My late sister-in-law, a teacher, used to brag to me that the only reason she took graduate courses in education was to get paid more. She said the courses were ridiculous bull***.

I've had 4 friends or relatives that had or have Ph.D's and they're all idiots who know how to do nothing. NOTHING. You wouldn't want to be around them if you had any kind of problem,....in fact they would be a hindrance or a danger to your safety.

Show me a bossy woman teacher and I'll show you soy boy beat downs among her masculine students.

Fortunately I attended elementary school when women teachers just taught and did not harp on the concept of the "aggressive male predator". Thank God for small favors. BTW, I am 74.

Those were the days, my friend-I'm 70.

Yeah, I hear you. Mine didn't mind taking a ruler to calves exposed beneath my knickers. Don't remember the girls getting the same, but I don't remember the conditions either.

LOL,....I remember once when a school mate and I got taken to the principal's office for shooting "spit wads" and got a "strapping" or punishment with a wide leather belt on the butt by the principal. It stung. It was an "educational experience". They didn't call my parents for a "conference" and I didn't tell them. I didn't shoot any more spit wads.

I'm not as old as you, but I"m glad I attended school when teachers actually taught people not brain washed them. Suggested reading is two books "NEA Trojan Horse of American Education," "Crimes of the Educators." These are by Samuel Blumenfeld. Also read Paolo Lionni's "The Leipzig Connection."
A search of the web will find Alex Newman, co-author of "Crimes of the Educators," speaking on the book. Earlier this year I stumbled on an article that

Bill Ayers and his WU pals wanted exactly what is happening but it did not happen so he became a college professor. Great idea, teach the future teachers, who will teach America's children and Marxist America is a done deal.
Too many churches are too busy planning for the rapture to care.

I suffered through first and second grade under the tyrannical Ms. Denton, who tried to convert me from being left-handed (she failed). My best year was fifth grade with Mr. Bailey.

I remember when they tried to “convert” me from left-handedness in elementary school..no way it was going to work, and of course, it didn’t!!

My favorite teacher was also my fifth grade teacher, Mr. Hazlett.

My favorite teacher was also my fifth grade teacher, Mrs. Isa Pavelka. She was an angel. She turned 104 years old this year.

I had such a crush on my kindergarten teacher, Miss Franklin. I can say Miss can't I? Her substitute when she got married was an older teacher and I learned early what bad was. She came in one day and had us count to ten. I had never been taught to count and was punished because I could not. Punishment? I had to sit in a corner facing into the corner.

Right dianecee: I went to an all boys grammar and high school both taught mostly by men. Manhood is both genetic and role modeled. One gives the equipment and the other gives details of character.

Show me a bossy woman teacher and I'll show you soy boy beat downs among her masculine students.

I wish you had become a teacher. There were far too few warrior-teachers in the 35 years I taught in high schools. But I be to differ on your point :"Women cannot teach boys how to become men?" What about the Spartan mother who said to her son, "Come back with your shield or on it?"
There is something for separating the genders both the students and teachers.

My kids went to sex-segregated religious schools. It was a good decision on our part; most girls are able to sit down, shut up, and learn by age six while most boys are not. It works out better for the kids and better for the teachers.

Teaching a son that a mother's love is conditional is NOT a good thing!

It is if you're Spartan.

Socialist Greek city-state where you and your children belong to the state.
read up on The Roots of State Education Parts 1-3 The Spartan model at Libertarianism. dot org

Yes, it was pretty grim by our standards. But who knows? Maybe the upper classes there, brought up that way, liked it.

The lesson is there are higher aspirations than self-love of duty and country. Love is abstract-an emotion that can change. Actions prove love, like obedience. God's Law is above all. He gave us His Law, something tangible and we are to obey-an action. There are consequences to selfish love.

Very different from a socialist Spartan mother....

