Atheist Activist Uses Status as Conference Speaker to Hook-Up

Over at his blog (Sept 16), anti-religious activist Richard Carrier has a problem:

Through a confluence of events, none of my girlfriends can make it to MythCon in Milwaukee this year.

Oh, oh.  The harem is busy.  No worries.  Carrier is out to turn lemons into lemonade.

So I’m looking for a date that weekend. You should be aware I’m straight, promiscuous, polyamorous, godless, drink, don’t smoke, and have that cloud hanging over me. And you can ask me anything else to vet me by. I’m an open book. Just contact me by email or FB messenger to inquire.

Kinda makes sense, I guess.  After all, why would a promiscuous polyamorous atheist even bother attending Mythcon if you can’t get laid there, right?  But I notice that Carrier forget to instruct his potential date about his preferred pronouns.

The Great Scholar Carrier then dangles various perks to expand his harem:

I can offer you access to the event, if you don’t already have tickets; and a share of a bed (platonically even), if you haven’t already booked your own room. I’ll also cover drinks. I’ll be at the Aloft hotel in downtown Milwaukee, also the location of the event afterparty, which is probably where we’d spend most of our time together. The conference consumes all of Saturday, September 22, and I’ll be tabling most of it, although you’d be welcome to sit & chat with me as I do. If you’ll be around the previous evening, you could also join me at the VIP party Friday.

It’s rather pathetic when you have to turn to the internet and use your lofty Mythcon position to try to hook-up.  Makes it hard to believe those accusations of him engaging in sexual misconduct, eh?

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

9 Responses to Atheist Activist Uses Status as Conference Speaker to Hook-Up

  1. Kevin says:

    I’m curious about the sort of woman who would find his self-description attractive. Actually, no I’m not.

  2. unclesporkums says:

    Thanks for the extra ammo!

  3. TFBW says:

    I notice that Carrier forget to instruct his potential date about his preferred pronouns.

    I suspect that they are, “I / me”.

  4. nsr says:

    Carrier is a middle-aged, physically unattractive man who desires a lot of sex. That is nothing unusual. What I don’t understand is how he (apparently) finds so many women willing to fulfil this desire. Is it some form of atheist celebrity worship? Typically the sort of celebrities women will lust after will be physically attractive or charismatic in some way. Carrier comes across as an excessively verbose narcissist.

  5. Dhay says:

    Returning to the OP, Carrier’s evidently now wary of transgressing clearly-stated boundaries and written rules at atheist conferences; the same ‘be my date’ blog post says:

    I’m currently not picking up dates at conferences. Only if you broach the possibility ahead of the day.

    He evidently wants to hook up at MythCon despite the rules explicitly not allowing him to even ask, when there; so he’s seeking to get around the rules to achieve the same ends. MythCon’s Code of Conduct includes:

    Prohibited conduct includes, but is not limited to, sexual harassment. By way of example, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of an unwelcome sexual nature are prohibited.

    Hmmm, I’d say that Carrier’s, er, very kind offer to …:

    I’ll also cover drinks.

    … fails to serve as a warning only for someone who is very naive or an utter fool.

    *

    Looking through Richard Carrier’s other recent posts I find a rant entitled “What’s the Harm? Why Religious Belief Is Always Bad”; and this revealing snippet buried in his endless verbosity:

    Indeed, I think a common problem pervading liberal sects is a more subtle conservatism, pressuring, and exploitation. They may be on the right side of most things, unlike conservatives; but they often still stand in the way of future advances in social wisdom, with their own peer pressuring and passive-aggressive judgmentalism—such as punishing anyone who becomes ethically nonmonogamous, …

    Do I detect the wellsprings of Carrier’s vociferous New Atheism? Poor victim! Those nasty Christians have criticised his behaviour so he’ll throw a revengeful hissy fit; for the rest of his life he’ll be as spiteful as possible back.

    I think we can reasonably assume that Carrier’s “punishing anyone who becomes ethically non-monogamous” means (not exclusively, but especially) “punishing” himself. And that “punishing” (by “peer pressuring and passive-aggressive judgmentalism”) refers to some liberal Christians raising an eyebrow or expressing their disapproval.

