I think back as well. I thought I knew it all and was happy to mouth off not knowing what an ass I looked like- ahh youth. Sad, some adults remain this way. They don't grow and nothing ever changes with them. I guess that's the point when they start mouthing off anonymously on the net. How sad for them.

I adore you blog and I'm smart enough to know, what I don't know is a whole lot. :-)

I love how you have made assumptions about the age, race, education, experience, and/or privilege of your recent critics. It's just so ironic. And completely irrelevant. If I find you a racist and sexist professor emeritus, would you accept his viewpoints on gender, race, class, etc., especially without debate? And if you did not accept his viewpoints, would it be fair for him to call you racist, sexist, and ignorant?

I'm not interested in your feigned compassion. This has nothing to do with feelings. This has to do with a person of moderate authority at a major university shoving illogical, sexist crap down subordinates' throats from that position of authority, and refusing to logically defend that sexist crap against criticism. You are experiencing what anyone with a public opinion would and should experience: open criticism and debate. That's the whole point of having a public opinion. So don't take it personally -- I don't know you, just your public comments. If this were personal, I'd feel bad for you and let it drop. Maybe we're nearing that point anyway. I will say that your apparent inability to separate logical debate from emotions, or at least the ploy of emotional sensitivity, does make me question all of this talk of your own radio show. Outside of the protection of little USC, DYB, they will eat you alive. The "high road" shtick just won't fly when you're otherwise busy talking grade-A, inflammatory propaganda.

The reason I've continued to insist on this discourse is because your rhetoric should not go unchallenged in the face of the students you influence. Your students should find it as troubling as I do that you won't defend you public positions. Also, what is someone's talk worth when his or her actions undercut it? Specifically, why do you still go to USC football games? WHY? And why do you know of so many unreported sexual assaults? WHY?

Believe it or not, DYB, I have feminist mentors of great personal importance (I'm sure you won't). These are men and women with whom I can debate and agree with, disagree with, persuade, and be persuaded by. That is how minds are bettered and won, not through one-sided, holier-than-thou drivel. Perhaps you can add that tidbit to your vault of wisdom. It seems you like the word "wisdom" and to tell others that yours is bigger than theirs.... Hey, here's another wisdom tidbit: be wary of people who think they are so wise that they are above explanation and debate. I wonder what you will think about your current wisdom when you are 60? It shouldn't change much. You already have everything figured out.

Dear Dr. Blaine,

You clearly use feminist theory and your role as an academic as your own personal therapy. You repeatedly admit that you suffer from self-loathing, and then you blame this on society, and specifically on male oppression. If your role at USC were to help people become more open-minded and less susceptible to marketing schemes of the media, or focused towards studying oppressive circumstances that women actually face, or any topic that was rational and not sexist in its approach, you might not receive so much opposition. If you wanted to explore issues of low self-esteem in women, for instance, there are logical ways to approach this problem. If you think it truly is male oppression that causes us to feel badly, then what causes male insecurity? You see, people find your ideas distasteful because they are irrational and insane, not because we don't understand them. And if you truly believe that you are misunderstood by us insolent youths, why not explain yourself, answer people's questions?
Additionally, if you read Strunk & White, and then maybe re-edited your work, people who essentially pay your salary might not find your position as a writing instructor so offensive.

anonymous disgusted female

ps... as John noted, our age and pedigree should make little difference in your response. however, im surprised you havent caught on - some of us have quite a few degrees in subjects undoubtedly more challenging than women's studies.

Yeah, yeah, er...great article.

Now to more important matters. Who is that dazzlingly handsome man (in a rough hewn fashion) with the bulging biceps (and trews) in the center of your party photo?

He seems...genteel yet sensuous and poetic. The Celtic Warrior Poet type. To quote Lamb, "mad, bad and dangerous to know."

PS Learn to suffer fools gladly. From the comments above and elsewhere on your blog, you certainly seem to attract them.

How astute you are, Seaneen! He is indeed "mad, bad and dangerous to know," with the multiple prison terms to prove it.

But today, he too chooses to use his considerable powers for the good. And 'tis an awesome sight indeed.

p.s. gratitude for your p.s. Thanks to this tempest in a website I've gotten to laugh until I cried twice in as many days. "Attract" seems to be the right word--they seemingly cannot tear themselves away. But it's cool. My webmaster is always after me to get off my lazy butt and go trawling for more traffic to my site. These nice folks have done all the work for me!

