Anonymous wrote:The thing is though that high school and middle school favors girls because they go through puberty earlier and that leads to changes in the brain that are advantageous for doing well in school. Boys do catch up eventually, but the current system does make them look like weaker college applicants (esp now that it is so competitive to get into top colleges).
I’m not disagreeing, but when I was in high school boys were just as competitive academically as the girls. There was not this gender imbalance in the classroom. Boys today are particularly disengaged from academics - so I do believe something additional is going on. Chalking it up to simple brain maturity means you’re leaving other explanations on the table.
As school in general has become more drill and kill with lots of worksheets and less fun and creative work and more teaching to the test, it favors girls and boys disengage. As my 7th grade son said in reference to a friend of his who is very smart but constantly forgets to bring the correct materials to class or finish his homework "there are lots of smart boys, but the smart girls are better at school." Their school doesn't allow kids to carry their backpacks around and they only have a couple times a day to go to their lockers, so even that requires a level of organization I didn't have to have in middle school.
My experience has been completely different— teaching methods used to be more “kill & drill” when we were young. Most schools have moved toward project-based assignments, collaboration, and application of knowledge instead of memorization/drills. Teachers are also more accommodating now! Many allow kids to talk quietly, listen to music on headphones, and have a higher tolerance for noise & movement.
So, again, something else is going on. I’m not sure why boys are faltering, but I think it can be fixed.
+1 Schools are bending over backwards to accommodate boys.
:roll: How exactly is that happening? I'm not seeing it. Schools are bending over backwards to make learning and especially reading hateful to boys.
How is reading hateful to boys? Didn't they used to teach boys to read but not girls? Aren't most classical authors men? There is no reason boys can't read at the same level as girls. You have to be able to sit and concentrate in order to read. Boys need to learn how to do that.
You obviously don't have a son. If you did, you would know there are books that boys actively like to read - they will do so voluntarily - and books that boys actively hate to read. Women English teachers (a redundant formulation, I know) are seemingly only capable of assigning the latter as class reading. I suspect it's because they are only assigning books they like without any thought for what boys like. Last year DS said his teacher told the class they could choose from among five books to write a report on - she said "you will really like these books!" - and every single one of them was a book designed to appeal only to girls. Talk about completely oblivious.
PP. I don't have a son your age. From my experiences 20 years ago it was the complete opposite. All of the books were about nature, seafaring, war and other masculine stuff. Most assigned reading bored me to tears but I still had good grades. It was great to read anything a bit modern like 1984, which was still male oriented but at least had psychological themes. I can hardly remember a time that we read anything that would tend to appeal to girls other than some scenes Romeo & Juliet. And it was for precisely the reason you stated: boys will only voluntarily read boy stuff but girls will tolerate boy stuff, so we, girls, had to read stuff like Call of the Wild. However, we survived and did our assignments.
That was back when boys were doing roughly as well as girls in school. Sure that's making the point you think it is? Sounds like we need to go back to that era to me.
If the boys can't adjust to even reading something that's not their favorite type of book, why should they be doing as well in school? What if they decide history, science, and math are boring too? Do they just get to play action figures then?
I’m sorry but parsing the emotions of some woman of color after she was allegedly raped just isn’t that interesting
Weren't you going to share your son's reading list?
I forgot the names and he is out with his bros but one had to do with some indigenous girl on a reservation. 3/6 books revolves around a rape. They were almost all written by female POCs. The one interesting book was Gatsby and teacher apologized for including it at open school night but said it was “actually a good book.”
With all of the stuff going on with school libraries and sex, I'm awfully surprised that parents haven't complained about all these rape books... :roll:
My daughter was also subjected to a lot of books that included rape scenes. These were authored by male POC. Some BIPOC parents asked the school for more upbeat books since they thought it was depressing. The kids prefers Gatsby.
I have a son in a MD public school and he has never read any books on rape, sexual/ gender identity, etc.
Really? My son is in a DC public middle school and he’s definitely been assigned books like this for classroom
discussion.
I think people are missing the forest through the trees. If I asked my kid whether he would like to read The Great Gatsby or one of these YA books his answer would be…what are the other options. I don’t know why everyone keeps referencing The Great Gatsby…i slogged through it but I wouldn’t ever read it for fun (not that others wouldn’t).
Maybe kids can just read books they want to read. Teacher would have to review it and make sure it passes the sniff test…but maybe the boys want to read a great sports book, or war book, or [Insert topic here].
