Strange physics of feminism

PITY Professor Lawrence Summers, hapless president of Harvard University: whimpering through the ivy, he has recanted all, a prisoner of conscience broken by the brutalities of re-education campuses in the Democratic People's Republic of Massachusetts.

"Gender-equity" feminists dominate the campuses, determine discourse at academic institutions and decide that not only should some topics never be researched, indeed they cannot even be mentioned in polite company.

President Summers' capital offence was to mention he had tried non-sexist upbringing on his daughter by giving her toy trucks to play with, but she pretended they were dolls and named them "daddy truck" and "baby truck".

He went on to speculate there might be innate differences between males and females, and some studies could be undertaken to explain why fewer women than men succeeded in science and maths careers.

Such statements are a capital offence on campus. Even though Massachusetts does not have the death penalty, feminists might make an exception for Summers.

There's plenty of scientific research to support president Summers' illegal thoughts, but feminists cannot evaluate scientific findings scientifically.

Typical was the reaction of Professor Nancy Hopkins who stormed out of the room because, "I would have either blacked out or thrown up".

That is, she got the vapours, just like fragile maidens in the Regency era. At least they had the excuse of tight corsets to excuse their fainting spells.

The Australian female workforce also appears to be prone to "women's problems".

How else to explain the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union claim for an extra 12 days "menstrual leave" -- in addition to ordinary sick leave -- for their female members?

If some cautious admiral had suggested that female pilots should not be used to land planes on aircraft carriers (a tricky operation at the best of times) because it "might be that time of the month", he would have been drummed out of the navy, maybe even keel-hauled.

But feminists embrace both horns of the dilemma: while denying there are innate differences between the sexes, they want special privileges to compensate for differences they claim don't exist.

That may seem illogical, but feminists have defined logic as a "male construct".

Women, they say, think "intuitively" and have no need for logic (which may explain why most feminists don't do brilliantly at maths).

I ONCE drafted a caption for a cartoon in which a feminist had devised a computer program to "examine gravity from a gender perspective".

Some of my friends said I was exaggerating, but they didn't realise the half of it.

Feminist Luce Irigaray has argued that the relativity equation, E=mc², is a "sexed equation" that "privileges the speed of light over other speeds which are vitally necessary to us, and which therefore belong to the `masculine physics' that `privileges' rigid over fluid entities . . ."

With feminist "intuition" in that parlous state, it does not require the brain of Einstein to figure out many feminists are going to be no good at maths.

But back to the unfortunate Summers: feminists nearly caused a meltdown on the internet as they expressed their horror/indignation and demanded he submit to a week of "intense discussions".

Congress got into the flagellation with Democrat Senator Ron Wyden opining that Summers "knows he clearly crossed the line", and Time magazine ran two stories, including a cover feature on the issue.

Summers caved in to every demand, apologised abjectly, and appointed two task forces -- on women in the Harvard faculty and on women in engineering -- to recruit, promote and support women.

It's the bridges built by these "wimmin" engineers which may need extra support if their "gender physics" is of the Luce Irigaray genre.

Summers' task forces consist of 22 women and five men -- in feminist maths this is equality. He also appointed a Commissioner of Faculty Diversity.

Perhaps she -- or our own Office of the Status of Women -- will fund my project for "evaluating gravity from a gender perspective".