Good points, Nick. The Marxist environment in colleges is tailor-made for anyone who isn't a Christian White male. Every single class, be it psychology or calculus exists to indoctrinate all people groups that the Christian White male is responsible for all the hell that you and people before you have ever gone through. So, of course women are going to outperform men. Colleges are all about convincing them that they're equal to men. And they're all about convincing everybody else that they're equal to everybody else. So how is the lie perpetuated? By leveling the playing field of course. Any woman is going to excel in college with idiotic and Satanic feminist goddess poetry classes and "How Christian White Males Destroyed Civilization" classes. Are those classes for mainstream college-bound men? Of course not. And even the less extreme classes are full of Marxist indoctrination and guilt trips. No young man wants to pay for 15 units to be told all day long in one form or another ( and he'll get the message loud and clear) that he's a cancer in society (Susan Sontag's words) and that everything horrible in the world is his fault.
42 comments
I'm so glad that we could speak to an expert on the subject of college's many problems. You must've spent years upon years in a college studying this awful problems. What? You're speaking out of your ass? Wow, I never would've guessed...
Oh and btw, your comment on poetry is a tv sitcom stereotype. They like to imply that colleges are full of poetry loving women who want to drag their boyfriends into that world. In the real world poetry classes are mainly there on the side for English majors. You might know this if you got up off the couch every now and then and didn't say everything that you couldn't do was stupid.
This message brought to you by, Man in a Bubble, see the world through the narrow eyes of a paranoid schizophrenic misogynist! He only knows what TV tells him, but he's passionate about it!
Hm... I'm a physics student and on my first year, I had 10h of math a week. 2nd year 5h of math a week and 6h of psychology (and alike) a week. 3rd year, no math (but helluva lot of physics) and 7h of psychology a week. This year, 6h of psychology a week.
I don't... even ONCE... remember hearing ANYTHING remotely similar to this.
And if it makes any difference, I was the first generation that didn't have marxism as obligatory in high school. And yet, none of my older friends heard about this, either.
Colleges are all about convincing them that they're equal to men. And they're all about convincing everybody else that they're equal to everybody else. So how is the lie perpetuated?
The lie that women and men are equal. Yeah, buddy, great.
And come on, do you seriously believe that fucking calculus courses constantly digress into christian white male bashing? 9_9
I also love how shit that they perceive as "white male bashing" is... um, historical facts. Like, why bring up that Christopher Columbus was a genocidal slaver? Do you hate America or something?
*Women are outpreforming men because the playing field is leveled?
Just to play devil's advocate: no, the field isn't levelled. Women and minorities get additional access to aid from not only the government but also at the colleges themselves. In addition, even though the legality is in question some schools will actually place women and minorities higher up on the recruitment list; in a particularly egregious case, it was discovered that a college was curving entrance exam scores for any student who was black.
Plus, in regards to Title IX a number of colleges have decided that it's cheaper and easier to delete men's athletic teams than it is to fund additional women's athletic teams as the Title requires. Cutting teams = cutting athletic scholarships.
I was an English Literature major in college, and I took poetry classes. I don't remember any Satanic feminist goddess poetry: most of the poets we studied were men. Several of my fellow poetry students were also men. And they didn't seem to feel threatened as Christian White Males: our reading list was WAY too long to waste time fretting over Marxist feminist indoctrination.
I recognize this syndrome. He took an English Literature course and a Physics course, with female professors, and flunked both. To him, the failures were due to feminsists, not his own limited, warped world-view. Get over it, asshole.
@Skyfire
Plus, in regards to Title IX a number of colleges have decided that it's cheaper and easier to delete men's athletic teams than it is to fund additional women's athletic teams as the Title requires. Cutting teams = cutting athletic scholarships.
Please explain why athletics scholarships are good? Aren't they fraudulent ring-ins and systematic cheating? There is no need for a collegiate competition to be the 2nd tier to the National franchises. The fact you can purchase a qualification (but not an education) is yet another blight on society. Anyway, that wasn't the point...
