Tuesday, December 06, 2005
girl-centric reading curriculum is responsible for the drop in boy's attendance and performance in schools... likewise for her belief that "radical feminist academics, theorists, and activists" are responsible...
I know O'Beirne has it in for women such as the ones she refers to in her column. But just because they do do some rather silly and stupid and ultimately damaging things doesn't make them responsible for everything that has gone wrong in schools.
If you're going to blame the schools, I'd look more to the way schools deal with what used to be called "boys being boys". More than any book boys have to read these days, the crackdown on 'boyish' behavior has made schools a tough place to be for a lot of boys. Face it, boys play rough.... and they do mean things to girls and to each other. Once upon a time, this behavior was winked at... but no longer. What used to be okay, or at the worst, deserving of a visit to the Vice Principal in charge of discipline, is not met with suspensions and expulsions. And this is not driven by the radical feminists, but rather by the parents of girls who aren't willing to let their daughters be the victim of male aggression in and around school.
But more to the point, why not 'blame' the parents of the girls who now form a majority of college students for pushing their daughters to achieve all that is possible? Why not 'blame' the parents of the boys who have 'disappeared' for not keeping their kids motivated (despite the lack of 'inspiring' books that O'Beirne laments)? After all, isn't it conservatives who preach the importance of the family in educating their kids? Just because some school district wants to teach a kid garbage doesn't mean the parents have to stand by and let it happen without getting involved. If my daughter's liberal civics teacher wants to push the "Bush is evil" liberal line, so what? I know enough to make sure she is given the 'other' side of the picture... so she can make up her own mind.