Fitz!

Oy. I didn’t read the whole thing (couldn’t stand it) but it sounds like “The Bell Curve”, this time directed at women.

I’d like to see one of those “journalists” say that to Harvard physicist Lisa Randall. Now that would be fun.

Heh! I just knew ya were gonna jump on this one, Jane. Dog help charlotte ’cause she (and whoever the facilitators are) done stepped in it good!

This woman is an idiot – superior verbal skills, my a**. The column leaves me sputtering and furious. Who is this inane human being and has she ever written anything before this?

Well, I did read the whole thing. Dear Charlotte sounds like she’d be perfectly happy curled up reading The Total Woman. What amazes me is that she imagines–dim though she is–that anyone else would be interested in her opinion. Sounds like a deliberate attempt on the paper’s part to draw fire. What else is around that we should be paying attention to? hmmm….FISA and Reyes’ comment that a compromise may soon be worked out, maybe….or……?

Ole 60 Grit’s outfit

http://www.iwf.org/authors/show/7.html

Uh oh someone telling the truth is going t get destroyed by the Obamanacs again..Democrats doing to the Clintons in six months what the Republicans couldn’t do in sixteen years…..Dick Morris is in awe of your hatred.

Jeebus! She pretty much managed to take down everything and everyone except for straight men.

She smacks on Obama because the women were “screaming” for him ala The Beatles circa 1964.

Hillary gets smacked around because she’s a woman.

Then she throws in gay males just because.

It would have been fun to watch my mother take her apart.
(My mother took trig and calculus at the same time. Didn’t recommend doing it that way. Worked as a newspaper proofreader. Worked in an oil company lab, and gave them six months notice when she left; they still couldn’t find anyone to replace her.)

from the link:

And obviously men do dumb things, too,…

See – there ya go – fair and balanced. (and correct in at least that one sentence).

I miss the WaPo. And the NYT. And intelligent, independent political coverage. And, and,….

Obamanacs? Are those Obama supporters who like men?

thanks will read later when I can take more of this. blegh

Jane???!!!

Who the fuck is this moron? That’s the lamest thing I ever read. Chick has the Marabel Morgan gene, obviously.

Charlotte F. Allen is the author of “The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus.” She also wrote a screed last year jumbling together hospice, living wills and assisted suicide in such a way as to make all of them seem pernicious. Such a doll.

anything you can tell me about how this insufferably ignorant woman made her way into your pages.

i don’t know but don’t they make a pill or cream for this (ignorance)? (Better living through pharmaceuticals)

BTW, gang:

Relax–I leave in a few…(as Jane would say)..*G*

She appears to be a bit of a universal dumbshit:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R…..r_rdp_perm

“The theory that women are the dumber sex — or at least the sex that gets into more car accidents — is amply supported by neurological and standardized-testing evidence. Men’s and women’s brains not only look different, but men’s brains are bigger than women’s (even adjusting for men’s generally bigger body size). The important difference is in the parietal cortex, which is associated with space perception. Visuospatial skills, the capacity to rotate three-dimensional objects in the mind, at which men tend to excel over women, are in turn related to a capacity for abstract thinking and reasoning, the grounding for mathematics, science and philosophy. While the two sexes seem to have the same IQ on average (although even here, at least one recent study gives males a slight edge), there are proportionally more men than women at the extremes of very, very smart and very, very stupid.”

So, isn’t that sort of like the remarks made by Jimmy the Greek that got him fired by CBS when he said that blacks were better athletes because they were bred to be that way.

She should be fired immediately. This is disgraceful.

have fun Biodun

Having observed that one female columnist, in emulation of many male columnists, has already demonstrated the ability to shape a career appreciating only their own limited gifts in this world and deriding the choices of others, is it any surprise that someone like Ms. Allen would toss her wig into the ring with the support and encouragement of an envious paper management team. Management like that will eat its own in time. Intentional missed appreciation fosters the same. Poor, Charlotte, soon to be slain with her own copy.

Fellow Democrats;
The choice between Clinton and Obama is like picking between two very similar political creeds.

I won’t belabor the here and now with all the trivial issues that are being used to separate Obama and Clinton.

But in essence, we are voting for two degrees on a political thermometer that are very close together, like choosing whether you prefer 70 degrees over 72 degrees for your room thermostat. And the parsing of that difference has reached an historic fever pitch; never have two people with such similar political bent been so drastically dissected, putting a lot of rhetorical and contrived real estate between their common ground for the sake of political advantage and media profits. The more division between them, the more compelled they are to spend their money advertising those subtle differences.

But there is one factor that everyone should consider, one major difference that we all need to take into account when we make our choice. I think there is one very good and irrefutable reason to vote for Obama, with all else being equal.

You probably think I’m going after Hillary as the war enabler, which would certainly be worth considering. But I have always held the opinion that she took this politically unpopular tack because she is willing to represent her constituency, rather than her own self-will, as their elected Senator.

