Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 39

Thread: Kindergarten teacher bars boys from Legos for the sake of gender equity

  1. #1

    Kindergarten teacher bars boys from Legos for the sake of gender equity

    Washington kindergarten teacher's Lego lesson: Boy's can't play

    A kindergarten teacher in Bainbridge Island, Washington decided to attack what she sees as gender inequity by preventing her boy students from playing with the Legos in her classroom. Only girls were allowed to play with them.

    Karen Keller, who teaches at Blakely Elementary School, has been trying to get girls more interested in science and math and noticed that during the 30-minute “free-choice” time at the end of the school day, the boys frequently played with Legos. The girls did not. Keller decided to bar the boys from the building materials so girls would not be intimidated to play with them.

    In an interview with the Bainbridge Island Review, Keller said, “I always tell the boys, ‘you’re going to have a turn- and I’m like, ‘yeah, when hell freezes over’ in my head. I tell them, ‘You’ll have a turn’ because I don’t want them to feel bad.”

    Keller cites research showing the benefits of kids having open-ended “trial and error” play with building materials like Legos. She determined that without her intervention the girls would continue to miss out on developing important spatial and math skills. She even got help from the Bainbridge Schools Foundation.

    The parent-led school support group gave Keller a grant to purchase several new sets of Legos for the school. The grant was titled, ‘Deconstructing Gender Play in the Kindergarten Classroom.’

    When KIRO Radio host Dori Monson heard about Keller’s Lego lesson, he was incredulous. Monson asked his listeners, “Why do we have to tear down boys to elevate girls?” Monson, who is the father of three girls also said, “If girls want to play with dolls and boys want to play with Legos, why do we have adults in the public schools who feel like they have to make a social statement about gender equity?”

    The Bainbridge Island School District released a response to the controversy saying the boy Lego ban was an “isolated, short term practice” that ended in October. District spokeswoman Galen Crawford wrote, “All students in all classrooms have and will continue to have access to all instructional and non-instructional materials. BISD is committed to providing equal opportunities for all persons. The district does not discriminate.”

    In the same news release, the district issued a lengthy statement from the teacher, Karen Keller. It read in part, “I proposed allowing girls to have an unencumbered opportunity to become more comfortable working with Legos in an attempt to support girls with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math). I treat all of my students with equal respect and kindness. Every student in my class has access to all curricular materials, including Legos.”
    Kindergarten teacher denies Legos to boys in name of 'gender equity'

    A kindergarten teacher in Bainbridge Island, Wash., actively denies her male students the opportunity to play with Lego blocks in order to encourage her female students to play with them.

    Karen Keller bars the boys in her class from playing with the colorful blocks, even going so far as to lie to them about their opportunity to play.

    "I always tell the boys, 'You're going to have a turn' — and I'm like, 'Yeah, when hell freezes over' in my head," Keller told the Bainbridge Island Review. "I tell them, 'You'll have a turn' because I don't want them to feel bad."

    Keller does this because she saw the boys in her class gravitating toward the blocks during their "free choice" play time while the girls flocked to dolls and crayons. Keller's solution was to deny the blocks to the boys, who wanted to play with them, in order to encourage the girls to play with them. The Review article offers no indications about how Keller gets the girls to play with something of which they have no interest.

    Keller had originally tried to entice the girls by providing pink and purple Legos, "But it wasn't enough." So she requested a grant from her school to purchase Lego Education Community Starter Kits for three classrooms at the Captain Johnston Blakely Elementary school, where she has taught for seven years. She requested the grant without telling the school she would be denying boys access to the toys.

    "I had to do the 'girls only Lego club' to boost it more," Keller said. "Boys get ongoing practice and girls are shut out of those activities, which just kills me. Until girls get it into their system that building is cool, building is 'what I want to do' — I want to protect that."

    Keller had found research finding that Lego play accelerates development and helps with spatial and math skills. And since Keller believes that gender stereotypes are ingrained into girls at a young age, well, something had to be done.

    "I just feel like we are still so far behind in promoting gender equity," Keller said.

    Now, if Keller had done some additional research, she might have learned that in the past decade, girls have been catching up to boys in math and science skills and have surpassed boys in many other skills. In fact, a study from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a French think-tank, found that teenage boys are 50 percent more likely than girls to fail at achieving basic proficiency in math, reading and science. Boys are also behind girls in literacy skills.

    Overall, boys are ahead of girls in math (by an equivalent of about three months of schooling), about even with girls in science and a year behind girls in reading.

    Part of the reason for this more recent disparity is that boys spend less time doing homework and reading books than girls. Another reason is teachers like Keller, who actively hold boys back in order to promote girls.

    The OECD also found that teacher assessments favor girls, while anonymous tests allowed boys to do much better.

    "The gap with girls in reading was a third smaller, and the gap in maths — where boys were already ahead — opened up further," The Economist wrote. "In another finding that suggests a lack of even-handedness among teachers, boys are more likely than girls to be forced to repeat a year, even when they are of equal ability."

    Also, more women than men attend and graduate from college nowadays.

    Rather than finding a way to encourage girls to play with the blocks, Keller decided to bring down boys. By Keller's own research assessment, she is actively working to hinder the development of the young boys she is tasked with teaching — all in the name of "gender equity."

    As one of my Twitter followers said: "When you have an axe to grind with 5yr old boys, maybe you shouldn't teach kindergarten."

