DD's school going co-ed - I'm really annoyed

[SomewhereOutThere]

Am I allowed to talk about a private school issue in FC? I know that can be polarising in and of itself, but my particular issue here is about something I feel strongly about as a feminist so I hope this is okay.

We heard yesterday that DD2's prep school is going fully co-ed. (Currently there are a small number of boys up to year 2, a relatively recent change which came alongside an assurance that the school would be staying single sex to 11.) It won't directly affect DD's lessons - boys are being phased in so her year group will remain all girls until she leaves in 3 years. (Though there will be younger boys in her playground which will change the atmosphere I suspect.)

But I'm annoyed that:

• There was no consultation with existing parents or (seemingly) staff, who were surprised.
• A four page booklet about the change continually refers to adding extra facilities to be able to absorb two 'genders'.
• The four page booklet also explains that staff will get extra training to refresh their prior experience/training in teaching co-ed to encompass 'the different ways in which girls and boys learn and their differing interests, strengths and weaknesses'. Makes me feel like there will be lots of the 'boys like science/girls like stories' bollocks which is bad for girls and boys.
• Most of all, in the whole 4 pages the fact that many girls learn better in an all girl environment, and are more likely to pursue STEM subjects, is not addressed! Nor is the fact that there will now be 3 co-ed prep schools in the town the school is in, an all boys school, and no all-girls school.

We chose this school back when my elder daughter was a toddler because I wanted an all girl environment. DD1 was able to be her zany self at this school - she's maths mad and that was massively encouraged, as was sport - she got into one there that she now plays at a county level. She moved on to an all girls senior school in a nearby city brimming with confidence and loves being just with girls. It makes me sad that the governors don't seem to give any weight to the fact that for over 100 years this school has offered that to girls.

Oh, and as they say themselves, they have an all time high of pupils enrolled. So they are 'doing it from a position of strength'. So I have no idea - despite the 4 pages - why they feel it necessary. Something about the needs of our future demographic after engaging consultants to research the strategic future. It must be right then, since a consultant says so. Nice to know that's what fees have been being spent on. (I say that knowing all about consultancy bullshitting to justify a high fee, since I work in a similar field myself!)

I feel like moving DD2 into the nearby city, since it is clear the new (male) chair of governors at her school doesn't believe in and support the importance of an all-girl education, which is my primary reason for paying private school fees. I've contacted the girl's schools this morning. But it'll mean a massively long journey for her on public transport, and might just be too disruptive at this stage - something the school is counting on, I suspect. Gah!

Somewhere I'm just saying that the black diaspora are clearly socio-economically disadvantaged and discriminated against. If you go to the Southern States that is evident. There are more black men in prison in the US than in college.

I am not seeing that kind of socioeconomic female disadvantage in evidence. It isn't comparable.

I've reported Qwerty's post about black people living in prisons and ghettoes. Disgusting comment.

Where are you looking querty? I can think of many places world wide where that's the case for girls/women.

I think male privilege in the sense it's being used here is the idea that we should all defer to your superior opinion and arguments and focus on what you personally wish to talk about even though it's a derail, on a board intended for women to talk about issues which affect women, based on their lived experience of being women. Without any understanding or acknowledgement that you don't really know what being a woman is like because many of those issues don't affect you. Which is a trait observed more in men.

Well, if you have that is on the basis of a reprehensible interpretation. Clumsy as it was, my comment in way suggested that it was right that lots of black people live in ghettoes and are in prison - but that lots of them are. Completely unjustly because they are discriminated against minority.

That is out of order and you know it.

venusinscorpio I see your point. However, in this case the issue single sex schools clearly does affect boys.

Sorry if this got heated everybody. My bad.

It's really not. You said the majority of black people live in ghettoes or in prisons. It's a pretty clear statement. It's incredibly clumsy wording if it was accidental.

Where are you looking querty? I can think of many places world wide where that's the case for girls/women.

In Saudi Arabia or Syria, yes of course. I agree.

You said the majority of black people live in ghettoes or in prisons.

What a crock of shit. Is this the twilight zone.

Querty, everyone on here is telling you you're behaving like a bell end. Does this send a clear message?

It was VERY clumsy wording I admit. I should not have used the word majority.

I just meant if you go to LA then it is evident that very many black people live in poverty. And I meant that it is wrong that they do of course.

My apologies SpeakNoWords. I got carried away.

thedancingbear I typed without thinking and it was a stupid comment. It should have been clear within the context of my overall comment that I really meant the black community in Western nations are unjustly disadvantaged.

So are women.

The fact that you don't see it notwithstanding. The point of privilege is that you don't see it as it doesn't affect you, as a man. It's not a value judgement, it's a class analysis.

Why should it be clear what you meant? You're assuming we know you're not racist when we know nothing about you.

this is from a presumably biased website, but the research cited indicates that single sex may be better (at least in terms of educational outcome) for both sexes.

So are women.

I don't think they are economically disadvantaged anymore. I certainly think a young middle-class women has better prospects than anyone. She will statistically do better at university, be less likely to be unemployed and less likely to be homeless than men.

Of course women are disadvantaged world wide in all sorts of ways. And they're disadvantaged culturally in the West in all sorts of diffuse ways - in how they're sexualised by the media etc. But are Western women at a particular economic disadvantage? I'm not so sure.

Anyway I'm obvs pissing people off and this has started far from single sex schools. That is partly my fault. I'm off.

Why should it be clear what you meant? You're assuming we know you're not racist when we know nothing about you.

Fair point. Sorry.

Who said it was about economic disadvantage necessarily? That's the spin you personally have put on it. The only person talking about that is you.

And I don't necessarily agree with you but it's a derail, so here is not the place.

What other kind of disadvantage is there?

When it comes down to it, power is all about economics. Everything is about economics - even our sexualities. It's all about units of currency, and who controls those.

You've just said in your own post that there are other types of disadvantage as well as economic. Picking up a dictionary would tell you that. But I am feeding you now, I realise. Cheery bye!

That's one way of looking at it. There are others.

Aargh! I'm sorry about my part in the derail OP!