An essay on progressive education.....

[Romero]

Why oh why can't I just stay away?



Typical Romero.  You've turned a case for the failings of the education system for boys into an issue of offense to women, sexual assault and rape.  Thank you for once again proving the point regarding the stifling of socially relevant conversation with bullshit PCism.



Munday, there is no doubt in my mind that school doesn't work for boys.  As stated in the article, it panders to the types who can sit still and listen for hours on end, which generally translates to girls.  The same model applies to colleges and universities for the most part.



Boys tend to be more hands on.  They learn better by building, inventing, dissecting, troubleshooting, repairing, etc.  There is a real push in the education sector for reform that creates a learning environment where boys can excel.  They have seen successes in gender segregated classes in terms of male learning but have found it creates socialization issues when it comes to the opposite sex.  We are a ways off a working solution but at least it's being viewed as an issue worth serious investigation.

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

[Anonymous]

Why oh why can't I just stay away?



Typical Romero.  You've turned a case for the failings of the education system for boys into an issue of offense to women, sexual assault and rape.  Thank you for once again proving the point regarding the stifling of socially relevant conversation with bullshit PCism.



Munday, there is no doubt in my mind that school doesn't work for boys.  As stated in the article, it panders to the types who can sit still and listen for hours on end, which generally translates to girls.  The same model applies to colleges and universities for the most part.



Boys tend to be more hands on.  They learn better by building, inventing, dissecting, troubleshooting, repairing, etc.  There is a real push in the education sector for reform that creates a learning environment where boys can excel.  They have seen successes in gender segregated classes in terms of male learning but have found it creates socialization issues when it comes to the opposite sex.  We are a ways off a working solution but at least it's being viewed as an issue worth serious investigation.

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

I am lost; I thought this thread was about the public educational system failing little boys?

 :?

[Obvious Li]

Are you saying brilliant minds should NOT have learned to harness nuclear energy? No hydrogen filled balloons? The  Hubble Space Telescope is also powered by nickel-hydrogen batteries? What were these brawny, but brainless men thinking? They should have invented Spanx instead.

Of course not, Shen.



It's just that, over and against the type of puerile chest-beating and suspender-snapping displays such as the one I quoted in my post, I do not believe brilliant minds are brilliant because they're the products of male brains. Brilliance has no gender.



But, as OL has (rightly) pointed out, this is not the issue.



On the issue itself, I'm undecided because (and just because) I don't know enough about it. I don't have any children myself so, other than articles I read here and there, I have no real clue what goes on in K-12 classrooms these days. Yes, I'm aware--hard not to be--that there's a "boy-learning" crisis at the moment that may--may--be due to newfangled approaches to education (which often centre on sensitivity training and peaceful resolution of conflicts... deemed by the more traditional set to be feminine values). My gut tells me to side with RW on this one... that education needs to be gender-differentiated. I resist this idea, though, because, for obvious reasons, I also tend to believe that gender itself is a social construct. There are a million or more ways to be a man and a million or more ways to be a woman. Why would we teach boys only one and girls only one? Again, though, beside the point. Because what we're doing is teaching both boys and girls simultaneously that there's only way to be--for both.



But dear OL and I differ on this point mainly; that the way boys (and girls) used to be was the best way for them to be. To echo RW's sentiments, I think the best way for both boys and girls to be is still somewhere ahead of us in a future that will take into account how boys learn best and how girls learn best, so that both can have a shot at brilliance.

[/b]



we may not be that far apart at all CF.....i am merely saying that what we have now is not producing results that has or will benefit society.....so in the absence of a credible alternative i will take the default position of reverting to the good old days...at least we know the system was time tested and produced stability...not for all but by and large it worked......who knows maybe our best days are in front of us.....but what we are producing now will not get us there........the relationship between males and females is a fragile construct...there are rules that nature applies...when we tinker with these universal truths we fuck it up....just like everything else the busybodies touch.

[Obvious Li]

Why oh why can't I just stay away?



