Boys Are Failing Girls (in multiple ways)

[grainfedprairieboy]

Years ago all the way back to the 1960s, the lefties of their day wanted to address what they perceived as an educational inequity between males and females. The prevailing wisdom of the day concluded that it wasn't females that weren't smart, it was that darn regimented educational system with it's adherence to results, it's corporal punishment, it's reward for success and punishment for failure, it's take it out back mentality that appealed to a structure boys naturally excel in and girls struggle with.

As such, the education system was completely overhauled and where little Suzie was once chastised for not being as competitive and progressive and a go-getter like little Johnny, a generation later little Johnny was being scolded for an inability to sit still and pay attention like little Suzie does.

And it is not just in education where we have devalued what makes boys....well, men. If you look at girl's civic groups such as Sparks, Brownies & Girl Guides they are 100% operated by women and allow only female members. However, compared against Beavers, Cubs and Scouts, these groups must all allow girls within their ranks and are very much operated by the mothers of the boys. Hell, even the word `boy` is no longer permitted with the phrase Scout either on paper in speech.

And this has extended to sports teams where a boy may not compete with girls but a girl must be accommodated if she wishes to compete against boys. Thanks to social services women don't particularly need a man to raise a family anymore and men don't really feel any particular responsibility to be providers. They know they are little more then sperm donors and the justice system reinforces this by treating male vs female cases like an 19th century Southern US court would've treated black vs white.

So the women are now the teachers of boys, they are the leaders of boys, they are the mentors of an entire generation of males half of whom who grew up perpetually drugged to make them sit still like a girl and are so content to be feminised they don't even bother to get a drivers license.

Throw in the cadre of single moms who are also the defacto fathers and is it any wonder we have the modern uneducated, unmotivated, under employed mid 30 year old still dwelling in his parent's basement who prefers internet pornography to women and occasionally strokes himself while holding the homoerotic Big Jim doll of his youth with his other hand?

Is it any wonder when Marc Lepine walked into that classroom fully armed and then ordered all the males to leave they just dutifully walked out? They don't see themselves as the protector of women. They actually see themselves essentially as women. It is how they were raised.

Can you imagine a bunch of men from the 1960s on down who would just walk away from a desperate situation and let the girl's fend for themselves or a society that wouldn't have mocked them forever for having done so? Now boys are seemingly broken into two groups; the 99% who are cowardly pussies and the 1% who are psychotic sociopaths. Those fellows who do stick around are happy to have their wives assume the role of their mother, bread winner and sex toy while they play video games and she cares for the children and house.

Clearly the female focused system is not working, at least for the lovelorn gals and military, police and fire recruiters, and to the credit of the modern woman, the one who is now for the most part raising boys on her own - some of these women are at least recognising the legal, cultural and ethical issues and trying to re institute masculinity in society for the benefit of both their sons and daughters.

I was recently at a Beavers meeting where the women leaders commanded the boys to a level befit of any military platoon vs the Sparks group next door which was as lackadaisical as any modern film studies class taught by the most tenured drug addicted hippy at the most liberal of universities.

So maybe our collective future hope for raising men we can be proud of rests with the modern woman?

Your thoughts?

My link

Edited October 16, 2010 by grainfedprairieboy

[eyeball]

So maybe our collective future hope for raising men we can be proud of rests with the modern woman?

Your thoughts?

I imagine Oleg will come unglued when he sees this.

[Shakeyhands]

I imagine Oleg will come unglued when he sees this.

See... now I thought it was exactly like an Oleg post.

[eyeball]

See... now I thought it was exactly like an Oleg post.

It seems to resonate with the warnings about the gayification of society that Oleg often mentions but I think the final suggestion at the end might cause his head to explode.

[grainfedprairieboy]

the gayification of society

I have the answer for you guys:

[dre]

Years ago all the way back to the 1960s, the lefties of their day wanted to address what they perceived as an educational inequity between males and females. The prevailing wisdom of the day concluded that it wasn't females that weren't smart, it was that darn regimented educational system with it's adherence to results, it's corporal punishment, it's reward for success and punishment for failure, it's take it out back mentality that appealed to a structure boys naturally excel in and girls struggle with.

