Polyamory and apologies at the 83rd American Humanist Association Conference

Report by David Warden

I was thrilled to be able to attend the 83rd American Humanist Association Conference over the weekend of 14 and 15 September from the comfort of my own sitting room in Bournemouth, UK. Unfortunately, because of the time zone difference and other distractions, I was only able to attend a small number of sessions. But the ones I did attend turned out to be dramatic in different ways.

The Visibility of “Invisible” Disabilities – Rebecca Finch Vitsmun

The first session I attended was on the topic of “invisible disabilities”. The speaker pointed out that the phrase “hidden disabilities” is preferable to “invisible disabilities”. It acknowledges that, while such disabilities may not be immediately apparent to others, they are still very much present and real to the person experiencing them. Moreover, their effects may be apparent, if not the underlying cause. For example, a person suffering from fibromyalgia is likely to experience fatigue and exhaustion. Its cause, the condition itself, and the chronic pain associated with it, may be “hidden” but some of its effects, such as the need for rest, will be apparent. It can be very helpful to know about the underlying disability which a person is trying to manage so that we can respond with understanding and accommodation rather than ignorance and judgement.

There are a huge number of such “hidden disabilities”, affecting millions of people. They include chronic illnesses such as diabetes, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Multiple Sclerosis and Crohn’s Disease; mental health conditions such as depression, PTSD, and OCD; neurological conditions including epilepsy, autism spectrum disorder, ADHD and dyslexia; and sensory disabilities including sight and hearing loss.

Understanding that disabilities can be hidden is essential for creating an inclusive environment. People with hidden disabilities may require accommodations, such as flexible working hours, quiet workspaces, or access to rest areas. Awareness helps reduce stigma, improves support, and fosters empathy and understanding for people with disabilities that are not immediately apparent.

Reimagining Relationships and Destigmatizing Non-Monogamy, presented by Mim Chapman, Michelle Hy, Kevin Patterson, Valerie White, Alan MacRobert

This session was essentially about polyamory and “the poly community”. Each presenter spoke frankly and courageously about their personal story of liberation from traditional monogamous relationships. Michelle Hy explained that, as a “solo poly” and “relationship anarchist”, she did not live with any of her partners – an arrangement which worked well for her. Kevin Patterson explained that, for him, it started with a threesome which led to a greater sense of self-realisation. He frankly acknowledged that, yes, there was jealousy at times, but he explained his growing “emotional literacy” in being able to confront and understand his emotions. For further reading, he mentioned The Ethical Slut: A Practical Guide to Polyamory, Open Relationships, and Other Freedoms in Sex and Love (2017) by Janet W. Hardy and Dossie Easton.

Nicole Carr, Deputy Director of the American Humanist Association, apologised for the session on social justice approaches to teaching and learning

America at the Crossroads: Social Justice Approaches to Teaching and Learning, presented by Dr Tabia Lee

One of the attendees at this session described it as a “train wreck”. From the first few minutes, I was very pleased to see that the American Humanist Association Conference had included a speaker who was prepared to dissent from the prevailing progressive orthodoxy, as embodied in such questionable theories as Critical Race Theory. It soon became apparent, however, that most of the attendees were horrified as the session unfolded. Comments in the chat included the following:

These are right-wing talking points. It's fear-mongering and hurtful.

WTF?

I didn't expect to hear a classical liberal perspective on DEI and social justice at an AHA conference

Nicole please stop this

Nicole please stop this second

This isn't a remotely accurate description of what's going on in American public schools

I say we all leave

I never expected to hear TERF talking points at an AHA conference

Was this talk approved in its current format? [official answer: No]

Leaving

Is there no one just able to press the stop button?

Obviously, we have mistakenly platformed this speaker and Fish Stark (Executive Director) will have more to say at the end of this talk (Nicole Carr – moderator)

AHACON has been infiltrated

Should we chalk this up to listening to all sides?

I've never been able to look away from a train wreck. I'm sticking around for the recovery effort.

I don't know how much more I can listen to.

My dog needs a walk.

Freethinking at its best.

Cut her mic.

Fish Stark, Executive Director of AHA, cancelled the Q&A session in order to explain what had happened.

