fundraiser. Last year, the first year of the FBB’s participation in the Light the Night Walk, they raised $430,000 dollars. This was the largest amount ever raised by a first-year non-corporate team, and the fourth largest amount raised by any team in the nation in 2012, including corporate teams. As awesome as this was, they’re hoping to outdo themselves this year. Now that the atheist community is familiar with this event and the structures are in place, they’re raising their sights to a goal of $500,000.

Last year, they named Christopher Hitchens as their International Team’s Honored Hero. As someone whose atheism and cancer were both very public, Hitchens was an obvious figure around whom the community could mobilize for this event.

This year, they’ve named me.

I am both proud and humble that they thought me worthy of this honor. But I’ll be honest: I’m also slightly puzzled by it. When I first heard about it, I kept thinking, “Why am I being honored for getting cancer?” I mean, it’s not like getting cancer is an accomplishment. It’s not something I made happen—it’s something that happened to me. If I could have avoided it, you better believe I would have.

But when I think about it more carefully, I don’t think I’m being honored for having gotten cancer.

*****

Thus begins my latest column for The Humanist magazine, On Being Honored for Having Gotten Cancer. To read more, read the rest of the piece. And if you want to take part in the Leukemia & Lymphoma Foundation’s Light the Night Walk under the Foundation Beyond Belief banner, here’s how to get started.

Aug 16 2013

If You’re Getting Discouraged…

If you’ve been getting discouraged lately by all the horrible bullshit, and by all the people who want to cover their eyes and pretend the bullshit isn’t real, and by all the people who would rather blame the victims of the bullshit rather than consider the possibility that it might be real… I bring you this comment, recently made by SheerDistaste at The Atheist Experience.

Don’t stop at the first two sentences. Keep reading.

You know what? This whole feminism crap that all of FtB has been going on about ever since that elevator thing pisses me off.

Do you know why it pisses me off?

Because it’s rubbing off on me.

Back when it started here, pretty much all of the articles talking about feminism, harassment at conferences, rape culture, whatever I found to be ridiculous overreactions to inconsequential bullshit.

Then after reading these articles for about a month, eventually 1 in 10 I would say “that’s actually a good point”. Then it was 2 in 10, then 3. As of now it’s about 8/10.

And furthermore, often when I am reading something, or talking to someone, or watching something, etc. completely away from FtB, I’ll find myself thinking “that’s sexist” or “that’s really offensive and degrading to women, I don’t support that at all” – when before I wouldn’t ever have these thoughts. And whenever I get these thoughts I get annoyed because I’m starting to sound like PZ Myers or whoever or one of his flunkies here… yet these things keep popping into my head, more and more frequently!

You guys (and girls) are slowly turning me into a feminist, and that pisses me off a lot.

Dear SheerDistaste,

First of all — thank you. A whole lot of us really needed to hear that right about now.

Second — yeah, I’m pissed off too. Swallowing the red pill can really, truly suck. It’s hard to see how shitty the world is sometimes. It’s hard to see how deeply sexism has burrowed into all of our brains. It’s hard to see people denying even the possibility of unconscious sexism, because they don’t want to admit that they or the people they care about are perpetuating it, and don’t want to do the hard, never-ending work of uprooting it. It’s hard to see rape culture in action, perpetuated by otherwise decent people who would no doubt be outraged that you think of them as perpetuating rape culture. It’s hard having your eyes opened to sexism… and then, as a direct result, having your eyes opened to racism, and classism, and ableism, and xenophobia, and homophobia, and transphobia, and all the other isms and phobias that permeate our brains and our culture. And it’s really, really hard to see how often the bad guys win.

On the other hand…

You get to have authentic relationships and connections with people of all genders. You get to live your life without constantly worrying about “Am I a real man?” or “Am I a real woman?” You get to not live in a constant state of cognitive dissonance. You get to expand the kinds of people you can have friendships and relationships with, and not live your life in a bubble of people who are almost exactly like you. You get to know that you matter, that you’re one of the people who’s making the world better. And you get to have some incredibly smart, funny, courageous, compassionate, dedicated, insightful, freaking awesome people in your life.

I’m giving myself a pep talk here, as much as I’m giving you one. This has been a shitty, shitty couple of weeks, and a shitty, shitty couple of years, and right now I’m feeling very discouraged and demoralized. So mostly, I want to say “Thank you.” Thank you for being willing to change your mind about something difficult. And thank you for saying this. A whole lot of us really needed to hear it.

And I’m putting out a call for comments. If you became a feminist, or became more of a feminist, because of all the writing and speaking and video-making and podcasting and other work that so many of us have been doing about it? Please say so here. If you’ve been emboldened to speak out more about feminism by other people speaking out? Please say so here. And if you can think of other reasons why you’re happy to know and understand about feminism, despite it often being painful and angry-fying? Please say so here. I think a lot of us could stand to hear it right now. I know I could.

