What bothers me is when I see a college graduate interviewed by Jay Leno, and when asked how many moons the Earth has, she hesitates and eventually says four. Now I know that this was just one lone soul among millions...but come on. That's the sort of response that would be surprising coming from an 18th Century Eastern-European peasant who spent most of his time telling fortunes and hunting werewolves. The fact that someone can go four years to a major collegiate institution and give a response like that goes beyond the bounds of the absurd. Maybe she wasn't an astronomy major? One would hope.

Well The Earth has only one known moon and defintiely only one large round natural satellite.

BUT...there are at least four known additional objects (the most famous one is 5KM in diameter and named Cruithne) that share Earth's orbit around the sun and do interact with the Earth gravitationally in a pattern called resonance.

While they are not moons or true earth satellites there are enough frustrated astronomy teachers and science writers out there who want to impress their students/readers  or at least get their attention that the truth gets "fudged"  leaving the mistaken impression that Earth REALLY has four or five moons instead of just one. I recently took a Solar System Astronomy course and very few of the students had any interest in the subject or paid much attention. I could easily see them mentally transforming near Earth asteroids in resonance with Earth into additional moons and  two years later recalling that in front of Leno's camera.

Hell, I thought Cruithne was a moon the first time I hard about it.

Chad wrote: The feminized culture has resulted in the backlash against men.

Firstly I'd take issue on that presumption of a feminised culture. What I think has happened is that men are now having to share territory with women that had hitherto been exclusively male. I agree there has been a superficial movement toward a more touchy feely culture but I see that more as a balancing factor.

I do not dispute however that men feel under threat from a supposed female culture but I would argue that the backlash is that of men against women rather than vice versa.

QUOTE: Father figures in America today are generally supposed to be flabby, football-loving morons who are inadequate in bed and forget to put the seat down. Women love this view of men until it comes time to find one to marry. Then they want dependable, upright, men of action who will give them multiple orgasms and healthy children and safe homes. Mr. Fantastic from 1964 in other words.

Yes, this is the image portrayed in adverts and sitcoms but that is nothing to do with real life or anyones expectations.

QUOTE: . Whether the 1950s man was a caricature and a lie any more than the current pussy-whipped hairless ape, it's hard to say. I like to believe at least boys had something to look up to, rather than deride.

Ah well thats the problem isn't it - 1950's man was a myth - women as well as men were sold the dream of the strong reliable man of integrity but how many men lived up to that ideal? I'm sure there were as many drunks wife beaters and cheaters as there are today, and of course as many men who were strong, decent and loving

QUOTE:  Recently I got into a discussion about Hemingway with some literate older fellows during Thanksgiving. The women all looked like we were talking about rebuilding a transmission, just completely dismissive. The discussion wasn't about whether Hemingway was a great man, it was about a writer who was tortured to his grave by insecurity, but still a great writer. It's tiring to have to justify Hemingway in this day and age, or Connery's Bond, or lurid Nick Carter novels, or Blaxploitation films or films from the 40s and 50s, because women dislike the misogyny they sense in them.

You can't blame women for that any more than I blame you for disliking sitcoms etc that are misanthropic. Novels have to be read in the context of the age that produced them of course but at the end of the day some attitudes just stink. .

I am in sympathy with you here though I think men today have a very difficult task - to leave behind old comfortable stereotypes and redefine masculinity in a way that makes sense to them.

Durn wimmens an' thar equality!

Reverting to the original post the US does not have the monopoly on anti-intellectualism - it has long been a feature of traditional white working class culture.

Which is obviously very convenient politically speaking, I mean we don't want the masses being able to think for themselves do we?

I notice too that despite his wealthy and privileged background because Bush gives the appearance of being not only ignorant but also stupid he is regarded as being a 'regular guy'.

Never mind the number of moons in the sky - there are a large number of Americans who think WMD's were found in Iraq.

"Reverting to the original post the US does not have the monopoly on anti-intellectualism - it has long been a feature of traditional white working class culture."

Precisely how conversant are you with this culture? Did you study them, perhaps from the bushes while they performed their daily rituals? I want to know because I wasn't aware that one culture had cornered the market on ignorance.