Boys Ruin School for Girls...

[Guest Adara]

I thought it was hilarious at first, but, being a mother to two daughters has got meh thinking....

Here's the article:

Boys Ruin School for Girls

What do you all think from your personal experience?

[Entrisic]

I'd agree that boys are a massive distraction. I was self home-schooled for high school but middle school with boys was at times extremely trying. They were loud, destructive jerks on average and Science save you if you gave them an inch.

I remember one (during eight grade) who would steal an ink stamp from the teacher's desk whenever he saw that I was drawing - and just when he saw that I was done, he'd slam it down on the drawing and ruin it. He stopped that promtly after I not-so-gently prodded him with a sharp pencil. That was just an average event that happened daily, to give an example.

On the other hand, I have a difficult time seeing a classroom full of girls. (I've never gone to a same-sex school, even though I've gone to private ones.) It seems to me that would carry its own problems, even if the grades go up. Girls can be vicious and at least some of that is released with typical girl vs boy rivalry.

Honestly, I don't have much to say except offer up what I've experienced, but have they seriously tried to put a lot less boys in classes? My 7th grade classroom of 25sh students (in a private school) was like, 75% female and 25% boys. We were all very close and amiable with each other, far more than I've ever found in any other school.

[madlodger]

I went to a regular school, about 30 evil beasts of both sexes dying from boredom in a stuffy classroom. Girls and boys were about 50/50. There was much more socialising going on than learning Would it be different in a single-sex classroom? Not sure, never attended one.

I sort of feel that being separated while going through teen years would deprive both sexes of one of the kind experience. Like falling in love, learning about what the opposite sex is like and so on. It's not something people can "do-over" as adults.

The educational system itself is lacking. Some of my teachers probably started all young and inspired and years later lost the spark. The same curriculum year after year, maybe a few kids in the class who would be really good at the subject but - no time for them, as well as no time for the rest of the little urchins. I suppose that a single-sex setting could be easier to control, but if curriculum and funding are the same...

[Leonhart29]

I honestly don't think it's the sexes we have to wonder about. It's the size of the classes that's the problem. My children go to a small country school and on the whole they learn more, enjoy their friends more, and are very happy. They've been in large classes (like I was through out my entire school career) and they never did as well. There's something to be said about a teacher being able to know his/her students well instead of guessing at which John or Jane they are talking to or about.

[ArkaineX55]

The Bullshit Meter is rather high on this story.

Honestly, It's rather common for boys to disrupt in classrooms, but there are a fair share of girls that can do the exact same thing.

Having to go through public schools in my life, high school girls were far more disruptive than the boys (who were worse in Middle school.) Heck, some of the athletes in high school had more manners than the girls I've seen.

I might sound rather mean here, but I have to say this:

really, how much of this anti-male bullshit do they have to keep spewing out before men actually retaliate?

[dazzledfirestar]

I agree with Arkaine. There is a strong reek of BS on this one. The people I remember disrupting classes and being pains in general were... GIRLS! Of course, I've always been a "one of the guys" kind of girl, but my friends (the guys, the athletes, whatever) were never as bad as the stuck up, bitchy girls in middle and high school. Have you seen Mean Girls? It's pretty on target.

So should my son's education be sacrificed become some up tight snob doesn't want their poor little angel corrupted by all the evil boys? Is that what we're saying here?

[Guest Agaib]

Ehh... The article itself was iffy. I didn't really like it. It was written in a way that basically made Me think that the author had looked around for an article that agreed with her preconceived notions and wrote about it. It also takes a very cynical, almost disparaging, view of boys and borders on rude. A single study showing a trend does not constitute proof. Its important to gather a lot of data from several sources before making conclusions.

I suppose that the problem is most likely the fact that males tend to have more extremes than girls. On average, a girl will do better academically, than a boy. But boys tend to have more on the super academically successful and super academically unsuccessful. We're less centered. Because males tend to deviate more from the mean we also have more who are exceptionally disruptive. Disruptive people make lots of waves, are very visible, and waste a lot of teaching time.

Everybody has a different school experience too. Humans are not predictable and some schools have more problems from different "groups" of humanity. Even more reason to gather more evidence rather than cite a single study and claim "proof."

[foeofthelance]

I was actually surprised. The article was apparently written by a guy. At least, I can't come up with a girl's name that shortens down to Tim.

Seriously though, what the flying fuck in a monkey's hot pants?

A social planner might thus conclude that all education should be single-sex. The difficulty is to combine this perspective with the principle of parental choice. I have the answer: a congestion-charge-style tax on parents who insist on polluting girls' education with their testosterone-fuelled little monsters. The money could go toward hiring extra teachers—and riot police.

We managed to go from boy's can be disruptive to boys being testosterone fueled monsters? Eh? I think someone might have been a wee bit bullied in school there! I'm a guy, and as far as I can remember, all of six years ago, I know its a long time, but fortunately not that long, the only effect testosterone had on me in school was to pop the occasional hard on when a pretty girl walked by. Admittedly, I was fairly distracted, what with my naughty thoughts and all, but I doubt it had much effect on the rest of the class. Well, save for that one time I started to lose focus mid-answer...

