Bart Meltzer has resigned from the Board Of Directors. He wrote a long letter of resignation, taking full blame for the snowball effect that led to Ellen’s departure, and stating that it was about power and control. He obviously feels terrible — I can only imagine what this has done to his relationship with Ellen.An exerpt follows:
This is my formal resignation from the board of directors of American Atheists, Inc. and United Secularists of America. I can no longer serve on the boards because of the events that have transpired leading to the departure of Ellen Johnson.Specifically, I was the instigator to Ellen?s departure and caused irreparable damage to the organization and pain and suffering to Ellen and her family. Because of my own self interests, I tried to stop Ellen from doing the Bill Moore walk. Yes, I was concerned for Ellen?s safety but initially I also refused to work with Ellen to try and make this walk as safe as I could. I just wanted Ellen not to do this walk and I refused to listen to her plea to help make this walk safe.That?s what Ellen asked me to do when we first discussed this on the morning of March 6th, 2008. ?Help me make this walk safe? was Ellen?s exact request. I replied that there was no way to make a two week walk safe. Maybe there was no way to eliminate all the risks, but making it a little safer is exactly what I wound up doing anyway. So I should have just done that from the start. The Bill Moore walk WAS a noble cause for Atheism and American Atheists, albeit a dangerous one. However, it did not turn out to be as dangerous as I thought it would.The other (not so minor) issue is that I tried to ?Control? Ellen. I incorrectly assumed that I had that privilege because of our relationship, I was on the board, and this was a safety issue. I tried to force Ellen not to do something she had already made plans to do. I don?t know that I did this intentionally to control Ellen but I did it just the same. Intentional or not, it was wrong.
I can’t say his departure is a surprise to me, and I can’t say it’s the wrong thing to do (it isn’t). However, I think it’s a bit of an overstatement to say this one incident (the Bill Moore March) caused the firing. There were a lot of problems here, and most of them still exist. The Moore March was the final straw. All in my opinion — just applying logic to a very emotional situation.
For Smartgal:
FYI, though you may think so, you don’t have the monopoly on feminist issues. And name-dropping (”Betty used to say”) is indicative of (maybe) an insecurity issue. Though you seem to know a lot about AA, it would be so much more productive to offer some worthy suggestions to this group of bloggers.
Tarma:
Good suggestions. I’m new to all this, and appreciate all that I’m learning about this very necessary but obviously troubled organization. Maybe now that everyone has vented, bloggers will move on to suggestions which might work, and finding a way to get the Board to say more about what the problems were/are. Then members, who are obviously interested and invested, can offer their suggestions and advice.
nancyjensen1213,
Well, I am certainly new to all this exposure to the behind-the-scenes workings of the organization. Having retired a couple of years ago from a nonprofit with a few eerily similar problems, I’ve been both bemused and somewhat alarmed to keep hearing more and more disappointing details leak out. It can all be turned around, however. Of that I am certain.
I’ve stated several times that the best thing about AA is this blog. There are many intelligent, experienced, and caring people posting here. Hopefully the board is taking notice.
Tarma:
I agree with you…this is a group of very bright, motivated, and invested individuals who can offer what they’ve learned from their life-experiences and advice/guidance in this struggle.
You’ve had experience with non-profit organizations, Smartgal is in publishing (maybe she can offer her voluntary services to the magazine) and I’ve had a psychology practice for the past 22 years. Surely some of us can offer our ideas, based on our experience, to assist in this new transition, whatever it may be, going forward.
I do think, as you do, that the organization should focus on what it needs most…getting new members and money to invest in staffing, as a start. I’m amazed at what the board paid Ellen, who obviously worked very hard.
My Apologies for any confusion caused by my use of the acronym AAI when referring to American Atheists Inc. It is the same acronym used by American Atheists Inc in it’s Constitution and ByLaws and after reading through the American Atheists Inc. Constitution recently, the acronym used in it’s content stuck in my head.
I should have seen that AAI could be confused for Atheist Alliance International. (Or Arab American Institute, Adam Aircraft Industry, or Acute Alcohol Intoxication depending on what circles you run in)
I’ll be sure to use “AA” in the future when referring to American Atheists on this blog.
I hope that people such as Tarma, will offer lessons learned from other organizations to improve AA.
SecularMan,
Every time I use “AA” I think of Alcoholics Anonymous. Definitely not a good association
First,
Would anyone who has ever threatened to quit the organization unless they get their way please quit now. We need your $35 a lot less than we need some unity, rational discourse, and civility.
Second,
Those of you getting into ad homenim high school flame wars must be amusing to the xians who monitor this site. If there were atheist commandments, one of them would need to be thou shalt argue logically no matter what!