Aug 16 2013

Activist Burnout — Prevention & Treatment: My Talk at SSA Con West 2013

My talk at the Secular Student Alliance convention this year is up on YouTube! The topic: “Activist Burnout — Prevention & Treatment.”

I think a lot of us maybe need to hear this right now. I actually just watched the video myself: I wrote this talk to be as much of a pep talk for myself as it is for the rest of the movement, and I, for one, really needed to hear it tonight.

This, by the way, is the talk that includes my analog PowerPoint slide… which became a trope/ running joke throughout the rest of the conference.

Topics I touch on include: taking care of your health; carving out a life separate from activism; finding forms of activism you like to do — and letting that change as your life changes; just saying “No” to projects; and more. The talk is aimed at atheist activists, and somewhat particularly at student atheist activists… but I think it’s probably applicable to almost any social change activist, in any field. Plus — analog PowerPoint slide! Enjoy!

Aug 15 2013

Secular Meditation: What’s the Point?

As I’ve been pursuing this new meditation practice that I’ve been yammering on about, there’s a question that keeps coming up: Why, exactly, am I doing this? What’s the point?

I don’t mean “What’s the point?” as in “Why am I bothering with this?” I know why I’m bothering with this. I’m getting a whole lot out of this practice: it’s affecting my life in heaps of ways, most of them overwhelmingly positive.* But… well, that’s actually the question on my mind. I’m getting lots of different things out of this practice. Which of these are side benefits — and which of them are actually the central point?

This isn’t an academic question. The specific goals I’m trying to achieve with meditation are, to some extent, going to affect how exactly I pursue it. I’m already noticing subtle but non-trivial differences in different forms of meditation and how they affect me… and it’s occurring to me, as I work on creating a meditation routine that fits into my life, that what I want to get from meditation is going to affect how exactly I go about it.

So what are the reasons that I’m doing this practice… and which of these, if any, are the central reasons? (For me, of course. Your mileage will almost certainly vary; your motivations and priorities for doing this, if you are doing this or are considering it, will almost certainly be different from mine. And yes, I’m aware of the irony of being goal-oriented about a practice that’s fundamentally about acceptance and being in the moment. I’m looking at that… but I’m basically okay with it.)

sad_silhouetteAlleviation of depression, stress, and anxiety. This is the primary reason I started this practice in the first place. I was experiencing a serious depressive episode, triggered by seriously bad shit happening in my life, and I was looking for pretty much anything I could add to my mental health care repertoire. (Anything with some decent evidence showing that it’s effective, that is.)

And this is still a huge part of what I’m getting out of this practice. Both in the immediate sense, and in the longer term. If I’m having a depressive episode, meditation is one of the things — like exercise, or spending time outdoors — that reliably makes me feel at least somewhat better pretty much right away. And in the longer term, the practice does seem to be helping lift the depression: my episodes are coming less frequently, and are less severe, and are easier to pull out of, since I started the practice. (And yes, I realize that many other factors are contributing to this improvement, and I realize that I am a data point of one, subject to confirmation bias and the placebo effect. I wouldn’t be crediting this practice with these effects if there weren’t medical research backing it up.)

But I don’t think this is the central reason I’m doing this. I can see how it would be for a lot of people, that would be entirely reasonable — but I don’t think it is for me. I think that once this episode of depression is managed and is well behind me, I’m still going to want to meditate, and am still going to find value in it.

still waterThe ability to be still. This is a good one. Before I started mindfulness and meditation, I was totally one of those people who couldn’t be still for a minute, who wanted to constantly be doing some activity or having some sort of stimulation going into her brain, who surfed the phone and checked her email while waiting five minutes for her coffee at the cafe, who drummed her fingers and looked at Twitter and Facebook while her email was taking thirty seconds to load. Now… well, okay, I’m still one of those people, but I’m a whole lot less like that. And I’m getting less like that every week. I’m becoming much better able to just be still, to take those five minutes waiting for my coffee and spend them focusing on my breathing, or observing how my body feels and experiencing it, or even just looking around and noticing, really noticing, the people around me and the place I’m in. (It’s a bit paradoxical, I suppose, since “practicing mindfulness” is still, in some sense, an activity… but it’s a paradox I’m okay with.)

This is a big one. And it’s one of the ones that really feeds the others. Being able to be still makes it easier — heck, makes it possible — to connect with my body, to respond rather than react, to turn my focus where I want to. Actually, it makes it easier — heck, makes it possible — to meditate in the first place.

But I still think it’s a side effect. I don’t think this is the central reason I’m doing this.

hammockRelaxation. Yeah… not so much.

It’s interesting how many people assume that the point of meditation is to relax. Not so much. Sometimes meditation is relaxing… but sometimes, it’s really not. I’ve had meditation sessions that made me want to climb out of my skin. Not as often now that I’m more experienced with the practice, and am better able to sit with uncomfortable or unpleasant emotions and let them happen instead of twitching out of my skin to evade them. But still. Meditation is often relaxing for me… but sometimes it’s aggravating, or uncomfortable, or frustrating, or occasionally even upsetting.

