UK: Headteacher appoints two head girls as boys fail to make the grade

... it's about who is most-qualified. When boys are doing much better, it's about "representation".

Either way the issues are always viewed in the favor of females. This is nymphotropism.

What's really dispiriting is some of the dumb comments, for instance,

Too much time and money has been spent on "raising boys achievement", which is simply a way of pandering to idiocy and handing opportunities out on a plate that are then exclusively offered to boys and not to girls.

Which just highlights how uninformed most people are on gender matters. Just how much money, programs, and efforts does this clown think the gov't spent on girls over the last 4 decades? That this kind of ignorance is so common really lets the air out of me sometimes.

that's fine, lets have the same rule apply to sports tryouts...

on a more serious note, if the qualified boys are not applying it is a poor reflection on the school not the boys.

The problem is that this is the traditional view of males being reflected in this comment. Boys and men have universally throughout time been expected to either succeed or fail on their own. This attitude was necessary in pre-history because each tribe needed to have the strongest hunters and warriors possible to feed the tribe and defend against other tribes.

The modern expressions, "man up", "pick yourself up by your own boot laces", "toughen up", etc... are all reflections of this mentality. It is a view that if males are offered help and support that it encourages males to not be their best and only through overcoming the odds does one truly become a man.

Problem is, we've NEVER in human history thought that way about females, and you're right, the rules of the game were changed to benefit them. Problem is, boys, bred for eons to strive to be their best, would rather not play at all then not play fair and they see that the game is rigged in favor of girls so they simply opt out of the game entirely.

Whether feminists like it or not, special rules and handouts and privileges to girls, hurts boys because boys will lose interest if the game is rigged against them in favor of girls.

If it were me, I would pull my boys out of that school immediately. It is a private school. Probably expensive. This shows how much they care about boys. The school does not even recognize that it is a reflection on them if boys are doing poorly. Since boys make up half the school body, I would let them miss out on half of their tuition income.

I'm not familiar with this "head boy and head girl" position as it is a UK tradition. But from what I can tell it is about leadership and representation and not about academics (similar to "class president" in the US).

There is no reason why a head boy should not have been appointed and the school should be embarrassed that boys are doing so poorly under their watch.

The article says that it is a comprehensive school 9public school in US terms), so pulling your kids out is not an option.

Thanks for the clarification, Malcom.

So this is equivalent to public school. I still would pull my kids out. I currently don't send my kids to any school. My state has liberal homeschool laws, but some areas do not. That is another issue all together. I also realize that homeschooling is not an option for many people

Pulling kids out and homeschooling may be best for boys but it does not fix the issue, and in a way it lets the schools off the hook (I almost think they would be glad if all the boys left school). That is why, even though my kids do not even attend school, I still am politically involved with fighting for education for boys.

It is important for everyone, wether you have kids in school or not, to demand that schools be held accountable, fair, and responsible for educating all children in attendance.