The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Lance Welton Archive
Women In Universities (IU’s Provost Lauren Robel, Dean Idie Kesner) Show Why Women In Universities Are Not A Good Thing
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Earlier: Professor Eric Rasmusen Attacked By His University For Tweeting Article About Lack Of Women Geniuses

I don’t often write about my personal feelings, but I can’t help but be amused by what has happened as a consequence of a November 2 piece I wrote for Are Women Destroying Academia? Probably. A tweet quoting me by a dissident academic went viral, anti-science colleagues called for him to be fired for “sexism,” his employers declared his tweet (and thus my empirically accurate words) “vile,” when it was found that he couldn’t be fired due to his contract and that unhelpful thing known as the First Amendment, Woke female students and faculty responded with exactly the kind of female-typical behavior that is destroying academia, and the scandal was reported not merely in the Washington Post [University says a professor’s views are racist, sexist and homophobic — but it can’t fire him, ]] and on CNN, but on news sites worldwide, including Britain’s CultMarx newspaper The Guardian. [University decries professor’s ‘vile’ racism and sexism – but says it can’t fire him, November 22, 2019]

In my piece, which was cross-posted at The Unz Review, I drew on an article by columnist Christopher DeGroot and a video by Dr Edward “The Jolly Heretic” Dutton, both of whom argued, for different reasons, that females destroy academia.

DeGroot claimed that females become upset more easily, making it more difficult to engage in unemotional academic disputations, because their logic is more likely to be overwhelmed. Females are also more conformist than men, which militates against challenging received knowledge and thus discovering new things.

Dutton, in a video entitled Do Female Academics Reduce Male Per Capita Genius? averred that the growing female influence on academia suppresses genius. He argued that you don’t get many female geniuses because geniuses combine outlier high IQ and a moderately anti-social personality. Geniuses are low in altruism, low in empathy (and thus coldly rational) and low in rule-following. Thus, they don’t care about causing offence, which original ideas always do. All these traits are less likely among females.

Dutton maintained that, as women take over universities, they make universities more female—more focused on rule-following, everyone getting along, and not causing offence. This drives geniuses out of universities, meaning females undermine a key element of universities: the unemotional pursuit of truth.

The Unz Review version of my article allowed comments and I couldn’t understand why so many people had commented on it: at the time writing there have been 442 comments, adding up to almost 60, 000 words. It turned out that, on November 8th, a link to the article had been t weeted by Indiana University’s Prof Eric Rasmusen, a professor of business studies, along with a key quotation from it:

Geniuses are overwhelmingly male because they combine outlier high IQ with moderately low Agreeableness and moderately low Conscientiousness.

Despite being retweeted a mere 55 times, Rasmussen’s tweet came to the attention of the Woke Mob because a pretty yet rather aggressive Indiana University student with a Twitter following of 435,000, Michaela Okland, tweeted negatively, about it on November 19th.

This amazingly vapid mauve-haired YouTuber, who admits that her ‘brain is very broken,’ also reported Rasmusen to the university authorities. Her tweet was liked 4,100 times and shared 30,500 times.

Attention was also drawn to earlier tweets of Rasmusen’s which weren’t entirely Woke.

The fact of Rasmusen’s Lance Welton quote tweet—a quote that, as I pointed out in my original article, is backed up by numerous scholarly papers—made the national news on November 22nd. This was because Indiana University’s provost—a somewhat less attractive female called Lauren Robel [Email her]—had publicly condemned him on November 20th. She wrote, in a statement entitled On the First Amendment”:

Professor Eric Rasmusen has, for many years, used his private social media accounts to disseminate his racist, sexist, and homophobic views. When I label his views in this way, let me note that the labels are not a close call, nor do his posts require careful parsing to reach these conclusions. He has posted, among many other things, the following pernicious and false stereotypes:

  • That he believes that women do not belong in the workplace, particularly not in academia, and that he believes most women would prefer to have a boss than be one; he has used slurs in his posts about women;
  • That gay men should not be permitted in academia either, because he believes they are promiscuous and unable to avoid abusing students;
  • That he believes that black students are generally unqualified for attendance at elite institutions, and are generally inferior academically to white students.

Ordinarily, I would not dignify these bigoted statements with repetition, but we need to confront exactly what we are dealing with in Professor Rasmusen’s posts. His expressed views are stunningly ignorant, more consistent with someone who lived in the 18th century than the 21st.

In this breathtakingly unprofessional and partisan statement, Robel also cast doubt on the genuineness of Rasmusen’s Christian faith:

Rhetorically speaking, Professor Rasmusen has demonstrated no difficulty in casting the first, or the lethal, stone.

But, she continued—

His latest posts slurring women were picked up by a person with a heavily followed Twitter account, and various officials at Indiana University have been inundated in the last few days with demands that he be fired. We cannot, nor would we, fire Professor Rasmusen for his posts as a private citizen, as vile and stupid as they are, because the First Amendment of the United States Constitution forbids us to do so. That is not a close call.

But she then declared that no student would be forced to take any of his classes from now on and a double-blind submission system would be introduced to ensure that Rasmusen couldn’t discriminate against females, gays or minorities in terms of grading papers.

Provost Robel concluded that:

I condemn, in the strongest terms, Professor Rasmusen’s views on race, gender, and sexuality, and I think others should condemn them. But my strong disagreement with his views—indeed, the fact that I find them loathsome—is not a reason for Indiana University to violate the Constitution of the United States.

This is a lesson, unfortunately, that all of us need to take seriously, even as we support our colleagues and classmates in their perfectly reasonable anger and disgust that someone who is a professor at an elite institution would hold, and publicly proclaim, views that our country, and our university, have long rejected as wrong and immoral.

Reading between the lines: “I’d love to fire him for his 18th century views but I can’t due to the First Amendment on free speech which was passed in . . . erm . . . the eighteenth century.”

Roblel was promptly criticized for not breaking the law in a letter to the editor of Indiana Daily Student.

The United States Constitution is a document created by men who believed they could force other people into a brutal system of slavery. It’s allowed for untold atrocities to be committed under the rule of law. The Constitution is the starting point of our government, not an immutable divine decree

[Response to Provost Lauren Robel, By Vauhxx Booker , [a local black politician]November 22, 2019].

Remarkably, Rasmusen struck back. He demanded that Robel be fired for professional misconduct [Fire Professor Eric Rasmusen? Or Fire Provost Lauren Robel Instead?, b Eric Rasmusen, Unz Review, November 25, 2019].

He also pointed out that Robel is openly Left-wing and has promoted homosexuality in The Huffington Post [IU Pride: Launching a National LGBT Scholarship Campaign, by Lauren Robel, Huffington Post, September 17, 2013].

Additionally, Rasmusen was also condemned by Idie Kesner,[Email her] the Dean of the Business school where he works.

Kesner claimed that my article “suggests women academics and most women students are harmful to the academy.’”

I would say “most women academics” but I imagine Kesner was feeling triggered.

She declared such views “reprehensible” and “abhorrent.” She then summarised the usual “diversity is our strength” dogmas before claiming it was “hurtful” (emotion over logic again) “to see views expressed that are the antithesis of these.” She concluded:

Each of us brings a valuable aspect of diversity that gives our institution strength. I hope we can remember this when we are challenged by others whose minds are closed to this viewpoint.

[Female Indiana business students launch ‘Female Genius’ hoodie fundraiser for Girls Inc. after university failed to ‘take action’ against tenured professor’s ‘sexist, racist and homophobic’ views, by Matthew Wright, Mail Online, November 23, 2019].

Yes, even more amusingly, female business students at Indiana University had launched a fundraiser to produce hoodies emblazoned with the words “Female Genius” on the front and “Support Women in Academia” on the back. This predictably emotional and group-solidarity-oriented reaction rather fails to grasp the fact that geniuses, by definition, are very rare, and certainly wouldn’t wear clothing advertising their genius, let alone as part of a hysterical emotional reaction.

In a tweet, reported in Mail Online, Indiana University’s ‘Women in Business’ declared that ‘Women in Business would like to reject the notion that more females in higher education is a negative.’

Apparently, you logically refute such a notion by a producing a hoodie with a cringe-worthy slogan on it.

It is hilarious that neither of these female senior academic bureaucrats, Robel or Kesner, can see that they embody why having too many women in academia is a problem.

Kesner, in particular, not only uses emotional language but actually implies that it a problem that people’s feelings have been hurt because their fervently-held ideas have been challenged. Yet challenging dogmas—and thus hurting feelings—is how you get to truth.

Also, her entire statement involves rallying a group together and proclaiming they’re all, somehow, equal in their contribution to academia: i.e. the female emphasis on empathy and getting along. But if the truth is the goal of academia, there must be a hierarchy, with those better able to reach the truth inherently being more “valuable” than women like Kesner who get overwhelmed by her and other’s totally irrelevant “feelings.”

Robel is similarly emotional rather than logical, using her statement to vent how she “feels.’ “

The response to Prof Rasmusen’s tweeting of my article has done nothing more than prove the points made by Edward Dutton and Christopher DeGroot.

If universities are to remain centred around the pursuit of truth, then there need to be far fewer females involved in them.

Lance Welton [email him] is the pen name of a freelance journalist living in New York.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Academia, Feminism, Political Correctness 
Hide 213 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Realist says:

    Yes, the truth sets shitlibs ass on fire.

    • Replies: @Richard B
  2. Elster says:

    No doubt they do think, the youngsters, it’s be more fun to be under the same roof, but who cares what they think? All very well for the women no doubt, it’s the men who are going to be the losers—oh, it’ll, it’ll happen all right, no holding it up now.

    When the first glow has faded and it’s quite normal to have girls in the same building and on the same staircase and across the landing, they’ll start realising that that’s exactly what they’ve got, girls everywhere and not a common-room, not a club, not a pub where they can get away from them.

    And the same thing’s going to happen to us which is much more important, Roger’s absolutely right, all this will go and there will be women everywhere, chattering, gossiping, telling you what they did today and what their daughter did yesterday and what their friend did last week and what somebody they heard about did last month and horrified if a chap brings up ‘a topic’ or an ‘argument’.

    They don’t mean what they say, they don’t use language for discourse but for extending their personality, they take all disagreement as opposition, yes they do, even the brightest of them, and that’s the end of the search for truth which is what the whole thing’s supposed to be about.

    Jake’s Thing, Kingsley Amis

  3. Svevlad says:

    Jeez, how didn’t you people just start a mass slaughter?

    Back in the good old days this would be grounds for a small genocide.

  4. Brown boi says:

    Rosie, paging Rosie.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Daniel Chieh
  5. Mr. Welton, I’d kind of trashed your last post here on unz just due to the psychological mumbo-jumbo that I just don’t think is very meaningful or important. However, you are right on the money on this women-in-academia issue. I just noted that I had no comments under the article in question here, out of those 442 comments (as of now). That can only be a good thing, haha!

    The reaction from Provost Robel does indeed fit right in with your theory. I just read her bit about “this is not a close call”. Who the hell does this broad think she is, head of the Red Guards? (No, we don’t have them yet, and they’ll be red, white, and blue, not just red, but they’re coming…) The Founding Fathers wrote the 1st Amendment to protect us from the Feral Gov’t they were creating. The important right to be able to write and say anything, no matter how “hurtful” to people’s little feelings has no limitations.

    There are no close calls or not-close calls, there are principles. Women are known for being let to change their minds 180 degrees without criticism. They are not known for sticking to principles, and we all know and are used to that. Besides your very good points on their stifling of genius and creativity at the universities, they have no business being in positions of power. Lauren Robel is Exhibit A.

    (I’ll give one exception to Miss Ann Coulter. One of her first efforts, were she President, would be to push for a revocation of Amendment XIX on the women’s right to vote. I’m with HER!)

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Jake
    , @Wally
  6. Anonymous[398] • Disclaimer says:

    The sheer number of universities in most Western countries is unsustainable, most of which are government funded. I think in the foreseeable future there is going to be a big re-think in what higher education should be in the Western world and many universities will close as a result, only the prestigious, research-intensive universities are viable long term.

    It’s already happening now to a large extent, being a “Professor of Arts” is no longer the viable career path it once was. There’s too many people with such degrees, most people set on being an Arts Professor might as well aspire to be an astronaut for how likely it is to happen, I would think a 1 in 100 chance would be fairly good odds and that’s just the posts that are advertised, most professor jobs especially in things like “the Arts” go to cronies.

  7. This amazingly vapid mauve-haired YouTuber, who admits that her ‘brain is very broken,’ also reported Rasmusen to the university authorities. Her tweet was liked 4,100 times and shared 30,500 times.

    Don’t worry too much about broken-brained youtuber Michaela Okland, Mr. Welton. She has 4,098 followers who LIKED her long legs and rear end and the other 2 were her Mom and Dad.

    Make that 4,101, but I’m not on twitter, so I guess I don’t count in this world.

  8. @Achmed E. Newman

    Ahh crap, that’s what I get for only reading so far before commenting. So far Provost Robel has stood up pretty well for at least that one important principle, I noted, from later on reading. I apologize for my slur on her, as so far, though still a left-wing loonie, she still shows respect for the US Constitution, amazingly. Women in positions of power – still not a good idea.

    I still have no idea what Robel’s “close call” bit is all about. Is that her catch-phrase, like the “I didn’t do it” of Bart Simpson? Does she have it trademarked?

    • Agree: Alternate History
    • Replies: @orionyx
  9. Gunga Din says:

    Professor Rasmussen’s observations are spot on!

    • Agree: Alternate History
  10. So far Provost Robel has stood up pretty well for at least that one important principle, I noted, from later on reading.

    If the law allowed her to fire him, she would, hands down. But she can’t so she slathers up the truth with a little free-speech bullshit that she neither believes nor respects. On top of it, she’s going double-blind on all the work he grades and none of his credits are now ‘necessary’.

    Not only is she an overly emotional and ineffective ‘academic” EEOC hire, she’s a fundamentally dishonest one, the very epitome of the unsuitable element depicted. That she doesn’t see how ridiculous and confirming of the notion of her inadequacy is her part in this points out just how utterly stupid she is.

    And she’s ugly. REAL ugly. Whole lot of ugly.

    • Agree: the grand wazoo
  11. I always like Kingley Amis, and he is mostly right when he says women “don’t mean what they say, they don’t use language for discourse but for extending their personality, they take all disagreement as opposition.” Mostly.

    But not all women in academia are like this. Some of them are much more reasonable than the men.

    Take the male department head who just negates anything you say. If you say up, he says down. In, out. Over, under. Good, bad.

    The cooperative and understanding female department head who is willing to find ways to compromise? Much much more bearable. FYI, most teachers in college, male and female, are just trying to survive the general institutional bureaucratic inanity and unfairness, and some cantankerous asshole (male or female, and both are common, but a little more often male) in a choke-point position of absolute power does not make the job any easier.

    (On a side note, one of the biggest problems with colleges is businessmen–men–on the board trying to structure them to operate like businesses. Typical of the modern era, such a stupid idea it does not even deserve consideration.)

    Take the male students who can’t sit still in their seats, squeak, squeak, squeak, who gnaw on necklaces made of pieces of wood so loud it disrupts the class, who eat their boogers, who scratch their crotches. Not to mention the football players who threaten the teacher and all the other students.

    Versus the young women who do all the work, on time, sit still, and, even if they are contentious, and young women are just as capable as anyone else of being contentious, raise their hands and voice their contention reasonably and with respect.

    In other words, a college full of “geniuses” would be a living hell. Teachers should not be “geniuses.” Administrators should not be geniuses. Teachers and administrators should be calm, cooperative, reasonable, common-sensical people devoted to making the unwieldy thing operate for one more day.

    Just what a college needs. An increase in insane fighting over nonsense and trivialities.

    Put the geniuses in a think-tank or something.

    On the other hand, a one-sex school would be better because the sexual tension of most classes is just one more disrupter. One-sex classes do, it’s true, work better, and it’s easier to discipline boys when they are just among other boys and girls among girls.

    See. It’s more complicated than this article or its commen-taters are able to imagine.

  12. Rosie says:
    @Brown boi

    Rosie, paging Rosie.

    There’s nothing more I can say. Welton cares less for truth than all the men who threatened to kill Galileo. New ideas have always been threatening to the academic establishment. Right now, they’re repressing intelligent design because atheist-materialist men don’t like it. On the Big Bang:

    Philosophically the notion of a beginning of the present order is repugnant to me. I should like to find a genuine loophole. I simply do not believe the present order of things started off with a bang…the expanding Universe is preposterous… it leaves me cold.
    -Sir Arthur Eddington

    Why the Academy needs women:

    Maybe Galileo wouldn’t have been relegated to house arrest and forced to retract.