    Update: The school district, Keller and the Blakely Elementary principal have each released statements regarding the report.

    Keller claimed she only instituted the "girls only" Lego play for the first month of school to get them interested in the toys. She also said her "hell freezing over" remark was "a casual, off-record aside meant to convey my frustration with the marketing to girls in our society." She said that it was "not appropriate" and "taken out of context." She insisted that every student in her class has access to Legos.

    The school district called the Review article "inaccurate" and said the school does not discriminate on the basis of sex.

    Blakely Elementary Principal Reese Ande said the school does not "promote access or opportunity through any forms of exclusion" and that Keller is "a passionate teacher who cares deeply for each and every one of her students."


    Related:

    Radical in the sense of being in total, root-and-branch opposition to the existing political system and to the State itself. Radical in the sense of having integrated intellectual opposition to the State with a gut hatred of its pervasive and organized system of crime and injustice. Radical in the sense of a deep commitment to the spirit of liberty and anti-statism that integrates reason and emotion, heart and soul. - M. Rothbard



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    That's my western Washington, such fine progressive part of the planet. Actually Dori is a pretty good radio host considering where he's at.
    "The Patriarch"

  4. #3
    Public schools are child-abuse.

  5. #4
    I like how she openly admits lying to the boys, it's all justified in her head.
    "The Patriarch"

  6. #5
    It's important to drill into kid's heads early that their unstructured time has a bunch of rules attached to it.
    Otherwise they might grow up into adults who think they're free.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabal View Post
    Related:

    Sommers makes very dishonest arguments in this video. First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support. In fact, most studies show a greater degree of intra-sex behavioral variation rather than inter-sex. The differences between the sexes have been found to not be statistically significant. Despite these findings, however, Sommers continues to suggest that genetic differences between males and females lead to hardwired forms of human behavior that are apparently fixed throughout life. Sommers' idea that male nature is set in stone is the key to her argument, when it doesn't even have much support among biologists. Keep in mind that Sommers' academic background is in philosophy rather than biology or sociology, which may explain why her foundation is a little shaky. The more widely accepted view, in contrast, is that heredity sets a range of possibilities for every individual and then environment determines the variation within that range. This moderate view is backed up by the studies that I mentioned earlier, as well as research that shows brain structure and function changing in response to a person's lived experiences. In short, no, it's not clear at all that being restless and noisy in school is something inherent to boys.

    Now, if the research shows that neuroplasticity is indeed a thing, then we are correct to have concerns about cultural messaging. Sommers talks about getting more boys to read, saying that boys tend to prefer nonfiction. That's all well and good, but if the claim is that English classes aren't including enough nonfiction, that's because nonfiction doesn't belong in English classes in the first place. The point is to teach an understanding of literature, which is not inherently feminine by any means. The solution is clearly to push for inclusion of nonfiction in history, science, mathematics, etc. I have a feeling this would make both boys and girls very happy. But Sommers chooses to politicize the obvious failings in our school system by using her argument as an excuse to strike back against feminists. She's not really concerned about boys' lack of achievement. If she were, her writings and videos would be works of scholarly reflection rather than conservative polemics against feminists and liberals. As for not including comics, this has less to do with political correctness and more to do with the fact that comics are not suitable reading material for a school setting. The goal should not be to encourage reading at all costs. School is meant to instill a certain background and education, not to be entertaining.

    I just looked at the AP English summer reading list for my high school in 2014. It has not changed much from when I graduated in 2011 (perhaps made easier).
    Conrad, Joseph. - Heart of Darkness (male author, male protagonist)
    Fitzgerald, F. Scott. - The Great Gatsby (male author, male protagonist)
    Gaines, Ernest. - A Lesson Before Dying (male author, male protagonists)
    James, Henry. - Daisy Miller (male author, female protagonist)
    McCarthy, Cormac. - The Road (male author, male protagonists)
    Otsuka, Julie. - When the Emperor Was Divine (female author, female protagonist)
    Twain, Mark. - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (male author, male protagonist)

    This reading list does not differ significantly from ones like it all across the country; by representation alone, I would say that males still keep an admirable foothold - domination, even. Even Daisy Miller certainly is no radical feminist propaganda (though it is boring). The real problem is that over the years, "male culture" has learned to see reading literature and poetry as an activity for "sissies, geeks, and ******s," associating it with the feminine. There is no actual bias toward women in English curricula, as Sommers seems to be claiming. Want to solve the problem? Address the boy culture bull$#@!. Finally, Sommers fails to mention that the disparity in literature assignments has existed at least as long as the Department of Education has records, since 1969 - this is before feminism had solid traction as a political movement, let alone an educational one.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  8. #7
    Is she making the boys pee sitting down too?

  9. #8
    Love Christina Sommers.

    HOMESCHOOL WIN!
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Nothing new. My kindergarden teacher banned boys from a lot of activities. Mostly arts and crafts kind of things. The boys would eat the glue and get paint all over everything if she let them. She probably wanted to medicate the hyper boys...
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Sommers makes very dishonest arguments in this video. First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support.
    You will probably change your mind on this when you get older. I know women who thought just like you when they were younger... then they had kids..

    I mean, seriously, it's like you're getting up here and saying, "look people, I know you think that grass is green and the sky is blue, but these scientific research papers show that in fact the sky is yellow and grass is purple. They are peer reviewed!!"

