Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This statement is enough to prove you don't know what you're talking about. Once you've seen kids truly free to learn in their own way, you can see school is 'friendly' to only a very small percentage of children.
No "true scotsman" fallacy. You should look it up.
Quote:
Hyperactivity, like most cases of ADD/ADHD and dyslexia, is a made-up diagnosis for kids who don't fit into schools' paradigms of how learning should happen. And, once again, boys are diagnosed with these 'disorders' at a much higher percentage than girls.
And yet the vast majority of children regardless of gender make it through school quite successfully.
Quote:
You might try looking at the research before you dismiss something very obvious.
Obvious? You mean like your desire to label all boys with one label? OK so a traditional school isnt working out for YOUR kids. So I get you want to label all kids as the same as yours so you do not feel like there is something wrong with yours but that does not make it true. Your kids are one end of a spectrum but they truly are not the norm. Again. So what?
You have found some sort of coping mechanism for your kids and thats fine. Hopefully they will find gainful UNemployment doing some sort of UNwork too. I wish you the best of luck but you really should stop trying to force everyone else into your mold since it works for the majority of students. I mean isn't that what you are accusing the schools of doing? Little hypocritical don't you think?
As for unschooling itself. Its a joke. I am all for encouraging children to pursue their passions but just look at this recommendation on how to lie to college admissions so unschoolers look like the well educated people they are not:
"(2) Re-name non-traditional studies with traditional subject headings in order to fit into the traditional "college prep work" categories. We re-named our son's five year experience of studying fly fishing "science" and described the work by categorizing it in terms of ichthyology, physics, entomology etc."
Have fun getting those unschoolers a job at some point. Jeez, I wonder what will happen when they get to the parts of a job that they HAVE to do instead of CHOOSE to do.
"'The belief that boys are being wrongly "masculinized" is inspiring a movement to "construct boyhood" in ways that will render boys less competitive, more emotionally expressive, more nurturing — more, in short, like girls. Gloria Steinem summarizes the views of many in the boys-should-be-changed camp when she says, "We need to raise boys like we raise girls."
This novel agenda is no utopian fantasy. Indeed, as I will show, the movement to overhaul boys is already well under way. And like many other well-intentioned but ill-conceived reforms, this one has enormous potential to make a lot of people — in this case, millions of schoolboys — very miserable indeed.'"
The OP, along with JS1, writing about forcing boys to "act like girls" is absolutely ridiculous. What does that even mean?
No way in hell would I let boys (or girls) fight or rough house at school. Parents take their children to school with the idea that they will be supervised and cared for. The premise of this thread is nonsensical.
From my personal situation, this has nothing to do with making boys feminine, but about control over my classrooms. Other than that, teachers would be doing the students a disservice by making them think that violence among men is acceptable behavior. Those types of people end up in jail.
"'The belief that boys are being wrongly "masculinized" is inspiring a movement to "construct boyhood" in ways that will render boys less competitive, more emotionally expressive, more nurturing — more, in short, like girls. Gloria Steinem summarizes the views of many in the boys-should-be-changed camp when she says, "We need to raise boys like we raise girls."
This novel agenda is no utopian fantasy. Indeed, as I will show, the movement to overhaul boys is already well under way. And like many other well-intentioned but ill-conceived reforms, this one has enormous potential to make a lot of people — in this case, millions of schoolboys — very miserable indeed.'"
Or check out her book, "The War Against Boys" on Amazon.
Mod cut - offensive wording. Again, if I had wrote a book called "The War against Girls" and talked about how girls are taught "boyish" qualities like aspiring to have a job, being more open to sexuality, being independent, and wearing pants I'd be called a misogynist.
How is it ok to do the same for boys? I say don't push anything on kids- let them be who they want to be without labels or stereotypes. If they choose to conform to labels/stereotypes of any kind, then that's fine because it was their choice. If they choose to defy those labels, then that's also their choice.
I don't think boys "should be changed" because they don't NEED to be changed. Our society has progressed to the point of where we no longer have any real use for gender roles and clear ideas of gender; men don't need to hunt and women don't need to stay home and care for the children.
Since when is being expressive and not competitive a feminine trait? My ex-biker grandfather was "expressive". He always let people knew what he felt, for better, worse or neutral. He cried at his mother's funeral, he cried when we put our dog to sleep. He loved reading and he & my grandmother (but mostly he) fueled my love for good plays with frequent trips to Playhouse Square in Cleveland.
