Wow, fantastic Mr Pierce, you definatelly have a knack for finding academics who now share our concern. I will add Mr Weissberg to my list of American academics to learn more about.
Is the declining enrollment of men in college a bad thing? With college tuitions near bubble levels, maybe men are at the leading edge of change. I calculated that if my son (17) has a kid entering college in 35 years, tuition will be $250,000 a year.
Jeff, I'm not an expert, but I think we may be seeing something quite natural here, and it's not the "decline of males." Remember that IQ skews differently for men and women. There are more women in the middle and more men at the top and bottom. The bottom wouldn't be as likely to go to college, so all things being equal, there should be more women in college than men. Add to this the fact that testosterone, we are told, enhances risk taking, so men likely will alway be more likely to do the dangerous jobs (that don't require a college degree).
Good article. I enjoyed it. Getting the white males off campus so the void can be filled by others is just what Dr. Obama ordered (sarcasm off). Males and females cannot simply be interchanged as feminists and progressives imagine. Neither can males (probably) be easily interchanged from different cultural groups. I am Not suggesting white male superiority. I have observed that the incredible scientific, engineering, and industry building achievements largely by the white males in America (and elsewhere) was also because of the 'old-school' western thinking and values ie the socialization process that society used to have.
Right but with affirmative action helping get minority men into college, it's an even bigger decline for white males. Plus do to political correctness, When white males are behind, most people just look the other way when they wouldn't do that for women or minorities so white males falling short in colleges doesn't really seem like a big deal to some people. Plus many people don't even know of this huge gap because they've been fed lies from politically correct feminists. That was to anonymous @12:13.
this article might have done some good 25 years ago, when females were still in the process of taking over u.s. education (and everything else)
now that the u.s. "economy" is croaking, and producing virtually nothing, looks like some of the pundits and ivory tower dwellers are developing a Social Conscience
LOL!
i attended a number of colleges in the eighties and nineties, and witnessed first-hand the last-class citizenship and gleeful hate that was poured out upon "males" (esp that Ultimate Oppressor, the Evil White Male)
now that the ship's going down, we see hints (but only hints!) that we are being "invited back"
well, your gyno-colleges and your matriarchal gulag, that has taken so much pleasure and profit in disenfranchising boys and men the past half-century, can rot on the bottom of the Atlantic Trench
with Ms. Liberty's statue stuffed on top like a plug
you wanted gynoland, you got gynoland, now you will live with the consequences
Exactly! 'The Great White Male Shortage On Campus' is not a problem, it is this misandric government establishment's desired result. Now it can live with the consequences -- and everything else that comes with it.
In America Gender-feminists have the womens vote... right now. That might not always be the case, as women themselves are starting to say "where are the men" on campus, and out of the percentage of men that are on campus, a growing fraction of them don't date girls (they are not hetero-males). So what Gender-Feminism is doing is basically making "hetero-males" more and more scarce on campus, and the girls may eventually conclude that "This Isn't Fair to hetero women to purge from campus our friday night dates".
"So what Gender-Feminism is doing is basically making "hetero-males" more and more scarce on campus, and the girls may eventually conclude that "This Isn't Fair to hetero women to purge from campus our friday night dates". There was a piece not long back from some college or another. Because men made up only 40% of the campus and half of those were deemed "undateworthy" college girls were finding themselves having to compete for the available men. And they were not enjoying that at all.
Funny thing: I wrote a response under the post that's been cited here that mildly suggested that the reality of male debate wasn't quite as rosy as portrayed by Prof. Weissberg. It wasn't insulting. It was not cutting. I did point out that it was ironic that insults and put-downs were deemed perfectly OK by Weissberg (which I think they are) but that the web host of the article would not publish comments that were "vicious" or obscene, which struck me as ironic since put downs by young men are quite frequently both.
In any case, I was not published and can't imagine why not. I'm pretty good at knowing when I'm being rude and I was careful not to be in this case. I also can't help but note that all seven comments that were published are completely complimentary to Weissberg.
I'm kind of left here scratching my head wondering what the problem is.
Every civilized society must strive to (1) eradicate heinous crimes by punishing the offenders, and (2) insure that the innocent aren't punished along with the offenders. Too often, the second half of that balance is omitted from the public discourse. Accusations of serious criminality, especially murder and sexual wrongdoing, too often are their own convictions in the high court of public opinion because the stigma is so severe. It is our mission to raise awareness about the injustices suffered by persons wrongly accused of serious criminality. Protecting the innocent from unjust harm as a result of a wrongful accusation is a hallmark of a civilized society.
