Planet-busting is a venerable tradition. The only thing better than planet-busting is writing a fleet action in real-space. Yes, I know it's inaccurate, but it's FUN to write.

And just when I was feeling as if I were getting too many LULZ out of Lonewolfy, he comes up with the "he's sorry that I had such experiences with men, etc."

Wolfy, were you SUCH a special snowflake in school that they didn't teach you that projecting is dishonest in argument? or did you think you could get away with it? You're not sorry, which is one lie; you don't know what my experience is, though you pretend that you do -- that's two; and you're making a hash of psyops. You're not very good at this, or did they teach you self-esteem at the cost of logic? (Durian Joe, don't say it. Don't say a WORD about it, okay?)

I don't approve of attempts at mind games, and the faux sincerity comes off badly. East German judge (another reference you can look up) gives it a 2.

One disadvantage Boomers had versus your generation: our technological sophistication came much later, and for most of us, it isn't reflex.

One major advantage: plentiful and accessible scholarships and academic loans.

As for music, my idea of twentieth century composers includes Puccini, Ralph Vaughan Williams, Strauss, Benjamin Britten...and I'm afraid I think Pearl Jam is what would happen if oysters had toes.

When did "thought control" become a synonym for "courtesy" and "compassion"?

I understand that some of the people here want to go on using a word that's convenient and colorful for them and will justify it with terms like PC and thought control, or act as if they're carrying on a discussion on a higher plane.

Here's another word for you: rationalization.

Thank God you're -able- to do it. The people whose medical designation you're appropriating can't.

What's -your- problem?

Given your logic, God help your female students. Let's assume that one of them trusted you enough to remain after class the morning after the night before and confided in you. Granted, that's an assumption containing enough holes wide enough to drive a HUMVEE through, because students, although sometimes unprepared, and sometimes naive, are not damn fools. So let's assume it. Is -this- kind of polysyllabic rationalization the comfort you're going to offer?

Just checking.

I used to teach college English (four-year school, tenure track) and attended several rather distinguished schools, so don't try the authority card.

The principles of avoiding censorship and promoting freedom of speech have long been fighting words and words worth fighting over.

Do you really want to cheapen them into rationalizations of your right to say hurtful things because you are a Special Snowflake with the right to do whatever you damn well please?

I call that tacky, myself. And if any wet paint decides to be offended by the terminology and says so, I can come up with synonyms. Are you really that linguistically restricted? (Lynn, this applies to you, too.)

Malusinka, do you know about the Siblist?

Speaking as a native, I think that is SO characteristic.

We speak our minds. And vote with our feet.

My goodness, why don't you set up a straw feminist and yell at it; you'd have a better chance of being right than the resentful screed you tried to aim at me.

You were the one criticizing female students' behavior, so I responded to that. In point of fact, I tended to be consulted by both male and female students about some fairly serious stuff, from girl and boyfriends (depending on individual preference) to drugs to abortions to suicide attempts to anorexia. Lacking the kind of backup I had in grad school, I am afraid I must disappoint you: I resigned a tenure-track position and moved into another area where I do not have teaching fellows. I have, I suspect, outpublished my graduate year -- combined.

Classist, much? The resentment just oozes. Yes, I know. Back in the day, the wimmenz weren't allowed to go where I went, leaving more opportunities for jumpers to conclusion like you.

"It is interesting" generally means a lead-in for "I don't like this, I don't believe it, and I'm trying to appear dispassionate." I'd have said that in Expository Writing, too.

Here is a new book that is ABOUT MEN. Granted, some of it sounds like stuff George Gilder got away with some decades back, suggesting that women sacrifice individual achievement in favor of men with thwarted entitlement acting like hooligans, but it is a book explaining why some men appear to feel angry, confused, and lost.

Someone here pointed out the troubles that boys have in schools.

These are real problems. If I were minded not to think so, I'd have only to read the reactions -- anything from a community college faculty member to The Second Incarnation of Brightstar, some expletives from a Parson, and a few other cute names -- that prove that, yes, indeed, there is trouble in Guyland and in Men's World.

Presumably, this trouble can be addressed if the people who suffer from it (primary, the males; secondary, the females who deal with them as well as their own problems) step up to the plate.

Instead, "the hand that rocks the cradle..." with demands that MOMMY MAKE IT BETTER and the usual psychedelic Darwinism of the resident trolls.

Attention -is- being paid. But apparently attention that isn't deference is, by definition, bad. It's bashing.

You guys live in a dreamworld, or maybe Nightmareland.

One reason I left teaching was that I didn't enjoy pontification. Clearly, we disagree on many things.

Libel? It isn't libel if it's true.

You're oversimplifying, and I'm not playing.

Stop trying to set me up.

What's next? The set of all Y Chromosomes v. Greeneyedkzin?

GMAFB