WE Blog

Stop trying to make even this a partisan issue Boxlock. Separating the sexes has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism. Jesus Christ.

Dumb idea. We have nothing to learn from private or parochial schools. I am fighting this crap at my son’s school. They have the boys and girls in separate lunchrooms.

Door King,
Whoa, now your degenerate into a tantrum.
I win!!

J R, keep up the fight! That is ridiculous!

Door King
Posted March 10, 2008 at 7:12 am |
“Not as long as the schools teach people to read, Boxlock.”

That’s the whole point, the public schools too frequently AREN’T teaching people to read.
Whole segments are coming out functionally illiterate.

Whole segments are coming out functionally illiterate

Including yourself apparently.

Speaking of separating boys and girls, the loudest screams I have ever heard was at a high school in which of I was a new arrival.

A basketball had bounced off several walls and down a long hallway into a locker room. I ran in there to fetch the ball and suddenly realized it was the girls locker room.

“A basketball had bounced off several walls and down a long hallway into a locker room. I ran in there to fetch the ball and suddenly realized it was the girls locker room.”
Regular Posted March 10, 2008 at 8:11 am

At least that’s your story and you’re sticking to it, uh Regular.

From the mind called JR

“We have nothing to learn from private or parochial schools”

chucklesnort…

except how to turn out well educated young people equipped with the necessary skills to be successful in life.

I think the article cited has some good points. SPecifically, that girls and boys do learn and react differently. Teachers should be made more aware of those differeneces, as well as the differences in the learning style of various students, and make sure that they teach everyone. I don;t think separating the sexes is a great idea, except perhaps for some who are falling behind. Perhaps same sex classes would help. Perhaps just more individualized teaching would help.

Outlander - Girls dress to impress other girls. Guys don’t care about the label, but girls do.

ghotiphaze
Posted March 10, 2008 at 9:10 am | Permalink
LJ, teachers ARE aware of the differences. They’re just not allowed to teach to the gender because of NCLB. Lake Woebegone effect–every child must be above average.

While I understand your sentiment, I respectfully have to disagree. (except for the last statment). NCLB has been used as an excuse for far too many failings of teachers and administrations. Many were failing before NCLB, and many have not gotten any better. There are lots of reasons. One of them is not holding teachers accountable for the students learning. any friggin idiot can stand up there and recite lesson plans. A teacher is something different. Unfortunately, we have way to many lesson plan reciters, and too few teachers. We have way to many. Well, I don;t want to get into rant mode. Suffice it to say, NCLB is an excuse being used by lazy lesson plan reciters.

I definitely agree with you last post LJ. Although I was never spanked in school, I always knew that was an option for the teachers and principal.

Although I was never spanked in school,

TDT, If ya ain’t cryin’, ya ain’t tryin’

I got it alot.

“Not everyone can afford a nanny, or to stay at home.” ghotiphaze

That’s exactly the problem. There is nothing more important than raising your OWN children - at home.
And it is that simple.

Society and your government cannot be expected to raise your children.

We ate a lot of beans and franks (hotdogs cut up and put in the beans. I still hate Mac and Cheese.
But momma stayed home until youngest one was in school full time.

Interesting, our children do not remember those as hard times. They didn’t know we were poor.

Of course, I left for work at 04:30 and got home routinely after 7 PM. Often even later. Many times, I woke the kids just so I could see them that day.

But mom stayed home.

American Way
Posted March 10, 2008 at 11:00 am | Permalink

We ate a lot of beans and franks (hotdogs cut up and put in the beans. I still hate Mac and Cheese.

—————————–
You had franks for your beans and cheese for your macaroni?

Man, you lived a life of luxury.

I attended public schools. I did receive just a few instructions to the seat of learning sessions. Not many, but a few. I also received the same instruction when I got home. Once, the teacher was out of line—My parents were there immediately. The teacher was not ever out of line again. he was an adult, he learned from the process. me, as a teenager, only sometimes.

