Do smart women try too hard? Or, a Theory of Everything III

I realize that my macro parts might prejudice me, but a frequent sensation when reading two smart women, Peggy Noonan and Virginia Postrel, is that they're just trying too hard. There isn't too much to complain about in Noonan's observations on Katrina, I suppose, but nonetheless I'm often just a bit put off. Perhaps it's just a lingering prejudice from "What I saw at the revolution," which had a feel of Peggy telling just how smart Peggy was, and how smart Ronaldus wasn't.

But Noonan is decidedly second rank in the look-how-smart-I-am sweepstakes to Postrel, who engages in a bit of intellectual triumphalism over Vaclav Klaus, who offended her once, I guess.

I'm sympathetic to Postrel's efforts; I myself have a theory of everything here, and hands down hers is better developed. (It's just developed in the wrong area, is all: Masterful, but pointless.)

Postrel says her speech on "stasism" and "dynamism" is better than Klaus's speech on "environmentalism" or any other ism he can throw against the wall.

I still say it boils down to something else, something that is in some ways simpler. Maybe if I add an ism it'll be easier to take. How about "propertyism" or "individualism-ism"?