Jump to content

Has society left men behind?


Argus

Recommended Posts

A column in today's Globe strikes a chord with me, as it talks about how boys and young men have lost interest in education and working, and so many have found their preferred life is that of 'slacker'. School, from kindergarten up through university, has become so feminized it's often a hostile environment for boys and men, and doesn't appeal to their instincts for competition. In fact, competition is frowned on, and a more feminized 'cooperative approach' is taught instead.

Most of what we used to think of as typical boy and young male behaviour has become banned or at least frowned on by society. The kind of rowdiness which used to be routine now gets advice from stern teachers and principals to put junior on Ritalin. And that attitude has spread out through society as it tries to instill a feminized version of behaviour. As a result, a lot of boys and men don't act or feel much like participating any more, and have kind of dropped out.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-lost-boys-video-games-more-fun-than-growing-up/article31464598/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elaborate on specific banned behaviours. What are the behaviours that are banned? What are the specific policies that ban them? I would also like you to elaborate on "hostile" and how teaching kids how to work co-operative is hostile, particularly considering the nature of Post-Fordist industry today with a focus on flexibility and collaboration.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree there is a societal change in regards to male roles. Change is hard for some people - especially if the perception involves giving up power to another group (such as young women in politics), but I think more could be done to highlight the strengths men bring to society, as we continue to work on gender equality in all areas. The current inequality isn't really the 'fault' of men, though they remain the primary beneficiaries of a long-time patriarchal society, but change comes slowly - generation by generation. I have seen roles expectations loosened for men and women in my lifetime, but there is still significant rigidity for both.

As to boyhood rowdiness and using drugs to control, I have mixed feelings. It does seem that too often a diagnoses becomes "trendy" and suddenly everyone is being treated for it. On the other hand, my daughter resisted putting her son on Ritalin for his first two years of school - but the problems were simply getting worse.. He hated school, did poorly both academically and socially; by the time he got home, he was beyond frustrated and his behavior at home reflected that. On Ritalin, he performs much better and as a result, gets positive feedback from teachers and other kids; he's actually starting to like school. My daughter avoids giving him Ritalin while at home, so they get the bulk of his disruptively rowdy behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One would want to look at the education (or conditioning) system over the past 20-30 years to see how it got to this stage. And it is systematic but not quite clear and open about it. Education has clearly become social conditioning and moving more away from actual education (like languages, applied sciences, math, history, geography).

Now you have to wonder how it got to this stage without people noticing it early on (boiling frog scenario). Who approved this kind of thing?

Some of this came out with Common Core, and the notion of No child left behind. With this 'educational' system, they are leaving all children in a situation where they will have one hell of a shock when getting into the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to boyhood rowdiness and using drugs to control, I have mixed feelings. It does seem that too often a diagnoses becomes "trendy" and suddenly everyone is being treated for it. On the other hand, my daughter resisted putting her son on Ritalin for his first two years of school - but the problems were simply getting worse.. He hated school, did poorly both academically and socially; by the time he got home, he was beyond frustrated and his behavior at home reflected that. On Ritalin, he performs much better and as a result, gets positive feedback from teachers and other kids; he's actually starting to like school. My daughter avoids giving him Ritalin while at home, so they get the bulk of his disruptively rowdy behavior.

One wonders how young boys ever managed to get through school before Ritalin was developed. Maybe he hated school and did poorly because he was being forced to act like a girl and instinctively rebelled against it. Schools don't like boys. They like girls, and they want the boys to behave the way girls do. All their teaching and discipline is directed at making boys act like girls. Drugs help them guide these young boys into their more submissive, quieter role of girls.