Separating boys and girls does seem to assist learning. Boys tend to work harder and learn more in a competitive environment, while girls do better in a cooperative environment.

Boys tend to have a harder time learning some skills, such as reading, so could well learn better if not trying to compete with girls who are at a different level of development. In the same way, girls could achieve higher scores and learn more in science and math when not dealing with competitive boys who are at a different level of development.

We have a crisis of young men dropping out of school and never attending college due to the current educational faults. There are nearly twice as many girls in college as boys, which is great for women…but many girls just aren’t interested in the hard sciences, leaving those programs and job markets hurting for the skills that may reside in those drop-outs.

American education must develop methods to teach ALL children. Recognizing the differences between the sexes could well be the first step in making it possible to have a 100% literate society.

It is interesting to note that to maintain the same standard of living our parents enjoyed with just dad working, today, both husband and wife have to work.

And our vice-principal had the shop teacher make him a paddle. It had lot’s of holes in it. He always said it cut down on wind resistance when he had to use it. It hurt, but nearly as bad as when dad found out. He used a belt.

They say the holes are for wind resistance, but really it’s so the skin oozes into the holes increasing surface connection–hurts more.

What I think I know about the thread topic, and matters thereto directly related:

1) Girls develop various skills useful in academic education more quickly than boys as a general rule. The linked piece discusses 5 year old girls and 6 year old boys as roughly equivalent.

2) The gains from separate gender education are modest at best, more pronounced when low income, racial “minority” boys are involved, very little difference with white, middle class boys.

3) Girls in an all girl academic environment appear to do better in math and science than in a coed environment (again, a generality).

4) Not all education is academic; separate gender education might provide some betterment in academic performance, but there is a cost IMHO from the separation in social areas.

5) Many of the differences in learning styles, etc., are gone by the time the students are in high school.

6) It is difficult to segregate the variable of separate gender education when undertaking studies of the effect thereof. Often, there also exists other differences which might contribute to the better performance, such as parents making the choice to have their students educated in a separate gender environment, and more involved teachers to name but two.

7. Title IX clearly outlaws mandated separate gender education in public schools; to be lawful, these programs must be voluntary.

What I believe we all recognize is that the way it has been done for all these years isn’t working now, which assumes it once worked. It seems to me that the cry for separate gender education is another attempt to find a simple solution for a complex problem.

Yep, ghoti; I am a rather strong believer in that as well.

For example, the “hard” way might be to mandate a boy be six before starting school, in kindergarten, while for girls the age should be five (a simplistic approach that takes some of the gender differences into effect). Better way, and a “harder” way is to test all children for readiness for kindergarten, e.g., and only allow those in at age five (or six or…) that demonstrate readiness. I can hear the howls of protest now.

Yep, ghoti

And I don’t know why ya don’t just call me ‘fish’. Durned sight easier to type.

Gee, “fish”, I thought Abe (oh, darn, forgot his last name) had died….

Are you an Abe Vigoda clone

LOL, no, but Detective Fish did impart a prime piece of wisdom that I’ve discovered to be absolutely correct. He said, “You take a man’s age, divide it by his height in feet and that will give you how many times a day he goes to the bathroom”.

Ya gotta feel sorry for the 90 year old midgets!

I loved it when Abe Vigoda made a surprise visit on the “Letterman Show.

There had been reports of his deaths, 80s or 90s?

Anyway, Vigoda popped out, walked up to Letterman and said, “I’m not dead you idiot!”

outlander
Posted March 10, 2008 at 8:15 am | Permalink
“Sounds like a good idea, especially for girls and their self-esteem. Without boys around, they can focus on learning, instead of dressing like street walkers and acting stupid in a desperate attempt to be popular.

“Then, once they are well-grounded and have some self-confidence, they can better face social pressures.”

