Stop punishing boys for being boys ft. Christina Hoff Sommers | #TruthStraightUp

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:26 am

Let's stop punishing boys for being boys.

Girls and young women are succeeding in society now more than ever. Meanwhile, the needs of boys are being neglected. Increasingly, boys fall short in school, get lower grades, and are less likely to attend college.

Modern educators have taken a hostile approach to the needs of boys and young men. Male characteristics are now viewed by many as a pathology in need of a cure.

It's time for educators to reject "gender theories" and focus on educating.

Now that girls and young women have ample opportunities to help them succeed in the classroom, we must ensure that boys have the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqVV5Emne8Q

by Original Quill Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:38 am

phil wrote:Modern educators have taken a hostile approach to the needs of boys and young men. Male characteristics are now viewed by many as a pathology in need of a cure.

Bullshite.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:22 am

Original Quill wrote:
phil wrote:Modern educators have taken a hostile approach to the needs of boys and young men. Male characteristics are now viewed by many as a pathology in need of a cure.

Bullshite.

No its not bullshit, when againm the extremist far left promote such grievance studies, that hate on men. I suggest you just read some gender studies bollocks on this. People are starting to wake up to the extreme left and how they have taken over humanities studies.I mean this was exposed by grievance fake studies. Where one quoted from Mein Kampf hating on men and was peer reviewed. So either you are being deliberately stupid here, or you knowingly know this man hate is happenning within education

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_Studies_affair

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k

by Original Quill Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:41 pm

phil wrote:No its not bullshit, when againm the extremist far left promote such grievance studies, that hate on men. I suggest you just read some gender studies bollocks on this. People are starting to wake up to the extreme left and how they have taken over humanities studies.I mean this was exposed by grievance fake studies.

I don't see any evidence of that.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:51 pm

Original Quill wrote:
phil wrote:No its not bullshit, when againm the extremist far left promote such grievance studies, that hate on men. I suggest you just read some gender studies bollocks on this. People are starting to wake up to the extreme left and how they have taken over humanities studies.I mean this was exposed by grievance fake studies.

I don't see any evidence of that.

There is plenty o evidence and I even proved this by the fake studies how studies that were made up with an intent to hate on men, got peer reviewed. By these ideological far left extremists. You simple want to continue to bury your head in the sand over this. The reality is humanities has been over run by these extremists out to brainwash students and if you have taken at least a look at what happened at Evergreen college. It further proves you are either again being incredible stupid, or deliberately denying the evidence

https://quillette.com/2018/10/01/the-grievance-studies-scandal-five-academics-respond/

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:59 pm

Increasingly, boys fall short in school, get lower grades, and are less likely to attend college.

I saw this in the five years I worked in education. Admittedly, it was a few years back, but it was definitely true then.
White males born in the summer, fared the worst in exams.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:15 pm

eddie wrote:
Increasingly, boys fall short in school, get lower grades, and are less likely to attend college.

I saw this in the five years I worked in education. Admittedly, it was a few years back, but it was definitely true then.
White males born in the summer, fared the worst in exams.

Indeed and this is actually very true with white working class boys in the UK today. Place on top of this that then they are told, that being white male and straight is a privilege and to then be told, they are what is wrong within society. Based on an ideological view point that is racist in thinking of people based on their skin colour as white?
That is sexist and hateful,l thinking and casting all men, as if they are monsters.
What sort of effect is that actually going to have on young boys, based on such identity politics?
They are going to be viewed as not worth helpoing and seen as not worthy of help, based on such divisive identity politics
I understand why intersectionality form, but its having the same effect of previous racism, sexism etc. Its not looking at treating people equally, but based off a group system. That casts people as in the wrong simple for being the wrong colour of skin and gender

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:18 pm

I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:23 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:32 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

Or the problem is intersectionalty, that places said boys as of least need of help.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:34 pm

Britain’s education system is failing to tackle the “astonishing” underperformance of boys as feminists have made the topic “taboo”, the former head of the university admissions service has warned.