So guys are disruptive huh? Ok, blatant sexism time! Girls, you are here by warned, I'm going to piss you off! I have come up with the solution! We shall simply...get rid of female teachers! Its obvious to me that the real source of the problem is that teachers cant control their students. Why? Because females are inherently weak willed, are no match for a stronger male, and should simply stay at home and cook! Pah, what do they know about discipline? Sissies! Wishy-washy namby pambies! (Pambys? How is that spelled anyway?) It takes a man to discipline a boy, only way to make it stick. I saw plenty of disrespect for the ladies in their tight skirts and transperent blouses (where do you think the testosterone surges come from, anyway?) but the one time I saw another boy try to disrespect a male teacher he was choked for it! And that brings me to my next point!

Echtrae, where are you? Bah, why single you out? I've let the ladies have it, now its time for you pussy liberals as well. Yes, I'm looking at all of you! Spare the rod, spoil the child as they say. What's with all of this community building nonsense? Self esteem needs to be earned, not handed over on a silver platter! Let the weak fall, so that the strong, or those smart enough to avoid the strong, make their way to the front. All men might have been created equal (and I doubt that) but we sure as all get out don't end up that way! Stop with the equality bull shit, and try teaching those who want to learn.

Who else? Ah yes, feminists! Those homewreckers! Dykes, the lot of them! So insistent that men don't need to be a part of raising their own children, and where does it get us? Boys have no one to teach them how to handle themselves, and then the feminists have the gall to blame boys for being boys. (I'd say they have the balls, but that just isn't true.) I know how to fix this. From now on, all daughters shall be raised solely by men! Granted, they might get pregnant a little earlier, depending on how good looking they are, but who cares? At least they'll have a working education! They'd be able to do everything from being able to throw up a drywall to changing their own oil and tires!

Guess who else is responsible? You got it! Its those bloody atheists! There are many studies that have shown that Jesuit run schools make for the best students. But those godless atheists are so afraid that their children might be contaminated. Come on, its not like religion is like homosexuality or something! You don't just catch it, it has to be forced down your throat first. We already have In Ggod We Trust on our money, and its One Nation Under God, so why not let the Jesuits run the public school system? Then we'd really see some results!

But just to make sure you don't think I'm some racist*, sexist, bigoted homophobe, I will take my final parting shot at the conservatives. How dare they! We give them the Bush Administration for two consecutive terms and the best they can come up with is No Child Left Behind? What bull shit is this? Why didn't they just round up and shoot all the democrats like they promised? They've squandered the power we gave them, they wasted their oppurtunities while we quietly ignored their scandalous behavior. All that scheming, wasted! Bah! It's enough to make a man vote for Mickey Mouse!

* Actually, I never did manage to pin it on the blacks, did I? Eh, probably would have been easier to blame it on illegal latino immigrants instead anyway.

** If anyone took that seriously, I apologize. I could make some pithy comment about sarcasm and lacks of intelligence, but I fear it would be wasted...

[madlodger]

Wow, foe, excellent rant, hehe. That article got you all fired-up. Yeah, it is pretty insulting to male species and un-substantiated by any factual proof. That "Tim" guy could be a guy or a girl, though, plenty of journalists use pseudonyms. Well, if he is a "testosterone-fuelled little monster" then shame on him for writing that rubbish.

[EveKnight75]

It is all rather troubling, especially for the parents of little angels like my daughters. Evidently, it is impossible to satisfy the—apparently justified—parental demand to educate girls in single-sex schools and boys in mixed classes. (Not for the first time in my life, I conclude that the world doesn't have enough girls in it.)

Can't... stop... laughing. Too... funny!

My ribs hurt.

At first, I thought it was kinda sad because a man wrote this. But that one paragraph says it all.

His point: keep those nasty filthy boys away from my little angels. They'll corrupt them!

The dude can't deal with the fact that his daughters are growing up and are apparently heterosexual so he pulls bullshit out of his ass to justify his insecurities.

The insecurities are normal and I would've had some sympathy for him if it hadn't been for this article.

From my experience, it's not the gender that's the main issue. There's hormones in the air, but if you go out onto a public street it's going to be there, so I don't see how it's the school's fault.

When it comes to disruptive behavior and academic failure, it's not the student's gender at fault. Boys and girls have different ways of being rude, disruptive bullies, but they come in equal numbers.

If we're going by stereotypes, let's put it this way. Girls prefer verbal methods. Boys prefer physical methods. Girls bully other girls by spreading rumors and talking down. Boys bully other boys by shoving them into lockers and dunking their heads in toilets. Boys like to irritate girls with toilet humor. Girls like to use excessive "interest" to freak out boys.

Both boys and girls can be assholes. It's more an individual personality thing. Boys and girls can be equally uninterested in education. Reasons may vary. Some girls may do it because they were taught that a girl's brain doesn't matter, but would that school of thought go away in an all-girls' school? I doubt that. Boys and girls have an equal capacity for disliking academically superior peers and trying to make things worse for said peer in the classroom to satisfy some inner jealousy.

If this guy wants to put his daughters in an all-girl school, then he should just shut up, do it, and leave us alone. I can guarantee that it won't solve the real "boy" problems and it won't make them more studious, but that's his problem not mine.

