Vanna will not be amused.

(Apologies to Queen Victoria).

:P

*What inhibits women's advancement is not women's skills, capacities, abilities or courage*

In that case I welcome a whole host of female entrepreneurs to
appear, to test their skills in the marketplace.

Feminists should stop whinging and let those girls show their
talent. Consumers will decide.

All I see is a whole article trying to break apart one explanation while studiously avoiding explicitly stating an alternative explanation.

Just take a risk, and say it. Women's choices are all men's fault!

You don't see studies agonising about why!, oh why oh why, just why! men don't choose nursing more often. It MUST be because of the nasty women excluding them.

Any area where men are under-represented is considered due to *men*'s choice, or *men* being misogynists and sexist and not liking women's work or *men* not being content with the pay for 'women's work'. Yet when women don't choose men's jobs, it's also some big *male* misogynist conspiracy.

Translation: Everything is men's fault. Whatever women or men choose, it's men's responsibility. Men should jump through hoops and knock down walls and paint the world pink to accommodate (Nay attract and win over) women at every turn to any jobs women aren't interested in. Further, they should bloody well start draping themselves in pink while they're at it and stop *rejecting* women's jobs they themselves aren't interested in.

Give me a break!

I think it's time we encouraged nursing to be more male inclusive. It's a female dominated culture of caring and nurturing and it excludes men by rejecting their aspirations to be confrontational hard cases lacking in empathy. Tea rooms should be banned and women nurses should be forced to play golf in their spare time rather than the male-exclusionary tactic of going for coffee.

Are feminists so repulsed by women, their likes, dislikes and the female dominated areas of society, that they think the only prestige in being human is liking what men like?

Is it a crime to make friends at work, play golf and talk about work on the golf course? If so, what about women and those insular 'female cultured' misandrist 'mothers' groups deliberately formed to exclude men?

Gimme a grant and I'll study them!

'I drank with them, defeated them at snooker, laughed at their jokes. Suprisingly, it worked. They paid attention, met their responsibilities – yet all the while I squirmed inside. How could I prostitute all I had come to believe in as worth fighting for? I knew then I had to get out: if male power was needed to survive, I certainly did not need it.'

I went for coffee, started to use cosmetics, engaged them in emotional post-mortems of their personal romantic relationship conflicts. Surprisingly, it worked. They paid attention, met their responsibilities – yet all the while I squirmed inside. How could I prostitute all I had come to believe in as worth fighting for? I knew then I had to get out: if female power was needed to survive in the P&C, the tuckshop, the parental social groups and the part-time job sector, I certainly did not need it.'

There's aptitude and there's interest.

Sure, I have the aptitude to raise children, creating stimulating educational play, 'multi-tasking', managing a home and socialising while creating a social environment and network with my kids for my kids, taking an active role in their education etc. I could do it very well. I have the skills and the aptitude.

But do I have the motivation? Am I interested enough? Can I stomach all that coffee? Can I endure all that chit chat? Can I be social with people and spend the majority of my time with people with different life interests and outlook? Can I deal with the overload of oestrogen, can I be bothered fitting in with the existing social conventions of 'little presents' and compliments about hair cuts and bitch sessions about the parenting choices of the less popular parents? Would I enjoy that female dominated culture and environment?

Or would I rather just spend my day in the workforce, predominantly left to my own solitude, getting deep into a problem with no interruptions, getting a token deposit in a bank account as reward that is happily spent on my family that I can enjoy with them.

Hmmm. Which would make me happier.

Hey! Maybe I could do some studies into how all the mothers of the world are in conspiracy, excluding me and wasting my talents! They should be made to change to suit me, and to make that role in life more interesting and rewarding for me!

It's all their fault that I don't want to be in this female dominated culture! They must change! My choices are their responsibility!

"the evidence puts paid to the proposition that it is girls and women who limit their own horizons through timidity" blah, blah, blah.

What evidence?

Who gave the proposition?

What are the names of the people who gave the evidence or made the proposition?

I think the author has made the whole thing up.

In fact, I'm sure the author has made the whole thing up.

The lack of choice in many circumstances (industries blah blah) is real Houel... exclusive of women and all effeminate males usually.

I think the point might have been that men can choose nursing – it is only other men that hassle them about it. I doubt any conspiracy, just the way things have evolved. Mindsets and all that, hard to break – probably the fems think they have to go a little over the top to really change it and perhaps they are correct.

Now your girls, they can be anything (do I have to do a disclaimer?), as long as they understand if they choose a mechanics course they will be out numbered and the males will bully them. If you had sons they could be anything but if they choose nursing they will be outnumbered too and the females will want to go out with them.

How many classically female jobs are there out there compared to traditional male jobs?

How come there are these lists of what men like and what women like? I think they only came about through many generations instilling some very weird shet in children’s heads about what boy things are and what girl things are and there is no such thing as the individual or much allowance made for just how flexible people really are.

Isn’t that socialism or something?

Now if you will excuse me I have a goblin hoard to kill and I have to buy a longsword and a bronze shield. My character on the game is male otherwise you gotta put up with males hitting on you, on the other hand they wouldn’t attack me if I was a female character. Tricky tossing up the pros and cons really but nice to be able to at least choose a gender online that works better in the given environment.

I don't think women in large groups are any less exclusionary than men in large groups Jewely.

'it is only other men that hassle them about it. '
Oh come on! How many women would chase after a nurse vs a professional athlete or merchant banker with a house on the beach? How many women are still suss about men around children?

'I doubt any conspiracy, just the way things have evolved.'
That's the way it's always put across; Secret meetings of The Patriarchy!

'out numbered and the males will bully them'
Ooooh the dangers of men in large groups. Run! Hide! Lock up your daughters!

'the females will want to go out with them.'
The female nurses want to go out with doctors luvvy. What world are you living in?

'How many classically female jobs are there out there compared to traditional male jobs? '
It just so happens there are more traditional female jobs. All that is required is popping out a kid to qualify too.

My argument is, if women truly want to get the keys to the boardroom (And I'm not sure they really do) all they need do is give up the keys to the nursery. Guys will do whatever attracts women. Wearing an apron and being a domestic god just doesn't seem to attract women in the numbers that being a rich guy with power does.

The more women who have kids and 6 weeks later say, dear, I would love it if you would stay home to support me in my truck driving career, it would really do it for me, the more men would see this as an avenue, and the more jobs would be gender balanced with acceptable (to primary carers) working conditions.

But, of course, this is all nonsense, as men are responsible for 'societal expectations', and women are always victims of them. Men's attitude and behaviour must change to suit women, and women must never be made responsible for their choices, or the choices or 'culture' of a singular 'women'.

“ I don't think women in large groups are any less exclusionary than men in large groups Jewely.”

Good that there’s usually a male boss to settle ‘em all down then eh. Nah I honestly think women are better at including men.

“That's the way it's always put across; Secret meetings of The Patriarchy!”

True true but I’ve heard males complain a lot about the Old Boys Clubs too.

“Ooooh the dangers of men in large groups. Run! Hide! Lock up your daughters!”

Umm.. even small groups Houel, c’mon you know how nasty males can be and the thing is they are more often found in groups in the workforce than the females are.

When did this become about attracting women? But yes I think if they want the big career they shouldn’t sacrifice the kids to achieve it. Not sure how to go about that, have kids younger? Poirot said it wasn’t such a biggy having that time at home though so it should work for either parent.

“But, of course, this is all nonsense, as men are responsible for 'societal expectations', and women are always victims of them. Men's attitude and behaviour must change to suit women, and women must never be made responsible for their choices, or the choices or 'culture' of a singular 'women'.”

