6 Reasons (+2) to NOT Send Your Daughter to College

XxMCRxBabyxX

Now I'm not sure whether this should be here or in After Hours considering how ridiculous it is but this article popped up on my facebook today (actually linked by another TLLer) and I am actually speechless over it. It has to be fake. Right?

Let's have a look at the "Reasons":

1. She will attract the wrong types of men.
2. She will be in a near occasion of sin.
3. She will not learn to be a wife and mother.
4. The cost of a degree is becoming more difficult to recoup.
5. You don’t have to prove anything to the world.
6. It could be a near occasion of sin for the parents.
7. She will regret it.
8. It could interfere with a religious vocation.

I find 3 and 6 particularly amusing!

Anyone else come across it? Thoughts?

Links234

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

It has to be fake. Right?

there's so many right-wing conservative Christian nuts who spout this kinda nonsense in the US that even if it were fake, you'd have a hard time telling the difference from what some of those types spout

XxMCRxBabyxX

Actually, having reread this and gotten over my inital shock, I'm now really enjoying it. It's so ridiculous it's funny!

The feminist world has twisted this so that a job (career) appears elevated, and homemaking is denigrated. This is the evil work of Satan and devastating to families.

I may let all the working women (who go right up to my grandmothers) know how much they have devastated their families...

Scarinae

I think my absolute favourite line has to be:

Is a degree worth the loss of your daughter’s purity, dignity, and soul?

I'll keep that one in mind for female cousins etc. It may be too late for me, but not for them!

And it continues:

Catholic OB-GYN Dr. Kim Hardey notes that a woman is naturally very observant of a man’s faults as long as she is in a platonic relationship with him. Once she becomes sexually active with him, she releases hormones that mask his faults, and she remains in a dreamy state about him. We can see why God would arrange things in such a way so that when in a proper state of holy matrimony, she would be less sensitive to his faults and thereby less tempted to be critical of him.

How very thoughtful of God!

Elmer Blooker

I've two daughters and I have savings in a post office account for when they go to college but after reading that article I can now blow it all on drink, drugs and hookers............ Thailand here I come!!
Thanks OP for this eureka moment

lilmissprincess

It made me outraged and giggle at the same time.

Not sure which my parents despair more about my college life; the fact that I could have potentially lost my purity (still giggling) or that I got a degree in writing about Fionn Mac Cumhaill's sex life (yes him of salmon of knowledge fame)...

XxMCRxBabyxX

lilmissprincess wrote: »

It made me outraged and giggle at the same time.

Not sure which my parents despair more about my college life; the fact that I could have potentially lost my purity (still giggling) or that I got a degree in writing about Fionn Mac Cumhaill's sex life (yes him of salmon of knowledge fame)...

I'd say theyd be more concerned about you nearly driving them to sin!

baby and crumble

Oooh, they have a Man Room. I bet all they'll do in there is learn about fixing houses and making money. Sure what else are men meant for???

I also very much like their derision for someone who sets up their own business. Yeah, business people don't care of they fail or not, so long as someone else brings in money.

????!?

Catari Jaguar

Oh Catholicism... you so funny!

meeeeh

I wonder how many idiots actually donate to their cause.

Jenneke87

Catholic OB-GYN Dr. Kim Hardey notes that a woman is naturally very observant of a man’s faults as long as she is in a platonic relationship with him. Once she becomes sexually active with him, she releases hormones that mask his faults, and she remains in a dreamy state about him. We can see why God would arrange things in such a way so that when in a proper state of holy matrimony, she would be less sensitive to his faults and thereby less tempted to be critical of him.

You couldn't make this **** up if you tried..........This woman needs some proper psychiatric care before she does anymore damage

Femme_Fatale

Reminds me of this book I read recently.

metaoblivia

My favorite part was this:

...the rejection we receive is always emotionally charged and ends up insulting, since once explained logically, the opposition runs out of substance and is only left to hurl insults and presume and misconstrue this practical wisdom into some chauvinistic evil.

Right off the top they attempt to deflect any criticism of their stance because it's just so logical and practical no one could possibly generate a substantial response. And those critics only become emotional because they can't logically argue back, not because the content of the article is so outrageously offensive.