So while I agree with Obama that she was wrong to give Bush his power, I must commend her for representing the voters of her district, who for obvious reason wanted Saddam taken out as a threat to Israel and the whole middle east. I disagree with all of them, but I’m in Kansas and they are in New York.

No, it is not Hillary’s war policy that tilts my scales in favor of Obama.

It is her blind ambition, particularly evident in her media-obscured failure to get behind John Kerry in the 2004 election. She and Bill were notably absent from that election scene, the media never mentioned it despite their very conspicuous absence from the process, and to be very honest about it, I think there can be only one reasonable explanation.

Bill and Hillary DID NOT WANT THE DEMOCRATS TO WIN IN 2004 because it would have scuttled her chances to run in 2008!

Hillary did not have the political capital to run in 2004, and if Kerry had been the “official” winner instead of the “actual” winner, that would have meant her chances of running and winning in in 2008 would have been dashed before they ever got started. It doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to figure it out… the Clintons’ absence from that campaign contributed to the end game that fell short.

Bill and Hillary could have made a huge difference in that outcome, if they had put even a particle of the effort she has managed this year with her own campaign, into getting ANY Democrat elected in 2004.

So I guess, all things considered, that is what inevitably turned me into an Obama supporter when John Edwards dropped out. (I have to say this, if Hillary had really been as mistreated by the media the way she now complains, the way Edwards actually was trivialized, Edwards would still be in this race. Hearing the Clintons complain about the media is absolutely laughable to anyone who watched the concerted media effort to push Edwards off the front pages in this election, and Howard Dean in the 2004 election.)

The Clintons represent their own ambition much more than the aspirations of the new, young and growing Democratic Party. That is reason enough to find an alternative. That we have such a young, dynamic, and different kind of candidate in Barrack Obama makes it that much easier. Obama alone, in all his splendid quality, is worth supporting, but Hillary and Bill’s ambition just makes it so much easier to do that.

If for no other reaon than the Clintons’ blind ambition, our tidal-wave of support for Obama is justified. The fact that he is a great orator, a dedicated civil servant, and a devoted Democrat FIRST, just makes it all the more agreeable.

As I first stated, the actual political differences between Clinton and Obama are negligible, but their character qualities are graphically exposed in this comparison.

The Clintons are in it for the Clintons. Their conspicuous absence from the 2004 campaign is pretty good proof of it.

Yet through it all, Obama seems quite sincere in his dedication to the public will.

Do we need to know any more than that, to make the right choice between two close degrees on the same political scale?

So, isn’t that sort of like the remarks made by Jimmy the Greek that got him fired by CBS when he said that blacks were better athletes because they were bred to be that way.

That word makes me shudder when connected to human beings

Topic. It’s a beautiful thing.

1,774 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Hamsher:

Mrs. Clinton took the “gender thing” for granted and is gettin’ skewered on it by female shills…my wife LOVES it!!

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITON, AND DON’T WORRY, SEX IS HERE TA STAY!!!

oh geeeeeez, Jane. REALLY? You’ll keep any reply CONFIDENTIAL?

DANG!!!!!

i’d have LOVED to hear the response on this one! (assuming you GET a response.)

Citizen JEP07:

Right fuckin’ on!!

See absolute hatred for Clinton…….Democrats doing Dick Morris work for free. Congratulations your brainwashing is complete!

Jane, you are a bit of a celebrity, right? So, ignore the tabloids.

She seems to fit all the stereotypes that she projects in her writing. Given her intellect and insight into men and women, I am sure that she is a self made woman because it’s likely no one else will touch her.

I think maybe Charlotte should clean Jane’s house now since Charlotte believes that that is what a women’s role should be, since we’re good at nothing else. Spit.

I fainted half way through the article.

707

Nope. Woman have ignored this kind of garbage for too long and it needs to be answered each and every time. Just like campaign smears – quickly and hard.

OMG, now I know what it is that makes me so not want to have a beer with Hillary! It’s because she’s got blind ambition!

And ambition so ill-becomes a woman. She needs to learn her place.

What is it about the Obamabots, as Taylor Marsh calls them? They sure can spam a thread with overwhelming verbosity! Just pick a recent thread at random and scroll down until you find a huge, verbose comment full of links. I guaran-damn-tee it will be an Obamabot.

The vapors, don’t ya know.

did they condition and use creme rinse as well? *g*

707 !!

LOL

What’s so interesting is white males are also into Barack Obama and from the footage I’ve seen of his rallies, he’s not attracting the feminine males either. I wonder what Charlotte has to say about that? Probably nothing since Charlotte believes a woman’s role is to be seen and not heard. Spit.

Another example of faulty arguing from the particular (the stupidity of Charlotte F. Allen) to the general…

ROFL. (and THAT hurts, as I’ve caught the flu!)

I couldn’t get pass the first paragraph, logic kept getting in the way

lay off the name calling today, okay? I agree that the slamming of Hillary isn’t cool but your not rising above it by calling supporters names.

I’ll be back in a bit, because I have to go get my botox injections and then I’m going to read romance novels, cook dinner for the guys, clean the house so my hubby is happy and he as me trained…all barefoot, cause I’m a woooomaaan….w.o.m.a.n…wouldn’t want him to cheat on me ya know.