I guarantee if you asked my kid their choice is one of these books or Shakespeare…he will pick one of these books.
Because the characters in Gatsby are cool. They are daring and ambitious, take risks. Maybe a little coo-coo. Not just annoying victims
Thanks…you get that from the movie or the Cliff Notes (yeah, I know those aren’t a thing anymore).
It is a tedious read that people throw around to show they are literate.
There are plenty of great novels. Not sure why this one was plucked out as an example of what anyone wants to read.
DP. My kid read it in 9th grade and said it was most people’s favorite book they had to read that year.
Yeah yeah yeah but to return to the subject at hand, high school English readings now are rarely classics, they are primarily "black woman author writing about a black girl who experiences racism and is sad". Boring, cringe, painful to read.
To recap: kids ignore all of Gatsby, think it’s fun. But read this book by female POC, can’t name the title, and themes so scarring boys reject education ever more. But they’re smart because fast, precocious reader, 9th grade…can’t have it both ways.
Sorry, idiot, there is no contradiction at all when a smart kid who reads what he wants to read at home rejects school because they keep forcing him to read boring preachy message fiction.
+1. YA caliber racial grievance fiction is off putting, and refusing to accept the poisonous political indoctrination boys are getting these days does not reflect a lack of educational merit.
And Gatsby isn't grievance fiction? I think it's popular with teens because it's deeply cynical--American dream is bunk, human nature is despicable--and plays to their mindset. Otherwise the themes aren't particularly age appropriate--marital affairs, nastiness about having children, grizzly hit and run with dismember breast pivotal. Dude didn't have all the money so he wrote the great American novel as take down. What's unacceptable about someone from a reservation taking a crack at that? Did you read either book?
English class isn't reading, it's analysis. If DS doesn't respect the assigned reading, the papers should write themselves.
Anonymous wrote:I know many schools have higher male than female acceptance rates, but for the top STEM-focused schools, it's the opposite by nearly 2 to 1.
+1 I mentioned up thread that for majors like CS and engineering, it's male dominated. Girls get a bump. When we toured Caltech and CMU, we were told that they do try to keep the gender balanced as much as they can but you can see the demographics still skews more male, especially for CS/Eng.
Also at Harvey-Mudd, where the admit rate for women is 230% that of men.
I was at Mudd in the 80s, and it was very clear they were giving girls an admissions bump.
+1 I had a male friend at Mudd around that time, and he said the ratio was like 10:1 (girl), and ANY girl, no matter how attractive, could find a boy to date there. I knew one girl from my HS there, too, and let's just say that what my male friend said was accurate.
This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
It’s fine to have some of this queer POC literature but it’s overdone. In the case of my son’s sophomore English class it was like 6/7 books were clearly from the DEI approved list. The other was Gatsby.
Anonymous wrote:The thing is though that high school and middle school favors girls because they go through puberty earlier and that leads to changes in the brain that are advantageous for doing well in school. Boys do catch up eventually, but the current system does make them look like weaker college applicants (esp now that it is so competitive to get into top colleges).
I’m not disagreeing, but when I was in high school boys were just as competitive academically as the girls. There was not this gender imbalance in the classroom. Boys today are particularly disengaged from academics - so I do believe something additional is going on. Chalking it up to simple brain maturity means you’re leaving other explanations on the table.
As school in general has become more drill and kill with lots of worksheets and less fun and creative work and more teaching to the test, it favors girls and boys disengage. As my 7th grade son said in reference to a friend of his who is very smart but constantly forgets to bring the correct materials to class or finish his homework "there are lots of smart boys, but the smart girls are better at school." Their school doesn't allow kids to carry their backpacks around and they only have a couple times a day to go to their lockers, so even that requires a level of organization I didn't have to have in middle school.
My experience has been completely different— teaching methods used to be more “kill & drill” when we were young. Most schools have moved toward project-based assignments, collaboration, and application of knowledge instead of memorization/drills. Teachers are also more accommodating now! Many allow kids to talk quietly, listen to music on headphones, and have a higher tolerance for noise & movement.
So, again, something else is going on. I’m not sure why boys are faltering, but I think it can be fixed.
+1 Schools are bending over backwards to accommodate boys.
:roll: How exactly is that happening? I'm not seeing it. Schools are bending over backwards to make learning and especially reading hateful to boys.
How is reading hateful to boys? Didn't they used to teach boys to read but not girls? Aren't most classical authors men? There is no reason boys can't read at the same level as girls. You have to be able to sit and concentrate in order to read. Boys need to learn how to do that.
