Camille Paglia, of the title quote, believed that men were dramatically more likely to accomplish acts of genius than women, and that history bore this thesis out. Her reasoning was that as genius is a product of obsession (and as a corollary, so is sociopathy), the discrepancy should lay there.

Paglia's theories for the preponderance of obsession in men is as a result of alienation from the affection of women ("I can't get laid so I'm going to paint/mutilate the genitals of prostitutes!") or as an escape from domination at the hands of women ("My wife keeps nagging me, so I'm going to go hide in the basement and write poetry/torture transients!").

I've always loved this theory; I think it explains the world I see around me very well. Most people I know who disagree with it tend to reject it with the suggestion that historical inequalities of circumstances between women have disadvantaged them so severely that its no wonder there are so many fewer female geniuses. Perhaps! That's the sort of argument that only time can test unfortunately.

Anyone have an opinion?