I concur on the similarities to The Bell Curve. I lament that Stephen Jay Gould isn’t around to shred this, a la “The Mismeasure of Man”, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man for background.

Oh Laura. Did you get from me when we communicated? Just think if we had both gone to the meetup. FDL would have become a three legged stool for about a week.

ROFL my side hurts

More likely a McLamebot in disguise or a Rovebot….use your head…

The political hit piece on Hillary and Obama is crudely stupid in a way that only David Brooks could envy. It is the rawest of stereotyping, a try out of memes for the GOP’s fall campaign. Among her Rovian excesses [emph. mine]:

Then there’s Clinton’s nearly all-female staff, chosen for loyalty rather than, say, brains or political savvy.

Right. Bush prefers competence.

What is it about us women? Why do we always fall for the hysterical, the superficial and the gooily sentimental?

Right. Substitute “neocons” or “GOP’ers” or “authoritarians” and the comment might be accurate.

Depressing as it is, several of the supposed misogynist myths about female inferiority have been proven true.

Right. Including the one that casts Karl Rove as the ghost of Lady Macbeth.

Ms. Allen is Phyllis Schlafly, Maureen Dud, and the Capital Hill “Dating” Service all in one. My guess is she spends most of her time haunting the street corners of 15th & M, not inside the WaPo building around the corner. I doubt she gets more than $15 for a quickie, but it seems the once great WaPo has nevertheless asked her to stay the night.

I would disagree on this point.

“Appears”?

Allen is a self-loathing wretch who IS a dumbass.

A wretch proven unworthy of feminine labels, the Michelle Malkin of the Christianist world. It is Allen’s embrace of the misogynistic and unChristian Christianity that requires her to shut off what God dispensed at birth and yield to dogma that is fearful of woman’s intellect and power.

Ditch WaPo; if every woman did, it might actually hurt their pocketbook enough to make them stop such miserably poor content.

bonne soiree, sire..ca va bien? a plus tard…

bon soir, wobblybits–bebemos vina rojo esta nochee…

salut, LS–en depit du tout, tu es une de ma favotirites FDLers!

Je m’en vais, et c’est tout! comme Rimbaud a dit a l’epoch…

du calme et a bientot, ma FDL famille…

Je vous aime tous!!!

Nah. I’ve got plenty of virus stoppers on my ‘puter. But I’m glad we’re not sharing this with our pals….

this is so bad that I have a hard time believing that it is real.

Yeah, more REPORTED traffic accidents. I remember when I was hit by a guy in a car who was turning onto a one way street the wrong way. I insisted on calling the cops, though he was vociforcious in declaring that all he needed to do was give me the name of his insurance agent and drive away. He reeked of alcohol, his eyes were bloodshot. But when the police got there they rounded on ME and said that they didn’t need to be called for something like this, though the guy was obviously driving under the influence! They certainly didn’t write him up for it either. I thought, “What gives?”

LMAO! Have fun. Don’t forget to call home to see if hubby needs anything! LOL

Well, OK. But seriously, the Obama supporters remind me of Jesus Freaks. I mean, great, go ahead and love him, but please quit spamming me to death! OMG!

They definitely prefer quantity over quality in their arguments!

bon soir, wobblybits–bebemos vina rojo esta nochee…

vino rojo…gostoso!!!!

Merci Biodun, tres gentile a vous de dire ca, voila la meme de vous…bon voyage! (I made up the French for the most part….*g*) hee, hee, hee.

hey LS – did Mr. LS play with the Huckster? How’d it go?

(you’ve probably already reported on this, but I missed it)

This bit is SO bad:

I swear no man watches “Grey’s Anatomy” unless his girlfriend forces him to. No man bakes cookies for his dog. No man feels blue and takes off work to spend the day in bed with a copy of “The Friday Night Knitting Club.” No man contracts nebulous diseases whose existence is disputed by many if not all doctors, such as Morgellons (where you feel bugs crawling around under your skin). At least no man I know. Of course, not all women do these things, either — although enough do to make one wonder whether there isn’t some genetic aspect of the female brain, something evolutionarily connected to the fact that we live longer than men or go through childbirth, that turns the pre-frontal cortex into Cream of Wheat.

Although the bit I bolded is telling

What man would want to “know” this wretch?

Wait until I tell my spouse his evenings watching “Grey’s Anatmony” are anathema to his gender.

Hmm let’s see, still not rising above it.

I’m a supporter and haven’t sent you a lick of email and I have no idea what I have in common with the other not-so-nice name for people who believe in Jesus. Try again.

Off topic:

Chavez has ordered troops to the Columbian border…

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23435878

Serious question – really do want an answer. Could you tell me who you get spam from? I signed up on his site so that I could keep up with what is going on and I get about 3 or 4 e-mails a week and that’s it. Who’s doing all the spamming?

