atheism – Humanist Blog

Happy 60th Birthday, Ricky!

6th May 1965 (6-5-65) saw the birth of a young Australian man who had stellar aspirations, but who sadly did not live to see the future he envisaged. His life – and his resilience – can teach us things today, including taking a stand against injustice.

A certificate from the Golden Key International Honour Society certifies that Rick Ransome had achieved outstanding academic success (a double degree in Journalism and Arts, with a university medal) at the University of South Australia in 2000. After earlier years of self-doubt and the derision of some others with limited perspectives, he had proved to himself (and to the world) that he was intelligent, thoughtful, and capable of informed, researched, critical thinking. As a newly-qualified journalist, he was looking forward to making a difference in the world – but happenstance robbed him of that chance.

Today would have seen his sixtieth birthday.

Early Life

Ricky was a country boy, born to Albert and Merle and living in Port Lincoln. He was baptised on 3 October 1965 in St. Thomas’s Church, later being confirmed in the same church on 15 August 1976 at age eleven; religion would later play an important (if somewhat convoluted) part of his life. He finished school at the end of Year 10 and became a butcher. He later recalled losing his father too early in life, but looking up to his older siblings for role models. Family was important to young Ricky – but so was self-discovery and personal fulfilment. To these ends, he had aspirations for writing and humanitarian activism.

It was this desire for betterment, for humanitarian service, that would lead him into a traumatic detour but would ultimately set him on course for a positive life journey that would be cut tragically short. Perhaps we can all learn from his experience – to seize the day and use our opportunities wisely when we have them, because life can be short and uncertain.

The 1980s

Ricky left home in 1985 to join a religious group and (hopefully) travel the world undertaking good works in their name. He did travel to PNG, where he caught malaria, but this did not dampen his enthusiasm. Two passport photos from this time testify to his personal growth and change. The first, taken in May 1985 (one week after his 20th birthday) was prepared in anticipation of his time with the religious group and the international travel it might entail. This photo shows a bare-faced lad, appearing to be barely older than a schoolboy, with an air of youthful uncertainty about himself and a hesitant caution about the approaching future. The second photo, taken in January 1988 (barely 2 1/2 years later, and four months after leaving the group) shows a more mature, self-grounded young man, with individualistic spiky hair, playful moustache, and cheeky grin to match his developing autonomous personality and self-confidence; a physically and psychologically more well-rounded individual.

His personal growth during this time took place despite his involvement in the religious group, not because of it. Ricky found its cult-like practices restrictive and oppressive: absolute, unquestioning obedience and subservience to a “divinely-appointed” leadership; restricted diet and heavily regulated contact with the outside world; its rejection of science and its distrust of non-religious expertise; its burning of books and family photos and other items deemed to be “ungodly”; and its strict gender segregation in everyday practices. But worst of all, he was shocked by their blatant homophobia and their insistence that he undertake religious counselling and gay conversion therapy.

Two things probably helped Ricky get through these torturous times: first and foremost, his grace under fire; his resilience and personal tendency to seek the goodness within those around him. Even in the depths of his despair, he would bounce happily into a room and greet others with a natural, happy smile and a twinkle in his eye. Among his friends within the group, he was affectionately nicknamed “Ricky Ramjet” a word play on the name of a cartoon character who often burst into a room with boisterous enthusiasm and a total disregard for the convoluted machinations of others.

The second thing to help him get through these tough times was the love and support of his friends in the group, including me. I remember one afternoon in mid-1986 when he and I were, as mandated by the group, having a “deep and meaningful” conversation as a way of keeping each other fully transparent and monitored. We ‘came out’ as gay to each other – and then both did a double-take when we realised the implications of what we had just confessed. We ultimately bonded, becoming close friends and partners.

We spent a time growing together and experiencing all the opportunities that life had denied us up until that point: giggling like schoolkids sharing secrets together, becoming comfortable to (discretely) express physical affection in public and private, finding out how joyous it can be to share your life with another. But our learning also had its serious moments: confronting the internalised homophobia from our religious indoctrination which had created ongoing trauma and cognitive dissonance for both of us. But through this all he tried to remain encouraging: having been born with a heart condition, I once recall feeling melancholy about my own long-term medical situation, and Ricky consoled me with a confident throw-away line that I would probably outlive him by decades. How unfair for him that this would prove to be true because of his own (undiagnosed) heart condition.

At that time, he wrote me a poem “To A Special Friend” which I subsequently rededicated to a refugee who died too young, but Rick’s words take on a universal application for all who knew him:

“For even though my life has been
Occasionally a haze,
I can say I’m happier now
That you have shared my days.”

Ironically, following the religious group’s instruction to “love one another” drew their zealous fury and mistrust. The group itself has a long record of abusive treatment of its young volunteers. Its ignorant and unqualified leaders smugly tried to ‘cure’ us by gay conversion therapy; by repeated and increasingly frenetic “Christian” (ie. unqualified) counselling; by strict monitoring (spying) upon our daily activities to ensure we did not express affection or worse; and by everything from demanding our personal repentance to yielding to exorcisms. All these efforts failed because they are all fraudulent, and because homosexuality does not need to be “cured”. Furious, the group’s leaders gaslit and blamed us for being insincere, slandering us to their entire community and ghosting us from their social networks. I still recall our ignominious departure one bleak Tuesday night (12 September 1987) being forced to catch the overnight bus to Melbourne; a small and sad contingent of our young friends glumly bidding us farewell while clearly sharing our frustrated sense of injustice. I never saw most of them again.

Rick and Geoff at their last get together, Adelaide, 1991.

At the time, this left us both feeling very traumatised; and gave us both a sense of the imperative towards atheism fuelling our LGBT+ and human rights activism. In my case, my resulting humanism gave me consolation and self-respect; in Ricky’s case, his sense of anger about the lack of natural justice stayed with him all the days of his life. I later pondered the fate of that religious group, who ultimately abandoned their Goulburn base which subsequently burnt down – symbolic of lives abandoned and desolated. But life goes on… and we rebuild…

Two of his friends from that group – the only two friends with whom I am still in contact – recall him on this birthday:

“I was privileged to have been Ricky’s friend during his rough years. I found him to be a friend who could be relied upon in the midst of adversity. He chuckled when I playfully sang out the tune, ‘Ricky don’t lose that number’. My guess is Rick liked it as I certainly enjoyed singing it. On Rick’s birthday milestone, when he would have been 60, I ask all of you to sing, “Ricky don’t lose that number,” in a voice that is out of tune but full of love. Please also plant a dahlia next season, as that flower honours gays.” – Tim.

“When I think of Ricky I remember a friendly man with kind eyes, a cheeky smile & the spiky fringe… He was well liked which wasn’t a common thing with so many people living all together in a small space of different ages, nationalities and personalities. Most remember him and sum him up as kind – which I think is an undervalued attribute, but not to those who experienced it…” – Jenny.

