The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The Science Is Settled: Feminism Is Wrong

Posted on | December 3, 2013 | 36 Comments

Men and women are not the same:

By analyzing the MRIs of 949 people aged 8 to 22, scientists at the University of Pennsylvania found that male brains have more connections within each hemisphere, while female brains are more interconnected between hemispheres. . . .
By analyzing the subjects’ MRIs using diffusion imaging, the scientists explored the brains’ fiber pathways, the bundles of axons that act as highways routing information from one part of the mind to the other. After grouping the image by sex and inspecting the differences between the two aggregate “male” and “female” pictures, the researchers found that in men, fiber pathways run back and forth within each hemisphere, while in women they tend to zig-zag between the left, or “logical,” and right, or “creative,” sides of the brain. . . .

I’d quote more of the article, but it’s written by a woman and therefore cluttered up with a lot of silly irrelevant “creative” stuff.

This is something you learn to deal with as a news editor: It’s not that female writers can’t write straightforward just-the-facts journalism, but they tend to be better at feature-style writing — generally speaking, I hasten to add, because if you don’t add that qualifier, people will accuse you of stereotyping, which hurts women’s feelings, and we all know how they are about that, right? Anyway . . .

Contrary to the Archie Bunker stereotype of myself, I actually try to help female journalists and one way to help female journalists is to encourage them to WRITE MORE LIKE A MAN.

Ladies, don’t let yourself get trapped in the ghetto of “soft” journalism and, for God’s sake, avoid that awful Feminist Pundit racket.

There are women who get paid to be feminists. We call these people “Women’s Studies professors.” Writers who aspire to bring “the feminist perspective” to journalism are, without exception, tedious bores — and constantly angry. Why are they angry? Because their lives are miserable and their career opportunities are drastically curtailed by their self-selected niche. If all you ever wrote about was rape and abortion and income inequality, you’d probably be angry, too.

LADIES, DON’T DO THAT TO YOURSELVES!

Here’s a better role model for you: Christina Bellantoni, who just got named editor of Roll Call. Bellantoni was a Capitol Hill reporter for the Washington Times when I worked there, and never let herself get shoved off into the feature-writing ghetto. She does good work.

 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Just in case you need a primer… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhrYWNAKFSY

  • SuckItCons

    And here’s a study sure to make the homophobes but a few capillaries that claims the lesbian brain is wired more like the heterosexual male brain and the homosexual male brain is wired like the straight female brain:

    http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Adjoran

    Calling someone a “Women’s studies professor” is sexist on the face of it. First of all, the “wo-” prefix implies derivation and there can be no question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, here, because it was clearly the hen, wet and madder than hell.

    Secondly, the “-men” suffix is, well, obviously part of the Patriarchal Paradigm Of Oppression and insulting. The only acceptable spelling would be “wymyn’s studies,” of course, IF even that were not oppressive by drawing lines between the sexes which implies there are places wymyn should not go.

    Finally, for all the reasons mentioned previously, such departments are invariably titled “Gender Studies” these days, which solves all the issues since no one would dare consider any college level course on issues concerning men themselves, except as the oppressors.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    “SuckItCons” is quite the handle there. So is this like sucking the worm out of a bottle of tequila? How is your brain wired?

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    You have been carefully taught! Of course to be successful in wymyn’s studies you have to have your sense of humor removed…along with your penis and testicles.

    That sort of goes hand in hand so to speak.

  • Zohydro

    I hope this brains-wired-differently finding isn’t, like, a life-changing revelation for anyone…

  • Quartermaster

    His problem is he had a partial birth abortion, and he survived the part where they suck out the brains. He’s just blaming Conservatives for the atrocity.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    I couldn’t get the link to open, but, assuming that SIC described it correctly, he is telling us that homosexuality is a birth defect.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    I think it is more either a really small penis or a somewhat large clitoris, and he/she/it is confused on what exactly it is.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    Of course, nature has it’s way of dealing with birth defects; defectives usually cannot reproduce, which pushes the defect out of the gene pool. And if homosexuality is a birth defect, it is exactly the kind which nature would exclude, since homosexuals, following their inclinations, cannot reproduce. To get around that natural barrier, they must either engage in dishonest relationships with heterosexuals, or seek third party assistance.

    The obvious question is: is there any other birth defect out there in which it would be legal to try to use artificial means to perpetuate it? And should it be legal to assist homosexuals in passing on a birth defect?

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    If all you ever wrote about was rape and abortion and income inequality, you’d probably be angry, too.

    Amanda Marcotte could not be reached for comment. :lol:

    Obviously there are some financially-successful niche writers on those subjects, but they aren’t journalists in the employ of major metropolitan dailies. Those reporters have to come up from the city beat, reporting on crime and mayhem and city council meetings and school boards and troubles with the recycling program and overcrowding at the animal shelter.

    Then, after many years, and producing decent work, if they happen to be cute redheads like Maureen Dowd, they might get a column, and can write about anything that they want.

    Of course, the vast majority of reporters never get their own column in anything larger than the Mt Sterling Advocate, and city beat reporter at the Lexington Herald-Leader is the top of their professional ladder; a job with The New York Times or Washington Post is a far away star, unattainably distant, unless they happen to be as lucky and talented and hard-working as Jayson Blair or Janet Cooke.

  • RS

    Setting aside the notoriously abysmal science reporting which infests the MSM, you obviously didn’t read beyond the headline, or you would’ve read the following:

    Just what these brain differences mean is still not clear. Ever since 1991, when Simon LeVay first documented differences in the hypothalamus of gay and straight men, researchers have been struggling to understand what causes these differences to occur. (Emphasis added)

    I would also note, the sample size of the study was limited to 90 individuals distributed among males and females, who self-identified as heterosexual or homosexual. The study is five years old. Has it been replicated among a larger sample?

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady
  • concern00

    Hate, thy name is science.

  • Adobe_Walls

    As usual Stacy you make one proud to be a Patriarchyist .

  • gastorgrab

    I’m working on a theory myself to explain why the ‘math center’ of a liberal brain is fundamentally flawed. Not a one of them can add or subtract.

    Developing……

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Patriarchy now, patriarchy tomorrow, patriarchy forever!

  • RKae

    “…their career opportunities are drastically curtailed by their self-selected niche.”

    Off-topic, but as a playwright I see this in Asians. Whenever Chinese Americans write plays (that I see in new playwright festivals) they’re ALWAYS about “being Chinese.” Their parents are stuck in traditional Chinese thinking and want the kids to run the Chinese restaurant, while the lead character (the playwright’s hand-puppet) natters on about wanting to be a pop star or something.

    God, it’s tedious. …And I keep seeing it!

  • RKae

    What idiocy. “Cause and effect” anyone? None of these studies – NONE – prove that the brain is “wired” that way; only that this is what these people have become after a lifetime of habits, obsessions and acquired behavior traits. Unless you do a study on newborn infants and then a follow-up when they wind up gay later on, this is utter nonsense.

  • http://boogieforward.us/ K-Bob

    The progressive-left response to that:

    “That’s because you’re a slave to your pathetic, theory-based worldview. If you’d just let go of your insistence that arithmetic follows a pattern, and learn to let the numbers just be whatever they want, then you could see how irrelevant balance sheets really are.”