Richard Dawkins "stripped of humanist of the year" award.

[TSwizzle]

Another episode in the ongoing retreat from reason saga;

Richard Dawkins has been stripped of his 'Humanist of the Year' title after comparing transgender people to the American activist Rachel Dolezal - who posed as a black woman for more than ten years. The American Humanist Association (AHA) revoked its honour from the evolutionary biologist, 80, after he appeared to question whether people could choose their gender. The move comes 25 years after the evolutionary biologist, whose books include The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, received the honour for his 'significant contributions' as a science communicator.

DailyMail

No room for science in this age of superstitious mumbo jumbo.

 

[Metaphor]

Another episode in the ongoing retreat from reason saga;

Richard Dawkins has been stripped of his 'Humanist of the Year' title after comparing transgender people to the American activist Rachel Dolezal - who posed as a black woman for more than ten years. The American Humanist Association (AHA) revoked its honour from the evolutionary biologist, 80, after he appeared to question whether people could choose their gender. The move comes 25 years after the evolutionary biologist, whose books include The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, received the honour for his 'significant contributions' as a science communicator.

DailyMail

No room for science in this age of superstitious mumbo jumbo.

Evidently, it appears that men like Dawkins are capable of causation backwards in time, where questions asked in 2021 can cause achievements in 1996 to cease to exist.

Dawkins asked why people are championed to believe one impossibility (that humans can change sex) while being vilified for believing another (that humans can change race). I'd like to know the answer to this myself.

 

[Patooka]

I give it about 8 replies before the OP says they don't really care about the issue.

 

[Politesse]

No great surprise there. Remember Elevatorgate? "Dear Muslima"? Dawkins has been a prominent voice promoting gender chauvinism in atheist spaces for a very long time.

If you don't want to slurp your news from DailyMail, you can read the AHA's actual statement here.

It's not long, so go ahead and just read the whole thing. The main point is thus:

Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values. His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient. His subsequent attempts at clarification are inadequate and convey neither sensitivity nor sincerity.

 

[Metaphor]

No great surprise there. Remember Elevatorgate? "Dear Muslima"? Dawkins has been a prominent voice promoting gender chauvinism in atheist spaces for a very long time.

I remember it. How does that incident display Dawkins' 'gender chauvinism'?

 

[Trausti]

World famous atheist upsets atheist group by questioning religion.

 

[Politesse]

The American Humanist Association is fundamentally a Humanist, not as such "atheist", group. While they are oriented as a key objective toward promoting extra-religious valuation of human potential and creating safe spaces for nontheist persons and groups to flourish, fundamentally combatting bigotry in all of its forms and justifications is and always has been a key objective of the Association as well. They do not exist just to champion a particular partisan position on religion, in short, but rather to foster a society in which religion and religious distinctions no longer matter and are not used as a guide to policy. You can read the Association's official statement on Justice, Equity, and Diversty at this link. It is worth noting that both gender discrimination and racial discrimination are specifically condemned in this statement.

 

[Trausti]

“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.”
― Richard Feynman

 

[Politesse]

“The highest forms of understanding we can achieve are laughter and human compassion.”
― Richard P. Feynman

“We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions, and pass them on.”
― Richard P. Feynman

“No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles, nor to prescribe in any way the character of the questions investigated. Neither may a government determine the aesthetic value of artistic creations, nor limit the forms of literacy or artistic expression. Nor should it pronounce on the validity of economic, historic, religious, or philosophical doctrines. Instead it has a duty to its citizens to maintain the freedom, to let those citizens contribute to the further adventure and the development of the human race.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Sorry, if you're going to use one of my favorite Humanists to preposterously support anti-Humanist values, I'm going to reach into my own quote notebook! Feynman, for all of his faults, was no lover of bigotry in any form. His position was always that whatever expanded human potential was a good thing, whatever limited it was not.

 

[Metaphor]

The American Humanist Association is fundamentally a Humanist, not as such "atheist", group. While they are oriented as a key objective toward promoting extra-religious valuation of human potential and creating safe spaces for nontheist persons and groups to flourish, fundamentally combatting bigotry in all of its forms and justifications is and always has been a key objective of the Association as well. They do not exist just to champion a particular partisan position on religion, in short, but rather to foster a society in which religion and religious distinctions no longer matter and are not used as a guide to policy. You can read the Association's official statement on Justice, Equity, and Diversty at this link. It is worth noting that both gender discrimination and racial discrimination are specifically condemned in this statement.

What gender and racial discrimination did Dawkins champion?

 

[Trausti]

The American Humanist Association is fundamentally a Humanist, not as such "atheist", group. While they are oriented as a key objective toward promoting extra-religious valuation of human potential and creating safe spaces for nontheist persons and groups to flourish, fundamentally combatting bigotry in all of its forms and justifications is and always has been a key objective of the Association as well. They do not exist just to champion a particular partisan position on religion, in short, but rather to foster a society in which religion and religious distinctions no longer matter and are not used as a guide to policy. You can read the Association's official statement on Justice, Equity, and Diversty at this link. It is worth noting that both gender discrimination and racial discrimination are specifically condemned in this statement.

What gender and racial discrimination did Dawkins champion?

He’s a cis-While male. Absolute bottom of the progressive stack. Got out his lane. That devil.

