TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Do Schools Discriminate Against Boys?

rbrockway

March 29, 2022
132 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://avoiceformen.com/featured/do-schools-discriminate-against-boys/
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Do Schools Discriminate Against Boys?
Author

rbrockway

Upvotes 132
Comments 146
Date March 29, 2022 4:52 AM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/tqs2sl/do_schools_discriminate_against_boys/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/do-schools-discriminate-against-boys.1109653
https://theredarchive.com/post/1109653
Top posts by rbrockway

Unprovoked 'one punch' attacks are now subject to harsh penalties in Australia unless the perpetrator is a woman in which case she gets off with a small fine as usual.

3441 upvotes
February 3, 2019
/r/MensRights

Women treat each other worse at work then men treat women or women treat men.

3035 upvotes
February 24, 2018
/r/MensRights

Woman burned 13-year-old boy's genitals with hot tongs for refusing sex

2919 upvotes
November 29, 2018
/r/MensRights

Woman committing sexual assault at “Women’s March” identified and arrested

2765 upvotes
February 4, 2019
/r/MensRights

Boys left to fail at school because attempts to help them earn wrath of feminists, says ex-Ucas chief

2614 upvotes
January 28, 2019
/r/MensRights

School proposes punishing boys by taking away part of their recess on International Women's Day

2488 upvotes
May 17, 2019
/r/MensRights

United Nations research finally admits that 94% of children held in bondage around the world are boys.

2424 upvotes
November 23, 2019
/r/MensRights

Women-only STEM college programs under attack for male discrimination

2130 upvotes
August 22, 2019
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]offtable 51 points52 points53 points 4 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

Yes, the school System is not for boys.

[–]rosewiththornzzz -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

The school system is not for anyone here in America. The year I graduated high school 15 girls had been raped and the school swept them under the rug

[–]offtable 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

Thats not what we're talking about. We are talking about education.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (43 children) | Copy Link

Be specific. What is it exactly?

[–]offtable 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

That boys have a disadvantaged im school, because the Way school system and the way we teach are not in line of how boys/men learn, they are more in line of how women/girls learn.

Boys are arguementitive, they want to try things out, more around more, less agreeable, etc... Which is all the traits that are deemed wrong in school.

On the other hand, girls are quiet the opposite. You tell a girl "go study, learn this pharagraph verbatum and see you tomorrow on the test". Girls are more likely to obey and do that. Boys wont. They'd rather go out and play football or something. Boys have much less care about authority aswell.

Basically what school does is that they took the charasteristics of a girl, decided "this is a good drone behavior and we want drones" and they reinforce these behaviors and punish the others.

This is why you see so many boys failing schools and why women graduate college more than men. That, and because colleges are becoming woke propaganda machines and women tend to study something usless degree and men rather go into trades to make money.

[+]GiantDairy 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

Girls are not argumentative? Are you joking me bro?

What the hell does “more around more” mean? Do you mean “move”? If boys are “less agreeable” how could we possibly arrange school/the world around that?

These “traits” are not acceptable in workplaces. What good does it do to accept them at school?

We’d all love to “go out and play football” instead of work/school. Are we helping boys by telling them it’s cool to indulge that impulse when work needs to be done? How does the modern workplace accommodate that?

Schools and teachers don’t want drones, they want critical thinkers. But you have to sit down, read, respectfully engage in discussion to do that. How are boys supposed to learn while running around the classroom freely and leaving whenever they want to go play football?

[–]offtable 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

Yes, girls are less arguementitive. Not joking.

Yes, I was meant to write move around more. You can teach boys how to use their disagreeableness for the better of themselves, their loved ones and society. Disagreeableness is not a negative trait.

These traits are essential in workplaces. Fight for your wage, be able to trade for your benefit, stand up for yourself and others. And when men work together, they can reach the impossible.

I wasnt referring to going out playing football (which I doubt girls want to do, most girls dont) instead of school. I talked about afterschool activity. Homework, tedious studies. Instead of expecting the boy to read countless pages, show them in practice. Let them play with the ideas with their hands. They will understand much better in practice, than on paper. Thats how their brain is wired.

The modern workplace is everything about "do" and school is everything about "say". The System we have now is not compatible with the workplace.

The school system we have now is essentially creating drones. -dont think for yourself, read the pages, say it back to me verbatum. -you can only have lunch at X time, you only have X time freedom, school follows you home with homework. -obey without question. -sit silently for hours.

This is what a drone looks like. And schools are propagating this behavior.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

How is disagreeableness not a negative trait? How can it possibly serve someone?

Note that this is distinct from “assertiveness”, you seem unaware of the difference.

How do you learn literature by playing with your hands? history? geography? Philosophy? All studying is “tedious”, yet there are many male scholars.

Workplaces today are not all about working with your hands. Most require you to be agreeable and work with a team. Listen to instructions. Watch details. Higher order thinking is required.

No one teaches children to memorize things as a rule. This is not how contemporary school works.

[–]offtable 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

Disagreeableness allows you to bargain better. To hold yourself to a standard and others. To protect yourself and to protect others.

Not all studying tedious. You can learn history by seeing the history. You know, we do have technology that allows more than paper. Geography aswell. You can learn philosophy by talking and showing examples.

Agreeableness and teamwork are useful and needed in a team environment. And boys can work As a team very well without having to teach them. We are like that. We see a goal and we work for the goal together. We only need the motivation.

Yes, many schools still expect children to memorize. And they grade memory over practice.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

Disagreeableness makes people dislike you. That’s it. If you don’t like people, they won’t like you. You can’t be a dick to people and expect them to promote you or give you a raise.

How can you “see history”? Do you mean like a movie? Explain how disagreeable boys who would rather go out and play football are going to learn from going to a museum.

I am a certified teacher. We were taught to make accommodations for boys that allow for more physical movement, but there isn’t a lot else to change. We are not trained to make kids memorize, because they don’t actually learn that way.

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Youre a certified stupid is what you are if you think disagreeableness = people dont like you and youre being a dick.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Disagreeable LITERALLY means “unfriendly and bad-tempered”. As a person with a real job at a very large company, I can tell you it’s not something anyone likes, and it ABSOLUTELY does make people dislike you.

Again, I think you are confusing “disagreeable” with “assertive”.

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Disagreeable is literally the opposite of agreeable. And agreeable is to form yourself around others. To accomodate for the needs of others. And disagreeable is literally the opposite of that.

What you seem to think disagreeable is, that the person is a dick to everyone and is selfish. It doesnt mean that.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Please look up the definition of “disagreeable”.

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not to one's liking; unpleasant or offensive.

Having a quarrelsome, bad-tempered manner.

Not agreeable, conformable, or congruous; contrary; unsuitable.

Exciting repugnance; offensive to the feelings or senses; displeasing; unpleasant.

Not agreeable, conformable, or congruous; contrary; unsuitable.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You don’t see how being this way makes you disliked???

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You dont seem to understand that being disagreeable is not an always on behavior. And you dont seem to understand that there are benefits to disagreeableness. Aswell As there are benefits to agreeableness.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Read your definitions again. How is there benefit there? You act like that people dislike you and you don’t get what you want. Simple.

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you are disagreeable, you are less likely to accept smaller wages, for example.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you think being disagreeable helps you get raises? Because hell no, it does not.

