Non-Believers Have More Activism Ahead of Them: A Different Kind
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2023/10/30
Chuck Green in Nebraska Today made some important comments on the nature of atheist closeting. Even after the successes of the New Atheist movement, which simply meant a more brash, sometimes, and a more open and straightforward, more accurately, statement of non-belief in theological claims, there continues to be a self-silencing of non-believers in the United States, which, by comparison, means most countries of the world. Why?
Green notes how those without a religious affiliation are the fastest grouping population in the United States. One reason, as noted over years of interviews and conversations with these individuals all over the world, is the Internet. The decentralization of informational access provides a basis for individuals to critically evaluate cultural beliefs with others. This, by itself, neuters fundamentalism for many. Global informational cosmopolitanism is the first benchmark of a Type I civilization. Everyone garners mutual understanding, which begets tolerance in diversity.
However, as Green notes, “But the social stigma associated with atheism leaves this population vulnerable to isolation and poor mental health outcomes.”
That’s an ongoing problem. Arguably, since the population of non-believers is increasing precipitously, this has been a declining problem with improved recognition and movements devoted to their visibility, e.g., New Atheism, Firebrand Atheism, reinvigoration of global Humanism in branding – think IHEU to HI – and advances in the global South, advances in science to justify agnostic empiricism, pluralistic multiethnic societies reducing supremacist movements to comedy, and the like. Nonetheless, the stigma and isolation and self-abnegation is a crucial element for consideration. Again, why, especially in the United States?
Green uses research by Assistant Profrssor Dean Abbott who looked into the psychological well-being of “rural-residing and women-identified atheists — in the context of anti-atheist discrimination in the U.S.”
“Both rural and woman-identifying atheists were thoughtful about not sharing large parts of their worldview,” he said.
And that’s significant. People comfortably go to ‘safe spaces’ as entire colleges and universities devoted to religious study, credentialing, and life. They wear crosses, make movies, write books, fund political parties, conduct wedding ceremonies, wear culturally appopriate signifiers, and such. They talk about going to religious institutions every week, praying, and so on. How come this sector of the population feels the need to self-silence? In theocratic societies, it’s obvious: Fear of political pressure, legal consequences, and social reprisal, so various abuses. Even an American example as shown by Dr. Herb Silverman, it was illegal to run for political office.
600 atheists — 300 from each group — took part in the study. If you have an experience with social scientific research, you can realize the depth of the sample size for a study. That’s, in fact, quite enough to get a good idea. The two groups of atheists experienced things in different ways.
Many atheist women found atheism, in and of itself, liberating when coming out of a Christian background. Most of the restrictions are for women in the Christian faith, though the faith was liberationist for its time; it’s almost retrograde now. Green uses the word “expectations” when describing this phenomenon. Women atheists found the general expectations from the faith stultifying, restrictive.
You can find many atheist women like this. Usually, two camps, the majority: they find liberation. A superminority who have come out and left the religion, then declare an aggressive stance against not only illegitimate patriarchal tyranny but also transferred — overextended — to innocent men. It’s a sad sight, hard to defend those unfortunate men having to be the punching bag for these unfortunate, too, women’s processing of trauma. It happens; that’s life.
North American religion has truly been nullified on a number of levels, which explains the attempts at a resurgence for political power and social relevance. Canadian Christianity lost the culture war. It will be, by my math, less than half of the population — and not very serious worshippers — somewhere in 2024. That decline will continue onwards towards a more United Kingdom level for the rest of the 2020s, at least.
An important finding from the study was anti-atheist discrimination was “uncommon.” Yet, those women found the authority of the Christian faith and the norms distressing. A stereotype for women atheists was being “sexually immoral” for simply being atheists, which is clearly nonsense and an attempt at shaming women into conformity. It’s wrong. These stereotypes can be actively encouraged by church leadership.
The rural atheists had different challenges. They feared violence, so “a heightened sense of danger.” One secular opinion writer for their community received a death threat at a local restaurant. Death threats are common in the secular world for writers and prominent people. Even if the issues facing atheists in these rural areas, let alone rural atheist women, were covered and known, the care is, typically, faith-based anyway. This makes the entire social and care landscape geared by and for religious believers, often Christian. That’s another reason for the isolation. Why participate in an unwelcoming community and then getting help includes only faith-based treatment?
Abbott is working, happily, to create a mental health handbook for professionals working with non-religious clients, remembering anti-atheist discrimination was not the issue. It’s a larger set of issues, but specific to geographics, socioeconomics, and gender.
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 