Is U.S. education truly getting worse?

[volatile]

God save me from ideologically-drive pedants.

Ditto...

My God...you only need to stand on a playground for 15 minutes to see that little boys (sigh...generally) play more agressively than little girls. Hand a boy a baby doll and he turns it into a gun or starts seeing how high he can throw it. Hand it to a girl and she starts cooing and nurturng it, whether her parents are "good" or "bad."

How do you know that's "hard-wired" and not a result of socialisation? The literature says it's a rather complicated mix of both, with socialisation (parenting, cultural factors, biological determinism) being uppermost.

Boys are NOT hard-wired biologically to act differently to girls, at least not in the way you are implying. It's not pedantic, it's fact. Ergo, it is thus pretty impossible to "drug boys to behave like girls", given that the distinction required to make that kind of judgement is one entirely of your own invention.

You never met a girl who liked playing with trucks and rough-housing? You never met a boy who liked dolls and handbags? You cannot be biologically deterministic about gender roles, Tokie. It's so blunt.

 

[Dancing David]

*giggle* So men and women are always distinguishable, except when they're not? You are some kind of genius, I swear.

Come on, Tokie. What are the biologically-determined behavioural and cognitive differences between males and females? You still haven't suggested any.

There are the effects of the androgens , but ooops those are converted to estrogen in the cell. There is a biological basis but it is overwhelmed by social and cultural conditioning.

Notice how Tokie still uses womyn, even Zee Budapest has stopped that.

Most femminists in fact like to be girly.

But someo people are stuck in the past and use appeals to emotion rather than critical thought.

 

[Dancing David]

Ditto...

How do you know that's "hard-wired" and not a result of socialisation? The literature says it's a rather complicated mix of both, with socialisation (parenting, cultural factors, biological determinism) being uppermost.

Boys are NOT hard-wired biologically to act differently to girls, at least not in the way you are implying. It's not pedantic, it's fact. Ergo, it is thus pretty impossible to "drug boys to behave like girls", given that the distinction required to make that kind of judgement is one entirely of your own invention.

You never met a girl who liked playing with trucks and rough-housing? You never met a boy who liked dolls and handbags? You cannot be biologically deterministic about gender roles, Tokie. It's so blunt.

It is in that durn bible, and because Tokie says so. No rational critical thinking involved, just chain yanking.

 

[digithead]

Actually, I looked for it in the storage room the other day, but the light was burned out. Maybe after I replace the bulb (reg'lar incandescent...I like to see...just the kinda hairpin I is!) maybe I'll find it next time I am in there if I remember.

Tokie

You don't own a flashlight?

In any event, can you at least tell us the subject of this awesome textbook?

 

[Tokenconservative]

There are the effects of the androgens , but ooops those are converted to estrogen in the cell. There is a biological basis but it is overwhelmed by social and cultural conditioning.

Notice how Tokie still uses womyn, even Zee Budapest has stopped that.

Most femminists in fact like to be girly.

But someo people are stuck in the past and use appeals to emotion rather than critical thought.

I deal with folks as I finds 'em. There were once feminine feminsts...they just wanted equal rights. No problem with that....was pretty stupid not to shift in that direction. Same as with non-white folks.

Just plain economic stupidity to do it any other way.

Wymyn are a different issue. These are radical feminists who, even today, believe that they face "glass ceilings" and open discrimination in the workplace, that they are "second class citizens" etc., etc. They hate men and believe that there are no physiological differences between the genders, and that any differences are entirely a matter of "nurture" rather than "nature."

This is utter poppycock, but it is the wymyn, who run the feminist movement today, and have insinuated themselves into many areas of ourculture which produce enormous impact, esp. the schools and the media. From these perches, they can continue to keep reality from being discovered by making research into the DIFFERENCES between men and women a no-man's land where anyone who dares tread is risking career and income.

In this way, by disallowing any such research that concludes what any rational, thinking person knows (shhhh!! Men and women, and yes, boys and girls, are DIFFERENT physiologically which results in DIFFERENT behaviors!! Who knew!?) they are able to maintain the utterly ridiculous position that ALL differences demonstrated between the genders are "cultural" and that "if only" we did not live in a strict, prejudicial, bigoted patriarchy, more girls would get science and math degrees, more would become roofers and truck drivers, more would be NFL coaches, etc., etc.

As a leftist-feminist yourself, thoroughly inculcated in this nonsensical propaganda all your life, you've been completely brainwashed to believe it and worse, to belive that anyone noting that there are DIFFERENCES is first, saying that the primary difference is that "men are better!!" and that to note the DIFFERENCES clearly demonstrates that the one doing the noting is a sexist pig.

And I say "wymyn" Two "y"s. To make fun of people who think like you do.
Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

You don't own a flashlight?

In any event, can you at least tell us the subject of this awesome textbook?

