Government creating a fatherless society" - On Line Opinion 15/3/2012 - please comment
Craigo saidI'm afraid April doesn't like answering questions
April saidAdelaideD I didn't answer your questions because I can't see the point in people directing their comments to me and not the broader topic. I have made my contribution, and getting into a personal debate with you based on your misguided notions of what you think feminism is is pointless. All people are different, gender is over rated, teachers ability to teach does not vary with their gender, and employers (if they are wise) would cast a large net when recruiting so that people from all walks of life get considered for the position.
Frenzy, the evidence I provided (from a 2006 final report) comes from the thick of the so called "feminised" education system. You have made a lot of unsubstantiated claims, including females score 30% higher than boys on some aspects of literacy. Where's your evidence for that?
April, I said senior English, the 30% is data from Tertiary Admissions in senior English in NSW. To be exact girls in NSW score on average 27% better in over all in results. Some schools in NSW have implemented changes to try and address this, like it or not it is happening Australia wide eventuay & some schools are trialing more changes under the smarter schools initiative , the only ones complained are those from self proclaimed feminists at AEU.Frenzy, the evidence I provided (from a 2006 final report) comes from the thick of the so called "feminised" education system. You have made a lot of unsubstantiated claims, including females score 30% higher than boys on some aspects of literacy. Where's your evidence for that?
As for so called 'feminised' education system, those feminists in the AEU have been very proud at times, to call it that themselves, so yes I have borrowed their term. In fact they are now calling for more girls reforms in schools, targeting only girls as they are concerned young girls are more concerned about looks & becoming sex symbols rather then the next prime minster or CEO.In their words and published in their own feminist magazine ' young girls have given up the kitchen for the bedroom, now why isn't this attitude considered a self for filling proficy?……..talk about double standards, we can't have anything targeting 'boys but can girls'.
Oh and apparently April can ask questions to others but choose to ignore them when they are directed a her…
Last edit: by Frenzy
Are you saying the mean score for all girls in year 12 English in NSW is 27% higher than for boys? Or are you saying that all girls scored 27% higher than all boys overall (including maths and sciences?). Where are you getting these figures from and to whom do they apply?
"Government creating a fatherless society" is now the 4th most commented article on the site. The deputy leader can hardly miss it if anyone cares to contribute…
It was refreshing to read the comments on OLO and see such a variety of opinions to the "fatherless society" piece. My favourite was the comment pointing out the hypocricy of the authour who feared a fatherless society, but was also was against two men being fathers to the same child.
I get it now. All the hype is about the evil radical feminists who have a plan to destroy the nuclear family and take over the world. If only the nasty feminists would all just get back into the bedroom and kitchen where they belong then the evils of modern society (created by the evil radical feminists) would disappear and we could all go back to living happily ever after.
April saidI get it now. All the hype is about the evil radical feminists who have a plan to destroy the nuclear family and take over the world. If only the nasty feministswould all just get back into the bedroom and kitchen where they belong then the evils of modern society (created by the evil radical feminists) would disappear and we could all go back to living happily ever after.
Your high school level, passive-aggressive comments are immature. You simply shite stir. Misrepresenting comments to claim anybody that disagrees with feminist nuttery must be in misogynist and stupid is straight from the Ministry of Truth. You have no integrity.
But do keep making shite up though, perhaps you'll be offered a job in the PM's office.
I proffer these timely words of warning to die hard feminist extremists that many feel have hijacked the public debate on gender equality with their propaganda and sometimes absurd actions and statements.
"I want to see gender equilibrium in our society. I don't want men to experience what women experienced before, that women are so strong that men have to struggle in order to maintain equal rights the golden mean is the road to travel. All extremism is bad. It contradicts the nations psyche and a social struggle that becomes too extreme is counter productive."
If one freely expresses concerns with their inequality outcries or any other actions of the radical feminist movement, he or she is branded as being antifeminist, chauvinist, misogynist, gynophobic or even a pornophile to effectively shut him or her up
The radical feminist movement has lost it's connection with the original vision of equal rights for men and women: one area of the gender sphere has suspiciously been left out when self-proclaimed equalitists have re-engineered our society with the aim to rule out every gender discriminating law or rule, be it written or unwritten. Namely laws on fathers rights with regard to their children.