Children have no rites of passage by which adults may confirm the maturity and character of a young man or young woman. Those descriptions have been melded into, "you guys," a plural pronoun all through life. Drugs have become the rite of passage, far more dangerous than violent hazings, but the passage is not into a greater being, but into a lesser being, an animal being stipped of his moral conscicence by powerful drugs that surpass the legitimate pleasures associated with survival, eating, sexing, safety, shelter, and family bonds. The day after a child's first, perfect buzz, the world looks different, including those who care about him. The world is suddenly an edenic jungle, and their own parents in one day appear to be enemies who can thwart doing what comes naturally, the mandate of survival encoded in their DNA. Alcohol or other synthetic drugs, especially marijuana, take nice kids from good families and turn them into liberals, peer-running collectivists who are fed social (street) justice as morally superior to criminal justice, when those approaches are obviously to mom and pop the inversions of each other. We have allowed several generations, named by letters of the alphabet or by some juvenile tag, of Teen Monsters who enter adolescence, the Not-OK-Corral, a clinical, doctrinal harness into which one may check in but not out. The division in America and pole to pole is between the parents and children, and the ancestral heritage of moral precepts used to cool off family friction, the heated conflict that is necessary forthe family to become the melting crucble for alloys of character, love and courage, attributes sadly absent in the packs of peers said in psychology books to be essential for the proper personality and emotional growth and develop, when actually they are exactly as they appear, stupid, without foresight, not a whiff of human history, and ignorant that while we are all born equally animal beings, not all of us become or remain human beings characterized by universal family values, i.e., honesty, integrity, personal responsibility, industriousness, love, affection, loyalty, self-discipline, compassion, cheer, generosity, and mutual respect. Those are lost to recent generations, but I pray that my saying this may bring forth throngs to prove me wrong, that Homo sapiens are naturally good and their adult problems really are caused by the curse of traditional family values that suppress the natural goodness that blooms into the human spirit, known to some as the holy spirit. Adolescence is a made-up psychological bullshit syndrome, unknown until the neoFreudians took off with Sigmund's hokum and created the spiritual poison of clinical thought, the practice of shifting responsibility into past circumstances and exploiting the better nature of our vanishing culture for benefits and privileges usually reserved for people with real diseases, not designer diseases cured by deep talk. Clinical thought has created more demons than all the devils and Satans, and Lucifers combined, foremost among them the disease concept of addiction, the mother lode of anti-family doctrines gushing from the fountains of sharing at the town square. Good evening.

I agree. I think the genders should go to separate schools. I also think that kids should wear uniforms in schools to eliminate status seeking and competition.

What’s more serious about this spat is the foundational flaw that runs through it–– our failure to separate real science from activities that reflect scientism: Dressing up ideological beliefs or even fads in the quantitative data and forbidding jargon of real sciences like physics or engineering.

I fully agree with the author that this womyn's insistence upon being called "doctor" smacks of the worst sort of elitism and pedigree-chasing, things that have never impressed Americans much. But scientism it is not. In fact, what this womyn is doing is bizarre and irrational, which is the opposite of scientism.

Why? Here is the definition of scientism that I just pulled off the Internet:

Scientism is the promotion of science as the best or only objective means by which society should determine normative and epistemological values. The term scientism is generally used critically, implying an unwarranted application of science in situations considered not amenable to application of the scientific method or similar scientific standards.

This womyn's elitism is the opposite of scientism; it is in violation of a logical fallacy called poisoning the well. After all, if the EdD major were to declare that phonics aren't necessary to teach children to read while the semi-literate ditch digger disagreed, would the liberal EdD become correct by virtue of its education? All that matters is what we know, not our fancy educational pedigrees.

Scientism is the inappropriate use of science or logic to replace human qualities such as emotions and morality. This was the basis for older Anglo-American liberal ideas, such as utilitarianism and logical positivism--ideas long since abandoned. The subjective human factor doesn't matter at all; only the objective does. This is why Charles Dickens' "Mr. Gradgrind" was mercilessly lampooned for his scientism in his novel Hard Times:

“Bitzer,” said Thomas Gradgrind. “Your definition of a horse.”
“Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth; namely, twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the Spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth.” Thus (and much more) Bitzer.

