<p><a href=“http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/no_way_to_raise_a_boy/[/url]”>http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/no_way_to_raise_a_boy/</a></p>
<p>Why only boys? (yes, yes, I’m a feminist :))</p>
<p>Tetrisfan, this is why he is discussing boys:
I have raised two boys, and a girl, and I have to say that all three of them are very different, and I could not have used a one-size-fits-all program for any of them. My two boys are opposites in many aspects, and my D fits somewhere in between.</p>
<p>Sometimes I wonder if the “boy” problem might be partly do to the fact that if we do have a boy who prefers staying inside, has “rounded shoulders”, and doesn’t do all the “boys will be boys” stuff, then everyone assumes there’s something wrong with him.</p>
<p>“Sometimes I wonder if the “boy” problem might be partly do to the fact that if we do have a boy who prefers staying inside, has “rounded shoulders”, and doesn’t do all the “boys will be boys” stuff, then everyone assumes there’s something wrong with him.”</p>
<p>Some people go as far as to say that the male “masculinity model” has been instinctually evolved in humans, based on bazillions of years of requiring men to go to defend the tribe. Weak boys were considered a hindrance. Maybe, now that men are no longer required to go out and spear their foe, in another bazillion years, will see “round shouldered” men being the masculinity norm.</p>
<p>Uh, yes, I meant to basically get across a hypothetical question somewhat related to doubleplay’s post. Jeez, I’m not making much sense, am I?</p>
<p>The cover story in last week’s time magazine was about this same issue, the “boy problem”</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1647452,00.html[/url]”>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1647452,00.html</a></p>
<p>Interesting article, whose bottom line was that boys are doing just fine thank you; statistics only look bleak compared to girls, who are now performing at the highest levels ever on many measures. However, there are gender differences in the ways that boys and girls learn and we ought to take these into account in.</p>
<p>I think the problem is that people seem to think that its a zero sum game, so if girls are doing better, they MUST be doing it at the expense of boys.</p>
<p>FWIW: I think generally speaking, elementary schools could do a little more to accommodate the physical needs of the general boy - more activities that don’t require sitting still and being quiet.</p>
<p>Didn’t we go round and round on this about a month or two ago, with a thread
that started by linking to an interview with the author of “The Dangerous Book
for Boys”, the same book that is referred to by this lead article in this thread?</p>
<p>Anyway, I like that book, along with “Backyard Ballistics”, another book
that lays out how to have some extreme, boyish fun.</p>
<p>I agree, the phenomenon of slacker boys is very sad. On the other hand,
I’ll defend some of those boys engaging in a lot of screen-time.
Some of the most exciting artistic and creative talent in our society is
going into designing computer-based entertainment, and many boys are
learning how to create this stuff, not just consume it.</p>
<p>Basically, they’re actively engaged in learning how to do the Next Big Thing,
while their teachers and parents think they are just goofing around.</p>
<p>Irishmom–it can be a zero-sum game, if we’re talking about who gets to be Val or Sal, who gets accepted to the limited number of freshman slots at HYP, and who gets to be CEO. </p>
<p>OTOH, girls who follow the rules and get good grades don’t necessarily do better in life than boys who were busy “doing stuff” instead of studying. </p>
<p>The big losers in this game are children of either sex who spend their free time in front of the TV or X-box. They never discover if they are good at sports OR the violin.</p>
<p>geomom–you posted while I was still thinking!</p>
<p>Agreed, there’s a huge difference in playing games and in designing them and writing code.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The thing is, so long as all education is organized in ways that handicap boys, it is a bit of a zero sum game. And it’s more than elementary school. Boys up through high school need an education that channels rather than stifles their natural energy and curiosity. </p>
<p>It would be better if schools recognized and took advantage of the different ways that boys and girls learn. Frankly, I love efforts like this one:</p>
<p>[Math</a> Book Helps Girls Embrace Their Inner Mathematician](<a href=“http://www.wired.com/culture/education/news/2007/08/winniecooper_QA]Math”>Math Book Helps Girls Embrace Their Inner Mathematician | WIRED)</p>
<p>I’m all in favor of breaking down the bad stereotypes and exploiting actual human nature.</p>
<p>Geomom – Backyard Ballistics is a great book. My dh and dd built a potato cannon…yep, my daughter…barrel, stand and all. They made a few improvements too to get a more accurate shot.</p>
