I must be the only jblogger who wants to be non anonymous but can't

Grrrrr. So many people wrote to me to explain why I can't be non-anonymous; It will cause too much trouble, I will no longer be able to quote my Rabbis so openly, think of my family, it will affect the whole Tropper thing (?) etc etc etc. It's freaking ridiculous.

And everyone is also commenting that my criticism of Kanefsky is unfair, because in reality he probably holds of the DH (or as one commenter put it - he is a "Complex Thinker") but he just can't say so. Plus the Rabbi I quoted yesterday is upset because of what I wrote.

I think it's pathetic that in the MO world all these MO Rabbis are so scared of [their wives their congregants the right wing the bogeyman ] that they can't be honest about their true beliefs. Yes yes, I know, people just can't handle the truth. But in fact, 50% of MO people CAN and DO handle the truth. So why are we faking it for the other 50%? Maybe they should fake it for us?

What's it going to take to make it OK not to have to believe in stuff which is most probably NOT TRUE ACCORDING TO EVERY PIECE OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH KNOW TO MAN???

What will it take to convince the RCA? The IRF? The EJF? Actually, that last one is the easiest. As long as you turn some tricks for Leib and that Satmar guy, you're in. (sorry, couldn't resist).

Do we really live in a world where to admit that the global concensus of academic research might just be right is such a terrible thing? Is that the kind of world we have to live in? Is it?

IS IT?