As such, the education system was completely overhauled and where little Suzie was once chastised for not being as competitive and progressive and a go-getter like little Johnny, a generation later little Johnny was being scolded for an inability to sit still and pay attention like little Suzie does.

And it is not just in education where we have devalued what makes boys....well, men. If you look at girl's civic groups such as Sparks, Brownies & Girl Guides they are 100% operated by women and allow only female members. However, compared against Beavers, Cubs and Scouts, these groups must all allow girls within their ranks and are very much operated by the mothers of the boys. Hell, even the word `boy` is no longer permitted with the phrase Scout either on paper in speech.

And this has extended to sports teams where a boy may not compete with girls but a girl must be accommodated if she wishes to compete against boys. Thanks to social services women don't particularly need a man to raise a family anymore and men don't really feel any particular responsibility to be providers. They know they are little more then sperm donors and the justice system reinforces this by treating male vs female cases like an 19th century Southern US court would've treated black vs white.

So the women are now the teachers of boys, they are the leaders of boys, they are the mentors of an entire generation of males half of whom who grew up perpetually drugged to make them sit still like a girl and are so content to be feminised they don't even bother to get a drivers license.

Throw in the cadre of single moms who are also the defacto fathers and is it any wonder we have the modern uneducated, unmotivated, under employed mid 30 year old still dwelling in his parent's basement who prefers internet pornography to women and occasionally strokes himself while holding the homoerotic Big Jim doll of his youth with his other hand?

Is it any wonder when Marc Lepine walked into that classroom fully armed and then ordered all the males to leave they just dutifully walked out? They don't see themselves as the protector of women. They actually see themselves essentially as women. It is how they were raised.

Can you imagine a bunch of men from the 1960s on down who would just walk away from a desperate situation and let the girl's fend for themselves or a society that wouldn't have mocked them forever for having done so? Now boys are seemingly broken into two groups; the 99% who are cowardly pussies and the 1% who are psychotic sociopaths. Those fellows who do stick around are happy to have their wives assume the role of their mother, bread winner and sex toy while they play video games and she cares for the children and house.

Clearly the female focused system is not working, at least for the lovelorn gals and military, police and fire recruiters, and to the credit of the modern woman, the one who is now for the most part raising boys on her own - some of these women are at least recognising the legal, cultural and ethical issues and trying to re institute masculinity in society for the benefit of both their sons and daughters.

I was recently at a Beavers meeting where the women leaders commanded the boys to a level befit of any military platoon vs the Sparks group next door which was as lackadaisical as any modern film studies class taught by the most tenured drug addicted hippy at the most liberal of universities.

So maybe our collective future hope for raising men we can be proud of rests with the modern woman?

Your thoughts?

My link

I think youre just have withdrawal symptoms caused by our evolution away from a strictly patriarchial society.

As for the underemployed 30 year old. Its true that issues are emerging with the employment when you compare women to men. I read that the men have a higher unemployment rate by about 2%. But this has nothing to do with any of the factors you mentioned (librals, women, etc).

It has to do with the fact that wealthy elites (mostly males) were able to trick us into this whole idea of a "service based economy". The idea being all the "labor" would be done somewhere else by someone else and thats good for us because a crappy DVD player only costs 15 bux . Sounds crazy but we bought into the scam with narry a whimper.

In the service based economy a lot of the jobs traditionally held by males are now done overseas. The jobs that remain here in a service based economy are things like customer service, customer relations, front office stuff, office administration, sales, and so on. These are the jobs that WOMEN have traditionally been very good at. Also in a more modern economy less of the good jobs are physically strenuous or require you to be able to lift 150 lbs. So the traditional male physical advantage in the workplace is reduced... Theres nothing that makes a man a better web designer, programmer, or a better Walmart cashier.