Okay...here it is for you to Google (gonna need you to offer some proof, by the way, that you found this online when you come back and lie...er, say that ya did, okay? You can prove it by telling me what is sketched on the inside cover): The Standard Referenc Work, Vol. VIII, Chicago Standard Education Society, 1927.

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

Ditto...

How do you know that's "hard-wired" and not a result of socialisation? The literature says it's a rather complicated mix of both, with socialisation (parenting, cultural factors, biological determinism) being uppermost.

Boys are NOT hard-wired biologically to act differently to girls, at least not in the way you are implying. It's not pedantic, it's fact. Ergo, it is thus pretty impossible to "drug boys to behave like girls", given that the distinction required to make that kind of judgement is one entirely of your own invention.

You never met a girl who liked playing with trucks and rough-housing? You never met a boy who liked dolls and handbags? You cannot be biologically deterministic about gender roles, Tokie. It's so blunt.

I sense by your language you are a Brit. I am guessing Ritalin was never big in your schools?

It was here. Slowed down a bit once people started noticing what it was doing to their sons.

By the way, do you know what "generally" means?

I realize generally that I am generallyremiss in not generally placing that word generously every other word, but I am assuming here that we are all rational, reasonbably educated adults who understand, generally, what the term "generally" means and that it does not, therefore, need, generally, to be placed in discussion of this sort, generally, every, generally, two, generally, or three, generally words.

Can you point out where in my posts I said that these things apply to all members of either group? I'm sure I must've done so based on your closing comment here.

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

It is in that durn bible, and because Tokie says so. No rational critical thinking involved, just chain yanking.

I never mentioned the Bible.

If I am mistaken, mayhaps you'll be able to point to where I mentioned it?

Tokie

 

[volatile]

Can you point out where in my posts I said that these things apply to all members of either group? I'm sure I must've done so based on your closing comment here.

Maybe the words "hard-wired" mean something different in America?

 

[Tokenconservative]

The problem with this discussion is twofold:

1. Inculcation,
2. Fear.

1. Since the late 60s we (Western society, though Europe to a far lesser degree than US/Canada) have been told over and over and over and over and over that only the brutal, dictatorial, bigoted, sexist patriarchy is what makes boys and girls and men and women behave differently. If not for (for the slow in here everything I will be saying applies in GENERAL terms) the brutal, dictatorial, bigoted, sexist patriarchy under which girls and women are brutally repressed and suppressed, girls and boys (and men an women) would act exactly alike. This has been pounded into our heads in the schools, and especially the universities and from our media, along with the irrational nonsense that noting a difference is, in and of itself stating "men are 'better' than women."

2. This campaign to convince us that since, absent the brutal, dictatorial, repressive, suppressive, bigoted, sexixt patriarchy, boys/girls and men/women would act exactly the same, that suggesting otherwise is heresy. Any academician doing so does so only at very great risk to his...or her, career and livlihood. This has worked extremely well, the recent pillorying--and career destruction--of a Harvard president for the crime of simply implying that it may be the differences between male/female brains that guide more men into higher math and science and more women in to the liberal arts is proof of this.

This makes it easier for those who shriek that there are no differences to point to the "peer-reviewed" research ans shriek "see!?? SEEEEEEE!!!!?" It's like being in Nazi (Godwin!! GODWIN!!!!) Germany circa 1942, noting as how so few Jews seem to be in evidence, and concluding therefore that there have never been Jews in Germany, and then if someone disagrees saying, "well, can you find me some books written by Jews here, lately?" and concluding that since, no, nothing of the sort is to be had, that this is further proof of your assertion.

If you make it virtually impossible to research the differences, as is the case in America, then of course the "peer-reviewed" research doing so is going to be a little scarce.

Duh.

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

Maybe the words "hard-wired" mean something different in America?

Maybe.

Say, what does "pedantic ass" mean in Britain?

Tokie

 

[volatile]

Maybe.

Say, what does "pedantic ass" mean in Britain?

Tokie

So... ummm... the behavioural differences between boys and girls aren't "hard-wired"? Just so we're clear.

 

[Jeff Corey]

The problem with this discussion is twofold:

1. Inculcation,
2. Fear.

1. Since the late 60s we (Western society, though Europe to a far lesser degree than US/Canada) have been told over and over and over and over and over that only the brutal, dictatorial, bigoted, sexist patriarchy is what makes boys and girls and men and women behave differently. If not for (for the slow in here everything I will be saying applies in GENERAL terms) the brutal, dictatorial, bigoted, sexist patriarchy under which girls and women are brutally repressed and suppressed, girls and boys (and men an women) would act exactly alike. This has been pounded into our heads in the schools, and especially the universities and from our media, along with the irrational nonsense that noting a difference is, in and of itself stating "men are 'better' than women."