The point of meditation and mindfulness isn’t to relax. The point is to be present with my thoughts and emotions and sensations… even if they’re uncomfortable, or anxious, or freaky, or frightening, or sad. In the long term, in my day-to-day life, this practice does seem to be making me more calm and peaceful. But if I want to do something that will reliably relax me, I’m much more likely to get a massage, or masturbate, or sit quietly and read a book.

So yeah. This definitely isn’t the central reason I’m doing this. It’s not even a peripheral reason. It’s a nice thing that happens sometimes.

peace-signPeace. Since starting this practice, I’ve become much more accepting of annoying things in my life that I can’t change. Small things, mostly — things like the bus being stuck in traffic, or the restaurant being out of the dessert I wanted — but I’m becoming better able to apply this to some bigger things as well. And frankly, the “little things” thing is not so little. The ability to get through the day without falling into a series of irritations and frustrations and mini-rages over small things that I can’t do anything about — the ability to go, “Yes, this is irritating and frustrating, but it’s out of my hands, so I’m just going to let it go,” and the ability to then actually let it go — that’s pretty awesome. (I’m working on a whole separate post about this, in fact: the whole “serenity to accept what I can’t change, courage to change what I can, wisdom to know the difference” aspect of this practice. It’s the “wisdom to know the difference” that tends to be the sticking point, of course. But I digress.)

So, yeah. Inner peace. Pretty cool. But still not the central reason for doing this.

Nervous_system_diagramConnection with my body, and improved body awareness. Many of the practices I’m doing are very body-focused. There’s the body scan (the practice I try to do every day if I can), in which I focus my attention and awareness on each part of my body in turn, fully experiencing the sensations in each part before moving on to the next. There’s the walking meditation, in which I walk slowly and deliberately, focusing my attention and awareness on each step I take, and how it feels in my feet and legs and the rest of my body. There’s the breath meditation, in which I focus my attention and awareness on my breath, as I breathe in and out. All of these have the effect of making me more intensely and intimately connected with my body: not living in my head quite so much, not feeling quite so much like data stored in a cloud system, off in the ether, accessible by my hardware but separate from it. And this has loads of benefits: from making it easier to take care of my health, to just feeling good in and of itself.

But no. Still a side effect. Still not the central reason for of all this.

wait-signResponding rather than reacting; having my experiences rather than them having me. This is a big one. This is a huge one. This is pretty darned close to the central reason I do this.

It’s also a little hard to describe. But I’ll take a crack at it.

There is a difference between consciously responding to things, and reflexively reacting to them. There is a difference between, on the one hand, having a thought or sensation or emotion, and noticing it, and making a conscious choice about what, if anything to do about it… and on the other hand, having a thought or sensation or emotion, and reacting to it impulsively, without thinking. There is a difference between being influenced by my thoughts and emotions and sensations… and being driven by them. I sometimes think of it as the difference between riding a rollercoaster, and being chained to it. The way I usually frame it is that I want to have my experiences, my thoughts and feelings and sensations… rather than being them, rather than them having me.

This isn’t an either/or thing. I do both of these, I always have, I probably always will. But since I’ve started meditating, the balance is sliding away from the latter, and towards the former. I won’t pretend that I’m anywhere with this other than tiny baby steps — but I can already see a difference.

And this is huge. This has enormous potential to change my life for the better. This is already changing my life for the better. This is making me better able to make good decisions; to take my time about making decisions; to patiently wait for information to come in before making decisions; to make decisions thoughtfully based on my actual values rather than making them reflexively based on my lizard-hindbrain fight-or-flight instincts. And it’s also just enabling me to feel a little more centered, to not feel like I’m constantly being whipped around, to feel like my life is mine and that it doesn’t belong to whatever circumstances happen to be popping up at the moment.

This is a big fucking deal.

But I still think this is a side effect. A big one, and one that’s very close indeed to what I’m seeing as the central point of meditation and mindfulness… but still a side effect.

camera lensSharpened focus. This is even closer to the central point. When I meditate, I often feel like I’m practicing a very specific mental skill: the skill of turning my attention and awareness away from the distracting chatter that my brain constantly churns out, and returning my focus to whatever I’m choosing to focus on. And when I say I’m “practicing” this skill, I mean it literally, in the sense that a musician or an athlete practices — doing it over and over and over and over and over again, and over, and over, and over and over and over… until I get better at it, until it becomes easier and more second nature. It feels almost like physical exercise: like I’m exercising the muscle in my brain that recognizes when I’ve gotten sucked into some memory or worry or plan or fantasy or perseveration, and notices it, and accepts it, and gently turns away from it to focus on something else. (And yes, I know I don’t have muscles in my brain. A more accurate description would probably be that I’m strengthening and reinforcing certain neural pathways.)