From my perspective as a humanist who dissents from many of the dogmas of contemporary progressivism (often described as “wokeism”), Dr Lee was presenting an interesting alternative to “Critical Justice” approaches to education which, she asserted, promotes contested ideas such as that “America is irretrievable rooted in White supremacy” and that “Systemic racism is baked into American society and is the cause of every disparity”. She outlined an alternative approach which she called "Classical/Empowered Social Justice" which claims that “America was founded on and rooted in the aspirational goals of fairness and equality for all”, and that “Racism is not the cause of every disparity”. She referenced Helen Pluckrose, a British humanist writer I respect, and Coleman Hughes, a black US writer and YouTuber who has written a compelling book called The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America (2024). What seemed to have enraged many of the attendees was Dr Lee’s referencing of right-wing and Christian Nationalist advocacy groups. It is worth noting that Dr Lee herself appeared to be Black or of mixed heritage.

Dr Lee went on and on, apparently oblivious to the gathering storm in the chat. Perhaps she was aware and decided the best policy was to keep calm and carry on. At the end, Executive Director Fish Stark intervened to stop the Q&A and to explain to the attendees what had gone wrong. Dr Lee complained about this disrespectful intervention.

Later that day, I received the following email:

As the organizers of AHACON24 we wanted to follow up on the America at the Crossroads: Social Justice Approaches to Teaching and Learning session. Dr. Lee's talk doesn't represent the views of the AHA. We weren't aware of the content of her talk beforehand, and that was a mistake on our part. While we're not against inviting speakers who have opposing views from ours, it won't surprise most of our members when we say say we wouldn't have knowingly invited someone to share resources from Christian Nationalist organizations like the Family Resource Council without providing a strong counterpoint and making clear that their views are distinct from ours. We will do better in the future, and hope this does not keep you from enjoying the rest of the sessions at AHACON24.

I subsequently emailed Nicole Carr and Fish Stark to say that I was delighted that the AHA had had the courage and open-mindedness to invite a speaker with a view that dissents from [what Professor Eric Kaufmann calls] cultural socialism and reverts to approach based on Enlightenment liberalism and common humanity... So please do not apologise for bringing diverse viewpoints into the AHA conference. I then had a very cordial and productive exchange of emails with Fish Stark, who reassured me that the AHA is open to opposing views as long as they are presented in such a way that they do not imply that they are the views of the AHA.

I attended two more sessions, one by Kevin Bolling on “Conservative Threats to Public Education: Safeguarding the Future of Our Schools”, which provided a counterweight to Dr Lee's talk, and “The Progressive Parent: Harnessing Science and Social Justice to Raise the Next Generation of Humanists”

by scientist journalist Kavin Senapathy. Senapathy’s talk horrified me because of its promulgation of a kind of progressive catechism, including such “facts” as that there are “more than two sexes” and that “we should believe in the undeniable findings of science”. There was absolutely no pushback in the chat this time. I'd like Richard Dawkins to be invited to debate the “more than two sexes” nostrum but unfortunately he was cancelled by the American Humanist Association some years ago for questioning progressive dogmas about transgenderism. I'd also like to see a philosopher of science cautioning humanists about the dangers of placing too much faith in the “undeniable findings of science” which is an example of scientism rather than science.

I do think that the American Humanist Association has been ideologically captured by a kind of fundamentalist belief in progressivism. When I put this to Fish Stark, he explained:

“Humanism for generations has produced thinkers who tend to be on the more progressive edge of American thought and leadership. This is not a recent development. That’s not to say that people who apply humanism to their own lives and end up with a different political identity are wrong for doing so; freedom of conscience is and should be an important part of our shared beliefs. But we Americans live in an era of dual political tribalism, much as we may wish it weren’t so, and it’s not surprising to me that the majority of a group of people whose beliefs are inherently bound up with preserving secular government tends to end up in the ‘tribe’ that is committed to protecting it and not the ‘tribe’ that has promised to tear it down.”

It may not be surprising, and I do understand the problems of extreme polarisation in America, but I believe that humanism needs to rise above factionalism and tribalism. Humanism needs to be part of the solution to polarisation and tribalism rather than allowing itself to get dragged into it. I hope this is not a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I may have earned a reputation for tribalism myself, but my ideal is to be non-binary in my political thinking, because I believe that there is humanistic value in all moderate political philosophies, including conservatism. If politics descends into a Manichean war of good versus evil then democracy itself will have given way to cultural warfare. In fact, we are already there. Humanists can, and should, be part of the solution. At the very least, they should be able to critically question today’s progressive catechism which has become so unhinged from reason, science, and our common humanity.

AHA’s State of Humanism 2024 videos

https://youtu.be/z26QogYlg4c

https://youtu.be/QNy8gGvP70s

https://youtu.be/D_3JgfKrX9g