Short Answer: Because they and their sons don’t have any lobbies to tell them otherwise. Long answer follows.

Sexist Discrimination In American Education

Women are having a lot of fun these days laughing at the dumb, inarticulate, clumsy men they are finding on college campuses. The situation has grown more noticeable in recent times as colleges and universities tinker around with “affirmative action” for males in their admission practices. According to numerous news articles over the past four or five years, college women hate the idea of “affirmative action” programs that admit sub-par males to campus (at the expense of more women on campus), but grant that it is more desirable from their perspective to have a male “dating pool” larger than the current two women for each man, even if many of those young men are marginal at best. Many college administrators are willing to engage in such stupid practices in order to attract sufficient numbers of much higher caliber women to campus — women who, of course, wanting better dating options, then snicker at the male nitwits around them. Listening to all that frivolous nonsense, you’d think that our colleges and universities have become nothing more than social resorts for the incredibly superficial, spoiled and privileged. (See 2014 addendum below at end of article.)

Does any of this make you just a little hot under the collar? It seems both men and women have rather strong feelings about affirmative action in the 21st century, for very different reasons. As is common with all social issues in America, we all will hear, and continue to hear, only the women’s view, even if it’s parroted by their well-trained and compliant male clones. So here’s a rare independent man’s view, an actual man who has reached an age when he no longer has a vested interest in the subject, other than the future of his society after he’s gone.

I’ve spent my entire life accommodating and adjusting to the consequences of forced affirmative action everywhere – for almost every conceivable group in America, but most especially for women, and always under a “grievance” argument solidly based on “fair” quota “rights”. And still the only group or organization with which I have ever had an affiliation is the group called “American citizen taxpayer”. (I also happen to be a member of that minority of our society that has never had an interest group lobby to champion its “cause”.)

First, as a guy who has watched with an educated social scientist eye the evolution of this twisted campus situation for the past half century, I have to admit that it makes me livid. Is everyone in this country so incredibly childish anymore that they can’t see the longer range adverse consequences of the situation behind the affirmative action nonsense? Is everyone so incredibly shallow they can’t even think to ask why this is?

Sadly, those snickering college women are correct.

Forty years ago America’s young men were the envy of the world. There was nothing they couldn’t do, nowhere they weren’t sought – due in no small part to the role played by American men throughout the world as World War II soldiers and post-war peacekeepers and nation-builders, at home and abroad. By 1965, they had it all – health, education, character, pride, intelligence, bravery, vision, responsibility, you name it. They fought and died on the battlefield while venturing into space and walking on the moon. They created satellites and personal computers; joined, supported, shaped and led the great social movements of our time; made the “Green Rice Revolution” in Asia; continued building the contemporary American infrastructure; made houses in the suburbs possible for the masses and built roads and cars to connect them to employment, schools and hospitals; filled homes everywhere with every conceivable new device to make life easier; cured diseases; designed and constructed spaceships; took the violent heat from every single group in the nation and much of the rest of the world, made appropriate honorable adjustments, and still somehow kept on tickin’. Honorable American men, men of the Greatest Generation, were the world’s Gold Standard. Younger siblings of the Greatest Generation, members of the small Silent Generation, stood in awe and tried hard to measure up.

And that was just the beginning. Their horizons were limitless. They just KNEW they or their sons would be exploring other planets and other moons before the end of the century and bring untold wonders to humanity in the process. They felt destined to leave a far better world for everyone, no matter how hard that was, how much sacrifice it required. In those days, back in the early-1960s, you had to hunt hard to find a young man loser; everywhere around were very bright, healthy and tough independent-minded competitors who just KNEW they could do the impossible, in any arena imaginable. Working mostly on their own, without any government help at all, their mothers had raised the healthiest and best educated kids – boys AND girls – the world had ever seen, and they all planned on conquering new challenges, even new worlds beyond their own, in their own lifetimes.

Today, sadly, it’s actually difficult to find boys or young men who are not “losers”. Many of them truly embarrass me. Of course there are always exceptions to the “norm” in any human group, but, generally speaking, they write on a level many years below what is appropriate and read almost nothing that isn’t on a tiny glowing screen. They have trouble with basic arithmetic and routinely screw up their own meager finances. They can’t begin to express themselves adequately, and thus frequently substitute violent aggression for intelligent reasoning. They ponder in such confined realms, have such small goals, parrot so much popular idiotic nonsense, regurgitate so much revisionist propaganda masquerading as “knowledge” and “history”, seem so uninterested in discovering real truths for themselves, in pursuing actually worthwhile endeavors. They “think” with girlish emotion rather than with masculine logic. They can’t see beyond next week and choose paths intended for quick payoffs that will ultimately, inevitably, fail.

The things that hold the interest of boys today border on the inane. They are just as self-involved as our women. They learn about “real life” from Hollywood, the internet and video games. They are far better at destroying than building. Infatuated by silly toys that occupy most of their waking hours, they are all about quick fixes, short cuts and easy answers. They use their brains for little more than reciting isolated factoids from the past needed to pass long out-dated tests, but can’t put them all together to build a sensible comprehensive whole, much less craft a new strategy forward based on new conditions. Their ability to objectively analyze is rudimentary and greatly hindered by all sorts of artificial dogmatic stumbling blocks. They focus on the easily-grasped micro while ignoring the far more complex macro and how it all fits together to form a complete universe full of many critical and inter-related moving parts; their world view is just simplistically banal. When someone well educated tries to engage them in meaningful conversation on just about any topic, they quickly realize there’s almost nothing there, just a lot of blank stares, mumbling and memorized politically correct pablum, or the latest group think running with the “social media” herd. Four of every five of them can’t even qualify to enter training that might lead to becoming a sergeant in today’s US Regular Army. Only a minority of these guys can even read and comprehend what is written here, and I spent most of my adult life as just a professional ground soldier.

It’s easy to assume these guys are all bunched at the bottom of the pecking order. But that would give a free pass, for example, to all those male politicians who have greatly embarrassed me as an adult man through their incredibly stupid and juvenile behavior, their proven inability to even think as rational adults. What could be more asinine than a New York City politician who sends pictures of his little wee-wee to others, and then lies about it like a small child when caught with his pants down? This is a case of shamefully arrested development, stuck somewhere in the fifth grade, who never had a father to smack him in the face, tan his hide, stand him in the corner. And he presumes to have talents that qualify him to represent actual adult Americans in the halls of the United States Congress? And just what is any intelligent person to make of a multi-millionaire New York businessman who thinks he’s presidential material talking like a boy bragging on the school yard with all the knowledge and wisdom of a 12 year old? Who manufactures these twisted, effeminate, irresponsible, grown-up children stuck on stupid? Why? Just like most of our women politicians, these guys couldn’t even qualify to serve in the nation’s armed forces they arrogantly presume to direct. This is the best “men” we can now find in our girly culture? What twisted mentality would ever waste a vote for such people to become even dog catcher? This is what it takes to confiscate other people’s money to buy the votes of our whining women majority that put such jerks in office? These pathetic juveniles are “leaders”? Where are the standards?

Our society now rewards nothing more than stupidity. Dumb and Dumber, quite content with their own stupidity, substituting brawn for brain to achieve twisted “machismo”, most of these young males can’t hold a candle to many of our young women. I’m a military man, well trained to think with cold hard logic, and I can’t stand such useful idiots any more than smart women can.

Everyone knows what to think, but no one knows how to think.

Consider this tiny example: Every year the US experiences tens of thousands of truck-related accidents resulting in a huge toll of life, injury and property damage. There are about 1,300,000 heavy-duty trucks and 4,400,000 trailers in America’s rolling 18-wheel fleet. Really big trucks and whiz-bang technology used to fascinate American men. Did you ever get behind a slow 18-wheeler on a two-lane highway? The first problem is that big trailer wall in front of you obscuring the road ahead. You’d think the problem years ago would have been screaming for obvious solution using stuff that everyone sees every day. Now some guys have finally gone ahead and done it. They designed a hi-res wireless video camera and installed it high on the front of a big truck. It sends what it sees of the road ahead in real time to four giant thin-panel screens installed on that flat wall at the rear of the trailer, presenting those behind the truck a big full view of everything the trucker sees, and from a better vantage than a car offers. Now those following behind the truck don’t have to drift out into a passing lane until they know for certain that there’s no on-coming traffic, that there’s enough time and clear road to pass safely. There was a time in America when some young guy would have come up with that idea, developed and marketed his product as soon as the technology was available, probably in weeks, competed hard with several other guys with similar products, and made a fortune with his rapidly growing company employing hundreds of people making and installing the devices. This product solution is just beautiful in its simplicity, but it was some South Korean guy who came up with the idea, and it is South Korea’s giant Samsung corporation that is developing and testing it, first in Argentina. A half century ago, that ingenious product would have gone on the market in the US many years earlier – and every American would have benefitted in so many ways (after responsible government had banned the display of ads on the screens so as not to distract drivers). (See “The American Spirit … Now Comes From China“.) Now it seems that young American guys are all sitting around sucking their thumbs while playing with their herd via little talking toys – constantly presenting to guys like me a mental image of pre-humanoid apes sitting around picking fleas off each others’ backs.

What the hell happened?

How did so very many of our boys go from global top to global bottom in the span of one single generation? Did someone put something in the drinking water?