Oh my, it’s Sunday, I’m typing and he’s cooking me breakfast in bed as we speak…in reality, I married Mr. Mom…shhhhhhh…really…see what all that botox gets you??

rut-roh

He is a problem in South America (has been pissing off the brasilians and worrying just about everyone)

Wow. WTF was her name again? That was undoubtedly the most heinous piece of crap to have ever appeared in the Washington Post…I wonder if Katherine Graham was spinning in her grave as that was put to press?

I guess that Ms. Allen took the time to crawl out from under her burka to scribble that miserable piece of excrement before parking her and her smaller-than-normal brain back in her house where she puts her biscuits in the oven and parks her buns in the bed.

Does the “F” in Charlotte F. Allen stand for “Fucking Stupid” or just Fucked?

Our hearts ache for change and peace.

Lahoma.

The Huckster’s campaign called at 4:30 yesterday and said they were stuck in Houston…I don’t know if they are gonna do it tomorrow…Mr. LS just did the most hilarious photoshop of Huckster and the other guys with the title of ZZTop’s…Have Mercy been waitin’ on the Bus Huck All Day..

Kiddo!!!!!

Your husband is the perfect husband. Charlotte would be stunned! LOL Poor thing.

From the Obama-(insert nasty name here) who are remarkably like (insert insensitive religious name here).

Seriously, the over simplifications and generalizations and name calling are way past their sale date.

Makes you wonder if Georgie will send in the CIA or the Reagan Crazy paramilitary guys down there? Hey, the warmongers will do anything for more wars.

{{{Lahoma}}}

LOL….kinda sad when you think that she has such low self-esteem and self- hatred of being a woman. Maybe she needs a sex change or something.

oy please nooooooooooooooo

Methinks Ms. Allen is trying out a new GOP meme that tries to undercut all of Hillary and the sensitive side of a streetwise, HLS editor-in-chief Obama. (Just to be clear, Hillary is at least as experienced, credentialed and talented.)

Why? Both will be potent electoral forces in the fall campaign, though only one as the presidential contender. Both out-poll McCain. Both appeal strongly to women and many other focus groups, frankly, leaving McCain in the dust with everyone who doesn’t eat their meat raw. And because the vote in November is only the start of a new phase of GOP attack mongering.

Allen’s is a pure attack piece, Jack London-meets-Bill Safire, meant to shore up a dwindling, more extreme base in a way that the milquetoast Brooks and empty-suited Kristol simply can’t. It is the WaPo become Fox Noise machine.

Jeebus, I have to go do something else; I can’t spend any more time on such a putz like Allen.

Better go find something stupid to do suitable to my gender.

Like fix the video display on a computer.

Or read something useless and fluffy like this month’s Foreign Affairs.

They are already there.

and wobblybits too: when I say “spam” I’m referring to spamming a thread, i.e., cluttering it up with a bunch of bombastic, overly verbose comments. Not literally e-mail spam.

OK wobblybits, I guess I’m having a problem with the name calling today. I’ll try harder. :-)

What’s Foreign Affairs?

Oh my Brattleboro is still at it. Today at the town meeting they will decide whether or not to indite Bush and Cheney!

http://www.timesargus.com/apps…..002/NEWS01

Since Brattleboro’s actions to put it on the town meeting ballot became public, he said, the group had been contacted by constitutional scholars who said it could be argued that the action is grounded in the concept of common law, and that it would be within the town’s right to issue an indictment.

Go Brattleboro!! Impeach the bastards!

I’ve never understood women like Charlotte. I’m not voting for Hillary for lots of different reasons, but her being a woman is not one of them. The fact that women are fainting during Obama’s speeches could be for lots of reasons (too many people causing dehydration in some for starters), but when Charlotte state’s that fainting is a woman thing, I have to believe Charlotte is wearing an 1800’s smock dress and bonnet while writing her articles. For crying out loud!

It’s all that can be asked in order to keep some semblance of peace here.

As far as verbosity, we’re all guilty of that at some point here at FDL, aren’t we?

Don’t you mean Whose Foreign Affairs? ; )

You are not reaching women over the age of 65 with that message. The Clintons and Obama are not subject to measurable degrees of separation. The Clintons are like the gang in High Noon; they rely solely on power to mask their intentions which are solely to run the town.

Yep. The Reagan Crazies have been preparing for a lot since that time. Bastards.

Last week Kathleen Parker has a similar piece on women swooning for Obama. Her’s took more of a “look, it’s the new religion” slant, which is just as weird and wrong as the piece of crap in the WaPo today.

Here’s a LINK if you have a few minutes to waste.

On the Huffington post, one poster wrote a long blog on, using the typical tv sit com meme on the uselessness of men, how women can multitask and take care of business better, ergo Clinton over Obama. In the United States, colleges and universities in the late 1970s opened their doors and some of their curriculum to women, and a demographic sea change that has been widely documented has occurred. Brain measurement, the phoney baloney 19th century pseudoscience that was appropriated to use half understood Darwinism as a racist political tool has in the past century been widely derided as a joke. In the 1980s when IQ tests were being revealed for what there were, the joke going around about it went like this:
“Who’s buried in Grant’s Tomb?”
…

Your mama.
Stupid is as stupid does, even a fictional idiot knows that.

