Is MCPS systemically Biased against Boys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep we've seen it too. Also in our Bethesda ES, there are no male teachers and no male adminstrators. The only males working in the building are the building services and janitorial staff.

I've seen little attempts by MCPS to address the massive gender imbalance in hiring.

It's not an MCPS imbalance in hiring. It's a gender imbalance in the number of education majors who are women vs. men. Teaching has always traditionally been seen as a woman's career (I bet teachers would be paid much better if it was a male-dominated field!). The way to address the gender imbalance in schools is to encourage more boys to go into teaching, which won't happen until we change societal expectations of men as providers and women as nurturers.

We heard the same thing in tech -- not enough "pipeline" of women so that's why STEM fields had a huge gender imbalance. So, we focused on ensuring gender balance at the college level, which is why the STEM fields at many universities are now evenly balanced in terms of students studying. The result is more women in STEM fields, since more women are being educated in those fields. We made STEM "cool" even at the grade school level, which is great.

But... no such efforts when the gender imbalance is the other way. Again, we're failing our boys.

The problem with your comparison with STEM is that girls/women have traditionally been seen as not being good enough for these professions, while teaching was seen as not good enough for boys/men - because it doesn't pay enough, it's "easy," etc. (in both cases, boys/men are seen as superior).

Excuses, excuses. We heard a million reasons why women couldn't enter field X and they proved them wrong. Why don't we apply the same to boys?

You realize that women still drop out of STEM careers at shockingly high rates? The problem of women in STEM is far from over. Do not be so smug. You have nothing to be smug about.

Some of us acknowledge brain differences between biological sexes, rather than blame some bogeyman for our preference toward the verbal.

And some of us acknowledge the spectrum of differences within a biological sex are greater than the difference between the biological sexes.

That is clearly false.

Signed,

Scientist

DP and a neuroscientist. Why do you think this statement is false? It fits with the neurocognitive data I've seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

And where did I bash it? I simply said there's no equivalent program for boys. Guess what, life isn't necessarily easy for nerdy, non-sporty, awkward boys either. As a woman who also has a daughter, I'm perfectly aware that girls also face unique challenges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep we've seen it too. Also in our Bethesda ES, there are no male teachers and no male adminstrators. The only males working in the building are the building services and janitorial staff.

I've seen little attempts by MCPS to address the massive gender imbalance in hiring.

It's not an MCPS imbalance in hiring. It's a gender imbalance in the number of education majors who are women vs. men. Teaching has always traditionally been seen as a woman's career (I bet teachers would be paid much better if it was a male-dominated field!). The way to address the gender imbalance in schools is to encourage more boys to go into teaching, which won't happen until we change societal expectations of men as providers and women as nurturers.

We heard the same thing in tech -- not enough "pipeline" of women so that's why STEM fields had a huge gender imbalance. So, we focused on ensuring gender balance at the college level, which is why the STEM fields at many universities are now evenly balanced in terms of students studying. The result is more women in STEM fields, since more women are being educated in those fields. We made STEM "cool" even at the grade school level, which is great.

But... no such efforts when the gender imbalance is the other way. Again, we're failing our boys.

The problem with your comparison with STEM is that girls/women have traditionally been seen as not being good enough for these professions, while teaching was seen as not good enough for boys/men - because it doesn't pay enough, it's "easy," etc. (in both cases, boys/men are seen as superior).

Excuses, excuses. We heard a million reasons why women couldn't enter field X and they proved them wrong. Why don't we apply the same to boys?

You realize that women still drop out of STEM careers at shockingly high rates? The problem of women in STEM is far from over. Do not be so smug. You have nothing to be smug about.

Some of us acknowledge brain differences between biological sexes, rather than blame some bogeyman for our preference toward the verbal.

And some of us acknowledge the spectrum of differences within a biological sex are greater than the difference between the biological sexes.

That is clearly false.

Signed,

Scientist

DP and a neuroscientist. Why do you think this statement is false? It fits with the neurocognitive data I've seen.