I dunno – who’ve been the bosses in the world the longest? Seems a very recent thing all the feminist stuff. Victims umm…. Maybe they are. Maybe some are victims of feminists as well. And I just got pwned by the damn goblins cause I was cooking dinner at the same time. Can’t say that though had to make up some rubbish about the damn wife nagging me to distraction so the other men (who are all probably women) go easy on me.
.

The author doesn't seem to consider the possibility that men and women are simply different and therefore want different things. I'm sure that most women are capable of training to be a plumber. But how many women want to spend their days unblocking peoples toilets and digging trenches? Good money in plumbing though.
The same probably applies to CEO positions. Maybe most women don't want to pend 60 hours a week at work. They may like to spend more time with their families.
I suspect we will always see the different genders favour particular occupations. Not because of any genuine barriers but simply because they are different and want different things out of life.

There was an article published about blowing the whistle into an empty room.

Basically data/evidence was turned into gobbly goop. So the review process involved creating rubbish.

This sort of process happens when certian parties do not want to deal with what the data/evidence shows.

A similar process is undertaken by feminists academics Daphne Patai called it Sophistry and labelled these spin sisters as sophistists.

In psychological terms the process of denying, particularly when reality is too uncomfortable to accept envolves processes like rationalisation, transference and projection.

So typically a lawyer who is adept at making mental gymnastic twists and turns, would have very little difficulty in rationalizing away certain things which would other wise be uncomfortable to accept, thus avoiding internal conflict between what is being taught by feminist propaganda and what is actually happening.

As Holly points out, it is much easier to blame men, than to accept responsiblity for the consequences of one's own behaviour.

Statistics only tell us the numbers, they don't inform about the why?

What about women who choose to stay at home and raise children or are happy being receptionists or nurses. I would choose nursing or reception work over many of the high level jobs in the private sector or in the public sector - at least you get to keep your soul. That might sound a bit alarmist but not too removed from reality in some industries. If you get to play with the big boys and girls you might not like what you have to become to stay in the game. That goes for men as well as women, these are not gender specific considerations.

Breaking the glass ceiling is not all it is cracked up to be but it is possible for women to make choices that were not available even 20 years ago. There are many women now in business working for themselves, and many entrepreneurs you just don't get to hear about them.

What a mad world we live in. We get articles and masculinists bemoaning and pushing the perception that girls are outstripping boys at school and boys are being pushed out of career options, feminist education systems blah blah. Then turn the page and the feministst are bemoaning the lack of risk taking by girls and wondering why they aren't choosing all the jobs that the radical masculinists think they are taking from the boys.

Groupthinking on both accounts.

"Tendency of the members of a group to yield to the desire for consensus or unanimity at the cost of considering alternative courses of action. Group-think is said to be the reason why intelligent and knowledgeable people make disastrous decisions."
(BusinessDictionary.com)

There are male dominated industries, and there are female dominated industries, not a problem really...

The issue is that female dominated industries tend to be more lowly paid than male dominated ones. Nursing and teaching are relevant examples. There are, of course, male nurses and male teachers, but as a general rule, these are female dominated industries and we as a society do not adequately value the contribution that these sectors make.

Until we as a society start to value our nurses, teachers, and any other typically female dominated industry more equitably, then we will continue to have a problem with wage inequality.

And the thing we have to realise is that women don't necessarily choose these areas because of some inherent female trait - it may simply be because these typically female dominated industries offer greater flexibility around family and child care.

Then, you have to factor in the economic reality that it is more often economically sensible for a woman to give up her more lowly paid role to take on care of children or aging relatives, not because of an inherent female instinct, simply because it makes economic sense for her to do it rather than her more highly paid partner.

And to reference an earlier comment - why do we pay our plumbers so much for cleaning out our toilets when our (mostly women) carers are the ones wiping the arses of our elderly. You are never going to convince me that women have an aversion to poo - their contribution is simply not valued as highly.

Oh dear, talk about put your foot in it.

Unfortunately Jocelynne, you have proved exactly the opposite to what you set out to.

Yes, the girls are doing better in school.

Yes they fail to thrive once they get out into the big nasty world.

Yes there is an area of exception, & that is the education sector.

So what have you proved? Only that this female controlled education sector has gone off the rails.

Education & assessment has been heavily biased toward female strengths to such an extent that the results no longer attempt to represent a true assessment of a students ability.

Once the female student is asked to perform in a real world situation their true ability surfaces, & they are found to be unable to achieve to the level that school & university assessment would suggest they should.

What needs to be corrected is the assessment system, so our girls are not led to believe they are capable of things beyond them.

This may reduce the likelihood of them writing articles that prove to be not only biased, but wrong.

Hasbeen:”What needs to be corrected is the assessment system, so our girls are not led to believe they are capable of things beyond them.”

Like what things?

Convoluted rationalizations.

In Lying in Ones Own room, Christine Stolba gives examples of how twisted logic is used to turn logic into gobbly goop, and then reach a prearranged conclusion.

Hasbeen,

"...they fail to thrive once they get out into the big nasty world."

What is your definition of "thriving" in the big nasty world?

And what do you know about how women assess their level of satisfaction in our society?
Do you know, or do you just assume that women measure their satisfaction using the same criteria as men?

"Thriving" by whose definition. If you are judging purely within an economic growthist/consumerism perspective it narrows the field.

Girls are not 'led to believe' anything only that they are able to access job opportunities in the same way that boys are able, many girls and boys will not be suitable for some professions and jobs if they do not possess the requisite talents and abilities - nothing to do with gender.

Women also possess a womb which means they have the babies. This generally means some women will choose to stay at home for some period of time interrupting career aspirations for a while. This is not a failure to 'thrive'. This is women making choices. Isn't that what the feminist movement was about.

Saoirse
Good points. Traditionally female dominated professions have earned less, partly due to a catch-up lag from when men were the dominant bread winners. Male dominated professions were also more heavily unionised. Bus drivers are a good example of where high salaries can be compared with, for example, the lower pay of nurses. Those in caring positions generally tend not to strike unless a last resort or in a staggered approach never leaving duties completely unattended.

The nursing profession has attracted better pay in recent years due to the failure to attract students or to retain trained personnel. It is a shame that there is not more forethought and adjustments made before skills shortages rather than coming at it from a fix-up perspective, which in the long run costs more.

Ladies, the answer is quite simple, same as in the military. Bring in Conscription with a 50/50 quota. Hold guns to young women's heads & force them against their will to go into the infantry, dirty dangerous work like underground coal mining, etc.

I know many women personally, who make a "lifestyle choice" to work less hours in jobs with less responsibility, because they just don't want to work that hard. Clearly the only way to fix this, is to force them against their will to work harder. Another solution would be to force them to support a full time stay at home house husband, if they want to have children as well as a career.

Oh & there is another problem, those recalcitrant women who want their husbands to be the "main bread winner". Many of them are "career aggressive by proxy", they encourage their husbands to be aggressive at work, earn more money, so they have, more spending power, without being a working mother. Take away their credit cards & their husbands won't have to work to quite so hard, go for that promotion, then working women will have more access to the top jobs, easy, problem solved.

See how easy it is to solve problems when you use Masculine, linear, logical thought processes. EG, face facts, instead of using female, lateral thinking, denial, thought processes.

Snag:”Hold guns to young women's heads & force them against their will to go into the infantry, dirty dangerous work like underground coal mining, etc.”

Yep we’ll start with you sisters, aunts and mothers.

Do you go through a lot of keyboards posting here??

Snag:” See how easy it is to solve problems when you use Masculine, linear, logical thought processes. EG, face facts, instead of using female, lateral thinking, denial, thought processes.”

Oh that was logical thought was it. I did look up “linear” and found “developed sequentially from the obvious without in-depth understanding”.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11925#204821

Got it in one Jewely, i want you to start with my female friends, relatives, along with everybody else's, then we will see just how popular Radical, Extreme, Loony Left, feMANazism really is, with "real" women.