Mary Curnock Cook, who was chief executive of Ucas until last year, said the fact that boys are falling behind in education is a national scandal – yet it is such an “unfashionable” topic to discuss that it has become “normalised”.

Girls outperform boys in all aspects of education, from primary school to GCSEs and A-level results. Last year, 57 per cent of women went to university compared to 43 per cent of men, a gap that has widened significantly over the last decade.

“I just find it unacceptable to think that it’s OK to let boys fall further and further behind in education and allow the gap to get bigger,” Ms Curnock Cook said.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/11/16/boys-left-fail-school-attempts-help-earn-wrath-feminists-says/

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:38 pm

“Boys underachieving in education is becoming pretty normalised - everyone knows it yet no one is doing anything about it.” She said that other disparities in education – such as the gulf between rich and poor children – are narrowing, but the gap between boys and girls is getting wider.

“In about ten years’ time the gap between boys and girls will be worse than rich and poor. That is astonishing really.”

Ms Curnock Cook said that the debate about gender equality tends to be dominated by issues such as the gender pay gap and the glass ceiling.

“But those are work issues, not education issues,” she said. “Quite often initiatives to support men do meet derision from feminists.”

When attempts are made to address men’s issues, they are ridiculed and are met with the “wrath” of feminist and gender equality groups, she said.

Last month the only university in the UK with a men’s officer scrapped the role after the candidate withdrew due to “harassment”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/11/16/boys-left-fail-school-attempts-help-earn-wrath-feminists-says/

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:46 pm

phildidge wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

Or the problem is intersectionalty, that places said boys as of least need of help.

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:52 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Or the problem is intersectionalty, that places said boys as of least need of help.

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

Well I gave you one of these examples and you simple glosssed over this
Do you not think, that based on post modern views, with a view to put men down and claim such things as masculinity is wrong. That men are not allowed an opinion. Based on the oppressionj olympics with intersectionality. With a stance to hold a racist and sexist view, that who they are is demeaned based on identity politics? How often do you here about how according to Maxists, its the patriarchy that is holding society back.

What sort of view do you think this is going to have on young boys?

Now there is certainly other aspects but as seen the gap is being closed with class. So when you put a person down, based on being simple a man, white or even straight. What effect over time, do you think this will have on impressionable young boys?

This now happening within many schools and colleges.

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:53 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
phildidge wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

Or the problem is intersectionalty, that places said boys as of least need of help.

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count the fact that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:56 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
phildidge wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I'd like to know exactly how teachers are failing boys. Are they giving them lower grades out of malice? Deliberately giving the girls more attention?

Or is it problem with society, where it's more socially acceptable for a girl to excel in school than for a boy, who might be seen as un-cool?

Or the problem is intersectionalty, that places said boys as of least need of help.

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count that fat that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

I buy that far more than I buy the claim that teachers across the land are spending their class time preaching that white males are the cause of all society's problems.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:58 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count that fat that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

Well its very easy to explain. Once boys were give most of the attention, family based, culturally and within schools.
The view that men have a shorter attention span, is seriously flawed, as I am sure you have as little an attention span to football Eddie. Hence the point is here that there is a difference on what females have an attention span on compared to males. So the view should be to garner interest based on what drives attention within each sex group

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:02 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count that fat that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

I buy that far more than I buy the claim that teachers across the land are spending their class time preaching that white males are the cause of all society's problems.

I am sure you would, mainly as you continually bury your head in the sand.
Like i said, men dominate subjects like maths, and science, based on traits that are suited psychological to analytical studies and with females its with communication, or care fields, like nursing etc, which women now dominate. So the view to what interests either male and females is already well known and there is still a huge gap between the two in what interests each group

I suggest you get off that cloud you live on and actually research what is going on within schools and Universities

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:04 pm

phildidge wrote:
eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

That doesn't answer my question at all, though. I want to know the actual mechanism by which boys are failed. No blaming this idea or that idea -- tell me what the idea is actually making teachers do to boys (or not do).