Have you senn Joel Stein’s nasty little comments from Friday? Maybe they are channeling each other?

LA Times

From the Los Angeles Times
A little something for the ladies
Joel Stein

February 29, 2008

[Mod Note; link reformatted]

The only problem with your “crdentialed” Hillary is that she will not release her appointment records during the time period she served as First Lady. As a Senator she is a non-event, except for her votes.

The “women’s perspective” is false, a Hollywood store front. Ms. Allen is writing as artful and crude a political attack piece as she can. She’s a paid attack dog for whom gender is irrelevant except as a rhetorical tool.

LOL

Charley’s Aikin’ falls into a common trap. We tend to view others as we view ourselves. Intelligent people know better than to write, “I am somewhat dim, therefore, so are most other chicks.”

That’s not a direct quote, but it’s right on target.

Hillary and Obama are different talents, but she is as smart and streetwise and experienced as Obama. The meme about releasing her records might be relevant at another time, but not in a contest with an administration that hides and destroys government records at the pace of this one. Even Cheney’s visitors’ log.

Any chance her whole piece is pure snark?

Please, RF, I grew up with four sisters with an average IQ of 140, no one needs to tell me we are all equal. I spent the first years of my life struggling to compete with that, so I don’t need a lecture on sexual equality.

I’ve been outnumbered, outsmarted and outmanuevered often enough to humbly and readily admit gender equality, without any prodding from frustrated feminists who are tyhemselves so starry-eyed over Hillary, they can’t see that her ambition knows no gender.

So, in this little game of imaginary political poker, I see your “Hillary for President” and raise you “Sebelius for VP…” which would be very good for the whole party.

Also, I think I defended, if not proved the “blind” qualifier with the reference 2004 campaign absenteeism, if you have a better explanation for Hillary’s non-commitment, please elucidate.

Lastly, I have only been an Obama supporter since Edwards dropped out, so don’t lump me in with the starry-eyed newbies, although I am certain Hillary’s people would be more than glad to be the recipients of that adoration. As for me, I van only say that, even though starry-eyed, these ne people represent the future of our party. The more the merrier, if they stay involved for more than one electin cycle, they will lose the luster in their eyes, maybe not for Obama, but surely for the process they have recently joined.

Then they will be as jaded and skeptical as the rest of us, and that makes them the best kind of voter.

To me it’s no different than a gay writing an attack article on gays and attacking every issue they fight for.

Jesus, that reads like something published in Cosmo in the 1950s. Helen Gurley Brown, come back!

I’m heartened by Brattleboro’s willingness to openly debate this, in the finest spirit of democracy-in-action. I’m equally disappointed that our congresscritters lack the courage to do the same.

Sebelius for VP, that sounds good to me. I just saw here on C-Span at an Obama rally.

I’m glad you’re for equality of the sexes. I figured you were, but the blind ambition meme is bullshit. Any politician who makes it anywhere near running for president is ambitious.

Good afternoon Jane, Laura’ Twain, wobblybits, the rest of you foul-mouthed fem bloggers and gents as well.

I can see you are all quite annoyed with poor little Charlotte. But, really what can you expect from someone (of either sex) who admires Maggot Thather?

Certainly no one here is truly surprised or shocked at the sort of ‘person’ who is ’successful’ in today’s media? This article isn’t about depth or substance. Its purpose is two-fold: to get a rise out of those who are disgusted and an ‘aha!’ from those whom she confirms, most of whom, by the way, are NOT women.

Jane, please consider, when you send us on excursions of this nature, that
whatever ‘edification’ we may enjoy is countered by the number of ‘hits’ which result, only enhancing Charlotte’s ‘web’ appeal.

Paying any attention whatsoever (beyond assessing what ‘they’ are ‘up to’) to such writing(?) ability as she demonstrates, in my opinion, is not merely a waste of time, but of ink, paper, and ‘airwave’ space as well.

Frankly, she’s not worth the effort of juicing-up for a good spit.

AS outrages go, she represents women quite as well as ‘W’ represents intellect and nuance.

I was for Edwards too, and I’m not especially excited about either Hillary or Obama. But the Obama people do tend to be true believers, it seems to me, and I’m fed up with it. I’m also fed up with the nasty attacks on Hillary.

I went to the Great Orange Satan the other night, and believe me there are some very nasty people supporting Obama.

Here’s some Charlotte Allen for you: Larry Summers was attacked because:

[His] statements violated the central tenet of feminist ideology: that the two sexes are intrinsically identical except for a few superficial physical characteristics and that any perceived differences between them can be blamed on sex discrimination and social conditioning. Scientific evidence to the contrary be damned; a feminist professor in Mr. Summers’ audience announced that his remarks made her feel as though she was “going to be sick.”

Link.

Having read her other piece for the WaPo, no. She’s a conservative and very foolish person.

