Women Skeptics

This is an interesting blog I found on Women and Skepticism, trying to find an answer to the question "Why are there not more women skeptics?" The author outlines a brief history of Womens’ contributions to skepticisim. Among some other ideas, she broached the idea that skeptics have the potential to be mostly men, ‘macho’ and condescending, and that women are turned off by that, and would rather spend their time with their supportive friends who believe in the paranormal than hang around a bunch of rude men they agree with.

I’ve had this problem, and not all skeptic communities are very good. I’ve had some bad experiences with the Rational Response Squad, which might be said to be more of a militant atheist group than a skeptic society. But their tactics involve ridiculing debate opponents, and I don’t agree with that at all. Ad hominem attacks are rarely a good idea. The debate we were having was over feminism and chivalry. I suggested that treating someone in an overly kind and chivalrous way just because you desire to have sex with them, and then getting angry at them when they’re not interested is sexist and patriarchal. It was infuriating to hear a group of otherwise intelligent human beings spew the most sexist s***.

It turned out they weren’t that skeptical after all. But this is a problem, one I think the author of the blog linked at the top handles quite well.

The Bay Area Skeptics are not the only ones to confront the problem. In response to an article by physicist George Lawrence in Rocky Mountain Skeptic, John Wilder (1988) wrote: “For all of the author’s [Lawrence’s] scientific, academic and intellectual credentials, he displays a level of disrespect for others that, in my opinion, is completely inappropriate. . . . The author succeeded only in subjecting a group of sincere . . . people to outright ridicule” (p. 8).

Would a less ‘ridculing’ attitude in fact help both genders? Why, I ask myself, must women in skepticism be particularly ‘mobilised’ or what have you? Are there particular needs that women skeptics have that aren’t going to be bolstered by already-existing Science for Women initiatives – or are they pointedly shut out right now from the embrace of social communities of skeptics, humanists, what have you?

This is a good point. A lot of skeptics are used to having been outsiders their entire lives. They’re used to being ridiculed or bullied. But a lot of skeptics, male and female, can come off as condescending and rude, and this drives people away from skeptic groups. Even women skeptics come off in the same way. I know from my experience that being the only person in a group who doesn’t believe in God or mystic cults of fantasy can be a real social downer. ‘What? You don’t believe in chakras? Shame on you, you close-minded person. History was written by rich white men who had a vested interest in squashing belief in feminine-based medicine, you’re only bowing to the altar of patriarchy and science, blindfolded.’

Or is this just a situation that faces women in general in society anyway – and skeptics in general full-stop?

I’d be more inclined to believe that male and female skeptics have more in common than not. It’s just that women, we _know_ we’re being discriminated against, the oppression of women is written on the pages of history. But feminism isn’t something you have to prove empirically. It’s a movement where women demand equal respect and treatment, not a scientific theory of how the world works. I happen to think that there are probably innate differences in men and women’s psychology. But cognitie differences do not equal cognitive deficiencies. And for anyone who hasn’t read Simone deBeauvoir, her chapter on female mystics is quite interesting. Quoting again from the blog at the top:

Certainly, I know – research does suggest that women are more superstitious than men (Gallup & Newport, 1991) and that females hold a greater range of paranormal beliefs than males (Wolfradt, 1997; Rice, 2003; IPSOS Mori, 2007), although men express greater belief in UFOs and extraterrestrials (Rice, 2003). According to Blackmore (1997) a possible reason for this is that males are encouraged to engage in science, while females are more encouraged towards social and religious issues which emphasise fantasy life. Studied have demonstrated that there has been a documented increase in belief in various items like Extra-Terrestrials, ghosts, hauntings, communication with the dead and astrology (National Science Foundation, 2002).

It’s my current belief that encouraging women to believe in fantastical things is one of the tools of the patriarchy used to keep women from expanding their minds and competing with men intellectually.

Thanks, this was my first post.