No, keyboard is fine, i love "real" women & they love me.

As to your last sentence this drivel about "logical thought processes" was made up by communist humanities academics in the mid 1950's as part of their Politically Correct Thought Police agenda to discredit male dominated science in the west.

BTW, my auntie was a rocket scientist on the Woomera rocket range because she had the opportunity many men her age did not have, to go to university. She also was forbidden from having babies or being married during the post war baby boom because after the war, there was not enough men to go around.

“Got it in one Jewely, i want you to start with my female friends, relatives, along with everybody else's, then we will see just how popular Radical, Extreme, Loony Left, feMANazism really is, with "real" women.”

What is a real woman then?

“As to your last sentence this drivel about "logical thought processes"”

You bought up the logical thought stuff. I looked up the linear thought process.

“was made up by communist humanities academics in the mid 1950's as part of their Politically Correct Thought Police agenda to discredit male dominated science in the west.”

Communists invented logical thought?

“BTW, my auntie was a rocket scientist on the Woomera rocket range because she had the opportunity many men her age did not have, to go to university.

Why did they let her in to Uni and not a man instead? Is this when you started getting angry at women in general?

“She also was forbidden from having babies or being married during the post war baby boom because after the war, there was not enough men to go around.”

Lucky cow eh. My Aunties were left to raise families and keep the farms going alone. I don’t think yours or my Aunties would complain either.

We just had a female chief scientist untill she resigned.

Why did she resign.

Well it appears that she didn't like the federal government's attitude towards science.

But the prime minister and many other ministers in the federal government are female.

The situation of continuously blaming evil male belongs to the 1970's.

I really didn't want to get into this one, but I just couldn't resist a few comments.

Jewely, you are such a breath of fresh air in this otherwise musty isolated world of rationalising and rationalisation. Good for you! A tiger, grrrr (but one who maybe also loves playing with the cubs).

I think women and girls are great - they keep the world going and keep us guys on our toes. My humble opinion is that the female of the species has some significant attributes not generally shared by males, and that's a good thing. However, there are obviously differences from one female to another, and hence we have a Julia Gillard, who is successful, yet it's not her success which makes me rather dislike her. Maybe it's the body language thing, but I tend to focus on the thin lips. Shouldn't be talking about our PM like this - supposed to show respect. It's ok to have a shot at Rudd though. Want a contrast? Dr Marie Bashir - just love her. It's a perception thing.

Seriously, would we really want women to be more like men? I don't think so. Women can probably do just about anything they set their mind to. And that I think is the crux - they have to want to, and usually that would mean that they have to be wired in a certain way. I think people end up the way their innate capabilities or particular circumstances dictate. No doubt some female geniuses probably fall through the cracks from time to time because of circumstance. Pity.

Make education more equal, ok, but not by limiting opportunity for women and girls who really just want to be home-makers. Sure, there needs to be choice, and impartial well-founded career advice. Go to it girls. The world is more open now than ever before, and it's only going to get better, unless megalo machos ruin it all.

(I know I've come across real paternalistic, but I can't help it, I'm wired that way both inherently and from my life experience.)

Saltpetre

Jumping in before Jewely, bit rude, but loved the honesty of your post - no bitterness as refreshing as spring rain 'round OLO.

Nah, we don't want women to be like men - just to have the same opportunities and that means if men want to be homemakers - why not? Some women, for reasons I cannot fathom, want to be front line soldiers - no reason they shouldn't if they qualify. We're all wired just a bit differently; male or female - just look at Maggie Thatcher - an excellent example of why we don't want women to be like men.

Cheers

Ammonite
“an excellent example of why we don't want women to be like men”

A highly bigoted, discriminated and prejudiced comment. However, very much a part of feminist training, and I might add, such thinking does quite often occur amongst the ranks of university academics, who like to label something as being “male” if they don’t approve of it.

Best now to expel yourself from the forum, as being too bigoted, discriminated and prejudiced to make any further comments.

vanna,

You surely are a precious flower.

Your comment is overwhelmingly an instance of the pot calling the kettle bigoted, discriminating and prejudiced.

Coming from OLO's most widely acclaimed woman hater, it provoked my first guffaw of the morning - to be followed by many more, I hope : )

Poirot,
Find one instance where I have said something negative about women.

BTW. Feminist do not represent women. Feminists are self appointed.

"When looked at without blinkers, the evidence" that men purposely push women out of science is circumstantial, and wouldn't hold up in a court, even though the author is a barrister.

If girls drop out of science at around 15 - 16, they also tend to drop out of art classes, gymnastics classes and most sports.

Just ask an arts teacher, gymnastics teacher or sports coach.

Most girls (ie the majority) seem to develop over interests around this age, and the author would know this also, but doesn’t mention it.

Now why would that be?

Gosh, it must have been a mere oversight by the author.

Like not.

Hey Saltpetre, very cool name. Why I am in this thread is beyond me, I read the article and thought ‘wha..’ And I’ve eaten a lot of chocolate the last few days.

No worries Ammonite and please never wait for me because you make more sense than I do anyway.

Since time began Vanna if we see something like a big ugly spider people have said “Ew squish him!” This was bought to my attention years ago when my little sister (real one, not comrade in red undie wearing femob) said “that is so sexist how do you know it is male?” “What a twat” I thought, and when did weather events start being given male names? You men just take everything!

Ages of 15 and 16 for boys and girls is an interesting time, usually their interests in everything slides as they become extremely interested in each other and the drama created is amazing. I’d suggest a full year off around this age and throw them all into non-academic stuff then bring them back into school afterwards.

Poirot Vanna has stated he does not hate women… "real" ones anyway; I’m still waiting for the definition. Bare feet and flat head come to mind.

I did say in the opening post for this thread that Vanna "would not be amused". And true to form.....

Jewely, I understand that the 'women' Vanna likes are manufactured in Stepford.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cRrbcv_qKA

Ammonite
It is possible to maintain girl’s interest in science.

“When scientific concepts in physics, information technology, and statistics were presented in a female friendly way -- as for example relating to online shopping or cosmetic surgery -- the mean level of girls' interest rose. However, the boys' interest in these topics simultaneously decreased.”

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110302075951.htm

A question could be asked “Why should boy’s interest increase if the science course were structured around ” online shopping or cosmetic surgery”?

Another question could be “Why should a science courses be structured around “online shopping or cosmetic surgery”?

Remembering that online shopping occupies a very small part of computing, and cosmetic surgery occupies a very small part of science.

If girls lose interest in science, it is not necessarily because of science or men.

Perhaps it is because girls lose interest in science.

The author should open their mind, and not be so ready to blame men for anything and everything.

I am left to wonder which so-called Australian university was the author educated in.

Hopefully one day there will be robot/android things to be the perfect partner. I’d have two of them.

My girl recently listened to a mother tell her teenage daughter she cannot be a mechanic because it is a boys job. She later took this teenage girl aside and told her what a load of crap that was.

I think my opinion would be that since she accepted what her mother said then she probably isn’t going to cope trying to learn alongside a room full of young men.

It’s a funny old life. I’m waiting to find out what course this girl does decide to go on. Hairdressing? Childcare? Is Domestic Science still out there? Years ago some legal papers needed me to fill in my occupation “mother” I said or “housewife”…. Nope had to be Domestic Engineer, so embarrassing.

Vanna aren’t the science people clever enough to come up with topics both sexes are interested in?

You just said the girls level of interest did rise based on what the topic is so they don’t lose interest in science something is making them lose interest.

Jewely
"You just said the girls level of interest did rise based on what the topic is so they don’t lose interest in science something is making them lose interest."

Hormones.

