Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like everything else, there's been an over correction. When I was in school girls did not perform as well as boys. Efforts were made to correct it and here we are now.
The girls on the run thing, etc pisses me off too.

We have also run into teachers who clearly favor girls no matter what.
And bullying against boys is tolerated much more than bullying against girls.

I have a boy and a girl and I hate that the school focuses so much time an attention on ‘girls only’ activities. Agree about Girls on the Run. As if boys wouldn’t benefit from releasing some extra energy by training for a 5K and discussing issues.

There's a similar program for boys called Let Me Run (https://www.letmerun.org/). Like Girls on the Run, it's a running program and it has a curriculum - the one for Let Me Run is focused on teaching boys that there are lots of ways to be a man, that it's okay to show emotion, etc. So, basically, an anti-toxic masculinity program. But it needs parent volunteers to set it up and keep the program going, just like Girls on the Run does. So, if you're upset about Girls on the Run, you may want to look into starting a Let Me Run program at your kids' schools.

You're joking right? The parallel program of Let me Run would be a program that is anti toxic femininity (using looks as a weapon, gossiping, social gate keeping, weaponizing feelings) which girls on the run is not.

what are people talking about? I have a girl and a boy. the girl did "girls on the run" and the boy did "let me run". Both great programs. But I do agree boys are being neglected overall.

Richard Reeves just wrote an essay recommending all boys be redshirted to deal with educational bias against boys:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/10/boys-delayed-entry-school-start-redshirting/671238/

In short, OP, you aren’t wrong.

The Boy Crisis is a pretty good read on this subject. It's def worth it if you have a boy who is struggling

Anonymous wrote:
My oldest is now a senior after having spent all his school career in MCPS, in Bethesda schools.

I have never seen what OP describes, but I made sure to tell my kids never to act aggressively, but always to complain to the teacher if they were bullied. This is how it works here. I come from a British boarding school where schoolyard differences were solved physically, and the Headmaster didn't much care.

My son was bullied by other boys, and as soon as I complained to the teachers, she spoke to the others boys and the matter was resolved.

OP, it's not normal that your kids are fighting. It's not normal that the teacher ignored that your child was the aggressor. You can't let that fly in your house. You have the power to stop this - please do so.

Excuse me, but you need to get a grip on reality. OP didn't say anything about fighting; they mentioned behavior that while not exhibited by all children, is quite normal. A person does not need to be pediatrician or pediatric mental health professional to understand that. Parents must address it when it happens and teach their children how to avoid them moving forward, but let's not pretend that OP describes behavior that is abnormal or that they're not addressing it with their children when it occurs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s culture-wide, not just MCPS.

+1 Happening in DCPS. Boys really started to notice in 5th grade up, and both were humiliated in a class by a teacher who called out all the boys.

Beverly Farms would make boys who act up at lunch sit by themselves on the stage to embarrass them in front of their peers. Also recess would be taken away which gave them no outlet to burn off energy.

They took away lunch and recess to for us and it made no sense as they'd do it for a week or two for really minor/petty things and refuse to notify parents. Worst was my kid preferred missing lunch and recess and would rather eat in the office so when we requested this, they refused saying it wasn't allowed by MCPS. The lunch room and recess were horrible and chaotic and they wouldn't allow parent volunteers to help out. Anyone can accuse or make something up and there are teachers/principals who target specific kids for different reasons and those kids are constantly punished and humiliated. Mine was punished as we kept going to war with them over the IEP and then when they refused to work with us we terminated the IEP as it was worthless and doing more harm than good. They got angry as they needed the IEP numbers to justify special education teachers and demanded we keep it and change the diagnosis to one they preferred that wasn't fitting to keep their numbers up.

You should all go watch the White Lotus and commune with the Connie Britton character - her take is right up your alley

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree about schools being biased against boys, but when it comes to youth sports, boys definitely have the advantage and it's pretty petty to be pissed about Girls on the Run.

No, you. If you had a boy who needed confidence building and found such a program exists but your child was purposely excluded because he's a male, you'd be pretty disappointed too. Imagine "straights on the run" or "Caucasians on the run" being an acceptable program.
It's exclusion based on a protected class: sex. They shouldn't allow that. Especially when schools push it/host it/advertise it.

You make a good point. You could file a Section 504 complaint with the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (Philadelphia Office) for discrimination on the basis of sex and see what the Federal Government thinks of excluding boys without an alternative program for boys. I think that would be the only way to address the issue in MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s culture-wide, not just MCPS.

+1 Happening in DCPS. Boys really started to notice in 5th grade up, and both were humiliated in a class by a teacher who called out all the boys.

Beverly Farms would make boys who act up at lunch sit by themselves on the stage to embarrass them in front of their peers. Also recess would be taken away which gave them no outlet to burn off energy.

Anonymous wrote:Wyngate 10 years ago? Yes. Boys always in the office. Mine included.

Same for Beverly Farms. No aggression but constantly sent to the office for socializing in class, being off task, and talking too loud in the cafeteria. He was the type of kid that had a sense of humor and cracked a lot of jokes. When we asked for an evaluation for ADHD, the referrals to the office and his behavioral intervention plan stopped. We paid for a private evaluation that confirmed he was a student with ADHD that needed accommodations and special education services.

