DS8 feels hard done by as a male..

Although - anecdotally I have noticed some real correlation with young kids who spend a lot of time gaming and reading issues, and the gaming group is very male dominated.

Do I think boys are "done down" in education? It's not a phrase I've ever used. Well, they aren't achieving at the same levels, and they are certainly disciplined and expelled more often at school. Would you say, if the situation were reversed, that girls were "done down"?

I would say that changes in education have strongly favoured girls in a few ways - pushing academics down to younger years, and certain changes in classroom management being the big ones at lower levels. All the evidence is that lack of educational achievement in girls compared to boys is not really the kind of issue it once was.

Given that the world to an eight year old boy is the school in many ways it's not a surprising observation.

"The bbc documentary "No more boys and girls" is good for showing how stereotypes harm both boys and girls."

Another vote for this, of you can find it. It's a great programme - Dr Javid Abdelmoneim goes into a primary school and changes everything. It's quite radical, but he's such a charmer that it all works. And he does it properly, testing the kids before and after to find what effect it's had.

I think you could watch it with your son and it would really highlight for him the way that boys and girls are treated differently even in areas where they're the same (for example they're physically quite equal until puberty - a girl is the strongest person in the class) and where they have different abilities because they've been told they have; or because they've had different toys to play with.

It's also very clear about how the boys are disadvantaged by not being able to do the craft things that are thought 'girly' and by not being able to express emotion. Really worth tracking down.

I was amazed by how much my kids understood this stuff even at quite a young age. One thing I did a lot was comment on stereotypes in films and ads and things – for example in LOTR I don't think we ever see Liv Ullmann's character not either crying, about to cry, or mopping away tears, except when the soft focus is too hazy to tell... I think his idea that men are shown to be stupid may be from the kind of ad where women roll their eyes at male incompetence.

But I think it is tough for gentler boys who'd really prefer to be with the girls.

Just to get to the crux of it- is your view that boys are done down, as it were, in education and society, and girls are generally favoured?

You're sure then that socialisation/ expectations around behaviour and achievement make no difference?

I think that the implication has been pretty clear in several posts that the reason boys get into trouble more often is because they are not behaving, when they could. And I've heard people say this explicitly more than once.

It drives me a little crazy that there is so much ideological attachment to the idea that there are no developmental differences by sex that people resort to the idea that little kids are just acting out on a widespread basis, and failing to do well, and there is very little questioning of that.

It is true that white working class boys have the worst outcomes, but there are gaps and differences in boys and girls generally as well. Probably one of the reasons is that parents with more resources are more likely to be able to compensate for what's lacking in the educational system - if you look at children that go into private reading tutoring in primary education, it's very much dominated by 10 to 12 year old boys.

Interestingly, if you look at home educated children, there is no gap in things like reading for pleasure between boys and girls at age 12, which you do see in schools. But many parents of kids that are home educated will tell you that their boys were later readers, sometimes substantially - the difference is they can afford to wait and not try and force the issue.

I have never said that boys don't try hard enough and I don't think anyone else has but you've mentioned it a couple of times now I think, why does that come to your mind?

The lowest attaining group is white working class boys I think? The difference between attainment between different groups of boys must surely be social rather than innate?

Also it's not a simple picture. Boys and girls both have different challenges.

I read recently that around puberty boys confidence takes off while girls plummets.

All children should be supported to do the best they can, in an ideal world.

In general i think children start school too young here.

Not sure why that video attached again? Oh well.

Similarly more boys are dyslexic which is not because they are treated differently or not trying hard enough.

Boys and girls end up in more or less the same place but they don't get there the same way and that's not all that controversial in education. (Nor is it particularly controversial to think this is true in the relevant sciences)

It isn't even all that notable in schools if they accept more variation in terms of school reediness and expectations around reading - in many countries children start school later which makes a big difference. Expectations around this stuff have really changed over the years with kids spending a lot more time in institutions, things like after-school care, and starting academic learning earlier, and less time in outdoor activity, physical activity generally, and free play.

If anyone said, oh, girls are getting in trouble for acting out, and the reason is they are being encouraged to act out and people think it is ok, I am pretty sure people would jump all over it.

He's 8. I remember being that age thinking "boys are better than girls". It changed pretty quickly in the following 2 or 3 years.

First, I misread and thought you had 8 sons

That said, if they were all like my one, that would be sweet.
I know what you mean. Ours is a kind, gentle soul (as is our daughter) and I have on occasion been frustrated over the years at the general “boys will be boys” perception.

In the end, though, character will out and as he gets older he will become appreciated for who he is.

The whole point is that it's nigh on impossible to tell if loads of things are nature or nurture. Or a mix.

It's never a good idea to dismiss ideas out of hand.

Boys used to be the ones who went to school and sat and did their work in rows.

I watched a thing on the news the other night about a school in Syria, I think it was. Zero kids dicking around.

Etc etc

The principals office?

Is that a Scottish thing? I know they have a different school system.

There's a BBC clip showing the difference in how people treat babies depending on their sex.