AS outrages go, she represents women quite as well as ‘W’ represents intellect and nuance.

You nailed it, David. (Hi backatcha!)

“The theory that women are the dumber sex — or at least the sex that gets into more car accidents — is amply supported by neurological and standardized-testing evidence. Men’s and women’s brains not only look different, but men’s brains are bigger than women’s (even adjusting for men’s generally bigger body size). The important difference is in the parietal cortex, which is associated with space perception. Visuospatial skills, the capacity to rotate three-dimensional objects in the mind, at which men tend to excel over women, are in turn related to a capacity for abstract thinking and reasoning, the grounding for mathematics, science and philosophy. While the two sexes seem to have the same IQ on average (although even here, at least one recent study gives males a slight edge), there are proportionally more men than women at the extremes of very, very smart and very, very stupid.”

This utterly confounds so many aspects of biological phenotype and genetics that it’s pathetic. First, we are now discovering that the brain is not some static organ that remains unchanged at birth and is isolated from environmental factors. It’s a dynamic organ that responds to acquired information and reprocesses that in efficient ways. In the 1980’s a Japanese neurologist claimed that there were inherent differences between Asian brains and those of Westerners because they processed musical information completely differently. Turns out that this was because Japanese, Chinese and other Asian languages were tonal and that musical and linguistic processing mandated different processing pathways, Japanese and Chinese-Americans whose native tongue was English…processed linguistic and musical information just like European-Americans.

It’s very likely that male-female average differences in spatial processing are set down in childhood as a result of play activities. Boys (in the past) generally played outdoor sports, were involved in mechanical play (rather than “social interactive play”) that girls were involved in. None of this presumes genetic inevitability. In fact, pedagogues today are quite concerned over the fact that children have very little free-play where they themselves create the games, rules and imaginary toys. This has impacted severely the ability of children to have impulse control. The brains are processing information differently. Where schools have introduced periods of free play, the differences, in both psychological testing and actual neurological processing (as measured by Pet-Scans and CAT-Scans are significant). These processing networks can be changed, but the later one starts the longer it takes.

And even if 5% of the populations of genders are under different “treatments” one will have “statistically different” outcomes. But genetically inevitable…uh-uh.

Finally, the author uses the “outlier argument” to justify the sexual differentiation argument. But even assuming that it’s genotypic imputs that produce these differences at the outliers (a massive leap in logic), this is the worst sort of statistical inference. Overlay two “Bell Curves” atop one another -have one represent females, the other males. Shift the Bell Curve of one so that the mean difference is about one half of one percent above the other. Now no one would say that there was a smitten of difference between the vast bulk of individuals that fall in the middle 99.9% of the distributions. But if those samples number in the millions the outlying 00.1% of the sample will contain about 1000 representatives of one sample to the 10 of the other.

That is, and this needs to be made quite clear, the flaw of the outlier (or as I prefer to call it the “out LIAR” argument. Any effect (genetic or environmental) that influences the mean a mere microscopic amount is exagerrated at the outlier. Now lets say that Ms. Allen’s argument convinces even 1% of parents on average to tell their daughters that they are “the dumb sex” and can’t do visual-spatial (and abstract) thinking? That would translate to major effects at the outliers.

Good job, Ms. Allen! You’ve succeeded in holding back thousands of young girls from their potentials.

I see it differently than you do. I see a nation fed up with the Clintons and the Bushes running this country and when anyone mentions Obama, the Clinton supporters immediately cry foul by calling the commenter a misogynist or something to that effect. It escalates into something ridiculous and very mean spirited. I think some of the Hillary supporters just assumed Americans would take to her, but then again, eight years have passed and we’ve seen this family cozying up to the Bushes, you know, the family America despises greatly right now.

This doesn’t happen so much on FDL, but it’s happening pretty much everywhere else. I’ve been called a woman-hater on my blog because I don’t support her. Jees.

I read that last night, and linked to it on LLNight. Unfreakingbelievable, isn’t it. Revolting.

Frank Rich’s column today was only more slightly more artful than Miss Allen’s, slightly less crude, but equally unedifying. His favorite attack on McCain, whom he professes to admire, is that he often “channels” Hillary (a double insult a la David Brooks) and will, therefore, lose. He writes as if Obama will be the winner by default.

Rich’s claim that McCain is as frequently democratic as the Democrats would be tongue-in-cheekly humorous were it not so much in error. McCain the “Maverick” may occasionally vote in the same manner as Democrats. But he is staunchly conservative (which means “centrist” as measured by today’s neocons), just as much in thrall to lobbyists as Bush, but has more energy and a worse temper. A recipe for Armageddon pie that only Hagee could admire.

I’ve seen that at work, too. Many people (but of course none of us would ever dream of doing this, even on a bad day ;-) ) have leapt to the presumptions that X supports Senator Clinton because X is female, Y supports Senator Obama because Y is black, Z supports George W. Bush because Z…oh, wait. Never mind that last one. And the opposite presumptions (Y is a misogynist, X is a racist) tend to be made as well.