And why in the world is the focus now stupidly on college admission practices and not on the gigantic school industry that is supposed to create well prepared students at the college gates, supposed to feed higher education with honed minds? Does everyone focus on the college “affirmative action” aspect as just another pathetic effort to divert attention from the elephant in the living room growing stinkier by the minute?

Have Americans REALLY become this easily manipulated?

This country annually imports over 850,000 mostly male foreign-schooled students to attend and conduct research at our universities, and still those campuses have really huge majorities of American women. (See Footnote #1.) The number of those foreign students rises annually. Worse, most of those women are immersed in navel-contemplating liberal arts and social sciences while our higher education system has become ever more dependent on foreign students to maintain high standards in the physical and highly advanced sciences that keep us barely competitive in a global economy. About 45% of such US university science students are, in fact, foreign-schooled students. Even worse than that, those women now overwhelmingly dominant in social sciences establish unchallenged the self-serving dogma that sets our society’s social agendas, including those in “education” and “child development”, and all according to “very special me”.

It is simply not possible to observe a United States of America in 2011 that provides college educations to twice as many women as men and NOT conclude that this represents the nation’s greatest and most shameful social injustice – one fully prohibited by civil rights law enacted by The Greatest Generation in 1972 specifically designed to keep such critically important things in American education in fair, proper and equitable balance, and all at the highest standards.

When a college graduate will earn $1,000,000 MORE over the course of an average career than will a high school drop-out – this imbalance signifies a truly gross denial of equal economic opportunity for many millions of American males. Why are boys dropping out at a rate eight times higher than for girls? Why are they committing suicide at such staggering rates? Why are so many more of them than girls ending up on drugs or in jail? Why do at least three times as many scholarships routinely go to girls, decade after decade? Who cares? It most definitely is NOT our disgustingly narcissistic women, even those who presume a quota “right” to “leadership” of all of us. There is no easier sitting-duck target for “tyranny-of-the-majority” bigotry than those who lack a voice. Just who speaks for America’s boys? Certainly not all those dumb men running around loose out there.

Make no mistake about it: The American “education” industry has always been a female-dominated industry, probably the most critical industry in the nation, and it includes all those women who overwhelmingly dominate the entire humongous “child development” arena from birth through college. And none of these women “experts” will accept alternatives to their ingrained self-serving prejudices. Over the past thirty years that industry has been an unmitigated failure, an industry fraught with institutional sexist discrimination serving the “special” people, at the expense of everyone else. Despite all the new rights they keep demanding every other week, it is no longer possible for American women to avoid their just responsibility for such massive institutional bigotry in the industry they dominate. The results speak very loudly all by themselves. A whole gender does not go from academic global top to global bottom in a single generation – unless it is the consequence of deliberate malicious design.

The imbalances began over thirty years ago and have grown wider in every year since.

For you college graduates who have trouble with math: Those numbers are cumulative! We are now talking about tens of millions of purposefully disadvantaged men – who will now be supported by our enormously privileged women – who accept responsibility for nothing. Already, over 40% of married women earn more than their husbands. Already women employed full time nationwide earn an average of 119% of the earnings of men working full time – a natural consequence of them earning twice as many college degrees every year as men do – and still expect men to pay the bills, take the blame and do the hard stuff for “very special me”.

We are talking about “role reversal” here on a truly massive and rapid scale – but a role reversal that conveniently leaves out the responsibility part.

We can only hope that the ladies are ready to pick up the tab, and the responsibility – not to mention the full accountability. Once you become “The Man”, you also become the universally hated free-fire target on the firing line – the party responsible for everything wrong in our society. It goes with the territory. It is “The Man” who is that universally hated “someone else” responsible for taking the blame, paying the bills and doing the hard stuff for all the slacker others. It is “The Man” whose responsibilities for others far overshadow any measly petty rights she might claim for herself. I surely hope women are ready for that very heavy burden. If not, we all go belly-up, and fast. Sadly, all the signs so far are definitely not promising.

A Little History

Maybe it’s time for a little recent history lesson from a guy who actually participated in much of it, not from some politically correct or self-serving revisionist tract. Relax; I won’t go back further than the 1960s, when I, a young Jack Kennedy disciple, was a “rebel” student activist. I watched the 1961 birth of both Kennedy’s Peace Corps and the Special Forces and appreciated the great beauty of its ‘carrot and stick’ genius – through really hard work on both ends – the perfect challenge in the world for the “best and brightest” of the “Greatest Nation On Earth”. The very first vanguard of the Boomers were just 16 years old when Kennedy was assassinated, and most would not reach 18 before the end of the decade, around 1969. I’ve listened to the Boomers lay claim to virtually everything, as if simply being alive was sufficient, but the truth is less flattering. For example, the great landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, enacted when the very first of the Boomers were just reaching age 18, primarily addressed race discrimination, although it also addressed gender discrimination in employment (and the resultant very wide-ranging affirmative class actions everywhere). That was a fifty years – a whole half century – ago. Boomers played no role in emplacing such civil rights law. In fact, the Baby Boomers put nothing in place; they just milked what they were handed, or twisted it for purposes never intended (or even imagined) by their towering parents.

A LOT happened in America after 1964, in very short order. Kennedy’s New Frontier folded into Johnson’s Great Society, and very quickly came The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964; The Voting Rights Act of 1965; The Elementary and Secondary Education and the Higher Education acts of 1965 – which opened the floodgates of federal money to America’s schools, established Head Start and the National Teachers Corps. Then came Medicare; Medicaid; the War On Poverty; the Job Corps; the Civil Rights Act of 1968 banning discrimination in housing; and so much more for the economy, transportation, the environment, arts and consumer protection. Except for a comparatively rudimentary and nascent Social Security system, none of this stuff existed in America (or anywhere else) until the Greatest Generation went to work after they won the Second World War.

Despite today’s popular myths of everyone sitting around smelling the flowers and smoking pot, every adult – Greatest Generation adult – during the 1960s was incredibly busy, on so many different fronts. Jack Kennedy kept them going, and even his, Martin’s and Bobby’s tragic deaths, while slowing them down, didn’t stop them. That explosive decade deeply affected everyone, including women, but the truth is that the great historical events and legislation enacted during that period, which very dramatically changed the way America operated at home and abroad, was the final contribution of our Greatest Generation – our 1901-24-born parents who had grown up during World War I (1914-18), survived the misery of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression (1929-39), bought us through the great bloody World War II (1940-45) and then went on a building and baby binge (1946-67) that bought lasting peace to Europe and produced the greatest economic boom in the history of humanity. Feverishly determined that their kids never experience what they had experienced in their own youth, they proceeded to hand their 80,000,000 “Baby Boomer” kids literally everything under the Sun – gratis. Even in their later years they did not rest. In their final days in the 1970s, came the wise Privacy Act and the Freedom Of Information Act (and in 1980 an aging guy who came out of retirement to show the kids how to finally bring an end to the constantly terrifying “Cold” War).

While their parents were incredibly busy setting really important things in place, most young Baby Boomers during the ’60s focused on the Vietnam and race wars. Many young women, however, were busy waging their own war, and it didn’t have anything to do with their bras. Eight years after the Civil Rights Act, the Greatest Generation’s Education Amendments (Title IX) in June 1972, when the earliest Boomer vanguard reached age 26, added new civil rights law to the original landmark legislation. It significantly broadened the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include gender discrimination in education.

That law stated flatly: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination, under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

So, while much of the country was engrossed with very high profile issues of explosive conflict, women became the driving force behind very major changes in employment and education. It was mostly opportunistic, since the environment especially for employment for everyone had been very dramatically improved by the Greatest Generation over the previous two decades so that now even women could be employed in the workplace with little fear of death, disease or injury as had always been the case in the past in most endeavors. While the young Boomers’ actions in the streets would soon force their parents to end the war in Vietnam and make significant headway against racial discrimination, other young women began using law to muscle their way into wherever they wanted to go, to do whatever they wanted to do, damned any males, including their own fathers, who got in their way. By the end of the 1970s the exhausted Greatest Generation would gradually step aside and turn the reins of their magical cornucopia over to their kids, the enormously spoiled and self-involved Boomers – who had almost no understanding at all of the half century of awful misery and monumental accomplishment that had gone before them.

It wouldn’t take them long to screw it up.

The things that would come to symbolize the Boomers, best grouped under the heading of “Entitlements”, were somewhat less glorious than those of their parents. “Ask not what your country can do for you…” became “What’s in it for me?” – the sole relevant question for the rest of the century. The Boomers bought us political stalemate and intellectual inertia, an incredibly short attention span, a shift from logic-based to emotion-based “thinking”, an inability to embrace and solve big long-range challenges, the rise of the idle “elitist” chattering class and enormously powerful special interest lobbies, an endless list of rights with no responsibilities, a steadily decaying infrastructure (including our entire education industry), a fatally low birth rate eventually requiring a massive flood of Third World immigrants just to take up the native slack and keep the whole show barely viable, the dominance of appearance over substance, perception over truth, process over results, and a shift from an economy that invented and created and manufactured truly useful, worthwhile and wonderful things desired by the entire world to one characterized best by idle apes sitting around playing with toys and picking fleas off each others’ backs – all while getting “someone else” to take the blame, pay the bills and do whatever hard stuff they wanted done. Society became judged by the size of moronic herds stampeding in “social media”. Propaganda evolved into sophisticated “marketing” and set about crafting a culture based on rigidly imposed conformity, insatiable materialistic consumerism and a “knowledge base” that was mostly thin air. Truth became irrelevant, perception everything. And, most of all, self-serving personal rights trumped social responsibility.

