Rules ease restrictions on single-sex schools

Segregation?Seems like divide an conquer of the next generation.It could be me,but society is getting a little creepy.To 1984ish for my taste.The country is undergoing alot of change,not always for the better in my opinion.Also to see this taking place in "public" schoolsraises a red flag to me.I understand "private" schools do this,but never heard of such a thing in a public school.

(MSNBC)-Bush administration describes them as tools; critics see segregation
www.msnbc.msn.com...

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is giving public schools wider latitude to teach boys and girls separately in what is considered the biggest change to coed classrooms in more than three decades.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

After a two-year wait, the Education Department issued final rules Tuesday detailing how it will enforce the Title IX landmark anti-discrimination law. Under the change taking effect Nov. 24, local school leaders will have discretion to create same-sex classes for subjects such as math, a grade level or even an entire school.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

After receiving 5,600 public comments, education officials said they were moving forward with the plan with some wording tweaks and assurances from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that it was legally sound.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

I personally don't see what the big deal is? Studies have shown that all girl or all boy schools outperform coed. There aren't the huge hormonal distractions that way. They can actually concentrate on their studies rather than be day dreaming about feeling up the girl next to them. Why is this big brother? I don't understand your concern. What does this have to do with conquering? What are they trying to conquer? Kids are in school to learn and I believe that is what they are trying to accomplish. School has just turned into one big fashion show and love fest. I was surprised at how many kids I'd see making out in the halls of my daughter's high school. Sorry, but that's not what school is for.

(MSNBC)-Critics who compare the plan to “separate but equal” segregation-era classrooms haven’t been so sure. The National Organization for Women says it creates the risk of breeding second-class citizens. The American Association of University Women has said it would “throw out the most basic legal standards prohibiting sex discrimination in education.”
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Number one, I don't put much creedence in what some of these groups like to spout. Seems like they always need a reason to complain. They don't state how it will "throw out the most basic legal standards prohibiting sex descrimination" do they? They are speculating that it "could" or "might" be discriminating.

Did you also read the part in the article where these classes would be voluntary?

Originally posted by closettrekkie
Number one, I don't put much creedence in what some of these groups like to spout. Seems like they always need a reason to complain. They don't state how it will "throw out the most basic legal standards prohibiting sex descrimination" do they? They are speculating that it "could" or "might" be discriminating.

Did you also read the part in the article where these classes would be voluntary?

Did you also read the part in the article where these classes would be voluntary?

Yes i did.
By chance did you ever read the fact that Income tax is only subject to "voultary compliance" also?

Everything starts off as voluntary,in the begining,lets see how "voluntary" it is 10 years from now.

Single-sex schools used to be quite common, at least as far as private institutions went, although I never attended one. If they fell out of favor it was because of the feminist garbage that was published as fact for a couple of generations, which is now being refuted by evidence and now feminists who once were hell-bent on breaking down all gender-based barriers are hell-bent on replacing many of those barriers, however it suits their agenda.

However, anyone who's old enough to remember the fifties knows that when even coed schools understood and accommodated the differences in childhood development relative to gender, schools actually turned out high school graduates who could read and write.

That's nothing to sneeze at.

I'm totally against this, as I see it as sexist.

I don't care if single gender schools do better or not, growing up
in a co-ed classroom helps kids to be more open, sociable and
normal, it also allows them to 'practice' with relationships.


And no, I don't have a source, that's what I've observed
personally.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Single-sex schools used to be quite common, at least as far as private institutions went, although I never attended one. If they fell out of favor it was because of the feminist garbage that was published as fact for a couple of generations, which is now being refuted by evidence and now feminists who once were hell-bent on breaking down all gender-based barriers are hell-bent on replacing many of those barriers, however it suits their agenda.

Wow, how dare women want to be treated equally... How dare they want the right to vote, go to school, get a job... How dare they want to be equal to men...

Anyways, sorry Grady, but that little rant against women makes me wonder, why do you hate women? Or is it just you consider them to be third class people who don't deserve to be equal?

Iori - Children learn about socialization in many given situations. School is for learning, it's not an ice cream social.

Hoorah - I am a woman and I completely agree with Grady. I don't understand where you get that he hates women from that? Of course they have the right to vote, get a job, etc. But I'm not too thrilled with the feminists for making my life even harder than it was! I think you're taking this to an extreme and you sound more like you're ranting than Grady does. There ARE differences between the sexes and I'm tired of people trying to make us sexLESS!

Originally posted by closettrekkie
Iori - Children learn about socialization in many given situations. School is for learning, it's not an ice cream social.
...
I'm tired of people trying to make us sexLESS!

Many kids learn socialization at school though.
School is meant for learning yes, but it's also meant to be
a place for people to come together and socialize as well.


When you say sexless, what exactly do you mean?

I feel that these "groups" are trying to make everyone the same. There IS a difference between men and women. It's becoming so controversial to even admit that for some reason. We are different and I embrace those differences.

I don't find it to be freeing when women are afraid to spend time at home raising their children because some feminist says she should be at work and be proud of it.

I think it's important that we remember who we are. This society is turning women into a bunch of burnt out worker bees and the men are becoming more and more femine and confused.

[edit on 24-10-2006 by parrhesia]

I feel that these "groups" are trying to make everyone the same. There IS a difference between men and women. It's becoming so controversial to even admit that for some reason. We are different and I embrace those differences.

I don't think that's true at all.
In my opinion, men and women are very, very different and the point of feminism is not to eliminate those differences but to disassemble the positive values placed on "male characterstics" and negative values places on "female characteristics." Having studied much feminist literature formally this is what I have taken from the vast majority of it, and not even the most radical feminists seek to create sexless human beings, but rather what I said before, and also create people who question the very basis of gender roles which are very much the product of humans and unnatural.

I don't find it to be freeing when women are afraid to spend time at home raising their children because some feminist says she should be at work and be proud of it.

This does indeed happen, but are you really going to disagree with feminism as a whole based on how the beliefs of some feminists affect you? The whole point of feminism was to have a choice. I think devaluing traditional female work is a negative thing, and know full well some feminists look down on it, but I would never let that dissuade me of the value feminism can have.

I think it's important that we remember who we are. This society is turning women into a bunch of burnt out worker bees and the men are becoming more and more femine and confused.

This is interesting and I'm not completely sure how to interpret it.

"Remember who we are"? Please, tell me who we are. And judging from the statements that follow that women are not meant to be burnt out "worker bees"? How do you define a feminine man? What makes this man confused? Why is a feminine man a bad thing?

Men aren't inherently masculine. They're raised to be so. What's wrong with rejecting it and doing what you want? After all, that's what you want to do with feminism and its proponents.

Originally posted by parrhesia
Men aren't inherently masculine.

This was the battle cry of feminism for thirty years and boys have undergone sexual reassignment surgery and raised as girls because of trauma to their sexual organs and the results have been disastrous.

Socialization might try to encourage masculinity in boys and femininity in girls, but masculinity and femininity have a strong genetic component.

And let us not make the mistake of confusing masculinity and femininity with the attributes of either ladies or gentlemen.

Here is but one story:

As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl

This is not the only case I have heard of.

[edit on 2006/10/24 by GradyPhilpott]

I feel that these "groups" are trying to make everyone the same. There IS a difference between men and women. It's becoming so controversial to even admit that for some reason. We are different and I embrace those differences.

I feel differently, I thik we need to get rid of differences, and
see oursleves human, not man and woman, or any other
differences.