Male teachers - Mod Note Post #221

seamus

tritium wrote: »

You know it is reasonable to have a hypothesis that women amd men want different things from work amd career and its not just women being kept out of management by the boys right?

You know that's in fact far from a reasonable hypothesis, right?

Men and women are not two homogenous groups of people who share similar mindsets and ambitions because they share some specific biological subtleties.

skankkuvhima

silverharp wrote: »

yep that would do it alright

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/teacher-kato-harris-cleared-of-raping-teenage-girl-at-london-school-warns-men-to-avoid-profession-a3516041.html?amp

Ya, I think regardless of the wages that sort of thing will deter men from becoming teachers. No money is worth having your life destroyed.

tritium

seamus wrote: »

You know that's in fact far from a reasonable hypothesis, right?

Men and women are not two homogenous groups of people who share similar mindsets and ambitions because they share some specific biological subtleties.

You do realise we seem to be making the same point? Mine was in reaponse to the poster who claimed some sort of unconscious misogyny was an undercurrent to this thread.

volchitsa

tritium wrote: »

Wow, hell of a leap there, of the 2+2=600 variety!

You know it is reasonable to have a hypothesis that women amd men want different things from work amd career and its not just women being kept out of management by the boys right? Especially in a role like teaching which have clear lifestyle benefits

I didn't say that it was "just women being kept out" though, did I?

I was pointing out that exactly opposite arguments were being used in this thread to explain the same phenomenon (gender imbalance) depending on which gender is in the majority.

That's not the same thing as saying women are being kept out. They could even be right - but since no evidence has been put forward in support, just posters' beliefs, there's no reason to think so.

Oh, and no, it's not a reasonable hypothesis to assume that all women will want one thing and all men another. It's particularly unreasonable to assume that men are somehow being kept out of teaching when those who do go into it are far more likely to end up as principals, or indeed to agree with the quota suggestion for male teachers but not feel it's necessary for female principals.

All things that have been said or implied on this thread.

tritium

volchitsa wrote: »

I didn't say that it was "just women being kept out" though, did I?

I was pointing out that exactly opposite arguments were being used in this thread to explain the same phenomenon (gender imbalance) depending on which gender is in the majority.

That's not the same thing as saying women are being kept out. They could even be right - but since no evidence has been put forward in support, just posters' beliefs, there's no reason to think so.

Oh, and no, it's not a reasonable hypothesis to assume that all women will want one thing and all men another. It's particularly unreasonable to assume that men are somehow being kept out of teaching when those who do go into it are far more likely to end up as principals, or indeed to agree with the quota suggestion for male teachers but not feel it's necessary for female principals.

All things that have been said or implied on this thread.

Far more reasonable to apply a bit of amateur psychology and put it all down to unconscious misogyny. Yeah, right

If it were true about all men or women wed see zero female principles or male teachers for example. It is however reasonable to look at the numbers and infer that there may be reasons for the imbalance

volchitsa

tritium wrote: »

Far more reasonable to apply a bit of amateur psychology and put it all down to unconsciois misogyny. Yeah, right

You're doing it again, I point out visible contradictions in the arguments being put forward here - unconscious misogyny is probably the kindest possible, explanation for them. Certainly you haven't tried to find one, well, except for the old "men and women just are different" one. Which you immediately contradicted in your next post!

OTOH, we are apparently supposed to assume that your own explanation isn't amateur psychology?

"Yeah, right" is particularly apt.

volchitsa

tritium wrote: »

If it were true about all men or women wed see zero female principles or male teachers for example. It is however reasonable to look at the numbers and infer that there may be reasons for the imbalance

You added this on as I was replying to the first part.

Of course it's reasonable to look for explanations, but:

1) you still need evidence, not assumptions, which is all you've offered,
2) you're arguing a somewhat different point to the one I made anyway.

tritium

volchitsa wrote: »

You added this on as I was replying to the first part.

Of course it's reasonable to look for explanations, but:

1) you still need evidence, not assumptions, which is all you've offered,
2) you're arguing a somewhat different point to the one I made anyway.

The only point im argueing is that its disingenuous and lazy to throw out the misogyny line in this arguement

On a different note, strange how many folk are ok with whataboutery when it suits. I thought yhe thread was about male teachers....

volchitsa

tritium wrote: »

The only point im argueing is that its disingenuous and lazy to throw out the misogyny line in this arguement

So what do you call posters liking a post that says boys are being "kept out" of teaching and also that women prefer to blame the "glass ceiling" for their own lack of ambition?

Looks like double standards to me, and in this context, that's misogyny, whether or not posters are aware of it.

On a different note, strange how many folk are ok with whataboutery when it suits. I thought yhe thread was about male teachers....

You're going to have to explain who/what you mean. Who brought in these other issues that you think are whataboutery?

silverharp

volchitsa wrote: »

So what do you call posters liking a post that says boys are being "kept out" of teaching and also that women prefer to blame the "glass ceiling" for their own lack of ambition?

Looks like double standards to me, and in this context, that's misogyny, whether or not posters are aware of it.

I think its silly to link them because there are completely different mechanics going on.