You obviously don't have a son. If you did, you would know there are books that boys actively like to read - they will do so voluntarily - and books that boys actively hate to read. Women English teachers (a redundant formulation, I know) are seemingly only capable of assigning the latter as class reading. I suspect it's because they are only assigning books they like without any thought for what boys like. Last year DS said his teacher told the class they could choose from among five books to write a report on - she said "you will really like these books!" - and every single one of them was a book designed to appeal only to girls. Talk about completely oblivious.
PP. I don't have a son your age. From my experiences 20 years ago it was the complete opposite. All of the books were about nature, seafaring, war and other masculine stuff. Most assigned reading bored me to tears but I still had good grades. It was great to read anything a bit modern like 1984, which was still male oriented but at least had psychological themes. I can hardly remember a time that we read anything that would tend to appeal to girls other than some scenes Romeo & Juliet. And it was for precisely the reason you stated: boys will only voluntarily read boy stuff but girls will tolerate boy stuff, so we, girls, had to read stuff like Call of the Wild. However, we survived and did our assignments.
That was back when boys were doing roughly as well as girls in school. Sure that's making the point you think it is? Sounds like we need to go back to that era to me.
If the boys can't adjust to even reading something that's not their favorite type of book, why should they be doing as well in school? What if they decide history, science, and math are boring too? Do they just get to play action figures then?
I’m sorry but parsing the emotions of some woman of color after she was allegedly raped just isn’t that interesting
Weren't you going to share your son's reading list?
I forgot the names and he is out with his bros but one had to do with some indigenous girl on a reservation. 3/6 books revolves around a rape. They were almost all written by female POCs. The one interesting book was Gatsby and teacher apologized for including it at open school night but said it was “actually a good book.”
With all of the stuff going on with school libraries and sex, I'm awfully surprised that parents haven't complained about all these rape books... :roll:
My daughter was also subjected to a lot of books that included rape scenes. These were authored by male POC. Some BIPOC parents asked the school for more upbeat books since they thought it was depressing. The kids prefers Gatsby.
I have a son in a MD public school and he has never read any books on rape, sexual/ gender identity, etc.
Really? My son is in a DC public middle school and he’s definitely been assigned books like this for classroom
discussion.
I think people are missing the forest through the trees. If I asked my kid whether he would like to read The Great Gatsby or one of these YA books his answer would be…what are the other options. I don’t know why everyone keeps referencing The Great Gatsby…i slogged through it but I wouldn’t ever read it for fun (not that others wouldn’t).
Maybe kids can just read books they want to read. Teacher would have to review it and make sure it passes the sniff test…but maybe the boys want to read a great sports book, or war book, or [Insert topic here].
I guarantee if you asked my kid their choice is one of these books or Shakespeare…he will pick one of these books.
Because the characters in Gatsby are cool. They are daring and ambitious, take risks. Maybe a little coo-coo. Not just annoying victims
Thanks…you get that from the movie or the Cliff Notes (yeah, I know those aren’t a thing anymore).
It is a tedious read that people throw around to show they are literate.
There are plenty of great novels. Not sure why this one was plucked out as an example of what anyone wants to read.
DP. My kid read it in 9th grade and said it was most people’s favorite book they had to read that year.
Yeah yeah yeah but to return to the subject at hand, high school English readings now are rarely classics, they are primarily "black woman author writing about a black girl who experiences racism and is sad". Boring, cringe, painful to read.
To recap: kids ignore all of Gatsby, think it’s fun. But read this book by female POC, can’t name the title, and themes so scarring boys reject education ever more. But they’re smart because fast, precocious reader, 9th grade…can’t have it both ways.
Sorry, idiot, there is no contradiction at all when a smart kid who reads what he wants to read at home rejects school because they keep forcing him to read boring preachy message fiction.
+1. YA caliber racial grievance fiction is off putting, and refusing to accept the poisonous political indoctrination boys are getting these days does not reflect a lack of educational merit.
And Gatsby isn't grievance fiction? I think it's popular with teens because it's deeply cynical--American dream is bunk, human nature is despicable--and plays to their mindset. Otherwise the themes aren't particularly age appropriate--marital affairs, nastiness about having children, grizzly hit and run with dismember breast pivotal. Dude didn't have all the money so he wrote the great American novel as take down. What's unacceptable about someone from a reservation taking a crack at that? Did you read either book?
