Feminists are as anti-science as anybody else when science goes against their ideology.

The article I am analyzing today reveals a lot about how the Feminist Media game is played. It reads more like an internal message between editors or a scheme among JournoList members. It is a rare mistake that is in violation of Guideline 7c: Feminist Media bias by omission.

Here is the article’s title and where you can find it:

“Science Proves That Women Are Mean (Again). Thanks Science!” Meghan Casserly. Forbes.com. 11/29/2011.

The statement under Casserly’s name on Forbes.com is: “I cover the juggle of work, life and play for smart, ambitious women.” [Emphasis added.] Feminists love to compliment themselves, especially their intelligence. (Adhering to Guideline 9a: In the Feminist Media, it is allowable to praise or celebrate only women.)

Casserly is feeling touchy and peevish because a scientific study was done and she didn’t like the results. The study itself isn’t the important thing to note here. It is her reaction to it that is so astonishingly anti-science.

In a nutshell, the study showed that women had more negative feelings toward women dressed in a more daring manner, than they did toward women who dressed more modestly. The study supports the idea behind Guideline 24a: Mean girls and even meaner women. 

“When women present themselves as being sexually available, it compromises the power-holding position of the group,” said the professor who conducted the study, Tracy Vaillancourt of the University of Ottawa.

This in-group/out-group game is not limited to sexual availability. When honest, virtuous women state that women aren’t oppressed; it compromises the deceitful and manipulative power of the whole group. Which is why feminists feel they must shame and pillory wayward individuals and destroy competing religions.

Casserly pours skepticism on the study “that seems to once again use science to reinforce the stereotype of superficial bitches, my interest was piqued. What, if any, is the value of research that “proves” (her scare quotes) the bad behavior of women?” [Emphasis added.] 

She continues, “As for me, I’m left unconvinced that the potential benefits of research like Vaillancourt’s…outweigh the negatives of handing incriminating statistics about women to haters on a silver (and scientifically-backed) platter.”

For her it all comes down to how women are portrayed, regardless of scientific results. (Adhering to Guideline 26a: Self-report bias. Feminists always try to portray themselves in the best possible light, not just a good light, the best possible light.)

Casserly writes, “Listen: I know [emphasis in original] that women are often competitive, rude and aggressive to other women. [Emphasis added.] Vaillancourt’s research tells me nothing new. You know it too. But to me, adding credibility to these stereotypes about women gives artillery to our detractors…”

What does she mean, women are often rude and aggressive to other women? They can be rude and aggressive to men too! I explain this more thoroughly in Guideline 24a: Mean girls and even meaner women.

She writes, “If ‘bitchy behavior scales’ are science, I’m of the opinion that this sort of study should not be published.” [Emphasis added.]

I find that last sentence to be both hilarious and sad. If the truth doesn’t help women, then she thinks that it shouldn’t be allowed.

Casserly shouldn’t be so worried. Women have personality flaws and that’s okay. Men have personality flaws too, and that’s okay. We, all, need to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative. It is when personality flaws are excessive that they are a concern. We need to emphasize virtues and try to reduce our flaws.

March 31, 2013