My 9yo DS tripped on a backpack and fell on top of a girl. She accused him of harassment. Principal interviewed her and her BFF who corroborated her friends story. My son was interviewed but then reprimanded and given a talk about sexual harassment and all of his teachers were notified. Principal never interviewed DS’s friend who witnessed the whole thing and saw my son trip. It left him shaken and really really upset. He didn’t even know what sexual harassment was. I am positive it wouldn’t have been handled this way had the genders been reversed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like everything else, there's been an over correction. When I was in school girls did not perform as well as boys. Efforts were made to correct it and here we are now.
The girls on the run thing, etc pisses me off too.

We have also run into teachers who clearly favor girls no matter what.
And bullying against boys is tolerated much more than bullying against girls.

I have a boy and a girl and I hate that the school focuses so much time an attention on ‘girls only’ activities. Agree about Girls on the Run. As if boys wouldn’t benefit from releasing some extra energy by training for a 5K and discussing issues.

There's a similar program for boys called Let Me Run (https://www.letmerun.org/). Like Girls on the Run, it's a running program and it has a curriculum - the one for Let Me Run is focused on teaching boys that there are lots of ways to be a man, that it's okay to show emotion, etc. So, basically, an anti-toxic masculinity program. But it needs parent volunteers to set it up and keep the program going, just like Girls on the Run does. So, if you're upset about Girls on the Run, you may want to look into starting a Let Me Run program at your kids' schools.

You're joking right? The parallel program of Let me Run would be a program that is anti toxic femininity (using looks as a weapon, gossiping, social gate keeping, weaponizing feelings) which girls on the run is not.

Kindness, inclusive behaviour, self-confidence, body positivity, focus on brains over looks - these are all CORE to Girls on the Run. It's actually exactly an anti-toxic-femininity program.

Does anyone have any actual research on this? I remember an eye-opening paper some years ago about how in mixed gender classrooms in Australia, if girls talked/asked questions more than ~20% of the time, they were perceived (by teachers and students of all genders alike) as dominating the conversation. This really drove home to me how our perception of how people are treated in the gendered way can be off.

But obviously that research was from (IIRC) the 90s and Australia. It would be interesting to see some kind of quantitative data of actions-and-punishments broken down by gender vs child/school/parent perception of the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree about schools being biased against boys, but when it comes to youth sports, boys definitely have the advantage and it's pretty petty to be pissed about Girls on the Run.

No, you. If you had a boy who needed confidence building and found such a program exists but your child was purposely excluded because he's a male, you'd be pretty disappointed too. Imagine "straights on the run" or "Caucasians on the run" being an acceptable program.
It's exclusion based on a protected class: sex. They shouldn't allow that. Especially when schools push it/host it/advertise it.

DP. There is a confidence building running program for boys as has been pointed out. If you think it's important and needed, but your school doesn't have it, you should step up and lead it. If your only interest is in tearing down things for girls, then feel free to keep whining about it on the internet.

Again. They aren't the same. You're wrong.

I doubt they're precisely the same, but the motivation behind Let Me Run was to offer an equivalent program, the founder was even a Girls on the Run coach before starting Let Me Run.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like everything else, there's been an over correction. When I was in school girls did not perform as well as boys. Efforts were made to correct it and here we are now.
The girls on the run thing, etc pisses me off too.

We have also run into teachers who clearly favor girls no matter what.
And bullying against boys is tolerated much more than bullying against girls.

I have a boy and a girl and I hate that the school focuses so much time an attention on ‘girls only’ activities. Agree about Girls on the Run. As if boys wouldn’t benefit from releasing some extra energy by training for a 5K and discussing issues.

There's a similar program for boys called Let Me Run (https://www.letmerun.org/). Like Girls on the Run, it's a running program and it has a curriculum - the one for Let Me Run is focused on teaching boys that there are lots of ways to be a man, that it's okay to show emotion, etc. So, basically, an anti-toxic masculinity program. But it needs parent volunteers to set it up and keep the program going, just like Girls on the Run does. So, if you're upset about Girls on the Run, you may want to look into starting a Let Me Run program at your kids' schools.

You're joking right? The parallel program of Let me Run would be a program that is anti toxic femininity (using looks as a weapon, gossiping, social gate keeping, weaponizing feelings) which girls on the run is not.

+1. Not sure how you can compare the two programs. One is empowering the girls and the other is ensuring that the boys do appropriate things so as to not do anything naughty.

Well said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree about schools being biased against boys, but when it comes to youth sports, boys definitely have the advantage and it's pretty petty to be pissed about Girls on the Run.

No, you. If you had a boy who needed confidence building and found such a program exists but your child was purposely excluded because he's a male, you'd be pretty disappointed too. Imagine "straights on the run" or "Caucasians on the run" being an acceptable program.
It's exclusion based on a protected class: sex. They shouldn't allow that. Especially when schools push it/host it/advertise it.

DP. There is a confidence building running program for boys as has been pointed out. If you think it's important and needed, but your school doesn't have it, you should step up and lead it. If your only interest is in tearing down things for girls, then feel free to keep whining about it on the internet.

Again. They aren't the same. You're wrong.