Are you disagreeable at your workplace?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You think being disagreeable is something that you are all the time, dont you? Im sorry for you.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why would you be sorry for me? Because I don’t like disagreeable people?

Again, are you disagreeable at work? How’s that working out for you?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I feel sorry for you, because you think people are always X.

I not always disagreeable. I am disagreeable when I need to be. See, for example. You ask for a raise, your wage is X. You go to your boss, say "hey boss, I no longer wish to do Y job for X money. I want X+1". Or an inteview at a New place "we offer you X for Y job". Then you say "no, I will take X+1".

This is being disagreeable in a positive sense. And there are many more examples where disagreeableness can be positive.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No that’s being assertive. You can’t make up the definitions of words. Please look up the definition of “assertive”.

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're being disagreeable with me right now. Do you at least understand that?

[–]Fearless-File-36252 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are wasting your time. This femtroll is not worth arguing, almost every argument leads to her calling names.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL not really. I’m being argumentative which is not the same thing.

You’re being obstinate and making up definitions of words.

Are you really unemployed? Does mum pay your bills?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There we are. We arrived. Well done.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Bang on wasn’t I? You’ve repeatedly refused to answer whether being “disagreeable” serves you at work. What other conclusion is there?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No. Couldnt have been farther from the truth xD we arrived at you. We finally see your true colours.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Still no details on that job eh?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What do you want from my job?

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Are you disagreeable because it has so many benefits in the workplace? How has it worked out for you? Any examples? What do you do?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

As I said, im not Always disagreeable. Im disagreeable when I need to be. It helped me resolve issues that I had. Im actually fairly agreeable, so I had to learn to be not that in order to get what I want.

Its not only in the workplace, tho. It did help me bargain for my wages better. It helped me to not accept people talk down to me and belittle me.

Im a tool-maker/maintainancer. Idk how that is revelant, tho.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What tools do you make?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why is that relevant?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Actually, it is my agreeableness that is hurting me more in my life. :) Its so fantastic to see you build up this character of me, and presumably of others based on nothing. If you are a teacher, im sorry for you students.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’m not a teacher anymore. Now I write RFP’s for a big security services company.

What do you do for a living?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Glad to hear that. No children needs to learn from you.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

On the contrary. I have three kids.

What do you do again? Who pays for your food?

[–]offtable1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why do you assume im living off of someone?

[–]rosewiththornzzz -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know what generation you grew up in. These days schools don’t care about anyone’s education. My education suffered greatly because of the faults of teachers thinking that education should be a one size fits all when it’s not. I honestly do think you’re looking from all the wrong angles. Everyone’s education is suffering. Not just boys. Not just girls. Boys are allowed to act up. Girls really don’t focus as much as boys would like to believe. Bully’s are allowed to push the weaker kids around. Kids like to call the lonely girl sitting in the corner a slut. Confident boys are being accused of just being misogynistic jocks. Girls can be raped on school property and the school will do it’s best to sweep the story under the rug. And everyone’s education suffers because of the expectations teachers hold them to. You wanna know the secret of how most girls do graduate tho? They cheat. They all cheat. They’re clever about it to. That’s the only reason most girls pass. Why do they cheat? Because they too have been held to this robotic like standard that they’ll more than likely obey if teachers say to do your homework and study for the upcoming test. Education is not a one size fits all. And it does not work anymore for one gender than it does the other.

[–]offtable 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Thats why girls get better grades all around school, and finish highschool and college at higher rates with better grades? Hmm. Okay.

Im not saying schools are made for women to prosper. Schools are shit alltogether, mostly. But the Way the systems are built it does seem schools favor girls over boys.

Boys arent allowed to act up. Idk where you got that nonsense.

[–]rosewiththornzzz 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yup. Most of them will scratch the answers from their study review into the bottom of their water bottle

[–]offtable 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, if youre not willing to understand what the other is sayingy idk why youre engaging

[–]rosewiththornzzz 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m not saying I’m not willing to understand. What I’m saying is I see the argument on the feminist sub all the time that girls education is suffering while mentioning nothing about boys education. I simply like to make the argument in both that both genders education is suffering

[–]offtable2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Education is suffering As a whole. Im not talking about that. I know education is shit and only gets shitter. Im talking about the Way the System is created in a Way that It favors girls and the Way their learn and behave over boys.

[–]RingosTurdFace 37 points38 points39 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. So much so in fact that even the normally woke/feminist BBC covered it:

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672.amp

[–]Puzzleheaded-Heat174 31 points32 points33 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In one word : yes

[–]pacsatonifil 20 points21 points22 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes and we all know about it and nothing has changed. I used to think single sex schools were dumb, but now I think we need them more than ever.

[–]Lord_of_Entropy 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish I could upvote this more than once.

[–]Inevitable_Cup_70 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

[–]Styles_Jh 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah

[–]buficek7_CZ 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From my own experience I can say: yes, they do

[–]YoungQuahogMoney 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course they do. My story:

https://www.reddit.com/r/pettyrevenge/comments/t4dta2/false\_accuser/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3

[–]Marty-the-monkey 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago* (76 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and the problem is that it's a very inherent and systematic discrimination, which has come about over decades (maybe even centuries) of developments within the educational institutions.

Condensed and simplified for expediency:

Education, pedagogy and didactic have gotten a reputation for being primarily fields for women. Taking care of children and educating youth is something women do, and men who want a career doing that are, in extreme situation, seen as lesser or sometimes creepy. The prestige within these fields are, in a lot of circles, non existing.

This has created a perpetuating issue of primarily women being in charge of education (from kindergarten till grad school), which means women (naturally due to over representation) get to organize and decide which values are important to imbue the institution with.

So gradually, the ideal student have basically become the sweet and attentive little girl, who does her things, keeps organized and stays within the prescribed expectations and never rocks the boat.

All the ideals we used to have for women, the teachers have carried over from generation to generation. The good and proper girl from finishing school slowly became the ideal student at large. The values we normally attribute to boys (and tomgirls) were cast aside and devalued in an educational setting. And since it's these people who also excel within the institution, they perpetuates these values when they are put in charge (it gave them success, so it should work for everyone else too).

Non of this are deliberately or intentionally done to discriminate (despite it being the result), making it so much harder to talk about, because it falls within the same systematic problem as racism. It's systems upon systems and traditions of 'how we have always done' resulting in the current state.

Subsequently, it also means that the solution to this is to push and incentives men to be more active in the educational fields, which are the moment (as mentioned) considered so low on the prestige totem pole to make most men not want to.

[–]NoLettuce7713 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I agree with a lot of this, except that it's not all about prestige.

As a former teacher, I didn't leave the job because of lack of prestige or pay (I earn less now).

The job was just messed up. It had all the pretentions of a modern profession and none of the benefits. No work boundaries. Multi-tasking to an extreme degree. The expectation of being a counsellor, disciplinarian, subject matter expert, trainer and assessor, and then spending hours standing around in the hot sun supervising children and putting up with squalid office conditions.

In my country, a huge proportion of teachers (male and female) leave the job in the first 3 or 4 years. Just raising the pay is not going to fix it.

Finally, there used to be more male teachers (it's been in freefall for the last few decades), so the argument that it's because it was always seen as a female role doesn't hold.