Something the author could study up on, (as a part of discovering new information).

Next topic please.

Or next piece of discriminatory, bigoted miandry thrown at the male gender by someone trained in a so-called Australian university.

Don't worry, they have found a science for girls, but they are still not too good at applying it. It's Environmental science.

It takes all those with OPs so low they can't get into any worthwhile course, & it starts back at high school year 10 level, as most of the students didn't do any math or science after year 10.

Councils & the Environment Department are giving the graduates some of the meaningless jobs they have in abundance.

We had a couple of these ladies, billed as irrigation "experts" from the water resources section of what used to be the Dept of Agriculture, [now Dept of Environment] at our local irrigation committee meeting recently. The Agricultural Department existed back when government departments still did something.

As many of us still judge irrigation effect in inches per acre applied, I asked one of them, talking in liters to tell us how many litres applied an inch to one acre, so many in the group could apply the information to their farming situation.

Would you believe two Bachelors of Science, sent out as irrigation experts could not tell us, nor could they do the math required to work it out.

They were nice young ladies, who could tell us interesting things like which types of invertebrates, living in the sand in the river bottom, suffered most when the river was dry for a period.

Now that's science, & about as much use as big boobs on a bull.

Oh, & don't worry, we have an accountant, & 2 engineers in the group, so we showed them how to work it out.

vanna,

"Find one instance where I have said something negative about women."

I see you've fallen back on your longtime tactic...you attempt to disguise your misogyny by mainly bagging mothers and feminists. And although you obviously consider yourself scintillating in your covert disparagement, it is blatantly obvious where you're coming from.

"...women are becoming increasingly hopeless." (amongst other rants about mothers in general)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10396&page=3

"....and now it's almost impossible for a man to work with women for any length of time in the workplace without one of them accusing him of some type of sexual harassment...."
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11703&page=13

No doubt, I could find many instances where you forgot to insert mother or feminist in place of "women" - suffice to say, I've got better things to do.

“Hormones.”

What? You do know our boys have them in abundance also don’t you Vanna?

If you’re talking about female puberty it’s usually years earlier than the 15 – 16 year old ages you referred to. Try 9 – 13 for girls. I think they cope a lot better in many ways with it than those same awkward years in boys.

Hasbeen – sorry to hear about your bad day at work with two young ladies. Bad that their teachers seem to have let them down somewhere along their chosen fields.

"Hormones."

Oh dear.

I can see why Vanna and Hasbeen would feel intimidated by the wonderful author, and the contents, of this article :)

I read up on her education and life history...
"Some of her books are Lionel Murphy - A Radical Judge, Even in the Best of Homes - Violence in the Family, The Baby Machine - Commercialisation of Motherhood, The Sexual Gerrymander - Women and the Economics of Power, Women and the Law, The Incredible Woman - Power and Sexual Politics, and Poor Nation of The Pacific - Australia’s Future? She is editor of the Artemis ‘Women’s Voices, Women’s Lives’ series, and has recently completed a book on equal pay, for the Australian Federation of Business and Professional Women, National Council of Women and New South Wales Trades and Labour Council, Wage Rage - Women’s Struggle for Equal Pay."

Sounds impressive... and all this learnt by a woman from several Australian Universities!
I say she would make a great Prime Minister :)

C'mon girls vanna loves women. The love and warmth verily seeps from every sweet dulcet tone.

It is only feminists, mothers, single mothers, single women, divorced women, abused women (there is no such thing in vanna's world), school girls, female teachers, career women, tradeswomen, female soldiers that he despises.

Sheesh...give the guy a break already.

Ooh Pelican, you are naughty!
But I like you :)

suzeonline,

Thank you for the listing of the credentials of this article's author. Very impressive. Though, to one not really familiar with women's affairs there appears perhaps a certain leaning in some of those works - not that this really matters.

What is of concern to me, however, is that, for all that scope of experience, education and achievement, I don't think the author has made much of a case for anything. Maybe I'm missing something (or a lot), but I think there has been more revealing investigation in the comments on this thread than in the article itself. (And I have to admit that I have enjoyed the diversity of responses the article has summoned.)

Nonetheless, though further gems of wit and fancy may yet present, I think this particular thread is done for me. And so adieu.

Saltpetre

>> Though, to one not really familiar with women's affairs..... <<

Welcome, alien being from another planet, I am pleased you have been entertained by this thread. During your visit on planet Earth you need to understand that men and women make up the species called homo sapiens, that what affects men affects women and vice versa.

Therefore, a male homo sapien who is filled with much hatred of female homosapiens (and vice versa) is of much concern. Hatred leads to a variety of consequences of which even the mildest: discrimination to the worst: physical violence, results in unhappiness and even harm.

Generally (please note use of 'generally', I am not saying 100%) most girls are raised in an environment encouraging them to be more introverted and boys are encouraged to be more extroverted. For some a level of timidity prevents the child from partaking in the opportunities that abound. For the excessively extroverted this may lead to high degrees of risk taking that results in the death of themselves or others.

Therefore, it is important that both girls and boys receive the love and care to aid them as they grow to be fully functioning adults - who are able to interact successfully with each other.

Please your stay here on planet earth.

Ammo:”Welcome, alien being from another planet…”

Hahaha.

Salt you remind me of Antiseptic on some kind of calming drug or maybe a women standing behind him with a gun to his head. Catch you on another thread babe.

Morganzola,
“When scientific concepts in physics, information technology, and statistics were presented in a female friendly way -- as for example relating to online shopping or cosmetic surgery”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110302075951.htm

Now you must know a lot (aka C.J Morgan) so if it isn’t hormones that makes girls interested in “online shopping or cosmetic surgery”, then what is it?

The answer to that question could be worth a lot of money.

Suzanonline,
There is no science in the author’s credentials. So why do you want her to become Prime Minister.

Is it because she is feminist and non-scientific.

Pelican,
I think you strayed from the topic in your ruthless and bigoted attack on me, and I was very hurt.

But you will be pleased to know that I recovered immediately, and just brushed it off as a ruthless and bigoted attack.

Now you could be more constructive and produce something worthwhile that could be used by the education system.

So what topics do you think should be taught in science courses at schools to keep girls interested, besides “online shopping or cosmetic surgery”?

vanna,

How about "how to dissect a misogynist"....

(Of course, taking "dissect" to mean: to examine analyse and criticise in minute detail)

Just a suggestion : )

Poirot,
Unfortunately, your suggestion just doesn't cut it.

Try to think outside of the feminist box, where misogyny is everywhere inside the feminist's head.

Try to be original, and not some 1970's feminist.

Try to be yourself, and not some chewed up and spat out victim of feminist brainwashing.

In other words, give a better answer.

Come on Suze, intimidate, you've got to be kidding.

Try disgust, the feeling I have for our present PM, & you might just be getting somewhere.

vanna
Perhaps before you accuse someone of bigotry you should do some self-examination. You don't even acknowledge women are abused or raped unless it is somehow their fault or that men have affairs and that is why some women might be single mothers, or that their men have abandoned them. That sort of one-eyed denial really gets up my nose – it is dishonest.

My statement was based on your own words over a number of different threads and topics. You want your cake and eat it too Eg. women who stay at home are leeches and men who accept this state of affairs are naive. Eg. women who work are failing in their responsibilities at home. Eg. single mothers are the cause of crime. You get the picture. The only bigoted comments are from you.

From your masculinazi perspective, women are in a no-win situation. Working women are feminazis, if they don't work they are leeches and men are fools (give men more credit too), if their husbands leave them it was the woman's fault, if the woman leaves she is 'fickle' and lacking in character. You sir are the bigot.

Many problems are caused by economic disparities than by imaginary gender conspiracies.

