401–410 of 600 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Future generations will consider us barbarians for dosing our young boys with drugs because we providing them with physical education/exercise was inconvenient to us. They'll also be able to datamine the internet from this time period and use our own words to hang us.
It'll be a long time yet. We haven't even moved past cutting pieces of them off for cosmetic reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t that mean that 79% of the difference is not due to bias? So boys would still be behind girls even if the bias didn’t exist. Or am I misunderstanding this?
Tables 1-6 show you the actual results on the page labeled 40 (PDF page 42) and the page prior shows actual numbers. In blinded effects, boys overperform in math and underperform in literacy. In non-blinded effects, boys underperform everywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern progressivism has apparently solved that issue already. I'll demonstrate: Whenever statistics show an imbalance that benefits men, say in earnings, prestigious jobs, or positions of leadership, then the modern worldview dictates that this must be a result of a nefarious bias on the part of society or men as a group, aka "the patriarchy". On the other hand, whenever the statistics show an imbalance that benefit…
[baleeted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You made a lot of assumptions in that assessment.
Anecdotally, I have 4.5 year old boy and see a lot of similar-aged boys and girls at the playground, etc. (unfortunately not as much in our/their homes, during this global pandemic), and from what I see most small kids are just incredibly active a lot of the time. They crave (and physically need) hours every day spent running and climbing and swinging and rolling around, chasing each-other, etc. Furthermore, many of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd assume most school administrators are women. At least in the United States, this isn’t at all true. A disproportionate number of administrators (especially when adjusted for the normal male/female teacher breakdown) are male. There have also been many studies that show that teachers call on boys more, praised them more (they acknowledge girls, praise boys), and talk with them more. So your assumptions are compl…
>> I'd assume most school administrators are women. > At least in the United States, this isn’t at all true. 54% female, 46% male https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cls.asp
Close to 68 percent of elementary school principals are women, while men make up 67.3% of high school principals and 60% of middle school principals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think it has anything to do with girls having better handwriting. I couldn't improve my handwriting for the life of me when i was in school and got really poor grades from teachers not being able to read what i was writing.
Today, it's typing. I've seen the difference in kids. I think readability may be one issue, but perhaps even more important is that if writing is physically awkward and painful, it leads to writing fewer words and doing fewer edits. My own experience was that learning to type, thanks to getting interested in programming, was game changing. All I can say is that I could write lengthy essays and reports in a jiffy. Sti…
Do we want equality in this area? Should we change schooling to make it easier for boys than girls until we get to 50/50 achievement? Or should we retain the status quo to boost the chances of women succeeding later in their lives when they do not achieve in their careers at the same level as men?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "women are wonderful" effect doesn't stop. I would ask you actually search around a little and read my point again, as well as the many other comments, before dragging down the conversation with phrases such as "convenient excuse". As other comments have pointed out, the reason can easily be explained by a paradigm shift. One which shifts from a cooperation-favored environment, to a competition-favored environmen…
> The "women are wonderful" effect doesn't stop. I would ask you actually search around a little and read my point again, as well as the many other comments, before dragging down the conversation with phrases such as "convenient excuse". How do you reconcile this with discrimination towards women? Also the whole trope that women somehow cannot compete and can only collaborate, as if the two things are at odds, is als…
Frankly, this "discrimination towards women" may as well be turned around with one simple trick. Which of the two sexes is more likely to have their worth as partner be judged based on their ambition and achievements? Last time I checked, women are a lot more judgmental of their partner's ambition, earning capabilities, career, and similar traits than men are, frequently to the point of wanting a guy who is relatively "better" than themselves. You think that has no influence on competitiveness? When your worth as a romantic partner gets tied heavily to all those things, which can be found in a field emphasizing competitiveness, surely you can imagine men respond by being more competitive.
Now imagine your worth isn't as tied to this, you have all these men with a very clear incentive to compete keep trying to one-up another. It isn't a secret people give up easier when the challenge is too difficult compared to the reward, and assuming above, women clearly have less of a reward at the end of this.
Convenient excuses? Probably. Frankly, the entire "oppression" narrative is awfully convenient when put under the right angle. So instead of knee-jerking towards all this, let's stop this "trope" as well and address the problem for the multifaceted issue it truly is.
Edit: as replying to the below is no longer an option and apparently my "competition" claim is "unsubstantiated", it seems I have to point out the obvious. Women still largely go for men outearning them rather than equals, let alone lower.(https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jomf.12372) Additionally, money helps men more than women when it comes to cushioning traits of lower value (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S10905...) Though I guess one peer-reviewed study tracking diaries says more than entire countries filled with anecdotal data of women more willing to work part time even when not caring for kids.
Then why do boys/men seem better at inventing things (edit: from past statistics)?
My understanding is that IQ is distributed such that men are slightly lower on average than women, but more spread out. If this is true, then it would follow that there would be more genius men than women, which would explain what you mention.
I've noticed throughout my life that negative outcomes that primarily affect females (math test scores, wage gap, etc) are Huge Problems That Demand Immediate Action, and negative outcomes that primarily affect males (language test scores, life expectancy gap) are just kind of how it is. I'm not bitching about it or pushing an agenda, but it's not subtle.
Generally speaking, the clearly oppressed and disadvantaged group is the one we focus on in terms of equity. Men are not, nor have they ever been, that group.
Men have been that group when it comes to their foreskin.