The Era of AIDS

Rick’s courage and resilience are reflected in the reality that he lived through two life-threatening and socially disempowering epidemics: the first being legalised and religiously/legally mandated homophobia which justified discrimination, family/workplace rejection, and condemnation of individuals from pulpit to Parliament. The second one was worse…

These times were the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic that devastated the gay community in the western world (and many others across the developing world). Our mentors, friends, and community were dying by the thousands. I have previously recalled and noted the times we lived through:

Any LGBT person in Australia over a certain age will undoubtedly recall incidents and events of that era which hark back to times of stigma, homophobia and discrimination. I recall certain politicians calling for the quarantining of all gay men on an otherwise unoccupied island and leaving them there to die, while others called for homosexuality to be outlawed in order to protect children or ‘normal’ people. I recall workers refusing to work with people they suspected of being gay, and hairdressers or ambulance attendants similarly refusing to attend to such clients. Restaurants smashed crockery that may have been used by gay people, and funeral directors refused to bury those suspected to have died of AIDS. Public walls were decorated with slogans like “GAY = Got AIDS Yet?” or “AIDS = Anally Inserted Death Sentence”; one newspaper targeted a front-page headline to a dying gay man: “Die, You Deviate!” Religions proclaimed that “God hates gays” and that homosexuality was unnatural; and they called for laws to reflect their heterosexist morality because of the presumed superiority of their religious views. Families, schools, churches and communities rejected their LGBT children, teachers, clergy, and community members. Families even lied at funerals and proclaimed that their ‘lifelong bachelor’ son (even those who had been in long-term gay relationships) had actually died of cancer or car accidents.

This was the era of AIDS, when public toilets… became one focal point for roaming gangs of “poofter bashers” (I even recall reading in the newspaper about a young father who was bashed to death on a nearby train just for allegedly looking gay). Despite a number of prominent Australians speaking up for tolerance, acceptance, and in opposition to homophobia and AIDSphobia, other prominent Australians spoke of gay men (and other disempowered cohorts) as being ‘radical deviants’,,, or purveyors of ‘brazen indulgences… to spread AIDS in Australia”…

The gay community had rallied and successfully conducted “safe sex” campaigns to reduce the spread of HIV, but this had remained largely within their own or related affected communities – all of them stigmatised and marginalised…

The Grim Reaper, an infamous campaign by NACAIDS in 1986. (Photo supplied by Phil Carswell).

The devastation of the 1980s ultimately evolved into the emerging LGBT+/HIV activism of the 1990s. This was no small, incidental side note: our lives, and millions of others, were directly impacted by this epidemic. To paraphrase a popular comment within the HIV/AIDS activist community: although we were not infected with AIDS, we were affected by it – everything from our social or sexual behaviours to our sharing of cutlery or toilets (or breathing the same air) was tempered by popular fears of possible infection. Such stigma and fear contributed to Ricky’s own inner conflict that was compounded by his religious beliefs.

I remember our conversation about the Grim Reaper campaign in 1986, a TV public service advertisement about HIV/AIDS which terrified millions of Australians. I had not seen the advertisement at that time, but Ricky had – and he told me that it was “enough to put you off having sex for life”.

A pink triangle against a black backdrop with the words ‘Silence=Death’ representing an advertisement for the Silence=Death Project used by permission by ACT-UP, The AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power. Colour lithograph, 1987. Source: Wellcome Collection.

But amidst the sense of emerging LGBT+ community self-empowerment and activism during this epidemic – heroes such as Eric Michaels and Michael Callen and Phil Carswell – Ricky felt a sense of personal, emerging activism and pride as I recalled of the times: “Those were the days when being out was still a courageous political act.”.

His poetry reflected this conflict between his lingering religious guilt and his personal gay pride. One poem (“Victim of Control”) was written to reflect the fear and depression of a gay man dying of AIDS. He wrote it as an attempt to empathise with those in that situation, and to encourage readers to share that empathy. He later told me that a religious magazine published his poem while mistakenly reporting that the poet was a gay man who was dying of AIDS. The poem was full of despair and nihilism:

“Life, why do you hate me?
Why do you seemingly despise?
Life, you have laid a trap for me…

“You’re a bastard, life,
And I hate you.”

A second poem (“Ballad of the Bedpan”) spoke of a similar situation (being sick and hospitalised) but began to include tongue-in-cheek humour as a way of fighting the stigma and minimising the trauma:

“It was then I knew this bedpan would be my closest friend.
It would be with me all the hours while my stomach wouldn’t mend
Waiting by my bedside I gave it all I had to give
Without my trusted bedpan I really couldn’t live.”

His poetry reflected his developing confidence to confront the fear and stigma of the times. This mirrored what was happening around him in the gay community; as we struggled to fight an epidemic and save lives, the educational and confronting AIDS Memorial Quilt became colloquially known as the “doona of death”; activists confrontationally suggested that: “If life gives you lemons, make lemonAIDS”. This was a form of individual and community empowerment by trying to remove the harshest sting from the situation. Nevertheless, the desire to be ‘out and proud’ included the compulsion to tell the stories and this was something that Ricky would work towards for the rest of this life.

The 1990s: Journalism

Rick and his beloved dogs, Keeley and Lochie.

Ricky’s growth and change were reflected in an action he took shortly after leaving the religious group. He changed his name from Ricky to Rick, declaring that “Ricky” was too childish and that it was time for him to grow up.

He explored a number of jobs in a number of locations – ranging from Melbourne to Uluru to Adelaide – and travelling to San Francisco in 1990 to absorb the gay aesthetic that had previously been denied him by life and circumstances. He settled down in Adelaide, met a longtime companion, Nicol, who stayed with him for much of his remaining lifetime; and began to work on developing his life ambition of journalism to tell the stories and give voice to those who could not speak for themselves.

Rick later wrote of his involvement with the local gay community press:

“I started writing for Adelaide GT Newspaper in May 1994 when I was relatively new to Adelaide. I was studying at Adelaide Institute of TAFE and I noticed advertising within Adelaide GT calling for community writing submissions. My first published writing of this paper was a short story titled Coffee Shop Conversation… and this was followed with several pieces of poetry.

“Later that same year, I was ‘inspired’ (call it what you will) to start an advice column of sorts…”

Many of Rick’s articles for the gay press involved stories that reflected his desire to fight injustice or discrimination:

CHURCH LEADERS OPPOSE FESTIVAL
“Some leaders from Adelaide’s Christian churches have expressed their disapproval of a gay and lesbian festival being held here.”
– ADELAIDE GT #88, 10 May 1996, p. 1.

GAY DE FACTOS NOT RECOGNISED
“An amendment to the defacto relationship Bill, passed two weeks ago in the Legislative Council to effectively allow gay couples the same legal recognition of their defacto status in property settlements as heterosexual couples, has been defeated in the Lower House.”
– ADELAIDE GT #91, 21 June 1996, p. 1.

BENDS IN THE STRAIGHT ROAD
“Ex ‘Ex Gays’ Tell Their Story.”
– ADELAIDE GT #92, 5 July 1996, p. 7.

CHRISTIAN GROUPS DEMAND LEGALISED DISCRIMINATION
“A Senate inquiry into sexuality discrimination, put forward by the Australian Democrats to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Reference Committee has heard from several Christian groups strongly opposed to the proposed changes.”
– ADELAIDE GT #95, 16 August, pp. 1 & 2.

GAY REFUGEE CASE NOT UNUSUAL
“The case of a Polish man allowed to stay in Australia on the basis of his homosexuality is not unusual, according to the Refugee Review Tribunal.”
– ADELAIDE GT #97, 13 September 1996, page unknown.

Rick wrote news articles; profiles of prominent community people; reviews of literature, movies, theatre and videos; and a “Dear Racquel” column as a tongue-in-cheek LGBT+ satire of advice columns. He also wrote letters to the editor, poetry, and a short story; and undertook rewriting of other work at the editor’s request.