While I can see the reasoning here, I am not accepting the underlying premise that boys are a primary influence on how girls act. I think positive influences from assertive and independent role models are important for the development of children of both genders. But again, development is a complex subject with many interacting variables as it was acknowledged above.

PoliMom, I realize girls in general aren’t shallow. My daughter tends to be, but i blame influence from the rest of the family.

I’ve noticed that blonds aren’t really stupid, they’re just cagey enough to act that way.]
*ducks*

Political_mama
Posted March 10, 2008 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

Regular, next time, YOU stay home with the kids and neglect your future desires.

see how you like it.
———————

Yeah Pmom, damn our parents and grandparents for having the patience and wisdom to do such things.

And you stated it correctly Pmom, YOUR DESIRES.

Of course, I don’t expect you to agree, because I had just stated my opinion in my previous post.

However, if the shoe fits…

Wow PMom, God complex, huh? Chuckle… you certainly make it hard to take you seriously.

So, you don’t think that girls these days are more aggressive? You don’t see the Britney inspired clothes some wear and how they come on to teenage boys? And at a younger and younger age?

Well, if you wish to remain blind Mom, that is your right.

Cute, “outlander” –

The old “teenaged loose wimmen” argument.

You’re really tempted, aren’t you, “outlander?”

Adolescents, simply because of adolescence, are acutely aware of the changes their bodies are going through. Guys wear Speedos or muscle shirts. Girls wear padded bras and hip-huggers. Perhaps you’d prefer burkas for all those nymphs who’re tempting you, “outlander.”

But it’s Brittany’s fault, isn’t it, “outlander?” Not yours.

Yeah right.

“But it’s Brittany’s fault, isn’t it, “outlander?” Not yours.”

————

I’m thinking that yes, it is my fault Monkkkeyhawkkk that teenage girls are dressing provocatively. I’m that powerful. Moron.

“Political_mama” –

Good point when you posted:

“I’m so sick of this arguement that women have to give up everything for the sake of their kids and can’t be good parents unless they do.”

If God had merely wanted to give Adam a help mate in the Garden of Eden he would have made it Adam and Steve.

The “fruit of the Tree of Knowledge” is all about sex. And, if you read the Book, God set humanity up for its “fall.”

Nice guy, God.

it is my fault Monkkkeyhawkkk [sic] that teenage girls are dressing provocatively

Actually, he’s just a product of his generation and showing his age. My kids don’t think girls dress provocatively. I didn’t think girls did in the 60s, but my parents sure did. Outlander probably thinks it racy if a girl shows a slip of ankle.

DOUBLE the classrooms… DOUBLE the faculty…. DOUBLE the busses (or would it be ok tolet them ride the bus together?) Yep, really sounds like a good economic move here… And we are griping now because of a school bond issue?? Hmmmmm…..

And why is it that the issue of “sex” should even be brought into the discussion… Much of the separation would be started at a very early age, if I read that right… I dont think 1st - 6th graders are nearly as worried about “sex” issues as Outlander!! LOL

Chas, in my day I didn’t notice the girls so much either. By time I was of that age I’d discovered Playboy and the newly released Penthouse (dang, I’m old!) The girls in my Jr. High had NOTHIN’ on that Marilyn Monroe spread.

And about the bond issue (really doesn’t concern me, as I’m outta district), I tend to notice the ones griping the loudest are those that have to shill out the extra 40 bucks a year because they live in the 200k houses. “We just can’t afford to take another hit!!!”

Fish, I think we must be of a similar age bracket… I remember the origins of Penthouse too!!

Chas, I’d say that could be handled through scheduling. 1/2 the class sizes per gender. Block 1 dudes, Block 2 dudettes.

Chas., it would not required double faculty if the building already had 3 or more sections of the same grade (in order for there to be a permissible separation by gender, there would need to be one all male, by choice; one all female, again by choice; and a coeducational section). If the building indeed had less than this, yes, additional faculty would be needed. As you point out, salaries and benefits make up the largest portion of the general school budget.