Lost in all this are the substantive points that I’m sure each of us would make about our choice(s), the ones that have nothing to do with who we are and everything to do with who they are. So while I’m truly happy to see the reinvigoration of the electorate (Memo to TX and OH: prepare for an avalanche on Tuesday), I’m disappointed with some of what I read.

Publishers Weekly, whose opinion I find generally useful in assessing books, said:

While the book might be helpful to some readers as an introduction to the quest for the historical Jesus, its superficial scholarship makes this a less than worthwhile contribution to the historical Jesus conversation.

I wouldn’t trust this woman to give me directions to the grocery store.

But the Obama people do tend to be true believers, it seems to me, and I’m fed up with it.

You seem to not have issues with blanket statements and to be honest, I’m sick of it and I’m going to call you out every time you or anyone else does it. Will I do that to anyone that picks on Hillary supporters as well? You betcha.

I did imply that JEP07 was sexist, and I was wrong to do that. I’m so used to the “blind ambition” meme coming from the right, where I think it is sexist, and I jumped to the conclusion that that’s where he was coming from.

I still remember the “blind ambition” bullshit dumped on Hillary by the wingnuts in the 90s, and to hear that coming from the left in the primaries– it’s not just disheartening, it’s goddamn revolting.

You seem to not have issues with blanket statements

That’s kind of a blanket statement itself, isn’t it?

Are all generalizations bad? Can I say something like “Republicans are selfish” or “Liberals tend to be inclusive”?

I believe Obama supporters do tend to be true believers, and I think when they wake up the hangover’s gonna be a bitch.

Soi la vuel.

I learned long ago not to judge a candidate by their most outspoken supporters… and those are the ones who have plagued you with their incessant opinions that you call spam.

Look at Obama, not his fans.

And I have to admit, the excitement about Obama is one of the most contagious political evente I’ve seen so far. When my home state of Iowa managed to overcome all the criticism about being so white and such a bunch of hicks, and gave him his caucus vistory, I was elated, proud, and excited all in one moment.

As for the zealousness of his supporters, since when is enthusiastic activism a bad thing? How on Earth could you be fed up with DEMOCRATS getting new people into the party, and networking around like a real party ought to?

And, like I said, you can’t judge a book by it’s readers.

Except maybe for Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter.

A study published in 1998 by the Johns Hopkins schools of medicine and public health revealed that women clocked 5.7 auto accidents per million miles driven, in contrast to men’s 5.1, even though men drive about 74 percent more miles a year than women. The only good news was that women tended to take fewer driving risks than men, so their crashes were only a third as likely to be fatal. Those statistics were reinforced by a study released by the University of London in January showing that women and gay men perform more poorly than heterosexual men at tasks involving navigation and spatial awareness, both crucial to good driving.

Well, the NUMBER of miles driven by males might mean they are MORE PRACTICED. It would have nothing to do, at least directly with a measure of accidents/miles driven. It’s extracted out of that measure, so trying to somehow suggest that females should “benefit” from that datum is absurd. Now, I wonder if they also looked at these numbers in age cohorts and standardized it by areas driven within. Males are more likely to log long road miles on highways and interstates, I would guess. In addition male driving occurs under less distraction. Women drive disproportionate miles in urban and suburban situations, and often have teenage or children as passengers. Studies have shown that 90% of accidents occur within a few miles of home. That’s because this is not “open-highway driving”, but involves lots of stop-starts in traffic-heavy environments, with social distractions.

In addition did they age-grade this? Elderly people have more accidents than any other group than teenagers. Women generally live, and are socially active, for much longer than males. If there are more elderly women drivers than males, they’d likely increase the number of accidents in the total measure significantly. And yes, these women (at that age) may have significant “navigation and spatial” impairments. Wow!

But even if there were differences that failed to wash out when one fairly balanced the driving conditions and age cohorts…it still wouldn’t imply that the differences were “genetic” or “hard-wired” in the brain. Boys tend to do activities that improve “mapping” of their environments. They roam around town on bikes and on foot, and they enter into a “car-culture” that girls are rarely privileged to join (exception Danica Patrick). That’s an out-LIAR, but it occurs at every level from playing with Hot-Wheels (and auto Video Games) down through shop. Boys use maps in the Boy Scouts and travel the globe as backpackers and hikers….disproportionately. They have tended to play sports and undertake other activities that utilize visual-spatial decision-making. Baseball, basketball, football, soccer, cricket, wrestling, etc. are activities that program the circuitry of the brain to deal with rapid decision-making using specific types of cues. For boys growing up these are common activities…girls who do them have a name…they are called “Tom Boys”.

AS outrages go, she represents women quite as well as ‘W’ represents intellect and nuance

Snap!

Well said.

Hardly a blanket statement for the day, don’t you think?

Well i bow to your superior intellect and humbly ask that you allow us ’supporters’ to come to that conclusion ourselves.

Thank you

Wow, I don’t think I’ve ever read anything worse than that.

apologies for the above, I was using FDL’s html and mistakenly hit submit

Mods please feel free to delete

WaPo comments under Ms. Allen’s screed are running heavily against her.