    It cannot refer to a beating up or a brick through the window, we’d never hear the end of such; whereas what comes across very strongly in Carrier’s blogs is that he is hyper-sensitive to, and infuriated at great length by, any criticism however mildly expressed.

    *

    I note that Carrier is currently pursuing his fellow atheists through the courts, not religious people, liberal or otherwise. Looks like Carrier gets mad at those (Christians) who raise eyebrows, or otherwise express disapproval in ways he considers “passive-aggressive” when he breaks society’s unwritten rules, but he gets livid when his fellow atheists insist on their clearly-stated boundaries and that he may not break written rules. Poor victim! But he can always try to slide around them on technicalities; and it looks like he is trying to at MythCon.

  6. Dhay says:

    Returning to the OP, Carrier’s evidently now wary of transgressing clearly-stated boundaries and written rules at atheist conferences; the same ‘be my date’ blog post says:

    I’m currently not picking up dates at conferences. Only if you broach the possibility ahead of the day.

    He evidently wants to hook up at MythCon despite the rules explicitly not allowing him to even ask, when there; so he’s seeking to get around the rules to achieve the same ends. MythCon’s Code of Conduct includes:

    Prohibited conduct includes, but is not limited to, sexual harassment. By way of example, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of an unwelcome sexual nature are prohibited.

    Hmmm, I’d say that Carrier’s, er, very kind offer to …:

    I’ll also cover drinks.

    … fails to serve as a warning only for someone who is very naive or an utter fool.

    *

    Looking through Richard Carrier’s other recent posts I find a rant entitled “What’s the Harm? Why Religious Belief Is Always Bad”; and this revealing snippet buried in his endless verbosity:

    Indeed, I think a common problem pervading liberal sects is a more subtle conservatism, pressuring, and exploitation. They may be on the right side of most things, unlike conservatives; but they often still stand in the way of future advances in social wisdom, with their own peer pressuring and passive-aggressive judgmentalism—such as punishing anyone who becomes ethically nonmonogamous, …

    Do I detect the wellsprings of Carrier’s vociferous New Atheism? Poor victim! Those nasty Christians have criticised his behaviour so he’ll throw a revengeful hissy fit; for the rest of his life he’ll be as spiteful as possible back.

    I think we can reasonably assume that Carrier’s “punishing anyone who becomes ethically non-monogamous” means (not exclusively, but especially) “punishing” himself. And that “punishing” (by “peer pressuring and passive-aggressive judgmentalism”) refers to some liberal Christians raising an eyebrow or expressing their disapproval.

    It cannot refer to a beating up or a brick through the window, we’d never hear the end of such; whereas what comes across very strongly in Carrier’s blogs is that he is hyper-sensitive to, and infuriated at great length by, any criticism however mildly expressed.

    *

    I note that Carrier is currently pursuing his fellow atheists through the courts, not religious people, liberal or otherwise. Looks like Carrier gets mad at those (Christians) who raise eyebrows, or otherwise express disapproval in ways he considers “passive-aggressive” when he breaks society’s unwritten rules, but he gets livid when his fellow atheists insist on their clearly-stated boundaries and that he may not break written rules. Poor victim! But he can always try to slide around them on technicalities; and it looks like he is trying to at MythCon.

  7. stcordova says:

    UPDATE on Carrier’s 2.1 million lawsuit:

    Mario Quadrucci of Mythcon is bankrolling Carrier’s lawsuit against PZ Myers! Read more (from PZ’s Perspective) about the supposed alt-right backer of Carrier:

    A guy with connections to the Alt-right backing a mangina feminist in Carrier? WTF (Wednesday Thursday Friday).?

  8. hikayamasan353 says:

    Given Dhay’s references to the prohibition towards affair requests, this is just blatant hypocrisy: “I can ask someone for a hot coffee, but you can’t”… Also it is unequal opportunities.

  9. TFBW says:

    In 99% of all cases when a Leftist/Progressive applies the label “Alt Right” to someone, it’s just a malicious slur. In the other 1% of cases, the target welcomes the label. People who are actually Alt Right are proud of it, so it’s pretty easy to pick one case from the other.

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.