He also expanded his efforts to include journalism for the Education Department, and ultimately became involved with the ABC. This combines with his studies ensured that he was establishing himself as a credible and qualified journalist.

The 2000s

Rick and I kept in contact as pen pals and by telephone for many years. My last phone conversation with him included his response to life’s current challenges and he spoke of plans to redouble his activist efforts in both his personal life and the LGBT+ community. We agreed that we should catch up again sometime soon – but we never got the chance.

Rick died, suddenly and peacefully, of a previously unknown and undiagnosed condition. He was aged 36, visiting his mother and sipping sherry, when he suddenly slumped, and could not be revived. The day of his funeral (12 September 2001, still 11 September in the USA), took place on a day when the world was reeling from arguably the greatest single news story of our generation – and journalist Rick missed his opportunity to research and explore this news from his own perspective.

His mother Merle kept all the sympathy letters and cards she received, and the first in her scrapbook is handwritten by a Board member of ABC News, expressing his sympathy and recalling Rick as a young and enthusiastic journalist:

“He struck me as a very sincere and thoughtful young man who had achieved a great deal in his life. He made a real difference in the newsroom when he worked here, by always putting his head down and doing the best job he possibly could every day.”

Rick with his background computer showing an Okudagram – a display panel from Star Trek.

The photo that was used on the order of service for his funeral happened to be a reworked photo that originally showed Rick smirking while in the background, we can see his computer displaying an Okudagram (Star Trek display) that hinted at his love of Star Trek – a guilty pleasure to which I had introduced him. We had chatted often about the hope for the future provided by the franchise – that even after the anticipated tribulations of the coming 21st century, humanity would mature into a world without war and poverty and injustice (he even wrote a university paper featuring me in cosplay as a Star Trek alien as part of its context). In between our camp phone chats joking about Captain Janeway’s pecan pie, we speculated that Harry Kim or Seven of Nine or Chakotay might be gay. Imagine a world of equality, where everyone was equal – whether male or female, gay or straight, white or black or green, Israeli or Palestinian or Vulcan… such hope for the future was something that Rick found inspirational. Much of his journalism aimed to empower and support others in their fight against injustice, and for a better future. The theme music from “Star Trek Voyager” was played at his funeral.

Years later, in 2008, I finally got to march in Sydney’s Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. I carried a small photo of Rick in my wallet for the occasion, so we could effectively walk in this event together – something that Rick and I had spoken about for years but had never quite managed to do. We finally did it.

His Legacy

One of his poems (“My Life Slipped Through My Fingers”) envisaged himself in his old age, pondering the value of life and opportunity:

“Time has caught up, I’ve had my share,
I’ve had my life, my jewel,
And as the reaper takes, I ask,
“What happened to it all?”…

“I had wanted age, and to mature,
And now I’m there I know,
To be mature is to live your life
At its best, as you go…”

Although he did not reach that old age, his words and wisdom, borne of trials and tribulations at a younger age, surely speak to us across the years today. His life did indeed slip through his fingers, and he had so much more he wanted to contribute, but his contributions did not stop upon his death.

Despite some life difficulties, he had been a happy young man who was encouraging of others, showing an inner strength and a determination to overcome all obstacles. He was loved by – and he loved – his friends and family. He was also a pioneer who helped to change the world in his small corner, and he would be furious to see the state of LGBT rights in Uganda or the USA today. In his short life, he achieved goals for personal betterment, and he had started to use his skills to help others through education and empowerment. Who knows what activism he could have accomplished had circumstances given more years of life, love and opportunity? Although he did not have HIV, he was a pioneer from those terrible times who helped to light a candle in his corner and shine a light on injustice. Of his generation, I write elsewhere:

People today living in lucky countries might be forgiven for thinking that the human rights they enjoy today are the norm. But such gains were only achieved at great expense. We owe those who suffered and died for the relatively good life we enjoy today. Everything from anti-discrimination legislation to marriage equality, from needle exchange programs to the public sale of condoms, from dying with dignity to inheritance laws, have been shaped by HIV/AIDS activism. It look a lot of sacrifice and suffering, but we ultimately learnt a lot from the tragedy of those heroes and those times…

Rick’s ongoing legacy extends beyond those who remember him or who read this. Many years after his death, I participated in a university study regarding gay conversion therapy. Rick’s and my experiences were referenced anonymously within the final report – which contributed to my State Government legally banning the practice outright. Rick would have been proud to know that after his years of anger and activism, his personal experiences played a part in outlawing that homophobic cruelty and injustice. After his journalistic efforts to give a voice to the voiceless, his own quietened voice had finally been heard. As it still can be heard every day.

In Memory of Rick Ransome
6th May 1965 to 6 September 2001

Reference Material:

With thanks to Phil Ransome for reference material, including many of the news articles and Rick’s private memorabilia. This includes much of his poetry, excerpts of some of which have been published here.

Author unknown, “Obituary: Rick Ransome”, XPress, Vol 4, No. 16, 20 September 2001.

Scott McGuiness, “Rick Ransome 6/5/65 – 6/9/2001”, Adelaide GT Newspaper, circa. September 2001.

Rick Ransome, “To A Special Friend“, 1986.
– – – – – – – -, “Victim of Control”, date unknown.
– – – – – – – -, “Ballad of the Bedpan”, date unknown.
– – – – – – – -, “My Life Slipped Through My Fingers”, date unknown.
– – – – – – – -, “Portfolio of Writing for Adelaide GT Newspaper“, circa. 1997.
– – – – – – – -, “Television Fans: Production Pleasure and Postmodernism”, University of South Australia, November 1997.

Sustaining Humanity

“So I think as a biologist I would like us to focus on this planet and finding solutions to sustaining humanity, to improving people’s lives globally, but doing our absolute utmost to preserve as much biodiversity as we can, knowing that we have already been responsible for the loss of thousands of species.”
– Alice Roberts.

The four characteristics of humanism are curiosity, a free mind, belief in good taste, and belief in the human race.” – EM Forster.

“Humanism is a way of thinking and living that emphasizes the agency of human beings. Humanism stresses the fact that we, human beings, are capable of changing the world.”
– Leo Igwe.

In my younger days, I was proud of my human rights activism and my achievements in that forum. One of my guiding principles came from what was attributed as being an old Chinese proverb: “It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness”. Today, as we live through an era of increasing darkness and uncertainty, I believe that it is important to be fully mindful of the candle adage. In my experience, an optimal way of expressing that principle in practical terms cannot be found within an organised religion – which is usually exclusive and elitist – but through a recognition of our common humanity. This, to me, comprises humanism.

A fair definition of humanism – across time and culture – is that it is a philosophy which acknowledges the capacity and responsibility of human beings to think and act in ways that are reasoned, compassionate, humanitarian and responsible – especially in solving the world’s problems that we have caused. Placing humans at the centre of this focus does not, in any way, diminish the inherent value of other life on this planet, but commits us (as individuals and as a species) to respect and protect these other forms of life, and the biosphere upon which we co-exist.

As a collective, humanists have a lot of which they can be proud. From the abolition of slavery to the establishment of human rights; from gender and sexual and racial equality to international conventions on rights for children and refugees and people with disability; from anti-discrimination laws all the way to animal and environmental rights; humanism has changed the world. As a philosophy that has influenced religions across space and time, it has engendered “The Golden Rule” into cultures everywhere with such confidence that religious adherents often believe their dogmas are responsible for inculcating this principle of universal human fraternity.