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count that fat that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

Well its very easy to explain. Once boys were give most of the attention, family based, culturally and within schools.
The view that men have a shorter attention span, is seriously flawed, as I am sure you have as little an attention span to football Eddie. Hence the point is here that there is a difference on what females have an attention span on compared to males. So the view should be to garner interest based on what drives attention within each sex group

Yes didge I do remember that being a thing when I was in education ie lots of school reading books drew little interest from boys but they do have library visits where children can choose their own books so boys, for example, could choose books on dinosaurs or football for home-reading.

Perhaps it is a problem that stems from home? I think perhaps that could be one cause.

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:09 pm

I think all of it stems from home. I had some shit teachers in my time, and some great ones, and I saw how me and a few of my classmates still managed to learn just fine (whether male or female). Our parents cared about our grades, helped us study and took an interest. And they were the kind of people who had that "amazed by the world" attitude of people who never stop being curious.

As far as white boys being taught they're evil, I simply don't believe it. I don't think that telling children that some of the most powerful, influential people in history have also done some very bad things is in any way wrong, or should in any way make white boys feel like they're at fault.

This whole theory is a house of cards, and I bet I know the sort of people who built it.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:10 pm

eddie wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Well its very easy to explain. Once boys were give most of the attention, family based, culturally and within schools.
The view that men have a shorter attention span, is seriously flawed, as I am sure you have as little an attention span to football Eddie. Hence the point is here that there is a difference on what females have an attention span on compared to males. So the view should be to garner interest based on what drives attention within each sex group

Yes didge I do remember that being a thing when I was in education ie lots of school reading books drew little interest from boys but they do have library visits where children can choose their own books so boys, for example, could choose books on dinosaurs or football for home-reading.

Perhaps it is a problem that stems from home? I think perhaps that could be one cause.

Yes Eddie, and whilst that is your personal experince, this is never the case in every sitiuation and if boys are not encouraged. To things they do like, what effect do you think this has? Boys have as much an attention span as women. Each are either put off or interested and more so on inate traits that men and women have.

I think you have a point that the problems stem from home, but also society as well and in the way its heading to view men. You see when culturalexperiments are played out, and in order to do good, they have side effects. Of which we are seeing now. Hence the methods being used now are flawed and we need to go back to the drawing board. To find a plan that benefist both boys and girls

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:13 pm

I tend to agree. It is starting to become a woman’s world. I have been thinking that for quite some time.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:14 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I think all of it stems from home. I had some shit teachers in my time, and some great ones, and I saw how me and a few of my classmates still managed to learn just fine (whether male or female). Our parents cared about our grades, helped us study and took an interest. And they were the kind of people who had that "amazed by the world" attitude of people who never stop being curious.

As far as white boys being taught they're evil, I simply don't believe it. I don't think that telling children that some of the most powerful, influential people in history have also done some very bad things is in any way wrong, or should in any way make white boys feel like they're at fault.

This whole theory is a house of cards, and I bet I know the sort of people who built it.

100% complete lack of empathic intelliegnce to the problem here

I just showed you that a group posted a study, that based on Mein kampf, changed the word, of Jew to men and was peer reviewed and you do not think a view of teaching men as evil is happenning?

How much more evil can you get, when a humanities group is now so in control, they would academically pass such a fraud study that sought to hate on men?

I think its time, you fucking opened your eyes up Ben

Undoing whiteness (yoga course): https://www.rainierbeachyoga.com/undo...

Race to Dinner program: https://race2dinner.com

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:16 pm

eddie wrote:I tend to agree. It is starting to become a woman’s world. I have been thinking that for quite some time.

Indeed roles are being reversed and where the view was to look for equality, now its more about women being in control.

Shame really and its going to end badly also Eddie

People have simple negated what equality actually means

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:22 pm

phildidge wrote:
eddie wrote:I tend to agree. It is starting to become a woman’s world. I have been thinking that for quite some time.

Indeed roles are being reversed and where the view was to look for equality, now its more about women being in control.

Shame really and its going to end badly also Eddie

People have simple negated what equality actually means

This is probably going to make me unpopular (what’s new?) but I do think (a lot of) women tend to let their relationships slide once children come along...which leaves men somewhat lost and confused.