Why is treating men and women equally, bad? And why did you give this example to say the playing field is tilted in women's favour when clearly it shows it is not level and they are trying to address it - and still have a very long way to go.
Skyfire #55995
<< Plus, in regards to Title IX a number of colleges have decided that it's cheaper and easier to delete men's athletic teams than it is to fund additional women's athletic teams as the Title requires. Cutting teams = cutting athletic scholarships. >>
Skyfire, the other stuff you mentioned sounds pretty appalling, but personally I think that this development (dropping athletic programs) is almost 100% positive. Schools should be for learning, not for sports programs; unfortunately, in too many cases, sports become king, usurping the place that should be reserved for academics.
If you want to talk about corruption in schools, athletic programs are infamous for it -- teachers being forced to pass players who do nothing in class so that the students can keep playing (and then getting fired if they don't), under-the-table cash deals and "gifts" of cars and such to recruit athletes to the school, and so on. I have seen multiple examples of both of these in the news and personally (or just once removed) I'm not saying that it is either constant or universal, but it is depressingly common and frequent. When's the last time you ever heard about this happening to somebody getting an oboe scholarship or a grant to study chemistry? And that's to prepare a student for a career that can last a lifetime, rather than just a few years (IF he can even get into the few slots available at all!). So if equal treatment means no athletic programs for either men or women, that sounds like a school I would gladly attend.
Regarding the original post here, this is a painfully misogynistic rant against a caricature of academia that does not exist in reality. It's also self-contradictory. (Is the playing field level, or is it slanted in favor of women? You can't have it both ways.) Sure, there a few courses at some universities that are biased in favor of women, some egregiously, since there are a few professors with an axe to grind -- but they get their share of academic criticism for it. And please note the distinction between "a few classes by a few professors" and ALL CLASSES IN ALL COLLEGES. Someone here is using a skyscraper-sized brush.
~David D.G.
*Please explain why athletics scholarships are good?
It gives people another way into college.
*Why is treating men and women equally, bad?
They aren't being treated equally.
What's going on is that many institutions have so twisted Affirmative Action and other such programs around that instead of leveling the field it's actually providing an unfair boost to women and minorities.
What I want to see is a situation in which race and gender play no part at all in admissions and scholarships.
Sure, there a few courses at some universities that are biased in favor of women, some egregiously, since there are a few professors with an axe to grind -- but they get their share of academic criticism for it.
I'm not exactly sure what this means, but as a woman who went to college for a very long time (too long) I can tell you that I spent a LOT more of that time studying men than women. And someone puts out a class on Women's History or something and people are all OHMYGODTHATISSOBIASED!!1! (not saying that about you, David).
And I love how the fundie quotes Susan Sontag (a person to whom college students probably would only be exposed in a specialized course) but no Aristotle, Augustine, Freud, etc., etc., etc., from the Western canon college students read over and over, all with horribly nasty things to say about women.
For the record, my world lit surveys always include at least the Poetics and Civilization and Its Discontents. I feel like a survey should be a real survey, and there is much to learn from those men. I also include people like Christine de Pizan. I'm just saying it's stupid to get all worked up over "feminism" in college when misogyny is so prevalent in the canonized readings.
"Please explain why athletics scholarships are good?"
while giving student athletes easier grades is appaling, a big reason for athletic scholarships and big sports programs is the money it brings in. If letting a few amazing football players with a mediocre intelligence into the school brings in funding in the form of higher attendance at games and national coverage of gamest that can be used for research and providing academic scholarships to deserving students, then so be it.
Skyfire
What I want to see is a situation in which race and gender play no part at all in admissions and scholarships.
So would I. Unfortunately, it plays a roll in education from kindergarten on up, so until the general bias goes away, I'm comfortable with Affirmative Action. Solve the problem at its root, and correction won't be needed higher up.
Shell #56088
<< "Sure, there a few courses at some universities that are biased in favor of women, some egregiously, since there are a few professors with an axe to grind -- but they get their share of academic criticism for it."
