60% of girls say they want college, only 46% of boys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boys were more academically successful back then for a number of reasons. I tried to limit my son’s screen time and encourage books and trips to the library and local cultural events. I refused to let him have an IPAD or phone until he was older- and I got pushback from a lot of people fir that. Whether any of this made a difference, I don’t know (he’s ‘24), but I think we as a society have normalized dependence on electronics for young kids. It can be even more challenging for boys who aren’t interested in sports- at least sports get kids away from their electronics.

+1 we never got an xbox, and DS didn't get a phone until he was 13 because we didn't have a home phone, and we wanted to be able to leave him home while running errands. But, he had very limited screen time in every way. We saw how he could get easily sucked into computer games and how he got angry playing them.

He's now 19, straight A student in college dual STEM major. He told me recently that we did a good thing limiting their electronics.

These posts are so frustrating! My kid also didn't have video games or a phone well into his teen years. He has very high intelligence. Is earnest and sweet. He is definitely not a straight A student nor in STEM, despite his parents probably doing an even better job than you. Just stop.

? how do you know that?

So what kind of outlandish statements are allowed? Just the ones saying parents of boys who struggle should have done better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College outside a flagship, top 50 lac or top 50 national private really should be disbanded

j

I’m assuming you are a Russian bot, but if not I completely disagree. If you don’t want your DC attending a school outside the top 50 don’t send them. Others disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, my college sophomore son is home for spring break working on a project on Saturday night. His sister, a HS senior, will probably need a designated driver this evening.

Beta son, only fans daughter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but it's not a systemic thing, it's BAD PARENTING. Parents have just assumed for so long that their boys are going to do well that they have been completely ignoring them throughout their entire childhoods, and then they become young men, and boom! Boymoms blame the system instead of themselves for not encouraging independence and providing enrichment for them. Want STEM for your boys? Find clubs for them to join, there are plenty - look at all the First Lego leagues. Want outdoorsmanship for your boys? Surprise! There's Boy Scouts (or whatever it's called now). Want your boy to do track and field? Rec leagues offer a million and five sports options every season! Art classes accept boys, all the math enrichment programs accept boys, all sort of things available to your boys, ladies, STOP IGNORNIG THEM.

+1. It’s a lot easier to blame others and the system for your parenting failure. There are no shortages of opportunities for white boys. They fail because their parents enabled them.

Where is the evidence that parents of girls parent better?

+1
I have polite, smart sons that got into Ivies unhooked. They have serious grit and empathy for others. Fit, athletic, non-drinkers, etc.

We did a damn good job- lol

Girl mom here and I have to admit that both of my DDs have boyfriends who are spectacular kids. Kind, respectful, smart, and ambitious. Their parents definitely raised them right!

I raised my kid right and he is all those things. But teachers treated him horribly the first 18 years of his life and he was profoundly despressed for quite a lot of it as a result. His dad and I were his champions, so he made it through, even has one of his best friends committed suicide junior year and another classmate died of an overdose as a result of serious depression. Those of you who don't have boys who struggle in this thread are not just heartless but also without a clue.

What kid of crazy place did you raise your kid? My sons both did well in school and doing well in college. Their friends are also well adjusted and doing well…know nobody that committed suicide or overdosed.

So then they weren't a private school in VA in 2020 then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but it's not a systemic thing, it's BAD PARENTING. Parents have just assumed for so long that their boys are going to do well that they have been completely ignoring them throughout their entire childhoods, and then they become young men, and boom! Boymoms blame the system instead of themselves for not encouraging independence and providing enrichment for them. Want STEM for your boys? Find clubs for them to join, there are plenty - look at all the First Lego leagues. Want outdoorsmanship for your boys? Surprise! There's Boy Scouts (or whatever it's called now). Want your boy to do track and field? Rec leagues offer a million and five sports options every season! Art classes accept boys, all the math enrichment programs accept boys, all sort of things available to your boys, ladies, STOP IGNORNIG THEM.

+1. It’s a lot easier to blame others and the system for your parenting failure. There are no shortages of opportunities for white boys. They fail because their parents enabled them.

Where is the evidence that parents of girls parent better?