Anyway, that’s a different topic I guess.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:30 pm

eddie wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Indeed roles are being reversed and where the view was to look for equality, now its more about women being in control.

Shame really and its going to end badly also Eddie

People have simple negated what equality actually means

This is probably going to make me unpopular (what’s new?) but I do think (a lot of) women tend to let their relationships slide once children come along...which leaves men somewhat lost and confused.

Anyway, that’s a different topic I guess.

Its not poor to make such a view and i think there is reasons to this and more to do with naturing. I could be wrong. Though relationships and stability clearly would play a part in the upbringing of children. So its a valid point, but i should be based on a case to case bases and not as a group identtity view point. When many factors are at play why people break up Eddie. So any view on this is valid to expand upon

by eddie Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:36 pm

Perhaps I’ll think about it and start a new thread. It’s certainly an interesting topic and one to be explored.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:41 pm

eddie wrote:Perhaps I’ll think about it and start a new thread. It’s certainly an interesting topic and one to be explored.

I agree it should be and from an open view point and based on studying, with the effects and benefits. Hence its always going to be dififuclt to explore. Based on diffirent cultures, eras in time and have we have come to the timeframe we are in today. Th point made about gender studies and has been exposed over this. Is that they are politically driven and not academically studied. Hence instead of ttrying to find answers from a stand point. They try to make the study fit their beliefs. It shows education is losing itsstandard and its people on the left with a political ideology that is corrupting this Eddie.

by Original Quill Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:53 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:

I think it stems from girls having a slight better concentration at a younger age - or that’s what I saw and was led to believe. Also, children with summer birthdays are nine months younger than their classroom peers and so are slightly more immature.

Not sure how teachers are failing boys unless you count that fat that they may not have the time and/or resources to concentrate on them.

I buy that far more than I buy the claim that teachers across the land are spending their class time preaching that white males are the cause of all society's problems.

That's exactly why I say it's Bullshite. It's not an educational problem; it's differences in development.

by Guest Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:55 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

I buy that far more than I buy the claim that teachers across the land are spending their class time preaching that white males are the cause of all society's problems.

That's exactly why I say it's Bullshite. It's not an educational problem; it's differences in development.

But it is an edcuatioonal problem, when the humanities and proponents of gender studies, think Hitler is a good souurce of equality?

by JulesV Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:59 am

phildidge wrote:Let's stop punishing boys for being boys.

Girls and young women are succeeding in society now more than ever. Meanwhile, the needs of boys are being neglected. Increasingly, boys fall short in school, get lower grades, and are less likely to attend college.

Modern educators have taken a hostile approach to the needs of boys and young men. Male characteristics are now viewed by many as a pathology in need of a cure.

It's time for educators to reject "gender theories" and focus on educating.

Now that girls and young women have ample opportunities to help them succeed in the classroom, we must ensure that boys have the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqVV5Emne8Q

People should calm down. So boys are currently doing worse than girls? "Boohoo, it's so unfair" Rolling Eyes

Historically in society, boys have always had huge unfair advantages over girls (and that's in addition to the various biological obstacles nature threw in our path).

So, quite rightly, steps were taken to correct this unfair male advantage - and it could well be that the pendulum has swung too far the other way, and so it needs to be pushed back? In which case it should be done gently, without any hysteria and cries of "it's unfair" ….. when ironically the only reason this "unfairness" happened in the first place was because steps were taken to correct the ORIGINAL problem.

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 12:08 pm

People should calm down and now based off past oppre4ssion to women, we should simple ignore this Jules? So yes steps were taken to correct this advatantage but now the view based off intersectionality, is to ensure men are now treated asd once women were.

How is that equality?

If that is the steps to correct a problem to create a new same problem. How arwe you even tryiing to argue this as a good thing?

So what do you understand as being equality? Women, being advataged over men or women have equal rughts as men?

Nothing worse when people exciuse inequality of women to then say is fine to be prejudiced and discriminate against young boys off this. Sorry Jules, that is utter bollocks. No steps should be taken wqhen they conflit with the rights of others. What you do is ensure all have equality and not argue that womens rights matter more than men, when they are equal

by JulesV Sat Jun 15, 2019 12:11 pm

I have no bias against boys.