  13. orionyx says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    she still shows respect for the US Constitution

    On the contrary, I think she emphasized the Constitution as a stumbling-block in the way of her feelings, and will at some time come out as one of those in favor of throwing out the whole Bill of Rights – except for those sections that give women and 2/3-persons the vote.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  14. SMK says: • Website

    Open borders and an invasion of legal and illegal aliens will soon transform the U.S. into a nonwhite majority country in which European Americans are an increasingly dispossessed and persecuted minority and no Republican much less another Trump will even be president again and the left will control everything, including Academia, and Lance (Islam is right about women”) Welton is arguing, yet again, that women should not have the right to go to college and be university professors, a proposal that has absolutely no chance of being realized and exposes him as not only a misogynist but also an extremist and crackpot. And if women were denied the right to go to college, not only could they not be professors; they also couldn’t be lawyers, doctors, teachers, dentists, etc. Welton not only wants to repeal the 19th Amendment, apparently, but also return to the 18th century if not the middle-ages.

    And even if women were denied the right to go to college and be professors, the universities would still be dominated by leftist professors. Male students would be subjected to white-hating, anti-American, “cultural Marxist,” racial egalitarian, cultural determinist propaganda and indoctrination. Let’s assume, purely for the sake of argument, that women were denied the right to go to college and be professors -which will never happen, of course, so why espouse, publicly, such an extreme and misogynist proposal- but that nothing was done to close the border and end the invasion of legal and illegal non-white aliens that will create a nation and society in which all or nearly all professors are male leftists/socialists, a minority of whites and a majority of nonwhites: blacks, Mestizos/Amerindians, “Asians,” Muslims.

    • Agree: TKK, freedom-cat
    • Disagree: ben tillman
  15. Verily,
    “no one ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”
    (Henry Louis Mencken)

    So, in the spirit of freedom of speech, inquiry and enterprise I am now offering:

    Hoodies “Larry Summers Was Right 😛 ”
    (butcher´s cloth, pink paint and tears can be removed with cold water)
    Toxic Male OD (XXL) $ 100 ea.
    Level IIA Kevlar inlays, back (optional) $ 250 ea.

    Holy Saint Gambrinus … the dames do not even realize how ridiculous they are.
    Thank God for the very hard sciences – our ladies are not there yet 😀

  16. @Rosie

    Why the Academy needs women:

    Another piece of evidence. Women aren’t suited. You think it’s coincidence the entire decline of academia and the sickness in politics and the workplace started at the time of women’s entry into these institutions?

    It is not. It’s BECAUSE women started in. That’s all there is to it. Yall wanted equality, so you said, that was a lie. You wanted to RUIN it all. Tear it all down, that was the stated purpose. THAT’S what women’s rights was about. Tearing it down. Kudos. And yall HATE when we notice.

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie
  17. Just ask Damore.

  18. Rosie says:
    @Jim Christian

    It is not. It’s BECAUSE women started in. That’s all there is to it. Yall wanted equality, so you said, that was a lie. You wanted to RUIN it all. Tear it all down, that was the stated purpose. THAT’S what women’s rights was about. Tearing it down. Kudos. And yall HATE when we notice.

    And you all say we’re hysterical! Good Lord, get a grip.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  19. @SMK

    Strawwomxn, SMK.

    No one wants to deny their oh-so-precious “rights” to clog up higher learning.

    But what´s the difference between siccing Somali rapists on areas deemed “too White” and pushing third-rate housewife material on fields of knowledge deemed “too male”?

    • Agree: MikeatMikedotMike
    • Replies: @Rosie
  20. @Rosie

    Hysterical was the pussy march. Noticing isn’t hysterical. YOU are hysterical.

  21. MarkU says:

    Right now, they’re repressing intelligent design because atheist-materialist men don’t like it.

    ‘Intelligent design’ is NOT being repressed, it is simply not a scientific hypothesis at all, if it is not testable it is not a scientific hypothesis. Science is what you get when you use the scientific method, if it isn’t using the scientific method it isn’t science.

    In order to argue sensibly you could try to demonstrate that the ‘intelligent design’ hypothesis is testable in some way, ideally you would be able to show that its proponents have made some predictions and tested them.

    Instead you will probably tell me how you feel about my reply (as if that was a valid argument) just as you seem to imagine that the way Sir Arthur Eddington felt about the big bang theory was a valid argument. I hope to be wrong but I very much doubt it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Realist
    , @TomSchmidt
  22. Rosie says:

    Instead you will probably tell me how you feel about my reply (as if that was a valid argument) just as you seem to imagine that the way Sir Arthur Eddington felt about the big bang theory was a valid argument. I hope to be wrong but I very much doubt it.

    My feelings have nothing to do with it, but I do object to your overly-restrictive definition of “science.” The “it’s not science” argument is precisely the basis for the repression whereof I speak. It is a purely semantic argument that doesn’t really get to the heart of the matter, which is not whether ID is “science” but rather whether it is more or less likely to be true, based on the evidence of our senses and inferences we draw from it, than any alternative explanation.

    • Replies: @Semperluctor
    , @MarkU
  23. Rosie says:

    But what´s the difference between siccing Somali rapists on areas deemed “too White” and pushing third-rate housewife material on fields of knowledge deemed “too male”?

    SMK has said nothing to the effect that equal representation ought to be expected in every field of endeavor. Therefore, it is not possible for anything to be “too male” in the absence of discrimination against women.

    And shame on you for disrespecting housewives.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    , @SMK
  24. Duke84 says:

    When I read this article I thought of former UVA president Teresa Sullivan who fell for Jackie Coakley’s preposterous gang rape story that was printed in Rolling Stone magazine.She immediately suspended the entire Greek system and when it exposed as a hoax she never apologized to the fraternity that was defamed and vandalized.

    • Replies: @anonynous
  25. @Rosie

    Curious to know which of your senses will give you an insight, or allow you to make any inference, as to whether Intelligent Design is a more complete or even viable explanation for Creation. My 2 cents; this question has no falisifiable answe and is of no interest to debate unless the debate is for training purposes only, akin to bear cubs wrestling. How so? Because no experimental equipment exists to prove one way or another whether a Creator created Creation, or whether it spontaneously arose. Even if an experiment ‘proved’ that there have been repeated cycles of Big Bangs and contractions, it would not answer the question posed above. Here’s the kicker. If humans ever are in a position to know, truly know the answer, they will not be human. They will be God, and the Universe will end. Maybe that’s what happens every 15 billion years. It’s as good a theory as any other; it cannot be falsified, but neither can ID. Lastly, ID and Big Bang are not mutually exclusive. All that scientists can say for sure today is that they have not discerned a originating cause for Big Bang, therefore, according to present day knowledge, it is self originating. This says in essence nothing of significance. It admits, even if only unintentionally, that we cannot see any evidence of the Creating Hand. Frustrated by this dogmatic position, IDers counter that evidence exists everywhere of the existence of a Creating Hand, shown by the laws of physics and the extremely low probabilities of life’s existence. And then round and round we go.

    • Agree: Ilyana_Rozumova
    • Replies: @Rosie
  26. This one here says girls should cement themselves, they should ‘take up space:

    “““I think one of the most important things we should be teaching young girls today is leadership,” she said. “It’s something that has been lacking in young girls and women for a very long time – not because we don’t want to but because of what society has labeled women to be. I think we are the most powerful beings in the world, and that we should be given every opportunity. And that is what we should be teaching these young girls – to take up space. Nothing as important as taking up space in society. Nothing is as important as taking up space in society and cementing yourself.”

    That morons like this are elevated is the problem with women’s participation in anything serious. They’re just taking up space. Miss Universe (Miss South Africa), this one, when I saw the title of the article I thought, oh! Girls learning about aeronautics! How noble! But no, she just meant displace, sit, take up actual space, like a man spreader on the train, like cement, literally. Maybe she should teach her girls and boys how to grow a potato in South Africa since they ran off or (mostly) murdered all the White farmers in South Africa. Maybe teach the girls to quit having 7.2 babies each. Oh, they’re going to take up space all right. When they’re 4.7 billion strong in another forty years. Steve Harvey is a P.O.S.. by the way, another monster created by OoopRah-Rah-Rah. White women women and they’re sassy-Black woman worship is another distinctly white feminist characteristic that makes them ridiculously unfit for serious consideration in serious things. Miss Africa Universe is their role model.

  27. MarkU says:

    You are the one using semantic arguments. What you are saying is “lets take the word ‘science’ and stretch it to mean whatever you want to include in it”. Sorry but science uses the scientific method, if it doesn’t use the scientific method it simply isn’t science. Science also uses very tightly worded definitions in order to avoid semantic arguments. I really must reject your attempt to take the word ‘science’ and stretch it to include untestable metaphysical speculation.

    Intelligent design is just the ‘God’ hypothesis dressed up with a new name to make it sound sciency, which it is not. It adds nothing to the debate, it still adds up to “The world is so complicated I can’t believe it could come about by natural causes, therefore God must exist”. Unless the intelligent design proponents can come up with some sort of experiment which would, at least in principle, be capable of refuting their hypothesis it will remain invalid as a supposed scientific hypothesis.

    • Agree: Charon
    • Replies: @Rosie
  28. Renoman says:

    Don’t worry about the Women getting ahead, they’ll all turn on each other, fall in love and become drooling drug addicted Mental patients. One has only to watch the “Ellen” show to realize what they are.

  29. Rosie says:

    What you are saying is “lets take the word ‘science’ and stretch it to mean whatever you want to include in it”.

    No, I’m not. I couldn’t care less whether you call it “science” or not. Call it “natural philosophy” or “metaphysics” or whatever the hell you want.

    I would like to know, though, how exactly you think Darwinism can be falsified if not by reference to Design. Natural causes either are or are not sufficient to explain the origin of life, the universe, and everything or they are not. If you rule out design a priori, you have, in effect, placed Darwinism above the scientific method and beyond criticism. You are, in fact, admitting that you will not follow the evidence where it leads. You have created a new dogma.

    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @Realist
  30. Rosie says:

    Curious to know which of your senses will give you an insight, or allow you to make any inference, as to whether Intelligent Design is a more complete or even viable explanation for Creation.

    Vision, for one, aided by the microscope.

    “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.”

    Lo and behold:

  31. @Rosie

    Most women in a academia are at best dross, save for a few outliers, and at worst destructive.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  32. Rosie says:
    @Amerimutt Golems

    Most women in a academia are at best dross, save for a few outliers, and at worst destructive.

    So how is that any different from most men in academia?

    • LOL: TKK
  33. One needs only look at the recent implosion in the National Communication Association (“NCA”) to see what happens when an academic group becomes dominated by women. First, over the summer, the ruling clique at the NCA decided that the membership in its group of “Distinguished Scholars” was insufficiently diverse, and by FIAT decided to change the selection procedures to include more women, LGBTQ scholars, etc. Second, NCA decided that its journals were not publishing sufficiently diverse authors and instructed its journal editors to fix the problem–the idea of blind pure review is now a little less blind in the NCA. Third, a group that runs a Facebook Group called “Communication Scholars For Reform” has begun targeting older white male professors in the discipline. The fighting in the discipline got so bad that NCA shut down its open discussion forum called Critnet. (see )

    Taking the example of the NCA, it is easy to see why the humanities are dying in American college and universities. What institution that wants to maintain a shred of intellectual credibility can support an NCA connected department? How can a university wide rank and tenure committee take its journals or related book series seriously?

  34. @Rosie

    This is not what I meant … and I apologize 🙂

    But my alma mater, the cradle of modern geology, has just replaced History and Theory of Science with mandatory djenndah studies. In the geosciences?
    When we had, say, 15% females and 3% blacks I could trust everybody and his mama could pull their weight. Now?

    Allow me to weep a little, will ye.

    “German Physics” (you know, in the bad old days – “no matter what, as long as it is without the joo”) has been a laughingstock ever since; but compared to “feminist” or “African” physics they were gods on Earth.
    I do believe in open universities – but with a uniform lower cutoff IQ of 115.

    (I can only speak for actual science – to include sociology and anthropology as practiced in Europe; few women have real interest in these fields anyway)

    • Replies: @Rosie
  35. anonynous says:

    Of all the terrible “isms” that corrupted and attacked Western Christian Civilization in the 20th century, I have to go with “Feminism” being the worst. And like other toxix “isms” like Marxism, Communism, Neo Conservatism – feminism has been predominately Jewish in nature.

    Just look at the photo of the very lovely young White gal Michaela Oakland and understand the evil spirits of Roza Luxumberg, Bella Abzug, Gloria Steinem, Ruth Bader Ginzberg, Elena Kagan are trying to posses her body and soul and turn her in to another Hillary Rodham Clinton. Hillary didn’t look or think that bad when she was Michaela’s age and look what she became – a hideous, hateful feminist witch!

    • Agree: theMann
    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  36. anonynous says:


    I also noticed that.

  37. MarkU says:

    I couldn’t care less whether you call it “science” or not. Call it “natural philosophy” or “metaphysics” or whatever the hell you want.

    OK, fair enough, I just didn’t want the word ‘science’ to go the same way as the word ‘gender’ ie rewritten to mean whatever the hell they want it to mean.

    As for falsifying (I hate that word) Darwinism, I think you would need a very tight definition to start with. What exactly are we attempting to falsify? That some evolution is caused by natural selection? That all evolution is caused by natural selection? it seems clear that some evolution is caused by natural selection, I doubt that anyone would argue that it all is, haven’t we ourselves altered species by selective breeding? I do agree with you in principle, that science cannot be allowed to become dogma, there can be no sacred cows. If you can think of a suitable experiment to test either ‘Darwinism’ or ‘intelligent design’ then I am all for it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  38. Realist says:

    No, I’m not. I couldn’t care less whether you call it “science” or not. Call it “natural philosophy” or “metaphysics” or whatever the hell you want.

    Okay…let’s call it bullshit.

  39. Rosie says:

    . If you can think of a suitable experiment to test either ‘Darwinism’ or ‘intelligent design’ then I am all for it.


  40. Rosie says:

    Allow me to weep a little, will ye.

    Yes, and I certainly understand your frustration.

    I do believe in open universities – but with a uniform lower cutoff IQ of 115

    That would help a great deal, no doubt.

  41. SMK says: • Website

    My argument and criticism of Welton is that the problem with academia is not women but leftists, leftists of all races, male and female. And so, too, with poltics, the courts, the culture, the MSM (CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc.) Yes, the women are awful, but so are the men, and they’re more of a problem, systemically and fundamentally, because there are more of them and they have more power and influence. And things will worsen and worsen as more and more academics, politicians, judges, prosecutors, journalists, etc., male and female, are black, mestizo/amerindian, and Muslim.

    But Welton doesn’t attack leftists, leftists of all races, male and female, or analyze the importance of race and immigration, the demographics juggernaut that will soon destroy what’s left of the “historice American nation” and turn whites into an increasingly dispossessed and persecuted minority but focuses on women as the problem with academia, the reason of which can only be misogyny. To give but one example: The deranged hatred of Trump, the ubiquitous and relentless lies, the slander and censorship, the mass psychosis and hysteria, the Russia hoax, the Ukranian hoax, the jihad to impeach, ad nauseam, none of this would end or change if all the leftists in the MSM were male

  42. It’s quite possible that these male academics of humanities are just extremely peeved at women invading their safe spaces, their subjects have always been pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo that will be cherry picked by the powers that be at newspapers to prove some point while others with preconceived ideas cherry pick academics not cherry picked by the media to prove THEIR point

    I suppose this professor got a good kick from this drama, perhaps he too is a genius judging by his low empathy and willingness to offend and could be the next big thing in (((economics))), if only the f*male menace was not there to impede his march to glory…

  43. Paul says:

    $29 for a sweatshirt? What a rip-off !

  44. Alfred says:

    The sad thing is that there are a lot of women in science and academia who are objective and who are capable of thinking for themselves. However, these women tend to be outliers – the ones least likely to wish to get embroiled in this discussion.

    Here is one who has been trying to explain how Global Warming is a hoax so far as Australia is concerned:

    Jennifer Marohasy

    And this lady is also very smart but somewhat less inhibited:

    Joanne Nova

    Frankly, these two women should put lots of male academics in Australia to shame.

