How many times is the New York Times going to publish this article? Or a permutation of it? Less than one standard deviation from another article about gender differences using one myopic expert to prove the rule, the assumption, the sexist expectation?
What's the consensus? Do we feel bad for boys this time? Are they not getting enough attention? Oh, I see, this time we're mentioning that age-old concern that females aren't encouraged in math and science - seeking equality in the text. How genuine.
I think students should be separate based on braces or no braces. Or Hannah Montana fans or Zac Efron fans. Sounds more productive to me. Everyone would get along in harmony, singing and staging choreography as they construct geometric proofs.
Oh, but we wouldn't split them up by race. No, no. That'd be absurd. That'd be like splitting them up based on Free & Reduced eligibility (FRLP, remember?). We like to touch and prod and step all over gender in America; it's the clearest decision to make and least messy. It's not like we've witnessed how that's played out lately here or here or here or here (the only one that makes ANY sense), or give me a few minutes and I'll find more.
So, I wonder, NYTimes, who you actually endorse. Women? Never. Not on the page not in your spacious cubicles and floors down by Port Authority.
And Obama, king of non-stick politics, when can we expect that huge endorsement from Teflon (and others, the NRA, nuclear power, etc.)?
...all I hear are words to a changing tune...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment