Statement Of Findings Of Antisemitic Exvangelical Anti-Theist Harassment
There is a general pattern expressed by Culturally Christian atheists, specifically the Exvangelical Anti-Theist (EAT) subtype, in their interactions with the Jewish users on Tumblr and other social media sites. These individuals are extremely vocal anti-theistic atheists whose pattern of behavior shows that they are deeply acculturated with American Evangelical Protestant cultural beliefs and patterns. However, as a result, they exist in a state of deep internalized tension due to the innate contradictions between their acculturated behavior patterns and their current ideological belief systems. To reduce this tension, they externalize it by instigating conflicts with individuals identified as hostile critics so as to bolster their own certainty by dint of feeling attacked; parallels with the Evangelical method of reducing their own internal conflicts and bolstering in-group cohesion are to be expected due to acculturation.
Due to biases from their former Evangelical in-group, the most pertinent perceived hostile critics are typically Jewish individuals. Simply put, active Evangelicals are not going to pose a threat to the EAT’s self-image as having completely cut themselves off from Christianity due to Evangelical culture’s black-and-white outlook on apostasy. Conversely, Jewish individuals pointing out that the EAT is still part of a larger pattern of Christian hegemony can and will be seen as a threat to that self-image.
As a result, there is a typical, if broad, pattern of behavior that has emerged across multiple encounters with the type, broken down into the following steps:
Stage 1: Initial Encounter
Always initiated by the EAT, the initial encounter generally precedes the period of highest antagonism by several weeks to a month; the EAT finds posts by Jewish bloggers discussing Christian hegemony and the concept of Cultural Christianity, and reacts negatively. This reaction is typically limited to a few snide or dismissive remarks from the EAT that are only vaguely topical. If blocked, the EAT will move on to other bloggers with similar remarks until they either reach stage three independently, or find some victims to attach themselves to.
Stage 2: Quiet Belligerence
During this stage, the EAT will essentially stalk a handful of Jewish bloggers, taking screenshots, deliberately misinterpreting the statements and beliefs regarding the nature of Christian hegemony, and building a strawman in their head about the attitudes and outlooks of the Jewish bloggers. The EAT will convince themselves that the Jewish blogger(s) are personally antagonistic to atheists like themselves in the construction of this strawman, as well as drawing on various Culturally Christian antisemitic biases (attempting to paint Judaism as barbaric, backwards, or otherwise socially obsolete are popular, and have direct roots in Christian supercessionism). This stage will build until it reaches a threshold of belligerence and it is time to attack the strawman and the Jewish blogger openly.
It is unfortunately unknown if there is any method or strategies that can reach the EAT during this phase, but it seems unlikely. This is because this pattern is ultimately an emotional displacement action founded on the antisemitic biases and bigotries the EAT was acculturated with during their formative phases, in combination with the fact that their refusal to engage in self-examination and recognize their latent evangelical acculturation is making them lash out at people who suggest that such acculturation exists. As such, there is no avenue for Jewish bloggers to be able to treat the root cause.
At this stage, the EAT will openly attack the Jewish blogger(s) they have fixated on and built their strawman around, accusing them of conflating them with Christians, of hating them personally, of engaging in anti-atheist bigotry, and other such unfounded statements. The method by which this is done is typically in a reblog on one of the more popular posts from the blogger(s) and will not be pertinent--it will always be a derail.
EATs have shown a particular affinity for targeting posts talking about antisemitism experienced by the Jewish blogger, or speaking about the Holocaust or other large-scale antisemitic actions. The EAT will directly attack them with statements that typically take the form of “I don’t care about you because you persecute me/don’t care about me/don’t prioritize my personal comfort.” These are often combined with direct accusations of the Jewish blogger being personally anti-atheist in attitude, if not targeting the EAT directly. This leads, in many cases, to a degree of ironic humor, because the Jewish blogger very likely does not even remember the initial interaction, assuming they even noticed, so there is often a moment of “...who are you?” befuddlement from the Jewish blogger at the direct accusation of bias.
At least some EATs will send Asks directly instead of reblogs to initiate this stage, but it is less common.
In either case, no matter what the response is, the EAT will take that response as a personal attack and react accordingly to their strawman construct.
At this point, engaging with the EAT and their arguments in good faith is pointless, as they are not willing to listen, having spent weeks building up a strawman and are in no way willing to engage in good faith from their end. Blocking them immediately is advisable, but note that the EAT will either 1) immediately move onto the Judaism-related tags in general to attack as many Jewish bloggers as possible, or 2) create multiple sockpuppet blogs with which to attack the object of their fixation.
In either case, there will be a noted escalation of increasingly violent and hysterical language, frequently with overt antisemitic overtones, if not explicit statements of hatred (often made in the same paragraph or even same sentence as insisting that they don’t hate Jews). Rapidly shifting goalposts--often from immediately successive posts--are a typical feature as well, with statements made and then ignored when the intended victim did not react in the intended fashion according to their strawman construct.
The best thing to do is to remain calm and minimize engagement with the EAT while warning others at risk of sudden attack. Ignoring the EAT entirely is often counterproductive, as they wish to gain some emotional satisfaction from their attacks and will escalate until they gain something in that regard (sockpuppets sending explicit death threats and gore have been documented in the past), but responding in kind will simply vindicate their persecution complex.
It is best to remain as calm as possible during this stage, and frame all responses in a tone of “sorrow, not anger”. Openly pitying the individual seems to work best at deflating their anger, likely as this does not follow the mental script that they were rehearsing, but has been known to incite further escalations of rage. However, this can also be useful in its own regard, so use advisedly.
Another tactic is dispassionately pointing out the general parallels with Evangelical behavior, although this typically escalates things. It can be helpful, though, as it pushes the EAT towards emotional burnout, ending the stage faster than it might otherwise have.
Typically this stage lasts less than 24 hours, and is typically followed either by deletion or abandonment of the blog within 12 to 24 hours, or with further attempts at engagement, reverting to Stage 1.
Nearly identical patterns of behavior are also exhibited by Evangelicals in their own harassment of Jewish bloggers, including engaging entirely with a strawman, rapidly shifting goalposts, insisting that they “love Jews” despite every bit of evidence to the contrary, expressing a sense of personal victimhood from the Jewish person’s abstract/general statements, quotemining Jewish texts from a Christian perspective, personal attacks, and the general pattern of rapid escalation.
There is also a distinct similarity/parallel between the EAT’s vehemence at being associated with Christianity, and an Evangelical’s vehemence at being associated with Catholicism, however tangentially. Indeed, the only major difference in behavior is that the Evangelical insists that Judaism is obsolete because of Christian supersessionism, while the EAT insists that Judaism is obsolete because it is (to them) theistically identical with Christianity.
There is, unfortunately, no way to stop Exvangelical Anti-Theists from engaging in this pattern of behavior; they come from a Christian background that is deeply antisemitic and carry that with them when they leave. Furthermore, they adamantly refuse to engage in any degree of personal self-examination regarding their biases and personal patterns of behavior, and this particular pattern of behavior is instigated by the merest suggestion that they should do so. In short, they’ve rejected Jesus as their Personal Lord and Savior and that is where they stop, despite insisting that they’ve completely divorced themselves from their roots.