    Well guess what? The guy you hate, Stefan Molyneux, recently did an expose on the "peer review" process and showed how it is all total crap. He cited a study of peer reviewed research - first some cancer studies that were peer reviewed and highly lauded by the establishment - only 24% were replicable!!

    Worse yet was psychology - only 11% of the peer reviewed studies were replicable!!

    Peer reviewed doesn't mean much, except for that a bunch of stuffy academics who receive gigantic government grants and are ingrained into the establishment, pushing establishment nonsense propaganda, are deciding what studies are valid and which are not.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism
    Biology is deterministic! Learn biology! Seriously!

    (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support.
    Boys do behave one way. Girls do behave another. It rests on REALITY! Everyone knows this, everyone accepts this, even you yourself accept it in the very same post. You just don't like it like that. Fine. Understood. You hate biology. Great. Guess what: no one is forcing you to follow it. Buck biology. You're human; you can do that.

    The differences between the sexes have been found to not be statistically significant.
    Statistically significant? Statistically significant?!? What does that even mean? What are you even saying? Please, don't use words you do not understand.
    Sommers' idea that male nature is set in stone
    Set in stone? No, it's set in biology, which is more permanent than stone (and at the same time, more flexible). Biology changes both faster and slower than stone, depending.

    Now, if the research shows that neuroplasticity is indeed a thing, then we are correct
    If neuroplasticity "is a thing" then that proves you and others who share your delusions "are right"? Unbelievable. Again, don't use words you do not understand.

  14. #12
    Mine worked on making me be right handed. $#@! her, I'm still a lefty.

    I was pretty radical even as a child, of 5.

    YAY!
    Last edited by Ronin Truth; 11-25-2015 at 01:11 PM.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    You will probably change your mind on this when you get older. I know women who thought just like you when they were younger... then they had kids..

    I mean, seriously, it's like you're getting up here and saying, "look people, I know you think that grass is green and the sky is blue, but these scientific research papers show that in fact the sky is yellow and grass is purple. They are peer reviewed!!"

    Well guess what? The guy you hate, Stefan Molyneux, recently did an expose on the "peer review" process and showed how it is all total crap. He cited a study of peer reviewed research - first some cancer studies that were peer reviewed and highly lauded by the establishment - only 24% were replicable!!

    Worse yet was psychology - only 11% of the peer reviewed studies were replicable!!

    Peer reviewed doesn't mean much, except for that a bunch of stuffy academics who receive gigantic government grants and are ingrained into the establishment, pushing establishment nonsense propaganda, are deciding what studies are valid and which are not.
    But one could just as easily argue the same about the "proof" that sex differences are intractable. There is politicization on both sides. I mean, I think it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that anyone making assertions better be prepared to back them up; otherwise, he/she is arguing "from conventional wisdom." If I am not allowed to use studies to refute Sommers, then she is not allowed to use studies supposedly supporting her argument (what she does is actually clever, highly selective reading/cherrypicking, anyway). So what are we left with? Both sides saying "I feel this way; therefore, it must be true"?

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Biology is deterministic! Learn biology! Seriously!
    "Biological determinism" is not being used in a redundant way here - it refers to the specific belief that human behavior is controlled solely by genes or some otherwise physiological factor. There is no evidence for such a view. Most everyone agrees that environment plays some role in shaping human behavior. Sommers presents only the deterministic view without acknowledging the other arguments in this video (and she does this in her books, too).

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Boys do behave one way. Girls do behave another. It rests on REALITY! Everyone knows this, everyone accepts this, even you yourself accept it in the very same post. You just don't like it like that. Fine. Understood. You hate biology. Great. Guess what: no one is forcing you to follow it. Buck biology. You're human; you can do that.
    It's not that "I don't like it like that," but that excessive binarization is used to create false dilemmas.

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Statistically significant? Statistically significant?!? What does that even mean? What are you even saying? Please, don't use words you do not understand.
    Set in stone? No, it's set in biology, which is more permanent than stone (and at the same time, more flexible). Biology changes both faster and slower than stone, depending.
    I am simply saying that researchers investigating whether sex differences in various forms of behavior exist tend to find that they cannot reject the null hypothesis (in this case, that there is no relationship between sex and behavior).

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    If neuroplasticity "is a thing" then that proves you and others who share your delusions "are right"? Unbelievable. Again, don't use words you do not understand.
    Fine, quibbler. If neuroplasticity is real, then that tends to legitimize concerns about cultural influences. I misspoke when I framed the argument in terms of correctness.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Sommers makes very dishonest arguments in this video. First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support.
    Generally, boys and girls are different. It's not a bad thing, it just is. I'm not a sociologist or a biologist but I do have 2 sons and have a bunch of brothers. I speak from lots of experience.

    The real problem is that over the years, "male culture" has learned to see reading literature and poetry as an activity for "sissies, geeks, and ******s," associating it with the feminine.
    That's not true. All my brothers and my sons love to read. They don't care to read the same types of books I do but there's nothing wrong with that and I've never heard them bash anyone (male or female) for reading literature. They seem to prefer reading technical manuals, the sports page, books with a lot of action and gore (they do like literature that meets that criteria), comics, and one brother in particular was a huge fan of Penthouse Forum. I only know about the dirty mags because I found them snooping in his room when I was a kid.

