~ archived since 2018 ~

San Francisco Chronicle: Policies proposed to boost boys of color. (What if it was just about boys?)

phlake14222

August 10, 2012

4 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Policies-proposed-to-boost-boys-of-color-3770909.php

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	San Francisco Chronicle: Policies proposed to boost boys of color. (What if it was just about boys?)
Author	phlake14222
Upvotes	4
Comments	2
Date	August 10, 2012 3:31 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xz87i/san_francisco_chronicle_policies_proposed_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/san-francisco-chronicle-policies-proposed-to-boost.1016165 https://theredarchive.com/post/1016165

Comments

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It makes sense to target a demographic here. Minority boys are statistically more likely to get in trouble than white boys.

Yet "boys" is a significant part as is "color." This demographic targeting does not answer anything about those boys who are not "of color" yet are also at special risk compared to girls. So what if at-risk white boys are statistically rarer (ahem, a minority) compared to at-risk black boys? They are still at-risk boys.

You cannot tell me that efforts to boost black girls are more prevalent than efforts to simply boost girls. (Example, Title IX.)

As the title asks, what would the response be if they looked at a population of at-risk students and addressed it as gender alone, without sorting it into PC categories of special and not-special? For girls, it would be applauded. For boys, it would be scorned. This must change.

To buy into the PC type of gender sorting is to buy into universal white privilege apex fallacy. Fuck that shit.