This is what I wrote on this blog recently:
Take Tenured Radical, for example. I disagreed with most of what she wrote but at least her posts were always interesting, controversial, engaging, and fun. After she moved to the Chronicle, everything she writes has become bland, sanitized, and utterly boring. So I stopped following. (Read this post on students with autism, for example. There is just no substance to it. I have no idea what the blogger was even trying to say.)
And here is how Tenured Radical retold my post in her own words:
I know, I know. No one should ever write about autism unless they are actually they are actually on the spectrum themselves — this was a point that was made in several of the comments. Those without ASD should all be mute and await instruction. I remember a similar admonition from feminist collective meetings in the 1970s and 1980s, where no one was supposed to speak except out of their own experience because to do so as oppressive, colonizing, and just plain wrong.
Can anybody spot ten differences between these two texts? Actually, let’s try to spot any similarities instead. If anybody manages to find any, please let me know. Those who are familiar with my blog could also venture a guess as to whether I am likely to use the expression “those without ASD.” I just looked up ASD, and it means “autism-spectrum disorders.” How much chance is there that I, of all people, would refer to autism as a “disorder”?
It is very sad when people assign some really outrageous opinions to you and then proceed to berate you for the thoughts you never even remotely entertained. It is even sadder when people can’t accept honest criticism of their bland and boring writing and try to hide behind some strange criticism of autistics who supposedly prowl around the blogosphere trying to shut everyone up.
Clarissa's Blog 
The problem with her is not that she speaks about things she has no first-hand experience with (I do that all the time), the problem is that she speaks about things she has no knowledge of. Her post about adjuncts some months ago is a great example of the latter.
LikeLike
Oh yes, that post on adjuncts was very very aggravating.
Once, she published a post about how people who protested the customs pat-downs must be homophobic. When I politely replied that some of these people could also be autistic, she got very angry and has hated me ever since.
Here is the entire debacle if anybody is interested:
https://clarissasblog.com/2010/11/24/how-democrats-defend-the-new-tsa-procedures/
I need to stop quoting myself already. 🙂
LikeLike
I felt the same way about the latest post. I was bored!
LikeLike
Thank you, Dame Eleanor! This is all I was trying to say about the post in question.
LikeLike
Yep it was boring.
LikeLike
🙂 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
I really liked your post/reply about students and drinking.
LikeLike
“Actually, let’s try to spot any similarities instead.” easy:
1) Both passages use exactly 36 different words.
2) Both passages have an average of 1.7 syllables per word.
3) The minimum sentence length in both cases is 4 words.
I cheated http:http://textalyser.net/
LikeLike
Wow! Really? This is freaky. This kind of means that TR and I have things in common. What a sobering thought. 🙂
LikeLike
I wouldn’t be too worried. I don’t think we have a statistically significant sample.
LikeLike