But it's true that pedagogies, curriculum and even the flow of the school day have been changed over the years to favour (in general) the way girls learn.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

It wasn't always seen as a female vocation, since the church used to teach people.

I do believe I pointed out it was the current iteration that had been more female centric and that's the one I was referring to.

In terms of prestige; I'm using it as a somewhat condensed shorthand which consists of, amoung other things, payment. Jobs with low prestige tend to be not only paid less, but also seen as undeserving og higher pay (justified or not). That teachers in some countries should be paid more is an important aspect, but in itself as a complete separate aspect it's not as influential as prestige as a whole. You mention yourself that it effects women and men both in your country.

I do believe I also mention that it isn't just about payment and more about insensitivising men to want to go into the field. That can be done in many different ways, not exclusively monetary.

[–]NoLettuce7713 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Despite the massive gender imbalance, there certainly doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in incentivising men to go into education, especially compared to, eg. the amount of focus on incentivising women to go into STEM fields.

I pointed out that I don't think the issue is primarily about pay. I think the job itself needs to undergo radical, root-and-branch change before it can even be treated like any other professional field.

I mentioned earlier that teachers are expected to wear way too many different hats. But here's what really shocked me when I was doing my education course: Instead of criticising this state of affairs and pointing out how unreasonable a work environment it creates, we were treated to messages about how wonderful teachers are because they manage to do all these things. It was the epitomy of the traditionally female stereotype of the martyr. "I cook and I clean and I look after the kids and I do it all without complaining because all I need is to see the looks on their happy little faces."

Now, I know this isn't the case in other work fields where women also dominate statistically, such as nursing or counselling.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Despite the massive gender imbalance, there certainly doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in incentivising men to go into education, especially compared to, eg. the amount of focus on incentivising women to go into STEM fields.

Absolutely agree, and that was the point I was trying to convey in my initial comment. I was also where my usage of prestige were intented to come into play. The STEM fields are considered the most precious fields to be in (because math is hard, right) whereas education still seem to live under the derogatory idiom: 'Those who can't do, teach'. IE. No self respecting man should want to teach, since it shows he is unable to practice whatever he has resolved to teach instead.

It was the epitomy of the traditionally female stereotype of the martyr. "I cook and I clean and I look after the kids and I do it all without complaining because all I need is to see the looks on their happy little faces."

I have seen people both here, on other sites, op-eds and even straight up politicians openly state that teachers shouldn't be paid more, because it's a job to be considered a 'calling', implying that teachers should just reside in the fact they then need to live like impoverished monks.

Now, I know this isn't the case in other work fields where women also dominate statistically, such as nursing or counselling.

Here in Denmark the field of nursing is filled with your very well put formulation above as well.

[–]NoLettuce7713 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I have seen people both here, on other sites, op-eds and even straight up politicians openly state that teachers shouldn't be paid more, because it's a job to be considered a 'calling', implying that teachers should just reside in the fact they then need to live like impoverished monks.

I agree about the problem of seeing it as a 'calling', but again I want to state that I don't think pay is the main issue, and I don't think it's going to be solved by paying more.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And I agree to an extend. Having also lived in the US, I can tell you their pay is borderline criminal. It's not a universal issue, but some countries severely underpay their teachers on top of underappriciating them.

seriously, it is not uncommon in US public schools that teachers have to provide their own material e.g. pencils, paper, erasers and so on. Not just for themselves, but the students as well. Paid out of own pocket. That is just appalling

The argument of a monetary incentive could generate an initial bump in potential candidates to make the job more appealing. It's not a permanent solution by any stretch, but in showing appreciation through financial backing might make some consider a career in the field, starting a process of making it less gender-one sided.

As it is now, the financing of the education sphere at large (in some countries) illustrates an honestly baffling disregard of a sector which has been proven by OECD as one of the most important for economic growth for a nation.

While I agree that a much more systemic reform of the system is required, it is moot if male candidates can't be drawn into the field. It then become a matter of how to create an environment where education, pedagogy and didactic are seen as equally prestigious endeavors to pursue. This can initially be achieved with a monetary incentive even if that's a short term solution.

Though to underline my point: I fully agree with you that it is in no way the only (or even most important) step in solving the discrepancy. It's just a tangible place to start.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes it is. Especially in nursing. Still opposed to teacher's unions?

[–]NoLettuce7713 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why would I be opposed to teacher's unions?

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Exactly what has changed?

[–]NoLettuce7713 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There's been a number of articles published on this over the last 10 years, but I haven't got any on hand right now.

In terms of pedagogy and assessment, an example would be the rise of long-form assignments in place of traditional tests and examinations. These are, of course, statistical generalisations, but it's been argued that girls tended to do better at the former and boys better at the latter.

In terms of the flow of the school day, it is argued that the time and freedom given to students to engage in physical play during the day has been cut back over time, and that this disproportionately affects the energy levels and concentration of boys.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do you suppose when girls where not allowed in school, the teachers allowed a lot of outdoor play time and short assignments? LOL

Teaching to the test requires rote memorization, which another guy on this thread already said somehow benefits girls. But you want more tests?

Adding physical movement into class is something we already do to accommodate lots of kids. But it’s not something that works well with 16-18 year olds. They feel ridiculous.

[–]NoLettuce7713 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you suppose when girls where not allowed in school, the teachers allowed a lot of outdoor play time and short assignments? LOL

re: outdoor play time, I wasn't even thinking that far back. That change is more recent, and correlates with the increasing decline in male engagement and performance in schools.

As for assignments vs test-based assessment, it's my understanding that the shift in favour of the former has been occurring since at least the 60s.

Teaching to the test requires rote memorization

Not necessarily. Consider Mathematics tests (incidentally an area where the decline in boys' performance is less pronounced) where skills, not rote memorisation, are often being assessed.

Adding physical movement into class is something we already do to accommodate lots of kids.

This also isn't what I was referring to, since this is a controlled, indoor environment. As useful as this practice might be, it is not the same as free play outdoors.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

This has created a perpetuating issue of primarily women being in charge of education (from kindergarten till grad school)

This is patently untrue. At the university level, most professors are men.

The values we normally attribute to boys (and tomgirls) were cast aside and devalued in an educational setting.

What values are these exactly? What exactly needs to change?

[–]Marty-the-monkey 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

This has created a perpetuating issue of primarily women being in charge of education (from kindergarten till grad school)

This is patently untrue. At the university level, most professors are men.

Which is why I wrote grad school, as professors is a tenure position, whom don't necessarily have to deal with the educational side, more likely focusing on research (varying from university to university)

The values we normally attribute to boys (and tomgirls) were cast aside and devalued in an educational setting.

What values are these exactly? What exactly needs to change?

This is two separate questions, the latter of which I already addressed in the previous comment.

The former as to which values we normally attribute to boys are, within the context of my comment, being more rambunctious and in need of more active learning over the current valuing of sitting still and paying strict attention. Note however that I also included the mention of the 'tomgirl', as an acknowledgement of the values or perspectives not being exclusive to male/boy behavior.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Are you saying professors don’t teach? Also you were very clear “kindergarten TILL grad school”. At BOTH the undergraduate and graduate levels, professors are mostly men. Have you ever been to university? Did you don’t know professors teach both undergrad and grad students???