And this is huge. This ability to consciously decide what I’m going to pay attention to, the ability to let go of multi-tasking and just focus on doing one thing at a time… it’s huge. It has already improved my work productivity tremendously, my ability to focus on whatever piece I’m actually working on, and not get constantly distracted by shiny beads on the Internet. (Hey, I said “improved.” I didn’t say “perfected.”) And this increased ability to focus my attention and awareness where I choose to focus it… it’s absolutely essential to realizing the central thing that I’m getting out of this practice.

But it’s not the central thing.

I think the central thing that I’m ultimately getting from this mindfulness practice is this:

Mindfulness itself.

Mindfulness isn’t just a means to an end. Mindfulness is an end. Mindfulness, itself, is the point.

This is the only life I have. I want to be present in it. I want to experience it. I don’t want to be barely conscious through most of it. I don’t want to be sleepwalking through it like a zombie. And I don’t want to constantly be racing through it to the next bit. I don’t want to spend my entire life focused on my future, until I’m on my deathbed and look back and realize that I didn’t let myself have a present. I want to savor the experiences of my life, and really take them in. I want to taste the food I’m eating. I want to absorb the book I’m reading. I want to feel the sex I’m having. I want to stay present with people when I’m with them, and to really listen to them, without tuning out or rehearsing what I’m going to say next.

I want to be present in my life. That’s what mindfulness means. The reason for practicing mindfulness is so I can get better at being mindful. Mindfulness, itself, is the point.

And all these other effects of this practice are, for me, ultimately subsets of this one, or are in service of it. The ability to focus is a form of being mindful. The ability to respond rather than react, and to experience my thoughts and emotions rather than have them toss me around, is a form of being mindful. Being present with my body is a form of being mindful — and it makes it easier to be mindful in other ways. Being at peace makes it easier to be mindful. Being relaxed (when that happens) makes it easier to be mindful. Being still makes it easier to be mindful. Not being depressed sure as hell makes it easier to be mindful. In fact, in some ways, that “buried in a vat of cotton” feeling of depression, the feeling of being disconnected from my life and my feelings, the inability to experience pleasure, the inability to make the connection between seeing something that I want or need to do and finding the will to do it… all of this is, almost by definition, an inability to be mindful, an inability to be present in my life and to experience it. These side effects aren’t trivial, far from it. But they’re side effects.

Now, on a day-to-day basis, I am going to tailor my practice, at least to some extent, to which side benefit I feel most in need of. If I’m feeling anhedonic and disconnected from my body, I’m going to do a body scan, or maybe a walking meditation. If I’m feeling jittery and jumpy and in need of calm, I’m going to do one of the “sitting still or lying down” practices: a body scan or a sitting meditation, as opposed to a walking meditation. If I’m feeling reactive, overwhelmed by my emotions and worries, I’m going to do the “focus on your thoughts” or “focus on your feelings” meditation, where I let myself have my thoughts or feelings, and notice them, and experience them, and let them pass. Again, these effects aren’t trivial: they have a great positive impact on my life, both in the larger scheme and in my day-to-day, minute-to-minute experience of it. And of course, many of these practices and effects feed into each other, and make each other easier and more effective.

But ultimately, for me, the point of practicing mindfulness isn’t to be less reactive, or to have more stillness and peace, or to be more connected with my body, or to bring a more laser-like focus to my writing, or even to be less depressed and anxious and stressed. The point of practicing mindfulness is so I can get better at being mindful. Mindfulness, itself, is the point.

*There have, in fact, been a few interesting and unexpected downsides to this practice… which I may write about at some point.

Aug 13 2013

Why We Need to Keep Fighting

This piece was originally published in Free Inquiry magazine.

Megaphone.svgIf we don’t speak up, the status quo wins.

Yes, this fight can be painful. When we fight against deeply entrenched beliefs, beliefs that people are emotionally attached to, beliefs that are entangled with the social and political and economic structures on every level, it can be difficult. More than difficult. We’re asking people to give up ideas that they’ve built their lives around. We’re asking people to change, often in profound ways. We’re asking people to take a leap into a way of thinking, indeed a way of living, that they know little or nothing about, and that they’ve been fed lies and myths and misinformation about. We’re asking people to admit that they’re wrong, about something really important. In many cases, we’re asking people to acknowledge that they have done harm. Of course they’re going to resist. Of course they’re going to fight back.

We’re often told that our fights against these beliefs are divisive. And the people saying this aren’t wrong. These fights can be ugly, painful, difficult. They can create bad feeling between people who might otherwise be friends and allies. They can make it hard to work together on issues we have in common.

But calling for an end to the fighting means standing up for the status quo.