13 comments:
Wow, fantastic Mr Pierce, you definatelly have a knack for finding academics who now share our concern. I will add Mr Weissberg to my list of American academics to learn more about.
Is the declining enrollment of men in college a bad thing? With college tuitions near bubble levels, maybe men are at the leading edge of change. I calculated that if my son (17) has a kid entering college in 35 years, tuition will be $250,000 a year.
Jeff
Jeff, I'm not an expert, but I think we may be seeing something quite natural here, and it's not the "decline of males." Remember that IQ skews differently for men and women. There are more women in the middle and more men at the top and bottom. The bottom wouldn't be as likely to go to college, so all things being equal, there should be more women in college than men. Add to this the fact that testosterone, we are told, enhances risk taking, so men likely will alway be more likely to do the dangerous jobs (that don't require a college degree).
Good article. I enjoyed it. Getting the white males off campus so the void can be filled by others is just what Dr. Obama ordered (sarcasm off). Males and females cannot simply be interchanged as feminists and progressives imagine. Neither can males (probably) be easily interchanged from different cultural groups. I am Not suggesting white male superiority. I have observed that the incredible scientific, engineering, and industry building achievements largely by the white males in America (and elsewhere) was also because of the 'old-school' western thinking and values ie the socialization process that society used to have.
Aharon
My only problem with this article is the emphasis on WHITE males.
I've seen all too many examples of feminists painting the MRM as a WHITE male thing, when really it's an ALL male thing.
Right but with affirmative action helping get minority men into college, it's an even bigger decline for white males. Plus do to political correctness, When white males are behind, most people just look the other way when they wouldn't do that for women or minorities so white males falling short in colleges doesn't really seem like a big deal to some people.
Plus many people don't even know of this huge gap because they've been fed lies from politically correct feminists.
That was to anonymous @12:13.
Thanks for the link Pierce!
this article might have done some good 25 years ago, when females were still in the process of taking over u.s. education (and everything else)
now that the u.s. "economy" is croaking, and producing virtually nothing, looks like some of the pundits and ivory tower dwellers are developing a Social Conscience
LOL!
i attended a number of colleges in the eighties and nineties, and witnessed first-hand the last-class citizenship and gleeful hate that was poured out upon "males" (esp that Ultimate Oppressor, the Evil White Male)
now that the ship's going down, we see hints (but only hints!) that we are being "invited back"
well, your gyno-colleges and your matriarchal gulag, that has taken so much pleasure and profit in disenfranchising boys and men the past half-century, can rot on the bottom of the Atlantic Trench
with Ms. Liberty's statue stuffed on top like a plug
you wanted gynoland, you got gynoland, now you will live with the consequences
ray said - "you wanted gynoland, you got gynoland, now you will live with the consequences"
Amen.
"you wanted gynoland, you got gynoland..."
Exactly! 'The Great White Male Shortage On Campus' is not a problem, it is this misandric government establishment's desired result.
Now it can live with the consequences -- and everything else that comes with it.
"Who is John Galt?"
In America Gender-feminists have the womens vote... right now. That might not always be the case, as women themselves are starting to say "where are the men" on campus, and out of the percentage of men that are on campus, a growing fraction of them don't date girls (they are not hetero-males).
So what Gender-Feminism is doing is basically making "hetero-males" more and more scarce on campus, and the girls may eventually conclude that "This Isn't Fair to hetero women to purge from campus our friday night dates".
"So what Gender-Feminism is doing is basically making "hetero-males" more and more scarce on campus, and the girls may eventually conclude that "This Isn't Fair to hetero women to purge from campus our friday night dates".
There was a piece not long back from some college or another. Because men made up only 40% of the campus and half of those were deemed "undateworthy" college girls were finding themselves having to compete for the available men. And they were not enjoying that at all.
Good article, btw.
Funny thing: I wrote a response under the post that's been cited here that mildly suggested that the reality of male debate wasn't quite as rosy as portrayed by Prof. Weissberg. It wasn't insulting. It was not cutting. I did point out that it was ironic that insults and put-downs were deemed perfectly OK by Weissberg (which I think they are) but that the web host of the article would not publish comments that were "vicious" or obscene, which struck me as ironic since put downs by young men are quite frequently both.
In any case, I was not published and can't imagine why not. I'm pretty good at knowing when I'm being rude and I was careful not to be in this case. I also can't help but note that all seven comments that were published are completely complimentary to Weissberg.
I'm kind of left here scratching my head wondering what the problem is.
Post a Comment