Another reason for thinking that the feminist movement is too extremist is their public advocacy towards reducing the human rights of men only. They claim that the ideology of assuming a man innocent until proven guilty is outdated in light of feminist research and therefore indicated that this cornerstone of the justice system should be abolished and the burden of proof reversed in crimes that are committed against women - which is exactly what is proposed in Gillards National Plan to reduce father-child relationships.
If these aren't examples of feminism that has gone at least a bit too far, then I wonder what is. It is time that feminists with healthy objectives rise against the more radical feminists that want more than just equal rights to end this state-sanctioned misandry.
*Vigds Finnbogadttir was the first elected female president of Iceland and served for 16 years. Iceland was transformed into the best place to be a woman with regard to politics, education, employment and health indicators.
Unfortunately Iceland went bankrupt.
The 1981 results, I mentioned where what kick started the feminist division of AEU to lobby for and in the late 80's & 90's to achieve specific reforms aimed at improving girls educational results. Since 2006 the scaling back of these feminist reforms has started with some states being more advanced in implementing change then others. The feminist reforms, the actual changes to education content & delivery are well documented, my daughter learned about it modern history………..if they are just numbers, as you said then why were the feminists themselves so deeply concerned about senior girls average scores? (rhetorical question cause I no there will be no answer)
As for thinking people are concerned about evil feminists taking over the world, your being irrationally dramatic. Who would be worried, as in regards to education anyway, they are having less and less clout now under reforms, their ideology is being replaced by human rights ideology. When surveyed most young women are not interested in feminism as a movement at all. Probably just as well as those that actively campaigned for the girls reforms, were all white, middle class and 14 out of 20 of them admitted to having racist beliefs. Hence why when the girls reforms were introduced they were attacked on parliamentary steps by indigenous women whose educational needs & cultural differences were not given any consideration & in fact they suffered more disadvantage. Took human rights activists to start the ball rolling for aboriginal students, the feminists turned a blind eye to it.
In regards to education, most sane people and parents just want a system that meets in the middle for both genders. Any one who reads literature put out by these educational feminists campaigners can clearly see they gender bias they are promoting.
Frenzy, equality of opportunity/status of both sexes is a human rights issue. You are exactly right.
srldad101, so the nasty feminists caused the economic crisis in Iceland? Iceland had a male prime minister in 2008 when the Icelandic economy went into trouble. It now has a female prime minister and Iceland is in recovery. The president of Iceland is a figure head, similar to the GG in this country. Of course, the gender of the leader of Iceland is irrelevant. Your ridiculous attempt to link Iceland's economic downturn with the gender of their president is pathetic and hate promoting.
Faigo also mentioned NPLAN, these results are publicly available. Perhaps you could look into doing some research yourself, some of the info you will have to pay for like I did.
Yes education is a human rights issue, too bad the actual feminists on the coal face, those employed by the ED Dept unions ect, don't see it like that and instead are making comments like these…
Does it matter if girls generally outperform boys, personally I think it's good
Poor performance by boys is a result of "macho masculinity"
Boys are lazy & predisposed to behavior issues, that is why they under preform.
Now boys know how we felt
Allowing government funded scholarships to encourage more males to teachers, discriminates against women.
Anyone who reads feminist journal articles and their government submissions, will have noticed these comments. People can make excuses and justifications all they want for feminism but personally I can never support such judgmental, gender victim biased opinions, which fly in the face of human rights principles …and to think these women that make such comments get paid very well to make life better for our children is unbelievable. Funny thing is April, you are denying a gender gap in performance but many of these 'paid on the job feminists' themselves admit it's there, they don't just want it to be addressed or dealt with.