  45. @Rosie

    Rosie makes a key point here. The academy has always tended to select for dogmatic characters because it has always focused on formulating, propagating and enforcing dogma. Authoritarian hierarchy is the formal model. Science has always found it a problematical environment. Perhaps women are, on average, better suited for the role, but the academy has never had any trouble finding ready, willing and able males. Thorstein Veblen’s The Higher Learning In America, published in 1918 but written a dozen years earlier, gives abundant evidence of this situation from a time when women were very rare in colleges. So does Veblen’s career. He was far too insightful and too truthful to last long on any campus. Today he wouldn’t have survived grad school.

  46. LOL

    Too many contradictions. The author’s emotions are obviously “triggered” just like the females he refers to, which is about 2 women.

    It’s kind of funny in a sad way to watch grown men and women fighting like this and then obviously exposing themselves to the same behaviors they accuse each other of.

    He doesn’t like it when these feminists attack him and attempt to get a male Prof dismissed….so why would he think they’d stay silent regarding comments that insinuate same for them?

    Pretty sad…..and embarrassing for these men especially.

    • Agree: TKK
    • Replies: @eah
    , @TKK
    , @renfro
  47. @SMK

    Many men don’t seem to understand that degrading 1/2 their race will get us all nowhere fast. The same can be said for women about men.

    • LOL: eah
    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    , @eah
  48. Paul says:

    Indiana University’s Professor Eric Rasmusen ran into the usual hysteria.

  49. JoannF says:

    I have a collection of quotes and text blocks in connection with intelligence statistics that I gathered from diverse websites over the last years, I c/p’d a few here, please have a look. It’s not about outliers though, just about averages.

    If… girls and boys know about the same amount of math but boys’ test scores are consistently and significantly higher, then the test is biased.

    Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972. 7 Title IX was enacted in 1972 to ensure that females receive the same educational opportunities as males. 8 The language of this statute is modeled after Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 9 the educational counterpart to the equal employment statute, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    10 Part II of this Note delves into the history of standardized tests as they relate to higher education, focusing primarily on the SAT.

    In their introduction to the first revision of the Stanford-Binet, Terman and his collaborator Maude Merrill eliminated a few tests in their trial batteries that yielded the largest sex differences. There is evidence that David Wechsler, another IQ test constructor did the same.

    A relevant video whose link I had held in evidence has, to my shock and utter surprise, been deleted by youtube.

    The wikipedia page about nerve cell counts in mammals states this (these being approximations, there’s a tendency for these counts to grow over the years, they are kinda hard to count) :

    15,000,000,000 Fin Whale

    16,000,000,000 (male)
    13,440,000,000 (female) Homo sapiens’

    37,200,000,000 Long-finned pilot whale.

  50. Onebornfree says: • Website

    “If universities are to remain centred around the pursuit of truth, then there need to be far fewer females involved in them.”

    Women in universities might be a problem , but they are not the main problem. The main problem is their being government funded, and that that ensures , not education, but indoctrination into an ideology that is inevitably totally supportive of the state itself.

    “One must differentiate between one’s thoughts and one’s emotions with full clarity and precision…No discussion, cooperation, agreement, or understanding is possible among men who substitute emotion for proof.” Ayn Rand

    “There’s never been a good government.” Emma Goldman

    “Civilization has been a continuous struggle of the individual or of groups of individuals against the State and even against “society,” that is, against the majority subdued and hypnotized by the State and State worship.”Emma Goldman

    “The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” Ayn Rand


  51. Bert says:

    Been there. Done that. And you are absolutely right.

  52. GMC says:

    This is not just a University/Institutional problem either. This “operation woman” has infiltrated all jobs and positions that were held mostly by men. From the Construction Industry to the POlice Departments to the Military , good qualified Men have been routed from their jobs because of this Black Ops which started in Washington back in the 70s = Affirmative Action. JUst like the N Y Zio-Jew Lobby that made Open Unlimited Immigration, I’ll bet that the same Tribe lobbied for this BS too. Now look – the Propaganda machine has been running for about 100 yrs now. If its not the Zio-Jew run Federal Reserve/Wall St. , Hollywood, TV, NGOs, Think Tanks, Newspapers, Massive Lobby machine, it’s the USGovernment Agencies pushing even more propaganda and lies – 24/7. No wonder no one in America is seeing what us few – do see – and Thank You Unz Rev. and other Alternate Journalism and their Writers, for Proving the Pravda.

    • Agree: SOL
  53. BALZAC

    Even when exercising their greatest duplicity women are always sincere because they are yielding to some natural feeling.

    • LOL: eah
  54. TKK says:

    Furthermore, very few households can survive on one salary (the male’s).

    Housing is such a racket, most folks could not make their mortgage note without two “pulling the plow.”

    But let’s bring in more immigrants to soak up living wage jobs and affordable housing.

    We crossed the rubicon now. It’s all downhill.

  55. El Dato says:
    @Jim Christian

    Nothing is as important as taking up space in society and cementing yourself.

    Every govnmt employee can attest to that fact.

    Be a Maginot line. Fat, expensive, ugly, useless, filled with explosive stuff, and giving other people cause to work around you.

    Girls learning about aeronautics! How noble! But no, she just meant displace, sit, take up actual space, like a man spreader on the train,

    These people believe that high tech grows on trees and that they can have both a deskilled workforce banging on drums all day and iPhones.

  56. eah says:

    He doesn’t like it when these feminists attack him and attempt to get a male Prof dismissed

    Right — because there are certain minimum standards in intellectual discourse that men expect all participants to uphold, and one of them is not trying to get someone fired for having and expressing disagreeable or unpopular views and opinions — and it is far too often women who fail to uphold these minimum standards.

    So you’ve misidentified the real problem here.

  57. Most women who work do so out of selfish motives, regardless of how their rational hamster convinces them otherwise. They deliberately evade marriage and children in support of a career. This sets up a host of secondary consequences that slowly but surely destroy the nation. So-called rights mean nothing without responsibilities, which should be clearly stated in law, otherwise penalties ensue. In this case, career women should be stripped of their voting franchise.

  58. Emmet says: • Website

    As the Tao sages of China said: “Men build up the city walls; women tear them down again.”

  59. @Rosie

    “There’s nothing more I can say.”

    Oh yes there is…

  60. El Dato says:

    Meanwhile in Finland (via RT)

    And in case you come from a country that still considers a female or somebody under 40 to be too bold a candidacy to be elected, Marin hardly stands out in Finnish politics. In fact, the four other party leaders in the ruling coalition are all women, and some of them are even younger.

    Li Andersson, 32, heads the Left Alliance [SJW program], holds the office of the minister of education [since June 2019] and has a T-shirt with the slogan “F**k racism” in her wardrobe.

    View this post on Instagram

    New morning in Sweden!

    A post shared by Li Andersson (@lindrssn) on

    Such a T-Shirt signals that education standards may well be wrecked soon for the benefits of “New Finns”.

    Leftism: When you are living in a stable society and you can afford to consider the Grand Plan of Saving Everyone From Evil as you sip a martini by the swimming pool. A bit later you switch to Rightism. Or not.

    • Replies: @Jake
    , @Frankk
  61. @Rosie

    “So how is that any different from most men in academia?”

    Gee I don’t know – maybe read about the history of Western Civilization up to the 20th century.

    • Replies: @Anon
  62. El Dato says:

    all the men who threatened to kill Galileo

    Actually, put under arrest. Because of RELIGIOUS DOGMA.

    they’re repressing intelligent design

    Contrary to the mention of the objective correctness of heliocentrism, Intelligent Design is RELIGIOUS DOGMA.

    The idea of “intelligent design” is not needed. Indeed, it is a repugnant idea of God as The Big Blundering Diddler Nerd Working Across Time instead of God as the Skillful Master who doesn’t need to diddle but can compress everything into a timeless description of a finitely/infinitely fine (we don’t know) developing system that can hold on a page of human paper. People holding IE ideas are in big need of expanding their horizon. A sad lack of the imagination.

    …the expanding Universe is preposterous… it leaves me cold.

    Just look through a telescope to become less dumb and you coldness will very much disappear quickly. The universe ages and dies like anything else.

    Why the Academy needs women:

    Ladies, if you think your boyfriend is congenitally unable to admit that he is wrong about directions/instructions/whether “The Leftovers” is any good, you are correct. Newly released research indicates that men who have high testosterone levels are more apt to be unable to yield their side of an argument.

    “Let’s talk about the spat I had with my sex partner about cooking”.

    That has nothing to do with academia.

    Real Women in Science dismiss sexual harrassment whinery and get on with the job:

    • Agree: nokangaroos
  63. Anon[205] • Disclaimer says:

    College age girls are idiots. University knows they will take out loans so hence the heavy emphasis on females. Don’t slaughter the cash cow. And many are cows. Believe me.

    These girls think nothing of taking out a college loan. It is their hope and plan to find a husband and let him pay it off. Well, it’s failing miserably because men, young and old, have caught on and are asking these girls how much student loan debt they carry.

    Women are in trouble.

    Men no longer will bail them out.

    Who in their right mind would marry a woman with 75k in student loan debt? Or 30k? Even if she has a good job, when the time comes to have kids she’ll just quit and the husband will be making the payments.

    When it’s paid off she’ll divorce the guy.

    Let’s be honest. The United States sucks. Lawyers, big business and academia are driving a wedge between men and women. The propaganda is endless. It’s powerful. And women are more duped by it then men.

    Profits over families.

    This country is going downhill.

    • Agree: Stonehands
    • Replies: @TKK
  64. Anonymous[107] • Disclaimer says:

    The problem is in the hard sciences and interpretive fields based on science, such as medicine. For every woman admitted to medical school in the US, nineteen more qualified young men are passed over, which is presumably all the more so in physics and chemistry. Add to this the number of low IQ Affirmative Action blacks and Hispanics, and we’ve got a crisis on our hands. Moreover, women in anything but administrative support roles in the military is suicidal.

    The proof that all this is designed to destroy America is more easily discerned with the Pentagon’s unmerited preferment granted to homosexuals, whose severe psychological disabilities outweigh even their disgusting sexual practices. Human nature hasn’t changed, of course. What we’re witnessing is the final destruction of America by the Jews, whose 35-times overrepresentation as determinants of social, economic, and academic policy is not only self evident, but openly bragged about by their opinion leaders.

    The irony I cannot understand is the support of CUFI’s and other evangelicals for—clearly—the most anti-Christian, secularizing government on the planet in DC, that’d turn their children and grandchildren into sexual chimeras when they’re not being taught how to perform anilingus in the first grade. The takeover of their minds is as complete as the most bizarre instances of insect parasitism, and yet, as Jacques Ellul pointed out 75 years ago, they fancy themselves well informed because they watch Fox News, which is more deep state propaganda than CNN. They proudly send their sons and daughters as mass murderers of God’s innocent children on the other side of the world, to possibly be killed or maimed themselves, because they mistake the costumed bureaucrats in the mother of all bureaucracies for patriots like themselves. They cry out, “Let the blood of ten million Arab children by on our heads,” and so it shall be.

    • Agree: Bill
  65. Jake says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The basic premise of the article is true of education at all levels. For example, when America made the change from schoolmaster to schoolmarm, America signed up for a slow slide into utter leftism.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  66. Jake says:
    @El Dato

    Surely this cannot be happening. After all, Finland is not filled with Jews. And equally important is that over the past 40 or 50 years, Finland’s educated classes have become thoroughly Anglicized culturally.

    Everybody knows that Jewish women are the cause of female Leftism. And VDARE and its ilk know that WASP culture is our salvation, which means that the more Anglicized a country gets, the more level headed it becomes, the less likely to embrace Liberalism.

    Here are couple of things to ponder: when the Russian Empire controlled Finland, it – the only non-Germanic one – was the only Scandinavian country not to be defined by ultra Liberalism in cultural terms. When the USSR controlled Finland, it remained culturally much as it had for hundreds of years, and then after Finland was freed by the Anglo-Zionist Empire, Finland began racing to become as Liberal as Sweden.

    The English have long seen Russians, as they have Irish Catholics, as the very definition of backward conservatism. What is it about Germanic culture?

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  67. @MarkU

    Is the argument that, if some thing isn’t testable, it isn’t science, itself testable?

    Btw, I accept your premise and argument.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    , @MarkU
  68. Saggy says: • Website

    The peculiar type of idiocy this article represents shouldn’t be published on Unz. I don’t see it anywhere else on the web except on the, also one of my goto sites, I should say my other goto site, and it seems shameful to me for the ‘right’ to be continually blaming everything on women. Good grief !

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  69. eugyppius says:

    A diffuse response to some comments above me:

    Often these discussions tend to run two separate questions into each other. There is a) the matter of allowing, in principle, women to attend university, write dissertations, win appointments, and serve in the administration; and b) establishing as policy that women be some significant share, generally half if not more of enrolled students, PhD candidates, professors and administrators.

    One argues against variations upon b) and one gets defenders of a) in response. But our experience has been that a) gets you to b) in very little time. And while some women do make capable professors and do brilliant work, there are not as many of them at the right tail of the bell curve as men. Opening the university as we have in the twentieth century to women students and women professors has led us straight to the equal-outcome social experiment, which has been so bad that it has probably destroyed all the advantages we got from accepting women academics and women students in the first place.

    The first thing that happens, is everyone notices there aren’t as many women as men, and so they relax standards to hire more women. Then they realize that these women hired according to relaxed standards are generally not tenured and promoted at the same rate as men, so schools begin rearranging and partly dismantling their internal promotional criteria to be less sexist. One of the reasons for this hidden plague of sexism is held to be the dearth of women in the administration and so more have to be brought there. The more the thumb is put on the scale to bring women to positions of power, the more those men who have not already been excluded flee for the hills, because who wants to sit in meetings all day worrying about whether freshman orientation is sufficiently inclusive and whether junior faculty are being properly mentored by their senior colleagues in the run-up to their reappointments in year 3.

    At the end of this process you have a school like mine was when I left it: Overwhelmingly majority female upper administration, majority female student life administration, department chairs are mostly women, as indeed are all the key committee chairs. Tenure and to a lesser extent other promotional procedures have become such fraught processes with potential sexist and racist landmines everywhere that they sap large amounts of attention. At this stage suddenly also a great many of the male faculty turn out to be gay.

    All of this adds up to a lot of things, but the most obtrusive is the sheer effeteness of everything. Very few people even argue with each other. The emotional and often mental infirmity of the student body is assumed outright. The humanities and social sciences, quite apart from Theory and all that it has wrought, are allergic to positivist or empirical pursuits because they entail that some people must be wrong. (Only the concept of moral wrong is permitted to exist and in fact it flourishes.) There is a real truth to the popular image of the pathologically nurturing middle-aged childless woman. These sorts are to be found everywhere at today’s universities, especially in positions of power. An ironic corollary to aggressive inclusiveness and acceptance is that it is enforced with a completely jarring zeal and lack of proportion and a totalitarian insistence that everybody adhere to a vast and complex set of behavioral guidelines lest one exclude somebody. The more nurturing you are towards ‘insiders’ the more your aggression towards ‘outsiders’ (in this case, those outside your ideological circle) becomes a necessity and the more of an unpleasant monster you become.

    These nurturing powerful women can be terrible individually, but most of the problems come from the self-reinforcing environment they create among themselves for the entire school. They want everyone to be nice to each other, and not be naughty; they have deep distaste for people, especially men, who they deem to be unkind or uncaring to others. The women want to talk all of the time and build consensus in the course of lengthy discussions. Thus committees and meetings have flourished even as we have vastly expanded the number of administrators who were supposed to relieve faculty of administrative chores. A great part of the books have been moved out of libraries and replaced with comfortable chairs, dimmable lighting and group study rooms so that students can socialize with each other more effectively while they study. Vast numbers of gardeners are retained by elite schools to manicure the lawns just right and water all the strange wetland plants. People bring their pets everywhere; many of these have been declared support animals of some sort. We employ armies of psychiatrists and other medical professionals to tend to fragile students and staff alike. Every few hundred meters on every elite campus, even those with no crime to speak of, there is another emergency telephone indicated by a blue light that will connect you straight to security if you feel nervous or have forgotten your key or see a dog who might be unfriendly.

    Female (and increasingly male) faculty hired under this regime must above all be nice, accepting, outgoing tolerant people. You might not want a school of full of geniuses, but a school full of aggressively friendly extroverted networkers is hardly any better. These are people who do the intellectual equivalent of coloring very carefully within the lines all the time. Scholarship as a whole has become a vaguely leftist enactment of their nurturing tolerance and out-group preferences.

