The first chapter of The Hunger Games is one of the finest first chapters I’ve ever read. Suzanne Collins masterfully draws the reader into her dystopian future with history and descriptions that are immediately fascinating as well as chilling. The poverty of District 12 is apparent straightaway, and the sketch of Effie Trinket provides both a picture of a frustrated bureaucrat and a window into the politics and culture of the Capitol.

The main focus of this chapter, however, is our heroine Katniss Everdeen.

Katniss is hard. She’s unsentimental, stubborn, and unforgiving. Honestly, she’s not particularly likeable. Oh, she loves her sister, Primrose, and indulges her sister as much as she can, but Katniss also sees her sister as weak and fragile. She resents her mother. She takes far too much upon herself, and she thinks a bit too well of herself because of it.

If I knew Katniss in real life, I wouldn’t be able to stand her.

As a character, I love her. I’m curious to see where her character development goes. She’s already tough, so it’s not like she has to learn her own strength. She’s street-smart, so she doesn’t need to have a rude awakening. She’s confident, so I don’t think she’s going to need to learn how to stand up for herself.

I imagine that at some point she’ll be traveling to the Capitol, so I suppose that we’ll get a bit of fish-out-of-water development there as Katniss has to learn how to use the skills she already has to cope with an unfamiliar environment. And of course there will be the Games themselves. I dunno. I’m just curious so far. Katniss isn’t a character with some hidden reservoir of strength–she’s actually strong and capable, which is fairly unusual for a girl character.

Time to read some more, I guess.

After much discussion with my partner on the topic of atheism and privilege dynamics, I’ve realized that maybe I’ve been going about explaining it all wrong, so I’ll try to explain again in the way that helped him to understand what the heck I was talking about.

What I think it really comes down to is that in atheist groups, unlike in any other social justice group, white men aren’t the oppressor. It’s not that anyone is joining a group in order to be oppressed or to feel oppressed. I think that on the whole, atheist/skeptical spaces have been, are, and will likely continue to be dominated by white men because they are spaces in which those men aren’t at risk of being seen as part of the problems trying to be addressed.

In feminist groups, for example, men in general (white men in particular) are generally only conditionally welcome–contingent upon their ability to check their privilege at the door and to understand that they themselves are likely part of (or at least beneficiaries of) the societal ills that feminism attempts to address. And this tends to go for pretty much any social justice group; white men, as the most privileged members of society are welcome conditionally only if they are willing to do their best to no longer be part of the problem. This is an incredibly humbling position to be in.

As a person of no small privilege myself, I can certainly sympathize. No one likes to be the bad guy. I don’t think many people like to be not just aware of, but constantly mindful of and alert for, the ways in which their own privilege clouds their thinking, twists their perceptions, and interferes with their ability to interact in healthy and helpful ways with marginalized people. It’s uncomfortable. It’s hard. It’s easy to fuck up, and in many social justice groups you will be called out when you fuck up. It requires a level of humility that I know I find hard to muster at all times, and which many people just seem incapable of achieving at all. The men who dominate the atheist movement have managed to create spaces where they can avoid the unpleasantness of ever being the bad guy.

I think it’s less that men find atheist activism/community appealing because they want to feel oppressed and more that it’s appealing because it offers them a way to not be reminded that they are themselves often oppressive.

By, for the most part, avoiding addressing things like sexism, racism and the like, atheist and skeptical groups seem determined to pretend that everyone in their group is on an equal footing, united under the shared experience of being atheists but without any recognition or appreciation whatsoever of differences in experience, even within the movement. I continue to see that any attempts by women or minorities to point out problems within atheist and skeptical groups aren’t even ignored, but instead bring out all the worst of the men in these spaces. Even otherwise “nice” men tend to trivialize and gloss over any complaints or criticisms by women.

