wow, you're amazingly ignorant.
1) Atonality is NOT A STYLE
Atonality is the term given to music that mostly plays atonal chords and scales. Doesn't go beyond that. Therefore:
2) Atonality has nothing to do with rhythm
3) Atonality has tonality, what it may not have is predominant tonal harmonies/melodies

4) Concerning the proposition: "music is supposed to be a set pattern of sounds with a distinctive rhythm which can be recognizable and can become familiar"
This is HORRIBLY and COMPLETELY WRONG.
Music is any arrangement of sounds you want it to be. Music needs no distinctive rhythm nor set pattern of sounds. Music does not need to be familiar. Music can be noise, it can be freestyled solos, it can be drones, anything can be used as music from storms to traffic noise, from wind noises to birds chirping. Music doesn't not need to have a clean production, it can sound dirty or messy. It can be ANYTHING. It is NON-RESTRICTIVE.
Now don't come to me saying what is good music and bad music, and that any atonal music or any weird sort of composition is bad music because it doesn't accord to what you preach music to be. Metal pretty much fits in your description and fuck man it is a horrible genre. But I'm not saying it isn't music even though I'd be tempted to.

5) You said: "Of course as hard as atonal music tries to be atonal, its IMPOSSIBLE to be completely atonal"
If you write sheet music, you can easily make the whole composition atonal. Whether I think it sounds good or not is another issue.
Let me tell you this, I am a musician, I made 8 albums, and most people (specially Inri) regards me as the most atonal musician around here. My 6th album, Future Science Vs Man is my biggest statement of atonal music. And you know what? I DON'T TRY HARD AT ALL TO MAKE ATONAL MUSIC.
It just comes that way, why? because I play music which I feel emotionally attached to. I feel that playing atonal things among tonalities is the best, because it is very expressive.
Ugly is the new nice.
And I think my album, atonal as it is, is definitively melodical, can be hummed to and such, and I find it to have huge replay value because there is always new things to discover in that music because it flows in a completely unexpected but adorable way.

But y'know I am not going to change your mind and continue hating atonalities in your narrow minded mind and be happy

Hm... let me see.
I never said that atonal music is unorganized or that it had no melody.... I had to write atonal 12 note compositions according to Shoenberg's theories in school... inverting the melody, wrting it backwards etc etc...

1) The reason why I said that atonal music is a style is because in the early 20th century there were many composers that wrote music following a certain scheme that was theorised specially by Schoenberg, which was "the way" to write atonal music.
2) I am not completely sure but from what I remember one of the "rules" in the atonal composition scheme designed by Shoenberg, the compositions had to lack an obvious sence of rhythm.
3) Atonal music as it is, is ATONAL meaning that it is supposed not to have any kind of tonality center or anything at all. I think that you might be confusing atonal music with neoclassical and 20th century music. Composers such as Lygetti, Stravinsky and Bartok are all tonal, just not tonal in the classical way. And they are in my oppinion some of the greatest. Strictly speaking atonal music is like that video Lyndon uploaded some posts ago, and in my opinion, although interesting, its not enjoyable.
4) Ok, maybe my definition of what music is supposed to be was a bit to narrow. But still I believe that there is a distinctive line between what is sound and what is music, and for me atonal music walks on the line. I will agree with you that almost any sound can be put together and become some kind of music, and that whether is good or not is a matter of the listener, but you will have to admit as well that there is a big difference between spending 10 years meticulously arranging a piece of music so that it is perfect, and just going to the streets, recording some sounds and putting them together.
5) I believe again that you are confusing what strictly speaking atonal music is, because believe me that if you want to write a whole atonal composition, it is a big pain in the ass if you follow all the rules. And if you don't chances are that your composition will not be completely atonal and that it will move around a tonal center.

And please don't call me narrow minded, because I have heared this kind of music and I think I have good reasons why to regard it not as good as the music I like the most. Which by the way is not metal at all.

EDIT: Oh! And about minimalistic music is no good because is like unartistic music. I mean, it has no meaning, no point, its very repetitive, no motif, just some colour... and its very very uninteresting in my oppinion. Have you ever played Civilization IV? I LOVE the industrial age because the music is just beatiful; but as soon as you turn to the modern age I turn the music off because after a while I simply can't stand the music anymore.

Jaruten first you say that atonal is supposed to have no rhythm and then that it's supposed to have no tonality, you're contradicting yourself

I've always said that atonal music is supposed to have no tonality and no rhythm.... so I don't really see where I've condradicted myself. I either write really bad or your comprehention of the text is really bad.

But it doesn't need to have no rhythm. Rhythm has nothing to do with tonality.

Oh right! I see your point now. Well the thing is, if I remember correctly, atonal music should not have a clear sense of rhythm, because it becomes easier to recognize a tonality if there is rhythm. 12 notes are too little to do a whole composition, and since you have to repeat them at some point to continue your composition, it becomes more atonal if there is no clear sense of rhythm.
For example, if you have a melody that encomprises the 12 notes, after that you would have to make the same melody inverted or backwards or transposed. If you use the same rhythmic pattern you had in the first melody for the second melody as well, then it will be easier for your mind to recognise some patterns in the notes. Therefore you are supposed to use a different rhythmic pattern, thus giving the whole composition no clear sense of rhythm

It does make sense, in that it makes the music have less center.  If the Music has a predictable rhythm, then it's easier for the ear to predict where certain notes will land (based on the tone row), and thus certain notes are stressed more. 

But Jaruten should really stop referring to dodecaphonic music as atonal, because atonal is a broader category (at least in every case I've heard it used) that encompasses all NON-TONAL music.  I've even heard it used in relation to modal music.

But most 12-tone stuff is complete shit, except for perhaps Schoenberg and Berg, especially Berg.

It does make sense, in that it makes the music have less center.  If the Music has a predictable rhythm, then it's easier for the ear to predict where certain notes will land (based on the tone row), and thus certain notes are stressed more. 

But Jaruten should really stop referring to dodecaphonic music as atonal, because atonal is a broader category (at least in every case I've heard it used) that encompasses all NON-TONAL music.  I've even heard it used in relation to modal music.

But most 12-tone stuff is complete shit, except for perhaps Schoenberg and Berg, especially Berg.

Thank you for that aclaration since I think I'm not being clear enough.
It was in my understanding that dodecaphonic atonal music was THE atonal music. Because all the rest was not really atonal, therefore should not be refered as atonal. If you are refering to other types of atonal music that use more than 12 notes.... well I must admit I don't know a lot about that kind of atonal music.

EDIT: Oh, and Gamelan is not atonal at all. They just use completely different tonalities from western music.

It means taking back what you said.  But I should've said "atonality is not a style" rather than "genre".  Semantics...

If anyone wants to check out some awesome Modern music that is more accessible, and still original, you guys should try Ned Rorem.  He writes in a chromatic tonal style that's pretty neato.

Why do you feel the art form Disappeared Maladroithim?

Also it's mainly me name dropping.  I CHOOSE YOU: JOHN CAGE!!  USE YOUR ABSTRACT MUSIC ATTACK!!!!