The people running this site have daughters and I feel sad for those poor girls.

meeeeh

Anybody with two brain cells probably doesn't even bother with this idiot. People (if tgere is plural) who actually listen to him are beyond help anyway.

clairefontaine

It's pretty stupid considering how many female only universities we have. Plus if a mother is educated it will benefit her children.

Jenneke87

Again, why is only girls who have "nothing to prove" or fail to learn how to be a husband and father? Why would an educated man automatically a"good"woman but not vice versa. And why would only we regret going to college? If I read PI correctly there are a lot of guys regretting their college course or going there in the first place? Why does this type of crap only ever run our direction? It get's so tiring.....

GalwayGuy2

Again, why is only girls who have "nothing to prove" or fail to learn how to be a husband and father? Why would an educated man automatically a"good"woman but not vice versa. And why would only we regret going to college? If I read PI correctly there are a lot of guys regretting their college course or going there in the first place? Why does this type of crap only ever run our direction? It get's so tiring.....

Hmmm, isn't there a "reasons to not go to college" thing going on in America? Sure, this is aimed at the parents of daughters (:rolleyes:), but I don't think the sentiment behind the sexism is anything new?

metaoblivia

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Hmmm, isn't there a "reasons to not go to college" thing going on in America? Sure, this is aimed at the parents of daughters (:rolleyes:), but I don't think the sentiment behind the sexism is anything new?

Somewhat, but it's not a gender issue. It's an issue with college being so expensive and student loans being so massive and whether or not a degree is worth the price anymore. It's not aimed at females or males, but mostly kids who can't afford college out of pocket with dreams of attending an expensive school.

maria_81

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Hmmm, isn't there a "reasons to not go to college" thing going on in America? Sure, this is aimed at the parents of daughters (:rolleyes:), but I don't think the sentiment behind the sexism is anything new?

I actually think a "reasons not to go to college" campaign is a good thing but it should of course apply to both genders.

When I was leaving school, it was completely expected that you go to college no matter what. In fact, ironically, in ireland I felt there was more expectation for girls to go to college than boys because at least boys might be needed to do labouring jobs that don't require college. It's probably still the same.

For me, college was an almost complete waste of time in terms of career. However, I enjoyed it at the time.

There's of course lots of careers that absolutely require college or formal training (eg medicine). However, there's alot of people wasting time in college because they're expected to go

WindSock

Jenneke87 wrote: »

Catholic OB-GYN Dr. Kim Hardey...


You couldn't make this **** up if you tried..........This woman needs some proper psychiatric care before she does anymore damage

Why would we take advice from her, she's an academic college WHORE!

Vojera

They should have added a number nine: College may teach your daughter to think critically!

We couldn't have that!

Sonics2k

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's pretty stupid considering how many female only universities we have.

Well obviously you wouldn't send your daughter to an all female University!
Clearly she'd end up as some rampant feminazi lesbian with a fetish for plaid shirts and Doc Martin boots!

clairefontaine

Sonics2k wrote: »

Well obviously you wouldn't send your daughter to an all female University!
Clearly she'd end up as some rampant feminazi lesbian with a fetish for plaid shirts and Doc Martin boots!

Well see there is that. Plenty or reasons not to go, but applies to both genders, and not for her reasons. But yes our universities have become left wing brainwashing palaces of over inflated costs ans salaries for academics.

meeeeh

Sonics2k wrote: »

Well obviously you wouldn't send your daughter to an all female University!
Clearly she'd end up as some rampant feminazi lesbian with a fetish for plaid shirts and Doc Martin boots!

Hopefully not. Doc Martins were sooo high school in my time.

clairefontaine

Sonics2k wrote: »

Well obviously you wouldn't send your daughter to an all female University!
Clearly she'd end up as some rampant feminazi lesbian with a fetish for plaid shirts and Doc Martin boots!

Yes possibly. Or being told every man is a potential rapist and its the patriarchy's fault for why her smoothie maker is broken.

GalwayGuy2

But yes our universities have become left wing brainwashing palaces of over inflated costs ans salaries for academics.

I would class myself as left, but I can see the point here.

I go to uni in Ireland, but some of the ways the lectures are thought borders on indoctrination.

clairefontaine

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

I would class myself as left, but I can see the point here.

I go to uni in Ireland, but some of the ways the lectures are thought borders on indoctrination.

It's nearly become a truth universally acknowledged in the US.

