There’s Skeptifem’s rant (and I mean that in a good way) about the “white male privilege” attitude of Bill Maher and other prominent skeptics/freethinkers/etc., with which PZ Myers agrees (sort of), but says the problem is merely that male atheists tend to be “confident that equality is the right answer, appreciating everyone, male or female, working to promote rationalism in society, and then smugly assuming we’re done when we’re not.”
I suspect the real problem is that, like members of pretty much any oppressed and/or disenfranchised minority, atheists often think prejudice is something other people have, and that they themselves are immune to it (or immune to being called out on it).
Along somewhat the same lines, Stephen Prothero holds forth on how maybe it would be good for atheism to have more prominent female voices (and for the male voices to be less prominent), since everyone knows girls are made of sugar and spice and all that. OK, that’s not exactly how he put it, but it’s not all that far off.
So Amanda Marcotte tears Prothero a new one, pointing out that expecting female atheists to be less aware of theistic nonsense or less articulate about calling it nonsense is just as sexist as the religious nuts who say women can’t lead religious nuts because they don’t have, well, nuts.
(cartoon via Dr. Jim’s Thinking Shop & Tea Room)