Furthermore the "male advantage" has also been greatly reduced due to mechanization and automation. You dont need as many physically strong workers now because instead manually completing some task using brute force the employee is pushing buttons on a machine to do the same thing.

So its these changes in our economy and technology that are disempowering males and leaving a growing number of them feeling frustrated and rudderless. Its not all these social factors youre focusing on, in my opinion.

[grainfedprairieboy]

It has to do with the fact that wealthy elites (mostly males) were able to trick us into this whole idea of a "service based economy".

Right now I am having a bit of trouble getting past the above statement. Are you sure it wasn't the Jews?

[Michael Hardner]

Now boys are seemingly broken into two groups; the 99% who are cowardly pussies and the 1% who are psychotic sociopaths. ...

Clearly the female focused system is not working ...

Your thoughts?

I'm not convinced by anything you said here. The world has changed in many ways over the past 40-50 years or so - gender equality being but one of them. You're blaming a lot of ills- and some things that are not ills - on one idea.

The patriarchal society that you seem to pine for didn't exist for all eternity either. Tribal societies appeared early in human development, before a lot of technological advancement, so you could argue that those societies are more natural. And a tribal society would be more egalitarian, I would argue, than 1950s North America for example.

[grainfedprairieboy]

I'm not convinced by anything you said here. The world has changed in many ways over the past 40-50 years or so - gender equality being but one of them. You're blaming a lot of ills- and some things that are not ills - on one idea.

The patriarchal society that you seem to pine for didn't exist for all eternity either. Tribal societies appeared early in human development, before a lot of technological advancement, so you could argue that those societies are more natural. And a tribal society would be more egalitarian, I would argue, than 1950s North America for example.

If not for a female oriented educational system how else do you explain the creation of the moder Canadian male? I would really like to hear your hypothesis for why male performance socially and academically degrades in perfect correspondence to the feminisation of the educational system over the past 40 years.

[dre]

Right now I am having a bit of trouble getting past the above statement. Are you sure it wasn't the Jews?

Thats it? No substantive reply my post? Guess I wont waste my time replying next time.

[Michael Hardner]

If not for a female oriented educational system how else do you explain the creation of the moder Canadian male?

Firstly, I don't accept your characterization that the contemporary Canadian male is a drooping wimp. Next, I would submit that economics and communications drive the society we have more than other factors. Consumer society, the invention of the teenager as a distinct type of personality, television, radio and the computer age have all given people tools to drive towards what they want in life.

I would really like to hear your hypothesis for why male performance socially and academically degrades in perfect correspondence to the feminisation of the educational system over the past 40 years.

All of these things, as far as they do exist, are products of the advance of the human history. Turn back the clock if you can.

Edited October 16, 2010 by Michael Hardner

[dre]

If not for a female oriented educational system how else do you explain the creation of the moder Canadian male? I would really like to hear your hypothesis for why male performance socially and academically degrades in perfect correspondence to the feminisation of the educational system over the past 40 years.

I would really like to hear your hypothesis for why male performance socially and academically degrades in perfect correspondence to the feminisation of the educational system over the past 40 years.

I explained that... and you completely ignored it. Here it is again.

In the service based economy a lot of the jobs traditionally held by males are now done overseas. The jobs that remain here in a service based economy are things like customer service, customer relations, front office stuff, office administration, sales, and so on. These are the jobs that WOMEN have traditionally been very good at. Also in a more modern economy less of the good jobs are physically strenuous or require you to be able to lift 150 lbs. So the traditional male physical advantage in the workplace is reduced... Theres nothing that makes a man a better web designer, programmer, or a better Walmart cashier.

Furthermore the "male advantage" has also been greatly reduced due to mechanization and automation. You dont need as many physically strong workers now because instead manually completing some task using brute force the employee is pushing buttons on a machine to do the same thing.

So its these changes in our economy and technology that are disempowering males and leaving a growing number of them feeling frustrated and rudderless. Its not all these social factors youre focusing on, in my opinion.

perfect correspondence to the feminisation of the educational system over the past 40 years

Correlation does not equal causation. Youre ignore the other major changes that took place in society during that 40 years. The changes I mentioned.

