Some people don't like non-M.D. Doctors

That is probably an exaggeration. It isn't like lawyers--there are no joke books about Ph.D's (at least that I know of), and I know many people who don't dislike me.

But people seem oddly conflicted about academic doctors. I say this out of experience. Hell, I was even mocked on this blog in my own comments! People are often impressed that I spent that much time of my life in school and often are shocked when they see how many words I wrote. Some have been brought up to respect people with authority or expertise. Others really want to, but they find my take on American history unacceptable (More on that later). So it becomes easier to dismiss me as an egghead academic--an ivory tower theoretician--a person trained only with book smarts.

So, why is this?

As any pseudo-academic should, I have multiple and even contradictory answers. I think that many of the critics of academic doctors are right on. Let's call it the "jackass factor." If the average number of jackasses per 10 people is 3 (that is way low, btw) then the average academic jackass factor is, what, 7, 8? If you don't know a jackass with a Ph.D., you probably don't know enough academics to have a suitable sample. Academics are "lone wolves, iconoclasts, eccentrics," or simply people who don't play well with others.

Why is that, you ask? Some of them are just asses pure and simple. I can rattle off names and email addresses of several. But I have a few other explanations for the rest. Some of those explanations are the fault of the academics, and some are the fault of the "others."

The first one is really a combination. Ph.D.'s are notorious for giving their opinion when it isn't asked. On any subject. On ANY subject. They often feel that they should know everything and be ready to defend it. While this really isn't the general public's fault, you need to be compassionate. Remember, these poor saps just endured several years of grad school (and I am just talking about the dissertation process here) and had their ego pounded to shit on a regular basis.

"Did a monkey write this chapter?
Do you know anything about this topic?
Have you done any primary research at all?
Can you run a spell-check?

All of this during that gut-wrenching and vulnerable period when you turn out a 300 page tome that NO ONE WILL EVER READ! But still, your advisor suggests that this is "marginal at best," that three or four other grad students (all working with other people) have "produced better work," that "hell, you have put in 3 or 4 years writing, we might as well PASS YOU!"

So, you can see how a newly minted Ph.D. might be just a little bit aggressive. Now with that title next to his/her name, any poor sap who asks about historical context or "who won the Civil War?" or god forbid ask if "anyone in the room can explain the FUCKING HISTORIOGRAPHY OF THE FIRST GREAT AWAKENING" might get more than you ask for? Huh? Huh?

Ok, calming down. Night-sweats receding. Petting the imaginary kitty.

That is probably enough for now. More later on this.