Atheist and Feminist Divide

I am an atheist and I am also a feminist. When I browse around atheist youtubers and also feminist youtubers, I see a strange rivalry between atheists and feminists. I also see that both respective parties are uncomfortable with the other’s label. I have met few atheists who would identify as feminists and vice-versa even though many of them agree with the main points of both movements.
Any thoughts on why or if this is a good or bad trend?

I am an atheist and I am also a feminist. When I browse around atheist youtubers and also feminist youtubers, I see a strange rivalry between atheists and feminists. I also see that both respective parties are uncomfortable with the other's label. I have met few atheists who would identify as feminists and vice-versa even though many of them agree with the main points of both movements. Any thoughts on why or if this is a good or bad trend?
I don't follow atheism or feminism, so I have no idea why people who associate themselves with either word would have an issue with the other. What I do know is that some groups are their own worst enemy. Overreaction to comments (often misinterpreted) can poison your message so that the very people who's minds you want to change are turned off before they hear your message.

Your question is based on a false presumption. There is no “atheist” perspective on women or feminism, and there is no “feminist” perspective on atheism. But that doesn’t mean that there are no msiogynist atheists or anti atheist feminists.
The problem is in what people assume they know about people in reference to these labels. Some atheists assume that all other atheists are rational thinkers and skeptical. The reality is vastly different. Some people ridiculously think all feminists hate men. And when people use these labels, they tend to think that the people they are talking to, share thier interpretation of what these labels mean.

Atheists who are also humanists, probably are pro-feminist in most of their values. I think that I am.

I am an atheist and I am also a feminist. When I browse around atheist youtubers and also feminist youtubers, I see a strange rivalry between atheists and feminists. I also see that both respective parties are uncomfortable with the other's label. I have met few atheists who would identify as feminists and vice-versa even though many of them agree with the main points of both movements. Any thoughts on why or if this is a good or bad trend?
I'm an atheist and a feminist. I probably know more atheists than most people do. Most of the atheists I know are also feminists. Lois

Atheism and Feminism don’t have anything in common - nor should they. Humanists, however, are very supportive of Feminism.
Something to keep in mind is that many atheists who claim to be feminists are probably just saying that because they see Feminism as a big f*** you to religion, not because they really care about Feminism.

There is no more divide between atheism and feminism than there is between feminism and any other portion of society, unless you’re talking about Evangelical Christians who are divided from everyone. Atheists come in all shapes, colors and political persuasions. Some atheists are Democratic, some Republican, some even Libertarian. Feminists are no different. Some are atheist, some are Christian, some are New Age nonsense believers. The problem I see in the so-called Atheist Movement® is some of the leaders are misogynistic jerks. Look at the shitstorm Rebecca Watson inadvertently started when she asked men not to hit on her in an elevator at 3 a.m. Rebecca made a reasonable request, and many men in the atheist community took it as a personal affront on their right to grope women and treat them like sex toys.
Unfortunately, this thinking starts at the top, with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer being the prime examples of how to not behave. Dawkins cannot keep his sexist opinions to himself and Sheerer has a history of inappropriate sexual conduct. We won’t make any progress on sexual equality until these dinosaurs are sent off to pasture and people stop respecting their attitudes. The SGU made a good start on that a couple of days when they rescinded Dawkins’ invitation to speak at NECSS. We have a long way to go, and will probably never completely eradicate sexist pigs from our midst, but this is a small step in the right direction.

A feminist believes in equal rights for women. An atheist does not believe god(s) exist. Finding an atheist who isn’t also a feminist would be a tough thing to do. I expect that the percentage of atheists that are feminists is way way WAY higher than the percentage of theists who are feminists.
Therefore the problem must be with the mouths who claim to speak for each group. Capital ‘A’ Atheism and capital ‘F’ Feminism have organizations that are full of people, and there is the problem… people.
After an exhaustive 8 minute search online, it looks to me like too many who label themselves “Feminists” are acting in such a way as to turn off a good portion of the rest of the world. And the way they turn off “Atheists” is to copy some of the methods of religion.
Capital ‘A’ Atheism and capital ‘F’ Feminism are not my areas of interest, so the politics and intrigue and personal soap-operas going on are not on my radar.

I am an atheist and I am also a feminist. When I browse around atheist youtubers and also feminist youtubers, I see a strange rivalry between atheists and feminists. I also see that both respective parties are uncomfortable with the other's label. I have met few atheists who would identify as feminists and vice-versa even though many of them agree with the main points of both movements. Any thoughts on why or if this is a good or bad trend?
It does seem strange that atheists would be interested in a rivalry with feminists and vice versa. The youtubers of whom you speak may represent some goofy subset of atheists and feminists.

There is the a problem with feminism among libertarian atheists. Libertarians have a tendancy to disregard the notion that msiogyny even exists. And that’s the part of the atheist population that feminists have a problem with. I dont agree that one can expect atheists to be feminist. There are many humanists that don’t use the label atheist, but are feminist. And, there are many atheists that reject humanism as well as feminism together.
I have to say that I find many atheist libertarians disregard the idea that our society should designate any minority population as needing a protected status. Now there’s a group of people who don’t believe privilege exsists because they usually come from a privileged background.