The problem that I have with atheist groups and spaces is not about any particular instance of sexist behavior, but rather about what I consider to be a structural fault in the hierarchy of the atheist movement that leads to a pattern of nastiness towards women especially, but also toward various minority groups. As long as men (especially white men) are the driving force behind atheist thought, politics, philosophy, and activism, atheist spaces will continue to be safe spaces for men and uncomfortable and unpleasant spaces for many others.

Unfortunately, years of leadership by men has created an atheist movement that doesn’t require them to examine their privilege and in which they are able to say and do mostly as they please when it comes to the treatment of women–creating an environment where not only do men get to avoid recognizing their roles as oppressors, but where they can be actively oppressive without being called out on it very often.

This is starting to change, and the habit of calling out sexism and other -isms seems to be catching on in certain segments of the atheist blogosphere. It seems like at least some atheist conferences and such are making at least a nominal effort to include women and minorities and to discuss issues that are unique to those groups. At the same time, however, my observation is that there has been quite a bit of backlash to this. More women participating seems to have served largely to make more visible the problems within atheist groups, as women continue to be taken less seriously than men while also continuing to be treated as if they exist primarily to be objects of male lust. Some male atheists are just incorrigibly sexist, while others are more actively unpleasant toward women. Others content themselves with acting as apologists for the poor behavior of others.

Regardless, it’s clearly (to me, anyway) more than just a few bad eggs that are ruining things for everyone. The comments on blog posts pointing out sexism regularly turn ugly, and several notable atheist ladies have reported receiving some pretty vile hate mail. Just since Hemant Mehta posted about my Tumblr comment, I’ve gotten a couple of particularly nasty anon messages and one commenter on my original post who popped in to tell me I’m a dumb bitch (plus the guy who had to try and explain to me how much men are oppressed, too), and I’m, frankly, an internet nobody.

As far as whether or not all these sexist douchebags are true misogynists (as Hemant Mehta seems to think they are not)? Well, I’m honestly not sure what difference it makes. Even if it really, truly is the case that sexist atheist men aren’t really and truly haters of women, they certainly hold hateful opinions of women, do and say hateful things towards women, and defend other men who do and say hateful things towards women. And there seems to be a woeful lack of any real desire on the part of most men to improve matters much.

After the original Tumblr discussions, I never expected to hear anything more about it, honestly, but a few days ago I woke up to find that someone had sent this screenshot of the original post to Hemant Mehta over at Friendly Atheist. After reading Hemant’s man-splaining of the sexism situation in general, I read through the comments on his post and basically hated everything far too much to be able to respond right away. I’m finally feeling at least somewhat up to that challenge.

First of, for full disclosure, let me say that I am not terribly active in any atheist communities on- or offline. This is almost entirely due to my general disenchantment with atheist communities and what passes for atheist activism. This disenchantment is due to several factors:

1. Atheist communities are often hostile to women, and (being a woman) I don’t feel as if my presence is welcome or that my opinions are particularly valued or sought after.
2. Atheists as a group tend to be relatively privileged, whether it’s white privilege, class privilege, education privilege, or whatever. Because of this sort of homogeneity of privilege, there is an amazing lack of any sort of privilege going on. This creates an unpleasant environment for those who lack the privileges of the majority as well as those who are actively trying to unpack their own privilege.
3. Atheist activism tends to be towards decidedly narrow goals. Some of these goals are important (improving science education, combating religious child abuse), but some of these goals are trivial (getting God off the dollar bill, etc.). The trivial goals get a disproportionate amount of attention, while at the same time there is little recognition of the intersectionality of the broader goals with the aims of other social justice movements.

What has happened as a result of this is that I’ve heavily cut back on the number of atheist blogs that I read, and I have essentially no desire to participate in atheist groups whatsoever. That being said, however, even in the limited number of atheist blogs that I read, I still have days where there is much that just disgusts me, and my statement on Tumblr was born out of that disgust and the frustration I feel at the ability of atheist communities to be consistently disappointing to me.

On to the criticisms of my statement!