[grainfedprairieboy]

Thats it? No substantive reply my post? Guess I wont waste my time replying next time.

You just blamed part of the problem as being a deliberate conspiracy of old white industrialists and you want me to dignify that?

[grainfedprairieboy]

Firstly, I don't accept your characterization that the contemporary Canadian male is a drooping wimp. Next, I would submit that economics and communications drive the society we have more than other factors. Consumer society, the invention of the teenager as a distinct type of personality, television, radio and the computer age have all given people tools to drive towards what they want in life.

So why do women outnumber men virtually 2:1 in university? Are you trying to blame the whole thing on the Hamlet Syndrome? (what it was called in the 80s when these type of men first started to appear). Why is that women are now more likely to leave home as young adults with their own apartment and car and wind up dating some drone still living off his parents and weraing baggy pants at 20?

And yes Canadian men are wimps. Or at least the predominately suburban ones seem to be. And though you may not see yourself or peers that way, I think many women sure do (men in general). And while I appreciate your point that media and consumerism are a significant factor in shaping our society, I don`t see it as driving factor but more of a mirror.

All of these things, as far as they do exist, are products of the advance of the human history. Turn back the clock if you can.

I think the future role of men in Canadian society are something that women will ultimately decide. Like Muslims in France, they are the future of this country and gals in my peer group are not overly impressed with the quality of men today and I hear far more from them that which I've precisely articulated to you.

But I do live in a bubble as well. But answer me this: why is there such a disproportionate number of men in this forum?

[Michael Hardner]

So why do women outnumber men virtually 2:1 in university? Are you trying to blame the whole thing on the Hamlet Syndrome?

I'm not blaming it on one thing - as I said, it's part of the unfolding of history. Economics and technology are the biggest drivers of change.

And while I appreciate your point that media and consumerism are a significant factor in shaping our society, I don`t see it as driving factor but more of a mirror.

Then why do things change, socially ? As some have pointed out, physical strength isn't required as much as it was, and certainly the ability to communicate is required more.

But I do live in a bubble as well. But answer me this: why is there such a disproportionate number of men in this forum?

Because men like it here more than women do ?

[CANADIEN]

Years ago all the way back to the 1960s, the lefties of their day wanted to address what they perceived as an educational inequity between males and females. The prevailing wisdom of the day concluded that it wasn't females that weren't smart, it was that darn regimented educational system with it's adherence to results, it's corporal punishment, it's reward for success and punishment for failure, it's take it out back mentality that appealed to a structure boys naturally excel in and girls struggle with.

As such, the education system was completely overhauled and where little Suzie was once chastised for not being as competitive and progressive and a go-getter like little Johnny, a generation later little Johnny was being scolded for an inability to sit still and pay attention like little Suzie does.

And it is not just in education where we have devalued what makes boys....well, men. If you look at girl's civic groups such as Sparks, Brownies & Girl Guides they are 100% operated by women and allow only female members. However, compared against Beavers, Cubs and Scouts, these groups must all allow girls within their ranks and are very much operated by the mothers of the boys. Hell, even the word `boy` is no longer permitted with the phrase Scout either on paper in speech.

And this has extended to sports teams where a boy may not compete with girls but a girl must be accommodated if she wishes to compete against boys. Thanks to social services women don't particularly need a man to raise a family anymore and men don't really feel any particular responsibility to be providers. They know they are little more then sperm donors and the justice system reinforces this by treating male vs female cases like an 19th century Southern US court would've treated black vs white.

So the women are now the teachers of boys, they are the leaders of boys, they are the mentors of an entire generation of males half of whom who grew up perpetually drugged to make them sit still like a girl and are so content to be feminised they don't even bother to get a drivers license.

Throw in the cadre of single moms who are also the defacto fathers and is it any wonder we have the modern uneducated, unmotivated, under employed mid 30 year old still dwelling in his parent's basement who prefers internet pornography to women and occasionally strokes himself while holding the homoerotic Big Jim doll of his youth with his other hand?