Third,
David is probably right about how a conflict of interest underlies this whole issue. Let me add that if there was not such a shortage of people willing to do the hard work, AA wouldn’t have to enlist whole families. So quit leaving emotional nasty-grams on this blog and get to work doing something productive!
I think it was courageous of Bart to let us all in on his personal turmoil regarding the situation. Resigning was the correct thing to do. I also think it would be very uncomfortable for Ellen to remain on the board after being fired in such a manner. I like both Ellen and Bart. I wonder what this has done to their personal relationship together. Whatever endeavors they pursue after this, I wish them success. They will be an asset to any organization.
At this point in time the board needs our constructive observations and suggestions. Everybody has vented, now it is time to get back to the work of Atheist activism.
I think on any forum, personal attacks between posters are not productive. We are all adults, so act like one.
Acute Alcohol Intoxication or Alcoholics Anonymous. Either way we’re a bunch of drunks…
Chris B:
Unity around what? An organization lead by dishonest and incompetent people?
I quit because the handling of this situation was unbelievably poor. AA’s members were lied to and then told to sit down and shut up (that this hasn’t outraged some of you is baffling to me).
It’s been over a month since Ellen’s firing was announced and there haven’t been any signs of progress. Aside from Bart, there haven’t been any apologies for mistakes made. There hasn’t even been a single sign that AA is heading in the right direction. I’m done waiting.
Smartgal would be a heathen.
Personally, I would prefer to see new leadership including changes to the Board that would result in a more open, more professional, and less “family-run” type non-profit.
I truly applaud and appreciate the job that Ellen and the Board have so passionately performed. However, every group eventually becomes less effective and even dysfunctional over a long period in time. It’s just a fact based upon the dynamics of group behavior.
Reading this blog, it’s obvious that there’s too much baggage associated with the current leadership to expect that they can work together effectively.
Being a member for just three years, I don’t know who might make a good President or Board member; however, I believe news ideas and voices are needed. I hope the Board is wise enough to recognize that changes are needed and that they themselves might need to step down.
I hope that Ellen, Bart, and any others that leave the organization continue to support it and provide their advice to the new leadership. I also hope to see more civility among the membership and on this blog.
Chris B,
While I don’t disagree with all your commandments (that is what you had in mind correct?) and, I may even agree with most at least in principle. However, it is difficult for me to take your commandments seriously without actually seeing your method in action for a few months. Why not engage the christians that show up here for a year, show us how it should be done. Personally, I won’t be giving the christians any undeserved respect until I evaluate your results.
My reasoning is that, in my experience, christians don’t care about truth, they don’t care about civility. As long as they are not being dragged in the mud and their fantasy isn’t being laughed at, they will continue along, pushing theocracy on the United States. They will continue with their march to make their jeebus cum by bringing destruction upon the world.
But, if you have a way to clean the cobwebs out of their brains, by all means, lets see it in action. However, I think your way was attempted first and, well, here we are.
Courage is when a man stands up in a crowd of finger-pointers and takes responsibility without raising his finger.
http://www.nagornyy.com/?p=119
I’m getting tired of this drama, we need to get back on the track.
AA needs to implement new rule: No fraternization between board members and AA employees!
v1k
v1k
Chris B
You’re either with us or you’re against us? I think we have all seen where that gets us. What has been called for, by those of us who will quit if not satisfied, is openness. Slowly the openness is trickling down. I’m giving AA until mid June then I will make my decision to support AA or not. That decision will be based entirely upon the question of openness.
What is it about the word “misogyny” that drives so many people crazy, both men and women, and brings down on my head a lot of insults from total strangers saying I am obviously obssessed, “insecure,” paranoid, whatever. If you look in Webster’s Collegiate misogyny just means “hatred of women.”
Wait a minute. Maybe that IS too strong.
What I am referring to in the case of Board vs. Ellen Johnson is not really hatred of women but the fact that this whole incident probably would have gone differently had Ellen been male. Bart’s Knight-in-Shining-Armor attitude toward Ellen, trying to keep her from the Freedom Walk to “save” her, certainly would not have happened if she’d been male.
If Ellen had been, say, a male buddy of Bart’s and he had said to Bart, “I am determined to do the Freedom walk and rather than trying to dissuade me, help me make it safer,” I’m sure Bart would have replied to his male friend, “Sure, Buddy, let’s do that.” Bart did not take Ellen seriously when she said that.
However, I’m not sure the Board would have acted differently toward Ellen had she been Allen instead of Ellen, not at that point. Where the Board erred in acting in a sterotypically gender-deprecating way was in not meeting with her for one of those man-to-man over-golf or a beer talks about the president’s intentions and his thinking about the Freedom Walk.