As for women and science. Why should we focus on women in science? Let women and men enter into whatever fields they show an interest or aptitude. As long as there is access to occupations and careers, the rest is up to individuals. Occupations don't have to be 50/50 gender mix, there may be other factors that influence which professions women and men choose. Why can't we acknowledge there are some differences in general terms between men and women?

There are a lot more women in science now than many years ago.

Why aren't there ever any conversations about why more boys aren't choosing nursing or child care occupations.

Why is it always assumed that traditional male occupations are the most desirable or worthwhile? It is this mindset that has diminished the role of ‘mothering’ and women-centric occupations.

Pelican
A lot of words, and I hope you are feeling better now.

You still haven’t addressed the issue of what to do to interest girls in maths and science.

After quite a lot of reading, I think the situation is best summed up below.

"More than 90 percent of elementary school teachers in the country are women and they are able to get their teaching certificates with very little mathematics preparation, according to the National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Other research shows that elementary education majors have the highest rate of mathematics anxiety of any college major.

The potential of these teachers to impact girls' performance by transmitting their own anxiety about mathematics has important consequences. Teachers' anxiety might undermine female students' confidence in learning mathematics throughout their years of schooling and also decrease their performance in other subjects, such as science and engineering, which are dependent on mathematical understanding."

http://educationresearchreport.blogspot.com/2010/01/elementary-school-women-teachers.html

The situation is almost identical in Australia. After an investigation was undertaken in QLD, it was found that only 5% of teaching time in primary schools was being spent on teaching science, and about 75% of teachers didn’t even use a science text book.

However the author seems to think that it has to do with men. Unfortunately 4 out of 5 teachers were female.

So the trained feminist response to always blame men does little towards identifying the real cause of a problem.

I have never known a feminist to get anything right, and I think the author’s article is yet another example of this.

vanna,

I'm beginning to suspect that your conduct is really a masochistic ploy to have yourself "chastised" by women....perhaps it's something you secretly enjoy....and you usually have our unwavering attention in response to your hysterical rants.
Hmmmm...

Poirot
I think you just can't answer a question.

I solved the author's problem for them, but unfortunately the solution is not what the author wanted I suspect.

vanna,

It's not incumbent upon me to answer your questions - and I know your penchant for asking them as a power play.

But, alas, one's efficacy is limited on OLO - better luck next time.

Much better thank you. :)

How about "how to dissect a misogynist"....

(Of course, taking "dissect" to mean: to examine analyse and criticise in minute detail)

Just a suggestion : )

The word misogynist seems get thrown around extremely frequently, and used as an insult, just like calling someone a bastard.

In reality, it is used extremely frequently when a male disagrees with the prevailing feminist view.

It would also seem to be used to try and stop debate and exploration of alternative ideas or arguements that do not agree with the feminist dogma.

It would then appear then that feminists want men who only agree with them and submit to their authority.

JamesH,
I would agree with that.

I have also noticed that feminists or their supporters will rarely answer questions or attempt to find solutions to problems.

They are trained to think of “men” as being responsible for any problem, and also trained to call someone a misogynist if they disagree with their bigoted philosophies.

No wonder few private companies will employ a feminist.

“It would then appear then that feminists want men who only agree with them and submit to their authority."

Oh – maybe I am a feminist then. :P

I think it’s mostly Vanna James, he is very insulting to women in general and says the weirdest things, it becomes way too tempting to insult him right back. Actually I generally don’t wait for him to get in first anymore.

I will do my best to behave better in future.

It occurs to me that the word feminist and the bastardisation of it with “femnazi” etc is also used frequently when a male disagrees with any female views. It would also seem to be used to try and stop debate and exploration of alternative ideas or arguments that do not agree with much male dogma here.

Wonder if we can have an amnesty of gender specific insults in the very next thread that comes up?

Graham might police it. We could have [amnesty non-participant]. If it was a pink or blue font and we could keep score it would be even better.

Vanna:”They are trained to think of “men” as being responsible for any problem…”

Guess I will stick to hand signals at the screen instead.

JamesH,

vanna has rarely (if ever) uttered a positive word about women - although he usually attempts to make a faux distinction in his antipathy by specifically targeting "feminists" and "mothers".

His commentary is one long repetitive denigration of womanhood. It would be difficult to find a more enthusiastic proponent of misogynistic sentiment.

vanna,

"...are also trained to call someone a misogynist if they disagree with their bigoted philosophies."

Well, yes, I refer to you as a misogynist since you fit the definition and because I disagree with you bigoted philosophies.

Poirot and Pelican, I like your style :)
Even when under unprovoked attack from rampant, chest beating, knuckle-dragging, 'chauvinazi's', you never fail to bring a smile to my face!

Vanna, I have also noticed that misogynists or their supporters will rarely answer questions or attempt to find solutions to problems.
They are trained to think of women as being responsible for any problem, and also trained to call someone a 'feminazi' if they disagree with their bigoted philosophies.

Many girls these days are taking science-based courses in schools and universities, so I don't know what your point actually is?

I know this because a good friend of my daughter is studying Forensic Science at Uni, and she told me that 80% of her class were female.
She also said there were many females in other science-based courses at her Uni. I don't know about other universities personally, but I can't see why they would be any different.

Maybe this fact frightens you?

It shouldn't, because I am happy that the science world will be in good hands, if the other girls are of the same caliber as my daughter's friend.

Good on you gals (sorry, Ladies), give em heaps.

Came back in spite of myself.

I have had a lucid moment, in which I realised how many wonderfully accomplished females I have seen on TV (my favourite hobby - the TV, not perusing wistfully) - scientists, researchers, police Inspectors, fighter pilots, chopper pilots, Governors and Governors-General, Astronauts, Doctors, Lawyers, Nurses, PHD's (particularly in the environmental sciences - a difficult and demanding and poorly appreciated field), astronomers, nuclear physicists, a few Premiers, Officers in the Armed Services, etc, etc, and the list goes on - not to mention commentators, reporters, artists, dancers, movie stars, spokespersons, CEO's, Directors, analysts, novelists, ...

And all those quiet achievers who are so great to be around.

More power to em; and leaves some of the really tough cerebral jobs to the boys, like the ARL, "boat races", bragging and being asses.

Though it's great that the female of the species has proven beyond doubt to be at least equally capable in virtually every major field of human endeavour (given half a chance) - and to be distinctly superior in some - I find it a little sad that this accomplishment seems to have coincided with something of a breakdown in attitudes towards marital or partnership loyalty and perseverance. We seem quite a bit more laissez faire about such things these days.

Maybe it's unrelated, and I certainly don't mean toughing-out an abusive or neglectful relationship, but it does seem that since the dawning of "free love" a few important cultural mores seem to have gone by the wayside. Of course, greater freedom in education and career opportunities may not have contributed at all to this fraying of cultural cohesion, but I just have to wonder. Maybe I'm just an ol' stick in the mud, but I think some things were worth keeping. Maybe I need "enlightening", or maybe I should just curl up and go away.

Here's hoping for an ever brighter future, but I can't help feeling that some "freedoms", if unfettered, may have a nasty sting in the tail.

No one has yet come up with any suggestions about how to interest girls in science, apart from basing science courses around "online shopping and cosmetic surgery"

Typical.

And its not just girls who are not interested, its also many of the teachers who are not interested.

Therein seems to be the main cause of the problem

"THE number of students studying maths and science is falling to dangerous levels, prompting warnings of a critical shortage in skilled workers.

The Group of Eight Review, carried out by eight of the nation's leading universities has delivered an alarming picture of maths and science in Australian schools.

The review reveals students are losing interest in maths and science in primary school, leading to a decline in the number of Year 12 advanced maths students going on to degrees in key skills shortage areas such as engineering, statistics and economics."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/group-of-eight-reviews-sum-of-all-fears-maths-is-in-serious-decline/story-e6frg6p6-1225838924327

Saltpetre,

"...all this fraying of cultural cohesion...."