2. This campaign to convince us that since, absent the brutal, dictatorial, repressive, suppressive, bigoted, sexixt patriarchy, boys/girls and men/women would act exactly the same, that suggesting otherwise is heresy. Any academician doing so does so only at very great risk to his...or her, career and livlihood. This has worked extremely well, the recent pillorying--and career destruction--of a Harvard president for the crime of simply implying that it may be the differences between male/female brains that guide more men into higher math and science and more women in to the liberal arts is proof of this.

This makes it easier for those who shriek that there are no differences to point to the "peer-reviewed" research ans shriek "see!?? SEEEEEEE!!!!?" It's like being in Nazi (Godwin!! GODWIN!!!!) Germany circa 1942, noting as how so few Jews seem to be in evidence, and concluding therefore that there have never been Jews in Germany, and then if someone disagrees saying, "well, can you find me some books written by Jews here, lately?" and concluding that since, no, nothing of the sort is to be had, that this is further proof of your assertion.

If you make it virtually impossible to research the differences, as is the case in America, then of course the "peer-reviewed" research doing so is going to be a little scarce.

Duh.

Tokie

The problem with this discussion is one fold. You offer no facts, only your uniformed bigoted opinion, expressed in an obnoxious manner. You have no idea what research is going on in this area and don't seem to have the background to understand it if you did.

 

[volatile]

The problem with this discussion is one fold. You offer no facts, only your uniformed bigoted opinion, expressed in an obnoxious manner. You have no idea what research is going on in this area and don't seem to have the background to understand it if you did.

It's like his stance on Global Warming. It's not that he's wrong, or that the evidence doesn't support him, it's that there is in fact a vast conspiracy in operation to suppress the truth of the matter, which he "knew" was right all along.

 

[Tokenconservative]

So... ummm... the behavioural differences between boys and girls aren't "hard-wired"? Just so we're clear.

In rational discourse, you don't answere a question WITH a question.

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

The problem with this discussion is one fold. You offer no facts, only your uniformed bigoted opinion, expressed in an obnoxious manner. You have no idea what research is going on in this area and don't seem to have the background to understand it if you did.

Curious...you just, in essence, called me a stupid bigot.

In another thread, when I pointed up that you hate me because I am conservative, you ran to the mods and complained that I was "attacking the person making the argument, not the argument..."

What sort of wussy does this?

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

It's like his stance on Global Warming. It's not that he's wrong, or that the evidence doesn't support him, it's that there is in fact a vast conspiracy in operation to suppress the truth of the matter, which he "knew" was right all along.

Indeed.

And just so.

Can you prove there ISN'T a vast conspiracy, on either count?

No?

But maybe you are right, maybe I am simply an irrational, far rightwing loon.

In either case if you, as a professional researcher of any sort write that there are differences between men and women or write that climate change is not being caused by humans, you will never see another dime in funding and will likely be driven out of academia.

This is a given.

So, what would it look like if there really WERE a Vast Conspiracy?


Tokie

 

[Jeff Corey]

Curious...you just, in essence, called me a stupid bigot.

In another thread, when I pointed up that you hate me because I am conservative, you ran to the mods and complained that I was "attacking the person making the argument, not the argument..."

What sort of wussy does this?

Tokie

I don't know because you are wrong. It never happened and is probably a product of your demented imagination. Or you are simply a liar.
Which is it, Okie?

 

[volatile]

In rational discourse, you don't answere a question WITH a question.

Tokie

Well, look. In rational discourse, you discuss things rationally. You don't, as you've done here, blindly claim that the behavioural differences between male and female children are both "hard-wired" and only "generally" applicable, only to stomp your feet and bitch about "pedant[ry]" (calling the other party in the discussion an "ass" in the process, by the way) when it's pointed out you that "hard-wired" and "generally" are mutually exclusive.

Man up, Tokie. You were wrong. There's no shame in admitting it. Say after me: "The behavioural differences between boys and girls are not 'hard-wired'".

You can even copy and paste that if you feel typing will bring on apoplexy.

 

[Tokenconservative]

Well, look. In rational discourse, you discuss things rationally. You don't, as you've done here, blindly claim that the behavioural differences between male and female children are both "hard-wired" and only "generally" applicable, only to stomp your feet and bitch about "pedant[ry]" (calling the other party in the discussion an "ass" in the process, by the way) when it's pointed out you that "hard-wired" and "generally" are mutually exclusive.

Man up, Tokie. You were wrong. There's no shame in admitting it. Say after me: "The behavioural differences between boys and girls are not 'hard-wired'".

You can even copy and paste that if you feel typing will bring on apoplexy.

Sure, I'll man up and admit that that was an overbroad statement.

Now, you grow a pair (and don't report me to a mod for saying it that way) and admit that you are being overly pedantic...you knew what I meant.

Tokie