The other thing is that it costs a fortune. And while more women are in university, getting degrees, and less boys and men, the boys and men are still doing better financially and professionally after college. In the US anyway.

I think college and university are starting to earn a deserved cynicism.

meeeeh

I went to very left wing university. It used to be a feeder school for communist party officials. Economically I'm more right wing then I was before going there and socially I'm there abouts. You have to be complete vegetable before to be significantly influenced by lecturers on whatever. Besides it is always better to have your world view challenged than just have people agree with everything.

GalwayGuy2

I went to very left wing university. It used to be a feeder school for communist party officials. Economically I'm more right wing then I was before going there and socially I'm there abouts. You have to be complete vegetable before to be significantly influenced by lecturers on whatever. Besides it is always better to have your world view challenged than just have people agree with everything.

Hmm, I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Lecturers are in a position of power as percieved experts, and are trained to argue and debate to an extent that a student would not be able to argue against it. And there's little things like only giving the positive to a policy, and not the negative, or classing everybody who disagrees with you as wrong because of their experiences.

Yes, I agree completely with the part in bold.

WindSock

WindSock wrote: »

Why would we take advice from her, she's an academic college WHORE!

I suspected as much so I checked, this "Kim" is a man ... naturally.

Moomoo1

meeeeh wrote: »

I went to very left wing university. It used to be a feeder school for communist party officials. Economically I'm more right wing then I was before going there and socially I'm there abouts. You have to be complete vegetable before to be significantly influenced by lecturers on whatever. Besides it is always better to have your world view challenged than just have people agree with everything.

This. Part of a university education is in learning to think critically. Lecturers aren't chosen based on political affiliation (contrary to what some might claim), and so represent a fair spread of opinions from among academics. As to why academics are left-wing (if indeed they are), that's a much harder question.

Regarding the original post, that page has been doing the rounds on the internet, really funny read.

Femme_Fatale

I don't get this "Universities are too liberal" thing. The more educated and intelligent and critically thinking a person is, the more likely they are to veer left of centre and consider the bigger, more complex picture in terms of their views.

I am socially left and economically right, I don't know about intelligence = left

Femme_Fatale

Yeh fair enough. I'm referring moreso to socially/culturally left-of-centre.

meeeeh

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I don't get this "Universities are too liberal" thing. The more educated and intelligent and critically thinking a person is, the more likely they are tr left of centre and consider the bigger, more complex picture in terms of their views.

Where I was science, engineering and similar were a lot more conservative (and considered us idiots). People from arts, especially media will be more likely on tv and in newspapers, so the opinion how left wing are universities is a bit skewed at the best of times. Especially regarding social issues.

clairefontaine

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I don't get this "Universities are too liberal" thing. The more educated and intelligent and critically thinking a person is, the more likely they are to veer left of centre and consider the bigger, more complex picture in terms of their views.

BA hahahahahaha.

First of all left and right mean totally different things on either side of the pond. This OP was an American perspective right? About American universities right?

Who says people in university are all critical thinkers? And being more left does not mean you you are more educated, intelligent etc. I don't kow where to start with this assumption.

I saw lots of rich NYU students in Che Guevara t shirts. I wanted to throw burritos at them. It's the same across the nation.

Femme_Fatale

clairefontaine wrote: »

BA hahahahahaha.

First of all left and right mean totally different things on either side of the pond. This OP was an American perspective right? About American universities right?

Who says people in university are all critical thinkers? And being more left does not mean you you are more educated, intelligent etc. I don't kow where to start with this assumption.

I saw lots of rich NYU students in Che Guevara t shirts. I wanted to throw burritos at them. It's the same across the nation.

Standing by it. I just mean left of centre anyway, not having insincere far-left pretensions like those rich eejits in Che t-shirts.

Not saying everyone who goes to college is automatically intelligent either.

meeeeh

I think in general poorer or less educated people are more likely conservative in political opinion. But it works only up to a point and it hard to generalize, especially because political parties became a lot more fractured in their policies and it is sometimes hard to make ckear left-right distinction. I don't know much about the research that is not linked to voting and it's more about general outlook.

metaoblivia

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Standing by it. I just mean left of centre anyway, not having insincere far-left pretensions like those rich eejits in Che t-shirts.

Not saying everyone who goes to college is automatically intelligent either.