Yes, it's a good way to describe it..
I believe our rampant consumer culture is the driver behind the fragmentation of community in our culture. This is a phenomenon that involves a collaboration between both genders, and is undertaken in an attempt to satisfy our unquenchable desire for ever more material gain.

The genie has escaped from the bottle....and it is, it would seem, of androgynous form.

vanna
Well I did offer a different perspective that you have ignored and asked why should girls be interested in science? Why is it that traditional male roles are valued but traditional female roles are not championed in the same way. There are many women in science now, many winning awards. Why is no-one asking why boys are not flocking to nursing or childcare roles?

How to interest girls in science? Girls already have access to science but girls also have choices. I dispute the fact that it is timidity or lack of risk taking. I started a Science Degree in the 70s and later swapped to Arts (Politics/Economics) because it better suited my interests and goals.

Saltpetre
Welcome to OLO. It is refreshing to see a man put forward his view without the blame-game or using terms like 'feminazi', or blaming the woes of the world on single mothers etal. Don't worry about being old fashioned, I too an anachronism in some aspects of gender discussions, managing both to annoy some feminists and masculinsts alike (acknowedging both are a broad Church). :)

I am reminded of the old parable about the blind men who wanted to see an elephant.

One felt the tail and said the elephant was like a rope, when the other felt the legs and said the elephant was like a tree.

Each was right from his perspective, but none had the whole picture.

Typically over the last few decades the some feminists found fame, notoriety in creating myths and misrepresentations.

The masculist movement or what ever would never have existed if feminism had not reared its ugly head.( I refer to the ugly side of feminism)

At Nojustice now archived, a few articles show how for example men were research by asking women, Researchers typically ignored the majority of males who were not alcholic, drug addicts, criminals etc.

<&#9632;Publicly making derogatory comments about staff members or their work, including use of body language (eye rolling, dismissive behavior), sarcasm, ridicule; making someone the target of practical jokes>
http://www.impactednurse.com/?p=2345

I agree Saltpetre. Equality of the genders (while not quite there yet) has come at a price. Women now have twice as many jobs as they had before, and many children now miss the undivided attention of all the stay at home mothers of yesteryear.

I don't believe that relationships are any worse off though. Unhappy couples of the 50's and 60's (and previously) had no choice really but to stay together- enduring a life of sadness and sometimes of violence.

At least these days they have a chance to start again with someone else...without all the stigma of that choice years ago (except the vilification from those people still living in the past of course).

Vanna, did you even read the posts above? Or do you just go on punching the keys on your keyboard with the same anti-female diatribe, time after time?

Perhaps some of the most charismatic feminists are sociopaths.

Ever heard of Don Quixote, who went around fighting imaginary battles. I wonder how many feminist are actually Don Quixotes?

Then Orwells Animal Farm has many of the parallels of feminism.

Could you imagine spending your whole life looking microscopically for areas of inequality that only pertains to women.

Forever shifting the goal posts. Never ever really defining what Shangri La would be like once it was achieved.

James H
"The masculist movement or what ever would never have existed if feminism had not reared its ugly head.( I refer to the ugly side of feminism)"

Can you see a parrallel as regards the development of the feminist movement. People who are respected generally do not revolt.

It is hard to respond to your post without knowing what you mean by the 'ugly side of feminism'. Most feminists I know are more humanist and egalitarian. There is really very few feminists that hate men or believe in a female autocracy, but 'they' are often depicted as the norm rather than the exception.

Suze
Good comment. I also think relationships are better now, more honest and generally (when it works) a sharing of roles. I do lament the decline in the emphasis on raising children - how these changes affect parenting and a shift in the focus on economic drivers rather than family/social ones. Alas maybe we are in an evolutionary process that goes too far one way before there is a shift to the middle ground. We will have to wait and see.

Salt:”Here's hoping for an ever brighter future, but I can't help feeling that some "freedoms", if unfettered, may have a nasty sting in the tail.”

In what way would you suggest we fettered freedom? You wonder if education and career opportunities have frayed cultural cohesion but by this are you only talking about female education and female career opportunities?

The sting is change makes certain people uncomfortable if they don’t see a benefit for themselves in it - maybe.

Oh Vanna, can’t you think of something to make the females that choose to continue further study of science interesting? Tell me which type of science and I’ll go think of something. Are we looking for an overall topic to study science within or a theme or a way to describe how certain things work by using analogies female students might find interesting?

James:”Then Orwells Animal Farm has many of the parallels of feminism.”

Didn’t we cover Animal Farm already? You all liked Clover the best right?

James:”Could you imagine spending your whole life looking microscopically for areas of inequality that only pertains to women.”

Nope – how’s it working for you?

JamesH,

Perhaps you could take note of the response of female posters to Saltpetre's comments.
His were couched in a reasonable and unprovocative style.

As Pelican has mentioned, the emphasis on raising children has declined, as parents are actively encouraged to place participation and consumption as a first priority..
This is a societal challenge - and one in which the onus is on men and women to demonstrate respect and cooperation to find the middle-ground.

Yours and vanna's provocative modes of expression are not helpful to rational debate.

Jewley

>> James:”Could you imagine spending your whole life looking microscopically for areas of inequality that only pertains to women.”

Nope – how’s it working for you? <<

Hahahaha!

Clearly NOT working for Vanna - a little bit OCD, a shame.

Thanks Poirot, this forum has helped me to broaden my perspective, and to question some of my assumptions and prejudices. Refreshing and educational. Values are a little harder to sort out, but the sharing of views helps. I have moved past confrontation and the stubborn retention of at least some of my perhaps outdated opinions.

Jewely,

I'm not suggesting that any particular interest group is responsible for restrictions on female options and opportunity, least of all women themselves, for there are far too many vectors to that equation, summing to a broad cultural perspective at any given point in time. I have only noted a gradual shift, with good points, and, from my viewpoint, some potentially troublesome aspects. Nothing more. A questioning of where we may be heading, and perhaps a caution. I'm not blaming anyone. We are all caught in a moving feast.

Have advancements in female education (or education in general) led directly to a fraying of our cultural cohesion? I don't think so. Advancements in education offering broader opportunity to male and female alike are beneficial across the board. Has this given rise to binge drinking and antisocial behaviour, to juvenile pregnancy, to increasing numbers of street kids, dysfunctional families, drug addiction or of the long term unemployed? Vectors, vectors, but operating within an overriding system, or in spite of it. It is largely your world now, largely in your hands. If I can help I will, but how, and who would listen? I don't have the answers.

And No, I'm not abashed if there is a movement to the general good, that's what life is supposed to be about.

Suze and Pelican made some good observations, and I thank them for their consideration. I'm glad if relationships tend to be more satisfying now, and, though I have no way of knowing if this is broadly the case, I sincerely hope it is. Family is after all the foundation of society and a microcosm of its integrity.

Saltpetre

Are you the same Saltpetre who claimed to be 'unfamiliar with womens' affairs'?

If so, you are an adept pupil.

;)

Salt:“I have only noted a gradual shift, with good points, and, from my viewpoint, some potentially troublesome aspects. Nothing more. A questioning of where we may be heading, and perhaps a caution. I'm not blaming anyone. We are all caught in a moving feast.”

What?

“Has this given rise to binge drinking and antisocial behaviour, to juvenile pregnancy, to increasing numbers of street kids, dysfunctional families, drug addiction or of the long term unemployed?”

Nope, hasn’t. Why? Do you think it has?

Salt:”Vectors, vectors, but operating within an overriding system, or in spite of it. It is largely your world now, largely in your hands. If I can help I will, but how, and who would listen? I don't have the answers.”