What threw me into that gender-bias frame of mind was Ellen’s initial email message to me saying, “Oh, the Board does not listen to me.” She said it casually, like, oh yeah, that’s the way it’s always been. I identified with that because, as all you women out there know, women are NOT listened to.
That’s why I brought up the gender gap thing (I’m abandoning the word “misogyny” as of this minute)and that’s why I name-dropped Betty and Gloria. Hey, I could have thrown in Ti-grace and Kate but, nah, let’s not go overboard.
Now guys, let’s do the manly thing and BRING ELLEN BACK. Real men can, and do, reverse themselves.
SG-
I’m glad to see that you’re going to tone down the feminazi rhetoric. “Misogyny” is too strong a word for the animosity created between the sexes by the unrealistic goals of feminism.
Having said that, I must now state that my respect for Ellen has diminished. I’m so out-of-the-loop that I wasn’t aware of this problematic union between her and Bart.
“Madelyn was president when (her son) John was on the board”.
Madelyn and John weren’t engaged in a sexual relationship. I have no problem with arguing w/ my mother and it has absolutely no impact on my sex life.
Were I in her shoes, I’D have known better than to risk my credibility by forming an intimate relationship w/ a board member. Atheist women may be scarce, but atheist men can be found OUTSIDE THE OFFICE.
I’d like to say that I can almost sympathize w/ Bart, but his actions harmed the organization – so I can’t.
Ellen may be a prize, but I’m not so sure about Bart.
Smartgal,
I think the word “chauvinist” (3rd definition via m-w.com)is a better description for what you have previously referred to as mysoginist.
Smartgal,
That seems like a leap to a conclusion. Any chance you could email Ellen back and ask her to clarify her original statement? A charge of sexism would certainly be more convincing if it came from Ellen, though it would still take more than that to convince me.
Misogyny, as it is displayed in the Bible, as it is practiced in Iran, as it was found in the polygynous society in Texas are varying degrees of the imbalance between men and women in this world. To use the same word to describe the stoning to death of women for not wearing a burkha by men and the use of the affectionate word ?Sweetie,? toward a woman by say, Barack Obama, is to create a problem rather than try to solve it. This is what you have done, Smartgal, and why so much of the text on this blog, including my own, has been wasted on the least important of issues. Not that it isn?t important. As a former ?male chauvinist pig,? I can say with assurance that some semblance of stereotypical attitude is probably resident in all of us toward the opposite sex, (Yes, even those who are so quick to cast stones, Smartgal).
But the kind of chauvinist I was after being raised by a submissive woman in the 1930s, and observing the attitudes and behaviors of the men around me, is a far cry from the husband and father of three competent and assertive women who are my wife and daughters today. I have learned a lot about the abuses of men toward women, and fortunately, changed most of them in myself. . . but most certainly, not all (You?d have to ask my wife and daughters for a more balanced view of that). It is likely that humans never will divest themselves of every trace of unfair or inappropriate attitudes of one sex toward the other. But I think that people like me, who are aware of our limitations and attempt to overcome them, are far more likely to have something of value to contribute to a discussion than those who choose to introduce incendiary epithets into a conflict and thereby divert the energy from where it should be directed.
I want Ellen to be reinstated. That has nothing to do with my attitudes towards women. Some other men may not want her reinstated. That may have nothing to do with their attitudes towards women. Even your semantic softening to ?chauvinism? may contribute little or nothing to a possible solution.
All this finger pointing and baseless accusations of misogyny reeks of gender insecurity. If Ellen wasn’t of European descent, there would probably be somebody trying to play the race card and scream “racism”.
I have yet to see “SmartGal” provide any evidence for her misogyny theory. All we have is a constant deluge of emotional accusations and the argument that since Ellen is a woman, anything negative said or done to her was a gender based attack because she has a vagina, followed by name calling and bickering over the subject.
If there is no proof or evidence, stop making empty accusations and allow people to discuss the future of the organization.
The simplest way to break down the problem with the information provided is that there was a conflict between the board and president over control and responsibilities. The President was also in a romantic relationship with a board member, who was also in charge of state & regional directors- who created conflicts & problems of control over the president, the head quarters office, and the board. These issues combined led to a snowballing of problems and the boards decision to dismiss Ellen. If this summary can be corrected or made more understandable, please do so and then lets work together on resolving the current situation and accomplishing the goals of the organization (by contacting the board via email) – without the distractions and red herrings of gender flame wars on a public blog.