    What you don’t have very much of anymore is the stuff that made ‘universities’ worthwhile in the first place, once upon a time. These overbuilt over-elaborated finishing schools-cum-amusement-parks for the Diverse and the Elite are not intellectually serious places, and at least in the English-speaking world they haven’t been for about two generations now.

  70. Handyman’ – A solid working -claas White Man. Right?

    Not for the greasy ARSEs of CountDown. All the ‘KyteBuilder’ show sponsor ads show women/darkies rescuing a nice White m/c family.

    Who is the psychopathic thug who knocks over bathroom tiles, scratches their wires etc?

    A dindu doin TNB? No. Racist!
    A fat hag? No. Sexist!
    A swarthy frizzy ARSE? No!

    Why ofc – it’s a GINGER!!!

    We all know those nasty fair redheaded Celts are the thugs of Yardie drugdealers, SSing groomers, fembot trigglypuffs!!!!

    I live in fear of GINGER thugz!!!

  71. Anonymous[107] • Disclaimer says:

    The flip side of effeteness is extraordinarily bad judgment dealing with realpolitik. “I’d like to teach the world to sing in menstrual synchrony…oh, oh, oh, oh, oh…”

    • Replies: @eugyppius
  72. It’s a fine controversy one stirs up when one inflates one’s unresolved mommy issues into a political/social position. And when one’s antagonists are so predictably “triggered” by their unresolved daddy issues, it’s a most diverting entertainment for the rest of us, heck, better than any TV sitcom. May the most/least neurotic side win/lose!

  73. Giving women the vote was/is the single biggest mistake any republic can make, even ahead of our fake wars and slavery.

    Unless you’re an accelerationist, the (((gynocracy))) must be put back in the kitchen.

  74. @Sick of Orcs

    Historically ½ adult life they were preggers. Explains unsuitability to grown up politics.

    • Agree: Sick of Orcs
  75. eugyppius says:

    In general I think politicking, like frank disagreement and the courting of controversy and the readiness to argue, skew male. They are also what happens when you have a relatively weak administration and power is fragmented. The authoritarian preferences of the woke faculty and students reflect an attempt to remove all of this unpleasant and divisive deliberation from the midst of mere mortals and vest it in powerful parent figures in the provost’s office.

  76. Theories of intelligent design have been subject to extensive critical examination since the Enlightenment. In what sense, then, are such ideas suppressed, as you claim them to be in your earlier post?

    A problem with such theories is that they typically beg the question, in the strict logical sense of the term. That is to say, as part of their argument they assume as true that which is to be proven. Hence, the universe is said to be the result of intelligent design because only an intelligent designer could produce such a complex and well functioning system.

    The whole of geological, evolutionary and cosmological science together provide an alternative account for the development of the material world from an initial set of defined conditions. An account that is based on reason and observation, something of which you apparently approve.

    Proponents of intelligent design have failed to provide a more plausible account of the origins of the material world. It is for this reason that their ideas fail to gain currency, not because the ideas themselves are suppressed.

    In my view, your arguments fail, not because of your apparent gender, but because they are unconvincing. Given the nature of my mediaeval namesake, I could hardly think otherwise.

  77. jsigur says:

    When every MSM entertainment outlet has a disproportionate number of shows with women heroes and role models while the enemy or object of disgust is a man or men, you can assume there is an agenda at play. Add to that, the same MO against conservative white males that don’t buy Judeo Christianity and ladies and gentleman, you are witnessing one of many NWO agendas meant to destabilize traditional society in the west.
    When every outlet is part of this problem for we the people, you can be assured marching orders are coming down from central location point behind the WWE curtain to carry this out. Those fictional protocols laid out the importance of divide and conquer to distract and misdirect, thus we get gobs of race war identity politics, male-female hate, mislabeling country boys as bozos who hate all non-whites, etc.
    We live in a country where it is quite clear what our rights are in regards to free speech while at the same time, authority figures keep giving you reasons why this exception needs to occur here, that exception there. Pretty soon the whittling will leave anyone with a free thought still left in his brain,not knowing what he can say and what he can’t. It’s interesting to see all this technology advancement with none of it entering into the skulls of the citizens as they parrot propaganda phrases and ideas about conformity while worrying that blondie above needs to be able to have her you-tube channel that talks about cum stains all over beds her fans have sex on.
    We are being encouraged to be petty and to think inside their box. So we must have all forms of recreational sex advocated, to undermine the family, female obsessive rants against the patriarchy, and enemies in action shows that turn out to be stupid white men
    They all do it and its advocated in the protocols but I guess that’s just a cohencidence. Of course there is a group that is leading the way on all this madness and we’ve been told its hate speech to mention them, all the while they target our white brothers as uncouth barbarians and Muslim extremists just around the corner with no mention of devisive Jewish subversion to be found anywhere in its propaganda but I guess that is cause they are still recovering from the holocaust

  78. Make a list of the male institutions to which men have foolishly admitted women and which have NOT become histrionic combinations of tyranny and triviality, Maoist daycare centers with soap operas on the screen 24/7.

    Outside their natural domains, women are an invasive species. The destruction they have wrought is only outweighed by the epic foolishness of the Western males who let them in.

    • Replies: @lloyd
    , @nokangaroos
    , @Anonymous
  79. Is that why we have election a black man president but have never dared to elect a white woman to be one?

  80. @anonynous

    Riling up our own women against us was their biggest stroke of genius … above and beyond all other “identity politics”. And it has contributed more to the downfall of the West than all other -isms.

    The only way out is to teach women to THINK (gentlemen: I can hear the “good lucks”, there is no need to print them 😀 ) until they are able to ask:

    1) Wot is this that I think I feel?
    – or: vice versa
    – or, to paraphrase Garfield: What´s this welling up within my soul?
    (“By golly, it´s my primal urges! 😛 “)
    2) What is its primary biological function? (Funny how with all de djenndah studies and scholarettes an sheet they are kept in a Russian Bear´s rear end on this most important aspect)
    3) Does it make sense in the situation at hand, or has it become self-defeating?
    (These things happen all the time during evolution)
    4) CUI BONO ?!

    Ladies: I wish I could spare you this, but for once BE EQUAL! 😀

  81. Washington Post, CNN, Guardian – 3 peas in a Globalist-Anti Christian Euro-Male pod.

    But, can anyone answer me this: has anything good ever come from Twitter?

  82. Walter says:

    The Nth university exists entirely to fulfill a political agenda. The idea that knowledge and universities are closely related is quaint, unless that becomes politically expedient. Right now the function is propaganda and impoverishment. In other times it was to suborn the youth by “the toga, the bath, these which they see as virtue are but the bonds of their slavery”…and all of that.

  83. The most hateful, revolting,nasty comment I’ve ever heard about women (when the lights are out, and no women are around) is: If it wasn’t for sex, there would be a bounty on them.

    Shame, shame, but, there it is, The First amendment again

    • Replies: @TKK
  84. TKK says:

    Good point.

    What do they expect? For the women to say: By God! You have a point! I shall give up my post and go home in defeat and accept poverty as my just desserts.

  85. TKK says:

    Who in their right mind would marry a woman with 75k in student loan debt? Or 30k?

    It’s called love.

    Not everyone is a cenobite that looks at relationships transactionally.

    The interns and paralegals I have hired- the young men that pursue them- they don’t give a rat’s ass about their debt. These girls are young, sweet and beautiful.

    Not all college girls are cows. Go walk around a campus. Youth is still the unbeatable hand.

    • Replies: @Milesglorious
  86. TKK says:
    @Common sense Giuseppe

    Ever had a sick parent, relative or child?

    Need someone to cook a meal for an invalid?

    Come let your dog out?

    Listen to a problem?

    There are good women. Is this also an incel site?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  87. It seems like not a one of you has ever set foot in a college.

    Couldn’t pass the entrance exams, no doubt.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  88. @TomSchmidt

    Gawd, I can no longer bear to hear this argument.

    Popper was forced to eat crow fifty years ago!
    The oft-conjured swan-of-color does not invalidate a stochastic statement (“As a RULE swans are White.”) based on (multiple) observation.
    Otherwise we´d be forced to accept that paleontology (as “not testable”) and quantum physics (as “not falsifiable”) are NOT SCIENCE while djenndah studies and parapsychology most definitely ARE.

    On one hand it is reassuring our harebrained opposition still uses the line of thought …
    but none of the hypotheses chewed over here are in the strict sense “falsifiable” – they all become “LAW” only through Large Numbers.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    , @TomSchmidt
  89. SMK says: • Website

    The problem with this country is not only the left-liberal establishment, male and female, which controls almost everything, but also the “cuck”-neocon “invade-the-word/invite-the-world” establishment, which is almost entirely male, including the likes of Jeb and George W. Bush, the ghost of John McCain, Max Boot, little Billy Kristol, Charley Sykes, and the verminous little maggot, Rick Wilson, the vilest of the vile, the most execrable and deranged of all the execrable and deranged “cuck”-neocon Trump-haters. Once an obscure Republican consultant, a Bushite hack no one had ever heard of, he’s now famous, thanks to CNN and MSNBC, where he and other “cucks” and “neocons” join their leftist pals in vilifying and excoriating Trump and his supporters. Wilson derides those who voted for Trump as having 10 teeth and the like in a clip shown by Tucker Carlson, who despises Wilson and Boot and Kristol.

    His deranged hatred of Trump has rendered him so stupid and obtuse that he doesn’t realize that he’s insulting 85-90% of the people who voted for his beloved George W. Bush, resulting in his disastrous presidency, his beloved John McCain (“trump isn’t fit to lick John McCain’s boots”), his beloved Mitt Romney, and who would have voted for his beloved Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio had they won the 2016 Republican nomination.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  90. @obwandiyag

    It seems like not a one of you has ever set foot in a college. Couldn’t pass the entrance exams, no doubt.

    Only a credentialed idiotic chick with a Diploma Mill degree run off the mimeograph machine for full price would think they were smarter than a roll of toilet paper and would make a remark like that. We already established you’re a dopey broad. I dated a million chicks like you (well, smarter than you, no doubt better looking than you, but the bar ain’t very high) down in DC when they started handing out degrees like Hershey bars on Halloween to dopey chicks.

    You know what I told em? “Yes, sweetheart, your Master’s Degree makes your ass fatter” Total idiots. Worth screwin, but not much else with those empty heads. Receptacles, is all.

    ObyNag, you also are an idiot. If it wasn’t for the White Patriarchy, you and your sort would be in a burqa, in the kitchen, barefoot on a dirt floor and if not too fat and ugly, pregnant with some sand-dune dweller’s 7.2 children. Its all you’re suited for, the point of the article. White men rescued you. But never be fooled that we don’t know exactly what you are.

    • Replies: @TKK
    , @renfro
    , @obwandiyag
  91. @SMK

    The Matriarchy is in free-fall failure. Not for nothing, the decline. Letting the girls in the club was responsible for the decline. They have nothing tangible to offer.

  92. @nokangaroos

    Tom Schmidt meant Testicle not testable. Or detestable maybe.

  93. fish says:

    There are articles and comments that I make sure my youngest son reads in preparation for higher “education”.

    This is one of them!

    Well done!

  94. Jewish organizations would never in a million years put women at the director’s role, as a general rule (unless there was a truly unusual lack of competent qualified men). And it’s for the very reasons Lance has enumerated at the beginning of the above article.

    This therefore reveals the likely authorship (and their conscious intent) behind this trend being imposed on our world.

  95. “Each of us brings a valuable aspect of diversity that gives our institution strength. I hope we can remember this when we are challenged by others whose minds are closed to this viewpoint.”

    — They’re tied up in knots on this one! They cannot even see the irony in their fetish over diversity coexisting alongside their insistence on unanimity!

    This would be very funny if it weren’t sickening in the extreme.

  96. TKK says:
    @Jim Christian


    Mouth breather.

    Probably a virgin to get so intimidated by women. It’s funny but embarrassing.

    • Troll: eah
    • Replies: @fish
    , @Jim Christian
  97. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    In 1951 Charlotte Whitten became mayor of the city of Ottawa, the first women in Canada to hold mayoralty of a major city. Today, she is remembered chiefly, I suspect, for her remark that:

    for a woman to succeed in a man’s world she needs to be twice as good as a man.

    At the time, that was largely true throughout the Western world. Then, for most women the main career opportunity was motherhood, and to distinguish herself in that role, a woman needed to raise distinguished sons.

    As an incentive to faithfully perform this essential service to the race and civilization women were provided with a considerable measure of economic security by virtue of marriage and divorce laws. Moreover, the absence of legal abortion services gave women a powerful incentive to seek marriage rather than casual sex.

    But there were always women who pursued careers and demonstrated that, if not twice as good as a man, some could certainly equal the achievements of men. In those days, therefore, it was the case that for a woman to become an academic provided good evidence of real ability.

    Today, the situation is totally different. Virtually all the protections provided to women who commit to the raising of children have been removed while casual and safe and sterile sex has been facilitated an promoted by almost every public institution from parliaments to parish churches, and from the media to the medical profession. The result? A feminist revolt manifest not in the refusal of sexual gratification but in the truly wicked refusal to perpetuate the race.

    Western society is now well on the way to extinction, without the slightest prospect of recovery: feminists in academia being among the principle agents of national self-destruction.

  98. @Brown boi

    Given that you encourage sati of all things, I’m not sure why you’d be paging her.

    • Replies: @Anatman
    , @Brown Boiii
  99. @Jake

    True, Jake. That change happened around the same time as the Feral Gov’t getting heavily involved in lower education – the D.O.E. was formed during the Jimmy Carter administration as payback to the teachers’ unions for their votes. They were both bad things for our kids.

    Peak Stupidity has more on my point in “It’s that time of year – THE STATE is coming for your kids.” and more on your point in “Western World demographic soo-ee-cide – the working woman”.

  100. renfro says:

    Too many contradictions. The author’s emotions are obviously “triggered” just like the females he refers to, which is about 2 women.

    It appears these enraged men are really scared of women.
    Obviously they arent confident of their own objectivity, logic, intelligence, etc or emotional women wouldnt bother them.

    If you check their background and other writings they have some weird obsessions, like Dr Dutton’s obsession with penis sizes……haha….I am just imagining the hysterics if a female professor was writing about penis sizes….lol,

    Seriously if unz post articles on the man, woman, race, IQ, crap, etc……can we at least have some real and respected experts on the subject…not these nobody gimmick hacks.

    • Replies: @freedom-cat
  101. @Jake

    Hmm … good points.

    Contrary to popular belief the epicenter of blondism (one-time “defect” mutation in middle Sweden) was not always populated by eunuchs.
    They got their danglings cut off by the Russians at Poltawa 1709 and have not regrown them since.
    It was a textbook case of overconfidence and overstretch followed by collapse – very teachable 😀

  102. Learner says:

    Jesus what a theater. But there might be some truth.

  103. lloyd says: • Website
    @Dr ExCathedra

    No one, except me, appears to notice that no Communist country or even ex Communist country has ever elected a woman leader. If I am wrong let me know. Even Islam has had a woman leader although they did eventually murder her, Bhutto. Could that be because Communism is rooted in the nineteenth century era of science and objective truth? That has survived even aftter the actual fall of Communism. In the professional occupations, Communist countries actually have out classed capitalism countries in employing women. But I assume that was because women professional workers outclassed in merit. In ex Communist countries and in Islamic countries, women are dominating the professions and sensibly leaving politics and war to the men. That might explain why they are out witting what we used to know as the West.

  104. @Saggy

    This is one of my goto sites, too, Saggy. Ron Unz has something for about everybody here. I’m not talking about this article, which I pretty much agree with. However, if you don’t like stupidity, then you are in the wrong place. “Interesting, Important, and Controversial” in no way rules out Stupid, and it is displayed in a big way by the Commie writers hosted here.

  105. @eugyppius

    Excellent comment, Eugyppius. As Fish says, now THIS should be the article!

  106. @Dr ExCathedra

    Fifteen or so years ago an Army systems analysis (it´s one of (((their))) methods but rarely used where it makes sense) concluded a woman was worth MINUS SEVEN men … not that it availed them a thing 😛
    (from personal experience I´d have estimated minus three, but neither the engineers nor recon hold much allure for those without a White foreskin)

    – It seems not to have hurt the quality of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra (because nothing much changed) but the erosion of social capital (esprit de corps) is hard to assess.