English class isn't reading, it's analysis. If DS doesn't respect the assigned reading, the papers should write themselves.
+1 to the bolded, and the middle and high school literature class classics are FULL of preachy message fiction well. Dickens? A Doll's House? All Quiet on the Western Front? The Scarlet Letter? To Kill a Mockingbird? They're great books, but they're also preachy message fiction.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
It’s fine to have some of this queer POC literature but it’s overdone. In the case of my son’s sophomore English class it was like 6/7 books were clearly from the DEI approved list. The other was Gatsby.
Exactly! Felt like they were throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
I had read all the traditional texts in the canon as an English major, so could help my DC. But the English teachers at my DC’s high school were very quick to deduct points for DC not being aware of norms/issues related to minority culture. They were chomping at the bit to mark DC down.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
I had read all the traditional texts in the canon as an English major, so could help my DC. But the English teachers at my DC’s high school were very quick to deduct points for DC not being aware of norms/issues related to minority culture. They were chomping at the bit to mark DC down.
Again, glad your DS learned something you were incapable of teaching, because I grok Holden Caufield, is more loan gunman than literate.
Anonymous wrote:The thing is though that high school and middle school favors girls because they go through puberty earlier and that leads to changes in the brain that are advantageous for doing well in school. Boys do catch up eventually, but the current system does make them look like weaker college applicants (esp now that it is so competitive to get into top colleges).
I’m not disagreeing, but when I was in high school boys were just as competitive academically as the girls. There was not this gender imbalance in the classroom. Boys today are particularly disengaged from academics - so I do believe something additional is going on. Chalking it up to simple brain maturity means you’re leaving other explanations on the table.
As school in general has become more drill and kill with lots of worksheets and less fun and creative work and more teaching to the test, it favors girls and boys disengage. As my 7th grade son said in reference to a friend of his who is very smart but constantly forgets to bring the correct materials to class or finish his homework "there are lots of smart boys, but the smart girls are better at school." Their school doesn't allow kids to carry their backpacks around and they only have a couple times a day to go to their lockers, so even that requires a level of organization I didn't have to have in middle school.
My experience has been completely different— teaching methods used to be more “kill & drill” when we were young. Most schools have moved toward project-based assignments, collaboration, and application of knowledge instead of memorization/drills. Teachers are also more accommodating now! Many allow kids to talk quietly, listen to music on headphones, and have a higher tolerance for noise & movement.
So, again, something else is going on. I’m not sure why boys are faltering, but I think it can be fixed.
+1 Schools are bending over backwards to accommodate boys.
:roll: How exactly is that happening? I'm not seeing it. Schools are bending over backwards to make learning and especially reading hateful to boys.
How is reading hateful to boys? Didn't they used to teach boys to read but not girls? Aren't most classical authors men? There is no reason boys can't read at the same level as girls. You have to be able to sit and concentrate in order to read. Boys need to learn how to do that.
You obviously don't have a son. If you did, you would know there are books that boys actively like to read - they will do so voluntarily - and books that boys actively hate to read. Women English teachers (a redundant formulation, I know) are seemingly only capable of assigning the latter as class reading. I suspect it's because they are only assigning books they like without any thought for what boys like. Last year DS said his teacher told the class they could choose from among five books to write a report on - she said "you will really like these books!" - and every single one of them was a book designed to appeal only to girls. Talk about completely oblivious.
PP. I don't have a son your age. From my experiences 20 years ago it was the complete opposite. All of the books were about nature, seafaring, war and other masculine stuff. Most assigned reading bored me to tears but I still had good grades. It was great to read anything a bit modern like 1984, which was still male oriented but at least had psychological themes. I can hardly remember a time that we read anything that would tend to appeal to girls other than some scenes Romeo & Juliet. And it was for precisely the reason you stated: boys will only voluntarily read boy stuff but girls will tolerate boy stuff, so we, girls, had to read stuff like Call of the Wild. However, we survived and did our assignments.
That was back when boys were doing roughly as well as girls in school. Sure that's making the point you think it is? Sounds like we need to go back to that era to me.
If the boys can't adjust to even reading something that's not their favorite type of book, why should they be doing as well in school? What if they decide history, science, and math are boring too? Do they just get to play action figures then?
I’m sorry but parsing the emotions of some woman of color after she was allegedly raped just isn’t that interesting
Weren't you going to share your son's reading list?