Last edit: by Frenzy
Fathers Do Have it Rough
Out of all of the controversy the one thing that strikes me the most is that women today are fighting for equality yet fail to give father's equality. They are happy to stay at home for years and happily take the income from the father, merely treating them as an ATM, yet when they re-enter the workforce they want the same exact pay as men even though they don't necessarily have the experience. This makes me ask why is it that woman can take signficant time off and not the father? In my opinion, a father equally nurture and care for a child and by law should be allowed the same opportunity.
However, it is the unique ability for the mother to be able stay at home (child after child) that sparks the never ending visitation battle in the event of a divorce. Due to the fact that they can stay home and use the father as a bank, they are then set up to be seen as the primary carer in the eyes of the court system in the event of a divorce. And let's face it most divorces don't end nicely and a woman scorned is evil. So due to the bitter divorce and bitter mother, the father is left fighting and spending every spare penny he has to see his children and re-establish a home so they have bare necessities while in his care. What infuriates me the most is that in many cases, mothers get legal aid and the father has to pay for his legal fees because he was out working and making a living to support the family.
Let's see I am a bitter ex-wife/partner… I hate my ex. How dare he want to be involved in his children's lives. So… as a mother if I don't want to be fair… I can't just be obstinate and say no to everything. Then when he has had enough, he can to take me to the court manadated mediation and then court. By the way, I know I will be favoured anyway and most likely get what I want. Afterall, only 15% of men have primary care in Australia. Plus as a mother I get all my legal fees for free… so I can going to make him suffer and pay every spare penny he has. All in all, claiming it is not in the children's best interest for more regular and frequent contact with their father.
Seriously, where is the incentive for the mother to be logical and reasonable?
There are many articles on the benefits of fathers being involved in their children's lives and most importantly there are too many negative myths about shared parenting being harmful for children. Below is an article that I couldn't agree with more about the Top 10 Myth's of Shared Parenting in Australia.
I just have one last question: When are we all going to treat each other fairly, no matter the gender?
The disproportion of boys not being able to reach minimum standard, is what is creating concern. Children with disabilities that affect their intellectual capacity or that have serious non compliance issues are excluded or have necessary adjustments made on NAPLAN reasting, so why the gender distortion at the lower end? I don't believe the AEU feminist stereo-typing version of it being a case of boys being genetically prone to not do as well at school
The NAPLAN results also show, There are more girls than boys working at or above the minimum standard in all the literacy domains at every year level and in numeracy at Year 3 (by 5%). In Years 5 and 7, the numeracy results for girls and boys are similar. Year 9 numeracy is the only instance where there are more boys at or above the minimum standard.
As the maths initiatives targeting girls (all) of them as a group, are showing success, why the big hoo ha with using similar literary initiatives aimed at all boys?…it is a double standard to say we can't aim education strategies at boys as a group, yet we do girls with maths!
English is the only compulsory core subject required for a TE score. English is vital in all subjects and according to many researches and experts poor literacy function is a contributing factor to the higher then average marks in regards to gender in senior years in NSW and QLD (this can be verified by data from the respective studies boards).
Also, it must be kept in mind that NAPLAN data does not predict and does not claim to predict over all success by gender in final grades in any area, which are what counts at the end of the day, so caution needs to be used when making broad statements. It's children's grade results as they age that matter.
My son has scored in the top 1% in the county NAPLAN testing every year in all maths areas since 2008 as he is Autistic and has savant skills in this area. He is enrolled in 12 now and the only formal school test/exam he has sat since year 8, is NAPLAN because the principle insist on it because it boosts their results. Cheating by schools is also a bit of an issue with the NAPLAN test, as irrespective of gender, schools don't what to look bad.
Gender results by subject/ year level have been analizyed as a whole with NAPLAN data in the boys inquiry reforms.
Last edit: by Frenzy
I have mentioned this previously. Boys scores are more variable than girls scores (the bell curve for boys is flatter than the bell curve for girls). So there are more boys than girls at the lower end (and the upper end). This phenomena is being taken as evidence of the education system failing boys, but that conclusion is not supported by overall results. This phenomena of wider variability in boys outcomes is nothing new and is mentioned in the NAPLAN report I read this morning as well.