  107. I disagree with most of the text- although I do agree with some points.

    There is no way going back to the old-type society where women were less educated, dependable etc. This is the definite past. Anyone who thinks in these parameters is beyond rescue.

    On the other hand, advanced (or at least functioning) modern societies like Japan, Russia, China with numerous small Chinas, most of eastern & central Europe, white parts of Latin America – don’t know this radical type of feminism, nor are women there, on average, as promiscuous as in North America & most advanced, technologically, Western European countries.

    Something has gone wrong with affluent West, just I don’t see a cause-effect dynamics there.

    Be as it may, educated & working women are not some freaking harridans or whores. And yet, these societies where so much is media manipulated & centered around sexualization of everything, where crazy ideologies run amok ( I guess North America & Northern Europe are the most lunatic places on earth, bar North Korea & Iran) – there is something fundamentally wrong.

    The rest of the world is either heavily lagging behind (non-white parts of Latin America), or is a bunch of fossilized societies without future (Islamic world), or is a mixture of everything, but highly unstable (India), or is a Stone Age mega-shithole (Africa).

    Future & hope, despite all shortcomings, begin east of Germany and stretch further east & north.

  108. @nokangaroos

    Are you familiar with D C Stove, mugwump philosopher of Australia? He’s fun to read contra Popper. Against the Idols of the Age having a few of his choice broadsides against Popper, Kuhn, and company and what he calls “Jazz Age Philosophy.” It’s actually quite enjoyable.

    Stove famously wrote a paper titled ” The Intellectual Capacity of Women.” It’s a non-mathematical argument, and ignores fat tails, but breathtakingly non-PC.

    I go with “if you make a falsifiable argument that can be disproved with evidence” you’re doing science, rather than Popper’s not. There’s enough experiments to run in that area. If other things beyond falsifiability ARE science is not covered in that construction, and I’ll let someone else argue that out.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    , @Daniel Rich
  109. @SMK

    Sure … but is this not a most excellent argument against allowing women to VOTE?

    Or are you going to posit it was NOT women who tipped the scales on “diversity and inclusion” because “those eebil territorial stinking men” must be put down a notch?

  110. It is both sickening and outrageous that the Unz Review, which should know better,
    hosts a link to this article. What is clear is that the institution where Rasmussen is
    employed should have one less male professor.
    Barbara Honegger
    Former Director of the Attorney General’s Anti-Gender Discrimination Law Review
    at the U.S. Dept. of Justice

  111. Shaman911 says:

    They’re just Freemasons doing their jobs. Ordo Ab Chao

  112. @freedom-cat

    Ran out of Agrees again 😀

    But what´s “degrading” about “No, Virginia, the army, the police and the fire department have more important tasks than your self-actualization”?

    And the opposite … “Raumpatrouille”, the antediluvial German clone of Star Trek, had an episode on a planet ran by women (since Fellini no one dared think this through, it seems), men were hypnotized and relegated to science, engineering and gardening, and everything was peace and hippie and well groomed.
    (not like that would make much difference for the humble one 😛 )

    What would be YOUR prescriptions?

  113. @TKK

    Good advise as long as you confine yourself to the SEC schools.

    • Replies: @eah
  114. Anonymous[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dr ExCathedra

    The Western males who promote women do so to negate the masculinity of their betters.

  115. Pheasant says:

    ‘Take the male students who can’t sit still in their seats, squeak, squeak, squeak, who gnaw on necklaces made of pieces of wood so loud it disrupts the class’

    Hampster u?

  116. eah says:

    Good advise as long as you confine yourself to the SEC schools.

    Not to unduly prolong this mostly OT and uninteresting string of comments, but the SEC comprises schools located in the most obese area/states in America — so it would be somewhat surprising if those schools did not contain an above average fraction of overweight young women (and you misspelled advice):

    • Replies: @Milesglorious
  117. fish says:

    It’s funny but embarrassing.

    Much like your response……

  118. @Barbara Honegger

    It’s not a link, dummy – publishes and hosts Mr. Welton’s articles. What is clear to me is that the “Anti-Gender Discrimination Law Review” is a waste of my tax money. Hey, Honegger, ya fiyad!

  119. eah says:

    It has nothing to do with “degrading” women generally; rather, in this case, with the behavior of women who occupy high positions in academia.

    You seem challenged, so let me help you out: go find and read the article by Prof Rasmusen here on — it contains a link to the full statement issued by IU provost Robel in response to criticism of Prof Rasmusen; much of her statement is reproduced above — then answer the following (mostly rhetorical) questions: 1) is her statement measured and appropriate, given her position?; 2) why did she issue a statement at all?

    See the problem is, her statement was indistinguishable from what you might expect from a hysterical SJW harpy — also, there was no need whatsoever for her to say anything — if for some weird reason she felt compelled to issue a statement, it should have been something like this: The views expressed by Prof Rasmusen are his own, and do not represent those of the university, nor anyone else associated with it.

    Of course men also engage in this kind of absurd, preening signaling of their virtue — but women do seem more prone to it.

    Now re women in academia generally: too many of them are junk academics who choose soft disciplines and then publish useless nonsense — to get an eyeful of this phenomenon, follow New Real Peer Review.

    Finally, from my point of view, women are not authority figures — so I do not understand having them in leadership positions, in academia or anywhere else — but that’s just me.

    • Replies: @freedom-cat
  120. @TomSchmidt

    No I wasn´t, but thanks for future reference (soon´s I find time 😀 ).
    Feyerabend is a joke, but criticism of Popper (especially his dismissal of induction) is always welcome.

  121. @eah

    Thanks for your correction. They must lock up all the fat ones during football season.

    • Replies: @eah
  122. @Jim Christian

    No, this is not leadership, she got all wrong….

  123. Wally says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Men or women, it doesn’t really matter as long as they promote the mandated Jew supremacist agenda & their contrived curriculum.

    Study / Euro-whites discriminated against in universities:

    Are Facts White Nationalist?, by Ann Coulter:

  124. eah says:

    I’m sure there are plenty of nice (and attractive) girls in the SEC, as there are everywhere (including the ACC — ask Brett Favre — “LOL”).

  125. map says:

    Look, the solution to this problem is very simple:

    1) Allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy.

    2) Absolve the students of their bankruptcy debt to reset their credit.

    3) Seize university assets to make up for the bankruptcy losses: Pensions, endowments and real estate.

    The bankruptcy filings are simply a catalog of how fraudulent different universities are.

    We’ll see how loyal and willing all of these “female students” are in maintaining their student loans.

    4) Then, make it illegal for any corporation to require a college degree for a job that does not need a college degree.

    You do this, and this problem goes away.

  126. And someone was earnestly attempting to convince me that women don’t want any extra considerations in the workplace. The focus was AA, but I suspect that these women not only support AA, but clearly want protection from ideas they find upsetting.

  127. Wally says:

    In the meantime, teaching the fake & impossible “holocaust” narrative is mandatory in many states and may soon to be required everywhere in the US.

    Teaching Holocaust, Don’t know much about history, by Philip Giraldi :

    “Lest we forget, the holocaust industry operates everywhere in America, particularly in the education system. Eight states already have laws mandating holocaust education (California, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Florida, Illinois, Indiana and Michigan) and there is considerable pressure to make it universal in the United States. An alarmed World Jewish Congress (WJC) is urging required holocaust education for everyone everywhere “citing statistics from a 2018 poll revealing half of millennials can’t name a single Nazi concentration camp.”

    Only lies require censorship.

    • Agree: Republic
  128. @Daniel Chieh

    Stupid christcuck atheist matieralist larper.
    You don’t encourage something you hold it as Sacrosanct.

    Hindu atheists are getting wrecked by Islam for turning away from Sati Ma.

    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
  129. lavoisier says: • Website

    This was because Indiana University’s provost—a somewhat less attractive female called Lauren Robel —

    This has to be the understatement of the year!

    The woman’s face screams for censorship!

  130. @orionyx

    Ann Coulter is a negrophiliac who wants to make sure that her ‘groids get their due.

    She has scribbled about how we owe American blacks for slavery. She has written that we owe them affirmative action and that we have to be careful what we say around them. This means we could not talk about low black IQ and criminality. This is censorship She would be in favor of giving black males the vote.

    Coulter was good on immigration and getting Trump elected. Once the 2020 election is over, she is useless.

    • Replies: @Wally
  131. Leopold says:

    Rosie is the perfect proof that radical feminism is really the puppetmaster behind White Nationalism.

  132. @SMK

    Eric Rasmusen is married to a Korean woman. He is a degenerate Christian cuck. He probably believes that Asian women are superior to Caucasian women. Always cherchez la femme, le homme, la famille of a person.

    Lance Welton is one of the cuck writers at VDare. Here is an article he wrote about the Muslim Uighers. Please see my comment no. 12.

    Chris DeGroot is a cuck who writes for the cuck infested Takimag website.

    Welton scribbled: If universities are to remain centred around the pursuit of truth, then there need to be far fewer females involved in them.

    I am a Western nationalist. The first thing we need to do is get rid of blacks/Asians/Jews/Muslims from Western universities. Any Western male face planted in Asian poontang will also be expelled.

    We will then teach that the West is the best and who created and developed Western civilization.

  133. @Rosie

    The younger gent in the video when talking of the Flagellum motor said:

    “at the very least we have to come up with an explanation for this.

    Well I think God explains it very well. Let’s keave it at that, as man is not alotted enough years to figure it out.

  134. Robel and Krasner, are barren Jewish gender benders whose job is to drive the tribe’s agenda, which is: emasculate white males, promote homosexuality, allow trannies to teach sex ed in K-8 schools, trans our children, take away our guns, break up the traditional family, promote race war, and that’s just for starters. It’s not any more complicated than that.

  135. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:

    The cardinals I would disperse among the common-rooms of Oxford and Cambridge, where they could exercise to the full their talent for intrigue without having any serious effect, for good or ill, upon the destinies of the nation.

    Apparently not a new thing.

  136. Wally says:

    She said none of that, you’re a liar.

    Recently from Coulter:

    Study / Euro-whites discriminated against in universities:
    Are Facts White Nationalist?, by Ann Coulter:


    • Replies: @Thomm
    , @attilathehen
  137. Thomm says:

    Correction. Ann Coulter does date black men.

    You should experience my new song. It is extremely popular and catchy.


    Ann-O-Mite :

    She Dy-no-mite, she Dy-no-mite!!
    When we boink, it outta sight!

    I is black, and she is white,
    One joins with the other like day and night!

    Those WNs at first quake with fright,
    But after a while, just burn with spite.

    Together, we set the stage alight!
    She Dy-no-mite, she Dy-no-mite!!

  138. renfro says:
    @Jim Christian

    You know what I told em? “Yes, sweetheart, your Master’s Degree makes your ass fatter” Total idiots. Worth screwin, but not much else with those empty heads. Receptacles, is all

    I thought I remembered you from your previous comments……so I looked at your archive…half your comments here since 2015 are about hating women. Don’t know where you come from but in my neck of the woods we don’t talk about women this way……not even if they are fat or dumb or whores….if you do you will find yourself in a hospital for a long time courtesy of some good ole boy who took offense on behalf of his wife, sister, mother, daughter, etc..

    You are definitely an incel. …one thing I didn’t know about incels is some of them who have shown the same rage as you do have actually murdered women.
    The amount of rage you exhibit says someone needs to be watching you before you actually do kill some women.
    This describes you and some others here:

    The Rage of the Incels

    Incels aren’t really looking for sex. They’re looking for absolute male supremacy

    ”Men,unlike women who blame themselves, blame women if they feel undesirable. And, as women gain the economic and cultural power that allows them to be choosy about their partners, men have generated ideas about self-improvement that are sometimes inextricable from violent rage.”
    Several distinct cultural changes have created a situation in which many men who hate women do not have the access to women’s bodies that they would have had in an earlier era. The sexual revolution urged women to seek liberation. The self-esteem movement taught women that they were valuable beyond what convention might dictate. Most American women now grow up understanding that they can and should choose who they want to have sex with.

    In the past few years, a subset of straight men calling themselves “incels” have constructed a violent political ideology around the injustice of young, beautiful women refusing to have sex with them. These men often subscribe to notions of white supremacy. They are, by their own judgment, mostly unattractive and socially inept.
    They’re also diabolically misogynistic. “Society has become a place for worship of females and it’s so fucking wrong, they’re not Gods they are just a fucking cum-dumpster,” a typical rant on an incel message board reads.

    The incel ideology has already inspired the murders of at least sixteen people. Elliot Rodger, in 2014, in Isla Vista, California, killed six and injured fourteen in an attempt to instigate a “War on Women” for “depriving me of sex.” (He then killed himself.) Alek Minassian killed ten people and injured sixteen, in Toronto, last month; prior to doing so, he wrote, on Facebook, “The Incel Rebellion has already begun!”

    They assume that men who treat women more respectfully are “white-knighting,” putting on a mockable façade of chivalry.) When these tactics fail, as they are bound to do, the rage intensifies. Incels dream of beheading the sluts who wear short shorts but don’t want to be groped by strangers; they draw up elaborate scenarios in which women are auctioned off at age eighteen to the highest bidder; they call Elliot Rodger their Lord and Savior and feminists the female K.K.K. “Women are the ultimate cause of our suffering,” one poster on wrote recently. “They are the ones who have UNJUSTLY made our lives a living hell… We need to focus more on our hatred of women. Hatred is power.”

  139. Here is one who has been trying to explain how Global Warming is a hoax so far as Australia is concerned:

    Jennifer Marohasy

    And this lady is also very smart but somewhat less inhibited:

    Joanne Nova

    Frankly, these two women should put lots of male academics in Australia to shame.

    Hear here. They both certainly put Australia’s most famous academic, Tim Flannery, to shame. Flannery is not only a dullard but even though a quasi-scientist(a paleontologist I believe, so maybe not a scientist at all) does not believe in evolution. He is on record(I’ve seen him say it in Two Men in a Tinny*) as saying “I believe our intelligence was put here for a purpose.”. Not only that but he also stated “I believe in Gaia.”, another non-thing.

    He is also responsible for many early deaths in Australia due to miss-allocation of resources, due to his pushing of the “climate change” fraud.

    * Two Men in a Tinny used to be easy to find and view on the ‘net but about three years ago it was disappeared.

  140. @renfro

    Sure thing, Sir Galahad. You haven’t an original thought in your empty head. You don’t like it when we call out the depravities and the decline Feminism and the inclusion of women into every field has caused. And so, instead of showing me where I’m wrong, you just throw out “Incel” when you cannot defend the depravities. You don’t show where I’m wrong in any of this, just that YOU don’t talk like that. You don’t give a shit about women, you’re virtue-signaling, dummy. Pasting the idiotic ramblings of incel feminists isn’t terribly convincing.

    Let me give you a clue, Male Feminist. Feminists don’t respect you, they think you’re ‘creepy’. I might piss them off, but they respect me, the women in my life. They know I’m right. And they think men who think like you are using this defense of feminism, who march with them, who go to rally with them are doing it to get into their pants. That IS the feminist mindset. They know an incel when they see one. And that’s Sir Galahad. Look it up, the Male Feminist Model has failed.

    Glad to have pissed you off, Le Femme. But your fertilizer grows no flowers with me. And the feminists piss on the likes of you.

    • Agree: I'm Tyrone
    • Replies: @Thomm
    , @renfro
  141. @TKK

    Ok, TKK, take one point I made and argue against it. You can’t, because you have an empty head. Speaking of incel.

  142. No harm is done to the Universities when they employ and accept qualified people of any gender or color. However, when unqualified people are accepted as students or faculty because of their gender or color, the Universities are dead. That’s how libtards are ruining the Universities and science in general.

    • Agree: Mike P
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  143. Dannyboy says:

    Q: What’s the smartest thing that ever came out of a bitch’s mouth?

    A: Einstein’s cock.

    • LOL: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  144. @Wally

    You have to work on your reading skills and comprehension. Here is a passage from her article:

    “To every color in the rainbow coalition: YOU’RE NOT BLACK! Affirmative action is supposed to be for the descendants of American slaves. See? We owe them something. Nobody else.”

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  145. Thomm says:
    @Jim Christian

    Remember that a ‘male feminist’ is always a creepy predator in disguise. Most women know this, which is why they, too, hate ‘male feminists’.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  146. @Dannyboy

    Jesus, Danny! Just spewed a fairly expensive sip of scotch all over the screen. Best damned laugh I’ve had in awhile.

    Funny bastid.