Hi Diane,

Where did the trolling begin? I couldn't figure out what you'd written that attracted them? Are they local to the campus, just showing up as part of some retaliatory effort?

Wasn't clear about why you were being attacked....

Towards of the end of Beloved, as the title character is going into the sea, she becomes her mother.

Says Sethe: "Beloved is my daughter."

"Beloved is my sister. I swallowed her blood right along with my mother's milk."

and finally...

"I am Beloved and she is mine."


Ultimately, we can recall it's Paul D who reminds her, "you are your best thing, Sethe. You are."

People should read more novels and fewer blogs.

I hear you, gentle reader. There's no doubt that literature has helped to form my sensibility. Besides art, few places remain in a capitalist culture to celebrate complexity, humanity, beauty, tolerance. That astonishing novel touches strings one doesn't even know exist until she reads it.

We are, indeed, our own best thing, that is if we can only find the courage to know it, especially in the face of naked hatred, prejudice, and oppression. All hail Toni Morrison for teaching us that lesson.

Dr. Di -

I have several points of contention with your latest blog and the perspective by which you judge your critics, myself included in that latter category.

When you teach in the humanities, there is no absolute definitive truth, like there is in mathematics, engineering, or applied science. And since feminist theory touches on so many fields, including politics, sociology, and economics, why do you insist that only those who are well versed in feminist theory have the right to offer criticism? With other “truths” out there, why do critics need to establish fluency in your field. The people who enjoy your obsessively-oppressed perspective aren’t educated in feminist theory. Why can they give you props and not be called out as an individual who perpetuates a misogynistic culture? Frankly, by the standards of debate you use, you cannot offer any criticism in the fields I continually study. And since reading your blog, you continually step into academic fields that I am, by any measure, more knowledgeable and read than yourself.

Also, on your statement: "few places remain in a capitalist culture to celebrate complexity, humanity, beauty, tolerance."

Does this mean you do not regard capitalism as the best form of system to allocate scarce resources? Would you support a more socialized economical system?

I might add that it was the notion of self interest that had the owners of the bus service providers in the South angry at the government for mandating the segregation of blacks to the back of the buses. If capitalism was left alone, tolerance would have resulted and rights would have been better provided.

"Besides, I am an educator."

Doctor, you are not an educator, you are an advocate for a particular world-view. This distinction is at the very heart of the matter.

While your beliefs about constructed realities and male patriarchy and the rest may all of it be true, it is only the way you see it, and not necessarily the way it is. An educator should impart knowledge, not a rigid belief system.

"And while I cannot change peoples' minds, since I have no power over them, I can treat them with compassion, no matter how they treat me.... This being my goal, answering snarky attack with snarky attack would not advance me towards it, so I won't."

There have been serious and sincere questions posed to you and you have refused to confront them; they were not initially, and neither were they mostly "snarky attacks". An educator, if she has a set of beliefs and advocates them in a formal setting, should be not only willing but eager to debate those beliefs.

I am not "angry, sad, intolerant". I am disappointed that you refuse to take seriously your responsibility to the college.

You write, "I don't owe the world an explanation" and "I don't have to make everyone understand where I am coming from." Yes, in fact you do. That's the entire point. It's not merely enough to fervently believe something; as an educator you have to explain yourself, you have to fairly represent differing points of view, and you have to seriously consider the possibility that you are wrong.

To do less is to fail your students.

You are clearly a target of gross attacks by people who know how to present themselves so as to appear respectable.

I can only urge you not to let them kill you. I very much appreciate and enjoy this page as probably do many others. Whence these venomous attempts to destroy your credibility.

the comments from those trying to vilify you (unsuccesfully) are really interesting. while they *claim* to be holding you acocuntable for offering up all points of view, including critics of feminist theory, they themelves have nothing but vitriol to spew, both at you and at the theories themselves. I find it truly remarkable how anti-feminists can be so completely blind to their own duplicity. but you will prevail in the end because you are calm, rational, and kind.