I agree. I attended a private, all female university in Massachusetts that some might accuse of being a liberal brainwashing machine, and I wonder - have these people who make such accusations ever attended a class in a university like my alma mater? Have they ever even been on campus? Do they know what actually goes on there, on a day to day basis? The accusations are so hyperbolic and hysterical (brainwashing, lol, what?), I just can't help but wonder.
The students and faculty on my campus had a variety of political leanings, ranging from anarchists to libertarians to socialists to everything in between. Sure, there probably were more people who leaned liberal, but it was predominantly female and in Massachusetts - those two factors alone tend to skew more liberal. I don't even recall that much political discussion taking place in my classes, although perhaps that was down to my field of study.
I also attended a state university, and I knew just as many vocal conservatives as I did liberals. So in my personal experience, I don't know where universities get this reputation for indoctrinating students with liberal ideas. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

clairefontaine

metaoblivia wrote: »

I agree. I attended a private, all female university in Massachusetts that some might accuse of being a liberal brainwashing machine, and I wonder - have these people who make such accusations ever attended a class in a university like my alma mater? Have they ever even been on campus? Do they know what actually goes on there, on a day to day basis? The accusations are so hyperbolic and hysterical (brainwashing, lol, what?), I just can't help but wonder.
The students and faculty on my campus had a variety of political leanings, ranging from anarchists to libertarians to socialists to everything in between. Sure, there probably were more people who leaned liberal, but it was predominantly female and in Massachusetts - those two factors alone tend to skew more liberal. I don't even recall that much political discussion taking place in my classes, although perhaps that was down to my field of study.
I also attended a state university, and I knew just as many vocal conservatives as I did liberals. So in my personal experience, I don't know where universities get this reputation for indoctrinating students with liberal ideas. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

Yes. I have.

clairefontaine

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohk-Ey01c9k

Moomoo1

clairefontaine wrote: »

BA hahahahahaha.

First of all left and right mean totally different things on either side of the pond. This OP was an American perspective right? About American universities right?

Who says people in university are all critical thinkers? And being more left does not mean you you are more educated, intelligent etc. I don't know where to start with this assumption.

I saw lots of rich NYU students in Che Guevara t shirts. I wanted to throw burritos at them. It's the same across the nation.

equally, there are plenty of american universities that are very right-wing. A friend of my wife did an economics course that hardly ever mentioned the existence of either Marx or Keynes. And there many of those business and economics colleges dotted around.

but you never ever hear of those, you always hear endless complaints about liberal arts schools and the like. Of course, you can always reply by saying that if you don't like it, become a professor and project your views to students - just like they are fond of throwing 'don't like it start your own business' to those wanting to say tax the rich.

Femme_Fatale

Left-leaning is going to be the default for a lot of university courses in the humanities. It isn't some big brainwashing conspiracy.

GalwayGuy2

Hmmm, I wonder do most people even learn critical thinking skills in Uni? It seems more people learn how to critique another person's, or perhaps even the oppositions, opinion, rather than their own. Also, if your whole study of critical thinking is built on the foundation of the left, then surely that would affect your thought processes?

And, I've always found the mention of Critical Thinking in Uni to be reminiscent of middle class snobbery. It's kind of like saying that "the educated folk" have the right way of thinking, and the "Uneducated folk do no not." Not pointing the finger at anybody in this thread, more being judgmental on Uni.

Oh, and I said some lecturers bordered on indoctrination, not all, or even most.

meeeeh

Moomoo1 wrote: »

equally, there are plenty of american universities that are very right-wing. A friend of my wife did an economics course that hardly ever mentioned the existence of either Marx or Keynes. And there many of those business and economics colleges dotted around.

I'll give you Keynes but Marx really isn't relevant in any other way than in historical terms.

Moomoo1

meeeeh wrote: »

I'll give you Keynes but Marx really isn't relevant in any other way than in historical terms.

I would disagree, I think Marx is as relevant as ever. But never having done Economics I cannot say how much he features in your average undergraduate course.

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Hmmm, I wonder do most people even learn critical thinking skills in Uni? It seems more people learn how to critique another person's, or perhaps even the oppositions, opinion, rather than their own.
Oh, and I said some lecturers bordered on indoctrination, not all, or even most.

fair point. Although I would say that hearing a well-expressed and well-argued political opinion with facts to back it up is always good for you.

but according to this

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_12.html

according to this, people who went to college in the US were most likely of any other group (education-based) to vote Republican. I understand that there is a multiplicity of other factors in play, but even so.

