What do you like about Mann?

[Anonymous]

I'm guessing you don't understand social science.

Saying the best marathoners come from East Africa is also neither racist nor invalidated by the existence of world-class marathoners originating from elsewhere.

Anyway, this is all a digression. I'm not the original poster about the appearance of the moms.

One thing I admire about Mann is that it routinely successfully assimilates children who speak no English. This isn't terribly uncommon since the neighborhood is so international. (Most ambassador children speak English, but this is not as true for non-embassy staff.) The children seem to take no more than a month getting acclimated and then they fit right in, language and all.

This is probably more a comment on the children than the school, but whatever role the school plays it is doing it well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing you don't understand social science.

Saying the best marathoners come from East Africa is also neither racist nor invalidated by the existence of world-class marathoners originating from elsewhere.

Anyway, this is all a digression. I'm not the original poster about the appearance of the moms.

One thing I admire about Mann is that it routinely successfully assimilates children who speak no English. This isn't terribly uncommon since the neighborhood is so international. (Most ambassador children speak English, but this is not as true for non-embassy staff.) The children seem to take no more than a month getting acclimated and then they fit right in, language and all.

This is probably more a comment on the children than the school, but whatever role the school plays it is doing it well.

I understand very well how social science works, indeed. Take a look to Mann demographics and to the profiles of, precisely, this school families. You will maybe see the reasoning behind what I wrote.

[Anonymous]

No offense, but I doubt that. Your dissertation advisor would be cringing.

Nothing sexist at all. The theory (and I didn't bring it up) is that high earners have prettier than expected (i.e., conditional on other characteristics) spouses. If the high earner is male, then he should have a pretty wife. If the high earner is female, the husband should be extra handsome.

The key question is the likelihood that the female is the breadwinner. It doesn't happen often (for a variety of reasons, including discrimination), so on average the pretty spouse taking benefit from a high earner is likely to be female.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but I doubt that. Your dissertation advisor would be cringing.

Nothing sexist at all. The theory (and I didn't bring it up) is that high earners have prettier than expected (i.e., conditional on other characteristics) spouses. If the high earner is male, then he should have a pretty wife. If the high earner is female, the husband should be extra handsome.

The key question is the likelihood that the female is the breadwinner. It doesn't happen often (for a variety of reasons, including discrimination), so on average the pretty spouse taking benefit from a high earner is likely to be female.

I think DC is not a representative sample, Mann population either. You would be surprised. Female breadwinners are not so uncommon in certain social/ professional circles.
Anyhow, the sexism comes from the fact that the statement was not presented as you gave just done: gender neutral. High earners in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but I doubt that. Your dissertation advisor would be cringing.

Nothing sexist at all. The theory (and I didn't bring it up) is that high earners have prettier than expected (i.e., conditional on other characteristics) spouses. If the high earner is male, then he should have a pretty wife. If the high earner is female, the husband should be extra handsome.

The key question is the likelihood that the female is the breadwinner. It doesn't happen often (for a variety of reasons, including discrimination), so on average the pretty spouse taking benefit from a high earner is likely to be female.

I think DC is not a representative sample, Mann population either. You would be surprised. Female breadwinners are not so uncommon in certain social/ professional circles.
Anyhow, the sexism comes from the fact that the statement was not presented as you gave just done: gender neutral. High earners in general.

gave=have

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing you don't understand social science.

Saying the best marathoners come from East Africa is also neither racist nor invalidated by the existence of world-class marathoners originating from elsewhere.

Anyway, this is all a digression. I'm not the original poster about the appearance of the moms.

One thing I admire about Mann is that it routinely successfully assimilates children who speak no English. This isn't terribly uncommon since the neighborhood is so international. (Most ambassador children speak English, but this is not as true for non-embassy staff.) The children seem to take no more than a month getting acclimated and then they fit right in, language and all.

This is probably more a comment on the children than the school, but whatever role the school plays it is doing it well.

It really has to do with the number of children per classroom who need extra attention from the teacher. If it's a few, everybody does well. If it's half, everybody suffers. They've studied this in the Montgomery County system.

[Anonymous]

Is it the shade of bricks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but I doubt that. Your dissertation advisor would be cringing.

Nothing sexist at all. The theory (and I didn't bring it up) is that high earners have prettier than expected (i.e., conditional on other characteristics) spouses. If the high earner is male, then he should have a pretty wife. If the high earner is female, the husband should be extra handsome.

The key question is the likelihood that the female is the breadwinner. It doesn't happen often (for a variety of reasons, including discrimination), so on average the pretty spouse taking benefit from a high earner is likely to be female.

I think DC is not a representative sample, Mann population either. You would be surprised. Female breadwinners are not so uncommon in certain social/ professional circles.
Anyhow, the sexism comes from the fact that the statement was not presented as you gave just done: gender neutral. High earners in general.

Want my take on this as the shortest but not least attractive female lawyer at a Wall Street law firm for 6 years, where academics and merit was really as close to #1 as it gets, and schmoozing low on the list? Almost all the female lawyers, including the partners, were attractive and not overweight, and of average or taller height. We had also been at the top of our law school classes before we came. Almost all of the male associates were more attractive than the average man. Some of the male partners gained weight. But in general, studies have shown that being taller and more attractive increases your earning power, and I found that to be true even in a place where there was a real emphasis on intelligence and a hell of a lot of hard work.

PS as a woman in most fields, you are expected to look good even if you are overworked (as the female associates were), running on little sleep, had small children (most of us didn't dare)...........

I don't see many "Trophy Wives" at Mann. I see many attractive SAHMs who have given up viable professional careers to stay home...... But the way you said it sounded really insulting to the women as well as sexist..........