 

[Metaphor]

The American Humanist Association is fundamentally a Humanist, not as such "atheist", group. While they are oriented as a key objective toward promoting extra-religious valuation of human potential and creating safe spaces for nontheist persons and groups to flourish, fundamentally combatting bigotry in all of its forms and justifications is and always has been a key objective of the Association as well. They do not exist just to champion a particular partisan position on religion, in short, but rather to foster a society in which religion and religious distinctions no longer matter and are not used as a guide to policy.

The Association has clearly displayed its adherence to the secular religion of transgender ideology and excommunicates its heretics. Unlike the doctrines of the Catholic Church, however, redemption from sin is impossible.

 

[J842P]

No great surprise there. Remember Elevatorgate? "Dear Muslima"? Dawkins has been a prominent voice promoting gender chauvinism in atheist spaces for a very long time.

If you don't want to slurp your news from DailyMail, you can read the AHA's actual statement here.

It's not long, so go ahead and just read the whole thing. The main point is thus:

Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values. His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient. His subsequent attempts at clarification are inadequate and convey neither sensitivity nor sincerity.

Yes, it's pure nonsense.

 

[Trausti]

An atheist group punishing someone for free thought. Wokeness destroys everything.

 

[Politesse]

The American Humanist Association is fundamentally a Humanist, not as such "atheist", group. While they are oriented as a key objective toward promoting extra-religious valuation of human potential and creating safe spaces for nontheist persons and groups to flourish, fundamentally combatting bigotry in all of its forms and justifications is and always has been a key objective of the Association as well. They do not exist just to champion a particular partisan position on religion, in short, but rather to foster a society in which religion and religious distinctions no longer matter and are not used as a guide to policy. You can read the Association's official statement on Justice, Equity, and Diversty at this link. It is worth noting that both gender discrimination and racial discrimination are specifically condemned in this statement.

What gender and racial discrimination did Dawkins champion?

He’s a cis-While male. Absolute bottom of the progressive stack. Got out his lane. That devil.

The statement says nothing about his race or chosen gender expression.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Another episode in the ongoing retreat from reason saga;

Richard Dawkins has been stripped of his 'Humanist of the Year' title after comparing transgender people to the American activist Rachel Dolezal - who posed as a black woman for more than ten years. The American Humanist Association (AHA) revoked its honour from the evolutionary biologist, 80, after he appeared to question whether people could choose their gender. The move comes 25 years after the evolutionary biologist, whose books include The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, received the honour for his 'significant contributions' as a science communicator.

DailyMail

No room for science in this age of superstitious mumbo jumbo.

It's ironic though. His claim is that challenging the woke trans narrative leads to being vilified, leads to him being vilified, proving his point.

Well done American Humanist Organization playing right into the hands of truly transphobic and bigoted conservatives.

Dawkins is obviously not transphobic. This is so stupid. If he's not a hero of the humanist cause, nobody is.

 

[DrZoidberg]

“The highest forms of understanding we can achieve are laughter and human compassion.”
― Richard P. Feynman

“We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions, and pass them on.”
― Richard P. Feynman

“No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles, nor to prescribe in any way the character of the questions investigated. Neither may a government determine the aesthetic value of artistic creations, nor limit the forms of literacy or artistic expression. Nor should it pronounce on the validity of economic, historic, religious, or philosophical doctrines. Instead it has a duty to its citizens to maintain the freedom, to let those citizens contribute to the further adventure and the development of the human race.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Sorry, if you're going to use one of my favorite Humanists to preposterously support anti-Humanist values, I'm going to reach into my own quote notebook! Feynman, for all of his faults, was no lover of bigotry in any form. His position was always that whatever expanded human potential was a good thing, whatever limited it was not.

Dawkins does not represent anti-humanist values. That is preposterous. What he attacked in that Tweet was the anti-intellectualism of the woke position.

Feynman was above all a scientist. You'd be foolish if you though any of those quotes can be used against Dawkins today. Stripping Dawkins from the award is an attack on science, ie an attack on that which Feynman held as the most sacred.

The man wrote a book called, "the pleasure of finding things out". Everything in that book is a defence of Dawkins and an attack on the anti-intellectual woke scum attacking him today.

It has to be ok to discuss things. No matter of whose feelings get hurt. If you can't allow other people to freely explore where their intellectual curiousity takes them, then you are an enemy of Feymans ideals.

Feynman is one of my biggest heroes. If you challenge me to a Feynman quote battle, I promise, you I will win.

These woke idiots aren't the friend of transexuals. They are the enemies of reason. Of course any Humanist organization worth their salt should be on Dawkins side here.

 

[BH]

I wonder how much of this silliness is funded by rich people on the far right to make the left look stupid.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I wonder how much of this silliness is funded by rich people on the far right to make the left look stupid.

It's not. I wrote this in another thread. This is where the "the Revolution devours its children" comes from. Said by the revolutionary Jacques Mallet du Pan after being exiled from revolutionary France.

The left is imploding as a results of it's success in previous decades. Now it's attacking its own heroes for rediculous reasons.

 

[untermensche]

I wonder how much of this silliness is funded by rich people on the far right to make the left look stupid.

It's not. I wrote this in another thread. This is where the "the Revolution devours its children" comes from. Said by the revolutionary Jacques Mallet du Pan after being exiled from revolutionary France.

The left is imploding as a results of it's success in previous decades. Now it's attacking its own heroes for rediculous reasons.

Absurd nonsense.

A greater sense of morality is coming into being and those opposed to it are opposed like racists were and should be opposed.

A male who thinks they have a mind of a woman might very well have a genetic anomaly that gives them a mind of a woman.

We have no idea what goes on in some other person's mind.