[fasterik]

It turns out that when you level the playing field, girls do better than boys. I don't think it's about the "girl power" nonsense, it's about the ability to sit down, focus on something, and produce work that meets a certain standard of achievement.

I would say the more harmful slogan has been "you're okay just the way you are." I'm not saying we go back to harsh discipline and abuse, but there has to be a middle ground where we hold children, especially boys, to a higher standard.

[SubmarineClub]

> It turns out that when you level the playing field, girls do better than boys.

Why is it that when boys/men where outperforming and out-earning women, people were willing to move heaven and earth to correct this terrible injustice, but now when outcomes have reversed (for years at this point) it's considered acceptable to say "Welp, that's just how it goes. Boys just aren't good enough."

Hmmm...almost like, it's not a level playing field??

[ckw]

Approximate shares of undergraduate enrollment by sex:

  Year    Male     Female
  1970    58%      42%
  1975    53%      47%
  1980    48%      52%
  1985    46%      54%
  1990    45%      55%
  1995    44.5%    55.5%
  2000    43.9%    56.1%
  2005    43.3%    56.7%
  2010    43.0%    57.0%
  2015    43.6%    56.4%
  2020    42.7%    57.3%
  2025    42.7%    57.3%

So men have been in the minority for at least 46 years, and the skew is as large as it was in 1970, but reversed.

[stickfigure]

This is true and interesting but it's also incomplete. Men still dominate most STEM degrees, and unlike law or business it doesn't seem to be evening out over time. I'm not sure what conclusions we can draw from this.

[rootusrootus]

> I'm not sure what conclusions we can draw from this.

My suggestion would be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Take your thumb off the scale."

[bluGill]

Until someone can show a real biological difference we should level the playing field.

We do know boys mature later which may be reason to not level the field completely, but we should still not allow that as an excuse.

If someone shows another difference I will have to think in depth about the details before I can comment.

[rootusrootus]

> We do know boys mature later which may be reason to not level the field completely, but we should still not allow that as an excuse.

I am quite a long ways from right-leaning but this sure does lend credence to their claims of discrimination. If it weren't boys, we'd say that a biological disadvantage is absolutely acceptable as an excuse, and we should try to correct for it.

[rimliu]

So you claim that biolgically males and females are the same?

[bluGill]

For the purposes of 'intelligent' which is the topic here.

[rustcleaner]

Structural misandry. I'm telling you the Zoomer/Alpha boys have taken notice and are checking out of the system. Chickens coming home to roost in a few more decades as the West goes longhouse and gets economically pounded by the East. I was an early bird in MGTOW, but now it's common knowledge and operating strategy for most young men.

Boys don't owe society squat, and now they know it!

[Silamoth]

MGTOW nonsense most certainly is not the common mode of operation for young men. Where are you getting this idea?

[saadn92]

I disagree. There's cases where girls do better and cases where boys do better. This blanket statement is just as bad as saying that all men/boys are smarter than girls.

[bawis]

Exactly, girls and women can do astonishing work in fields that favour more or less their mutual traits and vice versa, no need for "hehe we are better because GPA said so".

[TheOtherHobbes]

Boys have been sitting down, focusing, and producing work that meets a certain standard for most of recorded history. That ability is really not a uniquely feminine trait, and suggesting it is is honestly bizarre.

Boys have also been doing more destructive things, but that's a different issue.

Boys and girls do struggle with different issues socially and culturally, which is upstream of struggling with them academically.

What's consistently missed that education is downstream of socialisation. The experience of learning as a first introduction to culture shapes consequences more than individual techniques do.

Part of that is challenging all gender stereotypes. The traditional stereotype was that girls were frankly rather stupid and couldn't handle anything rigorous and challenging.

Now the stereotype is that men lack focus, are disorganised, and have poor communication skills.

One stereotype has been challenged, the other seems to have replaced it, and younger men have almost been encouraged to live down to it.

I don't think as a culture we're emotionally mature enough yet to handle these issues in an effective way, and both education and socialisation will remain problematic until we do.

[rootusrootus]

> One stereotype has been challenged, the other seems to have replaced it, and younger men have almost been encouraged to live down to it.

Orthogonal to age and gender both, we got to witness an entire third of the US take "deplorable" as an aspirational goal and live down to it.

> I don't think as a culture we're emotionally mature enough

You can say that again.