29 August, 2009

How the Schools Shortchange Boys

Posted by Socrates in dispossession & destruction, education, feminism, General Decline, public skools, Socrates at 8:39 pm | Permanent Link

Note: this article is a few years old:


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 03/13/12 Why Are Today’s Women So Vulgar? 62% similar
  3. 09/26/08 The Roots of the USA PATRIOT Act 56% similar
  4. 09/03/09 Investigators Bust $44 Million Fraud Scheme 52% similar
  5. 03/28/08 The Jewish Features of Nuremberg 49% similar
  6. 09/30/10 Columnist: House Reps Want to Release Pollard 48% similar
  7. 5 Responses to “How the Schools Shortchange Boys”

    1. New America Says:

      This ties in with a larger issue, and that is the corporate control of the “school system’ to serve corporate needs.

      The greatest corporate need seems to be the reversal of the classic roles of the sexes, with the Masculinization of Women, and the Feminization of Men.

      This de facto process of gelding acts to strangle the potential Warrior Caste in the cradle.

      The Jews – this is their idea, of course – enjoy this, as women, at their most “masculine,” make very poor men, much less Alpha Males – the Living Foundation of the Warrior Caste.

      Fourteen Forever.

    2. Lee Luttrell Says:

      A more recent example is over on Rense, where a female employee turned in her manager for being dangerous for believing in conspiracy theories like 9-11, upon which he was promptly fired. Yes….the Jews, political correctness and feminism is all at the heart of this, but it is the women that are bringing it home and to the workplace. It is the women that are gelding their own babies, and it is the women that seek and destroy any Alpha males. As in all struggles, you have to deal with the ground soilders before you get to the ones responsible.

    3. Lutjens Says:

      Wymyn hold most teaching positions at the K-8 level and they are neo-Bolsheviks at the very least. I have personally observed these bitches pussify young boys. It will be up to the parents to remove them from these shitholes called schools – the fathers will have to intervene and bring them up as responsible men. Many ‘fathers’ in society today don’t have the balls or the will to do this. They are too busy watching their favorite coon rumble into the end zone while the bitch of the house runs the show.

    4. Mary O Says:

      Part I: Content & Structure of Learning Programs

      The article is off the mark. My observations as a former math teacher in mostly public schools is that the boys are not as whiny and lazy as the article implies.

      Both boys and girls ask that question, Why do we have to learn math? After you explain the importance of math in science and business, only the very weakest students persist in arguing. Ex. “My family owns a restaurant, so I don’t need to go to college.”

      The core problem in today’s schools is that the programs enforce long periods of physical inactivity. Consider the fact that we are descended from people who made their living as small farmers and fishermen. Even business people back before the 20th century did huge amounts of physical labor. Today’s sedentary lifestyle is unhealthy and promotes feelings of frustration, esp. among younger people.

      Old-style prep schools for boys (like Exeter) used to intersperse their days with considerable sports activity; partly because they were being prepared for possible military careers, but also because this activity is natural to boys. If their physical energy were exhausted on the playing fields, then listening to the science lecture was easier.

      However, schools of today have one goal in mind: maximizing the convenience of the adults. The day must be stretched out to suit the schedule of the commuting careerist parents, while physical activity is often difficult and expensive to promote.

      White boys are often discouraged from participating in serious team sports, as the schools wish to avoid anything resembling a racial incident.

      Integrating girls into boys programs weakens the value of these programs for the boys.

      Also, only healthy sports should be promoted. Some evidence suggests that overly challenging gymnastic programs put girls at risk for serious damage to bones and joints. Cheerleading programs often encourage high-risk stunts without proper safeguards.

      HOWEVER merely adding more gym classes will not save our school system; but maybe shorter sessions, with students involved in private all-White, all-boy or all-girl sports clubs (as in Europe) would be helpful. (Such clubs would also be very helpful to home-schoolers). Also, we should be doing the work that we supposedly don’t want to do, like gardening & raising vegetables, even food prep; instead of leaving it for Mexicans.

      Part II: Feminization as Part of Deracination Process

      Beyond the content of learning programs, a “feminization” among boys and men can be observed. White teenage boys often seem to have that awful homosexual lisp and wrist-flapping behavior. One explanation is that almost all of them live in fatherless (usually divorced) homes. The “gay accent” might be a “default” behavior in young teens. Maybe young men of earlier decades were consciously trying to sound more like their dad, or Clint Eastwood, or some other father-figure?

      On a recent episode of “The View” (which might be called “The Jew”) one of those women offered a pseudo-scientific basis of why relationships supposedly only last about two or three years. She claimed that nature only needed enough time for the women to get pregnant, and after that there was no biological imperative for the couple to stay together. She was thereby encouraging women to just give up on traditional marriage. However, her “science” was bogus; surely the prolonged maturation of human offspring (at least 13 years) required more than a casual fling between the parents. [See Carleton Coon.]

      In the same episode, she and her group further insinuated that middle-aged women should take up lesbianism. Again, pseudo-science was offered as a justification: older women produce larger amounts of male hormones; older men are supposedly only interested in much younger women; other women supposedly make better companions. Yet despite the View insistance that this mid-life lesbianism is a common and natural phenomenon, not one case of this occurrence in real life comes to my mind. And, my social experience has been relatively wide. Straight women just do not turn homosexual at 40. Why are they promoting this idea so stridently?

      Also, a new sit-com is out. Don’t watch much TV, but have seen clips. “Cougars” is the name? Anyway, the woman gets upset that her 40-year old ex-husband can have all the sorority girls he wants, but she has difficulty dating. Back in my early twenties, certain few acquaintances dated “old men” (and that is exactly what they called them). They were not sorority girls, but rather more like social misfits with major financial issues who eventually dropped out. And they were relatively rare. So why is the TV fanning the fumes of resentment between the sexes by making it seem as though the average married woman needs to fear competition from sorority girls? Believe me, the sisters are much more interested in frat boys. TV is setting up a false construct to scare people away from traditional marriage by making it seem unnatural and impossible.

      Ultiimately, communism prefers that people not be deeply rooted in their ethnicity, their religion, their family, even their immediate family, even their marriage or relationships, or even their heterosexuality. Not letting the boys be boys (or the girls be girls) is just one aspect of the deracination process for the promotion of total government control.

    5. Paul_W Says:

      Excellent comments, Mary. Your analysis is consistent with what I’ve seen.