While their parents were truly giant adults, their offspring were incessantly whining children – a truly amazing case of massive reverse evolution. The Boomers would memorize all the “right” answers for the tests designed by their parents and continue using the answers, and the brilliant thinking behind them, well into the next century – decades after the whole world upon which they had been based was gone – and couldn’t figure out why the old answers no longer worked.

Today, while the best description of most American men is just “dumb” and most American women “self-serving”, our best thinkers in intelligent print are mostly Third World immigrants. Just check out the very astute work of Indian-American Fareed Zakaria, now Editor-at-Large of Time magazine, including his article “Are America’s Best Days Behind Us?” (14 March 2011). He attended schools in Mumbai before admission to Yale and then Harvard. This very knowledgeable man thinks for himself, and brilliantly. (It does make me nervous that he, too, is a late-comer who jumped on the train after it was already built and launched and, like the Boomers, has little real comprehension or appreciation of what went before his arrival on the scene, of what it actually took, and still takes, to make this thing work.) The best and most effective math and science teacher in America – Salman Khan – is the son of Bangladeshi and Indian parents; he never received schooling in “education” and needs nothing but his home computer as “infrastructure” to teach many hundreds of thousands. Lebanese-born and raised Fouad Ajami is a professor at Johns Hopkins who writes for print media about foreign affairs with a remarkably distinctive flare for English that is easily attributable even without a by-line. The people who impress me most in America anymore are not native-born Americans. I do understand Walt Kowalski.

(Among immigrants, I am least impressed with those from western Europe over the past fifty years. I never encounter these people in the nation’s armed forces, on police forces, construction crews, in classrooms, rescue services, etc.. Such endeavors are “beneath” them; they “start off” much higher up the food chain. These “superior” westerners, like their American counterparts, didn’t come to contribute; all steeped in a million rights devoid of responsibilities, they came to milk – that which more useful humans designed, built and defended, apparently just for the “special” people who showed up after the hard stuff was done. Like American Baby Boomers, they feel no obligation to maintain or defend the bountiful gifts they found upon arrival.)

American society today is based on little more than mandated lies, dictated dogma, serving a plethora of many tens of millions of “special” people sitting around doing little more than making incessant demands of everyone else, using powerful lobbies and sophisticated propaganda to force a re-engineering of society to best serve their own childish wants for “very special me” blissfully playing in the crib (and whining about dating odds on campus).

Demanding Balance In Schools

During the late-1960s and 1970s young women inexplicably decided they needed to be “liberated” from all those men being drafted like lemmings for deadly war. Shortly after the Greatest Generation, after centuries of deadly labor struggles, finally succeeded in making most workplaces bearable (and survivable), these Boomer women went to work using powerful new law to forcibly “adjust” standards and practices everywhere they wanted to go. While employment was one major front (and the one where affirmative action quotas was used most extensively), education was the other. When Title IX became law in 1972 young American males were still living under fifteen excruciatingly long years of the ever-present threat of military Draft for a very deadly and polarizing war – a possible eventuality which was very dramatically affecting the decisions, lives and psychology of all young American men (and probably still affects many of those men today). While very few of the available male ‘pool’ ever actually served in the military, being in, and remaining in, college was at least a certain temporary deferment from the constant threat of war service. A Draftee for Vietnam faced, in addition to the $2.00 a day pay, if he survived the war intact, at the very least a two to three year forced delay in keeping up with college contemporaries of both genders who did not get drafted, and in those highly competitive times, that delay period was significant indeed. In those days, the chances of ever “catching up” were mighty slim. These were some of the things that women of that period never had to even notice. (Being welcomed back home from war by screaming mobs, stones, curses, spit and defamation was another; reeking with self-loathing, the Boomers who didn’t serve were simply vile in their treatment of military veterans.)

Still, it was at that same opportune time, in the late-1960s and early-1970s, that women, adroitly discounting the skewed effect of the Draft, decided to make an issue of slight enrollment imbalances on the nation’s campuses that favored men. But feminists wisely did not attack the colleges and universities for their admission policies, as is the stupid myopic focus today. They far more appropriately attacked the school system that prepared students for higher education – all the way back to the first years of elementary school.

Since the national gender “imbalance” on American college campuses at that time was only about 48-52 (a four point spread), there wasn’t much of a case to be made via the college admissions route, especially since a significant number of those “extra” males stayed in college primarily to avoid or delay the military Draft. Exempt from the Draft themselves, women at that time instead wisely focused their attention on America’s top rated elementary and secondary schools, since this was the critical route to higher education, advancement in society and significantly increased income in any endeavor of choice. As the Greatest Generation knew so well, the first-rate education system they had put in place, the most effective and highest rated in history, was the critical key to economic opportunity in America, and they were determined to ensure that route was equitably available to everyone. When more women did get into college, women activists wanted to be certain that those women could compete with men in any field they wished. It was difficult for most others to understand the focus on this particular target since there were almost as many women on college campus as men, and they indeed could hold their own with anyone. (And the fields of interest to women in 1970 were pretty much what they are in 2015 – forty-five years later. And, yes, there were then, just as there are today, a few token women who excelled in the physical sciences and highly competitive fields. Among women, nothing much has changed at all. But among men, the changes are profound indeed.)

But, still, there was also a certain “numerical imbalance”, and, in those days, wherever there was a “numerical imbalance” that was not advantageous to women, that was a target. Women activists and “feminists” were very successful in getting major changes instituted throughout our pre-college school system even prior to enactment of Title IX – simply by making very loud noises to our “woman’s world” school systems.

Most Americans, and especially men, think Title IX only concerns college sports programs. This is a gross underestimation of the true wide scope of the law, a misunderstanding that is the intended consequence of incessant women’s lobby propaganda for the last several decades. First, Title IX is universal civil rights law, applicable to all Americans, not just to any select group or groups. It is NOT some obscure fine print that enables college women to channel money from men’s to women’s sports programs. (Sports programs are actually a “bottom of the barrel” thing.) Title IX is NOT something “for women”; it is for BOTH genders, and, in accordance with our Constitution, it assumes an equal level of responsibility by the other gender.

Title IX makes no mention of women or sports.

Title IX of the 1972 Civil Rights Education Amendments to the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender against students and employees of any education programs or activities receiving any federal financial assistance at any level. Nearly every aspect of all public elementary, secondary and post-secondary institutions in America is covered under this law as a consequence of the Greatest Generation’s Elementary and Secondary Education and the Higher Education acts of 1965 (which addressed federal financial assistance).

Court cases less well known than recent college sports cases brought and won by women in the quarter of a century after 1972 firmly established that this legislation also prohibits gender discrimination in such higher education areas as: admissions to vocational, graduate, professional and public undergraduate schools; access to courses and programs; school counseling and guidance; tests, materials and practices; physical education and athletics; vocational education programs; student rules and policies; financial assistance; student housing; extracurricular activities; and employment in educational institutions. Such and similar legal precedents established the applicability of such matters all the way down to the first grade of elementary school. The most profound impact was at K-12.

Title IX is thus a comprehensive federal civil rights law that prohibits any discrimination on the basis of gender in any education program or activity receiving federal funds – a condition which is nearly impossible not to find everywhere in any public education entity in the nation today. Title IX applies to both students and teachers, both employees and administrators, just as much to the first grade as to post-graduate school. It applies, with a few specific exceptions, to virtually all aspects of education programs or activities in America that receive any federal money, either directly or indirectly. In addition to traditional public educational institutions such as colleges, universities, and elementary and secondary schools, Title IX also applies to any education or training program operated by a recipient of federal financial assistance, including that provided under the G.I. and subsequent similar bills for veterans. It even applies to research programs funded at educational institutions by federal taxpayer dollars. In short, Title IX civil rights law applies to every single aspect of American academic education, bottom to top.

How do you determine “discrimination”? By numbers, by simple math, by any appreciable deviation from a statistical “norm” in the results. The thinking was sensible Greatest Generation thinking. (Individual differences are easily accommodated in very large groups – as represented by a normal bell-shaped curve. The same applies to large sub-groups.) Institutional discrimination is the “absence of balance”, and balance for gender is 50-50, anywhere in American public-funded education.

The most glaring violation of Title IX possible is a significant gender imbalance in student enrollment on an American college campus. This, after all, is the ultimate objective of all the underlying law and its library of legal precedent. Federal law requires the government to bring suit against any such university under threat of withdrawing all federal financial assistance going to that university by any route. The law is intended to protect men as well as women, and ensure both are afforded equal opportunity to advance economically in America via taxpayer-funded education. The same also applies to any educational institution below the university level. Most applicable state laws copy these federal statutes – in compliance with United States (federal) civil rights law. Under the law, and to anyone with a functioning brain, there is no more grossly apparent and patently illegal civil rights injustice anywhere in America than a university system that provides university educations to twice as many of one gender over the other – a condition that has never before existed, or even been approximated, in America. That single condition literally screams of a thoroughly corrupt women-dominated American K-12 school industry engaging in institutional bigotry on a truly massive scale.