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Also, if your whole study of critical thinking is built on the foundation of the left, then surely that would affect your thought processes?

yes, it is inevitable that your political convictions colour what you teach, and we can discuss (should we really want to) how much a lecturer can prevent that in a subject like Social Science or History. But university employees are not chosen based on political affiliation, and so the sum total of the political opinions students get to hear should in theory represent a fair spread of those present among people with an academic career. Why in some subjects the average academic tends to lean to the left is also a separate, and difficult, question.

pwurple

meeeeh wrote: »

I think in general poorer or less educated people are more likely conservative in political opinion. But it works only up to a point and it hard to generalize, especially because political parties became a lot more fractured in their policies and it is sometimes hard to make ckear left-right distinction. I don't know much about the research that is not linked to voting and it's more about general outlook.

I don't agree with this generalisation, as it applies to economic policy at least.

Right leaning policies are low tax, low state service models. Left leaning policies are high tax, high state service policies... Like the nordic countries.

In my experience the wealthier you are, the more you resent forking over massive amounts of your income to the govt, especially when it impedes your ability to hire more people and grow your business. The poorer you are, the more likely you are to be a net recipient, and hence all in favour of state services and supplements.

The poorer benefit much more from a left wing economic policy with a robust social welfare system, and tend to vocally suppport it.

If you are very poor you are more likely not to vote or to be involved in politics.

Education is always a good thing.

I am back studding part time at the moment and I am enjoying it.

The course I do has a very left wing bias because of the nature of what we are studying, and studying it as a mature adult I can be critical and I have more life experience to reflect on, so I take some of what I am being told with a pinch of salt, However as an 18 year old studying you don't have that life experience to analyse what you are being told.

meeeeh

pwurple wrote: »

I don't agree with this generalisation, as it applies to economic policy at least.

Right leaning policies are low tax, low state service models. Left leaning policies are high tax, high state service policies... Like the nordic countries.

In my experience the wealthier you are, the more you resent forking over massive amounts of your income to the govt, especially when it impedes your ability to hire more people and grow your business. The poorer you are, the more likely you are to be a net recipient, and hence all in favour of state services and supplements.

The poorer benefit much more from a left wing economic policy with a robust social welfare system, and tend to vocally suppport it.

http://www.yale.edu/leitner/resources/docs/huber-stanig.pdf

This is an interesting paper that goes through numerous categories in different countries.

Religion has a huge say in voting preferences, especially in less urbanized countries (Ireland). Urban poor are most definitely left wing leaning but the average income is lower in rural areas where there is right wing preference (and also higher level religious people, education is lower in rural areas).

clairefontaine

meeeeh wrote: »

http://www.yale.edu/leitner/resources/docs/huber-stanig.pdf

This is an interesting paper that goes through numerous categories in different countries.

Religion has a huge say in voting preferences, especially in less urbanized countries (Ireland). Urban poor are most definitely left wing leaning but the average income is lower in rural areas where there is right wing preference (and also higher level religious people, education is lower in rural areas).

Voting choices and ones own political philosophy are not always congruous. I don't always vote for the person in the party that I would necessarily philosophically gel with. Take Nixon for example, theoretically right wing, but in reality an interfering socialist.

pwurple

meeeeh wrote: »

http://www.yale.edu/leitner/resources/docs/huber-stanig.pdf

This is an interesting paper that goes through numerous categories in different countries.

Religion has a huge say in voting preferences, especially in less urbanized countries (Ireland). Urban poor are most definitely left wing leaning but the average income is lower in rural areas where there is right wing preference (and also higher level religious people, education is lower in rural areas).

The paper is interesting, but the reference to Ireland is based only on the 2002 elections. Which, if I remember rightly, was boom time, and based on a giveaway FF and PD budget where both right and left economic policies were muddled. Tax was lowered(right) and SW increased(left). Everyone had something tasty to vote for in their own self interest in that election. We also had near 100% employment at the time, so the number of effective poor with a vote would have been tiny. I don't think that data is valid for use as a reference, it was surely a blip on our voting history.

The paper does discuss the other reasons for right wing leaning, which include ethnic heterogenity, and being religious. So, it is saying that social reasons outweigh financial for the uneducated poor.