+1
I have polite, smart sons that got into Ivies unhooked. They have serious grit and empathy for others. Fit, athletic, non-drinkers, etc.

We did a damn good job- lol

Girl mom here and I have to admit that both of my DDs have boyfriends who are spectacular kids. Kind, respectful, smart, and ambitious. Their parents definitely raised them right!

I raised my kid right and he is all those things. But teachers treated him horribly the first 18 years of his life and he was profoundly despressed for quite a lot of it as a result. His dad and I were his champions, so he made it through, even has one of his best friends committed suicide junior year and another classmate died of an overdose as a result of serious depression. Those of you who don't have boys who struggle in this thread are not just heartless but also without a clue.

What kid of crazy place did you raise your kid? My sons both did well in school and doing well in college. Their friends are also well adjusted and doing well…know nobody that committed suicide or overdosed.

+1 Sounds like the ghetto

Not even close. "Elite" private school. A few years ago.

[Anonymous]

Not sure why this is a surprise

[Anonymous]

There is an imbalance in med school now too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Discussed before
Boys = minority group in college
why there's a group of magas steering the country into what we have.
As Laura Bush (yes a first lady at the beginning on the 21st century) said something along the lines of we are focusing on the young girls which we should, but we should also be concerned about the young boys. Well, she wasn't wrong to have worried about them.
#getyourboytoattendcollegeANDgraduate

100%%%%. I said that all of the time. Laura Bush was rightly focusing on boys falling behind—especially her reading initiatives and the school systems designed to the way girls learn/develop. And, Laura has only daughters, btw. We had take your daughters to work (changed eventually to child), girls on the run, girls in stem, as nauseum

I’m a female PhD (in my 50s) and I played competitive college sports, etc. I had no problem in that realm.

We started just medicating every boy that couldn’t sit still in kindergarten and first grade. Labeling them all toxic..until what we did eventually came to fruition in MAGA-types

I voted Harris—but I am not dense enough to not notice why Trump was able to win

I happen to have a girl with ADHD and much of what you say is true for her. Our schools are not set up for the way many people (including presumably a lot more boys) learn. For us, the answer is private school.

I’m not sure how things like Women in STEM and Girls in the Run hurt boys. Most of the traditional STEM clubs are male dominated. It almost drove my daughter out of STEM, but a women’s college saved her and gave her the space to explore those interests without being dominated and condescended to by guys.

I think the point the pp was making is that investment in our girls should not be at the detriment of our boys — which for the past several years, maybe the past decade, it has been exactly that. I’m a girl mom and a feminist that can acknowledge the fact that if our highly educated empowered women have no one of equal merit to partner up with we are in trouble as a society

I disagree that investment in girls has come at the detriment at boys.

We should be very worried about boys, they need our attention. We need to get them off the video game addiction, get them reading, get them playing outside and building and making and working together as a team to solve problems. They brain rot in their basements, it’s terrible.

So you are able to acknowledge the pragmatic problems yet cannot see the cultural and systemic undertones that got us here?? You’re an idiot.

NP. We’re not allowed to talk about systemic issues that disfavor any one particular part of the population anymore. Or are we, as long as it’s boys?

The issue I have with this whole “schools are designed for girls” idea is when have schools ever been any different? Even when it was only boys attending school, they were expected to stay in their seats, shut up and pay attention. Things that girls tend to have an easier time with than boys. Boys are probably attending college at the same percentage that they always have. It’s just that now that girls are expected to go as well, more are attending because they don’t struggle as much with the characteristics needed for doing well in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So … basically most boys need DEI to compete with girls. Otherwise the girls blow them out of the water.

Mediocre white boys and men were able to succeed despite their mediocrity for hundreds of years. As soon as the tables started to turn, they went MAGA.

No, the school system is no longer geared toward the way biology enables them to learn and develop. Instead of active learning, athletics, camaraderie, they are forced to sit for 8 straight hours being yelled at and humiliated by purple-haired women who feel like they finally have control over men. It's pathetic.

I'm sorry but I'm 48 years old and never has "active learning", athletics, and camaraderie been the teaching style in the United States.

