What? This isn't just my schtick?

That's not much of a poll.

That was... interesting. I guess.

That's not much of a poll.

Well, it certainly has been definitively crashed.

The oh-so-tedious "back then women could only become teachers, nurses or secretaries" argument...

Those were indeed the big three options for most women.

Because most women are/were a) of average or below average intelligence and

b) generally lazy and hoping their Prince Charming would come along.

For those of us with above average IQs, no nurturing gene and lots of ambition, you could always do something else. It just wasn't EASY, and therefore, most women chickened out.

However, for most of the 20th century, law schools, med schools etc WERE already open to women.

It is just that most women weren't smart/ambitious/hard working enough to get into them.

And those professions didn't interest most women anyway because most women are emotional nurturing followers by nature. Others are hysterical neurotics who have no business in the professions anyhow.

Marie Curie somehow managed to snag two Nobel Prizes without affirmative action. Go figure.

Women only really started going into law and med school when tv shows started portraying these jobs as a) open to women and b) GLAMOUROUS, with b) being the big deciding factor.

Feminism was only ever meant for smart women, who, ironically, never needed it anyway. So it is doubly obsolete (with its own built in obsolesence, no less!)

What a charming person! Most women starting going to law and med school because of TV? Most women are below average intellectually and lazy.

The only thing she get right, and that was for the wrong reason, is that feminism should become obsolete.

that should do it... 60%

What's the point of crashing a poll when all the choices are bad?

Janine wrote, "Most women are below average intellectually and lazy." To be fair, she said that most women are of average or below average intelligence, which is true - for the same reason it's equally true of men.

This seems like a waste of time.

Skepsci: What's the point of crashing a poll when all the choices are bad?

The point, such as it is, is that an American group of gay conservatives has a poll for best female "patriot" blogger, and one of their self-selected nominees is a Canadian homophobe.

It's funny because conservatives are stupid.

Am I blind or has she been taken out of the running?

Unfortunately, there's now no longer any point in heading over there. You can't vote for somebody who has been silently removed from the list of options.

Yes, that's right - they've removed the target from the list of options, but left her in the list of links to where/who they all are, right below the poll. So that's what they meant by "the hope that this poll will not suffer from the glitches of last year's" - they've worked out how to remove any choices that they don't like.

Oh, yes. Just another little challenge. They've removed the front runner - maybe we should shift to a backup choice - (maybe they'll remove them all one by one and be left with no "Grande Conservative Blogress"}. My tentative suggestion at Sadly, No! was Amy Alkon, who reacts nicely to interest from the leftish wing.

I wasn't going to do "Sadly, No" any favors after seeing the snotty reference to Ann Althouse as "Professor Wine Box" Oh, that's right, she once actually held a glass of wine in her hand during a vlog session, so she must be a lush. PZ, better be careful when posting photos of Pharyngula meetups!

@11: Try this link instead.

You would prefer Professor "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see." Althouse?

OH, NO, not a "snotty reference"!?! from Sadly, No! ??

[clutch pearls, collapse on couch]

Thanks for the proper link garble @14.

Quite odd that she vanished from the regular poll page.
Very, very odd.

I'm sure it's just a bug in some poorly written code. Surely the person(s) running that site wouldn't manipulate things to cover up the fact that one of their nominees is doing really really well, would they? *cough*

Mock people's posts all you like -- I do -- but implying that someone is a drunk is defamatory and pretty lame. Many of us got annoyed when Nisbet posted an unflattering picture of PZ; was that "pearl clutching," too?

If you'd expressed your annoyance at Sadly, No!? - you betcha!

skepsci, I did not write that dreck. Though I at least should have placed the name of the miserable woman who wrote that.

Nah. I really do not want to do that.

I thought the "Prof. Boxwine" cracks about Althouse came because of her self-admitted drunken live blogging of "American Idol". That and she's a complete joke, which Prof. Myers is not.

but implying that someone is a drunk is defamatory and pretty lame.

The implication is not that she's a drunk, it's that she has no taste!

Your concern for the professor's reputation is touching.

I admit to stupidity here. Could someone explain this poll in ordinary English to me? How should I vote?

littlejohn, this should help you:

From HP @comment#9: The point, such as it is, is that an American group of gay conservatives has a poll for best female "patriot" blogger, and one of their self-selected nominees is a Canadian homophobe.

It's funny because conservatives are stupid.

Personally, the whole thing is just mind-boggling bizarre. But, voting for the shrieking harpy does seem like fun to me.

Oh. Sorry littlejohn. I misread because I have the dumb and can not brain today.

Just go Here and vote for Kathy Shaidle.

English is my first language, I've got academic qualifications in three other European languages including Latin, but I cannot understand the writing of that blog posting.

I really hate it when people adopt their own private language.

...the snotty reference to Ann Althouse as "Professor Wine Box"...

...but implying that someone is a drunk is defamatory and pretty lame.

I assume then that you have not seen her vlog entrees? As a prominent law professor you'd think......oh nevermind.

Ms Shaidle having "withdrawn" from the competition, we are now enthusiastically voting for Pammy of Atlas Shrugs (and placing bets on how many votes it will take to get her to "withdraw").

The Sadlynauts are now throwing the poll to Pam at Atlas Shrugs. Just because.

Remember the 'pledge poll' we couldn't tip? Well, I checked back there, and apparently it has been tipped (barely). Not that anyone cares anymore, but somehow I think it's still nice. Merry Yule!

I like how there's Atlas Shrieked, or whenever conservatives try to play off Ayn Rand. Now agreeing or disagreeing with her is fine, but sorry, she fucking hated conservatives.

From what I've heard about Ayn Rand, she hated everyone except herself.

I'm not helping Sadly No do anything. I hate those assholes.

The fact is, Sadly No! is a bunch of liberals who want to tax and spend our great country with their anti-liberty markists ideas, unlike us in the Heartland, who are true patriots who oppose B. Hussein Obama while working hard and supporting our current president and the troops, unlike the Democrat Party.

What do we call fake wingnuts? If not poes?

Gary Ruppert, get back home to Sadly,No!this instant! Does Gavin know you're missing?

Have a great Festivus, Pharyngulites!

"I'm not helping Sadly No do anything. I hate those assholes."

Confederate Yankee? is that you?

The fact is, the more we alienate those torture loving a-holes, the better off we all are.

Pammy is "Prof Winebox" because of her drunken vloging of american idol, not because "she once actually held a glass of wine in her hand during a vlog session, so she must be a lush."

And more importantly because it is, you know, funny. Getting upset because Sadly, No is snarky and mean is like getting upset because Bill O'Reilly yells shut up. You just put up with it because it is funny (Ssdly, No!) or you ignore it (Billy, Oh!).

Remember, vote for Pam