Aside from more active breaks I’m not seeing what other changes could or should be made.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Yes I have indeed been to both undergrad and grad school, and there might be a difference in countries, but in Scandinavia the universities have a very large amount of women in the faculties.

Which again leave me with my second statement of there might be a national differences, but they don't have to teach both. Especially when tenured. There are minimum requirements, but they can be very low dependent on a professors research.

You seem to fail my initial point of pointing out the central systemic issue inherent in education in an attempt of wanting a quick fix, which seems to indicate you aren't really getting the argument or comment.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

You’ve failed to articulate the “systemic” issue.

Please provide data that shows women make up more than half of the professors in universities in your country.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

All of our universities have faculty lists, and Denmark is a fairly small country, so they are all avaliable there.

I did articulate the systemic issues in my first comment, so you need to be far more specific if you want any more details as to which systemic issues you want, because (as mentioned in the first comment, since you seem to have not caught it) I condensed about a centuries worth of educational history and simplified it for expediency, meaning individual countries aren't taken into account.

So it's not that I don't want to answer, it's just dependent on which system you are interested in hearing about.

As already eluded to my own system is the one in Scandinavia, more specific Denmark, but I've worked on projects with the US educational system and have dived a bit into British and IGCSE.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Sigh.

In total, only 1/3 of the academic staff at Denmark universities are women. Why do you think you can get away with just making stuff up? Do you live in reality even?

If you can’t articulate your point, you lose.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Where did you get that number?

Also I have articulated my point several times, but when you want details I need specifics to answer them.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

You’re so stupid. It’s on the first page of a Google search.

https://uniavisen.dk/en/the-teachers-are-men-the-students-are-women/

You have articulated nothing but lies about women professors and vague, silly claims about “education”.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Interesting. Problem is when thats one university, where when you look at another one the numbers get a bit different.

I know it's in Danish, but it's the source from the university themselves

So there are no lies about women, and which silly claims have I made you seem so angry about?

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why don’t you produce the numbers if they are in Danish? Is that difficult? My source refers to ALL Danish universities. If you have a source that shows men are a minority of academic staff at Danish universities, provide it and quote the actual proof.

I’m angry because you tried to claim something that isn’t true.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Your reference is litteraly the university of Copenhagens newsletter.

I just send you the numbers from Århus. They even have graphs and subdivided them into faculties.

And if a bit hyperbole of area makes you this angry, then you seem rather disingenuous in your critique.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Where are the numbers? Show them.

And what’s this?

https://cerc.edu.hku.hk/seminar/female-professors-in-denmark-and-new-zealand-why-the-inequality/

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Also it wasn’t hyperbole, it was the LITERAL OPPOSITE OF THE TRUTH.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No it wasn't.

Overall closer to 50/50 split as you can see in Århus, but more specifically a vast majority within the academics of education and pedagogy itself, which was the point (though looking back, not explicitly stated enough).

[–]GiantDairy0 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why should I just trust what you’re saying when in 2019 this was absolutely not the case? Show your work. Quote the source and page number.

You said VERY CLEARLY that women dominate teaching from “kindergarten to grad school”. That’s not true. You have yet to prove it’s not true in Denmark, where you claim that women are most professors.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I frankly don't care if you trust what I say.

I gave you a link to a site which states the litteral numbers of faculty staff at one of the Denmark biggest universities showing that in a lot of areas women are the majority.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It’s in Danish. You won’t quote it because you lied.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I know it's in Danish, but the numbers are still the same, and the graphs are rather self explanatory.

Yellow are for women, Grey is for men.

It's pretty much majority women, except for the hard-core science ones (though not pathology, which is kind of interesting).

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Where are the numbers? Quote them. Show your work.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

it's all in the link

Which specific numbers are you interested in? It's divided into institutes of the university, so just mention a specific and I'll translate it, but you can just as easily go check them out yourself. The yellow side are women, Grey are men.

As I already mentioned, women are far majority within education and pedagogy witch is the first graph (the one with DPU written over it).

Almost 80% graduateproduction and about 65% PhDs.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The STAFF NUMBERS, especially the PROFESSORS.

Even a cursory English reader look shows women are a SERIOUS MINORITY.

You KNOW that, which is why you refuse to copy and paste or even quote from the document.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It is the staff numbers.

And the numbers and colors clearly show that women in some institutes are majority and in others represent the half, which is fine.

I'm still not sure why you are getting this pedantic over this particular detail, when it's the least important aspect of my initial comment.

You can be obtuse all you want to friend, but matter of fact is that this hill you've decided to die on is superfluous within the context of the point I was initially making.

[–]Fearless-File-36252 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are wasting your time, every argument with this femtroll will lead to her calling names. Also she is pretty stupid, so you can't make her understand anything.

[–]Marty-the-monkey2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Be that as it may, I was still trying to illustrate that it's a systemic issue and not something we can assign blame to.

Though it is an interesting observation to see from a lot of people that pointing out an issue usually result in a knee jerk reaction in thinking blame must be places on someone, when it's seldom a singular force one can ever point to.

[–]MRA_TitleIX 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

This is patently untrue. At the university level, most professors are men.

As it pertains to what is being talked about, the percentage of men in instructional roles in post-secondary education in the US is 52% men. For grade school, it is about 11% male teachers. Overall levels of education, men represent 24% of instructional staff. Source NCES (USA govt) data.

I assume you mean instructional faculty since that is what the other person is talking about. Correct me if I am wrong and you weren't using "professor" in the colloquial sense. If you really want to narrow it down to the one area of instructional staff where men are a significant majority, professor is it.

[+]GiantDairy 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

Sorry you’ll have to show the actual study or link. Also, yes I am talking about professors, not part time “instructors” who are paid $20 an hour.

Also we were specifically talking about Denmark.

[–]MRA_TitleIX 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (36 children) | Copy Link

Sure thing. This is for the USA data I used.

post-secondary ed: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_315.20.asp

grade-school and all-levels: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/clr#1

The comment you were replying to didn't mention Denmark, nor did your reply. It looks like what you replied to was edited, so maybe it mentioned Denmark before I got here? Either way, these are USA stats which I thought was partially relevant to the discussion that didn't specify a region.

For the post-secondary education faculty salaries relevant to the stats provided, averages are below. This is for the 9-month academic period they get paid for. It is hardly $20/hr. The lowest average translates to ~$41/hr assuming a 40 hour week over those 9 months of pay (~1560 hours worked).

  1. Professor - $127k
  2. Associate Professor- $89k
  3. Assistant Professor - $77k
  4. Instructor - $69k
  5. Lecturer - $64k

[+]GiantDairy 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally there was like a 20 post exchange where he kept posting a link to a study in Danish.

There are no full time lecturers or instructors. It’s just not reality. You make almost no money teaching at that level especially when you consider you have a PHd. Again, please show me where in the world there is gender parity at the full time professor level at universities.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

Dude I was there. He was talking about Scandinavia, then he said he was from Denmark.

Again, what is the gender parity in full time Professor roles? Not part time instructor.

[–]MRA_TitleIX 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

Again, what is the gender parity in full time Professor roles? Not part time instructor.