Because the main point, that GREATER part that I bolded, is not supported by evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

And where did I bash it? I simply said there's no equivalent program for boys. Guess what, life isn't necessarily easy for nerdy, non-sporty, awkward boys either. As a woman who also has a daughter, I'm perfectly aware that girls also face unique challenges.

You seem to have a bigger problem with me pointing out how girls have less access to sports than boys, than with people bashing Girls on the run on this thread.

There are a lot of ways kids can be disadvantaged. Girls can be nerdy and awkward too. Is life easier for them? Jfc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep we've seen it too. Also in our Bethesda ES, there are no male teachers and no male adminstrators. The only males working in the building are the building services and janitorial staff.

I've seen little attempts by MCPS to address the massive gender imbalance in hiring.

It's not an MCPS imbalance in hiring. It's a gender imbalance in the number of education majors who are women vs. men. Teaching has always traditionally been seen as a woman's career (I bet teachers would be paid much better if it was a male-dominated field!). The way to address the gender imbalance in schools is to encourage more boys to go into teaching, which won't happen until we change societal expectations of men as providers and women as nurturers.

We heard the same thing in tech -- not enough "pipeline" of women so that's why STEM fields had a huge gender imbalance. So, we focused on ensuring gender balance at the college level, which is why the STEM fields at many universities are now evenly balanced in terms of students studying. The result is more women in STEM fields, since more women are being educated in those fields. We made STEM "cool" even at the grade school level, which is great.

But... no such efforts when the gender imbalance is the other way. Again, we're failing our boys.

The problem with your comparison with STEM is that girls/women have traditionally been seen as not being good enough for these professions, while teaching was seen as not good enough for boys/men - because it doesn't pay enough, it's "easy," etc. (in both cases, boys/men are seen as superior).

Excuses, excuses. We heard a million reasons why women couldn't enter field X and they proved them wrong. Why don't we apply the same to boys?

You realize that women still drop out of STEM careers at shockingly high rates? The problem of women in STEM is far from over. Do not be so smug. You have nothing to be smug about.

Some of us acknowledge brain differences between biological sexes, rather than blame some bogeyman for our preference toward the verbal.

And some of us acknowledge the spectrum of differences within a biological sex are greater than the difference between the biological sexes.

That is clearly false.

Signed,

Scientist

DP and a neuroscientist. Why do you think this statement is false? It fits with the neurocognitive data I've seen.

Because the main point, that GREATER part that I bolded, is not supported by evidence.

(in the context of that comment, PP was trying to deny the importance of biological sex, which is well-documented for many of the traits discussed through this thread. And, sure, we're not talking about binary things but a continuum also mediated by other variables)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

+1 this

Some of y'all are selfish a-holes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

+1 this

Some of y'all are selfish a-holes

On the other hand, the question was is the system biased against boys. If you are telling people they should start their own programs to support boys, doesn't that suggest there is a problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

+1 this

Some of y'all are selfish a-holes

On the other hand, the question was is the system biased against boys. If you are telling people they should start their own programs to support boys, doesn't that suggest there is a problem?

PP, but not the one you're directly responding to, but no, I don't. Girls on the Run exists because parents and people in the community saw a need for it and built it. Let Me Run exists because the parents saw a need for it and built it. They're both equally able to access school resources and equally dependent on parents stepping up to make sure that the program is there. There's a discrepancy between how many locations each program has, (Let Me Run has 11 sites in Montgomery County, Girls on the Run has 66), but that's down to how many parents volunteer. If fewer parents see a need for a program for boys, how does that suggest a problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

+1 this

Some of y'all are selfish a-holes

On the other hand, the question was is the system biased against boys. If you are telling people they should start their own programs to support boys, doesn't that suggest there is a problem?

PP, but not the one you're directly responding to, but no, I don't. Girls on the Run exists because parents and people in the community saw a need for it and built it. Let Me Run exists because the parents saw a need for it and built it. They're both equally able to access school resources and equally dependent on parents stepping up to make sure that the program is there. There's a discrepancy between how many locations each program has, (Let Me Run has 11 sites in Montgomery County, Girls on the Run has 66), but that's down to how many parents volunteer. If fewer parents see a need for a program for boys, how does that suggest a problem?