I have only one offspring - a son !

Nothing has ever stood in his way, afaik.

He's now a grown man of course, a mind-blowingly successful one, imo, and he's still so utterly driven that he'd do 3 full time jobs if he could fit them all into his ultra busy working life. Shocked

Schoolboys who are determined to succeed, do succeed. End of.

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 1:36 pm

Jules wrote:I have no bias against boys.

I have only one offspring - a son !

Nothing has ever stood in his way, afaik.

He's now a grown man of course, a mind-blowingly successful one, imo, and he's still so utterly driven that he'd do 3 full time jobs if he could fit them all into his ultra busy working life.

Schoolboys who are determined to succeed, do succeed. End of.

And?

Does that mean based on your son, discrimination is now not happenning to boys?

by Raggamuffin Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:15 pm

If boys are not getting good grades, it's probably because they're not paying attention at school. Same goes for girls.

by Original Quill Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:14 pm

phildidge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

That's exactly why I say it's Bullshite. It's not an educational problem; it's differences in development.

But it is an edcuatioonal problem, when the humanities and proponents of gender studies, think Hitler is a good souurce of equality?

Hitler aside, I understand the argument that educational problems should be addressed by educational institutions. But is it really a problem? As Jules points out, somehow the males end up making some 30-40% more than females.

Maybe economics isn't the test. Maybe females end up with a much more enriching experience from their education. It's still a value question. Maybe the educational institutions should not be making up values and let nature take its course.

by Guest Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:23 pm

Original Quill wrote:
phildidge wrote:

But it is an edcuatioonal problem, when the humanities and proponents of gender studies, think Hitler is a good souurce of equality?

Hitler aside, I understand the argument that educational problems should be addressed by educational institutions. But is it really a problem? As Jules points out, somehow the males end up making some 30-40% more than females.

Maybe economics isn't the test. Maybe females end up with a much more enriching experience from their education. It's still a value question. Maybe the educational institutions should not be making up values and let nature take its course.

Cleary it is a problem when an education system becomes political and thus demeans boys, based on ideology

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 12:24 am

Will we ever wake up from the “woke” activist nightmare? This week, Kmart insisted it was a software glitch in photo printing kiosks — not some PC edict — that erased the “offensive” word Jesus from captions. Maybe, but the suspicion of journalists is hardly surprising. The grim reality of offence-activism keeps racing ahead of parody.

In Britain, transgender folk angry at being “misgendered” go running to the bobbies, who may be distracted by an epidemic of knife crime. Two years ago a biology professor at a US liberal arts college, Bret Weinstein, objected on moral grounds to a diversity “day of absence” when whites were told to stay away from campus. Harangued as a “white supremacist”, Weinstein was forced out of his job after the college president pandered to “courageous” students fighting racism with more racism. Some days the outlook seems bleak, and we may miss the filaments of hope. So, at the risk of being a politically incorrect Pollyanna, here’s a handful of reasons for optimism.

Had a gutful of anti-social media? On Sunday, Jordan Peterson, the most famous psychologist on the planet, gave a sneak preview of Thinkspot, his new online venue for people to speak their minds. “Once you’re on our platform, we won’t take you down unless we’re ordered to by a US court of law,” he said. “We’re trying to make an anti-censorship platform.” Unlike Twitter, where unwoke posts can get you banned. Ever on the lookout for white supremacists and other malefactors, Twitter last month suspended Ray Blanchard, a psychologist who helped write the diagnostic bible on “gender dysphoria”. He’d posted “hate speech”, namely his clinical opinion that sex-change surgery was less than ideal for children who might grow up to bitterly regret it. This won’t happen on Thinkspot. Peterson’s social media play may shake things up. He has 1.2 million followers on Twitter. Others in the loose grouping known as the intellectual dark web — united by the belief that without free speech and honest debate, society can’t correct its errors — also command big audiences. To join Thinkspot, you’ll have to pay a subscription and forswear mindless blurts of abuse. “If the minimum content (for posts) is 50 words, you’re going to have to put a little thought into it,” Peterson said. “If you’re being a troll, hopefully you’ll be a quasi-witty troll.” Thinkspotters will be able to tag a point of interest in a podcast, attaching their own remarks, audio comments or video clips. “We can really add dialogue to the podcast and YouTube world (with) continual running conversations.” Peterson is also plotting a private, online university to bypass what he sees as a corrupted academy.

