Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
The Death of Real Science...
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 2006-07-18 01:23
This article is instructive. I would have said 'eye-opening', but anyone with half a brain should have passed the 'eye-opening' stage years ago.
Having read the above article, the results of this article should cause one to ask some questions.
All three winners of this fair are women. The gender distribution of the fair participants, though not given in this article, was, according to other articles on the subject, 'still skewed'. I may be wrong, but I take this to mean that more boys than girls were participating. Still, assume that the genders were equally represented. This means roughly, a 12.5% random chance all three winners were women. If, say, a third of the participants were women, this means a ~4% random chance all three winners were women. All this in spite of the fact that boys still, somehow, manage to achieve higher scores on science aptitude tests. Indeed.
- Log in to post comments
Comments
Real science?
Perhaps the potential bias represented by the winners simply shows up the politicization of science. (I say "potential bias" because these are small numbers and do not yet lend themselves to reliable analysis.) The majority of the projects discussed in the first article are only of interest because they're in the public eye (e.g. the whole evolution/ID debate is a boondoggle and largely a waste of time for both sides), and the article itself points this out. Real science simply isn't all that exciting most of the time. What was the quote now? "Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration" (Thomas Edison). But science has always been like this - a few topics in the public eye attracting a lot of attention which in turn, attracts the attention seekers. Very little of this is ever productive. What is productive tends to go on quietly, behind the scenes, until it has an unstoppable impact. These science fairs and their publicity-driven winners are not relevant. Let them be cheerleaders, but protect the backroom boys...
The seriousness with which we should take the "science" being done at these fairs is amply demonstrated by the last example of the first article. "But she won't be showing any lab research. Instead, she wrote a song about the problem." I'm sure that'll impress grants committees.
Puh-lease....
-- Silence is the voice of complicity.
http://disenfranchisedfather.blogspot.com
It's Time for Segregation
This foolishness is just further evidence that the public education system and the activities associated with it are blatantly sexist.
I've been saying this for a long while, but it's long overdue: given the clear and proven bias against boys throughout the entire Western public education system, we need separate education for boys and girls, right through high school. In the primary grades, children are taught as if they're all girls, and masculine or boyish behavior is punished or drugged into submission. This happened to a friend of mine: their son is very bright, but because he was becoming bored with her lessons, the teacher insisted he be given Ritalin or an equivalent. A team of psychologists agreed with the parents that what he needed was a proper education that suited his needs, and he is doing spectacularly well in a private boys school, paid for by the parents, over and above the tax dollars they pay for an education system that tried to drug their child senseless.
Incidentally, administering a stupefying drug to children because the woman in the room wants peace and quiet is assault. This is no different than what happens to women who are slipped a date-rape drug to make them easier targets. Both are crimes, but only the men are prosecuted for what amounts to the same offence. As usual.
Does anyone have statistics about how often children are prescribed Ritalin when their teacher is male versus when their teacher is female? Any guesses what such a study would show? If a woman in an office suggested that the men around her be given a drug so she would be more comfortable, she'd be sent for a psychiatric evaluation. Why are young men not afforded this same protection?
Why the hell are teachers not being disciplined and fired for failing to educate half of their students? Isn't that clear evidence of their incompetence? Then again, we only just started prosecuting them for drugging and raping their male students, so I guess that's coming too. I see: adult women can ruin a man for telling an off-color joke in the workplace, simply by making an evidence-free accusation thereof, but young men can be marginalized, denigrated, ignored and even raped for years in a government-funded environment, and that's AOK. What the hell is the matter with these people? If the women teaching our children are neglecting boys, as is evidenced by the fact that home-schooled boys have the same educational outcomes as home-schooled girls and that boys still excel when tested in a standardized fashion, even though they achieve lower grades in school, these women deserve to be fired. If they're having sex with children or demanding that they be drugged for the woman's convenience, they deserve to do hard time.
There's a reason why young men still score higher on standardized aptitude tests despite underachievement in schools and the constant feminist attempts at re-engineering those tests to favor women. This nonsense in our educational systems is nothing more than a transparent agenda intended to marginalize men, and it's working. It's long past time for a change.
No son of mine would ever attend a public school today, and I'd be suing the local government over my tax dollars going to a system that openly discriminates against boys. Fortunately, I'm not in that situation, but millions of men are.