It might also be noted that secular humanism is currently under attack. With the decline of mainstream religions and cultural adherence to conformity, we have seen the widespread rise and acceptance of a multitude of alternatives to address the adage that nature abhors a vacuum. We now see an epidemic of fringe individualism, religious fundamentalism, conspiracy theories, science denialism, sovereign citizenship, political populism and dog whistling, social media celebrity, and a return to ideas that were long discarded: flat earthism, racism, Nazism, warmongering, rejection of refugees, the ‘othering’ of foreigners and immigrants and those from other races and cultures. Anyone who subscribes to universal human rights and the philosophy that all people are equal in worth and dignity, must take battle against such attacks upon human egalitarianism, knowledge and dignity.

In order to most strongly advocate for a universal philosophy of equitability and social justice, we must have the courage and honesty to explore humanism’s current weaknesses in practice, as well as its strengths in principle. Please come with me as we go on a journey to explore this nuanced and multifaceted human adventure.

The History of Humanism

“Humanism is about the world, not about humanism.” – Harold Blackham

Humanism is often presented as a historical, academic and philosophical phenomenon that was inspired by writings from ancient Greece and Rome, reborn in Renaissance Europe, achieving its modern context late in the nineteenth century. Despite the reality that modern humanism is a more grassroots and less academic phenomenon, its practice is rooted in this Eurocentric perspective, which highlights western culture (from academia to entertainment) instead of nurturing and sponsoring local African or Asian or Latin American expressions of culture and perspective.

Humanist ideas were discussed in Ancient Greece, from Thales to Anaxagoras and Protagoras. The teachings of Zarathushtra and Lao Tzu had strong elements of humanism, and there are many other examples.

The writings of the ancient Greeks were studied in the 1400s during the Renaissance. However, in this period the term “humanism” came to mean educated in the humanities, a rather different kind of idea. Petrarch is often cited as the first modern humanist, but he pointed backwards to classical authors. The modern meaning of humanism is more to do with using science to make the world a better place. – Kiddle Encyclopedia

(Remembering LGBT+ refugees in Africa, whose voices are often silenced)

However, the history of humanism extends further back than that, and its reach is broader. Humanity emerged from Africa, so although much evidence of those past times has long been lost, our humanism clearly also emerged from that same source. Like humanity itself, humanism has spread across the globe, and its rudimentary philosophy can be found in cultures from long ago.

Chirag Patel and Rishabh Prasad clarify the protracted history regarding the origins of humanism:

The principle origins of humanist thinking are in India, Iran and China. In India around the 8th Century BCE, there was the emergence of Lokayata philosophy, which was itself a development of ideas in the Vedas, the core Hindu holy texts, written in around 1000 BCE. Lokayata philosophy is a system that is explicitly materialist, rejecting the concept of the soul and taking on philosophical scepticism…

Earlier still are the Gathas of Zoroaster, or Zarathustra, between 1000 and 600 BCE. The Gathas focus on the notion of individual choice and agency (Schmid, 1979). In China, there is the Tao Te Ching in the 6th century BCE, which combines elements of spiritualist abstraction with a clear focus on the mutable world and away from metaphysical rules and authoritarian approaches. This is contemporaneous with Buddhism, which begins with a rejection of the Gods while retaining the valuable aspects of religious behaviour within a human-centred frame.

In each of these cases, models of thought and behaviour are developed that focus around the human self and supreme wisdom as an ideal, rather than authoritarian theologies. In each case, there is also a vision of the ideal person, such as the enlightened Buddha (‘awakened one’), and the defining characteristic of this person is their focus upon the human and personal rather than metaphysical and hierarchical. (Patel and Prasad, n.d., 7)

Humanism is documented as contributing to a medieval renaissance within Islam as well as Christianity:

“It was during the Renaissance of Islam that humanism unfolded in its luxuriant expression. This branch of humanism was essentially the offspring of the humanitas ideal which germinated in the period of Hellenism and Graeco-Roman antiquity. The primary features of this humanism are: a conception of the common kinship and unity of mankind; the adoption of the ancient classics as an educational and cultural ideal in the formation of mind and character (paideia); and humaneness, or love of mankind (philanthrōpia).” – Kraemer, pp. 135 & 136.

The American Humanist Association Centre for Education notes:

The Confucians tried to replace traditional religious beliefs with an ethical system focused on responsibility to family and society. Confucianism emphasizes benevolence, respect for others, and reciprocity as the foundations of social order. An early expression of the Golden Rule of ethics is found in The Analects (the collected sayings) of Confucius: “Do not do to others what you would not like for yourself.”

Morimichi Kato notes that Ogyū Sorai (1666–1728) established a Japanese version of Confucian humanism.

Meanwhile, the African philosophy of Ubuntu epitomises the universal nature of humanist tenets: “Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu”— or “a person is a person through other people.” (see Felix).

Modern Humanism Around the World

Humanism has been used as the basis for exploring socialism and post-colonial politics across Africa, as demonstrated by the experiences of President Kenneth Kaunda from Zambia:

“He developed a left nationalist-socialist ideology, called Zambian Humanism. This was based on a combination of mid-20th-century ideas of central planning/state control and what he considered basic African values: mutual aid, trust, and loyalty to the community. Similar forms of African socialism were introduced inter alia in Ghana by Kwame Nkrumah (“Consciencism”) and Tanzania by Julius Nyerere (“Ujamaa” – Wikipedia).

One modern Humanist in Ghana, writes about human priorities, particularly the universal human need for family:

“Family to me is anyone who loves me almost unconditionally and wants the best for me. I grew up thinking that family is blood and I’m sure a lot of us have as well…

“I broadened my definition of family when life snatched my wig and came for my edges. I was a hot mess. Life said “you’re too cute or whatever, lemme throw in some trauma and spices”.

His biological family being unavailable to offer meaningful support, he found love and help from a friend:

“One day, we were sitting and chatting in a library and I jokingly told him that he’s been adopted as my brother and he smiled and said “you’ve been my brother from the time you opened your heart to me”.

“Since then my adopted family has increased. The most recent adopted members were the humanist family and I’m glad I have. Sometimes I wish we’d stop fighting on how bad religion is and just love humanity as is.” – The Boy Behind the Flowers, Ghana Humanists.

In the Philippines, Humanists explore diversity:

“Empathy’s a Superpower… diversity can work if a society insistently treats it as the default setting instead of a glitch.” – Shane Haro, HAPI.

African American Humanism has its own challenges regarding survival and welfare:

“Black humanism originates from the lived experiences of African Americans in a white hegemonic society. Viewed from this perspective, black humanist cultural expressions are a continuous push to imagine and make room for alternative life options in a racist society.” – Alexandra Hartmann (summary)

Humanism in Latin America has not only influenced Brazilian and Mexican cultures (Mexican humanism, for example, employs the motto: “por el bien de todos, primero los pobres.” “For the good of all; first, the poor”) but also contributed to women’s rights being included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Australia’s most significant humanist cultural contribution may be within its long tradition of storytelling from authors including Marcus Clarke, Steele Rudd, Henry Lawson, Katharine Prichard and Patrick White. Given that this literary tradition is based upon the white colonialist perspective, the Australian convict and digger and ANZAC perspectives of egalitarianism and mateship have their challenges in being inclusive of First Australian and more recent immigrant perspectives, but our nation has a strong cultural claim to humanist equality upon which we should build.