When one group of people has gotten to control the conversation for centuries, indeed for millennia, and another group of people finally begins to get their voice of opposition heard… of course it’s going to create conflict. To say, “Let’s stop all this fighting,” basically means saying, “Let’s return to the way things used to be.” It basically means saying, “If there’s any pushback at all against this, the absolute top priority must always be that the people controlling the conversation don’t get their feelings hurt.” It basically means saying, “Let’s return to the good old days, when so many of us were comfortable and complacent, and the people who weren’t kept their mouths shut.”

And that is not acceptable.

The status quo is wrong. It is wrong in the sense that it is literally, factually mistaken, about questions of objective reality. It is wrong in the sense that it harms people, in real, practical, terrible ways. We cannot accept the status quo simply because fighting against it is painful. We have to be willing to fight. At the very minimum, we have to not try to stop other people from fighting.

I think now would be a good time to stop and say: I’m not, in fact, talking here about atheists fighting against a world steeped in religion, a world largely controlled by religious believers. Yes, of course, everything I say here could be applied to that. But that’s not what I’m talking about this time.

I’m talking about feminists fighting against a world steeped in sexism, a world largely controlled by men.

I’ve been noticing something interesting lately. As you may know, I’m the author of a book titled “Why Are You Atheists So Angry? 99 Things That Piss Off the Godless.” I’m the writer whose blog post about atheist anger went viral all over the Internet; I’m the speaker whose talk about atheist anger at Skepticon 4 has gotten over 150,000 views on YouTube. I am literally the person who wrote the book on atheist anger. And I am regularly and enthusiastically applauded by many atheists for articulating my anger about religion — anger that these atheists share — in such a passionate, uncompromising manner.

And yet, in all too many cases, the exact same atheists who applaud my passionate, uncompromising anger about religion will turn around and say that I need to be polite, diplomatic, understanding, non-divisive, and moderate when it comes to my anger about misogyny and sexism. At least, when it comes to my anger about misogyny and sexism within the atheist movement.

If it didn’t piss me off so much, I’d think it was hilarious.

screaming statueYou don’t get to have it both ways. You don’t get to be inspired and motivated by my uncompromising rage about religion… and then tell me that my uncompromising rage about sexism and misogyny in the atheist movement is divisive, distracting, sapping energy from the important business of atheist activism. You don’t get to cheer me on for being such a badass when I stand up fiercely against religion in society… and then scold me for being a bad soldier when I stand up fiercely against sexism and misogyny within the atheist movement. You don’t get to applaud my outspoken fearlessness when I demand that social and political and economic systems be made safe and welcoming for atheists, and when I point out the ways in which they are not… and then call me a divisive, attention-hungry professional victim when I demand that atheist groups and organizations and events be made safe and welcoming for women, and point out the ways in which they are not.

Does this fight get in the way of unity? Probably. As I wrote in my blog last May:
I do not want to be in unity with atheists who tell me to fuck myself with a knife. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who say they hope I get raped, who tell me to choke on a dick and die. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who say that I’m a whore and therefore nobody should take me seriously. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who say that I’m an ugly dyke and therefore nobody should take me seriously. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who post their opponents’ home addresses on the Internet; who hack into their opponents’ private email lists and make content from those emails public. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who alert the Westboro Baptist Church to atheist events, and ask if they plan to attend. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who bombard other people with a constant barrage of hate and threats of rape, violence, and death. I do not want to be in unity with atheists who call me a cunt, who call other women cunts, again and again and again and again and again. And I do not want to be in unity with atheists who consistently rationalize this behavior, who trivialize it, who make excuses for it.

I will now add to that list: I do not want to be in unity with atheists who sexually harass or sexually assault women: at workplaces, at conferences, or anywhere else. This was not in my original post from May or my original Free Inquiry article — but it should have been.

And I do not want to be in unity with atheists who consistently rationalize this behavior, who trivialize it, who make excuses for it, who blame the victims of it, who tell us to just ignore it, who say we’re participating in a “culture of victimization” for talking about it, who tell us that we have to set aside these “differences” in the name of unity.

And I don’t think I should be expected to. I don’t think anyone in this movement should be asking that of me. I don’t think anyone in this movement should be asking that of anyone.

megaphone 2If feminists in the atheist movement don’t speak up about sexism and misogyny in this movement, the status quo wins. And the status quo is one in which most atheist organizations are led by men, one in which most of our prominent public figures and spokespeople are men, one in which most conferences and meetups and groups and events are primarily attended by men. The status quo is one in which movement leaders say and do unbelievably stupid sexist shit… and double down when they’re called on it… and still continue to be movement leaders, with few consequences or none at all. The status quo is one in which the most moderate, non-controversial proposals for making the community welcome to women — such as having clear policies at conferences barring sexual harrassment — turn into a firestorm of controversy that eats the Internet for months. The status quo is one in which questions about why all this might be, and suggestions about what might be done to change it, are routinely met with anger, bafflement, dismissal, patronization, calls for moderation, excuses, elaborate rationalizations for why any explanation at all other than unconscious sexism must be the real reason for this pattern, and an insistence that our absolute top priority in this conversation has to be that men’s feelings don’t get hurt.