The most common criticism, which Hemant avoided but that I faced on Tumblr and saw in the comments at Friendly Atheist, was that I was wrong to say that the only reason white dudes become atheists is to get in on being oppressed. Fortunately, that is not even remotely what I said. While I admit that my original statement might have been confusing to some (but not to some others), what I meant was that I think that many men–especially an all-to-common type of upper-class, white, educated men–attach to movement atheism as their activist community of choice (as opposed to some other activist community) because they don’t experience oppression in any other way. For some people, “In God We Trust” being on the dollar bill really is the worst form of oppression they will ever face, and unfortunately atheist groups are simply crawling with these people.

What I see in a lot of atheist groups is that these men are the ones who drive the majority of discussion and decide on courses of action for the group. These men are also, sadly, the ones responsible for the majority of contributions to making atheist spaces unfriendly for anyone who isn’t one of them. As I said originally, I attribute a lot of this to unrecognized privilege, and as long as that privilege goes unexamined and unchecked, atheist spaces will continue to be dominated by white men as they alienate and drive off women and minorities.

Hemant’s post didn’t criticize, per se, but rather defended against charges of sexism within movement atheism in general. He starts off by saying the bolded part of my original statement is incorrect, insinuating that maybe I was joking (nope!), but admits that atheist groups could benefit from increased diversity.

Well, Hemant, you can of course disagree with me, but my opinion remains that white men dominate the atheist movement because it gives them a platform to advance a narrow agenda that addresses issues that effect them. Atheists who are interested in addressing sexism, racism, economic injustice and so on largely head elsewhere because the majority of people inhabiting atheist/skeptical spaces are unmitigated assholes when it comes to those topics. As far as this opinion “demeaning” the people I am talking about, I can only hope that maybe my statement will trigger an epiphany for a few of them, who will take a look at their privilege, think about the way it shapes their interactions with others, and work to recognize and be mindful of that privilege in a way that fosters community rather than driving away otherwise like-minded people.

Hemant then goes on to say that of course women have to deal with a lot of shit, which he knows because he listens to women. Gold star, Mr. Mehta!

But, oh shit, what is this?!

I’ve experienced the Boys’ Club mentality myself, where something I said was taken more seriously than a similar suggestion made by a woman. Are the people I’m talking about deliberately thinking, “She’s a woman, so who cares what she says”? Of course not. These are good, decent people who don’t hate women or go out of their way to belittle them. That’s part of the problem, though. They don’t realize when they’re effectively keeping women out of the conversation.

Oh, well, that’s okay then. As long as people don’t really mean to be sexist, then we should give them a pass, right? We certainly wouldn’t want to demean them by pointing out the colossal amount of privilege they have that enables them to do and say extremely sexist things without actually meaning to. That would just be mean, because they don’t hate women; they just treat women like garbage, but in a benevolent way. Gotcha.

Here’s more honesty for you: Many of the women I know who have worked for a while in any of the various national atheist organizations have been propositioned for sex (directly or indirectly) at some point or another. It’s not rape. They say they’re not interested and the men back off. But it’s to the point where I’ve seen women joke about it with each other because so many of them have been in that situation. I’m glad they can find humor in it, but humor comes from shared experiences, and it’s sad that this is one of the things they have in common.

I am simply awed by this insight. It’s just being propositioned for sex. It’s not like women are getting raped or anything! Some women even make jokes about it, so I guess it’s not that bad, even with Hemant’s rhetorical sadface at the end of the paragraph.

Obviously, there are women who run a couple of these groups. There are women who don’t have these experiences. There are plenty of men who don’t do these things and actively fight against it. But if these were isolated cases, we wouldn’t be giving this subject this much attention.

No joke? Honestly, there is not a day that goes by when I am not aware of the misogyny that is endemic in the atheist movement. And the men who supposedly fight against this sort of thing aren’t doing that great a job. I have a feeling that Mr. Mehta here is including himself in that group of white knights, and yet here I am pointing out how full of fail his grasp of the situation is. And I’m not even trying very hard.