Humanism for the Future

Humanism underlies our lives, existence, and commonalities. It therefore has the potential to grow and evolve along with the human species.

However, in a world facing global crisis, I do feel it is time for western humanists to reconsider their opportunities. For example, if humanists were to lead a challenge to the current withdrawal of US overseas aid and lifesaving medicine as an immediate, short-term goal; and if they were to adopt and promote the eradication of global poverty as some of their long-term goals; they could literally help to save millions of lives and lead the world by ethical example. This would also do more than their current local patchwork efforts to confront theism and religiosity, and ultimately achieve the same ends on a more geographically and historically global scale.

Western humanists are among the world’s most affluent people, and are able to spend more personal time in hobbies and study, versus others who spend more time just doing what they need to do in order to survive and who have relatively little time available for self-reflective introspection. Hence the history and practice of modern humanism appears to be encased in a Eurocentric shell of predominantly affluent western philosophical culture that largely excludes other voices and perspectives, attracts adherents predominantly from similar backgrounds, and leans heavily towards introspection rather than encouraging pragmatic activism.

Modern humanism in the western sphere needs to use its influence to literally change the world instead of comprising the ‘Ladies Who Lunch‘ syndrome. By definition, humanists are people who are good at heart, so I challenge them to make the change.

Let’s see the next generation of humanists adopt the life experiences and wisdom of Opeyemi and Zola and Moussa and Feng alongside our current/past mentors Carl and Richard and Christopher and Madalyn.

Secular humanism has the potential – and the opportunity – to adopt a more inclusive, celebratory and pragmatic approach to its own underpinnings. Many younger non-believers are not currently attracted to secular humanism, but to sentientism, which they perceive as being a more broadly inclusive philosophy and the next evolutionary step of humanism as a philosophy. Do we ignore them – or join them?

Where to From Here? As humanist Gene Roddenberry asserted: The Human Adventure is Just Beginning. The journey promises to be exciting, but like Neil Armstrong and the other Apollo Moon walkers who made history, we must have the courage to step out of our safety zone and into the unknown.

References/See also:

Felix, Ubuntu: The Philosophy of Shared Humanity, The Pan African, 23 September 2024.

Robert Grudin, 2023. “humanism“. Encyclopedia Britannica, 4 December.

Alexandra Hartmann, 2023. “The Black humanist tradition in anti-racist literature: a fragile hope”, summary from University of Southern Indiana, USA.

Harry Heseltine (ed.), Introduction in “The Penguin Book of Australian Short Stories”, Ringwood: Penguin Books Australia, 1976 (reprinted 1981), pp. 9 – 31.

Joel L. Kramer, 1984. “Humanism in the Renaissance of Islam: A Preliminary Study”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 104, No. 1, Studies in Islam and the Ancient Near East, Dedicated to Franz Rosenthal (January – March), pp. 135-164.

Chirag Patel & Rishabh B Prasad, n.d. “The Hidden History of Humanism Part 1: The Real History of Humanism”. [Academia.edu].

Originally published: 2 March 2025.
Edited and republished: 3 and 31 March 2025 in order to streamline and rework some material. Final editing on 1 April 2025.
With thanks to a humanist friend for his advice.

Thank you Rev Budde

“At the inaugural prayer service, the Right Rev. Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, made a direct appeal to President Donald Trump to have mercy on the LGBTQ+ community and undocumented migrant workers.” – Associated Press reporter Darlene Superville

In response, Trump demanded an apology, “for embarrassing him by … deliver[ing] a rare rebuke to his face”. No apology was offered.

Subsequent fallout included conservatives criticising her and calling for her deportation.

Here is my response, sent to her by email:

Dear Reverend Budde,

I am writing from Australia to thank you for your recent appeal to President Trump to show kindness and compassion towards marginalised peoples.

I personally know people in Africa who have been accepted as genuine refugees for resettlement in the USA, and they have now been advised that their resettlement has been cancelled by President Trump.

In the darkness and despair of their current situation, your words have given them hope that there are kind and compassionate people with the courage to stand up for decency and humanity.

I also know LGBT+ people in the USA and elsewhere who are indeed scared, and I want to thank you for acknowledging this reality and challenging those in power to consider the human consequences of their attitudes and actions.

I am an atheist and I share your concern for social justice, compassion and human rights. We both admire the principles of the refugee who is the central character of your religion.

Thank you for speaking up for those who have no voice. Thank you for lighting a candle in the darkness.

Yours most respectfully,

Geoff Allshorn
Melbourne, AUSTRALIA.

Richard Dawkins is Unhappy

Although Richard Dawkins was previously married to Lalla Ward (an actor formerly from Doctor Who), he reminds me of certain privileged white male viewers who, in recent years, protested bitterly that the Doctor had been recast as a woman (and later as a queer Rwandan-Scottish actor), thereby no longer reflecting their privilege as white men. Dawkins recently publicly spat the dummy over the withdrawal of an article that misrepresented trans issues. The previously esteemed academic and atheist is in danger of alienating himself from mainstream atheist and scientific communities and, in promoting transphobic bigotry, risks emboldening religious bigots and undoing decades of his own work to promote secular reasoning.

The news recently hit the Murdoch press in the United Kingdom: Richard Dawkins publicly quit his voluntary role within the Freedom From Religion Foundation after they withdrew an article written by Jerry Coyne. Dawkins’ resignation from FFRF was accompanied by those of Jerry Coyne and Stephen Pinker; Dawkins chose to publicly express his vehement outrage and created a media storm for certain elements of the tabloid press.

Disclaimer: As an atheist and supporter of human rights, I concede that I am unqualified to debate the science of trans issues. Fortunately, the material that Dawkins defends appears to be equally ignorant of trans science, and presents ethical discussion that would fail a high school essay; and as a teacher for nearly thirty years, I am suitably qualified to analyse such material. Accordingly, I critically analyse the inherent flaws in Coyne’s arguments, and defer where possible to suitable scientific and ethical experts so that we can all participate in informed and rational debate instead of wallowing in retrograde transphobic waffle. I also include a list of reference material (below) which informed me of the situation and its background. If I have, in my own ignorance, somehow misinterpreted this material or misrepresented the facts, I welcome corrections.

Background

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) is a US organisation with husband and wife Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor as Co-Presidents among a large Board and staff. FFRF conducts successful activism promoting secular values and the separation of church and state. On 7 November 2024, the organisation published an article entitled “What Is A Woman?“, in which the author, Kat Grant, discussed biological and chromosomal considerations surrounding trans people, and then summarised contemporary moral arguments:

“While American society has shed some of its Christian colonial heritage, fears around the morality of sex and gender remain ever present. Groups like Moms4Liberty have made major claims that transgender people are all sexual perverts that are grooming children. Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists, also known as TERFs, claim that transgender women are rapists who are attempting to take away opportunities from “real” women. Others still claim transgender identity is anti-woman because in their view, it reduces womanhood down to dresses and makeup.