Yes, this pattern is changing. The degree to which this pattern has been changing is the degree to which people have been speaking out about it, and pushing back against it. This pattern has been changing, and things have been getting better for women in the atheist movement, and more women are participating in the atheist movement at all levels, because people have been fighting for it.

And yes, these fights are hard. We’re fighting against deeply entrenched beliefs, beliefs that people are emotionally attached to, beliefs that are entangled with the social and political and economic structures on every level. We’re asking people to give up ideas that they’ve built their lives around. We’re asking people to change, often in profound ways. We’re asking people to take a leap into a way of thinking, indeed a way of living, that they know little or nothing about, and that they’ve been fed lies and myths and misinformation about. We’re asking people to admit that they’re wrong, about something really important. In many cases, we’re asking people to acknowledge that they have done harm. Of course some people are going to resist. Of course some people are going to fight back.

But that doesn’t mean the fight isn’t worth having.

Aug 13 2013

My Podcast Interview With Masocast!

I have a new podcast interview up! This one is with Masocast, who does “casual interviews with intelligent, funny, and all around interesting kinky people.” We talk about the experience of writing erotic fiction, whether the stories in my erotic fiction collection (“Bending: Dirty Kinky Stories About Pain, Power, Religion, Unicorns, & More”) came from my own sexual fantasies, being out as a kinky person, how the kink community can become more accepted, how the hell I wound up writing “The Unicorn and the Rainbow,” and a lot more.

And we also talk about atheism! Masocast is an atheist, and we had a grand old time talking about godlessness before we got to the sex.

It was a delightful conversation, and Masocast is a great interviewer. I’d never heard of the Masocast podcast before I went on it myself, but I think I’m now going to have to keep listening. Enjoy the interview!

Bending coverThe ebook of “Bending: Dirty Kinky Stories About Pain, Power, Religion, Unicorns, & More” is available on Kindle, Nook, and Smashwords. The audiobook is available on Audible and Amazon. The print edition is in the works.

Aug 13 2013

A Timeline of the Sexual Harassment Accusations

At the Lousy Canuck blog, Jason Thibeault has put together a timeline of the major events of the sexual harassment accusations in the skeptical and secular communities. This is a living document: he is updating it as new information comes in and as new events unfold.

This is hugely helpful. For people who have been following these stories and want a clear document of everything that’s happened; for people who have been following these stories and want to show other people exactly what’s been happening; for people who haven’t been following these stories because it’s confusing and new things keep coming out every day; for people who are writing or commenting on these stories and want to make sure they’re getting their facts right… this is enormously helpful

Also — when all the reports are put together like this, it’s really, really telling.

If you care about this issue, I urge to to go look at it.

Aug 12 2013

Harassment, Rape, and the Difference Between Skepticism and Denialism – UPDATED

UPDATE: There is now a timeline of the major events in these accusations, and the responses to them, on Jason Thibeault’s Lousy Canuck blog. It includes several additional reports of harassment and sexual assault, and several additional pieces of corroboration of these reports. It is being updated as new information comes in and as new events unfold.

So I got this comment on my blog from Hannah Barnhardt:

I have a question about how to handle allegations of rape and sexual harassment. In the local atheist group that I am only now tenuously connected to (because so many members display open disdain for women and feminists), Karen’s allegations have been discussed only briefly, and with criticism and disbelief. Basically, they’re saying: “Well we ARE skeptics after all, and skeptic means we need PROOF! DUURRRR”

But with something like rape, or the kind of sexual harassment Karen experienced (and I do understand Karen has lots of proof, but I’m talking about a case where perhaps, like many cases, there’s not much proof beyond the victim’s testimony), what is the best way to handle cases where there’s not much physical proof? Because I understand how little rape/harassment is actually prosecuted and how difficult it is to accuse someone, I favor giving the accuser the benefit of the doubt.

I guess I’m asking: what’s the best way to respond to these people, who say that there must be ample physical evidence in order to actually DO something about harassment or rape? In the real world, it would be awesome if every person who experienced this kind of abuse had ample physical evidence, but it just doesn’t happen that way. I don’t for one second believe that that means we shouldn’t believe the victim. What do you think?

A good question, and one that has been much on my mind in the last few days.

Here’s what I think, what I want to say to people who are saying this sort of thing: I think you should be really careful about not letting your skepticism turn into denialism.

Here’s what I think:

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But claims of sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape are not extraordinary. They are depressingly ordinary. So the level of evidence we should need to believe a claim about sexual harassment, abuse, assault, or rape is substantially lower than the level of evidence we should need to believe a claim about, say, Bigfoot.

2: Sexual harassers, abusers, assailants, and rapists are typically very good at covering their tracks. They don’t generally commit their acts in front of witnesses or video cameras, or leave a paper trail. Depending on the kind of harassment or assault we’re talking about, they often don’t even leave physical evidence (and when they do, it often doesn’t get collected, since collecting it typically requires the victim to report the assault almost immediately, and subject themselves to further emotional and physical trauma). And perpetrators often cover their tracks in other ways — such as getting the victim drunk, which our culture regrettably tends to see as evidence of consent.

