To feel unhappy about school giving ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ prizes

[olympicsrock]

A friend posted a proud mum picture yesterday of her son and daughter who attend a mixed secondary school. They have each won school prizes. Initially I thought great but then read that they were the ‘Biology prize for Year X girl’ , ‘French prize for year X Boy’ and ‘ overall academic achievement for year X boy’. I could understand if these were sports prizes but why do they have to have equal numbers of prizes won by girls and boys? Doesn’t this downplay the achievements? I felt very uncomfortable about this. Do others?

The reason that girl and boy catagories are needed is because otherwise the girls would get overlooked. And yes it’s 2018. And yes I work in education.

Don’t girls generally outperform boys?

yep, and yet in my experience, if there's a 'glory' position to be had, a boy is picked. If there's a 'hard work' position to be had, then it goes to a girl.

Sexism runs deep, this forces both boys and girls to be represented. If they were giving out barbie dolls and footballs as the prizes then I would have an issue, but having boys and girls categories, when we know that there are unconscious biases against girls, I think is fine.

pressuredrop Brilliant but idle should be passed over! Why would we want to reward laziness? What a waste of natural talent; children should be forced encouraged and taught to make the most of their abilities

So would the brilliant be awarded say, academic attainment, and the others for effort?

Boys and girls are separated in Sports at school as there is scientific evidence that the boys will outperform the girls. Why should this not be the same in areas where it’s been proven that the girls generally outperform the boys?

I can’t get worked up over something like this. Would only bother me if the prize was gender specific.

(Does anyone remember the thread about the boy and girl prize winners where the girl picked the Spider-Man raffle prize and the boys mum went apeshit as her son didn’t want the Disney princess one that was left?)

Just to clarify , I just clicked ‘like’ as I am pleased for my friend. This is just a theoretical conservation as interested what others think.

Conversation even!

Have you seen what happens when they do away with sex categories?

It's just a way of ensuring that boys and girls are pretty equally represented in the prize-giving. Otherwise you'd be bound to get parents whinging that the prize-winners were predominantly boys, or predominantly girls.

My dc's secondary school only gives out prizes for non-academic things, like sport and service to the school etc. I think academic prizes are pretty meaningless unless you genuinely base them on achievement rather than effort.

I do wonder if it is because girls tend to outperform boys in school. In my school, the girls would have nabbed all the top prizes—I would have been surprised if the top prizes would have been won by any of the boys at all, even maths or science. We were outliers in the school (other years would not have been quite so unbalanced) but I can see some sort of sense for equalizing the prizes but would think it’s more for the boys than girls in all honesty.

Have you seen what happens when they do away with sex categories?

No. What?

@tyredmama

I asked you to prove your assertion that sex / gender (you seem confused, but then you do feel the need to use the term "CIS" so you're clearly a little slow) has no effect on academic attainment. You've ignored that. Is the proof on its way?

I'm not sure what you mean by "great googling"? I'm an academic. I support students in their PhDs. I don't need help to find flaws in pop science stories.

What "must be genetic"? Aptitudes for different subjects? Yes, I think so. It's arrogance to think that humans are the animals which buck the trend and it's an insult to Occam's Razor to think that with the multitude of differences between men and women, including physical brain structure and differences in brain function from half-way through gestation, societal pressures are the greatest influence in differences in the sexes. We're different. We have our strengths and weaknesses. Men are stronger, faster, taller, have better metabolisms, respond better in short bursts of stress, have different eyes, muscles, bones, joints, brains, skin, hearing, smell, hair, responses to chemicals in the body, balance of white and red blood cells ... a massive list. We are different. It is absolute stupidity to think otherwise and to think that with these differences there won't be difference in attainment.

We're animals. We eat, fuck and die. We have evolved to be best at eating and fucking and least bad at dying. There's no higher purpose. No fairness. No equality of outcome. Sometimes empathy can benefit the herd. Usually it doesn't.

We're animals. We eat, fuck and die. We have evolved to be best at eating and fucking and least bad at dying. There's no higher purpose. No fairness. No equality of outcome. Sometimes empathy can benefit the herd. Usually it doesn't

How do you see pensions working out in this scenario?

Jesus wept. I despair. Some people really do have to find a problem in everything.

Sorry wrong thread. Thought I was on on the Jordan Peterson one. Hang on....

@gunnyBear

Thanks for that. Calling people slow and using offensive language isn't for me though.

I'll have a discussion, not a fight.

@tyredmama

Where was I offensive? "Slow"? Give over. Many of us find "CIS" offensive though.

I asked to you prove your assertion. I'll wait or should I give up as you can't and you'd rather find something to take offense at than admit you're speaking nonsense.

@echt

"How do you see pensions working out in this scenario?"

It's a little empathy which many animals display where the state supports people. Also, pensions are us not dying - one of the three things we (living organisms) all strive for.

It's also to do with ensuring the passing on of your genes even if a generation or two down the line. DH and I are lucky enough to have earnt and invested money so that our children and grand children benefit. They'll attend / have attended schools which give them a boost in life, they can access better health care, better food etc. It's not surprising that wealthier people live longer (especially after multiple generations of wealth) and are healthier, taller and often better developed due to pediatric nutrition.

As a direct example, our son would likely have died if we couldn't afford private health care. The treatment he needed as a 10 year old wasn't available on the NHS. He's now in his 30s.