    Want to solve the problem? Address the boy culture bull$#@!.
    Boy culture bull$#@!? I think the radio host in the op made a point when he said we don't need to tear down boys to build up girls. I don't think boy or girl culture is bull$#@! and neither do any of the men in my life. As a matter of fact, they all seem just as fascinated by my feminine interests and the "girl things" I do as I am with their shenanigans.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    Boy culture bull$#@!?
    There has always been quite a large group of women who could be called members of the "we hate boys" club. It is especially evident in families where the only male is the father (or no males at all sans father). As you were not in that situation, you can not understand the truly despicable and icky nature of boys. You were brainwashed into thinking that boys aren't pure evil incarnate.

    You need re-education...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	carrie_nation.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	42.1 KB 
ID:	4644
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  18. #16
    Is this incident being blown out of proportion? Not sure if I misread it, but it sounded like this was just a temporary thing exploring whether the boys were hogging all the Legos. Also, it sounds like more Legos were being purchased.

    I also think it's legit that she is up against the formidable force of Toy Marketing.

    Otherwise, I'm not sure how much the boys are artificially disadvantaged in this situation. Are there really no other toys for them besides the Legos they can use?



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Sommers makes very dishonest arguments in this video. First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support. In fact, most studies show a greater degree of intra-sex behavioral variation rather than inter-sex. The differences between the sexes have been found to not be statistically significant. Despite these findings, however, Sommers continues to suggest that genetic differences between males and females lead to hardwired forms of human behavior that are apparently fixed throughout life. Sommers' idea that male nature is set in stone is the key to her argument, when it doesn't even have much support among biologists. Keep in mind that Sommers' academic background is in philosophy rather than biology or sociology, which may explain why her foundation is a little shaky. The more widely accepted view, in contrast, is that heredity sets a range of possibilities for every individual and then environment determines the variation within that range. This moderate view is backed up by the studies that I mentioned earlier, as well as research that shows brain structure and function changing in response to a person's lived experiences. In short, no, it's not clear at all that being restless and noisy in school is something inherent to boys.

    Now, if the research shows that neuroplasticity is indeed a thing, then we are correct to have concerns about cultural messaging. Sommers talks about getting more boys to read, saying that boys tend to prefer nonfiction. That's all well and good, but if the claim is that English classes aren't including enough nonfiction, that's because nonfiction doesn't belong in English classes in the first place. The point is to teach an understanding of literature, which is not inherently feminine by any means. The solution is clearly to push for inclusion of nonfiction in history, science, mathematics, etc. I have a feeling this would make both boys and girls very happy. But Sommers chooses to politicize the obvious failings in our school system by using her argument as an excuse to strike back against feminists. She's not really concerned about boys' lack of achievement. If she were, her writings and videos would be works of scholarly reflection rather than conservative polemics against feminists and liberals. As for not including comics, this has less to do with political correctness and more to do with the fact that comics are not suitable reading material for a school setting. The goal should not be to encourage reading at all costs. School is meant to instill a certain background and education, not to be entertaining.

    I just looked at the AP English summer reading list for my high school in 2014. It has not changed much from when I graduated in 2011 (perhaps made easier).
    Conrad, Joseph. - Heart of Darkness (male author, male protagonist)
    Fitzgerald, F. Scott. - The Great Gatsby (male author, male protagonist)
    Gaines, Ernest. - A Lesson Before Dying (male author, male protagonists)
    James, Henry. - Daisy Miller (male author, female protagonist)
    McCarthy, Cormac. - The Road (male author, male protagonists)
    Otsuka, Julie. - When the Emperor Was Divine (female author, female protagonist)
    Twain, Mark. - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (male author, male protagonist)

    This reading list does not differ significantly from ones like it all across the country; by representation alone, I would say that males still keep an admirable foothold - domination, even. Even Daisy Miller certainly is no radical feminist propaganda (though it is boring). The real problem is that over the years, "male culture" has learned to see reading literature and poetry as an activity for "sissies, geeks, and ******s," associating it with the feminine. There is no actual bias toward women in English curricula, as Sommers seems to be claiming. Want to solve the problem? Address the boy culture bull$#@!. Finally, Sommers fails to mention that the disparity in literature assignments has existed at least as long as the Department of Education has records, since 1969 - this is before feminism had solid traction as a political movement, let alone an educational one.
    Sorry, but I disagree. I have a little boy (6) and a little girl (2). My boy loves rough-housing, is very athletic, loves getting dirty, building robots, and shows age-appropriate aggressive behavior etc. My girl is all about princesses and dresses. Though my girl is a risk-taker and also loves being wild outside, the pronounced difference in gender-activities could not be greater. My boy is 100% "BOY THINGS" and my girl is 100% "GIRL THINGS".... this isn't a product of parental conditioning... it's just the way they are. My wife and I were literally just discussing this two days ago. Granted, we are homeschoolers and the environment we provide is much different than the androgynous public school setting where anything even remotely masculine is shunned as being sexist...
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    Generally, boys and girls are different. It's not a bad thing, it just is. I'm not a sociologist or a biologist but I do have 2 sons and have a bunch of brothers. I speak from lots of experience.
    I think you would also agree that your sons and brothers are different from other people's sons and brothers, and also perhaps that those differences are larger than the differences between your sons and brothers and any females you may have in your family. I don't know, while we're on the subject of anecdotes, I argue so strongly against seeing boys and girls as separate spheres because that is not how my childhood was at all. I always had more boy friends growing up; I was able to relate to them better. I was a voracious reader (along with my best male friend - we shared books all the time), but I also played in the dirt, made snow forts, played sports, etc. I was always outspoken in class - I used to stand up in my seat to make myself as tall as possible while raising my hand (because I participated so much that the teachers began ignoring me after a while to give other kids a chance to participate). I don't think those are exclusively boy-ish things to do, in other words.