If there’s an upside to all the posts that have been made about sexism in the past year, it’s that some people who weren’t aware that this is a serious issue are more aware of it now. And that’ll hopefully lead to more productive conversations in the future. (Right now, comment threads everywhere seem to resemble a giant cesspool.)

Probably more people are aware that some women consider this a problem; there’s not really much sign that it’s being taken very seriously or treated as an issue that really deserves to be addressed. And yes, your comment thread is a giant cesspool.

Here’s the question that’s still lingering in my mind hours after I saw it: Why would anyone think that in the first place? And whose fault is that?

Well, golly gee. I can’t imagine how you might find out the answer to these questions. Clearly, the solution is to make a blog post about it, fail to even attempt to contact the original poster of the thing you are confused about, and then wring your hands in dismay over how uncivil the discussion gets:

It’s annoying to see all the posts about sexism in our movement. Not because it doesn’t exist or because bloggers are wrong to call it as they see it, but because I know how the story will end: With lot of people saying a lot of ignorant things, with huge generalizations being thrown all over the place, with people dismissing anyone who disagrees with them, with people talking past each other and arguing about completely different things, with people tearing down others who don’t deserve it… and with people not interested in the discussion giving the entire movement a giant middle finger and walking away from it for good.

Yep. The really annoying thing is when people point out sexism.

I want to prevent that from happening. That requires us to be able to confront the issues in a civil way. We haven’t figured out how to make that happen yet.

I have a few suggestions:

• Don’t minimize and trivialize the complaints about sexism (or any other -ism) by pointing out that it could be worse.
• Don’t say how annoying it is for you to see posts about sexism in the atheist movement. (Seriously. Just keep that to yourself until you realize why it’s a terrible opinion.)
• Don’t complain about how mean people are when they complain about being treated like crap, ignored, and made to feel unwelcome in your group.
• Ask the negatively affected people (in this case women) what can be done to change the hostile and unwelcoming atmosphere of your communities.
• When you are told what you can do to make things better, do it.
• If you aren’t willing to do the things that will improve the situation, don’t complain that it’s not getting better.

It’s just not that difficult.

Unfortunately, I just don’t see it improving. I’ve read the Friendly Atheist for years, but I have never felt so disappointed with Hemant Mehta as I am right now.

P.S. “This is About Rainbows and Kittens…”? How much more childish and insulting could that be? This is not how to take the issue of sexism seriously.

So, I was planning on writing a post tonight about skepticism and home birth, but then Hemant Mehta mansplained all over something I posted on Tumblr last week and I was going to respond to his post.

Instead, after I popped over to Friendly Atheist and read the comments, I made this. It’s like regular sexist bingo, but with SCIENCE!

My response to Hemant will be incoming tomorrow, but this is all I’ve got tonight.

Queereka is a place for skeptics and nonbelievers who are interested in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer issues. We seek to promote the inclusion of LGBTQ topics, voices and individuals in the skeptic and secular community and movement, promote rational and evidence-based approaches to LGBTQ topics, encourage critical thinking about gender and sexuality, and combat misinformation and mistaken pseudoscientific, superstitious, biased, religious, irrational, unsubstantiated or bigoted beliefs about LGBTQ topics, lives, individuals and experiences.

I highly recommend checking it out; although there isn’t a whole lot to see just yet, you can sign up for their RSS feed, follow them on Twitter, and like them on Facebook.

I’m particularly interested in reading the Perspectives column, which plans to examine queer genders and sexualities from an anthropological/historical/cross-cultural standpoint, but I’ve already learned some things from a pair of posts on 13 Myths and Misconceptions About Trans Women. Part One was posted at Skepchick, and Part Two is over at Queereka. Both seem worth a read, and there is some interesting discussion going on in the comments as well.

It’s good to see a space like Queereka being built in the skeptic community, which so often fails to address these sorts of issues, and I’m looking forward to seeing it grow.

