Atheist Writers

Members: 306
Latest Activity: Jan 21

Writing's Cool

So yeah.... discuss.

If your posting/writing contains explicit sex or erotica, please note that in the post title or the first line of the post. All discussions on A/N are open to all members, including minors and some prudes like me who blush too easily. Thanks in advance.

Discussion Forum

Corporate Fatwa

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jan 21. 0 Replies


Started by Don. Last reply by Stephen Goldin Aug 22, 2014. 3 Replies

Upcoming New Book putting God on Trial

Started by Ravi Morey. Last reply by tom sarbeck Jun 19, 2013. 1 Reply

I've Just Published a New Book, the "Freethought Resource Guide"

Started by Mark Vandebrake. Last reply by Michael B. Paulk May 26, 2013. 1 Reply

Is anyone working on anything?

Started by Joe Fausnight. Last reply by Milan Elesin Jan 31, 2013. 47 Replies

Is it too over the top?

Started by Ted E Bear. Last reply by Alan Michael Wilt Jan 21, 2013. 2 Replies

writing from musical flow

Started by michele ricketts. Last reply by Craig A. James Sep 22, 2012. 1 Reply

Book review blogs?

Started by Stifyn Emrys. Last reply by Cyle O'Donnell Sep 18, 2012. 1 Reply

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Atheist Writers to add comments!

Comment by Rich Goss on June 6, 2009 at 6:18pm
Radiation and drugs are known to be able to cause genetic mutations or rearrangements. An interesting coincidence of history, speaking of Hitler, is that methamphetamine was discovered in the 1933, the year he became Chancellor of Germany. His personal doctor, Dr. Morel, was experimenting with the stuff and wound up giving the Fuehrer a little pick-me-up cocktail. It gave him energy and made him feel dynamic and invulnerable. Sadly, by the time of the bomb at the Wolfsschanze in July, ’44, the meth had just about driven him insane. Millions of people had to die because of it.

Meth is psychotropic but doesn’t affect the genetic material. If it did my supposition would be plausible.

Angie, being in the company of Mel Brooks, who wrote The Producers ain't too bad.
Comment by Angie Jackson on June 6, 2009 at 5:20pm
Pansy Hitler... wait, anyone seen the Producers with Gene Wilder? They sort of covered that...
Comment by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on June 6, 2009 at 4:59pm
The important thing, Richard, is that you have attempted this difficult task. No-one else has, as far as I know.

You paint an intriguing picture of Hitler as a pansy. I had to laugh.
Comment by Rich Goss on June 6, 2009 at 4:19pm
Rosemary, I want to thank you for your interest in my writing, I admit that I didn't want the sex theme to run away. It was very difficult for me to express the worldview and sexual appetite of a woman. But Dawkins' selfish gene theory required that I see it through.

I thought the hawk/dove dichotomy was interesting. Can you imagine what history would be like if genes flipped so capriciously as they do in MR? I can picture Hitler becoming an effeminate pansy right after the Nazis invaded Russia.

Fun stuff to contemplate.
Comment by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on June 6, 2009 at 3:51pm

Ah, but I wasn't brought up Catholic! I never had any reason to think of non-reproductive sex as "sinful". And never did! OTOH, I got tied up with the usual Fundie nonsense about "fornication" being bad, just because it was. I overcame that one before I lost my religious beliefs. It made sense be forbid fornication in a society with no way of preventing pregnancy because the outcome was often horrid for the woman, the child and any guy who had the misfortune to be found out. The advent of reliable contraception blew that argument out of the water. I could be responsible and enjoy myself. No problem. Very ethical.

My problem with your character is that she is rather irresponsible at times. Or at least niave. As I think I said in an earlier comment on your book (or at least thought it), the female character is more like a male fantasy of how it might be. It grates on me for that reason. I suspect, but have no proof, that other women may also feel this way.

In other words, don't be so quick to assume that criticism of the book is based on your atheist world view. It may well be based on your masculine one!

Comment by Rich Goss on June 6, 2009 at 3:12pm
Rosemary, Non-reproductive is considered sinful. This makes no sense at all, except with a memetic interpretation that the memeplex needs to replicate. Tight knit, extended, patriarchal families are the best way for vertical transition (father to son) of the memetic information.

Just to explain some my preoccupation with sex, the story is an allegory of Dawkins' The Selfish Gene. Suppose what he dubs the “coy/fast gene” reversed due to chemical contamination and corruption of chromosomal nucleotide sequences.

Cynthia was a good girl from a well-to-do, tight family— shy, modest and family oriented. Pre-mirror reversal, she said, "I'm not that kind of girl," quite a few times in her life. But suppose a chemical managed to reverse the alleles. As shy as she was before the mirror reversal, that's how coquette, immodest, teasing and swinging she becomes.

How would this genetic flip change her life? She becomes a completely different person.
Comment by Woody Bass on June 6, 2009 at 2:34pm
Oops... Thanks Angie... didnt post the link to my site of ramblings:
Comment by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on June 6, 2009 at 2:00pm

To be honest, but not intending to be rude, I have some problems with the way Mirror Reversal treats non-reproductive sex.

Yet I am an atheist who doesn't care a f-ck whether the book has "anti-religious themes"
And I a woman who is all for lots of non-reproductive sex. That is how I got pregnant. One very remote chance was all it took. :-)
Comment by Angie Jackson on June 6, 2009 at 1:39pm
Hmm.. Maybe I should put something in the above group description asking that erotica/sex be noted in the title of the post. We do have some minors (or at least, the group is open to them) and while I'm not still Christian I am still a prude. Sorry!
Comment by Rich Goss on June 6, 2009 at 12:54pm
Rosemary, I didn't know my website was rated X, but it's just as well. Definitely Mirror Reversal is not for kids. One retired marine wrote an Amazon review highly indignant of my descriptions of non-reproductive sex. "Not worth the paper it's written on," said the commandant in a sally of imagination.

This intellectual with stripes couldn’t admit he was offended by the book’s anti-religious themes, but felt compelled to attack me for amoral preoccupation with sex, which was essential to the storyline.


Am I familiar with the Peter Principal? I just lived through eight years of President Bush.

Members (304)



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service