    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    That's not true. All my brothers and my sons love to read. They don't care to read the same types of books I do but there's nothing wrong with that and I've never heard them bash anyone (male or female) for reading literature. They seem to prefer reading technical manuals, the sports page, books with a lot of action and gore (they do like literature that meets that criteria), comics, and one brother in particular was a huge fan of Penthouse Forum. I only know about the dirty mags because I found them snooping in his room when I was a kid. ... Boy culture bull$#@!? I think the radio host in the op made a point when he said we don't need to tear down boys to build up girls. I don't think boy or girl culture is bull$#@! and neither do any of the men in my life. As a matter of fact, they all seem just as fascinated by my feminine interests and the "girl things" I do as I am with their shenanigans.
    For whatever reason, there is a dearth of boys who love to read. I think it's maybe (among other things) because organized sports have received so much emphasis in our culture, so parents just automatically assume their boys will gravitate towards those activities instead of quieter, more solitary ones such as reading. Maybe more dads need to encourage their sons to read. Reading was a daily activity in my household - maybe it is not so in other households. Perhaps our families are anomalies. However, I'm quite sure adolescent boys aren't typically encouraged to show interest in reading, say, Edmund Spenser, John Donne, Percy Shelley, etc. in their English literature classes. There is no reason why those authors' works should be seen as "feminized." Males wrote them! That's more what I was getting at in that particular "boy culture" tidbit.
    Last edited by Rothbardian Girl; 11-25-2015 at 01:36 PM.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  22. #19
    A radical thought, if the parents want their daughters to play with Legos they can just get them some. DUH!

    Tell that teacher to butt out and buzz off at parent/teacher open house school night.

  23. #20
    Keller decided to bar the boys from the building materials so girls would not be intimidated to play with them.
    Keller does this because she saw the boys in her class gravitating toward the blocks during their "free choice" play time while the girls flocked to dolls and crayons. Keller's solution was to deny the blocks to the boys, who wanted to play with them, in order to encourage the girls to play with them. The Review article offers no indications about how Keller gets the girls to play with something of which they have no interest.

    Keller had originally tried to entice the girls by providing pink and purple Legos, "But it wasn't enough."
    So the girls weren't intimidated, they just didn't want to play with the Legos.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by jllundqu View Post
    Sorry, but I disagree. I have a little boy (6) and a little girl (2). My boy loves rough-housing, is very athletic, loves getting dirty, building robots, and shows age-appropriate aggressive behavior etc. My girl is all about princesses and dresses. Though my girl is a risk-taker and also loves being wild outside, the pronounced difference in gender-activities could not be greater. My boy is 100% "BOY THINGS" and my girl is 100% "GIRL THINGS".... this isn't a product of parental conditioning... it's just the way they are. My wife and I were literally just discussing this two days ago. Granted, we are homeschoolers and the environment we provide is much different than the androgynous public school setting where anything even remotely masculine is shunned as being sexist...
    For RG to be correct, there would have to be another family out there with a girl who is just as masculine as your boy is, with a boy who is just as feminine as your daughter to counter-act your experience. Then there would have to be more and more to counter-act everybody elses experience which is generally similar to yours. It probably exists somewhere.. I mean there have always been tom boys and there have always been guys who are interested in dresses or designing decor or whatever, but it's just not nearly as common.

    I totally agree that variation within the sexes is very strong and depending on how it is measured it may be along the same lines of significance as the difference between males and females themselves.. But if a study comes out saying that there is NO statistical variation between boys and girls, then it just isn't a good study with good measuring tools.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    So the girls weren't intimidated, they just didn't want to play with the Legos.
    The Legos were probably all covered with boy cooties anyway. Ewwwwww!

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    The Legos were probably all covered with boy cooties anyway. Ewwwwww!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Sommers makes very dishonest arguments in this video. First of all, her emphasis on biological determinism (boys behave one way, girls behave another) rests on weak support.
    What? I wouldn't say the support is at all weak. It seems to me we already know, if we're being honest, males and females are quite different, we just haven't yet necessarily nailed down the fundamental factors that are causing many of these observable differences--the science is still, as always, looking for answers to questions. I'm not really sure why this is such a frightening or controversial topic, either.

    From what I gather, male and females seem to have differences that begin physiologically, and neurologically which ultimately means those differences are going to filter down and ripple out in many ways--emotionally, behaviorally, psychologically, and so on which then probably tend to filter down and ripple out in other ways--culturally, sociologically, etc.

    Most who have studied this topic are probably familiar with the Penn study from 2013 that caused a lot of controversy. Of course, there were some who criticized and questioned the findings and methodologies, but that's fine--it's what scientists are supposed to do, after all. In any case, this study and resulting scrutiny has seemingly been sufficient enough to open up further lines of inquiry, that have lead to many other studies in the field, and on the subject. As far as I'm aware, the topic and the questions it has raised are still very much being examined.

    The Scientist has a pretty good article on the ongoing debate and research.