It's 55% male for full time tenure track positions (all levels of "professor"). Data is in the link I provided previously. I find it a tad irrelevant to what the comment chain above is, but I have no problem providing what you want. The other user was talking about gender gaps in instructional staff, tenure track is a very very small subset of that. Professor being the highest level of tenure track positions in the dataset. At that point most of them primarily do research and graduate work rather than education in classes. At least in the US.

Dude I was there. He was talking about Scandinavia, then he said he was from Denmark.

I don't doubt you. Please don't interpret what I say as hostile. I was explaining a possible cause of confusion you had to me posting USA data. I simply didn't know that the region was edited out two days ago.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

Literally 62000 women vs 123000 men. Ridiculous.

Notice that the lower level positions that pay shit and don’t allow you to decide anything are all at parity or have more women than men.

Professors control the universities. They design curriculum, they write the syllabus. They get paid the most. But somehow, women control all education from kindergarten to grad school? We know that the power positions at schools are mostly occupied by men. They are the administrators, the deans, the principals. This is the reality.

[–]MRA_TitleIX 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

The overall gender gap in education in the US is 24% men. Idk why you are only using a small subset of the late-stage career in education to disprove a point regarding the gender gap in education? That's like 5% of educators in your subset. It isn't remotely descriptive of the topic.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

Women do not control the education system and are not rigging it against men and boys.

Men have the vast majority of the money and power in every sector and education is no different. Who gets the most decision making power and money in education? Men.

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Women do not control the education system

That isn't true either. The gender gap in total staff in college has women at 55% representation. That includes all the people making the hiring and promotion decisions. Literally the only place in faculty you will find a gender gap favoring men is in end stage professorship.

Men have the vast majority of the money and power in every sector and education is no different. Who gets the most decision making power and money in education? Men.

Idk what else to say when I showed you stats proving otherwise. The significant majority of staff at all levels are women. There is only a small subset in instructional staff that you are attempting to use for this claim. Perhaps you are sticking to a personal bias of the state of education independent of the facts?

Even if that is the case, the outcomes have favored women by a large margin. Women have been the majority of degrees in the US for decades. I think it was about 2015 when women started getting more degrees at all levels of education. More likely to get financial aid, more likely to graduate on time, more likely to graduate at all etc. The gap in the numbers is worse than when the US passed civil rights laws to help women in higher education, but with the genders reversed.

[women] are not rigging it against men and boys.

Never said that. Neither did the person who started this comment chain. Do schools discriminate against men? Absolutely. Source: I have personally caused a litany of federal investigations into exactly this issue. In fact, one got assigned a case number today!

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL.

I’m sure there’s even more parity when you include the admin and janitorial staff! Are you kidding me??

Power positions are power positions. Money is money.

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’m sure there’s even more parity when you include the admin and janitorial staff! Are you kidding me??

Just administration. You know. The people who do the hiring and admissions.

Case still stands that only 24% of educators in the US are men. Do educators hold the power or not? If they don't why do you talk about the gap in professorship which accounts for 5% of educators? If they do, why do you ignore that only 24% of educators are men? Do you think professors dictate gradeschool classes?

Power positions are power positions. Money is money.

Of course. But even if we assume that it is men in those positions, the evidence still shows it overwhelmingly favors women in educational success. The link between your opinion of who has power and the actual outcomes is broken. It doesn't really matter all that much if it was men who are 100% of educational staff if the outcomes still show significant preference bias for women. At the core the issue is bias in outcomes and preference of educational obtainment.

Not only is your interpretation of who holds power in education deeply flawed, but it fails to draw a useful connection to the significant pro women bias in educational success. If it were true that men hold power in education, it still wouldn't be possible to draw the conclusion they will favor men in the student population when all the evidence says otherwise.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

OH MY GOD. There is an Admissions panel that enacts admissions standards they themselves don’t set that decides. Admin people - as in office staff - do not make any of these decisions.

No teachers do not control education. Otherwise teachers would be paid more and work fewer than 12 hours a day. The administration and principals control it.

It’s only over the last 40 years that girls have been catching up and exceeding boys in school, and school was not dramatically different 45 years ago.

What exactly changed? In your mind?

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Going into this, I want to make sure it's clear that I don't blame any gender for any of these issues. In my opinion it is mainly an institutional issue. What I state below is what I think the dominant issue is, but it certainly isn't the only issue. I also don't support any gendered programs in education (excluding stuff like sports and choir). My response is long, but well informed since this is my area of activism. I hope you read this in good faith and don't assume I am anti-women simply because I am an MRA.

What exactly changed? In your mind?

Speaking for the US, a lot of it has to do with fallout from passing Title IX. It's a good civil rights law and I support it. The issue is the uneven application through selective enforcement.

What happened after it passed is that schools were taken to task for ending discrimination against women, which needed to happen badly.

OCR is the govt agency that handles Title IX compliance enforcement for schools. OCR is proactive about discrimination against women, but not men. When people file violations where men are the excluded class, OCR issues illegal dismissals and if they feel inclined to find a violation, the penalty is usually no admission of guilt and requiring the program to be changed.

The issue with OCR's actions is that it isn't a deterrent to discrimination against men. Schools can freely discriminate against men and when caught they can change the program without admitting guilt.

There are no rules for the competency of Title IX compliance staff at a school. They only have to take training on the sexual harassment side of Title IX ("harassment" is a legal term defined to include things like rape under Title IX). There is no required anti-discrimination training.

When schools went through their transition plans after Title IX was passed, it was legal to have female-preferred or female-only programs to speed up the transition. These programs are not supposed to be permanent. US law does not allow discrimination to be a permanent fixture of society, it only considers it a useful tool for correcting some imbalances that have resulted from discrimination. Even then, there are a lot of hoops to jump through to allow such a thing to happen.

Problems came about when Title IX staff with no training on the topic started implementing any pro-women discrimination thinking it was allowed. There are a lot of programs that flagrantly violate civil rights law in US education but OCR typically sits on its hands if the impacted party is male. The only real alternative is to take it to court which is expensive.

Schools have a heap of legacy programs that were once legal under transition plans, but are no longer legal. Discriminatory programs are legally required to have continual review for relevance, but schools don't do this. I think this is mainly a result of lack of training and lack of OCR enforcement.

The previously-compliant discriminatory programs violate the "evenhanded" requirement for them existing in the present. The school can not legally attempt to increase diversity with such programs if they only choose to do it when it helps women. Having programs to help women in stem is likely to be illegal if the college does not have diversity programs that help men's representation in programs such as nursing, social work, or education. This argument is substantially supported if the college is >50% women. In short, implementing diversity objective programs can not be done if the school only does it when it favors one gender and ignores it for other genders that are similarly situated.

Schools enacted programs to help women, but failed to stay with the times once the landscape changed. A college that only has diversity programs that help women while the students are more than 50% women is almost certainly in violation.

To be compliant the schools must either remove their discriminatory programs or enact ones that promote men in programs where they are underrepresented.

Culturally, OCR has supported this anti-male bias by completely ignoring the issue. The gender gap in college is worse than when Title IX was passed, but with the genders flipped. Yet OCR remains silent. In their report on covid's impact to students they discuss how it impacts women and minorities. They neglect the fact that covid had a dramatic disproportionate impact on men's representation. Dispite being ~42% of students in college, men were ~78% of total enrollment lost due to covid. The % drop in men enrolling in college every year is larger than women, and the % drop has been getting larger in recent years. This means the gender gap is accelerating.