    • LOL: Dannyboy
  147. renfro says:
    @Jim Christian

    I might piss them off, but they respect me, the women in my life.

    LOL…no one respects you…..and you have no women in your life….your wife left you remember?
    I seriously doubt you’ve had a live woman since then…unless you paid her.

    Probably the most pathetic thing I read in your past comments was this:

    Jim Christian says:
    December 23, 2015 at 11:55 am GMT • 900 Words
    To the dismay of the Feminist-run Left, all their institutions will be torn down and men will rule once more. Worst comes to worst, I’ll get my privilege back.

    You’ll get your privilege back?…lol…..what privilege was that? You were/are nothing but a service tech fixing phones and wiring so you didn’t have any ‘status’ privilege ……so what kind of privilege are you talking about …being white?…being male? …..LOL…..that obviously doesnt work for you either….women stole it from you…..whaaa…whaaa. hoo cry us a river…poor little emasculated fellow….a bunch of girls stole your whiteness and manhood privilege.

    Some men may rule but you wont be one of them…’re not man enough.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  148. @SMK

    My argument and criticism of Welton is that the problem with academia is not women but leftists, leftists of all races, male and female.

    And how do you think it became leftist? Women dragged it over to the exclusion of education and into the current Realm Of The Woke. Those who resist are destroyed. And who does that? Women. Because that’s what happens when you let them in on EEOC, TitleIX instead of purely on merit. Here we are with a bunch of idiotic degree programs created out of thin air to accommodate women who weren’t college material.

    Madame Curie these women are not.

    • Replies: @Frankk
    , @Dannyboy
  149. @AnonFromTN

    However, when unqualified people are accepted as students or faculty because of their gender or color, the Universities are dead.

    That’s how we got “Women’s Studies”, “Coomunications”, “Human Resources” so the Diploma Mill could run full time. Human Resources was important because once those girls were sent into the world, they could govern the workplace and start the decay there. Once they had all that, they could attract the money of women who weren’t college material, there are lots of them. Then African studies so Blacks who weren’t college material could pay in. The kicker that led to real depravity, speaking of the stretching of science, was when they broke sexual education loose from the madness of psychology and psychiatry into three or four courses under the banner of Sexual Studies. Throw in TitleIX, dumb down the academic portions of the curriculum (eliminate the mathematics, physics, history that rounds off an education, the difficult part), they really started to rake in the dough and fire up the Diploma Mill. Banks and SallyMae came in to pick up the tab, to be paid later. The enslavement of those kids was assured.

    Once this collection of The Dumb hit campus, because there were no real impediments (it takes time to study serious subjects), they were free to start the imposition of political correctness and speech control and the generally fascist, tyrannical atmosphere that exists today and it extends down to K-12. Women were the driving force in all this, the meek and mild bookish men stood by and watched. The Blacks were pissed because even though they were in college, they still weren’t college material and couldn’t handle even watered down degree programs. Now the women in the ranks of the top declared education was ‘too White’ and watered down their courses even more.

    We saw the strife at Dartmouth two years ago, Blacks storming the libraries every day, disrupting the kids who WERE there to study serious subjects, like LAW. Hundreds of law students who would one day be cops, lawyers, politicians or judges got their first taste of Blacks in their raging elements, educating them early on as to the violent depravities of Blacks in their raging state. Blacks couldn’t have picked a better group to hassle and smack around and call racist, many of the victims of these raids of course, were Asians, not exactly a ‘woke’ culture, they already know what Blacks are. Not smart of Blacks to hassle Law students, but they ain’t that bright.

    Women on campus drive all of it. The stretching of science, the falsehoods, the sexual depravities in education and life on campus was all driven by the women, the feminists and BINGO: Robel & Company. The Rape Culture was another pack of drivel invented out of thin air by women in college who were not college material. On every campus, these idiots, publishing drivel, they run an idiocrasy in a most tyrannical fashion. And it IS a tyranny. And it’s dumb, real dumb. All because we allowed into college those who were never College Material to begin with. Call them on any of it in class, they will kick your ass OUT. No arguing with Lesbian Mistress Goddess “educator” you awful men, we own it now.

    Where am I wrong, Rosie? Renfro the Feminist? Which part is wrong? I’m all ears. It took sixty years, but they did it. Psychos running our institution, the most important one of all. The race to the bottom and the decline started with letting women in.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  150. MarkU says:

    A definition is a statement of the meaning of a term, it is definitely not a hypothesis or testable.

  151. @renfro

    Well, you don’t know me and because YOU don’t your rant is ridiculous. That was a sarcastic take on the weakness of women inviting in the new, Violent Islamic Patriarchy. I don’t want commend of your world, your world is depraved, ill. It’s all yours. That’s why we all stay away. No one stole from me, I traded my labor for cold, hard cash. Who do you suck off of? From whom do you steal?

    I have a kid and grandkids now, married, well off. After my divorce in 92, I cut a fair swath through the twits and twats of every sort in Bill Clinton’s Washington as they filled the offices and lobbies of DC. Now I date an eclectic group of chicks up here North of Boston, all of em with a Diploma Mill ‘credential’, none of them particularly educated. Still, they’re nice girls. When I say girls, I mean in their late forties into their fifties. They’re good company, I entertain them, they me. Meanwhile, how are your offspring? Wow, Rennie, your mood has now outrun your meds, you’re headed for the wall. You must HATE that we old White men who make your world comfortable, keep the lights on, enable you to flush your toilet in the morning and feed you talk back to your bullshit.

    You know, a funny offshoot of allowing women into education is the fairly recent skyrocketing incidence of women in K-12 education ‘raping’ their female and male students. Because of the sexual depravities instilled at college and in education certification programs, it isn’t much of a jump to these women to screwing their students. Thousands of cases every year now, chick-teachers being busted for treating their schools as their own personal hard-on harem. They mostly get the pussy-pass and get probation, but they have to register. Curiously, when they take up with underage girls, these women, they get serious jail time. I get that, I’d kill the teacher that messed with my daughter, but if a good-looker of a teacher messed with my son, I’d send her flowers of appreciation.
    But that’s why you love me, Rennie.

    Your next post will be a request for a spanking. Idiot.

  152. @attilathehen

    I agree that this is one failing of Ann Coulter’s thinking. The 2nd was a minor thing – some big worries about “the pot” in one of her articles. Still, I’d say she’s batting about a .980.

    • Agree: Jim Christian
  153. @Thomm

    Remember that a ‘male feminist’ is always a creepy predator in disguise. Most women know this, which is why they, too, hate ‘male feminists’.

    It’s been a thing at Jezabel, Cosmo and comments sections all over since the Pussy-Hat March, speaking of idiotic feminist slags.. They began to notice at the Slut-Walks and pride parades, creepy feminist-boys, hitting on hard core femmes and man-hating lesbians. Those guys thought they were in. What the got was exposed for what they are, The Enemy Within. If they show up now, they walk in the back if at all.

    Funny those hardcore Lezzies and feminists folded like cheap suits when the Tranny Men showed up, yet another new Patriarchy to throw in with Islam, Blacks who beat their women and Hispanics who have no use for any nonsense from women like these. Trannies give a hateful name to women that don’t want chicks-with-dicks in their showers too, TERF. Look it up. They even slap the TERFs around at TERF-ralleys, the few that have marched. I applaud the trannies, they’re going to put those women in their places. It’s only Blue States that get this, but who deserves it more? They get their perversions good and hard, just like they deserve. They declared war on me 50 years ago, let them take their medicine.

    • Replies: @Donald A Thomson
  154. @Jim Christian

    Ran out of [AGREE]s – this Renfro is a piece of work.

  155. Women in universities might be a problem , but they are not the main problem.

    “Ayn Rand” [Alisa Rosenbaum]

    Emma Goldman

    Emma Goldman

    “Ayn Rand” [Alisa Rosenbaum]

    So you’re saying that the problem with universities is not women per se, but jewish anarcho-communist women — and jewish quasi-libertarian “objectivist” Zionist women? Huh. I suppose that’s possible, though it seems a little narrowly focused.

    Wait — does that mean that both Robel and Kesner are members of the Tribe? I didn’t know that. Are they anarcho-communist jews? Or “libertarian” Zionist jews?

    Just curious.

  156. @renfro

    Hatred is power

    That’s some pretty obvious projection from the (((New Yorker))).

  157. @SMK

    Open borders and an invasion of legal and illegal aliens will soon transform the U.S. into a nonwhite majority country

    Because clearly there’s zero connection between giving women power outside of their appropriate sphere on the one hand, and open borders on the other — in SMK’s “mind,” anyway.


    My argument and criticism of Welton is that the problem with academia is not women but leftists, leftists of all races, male and female.

    So your “argument” is that complex social pathologies simply must be monocausal? Or that the categories of “women” and so-called “leftists” have zero overlap? Or simply that the Slate is Blank because… you know, reasons?

    Like the people who try to argue

    “The problem with America in the current year isn’t the Tribe — it’s “leftists” and anti-whites!


  158. @Barbara Honegger

    It is both sickening and outrageous

    You forgot “problematic.”

    What is clear is that the institution where Rasmussen is employed should have one less male professor.

    I realize that this may be a much more inclusive forum than the venues that you usually frequent, but please try to contain your virulent, unreasoning anti-male hatred and your instinctive urge to shut down all dissent from The Narrative. You should be more tolerant — like us.


    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  159. @Jim Christian

    Thank goodness, I am in real science (biochemistry), not in PC BS “studies” you mentioned.

    Here is my personal experience: the three best (in terms of brains and productivity) of my grad students were girls. My second-smartest post-doc was also female. My best tech was a black female from Cameroon. So, I don’t see boys outperforming girls in my lab (or in grad class I am teaching since 2003). I hire people strictly on the basis of their qualifications. Their gender and color are irrelevant to me. If I tried to follow quotas pushed by libtards, I’d ruin my lab. But if I shunned females and blacks, I would have seriously damaged my lab.

  160. Vojkan says:

    I disagree with regards to blacks but let’s face it, maybe the nauseating mediocrity of the so-called modern elites has something to do with the fact that they were educated in academic institutions with an overrepresentation in teaching positions of women, gays and Jews, i.e. notorious attention whores and drama queens with a natural inclination to nepotism.

  161. Anon[300] • Disclaimer says:

    You missed Oberlin. The school has a black president and a black vice-president, and everything went to pot when black students decided to rob a bakery. The administration decided to protect the students and attack the bakery, and lost a lawsuit because of it. That was amazingly stupid.

    Black women turned Oberlin into an entity that now commits evil.

    • Replies: @fish
  162. Anon[300] • Disclaimer says:

    I’d say you have a point. The ‘Never Can Admit They’re Wrong’ crowd showed up to argue with you on cue.

  163. Serfer says:

    “It’s allowed for untold atrocities to be committed…”

    Bad contraction and passive voice, from a professional in academia.

    • Replies: @missouriboy
  164. “It is hilarious that neither of these female senior academic bureaucrats, Robel or Kesner, can see that they embody why having too many women in academia is a problem.”

    This keen observation validates that other one, that these emotional-thinking ladies are C.U.N.T.s: Can’t Understand Normal Thinking.

    It’s not just a problem, but a crying shame, that these types of people can hold positions of influence over young impressionable minds.

  165. @Serfer

    ???? Not defending the meaning of the comment, but “it has” contracted to “it’s” is NOT a bad contraction…

  166. ““Coomunications”

    The word is Communication known as Public Speaking, Oral Communications and anyone thinks that the field was born out of post modern o deconstructionist thought hasn’t a clue.

    Th science, skill and art of Public Speaking is born out the earliest form of recording human history of communities that began amongst the first humans in Africa and passed to the Greeks. That skill often referred to as oratory in our western traditions — predates written language and has been taught in every society since. The practice of political and scientific oratory from spohistry to the classic three tiers”

    1. pathos

    2. logos

    3. ethos

    There’s not time to school you here — but clearly you have no idea what you are talking about of you think communications was birthed in feminist ideological circles.

    Public speaking is routinely in the running for the top spot for the number fear of human experience: heights, snakes and usually at the top the number one fear is public speaking.

    I am delighted to have studied the field, practiced the skill in multiple arenas as well as coached it and paramount in that endeavour —

    the integrity, truth of person and message — above all else.

    You know not of what you speak.

    the primary factor in the break down of human relations: divorce, war, hositility, assault, etc. — failures in communication.

  167. Frankk says:
    @Jim Christian

    Well, who are the most left of the of leftists of last century, that preach diversity (for others) but promote destruction?

    Women mean well, the real culprits don’t.

    And with their admirable apathy they can’t be completely blamed, especially as many men (Wall Street, hippies, journalists, government) were fooled as well.

  168. Frankk says:
    @El Dato

    I would disagree in that Europe has done quite well for itself despite socialism on top of centuries of war.

    It’s when they can’t hold onto their culture, from Eastern European, Arab invasion, that all fails.

    I think Germany is the best conservative country in the world, better than the USA, and overcame much more adversity.

    I cry for future Europe but they had presented a good model until internacionalism took charge

  169. fish says:

    Black women turned Oberlin into an entity that now commits evil.

    Likely going to be an entity thats going to commit evil on a far tighter budget if the judgement holds!

    • LOL: eah
  170. @Jim Christian

    I’m a Geotechnical Engineer working in construction industry for over 11 years. Let me tell you my experience.

    My company had recently had a push to recruit more women for being “equal opportunity” employer. I argued that hire people on merit rather then their sex. A poor female colleague also agreed with me. Anyways, we got flooded with 10+ women in our group.

    The men who have similar experience as me have to train the females (with similar no. yr exp) to do the job. We’ve to even take the design decision for them. In my industry, there’s lots of money involved – schedules, deadlines, delivery. We design massive construction projects so even few days would end up costing thousands if not million of dollars. This puts a lot of pressure on us and I’ve personally seen the women don’t handle stress well.

    We (men) can’t even show sign of frustration because it might upset the women. And if that happens, then we’d get into trouble (from HR – which is mostly filled to brim with women). They always have to leave the work on time because they have “kids” at home. So we end up working beyond our working hours fixing the mistakes the women made.

    To all the UNZ readers (women in particular) – you don’t have to agree with me. This is my personal experience.

    • Agree: Jim Christian, Dannyboy
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  171. @Anonymous

    This is why student loans should not be cancelled. When kids realize their degree in Matriarchal Indoctrination Studies will cost them a cool $100,000 they will opt to attend welding classes instead. The number of universities, most of which are just fake diploma mills manufacturing NPCs who don’t even have to pass an exam to graduate, will then collapse.

  172. Women can’t be reached.
    They came into the comments, and did the same things they were accused of in the article. They simply can’t be truly self-aware.

    I’m not in the sciences, or have extensive knowledge of any studies. I know history, and I know what I see around me.

    The women in my immediate academic environment are mostly competent. For a humanities program, the requirements are a lot stronger than many places.
    The best scholar I knew in my PhD program was female, even.

    Yet the total number of women was very small. Whereas, in the bs “studies” programs, the numbers of women were and are massive, and those programs have absolutely zero rigor.

    You want a PhD in African American Studies?
    If you’re black, just find some piece of American culture from before 2008 or so, and describe how racist it all is. You’ll have to know the jargon, but it’s not hard to learn.
    I could troll the African American and Women’s studies departments endlessly.

    Truth is, most female “intellectuals” lack depth, and are the result of decades of coddling. I see it with my own eyes.

    You can call me an incel (wtf? Is this a YouTube comment section? Lol!), but it changes nothing.
    I could record every time I’m with my wife, and you irrational nature-deniers would just change the subject!

    Most women would not survive actual gender-blind competition. They need special consideration to make it work. They can’t get out of their own heads. Everything in nature or even abstract thought is just another extension of their own egotism.

    I don’t hate women in the slightest. When women act in concert with natural law, they’re amazing people.

    “Let it be done to me, according to thy word.”
    An attitude stronk wahmen need to pay heed.

    • Agree: Jim Christian
  173. @obwandiyag

    I think we just agreed that diversity is not a strength.

  174. @SMK

    This back n forth doesn’t seem to understand that women n men have different psychological traits n different biological motives. Men thrive in an open combative intellectual academic atmosphere where eccentricity pays, as Dutton says. They pursue fame n ego. Women demand consensus where eccentrics are pilloried n expelled, whatever they may have to contribute to science because it makes women scared n uncomfortable, so women retreat to safe spaces, then try to make the entire college a safe space.

