Sexism in Schools: Separate but Equal?
In 1892, Horner Plessy, a "colored" shoemaker, was locked up in jail for sitting in the "White" car of the East Louisiana Railroad. With a series of failed appeals, the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896 established that the principle "separate but equal" was legally valid in the United States of America.
It wasn't until 1952, over half a century later in Brown v. Board of Education, that the court finally decided that separate but equal was inheritantly inequal.
Now, with a twist it's happening all over again, only this time in reverse. It's been decided that "separate but equal" is fair, only this time it's not "white" v. "colored," it's "boys" vs. "girls." Public schools can now receive federal funding for same-sex classes, and even same-sex schools. It's not just for physical and sexual education anymore.
Is this a wise policy decision, or just sexism?
You can read the story, which Danacasso pointed out to us, at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070125/ap_on_re_us/same_sex_schools
Comments
Any public school student in America knows this isn't equal. PE classes are segregated by sex, as have sports programs. It's no great secret that boys consistently get a whole lot more funding than girls. While girls are getting more than they used to, boys still get more.
Isn't it ironic that this separation is supported by many fundamental conservatives? Haven't they read any reports that show same-sex schools make it much more likely students will engage in gay and lesbian sex? This might be a boon to social acceptance of homosexuality!
Check out Teacher barred for anatomy lesson at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070127/ap_on_re_us/anatomy_lesson_3
For a cop's lesson on justice and anatomy, making a 16 year old girl do jumping jacks topless, go to http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070129/od_nm/topless_dc;_ylt=AmOysOo9qVgSPOfIc16UOT.hOrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4cmUwbnA1BHNlYwMxNzAy
Posted by: Max Attack | January 30, 2007 04:40 AM
Its just sexism! Girls always get shorted. And how are they supposed to relate to boys if they can't learn with them?
I think the teacher being barred because he's teaching anatomy is just silly.
But a cop made a topless teen girl do jumping jacks or he'd arrest her? And then he just got probation?
Posted by: Lorien Loveshade | February 1, 2007 04:20 AM
This is how these programs work in schools. Some really great teachers come up with something new, and it works great because they're great teachers. They teach other teachers how it works.
Then within 2 or 3 years, those teachers retire, move, go to a different grade, etc. Someone else comes in who's had NO TRAINING in the system (sometimes not even a real teacher, but an aide), and after several years of this, reports show that it's not working. Then some other great teachers come up with something new, etc.
Posted by: Gina Johnson | February 1, 2007 07:15 PM
I'm a teacher in a public school. Yes I'm a survivor! lol
I worked for two years in a private all-girl's school. The girls there acted respectful most of the time, but were MONSTERS when your back was turned. And three girls got pregnant who learned nothing about boys? Single-sex classrooms are NOT the answer.
And Gina is totally right. Sometimes we have to teach things we were never taught! Education gets lots of funding, but I can tell you, it doesn't go to the teachers or the classroom! We can't even get current textbooks!
Posted by: Alice Mayfield | February 3, 2007 06:40 AM
I'm sorry but you are so WRONG! Boys are nothing but trouble and a girl CANNOT study with boys in the class!
Posted by: Blond Britney | February 4, 2007 06:11 AM
And us boys can't study with blond britneys in the class. Unless we study you!
Posted by: Rev. Ivan Betor Stang | February 5, 2007 06:17 PM
We had America to beat the s*** out of us, as we separate the Jews from the rest of the mankind... (Oh... we did'nt say that they're equal!)
Who's gonna beat the s*** out of your government... (for many reasons... hee hee) muahaha we're all doomed. (We not really put many hope in you, fat lapped americans!)
But i like the idea of girlschools. Maybe i had something learned in school, if there were no girls to dissipate my attention. And i could be a good citizien now... do you know our chancellor? lol... maybe it's better this way.
(Sorry we censored the "s-word" here, which has a long etymological history and was originally a fully accepted word. But as stated in our policy for this board at http://loveshade.org/blog/2006/08/how_to_post_on_our_site.html , we want to keep this blog appropriate for a general audience (in American film terms, G to PC-13). Thanks for your comment!)
Posted by: Askar | February 7, 2007 03:31 PM
It's all about saying all girls are this way and all boys are that way. So we have to keep them separate. What about girls and boys who are stereotypes? I think it's sexism.
Posted by: Binky The WonderSkull | February 8, 2007 03:58 PM
Separate is never equal.
Posted by: Bob Green | February 14, 2007 05:48 PM
Hey,
I love what you'e doing!
Don't ever change and best of luck.
Raymon W.
Posted by: RaymonWazerri | April 21, 2007 12:33 AM
Hello. If you don't know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else. If the sexes are send to different directions they will not find each other. This is not the way. Bring them together.
Posted by: Troy from Singapore | September 13, 2009 08:39 AM