Now I understand chas’ arugments better. No Libido. Chas., sixth and seventh grade boys average over a dozen “periods of excitement” per day. The peak of male virility occurs at age 12. But you weren’t interested.

Don’t confuse lack of desire with morality.

Political Mom-

Man, get down off the high horse a litle will you? I have two grown daughters, one a stay at home mom till all her children were in schoo, the other has always worked. I personally believe that children are better off with a stay at home mom. And yeeah, the Mom can hold off her dream job while the children are small. Small sacrifice out of a long lived life. I feel you brought them into the world, you should take care of them. ANd yes, we did that when my children were young. We didn’t take big or little vacations, we dreove old cars, and we did things as a family, because we could not afford to do things as a family, and as a couple. It’s called delayed gratificaiton. I know that’s not a common concept today, but it does work. I also think that it is the BEST model for society as a whole. Not the only successful one, but the BEST one.
However. I recognize that it is tough financially to do so. I recognize that as more and more families have two wage earners, the price of things reflect the money available, making it more difficult to survive, little own live today. I recognize families and marriages are not as stable, and a woman needs to be able to support herself, and her kids, if she has any, should something go bad. I recognize that some women are not instilled with a mothering instinct, and have no desire to stay at home wiping little johnny’s or little janes chin.
SO be it. Then make damn sure your kids are not being dumped off at a kiddie mill, getting little or no nuturing, and often, little or no supervision. Seen that one two. Liscenced day care that wasn;t worth a crap. Be responsible and involved with your kids, whether or not you work outside the home. It;s the least you cando.
I taughtm my daughters that they can do anything, and be anyhing, that they set their sites on. One has an MBA, the other is a teacher. One stayed at home, the other not. I support both their choices, but I have a a personal opinion too, and that is early chldhood is the time for Mom to stay at home,if possible.

Boys 1st hr gym…Girls 1st hr Sci
B, 2nd Sci…G, 2nd gym

follow through with rest of classes. Same kids, same space, same teachers. Just change the times.

Some of you guys aren’t understanding Pmom’s point. It’s not that women want “instant gratification”, it’s that time taken out of the workforce to raise children puts women at a disadvantage later on in life. They will not move up the “ladder” as quickly, will make much less money than men, and in the long run, when retirement rolls around, will not be likely to have their own retirement plan, and will get very little from SS due to years of not working. However, with men working all their lives and not having to take time out to raise children, they move up the “ladder” at a nice clip, make quite a bit more money than women over their lifetime, and can amass a nice retirement as well as get more from SS. That puts women at the whim of the men in their life, and that’s not a good position to be in sometimes. What happens to the woman that stays home to raise the kids while the dad is out in the workforce, and then bam, he leaves her for the young secretary? She hasn’t been in the workforce, so will have to start at the bottom. She will have worked for many less years when she wants to retire, therefore will not be able to since she won’t be able to pay bills. Very unfair.

It’s your life Pmom, just rendering my opinion. Don’t blame anyone but yourself when your family wonders what a “mom” is or why she’s never around.

Heaven forbid there be family unity above personal glory.

TDT_

All that may be true, or not. It depends on the woman and what field she enters. Many, many, jobs have no ladder to ascend. Many, many women who go to work after the years their children are at home (I’m talking pre-K years primarily) will have good retirements, absent the credit for the few years that they did not work. ANd since most people change jobs at least 3 or 4 times intheir working career, many many women and men have no pensions available from those first few years. And I don;t know for sure about SS benefits, but I believe they are capped anyway, after a number of years, and dollars earned, it makes no further difference. ANd as far as fair goes, fairness is when you make the decision, not when someone makes the decision for you. You speak of fair to the women, how about the fairness factor to the children? DO you really believe that they get the same quality of care from a daycare provider? I do not.
Now, to be fair, it probably doesn’t make that much difference, for some For others, it might. The jury is still out. In any case, I support the women’s right to choose who raises their children. I am just tired of the “you just want women pregnant and in the kitchen” attitude that prevails among the most passionate about this issue.

