Allow me to clarify. The expression "paint it ( whatever ) all with the same brush", is a rather informal colloquial generalization, so when I see someone talking about a specific trait ( misogyny ) in reference to an entire group ( the atheist or skeptical community ), although the intent may not have been to apply the trait to the whole group, it leaves room for clarification on that point, and my response was to get that process started. So my response has more to do with the way I process an issue than making any assumptions. Consequently we've narrowed down the issue to where it doesn't apply to those communities in a generalized way, but to a limited number of individuals. Does that help put my response in perspective?
I think we've got that in focus now. But we wouldn't have if we hadn't gone through this process. To answer the question, it seems that, as stated above, it seems to apply to a "limited number of individuals", and therefore I have doubts that it is commonplace. But then again, if the individuals responsible hold influential or high profile positions within those communities, it could affect the perception of how common it is, and if one person kept encountering examples, it could become that person's perception that the problem is larger than it is.
Yes I read the article. It's been posted before. I have also done a lot of posting over on the JREF forum ( an organized skeptics forum ), and I do notice a distinct lack of obvious female participation. Perhaps there is more than is perceived because the participants have chosen not to share their stats. Would it be sexist of me to say it would be refreshing to see more female participation? My experience with the few females I've debated with is that the other skeptics are certainly quick to come to their defense. To be clear here, I mean to support them in opposition to my views on UFOs, not because I've pounced on them in any personal attack ( I don't do that ). However when a female comes into the forum and starts in with what they call "woo" ... they're given the same opinions as the guys, and if anything they [ the skeptics ] seem to go easier on them [ the females ] at first, and it's the female skeptics who are less reserved about taking a more critical or personal approach. Of course that's just my experience there.
Have I ever found myself "perpetrating it" ... a clear "No." If anything I'm a victim of old school stereotyping. Rather than not liking women, I like women more than men in general ( for no logical reason ), I have a major aversion to violence against women in general ( even though I've been the victim of "reverse" spousal abuse ), I tend to make an extra effort to hold the door and help little old ladies cross the street. I also don't find the words "hostess" or "actress" or other designations bearing a sexual identifier to be discriminatory. I think those who do are the ones with the real problem. I think they changed the word "stewardess" to "flight attendant" to help the males feel less embarrassed ( I hope that attitude doesn't bother anyone here ). Anyway, perhaps try the JREF. Lookup a few female posters and check the posts and replies. See how they're treated over there, and please post links to any examples if you find them!
