Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers and macho podcasters have fed them a line of BS. Go into the trades. Code!!! Join the army. Be a man!

I don’t much care for right wingers or macho podcasters, but what’s wrong with any of those things? Why are so many fixated on making boys go to college if they don’t want to?

DP. Nothing. Most men (like most people) are not intellectual. These are options for those people.

Anonymous wrote:Right wingers and macho podcasters have fed them a line of BS. Go into the trades. Code!!! Join the army. Be a man!

I don’t much care for right wingers or macho podcasters, but what’s wrong with any of those things? Why are so many fixated on making boys go to college if they don’t want to?

Right wingers and macho podcasters have fed them a line of BS. Go into the trades. Code!!! Join the army. Be a man!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We sent DS to private school- small class sizes, high expectations, and a competitive cohort, all with an eye toward college and families who back that goal. It was expensive, we're not rich by most standards, but a good investment. I don't trust the public schools to educate my son and hold him to high standards--and I think it takes a village. Parents can't do everything by themselves.
My DS has ADHD, is pretty much impervious to any threats of punishment, and doesn't respond well to authority- with a headstrong personality, we could only control the environment.

We have a boy exactly like this. Age 5. We have been happy with the supports in our public school but are realizing he will need a smaller environment as he gets older.

If you are in the DC area, to which private did you send your son?

pp here- I'm not in the DC area anymore (Midwest now). A good private school with a heart for kids with ADHD and *a lot* of structure may help. At school DS didn't have significant behavior problems (he saved those for home), but he was of the "late, lost, and unprepared" kind of kid.

I think overall immature executive functioning is why a lot of boys aren't doing well or keeping up--and ADHD is definitely going to aggravate that problem. We scaffolded, provided routine, expectations, supports, etc. and finally in DS's junior year we took the brakes completely off. It was a little rough, but I read a lot about ADHD and maturity in general- and we do these boys, and ourselves, no favors by over compensating for executive functioning weaknesses past a certain age.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Yes but we also must attach personal responsibility somewhere in the equation. Men undoubtedly have various social advantages over women that should result in their success. There’s something implicitly sexist that all these discussions derive at women teachers being the issue and not the boys who’ve had continued broad access to education.

Can you give some examples of those undoubtful social advantages men have today?

Go look at the C-suite and board room of every F500 company. There’s your social advantages at play.

That’s not an advantage, that’s a result or outcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Yes but we also must attach personal responsibility somewhere in the equation. Men undoubtedly have various social advantages over women that should result in their success. There’s something implicitly sexist that all these discussions derive at women teachers being the issue and not the boys who’ve had continued broad access to education.

Can you give some examples of those undoubtful social advantages men have today?

Go look at the C-suite and board room of every F500 company. There’s your social advantages at play.

Why don’t you apply the same reasoning to the percentage of women enrolled in college? Should that be proof of social advantages women have?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Yes but we also must attach personal responsibility somewhere in the equation. Men undoubtedly have various social advantages over women that should result in their success. There’s something implicitly sexist that all these discussions derive at women teachers being the issue and not the boys who’ve had continued broad access to education.

Can you give some examples of those undoubtful social advantages men have today?

Totally curious what the imaginary advantages are for 13 year old boys today?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Yes but we also must attach personal responsibility somewhere in the equation. Men undoubtedly have various social advantages over women that should result in their success. There’s something implicitly sexist that all these discussions derive at women teachers being the issue and not the boys who’ve had continued broad access to education.

Can you give some examples of those undoubtful social advantages men have today?

Go look at the C-suite and board room of every F500 company. There’s your social advantages at play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Yes but we also must attach personal responsibility somewhere in the equation. Men undoubtedly have various social advantages over women that should result in their success. There’s something implicitly sexist that all these discussions derive at women teachers being the issue and not the boys who’ve had continued broad access to education.

Can you give some examples of those undoubtful social advantages men have today?

In this thread you know the posters are sexist if you replace males with females and you’d have second thoughts about expressing that in public.

There’s no problem if more women graduate college than men, but we see in a supposedly egalitarian society some different outcomes and we have to take a look and evaluate if there are some practices today, not in the 50s, that disadvantage men.

I can think of numerous announcements at my kids school for girls only, I strongly disagree with those. Without exception all of the books they read in English center on a female perspective. A log of teachers value social compliance more knowledge when grading.

But when your default thinking of gender issues is patriarchy, it shows that there’s not much room nuance and depth.

DS is going to college. 11th grade, has always known this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

Yes, this. I don't think it's "anti-male" to acknowledge this and say to them "sorry, if you don't have the grades and ability to take up a spot in XXX college, then you shouldn't." Especially since they are at least being judged on their merits instead of arbitrarily excluded like women were for generations.

Anonymous wrote:We sent DS to private school- small class sizes, high expectations, and a competitive cohort, all with an eye toward college and families who back that goal. It was expensive, we're not rich by most standards, but a good investment. I don't trust the public schools to educate my son and hold him to high standards--and I think it takes a village. Parents can't do everything by themselves.
My DS has ADHD, is pretty much impervious to any threats of punishment, and doesn't respond well to authority- with a headstrong personality, we could only control the environment.

We have a boy exactly like this. Age 5. We have been happy with the supports in our public school but are realizing he will need a smaller environment as he gets older.

If you are in the DC area, to which private did you send your son?

Lower executive functioning skills at that age relative to their female peers

ADHD is 4x higher among boys

Dyslexia is more prevalent with boys

Boys generally are not ready to go to college at 18. They could use a few years in the real world or military to have time to mature.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We used to teach men that discipline was necessary for a quality life and successful career. Now people complain of it being “anti-male” to discipline boys rightfully for erratic behavior. I do think more boys would benefit from an all male environment, since girls are socialized to be more disciplined and still than men.

Counterpoint, for generations we kept women out of academics when they are far capable both there and in any thing that requires time management and executive function. The guys will experience discipline in their gigs driving for Amazon and Doordash.

As this comment illustrates, many people don't care about boys at all. That's the real problem.

Not really, truth is this is nothing new, kids who can't get it together have always been expendable.

Until we’re talking about your kid, who can’t possibly be expandable, because you’ve done an awesome job as a parent. Or can’t have difficulty finding a partner to start a family because again you’ve proofed their life for any kind of setback.

The point is males seem to have difficulty enrolling in higher education and getting degrees, regardless of what their grandfathers did. I think it’s worth looking on the causes instead of just chucking it to video games and being lazy.

We want people in our society to be successful regardless of gender, not settle some score.

Instead of looking at their grandfathers, look at their grandparents. In that calculation your going to see about as many if not more kids today completing college. If women have displaced some men, that's what competition looks like.