But laws are only as good as the effort that goes into enforcing them, especially by those elected, employed and paid to serve all of us, and not just to serve the “special” people. In the forty years since its enactment, no Title IX case has ever been bought on behalf of boys – the “other half” of our society. That’s a truly twisted version of “equality” indeed.

Legal Arguments

The two key legal principles firmly established in law by women which led to and then relied on the Title IX legislation were:

(1) appreciable imbalance beyond the statistical norm (50-50) is prima facie evidence of institutional gender discrimination, and

(2) it is not possible to blame the victims of such discrimination for their failure to achieve the desired numerical balance, i.e., it is necessary for the institution to change to ensure gender balance is achieved.

Women focused on elementary and secondary

 drop-out rates,

 teaching methods,

 classroom atmosphere,

 textbook content,

 gender role models,

 test questions,

 special programs,

 testing methods,

 test scores,

 graduation rates,

 scholarship awards,

etc. – and found them wanting, i.e, unfavorable to girls, imbalances that needed immediate correction no matter what that took. Even though the numerical imbalances were quite minor compared to today, the schools and the courts agreed. The initial intent was to get things everywhere in proper balance, and then to keep them there.

.

People wallow in their eternal “victimhood” solely to avoid their just responsibility – for themselves and for anyone else, too. It neatly shifts the blame from “me” to “someone else”. Thanks to a half century of incessant “feminism” – in the home, in the school, and in politics – this is now the dominate trait of a majority of the whiny American population, all of whom are pampered members of the “greatest nation on Earth”.

.

There was no need to query school girls on what they thought of it all, or even about what they wanted for themselves, because school girls, as “child victims”, were not capable of recognizing the degree to which “numerical imbalance” resulting from “institutional discrimination” was hurting them and their futures. (“Child victims”, intended in US law to apply to all those below the age of 18, as a consequence of women’s demands later included college women, regardless of age, seemingly uninterested in competitive sports. The American definition of “child” just keeps expanding, albeit selectively. Men are still assumed responsible for their own choice to risk their lives in deadly war at age 18, can even be criminally charged as adults at age 13, but women are not even responsible for their own social choices well into their 30s. How’s THAT for a really perverted sense of “equality”?) Since children are not capable of recognizing how their lack of success as children will adversely impact their entire lives ahead, it is the responsibility of accountable adults to do whatever is necessary to ensure they do succeed. And the first step to that end is to recognize that the two genders do, in fact, learn in different ways and to make maximum use of those differences to the best advantage of each. But this is not what happened.

Women activists asserted very persuasively that numerical imbalance was sufficient evidence of institutional discrimination and thus just flat-out wrong. They applied very extensively a legal concept known as “disparate impact“, which focuses not on discriminatory intent, as disparate treatment does, but instead on discriminatory consequences, regardless of the treatment, and it is now firmly established in American civil rights law; it shifts the focus from the process to the results, and demands that the process be altered in any way necessary to achieve the desired results. Nowhere is the concept more important than with society’s most vulnerable group, the one that literally screams out for equitable attention under full adult accountability – its children, its girls AND boys. (Today, a very effective dodge is to focus solely on the process while ignoring the results, a dodge tactic which women never would tolerate if the results placed them at a disadvantage.) And at that time many millions of American men fully accepted that rationale at the K-12 level on its face value.

This was at least an intelligent approach, far more sensible than attacking college admission policies – and one all well and good as long as the “victims” were female children. Note, however, that this approach has unintended consequences, not fully recognized at the time. It works just fine for ages 0 to 18. But when applied to those 18 and older, including college women, it effectively shifts responsibility from the individual to others who have an impact on the individual; it allows people over 18 to escape responsibility for their own choices, for their own behavior. “It’s not my fault if I don’t learn; it’s your fault for not teaching me.” Once “disparate impact” moved beyond the childhood years, past age 18, it fed the growth of the most asinine dogma in human history. (It’s “arrested development”, or the permanent infancy of the Whining Class.) And it began with women’s college sports programs, when women began seeing the bottom of the “education” barrel and needed to push their dogma even below that bottom.

(It’s easily possible for very weak minds to extend this “argument” into every aspect of human endeavor. Eventually it would divorce all personal responsibility from any discussion of women’s rights and shift the responsibility parts to “someone else”. “I have rights; I do not have responsibilities. It’s your responsibility for ensuring whatever rights I decide to demand for me.” This is an idiotic dogma that could only be embraced by Useless Humans – commandeering valuable space that could be filled far better by Useful Humans. Those with a functioning brain can see where such madness leads. “It’s not my fault that I don’t advance in my job; it’s your fault for not promoting me.” “It’s not my fault for being poor; it’s your fault for not giving me enough money.” “It’s not my fault for having a criminal record; it’s your fault for arresting me.” “It’s not my fault for getting pregnant; it’s your fault for being one of those evil men.” “It’s not my fault that I have high student loan debt; it’s your fault for charging such high tuition.” “It’s not my fault for being misunderstood; it’s your fault for thinking rationally.” The concept of “disparate impact” soon settled into the mindset of huge portions of the American population seeking to shift blame to “someone else”, seeking to use perpetual “victimhood” to avoid personal responsibility, seeking to float through “life” with zero effort or contribution while everyone else kisses their glorious asses – as an entitlement bestowed solely by miraculous birth as … female – the unearned difference of a single chromosome at the molecular level. Like so many other well-intentioned temporary remedies in our society, it became permanently institutionalized. An argument to assist little children soon extended the definition of “children” to double “childhood” well past age 35. Now you can be as stupid and helpless and childish as humanly possible and still blame “someone else” for being a total loser getting by solely on your self-proclaimed “special” status – in a nation now only theoretically based on “equality”. It’s been decades since any privileged American woman screaming about her rights even mentioned her responsibilities – for herself much less for anyone else, including for her society.)

But before that happened, women activists, aggressively applying the principle of “disparate impact” only to their own group, demanded, and quickly got, very major changes in the nation’s pre-college school system – changes in teaching methods, counseling, very significant extra federal funding, extensive reporting requirements, shifts in core subjects, special programs, even changes in test questions and text book and test content – all of which were ostensibly intended to move girls into ‘parity’ with boys graduating from high school and gaining admission to college as rapidly as possible. The changes were sold and instituted with the broad understanding that they were temporary measures needed to achieve “balance” in the results.

Significantly, the previous prevalent classroom learning process of relying heavily on carefully orchestrated individual competition among students, which, it was argued, favored boys, gave way to more quiet group cooperative learning, which, it was argued, provided a more conducive (“less threatening”) learning environment for girls. It was an intuitive argument, based on almost no objective research other than a few small survey-type studies that counted raised hands in class and noted their gender. (The number of raised hands was deemed an indicator of ‘classroom participation’, and thus an indicator of ‘learning progress’, even though no cause-and-effect relationship was ever established.) This intuitive argument was indeed implicitly supported by previous extensive scientific study by the Greatest Generation that laid out in very considerable detail by 1965 the very real differences in the ways in which boys and girls learn, and well understood by most teachers.

I noticed the same classroom dynamic in conjunction with my own university studies of school children a decade earlier, and then found published controlled scientific studies in both psychology and sociology conducted over the preceding quarter of a century which confirmed my own observations. But what was really going on? It turned out that 80,000 years of preceding human evolution had resulted in a few gender differences in the learning process, including that boys are more competitive with each other than are girls. That hand-raising was a form of mild competitive game among the boys. Smart and well-trained teachers had been using this natural tendency among boys to hold their interest and to teach them to their own best advantage. But what about the girls? There of course was nothing to prohibit girls from playing the same game, but most as a matter of natural inclination did not. It turned out that when the teacher ignored the boys and called on a girl, who may or may not have raised her hand, she almost always knew the correct answer, too. She just wasn’t all that much into making a ruckus about it. She was watching the boys go through their ritual, doing her own thinking, watching for cues from other girls, and just waiting to bowl them all over. And she almost always did. Girls do more private contemplation and discussion among themselves to reach a consensus about the correct answer; they use their own natural tendencies to their best learning advantage. Like everyone else, girls were also learning from the boys’ wrong answers, and those wrong answers were speeding up the learning process for both genders. Boys are less reluctant to embrace risk, to fail, to make leaps of faith, to learn from mistakes, to make unexpected discoveries. Girls were learning just as well as, if not better than, boys – because teachers were very aware of the quite different ways in which boys and girls learn and were using that knowledge and expertise to the advantage of both genders. It’s a little more difficult to do this, since it requires simultaneously teaching to two different groups, and since some boys can get a bit too competitive. But teachers knew that the other boys would quickly put such a boy in his proper place if she didn’t.

(Always embrace risk. No one ever achieves real success without first experiencing failure. Even birds can’t soar without challenging the wind, and those of us who never do anything “wrong” never do anything. This was a time when Americans, Greatest Generation Americans, were first circumnavigating the globe under water, traveling beyond the confines of Earth into space, reshaping a continent with a colossal super-highway system, conquering diseases, creating super-computers, inventing useful innovations almost weekly, becoming a global super-power by advancing ALL frontiers at once. There seemed no limits to the potential rewards of risk, and competition. That’s why women wanted to claim as many rewards as boys, in a system that was “fair”.)