Oy, all this arguing is truly misplaced. I apologize for everything: for noticing the hanging periods, for the misogyny, for citing Betty & Gloria, all of it. I think you are all nice people, and some of you are very smart, except for those who do not want Ellen reinstated.
I even think Tarpits has a way with words and she has made me laugh with that Kitty, Kitty, Kitty. (Tarpit, I got the name “Smartgal” because I objected to the original handle that someone gave me: “Cutegal.” Play with that for a while.)
The only thing I really want is for ELLEN TO COME BACK. I don’t care if Bart is on the Board. I don’t care if Ellen wants to run in the Indy 500. I JUST WANT HER TO COME BACK AND RUN AA. I WAS PROUD TO HAVE ELLEN REPRESENT ME AND ALL ATHEISTS. ELLEN DOESN’T BELONG TO THE BOARD, SHE BELONGS TO HISTORY. PLEASE, DIRECTORS, SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE AND BRING HER BACK. THIS IS A GOOD WOMAN, A COMPETENT WOMAN, A DEDICATED WOMAN. HER EMPLOYEES LOVE HER. THE MEMBERS LOVE HER ). We need Ellen to come back.
Karen wrote:
“The conflict of interest comes in with having a Board member being a loved one or family member of the President,”
Apparently you do not realize that Frank Zindler’s wife is on the Board of AA and has been for years.
She has not, to the best of my knowledge, resigned, now that Frank is the new president.
When it comes to conflict of interest charges, don’t you think that what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
I rest my case when it comes to the M word.
Smartgal,
Y’know, I honestly had every intention of staying out of this nonsense, but there you go again. Having two members of a family on the same board is NOT a conflict of interest, no matter their position on the board. It is quite common, especially in small organizations. It was the case in the nonprofit organization where I was employed for 20 years. Perfectly kosher.
The problem is with a board member’s relationship with the CEO (in AA’s case, the “president” and in the organization I worked for, the “executive director” – same job description) who is employed by (is hired and fired by) the board.
It is NOT the same situation.
Apparently not, but whatever floats your boat.
That’s TARMA (sword-sworn of the Shin’a'in and most kick-ass women’s rights defender ever) to you. Google it if you’re not familiar.
I am sure you are an intelligent and accomplished woman, but not everything in life has to be driven by and infused with the M word. If that is your experience, then I am truly sorry.
Sorry folks. Nuf said.
Chris B.
“Those of you getting into ad homenim high school flame wars must be amusing to the xians who monitor this site. If there were atheist commandments, one of them would need to be thou shalt argue logically no matter what!”
From a Christian who’s reading this, nah. What I see and what I would hope other Christians would see is a bunch of passionate people acting human. If there are fellow Christians out there reading this and getting a kick out of it then they’re petty, small and need a real hobby.
smartgal,
The problem here is not that you’re trying to raise awareness of a problem, it’s that you’re doing it by making so-far baseless accusations.
How many times have you been asked to back up your claims only to counter with a coincident or a personal feeling?
This is not even close to the truth. There is a wide difference between entertaining the idea that Ellen’s removal may have been motivated by sexism and stating it as truth. In the absence of any evidence (again, do you have any yet?), we have to conclude that that difference is a result of you making a leap to conclusion rather than a mere difference in perspective.
You may very well be right, but until you actually prove your case you should not be surprised that you are regarded as a nutcase.
By my (possibly faulty) count, this is the first time you’ve mentioned “considering” sexism. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’ve certainly considered it.
All this whining is only making us less likely to listen to you. Your time would be better spent asking Ellen to make a statement to back you up, or looking for other evidences of past sexist behavior on the part of the various board members.
So? What’s your point? The general case of sexism is not going to be made by individual examples. You should know better than that.
Anthony Flew was a famous scientist who used to be an atheist, but he became a theist. Therefore, theism makes more sense than atheism.
Tar pits, I agree with you about it being OK to have a family member on the Board–but others on this blog DON’T agree with you. Several people have commented on the “conflict of interest” that was allegedly there when Bart was on the board.
All I’m saying is, OK, you feel that way? Then how about applying that same principle to the current president? It seems to me THATthose of you who mentioned this alleged conflict of interest have a double standard.
It’s OK for Zindler to have HIS bedmate on the Board but Ellen can’t?
Okay cutie-pie, whatever. Don’t let the fact that Zindler is merely a board member filling in on a temporary (and unpaid) basis get in the way of your M obsession.
Over and out.
Tarpit, I accept you condolences on my alleged unfortunate life where, you think, everything “must be” infused by the M word.
But please think of me as just being very alert to this kind of oppression and having the courage to fend off the derogatory remarks that ensue when I try to raise consciousness among atheists to the subtle bias against women.