“Such views disregard both medical science and lived experience. Transgender people are no more likely to be sexual predators than other individuals, and transgender women actually face higher rates of violence than their cisgender counterparts. Transgender participation in sports is already highly regulated, and the idea that a man would go through the intense process of hormone replacement therapy and delaying an athletic career for at least a year in order to have roughly the same odds of winning a contest that they would have otherwise is frankly laughable. And in actuality, gender diversity does the opposite of reducing womanhood to sex stereotypes. A gender diverse model allows womanhood to be defined on internal, personal terms, not outwardly visible characteristics. Women can present as and behave in ways that are considered “feminine” or “masculine” or anything in between because those aren’t the things that make them a woman, just a man can explore those same concepts and still be a man. As a nonbinary person I play with gender expression in all sorts of ways, from my physical presentation to my art in ways that vary throughout the day. I’m not nonbinary because I don’t identify with femininity, I’m nonbinary because no particular gender matches my internal sense of self at all.”

Problematic Response

In response, FFRF volunteer Board member Professor Jerry Coyne, wrote an article entitled, “Biology is Not Bigotry” that was published by FFRF on 26 December. In his article, he began with a mention of inferred similarities and stated differences between trans people and those who perceive themselves to be a horse, or Asian (“transracialism”). The purpose of this conflation is unclear, and does not provide a confident start for his writing.

Coyne then states, “In all animals and vascular plants there are exactly two sexes and no more,” which not only contradicts science as explored elsewhere, but he conflates sex and gender, which is apparently both scientifically and anthropologically questioned. He dismisses intersex people as being statistically insignificant (ignoring the ethical underpinning that human rights apply equally to cohorts regardless of whether they comprise 1% or 99%).

Coyne then implies that a more relevant analogue for trans people would be polydactyl people, a much more statistically common cohort of people who, in this case, do not have ten fingers: “Nevertheless…” he states, “Nobody talks about a spectrum of digit number.” He implies that people with genetic variations (causing extra digits) are somehow comparable to those with gender variation – but he ignores the fact that they have never (to my knowledge) faced legal or moral sanction, been oppressed, culturally discriminated against, and even been murdered over the centuries (and continue to be victims of such violent behaviours and hatreds to this day) as have trans people. Hey Professor Coyne, has US President-elect Trump vowed to remove human rights for polydactyl people, to ban them from the military, and to deny such children the right to relevant affirming care, legal protections and counselling in schools, as he has indicated regarding trans people? Do you want polydactyl people to be banned from public bathrooms or sporting competitions? Do governments in Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Russia, or half the countries of the Commonwealth, criminalise or imprison or execute polydactyl people?

Coyne infers that trans people are ideologues because, “Feelings don’t create reality” and he tries to rebut Kat Grant using questionable evidence:

Grant misleads the reader. They argue, for example, that “Transgender people are no more likely to be sexual predators than other individuals.” Yet the facts support the opposite of this claim, at least for transgender women. A cross-comparison of statistics from the U.K. Ministry of Justice and the U.K. Census shows that while almost 20 percent of male prisoners and a maximum of 3 percent of female prisoners have committed sex offenses, at least 41 percent of trans-identifying prisoners were convicted of these crimes. Transgender, then, appear to be twice as likely as natal males and at least 14 times as likely as natal females to be sex offenders. While these data are imperfect because they’re based only on those who are caught, or on some who declare their female gender only after conviction, they suggest that transgender women are far more sexually predatory than biological women and somewhat more predatory than biological men. There are suggestions of similar trends in Scotland, New Zealand, and Australia.

His attempted rebuttal ignores and misrepresents Grant’s original point: in talking about “sex offenders”, she was clearly discussing the fictitious stereotype that trans women are simply men who cross dress so they can rape women in public toilets. In response, Coyne used unverified statistics (from a group that has been accused of using misleading material) to, in this case, propose that trans people are disproportionately overrepresented in overall sexual offender statistics. He provides no analysis to verify, clarify or contextualise his claim. I have Ugandan trans friends, who by sheer definition of the law in their country, are all sex offenders simply for being themselves. Coyne makes no attempt to consider such nuance.

Coyne’s Most Dubious Evidence

Another piece of evidence that Coyne offers would initially seem to be a very strong point in support of his anti-trans arguments:

“According to a United Nations report on violence against women, “By 30 March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals [to transgender women] in 29 different sports”.”

This rather startling statistic comes from no less than the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. Our natural instinct might be to automatically accept the authority of the report and seek to pursue justice and redress for these women and girls around the world. However, there are problems.

For a start, the alleged statistics were supplied to the UN Special Rapporteur by a transphobic organisation, and Coyne makes no attempt to verify these statistics; nor does he reference other, independent and credible sources (e.g. IOC, Australian Institute of Sport, Amnesty International, human rights networks, other UN agencies, etc), none of whom seem to be aware of these statistics, and whose positions on trans participation in sport contradicts Coyne’s.

Worse, independent research shows that the current UN Special Rapporteur’s reports are flawed and unreliable. An international study of a 2023 UN report stated:

“The authors of this document (the “Analysis”) carefully reviewed the Report and found many misleading statements, extensive misinformation, blatant errors, use of science denial techniques, and deliberate misrepresentations of the current state of peer-reviewed published research, scientific inquiry, and case law support for the family dynamic of parental alienation. These errors are so egregious that we believe they constitute a deliberate attempt to mislead mental health professionals, legal professionals, and policy makers, such as the Human Rights Council and other components of the United Nations.

“The Report of the Special Rapporteur is unreliable and dangerous; the misinformation contained in this Report is likely to cause irreparable harm to children and families. Therefore, after conducting our Analysis, we recommend that the Human Rights Council immediately withdraw the Report from publication and prohibit any component of the
United Nations from relying on it…” (p. 9).

The current UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls has been criticised for producing erroneous and transphobic material. The Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) has published a 2023 letter signed by 550 human rights groups and 844 individuals that calls for a review of her mandate:

“We express grave concerns over the series of harmful statements made and actions1 taken by the current UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, Reem Alsalem. To our dismay, the Special Rapporteur has persistently advocated for additional obstacles and conditions to legal gender recognition that undermine the rights protections of trans people, rather than calling for bodily autonomy for all…

“We reject the co-optation of the human rights framework, particularly the notion put forward by the Special Rapporteur that the fulfillment of the rights of trans women and cis women is or can be conflicting and incompatible…

“The Special Rapporteur must guarantee the mandate’s independence, accountability to rights-holders. We believe that the harmful position taken by the Special Rapporteur undermines the integrity, independence, and credibility of the Special Procedures mechanism as a whole. As feminists, we demand accountability for and a halt to the Special Rapporteur’s harmful practices. We insist that the UN system ensures voices and concerns of feminists, women’s rights, and LGBTIQ+ movements – particularly trans-led groups, are at the center rather than the margins.”

It is significant that Coyne, while claiming to present “science” and “free speech” on trans issues, merely provides unverified, flawed and unscientific evidence, and he ‘cancels’ the legion of verified, documented and independent sources that contradict his claims. It is interesting that Dawkins and Pinker also apparently support Coyne’s right to publish potentially misleading material without themselves making any effort to verify or confirm its accuracy. While Dawkins has previously stated that, ““If you only get exposed to ideas you believe in… what kind of university would that be?”, his current stand on trans issues appears to be an example of a closed mind seeking confirmation bias.

