Atheist War is Heating Up

 

Here’s another article about Lawrence Krauss’s demise that notes he has also been deplatformed from the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism.

But what’s even more interesting are the future targets.  From the article:

I also wrote in my 2013 blog post—and the BuzzFeed article reiterates—that at least one CFI employee implored the then-president of CFI, Ron Lindsay, to not invite Krauss on a planned 2014 cruise, citing the “report of unwanted sexual attention” she had received from the woman and other past offensive behavior. The CFI nevertheless invited him.

[….]

“As an organization, CFI treats all allegations of harassment seriously,” Nick Little, a lawyer for CFI, told Gizmodo in an email Friday. “Over time, this policy has evolved, and will continue to adapt in order to best serve to protect employees, volunteers, and event attendees. Under this policy, CFI is unable to comment on individual allegations or individual investigations of them.”

Little did not respond to a further request for comment regarding whether Krauss remains on the CFI’s board of directors as an honorary member. The Richard Dawkins Foundation, which has since merged with CFI, also did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, where Krauss is currently listed as a fellow.

Given the social justice atheists have been wildly successful in deplatforming Krauss, it seems clear they will be targeting Dawkins by demanding  his organizations cut all ties with Krauss.

Note how the article ends

“As the President of Secular Woman, it is my responsibility to urge [CFI] to prioritize the safety of women over whatever benefit they see in the continued attachment to Lawrence Krauss,” Monette Richards, who is a chapter leader of CFI Northeast Ohio, told Gizmodo. “This article has given them an excellent opportunity: make a break from past leadership practices; remove Krauss from their honorary board; promise to stop inviting him to events.”

“I certainly hope they don’t intend to ignore it and hope everyone forgets,” Richards added. “Because I will work hard to make sure no one does.”

Oh, and if anyone thinks Krauss is likely to apologize, that’s looking more doubtful, as Krauss’s wife is using twitter to defend him and attack Rebecca Watson:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in atheist activism, atheist news, atheist wars, New Atheism, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Atheist War is Heating Up

  1. John Branyan says:

    Nothing better than a bonfire, especially it’s godlessness that’s ablaze.

  2. Mark Plus says:

    The atheist project of sexual freedom doesn’t work for unattractive men like Lawrence Krauss, Michael Shermer and the guy who tried to pick up Rebecca Watson in a hotel elevator a few years ago. That’s why there are so many atheist incels, like those neckbeards who show up at atheist gatherings who are clearly strangers to the experience of having a girlfriend.

    By contrast, the atheist Chads must be living the dream of a godless sexual utopia, where the women who have encounters with these men keep the knowledge to themselves because they don’t feel taken advantage of.

    I don’t know of any atheist who predicted this outcome.

  3. Leppert says:

    So…what are the opposing factions of this “war”? It seems to me that it’s Krauss and his wife against everyone else.

  4. Michael says:

    So…what are the opposing factions of this “war”? It seems to me that it’s Krauss and his wife against everyone else.

    We haven’t heard from people like Sam Harris ands Richard Dawkins. Will Harris continue to appear with Krauss in any more celebrations of Science and Reason? Will he be asked about Krauss at the next show? Will Dawkins, and the RDF cut off associations with Krauss?

  5. Leppert says:

    So…no war.

  6. TFBW says:

    Leppert, this isn’t your usual war. In this war, everyone is on the same side right up until the point that someone gets singled out and told that they are the enemy. At that point, other people decide whether they are going to hold ranks against this new enemy, or cross the line and say he did nothing wrong. Given the nature of the battle lines, it’s almost certain that the person so singled out will lose: it’s just a question of how much general acrimony can be raised along the way.

    Bear in mind that this is not a one-off thing. Krauss isn’t the first to find himself in this position, and he won’t be the last. What entertains me the most is the fact that the men who are quickest to denounce Krauss are the most likely future targets — second, perhaps, to anyone who chooses to defend him. Back-stabby goodness all ’round. I feel a craving for popcorn.

  7. Dhay says:

    TFBW > Krauss isn’t the first to find himself in this position, …

    I note that Richard Carrier is “Looking for Places to Crash: Texas, Missouri, Arizona, Colorado”:

    In March I’m doing a tour across the Western U.S. that will take me to several destinations. And in April I’m doing another, to attend Atheistock. It would be so helpful to have places to crash at some stops on the way. If you or anyone you know is interested in having me in, by all means email me. I’ve got no place to sleep yet planned for… [List] I’ll appreciate any reasonable options at those destinations. Do let me know!

    https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13740

    I grew up with the idea, gleaned from American films of the period, that US motels were cheap.