<p>Our Cincinnati fire kite went up so high, it landed on our roof!! I put
it out with this garden hose, and DS, 10, and I were laughing so hard…</p>
<p>Strick11,
You’ve got to be joking about that link, right?<br>
A math book that includes horoscopes and personality quizzes, modeled after a teen glamour magazine? And appeals to girls’ “desires” to learn math from the standpoint of improving their cooking skills? OMG…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This has been proven again and again to be untrue. Boys are finishing high school and going to college in record proportion!</p>
<p>The so-called “boy gap” is almost entirely due to the fact that minority and low income males aren’t doing as well as girls in those groups at catching up with upper income white males.</p>
<p>I sort of get the impression that the author of the article OP cites misses the days of jock boys getting good grades from coach teachers. Suzie should be emptying the dishwasher while Stevie “makes stuff”, I guess. And if Stevie was an attentive student who came home & did his homework, he’d be a weenie, right? Or possibly not a real man (he does cite a genetic link, after all). The biggest problem I have found for my son was the lack of expectations for boys to excel in school. I had to put him in a private middle school where the boys actually were proud of academic excellence … and it was cool, not weird, to do well. He is now in a public high school where he feels comfortable being an excellent student … but I have overheard parents at conferences letting the teachers know that “boys will be boys” (excusing their poor performance). The people who are failing boys are parents who make excuses for them when they don’t do their work or study.</p>
<p>I think you are mis-reading the article. You don’t want to excuse poor
performance in your son. You want him to have strength and excel.
Kevin Ryan’s last line is “But think about it. A nation without men,
with only pleasure-saturated, spineless screen-watchers is a truly
frightening prospect.”</p>
<p>I don’t agree with his statement that girls are better than boys at
symbolic work, either, but I don’t let that negate his main point
that undisciplined, slacker boys show us that as a society we
are not expecting enough (or enough of the right things) from our sons.</p>
<p>Can we blame society to some extent? I mean, boys gotta go to college, they need awesome grades and EC’s and stuff to make it to an Ivy like their parents want them to…isn’t it only natural then?</p>
<p>I went back through & realized that I reacted too strongly to the last half of the article, basically taking it out of context. Sorry. He still kind of loses me near the end (maybe my reaction to his girls/boys comments!), but I do agree with some of his other points. My son has had a tough time finding other boys who want to just go outside & play … somewhere around middle school, they became more interested in video games to just be boys. He is now a bit older & he has joined a band. Now THERE is a classic boys’ experience for teens!!</p>
<p>I really don’t think there’s been any society that doesn’t worry about socializing its young men. Testosterone levels between 15 and 30 make males of these ages dare devils (and unfortunately cannon fodder.) There are pluses and minuses to this feeling of invulnerability.</p>
<p>Yeah, my perfect guy is John Walton of THE WALTONS, but I must admit I never met a guy like this. Nor do I think he would do very well in our current economy: too much time outside and not enough time learning computer skills! Like it or not the “indoor boy” is more set up for the society he will be entering. The majority of the human race is now urban!</p>
<p>My S resisted every effort I made to “get him to go out and play” on a casualn basis. He did spend time outside on “play dates”. He hates sports and loves movies and music; plays violin. Met all girl friends through musical activities. That’s just who he is.</p>
<p>Fortunately for him he has one of those metabolisms that just won’t quit; everyone wants to feed him. He swims well and is a fairly fast runner. He also went to a high school (public) where a lot of guys were like him, and he fit in fine. He became a kind of celebrity on the schools high scoring 4 man varsity academic team. They had groupies and everything.</p>
<p>Now all of a sudden he wants the outdoor life and has selected Williams. Great! I’m excited! However, had he picked Columbia where his sister is because he wanted to go to every concert he could I’d be delighted too. </p>
<p>My uncle (not much older than I, but that’s a different story) is the most successful husband and father I know. He’s adored by his wife and daughter; never lived outside NYC except for Hamptons vacation house and Fla. vacation house. Can’t do any traditional “male” activites; pays people to do them. He’s a dedicated lawyer and emotionally available family member.</p>
<p>He’s not John Walton, but who is? And I don’t think that scrapiung by depression life style would work in our high tech world.</p>