I don't agree with everything you think, and I am a feminist. I do not, however, feel that one of us has to be right and the other wrong. we make up the tapestry that feminism has become, and I am happy to be part of it alongside you. I wanted you to know: not everyone who comes from a place of difference has not ability to sustain yours and mine together. we can, and we will, and both be stronger for it.

best to you.

I guess I should've expected the good doctor to respond this way.

Anyone who disagrees with her views must be either uneducated or too young to understand the wisdom she dispenses.

Well Doctor, I am neither. I have read your blog and assessed your words, that is why I've written posts at my site debunking this mystique you claim.

You are not a sage or oracle, you are a university professor who fills malleable minds with feminist rhetoric.

As I've said, perhaps you will one day write of truly brave women who risk much more than tenure, they risk their lives.

Until then, you are just a hyper-educated advocate posing as a teacher who has a doctorate but no ability to see what real feminism is. Perhaps your solipsistic world view will one day be punctured by the cries of women who need basic rights in other nations.

To uninformed critics:

First, male oppression is the reason for male insecurity. Educate yourself!

Second, this is Dr. Diana's blog, not yours. If you'd like to wax philosophical, start your own blog. This forum is hers; you do not set the topics for discussion, and she is under no obligation to defend herself against your all-too-familiar agenda.

Third, you aren't interested in discussion; you are interested in getting Dr. Diana to change her mind, something that good educators, including the owner of this blog, do not appear to want to do.

Take a lesson from what those who are oppressed by a conservative agenda have always known--nobody owes you anything.

I wish the "critics" would save there so called points for class where they would have the opportunity to share them to your face (but it's safer anonymously, right)? I enjoy this blog and I prefer to stick to the topic at hand. Reading these petty little personal rants is tiresome.

Ps. Delete the negative comments. This is your blog and you can opt to not make it a place for people's personal shit against you.

Anne said: "start your own blog."

Actually, we have! It's here: http://cardinalmartini.mu.nu

Liz says: "Delete the negative comments."

That is counterintuitive to the concept of blogging and to delete comments that critique an academic position is to underline a point that we have previously made - Dr. Di does not tolerate views outside of her own.

If you want to see the reasons why fellow bloggers are asking legitimate questions of the Doctor, take a look at our blog.

Diana: Great blog. You are courageous to put yourself out there the way you do. Liberal Academics are under a well orchestrated and financed attack(We know who you are); many academics are choosing to take the route of obliviousness, to pretend that they can ignore conservative assaults on feminisim, African American studies,etc. These disrupters are ruthless people. And I suspect a lot of them are being paid to post to blogs like yours.
I'm not an academic, but I appreciate what it means to take the issues on and even to let freepers post here, when after all you could ban them at any time.
But don't assume there is anything on the level about them! I suspect you are too nice.

Block their asses.

Your readers don't come to your blog to read THEM.

The sooner women learn not to give people like this ANY of their time and attention the sooner we get back to the real work we must do.

Do not allow this antagonistic and imperialist behaviour. Why let them motor on in and take over? This is repugnant, in the lives of women, and in the lives of people in other countries.

Block them.

wow. maybe you should just have a private blog where only your fans can read your entries. additionally, if you don't like feedback, you could stop writing your dumbass letters to the editor in the DT; choose a liberal hippy paper and see if you don't get any similar responses.

i have a couple responses for those above:

Liz: clearly you dont want to consider that your beloved Diana could do any wrong so why not just skip the comments, eh? and the reason i post anonymously is so that i don't feel obligated to continue this correspondence, because I do have other responsibilities, and arguing feminist theory is not one of them. It is one of DYB's responsibilities, however, so I don't feel guilty for posting.

Anne: (1) Your argument that men are insecure from oppressing and women are insecure from being oppressed, is not founded on logic; I would love for you to cite a reference so I can educate myself. (2) I am not trying to get anyone to change their mind. the only person who does that is DYB who says if we dont agree with her, we are hateful, ignorant rapists, etc... many of us would merely like to understand her ideas so we can assess whether her political agendas are not in tune with the goals of the University. (3)i am not conservative.