Until OCR starts talking about this or takes action against illegal programs to a degree that serves as a deterrent nothing will change. I think men are turned off to college in part due to these discriminatory programs. Such programs always create an invidious environment, and SCOTUS has acknowledged this (I think it was Justice Ginsburg herself who said this) . Long term, they will always be toxic and corrosive to equality. They are only reasonable in the short term under very rigid circumstances.

My activism is filing complaints with OCR to force action. Action is only taken if the programs are violations of civil rights law. I'm not anti-women nor anti-equality. I simply challenge the legality of anti-male discrimination in schools. I would file against anti-female discrimination if I found compelling cases (feel free to dm me one if you got it). Most of those cases are in sports and I simply dont have the fact finding capability since most of the evidence isn't public info. Forcing equal application of civil rights law should not be seen as a threat to anyone's interpretation of equality.

[–]GiantDairy0 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL. Good luck with that!

Also, what the fuck is Title X?

You aren’t being specific enough.

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Title IX is a federal civil rights law, the entire text is:

No person in the United States shall, based on sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

It is links sex-discrimination in education to a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th ammendment of the US Constitution.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah so how are men being denied the benefits of university? Because they choose to drop out? What?

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Links below to some cases, most of these I have filed myself. I don't post all the cases I file though, and of the ones I have posted these are only a couple. I think I have ~20 active cases. Schools still have lots of (illegal) women-only scholarships, awards, grants, classes, programs, camps, mentoring groups etc. Not enrolling / dropping out is a side effect of the invidious environment that discrimination creates. Discrimination contributes to it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/tqyy7w/complaint_filed_against_texas_womans_university/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/tqcggx/ocr_01212215_woman_discriminated_against_by/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/tnc7mh/title_ix_complaint_against_barnard_college_and/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/t4d025/ocr_10212130_university_of_washingtonseattle/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/t3jhy3/ocr_03222067_and_03222066_investigations_opened/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/t3jbi9/ocr_11222018_and_08221033_investigations_opened/

https://www.reddit.com/r/MRA_TitleIX/comments/qzrsj1/verizon_game_forward_scholarship_complaint_filed/

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’m not going to read through cases. That’s super dumb. I have a job and three kids.

If you can’t quickly and easily summarize your point, you don’t have one.

[–]MRA_TitleIX2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I added a summary to the comment and the links support it with specific examples. Most of the linked posts have a summary as well.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That’s absurd. So you guys ALWAYS respond to my stating the fact that as a gender, women have much much less money and power than men -at all income levels, in every industry - with “women choose to be paid less and have less power positions/roles”. Why the different tune when it comes to men dropping out of school?

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I am pointing to very explicit and pervasive instances of illegal anti-male discrimination stated explicitly in institutional policy. Surely it contributes to the issue of male enrollment. Even if it didn't it's still illegal discrimination.

You have made false statements about representation in educators. When proven wrong you attempted to use a small subset (5%) to justify the claim. When shown to be a bad argument, you then argued they don't have any power anyway. You ask how schools discriminate against men, and when provided examples, you closed your eyes. Now you are attempting to use whataboutism to tackle my claim that discrimination in education impacts enrollment and success data. Let's take a look at it anyway.

It isn't a hard thing to claim that real, explicit, and tangible discrimination codified into policy impacts people. I think we can both agree on that. Claiming that aggregate stats on average pay by gender without controls is evidence of discrimination is a reversal of the logic I am using, and is critical to the flaws in the pay gap argument. I claim that discrimination proven to exist impacts aggregate stats. Aggregate stats do not de-facto prove discrimination. These are not remotely comparable arguments, it is a flawed analogy.

Besides, the argument on the pay-gap falls flat when variables are controlled. Within a peer group, women on average make 8% more than men. In NYC and LA that gap is 17% and 12%. The use of the pay gap to show discrimination falls flat when life-choice variables overwhelmingly explain the data, and even indicate a gap that favors women substantially. There are certainly instances of pay discrimination against all genders, but the data doesn't show aggregate negative impact to women. You would think that if a link existed it would be shouted from the rooftops in media instead of misinterpreting the meaning of average annual pay with no controls. Once controls are applied for peer groups as any good data science does, the issue flips and shows women are paid more. Can you explain why women are paid 8-17% more per hour and annually within a peer group? I can't, and I also don't flippantly claim it must be a result of discrimination. If we are using the pay gap to allege discrimination-at-large, it doesn't exactly fit the narrative that the primary impacted class is women. I only ever see this argument in context of uncontrolled data, once data science is applied people get real quiet on the issue.

In 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that for the first time, women made up the majority of the workforce in highly paid managerial positions. So even the claim that women are being paid well or serving in decision-making positions is a fiction. It can only be demonstrated by looking at very small subsets that can no longer be extrapolated to be represented of the population of each gender. Stats repeatedly show the median woman being better off than the median man. It is only in the tail of the bell curve that we still find gaps that favor men, but it no longer represents men or women's experience as a cohort.

Could the loss of men in education be a result of such variables? Who knows. There are certainly going to be some non-discrimination factors that exist. Why don't you go publish some academic studies on it so we can learn more? No significant effort is being made to look at the topic, maybe you can contribute. Does it invalidate the pervasive issue of explicit institutional discrimination against men in school? No.

Either you are against institutional discrimination and agree schools need reform of their illegal anti-male discrimination, or you are not for equality.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

False fucking statements. Oh my god. We were talking about Denmark. Ultimately, what I said was true: men make the most money and occupy the most leadership and power roles compared to women in education.

You fail to accept that women as a gender own less wealth and earn less on average than men. “Within a peer group” please. In real terms, the average man has more power and money than women. You attribute this to poor choices, we say the wealth and power gap shouldn’t be due to the biological realities of human reproduction.

Your cases will never see the light of day because you fail to acknowledge that this dramatic wealth and power gap between the genders is the context in which these “anti-male” policies/programs exist. The interventions are meant to close the gaps.

You would also have to prove that these initiatives/programs/policies actually led to you being discriminated against or suffering harm. You would personally have to show that you were denied something because of your gender.

Young women are briefly, on average, paid more than young men. As soon as they hit childbearing years they pay the motherhood penalty. But look at which gender has the most assets and cash overall? Which gender occupies the most leadership and power roles? Which gender gets to be President or Prime Minister? Men. Men all the way.

Again, you can tell me reproduction is a choice, but what does this ultimately mean? That women cannot participate if they want to be paid equally or have access to power? That only those committed to poverty and powerlessness should have kids? Absurd!

In Canada we just got $10 a day daycare. It’s too late for me as my kids are teens but man I’d be in a different position if I’d had that 14 years ago. I have three and two are twins, daycare was $500 a month more than I made. This will go a long way toward closing the income and power gap, I predict.

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

False fucking statements. Oh my god. We were talking about Denmark. Ultimately, what I said was true: men make the most money and occupy the most leadership and power roles compared to women in education.

The dominant desvriptive emographic of people in the top 0.01% is power. Not their gender. Not really sure how your argument holds for education considering total educators and total staff all show a massive over represention of women. The outcomes show a massive bias toward women. Pointing to a small subset as invalidating it is intellectually dishonest.

