“If you want something new, you have to stop doing something old.”
— Peter Drucker.
I was recently accused of being a militant gay atheist.
I felt momentarily dumbstruck, wondering which portion of that identity was meant to be militant – being gay or being atheist. But then I realised that the woman who had made this criticism appeared to be a religious lesbian who had read an article on my humanist blog. She evidently thought that accusing someone of being atheist was the harshest criticism she could hurl at me.
In response, I thanked her for the compliment, because – militancy aside (whatever that means) – I certainly would love to be considered in the same calibre as many LGBT atheists, nonbelievers or humanists who were part of the gay liberation era or subsequent LGBT rights activism, including Frank Kameny, Leonard Matlovich, Harvey Milk, Peter Tatchell, Greta Christina, Michael Callen, Barney Frank, Andrew Copson, Debbie Goddard, Christopher Hitchens, Bob Brown, Georgie Stone, Jason Ball, Alison Thorne and Phil Carswell – not to mention earlier role models including Magnus Hirschfeld, Oscar Wilde, Virginia Woolf, Walt Whitman, Greta Garbo, Alfred Kinsey, Henry Gerber, Alan Turing and Marlene Dietrich.
This woman who seeks to insult me by calling me ‘militant gay atheist’ is a member of my own LGBT community – people who have traditionally been criminalised and pathologised and marginalised by religion to this very day. Nevertheless, like many in the LGBT community, she appears to default to religion as being the ethical norm, even in a demographic where nearly three quarters of her cohort identify as having no religion.
Atheists and agnostics need to confront and change this popular but erroneous conflation of religion with ethics. We can change it through the application of humanist (and other humanitarian) ethics and activism. To do this, humanists need to explore ‘three rs’ of our own – not reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic, but another three challenges to test our resolve: relevance, reconciliation and reassurance.
Our nation is dominated by young people who no longer predominantly look to the church, theology, or older philosophies for consolation. They are an increasingly nonbelieving cohort of people who find ancient myths interesting only because such stories can be rebooted and retold in modern, space age ways. Forget Jesus or Athena or Hercules; today we have Superman, Jessica Jones, Wonder Woman, Pokémon, Marvel superheroes, Katniss Everdean, Harry Potter, Doctor Who, Captains Kirk and Picard and Janeway, Luke and Rey Skywalker, and Australia’s own Cleverman; all of them being reworkings of ancient heroic tropes. While young audiences flock to the Marvelverse, one recent popular visitation in Australia was to the Astraverse via the Bollywood Hindi superhero movie, Brahmastra Part 1: Shiva.
These superheroes are not like philosophers of yore, who navel gazed and debated how many angels sat upon the head of a pin. Today’s superheroes and cultural icons are people who reveal their inner philosophies and ethics through outward actions, not words. They reflect modern cultures of instant gratification and individualism: where smart phones make information exchange instantaneous and global; where communications have been revolutionised by Facebook which has replaced emails (which in turn replaced snail mail). People now seek their own answers and try to make their own sense of facts and data instead of deferring to experts and community leaders. They no longer need social clubs with monthly meetings and newsletters and annual membership fees if they can instead enjoy instant online social networking with those who share their specialised interests. Zoom meetings are replacing pub crawls. Welcome to the 21st century.
There is also the question of literary relevance. How do we promote humanism in a world where Scooby Doo and Sheldon Cooper have done more to advance popular understandings of evidentiary science and critical thinking than has the modern humanist movement; and where Big Bird has taught more young people about cooperation than a library full of secular ethics books? As an implicit recognition of cultural change, there have been various religious reboots, ranging from Jesus Christ Superstar to Black Lightning, and from ‘Christ of the Never‘ to an African Jesus, that have all sought to keep their messages relevant to new audiences. Meanwhile, the interdependence of cultural mixes becomes apparent with the adoption of UFO mythologies by the Warlpiri people of the Northern Territory (see Eirik Saethre, 2007). This is a lesson that secularists would do well to learn. Where are our modern role models and morality plays and genuinely militant activists for humanity?
This brings us to one of the greatest challenges for secularism across western societies: its predominance of white, European men across atheist, aligned, and humanist discourse: everything from our cultural histories and conference programs, to podcasts, books, and traditional lists of those receiving our accolades or awards.
Don’t get me wrong: many rationalist/humanist/atheist activists are doing what they can to fight institutional racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination. But we need to recognise that we are benefactors of generations of patriarchal and racially elitist attitudes and biases encompassing our sciences and arts, literary and intellectual norms; and that our cultural paradigms involve forms of white male privilege. Historically, Humanism can be seen as linked to colonialism:
“Colonialism relies upon a racist discourse of imperial humanism that orders humankind, implicitly or overtly, according to a naturalized hierarchy in which modern European White Man is taken as a normative template for human being, value, and achievement.” – Simone Bignall, p. 1.
Living in an era that strives to be post-colonial, do we dare to be post-humanist? What does that even mean, and what does it entail? Perhaps we should ask others outside of our comfort zone. Perhaps we should also consider the interdependence of our human and wider families: sentients, living creatures, the environment.
The debate between theism and atheism needs new definitions, and should ideally include the optimism inherent within humanist frameworks. As one example, US African-American humanist Anthony B. Pinn challenges his fellow humanists to ‘acknowledge blacks as being alive‘.
This rather startling statement has two clear interpretations: the first being to acknowledge that white privilege needs to be dismantled and replaced with genuine equality within which all people have equal rights and opportunities as a demonstration that all life is equally precious.
The second interpretation is that forms of atheism, in seeking to replace religious philosophies, must offer something that is at least as life affirming and compelling as the consolation offered by religion in response to death and mortality. Pinn explains that his walking away from the deeply religious elements of his African American community into broader secular humanism can be seen in this context:
“I left the church and entered a community I believe better values life, one that better understands the need to safeguard the life web of which humans are part.”
It is this consolation – the practical here and now, not some mythical afterlife – that Humanists should be promoting. Humans do not need the solace of a heaven in the afterlife if we are striving to make heaven here on Earth. Our questions, our answers, and our actions, can all help to create the future to which we aspire.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.” – Albert Einstein.
Simone Bignall, ‘Colonial Humanism, Alter-humanism and Ex-colonialism’, in S. Herbrechter et al. (eds.), Palgrave Handbook of Critical Posthumanism, 2022.
Adam O Hill, et al, Private Lives 3: The Health and Wellbeing of LGBTIQ People in Australia, La Trobe University, August 2020, p. 26.
Eirik Saethre, ‘Close encounters: UFO beliefs in a remote Australian Aboriginal community’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.), Royal Anthropological Institute 13, 2007; 901-915.
© 2022 Geoff Allshorn