Hattie: I am not part of a conservative agenda. i think i may actually be registered Green, and i am pro-choice. However, i don't believe that "equal rights" means we persecute white men and continue to complain about oppression because we have low self esteem. For instance, I support many liberal hippy ideas about not eating hydrogenated oil and I don't buy products that contain them. In fact, contrary to most conservative agendas, I wish the FDA would regulate food more carefully because corporations clearly cannot be trusted to do so. That said, fast food is not part of some patriarchal oppressive conspiracy to keep women down by giving them diabetes and cancer.

Pony: you're an ass. i am a woman and i stand by all of DYB's critics. what is repugnant and imperialist is pretending you want to educate people and then shoving only one perspective down their throat and dismissing all questions relating to it. sorta like what the Bush administration does.

Cardinal Martini: I hope you continue to shed light on this type of sexism and hypocrisy.

I agree wholeheartedly with Pony. I used to let them troll my place until one day I got an email from a wonderful woman who stated that she would like to speak up but the trolls were making her afraid to speak.

I decided, that instant, that I would no longer let them spew their nonsense on my site. They get banned and blocked. For me, the most important voices out there were the voices of feminists and trolls serve the purpose of scaring them into silence.

Too many women are already scared to speak. We're afraid to disagree and speak out, when I gave them a safe space to do so they began talking and then, later, writing at their own blogs.

I'd ban them, or delete them. Their sole purpose is to shut you and other women up and even if they don't bother you there is a possibility that they will scare another woman away from commenting.

This is your space and you have every right to kick out people who are rude and nasty to you. None of these folks are interested in debate, they use loaded language filled with presuppositions and their ideologies leak through every sentence.

Debate? They wouldn't know a debate if they were in it. What they want is arugument, discourse and the power they get from spewing their hate everywhere.

It's your space and your rules but you are allowed to protect yourself, your commenters and your space from these folks.

I've seen enough that I'll keep reading here. It's lovely to see so many new feminists all over the blogosphere.

Excellent work!

anonymous disgusted female,
You asked what leads to male insecurity if a patriarchal social structure contributes to female insecurity. I presume the point is that a system favoring men would not contribute to their insecurity?

Think of it this way, ours is not strictly a patriarchal structure, in which men dominate women and there's nothing more to it. Ours is a classist and hierarchical patriarchal structure with stratified classes (such as the poor, the middle class, and the rich) on a ladder leading to the top. Within each class, there is a hierarchy with men generally over women, but also white over black and so forth until you get down to a poor, minority, woman as the scapegoat for the system. This also explains the phenomenon of rich women domineering lower class men, that's part of the system. In a word, everyone has a bitch.

But the stratification doesn't end there, within the men of each class there is a pecking order determined by a number of factors including relative wealth and "manliness." A man's position is very unstable, depending a great deal on the perceptions of the men around him, thus explaining our culture of manliness. It makes sense to feel insecure when our society's mouthpiece, the media, tells men a million messages a day about what makes them manly: they have to have sex with lots of women, eat lots of meat, be big bodied, be violent... I'm not happy with the role of women round here, but I don't envy men that aspect of things.

The Glimmering,

You wrote:

"Think of it this way, ours is not strictly a patriarchal structure, in which men dominate women and there's nothing more to it. ... This also explains the phenomenon of rich women domineering lower class men, that's part of the system. In a word, everyone has a bitch."

So men and women face similar pressures imposed on them by society, partly caused by traditional gender roles (which btw, we can, and many do, ignore) and partly by media, politics, etc. This is my point.

Why does DYB argue that MEN are responsible for ideas that are imposed on ALL of us by the media (the media, which is composed of both men and women)? Why not lash out against the media then? To continually portray our sex as victims of male oppression (which in some cultures may be true) is insulting and undermines her own cause. Everyone faces hardships, it is part of life, and my hardships have been very similar to those of my male counterparts.

Why does DYB accuse all men of being rapists because they don't attend Take Back the Night? Men should attend Take Back the Night; it would be wonderful. However, throwing around insults and accusations is not an effective way of calling attention to a problem. Her behavior is irresponsible, immature, and embarassing to the University she represents.

I don't enjoy posting here; i don't actually enjoy insulting Diana Blaine. I believe DYB has good intentions, but I believe her methods need review. ie... Teaching women that science is sexist is a great way to make us all look dumb. If you believe this, you should take some science classes until you understand the scientific method.

