Feminists are some of the worst offenders of the ‘feelings instead of facts’ arguments. For example, in 2005, Harvard President Larry Summers gave a speech. The core argument of his speech?
As much as he disliked the data, numerous studies had proven it: there are innate, unexplained differences between men and women. These studies he cited said that men excel at ‘hard sciences’ (where there is only one right answer), and women excelled at ‘soft sciences’ (where there are multiple answers, open to interpretation). Examples would be mathematics, versus English literature.
Mind you: this was a speech, given by a Democrat who proclaimed himself a feminist. He opened his remarks by talking about inherent sexism in the work place, and how nobody could deny that sexism against women still existed. Then he moved on to say how he intended these remarks to be ‘provoking’, and ‘designed to make one think.’
It didn’t matter. The women of the audience responded with hysterics. Numerous professors -professors of actual universities, mind you -fled the room. Some cried. One women, an MIT professor -Nancy Hopkins- said, and I quote:
“I felt I was going to be sick…”
“My heart was pounding, and my breathe was shallow.”
“I just couldn’t breathe, because this kind of bias makes me physically ill…”
In the end, Ms. Hopkins fled the room, because otherwise, again in her words, she “would’ve blacked out or thrown up.”
Numerous denunciations followed Summers relatively tame remarks, resulting in his removal from Harvard. But the one thing his detractors lacked?
Evidence. Proof that Summers was wrong.
No, that never popped up. It didn’t matter that Summers cited hard, scientific studies proving his point; feminists feelings were hurt, and that was all that mattered!