Is Amber Heard an Atheist? Not Quite…

Hemant, as for the oxymoron…I thought she was referring to “practicing atheist” (but, maybe that’s just how I read it.)

i agree with kaleena, i thought she meant practicing atheist was an oxymoron.
that would be pretty strange for her to sit there and say she was an atheist, then say a friendly atheist is an oxymoron. maybe she’s reading too much hitchens 😉

when i came here on my blog reader i wasn’t sure what site i was on with all of these girly pics up!

Hemant, as for the oxymoron…I thought she was referring to “practicing atheist” (but, maybe that’s just how I read it.)

That’s how I read it, too, FWIW.

Hemant…you’re not going to start an atheist p0rn site, are you?!?!

From a female perspective, I think she’d make a pretty crappy spokesperson. I second Alycia’s sentiments!!!!

Hemant, your testosterone is showing. A spokesman like this is just what the fundies would expect. No moral sense.

Okay then – how about some equality. Let’s get a shockingly handsome, ripped, half-nekkid male spokesperson to make the female Christians swoon and convert. 😉

Hemant, is that you I hear volunteering?

I agree she was referring to “practicing atheism” not “Friendly Atheist.”

She’s hot?

I don’t think so, but I’ve never been a fan of the “anorexic tramp” look.

Is that last pic of her a promo for “Pineapple Express”, because she looks totally baked.

Oh, wait- those must be her “bedroom eyes”.

Two votes for Henry! I nominate David Cross as his vice spokesperson, but I have a thing for nerds of Jewish descent.

i agree with her – secularism needs a spokesperson, humanitarianism needs a spokesperson, atheism…nah. 2 reasons –

#1 – what are they gonna say? ‘it’s reasonable + rational to be an atheist, i promise i won’t eat your baby’ (repeat ad naseum)

#2 if secularism + humanitarianism (i.e. positions that are ‘for’ something, rather than a position that just states what you’re not into) were accepted widescale, atheism and religion could both be private matters.

gotta add that for me, atheism is only part of my identity, and primarily only addresses the fact i don’t believe in god/s. yes, like most, i decorate that belief with add-ons, but as my add-ons are not necessarily the same as anyone else’s, i’d be unhappy with anyone claiming to speak on my behalf. it’s enough that the occasional high-profiler’s out there, wish there were more, but hey…

@ HappyNat – rofl!

I have to agree with blackskeptic’s point. While I do realize the post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, the comments give me pause.

There is a problem and a danger with pushing sexuality to younger and younger girls, and I do believe that kids should be allowed to be kids. But this is an adult woman, not a child. If she wants to pose for some slightly sexy photos, that is her perogative.

Religion is all about repressing female sexuality – what on earth are we jumping on that bandwagon?

claire said:

Religion is all about repressing female sexuality – what on earth are we jumping on that bandwagon?

I agree with this completely.

Alycia, if people had confined themselves to “inappropriate spokesperson” I would be with you 100%, but they didn’t. One person used the word tramp, and as for your comments about her, they are definitely critical of her on-display sexuality and not of her (theoretical) lack of intellect.

While I will save my personal respect for the Danica McKellars of this world, not everyone has to be the same.

If Amber Heard wants to be the modern equivalent of a pin-up girl, I see no reason to criticize her for that. When she says or does something stupid or wrong, then that is a legitimate target for scorn, but until then, censuring her for these photos is just playing religion’s “female sexuality is dangerous and wrong” game.

Religion is all about repressing female sexuality – what on earth are we jumping on that bandwagon?

I agree. I don’t like that she has to “tramp” it up, and hump a beach ball, but, I don’t think we should look down on her for it or insult her. I read the interview she did, and she seems to be very articulate and intelligent. I like the fact that she is interested in reading and seeks to promote that. How many times do we read interviews with young stars and they talk about how much they love shopping, or friends, or “hanging out”, etc.
The problem is not with her, its with our society that promotes that this is what is important, this is what sells. Its a little unfair to ask a twenty year old to change the entire patriarchy. Maybe once she “makes it”, she can dictate the photo shoots and interviews, but I think at this point in her career she really can’t be too fussy.
Do I think its sad that Hemant has chosen her as his spokesperson, as opposed to Jessica Valenti, Amanda Marcotte, Jill Filipovic, or Naomi Wolfe? A little. Do I think he’s joking? Yes. Is it horny frat boy humor? Yes
Do I think Hemant thinks women should be skinny, made up, and humping beach balls in high heels? No.
I don’t think she’s repressing female intellect, as much as the society we live in does. I think a sexier picture would be her studying at the library (and not in a school girl outfit!). Or promoting charity work, advocating for world poverty, etc. I think she’s doing the best she can in the social construct she lives in.

One person used the word tramp, and as for your comments about her, they are definitely critical of her on-display sexuality and not of her (theoretical) lack of intellect.

If Amber Heard wants to be the modern equivalent of a pin-up girl, I see no reason to criticize her for that. When she says or does something stupid or wrong, then that is a legitimate target for scorn, but until then, censuring her for these photos is just playing religion’s “female sexuality is dangerous and wrong” game.