Only 3 mins to watch

The boys not reading thing is not because they are somehow not capable etc. It's to do with really unhelpful ideas about what boys ought to be doing and what is a bit crap.

Remember as well the whole education and exam structure was designed for boys in the first place.

This is one of those areas where the claim that there are no male/female behavioural differences on a group level mean people cling to these kinds of explanations that are simply false. As a group, boys and girls have developmental differences from fairly early on. The ability to read develops in girls earlier for example, so there is a significant gap in early reading achievement with boys and girls in the early years, which continues to have effects down the road. And boys are typically more active and slower to develop the ability to sit still and focus in the early years.

So you get boys being perfectly developmentally normal who are always getting in trouble, and struggling with their work, mainly because the schools try and push them to sit and do work in a way that's not appropriate too early on. It affects some girls as well, but in terms of cohorts or classes it disadvantages boys.

Sometimes you see a similar problem at adolescence where girls develop earlier, and that includes some brain development - they start making abstract leaps before many boys are quite ready. It's less of an issue though because typically that age group are given school work that is less advanced than they could handle.

I don't understand why people are so set on dismissing these kinds of quite well documented differences. Go to any reading recovery type program, they are dominated by boys who can't quite keep up. It's not because they are allowed to screw around while girls get told to read quietly.

"Fathers", "male partners" , "husbands" ?

I don't see the need to add the twee "expectant"

That was me. I used "expectant fathers" for men who are not yet fathers (although some may have been, if this was not their first baby) but who are expecting to take on that role. That’s who I am interested in, in this context. “Male partner" or "husband" isn’t as specific and seems less relevant to me because it is about the relationship to the mother and not to the fetus. I’m also very conscious of anti-abortion contexts (it's still 100% illegal here in Malta), so I routinely avoid calling someone an unqualified “father” (or mother) before the child is born. There are also “fathers” who have nothing to do with the pregnancy or the baby, and those aren’t the people I meant either.

I don't think that "expectant" is biological and therefore intruding on the terrain of women (like "we are pregnant"). I’m happy to be corrected if I’m using sexist or antifeminist language, but I’m not convinced that there is a consensus against “expectant fathers” here. Perhaps terms have different connotations in different countries/areas. Possibly that should be a separate thread, if anyone cares enough, because it’s tangential to what ZigZagInToTheBeach asked.

You did answer my original question, MissBarbary. Thank you.

He probably doesn’t even want to go to Brownies. He’s just pointing out a group that only accepts girls, and won’t allow boys.

"Fathers", "male partners" , "husbands" ?

I don't see the need to add the twee "expectant"

But we’re not talking about ‘fathers’, ‘male partners’ or ‘husbands’.

We’re specifically talking about men who are about to become fathers, because their partner is pregnant - hence, ‘expectant fathers’. It’s just short-hand to describe men in that particular situation, and nothing like ‘we are pregnant’.

And I still very much maintain that most women would like at least one girl, and most men would like at least one boy.

The trans issue is a big one. But a throw away moan about it is not at all relevant to this OP and it’s making this board far less effective as a feminist forum.

If he wanted to go to Brownie's and said he was a girl today they'd probably take him - so very relevant to his issue. Is no-one on this thread actually a parent, most parents know this already.

And actually if he put on a dress and said he felt like a girl today they'd probably accept him - you could ask if he'd like to do that and if he says no ask why not.

Why would the OP even ask that of her DS? It's got nothing to do with his issue!

The Scouts equivalent of Brownies would be Beavers www.scouts.org.uk/ For obvious reasons they are unlikely be running now but you can contact the movement to find out if there is a group in your area. If not you can explain to him how busy most adults are these days and how difficult it is to find people to run such groups.

And actually if he put on a dress and said he felt like a girl today they'd probably accept him - you could ask if he'd like to do that and if he says no ask why not.

I'm actually amazed no-one else has pointed that out.

If he wants a boys only group could you look for a local Boys Brigade?

This is a great thread (I have an 8 yr old boy) but I question the practicality of some of these suggestions. I could leave a copy of Invisible Women lying around for a month and my son would not think to pick it up and read it. He might ask me what it is about, particularly if he saw me reading it, but he wouldn’t read it himself.

It isn’t also really important to address the conversation from his point of view. Any implication that structural issues need rebalancing and therefore girls need girls only clubs is not really going to win him round.

I would suggest that one way to go about it is to agree with some points. You are far more likely to come round to another viewpoint if you see the other person agrees with some things you think.

It is unfair that girls have Brownies and there is no boys only group now. But once you understand the historical reasons - no girls allowed in Scouts and then that changes much later - it is easier to understand. It would not be fair to insist Brownies let in boys just to ‘make it fair’.

Also - what does he want. He can’t join a girls group because then he wouldn’t be a girls group. There is a mixed group that he can join. Does he want a boys only club? Try to show him the best way is for everyone to have a choice, rather than everyone to have no choice. Sympathise that he feels he doesn’t have a choice.

I'd be very confused if I had a little boy and someone asked me if I would have preferred a girl!

"Confused" was the least of it.

I don't see the need to add the twee "expectant"