You attribute this to poor choices

Never said that. I said life choices. Not poor choices.

we say the wealth and power gap shouldn’t be due to the biological realities of human reproduction.

Okay. Just do it without discriminating. Equal pay for equal work and most qualified candidates get hired. That is equality. Discrimination can't be a fixture of an egalitarian society.

Your cases will never see the light of day because you fail to acknowledge that this dramatic wealth and power gap between the genders is the context in which these “anti-male” policies/programs exist. The interventions are meant to close the gaps.

My cases have already produced changes in some universities. There are also federal investigations going on surrounding my cases. Including a class action lawsuit. Seems you are just trying to be insulting now. Very poor form. Also, what gap? Educational attainment, and representation all show a gap where women are ahead at all levels in the US.

You would also have to prove that these initiatives/programs/policies actually led to you being discriminated against or suffering harm. You would personally have to show that you were denied something because of your gender.

You don't seem familiar with how Title IX works which is fine. In one of my cases I do show that. For most cases it is the federal govt vs the school. I serve a fact finder / alerting role.

Young women are briefly, on average, paid more than young men. As soon as they hit childbearing years they pay the motherhood penalty. But look at which gender has the most assets and cash overall? Which gender occupies the most leadership and power roles? Which gender gets to be President or Prime Minister? Men. Men all the way.

Managers and HR aren't power roles? Why do you continue to limit yourself to extremely narrow parts of the population that aren't descriptive of the median nor average experience of each gender? Properly controlled and descriptive data doesn't support your opinion that this is relevant. Neither do the outcomes for genders.

Again, you can tell me reproduction is a choice, but what does this ultimately mean? That women cannot participate if they want to be paid equally or have access to power? That only those committed to poverty and powerlessness should have kids? Absurd!

Reproduction is typically a choice. Staying home with kids as well. People choosing to do things isn't discrimination. Equal pay for equal work.

In Canada we just got $10 a day daycare. It’s too late for me as my kids are teens but man I’d be in a different position if I’d had that 14 years ago. I have three and two are twins, daycare was $500 a month more than I made. This will go a long way toward closing the income and power gap, I predict.

Yea I agree. Non discriminatory programs such as affordable or subsidized daycare that is independent of gender is something I support and would do a lot of good for women.

I also support back to work programs for people who took substantial time off for whatever reason. Childcare, elder care, sickness etc. I don't think it should be based on gender.

Maybe you have the false impression I am against these things, but I'm not. I'm against limiting opportunity by gender as a matter of institutional policy.

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are literally trying to pick out tiny groups like “HR” (what does that mean? There are hr coordinators and hr directors and executives) and “manager” (again what does this mean? Do you have data that shows that OVERALL women occupy more power and leadership roles???) to prove somehow that women have more power and money than men. Men have more power and money than women. This is fact.

Choosing to do poorly and leave university is a choice as well. Yet you think it should be accommodated.

The fact is that women are the ones who take breaks for care most often and suffer financially for the rest of their lives. Are only women who want to be poor and powerless to have children?

Reproduction is not a real “choice” most people can opt out of. It’s not fair to pretend that children aren’t necessary and that they don’t require a certain level of care. Humanity does not survive without reproduction, and the will to reproduce is deeply human and unavoidable for most people.

What changes at what universities? Are you a well known entity in the manopshere?

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Choosing to do poorly and leave university is a choice as well. Yet you think it should be accommodated.

Obviously. And illegal discriminatory programs are illegal. I have no idea how well known I am nor do I care. It's unlikely they don't contribute to the issue of mens dropping enrollment. There are still schools that explicitly do not allow men in violation of federal law. When gender gap was flipped and less severe we had civil rights laws passed to fix it. It's a pretty minimal response to ask that it is enforced equally now that it is flipped and worse.

Do you have data that shows that OVERALL women occupy more power and leadership roles

Let's assume that it is entirely true and men occupy the top 0.1% echelon of power. That is not a descriptor of men as a class and couldn't possibly justify discrimination against men as a class. At best one would have to argue for discrimination within the cohort in the top 0.1% of each gender. Comparing peer groups within each class is informative of the class, and is a common method in data science. As I've shown, within peer groups outside the top and bottom 0.1%, women are doing substantially better. The fact remains that within peer groups women are paid more, and are more likely to be in management positions. That is descriptive of the experience of each gender class in aggregate and only fails at the extremes. No one even remotely familiar with how to properly analyze data would hazard to use the tails of a distribution as descriptors of the aggregate.

Getting more representation of women in upper echelon leadership position is important but it is not accomplished by discrimination against the class in aggregate. It is morally reprehensible and legally indefensible. As far as education goes, discrimination is only allowed to correct imbalances within the organization (with a lot of other caveats). Justice Ginsburg, an amazing Supreme Court judge and prominent feminist even said that broad generalizations are not acceptable arguments for discrimination to continue.

From a legal standpoint, justification must be specific, measurable, and relevant to the class being discriminated against/for. The entire argument of using narrow subset in the tail end distribution of success completely fails as it is only arbitrarily related. It fails even more when the class being discriminated against is already underrepresented and has lower success rates. When women make the same life decisions as men, their outcomes are the better.

Even without normalizing peer groups, women are doing better in education, which is the point of this comment thread. Effects at the extreme 0.1% tails of a distribution cant be used to justify aggregate discrimination. It's completely dishonest and doesn't hold up as a defense to violating the 14th ammendment's equal protection clause.

Disparity in the extremes of society is not and never will be allowed as a justification for aggregate discrimination. Personal life choices producing different outcomes will also never be an argument for discrimination.

However, stats showing poorer outcomes for a class are absolutely an argument against discrimination against that class. To use the fact that the top 0.1% of power is primarily held by men as a justification for discrimination against an underrepresented, underperforming body of men in education is horrendously vile. No one who supports equality would argue for that kind of discrimination.

I support wealth-class based discrimination that uplifts and encourages mobility independent of gender. I support life-choice discrimination that supports people returning to work after extended period of unemployment, if it isn't based on gender. I support govt subsided daycare based on income. Programs that don't discriminate can be used to accomplish diversity goals and specific needs of each gender.

I support ending discrimination based on gender in all forms across the board. Can you say the same? If you response is not an affirmative "yes" I'm going to be done with this conversation. I'm not keen on arguing with bigots.

[–]cheque-m82 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

mate, you're arguing with a useless sack of shit who thinks misandry doesn't exist, can't even type it without quotes, and pulls fake statistics out of its arse like 1 in 5 'sex workers' are injured/killed on the 'job', so much more compared to male fields ... bullshit stat and comparison of course combining injuries and deaths, there are way more essential male dominated fields and 'sex work' isn't essential at all, but this grubby victim can't make an honest argument to save its life.

not in the US but hope you get on well with all those cases, I checked a few posts and IANAL but sounds fishy. Keep up the good work

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thanks. I am unlikely to change this person opinion, but engaging in good faith when I have the energy to do so is important. Never know if someone else reading may learn something or realize a bias view they had wasn't aligned with reality.