    Some related reading:

    Linked Sex Differences in Cognition and Functional Connectivity in Youth
    Abstract

    Sex differences in human cognition are marked, but little is known regarding their neural origins. Here, in a sample of 674 human participants ages 9–22, we demonstrate that sex differences in cognitive profiles are related to multivariate patterns of resting-state functional connectivity MRI (rsfc-MRI). Males outperformed females on motor and spatial cognitive tasks; females were faster in tasks of emotion identification and nonverbal reasoning. Sex differences were also prominent in the rsfc-MRI data at multiple scales of analysis, with males displaying more between-module connectivity, while females demonstrated more within-module connectivity. Multivariate pattern analysis using support vector machines classified subject sex on the basis of their cognitive profile with 63% accuracy (P < 0.001), but was more accurate using functional connectivity data (71% accuracy; P < 0.001). Moreover, the degree to which a given participant's cognitive profile was “male” or “female” was significantly related to the masculinity or femininity of their pattern of brain connectivity (P = 2.3 × 10−7). This relationship was present even when considering males and female separately. Taken together, these results demonstrate for the first time that sex differences in patterns of cognition are in part represented on a neural level through divergent patterns of brain connectivity.
    Age group and sex differences in performance on a computerized neurocognitive battery in children age 8–21

    Abstract
    Objective

    Examine age group effects and sex differences by applying a comprehensive computerized battery of identical behavioral measures linked to brain systems in youths that were already genotyped. Such information is needed to incorporate behavioral data as neuropsychological “biomarkers” in large-scale genomic studies.

    Method

    We developed and applied a brief computerized neurocognitive battery that provides measures of performance accuracy and response time for executive-control, episodic memory, complex cognition, social cognition and sensorimotor speed domains. We tested a population-based sample of 3500 genotyped youths ages 8–21 years.

    Results

    Substantial improvement with age occurred for both accuracy and speed, but the rates varied by domain. The most pronounced improvement was noted in executive control functions, specifically attention, and in motor speed, with some effect sizes exceeding 1.8 standard deviation units. The least pronounced age group effect was in memory, where only face memory showed a large effect size on improved accuracy. Sex differences had much smaller effect sizes but were evident, with females outperforming males on attention, word and face memory, reasoning speed and all social cognition tests and males outperforming females in spatial processing and sensorimotor and motor speed. These sex differences in most domains were seen already at the youngest age groups, and age group × sex interactions indicated divergence at the oldest groups with females becoming faster but less accurate than males.

    Conclusions

    The results indicate that cognitive performance improves substantially in this age span, with large effect sizes that differ by domain. The more pronounced improvement for executive and reasoning domains than for memory suggests that memory capacities have reached their apex before age 8. Performance was sexually modulated and most sex differences were apparent by early adolescence.
    Sex Differences in Molecular Signaling at Inhibitory Synapses in the Hippocampus

    Abstract

    The possibility that mechanisms of synaptic modulation differ between males and females has far-reaching implications for understanding brain disorders that vary between the sexes. We found recently that 17β-estradiol (E2) acutely suppresses GABAergic inhibition in the hippocampus of female rats through a sex-specific estrogen receptor α (ERα), mGluR, and endocannabinoid-dependent mechanism. Here, we define the intracellular signaling that links ERα, mGluRs, and endocannabinoids in females and identify where in this pathway males and females differ. Using a combination of whole-cell patch-clamp recording and biochemical analyses in hippocampal slices from young adult rats, we show that E2 acutely suppresses inhibition in females through mGluR1 stimulation of phospholipase C, leading to inositol triphosphate (IP3) generation, activation of the IP3 receptor (IP3R), and postsynaptic endocannabinoid release, likely of anandamide. Analysis of sex differences in this pathway showed that E2 stimulates a much greater increase in IP3 levels in females than males, whereas the group I mGluR agonist DHPG increases IP3 levels equivalently in each sex. Coimmunoprecipitation showed that ERα–mGluR1 and mGluR1–IP3R complexes exist in both sexes but are regulated by E2 only in females. Independently of E2, a fatty acid amide hydrolase inhibitor, which blocks breakdown of anandamide, suppressed >50% of inhibitory synapses in females with no effect in males, indicating tonic endocannabinoid release in females that is absent in males. Together, these studies demonstrate sex differences in both E2-dependent and E2-independent regulation of the endocannabinoid system and suggest that manipulation of endocannabinoids in vivo could affect physiological and behavioral responses differently in each sex.

    SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Many brain disorders vary between the sexes, yet the degree to which this variation arises from differential experience versus intrinsic biological sex differences is unclear. In this study, we demonstrate intrinsic sex differences in molecular regulation of a key neuromodulatory system, the endocannabinoid system, in the hippocampus. Endocannabinoids are involved in diverse aspects of physiology and behavior that involve the hippocampus, including cognitive and motivational state, responses to stress, and neurological disorders such as epilepsy. Our finding that molecular regulation of the endocannabinoid system differs between the sexes suggests mechanisms through which experiences or therapeutics that engage endocannabinoids could affect males and females differently.
    Given the significance of brain function and structure on virtually everything else about us, both as a species and as individuals, it shouldn't be too surprising to see how neurological differences of these kinds may produce many other differences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Despite these findings, however, Sommers continues to suggest that genetic differences between males and females lead to hardwired forms of human behavior that are apparently fixed throughout life. Sommers' idea that male nature is set in stone is the key to her argument, when it doesn't even have much support among biologists.
    Now who is being dishonest. Did you even watch the video? Nothing like what you're suggesting was even so much as mentioned or even implied in this video.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Sommers talks about getting more boys to read, saying that boys tend to prefer nonfiction. That's all well and good, but if the claim is that English classes aren't including enough nonfiction, that's because nonfiction doesn't belong in English classes in the first place.
    Again, you seem to be inventing arguments that were never made to argue against them--straw men. She never said nonfiction belonged in English classes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    But Sommers chooses to politicize the obvious failings in our school system by using her argument as an excuse to strike back against feminists.
    I don't think she's the one politicizing the issue. Seems to me she's merely highlighting statistically supported inequities, and offering potential solutions and suggestions (that don't necessarily inhibit the opposite sex in the process) to counter them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    As for not including comics, this has less to do with political correctness and more to do with the fact that comics are not suitable reading material for a school setting.
    Yet another straw man. She didn't say exclusion of comics had anything to do with political correctness, and in fact she didn't say anything about exclusion of comics, nor did she suggest comics were suitable reading material. She simply said boys tend to prefer comics [and nonfiction] as reading material. That's all. She suggested guysread.com for books that might be of more interest to boys than the standard fare.
    Last edited by Cabal; 11-25-2015 at 03:11 PM.
    Radical in the sense of being in total, root-and-branch opposition to the existing political system and to the State itself. Radical in the sense of having integrated intellectual opposition to the State with a gut hatred of its pervasive and organized system of crime and injustice. Radical in the sense of a deep commitment to the spirit of liberty and anti-statism that integrates reason and emotion, heart and soul. - M. Rothbard



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    First, thank you for a very civil reply. I was a bit rude, and I apologize.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    "Biological determinism" is not being used in a redundant way here - it refers to the specific belief that human behavior is controlled solely by genes or some otherwise physiological factor. There is no evidence for such a view. Most everyone agrees that environment plays some role in shaping human behavior.
    Absolutely. And that genes do, too. To me, this goes a lot beyond genes, though -- males and females are just so obviously different! You don't have to be able to peer at the DNA to see that! There are clear differences between the two!

    It's not that "I don't like it like that," but that excessive binarization is used to create false dilemmas.
    I don't really understand what that means. Don't use jargon that I don't understand either!


    I am simply saying that researchers investigating whether sex differences in various forms of behavior exist tend to find that they cannot reject the null hypothesis (in this case, that there is no relationship between sex and behavior).
    It doesn't even seem like something that there needs to be studies about, to me; it just seems so obvious. There are clear differences between the two! There are clear differences in the behavior of the male and female in every animal species! I see absolutely no reasons to suspect that the human animal is any different.

    Anyway, this is just something that we see differently about.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Cabal View Post
    What? I wouldn't say the support is at all weak. It seems to me we already know, if we're being honest, males and females are quite different, we just haven't yet necessarily nailed down the fundamental factors that are causing many of these observable differences--the science is still, as always, looking for answers to questions. I'm not really sure why this is such a frightening or controversial topic, either.

    From what I gather, male and females seem to have differences that begin physiologically, and neurologically which ultimately means those differences are going to filter down and ripple out in many ways--emotionally, behaviorally, psychologically, and so on which then probably tend to filter down and ripple out in other ways--culturally, sociologically, etc.

    Most who have studied this topic are probably familiar with the Penn study from 2013 that caused a lot of controversy. Of course, there were some who criticized and questioned the findings and methodologies, but that's fine--it's what scientists are supposed to do, after all. In any case, this study and resulting scrutiny has seemingly been sufficient enough to open up further lines of inquiry, that have lead to many other studies in the field, and on the subject. As far as I'm aware, the topic and the questions it has raised are still very much being examined.
    It tends to be a "frightening or controversial topic" because it is impossible to separate stereotype from science when it comes to these matters. We're constantly bombarded with messages that say, for example, that boys cannot acquire good verbal skills and girls are less likely to acquire mathematics skills, simply because that's the way boys and girls are. It strikes one as very lazy argumentation that holds a lot of kids back. You're right that we can't nail down the factors that cause these observable differences. My contention is that maybe these differences are receiving a disproportionate share of attention (in order to justify sexist attitudes, which can be materially harmful and thus are worth opposing) in comparison to differences within the sexes. I don't think we'll ever know the truth, to be quite honest. The problem is that culture is a huge confounding variable that damages the case made by the Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus school of thought. Are girls' and boys' intellectual differences innate, or are they the results of what we expect boys and girls to be? Yes, there are differences, and I don't think I have ever denied that. Are they as stark as they are made out to be? I just don't think so. Most of the studies showing huge differences were performed with small sample sizes. So, again, there will always be quibbling. Also, I forgot to mention this, but there's often a selection effect going on with published papers. The ones that in fact show no differences between the sexes tend not to get published, because people like excitement, and they love to have their preconceived notions confirmed!

    Also, my argument got muddled a bit because I was flipping back and forth between that video and several other publications CHS has written on the subject, but CHS likes to argue that English classes are boring for boys because English classes tend to be "feminized". To that end, she has advocated before for having boys read comics, Tom Clancy novels, nonfiction, etc. in English classes in order to get them to engage more with the material. But that "boys will be boys" mentality she has in the video definitely suggests that she believes males are hardwired to be overly disruptive. Her cherrypicking of egregious disciplinary actions doesn't really help her case, either - wouldn't we be expecting a lot more boys to be sent home, if this were really something they are hardwired to do? And has she controlled for the school setting? (i.e., CHS likes to use elite, progressive schools as targets of her ire - not ones home to students from poorer conditions, which would likely see more "disruption incidents" and therefore not get all bent out of shape about a Pop-Tart looking like a gun.) Therefore, we get no sense of how widespread, typical or common these abuses are.