But “feminist” interpretation of their anecdotal classroom observations was not based on science. The boys’ raised hands were seen as “intimidating” to girls. Feminists used their superficial observations of this natural human dynamic to demand a change in “classroom atmosphere” via a dramatic change in teaching methods. A key element in demanding the changes women wanted during the 1970s was to label boys’ natural competitiveness as “aggression” – which immediately became a very bad word in the education industry. “Male competition” was now “male aggression”, something “evil” that had to be excised from the classroom. “Male aggression” remains central to feminist “thinking” even today (probably because, whatever you call it, it has very few sanctioned and controlled outlets and thus now often shows up in the wrong places while everyone else sits around playing with little talking toys in idly grazing cooperative social media herds). Feminists turned natural tendencies of males into a weapon to be used against them – to their own group’s advantage. Result: instant boredom, which accomplished nothing positive, for boys, or society. So, the first effect of the new “thinking” was to hobble boys so girls could “move forward” in their own cooperative group. Today all thinking on “competition” in the educational process derives from this “feminist” frame of reference. (And real success today is realized mostly by those very few who embrace the risk by first turning their back on the boring straightjacket that has become of American “education” – and striking out on their own.)

Today we teach our young what to think, not how to think.

And guess who decides what the “right” answers are.

.

“The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

.

With the nation’s attention dramatically diverted by the “anti-war” (-Draft) movement and the Black Rights movement, the length of the rather muted school “debate” at that time was no more than several years, and by the late-1970s the dramatic changes were almost universal across the country in all of our women-dominated school systems. Only minor court-mandated tweaking remained for the rest of that decade. While the newly demanded classroom environment (“atmosphere”) definitely provided a considerably easier working environment for teachers, most of whom were and remain women, a very major impetus to this rapid change across the country was also, of course, the 1972 Title IX civil rights legislation. Feminists used this new law aggressively wherever they found a desired opening that had not already been adequately addressed by previous loud complaints or court cases, most often via very powerful organizations like NOW and AAUW (See Footnote #2.). NOW’s voice was the largest and loudest special interest voice on planet Earth. Often just the threat of litigation was sufficient to achieve the demanded changes – which, since they favored females, were not difficult to achieve among the industry’s predominantly female teachers, now themselves being taught every day by those same powerful organizations that they themselves were “victims” in a “male-dominated” world and that they could all have a plethora of rights that came without responsibility. The name of the game was numerical balance, or quotas, affirmative actions, everywhere, no matter what that required.

(In case no one has noticed, the “cooperative” approach to “classroom environment” (group effort) is also highly conducive to cheating, which, in the intervening years, became an integral aspect of our entire culture, not limited just to inflated résumés, but including drug-popping professional athletes, women using double standards to advance by quota, political candidates lying for emotional votes, journalists “spinning” stories, perpetual losers constantly “reinventing” themselves, jerks claiming the work of others as their own, “achievement” awards for every “special” person who simply shows up, playing the game under changed rules so as to give the illusion of out-performing predecessors, people altering their appearance through plastic surgery, and even our nation’s nuclear weapons officers routinely sharing answers for proficiency tests on code handling, missile safety, launch procedures, even basic qualification exams. “Everyone cheats on every test that they can,” said one such woman officer, “and they have for decades.” Honest guys now finish last? Just whom can you trust? Boys learn their values between ages 7 and 12 by the examples shown every day by the adults around them. Just who are those “adults”? “It’s the name of the game.” A cheater is a liar; never ever trust a liar.)

(The article “America’s Greatest Social Shame – Boys” contains discussion of the legal considerations, rationale, arguments and precedents established in court decisions by women’s lobbies pursuing very extensive changes throughout American K-12 public education during the 1970s. That companion article also takes a closer look at some of the broad “thinking” mentioned here, and its consequences.)

In 1982, ten years after Title IX’s enactment, came the Pivotal Moment for our schools. Except for an aging Greatest Generation man in the White House who had come out of retirement dedicated to ending the “Cold” War, the really huge Baby Boomer wave was now dominant. Gender ‘parity’ (balance) on the nation’s college campuses was achieved in the early 1980s (five years after the Draft ended), when many of those temporary pre-college programs intended to assist girls came up for scheduled Congressional review. But, even though “numerical balance” was demonstrated in every key K-12 factor of interest to women, powerful women’s organizations such as NOW and AAUW argued very strongly before Congressional committees, with very questionable “evidence”, that there was still justification for keeping those programs and their huge federal funding in place.

And they were. The issue was dead, never to rise again. School systems, eyeing all that money, agreed. NOW and AAUW were gradually joined by the rapidly rising teachers unions AFT and NEA, now the two largest and most powerful unions in America, in the pro-girl/anti-boy “group think”. ( See Footnote #2.) The number of girls admitted to college began moving ahead of boys in the early-1980s, and that gap has grown wider in every single year since – now for over three decades. And American women, with their characteristic zero sense of responsibility, naturally watched and said nothing – except to whine about affirmative action practices that give preference to race. Women have been awarded the majority of bachelor’s degrees in the United States in every year since 1981, even as the worth of those degrees is but a sad imitation of their pre-1970 selves. Gender imbalances on college campuses are projected to continue widening as far into the future as can reasonably be projected, and those imbalances have now moved strongly into post-graduate schools. (For example, in December 2013, Duke University announced that its incoming class of doctorial candidates in economics will be two-thirds female. Maybe this explains why researchers at the Federal Reserve recently discovered that two-thirds (65%) of economic studies cannot be replicated, suggesting that the “dismal science” is not very scientific at all, that, like almost everything else in our society, it’s mostly just emotional self-serving propaganda.)

Congress by law funds programs for five or ten year periods, after which the programs are supposed to be terminated or re-authorized by vote after being re-evaluated by appropriate congressional committees. The proper process for this is for Congress to pass a dozen different budgets every year for each of the various distinct spheres of government responsibility. But the Baby Boomers elected to Congress have never been able to comply with such sensible procedures. They instead lump everything into one humongous “omnibus” bill and fund everything in last-minute panic mode under threat of a “government shut-down”. This tactic allows the really huge bill, a bill too lengthy (7,000+ pages) to be read and fully understood by anyone, to be filled with all sorts of “pork barrel” and “special interest” projects and for the proper program re-authorization process to be ignored. Fully one-third of the federal budget passed in omnibus bills each year ($3.8 Trillion) now funds programs that are not even reviewed by Congress. That’s well over a Trillion dollars of taxpayer money going to programs that have not been legally authorized by Congress much less evaluated. No one knows if those programs are still actually needed or even serve their original purposes. (Obviously, it’s now quite possible to “serve” multiple terms in either the US House or the US Senate without ever once exercising the muscle between the ears. Just cast a vote once a year to spend mountains of other people’s money.) As long as the money keeps coming, bureaucrats will always find a way to spend it, and a rationalization to justify it, usually on brainless auto-pilot. Furthermore, you’d have to be brain dead to think that those who benefit from this pathetically gross institutional dysfunction are ever going to complain about it.

By the late 1990s, “numerical imbalances” in K-12 had become so enormously tipped against boys that public schools would no longer reveal gender data in their reporting. (See “group entitlement” under ‘Bury The Opposition’ at “Marketing And Propaganda – Techniques“.)

Then there’s that role-model thing. We’ve now spent a half century vilifying every male role model from the Founding Fathers to the First Astronauts, while moving to the forefront their wives and women who enjoyed the luxury of writing. (What would YOU expect to come of two whole generations of children subjected to THAT? Something other than a nation of blustery girly men and privileged whining women?) And still American “feminists”, accepting zero responsibility for anything, remained silent, their interest groups, lobbies, politicians and mouthpieces even aggressively silencing anyone, such as Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers (“The War Against Boys“, 2000) and many others, who dared raise the matter of boys in trouble. These incredibly powerful women deities will tolerate zero hint of challenge to their self-serving dogma. “I only want MY truth!”

And this included women who were fiercely determined to crash the gates of every all-male private college in the country and relegate them all forever to the dustbin of history, while making sure that men did not do the same to all-women private colleges. From 1965 to 1985, there was literally no obscure corner of the vast American “education” system, bottom to top, that was not under attack by women fanatics fervently dedicated to using civil rights law to re-engineer everything to their demands under the clarion banner of gender “equality”, achieving mandated “balance”. By forcing every aspect of American “education” to bend to the will of Baby Boomer women, the top-rated system put in place by the Greatest Generation by 1965 was thoroughly trashed by their daughters by 1995. (For an examination of the “thinking”, the mental processes, that resulted from all this far beyond the classroom see “Gymnastics Of The Mind“.)

And all of this is just “normal”, “accidental”, and not the consequence of malicious intent? Doesn’t any part of this vast industry do something so basic as teach people how to think? Once you wade past all the self-serving propaganda, it’s very easy to see The Ugliest American. Since science has shown that there are no differences between the male and female brain, any gender differences on the scale of those found today on America’s college campuses are solely the consequence of environmental factors, i.e., what and how women, and the state, teach boys during the first 18 years of life – which is easily correctable through the enforced application of long-existing civil rights law, to alter the process and end the bigotry.