Coyne’s Conclusions

In Coyne’s conclusion, he posited two assertions:

“The first is to insist that it is not “transphobic” to accept the biological reality of binary sex and to reject concepts based on ideology. One should never have to choose between scientific reality and trans rights. Transgender people should surely enjoy all the moral and legal rights of everyone else. But moral and legal rights do not extend to areas in which the “indelible stamp” of sex results in compromising the legal and moral rights of others. Transgender women, for example, should not compete athletically against biological women; should not serve as rape counselors and workers in battered women’s shelters; or, if convicted of a crime, should not be placed in a women’s prison.”

Although he talks of “scientific reality”, Coyne’s first concluding point ignores the very clear science that demonstrates the non-binary nature of gender and sex as comprising different aspects of human identity, and while Dawkins claims that “sex really is binary”, atheist biologist Forrest Valkai appears to have a much greater understanding of the biological science than either of these men.

In alleging that sex is a binary, Coyne actually ignores the reality of scientific data. A blogger from Scientific American states that, “Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary” and calls upon such proponents to “Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia”.

Coyne continues:

“Finally, speaking as a member of the FFRF’s honorary board, I worry that the organization’s incursion into gender activism takes it far outside its historically twofold mission: educating the public about nontheism and keeping religion out of government and social policies. Tendentious arguments about the definition of sex are not part of either mission. Although some aspects of gender activism have assumed the worst aspects of religion (dogma, heresy, excommunication, etc.), sex and gender have little to do with theism or the First Amendment. I sincerely hope that the FFRF does not insist on adopting a “progressive” political stance, rationalizing it as part of its battle against “Christian Nationalism.” As a liberal atheist, I am about as far from Christian nationalism as one can get!”

Coyne’s second concluding remark is to question why atheists would wish to participate in social justice activism, failing to understand that (apart from the implicit call by basic human decency), opposing entrenched bigotry and injustice imposed by religious traditions would surely be part of the imprimatur of organisations like the FFRF. The lies, hatred and bigotry directed at trans people today is in no small part the legacy of centuries of religious hatred, and it is surely incumbent upon us all to actively work against such injustice instead of aiding it through writing misleading articles. Although Coyne claims to self identify as a “liberal atheist”, his actions here would appear to suggest otherwise. Genuinely liberal atheists or sceptics can be found on YouTube channels such as Essence of Thought, Emma Thorne, and The Trans Atlantic Call in Show, which not only defer to science and critical thought, but empower people from the affected community – which my own decades of work in the HIV/AIDS community testifies is essential to empowerment and saving lives.

Photo by Alexander Grey: https://www.pexels.com/photo/cubes-spelling-the-word-transgender-3868990/

Reader Backlash

Following an apparent backlash by LGBT+ readers, the FFRF quickly withdrew Coyne’s article and stated:

“Recently, we published a guest blog post as part of an effort to provide a forum for various voices within the framework of our mission. Although we included a disclaimer that the viewpoints expressed within the post were not necessarily reflective of the organization, it has wrongfully been perceived as such.

“Despite our best efforts to champion reason and equality, we recognize mistakes can happen, and this incident is a reminder of the importance of constant reflection and growth. Publishing this post was an error of judgment, and we have decided to remove it as it does not reflect our values or principles. We regret any distress caused by this post and are committed to ensuring it doesn’t happen again.”

It was this withdrawal of a published paper that appears to have aroused the ire of the three men. While I agree with them on principle that the paper could have been left online (in my case, so that readers could see how weak, academically untenable, misrepresentative, and incoherent it really is), I do question why the FRFF allowed such material to be published in the first place. Don’t they have an editorial team that oversees scientific or ethical quality control? As another atheist critic notes:

“While it is good that FFRF removed Coyne’s article, their statement regarding the controversy was unfortunately deficient on several fronts. Most notably, it lacked any explanation of the ethical flaws in Coyne’s piece that should have prevented it being published and necessitated taking it down.”

If Dawkins and Pinker wanted to fight a public battle for free speech and scientific debate, Coyne’s unscientific and inadequate article was not the hill for them to die upon.

This dummy spit and mass resignation was not, as suggested, a principled stand taken by three scientists protesting that either free speech or the scientific perspective had been “cancelled” in favour of “wokeism”, but it appears to be a reflection of personal bigotry, ignorance, lack of human empathy, or paternalistic privilege. In having a public dummy spit and resigning loudly and belligerently, they are people who seek to use their privilege to “cancel” the voices of trans people and their allies whose perspective differs from their own.

Dawkins elsewhere refers to trans rights as a modern, trendy, empty-headed form of activism: “the vogue for women with penises and men who give birth.” He has asserted that trans rights activism is a cult of backing transgender ‘religion’, and this perspective was rather gleefully regurgitated on at least one religious website after his departure from the FFRF.

Ongoing Bigotry

This controversy is reflective of a similar scandal that nearly destroyed the Atheist Community of Austin about five years ago – when transphobic elements fought against trans and other queer people, and, by extension, other minorities, to entrench privilege regarding the free speech of heterosexual, transphobic, cis gendered white males. (Fortunately, the final result of the scandal seems to have been the emergence of a stronger, and more queer friendly organisation.)

Such a controversy is demonstrative of attitudes and behaviours found across some atheist communities, such as some online atheist individuals: “Often online atheists like to play the card that “science says there are only two genders” despite the fact that their understanding of biology has very clearly not advanced since the 9th grade”; plugging into transmisia that has been actively promoted by religious extremists since they lost the marriage equality battle.

Entrenched Privilege versus Our Better Angels

One of the obvious problems with these three men speaking on trans issues is their apparent lack of known or verified personal connection with trans individuals, communities, or science. They appear to be simply three old, white, privileged, affluent, heterosexual, cis gendered men who should not be accepted as experts on trans issues any more than they might be considered experts on women’s rights or the racist oppression of African Americans. (Ironically, Pinker has been publicly criticised for speaking on behalf of both those other issues in arguably problematic ways).

Worse, they risk becoming aligned with what has been termed “The Intellectual Dark Web“, viz:

“Chief among these antiscientific sentiments, the IDW cites the rising visibility of transgender civil rights demands. To the IDW, trans people and their advocates are destroying the pillars of our society with such free-speech–suppressing, postmodern concepts as: “trans women are women,” “gender-neutral pronouns,” or “there are more than two genders.” Asserting “basic biology” will not be ignored, the IDW proclaims, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

“The irony in all this is that these “protectors of enlightenment” are guilty of the very behavior this phrase derides. Though often dismissed as just a fringe internet movement, they espouse unscientific claims that have infected our politics and culture. Especially alarming is that these “intellectual” assertions are used by nonscientists to claim a scientific basis for the dehumanization of trans people. The real-world consequences are stacking up: the trans military ban, bathroom bills, and removal of workplace and medical discrimination protections, a 41-51 percent suicide attempt rate and targeted fatal violence. It’s not just internet trolling anymore.”

In 2010, Dawkins referred to the principles of “objective morality” being discussion, reason, debate, and reaching an informed conclusion; what a pity that he doesn’t follow that course today. Equally disappointing is Stephen Pinker, whose definitive books (“The Better Angels of Our Nature” and “Enlightenment Now”) present discussion about the social evolution of humanity towards a kinder, more empathic society – and yet his stand against trans people resists that trend. Jerry Coyne is presumably an accomplished academic who needs to bring his talents of academic verisimilitude to the human rights debate for trans people, instead of producing material that appears misinformed. They are all capable of better.

By all means, let Dawkins, Coyne and Pinker speak publicly – and have their opinions accepted and respected appropriately – within their verified areas of expertise, but let them defer to others regarding issues on which they are ignorant, intolerant, or misinformed.