So you will stay on earth a while longer?

Jewlery,
“Tell me which type of science and I’ll go think of something. Are we looking for an overall topic to study science within or a theme or a way to describe how certain things work by using analogies female students might find interesting?”

I have had a lot of training in chemistry.

So how should chemistry be presented to girls so they would find it interesting?

EG Law of Multiple Proportions, Law of Conservation of Mass etc.

Saltpetre
"Advancements in education offering broader opportunity to male and female alike are beneficial across the board."

Well below is from a review into education in QLD.

“The average interest of Australian 15-year-olds in learning science is well below the OECD average and among the lowest in the world. “

http://education.qld.gov.au/mastersreview/pdfs/final-report-masters.pdf

Remembering that 4 out of 5 teachers in primary school are female, and the most significant decline in student’s interest in science occurs during primary school, and doesn’t increase much during secondary school.

Teaching was once considered a woman’s job, and if women in this feminist country have brought their special talents to teaching, they have now done one of the worst jobs in the world.

vanna
That just is not true. Back in the day teachers used to be all male, in fact secretaries were male. Women were not considered competent and too soft to be teachers or anything much else for that matter despite being left with most of the child raising - surely one of the most important jobs.

In recent years more women take to teaching than men usually because the wages are not (until more recently) as attractive and generally women tend to take on nurturing roles. (Well that last bit is my interpretation)

Perhaps we should be asking why more men are not going into the teaching profession? Strangely though the proportion of male principals and dep. principals is high considering the % of male teachers (ie. on a per capita basis). This is partly because of the fact many women still take more time out for parenting particularly within the last 20 years.

I have found with my own children than female teachers dominate primary schools and pre-schools but in high school the split seemed about 50/50 but I don't know the official statistics

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11925#205216

Satpetre, your comments throughout this thread have been quite honest & non confrontational but "denial is not a river in Egypt". The other comments from other gentlemen like Vanna or James H, have also been devoid of any antipathy towards women, girls, ladies, mothers, etc. In fact i have never seen any comment by any member of the AFL,

Anti
FeMANazi
League

that could be misinterpreted into misogyny by anybody other than a Communist Spinster, like our PM, or any of the "Siatas in da hood" like Pelican, suzeonline, Jewely, etc, who infect this web site with their obvious hatred for & desire to dominate all males.

Your comments about the moral & ethical degeneration of our society, culture & families has a very simple, sad answer. Which can be seen here, in this historical documentary about "Political Correctness".

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

After investing 23 minutes in watching this video, every dot will, for you, be connected, every "WTF" moment will have an answer.

Many "reforms" over the last half century to education, family law, family welfare, etc, always were a "plan for failure", by "inter"national socialists working towards the NWO.

Some more evidence of Closet Communists pretending to care about women or anything that gave them an excuse to bash our society or culture.

http://www.savethemales.ca/000185.html

http://www.savethemales.ca/160303.html

http://www.themonthly.com.au/node/2298

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Gillard

http://www.mailstar.net/xTrots.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabian_Society

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/the-covert-comrades-in-the-alp/story-e6frg6zo-1225887087909

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/radical-roots-seep-through-at-the-heart-of-greens-20100726-10sj0.html?skin=text-only

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=5vajlNhSzWYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=mark+aarons+the+family+file&source=bl&ots=_JqnT4mkHv&sig=23tiin36Jjg84b7-Ttuxxp7L3gI&hl=en&ei=jKD0TOiQD8fzcfH_mMcE&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false

To all those members, former members, male or female of the radical, extreme, far loony left factions of the RED/green, getup, GAYLP, Socialist Alliance, i ask, are your actions now, or over the last half century or so, social, economic or cultural treason? And should you be tried for it?

Gawd and it’s Friday.

Anyways, no way am I going to understand either the Law of Conservation of Mass or Law of Multiple Proportions unless you can teach me now you have my interest.

Making things interesting for girls is often about what is familiar to them; a few years ago I’d suggest that song from Moby ‘We’re all made from stars’. An interesting teacher who can explain the ratios not changing in a closed system without sending the class to sleep probably helps.

With girls explain about Dalton and who he was, give them some history around why they are about to learn what they are.

We are trying to work out how to make them interested enough in science that they chose further studies in it? Girls usually need more encouragement and they often want to please a teacher.

I think single sex classrooms, could benefit the learning differences between the genders since often what helps girls will bore the boys to death.

I’d also like to know why more men aren’t in the young schools, childcare and child services. Probably for all the same reasons girls learn in different ways.

Must go back to private industry not highering feminists. Also untrue. They even have womens clubs within the private firms - men are also welcome.

Good grief.

Suzanonline,
You have contributed nothing except flaming of other posters.

Pelican,
There has been a major decline in the number of male teachers in the education system, (particularly in primary education), with a simultaneous decline in almost every aspect of science education, now reaching some of the worst records in the world.

For example:-
“This reported time on science teaching places Australia among the countries spending least time on Year 4 science”
http://education.qld.gov.au/mastersreview/pdfs/final-report-masters.pdf

The situation has also had a major affect on our skills base.

“Nevertheless, the generally consistent decline in proportional enrolments at school is matched by declining tertiary enrolments in science-related courses and an increasing shortage of workers with SET skills (DEST, 2006).”
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/profiles/Australian_School_Education_Plan_2008_2012.htm

The whole situation has now cost this country mega $billions, and has affected everything from the trade balance to immigration programs seeking skilled workers.

Jewely,
Congratulations. It is true that we are all derived from stars.

The Law of Conservation of Mass and the Law of Multiple Proportions relate to chemical reactions, and of course, every movement someone makes, and every thought they have, occur because of a series of chemical reactions.

Everyone eats food and breaths air to provide reactants for the chemical reactions.

The recent report into education in QLD gave this as its number one recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION 1
“That all aspiring primary teachers be required to demonstrate through test performances, as a condition of registration, that they meet threshold levels of knowledge about the teaching of literacy, numeracy and science and have sound levels of content knowledge in these areas.”

http://education.qld.gov.au/mastersreview/pdfs/final-report-masters.pdf

So a method of stimulating interest in maths and science amongst students (and eventually the population), is to simply eliminate teachers from the education system who have no interest in maths and science.

Seems logical to me.

vanna, I think your criticism of suzeonline in your last post this evening was totally unjustified. (Perhaps a typo.) I think retraction would be in order.

Jewely,

What can I say. Pelican may have said it best, "Good grief". But then she may have been responding to vanna (who tends to be a bit of a worry, although his posts contain a lot of info).

So, Jewely, taking me to task. I thought you were nicer than that. Ok, this is a open forum, so if I open my mouth I have to be ready to have my foot put in it.

First up I gladly concede that all the ills experienced by womenfolk, past and present, may be laid squarely at the feet of menfolk. Done. Not that all women have been totally faultless in this, but generally men are the main protagonists. In the main I think women are pretty damn nice.

No, women are not responsible for kids on the street (mostly males in that predicament anyway), drugs, etc, BUT, these things are happening and they are a worry. (And I can't believe you could be so self-absorbed as to disagree with that.)

I sense that you are a liberated free-thinker, so I don't expect you to view the world exactly as I do - cautious, dull, non womanising, once only married, tending-towards-prude little ol' me.

So, obviously I have to give it to you straight. There is too much personal liberty, to make a fool of yourself, to booze, "dabble" in sex (yes) as though it is just a game, "experiment" with drugs - and a tendency to "need" something so I can let my hair down and have a "GOOD" time. What? Stories of pre-pubescent girls giving blow-jobs to boys in class? Can this be real? If this sort of behaviour is not a cultural shift and fragmentation, if not rampant disintegration, then I don't know what.