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    I don't really understand what that means. Don't use jargon that I don't understand either!
    I think Dr. Sommers spends a lot of time emphasizing the notion of this huge chasm between the sexes in order to create a false sense of panic from her audience.
    Last edited by Rothbardian Girl; 11-25-2015 at 03:41 PM.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    It tends to be a "frightening or controversial topic" because it is impossible to separate stereotype from science when it comes to these matters. We're constantly bombarded with messages that say, for example, that boys cannot acquire good verbal skills and girls are less likely to acquire mathematics skills, simply because that's the way boys and girls are.
    Impossible for who? Seems to me it's only impossible for those who have another agenda, as they can't possibly accept that which does not reinforce it, let alone that which directly contradicts it. In which case, to hell with them.

    In any case, the science, however unsettled it may be, isn't even suggesting that boys or girls cannot acquire certain skills.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    You're right that we can't nail down the factors that cause these observable differences. My contention is that maybe these differences are receiving a disproportionate share of attention (in order to justify sexist attitudes, which can be materially harmful and thus are worth opposing) in comparison to differences within the sexes. I don't think we'll ever know the truth, to be quite honest. The problem is that culture is a huge confounding variable that damages the case made by the Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus school of thought.
    That's too much of a cop out to me. And I hardly see how the attention is at all disproportionate. You may as well be arguing, 'this truth may just be too disruptive and uncomfortable, so ignorance is preferable,' even as the ongoing trend of inequity continues to widen where educational achievement between sexes is concerned. Learning about our differences may ultimately help to instruct how we deliver education not only to different sexes, but to different personality types within and across those sexes. And if that helps to uproot the archaic and, by all accounts, embarrassing state of the education system throughout western civilization, for which the evidence is manifest, then by all means.
    Radical in the sense of being in total, root-and-branch opposition to the existing political system and to the State itself. Radical in the sense of having integrated intellectual opposition to the State with a gut hatred of its pervasive and organized system of crime and injustice. Radical in the sense of a deep commitment to the spirit of liberty and anti-statism that integrates reason and emotion, heart and soul. - M. Rothbard

  32. #28
    Female teachers are always going to be more concerned with the learning outcomes and grades of the female students. That's just the way it is, unfair. The bias is felt throughout the entire educational system. Girls learning needs are prioritized.

    Common Majors for Women: Percent Female, National Median Pay

    Fashion Design: 95%, $38,900

    Interior Design: 90%, $37,800

    Elementary Education: 88%, $35,800

    Social Work: 88%, $36,100

    Nursing: 88%, $61,200

    Occupational Therapy: 86%, $70,600

    French: 84%, $46,500

    Art History: 83%, $42,700

    Medical Technology: 79%, $54,200

    Food and Nutrition: 78%, $48,000

    Spanish: 78%, $39,600

    Health Care Administration: 76%, $47,500

    Public Relations: 74%, $39,700

    Human Resources: 72%, $45,300

    Psychology: 72%, $40,700



    Common Majors for Men: Percent Male, National Median Pay

    Construction Management: 93%, $60,100

    Mechanical Engineering: 92%, $70,400

    Electrical Engineering: 91%, $78,500

    Physics: 89%, $68,100

    Aerospace Engineering: 87%, $67,700

    Civil Engineering: 85%, $63,900

    Computer Science: 85%, $69,700

    Landscape Architecture: 79%, $51,900

    Agriculture: 77%, $50,400

    Chemical Engineering: 76%, $81,400

    Geology: 76%, $60,400

    Economics: 72%, $60,000

    Geography: 72%, $48,100

    Sports Management: 70%, $39,800

    Finance: 70%, $55,000
    http://www.payscale.com/career-news/...aximize-income

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    It's kind of strange how we seem so focused on getting girls into male dominated careers, and so unconcerned with getting boys into female dominated careers. Why are there so few male fashion designers? Could it possibly be that women have an aptitude, or interest in this sort of thing that men don't have? Call me crazy, but the evidence above seems to suggest that is the case.

    Should we redesign society to get more men into interior decorating? Why is this an important or desirable thing to do?
    Last edited by DevilsAdvocate; 11-25-2015 at 04:59 PM.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
    Female teachers are always going to be more concerned with the learning outcomes and grades of the female students. That's just the way it is, unfair. The bias is felt throughout the entire educational system. Girls learning needs are prioritized.


    http://www.payscale.com/career-news/...aximize-income

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    It's kind of strange how we seem so focused on getting girls into male dominated careers, and so unconcerned with getting boys into female dominated careers. Why are there so few male fashion designers? Could it possibly be that women have an aptitude, or interest in this sort of thing that men don't have? Call me crazy, but the evidence above seems to suggest that is the case.

    Should we redesign society to get more men into interior decorating? Why is this an important or desirable thing to do?
    Dontcha know this "natural aptitude" is just a social construct? Society made kids that way so that women have no other choice! Of course the men have just as little choice, but poor fragile wymmynz!!!
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  34. #30
    Why is it now wrong for boys and girls to be different?

    The forced homogenization of society isn't a good thing.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •