I occasionally hear from atheists who do not like the "atheist" label for various reasons. I suspect that the primary reason involves the stigma attached to the label, but that usually isn't the reason given. The most common reason given seems to be that the label does not specify what is believed, only what is not believed.
This is certainly true. Telling you that I am an atheist does not tell you anything about what I believe. But unless one feels some sort of pressure to describe oneself with only one word, I'm not sure why this is a problem. Why not identify oneself as an atheist and whatever other descriptors one wants to use? For example, I could easily imagine an atheist saying, "I am an atheist, and I believe in the value of science, reason, skepticism (or whatever else one wants to share). What's wrong with this? It is rare that I tell anyone I'm an atheist without following the word "atheist" with the word "and" because I am more than an atheist.
A common refrain one hears from some of the atheists who object to using the atheism label is something like this: "I don't believe in unicorns or the tooth fairy, and I don't call myself an 'aunicornist' or identify myself as someone who doubts the tooth fairy." Another popular one is, "I don't go around identifying myself as a non-stamp-collector." Right. Because these are all equivalent to atheism. The society in which we live clearly regards not believing in unicorns or the tooth fairy or not collecting stamps no differently from not believing in gods. If only that was true! Unfortunately, those of us who don't believe in gods tends to be perceived as monsters merely because we don't believe in gods.
If I am feeling patient enough to attempt an explanation, I generally respond with something about how I will gladly devote as much time and effort on unicorns and the tooth fairy as I do to atheism when people who believe in them have a comparable influence as that wielded by the religious. Given the opportunity, I'll then elaborate by emphasizing that how we are treated by religious believers because we do not share their belief is directly relevant to the importance of atheist identity. In fact, this piss-poor treatment is a big part of what makes atheism salient as an identity in the first place.
Christopher Hitchens evidently encountered this objection enough that he chose to address it in the introductory chapter to The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever:
True enough - but we do not have to emerge from a past when tooth fairies and Father Christmas (both rather recent inventions) held sway. The fans of the tooth fairy do not band on your door and try to convert you. They do not insist that their pseudo-science must be taught in schools. They do not condemn believers in rival tooth fairies to death and damnation. They do not say that all morality comes from tooth fairy ceremonies, and that without the tooth fairy there would be fornication in the streets and the abolition of private property. They do not say that the tooth fairy made the world, and that all of us must therefore bow the knee to the Big Brother tooth fairy. They do not say that the tooth fairy will order you to kill your sister if she is seen in public with a man who is not her brother.
Maybe this will be something to remember the next time you encounter this popular objection to using the atheist label. For additional thoughts on this topic, see Why My Lack of Belief in Bigfoot Creatures Is Not Part of My Identity.
This post originally appeared on Atheist Revolution in 2012. It was revised and expanded in 2021 because it remains relevant.
