- Last week, The Associated Press proudly reported that
in the `largest` study of it's kind, where Mathematics is concerned, girls
are now as `tough` as boys. This last bastion of male dominance in education
has been breached. Janet Hyde, of the University of Wisconsin Madison,
who led the study said, " Girls have now achieved gender parity on
standardised Maths Tests".
- This relentless war on all fronts against the masculine
has been raging for many decades now, not least in our schools and universities.
I find myself asking "What is the `Femi` Brigade's` Endgame"
?. Is it to grow a penis on a baby girl and thus perfect the androgynous
being they seem intent on creating by all means at their disposal ?
- Before I digress and go off on one of my `rants`, let's
examine this business with maths and education more closely. As some might
know by now, I am British, so I will continue this article based on what
is happening in my own sad country.
- In August, when the GCSE results come out, it is highly
likely that, once again, girls will have beaten the boys at the examination
- For years now, girls have been taking the lion's share
of success in public examinations. This year's A and AS-level results were
further evidence of the trend. Girls out-performed boys in almost every
- They took nearly 47,000 more subjects than boys at A-level,
and nearly 91,000 more at AS level. And in both exams, they achieved a
higher proportion than boys of A grades in almost every subject.
- Of course, it is good news that girls are doing so well.
But it is worrying that boys seem to be slipping further and further behind.
For this trend isn't confined to the high-fliers passing exams. At the
bottom of the system, the drop-out rate among boys is causing serious concern.
- The reason is nothing other than the wholesale feminisation
of the education system. In GCSEs, A-levels and - increasingly - degree
courses too, coursework accounts for an ever greater proportion of the
final marks. This in itself favours girls.
- Boys tend to like 'sudden death' exams. They like taking
risks, pitting their wits against the odds. Girls don't. They prefer to
work steadily and conscientiously without gambling against memory, the
clock and questions from hell. Which is why at degree level boys have until
now achieved more firsts and thirds than girls who tend to get safe, if
- Nor is it surprising that girls are taking more exams
than boys. For the curriculum has expanded in ways that suit girls rather
than boys, with a proliferation of discursive, 'soft' subjects like general
studies, sociology or drama.
- The evidence suggests that boys and girls learn in different
ways. Research has found that girls gain more satisfaction than boys from
understanding the work they are doing. Boys are more 'ego-related', gaining
more satisfaction from competing with each other.
- Nevertheless, education policy denies such differences
and imposes instead an agenda of 'equality'. For at least twenty years,
feminist teachers have made a determined attempt to change a school system
they held to be hostile to girls. The assumption was that since boys tended
to opt for science, maths and technology and girls for languages, humanities
and domestic science, this proved discrimination against girls.
- It never occurred to them that this pattern had evolved
because each sex naturally gravitated towards these subjects. The view
was that boys and girls were identical, and these differences therefore
had to be corrected.
- The result was active discrimination against boys. As
James Tooley comments in his book, the Miseducation of Women, girls began
to be privileged over boys at school. Teachers gave priority to girls in
classroom discussions, playground space and sporting fixtures.
- The 'masculine content and orientation' of textbooks,
topics and tests was obliterated in favour of female references; teachers
were forbidden to use 'sexist' language; and male teachers' bonding with
boys through jokes or shared allusions to football had to be reprogrammed
out of the system.
- During the 1980s, moreover, one project followed another
to get girls into studying maths, science and technology.
- But it wasn't sexism that was keeping girls away from
such subjects - it was their choice. For time and again it has been shown
that wherever they have the opportunity, boys gravitate naturally to mechanical
sciences and girls to discursive or domestic subjects.
- Clearly, if any prejudice existed it would be right to
address it. But this was not prejudice. It was rather that boys and girls
behaved in different ways. This was never an issue in single sex schools.
But once co-educational schools became the norm, the differences became
striking - and feminism assumed that to be different meant inferiority
- This was not only wrong in itself. It was also disastrous
for boys. For rather than men being masters of the universe as feminists
contend, their sense of what they are is fragile. Unless their particular
male characteristics are acknowledged and supported, they start sliding
downhill and some go off the rails altogether.
- In school, boys find girls intrinsically threatening,
a fact generally masked at the top of the ability range but in often violent
evidence at the bottom. Girls mature earlier than boys, so unless boys
are exceptionally able they tend to be outclassed by girls. And if they
don't dominate, they tend to give up or drop out.
- Because doing well in school involves no manual or physical
activity but requires instead sitting quietly, reading and writing, the
most vulnerable boys view learning as feminine and uncool. And being feminine
is their deepest dread.
- This is because men's sense of their masculinity is far
more vulnerable than women's sense of their femininity. Biology reminds
girls what they are every month. Boys, by contrast, need to prove their
identity and role, particularly among those with poor prospects and few
- But rather than celebrating male characteristics, society
tells boys at every turn that its values have turned female, and that if
boys want any place in it they must do so too.
- Thus, male characteristics are derided. Warfare is said
to be obscene. Authority is oppressive. Chivalry is a joke. Competition
creates losers - taboo in education, where everyone must be a winner. Stoicism
is despised; instead, tears must flow and hearts be worn on sleeves at
- Men, however, define masculinity by being different from
women. So this unisex culture has resulted in two things. More men are
driven into stereotypical macho behaviour to prove their masculinity. And
they simply withdraw from any sphere which becomes identified with women.
- Because girls' success is now such a regular feature
of the league table carnival, disadvantaged boys identify school failure
with being macho and worthwhile. So more give up or drop out.
- It is not good for either sex to be placed at a disadvantage
by the other. The aim must be to make opportunity as fair as possible.
But that cannot be done by confusing equality of opportunity with identical
experience, the fundamental error of our age.
