Luke over at Common Sense Atheism has made a post featuring
sixteen luscious pictures of the sixteen sexiest female atheists. These pictures are not work-safe or school-safe. They're not pornographic, but they're damn close (ie Jennifer Love Hewitt naked but covering up with a bed sheet). After looking at those pics I'm not an atheist anymore... I believe in the existence of sixteen gorgeous sex goddesses.
Are you sure you want to declare sixteen apes as "sexy"? :wink:
ReplyDeleteAhhh, taxonomy...what a wonderful tool to accuse people of beastiality with!
I recently got started in blogging, so you might want to take a look at my blog:
http://darwinsdogsbarkings.blogspot.com/
Oh and I'm Unholy Joe from FRDB if you have trouble recognizing me.I'm mostly on TWeb now as Darwin's Dog.
It's rather sexist to reduce a group of women to nothing but sex objects.
ReplyDelete"It's rather sexist to reduce a group of women to nothing but sex objects."
ReplyDeleteNo way. It isn't sexist at all to celebrate the female race for (among other things) their superior beauty.
No way. It isn't sexist at all to celebrate the female race for (among other things) their superior beauty.
ReplyDeleteNow see, that comment is also sexist. It reduces all women to their physical beauty. That statement inherently excludes ugly women. That means only beautiful women are "real" women. That attaches a requirement for physical beauty to femaleness. It also assumes that women are supposed to be beautiful, while men are not. The idea that a man could be looked at merely for sexual gratification is laughable under that premise. While for women it is mandatory.
Whereas you might laud male atheist for their arguments or intelligence, you are praising female athiest only for their appearance. Whereas the comparable male list was titled Ten Most Famous Atheists, this list isn't about the women's fame, but their beauty.
You need to think about where you came from. I understand that as a former conservative Christian, you came from a culture of patriarchy and female subjugation. But you need to move past that and learn to view women as people, not just pretty things to look at.
"Now see, that comment is also sexist. It reduces all women to their physical beauty."
ReplyDeleteNot true. I said that there is nothing wrong with celebrating women for their superior beauty AMONG OTHER THINGS. Meaning that it is also proper to celebrate women for their roles as mothers (which we do every year on Mother's day and hopefully do on some other miscellaneous occasions too). Is it sexist to celebrate Mother's day? Does it reduce women to being good for nothing except as baby-raisers? No, of course it doesn't. It just celebrates women for a very important role that they play.
"Whereas the comparable male list was titled Ten Most Famous Atheists, this list isn't about the women's fame, but their beauty."
Actually there's a sexiest male atheist list here:
http://www.redheadedskeptic.com/2010/01/12/oo-lala-sexiest-male-atheists/
"You need to think about where you came from. I understand that as a former conservative Christian, you came from a culture of patriarchy and female subjugation. But you need to move past that and learn to view women as people, not just pretty things to look at."
That's absurd. I never said that women were just pretty things to look at.
Yeah, okay, I'm definitely taking this blog off my bookmark list. It's not like there's anything really unique about this blog anyway.
ReplyDeleteYou still don't get what's so sexist about the phrase "superior beauty," do you?
Jonathan, I don't know if you're still reading this, but it seems to me that you're the one reading sexism where there is none.
ReplyDeleteRecognizing the sexual attractiveness of the female form has nothing to do with ignoring other accomplishments and is not sexist. There is a poll about the most influential female atheist and the criteria there were not how sexy any of the women were or were not.
As to the claim that physical beauty is a requirement for 'femaleness', the point you're missing is that physical beauty is a requirement for humanity. We all respond to beauty. I react to the female form, women and gay men react to the male form. The problem isn't that I can declare my appreciation, its that historically the other side hasn't had the right to.
While it is a fact that sexism is still alive and well in society, the appropriate response is not to completely ignore sexuality and cry foul whenever someone mentions that some people are more attractive than others. It's a part of our biology. We are, among other things sexual objects, to dismiss this is just as bad as to judge solely by it.