Is it any wonder when Marc Lepine walked into that classroom fully armed and then ordered all the males to leave they just dutifully walked out? They don't see themselves as the protector of women. They actually see themselves essentially as women. It is how they were raised.

Can you imagine a bunch of men from the 1960s on down who would just walk away from a desperate situation and let the girl's fend for themselves or a society that wouldn't have mocked them forever for having done so? Now boys are seemingly broken into two groups; the 99% who are cowardly pussies and the 1% who are psychotic sociopaths. Those fellows who do stick around are happy to have their wives assume the role of their mother, bread winner and sex toy while they play video games and she cares for the children and house.

Clearly the female focused system is not working, at least for the lovelorn gals and military, police and fire recruiters, and to the credit of the modern woman, the one who is now for the most part raising boys on her own - some of these women are at least recognising the legal, cultural and ethical issues and trying to re institute masculinity in society for the benefit of both their sons and daughters.

I was recently at a Beavers meeting where the women leaders commanded the boys to a level befit of any military platoon vs the Sparks group next door which was as lackadaisical as any modern film studies class taught by the most tenured drug addicted hippy at the most liberal of universities.

So maybe our collective future hope for raising men we can be proud of rests with the modern woman?

Your thoughts?

My link

men who see themselves as women... "No wonder Lépine did what he did". What a load of complete non-sense.

Edited October 16, 2010 by CANADIEN

[grainfedprairieboy]

I'm not blaming it on one thing - as I said, it's part of the unfolding of history. Economics and technology are the biggest drivers of change.

If not for the feminisation of men through the schools, civic organisations and single mothers, which do you then believe most accurately describes the plethora of 35 yr old uneducated males living in their parents homes today?:

A. He is a product of economics and technology;

B. It is only a perception of modern men and doesn't exist in reality;

C. There was the same number of men or even more in the past but it just wasn't talked about.

Then why do things change, socially ? As some have pointed out, physical strength isn't required as much as it was, and certainly the ability to communicate is required more.

I'm not talking about physical strength. I'm talking about internal strength. I'm talking about discipline, honour and respect for community, country and family.

Because men like it here more than women do ?

I believe that men are more competitive by genetics. Even the ones beaten down by a school system where no one fails and everybody gets a ribbon still feel the stirring within and want to rise to the challenge and the internet affords it for them. Hence the predominance of males on political forums.

So tell me why I am wrong.

[dre]

You just blamed part of the problem as being a deliberate conspiracy of old white industrialists and you want me to dignify that?

I never said anything about them being white.

That was one line in a post that talked about the effect of economic changes, and the increased workforce mechanization and automation that has surplanted the need for physical strength in most industries.

Instead of looking at these obvious changes in the game you seem to be unable to do much besides dredge up the usual ideologic demons... liberals... women... feminism...

[dre]

If not for the feminisation of men through the schools, civic organisations and single mothers, which do you then believe most accurately describes the plethora of 35 yr old uneducated males living in their parents homes today?:

A. He is a product of economics and technology;

B. It is only a perception of modern men and doesn't exist in reality;

C. There was the same number of men or even more in the past but it just wasn't talked about.

I'm not talking about physical strength. I'm talking about internal strength. I'm talking about discipline, honour and respect for community, country and family.

I believe that men are more competitive by genetics. Even the ones beaten down by a school system where no one fails and everybody gets a ribbon still feel the stirring within and want to rise to the challenge and the internet affords it for them. Hence the predominance of males on political forums.

So tell me why I am wrong.

If not for the feminisation of men through the schools, civic organisations and single mothers, which do you then believe most accurately describes the plethora of 35 yr old uneducated males living in their parents homes today?:

A. He is a product of economics and technology;

B. It is only a perception of modern men and doesn't exist in reality;

C. There was the same number of men or even more in the past but it just wasn't talked about.

Its due to socio-economics like I described before.