I'm not exactly sure what this means, but as a woman who went to college for a very long time (too long) I can tell you that I spent a LOT more of that time studying men than women. And someone puts out a class on Women's History or something and people are all OHMYGODTHATISSOBIASED!!1! (not saying that about you, David).
And I love how the fundie quotes Susan Sontag (a person to whom college students probably would only be exposed in a specialized course) but no Aristotle, Augustine, Freud, etc., etc., etc., from the Western canon college students read over and over, all with horribly nasty things to say about women.
For the record, my world lit surveys always include at least the Poetics and Civilization and Its Discontents. I feel like a survey should be a real survey, and there is much to learn from those men. I also include people like Christine de Pizan. I'm just saying it's stupid to get all worked up over "feminism" in college when misogyny is so prevalent in the canonized readings. >>
Shell, thanks for not putting me in the same ballpark with this person. For the record, I freely admit that the only reason men are so prevalent in the coverage of Things That Have Been Done (in pretty much every field) is that for a very long time, men (A) prevented women from doing much of anything to contribute to society in ways that shaped it directly, and (B) found ways to suppress or belittle much that a few of them did manage to do.
I certainly have no problem with courses giving women their due; but I have read of a few of them that go a bit overboard in their search for contributions by women (i.e., by exaggerating the importance of some contributions -- though, no, I cannot name a specific one at this time, since it was years ago that I read of these).
I think that political correctness and reality are both best served by recognizing contributions regardless of who made them, and then by pointedly stating that men's unilateral control of society for centuries is the reason that the number of women is smaller.
~David D.G.
Why didn't my college offer "How Christian White Males Destroyed Civilization" uber lesbian feminist poetry classes, damnit?! Stupid pretend liberal arts school, without its REAL lib arts classes.
Don't they still teach Freud in many Psych classes? Alrighty then.
Maybe girls are just smarter that you, Stranger :D
Men are responsible for the ills of the world. Women are just as responsible because they still believe the myth that a man will take care of them. That they live to please men. Until women wake up and learn to take care of themselves, then say no to the bad behavior of men, nothing will change. As for colleges being Marxist enclaves, so what, the pendulum swings constantly. Adapt or become obsolete.
*raises her hand* Not that this says great things about me, but I flunked two Womens' Studies courses and aced a Christian Religion college-level course during my first year of college. Level playing field, my arse - we girls can be just as stupid as you boys, thank you very much. o.O
Also, I'm officially blaming you for Katrina, Pompeii, and the continuing existance of spiders in my bedroom; NOW you can feel like you're being told horrible things are your fault.
Calculus? I can understand philosophy, biology, and maybe even psych (he's wrong, but it's not insane-wrong), but CALCULUS as a tool of the devil?
I'm going to guess this guy has never set foot on a college campus, much less attended a single class there. No one who actually does so could possibly believe a word this guy has said. (Okay, maybe if you happen to get one of the bad profs, but the odds of managing to get nothing but bad profs in a full-time semester are pretty lousy.)
I find it very funny that in a society which grants overblown priviledges to a certain group with no reason, the withdrawal of them is considered "persecution". Has human kind done enough for all the harm done to women and minorities?, if the answer is no, this guy is selfish and a little self-absorved.
Because heaven forbid any of us feel some sense of responsibility and remorse for the things we've done wrong. Part of making mistakes is LEARNING from them, idiot.
"Memory says, 'I did that.' Pride says, 'I could not have done that.' Eventually, Memory wins."
There are no Marxists in 90% of colleges and universities. You just choose to believe that because they teach facts.
Also, psychology really doesn't work like that.
@ LibKitten:
Most of what Freud wrote has been debunked by further research. He's mostly taught for historical perspective these days.
My mother went to college. My sister went to college. I went to college. My daughter went to college. Not a poetry major among us. (Education / government / chemistry / geology respectively.) And every one of us married a man with a college degree.
Sorry you didn't make the cut.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.