The good news is that I’m not horribly disappointed in myself or discouraged yet. The bad news is that I don’t have a plan of how exactly to make this resolution happen.

My thought right now is that I need to have a project. Something I can do every day and that will, preferably, take around an hour of my time (maybe less). I have a few ideas, but I’m not sure exactly what I want to do.

1. A Song of Ice and Fire
   Pro – There is so much material here, it would probably take me a full year to get through it all.
   Con – I’ve already read the first four books twice each, so I don’t have a fresh perspective on it. Also, I don’t know if I could be brief enough with writing my feelings about it for this to be a daily project. It’s on my list of things to do, but I think I should give myself more flexibility with such an ambitious project.
2. Xena
   Pro – I haven’t watched this show in years, and I’ve never watched it critically, so it would be sort of new-again for me. I could easily do one episode a day, and if I take notes while I watch it, I could do a recap in an hour. Also, this is a show I could watch while my daughter is awake, so it could be a fun mother-daughter activity when she’s not at her dad’s.
   Con – I don’t think my partner likes the show that much, and I suspect that he would get bored with it if I didn’t.
3. Chapter-a-day book reviews
   Pro – I have a few books that I plan on reading this year that I know will be lighter fare than ASOIAF. Right now, I’m planning on reading the Hunger Games trilogy and the Lunar Chronicles as they come out (Cinder hits shelves tomorrow). I have a few other things in mind, too, but nothing else really specific.
   Con – This will have to wait a little while, as I don’t have the money right this moment to buy any new books and probably won’t until February. I don’t want to put off a project that long because I know how I am, and I suspect that sort of delay would mean I’d have to wait til next year before I feel this motivated again.
4. Some kind of art blog
   Pro – This is somewhat applicable to my profession. I work primarily with artists, and it’s reignited my interest in art, so it would be fun to do some sort of artist-of-the-day type blog. I could broaden my horizons and learn some stuff. I’m thinking I could do theme days or something, which would make planning and preparing for writing easier as well (i.e. Renaissance Thursdays, New Artist Sundays, or something).
   Con – This is somewhat applicable to my profession. I wouldn’t want this to in any way feel like an extension of my job, especially as my job is about to become a lot more time-consuming and stressful now that I’m permanent. While I love what I do, I would somewhat prefer that writing be a way for me to relax and wind down from work.

My question for my followers is just this: What do you think?

Do any of these sound like something you might be interested in reading if I wrote it? Am I right to think that a project would be a good way motivate myself and have a bit of direction in 2012? Is there some other great idea that I’m not thinking of?

I was laid off from a job in early January with the promise that I would be called back by the end of February. That never happened, and I spent a full 5 months being unemployed, struggling to keep the lights and phone turned on so I could look for work as I slipped further and further behind on everything.

Just when things were looking hopeless, only a few weeks before my unemployment would have run out, I got a call from the temp agency I had worked with in 2010. A publishing company needed a sales assistant. Was I up for it? Goodness, yes.

I didn’t think I was going to get the job when I walked out of the interview that day in late spring. I had no college degree; I had no experience in the industry; I had been out of work for months; I was a good 5 years older and a great deal shabbier in my 3-year-old suit than the girl who had the interview after me. I’m not young and naive enough to think that being smart and personable is enough to get my foot in the door.

So I was surprised when I got the call a couple days later telling me I had gotten the position. I had full-time employment through August at a company in an industry I would love to work in.

I loved it. I worked with people who were smart and interesting. I dealt with books all day every day. The salespeople I supported appreciated me and the work that I did. I was able to make a tiny bit of headway in getting caught up financially, which was imperative given that the nature of temp work is that, well, it’s temporary.

August was nerve-wracking. I still hadn’t found permanent employment, and the end of my temp contract was quickly approaching. Then, my boss told me about another temp position in the company, this time in ad sales. I jumped on it.

I struggle with anxiety and depression occasionally in the best of times, and I frankly don’t think I could have dealt with another bout of unemployment. I don’t even like to think of what would have happened if I hadn’t had this stroke of luck.

Things have still been hard, both financially and emotionally. There have been a few times that I haven’t been sure that I could keep going, and many times that I wasn’t sure I wanted to keep going. There’s good news, though!

My temp contract ended yesterday, but I’ve got an offer to stay on permanently in ad sales. I’ll be filling out paperwork on Tuesday, and I’m hoping to be settled in completely by the end of next week or so.

This is the first time in my adult life that I’ve ever been on what I would call a career trajectory. It’s the first time in over three years that I have been fully employed at a job that will comfortably support me and my family. It’s the first time in I don’t even know how long that I’ve been able to start a new year off with hope.

And I am hopeful. I’m grateful that 2011 is over, finally, and I’m more than ready to put it behind me. Mostly, though, I am hopeful for 2012, at least on a personal level.

Between dealing with crushing poverty and my often crippling depression, I’ve put off doing a lot of things that I want to do for far too long, and I plan for 2012 to be the year that I get back on track and get my shit together. In making my New Year’s resolutions, though, I’m trying to be realistic. Here’s what I’ve come up with:

• Write something every day, even if it’s just a line or two. My goal is one blog post per day, even if it’s just something short. If things go well, I’d like to give NaNoWriMo an honest try, too.
• Read 12 books that I’ve never read before. I’m taking suggestions for this one. I like 19th century English literature, high fantasy, hard sci-fi, science, economics, feminism, and politics, but the goal is to expand my horizons.
• Eat more vegetables. Seriously. I hate vegetables mostly, but I want to eat less meat and fewer carbohydrates. My goal, I think, is going to be one new vegetable dish per week as soon as I get caught up on all my bills and have the money to experiment.
• Walk for at least 30 minutes each day. This is another thing that will have to wait a little while, because I’ll have to get a decent pair of shoes when I have the money, but it’s on my list of things I need to do to live a bit healthier lifestyle. Working in offices the last couple of years coupled with depression and feelings-eating has caused me to be in pretty poor shape, and I want to change that.

I have no illusions that this is going to be a perfect year. I expect that I will continue to struggle with depression and anxiety. I’m worried about how my tendency to be a workaholic is going to affect my relationship and my family as I transition into this job. I’m probably not going to quit smoking, which is why I didn’t even put it on my list of resolutions this year–who am I kidding? I am concerned about the next year in politics and the upcoming elections. I’m not sure that my car is going to make it another year. And so on.

I survived 2011.

Here’s to surviving 2012, but with a bit more panache.

1. Is the movie titled for a male star?
2. Is the movie centered around the quest of a male?
3. Are the females in the movie helping the male achieve his goal?
4. Which character goes through a transition?
5. What is the ratio of males to females? Main roles? Crowd scenes?
6. What are the females wearing? Does their clothing expose belly buttons and other body parts?
7. How many lines do the female characters have?
8. How many of the females’ lines have to do with what they’re wearing, what they look like, romantic relationships, or shopping?
9. How many of the males refer to the females only in reference to romance and how they look?
10. How do the females in the movie interact with each other? Do they interact at all?
11. How are female friendships depicted in the movie? Are there any?
12. Is a female character rescued by a male character?
13. Does a female character make a rescue?
14. What heroic acts or acts of bravery do the female characters perform?

I think this is a great start, especially as the mother of an 8-year-old daughter. It’s incredibly frustrating that there are so few movies made about girls. There are the Disney princess movies and the Barbie movies, but all of these are problematic at best and full of sexism and racism at worst–not to mention the complete lack of body positivity, as every protagonist in them is thin and conventionally beautiful.

A few questions I would add:

• Are there characters of color in the movie?
• Are the cultures portrayed using stereotypes?
• What do the “good guys” and “bad guys” look like? Is racist or sexist imagery used to denote “good” and “bad” in the movie?
• Are there any characters of size? How are they presented?
• Are there any characters with disabilities? How are they presented?
• Are there characters who aren’t straight? How are they presented?
• What is the socio-economic status of the characters? How does this effect them in the story?