There is the a problem with feminism among libertarian atheists. Libertarians have a tendancy to disregard the notion that msiogyny even exists. And that's the part of the atheist population that feminists have a problem with. I dont agree that one can expect atheists to be feminist. There are many humanists that don't use the label atheist, but are feminist. And, there are many atheists that reject humanism as well as feminism together. I have to say that I find many atheist libertarians disregard the idea that our society should designate any minority population as needing a protected status. Now there's a group of people who don't believe privilege exsists because they usually come from a privileged background.
In that case, I ask somewhat facetiously, "Why are more Atheists not publicly condemning the destructive values of these Libertarian Atheists?" They are doing vile things in the name of our non-belief. They are giving our non-belief a worse name. (You know, like moderate Muslims are not reacting as much as they should in opposition to violent Muslims.)

Ditto to what DarronS said!

Finding an atheist who isn't also a feminist would be a tough thing to do.
Not necessarily, it would be much harder to find a humanist who doesn't support feminism. I'm an atheist who is anti- feminism.
There is no more divide between atheism and feminism than there is between feminism and any other portion of society, unless you're talking about Evangelical Christians who are divided from everyone. Atheists come in all shapes, colors and political persuasions. Some atheists are Democratic, some Republican, some even Libertarian. Feminists are no different. Some are atheist, some are Christian, some are New Age nonsense believers. The problem I see in the so-called Atheist Movement® is some of the leaders are misogynistic jerks. Look at the shitstorm Rebecca Watson inadvertently started when she asked men not to hit on her in an elevator at 3 a.m. Rebecca made a reasonable request, and many men in the atheist community took it as a personal affront on their right to grope women and treat them like sex toys. Unfortunately, this thinking starts at the top, with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer being the prime examples of how to not behave. Dawkins cannot keep his sexist opinions to himself and Sheerer has a history of inappropriate sexual conduct. We won't make any progress on sexual equality until these dinosaurs are sent off to pasture and people stop respecting their attitudes. The SGU made a good start on that a couple of days when they rescinded Dawkins' invitation to speak at NECSS. We have a long way to go, and will probably never completely eradicate sexist pigs from our midst, but this is a small step in the right direction.
I haven't paid enough attention to the "Atheist Movement" nor to Dawkins and Shermer, as supposed leaders of it, to know of their personal failings in areas beyond rational thinking. My limited attention to Dawkins has suggested to me that he is pretty good at exposing the fallacies inherent in religious beliefs and my limited attention to Shermer has suggested that he is pretty good at pointing out the fallacies of paranoid conspiratorial thinking. But if they are ALSO sexist pigs, then, by all means they should be called out for that. And it should be made clear that not believing in the supernatural does not equate to dis-valuing people due to their gender. (Edited to correct spelling of Shermer. I've actually emailed the guy a couple of times, so you would think I would remember his name.)
Finding an atheist who isn't also a feminist would be a tough thing to do.
Not necessarily, it would be much harder to find a humanist who doesn't support feminism. I'm an atheist who is anti- feminism.I'm treating feminism as simply the belief that women are equal to men. I was trying to differentiate between 'feminism ' and 'Feminism'. Capital 'F' Feminism is a group of people who have an agenda. Small 'f' feminism is nothing more than the belief that women have the same rights/freedoms/status as men. The feminism I assumed atheists would be is small 'f' feminism. Since the reason some people feel women are inferior is religion, it stands to reason that an atheist wouldn't have the foundation required for that belief. Maybe some atheists do, but their reasoning would be a mystery to me.

3point, believe it or not, there are some rational people who think that since men and women are essentially and naturally different, that their rights/freedoms/status should not always be equivalent. No religiosity is, necessarily, required for that belief. (Do not count me among them, however.)

3point, believe it or not, there are some rational people who think that since men and women are essentially and naturally different, that their rights/freedoms/status should not always be equivalent. No religiosity is, necessarily, required for that belief. (Do not count me among them, however.)
I suppose anyone can believe whatever they want. I'd be interested in what the justification for being against equality would be if not religious. I don't know how they can be called rational, but I can see how they can be an atheist. So you're a small 'f' feminist? I think you fit my definition of one.

Most atheists are rationalists. Most rationalists are in favor of human rights for all people. Some atheists are as stupid as some theists. Theism or atheism has no bearing on human rights except that thinking people are more likely to be atheists and feminists and anti racists, as well.
Lois

So you're a small 'f' feminist? I think you fit my definition of one.
I think that women must be in control of their own reproductive rights, since it's their body that is the vehicle for reproduction. I think that women should have equal pay for equal work. If they can cut it in the military, they should have the same "opportunities" there. That sort of thing. I don't go on marches to support women's rights, though I might, more passively, cheer them on. And I vote for political candidates that have similar stances, and do not vote for those who don't. As far as believing that women are equal to men (your definition for small "f" feminism)? Actually, by direct observation, I have noticed that women are a bit different than men. But I am certain that they are human. And thus are, at least as deserving of human rights as men.
So you're a small 'f' feminist? I think you fit my definition of one.
I think that women must be in control of their own reproductive rights, since it's their body that is the vehicle for reproduction. I think that women should have equal pay for equal work. If they can cut it in the military, they should have the same "opportunities" there. That sort of thing. I don't go on marches to support women's rights, though I might, more passively, cheer them on. And I vote for political candidates that have similar stances, and do not vote for those who don't. As far as believing that women are equal to men (your definition for small "f" feminism)? Actually, by direct observation, I have noticed that women are a bit different than men. But I am certain that they are human. And thus are, at least as deserving of human rights as men. In many ways, women ar superior to men. In fact, in all ways other than muscle strength. But even in that, some women are superior to some men. Lois