Nittany Nincompoopery

This sort of links up to the Worst Song Ever post below.

I used to go to Penn State and every year there would be a William Paley-esque anti-evolution column published in the Daily Collegian to which I would compose a 3 page polemic that would never be published.

This kind of tired and intellectually devoid column would also pop up occasionally when I went there, back in the halcyon Clinton Era.

Basically, this random dude is saying that if the goals of Feminism were acheived and a truly gender-equal society were to exist, it would suck for the ladies because men wouldn't buy us drinks in bars anymore or pay for dinner on dates. As empowering as it is to have drinks thrust upon me in bars in an attempt to diable my judgement to the extent that I might be tempted to shag the drink profferer, I feel like that is maybe not such an enormous loss. It's also kind of rude for one half of a party of two never to foot the bill. Especially if both parties are grad students.

Also, in a distopian feminist society, men would not open doors. I guess when a man comes up to a door in crazy feminist land he just stands there, or else goes through and lets it swing back and hit his date in the face. In this world, would men still hold doors for other men? Or would this trait be selected against entirely? Would we have to install curtains so that people weren't getting black eyes all the time?

Would women hold doors open? Is this an X-linked allele?

I kind of don't get this fixation on the door opening. But at Penn State it was a huge deal. People wouldn't smile or nod at anyone on the street or in the hall, but if you failed to hold the dorr open from someone you totally got tutted at. Male or female.

Shouldn't whomever gets to the door first just politely open it for the next person? I mean, it's not like most doors are made of lead or granite.

Finally, Mister Random Clever Dude (irony alert) says that:

... in a world where feminism holds the reigns of society, we overhaul the design of the family unit, weaken the effect of feminine sexuality and introduce the possibility of having our daughters, sisters and mothers fight on the front lines and work grueling jobs.

I assume he means the "power of feminine sexuality" to finagle free meals.

I also assume that he doesn't know that a lot of women already work gruelling jobs - usually for lower pay than their male counterparts - and serve in the armed forces.

I am pleased to note, though, that there seem to be more ID/creationism aren't science letters to the editor than anti-evolution letters. Perhaps Pennsyltucky ain't so backwards after all?