These days at home, we don’t watch many children’s movies. My daughter LOVES Parks and Recreation and Doctor Who, and we watch some documentary type things. Mostly, however, we read because there are many good books for girls that would make wonderful movies…that aren’t being made.

My top picks for books that should be made into children’s movies:

• The Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede
  I loved these books when I was a girl, and it’s nice to get to share them with my daughter. We’re currently working through the third book, in which one of the main characters is adventuring while pregnant. I recommend this series to everyone, and I probably always will; it has a few problems, but there aren’t many other books that present women as full and capable human beings in quite the way Ms. Wrede does in these. It would be great to see them made into movies–especially if someone could talk Angel Coulby (from Merlin) or Antonia Thomas (from Misfits) into playing Cimorene.
• His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman
  I know, I know, the first one was made. BUT! It could have been better, and it’s unlikely that we’ll ever get the next two, which is too bad because it’s a great series.
• Almost anything by Tamora Pierce.

What books would you like to see made into children’s movies? And what other questions do you ask yourself when you’re looking for movies for your kids?

“White Wine in the Sun” – Tim Minchin
This is probably my favorite Christmas song ever, and Tim Minchin does a wonderful job of delving into the complex feelings that many atheists have about the holidays. This year, there is a new animated video for it.

“God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen” – Annie Lennox
I love Annie Lennox, and I love this song, so I was thrilled when she released this (with a bit of a pagan twist) in 2010.

“Merry Christmas (I Don’t Want to Fight Tonight)” – The Ramones

“Christmas (Baby Please Come Home)” – Joey Ramone
Because you can never have too much of The Ramones.

“Happy Xmas (War is Over)” – John Lennon

“Oh Come All Ye Faithful” – Twisted Sister
This was a Christmas miracle in 2006.

“Merry Christmas Everybody” – Slade

“Santa Baby” – Eartha Kitt

“We Three Kings” – Blondie

“Christmas Wrapping” – The Waitresses

I was raised Catholic, but like many US American Catholics my family was never particularly religious aside from going to mass most Sundays and making sure that my sister and I had first communion and were confirmed at the appropriate ages. Holidays with my family were and are primarily secular affairs, days for eating too much pie and spending more-or-less quality time together.

The good thing about this is that my and my partner’s atheism doesn’t really affect that dynamic. The bad part is that we still have to figure out how to how to come up with our own traditions that reflect our philosophy and how best to discuss the religious aspects of the holiday with my daughter in a way that is honest about what we think while still leaving her room to decide what she thinks.

Realistically, however, my biggest concerns as a parent who participates in Christmas are probably the same as those of most parents who celebrate Christmas. I want my daughter to enjoy the holidays as a time to spend with family. I want her to learn to value giving more than receiving and to accept gifts with grace. I want to avoid the crass consumerism that surrounds this holiday and teach by example that the best gifts are those that are thoughtful and meaningful.

That being said, here’s a round-up of some of the best posts I’ve seen this year on the holidays:

• Santa Claus: The Ultimate Dry Run – Dale McGowan, editor of Parenting Beyond Belief, reposts this every year in time for Christmas, and he gives a great argument in favor of Santa.
• Libby Anne at Love, Joy, Feminism has an excellent series up on celebrating Christmas as an atheist who has left Christian Patriarchy: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
• Reclaiming Christmas – Sunni Zuniga blogs at Parents Beyond Belief
• Greta Christina breaks the bad news (but far more good news) in “No, Virginia, There is No Santa Claus”
• Jesse Galef explains why “Christmas Is for All of Us”; Annie Laurie Gaylor gives a history lesson; Roy Speckhardt makes it known that “Christmas Can’t Become Too Secular”; and Herb Silverman tells us to be good.
• David Hayward asks an important question.
• A very atheist Christmas – Elisabeth Cornwell at the Washington Post