Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Feminism means one thing, sexism against men, and they are vile enough to discriminate against male kids too.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2013-02-26 06:03||
#2 What do you expect from a system set up to indoctrinate kids for a life as factory workers? Get the state out of the business altogether except for distributing vouchers.
Posted by Spot 2013-02-26 08:04||
#3 I meant Israel, BP (I didn't really know the meaning of the term "Feminazi bitch" until I met my son's principal).
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-02-26 08:15||
#4 She's simply doing her job and the vision of the left g(r)om. The indoctrination of the youth and acceptance of feminized workforce supervisors and leaders must begin as early as possible. Old white men are so 60's.
Resistance Is Futile. You Will Be Assimilated!
Posted by Besoeker 2013-02-26 08:33||
#5 Given the vast disparity of female to male ratio of elementary school teachers, doesn't the situation just scream for governmental intervention in the name of 'equality'? /rhet question
It was never about 'fairness' or 'equality', it was about power, privilege, and prerogative.
Posted by Procopius2k 2013-02-26 08:38||
#6 An interesting, and humorous dynamic that I have observed for decades in fly-over country dealt with female PE teachers, and their lack of ability to become tenured. They would simply quit and disappear, or not be extended for a second year. No discussion or comment from the school board, no cards and letters, very hush, hush.
Posted by Besoeker 2013-02-26 08:49||
#7 Based on the female PE teachers I remember from HS, they probably got married.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2013-02-26 10:19||
#8 Or now Besoeker. She and I had a long conversation and reached an understanding.
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-02-26 10:34||
#9 "now" ---> "no"
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-02-26 10:34||
#10 Homeschooling is creating a generation who are well educated and poorly indoctrinated. I pin most of my hope for the future on these kids.
Posted by Iblis 2013-02-26 11:20||
#11 A young talk radio host in a major metro area who was home schooled by his parents is a big conservative hit in the region.
When a liberal calls in to make a comment the young host takes the liberal apart with ease. The liberal ends up sounding totally stupid. An indictment of the pubic education system.
Posted by Dino Shomomp7692 2013-02-26 11:48||
I wouldn't even go as far as vouchers. Loans to parents would be a far better model.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2013-02-26 12:00||
#13 P2k has the truth of it. Outside of a very few women the "movement" was never about fairness or equality or equal work for equal pay. it was about intergenerational grudges and vengeance and establishing superiority for economic advantage. Ditto for other movements like blacks etc.
White men didn't have to, but they ended up, voting to end a society which abridged the rights of women and minorities. It is safe to say at this point that had the situation been reversed, and men/whites were the oppressed class, that women/minorities would never have voted the same way to free whites/men. The data on the ground permit no other logical conclusion. Their behavior in the now is object proof of this.
Posted by no mo uro 2013-02-26 13:49||
#14 My thought on vouchers is simple: it works for college education, why shouldn't it work for primary education?
I had the equivalent of federal and state vouchers when I went to college: the NSDL, Pell, and State of Ohio grants. Wasn't ashamed to claim them, either, as they got me to where I am today. I could go to practically any college without a problem (the Ohio grant I did have to spend in Ohio, of course).
Do the same for primary education: here you go Mr. and Mrs. Jones, here's a voucher for your kid. Pick a school and off you go, public, private, secular, religious, whatever. Schools are licensed and meet the minimum state board standards. Teachers teach.
I'd make one more reform: an end to truancy. Hate to say it but if a kid doesn't want to be in school then I wouldn't force it. Kid isn't going to learn anything anyways in that situation. Find something for the kid to do other than deal dope on the streets and live with it.
Posted by Steve White 2013-02-26 14:48||
#15 I believe the problem with vouchers is much like food stamps/EBT cards. There's no accounting when its spent not on vitals but on non-essentials. When I was in Korea, the local elementary school kids came home about one in the afternoon, had a lunch and then, by families pooling their own resources, spent the rest of the afternoon with a tutor. The families were spending their own money and damn well expected the kid to make an effort for that consumption of personal income.
Posted by Procopius2k 2013-02-26 16:50||
Doesn't matter to me how the vouchers are spent. The whole idea is a refund of money you were taxed for public education and didn't use. It's a tax refund, which is always good. Comparisons to food stamps and the like make no sense. Those are transfer payments. Tax cut vs transfer payment is a no-brainer.
Posted by Iblis 2013-02-26 17:39||
#17 Steve, it's called vo-tech. Go to high school or learn a skill in a structured environment.
That doesn't mean a free pass to the streets to deal.
Posted by KBK 2013-02-26 21:12||