Plus... your premise is false to start with. While its true that more young adults live at home these days the trend is true for WOMEN as well.

The number of 30 year old women living at home has increased from 8% to 21%. In fact the rate of increase is HIGHER for women that it is for men. While its true that the gross number is higher for men, thats been true since the 50's and 60's.

Between 1981 and 2006, there was an increase in the percentage of both men and women aged 20 to 29 who were living at home. There was an increase of 14 percentage points for men aged 20 to 24, and 22 percentage points for women of the same age group. The percentage of men aged 25 to 29 doubled, while the percentage of women aged 25 to 29 more than doubled in the same time.

The biggest reason for this is that the cost of living has increased way faster than inflation adjusted wages, and it now takes two salaries to maintain a home that could be easily maintained by one salary 40 years ago. Its harder economically to leave the next now, even for people with full time jobs well in excess of the minimum wage.

Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, are all ranked as countries the cost of living has rapidly increased, and cities like Vancouver, Victoria, Abbotsford, Kelowna and Toronto are ranked among the cities with the most severely unaffordable housing markets.

So yeah... OF COURSE more adults live "at home" now. But the trend is true for women as well as men.

[grainfedprairieboy]

I never said anything about them being white.

I was paraphrasing but I shouldn't have but words in your mouth so I detract that part of the statement and apologise.

That was one line in a post that talked about the effect of economic changes, and the increased workforce mechanization and automation that has surplanted the need for physical strength in most industries.

You said: "wealthy elites (mostly males) were able to trick us into this whole idea of a "service based economy""

I can't seriously debate your position because from your perspective you believe it was deliberately orchestrated and that is too much humus to shovel through before we can debate it actually being the cause and effect.

Instead of looking at these obvious changes in the game you seem to be unable to do much besides dredge up the usual ideologic demons... liberals... women... feminism...

I'm with the feminists in that men aren't worth much and the oversexualisation of women is degrading and devaluing to young girls.

Too bad there are no girls here to weigh in on the quality of men in today's society. Instead I've got a bunch of the guys who are likely the problem themselves saying there is actually no problem or if there is it's the fault of ipods and pizza pops and jobs they have to work to get instead be handed on a platter.

At least I'm breaking it down. Tell me exactly in one sentence how a service based economy makes a 30 yr old man genuinely ill when Battlestar Galactica was cancelled?

[Jack Weber]

Its due to socio-economics like I described before.

Plus... your premise is false to start with. While its true that more young adults live at home these days the trend is true for WOMEN as well.

The number of 30 year old women living at home has increased from 8% to 21%. In fact the rate of increase is HIGHER for women that it is for men. While its true that the gross number is higher for men, thats been true since the 50's and 60's.

The biggest reason for this is that the cost of living has increased way faster than inflation adjusted wages, and it now takes two salaries to maintain a home that could be easily maintained by one salary 40 years ago. Its harder economically to leave the next now, even for people with full time jobs well in excess of the minimum wage.

Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, are all ranked as countries the cost of living has rapidly increased, and cities like Vancouver, Victoria, Abbotsford, Kelowna and Toronto are ranked among the cities with the most severely unaffordable housing markets.

So yeah... OF COURSE more adults live "at home" now. But the trend is true for women as well as men.

Good 'ol Neoliberal economics to the rescue!!!

The Free Marketeers have got what they wanted,including the dying middle class AND a resdistribution of wealth upwards into the hands of the few at the top to go along with it...

[Shwa]

I really hate to reduce that tome to a single line to reply, but where it's apt...

So maybe our collective future hope for raising men we can be proud of rests with the modern woman?

It always has rested with women, don't you have a mother?

Edited October 17, 2010 by Shwa

[grainfedprairieboy]

I really hate to reduce that tome to a single line to reply, but where it's apt...

It always has rested with women, don't you have a mother?

If your mother made you the man you are today I won't dispute it.

[Moonlight Graham]

I love my Xbox 360.

[grainfedprairieboy]

I love my Xbox 360.

What is that? Product name for one of those synthetic Japanese love dolls?