I am a 35-year-old woman with a PhD in math from an Ivy, currently a professor at a nearby research institute. I am a scientist and a feminist.

Several things trouble me about the attacks I have read here, in large part because of how closely they mirror the recent hoopla at UCLA about reporting on professors' liberal bias. I will save my breath and mention just two.

Foremost, I am deeply upset by the personal nature of the attacks against Prof. Blaine. A university is a place for the exploration of ideas, and professors are chosen at least in part because of the ideas they espouse. It is not assumed that all students will agree with all ideas, but rather that when they disagree, they will learn to carefully articulate their disagreement, thereby refining their understanding of the topic in question. Presented with such arguments, professors respond, refining their respective positions and understanding, and through such dialogues, new ideas and arguments and insights are born. This process is what thrills most academics about their jobs. Injecting personal attacks into the dialogue is (1) incredibly disrespectful, (2) distracting from the point of education and intellectual endeavor, (3) displaying the intellect of the attacker in a poor light.

I am disturbed also by the extrapolation of disagreement with particular ideas emerging from women's studies to a condemnation of women's studies as an enterprise. As a woman in a field dominated by men, I can assure you that sexism is alive and well in the scientific community. Because my time is consumed with science, I can't possibly maintain scrutiny of women's issues. I'm very happy there are people in the world devoted to that (and to all the other interesting tasks I can't do myself). I do not necessarily agree with all conclusions drawn, but by putting the ideas out there, these researchers are making it much easier for me to think about these important ideas.

To Prof. Blaine: I'm happy your recent nude pics scandal has put your webpage on my map. I look forward to future opportunities for refining my arguments!

ARGUING THAT SEXISM EXISTS WITHIN THE REALM OF SCIENCE IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM ARGUING THAT THE PRACTICE OF SCIENCE IS SEXIST!

Dear Tritesprite,
Here's one of Dr. Blaine's important ideas:
"Doesn't the teaching of the periodic table imply that "man's" appropriate relationship with "nature" is one of dominance? And that we should search for the meaning of existence through science? Since when are such humanist assertions free from political implications?" - Chron. Higher Ed.2000
Tritesprite - isn't all that math just a way of keeping women down - branding "nature" with "numbers". This is irrational postmodernist drivel. Why should we remain silent about it? "All men are responsible for rape". Why should we remain silent? I agree the ad hominem by some critics is counterproductive - but Dr. Blaine's views are in need of a dissenting voice or two.

Yes, of course, dissent is essential--but an appropriate kind of dissent. Instead of shouting insults, take the issues seriously and try to understand them.

Take the periodic table example. Through the scientific method, we have concluded that the elements are useful to our study of the universe. I can't be certain, but I would hope that Prof. Blaine is not disputing the scientific impact of such knowledge.

One interpretation of her comment is that she is questioning the cultural impact of scientific endeavor as a whole, with the periodic table as an example. While her method is not one I would choose, I think in this age of technological worship, it is reasonable to question the cultural impact of our progress.

As to the separation of sexism among scientists from sexism of science, I *almost* agree with a.d.f.'s shouted comment. In absence of human personality, science is purely about knowledge, based purely on logic. Unfortunately, when the practitioners of said logic hold some strong emotional belief (sexism, racism, bias for or against a particular theory), those beliefs can't help but be expressed in the scientific realm. If men are promoting work done by men over work done women, then the issues men find interesting are winning out over the issues studied by women. A fundamental example of this is found in medical studies, where results for the predominantly white, male test subjects were extrapolated to the larger population. It took a woman to discover that the treatment was white, male specific.

Does this mean science as an entity is sexist? In my opinion, no, but it does mean that the carrying out of the scientific endeavor is open to analysis from a gendered perspective. I don't view the periodic table as oppressive, but I also don't mind the question being asked.

To be fair, I should also say that one of my pet peeves is when tools that were developed for the study of literature are applied with authority to the real world. The leap from the written universe to the actual universe crosses a vast chasm...

here's a good site!

http://www.feministing.org/

(Apparently I'm having trouble shutting up--you can pity my students.)