By the time they reach high school, nearly 20 percent of all American boys will be diagnosed with ADHD. Millions of those boys will be prescribed a powerful stimulant to "normalize" them. A great many of those boys will suffer serious side effects from those drugs. The shocking truth is that many of those diagnoses are wrong, and that most of those boys are being drugged for no good reason—simply for being boys. It's time we recognize this as a crisis.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a32858/drugging-of-the-american-boy-0414/

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One would want to look at the education (or conditioning) system over the past 20-30 years to see how it got to this stage. And it is systematic but not quite clear and open about it. Education has clearly become social conditioning and moving more away from actual education (like languages, applied sciences, math, history, geography).

A new study on gender disparities in elementary-school performance — the first study to examine both objective and subjective performance — found that boys were given lower grades than girls, even in cases (such as math and science) where their test scores were either equal to or higher than the girls’ test scores. It seems like out-and-out discrimination, except there is an interesting wrinkle: teachers didn’t downgrade boys who had identical test scores to girls if they seemed to share the girls’ positive attitude toward learning.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-against-boys/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One wonders how young boys ever managed to get through school before Ritalin was developed. Maybe he hated school and did poorly because he was being forced to act like a girl and instinctively rebelled against it. Schools don't like boys. They like girls, and they want the boys to behave the way girls do. All their teaching and discipline is directed at making boys act like girls. Drugs help them guide these young boys into their more submissive, quieter role of girls.

I agree that there may well be a trend to use Ritalin when it's not needed; it was a concern my daughter had and why she avoided it for his first two years of school. But, when she finally decided to try it, the change was remarkable - he's not 'drugged' in any way, shape or form. He's still active, bouncy and very boyish - but he's not constantly out of control and bothering everyone else who is trying to do their school work, then having melt-downs when someone tries to control him. In his case, I think Ritalin is helpful and appropriate; that doesn't mean it's not being misused in other cases.

School has always been more comfortable for girls than for boys, for the very reasons you suggest - boys are more oriented to physical activity, girls less so. Still, only recently have girls begun to outpace boys when it comes to post-secondary education. Why is that, do you suppose? How did 'normal' boys go through a school system more aligned with girls' natural tendencies, and still end up in university or college more often than girls?

I think there are a variety of factors at play here, only one of them being less patience with boys' physical behavior. I think there is less emphasis on physical education or activities in schools overall, partly because it costs to run those programs and partly because there is fear of injury and resultant lawsuits. I also think that it's true that societal changes have resulted in boys' and men questioning their role in society and that plays a role. I think a concentrated effort to encourage girls to post-secondary education has helped increase their participation and perhaps now is the time to implement similar programs for boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In generations past, controlling the bahaviours of children/students in education settings did not require daily doses of drugs because an explicit discipline framework was already in place, including corporal punishment. Competition was encouraged, scores mattered, and everyone did not get a participation trophy. There were winners...and losers...just like in video games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In generations past, controlling the bahaviours of children/students in education settings did not require daily doses of drugs because an explicit discipline framework was already in place, including corporal punishment. Competition was encouraged, scores mattered, and everyone did not get a participation trophy. There were winners...and losers...just like in video games.

There were also a lot more male teachers, especially in the lower grades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The indoctrination of boys to realize they are bad people starts early and continues throughout the educational system.

What impact must all this be having on boys and young men, who are themselves at one of the most vulnerable stages of their lives? Last year, insideMAN published findings of a focus group of young male students, which gave a disturbing glimpse into the ideological classroom climate faced by boys, this time told by young men themselves.

They told us that when it came to expressing any view that contradicted feminist orthodoxy, they were shouted at and publicly humiliated. They said their motives routinely came under immediate suspicion simply on account of their gender. And they said they wanted to be protected against fundamentalism by prominent and leading figures in the campaign for gender equality.


http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-against-boys/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In generations past, controlling the bahaviours of children/students in education settings did not require daily doses of drugs because an explicit discipline framework was already in place, including corporal punishment. Competition was encouraged, scores mattered, and everyone did not get a participation trophy. There were winners...and losers...just like in video games.