    Atheistock is a major atheist conference? It’s a “Music & Arts Festival” ie Camp. (It’s in the woods, so I guess there’s a pun on “Woodstock”):

    “Atheistock” on a mountain, in SoCal, this April 20th-ish… Four four days of camping, and fun, in the fucking woods, with all of the other awesome godless heathens… ♥

    http://www.facebook.com/Atheistock-192060671384787/

    It’s 19-23 April. Carrier doesn’t say whether he needs an offer of a sleeping bag in someone’s tent. Perhaps it’s too early for him to ask.

  8. Leppert says:

    TFBW, that’s not what “war” means. For a “war”, there needs to be a divide with one side battling the other. I don’t see a pro-Krauss side here apart from Krauss and his wife. There isn’t a faction that is pro-sexual-harassment.

    By contrast, for instance, in the Catholic Church there were child rapists (clergy) and the enablers of those rapists (the hierarchy) on one side, and child rape victims and their families on the other side. The hierarchy was interested in protecting the image of the Catholic church by not reporting child rapists and shuffling them around to different churches, thereby creating more child rape victims. On the other side were the child rape victims and their families who were more interested in, you know, children not getting raped.

  9. Dhay says:

    I see that Krauss’ wife is fighting her own ‘atheist war’:

    There is another whisper network, you call “undercurrent”, that is much more legitimate. It is full of cautions for and amongst men who are the routine targets of delusional feminist aggression and professional victimhood that plagues the skeptic community. …

    Interesting: the mens’ ‘whisper network’ of cautions against some women “is much more legitimate” than the womens’ ‘whisper network’ against some allegedly sexually predatory men; she doesn’t explain why (though I note that with Twitter’s famous limitations one struggles to add explanation to assertion) so I expect we will eventually see that claim for much greater legitimacy being fleshed out with evidence and reason on some other platform.

    Perhaps Sam Harris will podcast another interview with Krauss, to discuss the allegations — and including why the mens’ ‘whisper network’ of cautions against some women “is much more legitimate” than the womens’ ‘whisper network’ against some men. Should be interesting.

    *

    The second claim of interest is that allegation that “delusional feminist aggression and professional victimhood [that] plagues the skeptic community”. Yet more internecine atheist strife. Yep, looks like the atheist war is heating up.

    *

    Funny how some atheists will throw the over-the-top “delusional” at anyone they disagree with. First they threw it at Christians, now at each other.

  10. Dhay says:

    Leppert >… There isn’t a faction that is pro-sexual-harassment.

    No indeed. On the other hand there’s those in the atheist hierarchy — the CFI is the obvious example — who have known of the allegations, and of the serious concerns of members of their staff, for many years but have continued to “enable” Krauss to gain access to women at further conferences: Krauss has continued to be invited, and, heck, women haven’t (except by the unofficial whisper network, which presumably has limited reach) — the women haven’t even been warned about him. Like you, I can happily use the word, “enablers”. (Sounds like your RCC example.)

    > By contrast, for instance, in the Catholic Church there were child rapists (clergy) and the enablers of those rapists (the hierarchy) on one side, and child rape victims and their families on the other side. The hierarchy was interested in protecting the image of the Catholic church by not reporting child rapists and shuffling them around to different churches, thereby creating more child rape victims.

    Then there’s the universities, such as AC Grayling’s ‘The New College of the Humanities’, which didn’t even bother to investigate allegations made against Krauss. Like you, I can happily use the word, “enablers”.

    Or there’s the universities which did investigate, even banned Krauss from campus (read “sacked”, surely) yet allowed Krauss to quietly move on to pastures new and opportunities new. Like you, I can happily use the word, “enablers”.

    > On the other side were the child rape victims and their families who were more interested in, you know, children not getting raped.

    And the parallel here is those who, despite their depiction by Krauss’ wife as delusional feminist aggressors and professional victims, have spoken out because they were more interested in, you know, women not getting raped.

  11. Michael says:

    TFBW, that’s not what “war” means. For a “war”, there needs to be a divide with one side battling the other. I don’t see a pro-Krauss side here apart from Krauss and his wife. There isn’t a faction that is pro-sexual-harassment.

    The two sides were defined years ago by Elevatorgate. It’s not going to be played out in terms of being pro- and anti-sexual harassment. Instead, one side has clearly played its hand – the evidence is compelling that Krauss engaged in sexual harassment and thus needs to be deplatformed and discredited. The other side will push back soon. You’ll notice that while activists like Mehta, Myers, and Watson have embraced the Buzzfeed story and publicly condemned Krauss, activists like Dawkins, Harris, and Coyne have not.

  12. Leppert says:

    OK, so, again, no war. After claiming that a “war” has not only begun but is “heating up”, you have now fully retreated from that claim and replaced it with a promissory note that a “war” will happen any time now. We’ll soon see a bitter divide with one side supporting Krauss, you promise. Any time now. You remind me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g37HT4-EtzE

  13. Michael says:

    OK, so, again, no war.

    Er, the war has been going on ever since Elevatorgate.