I guess my point is this. Let's assume for the sake of argument that all Prof. Blaine does is regurgitate "postmodernist drivel" and that her work is a complete sham. She is nonetheless a professor at a top school, which means there are others who think her ideas are interesting. We can continue to have these wars of science -vs- postmodernism, hurling words of logical sanctimony in one direction and cultural sanctimony in the other, or we can try to bridge the gap by understanding the objections raised on each side and addressing them in language that everyone can understand. As someone on the science side, I am willing to hear out these arguments, try to translate them into something I can understand, and try to articulate the reasons I do and don't agree with them. That way, the next time I have an opportunity to engage in this debate, I can do so with thought instead of a knee-jerk reaction. I am also willing to give people with opposing viewpoints the benefit of the doubt. After all, they have devoted a substantial part of their lives to arriving at whatever conclusion is being presented; the least I can do is to consider it seriously.

tritesprite,

your example is a good illustration of why peer review and the discussion of ideas is so important.

as to dissent being appropriate, i admit some rudeness on my part - i find some of DYB's ideas proposterous and perhaps her personal blog is not the appropriate forum to voice those concerns. however, some people have voiced concern without my disgust and received similar responses. it would be nice if DYB acknowledged that her choice of words has been inappropriate, and if not, explain why not. How do you feel when our president is asked a question, doesn't address it at all but pretends that he has? I feel outraged.

I'm so glad I found your blog! I also really appreciate your equanimity, actually I'm really inspired. Thank you!

Tritesprite, maybe you should start your own blog where we can actually have thought provoking, intelligent discussions on these topics. I would like to read such well-considered responses as yours from Dr. Blaine – but I won’t hold my breath. If Dr. Blaine wanted to ask what affect the application of science has on culture (a perfectly reasonable question), then she should have asked that. What Dr. Blaine was trying to say is that all areas of academia have an unspoken political agenda (as the speaker she was questioning said about women’s studies programs). Science has some biased participants to be sure, but it was not founded as the scholarly arm of a political movement. The philosophical assumptions of science are outlined in the scientific method (an empirical approach and so on) and the personal biases (we hope) are tempered by peer-review (not always of course!). The philosophical assumptions and political bias of Women’s Studies, remains, in my experience, largely undisclosed by its proponents. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
I do take Dr. Blaine’s ideas seriously. I also take creation science seriously – they both are founded, at some leve,l on the idea that faith, or feelings, or cherry-picked anecdotes and narratives are an equivalent or better way of understanding the universe than observation and reason. How can you argue with (or learn anything from) someone who refuses to consider observations or examples that invalidate their hypotheses? This isn’t a purely esoteric argument. Dr. Blaine states that all men are responsible for rape, and all white people are responsible for racism. We can falsify this assertion in numerous ways. The easiest would be to simply point out that some males and some Caucasians are too cognitively-impaired, or just too young, to even understand rape, or class, or race for that matter – much less do anything about it. The only way these folks could possibly be guilty or complicit in anything is through some sort of postmodernist version of original sin. Indeed, even a masked crusader who spent 24 hours a day fighting rapists would still be guilty simply because of his chromosomes.
Contradictions like this don’t sit well for scientists and other rational people, but for the post-modernists this is really just no problem – because hey, it’s their reality and they’ll say what they want. In my experience, I’ve found that most postmodernists don’t like the complexity of the real world because it screws with the hackneyed generalizations and cherry-picked anecdotes that serve as the basis for their publications and rants. For example, according to Dr. Blaine the animated feature Corpse Bride represents one of many examples of men objectifying women by portraying their corpses in the media. Let’s count the corpses in all of the movies ever made and see whether or not more male bodies or female bodies are portrayed shall we? Saving Private Ryan alone probably has more dead males than all the combined female corpse examples that Blaine presents. I’m not implying that all academics that focus on women’s issues are guilty of such sloppy scholarship – only that there is a wing of social sciences that amounts to politically-motivated storytelling in the guise of research.
What would be a better way of studying and/or addressing a complex social issue like the problem of rape on campus? Well, one approach would be to cite (or retest) work like Koss et al. on reported rape statistics. Then cite or conduct a study on the effect of male role models or peer discussions on attitudes about rape. Then use the two studies in a public letter in which you make the assertion that rape is still a big problem on campus, peer discussions may help change attitudes, and these studies provide supporting evidence. Wouldn’t that be informative and don’t you think that it would be effective at convincing people that the problem is real and a solution exists? How would that compare to the effectiveness and accuracy of Dr. Blaine’s blanket statement that all men are responsible for rape?