Smarter than we look

Entrepreneurs are twigging to the podcast secret: a vast, hitherto unsuspected audience hungry for long-form debate of deadly serious stuff, plus jokes. Likewise the appetite for that crusty old form, the 90-minute public lecture. Peterson’s rather severe self-help book, 12 Rules for Life, has filled halls in 150 cities around the world with more than 300,000 people. And their pay-off is to be told that life is suffering and malevolence made bearable by the meaning that comes with willingly shouldering a heavy burden of responsibility. Peterson: “It’s almost inconceivable the degree to which people are starving for encouragement, how little they get and how little it takes to make a massive difference in their life, to say to them, you are a sovereign individual … and you can put your life together with truth and courage.”

Name your grievance

Believe it or not, dog-humping is good news for the intellect. Canine rape culture, Hitler’s Mein Kampf as an influence on “intersectional feminism”, “fat-exclusionary” bodybuilding, a plan to put white students in “light chains” to teach them about their “privilege” — all this and more went into a booby trap sprung upon activists disguised as journal editors. Even insiders couldn’t tell the difference between hoax gibberish and genuine gibberish. The credit for this expose goes to three left-leaning scholars (two Yanks, one Brit) fed up with repulsive excess in “grievance studies” — critical race theory and kindred identity politics on pseudo-academic steroids. Helen Pluckrose, the Brit of the trio and a medievalist, will be in Sydney on Tuesday night at the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation to give a lecture against woke rewriting of higher education’s “colonialist” curriculum. She and her co-conspirators in the grievance studies hoax — mathematician James Lindsay and philosopher Peter Boghossian — have been alert for any sign that this academic victimology might fall out of fashion, as happened to the skull bump mumbo jumbo of phrenology. Pluckrose: “(Grievance studies has) got so dominant, it’s overreaching and so much of it now is so ridiculous that even the best intentioned left-liberals, who really want to support identity-based politics, are having to say, oh come on, this is a bit much.” From the US state of Tennessee, Lindsay thinks he can already discern what looks like sanity up-in-arms. “A rapidly increasing number of people are sick of the ultra-woke,” he says. “Most people don’t want to focus on race and sex all the time and be told they’re never doing it right, and they’re sick of what is pretty clearly racist attitudes (against whites).” In Portland, Oregon, Boghossian is less sanguine: “My guess is that things will get a lot worse before they correct.” He’s the only one of the three employed at a university, and may lose his job after being found guilty of an ethics breach for failing to alert journal editors to the hoax. Of course, this would have sabotaged the hoax, sparing universities the spectacle of scholarship deranged by activism. But this is a story with staying power. Mike Nayna, a Melbourne-based filmmaker, has documented every move in the grievance studies saga. Coming to a screen near you this year, with any luck.

Bad ideas mean well

Universities are an ideas incubator for society, so their vices matter. Next Friday and Saturday, 300-plus pointy heads will converge on the Sheraton New York Times Square hotel for seemingly yet another academic conference. But this is different because the host, Heterodox Academy, wants universities to choose between truth-seeking and political activism. Diversity is a higher education fetish — more women and people of colour, please — but “viewpoint diversity” is an awkward topic because of progressive groupthink in the social sciences, humanities and university administration. Heterodox Academy has put viewpoint diversity on the agenda, challenging the dishonesty that prevails when noisy activists intimidate the sensible majority. For authorities to preside over this campus culture — of “safe spaces” and “deplatformed” speakers deemed to offend groupthink — is a form of malpractice, according to American social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, a prime mover in Heterodox. “To teach students to see society as a zero sum competition between groups is primitive and destructive,” he says. The brutal tribalism of social media has compounded errors of judgment by administrators who ignore the findings of psychology. If you want to make young people resilient, the worst thing possible is to shelter them from different views, to play along when they equate unwelcome words with injury, allow feelings to trump reason and abandon all nuance for moral warfare. It has grown rapidly and the underlying conditions are present throughout the Anglosphere. It’s not just scary, it’s a threat to the very purpose of the university. “We can’t do higher education with no nuance,” says Haidt.