Well, OK. But seriously, the Obama supporters remind me of Jesus Freaks. I mean, great, go ahead and love him, but please quit spamming me to death! OMG!

They definitely prefer quantity over quality in their arguments!

BTW R-F…wouldn’t calling people names and implying that they aren’t capable of reasoning be VERY detrimental to attracting those needed Democrats to supporting your favored candidate in the Fall General election.

It’s called “fouling the nest” when you insult and degrade people that are going to be necessary to winning against McCain. Given that Taylor Marsh is supposedly a Democrat I’m surprised at her vitriol against Obama supporters. It’s almost something that I’d expect Carl Rove to be doing so that deep divisiveness splits the party. The use of “Obamabots”, “Obamapods”, and suggesting that supporters of Obama are mindless religious cultists is just the type of nonsense that Taylor (and many folks on Huffingtonblog also) are involved in.

I agree that issues like experience are real issues…but remember, as well, that Obama has far more years experience as an actual legislator than Clinton and has run and won more elections. And many people argue that Hillary’s “experience”, as an unelected and unconfirmed policy broker in the WH, an unofficial member of Bill’s Cabinet, and heavily involved in policy even in her first year of being First Lady…was precisely NOT what she should have been doing. She took upon a role that no other first lady had ever done (with the exception perhaps of Mrs. Woodrow Wilson after he had his stroke) “from day one”. She faced no Senate Confirmation Hearings…was not elected as part of a ticket. Her argument was that they came as a package deal. Yet she also argues that “some ” policies that were instituted in the Clinton years were NOT hers.

I support Obama for other reasons, but the case you made is an excellent one. I think he is the future of the Democratic Party and without new blood, the Democratic Party is on life support. Everytime the party betrays us, it is the old guard leading the pack.

Not fair! I don’t pretend I have a “superior intellect”. Sorry I disagree with you, I’ll try to be more respectful in the way I phrase it. I’ve been improving, wobblybits. I used to be even worse at this!

Amen

My email to the Post; please consider sending one.

ombudsman@washpost.com
Subject: Column on Female Inferiority

Regarding Charlotte Allen’s column today, “We Scream, We Swoon. How Dumb Can We Get?”

I realize I’m supposed to be laughing. I’m not. This is serious. Very serious.

I would like a response as to what the Post’s criteria are for determining when a column crosses a line into gratuitous incitement to contempt for an entire segment of the human population.

I sincerely want to understand why the Post accepted this for publication. Was it that a member of the targeted population authored the column? So if we learn that David Duke has African-American blood, the Post would allow him to opine that blacks are inferior?

Or did the Post rate this as “satire?” If so, what is the Post’s definition of satire? What precisely is it that the Post thinks is being satirized, and what does the Post consider Allen’s actual beliefs to be regarding female inferiority?

Would the Post print a comparable column about any historically oppressed group? Or are females a “special case”? If so, why?

I look forward to your explanation.

Oh ugh, I tried but just couldn’t finish it either. I couldn’t get past the part about the office full of women where nothing gets done. I have to ask, what planet is she from?

Are you sure about that? What if Kerry didn’t want the Clenis to be out campaigning for him. Al Gore didn’t.

Where are you getting your data from, or are you just theorizing?

Yet another Post columnist waiting for the Cah-Ching of the checkbook- seriously does anyone care what this pathetic hack writes?
its FAUX news caliber, all thats missing is a bible quote.

Hi Jane,
This is in the OUTLOOK section – which is the Sunday opinion section. Sort of like the editorials I guess. So I’m not sure it was an “assignment”.

All’s I can say is, Ug.

Well I did manage to read it through to the end. It was painful and I searched hard for the satire but I guess it isn’t there.

The same goes for female fighter pilots, architects, tax accountants, chemical engineers, Supreme Court justices and brain surgeons. Yes, they can do their jobs and do them well, and I don’t think anyone should put obstacles in their paths. I predict that over the long run, however, even with all the special mentoring and role-modeling the 21st century can provide, the number of women in these fields will always lag behind the number of men, for good reason.

Big of her to say she doesn’t think anyone should put obstacles in their paths, but the fact that historically many were and in some cases still are, doesn’t absolve women from not outperforming men, according to her view.
Jeez, I’m not that old and I remember when “girls couldn’t do that”.
It takes some time to blaze a trail.

And given the fact that so many women work the second shift while their biological clocks run, is it any wonder the cream doesn’t rise to the top all the time?

I think that’s a “good reason” why women may lag behind men in these professions, but I don’t think it’s the same reason she’s thinking of.

What was that they used to say about Astaire and Rogers?
He was a great dancer, but she did it backwards and in high heels.

Wow. I don’t know what to say. The article is an embarrassment and a hack job. I don’t understand how the Washington Post could run it.

This reads like a bad diary at Daily Kos that would last fifteen minutes before it dropped of the list.

The quality of writing was worse than Bill Kristol’s, and that’s pretty bad.