Dr. Diana:

Just read about the to-do over your blog site and topless photos on the daily "Inside Higher Ed" e-mail newsletter.

I'm an east coast-based, New England/Boston/Texas (born and raised), pseudo-conservative hybrid with all the rough edges worn off by constant exposure to the Cambridge/Harvard/MIT liberal zeitgeist. I also sell to the higher ed "industry"

But, I digress.

I just wanted to say I think your tits are great.

Keep on stirring things up.

Thomas Hardey

Thank you for this. Finding your website was a beautiful way of waking up this morning. I especially loved this lesson on compassion - its an easy lesson to forget, and an important one to remember.

Cardinal, give it up. I am part of the male cabal and I am willing to go on record in agreeing with Diana and admitting all men are rapists. So too, all Christians are evil, all women are beautiful, unspoiled flowers subjugated to the American patriarchy, and all conservatives are neo-Nazis waiting to enslave women and minorities.

Now I should be able to get laid at Lilith Fair for sure.

Congratulations...you just set woman back another 100 yrs.. This is why we dont take woman seriously. Your just a wannabe Rosie Odonald..Star Jones..etc Nobody takes u seriously. Your bringing woman down. Men will always rule. Why do u think there hasnt been a woman president?? Because they are always PMSing

Wow. Lot's of posts that seem tangental to the original point.

You're absolutely right, Doc. Age CAN confer a perspective that allows harsh words to have less impact, and we can often see our earlier selves in our opponents. It also slows us down enough to rethink some of the vitriol we might have at first put in our words. Bless you, for pointing out that compassion is important, too.

I think you need to start eliminating the nasty posts. It's starting to resemble a gang rape around here.

Hattie,
You're a Liberal Arts major,aren't you?Dr. Blaine,you've made yourself an object of ridicule and your posting doesn't really lend credence to yourselfd as an intellect of any magnitude.(Proper grammar is a good first step;check out 25 years youger than me for such.)
I don't know what advice to give you.Your field of study ,at first glance sems a reconstituted mantra closer to chiropractic or astrology than a legtimate scholarly endeavor.Get your pictures down.

Oh dear...

"Men will always rule" -wrong. There has never been a woman president in the US because we are pathetic. Hopefully, we won't always be.

The point for me is that science assumes reason can eventually explain everything. Men and Empires have consistently associated themselves with reason, illusions of grandure. There are limits to what science can explain. To think otherwise is folly.

Professor, your patience is admirable.

Nice tits, would like to suck on them ;)

Chairman,

I am a fairly well educated person. In the course of obtaining that education I learned something very important. The teachers that I learned the most from were not those who knew their fields the most intimately. They were the teachers with the most curiosity and the most passion for their fields. Dr. Blaine's passion and curiosity is something I respect.

I have also learned that remarkable people are usually good at one or more of the following skills: collaborating, leveraging, adapting, explaining, synthesizing, modeling, localizing, or personalizing. Exercising all of those skills is fair game on a blog and in the classroom. Blogs are intrisically public and any genius or idiot can and should post to them. It is part of the function of a blog to help separate the genius and idiocy without having any protected class prejudice get in the way.

Being educated in the hard sciences like physics or biology does not make a person more believable than those educated in the softer sciences. Making that kind of assertion just makes you look ignorant. If you think that the hard sciences are somehow more exact than the soft sciences, get a load of quantum physics! God does not care whether you think Feminism is less exact than biology and has literally thumbed his nose in your face :). If you think that science has somehow defined the universe, you have very much missed the boat.

I do, however, agree with you on one thing. Dr. Blaine should respond to some of the criticisms of her views. It is her duty as a teacher (as an explainer) to educate those of use who know little or nothing about feminism. It might be personally uncomfortable to have meaningful interaction with someone who has diametrically opposed views, . . . but isn't that what education is all about? Shouldn't Dr. Blaine put aside her negative feelings toward you and address your concerns? Shouldn't you cease your personal attacks and take one of her classes? There can be no discourse without a real effort for dialog. I admire Dr. Blaine for allowing you to continue posting but she is remiss in her failure to encourage your posts by responding on the issues.

Luke