This is not simply from personal observation but from statistical studies that women are far less likely than men to be atheist. I wonder why this is and wanted some of your opinions??
I don't mean to jump into some stereotypical conclusions so I wanted to see what others thought. One thought that jumped to mind is maybe one factor may be the fact that women are more emotional creatures and use more of the emotional centers of their brain than men? And we know one powerful component of religion is not due to rational factors but to emotional factors..
Epiphenom has had a series of blog posts on why women ARE more religous
thank you :)
"Fewer" atheist women. Not "less." ;-)
Sorry for grammar. :) It is early in morning! 6:45 AM here now!
To the extent that it may be true (that atheists are more often men than women), this may be another consequence of the repressive influences worldwide upon women of patriarchal societies, wherein females are taught from an early age to consider all male authorities their superiors in every way. So women, in general, may be less apt to deny or resist the authoritative word of religious leaders, who are almost always men. Men, on the other hand, frequently rebel against "the father" or against authorities whose dogmatic dictates they may suspect are misleading or false.
I'm going to nitpick the use of the word "apt" here, at the risk of being smacked down :-) Doesn't "apt" sort of imply innate ability? Or is it just my read on the word? I would have preferred a different word to indicate learned ability but I am at a loss for words: "less likely" perhaps? "Less socially skilled"? Maybe the word apt is perfectly fine and I'm reading too much into it.
But asides from that, yes, excellent point. Patriarchal system have a lot to do with women's attitudes as well as men's attitudes towards pretty much everything in society.
Now you've asked for it, Adriana. No, "apt" means "having a habitual tendency or inclination" or "likely," as in: "This species is apt to be found in shallower waters." Another meaning is "suited to its purpose," or "fitting."
I accept that definition, of course, but I still don't like the species in shallow waters example, because that biology. I was trying to get away from a possible implication that there is something biological behind the fact that women are less likely to challenge the patriarchy or authority.
OK, I see your hesitation. That sort of aptitude is common to biology, because it's fitting, but it helps to keep in mind that a particular aptitude doesn't have to have a biological cause. In this case the aptitude is sociological, I'm sure, or culturally imposed.
But now you have let the genie out of the bottle. There is an implication that women are less likely to challenge the patriarchy because of biology and evolutionary history. Now that you have brought it up, what are you going to do about it?
Research it, of course!
Women may be less likely to challenge authority, but oh, when they do, they change the world!