Frenzy saidThe disproportion of boys not being able to reach minimum standard, is what is creating concern. Children with disabilities that affect their intellectual capacity or that have serious non compliance issues are excluded or have necessary adjustments made on NAPLAN reasting, so why the gender distortion at the lower end?
That is why the programs Frenzy mentioned are useful as they target this sub group of boys.
I am interested to know more about how maths is being taught in a more "feminised" way. My son and daughter attend co-ed school and both have been taught maths the same way, and the way they have been taught is very similar to the way I was taught maths many years ago. Could you please elaborate?
There have been lots of initiatives and programs in relation to maths that targeted only girls, maths multiplies your choices, was an early one, aspects of this program have been phased into being part of the everyday curriculum, research showed these types changes benefited girls learning styles and increased their ability on test scores.
Under the, Gender Equity: A Framework for Australian Schools, - Curriculum-related policies were released, which required teachers to deliver maths in a style which was cooperative rather than the competitive learning style that was common. As according to the educational liberal feminist theory at the time, gender inequalities, such as the style of teaching, the masculine nature of the subject & environment particularly in mathematics was disadvantaging girls and causing underachievement in school. Teachers were asked to become gender sensitive and to build up girls confidence by incorporating girls learning styles into their maths programs.
Feminist lobbers for change relied on such studies as: The Fennema-Sherman studies (Fennema & Sherman, 1977, 1978; Sherman & Fennema, 1977), which, documented sex-related differences in achievement and participation in Grades 6 to 12 in maths.
The National Action Plan for the Education of Girls (1991- 1997) - brought further changes. There should be info available on this program. I don't know when you left school April but when I did in 89 in QLD, the high school maths syllabus was nothing like the syllabus reforms bought with in the last, 20 years, most noticeably those in 1994 & 2003. I was stunned at the changes in 2004 when my daughter started high school. So were teachers when they were bought in lol.
In QLD Smart Women Strategy, In 2005 extra funding was given to schools to be used in maths & science programs to increase the ability and interest of girls in these areas.
Honestly April, the AUE feminists themselves and the history books publish a lot this info, might be easy to read about yourself then have me explain. Even my daughter learn't about the feminist advances in maths and other aspects of educational changes in high school, so you can read up. I can ask her for a list of texts on the subject if you like.
April saidI have mentioned this previously. Boys scores are more variable than girls scores (the bell curve for boys is flatter than the bell curve for girls).
Frenzy saidso why the gender distortion at the lower end?
I, for one, am not persuaded that wider variability in boy's outcomes is an explanation. The area under a standardised normal curve, by calculus, must be remain one square unit regardless of variance which, by logic, requires the function values to be lower not just at the end points. I urge you to reread the section "Deconstructing the Test Score in Professor Hoff Sommers article The War against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men". This explains the factors which skew the test results.
Sommers writes that in the past few years girls have been catching up in math and science while boys have continued to lag far behind in reading and writing. Of the deficits in boys' writing skills "The large sex differences in writing … are alarming…. The data imply that males are, on average, at a rather profound disadvantage in the performance of this basic skill." They went on to warn,
The generally larger numbers of males who perform near the bottom of the distribution in reading comprehension and writing also have policy implications. It seems likely that individuals with such poor literacy skills will have difficulty finding employment in an increasingly information-driven economy. Thus, some intervention may be required to enable them to participate constructively.
Research identified a serious problem of national scope, but because the focus elsewhere has been on girls' deficits, few people know much about the problem or even suspect that it exists.
A more recent study is "Why Boys Fail: The Unexpected Gender Gap in Education" which examines the phenomenon that had been mostly invisible for a decade or more–boys falling behind girls in school. It suggests more boys are falling behind because of awkward school reforms, not because girls are doing better. This recent trend is mostly the result of the push by school reformers to make students more college-ready while not taking into account the fact that young boys might have a difficult time absorbing intensive verbal skills at an early age.
And to rub salt into the wound the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced that it was investigating whether colleges were discriminating against women by admitting less-qualified males.
