I too have a problem with term, for all the reasons mentioned. However it does seem to be the handle we are stuck all with. Just as many of you would hate to be called "Yanks" especially if you come from the south. It`s just easier to type.

I agree completely that it is a word that should not need to exist. Sadly, should doesn't always align with what is. I'm fine using it, it has great utility and cuts to the chase.

So my best guess is to call label myself an agnostic atheist. Atheist because I feel I know for sure there is no personal loving being blah blah blah, BUT, I had a whole lot of "paranormal" experiences a long time ago. I do need to say that I also know that I am unstable, in which ways, I haven't found out yet, still trying to get a correct diagnosis, so there's that! But that's where the agnostic part comes in. I feel like there's a possibility that I experienced things a certain way because of chemical imbalances, but since I was raised Christian, I thought it was all spiritual. Well it wasn't. Possibly just mental health issues/flair ups. On the other hand, I still believe my own experiences, I believe I had them, and I don't disbelieve people who have paranormal experiences, but now I don't discredit anything, including illness. I agree that it makes more sense to leave the label off of pure atheists because they are more like the control group-also then people may not be so confused about the definitions. The word also has a negative connotation that bothers me a lot, I take opportunities to clear up confusion when I can.

I always say agnostic. Most people won't ask a follow up. The ones that do I say that I can't prove or disprove if there is a god/s so agnostic means I'm neutral.

I admit that my heart skips a beat when I say the word. But, I decided a long time ago to be my authentic self no matter what. So, even with the super religious. I will say it.

My other motive in using the word clearly and matter of factly, is to show people that we are everywhere, we are normal feeling humans with cares, worries, trauma, triumphs and tragedies, and that we are not scary.

Very, I'm from the UK so it's not really an issue here

The belief in Santa Claus disappears with age and you pay a significant social price if you continue to believe when you grow up. However, God belief is not only accepted but expected, you pay the social price for not believing. Hence the need for a way to be different from the "norm" and, for me, atheist says it in the most direct way

Prefer anit-theist atheist sounds like we are one of them

Two things spring to mind.
Firstly, the reason that we don't have a word for non-belief in santa or fairies is because non-belief is the most popular position with regard to those things, and that only immature minds buy into them, when it's quite the opposite when it comes to gods.
Secondly, I think shying away from the word atheist is counter productive, if people have a bad reaction to learning you're an atheist, it's a good idea as an atheist to dispel the misconceptions, rather than retreating to another label that means exactly the same thing with regard to belief in gods.

Perhaps free-thinkers or rationalists might be better as far as labels go. But I don't personally mind referring to myself as an atheist, because it is accurate; I am without theistic belief ("a" plus "theist" ). This defines my position on religion and belief in God (gods) pretty well. On the other hand, it seems to me that many people of a religious persuasion might associate the term "atheist" with a hostility towards religion, which not all atheists have. I am willing to let people have their beliefs, although I am firmly opposed to religious fundamentalism.

I am proud to use the word Athiest that is what I am I tell everyone I am an Athiest a non believer of supernatural gods/dieties and follow the scientic idea of evidence being able to test whether a theory is true or false even though I am no scientist I do not have the knowledge to be one.

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called religion.
—Robert M. Pirsig

[cam.ac.uk]

I'm comfortable with the word and people who claim it. I don't consider myself one because I do believe there is something, I just have no fitting definition, working theology or proof of what it is. I'm ok with that, too.

Not a term I ever use. I too identify as a Buddhist. Which for me is about trying to live in a particular way as outlined by a man who later came to be known as the Buddha or awakened. There may or may not be a God. I have no way of knowing so I don't give it very much thought. Prefering to put my effort into things I can effect.
Someone here pointed out that 'Buddhism' doesn't treat women equally. I think that's true (and very wrong) for some forms of organised religious Buddhism but there also forms of Buddhism where equality is actively perused.

I am always proud to say that I am an atheist

Isaac Asimov observed the same thing. He said it was annoying being defined by what he didn't believe in. I usually say humanist or agnostic. Since that more accurately defines me.

As an Agnostic, I would say I am not, however, I have no issue with anyone else who does identify as an Atheist.

I like it in the same way I like bald as a description of hair.

I prefer "reasonable".

I really think a lack of knowledge is the default, until you experience or are taught something. There are some primitive things that are inborn, I think, in the brain stem used for survival like sucking to eat, flight or fight response. My info comes from a basic psych class way back in the 70s. I probably should review it.

I am as comfortable with the word atheist as I am with any other reasonably descriptive word.

You could say A-santa, or A-fairies, but that includes theias. How about A-fantasy creatures of any kind? It's the handiest "without" word we have.

Or, A-religion.

I'm comfortable with Athiest, free thinker,
Non-believer, simple.