Feminist idiocy

Speaking of addtional criteria of knowledge, feminists are up in arms over a post by Razib of Gene Expression in which he noticed, at the local bar, "a very attractive woman" discussing sci-fi novels. This was thought worthy of notice because in Razib's opinion not too many "very attractive" women care for that sort of thing. (Via Dusk in Autumn.)

Consider the response of this feminist science blogger, who says, in the vulgar terms which women have equal rights to these days, that "Razib has his head up his ass". (Well, if they can join the Navy, I guess they can swear like sailors too.) She thinks that Razib's observation is sexist, discriminatory, and since it disturbs her repose (to say the least), that it could not possibly count as knowledge.

Now, I know next to nothing about the science fiction genre; having suffered through attempting to read Dune while in college (about three hundred years ago), I've been happy to leave it alone. What aroused the ire of the feminists was the perceived negative correlation between intellectual activity, especially in science, and sexual attractiveness. I do know next to something about women in science, and in my experience they are, in general and to put it politely, not the first choice of alpha males. Women who are extroverted, attractive, with a ready smile and the willingness to pay attention to their appearance, do not go into science. Or health care, that being the other field of which I have first hand knowledge. They go into the arts or business, where their attractiveness is more of an asset, where they can meet a livelier and higher-compensated group of men. In science, attractiveness just doesn't count like it does in fields where personal interaction is more important; only results matter. To see why that might be so, consider that introverted, non-alpha men are far more likely to end up as scientists than corporate V.P.s.

The feminist blogger linked above unleashed lots of vitriol:

These are the stupid kinds of stereotypes that contribute to keeping women out of science and engineering, making them feel like they are freaks or there is something wrong with them for having an interest in science and engineering, making other people think they are odd for such interests or making other people less likely to encourage and nurture such interests in them when they do express them. Promulgating the kind of tripe razib put out on his blog is poisonous because it feeds other people's noxious stereotypes and contributes to making them think it's okay to believe all the really terrible stereotypes about women that they hold - and act on.

This woman's head is in the sand. Stereotypes like this come into being because they are, in general, accurate. Razib's remark disturbed her repose, so by her criteria, it couldn't possibly be true. Just as a "racist" is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal, a misogynist is someone who is winning an argument with a feminist.