So the kinds of evidence we’re likely to find supporting an accusation of sexual harassment or assault are not straightforward, obvious physical evidence. The kinds of evidence we are likely to find are:
* Multiple similar claims made against the same person from different people. Especially when these claims show a similar pattern of behavior.
* Other people saying that the victim told them about the harassment/ assault shortly after it happened — with stories that are consistent both with the accusation and with one another.
* Other people corroborating behavior that falls short of harassment/ assault, but is consistent with it. Example: If an accused assailant is accused of getting victims drunk first, and someone says they’ve seen this person deliberately getting people drunk while hitting on them, or have experienced this themselves — that would support the accusation.
* Paper trails, email trails, or other kinds of evidence that either directly support the claim — or that show behavior that, again, falls short of being direct evidence of harassment/ assault, but is consistent with it.

(Note that this doesn’t refer to the types of evidence we’d accept in a court of law. See #4 below. And note that “support” doesn’t mean “absolutely prove.” See… oh, the rest of this entire post.)

To make an analogy that skeptics should understand: Think about how creationists say, “Where’s your evidence for evolution? I’ve never seen life spontaneously generate from a peanut butter jar! I’ve never seen fish evolve into mammals in one generation!” Or think about how global warming denialists say, “Where’s your evidence for global warming? Why isn’t the Antarctic turning into Florida? Why was it so cold in Minnesota last winter?” No, of course not. That’s not the kind of evidence you’d expect to see to support evolution or global warming — because that’s not how evolution and global warming work. The kind of evidence you’d expect to see to support evolution is exactly the kind of evidence we do find: evidence from genetics, geology, anatomy, fossil records, etc., all consistent with one another. The kind of evidence you’d expect to see to support global warming is exactly the kind of evidence we do find: evidence from long-term studies of weather patterns over years, decades, centuries, and millennia.

So be a good skeptic. Think about how sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape usually work. Think about what kind of evidence you’d expect to see for them. And then think about whether that kind of evidence is present in this case.

3: False allegations of sexual harassment and rape are actually very low. The consequences of making allegations of sexual harassment or rape are very high indeed: public shaming, having one’s personal history — especially one’s sexual history — being subjected to extreme public scrutiny and censure, being traumatized by callous law enforcement officials if the crime is reported, harassment, threats, and more. And the consequences are especially high when the person you’re accusing is powerful: if they’re famous, if they’re rich, if they’re influential, if they have political power.

4: In the conversations we’re having about these incidents, we’re not talking about what kind of evidence would support publication in a peer-reviewed journal, or a judgment in a court of law. We’re talking about what kind of evidence would support judgment in the court of public opinion. We’re talking about what kind of evidence would support staying away from people if we’re at an event with them. Exercising caution if we have to deal with them. Warning other people to exercise caution around them. Not inviting them to speak at conferences. Not attending conferences, or speaking at conferences, where they’re speaking. Not buying their books. Not continuing to cite them as shining examples of skepticism at its best. In the most serious case, we’re talking about what kind of evidence would support firing someone. (And yes, for the record, I would want more evidence to support firing someone than I would to support not inviting them to conferences.)

This is a generally well-understood principle. The severity of the consequences affects how much evidence we need to believe an accusation. If several of my friends tell me, “Hey, your friend is a creep, they kept cornering me at your party,” and one person tells me, “Hey, your friend is a serious creep, they cornered me at your party and groped me”… that’s not going to be enough evidence for me to call the police, but it sure is enough evidence for me to stop inviting that person back to any more parties. Even our legal system has different standards of evidence for different situations: there’s a higher standard of evidence for criminal charges, for instance, than there is for a civil case. And the court of public opinion, and of of personal opinion, have different standards as well. Which they should. The standards shouldn’t be trivial, or non-existent — and for accusations of sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape, they should be pretty darned high. But there is a wide, wide world between “These accusations could lead to a conviction in a court of law,” and, “These accusations are entirely without merit.” It is a huge mistake to treat these as the only options.

*****

So. Think about the accusations that are being made. Think about the fact that sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape are, unfortunately, very ordinary. Think about the rarity of false accusations. Think about what kinds of consequences are being considered here. And perhaps most importantly, think about what kind of evidence you’re actually likely to see with sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape… and whether you’re seeing it here.

So.

As of this writing, August 12, 5:21 p.m. Pacific time.

In the Ben Radford situation: There is an email trail. There is independent corroboration from more than one person, who witnessed the behavior or who Stollznow told about it. There is the acknowledgement from CFI, after an investigation from an investigative firm that they hired, that Radford behaved inappropriately at conferences, and harassed Karen Stollznow with unwanted correspondence.