Meanwhile, he should try taking a step back to realize that he's just insulted his own gender.

[ArkaineX55]

Nice rant foeofthelance! Had to blow off steam eh?

On the Atheist part: Christian-run schools are not as good anyways. Any school nowadays is really watered down. I would rather Home school my children (when I have children that is...)

If the children want to learn some religion, fine by me. They're going to find out sooner or later.

(and btw, the "Under God" part was added to the anthem, but you knew that. And the Coin, I'm sure that motto was added in the 1860's, probably 1866.)

I firmly understand it was shoved down our throats. I would prefer that it would be shoved without the motto and the added line.

Just to add my 2 cents.

[foeofthelance]

Hahaha, I'm glad people liked the rant. Sometimes I find the best answer for stupidity is even more exaggerated stupidity.

On the Atheist part: Christian run schools are not as good anyways. Any school nowadays is really watered down. I would rather Home school my children (when I have children that is...)

If the children want to learn some religion, fine by me. They're going to find out sooner or later.

(and btw, the "Under God" part was added to the anthem, but you knew that. And the Coin, I'm sure that motto was added in the 1860's, probably 1866.)

I firmly understand it was shoved down our throats. I would prefer that it would be shoved without the motto and the added line

That was actually the reason I specified the Jesuits, rather then Catholics. Sure there are a lot of Catholic schools, but the Jesuits have been teaching people for longer then the continent has been colonized, and on more then just God and his firey vengance at that. I fiugre all of that experience has to count for something, for why else would people keep letting them open schools?

As for the other stuff, meh. Religion is religion, and at the end of the day I'll stick by it, just in case the preachers are right. I figure that way if the atheists are correct, we're all screwed, but if they're wrong, at least I can present a strong case in my own defense. Even if my defense is based on some very loose interpretations...

[ArkaineX55]

I can understand that.

I also apologize for the slight misunderstanding on the Jesuit/Catholic issue. There are times that I need to rethink things through.

Athiests have their fair share of assholes I guess. I'll try my best not to associate with them.

I hope we're on the same wavelength foeofthelance.

[Guest Adara]

Personally, I always found the opposite to be true. I don't think I ever recall any of my guy friends in school distracting me.

It was always the petty popular girls who wanted me to follow them about like all the other attention-craving chits that pissed me off and made me wonder if I was born into the wrong gender!

I always found the guys in my classes to be far less...critical of anything I may be doing and/or wearing than the girls. I found that most of the girls, though intelligent and academically focused, didn't seem any more interested in the world around them other than who was dating whom.

My medium? I'm going to teach my girls to be tomboys.... That'll show them girlz.

[Nanaea]

This is a reminder from your forum Moderator to play nice.

[Guest Big Samurai]

I can sum up my (male) opinion easily enough. If I had gone to a school that was boys-only, I would most likely not be alive to sit and talk to you today. It was bad enough for me at a mixed public school; I can only imagine how rough it would have been if I had been surrounded by nothing but alpha male bullshit with no females to keep it off my back. Thus, based on my own experience, no matter what the statistics say, I cannot advocate single-sex education ... for boys, at least.

[Guest Madapple]

are you saying that the females kept you on your back, Big Sam?

[Guest Adara]

LOL Oh, them girls were buseh!

[Guest echtrae]

For the most part, I think this article is tripe. I've seen similar articles saying basically the same thing about the damage the girls' presence was having upon the boys' education. The sheer volume of trouble I got into while I was in school, would probably have increased if I had been in a single sex environment. It was the girls being there that made the school even somewhat interesting, or at least tolerable.

[Guest Big Samurai]

are you saying that the females kept you on your back, Big Sam?

Wouldn't that have been fun! I think I would have enjoyed high school a lot more if that had been the case.

Really, though, I've noticed that, even if they don't behave very well, guys tend to tone it down a bit in the presence of women, especially if those women have adopted the local samurai to be their go-fer.

[NightScribe]

Every time I read or see this issue on the news, I think "what a load." We had big classes, pretty much 50/50, and no real problems, so this makes me go "huh?" I think separating can create a problem in regards to building social skills which are needed once you get out into the big, bad world.

[Guest echtrae]

NS, I'm fairly certain that nowadays, most people consider social skills to be overrated.

[madlodger]

I'm fairly certain that nowadays, most people consider social skills to be overrated.

Maybe it's just my job, but it seems that people with good work skills are getting loaded with more work and people with good social skills get promoted. It's all about networking these days. Of course, this experience could be unique and not apply everythere.

[Guest echtrae]

I see much of the same thing where I work. So, no, I don't think your experience is unique. Depressing with the realization of its commonality, but not unique.

As for the social skills that you are referencing, I've always seen them as brown-nosing.

[ladydeathfaerie]

Maybe it's just my job, but it seems that people with good work skills are getting loaded with more work and people with good social skills get promoted. It's all about networking these days. Of course, this experience could be unique and not apply everythere.

no, no, no. it isn't the people with good social skills who are getting promotions, Madlodger. its people with good ass kissing skills.

everyone else gets shit on.