Dawkins has previously caused outrage with his alleged comments about rape and child abuse; Islamophobia; and suggesting that babies with Down Syndrome should be aborted. In 2021, he was stripped of an award from the American Humanists because of alleged anti-trans and anti-Black statements. While he holds eminence as an evolutionary biologist, his frequent intemperate remarks about other issues suggest that he is neither extensively knowledgeable nor prudent. Rather than behaving like a snowflake and having a temper tantrum about his latest confrontation with diversity, perhaps it is time for him to quietly retire from public life.

Atheists are often humanists – they combine science and rationality with a compassionate approach to human affairs. I call upon Dawkins and his mates to adopt a humanistic approach rather than dehumanise trans people or other minorities. Otherwise, he risks alienating himself from the younger base of secularists, atheists and sceptics, and reinforcing the difference between privileged, tired, white baby boomers and the majority of the population.

Reference Material:

Aichenbaum, Bernet, Brzosowski, Cedervall, Hellstern, Korosi, Ludmer, Marcus, and Mendoza-Amaro, “An Analysis of the Report by the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls, Its Causes and Consequences to the United Nations Human Rights Council”, Parental Alienation Study Group (USA) and Global Action for Research Integrity in Parental Alienation (México), Nashville, TN, USA, June 2023.

Claire Ainsworth & Nature magazine, “Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic”, Scientific American, 22 October 2018

Paul Aufiero and Ryan Thoreson, “Interview: Trump Poses More Threats to Rights of LGBT People”, Human Rights Watch, 19 November 2024.

Australian Sports Commission, “Transgender & Gender-Diverse Inclusion Guidelines for HP Sport”, Australian Institute of Sport, May 2023.

AWID, “There Is No Place for Anti-Trans Agendas in the UN”, AWID, 18 May 2023.

Dan Barker & Annie Laurie Gaynor, “Freedom From Religion Foundation supports LGBTQIA-plus rights”, FFRF, 27 December 2024.

BBC, “Richard Dawkins’ Berkeley event cancelled for ‘Islamophobia'”, BBC, 25 July 2017.

Harriet Brewis, “Richard Dawkins reignites pain and fury with comments about babies with Down’s Syndrome”, indy100, 16 May 16 2021.

Jerry Coyne, “”Biology Is Not Bigotry”, republished on “Archive Today” website, 26 December 2024.

Richard Dawkins, “The myth of the God-shaped hole”, The Spectator, 3 January 2025, reprinted at Archive Today.

Daily Telegraph NZ, “Richard Dawkins resigns from atheist group after censorship of biology-based gender article”, Daily Telegraph NZ, 4 January 2025.

Essence of Thought, “The Death Of The Atheist Community Of Austin – Testimonies From Volunteers & Service Users”, YouTube, 20 Jul 2019.

Agustín Fuentes, “Here’s Why Human Sex Is Not Binary”, Scientific American, 1 May 2023

FPFW, “Half of all transgender prisoners are sex offenders or dangerous category A inmates”, Wayback Machine, 9 November 2017.

GATE, “Trans, Gender Diverse and Intersex Inclusion in Sports is a Human Right”, GATE – Global Action for Trans Equality, 3 October 2024.

Kat Grant, “What Is A Woman?”, Freethought Now blog, 7 November 2024.

Robert Hart, “Richard Dawkins Stripped Of Top Humanist Award For Using Science To ‘Demean Marginalized Groups’”, Forbes, 20 April 2021.

Gabriel Hays, “Richard Dawkins leaves atheist foundation after it unpublishes article saying gender based on biology”, Fox News, 3 January 2025.

Debbie Hayton, “How some atheists fell for the new religion of gender identity”, Spectator Australia, 31 December 2024.

Cameron Henderson, “Richard Dawkins quits atheism foundation for backing transgender ‘religion’”, The Telegraph, 30 December 2024; also reprinted on Anglican Mainstream, 31 December 2024.

I am a chinchilla, “Richard Dawkins on absolute morality”, YouTube, 3 May 2010.

FFRF et al, “Statement from secular groups affirming commitment to LGBTQ-plus rights”, Freedom From Religion Foundation, 14 January 2025.

IOC, “Fairness, Inclusion and Non-Discrimination in Olympic Sport”, International Olympic Committee, November 2021?

Tyler Kingkade, “Richard Dawkins: College Students Are Betraying The Free Speech Movement: Universities are supposed to expose you to ideas you disagree with, he declared”, HuffPost, 3 Oct 2015.

Sam Kintworth, “RE: Ensuring the inclusion of trans, gender diverse and intersex people in sport”, Amnesty International Australia, 29 June 2022.

Medical News Today, “Sex and gender: What is the difference?”, Medical News Today, last medically reviewed 11 May 2021.

Hemant Mehta, “Richard Dawkins has abandoned science to justify his transphobia”, Religion News, 1 August 2023.
– – – – – – – – , “Atheist group faces backlash after publishing, then removing, Jerry Coyne’s anti-trans article”, Friendly Atheist (YouTube), 30 December 2024.
– – – – – – – -, “Richard Dawkins, Jerry Coyne, and the intense fallout from their anti-trans bigotry”, Friendly Atheist (YouTube), 6 January 2025.

National Geographic, “How Science is Helping Us Understand Gender”, National Geographic Education, n.d.

Aaron Rabinowitz, “Biology is not ethics: A response to Jerry Coyne’s anti-trans essay”, Friendly Atheist, 3 January 2025.

Planned Parenthood, “What’s transphobia, also called transmisia?”, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc., 2025.

CQ Quinan, “From criminalization to erasure: Project 2025 and anti-trans legislation in the US”, SAGE Journals, 9 January 2025.

Michael Powell (The New York Times), “How a famous Harvard professor became a target over his tweets”, Boston.com, 15 July 2020.

Allegra Ringo, “The Atheist Movement Needs to Disown Richard Dawkins”, VICE, 17 September 2014,

SBS, “Dawkins causes storm after tweeting ‘date rape is bad, stranger rape is worse'”, SBS News, 30 July 2014.

SDGS, “Pride Month: UN’s transgender rights campaign goes global”, UN News, 30 June 2023.

EJ Sorrell, “Is There Room in Atheism for Trans People?”, Center for Inquiry, 15 June 2018.

Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences: Violence against women and girls in sports” (A/79/325), Wayback Machine, 27 August 2024.

Steph, “22nd of April: Fair Play for Women and their Misleading Evidence”, TransLucent, 22 April 2021.

Simon(e) D Sun, “Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia, Scientific American, 13 June 2019.

UCLA School of Law, “Transgender people over four times more likely than cisgender people to be victims of violent crime”, UCLA Williams School of Law, 23 March 2021.

Forrest Valkai and Secular Rarity, “The Surprising Truth: Gender Is Not The Same As Sex!”, The Atheist Experience, YouTube, 16 May 2024.

Natalie Venegas, “Rules for Transgender Olympic Athletes Explained”, Newsweek, 3 July 2024.

Wikipedia, “Women’s Liberation Front”, Wikipedia, last edited on 25 November 2024.

Rasha Younes, “Trans Day of Remembrance Marked with Grim Murder Data: More Than 5000 Killed in Past 16 Years due to Lack of Legal Protections”, Human Rights Watch, 20 November 2024.

= = =