Our friend, dissent

It’s welcome news that next month Haidt will make his first tour to Australia, speaking about “Moral psychology in an Age of Outrage”. It should boost Heterodox membership Down Under, which is small. One graduate affiliate is Monica Koehn, a mature-age student at Western Sydney University with a business background. She is doing her doctorate in evolutionary psychology and mating behaviour, a field where gender politics sometimes denies inconvenient science. Koehn says: “If universities had more viewpoint diversity, I believe people would be more willing and able to listen to evidence from differing points of view.” Like Haidt, her politics happen to be on the left but she opposes the shutting down of debate. “If people don’t have the ability to hear a speaker or understand both sides of a controversial topic, how are they able to make up their own minds?” Another Heterodoxer is Kevin Carrico, now at Monash University in Melbourne but American-born and a seasoned visitor to China, the object of his scholarship. “A considerable amount of my thoughts about viewpoint diversity and orthodoxy very much grew out of my experiences in China, where I was not always particularly impressed by the vitality of political debates,” he says. “Coming back to the US after living in China — I don’t want to be too hyperbolic, but I suppose I did recognise the dangers of a situation in which everyone agrees on something and nobody raises any questions about it.” He, too, regards himself as progressive. “But sometimes in academia, critical engagement is too often simply equated with a far left or Marxist viewpoint, which in my perspective … don’t actually provide us with any real understanding of the sheer complexity of the world.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/signs-of-resistance-to-the-woke-gangs-war-on-reason/news-story/420b4ae949e772f5475d921ff9c166ae

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 1:34 am

I love how to some, a few dozen incidents across several countries has turned into a terrifying wave of change which must be fought with everything we have.

I mean, who decided we live in an "age of outrage," and why do they get to decide? What did they base this theory on?

So some people don't want someone they don't like speaking at their university. What should they do, shut up about it?

I mean, I agree with not shutting down the debate, but in every debate, there are at least two sides. It seems that the only side getting any attention right now are the people that continuously complain that they don't get to speak, and that their being "censored," here and there, every now and again, has overshadowed the reasons people might not want to give them a platform.

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:59 am

Ben Reilly wrote:I love how to some, a few dozen incidents across several countries has turned into a terrifying wave of change which must be fought with everything we have.

I mean, who decided we live in an "age of outrage," and why do they get to decide? What did they base this theory on?

So some people don't want someone they don't like speaking at their university. What should they do, shut up about it?

I mean, I agree with not shutting down the debate, but in every debate, there are at least two sides. It seems that the only side getting any attention right now are the people that continuously complain that they don't get to speak, and that their being "censored," here and there, every now and again, has overshadowed the reasons people might not want to give them a platform.

Amd as usual the the dim witted clueless lefty downplays any incident and claims its not a problem and over on the other thread, a kid is kicked out of the classroom for rightly believeing in the fact that humans are a dimorphic species.

wow

There was no debate or side on this and the teacher basically told the student he cannot have his own opinion on science

People are sick to death or your kind of Totalitarian far left facists that have now overtaken school systems, enforcing them Far left bullshit ideology. You tossrs, are trying to enforce your leftist cultish hateful ideas onto society and people are siick to death of you extremists

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:27 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=31&v=GXjzYh6p4WE

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:38 am

phildidge wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I love how to some, a few dozen incidents across several countries has turned into a terrifying wave of change which must be fought with everything we have.

I mean, who decided we live in an "age of outrage," and why do they get to decide? What did they base this theory on?

So some people don't want someone they don't like speaking at their university. What should they do, shut up about it?

I mean, I agree with not shutting down the debate, but in every debate, there are at least two sides. It seems that the only side getting any attention right now are the people that continuously complain that they don't get to speak, and that their being "censored," here and there, every now and again, has overshadowed the reasons people might not want to give them a platform.