In the Michael Shermer situation: There are multiple reports from different people. There are other people saying that the victim told them about the harassment/ assault shortly after it happened. There are other people corroborating behavior that falls short of harassment/ assault, but is consistent with it (in this case, Shermer getting the person very drunk while flirting with them).

In the Lawrence Krauss situation: I can’t say anything about that right now, because the blog posts reporting on the accusations against him have been taken down, apparently under threat of lawsuits. If you’ve been following the story, you can probably remember what was reported before it was removed, and you can look at these questions — are there multiple claims from different people, are there other people saying that the victim told them about the harassment/ assault shortly after it happened, are there other people corroborating behavior that falls short of harassment/ assault but is consistent with it, is there any sort of paper trail or email trail — and decide how you would answer them.

UPDATE REMINDER: There is now a timeline of the major events in these accusations, and the responses to them, on Jason Thibeault’s Lousy Canuck blog. It includes several additional reports of harassment and sexual assault, and several additional pieces of corroboration of these reports. It is being updated as new information comes in and as new events unfold.

I’m not asking what verdict you’d come to if you were on a jury. I’m not asking what you’d decide to publish if you were the editor of a journal. I’m asking you to pay attention to the difference between skepticism and denialism. And I’m asking you to not be a denialist.

Being a good skeptic doesn’t only mean knowing when to reject claims. It means knowing when to provisionally accept them. It means not demanding more evidence for sexual harassment, abuse, assault, and rape than you would for Bigfoot. It means not continually moving the goalposts of what kind of evidence you’ll accept to believe these reports. It means not telling victims who don’t name names that their vague accusations can’t be taken seriously… and then telling victims who do name names that they’re just trying to ruin reputations, and shouldn’t make public accusations outside of a courtroom. It means not saying to religious believers, “No, I can’t prove with 100% certainty that there is no god, there’s almost nothing we can prove with 100% certainty — but based on the available evidence, I can conclude with a reasonable degree of certainty that there is no god”… and then saying to victims of sexual harassment or rape, “Can you absolutely prove that it happened?”

Skepticism is not denialism. Don’t be a denialist. This shit is too important to be in denial about.

Aug 11 2013

The Atheist Baseball Game — Pics!

I’ve been having a grand time at the Minnesota Atheists conference. This sort of community building is exactly the sort of thing everyone says we need to be doing, and it’s wonderful to see it happening, and to be a part of it. At a very discouraging time — to say the least — it’s a soothing and inspiring reminder of why the hell we’re in this movement in the first place.

So here are some pictures from the atheist baseball game! As a special promotional event tied in with the conference, the local minor league baseball team, The St. Paul Saints, changed their name for the day to the Mr. Paul Aints. (This is the second year that they’ve done this.) The players wore special jerseys with the red Atheist A incorporated into their logo (Minnesota Atheists has T-shirts and hats in their store). They did a couple of silly atheist-themed promotional events between innings (like an evolution-themed race). They even put the atheist “Aints” version of their logo on their scoreboard. (I didn’t get a good picture of it, but PZ did, so I’ve swiped his.)

Aints scoreboard

And all around the stadium, they covered the “S” in the “Saints” logo, so it would read “Aints.” Generally just with bits of torn paper. Like this.

Aints 2

Aints 1

Aints 3

Aints 4

Here’s the Minnesota Atheists banner posted in the walkway leading up to the entry gates.

Aints 5

And here’s me with the pig, which apparently gets re-painted for every special promotion. No, I don’t know why the mascot of the St. Paul Saints is a pig.

Aints 6

There was just something really sweet and awesome about this. Very classic Americana. Right down to the train tracks right behind the ball park, and people waving as the trains went by. Almost Norman Rockwell. (Except for the part where they played Journey during the fireworks… but even that was a modern, rock-and-roll version of Americana.) And the atheists were a totally welcomed part of it.

Also, I ate fried cheese curds with Amanda Knief. In case things weren’t awesome enough.

Aug 09 2013

God Won’t Cure Mental Illness: What’s Wrong With Rick Warren’s Sermon

rick_warren“We’re all mentally ill.”

“You have fears, you have worries, you have doubts, you have compulsions, you have attractions…”

So said Rick Warren, founder and senior pastor of the megachurch Saddleback Church and author of “The Purpose-Driven Life,” in a sermon largely about his son’s mental illness and recent suicide.

Warren was clearly trying to help de-stigmatize mental illness, and I commend that. But this is not the way. We are not, in fact, all mentally ill. And saying that we are does not de-stigmatize mental illness. It trivializes it. It contributes to the stigma. And it makes it harder to recognize and treat.

*****

Thus begins my new piece for Salon, God Won’t Cure Mental Illness. To read more about how Warren’s sermon trivializes mental illness, stigmatizes it, dismisses evidence-based treatment, and frames atheism and religious doubt as a mental disorder, read the rest of the piece. Enjoy!

Older posts «