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

First topic message reminder :

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

Tommy Monk wrote:

Andy wrote:"Seig Heil", Tommy. 
The only words you truly understand.

Andy... seriously... please try learning some truth about Mussolini and what his fascism actually was, before you try condemning me as being a follower of it... as you'll find that you are more of a supporter of the sort of things that Mussolini's fascism actually did, than I have ever advocated support for...!


Try reading the details here...


https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2015/Samuelsfascism.html

Its an opinion piece which the vast majority of Historians and economists think is complete rubbish

I can post many links also Tommy.

You want to believe politically motiovated apologists, that is your choice, it does not make them right and why they are seen with mild amusement.

I mean Lawrence K. Samuels has got a degree in bachelor's degree in commercial art with a minor in journalism from California State University, Fullerton.

Score

Were the Nazis Socialists?

Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.

To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals.

Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast.

Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Firstly... white British boys are defined as white British boys... while east Europeans are defined as "white/other"... so no skewing of the figures...


Which brings me onto point 2... it is well known that the current most underperforming group is white British boys... and the reason for this is that the leftys, both teachers and others in positions of power in the teaching establishment, are too busy giving all the other "special" groups all the extra time/attention/encouragement/support/opportunities/rewards etc... all in the name of equality etc... where all must be treated equally regardless of colour/race/religion/gender/sexual orientation etc...


Although... throughout the current lefty run education system... white British boys are not considered as being "equal" enough.!

When you’re ready to listen I’ll tell you why your post is full of misconceptions and untruths.
May just blow your mind.

Go for it... I'm always ready to listen...

Okay tommy here goes.

Eastern European’s actively and positively engage with their children and urge them to try harder at school because english is their second language. Their whole attitude to work and education is desperate - they want to do well.  
Africans and Asians homeschool their children and push them hard (rightly or wrongly), and these kids are clever beyond their years mostly.

English kids are brought up to feel a little entitled. It’s a habit their parents can’t seem to break.

I saw this firsthand. For years.

Now I’m going to let that settle with you and wait for your questions.

phildidge wrote:Were the Nazis Socialists?

Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.

To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals.

Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast.

Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

An interesting "opinion piece" you posted there dodge... but I was talking about Mussolini and the fascism that he enacted...

eddie wrote:Okay tommy here goes.

Eastern European’s actively and positively engage with their children and urge them to try harder at school because english is their second language. Their whole attitude to work and education is desperate - they want to do well.  
Africans and Asians homeschool their children and push them hard (rightly or wrongly), and these kids are clever behind their years mostly.

English kids are brought up to feel a little entitled. It’s a habit their parents can’t seem to break.

Now I’m going to let that settle with you and wait for your questions.

That is a very broad to say the least generalisation. Which does not take into acount how well many middle class boys and girls do that are English Eddie. You are also on the wrong track as its religious families that push their children, as well as some asian cultures. That push their children.

As you can see from the link below, Irish kids, do the best out of all white groups. With Asian, is the Chinese and Indians that do best, with Pakistani's lowerr than Black African. So you can see there is divide between Asian groups also on who does well. So you need to break down your view point as its too broad a statement. When some asian ethnic groups do very well and others poorly. MNany Black groups also under perform

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/gcse-results-attainment-8-for-children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest

Tommy Monk wrote:

phildidge wrote:Were the Nazis Socialists?

Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party.

In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.

To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals.

Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialist rhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast.

Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.

https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

An interesting "opinion piece" you posted there dodge... but I was talking about Mussolini and the fascism that he enacted...

I know you were, which i responded to already

eddie wrote:Okay tommy here goes.

Eastern European’s actively and positively engage with their children and urge them to try harder at school because english is their second language. Their whole attitude to work and education is desperate - they want to do well.  
Africans and Asians homeschool their children and push them hard (rightly or wrongly), and these kids are clever beyond their years mostly.

English kids are brought up to feel a little entitled. It’s a habit their parents can’t seem to break.

I saw this firsthand. For years.

Now I’m going to let that settle with you and wait for your questions.

I thought you were going to explain your claim of my earlier post being "full of misconceptions and untruths"...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Okay tommy here goes.

Eastern European’s actively and positively engage with their children and urge them to try harder at school because english is their second language. Their whole attitude to work and education is desperate - they want to do well.  
Africans and Asians homeschool their children and push them hard (rightly or wrongly), and these kids are clever beyond their years mostly.

English kids are brought up to feel a little entitled. It’s a habit their parents can’t seem to break.

I saw this firsthand. For years.

Now I’m going to let that settle with you and wait for your questions.

I thought you were going to explain your claim of my earlier post being "full of misconceptions and untruths"...?

It's pretty self-explanatory, dude. She's saying it's not the teachers, it's the parents.

"...Girls have opened up the biggest achievement gap over their male classmates in the top grades at GCSE since the A* was introduced.

Some 19.8% of boys entries were awarded an A* or an A this year compared with 26.5% of girls entries - a gap of 6.7 percentage points..."




Is this disparity the 'parents fault' too...!?


Are parents of girls, much better at parenting than parents of boys...!?


