Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Social Science Strikes Again

I can’t wait to hear Julie Ponzi’s comments on this chart, which is offered as proof that "geek girls are easy."

Discussions - 7 Comments

But which girls are being labeled as geeks here? The easiest stereotypes for geekdom out of these disciplines are computer science and mathematics, and their (oh brother) virginity rates are nearly at opposite ends of this silly virgin-whore spectrum.

But Craig, there are such things as virgins, {the radiant Victoria Secret's supermodel Adriana Lima comes immediately to mind...} and there are conversely, such things as whores, {I'll decline naming those women who come immediately to mind}.

I remember meeting a girl for the first time, she was mildly attractive, and she clearly made a move on me, which I was mulling taking up, when an acquaintance informed me when I was getting a beer, that "she was the girl that did Media," {Media being the county seat of Delaware County, which is the county immediately to the south of the city of Philadelphia}. And the guy who clued me in about her, was a guy in a position to know.

Libs are fond of ridiculing the whole "virgin/whore" syndrome, which mostly exists in their minds, not in the minds of Conservatives, and not in the minds of most men. But withall that, there are still such things as girls who've not just got around the block, but girls that lapped the whole field by the many times they've been around the block.

Purity and passion are related. You can't ridicule virginity without simultaneously ridiculing passion, and the possibility of real passion.

Sooner or later passion, intensity, fire, demands exclusivity.

Notably absent from inclusion on this chart: Women's Studies . . . I mean, I'm sure Wellesly (of all places) must have such a department. Of course, when asking them the question I suppose you'd first have to ask yourself what "virginity" means in that context . . . I'm just sayin'.

But I am suspicious of the whole chart . . . not believing a bit of it past the English majors . . . Even so, I'm glad to see there is enough shame alive within the hearts of these women (and at Wellesly?!) to compel such lies. It seems like the teachers of deviancy still have their work cut out for them.

Julie - wonderful! Bravissimo.

If Craig doesn't like it it must mean it's good for America somehow.

Fine Arts majors have no shame! There has also got to be a great albeit dirty joke to pull out of the Mathematics/Computer Science whore to virgin rating. Something along the line of...how can you tell the girl next to you at the bar is a math major and not computer science....-add the punch line.

I agree with Craig and believe in the chart. The particular numbers probably should be adjusted downward, but if the sample sizes were large enough (which is probably why women's studies was not included, probably also with heterosexual bias...) I think the trend should hold. The mathmatical types are just not sexual people. I would bet that if philosophy was broken down by analytic and continental that the continental folks would be bigger whores. There is no damn way that in the aggregate folks who are disciplined enough to do Mathmatics have time for sex. That is why it is dominated by Asian men. I think this all goes to show that Mark Twain was right about turtles and goats. Hegel says that work is repressed desire and that sounds about right. Majors that actually require work attract more people that are dispositionally required to forgo sex and possibly even forgo thinking about sex. This is why loosely speaking the Puritan and protestant work ethic came about from death penalty restrictions on premarital sex and kissing could get you married on the spot. I don't think those art majors would last long in puritan communities but someone who was doing mathmatics would be alright. Is it any wonder that the folks in the 60's were all about sex and not about work? No doubt in my mind that they rejected the discipline required for academic work and just went out and did as they pleased.

What really pisses me off are articles by people about reading Kant(see don't trust anyone under 30), in my view there aren't any people who can read Kant, and I can tell you one thing...if you can read Kant then you aren't having sex. Ain't no damn way to maintain the mentality required to consider if all mathmatics is synthetic apriori while having sex on the mind.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/12501