‘

One of the Big Begging Questions that American men are too dumb to ask modern women: “In a nation of equals, just what is it, exactly, that makes you “special”?” (The answers, programmed by women, are all based on a society that vanished forever over a half century ago and grow more asinine with each passing day.) “What do you intend to do, Miz Smith, to guarantee the life of ease and comfort that me and my son deserve?”

.

Unfortunately, the programs originally instituted to assist girls have now been running so long that everyone thinks they are “normal”. They are not. They have just become permanently institutionalized; our public schools teach to girls and expect boys to adapt. American schools are now overwhelmingly “right-brain” oriented, to the great detriment of “left-brain” talents dominant in males. (According to left-brain/right-brain dominance theory in psychology, the right side of the brain is seen as best at expressive and creative tasks, emotion, facial recognition, etc.. The left-side of the brain is considered to be more adept at tasks that involve logic, language, numbers, analytical thinking.) It’s all “group think” running on mindless auto-pilot. Those boys who don’t adapt, fail, and in so many different ways, and in really huge numbers. There are very good reasons beyond a lack of interest among girls for why our schools do such a dismally poor job of teaching math, which historically has been more acceptable to male minds; it’s a natural consequence of a deliberate intent. The more you avoid teaching all children math, and all that follows from math, including intelligent reasoning and logic, the easier it is to avoid fact and context and instead use emotion to “make your argument”, i.e., inculcate your own self-serving emotional propaganda in very young, naive and impressionable minds. Boys exist in school in little boxes deliberately designed to contain, bore and frustrate them, while also programming them with “whatever women want”. Arrogant women in this enormous critical industry literally scream to boys, “You WILL become me!” And, of course, very many of them do just that.

There’s a lot more to math than just math. In 2015 just 57% of American adults were able to pass a basic five-question financial decision-making test conducted globally by the World Bank, Gallup and George Washington University. That pathetic result placed the US in 14th place in financial literacy in the developed world. More than four of every ten Americans can’t even properly manage their own finances! How is that even possible in 2015 in America?

It just so happened that this same period (early 1980s) was also the period when the number of women voters began moving ahead of men voters; this steady widening trend, too, has continued in every election since, so that today it’s absurd to think that any politicians are going to risk alienating that huge majority women’s voting bloc, or their powerful lobbies, their “journalists”, OR the even more powerful teachers unions, on ANY topic. (With a voter majority, most of which is willing to sell its vote to the highest bidder, which now routinely exceeds 12,000,000, women have decided all elections in America since 1980.) Women rule “education”, ruthlessly, and completely without challenge, or even question, on matters of gender. It’s solely a matter of “whatever women want”, a “tyranny of the majority” which civil rights law is specifically designed to counter. Gender in education has not been mentioned in Congress for over a quarter of a century, unless it was to vilify ‘boy bullies’ or to discuss drugging them into stupors under all sorts of newly invented “medical” pretexts. American women, running on mindless auto-pilot, give the impression that they care far more about some endangered animal in Africa than they do about America’s endangered boys, or even about their own sons.

Since boys are now failing at a rate far greater than the very high rate girls are succeeding, our whole public school system is, inescapably, by definition and by law, one gigantic affirmative action program for girls, now moving into its fifth decade. (See Footnote #1.) At no time in American history have gender imbalances in American education been nearly as great as they are today. It’s very small wonder why America must keep importing ever more far better schooled brains, mostly male, to keep itself competitive in the world.

The Emphasis On Girls

From 1970 to around 1995 it was impossible to read any report anywhere on the state of our public schools throughout the country without the progress of girls being trumpeted way up front and addressed with the same bold-letter gravity as race. “Girls” or “Women” was The lead-in to literally every news story on American education. Much of this publicity was due to reporting requirements that accompanied extra federal assistance funding for girls’ education, but a lot of it was also due to the continuing demands of women, including mothers and powerful women’s lobbies, to know exactly how well girls were doing in every aspect of school. Whenever they saw or heard gender-neutral words like “children” or “students” in education reports, these ever-vigilant women were quick to claim, justifiably, that “uni-sex in schools is just a cheap cover for hiding institutional sexist bigotry.”

Then in the late-1990s, the words “gender”, “girls”, “boys”, etc., quietly began disappearing from school status reports. No public announcement accompanied this mysterious change. The truth was becoming just too embarrassing, and too illegal. In recent years, it has become very difficult, if not impossible, to find a public school report from anywhere in the country that provides reliable comparative gender statistics, that does not religiously use gender-neutral terms like “students” and “children” to divert attention away from any gender discrepancies which exist in those schools or school systems. Such practices are patently and purposefully deceptive, deliberate propaganda. The same applies to women-dominated governmental agencies at all levels established to oversee American education, including the US Department of Education. The same also applies to every article written by the 98% of “education journalists” in this country who are women as they disseminate the propaganda churned out by the schools and their government agencies. Apparently the “cheap cover for hiding institutional sexist bigotry” argument now depends on which gender is benefiting from the bigoted “uni-sex” propaganda. “You WILL become me!”

“We must eradicate gender! – so that everyone is whiny effeminate me.”

In America, women and their many lobbies determine the social agenda. America is ALL about “whatever women want” – for themselves. The constant women’s whine, quota demands, affirmative actions, unearned entitlement, etc., sucks the air out of literally all other social ills. After a half century of intense navel contemplation, gender is of concern to women ONLY when such concern is or might be beneficial to women. The net effect is to screw males over in every endeavor possible so females can “advance” – and society as a whole can suffer. Now “uni-sex” applied to children is simply misandry in its purest form. American women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities. Everyone else has the responsibility — for ensuring whatever rights women decide to claim for themselves at any given moment. When you have lived your entire life under the concept of “disparate impact”, which was intended as a temporary measure to achieve numerical balance among school children, running on mindless auto-pilot in perpetuity, it’s possible to view it as “normal”, a “natural aspect of life that is intended to enable “me” to avoid responsibility for anything, even for my own choices, my own behavior, as an adult with a million rights.” We now have a nation of grown-up infants wailing for the nipple. (When you’ve absolved yourself of responsibility, whom do you blame when things go wrong, don’t work out the way you wanted, don’t realize the craved fame and fortune? Anyone and anything except “me”. “It’s an evil conspiracy!” Thanks to American “feminism”, this is now the basic underlying premise for almost all political “thinking” in America. Totally asinine, isn’t it? Human herds as tree moss. Even with all the advantages afforded them for the first 20 years of life, including in their own self-serving schools, these perpetually whining children, running on auto-pilot, are still demanding that “someone else” pick up the responsibility (and the tab) for their own free choices, their own elective behavior, ad nauseam. It’s what they do, their main function in life.)

Those are the most expensive – and worst performing – schools in the developed world, in civilized history. Costs of women-dominated public education in the US have risen an astounding 375% since 1970, but school test scores have remained flat or fallen, while concentrating in areas that do little to keep the nation economically competitive. (And those tests and their scores have been constantly adjusted to make the picture they paint less alarming.) Except for its free day-care function, this is the greatest “black hole” for wasted money in American history. For these “education” people, forty years of abject failure is ample justification for even more money to keep them employed for forty more years of failure. In American government, absolutely nothing succeeds better than failure; the more it fails, the more of other people’s money it rakes in for itself. (Most of these astronomical increased costs are a direct consequence of “feminism’s” deliberate and systematic destruction of the traditional family unit and its inherent division of labor and sharing of responsibility, which, in turn, has required a truly massive shift in women’s dependence from husbands and fathers to government and to all those millions employed by that government. It’s just another humongous cost to “all of us” of rampant self-involved “me-ism” devoid of responsibility. More than half of all “education” tax dollars in the US goes to keep platinum employee pension and health care plans flush before even one dollar can go towards educating our young. Rewarding failure, including with an annual three-month paid vacation, achieves new heights weekly – for people who can’t qualify to teach children in almost any other developed country.)

Today only a fool would trust anything any education official tells them about American public education. How is it even possible, for example, to research, write and disseminate a major report on schools with incredible 30% to 50% drop-out rates, without mentioning even once that over 90% of those drop-outs are boys? It’s done every day, on this and many similar topics, by the schools, by school systems, by their government agencies and by the women “education journalists” who churn out this school-provided boilerplate junk in every publication, TV station and web site in America. For an average taxpaying schmuck like me trying hard for the past ten years to get reliable gender statistics, it’s so unbelievably frustrating that it’s time for some responsible adult to propose that the Secretary of Education be replaced by an adult male federal judge with full subpoena powers. Today you practically need a federal court order to pry reliable gender data from this vast women-dominated school industry and its enormously powerful unions.

It’s all reminiscent of the “Cold” War days when US intelligence agencies tried to divine what was going on in paranoid Soviet Russia, long after the fact, by meticulously examining published obituaries of deceased key personnel. The Tightly Closed Secret Society. It’s impossible not to suspect sinister intent. But, of course, all you really have to do is study the obituary, take note of the enormous gender imbalance on our nation’s post-secondary campuses, to KNOW that our pre-college school industry is, under the law, just a self-serving criminal enterprise. American citizen gender imbalances on college campuses is now the obituary of the secret American K-12 school system. It’s small wonder that a college graduate today is on a knowledge par with a high school graduate of a half century ago, with the public at large in 1960. Based on performance over the past forty years, the results of American “education” move one full year backwards every decade.