Where are the 11 sites for let me run program in Montgomery county? I only see Kensington choice, 1 location in the county.

I have both a boy and a girl. In our elementary school, girl cam join on the Run at 3rd grade, and there is no other sports or similar activity for boy in our elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was dumbfounded when I volunteered in my kids' MCPS classroom that teachers reward students who can sit still on the classroom rug as early as K. All the boys fidgeted, all the girls got the rewards. As they got older, there were various extracurricular enrichment geared toward girls - not just Girls on the Run but also arts programs where boys were not permitted to join. It blew my mind that public schools could discriminate against one gender. I asked the art teacher at our MCPS elementary school, who held afterschool art classes that were only open to girls, why - she said boys rarely signed up because they were too busy with sports.

I have 2 boys, one of whom loves sports and the other who is totally indifferent. An afterschool art class or casual running club would have been a godsend especially as they got ready for the social pressures around middle school. It should be illegal to offer preferential activities that discriminate by gender.

Like any other program in community, including religious and ethnic groups, Girls on the Run can rent use of MCPS facilities. Do you complain when Korean Sunday Schools are held in our middle schools?

+1 bashing Girls on the Run is absolutely ridiculous and those that do lose all credibility. When it comes to sports there is no dearth of programs for boys. FFS in MCPS TWO of the sports played mostly by girls are focused on cheering on the boys' teams. GTFOOH.

In 6th grade there are no MCPS sports yet, but Girls on the Run is advertised by our MS, with no equivalent program for boys. I understand that there are reasons behind this, but it's still a fact. (That is kind of upsetting to my son - he's no very sporty though does swimming and would love to run/jog - I'm hoping he'll enjoy cross-country next year.)

Good for MCPS. That's the age when many girls drop out of sports. Boys also drop out but not in such large numbers. I assure you there are plenty of sports programs available in your community for boys in 6th grade. I hear that your son would love to run, guess what, a lot of girls would love to play sports that are not available to them either. Stop bashing a program that is doing a lot of good.

I'm a NP. I'm not sure that anyone is bashing Girls on the Run; just pointing out that the equivalent program for boys might night exist at every school. You approve the point but referring to "sports programs available in the community for boys" which are not the same as after school programs available in the actual school building and, therefore more accessible than community programs that occur in the evenings and on weekends.

People are absolutely bashing it. On poster said it "pissed them off," another thought it was disappointing that the program existed only for girls and compared it to "Caucasians on the run," at least one wanted to force them to accept boys or stop advertising at schools.

If people wanted to support boys, they'd build up the programs supporting boys, instead they're focusing on tearing down programs for girls. I think that speaks a lot to where their actual priorities are.

+1 this

Some of y'all are selfish a-holes

On the other hand, the question was is the system biased against boys. If you are telling people they should start their own programs to support boys, doesn't that suggest there is a problem?

PP, but not the one you're directly responding to, but no, I don't. Girls on the Run exists because parents and people in the community saw a need for it and built it. Let Me Run exists because the parents saw a need for it and built it. They're both equally able to access school resources and equally dependent on parents stepping up to make sure that the program is there. There's a discrepancy between how many locations each program has, (Let Me Run has 11 sites in Montgomery County, Girls on the Run has 66), but that's down to how many parents volunteer. If fewer parents see a need for a program for boys, how does that suggest a problem?

Where are the 11 sites for let me run program in Montgomery county? I only see Kensington choice, 1 location in the county.

I have both a boy and a girl. In our elementary school, girl cam join on the Run at 3rd grade, and there is no other sports or similar activity for boy in our elementary school.

Kensington is the location it gives for Montgomery County, but if you click it goes through to this (https://montgomerycounty.letmerun.org/teams) which has 11 teams, not counting schools that have separate 3 and 4th/5th teams twice. There are also lots of sports activities for boys in Montgomery County, so I'm not sure what you mean. Girls on the Run isn't paid for by the school or anything, they use school facilities, like a lot of sports teams. There's plenty of sports out there for 3rd grade boys.