“Now girl number twenty,” said Mr. Gradgrind. “You know what a horse is.”

This is the very opposite of "Doctor" Jill's postmodern liberalism, which is at base a war on reality and science.

The fact you use the ridiculous new alternative for women (womyn) shows that you are the victim of some social engineering yourself. Other than that I agree with your dissertation.

The fact you use the ridiculous new alternative for women (womyn) shows that you are the victim of some social engineering yourself. Other than that I agree with your dissertation.

Actually, I didn't make up the word womyn. Neither is it something new. From Wikipedia's entry on womyn:

''Womyn'' is one of several alternative political spellings of the English word women, used by some feminists.[1] There are other spellings, including womban (a reference to the womb or uterus) or womon (singular), and wombyn or wimmin (plural). Some writers who use such alternative spellings, avoiding the suffix "-man" or "-men", see them as an expression of female independence and a repudiation of traditions that define women by reference to a male norm.[2] Recently, womxn has been used by intersectional feminists to indicate the same ideas, with foregrounding or more explicitly including transgender women.[3][4]

God I hate that sort of rubbish. It's just a bastardisation of the English language!

God I hate that sort of rubbish. It's just a bastardisation of the English language!

I understand. Liberals will destroy anything, provided it benefits them. But we ignore just how much these liberals hate us at our own peril.

I get the impression that he is not using it because he is “woke” but it’s satirical. Meant to insult the use of such a word, indirectly.

I actually thought he was using it to insult jill biden.
I’ll go out of my way to appalls that, any day!

Women have destroyed much that is viable within our society in order to feel relevant. Don't you find it odd that Jill would choose to be in a family where her second husband was showering with his daughter? That says much about Jill.

Diane, I think the first thing we need to realize is that just as people vary greatly in things like musical ability or being athletic, we also vary in moral capacity. Moral capacity is in fact a continuum with sociopaths at one end and saintly people at the other.

This is true of both men and women though they express their immorality differently. Men do tend to be the most violent and rapacious. But in many cases their women encourage these behaviors. Many women are only attracted to men not averse to exhibiting such behaviors.

I fully agree with you that Jill Biden is seriously immoral. Unfortunately, I don't see any solution to the problem of moral cretins among us. One thing we can do though is to see to it that we aren't governed by them.

Yep, most sexual encounters are initiated by men, and when those attempts are refused, it is usually by the woman. For a man, such an encounter represents a few minutes of pleasure. For a woman it potentially means pregnancy and nursing, followed by a major commitment of time and money for at least the next eighteen years--and recognition of this reality is hardwired into most women. This is why most women are attracted to men who can protect and provide for themselves and their children. What we're talking about is this instinct run amok, which is the case with battered women and women married to unscrupulous scoundrels.

"For a woman it potentially means pregnancy and nursing, followed by a major commitment of time and money ..." - Well said brother!

Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a Blessed 2021!

Women have destroyed much that is viable within our society in order to feel relevant.
****************************

Not all, just the lib loving ones.

It's happened because the Communists and not just a few capitalists wanted to drive women from the home. Lie Bill Gates Men like Henry Ford believed there too many people. He supported eugenics and by getting women into the work force he could reduce the number of children they would produce while making money selling them cars. A major investor in Ford, James Couzens probably saw opportunity to make more money by killing off the Detroit Street Car system which he ran. Of course, according to Paul Kengor, the Weather Underground members engaged in "smashing monogamy." Read his book "Takedown" Women have been derided for wanting to be wives and mothers.

A friend, a WW Two vet said they did not go to war to conquer, but to defeat the bad guys and then go home to their sweet hearts and wives and jobs. Having a special person to return to makes for a good life. Alyssa Milano boasted about aborting a child because it would interfere with her career. That sort of woman is very unattractive.