Freedom is good, but of constructive, not destructive, opportunity.

Jewely,

In response to one of my propositions you replied "Nope, hasn’t. Why? Do you think it has?"

So, how about some constructive comment. You just say no, why? Your opinion - but is it really a considered opinion?

Vanna "I have had a lot of training in chemistry."
I'm assuming that is high school chemistry Vanna, because nasty Universities are no good, right?

Thanks for your support Saltpetre, but don't waste your typing fingers worrying about Vanka. He will always resort to snide remarks when he can't answer questions logically :)

Formersnag <""Siatas in da hood" like Pelican, suzeonline, Jewely, etc, who infect this web site with their obvious hatred for & desire to dominate all males."

Oh dear, ladies, we are found out!
(Whip at the ready...)
Our predilection for domination of all men is now out there for
all to see :)

Jewely, et al,

Sorry about my second to last post last night, late, tired, neuron fatigue, excuses, excuses. Skewed vision on display. Taking myopic example and painting it across the whole picture - age-old pitfall of hanging on doggedly to outdated, unsupportable opinion.

Truth is I have "reacted" to some headline snippets from our mass-media coverage of "the world today". Big mistake. Foot solidly in mouth.

How to make reparation? Is't possible?

Jewely's post is proving challenging. Step back, review. Try again? Or chuck in towel? Can my opinion be of value?, or validity even? Considering I have also fallen off my pulpit from time to time, mea culpa. The world has indeed changed, and will keep doing so, irrespective of me. Our world, Oz, let alone the rest. Global warming, Libya, Syria next? Afghanistan, Iraq, Ireland, earthquakes, nuclear problems, BP, GFC, foreign aid, trees, garbage-tip children, whales, CO2, Tibet, West Papua, Nth Korea, Iran, Labor government, mining taxes, Palestine, sea level rise, tornadoes, floods, petrol sniffing, jihad, boat people (= people), sharia law, burquas, U.S., fossil fuel, us, Dukes, Duchesses, football hooligans, us.

Perspective. Matriarchal societies work.

Values? Can that be at the crux? People working hard to build a career, security, a future, in our cut-throat whirlwind economic environment? Who has time? Sacrifice career to raise a family? (Placing success in hands of a partner? Do it alone, on the State?) Have to break out occasionally from the slog. Schoolies' week? Pre Uni year off. Full-time slog, all have needs, drives. Not everyone goes home to mum. Drinks after work, party here, there. Enjoyment here, there. Climb the ladder. Boy, it's tiring. 1/4 acre block, doldrums, retirement home, release. Achievement along the way? Footprint?

Old does not = wise (necessarily). Try to make a contribution, last resort? Shut up and leave the world to the young, it's theirs anyway? Values. By example. Encouragement, nurturing, not dictum.

Saltpetre
“Perspective. Matriarchal societies work.”

It is interesting that we had a female Chief Scientist whose job was to provide “high-level independent advice to the Prime Minister and other Ministers on matters relating to science, technology and innovation”

She resigned after 3 years, but during that time she only met with Kevin Rudd on one occasion, and never met with Julia Gillard at all.

The feminist excuse that men are always to blame and oppress the women does not hold up to reality.

Women have been given every opportunity, but now we have a male Chief Scientist.

http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/

vanna,

I actually did quite well at science in high-school, despite a procession of tedious and spiritless (male) teachers...it is necessary for a teacher of science to have the ability to arouse and enliven a pupil's imagination.

In adult life, two of the best non-fiction books I have read were on the dawning of the science of geology and one on paleo-archeology, because the authors had the gift to inspire.
Sadly,inspiration was nowhere to be seen in the classes I attended.

(Btw, my brother is a science teacher - so maybe he got the lion's share of the science genes in our family)

Poriot,
“I actually did quite well at science in high-school”

Does that tell you something.

The current situation of “You don’t have to learn maths and science if you really don’t fell like it” obviously doesn’t work.

Our current results show that.

I would agree that there are many sub-standard teachers. The current situation of minimal performance pay means that most teachers just go through the motions.

I believe that is why so many men have left the education system, or never join to start with. Few men would want to work harder for no reward.

However that is what the highly feminist and completely archaic teacher’s union wants.

Snag:“Jewely, etc, who infect this web site with their obvious hatred for & desire to dominate all males.”

Only 3.5 billion more and my domination will be complete. Mwuahaha.

Vanna:“Jewely, Congratulations. It is true that we are all derived from stars.”

I learnt some new stuff I’d never thought about before, thank you Vanna.

“So a method of stimulating interest in math and science amongst students (and eventually the population), is to simply eliminate teachers from the education system who have no interest in maths and science.”

Well yeah, how can they encourage students if they aren’t enthusiastic themselves? Are we talking about the younger schools that don’t move from class to class for subjects?

Salt:”So, Jewely, taking me to task. I thought you were nicer than that.”

Gawd forget it then.

The 'good grief' was at FS.

vanna might have an aversion to women in certain roles but he generally does not demonstrate malice.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11925#205303

Pelican, you know better than that, i have never displayed any malice towards anybody, i don't even hate Communists, i feel sorry for them. Loony Left politics was invented as a system of training sheeple to oppress themselves.

When will you understand that men are NOT victims of some radical, extreme, loony left, lesbian, feMANazi conspiracy.

Women ARE the victims of a closet communist, politically correct, plan to victimise themselves.

in the 1950's husbands "put their wives up on pedestals" worshipped, spoiled them. now many men, do, have a low opinion of women in general, because women are failing at being wives & mothers, at an ever increasing rate because the fauxMANistas TRAINED them to fail.

Recently i met 2 young men in their late 20's, wealthy, successful, determined bachelors. They told me a politically incorrect joke.

Q, What does a sensible, intelligent, self respecting, hard working young man on a 6 figure income, do when he is ready to settle down & he meets a good girl? A, shoot her, before she turns bad, they all do.

You will just have to take my word for this, but the joke did not come from "bitter, twisted, divorced, middle aged men" but a happy, healthy, well adjusted, university educated, young, Internet entrepreneur, whose parents are still happily married BTW.

That is what half a century of Politically Correct, feMANazism has done for the women of Australia. it was started by communists to spread fear, loathing, mistrust between men & women in capitalist, democracies. it has been working perfectly. you, suzeonline & all the others, are proof of that, continuing to be, "in denial" despite the mountain of evidence in front of you.

Formersnag, Communism brought us feminism did it?
So what brought us chauvinism then, the Nazi's?
Good grief indeed!

I am starting to worry about you now.
Have you ever sought any help for your obvious problems with imagined conspiracies?

FS
Well I feel sorry for you that the only women you have known have led you to the conclusion that all women 'turn bad'. Have you, however ever thought, it might be you that influences how people react to you. I don't know you, and maybe you are a basically decent person, but someone who espouses to be Christian and then makes a blatantly unkind and false claim about women is not seeing the world how it really is but only in terms of your obviously bad experiences. We are all human but in the end it is your happiness that is limited and that is sad.

Your comments are no different to ardent feminists who believe that all men are violent rapists and would rape if they could get away with it. Do all men turn into wife beaters just because a few do?

I generally don't respond to your comments FS because how do you speak to someone who has so little faith in the opposite sex. You simply can't argue with someone who not only thinks they have all the answers, but ones that involve the exclusion and demonising of a whole sex.

There is little to fear from Communism these days so I am not sure why you act as if we are under imminent attack. Perhaps you are older and still think in terms of the old 'reds under the beds'.

In the early days the movement to emancipate women was strong among the educated and Conservative classes first. It was much longer before working class men and women could improve their lot.

I would be interested to know what sort of role you see for women in your perfect world? If you could design your utopia how would it look in terms of gender roles?