To view gender balance on college campus as desirable for dating purposes is simply infantile in the extreme (which is not surprising given the overwhelming dominance of those perpetual children we still call “women”). And women’s efforts to whine about racial preferences in college admissions, even taking their whines all the way to the Supreme Court, is just a cheap tactic to divert public attention from women’s self-serving hegemonic stranglehold on all of American public K-12. Such women have no idea what hell is coming to them, fast. American women as a group now spend twice as much on their own clothing as all of us together spend on higher education, and still whine about the cost of higher education that benefits them twice as much as men! (And that doesn’t include an even greater amount these self-involved princesses spend on their shoes and all those accessories, jewelry, make-up, etc., that must accompany those expensive clothes – solely to impress other self-involved American women. And, get this: The average American woman doesn’t even wear 80% of the expensive crap that’s in her own wardrobe.) Who teaches them all that revolting “birthright entitlement” nonsense, the disgusting lie that they are somehow “special” in a democracy professing equality, that all those rights they claim for themselves come devoid of corresponding responsibilities for others? Who teaches these offensive jerks how to think? (They teach it to themselves, in a society that outlaws criticism, bans challenge to their self-serving “thinking”, uses phony charges of “misogyny” to “legitimize” their own misandry.)

Very many American women are so infected with such virulent hatred of men that you have to wonder why any sane person would allow such passionate bigots within a block of any boy under the age of 20. You even have to suffer such women bigots in the US Congress presuming that they represent only other women, that males do not exist among their constituencies, incessantly demanding that males be re-engineered to be “just like perfect me”, that masculinity be eviscerated from society. Their jealous hatred literally reeks of open cesspools.

Now we even have these “equality” fanatics using Title IX to broaden the intent of the law far beyond what was ever imagined by those who enacted it, even into such areas as “sexual harassment” on college campuses (if anyone can actually define just what that is), as if there weren’t enough laws, policies, regulations, etc., ad nauseam, already banning such nebulous behavior, even requiring men to lie to women, to tell them only the stupid nonsense they want to hear. (What idiot would ever hire such pathetically closed-minded people with such fragile egos?) It’s just using anything remotely possible to cover up the ugly truth to serve “me”. Laws using Title IX to govern “sexual harassment” is a way women intend to protect themselves from accountability for the sexist bigotry against boys perpetrated in their K-12 public schools. “It’s against the law to complain about bigotry directed against males, to hold women accountable for their own sexism.” To do so is “sexual harassment.” The Greatest Generation that put all that civil rights law in place is screaming from its grave, and most especially to see such lunacy on university campuses where the free exchange and open examination of all views and ideas is absolutely critical to the educational process, not to mention to human intellectual development. It’s just another trick designed to protect all those rights claimed by women, while also absolving them of responsibility, and accountability, for anything. “I will allow you to enter my privileged campus world provided you keep your mouth tightly shut and comply with all my demands. I am now “The Man”, but I am also a perpetual “special” victim who cannot be held accountable. Sure, I’ve been screwing you over for decades, but you are not allowed to do, much less say, anything about it.” These nitwits are always preaching “tolerance”, but that “tolerance” does not extend to views that differ from their own. “You must tolerate my views, but I will NOT tolerate yours.” It’s pure fascism, imposed by the intellectually challenged, seeking to remain so.

This stuff belongs in a lunatic asylum. I’ve tried to articulate what it feels like to a man like me to be affronted by the extremely offensive nonsense now spewed by so many women (and their cloned male morons) on college campuses today, but I always fall short. I guess the best description is utter disgust that my country could actually spawn such self-involved and ignorant tots in adult bodies. These intellectually ugly creeps tar me with shame as a responsible American man, make me feel just squalid. This is what you expect me to defend with my life? I don’t think I could even bring myself to shake hands with such twisted children pretending to be women, twits blaming everyone else for their own stupidly infantile narcissism, their own failure as contributive humans, fearing I might become infected with the same cancerous disease that is destroying my society – and all simply because they’ve never been challenged.

When I hear that nonsense, I fervently wish there were cell phones on campus in the ‘60s. I could have taken videos of all those exceedingly arrogant and offensive and intrusive and abusive young “feminists” screaming in the faces of trapped men, spittle spraying everywhere, “If you know it’s wrong and do nothing about it, then YOU, dickhead, are part of the problem!!” “Sexual harassment” indeed is in the eye of the beholder. Those guys back then honestly didn’t even know there was a problem worth contemplating. If the Draft and war and dead soldiers and racial injustice and massive riots wasn’t enough, there was always our totally oblivious and self-centered and privileged Baby Boomer women screaming in their faces. It was wall-to-wall screech. What would happen today if young men tried the same tactics with young women today? They’d be arrested for “sexual harassment”. Those uncomfortable with some of my rhetoric here should know that it was all lifted verbatim (less the profanity) from that used by American women during the 1960s and 1970s complaining about gender imbalances and perceived injustices that were inconsequential compared to those afflicting boys today. In 2011 not a day goes by when some extremely offensive woman does not say things, usually in a vulgar manner, about or to men that deeply offends me, that constitutes the exact same sexism that women refuse to be allowed to be directed against them. I can easily imagine what kind of “men” these “special” immune bigots, with all their double standards, are creating at home and in school. (Isn’t it telling that every parent proudly claims credit for children who succeed, but none claims credit for the losers? It’s the extreme “feminist” narcissism now endemic throughout our society, with all those rights and no responsibilities. “Blame it on a gene!” Because of the choices women make, three of every four American boys cannot count on his father through age 18, so, obviously, most of those guys are not being shaped by men. American women are world-class experts at blaming others for their own bad decisions. And this sad trait qualifies them to demand their “fair quota” of “leadership” positions?)

Never having been challenged, it’s not at all surprising that their most developed and visible talent is dictating to everyone else from their position of supreme omniscience and the power of politically corrupt government. (Of course, any twit off the street can dictate.) Never having been challenged, they possess zero capacity to, much less any interest in, seeing the board from the vantage of the other side, and this includes all those millions of women who now “raise” and “educate” boys solely according to “very special me” – while also promoting the thoroughly asinine notion that boys, unlike girls, simply “create themselves”, right there on the street corner, like magic, all by themselves, and are thus fully responsible for whatever they create. That’s a “logic” that only self-serving American women (and their moronic clones) could invent.

(So much of what comes out of the mouths of young people today reminds me of Chatty Cathy. Chatty Cathy was a “talking” doll that was quite popular around the 1960 period, well before micro-circuitry made possible much more sophisticated toys. Chatty Cathy dolls had a string exiting from the doll’s upper back; if you pulled the string out, it wound a coil inside the doll that played a small phonograph record over one of about a dozen different phrases or comments. As the coil pulled the string back inside the doll, the doll seemed to be “talking”. But, of course, no deviation was possible; the doll repeated only what it had been “programmed” to utter and nothing else. Chatty Cathy people today are still reciting the same dogmatic nonsense promulgated by interest group lobbies in the 1960s – as if nothing at all has changed in our society over the past half century. When you see a society ostensibly frozen in time despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you know that there is no thinking involved, that it’s all mindlessly rote memorization, programming. I just want to reach out and pull the string, even though I’ve heard the same “talk” thousands of times before. Of course it’s bad enough when women do the Chatty Cathy thing, but it’s really scary when “men” mindlessly recite the same nonsense.)

Pathetically, the US is the only English-speaking country in the world that has not been adult enough to recognize long ago that its boys are in Big Trouble and that the situation fully warrants very strong concerted effort, programs, campaigns and regulations at the national level to get things back into some decent equilibrium. All of those other countries were quick to copy civil rights laws enacted in the 1960s and 1970s by our Greatest Generation, and they still actually try to live up to those laws. Just consider that Canada’s schools are far better than ours, yet over 60% of the population of Canada was born in another country! (No, you can NOT blame it on language; it is the teacher’s responsibility to overcome any difficulties of language. That’s why taxpayers fund them. “It’s your job!”) Every country in Europe, starting with Finland at the top, has multi-lingual schools enormously better than ours, even though they are all, just like we, now heavily dependent on Third World immigration and its future taxpayer children to keep themselves viable, to pay for their own burgeoning birthright entitlement benefits.

.

“The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” – Abraham Lincoln (making an observation that goes far in explaining why our government, now populated largely by ignorant, childish and self-serving idiots, both left and right, has become so incredibly dysfunctional and a real danger to all the world in which it exists).

.

Technology In Education

New technology drives economic growth, but this principle only works if education keeps pace with technology. And education critical to technology definitely does NOT begin at the college gates. Everyone accepts that college basketball stars need nurturing for many years before college, yet women absurdly think that physics stars can be magically created during their sophomore or junior year of college. (What kind of brain thinks like that?) When public education falls behind, many millions of workers don’t have the skills to do the jobs required for new technology. Throughout our history, American public education at all levels kept pace with technology — until the 1970s. This is when American women decided to re-engineer K-12 public education to meet their self-interested demands and refused to adjust those self-interests for the next forty years despite ever more glaring and inescapable evidence of gross inequities and failure. It’s been systematically undermining the entire nation ever since.