Or... are you suggesting that parents (of 2 or more children and where they are boy/s and girl/s), that these parents are choosing to look after their girl childrens education more, while neglecting the education of their boy children...!?


Or are you saying that genders are not the same and equal... but that there are big differences between the intelligence/mental ability between genders, and that one gender is clearly more superior than the other...!?


?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


I thought you were going to explain your claim of my earlier post being "full of misconceptions and untruths"...?

It's pretty self-explanatory, dude. She's saying it's not the teachers, it's the parents.

Yes the teachers and schools are also to blame based around a fear of sexism to girls. Now boys are starting to suffer from this

Also white working class boys, if British in a predomninantly ethnic school. Will also find it difficult, due to English mainly being the second language and hence they become disadvantaged

We now have growing scientific evidence to replace old biological superstitions. Grey matter in female brains develops faster, says Jay Giedd, psychiatrist at the University of California San Diego. Because girls mature earlier, they are given more books sooner, and learn more. Sexism may encourage this: parents often stereotype girls as quiet readers, and boys as rambunctious adventurers. 

Either way, boys fall behind in school and get discouraged. There is evidence that they lose motivation in class from age eight. Smith says that when 11-year-olds arrive at Huntington, “the vocabulary gap between boys and girls is striking”. Many boys enjoy reading for information but struggle with the fiction that is central to schoolwork. The literacy gap peaks at about 16, when boys are often at their most dysfunctional — just when decisions about post-school destinations are being taken. 

And whereas most workplaces remain male-friendly environments, schools may be more girl-friendly. Girls tend to be more self-disciplined (perhaps because of how they are socialised), and good at sitting and listening, something many small boys find hard, says Francesca Borgonovi, senior analyst at the OECD. “Boys are too often seen as deficient girls,” says Gijsbert Stoet, a psychologist at Leeds Beckett University.

Most classrooms now are female-run. Two out of three teachers in the OECD were women in 2012, with the highest proportions in younger age groups: 97 per cent in early childhood education. In part, this reflects the traditional view that looking after small children is “women’s work”. On average, girls do more homework. Boys play more video games and generally spend more time online. That can give them practical skills, but it can also alienate them from real life. 

Many boys think school is uncool. Borgonovi says: “In schools, learning is the incidental thing that happens while kids are socialising. There is a lot of, ‘How do I impress my peers?’” Boys often do that by misbehaving.

The OECD notes that boys are eight percentage points more likely than girls to say school is a “waste of time”. In the past, especially for the working classes, this made sense; boys typically had to leave school at 16 to work in factories and mines. Today, across the OECD, boys’ favourite response when asked for their future profession is “professional sportsman”.

Interestingly, the gender gap in school attainment is widest in the most gender-equal countries, such as the Nordics. In Finland and Sweden between 2003 and 2012, girls closed much of the gap with boys in maths and widened their lead in reading. The OECD asks: “Are gender gaps a ‘zero-sum game’, in which education systems, schools and families have to choose whether to create an environment that promotes either boys’ performance or girls’ performance?” 

When Borgonovi is asked how to make classrooms more boy-friendly without disadvantaging girls, she replies: “It’s a tough question.” She pauses, then: “I’ll get back to you. Some of education requires the self-regulation and discipline that we value in girls.” 


https://www.ft.com/content/3b2509f2-fda2-11e8-aebf-99e208d3e521

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

Tommy Monk wrote:

Andy wrote:"Seig Heil", Tommy. 
The only words you truly understand.

Andy... seriously... please try learning some truth about Mussolini and what his fascism actually was, before you try condemning me as being a follower of it... as you'll find that you are more of a supporter of the sort of things that Mussolini's fascism actually did, than I have ever advocated support for...!


Try reading the details here...


https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2015/Samuelsfascism.html

Andy/HT...?


Did you have a read of the above link yet?


Here's another piece I found on mussolini and nazis being of the left...


In real time, Benito Mussolini and his movement – fascism or national socialism – was of the left. Mussolini was a great admirer of Karl Marx and Marx’s principle of revolutionary socialism. By “revolutionary socialism,” I mean to distinguish Marxist socialism from the democratic socialists and labor unions that were emerging in Europe.

Mussolini, like Marx and Lenin, saw the party as the vanguard of the working class, a force from without the system that would usher in change. Mussolini was in fact a member of the socialist party of Italy, although he broke with the party on the issue of neutrality during World War I. It was later that Mussolini thought to combine socialism with nationalism, and form a new party. He called the combination “fascism.” A fasces is a bundle of rods, each individually weak while the bundle is strong. Mussolini’s counterpart in Germany called the combination “national socialism.” In Germany, where they like long words, this became “Nationalsozialistische.” In America, where we like short words, this became “Nazi.”

Adolph Hitler was in many ways like Mussolini. Hitler, like Mussolini, was a great admirer of Marx, and was originally a member of the socialist party. Hitler, like Mussolini, served in the army of his country during World War I, and both rose to the rank of corporal. Hitler, like Mussolini, said that the members of the working class were not easily drawn to revolutionary socialism, but were responsive to a combination of socialism and nationalism.

The new national socialist parties of Italy and Germany clashed with the communist parties of those countries. This was a clash of rivals both of which were revolutionary socialist and had the will to power.