Believe me, it takes guts to put yourself out there and say, Hey, you wouldn’t have done that to a man! I get an almost immediate torrent of denials from most men (and from a lot of women too,) and a lot of insults and pseudo-Freudian analysis from women who commiserate about my “obviously unfortunate experiences,” as though I were the only woman in the world to have had these experiences.
All that ad hominem response is really just to avoid even thinking about the fact that Ellen may have been treated differently had she been a man. That’s a difficult thought to entertain; it’s far easier to accuse me of being “too senstive” or crazy or obsessed.
Telling me I’m unfortunate in my experiences is easy and dismisses the whole issue: You don’t have to face the fact that smart, talented women like Ellen, like Carly Fiorino (formerly prez of Hewlet Packard) or even Hillary, have had to face discrimination as women.
And it’s still there–perhaps less so than in 1970, but it’s still there–despite all our marching, all our agitation, all our work, all our consciousness raising–there is still residual bias against women–and I am saying, let’s consider that this might have been a part of what happened to Ellen.
For one vivid example, Blair Scott, an AA member, went on the Freedom Walk with Ellen. Ellen was dumped; Blair Scott was not only NOT dumped, he got a promotion to being in charge of the affiliates.
Hmmmm?
Smartgal,
If the board is so sexist, why was Ellen president for 13 years before being ousted?
You would think the chauvinist pigs on the board would have noticed that Ellen is female a little sooner, right?
Alatham, thank you again for your cool head and rational thoughts.
As a 57 year old woman, I am perfectly aware of the fact that there has been and continues to be a certain amount of bias against women in our society. It happens. I just don’t see it leaping out at me every five minutes like a conspiracy theory. My mind doesn’t work that way.
It truly would never have occurred to me, without some overt evidence, to blame Ellen Johnson’s departure from the board on sexism, especially considering how very long she held her position, and the fact that the founder of AA was also a woman. It’s really very insulting to the board to keep bringing it up. It also would never have occurred to me to suggest that Frank Zindler’s wife should resign. Apples and oranges.
After reading some comments it became clear that we are arguing amongst ourselves as if we were trying to debate the meaning of a Bible verse in Sunday school.
We got carried away from the main point: whatever the reasons were for Ellen’s dismissal, it will not bring her back. We need to stop dwelling on this, and get in touch with AA and help them make “OUR” organization even better, drive it to the new frontiers.
We need to stop creating conspiracy theories that board members supposedly were involved in (e.g. sexism).
Let’s move on and argue with theists, not within our own community. We’re already a herd of cats.
v1k
Well,
Bart certainly gave the Board the ammo, and they used it.
The only question is, what will they do with the power now that they have it?
I don’t think any of them have the ambition it takes to carry out all the projects, not to mention the media appearances Ellen did, as well as run the office.
It will take 5 people to fill the shoes of the one they dismissed.
Well,
Bart certainly gave the Board the ammo, and they used it.
The only question is, what will they do with the power now that they have it?
I don’t think any of them have the ambition it takes to carry out all the projects, not to mention the media appearances Ellen did, as well as run the office.
It will take 5 people to fill the shoes of the one they dismissed.
After more discussions with board members/state directors and other influential people at the 2009 Convention and Members’ Meeting, it grieves me to see that nothing good can come from lawsuits against the former President. Ultimately, either one person will have her reputation ruined or the entire Board of Directors will. In either case, I will be ashamed to be counted among the membership of Am Aths.
Eddie Tabash several years ago, said in a presentation that Atheists must support one another. It holds true as well here as it would for political office, which is what Eddie was talking about in that instance.
If it weren’t so bad for the organization, I could just become an amused onlooker to the spectacle, but because I would be accomplice by supporting a Board which continues in some sort of retribution against its former “leader”, I must cancel my membership in American Atheists, and never mention to outsiders that I was a member.
No one can win in this situation…because even a win for the Board of Directors would cast doubt on their choice of whom they hired. If Ellen wins, it would cast doubt on the choice the Board made to sue her.
Based on my experience of the courts in this country, even a win wouldn’t prove the correctness of the decision, but if the Board loses it could bring shame upon the entire organization in the court of public opinion. This can’t be good policy. Apparently, they have decided to sue on principle instead of on what the ultimate outcome may be, and to sue means one will abide by the decision of the court, be that as arbitrary as it may be.
I must sign off here for the last time. I have already resigned my membership, and don’t intend to renew it under the leadership of this Board of Directors. After 20 years hence, when most will be dead or will have resigned from that board, I will consider but not promise, to support this organization once again. …Bye