    After claiming that a “war” has not only begun but is “heating up”, you have now fully retreated from that claim and replaced it with a promissory note that a “war”

    No, this is just the latest skirmish. And it looks like it could be a big one, since Krauss is so well connected to Dawkins and Harris. Can you explain why Dawkins, Harris, and Coyne have not joined hands with Myers, Mehta, and Watson on this one?

    What we’re likely to see here is a lawsuit. Not only is it looking more and more like Krauss’s only option for saving his career, but it will give him cover for not being able to talk about the specifics of the Buzzfeed article. It will also give Harris and Dakwins the excuse not to have to speak about it, as they will cite since Krauss’s ordeal is being decided by the courts, they will assume innocent until proven guilty.

    will happen any time now. We’ll soon see a bitter divide with one side supporting Krauss, you promise. Any time now. You remind me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g37HT4-EtzE

    Some will support Krauss. But the divide will be more clearly seen by those who condemn Krauss and want him kicked out of the skeptic/atheist movement and those who refuse to make those demands and act on those demands.

  14. Michael says:

    Leppert,

    The return fire has begun. Lindsay is Boghossian’s sidekick.

    Being infuriated with the quality of discourse on this issue, as explained here, is completely justified. It's worth noting that even if the allegations are true as stated, the BuzzFeed piece is still a smear job that seeks punishment (and probably power), not justice. https://t.co/su390xB1oz— James Lindsay (@GodDoesnt) 25 February 2018

  15. Kevin says:

    Let me guess. Leppert will still insist, despite all evidence, that there is not, and has not been, any war within the atheist community.

  16. TFBW says:

    There is no war within the Atheist Community. The Atheist Community has always been at war with Eurasia.

  17. Dhay says:

    James Lindsay > …even if the allegations are true as stated, the BuzzFeed piece is still a smear job that seeks punishment (and probably power), not justice.

    I’ve looked repeatedly at this, and it continues to seem incoherent.

  18. TFBW says:

    Dhay, does it seem any more coherent if you think of BuzzFeed as part of a movement which seeks to convict and punish people through social (as opposed to judicial) means, rather than a news outlet? The de-platforming and ostracism which are the favoured punishments of the Social Justice movement have to be implemented by direct appeal to the public who would carry out said punishments. If you interpret the BuzzFeed article as the Case for the Prosecution in the Court of Social Justice, does everything start to make sense?

  19. Dhay says:

    Apparently, when Lawrence Krauss’ current university, ASU, hired him they didn’t know about the accusations leading to his banning from campus at the university he left:

    Krauss isn’t allowed on the Case Western campus or at Canada’s Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in response to complaints of inappropriate behavior, BuzzFeed reported.

    An ASU official said no one in the hiring process could have known of the restrictions as they’d come after Krauss came to ASU.

    “No one in the administration who was making hiring decisions about Krauss knew about either of those two actions because, according to the Buzzfeed article itself, those restrictions were imposed well after Krauss was hired here,” the official said.

    http://www.statepress.com/article/2018/02/spscience-asu-professor-lawrence-krauss-accused-of-sexual-misconduct

    Looks like Krauss slipped under the hiring radar.

  20. Dhay says:

    I see that Bill Ligertwood, organiser of the Imagine Conferences in Canada over the past 7 years, has claimed in the Buzzfeed comments that Lawrence Krauss attended five of them and “[Krauss] came into contact with probably over 1000 people and there was no hint or even insinuation of any wrongdoing”; and Ligertwood name-blackens “crazy Melody”.

    PZ Myers fired back that Ligertwood “is quite ready to sling slurs at women who complain, you probably aren’t the person most of these women are going to turn to in order to report such incidents”.

    “So [Ligertwood] doubled down.”

    This so far this and more is in Myers’ 27 February 2018 blog post “Rebecca Watson tells it like it is”. At the bottom of that post he tells us:

    I’ll also mention that this conference organizer, who had not heard any complaints about his speakers in 7 years, then turned around and claimed that he’d heard from dozens of women that I’d sexually harassed them when I spoke at his conference. That’s the level of dishonesty we’re dealing with here — that’s the amount of disrespect atheist conference organizers deal out to the women attendees. And then they wonder why women and minorities show less interest in organized atheism.

    [Myer’s emphasis.]
    http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2018/02/27/rebecca-watson-tells-it-like-it-is/

    It seems odd that Ligertwood should show himself so obviously to be a liar – would he, is this for real? I took a long and hopefully exhaustive look through the Buzzfeed comments for the “dozens of women that I’d sexually harassed” accusations against Myers by Ligertwood, but could not find it there; nor did Myers provide a link to source; nor did I find it elsewhere, using Google (it might not be indexed yet, if very fresh, but the Buzzfeed comments are already indexed and findable via Google: this doesn’t necessarily mean Myers is lying, but it does mean we need to take it with a big pinch of salt and ask just who is lying here.

    What it definitely does mean is that this little bit of the atheist war over Krauss is definitely hot.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.