das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
So if cultural stereotypes do not give women an advantage in education, and there's no innate bias in the education system favoring women, then what do you argue is behind women doing better than men in the education system?
FortyTwo
Custom Title
I don't believe anyone by nature is smarter than anyone else, so don't think I'm saying that. Well, at least in terms of gender - I think intelligence, or at least the capacity for it, is controlled with a different switch. But I'm no geneticist.
Perhaps it's just a coincidence. In what ways do you suppose the system is geared toward women? It'd be easier to answer if there was some sort of concrete bias. But I simply don't think it can be found, because the commotion with the "boy crisis" is mostly just the third law in effect due to women being vocal and taking a stand, and some men not understanding the societal privilege they were born into.
It's my responsibility to make sure that other people don't feel entitled?
Oh, I know that.
I've seen more of those than I can count.
You should know better than to assume a coincidence in societal matters.
http://www.parents.com/kids/education/help-son-succeed-in-school/
ledboots
Peace
(US schools)Personally I think the preschool and elementary schools are rushing the kids into some developmentally inappropriate things, and ignoring some things that are very important for early childhood learning.
Boys are often later in developing fine motor skills, so it sets them up for failure to have them writing so young, to say nothing about making them sit still for hours. Large muscle activities are very important for children, but very little real physical activity is encouraged or even allowed.
The standardized tests are so.important to the schools (tied to funding) that they stress little kids out about doing well on the tests. Some elementary schools here have big pep rallies for the standardized tests.
The public schools in my area are abysmal for the most part, and are failing both boys and girls. Far more boys than girls drop out before completing high scool, though.
Boys are often later in developing fine motor skills, so it sets them up for failure to have them writing so young, to say nothing about making them sit still for hours. Large muscle activities are very important for children, but very little real physical activity is encouraged or even allowed.
The standardized tests are so.important to the schools (tied to funding) that they stress little kids out about doing well on the tests. Some elementary schools here have big pep rallies for the standardized tests.
The public schools in my area are abysmal for the most part, and are failing both boys and girls. Far more boys than girls drop out before completing high scool, though.
Clueless Git
Plant powered
The idea that some men will not exclude other men is the opposite of logic.
A patriarchal society that excludes men who do not meet the patriarchs standards is entirely logical.
Clueless Git
Plant powered
I am confused as to how a general rule (one that has held up for a century and applies almost globaly) can be shrugged of as 'coincidence' in the first place.
Good article, btw.
das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
So the fact that one gender is doing far better than another gender is "just a coincidence"?
Do you also believe that in other countries, where men do better than women, it's also "just a coincidence"?
Or do we rule out coincidences when men have the advantage, not women?
I already told you - cultural stereotypes end up being a net positive for girls when it comes to education. Cultural stereotypes end up being a net negative for boys when it comes to education. (Actually, more accurately, I should state that "net positive" and "net negative" are relative to the other gender - cultural stereotypes could be a net negative for both genders, but is a greater net negative for boys.)
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
I can't speak for any other schools, but my son's school has this program specifically for girls to "help them transition to adolescence and grow to be responsible adults".
The school offers no such equivalent program for boys.
The school offers no such equivalent program for boys.
kazyeeqen
Superb Owl
FortyTwo
Custom Title
No, but it's your responsibility to fess up to the fact that a group centered around male entitlement is as such.
And speaking of statistics...
As a general rule, the people who benefit from a society are going to be... erm, benefiting from that society.
Even the excluded men, in your example, are privileged over women. Do all school-age boys not meet the standards of the patriarchs? Or are you arguing that the Secret Society of Super-Feminists and their Terrifying Liberal Agenda are behind this?
I said that's one possibility. Occam's razor: whatever makes the least assumptions. Assuming there's a gender conspiracy or that culturally positive bias is having a negative effect on those covered under it? Too many assumptions.
Classic. Poor men. Pity the socially dominant class!
And I asked what some of those are. Could you name any examples? If you make a claim you need to substantiate it.
I've never denied that the current situation is problematic.
What it has been and what it should be is different, however.
All men do not benefit greatly from our society.
I gave you some examples ya'know.
Since it doesn't have to be a conspiracy, but merely ignorance.
Hmm?
FortyTwo
Custom Title
I never said they did.
You gave an article that was filled with largely untrue and actually quite sexist tropes.
Ah, whatever. It's a lost cause, because even the people who don't think they're being sexist and are being sincere are supporting a very outdated and crude way of thinking.
It's based on physiological facts.
I won't claim anything as impudent as a "victory", but if you've given up on me, then I can't force you to argue anything more.
It's regretful though, since I will probably leave with some prejudice against you.
Based on my observations and experiences over a lifetime, the fact that girls do better in school than lower income/lower social standing boys is attributtable to something that arises from our (patriarchical) society, and it's something that works against girls in every avenue of life other than education and the possibility of ending up in jail. It's not something that came into being for the benefit of boys - quite the contrary.
Girls are expected to be, and are rewarded for being nice, for being people pleasers. So they do their homework, they do what is expected of them to a greater extent than boys. That benefits them in school. It doesn't benefit them in employment, where they would be better off being competitive, nor does it benefit them in their personal relationships, where they are generally the ones to "adjust", to modify their personalities and their behaviors. I see ittle girls who are so eager to please, and I wince for them, knowing how it's going to work against them in their lives.
It's something that affects pretty much every area of life for females, and its impact has been studied in many areas.
As the OP article notes, boys from higher income families, whose fathers have college degrees, do as well as girls. From observation, that's attributtable to the fact that those fathers drum into their sons from an early age that in order to compete, they have to do well in school and get post secondary and post graduate degrees.
Girls are expected to be, and are rewarded for being nice, for being people pleasers. So they do their homework, they do what is expected of them to a greater extent than boys. That benefits them in school. It doesn't benefit them in employment, where they would be better off being competitive, nor does it benefit them in their personal relationships, where they are generally the ones to "adjust", to modify their personalities and their behaviors. I see ittle girls who are so eager to please, and I wince for them, knowing how it's going to work against them in their lives.
It's something that affects pretty much every area of life for females, and its impact has been studied in many areas.
As the OP article notes, boys from higher income families, whose fathers have college degrees, do as well as girls. From observation, that's attributtable to the fact that those fathers drum into their sons from an early age that in order to compete, they have to do well in school and get post secondary and post graduate degrees.
It's pretty well established by a number of psychological studies that boys receive, starting at a very young age, more "process praise"than girls, with girls receiving substantially more "person praise" than boys. For instance:
http://www.kvue.com/news/health/kids-doctor/191406531.html
das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
Circular definition.
Is making the assumption that, depending on the state and the field, the educational differences between boys and girls is due to coincidence is the simplest explanation you can think of?
I suppose that, if that is the simplest explanation you can think of that fits the facts, then it would also apply to women not doing as well in STEM, right?
A culture (well, a collection of interconnected cultures, actually) that provides more real or perceived ways to excel for boys than to girls. For example, a greater emphasis on male sports can give boys a way to gain ranking when compared to girls (not that most boys will ever grow up to be a pro sports players - it's about as realistic as winning the lottery, but there's emphasis there). Cultural stereotypes can also reduce the worth of academic achievement, consider the cultural stereotypes of nerds, for example, and the default gender usually assumed.
Similar threads