Now we even have the totally absurd situation of American women and their lobbies whining about not having their “fair quota” of jobs in high tech companies that employ people with skills that not enough American women possess. Women employed by such companies today are less than a third of those employed in 1975 – when their rate was around 40%. A rational mind would conclude that women are “advancing” themselves in reverse. So, naturally, the reaction is to blame “someone else” – the companies for their “discriminatory” hiring practices. So what are the companies supposed to do? Hire women just to get the demanded quotas regardless of whether or not the women are qualified for the jobs? The whole argument is just asinine. (But it would not be a new approach.) “I have rights!; I do NOT have responsibilities!” “It’s not my fault if I don’t know how to think; it’s your fault for not hiring me!” The United States has been engaged in the stupid affirmative action quota nonsense for a half century, and the dismal results of this dictate are everywhere you look (including, shamefully, in our “foreign affairs” arena). All it’s really “accomplished” is instilling an asinine sense of “birthright entitlement” of the “special” people to simply make demands of everyone else. If you look closely at the work forces of those high tech companies, you’ll discover that most of their key male employees were schooled in foreign countries! Over 70% of the very well compensated engineers in Silicon Valley, for example, are foreign born. That’s a LOT of plum American jobs that are NOT going to Americans. This sort of absurdity would have been unthinkable in 1970 when the US was deeply involved in the quest to conquer space and place humans on the Moon. You just can’t get the required high tech qualifications by waving a magic wand after 16 years of pampered American schooling leading to a college degree in Women’s Studies or Medieval Art. Both genders, and society, have suffered just to meet the childish demands of women, beginning all the way back in the first grade.

It was just such self-serving absurdities that civil rights law was intended to preclude!

How many men are complaining about not having their “fair quotas” in industries now overwhelmingly dominated by women – such as the entire “child development” arena, dozens of fields of sociology, psychology, education and health – where women dominate with percentages over 85%? Women now also dominate in government and finance – that rely mostly on simply confiscating money from others (with zero risk, zero accountability). Men, and especially boys, don’t have lobbies, and American women are great at focusing attention on tiny places where they seem to be at some “disadvantage”, but women never allow a full discussion of the whole picture, or the reasons why. The result of such censorship is a totally twisted perversion of our entire sick society – that makes no sense.

In the early 1970s the mutual dependency between technology and education was broken. The result has been many millions of lower-skilled, lower-educated and low-paid workers and far fewer highly skilled, highly educated and high-paid workers – all creating ever rising income inequities. (See Footnote #5.) Worse, the American “highly educated” people are mostly in liberal arts and government services, services which do not contribute substantially to technological or economic growth – a grave imbalance for which the US now desperately tries to compensate with much better-educated foreign immigrants coming in and assuming positions at or near the top in higher education, research and business. But opportunities in America are steadily becoming less inviting to such people, who now can turn to a number of other more competitive and forward-looking societies to make their contribution, all while American society continues to drift in a self-involved morass with economic “growth” mostly driven by moving around other peoples’ inherited money as the American infrastructure decays around them. Any worthwhile education system, and most certainly one maintained by taxes on society’s members, MUST maximize learning environments for both genders equitably while also meeting the requirements of society’s survival, no matter how hard that is – for both teachers and students. The US education system accomplished this very well, up until the 1970s. Women have been offering arguments, excuses, censorship, rationales, blame-shifting, etc., ad nauseam now for decades about the blatant problems with our schools, while making zero forward motion on improving those schools, on making them live up to their mandate of providing quality educations to ALL of our children, equitably, as a matter of grave national security interest. As experience has shown, when it’s THEIR group on the line, American women can demand and implement very major changes in very short order to achieve what THEY want, simply by using the law and the courts as their battering ram. (See Footnote #6.)

(Another casualty in America’s public schools during the 1970s was to phase out the disciplined teaching of American Civics, the science of how and why our governmental system works. This is why today so few Americans have even a basic understanding of the democratic system that has been so beneficial to them throughout their entire lives, but which hasn’t accomplished anything worthwhile for the past forty years. It helps explain why most Americans’ view of America now borders on the childish, some sort of mythical utopia full of a million rights which “someone else” is responsible for ensuring for all the very “special” people simply for existing and taking up space from birth onward. Hint: No rights come in a society without corresponding responsibilities.)

Sports

In recent times all the Title IX emphasis has been on sports. Why? Because that’s all that’s left in “education” for women’s lobbies to complain about. (This is, of course, dependent on whether or not their latest whines about “sexual harassment” censorship gains enough legs to survive court challenge, assuming there’s an actual man left out there with enough spine to bring such a challenge to the “inalienable” Constitutional right of freedom of speech.) And even with sports they have always refused to look in the mirror. Women’s groups incessantly blame men for any “problems” they perceive in their own group, today and in the past, because that tactic fits much better into their “women as eternal victim” dogma. But in the US the simple truth is that it’s been mostly a case of overcoming women’s lack of interest in certain, usually competitive, endeavors, from basketball to math. As in all other endeavors, the chief problem women’s groups have had has not been with men; it’s been with other women. In the US, men have never “denied” women anything; they have always bowed to whatever women wanted, as soon as enough women decided just what it was that they wanted. (Some men did object, unsuccessfully, when women wanted to change employment rules to favor themselves at the expense of men.) (And, for the record, nor have American women ever been required to do anything.) So almost all of women’s group “wars” have been waged exclusively for the hearts and minds of other women; it’s just been more effective and self-serving if they claim that men are their “oppressors” so as to maintain that “victim” nonsense. Title IX in recent years has done much in overcoming women’s general lack of interest in competitive sports, and thereby generating more money and attention to meet that steadily growing interest. But it was never a case of women being “denied” participation in sports. (My own mother was a star basketball player in college – in 1940. She was also so good at math and analytical reasoning that she became a national-level cryptologist and senior division head for the “male-dominated” Defense Department’s National Security Agency long before “feminism” ever reared its ugly quota head.) It was always a case of not enough women being interested in competitive sports to make full blown programs worth the effort, especially since so few women who were not in the programs were even interested in supporting those women who were. So “feminists” in the early-199os turned to men to take the blame and assume the accountability under Title IX, a tried and true tactic elsewhere since the 1960s. (It was the familiar old “disparate impact” theory, the one that absolves one of personal responsibility, that requires “someone else” to ensure that the “special” people get whatever they want, that makes “someone else” responsible for the free choices women make, for their own elective behavior.)

If you tell the same lies often enough, even you end up actually believing the nonsense.

Under a late Title IX-based legal argument, huge amounts of funds were systematically drawn from successful men’s sports programs and invested in fledging women’s programs. (Extra profits generated by successful men’s college sports programs have long gone to their universities – in order to help reduce college costs for everyone.*) This huge influx of money enabled women’s groups to gradually generate more and more interest among women to participate in those programs – especially when the funds from men’s sports programs were used to pay women’s sports scholarships, all while men’s sports programs were reduced to meet the mandated quota “balance”. Women thus used money from men’s programs to build their own programs, while also successfully demanding that men’s programs be reduced under a numerical quota system that maintained the mandated Title IX “balance” – even taking away scholarships already won by men, most shamefully even on campuses where women students out-numbered men students by two-to-one! (How selfish, myopic and self-involved is it possible to get?) If more women entered women’s sports programs, then an equal number of men could be added to men’s programs; it was a classic case of screwing the other guy in order to cut him down to your level and forcing him to pay for it, too. The “evil oppressor” propaganda works much better on weak minds than the “uninterested women” truth. If you can take athletic scholarships away from men in order to achieve gender balance in sports, why can’t you take academic scholarships away from women in order to achieve gender balance in enrollment? If the scholarships involve government money, you can. (It should be noted here that all of the mechanisms that women’s lobbies used over the past half century to achieve their 50-50 “balanced” objectives constitute legal precedents; they are thus firmly established in American civil rights law and readily available for use by any other group seeking similar objectives in any similar arena. Equal rights, indeed, are a double-edged sword – IF they are equitably enforced.)

All of this was done in athletics, however, only after women’s groups for a quarter of a century had already successfully re-engineered all of American academic education to their desires – all under Title IX’s mandate for gender balance in every aspect of American education, no matter what that required, including, at the end, using funds generated by male athletics to boost female athletics. Today, of course, there is no mention of “balance” wherever women benefit far more than men, as they now do in all other aspects of American education. “Title IX is civil rights law just for “me”, and it only applies where “I” want it to apply, in order to favor “very special me”. And I do NOT have responsibility for anything beyond very special me.” This, of course, is both totally self-serving and completely absurd. (Some have described it as “the epitome of self-involved arrogant ugliness” – Narcissistic Personality Disorder.) Today I love watching the marvelous US women’s Olympic soccer team compete against the world’s best. (It still pains me that American women could not be bothered enough to support their own world class women’s soccer league with such global stars as Mia Hamm at the turn of this century. That magical Olympic team was for years America’s best ambassador throughout the Third World since our World War II G.I.s.) But when I recall the sordid history, the incredibly huge costs paid by men and, even much worse, being paid by American boys today – all because women weren’t interested in sports – I get a little sick, and ashamed of American women. I don’t blame today’s athletes; I blame their totally self-involved Baby Boomer mothers who keep their extremist hate groups runni