The “boys’ achievement gap” in education–you know the one where too many girls are on the honor roll?– is now a bona fide phenomenon, and the cure for it appears to be allowing the young excrescences to swing from the chandeliers at school. At one Boulder elementary school, requiring boys to act “like girls” is a thing of the past; educators now “honor [boys'] neurological strengths.” Which means cultivating their inner Genghis Khans, letting them “write essays” entirely with drawings, and suggesting they do “reports” on such historically significant dudes as Tony Hawk.
“Girls tend to be more compliant and willing to sit down and do what they’re told. Boys are less tolerant of that,” [the principal] said. “If they don’t have control and they’re not interested, they’re less likely to buy in. So we really need to approach it that way, and not make everyone act and behave like girls.”
Focus your keen analytic powers on that last sentence. Note the whiff, however faint, of the principal’s disdain for girls, who, even though they are perceived as the superior scholars in this context, are still considered weird variants of normal. “Everyone” should not be made to behave like them.
If this were really a call to abolish the feminine, I’d be all for it. But “everyone” doesn’t mean everyone, it means “boys.” Apparently girls, those freaks of nature, are still expected to behave “like girls.” Do not expect them to be doing reports on Kathleen Hanna any time soon.
Now that the national kid debate has shifted to the horrible plight of broken-spirited boys forced to conform to degrading girl standards, the ability to “sit still,” once thought of as a virtue in a child, is now attributed specifically to the female, and, like everything “feminine,” is instantly devalued. All these teachers can talk about, all of a sudden, is the egregious pain inflicted when a boy is made to sit at a faggy feminizing desk. His “15% more spinal fluid” makes this an unthinkable torture.
In Lowell, Mass, academic achievement itself is reviled as feminine. There, boys are “not liking school. They are dreading going. They have decided this is girl stuff, [girls] are the ones getting the good grades. The whole male structure is set up to be hierarchical, to be at the top of the mountain. If you’re climbing a mountain and you don’t think you’ll ever get to the top, you’re going to find another mountain, which really is a sad commentary on education.”
Or maybe it’s a sad commentary on the person doing the sad commentarying. The chump lamenting this tragedy of boys’ difficulties in maintaining their god-given upper hand is Kathy Stevens, spinal fluid expert and co-author of the book that started it all: The Minds of Boys: Saving Our Sons From Falling Behind in School and in Life. Stevens accepts without hesitation the notion that anything girls are good at automatically acquires an undesirable feminine taint. She takes it for granted that any boy in his right mind would rather drop out and pursue a career of baby-impaling than acquire that dreadful taint. She neglects to conclude that perhaps it’s the “whole male structure” itself that’s screwing over these boys.
You know the structure to which I allude. Patriarchy.
Stevens’ boss, co-author, co-crisis instigator, and co-patriarchy-enthusiast is Michael Gurian. Gurian has manufactured his crisis on the basis of his “discovery” that boys and girls “learn differently.” His thesis is that boys suffer, not because of social factors like absentee parents, poverty, or social conditioning, but from their natural genetic antipathy to being forced to “act like girls.” Having successfully promoted his genetics-based boy-crisis in national media (Newsweek, People) he is pleased to hawk his institute’s educational materials to schools that live in fear of rocking the patriarchal boat by matriculating too many chicks, and to families who feel confident getting their parenting advice from corporate consultants featured in magazines that alternate between cover stories on Jennifer Aniston and Angelina Jolie.
Parental “training packages” start at $80.
Stevens, meanwhile, is not alone in her conviction that boys should automatically reject anything stinking of Girl. Such as scholarship. A Colorado curriculum director wants to introduce comic books (whups, I mean “graphic novels”) because her boys chafe at “girl books.” “Girl books,” apparently, are the ones with words in them.
How did our nation’s school system descend to such a deplorable girl-friendly state? Like any underachieving young male prospective college dropout who has done absolutely no research, Lowell High School senior Luis Guitierrez blames the women’s movement for “hurt[ing] males.” To advance his argument, this degraded victim of America’s pathological girl-centricity employs the crafty Sitcom Gambit: Everybody Loves Raymond, a show that epitomizes Hollywood’s famed undying allegiance to radical man-hating feminism, promotes a misandrist worldview in that Raymond is dumb and his wife is smart. Feminism, Guitierrez intimates, invented sitting still at desks, and created the Doofus Dad. Whether Guitierrez holds the the women’s movement responsible for crappy TV writing is unclear.
Girls. Is there any crisis they haven’t caused? Abortion, poverty, teen sex, disease, feminism, prostitution, porn, pedophilia, and the mutha of’em all, sexy cheerleading–you name it; some castrating, conniving bitch of a loose-moraled slut is at the bottom of it.
The Twisty Solution: single-sex classrooms. Let the girls read books, and let the boys jab each others’ eyes out with pointed sticks. It’s only natural.