Ted, I agree with the first three points you highlight in the article. Education is wasted on these idiots and I for one favour raising entrance standards. It's even worse here in Canada, where we don't use SATs for admission; it's all done by high school marks. However, I can't see how you view a young woman's goal to get married, have a family, and focus on raising her children rather than adding to the GDP as pathetic. You say feminism is about choice, yet you seem critical of someone who aspires to focus on raising her children. I don't understand that. Education is for education's sake; it's not job training. You say the young lady proposes doing nothing with her education, but I think her future husband and children - and society as a whole - will benefit from having and educated mind in the household, regardless of how much cash she makes.
I can see within the rest of the context of this article how you might pause and wonder why tax dollars are supporting the education of these airheads for four years when they seem more interested in boys and shopping anyway, and how they're not going to use their education in an *economically quantifiable* productive manner. That's a fair question. Maybe I'm not clear on what you find pathetic, but if you are so "persuaded" by liberal ideology that you think a girl who wants to get married, have kids, and stay at home and raise them is pathetic, then maybe you should re-evaluate your....err....values.
David St. Hubbins