Brights movement logo
Oct. 1st, 2007 04:24 pmHave you heard of the Brights movement?
The Brights movement is the 2003 brainchild of two American atheists who felt that atheism had an unfairly poor reputation, especially in the USA. They proposed that part of the problem was the dry, academic sound of the word "atheist" itself, and proposed that a new word was needed, taking as their example the triumph of the proud, celebratory word "gay" over its medicalising predecessor, "homosexual". The word that they proposed was "bright" as in "I am a bright".
This bold move has been embraced by many atheists all over the world, and received the enthusiastic support of, among others, philosopher Daniel C Dennett and biologist Richard Dawkins.
I am as I'm sure you know sympathetic to the aims of this movement, but I don't think the logo (pictured above) is quite right, so I have taken the step of making my own proposal for a new logo which better reflects their new choice of name.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 03:53 pm (UTC)*sigh*
If you want to 'reclaim' words, why not call yourselves "the godless" or "heathens"? As far as I'm aware calling someone 'bright' was never perjorative.
(the other problem for me is that my mother's maiden name is Bright. So to me, "The Brights" is how I address christmas cards to my cousins.)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 03:59 pm (UTC)Personally I go for "godless", which I noticed the BBC using today...
no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 04:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 05:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 07:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-02 11:19 am (UTC)Angst-theists also seems to work well given the emo nature of many that choose this belief (I'll admit I fitted into that category in my early teens - later becoming a more moderate agnostic for several years)
Not to mention the reaction you can get from them by pointing out that by taking a position on the existance of god without proof to the positive or the negative (not to mention the logical falacy of it - ie in an infinite universe the non existance of something can never be proven) is itself a religious position...
You can have them spitting sparks enough to light a BBQ on a wet english summer afternoon
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-10-02 12:46 pm (UTC)buttbomb
Date: 2007-10-02 01:07 pm (UTC)I have my own beliefs, which include the idea that such beliefs are personal and should never ever be a corporation, an organization, hunger for money, famous for burning people to death over a misprint, edited to ostrocize and use as a weapon of hate, a fist of power, pretext for war, Phelps comes instantly to mind here. And, I resent people who try to "change my ways" to be "saved" etc.
So, I don't see this as an athiest symobl nor as a mock on athiests, but rather a mock on those who mock others for being different or even heratics.
I went to English Public School. When this one lady took over the "assembly" time, it went from a place of fun-social-learning to a place of church and only her church. We sat in rows and made way for her queenlyness to walk up and down. She was like the witch in Narnia. We went from a massive classrom to a mass of midevil sheep in rows pondering on the next meal out of bordom. And, I felt sad for the kids on our base who were Jewish or others. One could get out of a speeding ticket easier than this, when people start taking religion so seriously that they think they are religion, like Phelps's Family of Hatred. Its people like that who give reason to not conform, to put an ass on.
No offense.
Re: buttbomb
From: