In his latest VDARE article, he asks why so many male scientists and engineers have turned on Larry Summers, the President of Harvard.
Summers suggested that the reason why men dominate the higher echelons of science and engineering is, in part, because of a male genetic advantage in these fields. This means that affirmative action programmes for women in science and maths are misguided, as it's not discrimination which is preventing female "progress", but a natural disadvantage.
You would think that male scientists and engineers would react positively to Summers' views. But they haven't, and Sailer has an intriguing explanation for this. Sailer acknowledges that the influence of politically correct liberalism is one reason for male scientists and engineers to oppose Summers. But he argues also as follows:
But a more interesting subset, however, are the male science and engineering types who support gender quotas for women out of self-interest. My theory: they see the feminists' vendetta against Summers as their chance to get revenge on the female sex for its annoying femaleness.
Why do these men insist that sexist discrimination and socialization are the only possible reasons there are fewer women than men in their own fields?
Why do they demand massive social engineering to get more women to become as obsessive about the pocket-protector professions as they are?
Paradoxically, this is typically because of how little these nerds appreciate women. They don't like females the way they are. They want a vast societal effort to remold women into liking the same nerdy things they like.
That way, maybe, nerds can finally get dates.
It's roughly the same reason you see so many butt-kicking babes in movies aimed at male teenage comic book geeks ... It's always hyped in the press as female empowerment. But it's driven far more by the adolescent male's wish that sexy girls would stop being interested in all that boring girl stuff like relationships and start being interested in cool guy stuff, like kung-fu fighting and really big guns.
I find this theory persuasive, though I don't know where it leaves the majority of men who prefer their women feminine. Is it possible for us to get the "nerdier" men onside in some way?
By the way, whilst we're on this subject, I was interested to read the views of Fabio, the cover-guy for female romance novels, in this week's Who magazine.
Fabio is definitely on the side of traditionalists when it comes to female attractiveness. He says,
Something that really attracts me is a very feminine woman. When I see a really feminine woman with class, I melt.
As do most of us.