Typical Romero.  You've turned a case for the failings of the education system for boys into an issue of offense to women, sexual assault and rape.  Thank you for once again proving the point regarding the stifling of socially relevant conversation with bullshit PCism.



Munday, there is no doubt in my mind that school doesn't work for boys.  As stated in the article, it panders to the types who can sit still and listen for hours on end, which generally translates to girls.  The same model applies to colleges and universities for the most part.



Boys tend to be more hands on.  They learn better by building, inventing, dissecting, troubleshooting, repairing, etc.  There is a real push in the education sector for reform that creates a learning environment where boys can excel.  They have seen successes in gender segregated classes in terms of male learning but have found it creates socialization issues when it comes to the opposite sex.  We are a ways off a working solution but at least it's being viewed as an issue worth serious investigation.

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

I am lost; I thought this thread was about the public educational system failing little boys?

 :?

it is Fash...we're pretty much on track...homero wanders around the subject like a homeless Jew.....but the rest of us get the jist.....RW pretty much wrote the defining post and even CF is playing nice.....now once we hear from Renee i will be confident we have the real lowdown on the system..i think she has boys in school as well......

[Romero]

Why oh why can't I just stay away?



Typical Romero.  You've turned a case for the failings of the education system for boys into an issue of offense to women, sexual assault and rape.  Thank you for once again proving the point regarding the stifling of socially relevant conversation with bullshit PCism.



Munday, there is no doubt in my mind that school doesn't work for boys.  As stated in the article, it panders to the types who can sit still and listen for hours on end, which generally translates to girls.  The same model applies to colleges and universities for the most part.



Boys tend to be more hands on.  They learn better by building, inventing, dissecting, troubleshooting, repairing, etc.  There is a real push in the education sector for reform that creates a learning environment where boys can excel.  They have seen successes in gender segregated classes in terms of male learning but have found it creates socialization issues when it comes to the opposite sex.  We are a ways off a working solution but at least it's being viewed as an issue worth serious investigation.

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

I am lost; I thought this thread was about the public educational system failing little boys?

 :?

The article is supposed to be, but it's really not.



It calls female teachers "tail-wagging unmen" who "enjoy seeing boys fail" and want to turn them into "involuntary lesbians".



Then it goes on and on about how women are less smart, don't start businesses, and don't invent anything.



It's a hate piece against women.

[Anonymous]

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

I am lost; I thought this thread was about the public educational system failing little boys?

 :?

The article is supposed to be, but it's really not.



It calls female teachers "tail-wagging unmen" who "enjoy seeing boys fail" and want to turn them into "involuntary lesbians".



Then it goes on and on about how women are less smart, don't start businesses, and don't invent anything.



It's a hate piece against women.

I read it very differently than you did Romero..



It was a reminder that my son is not less intelligent than my daughter..



Given the right conditions he is very capable of academic achievement..



There was not hate in it, just a reminder that the public school system is not serving the different educational needs of little boys.

[RW]

If I'm the one who's supposed to be so politically correct, why are you the one who's so offended by my simply having an opinion?



I don't believe women are  "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". I don't believe sexual harassment and assault is "propaganda".



If you want to believe that, go right ahead.

Please spare me the "I have a right to an opinion" crap.  We all know you have a right to say whatever you want on the subject, just as I have the right to say your PC opinions do NOTHING to solve the problem at hand.  You would rather sit there making this some attack on women than what it really is - a failure of the education system to foster the success of boys.



The author didn't say women were "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers".  His comments are directed mostly towards feminISM and those who push that agenda aka feminists.



The comment about sexual harassment being propaganda is in regards to the vilification of boys.  "So many women are going to be sexually harassed or assaulted by men" is a message that rings loudly from the halls of even high schools.  It paints men as being untrustworthy pigs and has every woman keeping one watchful eye on the whole lot.  That is what the article writer was referring to.



Now Romero, let's get a few things clear here.  I am a woman.  I have fought many battles to be able to do "guy" things, including facing sexual harassment in my quest to do so.  I have sat in Women's Studies classes and watched the feminist chest beating against oppression and repression.  I know how it all works.  I don't need your help telling me what should and shouldn't offend me as a woman.



