|
LaMalinche -> RE: I'm not so sure this aspect of female domination/supremacy is a good thing (1/4/2006 3:48:03 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pollux
It's interesting that you mentioned the possibility that perhaps women are better than men at college. Did you hear about the controversy that erupted when somebody asked the President of Harvard (I think it was Harvard) why science & engineering fields tend to graduate proportionally more men than women? He said, "well, I think men are probably just better at those things". He was hounded mercilessly for that remark (by women, mostly), and eventually had to withdraw it.
Personally, I tend to doubt that men are inherently better at science & engineering, and I tend to doubt women are inherently better than men at attending and graduating college.
I believe that you are referring to Larry Summers, who among a list of different reasons why males were doing better in hard sciences than women, he also suggested that there MIGHT BE a genetic difference between males and females when it comes to the hard sciences. Mr. Summers was listing different areas that should be looked into in order to improve the ration of male vs. females in the hard sciences.
The women that hounded him were also the idiot women who didn't seem to mind that one of their "hard scientists" nearly had a fainting spell upon hearing that hypothesis out of around twenty.
The whole incident was absurd, but after losing the election, the liberals had to make some sort of human sacrifice. *WEG*
By absurd I mean the repeated mea culpas, breast-beating, and supposed scientists nearly fainting in the aisle. IT is not absurd that males do better and matriculate at a higher proportion than females, and there may be a gene that controls that - after all, that is what the human genome project is all about - how much is nature and how much is nurture.
Now, in reference to the OP's original topic. . . yes, girls typically out perform boys until about puberty or middle/Jr High school, and then the boys start out performing them. There are various theories and reasons for this. One is that boys (usually one or two per classroom) receive about 50% of the teacher’s time. This means that in a class of 25 - the other 23 students are only receiving about 2% each of the teacher’s time. Another is reading material. The greater percentage of "reading" books (as opposed to textbooks) assigned by teachers and school boards have male protagonists with female characters (if any) as passive observers. This works to further instill the societal belief about how girls should behave - passively, while the male has adventures and solves problems.
At the college level, one of the things to consider is which gender is getting which degree, and which degree pays more. An engineering degree pays much better than an English degree. In someways the classes are still segregated by gender.
In the hard sciences, a mentorship is a must for graduate degrees and above, and those that currently hold the posts of "professor" whether assistant, associate, full, et cetera, are most often men. By and large, these men chose male students to mentor.
Now, before I get flamed, please keep in mind that I did use the phrase, by and large. The problem with looking at ANY gender inequality is that there is always the case of the individual that does not fit the by and large category.
Women are the nurturers, okay, but what about the women who drown their children, or the single father who raises and loves his children with the same care and compassion that we typically reserve for women?
Women are not physically strong enough for combat. Well, by and large, but there are some that can run other males into the ground on that 5km trek with a 90 pound rucksack.
Another thing to look at as far as college matriculation rates go, are the changes in society. College has become more of a viable option for females and not just to get their Mrs. degree. The number of white middle class females in the workforce is steadily increasing, and these women know that they need a degree to get a decent paying job.
It goes further than gender, or I should say, it is not only reflected in gender. Minorities are also increasing their rates of admission and matriculation. The University that I attend, has about a 20 something % of students who identify as African America, yet the percentage for the State is slightly under 6%. This cannot just be for the basketball. Minority enrollment is up for both males and females, but especially the females. This is going to change the percentile rates for matriculation by gender.
Okay, I have been long winded enough. My point, and as Ellen DeGeneres would say, and I do have one, is that a change in college matriculation percentages does not necessarily reflect that the public education or collegiate education system is failing anyone regardless of gender. There are other factors to consider, some which the schools and students have no control over, such as their parents level of education and the age of their mother when she had her first child. I personally believe that the public education system is failing all when I look around at our post-literate society. But that is a topic for another thread.
I am somewhat at a loss as to how an increase of college graduating females, pussifies men, but oh well, perhaps white men ages 18-45 feel the need to belong to a victim group also. A system that has served them well for millennia is changing; it is not surprising that they would be alarmed.
If anyone wants to PM me, I can get you a works cited list on any of the information that I included.
Have a great day
LaMalinche
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes I take humor seriously. Sometimes I take seriousness humorously. Either way it is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