- Boys and girls are different. It would be far better
if they were educated in single-sex schools. Neither sex is well served
by co-education. Neither sex benefits from coercion by the educational
- Many girls resent the pressure to do science subjects.
Feminists fear that if girls don't study science in the same number as
boys, they won't have the same career opportunities later on. But girls
make different choices from boys because they have different impulses and
interests and calculate their life prospects very differently.
- This is not an argument against girls studying engineering,
or women becoming train drivers or particle physicists. It is rather that
the system has become unfair and discriminatory against boys - the outcome
of a philosophy that, despite its feminist credentials, does not allow
girls the freedom to make their own choices, for fear that the dogma of
unisex behaviour will be exposed once and for all as a big lie.
- In conclusion, I would suggest that this superficial
levelling of the Mathematics `playing field` has long been considered one
of the goals in the endless march towards that miserable, androgynous Utopia
so longed for by the Friedens, Sontags, and Gurley Browns. I would also
suggest that in reality, the Exam Results are in many cases more to do
with politically motivated marking and preferential treatment, rather than
any increase in the aptitude of girls in the field of Calculus, Geometry
- Ref: All Must Have Prizes by Melanie Phillips.
- Part Two
- Mathematics - The Final Frontier
- In The Feminist War Against Boys
- By Philip Jones
- Recap : Last week, The `Associated Press` proudly reported
that in the `largest` study of it's kind, a survey found that girls are
now as `tough` as boys in the field of Mathematics. and that this, the
supposed last bastion of male dominance in education had been breached.
Janet Hyde, of the University of Wisconsin Madison, who led the study said,
" Girls have now achieved gender parity on standardised Maths Tests".
- The relentless war on all fronts against the masculine
has been raging for many decades now, not least in our schools and universities.
It really doesn't take too much research and investigation in order to
identify the whole movement as being one part of a cynically orchestrated
`Psychological Operation` against all things male specifically, and humanity
generally. This `Psy Op` although once highly covert has now become overtly
obvious in it's aims, at least to those of us who have been able to see
through it's facade of `righting wrongs`.
- So, what are the goals of 21st Century Feminism in the
arena of education ? It would be easier to state what it's goals are not.
Equality in it's true sense is most certainly not a desired aim. If it
were so, then the `ideologues` would be as concerned with the opportunities
of boys as they claim to be with those of girls. Creating a stable environment
for learning is clearly not a part of their agenda either, nor is the nurturing
of young people, or the encouragement of any natural balance between young
males and females during their formative years. As for facilitating the
increased possibilities of girls opting for careers in Engineering, Science
etc. enabled by any betterment of Mathematics standards, does anyone really
`swallow` that one.
- I would suggest that the continued propagation of gender
chaos is the primary reason that this `study` was commissioned, in the
same way as all the others before it were. To `hit home` another nail in
the coffin of masculinity, and further demoralise the human male psyche.
Just as the `Feminazi's` have misled, manoeuvred and manipulated young
women into believing that a career in the Military was a positive and viable
option, now they are similarly luring girls into a career choice in the
Science and Engineering fields for which not only are they mostly unsuited,
but which few would even consider as being something they would naturally
want to do.
- This relentless campaign is not about advancing the cause
of women, nor some utopian ideal of equality. It is about destroying the
`masculine` by the use of vicious anti male propaganda and vitriol, designed
to deconstruct the masculine consciousness, especially in the fragile young
, engendering feelings of confusion, inadequacy, failure and thereby emasculating
boys entering their prime years. This in turn causes resentment and levels
of implied misogyny, via pornography and other forms of disrespect towards
the female, unknown, until very recently. For their part, young girls become
confused as to what is expected of them. Their instinct and natures are
constantly suppressed by feminist teachers agitating on behalf of a sinister
ideology born (not conceived) half a century ago on the back of `Big Money`
funding hateful and deranged `women` like Betty Freidan and Gloria Steinham.
- This latest `victory` in the seemingly ceaseless and
overwhelmingly one sided `war of the sexes` is almost certainly not the
last which will be publicly heralded as yet another vindication of Feminist
theory. So now, we are told, girls cannot only `Kick Ass` as good as if
not better than the boys. They can `add up` too. Does anyone else sense
the condescension here ?
- Having discounted above what the `She Devils` agenda
is not, let's identify what it is. Well, there can be no doubt that these
`banshees` will stop at nothing short of total victory coupled with unconditional
surrender. We are looking down the barrel of a `Fem Dom` artillery piece
here. All around is chaos, and as the Freemasonic Motto goes, out of chaos
comes order. Their order not ours. The goals of Feminism are the goals
of the New World Order. Feminism is their `Fat Boy` and Education is the
`Enola Gay` they have used to carry it.
- They say you can tell a tree by it's fruits. For goodness
sake people, apply that little piece of wisdom to your lives and wake up.
The enemies of good knew that in order to deconstruct western society,
they would need to `steal our children` and fashion them in their image
not ours. Now, the Feminist `Tree` is dropping it's fruit all around us.,
Apples of distrust, resentment and animosity. Acorns of divorce and fatherless
children. Berries of resentment, hostility, animosity, misogyny, and Pears
of depopulation and a decaying civilisation. These are the fruits of Feminism,
and they are bitter indeed.
- Divide and Conquer has been a proven technique of control
down the ages. The Feminist Agenda is the `sharpest blade` in the Illuminati's
Arsenal, they have divided man from his mate, and can anyone truly deny
that `we the people` have been conquered.`
- ' The Matrix is a system, and that system is our enemy.
When you are inside it, you look around and what do you see? Businessmen,
Teachers, Lawyers, Carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying
to save. But until we do, these people are part of that system and that
makes them our enemies. You have to understand that most of these people
are not ready to be `unplugged`. And many are so hopelessly dependent on
the system, that they will fight to defend it '.