Amd as usual the the dim witted clueless lefty downplays any incident and claims its not a problem and over on the other thread, a kid is kicked out of the classroom for rightly believeing in the fact that humans are a dimorphic species.

wow

There was no debate or side on this and the teacher basically told the student he cannot have his own opinion on science

People are sick to death or your kind of Totalitarian far left facists that have now overtaken school systems, enforcing them Far left bullshit ideology. You tossrs, are trying to enforce your leftist cultish hateful ideas onto society and people are siick to death of you extremists

There are two sexes. There are as many genders as you want to recognize.

Gender and sex aren't the same thing.

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:41 am

Ben Reilly wrote:
phildidge wrote:

Amd as usual the the dim witted clueless lefty downplays any incident and claims its not a problem and over on the other thread, a kid is kicked out of the classroom for rightly believeing in the fact that humans are a dimorphic species.

wow

There was no debate or side on this and the teacher basically told the student he cannot have his own opinion on science

People are sick to death or your kind of Totalitarian far left facists that have now overtaken school systems, enforcing them Far left bullshit ideology. You tossrs, are trying to enforce your leftist cultish hateful ideas onto society and people are siick to death of you extremists

There are two sexes. There are as many genders as you want to recognize.

Gender and sex aren't the same thing.

Really, based on your ideological views or actua biology?

So do I have to recognise these made up genders?

No

You do realise that transgender is also binary? Either male or female

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:45 am

Biology deals with sex, not gender, you stupid fucking idiot. Get educated before you embarrass yourself any further. Unless you don't mind looking like a stupid fucking idiot.

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:47 am

Ben Reilly wrote:Biology deals with sex, not gender, you stupid fucking idiot. Get educated before you embarrass yourself any further. Unless you don't mind looking like a stupid fucking idiot.

Posted to prove what a complete idiot Ben is

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:50 am

Learn before you preach, Didge. Look up the difference between sex and gender. You're making a fool of yourself.

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:52 am

Ben Reilly wrote:Learn before you preach, Didge. Look up the difference between sex and gender. You're making a fool of yourself.

Nothing to do with preaching but understanding biology.

Why are you so afaid that you might be wrong here?
That is how religious dogmatic people behave, not people open minded around science

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:54 am

In general terms, "sex" refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences.

"Gender" is more difficult to define, but it can refer to the role of a male or female in society, known as a gender role, or an individual's concept of themselves, or gender identity.

Sometimes, a person's genetically assigned sex does not line up with their gender identity. These individuals might refer to themselves as transgender, non-binary, or gender-nonconforming.

by Guest Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:59 am

Ben Reilly wrote:In general terms, "sex" refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences.

"Gender" is more difficult to define, but it can refer to the role of a male or female in society, known as a gender role, or an individual's concept of themselves, or gender identity.

Sometimes, a person's genetically assigned sex does not line up with their gender identity. These individuals might refer to themselves as transgender, non-binary, or gender-nonconforming.

Transgender is based on a known medical condition called gender dysphoria. So why do you think its called that Ben?
People with gender dysphoria hole a binary view point believeing they are trapped in the wrong body. They dnot think they are non-binary, which flies in the face of actual transgenderism itself. As again Transgenderism is binary with people who suffer gender dysphoria. So people claiming non-binary are simple holding beliefs, which they are entittled to, but has no biological bases.

Now again, when tests have been carried out on 9 month old babies, how are they then chosing male and female based toys, when now view of social construction can be applied?

Why is it that we know actually biological differences in men and women on average like for example and throughout many aniamls species, that women are naturing?

by Ben Reilly Sun Jun 16, 2019 8:02 am

In general terms, "sex" refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences.

"Gender" is more difficult to define, but it can refer to the role of a male or female in society, known as a gender role, or an individual's concept of themselves, or gender identity.

Sometimes, a person's genetically assigned sex does not line up with their gender identity. These individuals might refer to themselves as transgender, non-binary, or gender-nonconforming.

by Sponsored content