    Women are not motivated by cutting edge research, fame, or ego. They want to surround themselves with ‘diverse’ ‘vibrant’ men to increase the pool for mate selection. That’s why wherever women achieve significant numbers, they immediately push for dropping barriers to entry so they can select from a global smorgasbord of men. Men demand minimum entry standards n national borders to curtail the competition. Women always seek to drop entry standards n eliminate borders (for ‘the children’) to expand their choice. To mix men n women in the same college department simply multiplies the confusion n inefficiency because their motives are not the same.

  175. If women are intellectually equal to men, why do we have female-only chess leagues and female-only math olympiads?

  176. Dumbo says:

    I remember ages ago reading Montaigne… He wrote about the women around him being concerned mostly with foolish and futile things… With painting their faces and gossiping… In his whole Essays he didn’t write one line about his own wife… At the time I was a bit shocked. Montaigne after all was a sort of progressive for his days. And yet, now I see he had a point.

    There are of course a few exceptional women, and even Montaigne wrote about them.

  177. @whattheduck

    They always have to leave the work on time because they have “kids” at home. So we end up working beyond our working hours fixing the mistakes the women made.

    Careful, What, they find out who you are, it’ll be WhatTheFuck! Hey, I kid becuause I care. I’m a phone/IT guy, contracted mostly these days, but I’m in and out of offices and have been for over thirty years going back to the eighties. I’ve been seeing the dynamic for decades. The women get their names attached to every project, sometimes top-billing, full credit even though they come in at ten, leave at four and the men work ten hours at the office, and 6 more at home to make up for them and you better not say shit because you’re out if you do. Architecture firms, builders, engineering, especially, they are forced to get chicks with a Diploma Mill degree with the barest educational credentials, but they put them in and everyone suffers. And I’ve always been glad to be out when my work is done because without exception, when these chicks started coming in, the catty, sneaking, lying and conniving, mostly against the other women create an untenable atmosphere, you can cut the tension with a knife.

    I worked 1983-2001 (with interruptions at Bell South and Nortel) at a company name of CompuPhone in the DC area, headed by a tough-as-nails fiery redhead name of Dawn Spain. She cashed in on the Bell split, we all did, selling PBXs and key telephone systems, thousands of them, replacements of Bell systems. Toshiba made shit-hot, cutting edge stuff and with the voicemail systems, eliminated a lot of secretaries, too. Dawn’s passed on, but she was a great businesswomen. Because she was a female-headed company (although all us techs and her salesmen were men), she was the phone company of choice for all the lobbies, N.O.W., Planned Parenthood, Handgun Control. Everyone wanted to business with Dawn. Dawn built that company into the biggest Toshiba Telecom dealer on the East Coast for twenty years and that includes NYC. She used to laugh her ass off that they all came running to us because she was a woman-headed company. She hated liberals, loved Reagan and laughed the female applicants for positions in the office and sales right back out into the streets when they showed up with no qualifications other than a cert from a Diploma Mill and a vagina. When I’d go install phones or fix stuff, everywhere, in every office, the women’s desktops were on AOL or anywhere but work. And the women weren’t hard at work in the morning, they were just fucking around somewhere, you could never find the office manager.But always, tension and strife within. Now? their desktops are on facebook, their phones dinging away with whatever app and they’re on the phone with this or that at home or absent. I’ve been racking up 1 hour plus trip charges for showing up and the one that needed repair wasn’t there. Go back the next day and rack it up again. They don’t give a shit. And a lot of those companies went under. Businesses have to hire them, they’ve no choice.

    It’s the decline, fellas. Their inclusion on the mandated level of today IS the decline. In the workplace, in K-12, in academia, in politics, all lie in ruins, unable to move because of catty, sneaky females, who by the way, only hire other females. It’s their DNA. I used to service Old Ebbit Grill, a watering hole for Congress and the Press Club fellas, I fixed their phones, across the street from the White House. I always made sure they were my last stop of the day when their ticket hit my desk. There at the oyster bar where I’d settle in end of the fix of the day for a cocktail and wait out the traffic home, sat Tip, Ted, Newt, Boehner, a few staffers, I suppose. The men operated with a handshake and a wink, they criticized across the aisle and then they settled their differences over a scotch and you’d see them sketching shit on a napkin, never figured what, they came to agreement. They got things done. They’d leave together and I always imagined they were going across the street to fill in Dutch or Bill, “see, this is how we’re going to do it”.

    Today? In politics, this is not possible because once we got psycho, screeching Pelosi and Boxer and Waters up there and two hundred more just like them and all their female staffers, like EVERY SINGLE other workplace and organization women barged in on, their inability to shake hands and keep a deal, their revenge instincts, everything is clogged, everything a fight, everything about lots of meetings (they like to hear themselves talk), everything about vindication. And like I said, undercurrents of treachery, women against other women and any man that notices, vying for advantage within staffs and organizations.

    I saw the decline over three decades and it is now complete. The Matriarchy is installed, the Hill and all our political and educational systems lie in ruin, all our institutions ruined by catty, entitled, unqualified chicks. I ain’t even getting into the destruction of the military by women, but we all know.

    Along will come some chick or male feminist (chicks HATE male feminists), to tell me how misogynistic I am, I’m incel, whatever their insult is because all this is beyond refute and insult is all they have. But that’s bullshit. Instead of insult, they should tell me how the forced imposition of women without merit was a great idea and why they are NOT responsible for the decline? Because I knew a few women of merit, worked for one in particular for a long time. And these chicks today render us DOA. It. Is. Over. Ruined by women. Throw in the screechie women of color and it all triples down.

    Enjoy the decline. Sorry about this book I just wrote, but it needs to be said, even in these small environs. And, it was the best I could come up with in 15 minutes. Peace. Or not.

  178. @HilaireBelloc

    You can call me an incel (wtf? Is this a YouTube comment section? Lol!), but it changes nothing.

    The “Incel living in Mama’s basement ” thing is all these women here are capable of. They’re idiots at heart, God bless em. They say whatever their emotions spew forth and sit on their fat asses made plump on the labor of men, dependent on men and hating them even more for it.

    Because if careers were purely merit, education purely merit, if EEOC was eliminated, 95% of the women in our workforce of every sector would be out of a job in a week. A serious assessment of their value would tell the tale. from there, they would do what such women would do, should do, which is sweeten up, marry, and have kids and keep a home. Women of today, debased, defaced, disgraced and ruined would claim that marriage and kids are slavery to a man.

    But I see them in their little cubicles, ‘working’ away, not much but they have to show up, and what are they working for? These women are as a slave to a company, always owned by a man, with his woman at home raising HIS kids. And for what do these women go to college, dodge marriage and go to ‘work”? Money for a few idiotic baubles, cars they can’t afford, they’re slaves to loans, credit cards, shit they don’t need, all of it provided by men, especially the bankers. They pretend to have a career, but mostly, they’re just clerks. Every one of them I ever dated, up to the present is in hock up to their tattooed necks.

    Funny how they hit 28 or 30 or 40 even, they get tired of no one at home, of getting pumped and dumped and have the Epiphany and get desperate for a husband, for children, for a home. They’re my dating bread and butter for over thirty years now, the easiest meat ever. I tore up my husband card thirty years ago, the con is over for me, but these ladies are the easiest thing going, right up to when they ask, “Where is this going?” Kiss of death, on to the next one. No broad is ever stealing from my wallet again. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Rosie and Rennie-Baby-Sweetheart. The day it’s over for the present day female is when men quit being conned. Into ALL of this.

    • Agree: Dannyboy
  179. “We (men) can’t even show sign of frustration because it might upset the women. And if that happens, then we’d get into trouble (from HR – which is mostly filled to brim with women). They always have to leave the work on time because they have “kids” at home. So we end up working beyond our working hours . . . ”

    well placed. especially that section on expression — it seems never have dawned on women advocates that men have run a gauntlet of critiques in which mere frustration would have been a welcome respite.

  180. Richard B says:

    Yes, the truth sets shitlibs ass on fire.

    What truth?

    This is a question that sets a lot of asses on fire. Conservative as well as Liberal.

    That’s because they’re the flip side of the same 18th century coin. The Enlightenment.

    Both the Right and Left are two wornout, moth-eaten 18sth century Enlightenment ideologies that have long since outlived their usefulness.

    The fact that both sides are still – STILL – clinging to ideas that no longer work is what explains our current culture crisis.

    Kesner, in particular, not only uses emotional language but actually implies that it is a problem that people’s feelings have been hurt because their fervently-held ideas have been challenged. Yet challenging dogmas—and thus hurting feelings—is how you get to truth.

    Unchallened ideologies of the Right and Left ARE dogmas.

    We need to move from Dogma to Pragma and fast.

    But both the Right and the Left are still blocking the way. Simply because they can’t grasp an alternative to either one.

    And that’s why they won’t leave each other alone.

    Time to leave them both alone and move into a larger freedom.

    • Replies: @Realist
  181. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:

    “Female Genius hoodie fundraiser?” How trite… Isn’t that what sororities do every year, make a sweater to advertise their name/letters across the rack and ass regions? Only women entrepreneurs can make money off the strategy of “Look at me,” and the market glut sets in fast

  182. Realist says:
    @Richard B

    What truth?

    Any truth. I agree that the terms right and left are worn out, but not entirely for the reasons you state.

    I contend that both parties are indeed two sides of the same coin…the Deep State. The Deep State doesn’t care about the unimportant internecine squabbles of the ‘two parties’ as long as their important issues are maintained. As a matter of fact it strengthens the false perception that there is a choice when voting.

  183. Dannyboy says:
    @Jim Christian

    Exactly. One needs to remember we’re talking about what is probably the most pampered and catered to demographic on the entire planet.

    Jews scored big when they built upon and funded the rebellion of white women. Of course, the roots of feminism are mostly a Protestant Yankee phenomenon. Pampered upper class white women with too much time and money on their hands.

    Things have gotten way out of hand and they’ll need some correction.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  184. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Jim Christian

    I get that, I’d kill the teacher that messed with my daughter, but if a good-looker of a teacher messed with my son, I’d send her flowers of appreciation.

    And so would your son!

    • Agree: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  185. @HilaireBelloc

    Sarge, “I want you beeping beepheads to pick up your arms and backpacks and run up that beeping hill!”

    A few years later, women join the fray.

    Sarge, “I want everybody to make it to the top of that naturally raised area of land.”

    Some of the women walked.

    Equality doesn’t mean we’re all the same, because we are not. Treat others the way you want to be treated? I can live with that.

  186. @Dannyboy

    Jews scored big when they built upon and funded the rebellion of white women. Of course, the roots of feminism are mostly a Protestant Yankee phenomenon. Pampered upper class white women with too much time and money on their hands.

    Fair take, women of WASP heritage joined in and made “Women’s Rights” a fashion, but Jewish Feminists kicked off the latest wave in 1960 and they were protesting their own suffocating upbringing, WASP women copied and were used in media to spread the virus. But that was just a tiny seed planted. Jews, Carl Reiner and Goldman in particular, later Norman Leer, scored big in that they discovered with their miraculous new media, Television, they could set trends, reach millions with just a sitcom. For instance: when they wanted to split the men off from the women, they gave them permission by showing us Archie and Edith separating, Meathead and Gloria divorcing. Others too, but by the mid-seventies, 50% of the marriages were broken. They wanted the women out of the house and working, they wanted to double the workforce and halve the wages: Mary Tyler Moore, Rhoda were big trend setters and others, they showed the women how glorious and glamorous is the working world. All of a sudden, everyone was working, the wages are halved, women replaced the men and worse, everything is catty and nasty because those women were sassy and saucy. Norman Leer, Rob Reiner and his dad Carl, they set us for up some serious depravity, because women copy. And every household has both working. Except for the Jews at the top, their families are all intact.

    Let’s introduce a little more depravity for the Goyim to adopt: Cheech and Chong and pot, Fast Times at Ridgemont High: more pot, teach the girls to be sluts (Phobe Cates, baby! YEAH!), let’s ruin high school, get the girls acting and dressing slutty. Want to introduce opiates to the White masses? Pulp Fiction, because, “Coke is dead as dead, Heroin is the new fucking thing, Baby”. Show an overdose, it’s all a big party in the movies, not so much in real life. Bingo, in five years, lots more than just Blacks were ODing. Look what we have now. When Weinstein financed a seriously depraved Tarantino, look at his shit and everyone found a moved goal line with Pulp and who could forget DJango unchained, let’s give Blacks permission to beat their women and kill Whites! 95% of race against race crime is now Black On White. Not a coincidence.

    Wanna get lots of tolerance for one depravity after another over a decade? Check out 2 1/2 Men. first mocking gays, later accepting, then celebrating. Society followed right along. Gays, trannies, men living together, adapting children later in the series after Sheen left, Chuck Lorre and Lee Arohnson were some smart Jews, they made every depravity in a sexual sense acceptable, because people copy. This is not coincidence. Lorre must have been proud, he did a good job.

    Finally, and I could go on some more, I’m just touching on a few depravities in media that women copied to a T, Miami and L.A. Ink. These opened to millions of viewers, mid OOs to present. With that, the race to the bottom was on,, another depravity was adopted by girls who copy. Inside of 5 years, here were are, as in every depravity, lots of tatts, piercings and tramp stamps adorn 3/4 of the women 20-45 or 50 because women copy. 80% of tatts are bought by women, another stupid bauble women waste their money on to make themselves fucking disgusting. It’s a defacement, it’s ugly, ladies.

    Oh, one more thing, the glorification of the obese females, Oprah (“Men need to learn to love your fat”) and a dozen others There were two or three series that showed big fatties, Mike and Molly, others. Bingo-Bango, in five-ten years hardly any women in the population are thin, most are dead weight-obese and you young men better learn to enjoy your depraved, tatted, pierced, OBESE, course, foul-mouthed, colored-hair sassy women because they’re all you got. If you ain’t top-five percent of income in the society, the women you have are a shot at are the nastiest, angriest, most disagreeable broads on the planet. And you can’t even run because Jewish-led Feminism has gone round the world, even Korean chicks tatt, color their hair and take on the nastiest fattitude feminism the West has to offer and when they come here, they become Sarah Jeong and are celebrated for their racism and nastiness. Look her up. She’s at the NYTimes, big celebrity, this racist, nasty, pan-faced Korean.

    Heh, it’s over. Jewish broads kicked off the latest round of feminism backed by their media starting early sixties with Betty Freidan’s Feminine Mystique, Dworkin, a dozen others. Once the Feminine Mystique came out, the Goyim housewives weree suddenly dissatisfied and going to shrinks and divorcing. Once they got the Goyim women warped it was Game On.

    I defy anyone to show me one instance where I’m wrong. I was there, I saw every phase. Because this is what you get when you enable Feminists.

    I took some of this up in a public speaking course that’s a requirement for a particular cert at a certain college just five years back, maybe four, the final exam is in a hall, in a speech in front of maybe 150 of my fellow students, on a stage. Y with a degree all have gone through it, they call it different things, but it’s all the same, right? The scene: mixed race, mixed genders, lots of tatts, randomly, people drop in, they want you to speak in public, bright lights, microphone, the Big Time, sorta. I was perfectly prepared to present all of this, it would be a quick speech. But when I showed the prof a copy of my notes for my final “exam”, she and he (PA and Professor) went through the roof. They gave me my A and didn’t want me anywhere near the hall that day. Suited me, I was on my way. Anyway, enough.

    Shit. Another 1/2 hour of musing, 5000 useless words and information. Or something. Enjoy the decline Danny Boy. Yours is a fair take, but never forget who really started it. Man, those are some smart fucking gangsters. Laters!

  187. @lavoisier

    And so would your son!

    Well, sure, Lavvie old boy! As a Dad, I’d be thrilled that my boy ain’t a homo, no father wants that! Problem with the boys is, they talk. And text, and the chick teachers that take advantage of the hard-on factory that is high school, once they have a young hard-on to jump, the get confused, they send pics and profess their love in texts, they leave evidence, parents see that. Of course, then the mothers go crazy and call the cops. There’s a financial component to the parents calling the cops because then they sue the school system for the moral turpitude of the teacher, their sons are suddenly ‘victims’. Yeah, right! Hilarious part is most of these teachers that screw the high school boys have a simp of a husband at home that they’re cheating on. And always, the simp stands with and supports his slut wife when the cops and press get involved.

    What are their options? They’re simps! Hah!

  188. @TomSchmidt

    Stove famously wrote a paper titled ” The Intellectual Capacity of Women.” It’s a non-mathematical argument, and ignores fat tails, but breathtakingly non-PC.