I think there's truth in what you say. Although hitting the kid on the head with a textbook because she's slouching, as I witnessed in my grade six class, seems a bit much. But yeah, having goals to strive for helps, and having them reached and celebrated is important, rather than watered down so that the other kids don't feel bad.

For kids like my grandson, not sure that type of external discipline would be effective. My daughter employs patience, talking and time-outs, as well as corporal punishment with her kids, and his behavior did not change through any of that. Only when he started taking Ritalin was he able to adjust his behavior enough to avoid being in almost constant trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The indoctrination of boys to realize they are bad people starts early and continues throughout the educational system.

What impact must all this be having on boys and young men, who are themselves at one of the most vulnerable stages of their lives? Last year, insideMAN published findings of a focus group of young male students, which gave a disturbing glimpse into the ideological classroom climate faced by boys, this time told by young men themselves.

They told us that when it came to expressing any view that contradicted feminist orthodoxy, they were shouted at and publicly humiliated. They said their motives routinely came under immediate suspicion simply on account of their gender. And they said they wanted to be protected against fundamentalism by prominent and leading figures in the campaign for gender equality.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-against-boys/

Picking and choosing quotes again. From that same link....

While sex differences are real, and likely honed by cultural training as much as evolution, it’s also the case that differences within sexes are far more significant than the differences across genders. ...

... The focus on sex differences also obscures other important variables related to learning — such as age, physical maturity, mental-health issues and home environments, to name just a few. Educating children is a complex task, and while we should be concerned about our boys, we also can’t forget to look at the bigger picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If nurturing violent tendencies is a way to get boys to achieve academically, I say let them fall behind.

What a powerfully stupid thing to say, i feel badly for how ignorant you are, the system fails often, as it seems to have in your case.

Now tell us, where did anyone say we should nurture violent tendencies? Or don't and save us from the lies.

I wonder how many of you think like this and then will wail when anyone suggests that some other extreme male dominated cultural practices are things we don't want in this country, it's incredible how logically inconsistent and down right stupid that is and how unable you are to see it.

Edited by poochy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is no wonder why women are more in favour of immigration from the Middle-East as western men seem to have become so feminised. Of course there is the paradox that while women favour the immigration of the so-called alpha-males in the culture of those men women are often worth less than cattle. If feminists had any logic at all they would be up in arms against immigration from countries of backward cultures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If nurturing violent tendencies is a way to get boys to achieve academically, I say let them fall behind.

Boys are naturally competitive, but schools and society have done their best to eliminate competition for young people - which pleases girls, of course. Boys learn better in a disciplined environment with set rules, but schools no longer have much discipline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boys are naturally competitive, but schools and society have done their best to eliminate competition for young people - which pleases girls, of course.

What an ignorant statement, that girls are pleased by lack of competition. Girls have traditionally been encouraged to hide or eliminate their own competitive spirit, because it wasn't feminine and to avoid threatening the boys. Thank goodness that's changing too!

One of my proudest elementary school memories was being able to outrun all the other boys and all but one of the girls, even those a grade ahead, in short sprints. I sucked at long distance running, though. I was also a great tetherball player. :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to keep in mind is that a male without a college degree, can make an awful lot more money than a women without one and in most cases more than a women WITH one.

Women without a degree make about 70% as much as men without degrees.

Maybe women are more engaged in education because if they don't get one they have a really good chance of working minimum wage in the service industry. Men on the other can make 70k as plumbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't a woman be a plumber?

Because its a boy job.

Most women don't seem to want to work in trades, just like most men don't want to be hairstylists.

Women make up only 5% of skilled tradespeople – meanwhile, 84% of the people working in the hairstylist or aesthetician trades are women, according to Statistics Canada.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because its a boy job.

Most women don't seem to want to work in trades, just like most men don't want to be hairstylists.

My current hairstylist is a man and the last time I had to call a plumber, it was a woman. It's 2016, time to throw those stereotypes out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...