Biblically the man is to be the leader, but you ladies have insights that offer important council to your husband. When a man find s a good woman he will make better decisions when he includes her input. I see too many women, not all, born after 1960 that only have children as an accident. I is not like my mother, who wanted children and a husband. Of course, she had not had the feminist coolaid poured on her. The real word is not feminist but Marxist. Read Paul Kengor's "Takedown." If you need an example searching the web you'll find him speaking on the book at the Heritage Foundation. If you want to see the end game read Plato's "Republic." IT isn't pretty and women will be as they are now the big losers.

How about the fact that Hunter can't go near his niece because of a court order. That is according to the H. Biden hard drive. What happened there?

Enquiring minds would prefer not to know, thank you.

NO wonder! Pamela Geller ran a piece on Hunter's pornhub use.

And even more and worse about hubby # 2.

By the way, did you hear that her ex said she was having affair with the Joe prior to being divorced? He did. As to women in society those born after 1960 have been fed the mother's milk of socialism. It's taken me a long time to see it, but it is true.
My paternal grandmother was beautiful and smart and even caught a German spy during WW One while her future husband was serving in the army. She was a stenographer, but my mother told me that she could go to a fashion show and go home and cut the patterns of the clothing she saw. My mother said the clothing she made looked like it was from Lord & Taylor or Sax Fifth Avenue. Her family was important just as it was for my own mother. It's not accidental what has happened. Some years ago I read a book by Richard Poe, "The Seven Myths of Gun Control." The only part I remember is the chapter about Betty Friedan. What I learned was she was not a feminist. She was exactly like Madeline Murray O'Hare, a Marxist. Poe said when he spoke to Friedan's husband, having heard she was a "disgruntled house wife" he was told she was never a house wife. She was a Marxist. Friedan advocated for no fault divorce as part of the Marxist scheme to force women into the work force. Want to see the future? Read W. Cleon Skousen's "The Naked Communist" and "The Naked Capitalist." This last book reflects, in part on the oldest book on what the Marxist intend, Plato's "Republic." Paul Kengor in his book "Takedown" even alludes to the end game as demonstrated by the Weather Underground members. I doubt that it is accidental that a Fabian, Aldous Huxley, wrote his book "Brave New World."
By the way, I have a friend, who is a low level stock broker. He and his wife went to a loan. The banker was a woman. This was more than 20 years ago. The banker, looked at my friend and asked "What do you do?" He answered that he was a stock broker. She looked at his wife and said "What do you do?" She answered "I'm a stay at home Mom." The banker responded, "Oh, you don't do anything." Well, that is not how my own father looked at my mother. He was an engineer and loved his job, but loved his family and my mother loved being a mom and house wife. The Marxists can't have this. Consider. Anything look familiar?
45 Goals of the Communists - 1958
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policy-making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive meaningless art."
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion
pictures, radio and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, and healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
30. Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices,mental blocks
and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use "united force" to solve economic, political or social problems.

American universities have cheapened any degree, even a doctorate, with their emphasis on leftist ideology over learning. Grade inflation, where almost everyone gets "A's", is also responsible.

Universities will never challenge a politically correct thesis or dissertation, especially from a Democrat politician's spouse.

Anyone can obtain a doctorate today by simply paying tuition and writing in political newspeak.

The several fiskings I'd read of her "Dissertation" have noted that it's *not* even such, it doesn't remotely rise to that level. It's a position paper that is so full of poor grammar, illogic and mathematical errors, it'd have been rejected by a 7th grade Junior High School English teacher (at least one from back when I was that age). Her "EdD" is a sham gifted to her so that she may posses a hollow title that signifies nothing except to impress the witless and the deluded.

Sounds like my old buddy Bill Shakespeare: "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Not in the hard sciences.