I'm not crying reverse-sexism here. I'd be saying the same thing if we were talking about blacks "not acting black". This is a bunch of pie-in-the-sky, relative gobbledygook.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 05-17-2010 at 06:00 PM..
Mod cut - offensive wording. Again, if I had wrote a book called "The War against Girls" and talked about how girls are taught "boyish" qualities like aspiring to have a job, being more open to sexuality, being independent, and wearing pants I'd be called a misogynist.
How is it ok to do the same for boys? I say don't push anything on kids- let them be who they want to be without labels or stereotypes. If they choose to conform to labels/stereotypes of any kind, then that's fine because it was their choice. If they choose to defy those labels, then that's also their choice.
I don't think boys "should be changed" because they don't NEED to be changed. Our society has progressed to the point of where we no longer have any real use for gender roles and clear ideas of gender; men don't need to hunt and women don't need to stay home and care for the children.
Since when is being expressive and not competitive a feminine trait? My ex-biker grandfather was "expressive". He always let people knew what he felt, for better, worse or neutral. He cried at his mother's funeral, he cried when we put our dog to sleep. He loved reading and he & my grandmother (but mostly he) fueled my love for good plays with frequent trips to Playhouse Square in Cleveland.
I'm not crying reverse-sexism here. I'd be saying the same thing if we were talking about blacks "not acting black". This is a bunch of pie-in-the-sky, relative gobbledygook.
We surely still have gender roles. We've not yet crossed over to the point where a man can have a child. I think you're making us more advanced than we actually are.
Gender traits are not the same as race-based traits, since race is much more of a cultural concept, while gender is actually biological, whether we want to admit it or not. There are no real differences, other than superficial and cultural, between a black person and a white person, but there are real differences between males and females.
And while there's been a blurring of gender roles in everyday life, there is still a strong need for the two genders to complement and support each other. Where that is not happening, the results are poverty and social chaos.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 05-17-2010 at 06:01 PM..
We surely still have gender roles. We've not yet crossed over to the point where a man can have a child. I think you're making us more advanced than we actually are.
Gender traits are not the same as race-based traits, since race is much more of a cultural concept, while gender is actually biological, whether we want to admit it or not. There are no real differences, other than superficial and cultural, between a black person and a white person, but there are real differences between males and females.
And while there's been a blurring of gender roles in everyday life, there is still a strong need for the two genders to complement and support each other. Where that is not happening, the results are poverty and social chaos.
The differences between personalities of individual boys and girls will still be more significant than the commonalities. There will always be lots of boys who have traits stereotyped as feminine and girls with those considered masculine. It is wrong to say that having those traits makes you less of whatever gender you belong to.
This is so retarded. Again, if I had wrote a book called "The War against Girls" and talked about how girls are taught "boyish" qualities like aspiring to have a job, being more open to sexuality, being independent, and wearing pants I'd be called a misogynist.
How is it ok to do the same for boys?
First of all, the book is titled The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men. I think that the title alludes to the material presented in the book and speaks for itself.
Secondly, no one is suggesting that boys wear skirts.
Another thing worth noting is that gender has nothing to do with what sexual organ is between your legs or who you prefer to go to bed with, but instead with what sex you identify. As such, gender roles come down to the individual.
The differences between personalities of individual boys and girls will still be more significant than the commonalities. There will always be lots of boys who have traits stereotyped as feminine and girls with those considered masculine. It is wrong to say that having those traits makes you less of whatever gender you belong to.
No way in hell would I let boys (or girls) fight or rough house at school. Parents take their children to school with the idea that they will be supervised and cared for. The premise of this thread is nonsensical.
Wrong.. Parents send their kid to school to help them LEARN so they don't have to do it. Parents could care less if kids get the crap out of them (If they deserve it.). You get don't get the idea.This is comin from a boy that's in highschool.
Wrong.. Parents send their kid to school to help them LEARN so they don't have to do it. Parents could care less if kids get the crap out of them (If they deserve it.). You get don't get the idea.This is comin from a boy that's in highschool.
I literally cannot understand what you are trying to say. Care to try again?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The War Against Boy's Still Rages On...
