[analphilosopher] Keith Burgess-Jackson: A Testable Hypothesis About Academia

[analphilosopher at lists.powerblogs.com]

Posted by Keith Burgess-Jackson:
A Testable Hypothesis About Academia
http://www.analphilosopher.com/posts/1139708933.shtml


   Why is academia so biased toward leftism? No reasonable person can
   deny that this is the case; the only question is why. There may be
   (and probably are) several explanatory factors. I=E2ve written before
   that leftism is feminine and rightism masculine. See the work of Carol
   Gilligan and others. It=E2s no surprise to me that women are attracted
   to academia, since it=E2s a safe, secure place with little
   competitiveness compared to, say, commerce. I believe a certain type
   of male is attracted to academia: one who is effeminate (by which I
   mean sensitive, articulate, and unaggressive).

   The testable hypothesis is this: Male academics have lower levels of
   testosterone, on average, than men generally. Once ensconced in the
   academy, to which he is attracted because of its safety and security,
   the man becomes even more like his female colleagues, since doing so
   is in his long-term interest both as a scholar and as a colleague.
   There is also the well-known fact that men subscribe to feminism (or
   express sympathy for feminist ideals) in order to maximize their
   reproductive potential. When you add it all up, you get a feminized
   academy. It consists of aggressive women and effeminate men. They
   think alike, act alike, feel alike, and share the same basic values.
   Perhaps there has been research conducted on this issue. If so, and if
   you=E2re aware of it, please bring it to my attention.