On top of being a woman, I am also the mother of two kids of opposing genders in the public school system.  I don't have the luxury of denying reality in favour of feigning insult on my gender.  I see what goes on in our public schools and I have a responsibility to make sure BOTH my children are successful in their education.  So you go ahead and rant on about how insulting literary license in the article is, and I will continue stating what is true - school is fail for boys.

[RW]

Fash, I agree with your points but do you think the private school model is much different?

[Anonymous]

Fash, I agree with your points but do you think the private school model is much different?

That's a good question Real Woman?



Neither my brother nor I have ever attended public schools and I have followed the tradition with my own children..



I can only tell you what my girlfriends who have boys in the public school system have told me..



I do know we use tried and true methods at my children's school and we have results that would seem to say it is successful..



Both my husband and I are satisfied that it is a worthy investment.

[RW]

I'm not sure the structure or delivery is all that much different Fash.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure the structure or delivery is all that much different Fash.

That could be Real Woman, I have had no exposure to the public school system.

[RW]

When I was in the private system, it was very similar but that was ages ago.

[Romero]

I read it very differently than you did Romero..



It was a reminder that my son is not less intelligent than my daughter..



Given the right conditions he is very capable of academic achievement..



There was not hate in it, just a reminder that the public school system is not serving the different educational needs of little boys.

There's a lot of hate in it. Look at how it calls women "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, intellectual torturers, placid, morons, and panderers".



It claims that being against sexual harassment is "propaganda". It claims that women are less intelligent than males, and lousy at business and invention.



Those insults towards women have nothing to do with education.



Female teachers have never claimed boys are less intelligent and less capable of academic achievement.



"Bobby, we are making your life miserable and doing our best to turn you into an involuntary lesbian for your own good. Now keep quiet, take your Ritalin, and don't move an inch, you little bastard."



What a terrible thing to say about women and our teachers. It's not true. Those are the author's words and that's exactly what he believes about women.

[Anonymous]

I read it very differently than you did Romero..



It was a reminder that my son is not less intelligent than my daughter..



Given the right conditions he is very capable of academic achievement..



There was not hate in it, just a reminder that the public school system is not serving the different educational needs of little boys.

There's a lot of hate in it. Look at how it calls women "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, intellectual torturers, placid, morons, and panderers".



It claims that being against sexual harassment is "propaganda". It claims that women are less intelligent than males, and lousy at business and invention.



Those insults towards women have nothing to do with education.



Female teachers have never claimed boys are less intelligent and less capable of academic achievement.



"Bobby, we are making your life miserable and doing our best to turn you into an involuntary lesbian for your own good. Now keep quiet, take your Ritalin, and don't move an inch, you little bastard."



What a terrible thing to say about women and our teachers. It's not true. Those are the author's words and that's exactly what he believes about women.

I am a lady and I read it the same way as another lady who wrote this. The author didn't say women were "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers". His comments are directed mostly towards feminISM and those who push that agenda aka feminists.





I was not offended at all about the article, but like Real Woman I too have children of both genders and it is my duty to ensure both my children are successful in their education.

[Romero]

The author didn't say women were "smug, condescending, tail-wagging, hostile, propagandizing their sexual harassment, intellectual torturers, placid, less smart, morons and panderers".  His comments are directed mostly towards feminISM and those who push that agenda aka feminists.

All women are feminists, and he does mention all women specifically.



"There are more very smart men than women"



"Mensa membership is 66% male"



"The eight highest-scoring fields are all dominated by men"



"The two lowest-scoring careers are education, overwhelmingly female, and public administration. Thus we have morons, administered by slightly worse morons, trying to teach boys"



Do you agree with him that female educators and public administrators are overwhelmingly morons?

I have fought many battles to be able to do "guy" things, including facing sexual harassment in my quest to do so.

Isn't that just your "propaganda"?