Listen to Audio
Richard Whitmire, Author
Sara Mead, Bellwether Education Partners
Christina Hoff Sommers, AEI
Sommers at 19.00 min is brilliant.
it is true that minimally educated men are in serious trouble. Girls do better than boys in school. They get better grades, score higher on reading and writing tests, and are far more likely to go to college. The reasons for girls' educational success are complicated and likely reflect innate differences to some degree: Teenage girls, for example, tend to sit still and pay attention better than teenage boys. But whenever anyone comes up with a plan to help boys in the United States–boy-friendly classrooms, all-male academies, or vocational education tailored to their interests–women's groups such as the American Association of University Women and the National Women's Law Center cry foul and go on the attack.
I would like drag the topic back to Government creating a fatherless society by writing a piece on CEDAW which I believe Gillard is using as a social engineering vehicle. How this implementation of ideology as law is unconstitutional in most western democracies. How it leads to "gender-fair budgets", State-mandated quotas for gender-balanced legislatures, the requirement for the State to adopt "Temporary Special Measures Aimed at Accelerating De Facto Equality Between Men and Women", which is code for "affirmative action [reverse discrimination] and "comparable worth," policies. Feminist groups can litigate all areas of Australian life that fail to evince statistical parity between the sexes.
Our government's social literally becomes a license to sue, reeducate, and resocialize their fellow citizens and the lawyers union again rejoices.
drhuge saidGender, sexuality - none of it matters. The major issue we have is people not pulling their weight and having their handout for money. I am a divorced women, I have three kids and I have never ever asked my x for a cent. I ensured that we had a 50/50 split of assets and child care, my major focus was ensuring that my children has a relationship with their father. I have worked and supported myself and my children. It can be done! I blame lazy women and men, who think that staying out of the workforce and staying unskilled for the diabolical situations the CSA puts people in. You can't blame feminism, you can't blame gays for the alienation of fathers, you can only blame lazy people who refuse to stand on their two feet. It's simple - if one persons refuses to earn money, the other person has to earn twice much to make up for it. Get off centerlink, get your hands out of your partners pockets and make your own way in the world!!!!!!
Well spoken, bravo!
A very influential factor, however, is the role of feminist activists in creating expectations that can only be realised if someone else pays. They've taken the reasonable expectation of reciprocality that underlies the marital contract and subverted it to a claim for special treatment due to nothing other than gender.
Well done you for having the courage of your own convictions. I think this is increasingly recognised, with a significant portion of women coming to think that "girls can do anything" includes the possibility of self-support, instead of self-reliance on welfare or handouts.
drhuge saidCraigo, I don't get it and I never will. My xhusband has bludged his whole life, he is neither a feminist or a female. He is a person with a sense of entitlement and has no issue with taking my money, even though he can earn his own. I feel the same frustration as all the men on this site, forced to bluster lazy unskilled partners. The femists movement told me I can and I should run my own race. Who told these other bludgers to look for handouts…?
I can see your point; the bludger has been with us forever.
However, feminism has created an entirely new class of bludger, which has implications for the structure of our society. For example, the MJA article I referenced early in this thread says:
"Female doctors have a working life that approximates 60% that of male doctors. Significant amounts of time are consumed by family demands, and a desire to work sensible (and regular) hours on their return to the workforce.9 Safe working-hours policies are now established in most junior medical officer awards, and these have had a significant impact on workforce requirements in public hospitals. Further, male doctors are no longer willing to work the hours that were the norm 20 years ago, and are still worked by their senior colleagues. Together, these changes have spawned a current unmet need for medical services."
It's understandable that men aren't prepared to work harder and longer than female colleagues who are paid the same. Now, nobody is suggesting doctors are "bludgers", but if this is a problem affecting the brightest and hardest working, then it stands to reason that those who might be predisposed to bludge would also be affected. Why should a low-income earning man work when a woman who doesn't work at all will be paid directly by taking money from him, especially since she is already being given more by Government than he earns for 40 hours of labour?
It's a ratchet and ratchets need have no end: they're circular. If he earns more, he'll pay more to her. If she chooses not to work then why should he not do the same?
Your situation is not the norm, but I do sympathise with your plight.
Last edit: by Craigo