On behalf of the men of the World, I would like to congratulate you on your
original statement that:
"innate differences between men and women could play a role in why
fewer women succeed in science and math careers"
and condemn you for your later retraction. It is not that I agree with your
original statement -- because I have not read enough about the issue to have
a view -- but I congratulate you for confronting totalitarian Feminism by
In the 17 January Associated Press report, you were quoted as "discussing
hypotheses based on the scholarly work assembled for the conference".
Isn't that what universities are for ? No -- of course not ! Modern western
universities are for Feminists and other Leftists to say what THEY want to
say and for them to assault, bully, and intimidate those who say anything
different ! I have been assaulted by Feminist students in Law School -- these
same Feminists who brainlessly and fascistoidly repeat lying stereotypes about
men being violent towards women (See: fiebertb.html
). If Bin Laden wanted a secular argument in favour of Al Qaeda, that would
have to be one of the best ones !
In response to your addressing certain theoretical issues, one woman walked
out, and others later said they were "offended". None of them addressed
the issues that you had raised.
In other words, here we had a male discussing some theoretical issues at
an intellectual level, and the females in the audience refused, or were unable,
to address the issues at an intellectual level -- responding at the level
of emotion, and -- in effect -- censoring his views by political pressure.
That behaviour, if anything, supports the hypothesis that women actually do
have problems with intellectual competence.
The woman who walked out, biologist Nancy Hopkins, is quoted as having said:
"It is so upsetting that all these brilliant young women (at Harvard)
are being led by a man who views them this way."
That is an intellectually incompetent statement. It is clear that you were
not saying that the women on your staff were incompetent (though Nancy Hopkins
shows that that might have been partially correct) -- you were just saying
that there was evidence that, on average, women might be less gifted than
men in cerain ways. If Nancy Hopkins doesn't understand that simple difference,
she should resign on the grounds of intellectual incompetence. If she does
understand that difference, she should resign for hypocritically trying to
reduce an intellectual discussion to the level of politics.
I am not of East Asian ancestry, yet I am perfectly able to discuss the
hypothesis that East Asians have the highest average IQs without walking out
or putting on a show of immature petulance. Why can't Western women behave
maturely and rationally ?
I request that you find me a grant to research female stupidity in academia,
as I have begun to collect examples. Here is a classic from your brother Ivy
League university, Yale (femathom.html):
Ann Scales, in 1985, gave a lecture in the Dean's Lecture Series at Yale
Law School (later published in "Feminist Jurisprudence", edited
by Patricia Smith). In it she said (roughly):
that the female approach to life abhors dichotomies and oppositions;
that her Feminist theory of Jurisprudence, which was based on statement
(1), is opposed to male views of Jurisprudence, and that
this dichotomy should be resolved by replacing the male
approach with the female approach !
This self-contradiction, in my experience, is typical of the intellectual
calibre of Feminists -- if not of women generally. So many women in academia
are Feminists, by my definition of Feminism, (see: contents.html
) that it is hard to know if this is a feature just of Feminism, or of women
New Zealand Equality Education Foundation