Teacher here. And I totally agree with the immediate PP.
Schools have always, everywhere all throughout time expected learners to sit quietly and focus. It really can’t be any other way for serious learning to occur. The idea that this is some new approach to education is laughable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still waiting for people to talk about how teaching has changed to be more advantageous to girls.

Less recess.

+2 Also, expectations to sit still and no talking for longer periods of time during the day.

Nope. Not buying it. I still think it's the lack of discipline. You let your babies get away with everything.

I’m not buying that all of a sudden parents of boys are parenting differently or less effectively compared with girls or with previous generations.

Oh please, boys are no longer being disciplined in the same way that they used to be disciplined. Tell me that's not true?

They have always been way more boys who are f**k ups than girls. Just look at your local jail. In tje oast you had large numbers of boys that didn’t even finish school. The only thing different now is that girls are expected to go to college, so they do. Boys are doing what they’ve always done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boys were more academically successful back then for a number of reasons. I tried to limit my son’s screen time and encourage books and trips to the library and local cultural events. I refused to let him have an IPAD or phone until he was older- and I got pushback from a lot of people fir that. Whether any of this made a difference, I don’t know (he’s ‘24), but I think we as a society have normalized dependence on electronics for young kids. It can be even more challenging for boys who aren’t interested in sports- at least sports get kids away from their electronics.

+1 we never got an xbox, and DS didn't get a phone until he was 13 because we didn't have a home phone, and we wanted to be able to leave him home while running errands. But, he had very limited screen time in every way. We saw how he could get easily sucked into computer games and how he got angry playing them.

He's now 19, straight A student in college dual STEM major. He told me recently that we did a good thing limiting their electronics.

These posts are so frustrating! My kid also didn't have video games or a phone well into his teen years. He has very high intelligence. Is earnest and sweet. He is definitely not a straight A student nor in STEM, despite his parents probably doing an even better job than you. Just stop.

? how do you know that?

So what kind of outlandish statements are allowed? Just the ones saying parents of boys who struggle should have done better?

I realize that some kids are more difficult than others, and that there's a nature v nurture at play here, but if you as the parent know that your kid is kind of lazy, shouldn't you light a fire under their butts a bit?

What's the saying: you parent the child you have.

I have two kids: one (the boy) is very conscientious about their grades, always has been. Straight As all throughout, including in college (now a senior). The other (DD) is not as high achieving, and also has a bit of a SN, but we make sure that they aren't getting Ds and Fs. We check DD's grades, and if we notice it slipping, we put pressure on her to do better, and we make sure they have the tools they need to succeed. DD has a 4.0+ wgpa.

Unless your kid has serious SN, there is no reason why they shouldn't be doing well in school.

FWIW, a few of my male cousins went into the military after HS. One went to a public ivy after they got out, and the other went to the police academy. So, I'm not saying all boys need to go to college, but they need to have some goals. My cousins and I grew up lmc, btw. So, maybe that's the reason why they had goals, because when you're poor, you don't have the luxury of being lazy and having no goals. And those who don't have goals end up continuing to live a lmc life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will our daughters marry then?

No worries, and I say this with all seriousness. Alot of successful, educated women marry “down”. Lots of senior level women at my corporate job have low-achieving husbands, househusbands, SAHD husbands etc. That seems to be the norm among that cohort UNLESS they don’t have kids. In that case, the husband may or may not have a good career like the wife. I can also think of a couple high achieving exec women at work who are single, either via divorce or never married.

Get ready - it’s rough out there. My beautiful Ivy grad daughter is dating a drop out server. Great guy - I’ve grown to be happy for her because at least he’s kind and thoughtful and not a weirdo or ahole. He supports himself, has a car and apt (with roommates). She’s young - who knows where life will go. But many of her friends are in similar situations. Another friend’s Law school daughter is dating an Uber driver. Ivys have high percentages of gay men so that adds to the shortages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Discussed before
Boys = minority group in college
why there's a group of magas steering the country into what we have.
As Laura Bush (yes a first lady at the beginning on the 21st century) said something along the lines of we are focusing on the young girls which we should, but we should also be concerned about the young boys. Well, she wasn't wrong to have worried about them.
#getyourboytoattendcollegeANDgraduate

100%%%%. I said that all of the time. Laura Bush was rightly focusing on boys falling behind—especially her reading initiatives and the school systems designed to the way girls learn/develop. And, Laura has only daughters, btw. We had take your daughters to work (changed eventually to child), girls on the run, girls in stem, as nauseum

I’m a female PhD (in my 50s) and I played competitive college sports, etc. I had no problem in that realm.