lj, on the subject of SS benefits, IIRC, the same are computed on the basis of the last ten years (?) earnings, with adjustments made. Yes, there is a cap on maximum benefits, but there are credits for years worked after attaining the age of 65, etc., which add to the maximum. I haven’t looked into this for a while, but if anyone is interested, the social security web site has an explanation of how the benefit formula works.

the social security web site has an explanation of how the benefit formula works.

but can anyone without a MBA understand it?

I trust ya, vaughn (and I don’t trust many), I just don’t bother worrying about SS. If it’s still there when I can afford to retire in 50 years (at the age of 101), then I’ll worry about how much I’m not getting.

Seems to me that Regular would be about the last one here with any kind of expertise on women working/not working… LOL… But, he will still flame on it as long as you all let him do it!!

Jed-

i have to agree, although getting along at a young age is not necessarily the same as getting along with hormones raging and all the other crap that goes along with that age. Still, I agree.

By the way LJ, will you be taking care of your mother in her old age (since she didn’t work) or will you ship her off to a home?

Who will pay for it.

“By the way LJ, will you be taking care of your mother in her old age (since she didn’t work) or will you ship her off to a home?

Who will pay for it.”

My mother? What has that got to do with it. My mother is dead. She spend the last of her years in a nursing home with dementia. She did in fact work the last 10 years of her preretirement age. She didn;t work before. Her choice. Even after the kids were gone. Not every woman has to work outside the home to feel fulfilled.

Why didn’t you skip the night school and let her work then? Or you’re saying she didn’t want to.
I think she sold herself out by not working and making something of her own. I know there are a lot of women perfectly content to be home and taken care of, but they’re going to wish they hadn’t in the end. Trust me, I’m watching this with my grandparents right now. My grandmother was a businesswoman and her retirement is half of what my grandfathers was because she stopped during the years to raise her children. Last year toward the end of the year, she fell into her medicare donut hole for medications and she STOPPED TAKING THEM because she couldn’t afford them.

I only quit working because I had to and THANK GOD I’ve been able to get back out there or I was going to go nuts. I felt I lost my soul.

By the way, i have been married to the same woman for 35 years. She has her own job, her own retirment, and her own social security, In addition, she co-owns everything I have, including my 401 (k). In addition, If I should kick off, she would never have to work again if she didn;t want to. I took care of that by making the sacrifice of buying insurance. She will also get part of my pension.

“Last year toward the end of the year, she fell into her medicare donut hole for medications and she STOPPED TAKING THEM because she couldn’t afford them.”

YOU PAY FOr them, or pay the difference to the medicare plan that does not have a donut hole. Gee, it’s what I did for my father.

I am out of here for today and tonight.

Political Mama- You have a right to your opinion and lifestyle. Not everyone agrees that it the right lifestyle. Don;t put down those who disagree with you. My wife doesn;t figure she sold herself short. Neither does my one stay at home daughter, or the going back to work after 6 weeks daughter. Not everyone is you. live with it. Anyway,
You have a great night, however you want to live it

The most important job in the world is raising the children you bring into the world..anyone who “loses their soul” because they stayed home with a child instead of earning a paycheck shouldn’t have had children in the first place. As a child, I can’t imagine what it would feel like to have a mother who felt that way about me. I thank God every day that my mother never made us feel like we were a burden to her. Now that I’m grown, I realize how much easier her life would have been without us, but she never felt that way. When you love someone, taking care of them is not a burden. I never felt like my mother was a burden when I took care of her in her final years. I guess what goes around, comes around.

When you’re laying on your death bed, it won’t be the CEO of the company you work for that will be holding your hand as you exit this world. Think about it.