I forgot the names and he is out with his bros but one had to do with some indigenous girl on a reservation. 3/6 books revolves around a rape. They were almost all written by female POCs. The one interesting book was Gatsby and teacher apologized for including it at open school night but said it was “actually a good book.”
With all of the stuff going on with school libraries and sex, I'm awfully surprised that parents haven't complained about all these rape books... :roll:
My daughter was also subjected to a lot of books that included rape scenes. These were authored by male POC. Some BIPOC parents asked the school for more upbeat books since they thought it was depressing. The kids prefers Gatsby.
I have a son in a MD public school and he has never read any books on rape, sexual/ gender identity, etc.
Really? My son is in a DC public middle school and he’s definitely been assigned books like this for classroom
discussion.
I think people are missing the forest through the trees. If I asked my kid whether he would like to read The Great Gatsby or one of these YA books his answer would be…what are the other options. I don’t know why everyone keeps referencing The Great Gatsby…i slogged through it but I wouldn’t ever read it for fun (not that others wouldn’t).
Maybe kids can just read books they want to read. Teacher would have to review it and make sure it passes the sniff test…but maybe the boys want to read a great sports book, or war book, or [Insert topic here].
I guarantee if you asked my kid their choice is one of these books or Shakespeare…he will pick one of these books.
Because the characters in Gatsby are cool. They are daring and ambitious, take risks. Maybe a little coo-coo. Not just annoying victims
Thanks…you get that from the movie or the Cliff Notes (yeah, I know those aren’t a thing anymore).
It is a tedious read that people throw around to show they are literate.
There are plenty of great novels. Not sure why this one was plucked out as an example of what anyone wants to read.
DP. My kid read it in 9th grade and said it was most people’s favorite book they had to read that year.
Yeah yeah yeah but to return to the subject at hand, high school English readings now are rarely classics, they are primarily "black woman author writing about a black girl who experiences racism and is sad". Boring, cringe, painful to read.
To recap: kids ignore all of Gatsby, think it’s fun. But read this book by female POC, can’t name the title, and themes so scarring boys reject education ever more. But they’re smart because fast, precocious reader, 9th grade…can’t have it both ways.
Sorry, idiot, there is no contradiction at all when a smart kid who reads what he wants to read at home rejects school because they keep forcing him to read boring preachy message fiction.
+1. YA caliber racial grievance fiction is off putting, and refusing to accept the poisonous political indoctrination boys are getting these days does not reflect a lack of educational merit.
And Gatsby isn't grievance fiction? I think it's popular with teens because it's deeply cynical--American dream is bunk, human nature is despicable--and plays to their mindset. Otherwise the themes aren't particularly age appropriate--marital affairs, nastiness about having children, grizzly hit and run with dismember breast pivotal. Dude didn't have all the money so he wrote the great American novel as take down. What's unacceptable about someone from a reservation taking a crack at that? Did you read either book?
English class isn't reading, it's analysis. If DS doesn't respect the assigned reading, the papers should write themselves.
+1 to the bolded, and the middle and high school literature class classics are FULL of preachy message fiction well. Dickens? A Doll's House? All Quiet on the Western Front? The Scarlet Letter? To Kill a Mockingbird? They're great books, but they're also preachy message fiction.
The issue isn’t that books have themes, it’s the constant harping on the same annoying woke themes.
Anonymous wrote:This is what I did when they threw out the canon the year my son started high school. Instead of “Catcher in the Rye”, they substituted “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe,” a queer, coming-of-age novel set in El Paso. They threw out Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hawthorne and other authors. Then they had trigger warnings in the syllabus. So I ended up hiring a female, Black PhD Literature candidate to tutor my son. She was able to give him the perspective he needed to get good grades on his papers. Best thing I ever did.
Outrageous. Maybe we can all hire our own personal DEI coaches just to be able to function in this postmodern hellscape.
I felt I was beating them at their own game.
Simpler explanation, she knew how to read and write, and actually taught your DC something, but good for him.
Who would you have hired to give him the correct perspective to write well about rich, morally corrupt people from the jazz age; poor Southerners and intellectually disabled people; Puritans and adulterers? (ie., the characters in Fitzgerald, Faulkner, and Hawthorne works). I mean, it seems every bit of lit from the anon asks your child to relate to a group of people far removed from his experience, but you only have issues with queer folks from texas?
Boys do not want to read about whining victims of any kind at all. Boys want to read about overcoming a great challenge - and by great challenge they do NOT mean "someone said something mean that hurt my feelings".
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}