Whenever Maureen Dowd goes after the flaws in the male character, I get a little uncomfortable, which is odd, because I really have no problem with male bashing. But when Maureen does it, I start shifting around in my seat and tapping my feet. I feel like she’s showing too much of her cards. Maureen has a full set of Samsonite baggage.

Anyhow, she’s talking today about how men like their women dumb. She points to the recently panned, Spanglish and a recent study.

The study found that a high I.Q. hampers a woman’s chance to get married, while it is a plus for men. The prospect for marriage increased by 35 percent for guys for each 16-point increase in I.Q.; for women, there is a 40 percent drop for each 16-point rise.

(That study doesn’t necessarily show that smart guys go for cheerleaders. Maybe smarter women don’t need or want to get married. Maybe dumb women are more likely to get divorced.)

Maureen’s baggage aside, does she make a good point? Do men really want to jump a non-English speaking maid in a uniform over an award winning columnist?

UPDATE: Ogged objects. Loved Tim Burke’s comment. Yes, collective reluctance to date Carrie Fisher, self-confessed substance abuser and psychological basket case, surely indicates the pathological state of the American male. In a weak Dowd piece, the turn to Fisher went way beyond weak: it was almost charmingly stupid.

Speaking of Tim Burke, loved his essay on how universities have to concentrate on the real business at hand. Not squeezing the faculty for 20 page vitas, but in changing the lives of the students. Here. Here.