We started just medicating every boy that couldn’t sit still in kindergarten and first grade. Labeling them all toxic..until what we did eventually came to fruition in MAGA-types

I voted Harris—but I am not dense enough to not notice why Trump was able to win

I happen to have a girl with ADHD and much of what you say is true for her. Our schools are not set up for the way many people (including presumably a lot more boys) learn. For us, the answer is private school.

I’m not sure how things like Women in STEM and Girls in the Run hurt boys. Most of the traditional STEM clubs are male dominated. It almost drove my daughter out of STEM, but a women’s college saved her and gave her the space to explore those interests without being dominated and condescended to by guys.

I think the point the pp was making is that investment in our girls should not be at the detriment of our boys — which for the past several years, maybe the past decade, it has been exactly that. I’m a girl mom and a feminist that can acknowledge the fact that if our highly educated empowered women have no one of equal merit to partner up with we are in trouble as a society

I disagree that investment in girls has come at the detriment at boys.

We should be very worried about boys, they need our attention. We need to get them off the video game addiction, get them reading, get them playing outside and building and making and working together as a team to solve problems. They brain rot in their basements, it’s terrible.

So you are able to acknowledge the pragmatic problems yet cannot see the cultural and systemic undertones that got us here?? You’re an idiot.

NP. We’re not allowed to talk about systemic issues that disfavor any one particular part of the population anymore. Or are we, as long as it’s boys?

The issue I have with this whole “schools are designed for girls” idea is when have schools ever been any different? Even when it was only boys attending school, they were expected to stay in their seats, shut up and pay attention. Things that girls tend to have an easier time with than boys. Boys are probably attending college at the same percentage that they always have. It’s just that now that girls are expected to go as well, more are attending because they don’t struggle as much with the characteristics needed for doing well in school.

Good point.

If you go to an all boys schools, they are expected to sit in their seats and learn. It's about expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will our daughters marry then?

No worries, and I say this with all seriousness. Alot of successful, educated women marry “down”. Lots of senior level women at my corporate job have low-achieving husbands, househusbands, SAHD husbands etc. That seems to be the norm among that cohort UNLESS they don’t have kids. In that case, the husband may or may not have a good career like the wife. I can also think of a couple high achieving exec women at work who are single, either via divorce or never married.

Get ready - it’s rough out there. My beautiful Ivy grad daughter is dating a drop out server. Great guy - I’ve grown to be happy for her because at least he’s kind and thoughtful and not a weirdo or ahole. He supports himself, has a car and apt (with roommates). She’s young - who knows where life will go. But many of her friends are in similar situations. Another friend’s Law school daughter is dating an Uber driver. Ivys have high percentages of gay men so that adds to the shortages.

I think young women are going to have to temper their expectations if they want to get married. There just aren't enough high achieving men out there compared to women. It's kind of sad, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who will our daughters marry then?

No worries, and I say this with all seriousness. Alot of successful, educated women marry “down”. Lots of senior level women at my corporate job have low-achieving husbands, househusbands, SAHD husbands etc. That seems to be the norm among that cohort UNLESS they don’t have kids. In that case, the husband may or may not have a good career like the wife. I can also think of a couple high achieving exec women at work who are single, either via divorce or never married.

Get ready - it’s rough out there. My beautiful Ivy grad daughter is dating a drop out server. Great guy - I’ve grown to be happy for her because at least he’s kind and thoughtful and not a weirdo or ahole. He supports himself, has a car and apt (with roommates). She’s young - who knows where life will go. But many of her friends are in similar situations. Another friend’s Law school daughter is dating an Uber driver. Ivys have high percentages of gay men so that adds to the shortages.

I think young women are going to have to temper their expectations if they want to get married. There just aren't enough high achieving men out there compared to women. It's kind of sad, really.

DP. Is it, though? As I posted earlier, most men certainly didn’t worry about finding a high-achieving woman back when they vastly outnumbered women in colleges.