I didn’t mean my comment calling her a tramp to equate to female sexuality being dangerous. I like women who are confident enough to show their sexuality. I just think in the first three pictures she looks like a tramp. She has on enough eye makeup to paint a room in my house, while wearing ridiculously short shorts while humping a beach ball.

Not to mention she looks like she hasn’t eaten in a week (probably with some photoshop help) and this perpetuates the idea to young girls that they should look like her. What the media presents as attractive and sexy is unattainable by a large percentage of society. Images like this cause girls to starve themselves or hate the way they look and this aspect of it bothers me more than the “trampiness”.

I never said she shouldn’t be in the photos or we should wrap her in a burka. The pictures struck me as trampy and not at all attractive and I stated as much. She has the right to pose for them and I would never take that away from her or anyone.

HappyNat said:

I didn’t mean my comment calling her a tramp to equate to female sexuality being dangerous.

I got that, and you didn’t call her a tramp, and I did appreciate the difference. I just said that the word was used in reference to her look and added to the general tone of criticism. But you didn’t criticize her so much as a modern social trend, so I probably shouldn’t have used your comment as an example, and I apologize for that.

I have to say, I do know (and like) that not every guy thinks that that is the height of female attractiveness, and I have noticed that Angelina Jolie’s stock hasn’t dropped despite the fact that she keeps getting photographed in baggy khakis.

It’s just human nature – beautiful people get noticed, photographed, and a lot of attention. That won’t go away anytime soon.

Maybe that could be Hemant’s next contest: what male atheist can send in the hottest picture to be the future atheist spokesperson.

Are you volunteering? I think we may be able to get a calendar going. You in, Hemant? Oooohh, I wonder if we could get PZ and Dawkins in it too?

Great. Hemant is the new Perez.

She posed for some steamy pictures two or so years ago as well.

Link please.

(KIDDING!)

It must be cool to hate on skinny people now, because I see it an awful lot. How do you know she has an eating disorder? I guess she’s at fault for existing since her figure isn’t attainable by a large percentage of society. Her being alive makes others starve themselves and hate the way they look.

I don’t think it’s so much her existance as it is society’s obsession with her particular body-type that is the problem to which HapyNat is refering. As a young woman, I can tell you that seeing those pictures of her would have made me hate myself too, a few months ago. It can be very difficult for teenage girls to develop proper self-esteem when we are constantly bombarded with images like these and told that that’s the beauty standard.

Personally, I’d rather prefer to see the writings of a female contributor (someone with posting privileges) to Friendly Atheist to complement the male perspective given by Hemant, Richard, and Mike regardless of what she looks like. BTW, where has Richard been lately?

If you want to look at pretty scantily clad women (or men), there are plenty of other opportunities on-line. And yes, Amber is pretty and apparently smart as well. I wish her well.

It must be cool to hate on skinny people now, because I see it an awful lot. How do you know she has an eating disorder? I guess she’s at fault for existing since her figure isn’t attainable by a large percentage of society.

I never said she had an eating disorder and I never said it was her fault. The media puts women that look like this out there as a standard of what is attractive and it screws with girls/womens heads as they try an obtain this impossible (for most) standard. I get mad at the “machine” that creates these standards not the women themselves.

HappyNat,

I never said she had an eating disorder

No, you implied it.

Not to mention she looks like she hasn’t eaten in a week (probably with some photoshop help)

I don’t think so, but I’ve never been a fan of the “anorexic tramp” look.

As a 40 year old, slightly overweight, tired-looking mom I have found a new coping mechanism when I see women of any age who I deem to be a million times more attractive than me. I try to picture them without makeup. Seriously. Go to the bookstore and find a “makeover” book with before and after pictures. You will instantly feel better about yourself if you are insecure and have bought the hype that there are “perfect” women out there. I bet Amber isn’t nearly as hot without the help of hair and makeup artists.

Do I still sound bitter and jealous? 🙂

Wow. Who would’ve thunk that my silly little tongue in cheek post from a year ago would have generated this much discussion and animosity and – let’s be brutally honest with ourselves – stridently hysterical and silly comments about how the sky is falling because guys like me like to look at pretty girls like her.

Christ on a pogo stick, folks. Grow up already. At least the writer of the article seemed to get the humor in my original post, so there’s that at least.

…

Amber, if you’re following this conversation – which you probably aren’t, but what the heck, right? – you said in the article:

You have to love the irony—an organization based on the belief system of telling you not to believe in any organization based on belief systems…

1. Atheism isn’t an “organization”. It is a description. It describes a human being in whom god-belief (of any flavor) is absent. This is why we’re always carping on about how you can be both an agnostic and an atheist – at the same time. Wow! Pretty cool, huh?

2. Atheism is also not a “belief system”. See 1., above.

3. So, in light of 1. and 2. above, atheism (being a description, remember,) cannot “tell you to do” anything at all.

And now you’re beginning to see why we need a spokesmodel, Amber. Because we’re terrible at this social thing.

Oh, and Hemant may offer to be your own personal “Portable Atheist”, but I’d happily be your own Friendly Atheist any time. Heheheh…