"The type of people who go into soft subjects like "women's studies" are usually not the most capable students or thinkers. Like majoring in English, it tends to attract slackers. There are exceptions, but slackers are the rule."

So, since I assume you are not a slacker, you have hard evidence to back this up? Including a rational, measurable definition of a "slacker" as opposed to a non-slacker?

Or are you just talkking out your ass?

Since there are so few jobs open to English lit scholars, the majors I know worked pretty damned hard to make themselves attractive to academia. That meant they had to publish. Which meant they had to be pretty fantastic writers. Among other things.

Homeland Security as a reason for calling witnesses, requiring testimony, submittingsubpoenas?

After all, using our constitution for toilet paper is about as homeland security-worthy as we get.

JK Rowling said in an interview that she wrote the final paragraph of the final book "somewhere back in 1990."

She said she was wrapping up the book in a hotel room, anf got so verklempt she drank half a bottle of mini-bar champagne and sobbed.

She had a plan to write a series 7 books long. She knew how it was going to end as she started. That shows clarity of purpose, vision, and a story arc that makes sense.

Whatever she's written, it's not because she's "sick to death" of Harry Potter.

point me to the first-run of this recycled punhline? I'm feeling notalgic.

Just so we can deal in reality:

Our shower head drips. It drives me nuts: the wasrted water, the hint of a larger problem, plus the damned noise.

I say (to my wonderful, smart, handy and adorable husband): "Should we call a plumber, or can you take a whack at the shower?"

He says "Oh, I can do it. Maybe this weekend."

I do not nag, but as said weekend goes by and shower head remains drippy, I ask "Would you lie me to call a plumber, or do you think you can fix it?" He says "Yeah, I've jhust been so busy lately. I'll do it."

Several weekends later, he is out of town camping. I call my dad, an engineer, to ask if he thinks I can do it. He walks me through the steps. I consult a home repair book, get the correct parts and tools, and carefully read thestep-by-step instructions from the part manufacturer. I think "This may be cake. What a nice surprise for husbans!"

30 minutes later, the f%$kn cartridge is stll stuck, and the stem of the by which I must extract it is broken. I call my dad, then on his advice call a plumber. I feel stupid, like a bad Lucille Ball sketch. I feel like a kid playing with dad's tools. I feel like, as a woman, I should have left well enough alone.

Plumber comes, and proceeds to break his own tools on the f&^kn cartridge. He then removes the whole thing, caps the pipes, and days later comes to replace the entire faucet andcartridge unit. Cost $650.

He says "There isn't a thing you did wrong. The leak (after leaking for so long) corroded the copper and fused the cartridge to the pipes. No one was getting that out." I feel less stupid. Husband says "If I'd done it, we'd still end up needing a plumber."

My lesson learned: I'll do it myself as soon as I notice it.

But: husband said "I should have done it when you first asked." Amen.

I got called a republican nazi on this board was the day I realized that most of the opinions here are pretty useless.

But my husband got a big kick out of that one.

Makes me wonder: Are there any "republicsn nazi" costumes at the adult fantasy store?

of mine is working on a theatre piece about dis-connection in our age of mass-communication.

You bet he's tuning in to this piece.

Is it the anonymity that allows so many people to be so mean? Or is it that without a face or voice to connect to it's easier to think of everyone as not beig "real" and therefore not worthy of respect? Or is it merely a self-selecting community (only the stubborn, the patient or the vindictive stick it out while most of the reasonable, insightful people stay away or give up)?

It's interesting to me that whatever the topic might be, the conversation generally devolves into a few predictible headings:

1. the writer of the piece is an idiot and a man-hater.

2. the writer of the piece is also not writing about worthwhile subject

3. all the women who write in are eith man-haters, sexually repressed, stupid or desirous of a punitive miandrogynous double-standard.

4. men are geniuses whose only fault is trying to reason with women.

5. people make spelling or gramatical errors in their posts. Which renders everything they've said unworthy of consideration.

oh and

6. whoever is the most vitriolic is also a confirmed chick-magnet.

Since there are quite a few posters with welcome insights, including -gasp!- men, I try to wade through the bile. But, sheesh, it gets old.