    Not a single woman, who visits Unz Review, needs to be lectured on what PMS feels like.

    I, on the other hand, the toxic, metaphysical man, can only observe said manifestation, try to understand it and wonder how or why evolution added this phenomenon to a female’s physical makeup.

    It has to make sense [even if I don’t get or understand it], otherwise PMS wouldn’t be there…

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  189. @eah

    You don’t always need an “authority” figure in academia. It depends on the subject.

    You are assuming too much about my little comment.

    • LOL: eah
    • Replies: @eah
  190. BiggDee55 says:

    Oh how I love me my IU Hoosiers!

    Can I move to the 18th Century?

  191. @Daniel Rich

    I assume you’re familiar with the concept of the “s–t test.”

  192. Anonymous[775] • Disclaimer says:

    Michaela Okland certainly seems fond of supporting her arguments with T&A displays. Note how she accentuates her caboose by propping it up on a planter while raising her arm…the better to thrust out her boobage. Then she crops the picture to show off her gams.

    Just sayin’.

  193. Anonymous[775] • Disclaimer says:

    Per discussions of Evolution among commenters…

    Fred Reed has written several, IMHO, cogent pieces questioning Evolution. One point he makes is that it’s never been proven since time-lines are so immense. Another is that, thus far, the thing we call “life” has only come from prior life (plant seeds excepted if they are considered “dead” and not in “suspended animation).

  194. Anonymous[775] • Disclaimer says:

    Have YOU (Creator of Incels, Ms. Boner-Killer, and She Who Sports A Hair the Size of a Trans-Atlantic Cable Across her Fundament) ever…

    …known a gender that kills babies, in utero or born, who also make it a near sacrament?

    …wanted to know who starts HALF of all domestic fights in hetero couples?

    …wanted to know who starts ALL domestic fights in lesbian couples (the worst violence)?


    …known the sex that start “let’s you and he fight over me” scenarios?

    …known which sex commits most crimes by stealth, surprise, and proxies?

    …admitted which group lies the most about being raped?

    …seen someone cry her way out of punishment?

    …watched a particular gender routinely get wrist-slapped for committing serious crimes?

    …seen female rapes of under-age boys be called “romps-dalliances-affairs-mistakes-relationships-love-infatuation”?

    …wondered who inflicts the most abuse/neglect on the very young and very old?

    …wondered who initiates most divorces, using kids as meal-tickets while denying fathers access to their own spawn?

    …seen so-called “egalitarians”…during the past 50 years…do anything to help men?

    …seen so-called “egalitarians”…during the past 50 years…ask guys what men might want changed in any new social contract?

    …heard of feminists demanding an Equal Responsibilities Amendment?

    …wonder who teaches men to stuff feelings?

    …wonder which sex, while urging men to be more emotional, also brags about “bathing in male tears”?

    …condemned toxic feminity?

    …admitted that women who “hold up half the sky” also fill half of hell?

    …smirked when hearing “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”?

    …smirked when hearing “Men send scornful women to hell”?

    …watched women, constantly demanding “equality,” actually making and paying for dates?

    …notice women marching to be forced to register for the draft?

    …worry that feminists, when the next draft comes, will say, “We women would love to be selected to serve on frontlines but, damn the luck, we’re not registered!”?

    …seen women be open, honest, and direct about their sexual desires?

    …seen women make first-moves sexually like they apply for jobs?

    …wonder why women think “equality” is being handed the cushiest things in life?

    …admitted that women who whine about “powerlessness” exercise the power to define what power is…and who has it?

    …wonder why the mere TOUCHING of female genitalia is deemed a capital crime while laughing at the abuse/amputation of male sex organs is acceptable?

    …viewed a “tough and more-than-equal” female movie character attacking, killing, mutilating, and genitally-traumatizing mostly female others?

    Are you a moonbat-crazy, misandric, narcissistic, entitled, pampered, solipsistic, pedestal’d, hypocritical, eternally-protected, nonsense-yammering, woman-child feminist?

  195. Reisen says:

    I notice ‘females’, not ‘women’ is used, and how Lance Welton doesn’t mention how these vivacious women tend to be Jews, not white women. White women were legally blocked from college for a time, and the first wave feminists noticed how men, the superior sex, were willing to give Jews and blacks the vote but not white women. Why would you give men you consider subhuman and untrustworthy the Vote over your womenfolk? Is it because of the fact they’re male? Either way, Lance Welton shoud be reminded of the following:

    – Women, on average, do not have a lower IQ than men. The difference is 3-5 IQ points as per Richard Lynn’s metastudies.
    – Maternal IQ contributes to higher IQ in offspring. Education therefore is paramount for potential to be achieved.
    – Depriving half of your population from the economy on the basis of their sex, while half of your sex is dullards and dysgenic, is anti-civilization.
    – White women vote closer to white men. It is non white women and Jewish women who vote overwhelmingly Leftist.
    – Both Leftist white men and women voted Democrat. No one is telling the men their suffrage needs to be taken away.
    – This 18-19th century thinking ironically creates more feminists, and proves that the feminists were right in there being systemic misogyny. Men should stop acting shocked at the conditions they created.
    – The biological component of (white) women being inferior shows how much science folks have read. In terms of average IQ, see first point. In terms of evolution, higher educated women produce more intelligence offspring. Margaret Sanger understood this.
    – White women overwhelmingly supported the eugenics movement.
    – Nikola Tesla venerated his mother and said women, once given access to education, would go beyond their limits and truly prove their worth in society.

    Women may be ‘more emotional’, but women have less completed suicides and less mental disorders that acutely and negatively impact IQ and social interaction. If you want a true and proper meritocracy, that includes adding intelligent women worthy of the position.

    • Replies: @HubrisNOW
  196. HubrisNOW says:

    Tease out ALL of Lynne & Co have to expose,,! ……! Smart arse motor-mouthed wimin in the 70-100 bracket are flush.. @ 120 1:5 Are with men… 140+ 1:25… Are virtually ALL men..!?

    & to add .. Martin Fiebert’s Anointed bibliography covering 116,000 reviewed studies. involving wimin’s physical aggression to THEIR male partners. Some 340.000+ cases. it seems.!

  197. eah says:

    If you are an example of a typical woman, then the thesis of this article is reinforced — Robel is provost and “executive vice president” of IU, and is, therefore, a de jure ‘authority figure’ — I’m sure in the minds of many men (at least) she is, however, not a de facto ‘authority figure’, because it is impossible for them to take her seriously as an ‘authority figure’ — it has nothing to do with “need”, as such: the position exists.

    And it is still not clear that you understand the heart of the problem: how inappropriate her statement in response to the shrill criticism of Rasmusen by the usual SJW harpy snowflakes was — that it was indistinguishable from the criticism in all major points.

    Read my comment as many times as it takes.

    • Replies: @freedom-cat
  198. @eah

    I get Rasmussen’s points and where he is coming from for just tweeting an article that focuses on the need to get women out of Universities, which is then used to threaten his job. The men are getting triggered by the women and the women are getting triggered by the men. That is my entire point.

    Since men have the creativity and Genius, why worry about these women “taking over the universities”?

    Men should have no problem Creating new environments in which to non-conform and to create in. Or could it be that the “creative genius” male is really pretty rare.

    Did Bill Gates finish college? He dropped out of college after one or two quarters. He went to a garage and did his thing, as did Steve Jobs, and even the Google people started that way. No matter how much we might dislike any of those people, they are all damn smart and creative.

    It’s almost comical if it wasn’t so sad. These kinds of arguments between men and women tear are people apart. I don’t respect those women who did that to him. They did come off like emotional flakes and easily triggered. But we don’t need to react like they did.

    I don’t care if more men are Genius than women. Doesn’t bother me at all; my Dad was one, if 165-170 counts as Genius. But, the idea that Genius are low in Empathy, Altruism and don’t care about offending people is Not always the case. My Dad was very altruistic, compassionate, and empathetic. He had class. He didn’t follow the rules much but he never intentionally went out of his way to hurt anyone. The people who wrote that, must be thinking of Psychopathic or Narcissistic Genius. Genius always gets taken by some of those too.

    The idea that nobody would be offended by stating that fewer women should be in universities is ludicrous, and was done to purposely trigger people. They knew that many women would become threatened. Just like many men get threatened when women attempt to diminish their achievements and insinuate there should be less of them involved to make way for more women (or imply that men are preventing them from achieving – laughable, since anyone can push a creative plan forward if they have one).

    You are much more triggered about this than you realize. I’m not triggered at all. I find it sad that people feel a need to pound on each other this way.

    And again, the Brilliant people who really have something of value and creative, should have no trouble finding “space” to pursue their ideas. College obviously is not for everyone.
    And I understand what you are saying:

    “because there are certain minimum standards in intellectual discourse that men expect all participants to uphold, and one of them is not trying to get someone fired for having and expressing disagreeable or unpopular views and opinions — and it is far too often women who fail to uphold these minimum standards.”

    However, the men themselves have now violated their own standard, or “rule”.

    • Replies: @freedom-cat
  199. @freedom-cat

    * added to last sentence:
    Not by trying to get someone fired, but by insinuating that women are simply not suited for higher education. Kind of the same line of thinking as the women.

  200. @Jim Christian

    It’s not surprising that US women go to water when faced by drag queens. The drag queens claim they’re women too so any violence would just be between the girls. US women have never before met men who disagree with them let alone call them names. The patriarchy they talk about is nothing they have ever felt or seen. The drag queens may use violence so the women placate them out of fear of a one on one fight. The inevitable result is that one drag queen can rule 40 lesbians and/or “feminists”. They don’t have a helpful man around who wouldn’t be afraid of a drag queen.

    That’s not a fault of lesbians and/or “feminists”; they are completely unable to compete physically against a man so behave logically. It’s not even particularly complimentary about men. They’re just stronger and feel protective towards people who are threatened. Obviously, the lesbians and/or “feminists” would have to abuse their rescuer as a transphobe even though there’s no such thing as a trans-woman. Admitting that they were being bullied would mean admitting their inferior strength. Not ideologically permissible.

    Would Rapinoe be game to take on a small, 60 year old drag queen? I don’t think she’s that stupid. [email protected]

  201. @Rosie

    You are correct Rosie in the contention that “science” should first and always be about the seeking for greater correspondence between models of Reality and that underlying Reality, which is never – and can never be, with the intellect alone – perceived directly. In other words, with “the truth”. Attempts to limit the endeavour to exclude inductive reasoning, reasonable inference, intuition and the application of consciousness directly are misguided and incidentally, have never been used by the very greats in the history of science. By the real geniuses in fact – Newton, Einstein and the originators of QM, to name the most obvious. These individuals all had a depth of wisdom that saw clearly that the world-as-perceived is not the world-as-it-is and to access the latter the required tools are intuition and insight-knowledge. It creates significant linguistic confusion that these true geniuses are called “scientists” as also is an industrial chemist wearing a white lab coat working at the CocaCola company. Justin Beiber and Pavarotti are both “singers”, right? Not exactly the same thing, I’d say.

    These true greats, the paradigm-shifters, luminaries of the first water, had their understanding first, then went back and did the mathematics or the experiments that confirmed it at an intellectual level, but only once they knew what to look for. I would imagine that Darwin was in fact one of these and had he known of such things as the flagella motor you reference he would have elaborated a much more subtle version of his theory. Which is extremely valuable where applicable. (It should be remembered that Darwin had no concept even of the mechanism by which mutations are transmitted to progeny, the genetic code, never mind the subtleties of digital information systems.) Darwin, as Newton and as far as I can determine practically all the truly great innovators, had an unshakable conviction in the reality, indeed the obviousness, of a higher intelligence that transcends the world-as-perceived. I find it curious that so many that now treat Darwin’s Theory of Evolution 1.3 as sacrosanct are extreme material-reductionists, a position that Darwin (Newton, etc.) would regard as ridiculous. On the one hand they exalt and sanctify the Darwins and the Newtons but somehow they apparently know better than their icons the real truth about the most subtle aspects of the world. I guess Isaac Newton wasn’t that smart, after all.

    Much of what is presented as “science” is now “Science” a dogma dominated by a priesthood of radical materialists, complete with its Inquisitors and Defenders of the Faith. This dogma does not – of course – require intellectual rigour from its acolytes and adherents. Some are very, very clever as are some Jesuits. They simply ignore all the hard problems that Materialism cannot even begin to answer. These include (but there are many more):

    The problem of consciousness arising from a non-conscious Universe.

    The problem of origins – to say it all began with the Big Bang is a linguistic dodge, quite childish really, as it raises the question of “what was before the Big Bang?” “You can’t ask that”, they say,”there is no answer”. How convenient, though not very scientific, and of course posits a phenomenon or effect without a cause (some would call that God). Dear, oh dear.

    The problem of the absolutely fundamental insight of Quantum Mechanics that consciousness is at the root structure of the Universe, prior to matter and energy, and that its (the Universe, not consciousness) nature is probabilistic, not deterministic. Was it Bohr that said if you don’t appreciate how radical (in terms of Scientistic Dogma) QM is then you haven’t really understood it?

    Scientism just ignores these issues or waves them away with “well, we don’t understand how that works now, but we will, we will!” (One amuses oneself by imagining they would then like to proceed with, “Now burn the witch!!”) They ignore the repeated and precise rebuttals of that contention by Planck, Schrodinger, Bohr et al.

    You responded to the statement:

    “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.”

    with the example of the flagella motor. A very good one. Of course a critical adjective has been left out – the modifications are required to be random. It is certainly true that there is a calculable probability (so could “possibly” happen) that a hundred chimps tapping on typewriters will eventually reach a level that is not vanishingly electron-microscopic, say . . . 0.001%? . . . of producing the Collected Works of William Shakespeare. Hell, I’d be pretty impressed if we got Romeo and Juliet! But that would take, say, some trillions of years just to get to some small probability (I imagine it is vastly more than that). Okay, I’m guessing here but it is certainly not 15 billion, the age of the Universe, more or less. So how the hell did that bloody Shakespeare do it?! I mean he is just a random product of a random Universe, right? The Scientism faithful might tell us well, it was really the Earl of Oxford anyway. But they can’t resolve the dilemma and that isn’t because they just don’t have all the facts to hand.

    The point of all this in the current context is that arguing with Dogmatists using reason, logic, historical examples, etc. is entirely futile. Their position is Dogma, not resting on a foundation of reason or even reasonableness. Their position in taking the search for truth that is the original purpose of science and turning it into Scientism is precisely analogous to the perversion of true spiritual insight into institutional Religion. Yup, it is about ego, power, money, status and a laundry list of human foibles and character flaws. Sad to say, but there it is.

    On the question of women versus men in certain roles or positions in Academia it misses the point that Academia (as it now is) is the problem. Similarly with the mainstream Media, laughably transparent two-party Politics, the Courts, the mechanisms of Economic relationships. They are all systems fundamentally misunderstood by most (technical term: “the suckers”), designed to deceive, to disguise something which the powerful want hidden so as to maintain privilege and performing that function quite nicely, thanks very much. Same as it ever was. You have to laugh to imagine some think these structures were created to promulgate truth, information, justice or opportunity for all. Did I mention I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I can let you have quite cheap?

    If Universities were institutions that sincerely promulgated and acted on principles of integrity, excellence, truth and merit then it would matter not a whit whether any individual was man or woman. It is as useful to see the world as made up of men and women in this case as it is to imagine that it makes any difference at all whether a politician is Republican or Democrat. The system is broken, changing the colour of the bunting is not going to help. There are real biological and psychological differences between men and women on average but healthy social systems would be designed to counter and compensate for the shortcomings of individuals. To somehow suggest if only we replace women with men (,or Democrats with Republicans, or Whites with Blacks, and so on) everything will be just fine is side-splitting in its naivety.

  202. Welton and Rasmussen won’t ever become popular . They would rather be searching for the truth than following orthodox thought. Feminist. Jewish and ugly muffeaters will beat them every time.

  203. @Elster

    Welton and Rasmussen won’t ever become popular . They would rather be searching for the truth than following orthodox thought. Feminist. Jewish and ugly muffeaters will beat them evry time.

  204. @Elster

    In the academy where I toiled, the work environment became more and more toxic until the atmosphere was poisonous as more and more women came on board and as the school tried to seek numerical gender equality. I’m not sure the board of trustees liked the results of constant bickering and venomous strife. As the the trustees were cowards, they allowed it to continue.

    Thank God, I was ready to retire. I pity those I left behind.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Lance Welton Comments via RSS