No one is perfect. We all have unconscious bias. People who have willful ignorance won't change, but people who are unknowingly ignorant may. There was a good philosophytube video on ignorance. The person who does these is a transwoman which I think adds a really unique perspective to her philosophy videos. Give it a watch with an open mind. It's really fucking good.

https://youtu.be/ATITdJg7bWI

[–]cheque-m82 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'll bookmark it for later ... cheers

[–]MRA_TitleIX2 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

🍻

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No. Within ONE SINGLE peer group, for about five years of their lives, women out earn men. And the fact that men have more money and power than women exists across all income levels and all ranges of leadership roles. Again, in TOTAL, including ALL PEER GROUPS and ALL INDUSTRIES, men have way way way more money and power than women. I am NOT just talking about the “upper echelon” or the “1%”. This is true at the middle and lower income levels also. And YES ALSO INCLUDED ARE THE MALE HOMELESS POPULATION.

Again, I am talking about men and women IN TOTAL, overall.

If you think Ginsburg would ever have anything to go with you, this sub, or your ridiculous “arguments” you have no idea who the woman was.

So again, with the “poor decisions”. How come it’s fine for men to have kids and careers, but women have to pay? Could there be a biological root to this? Shouldn’t we treat it as a biological difference rather than a choice?

[–]MRA_TitleIX1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No. Within ONE SINGLE peer group, for about five years of their lives, women out earn men.

There were 2000 peer groups in that study. Maybe you don't understand what a peer group is. When normalized to hours works and total time spend in career it almost vanishes anyway.

Again, I am talking about men and women IN TOTAL, overall.

Yea and aggregate stats overwhelmingly show higher success for women in education so it is certainly time to stop discriminating against men in education

If you think Ginsburg would ever have anything to go with you, this sub, or your ridiculous “arguments” you have no idea who the woman was.

You are clearly not familiar with her time as a judge. She was a true feminist in supporting equality for all. Really something to be admired, and hardly representative of most "feminists" today. Some cases of interest might be Mortiz v. IRS. Her favorite case was Weinberger v. Weisenfeld. She wrote an inflential amicus curie for Craig v. Boren which was a critical precedent setting case. List goes go on. Ginsburg really good at being gender neutral in rulings, and the precedents she set are gender neutral.

So again, with the “poor decisions”.

Again, never said that. Anyway, I'm out.

[–]GiantDairy0 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

MEN AS A GENDER GROUP HAVE MORE MONEY AND POWER THAN WOMEN. THIS IS MORE CONSEQUENTIAL THAN UNIVERSITY ATTENDANCE.

[–]VTwinVaper1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So what you’re saying is, you chose to have a family and as a result are not participating in the discussion as much as someone who did not choose to do those same things?

[–]GiantDairy1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL. I’m fucking BUSY. Sorry you’ve never been in love or had a family of your own.

[–]VTwinVaper1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No I get it, everyone has their own reasons why they’re not able to contribute 100%. These priorities and choices are why women statistically make less than their male counterparts: because their level of participation in the workforce and workplace is statistically less.

And you have just proven that point for me.

[–]GiantDairy0 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So if that’s a choice you’re totally unwilling to investigate or make accommodations for, why is the arguably much stupider choice to drop out of university worth defending and accommodating?

[–]VTwinVaper1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Move along; you’ve been beaten, and we both know it. You believe that the last word claims victory—but nobody cares enough to listen to yours at this point.

[–]GiantDairy0 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOL. No response. I thought so!

[–]PsychologicalItem353 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The fact that I was required to do the work of girls made me stressed and I started doing poorly.... Couldn't do shit about it cause I was required to do so with a little thing called group work that was abused to make all the boys throughout my entire time in school to do the girls work while they did nothing at all. When it comes to me... I started doing poorly because I cannot operate with extra work my brain slows down. Causing me to panic and I can't think and I know everything but my brain just goes slow and I become useless. And I having to do such made this daily. Honestly I work better with a group of guys it just is better for me. Usually when I work with women I have major issues and they can't accept the right answers they always feel they are right even if they are not and I would blatantly show them the correct answers and research. Every time I did something like this girls just still think they are right. Guys its a "Damn my bad". When it comes to women/girls I got to do their work for them cause even if I did request to be out the group and put in another its another group of girls " that do their work and do well" when they really don't or I get told no do the work. Literally got suspended before multiple times when I was in school for cussing out girls for instructing me on their work that they know nothing about. If you think that I didn't have to do it I did. Its group work as in projects and shit and you are required to be in a group or you get a grade reduction or no grade. And their are two grades. Your personal grade and the group. The group is usually weighed more at least when I was in school. So if the group did bad but you did good you'd still get a bad grade. Which trapped you into doing all the work if you are a guy. Me having issues with stress affect my thinking this fucked me over cause it happened so often. And teachers who are female at least still do this. Cause "it helped then through school".

[–]Laggod619 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In one word : yes

[–]BrilliantPayment3303 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck yes thay do, oh jimmy is acting out time to fill him up with meds, cant have childrean acting like kids

[–]Glum-One816 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

This is a similar situation, but I was typing. "What are the worst experiences of being a special needs male student in schools?" I got negative responses on r/AskMen . They say some stupidest shit against me and I deserve to be bullied, attacked, and abused by other students. I went to a special education school and nobody helped me, including the situation at home was very toxic. I have to delete my thread because I felt like I didn't get much support from them. Eventually, they would say it differently if this was a girl's situation. They said, "Man up!" I did not want to join in r/Askmen anymore. It was toxic, so I join the Men's Rights page instead.

[–]rabel111 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As the bias against boys in education becomes more widely understood and discussed, the feminist academics who engineered this tragedy continue to refuse to acknowledge the harm their sexist attitudes are inflicting on generations of children. What will it take to make education academics wake up from their woke misandry, and start to address discrimination against boys in our schools and academic culture.

[+]GiantDairy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What sexist attitudes? What needs to change to make education better for boys exactly?

[–]urahara64360 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Unless they're gay/effeminate yes.

[–]Ok-Film-3125 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's just yes period. If you are a biological male, you're fucked.

[–]urahara64360 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The gay and effeminate are treated as girl lite so they're ignored as opposed to regular boys who are actively being targeted.

[+]cleaningmama 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's been a few years since I looked at the information, but early education is geared towards girls. Issues from K-2 teaching often come to crisis for boys around third grade.

Also, early reading often doesn't benefit boys as much as it does girls. Some studies show that boys shouldn't even learn to read until 7. Girls' and boys' development is in different places at that time.

However, those are generalities. I know plenty of boys who learned to read very early indeed (3) and didn't suffer for it.

Despite the early advantages in education, many girls' learning then lags behind later on.

Since my son is still in grade school, I didn't look beyond early education.

In third grade, I had to catch my son up from learning little in first and second grade. He's excellent at reading and math, but his hand writing is slow.

[–]ChadWolf98 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They discriminate against boys simply by making academic success based on memorising stuff, sitting silently, but mostly by making acadeic success based on TIME spent on study vs EFFORT/SKILL.

If you remember homework did you get 1 or 2 hard assignment, or a lot of easy ones thats easy to do but time consuming?

[+]awsdlefthandbutton -9 points-8 points-7 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah single sex schools work best for boys tbh. Helps get the aggression out of the system and they learn that they aren't as tough as they think they are.

[–]The_Dapper_Balrog 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Clearly you've never worked in education, because you'd know that statement is nonsense.

[–]DirtyPartyMan -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A little and only if they’re heterosexual.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter