Well, I'm a male parent in a stable, conventionally-married Catholic two-parent family. Do my kids get value from being raised by Erin? Yes. For one thing, they eat yogurt; for another thing, they can dress themselves. Do they get value from me? Yes. For instance, I am good at making pancakes.
Is there some huge man-woman socio-cultural hoo-hah I'm missing about what our relationship imparts on our children that would be dramatically different if I was replaced with an equally loving woman? Perhaps the pancakes would become crepes (though I'm good at that too). The whole of western civilization shudders.
There might be a real argument you have to make, axod, but you have to actually make it. Innuendo doesn't cut it.
Look into how badly boys do at school when there teachers are female - or how badly girls do when their teachers are men. The evidence is that neither do well in those circumstances.
Women and men are very very very different thank goodness. If you're missing out on either of them, you're missing out on a complete other world.
Erm. So you believe the only difference between women and men is their genitalia? What planet are you from? You've never seen any evidence of their thought processes being different, their completely different logic, social skills, spacial awareness etc?
I'm sorry but if you believe that you're blind, or really haven't lived.
Your statement sums up what is wrong with the political correctness/equality mob. Men and women are not equal. They will never be. Thank goodness. Celebrate the differences. Embrace them. Don't just blindly pretend they don't exist.
You were asked for evidence for an assertion you made that boys behave worse in classes with female teachers, and that girls behave worse in classes with male teachers. Put up or shut up, axod.
"A study of 25,000 pupils by Stanford University economist Thomas Dee found children did 4% better in tests when their teachers were of the same sex"
"In general, girls learned more with female teachers and boys with male teachers"
"A large fraction of boys' dramatic underperformance in reading is linked to the fact that their reading teachers are overwhelmingly female," Dee concludes.
There are a large number of similar studies with similar results.
Think you might be able to do better than one "controversial" study published by the conservative Hoover Institution by a visiting Swarthmore associate professor, an unpublished survey taken by a private consultancy in the UK, and an opinion poll in the UK?
That's not an argument; it's just circumstantial ad hominem. I could advance my argument against you the same way by saying you sound awfully threatened by women and gay people.
The claim you're citing is surprising not only because it defies conventional wisdom (which it does), but also implies that whole of the American educational system is built on an easily-corrected inefficiency. Why can't you marshall better evidence for your extraordinary claim? Why don't you have a better source than an untenured Swarthmore professor writing in a journal with dubious peer review?
When you or axod give me a relevant significant non-physical way that men and women are different, I'll address it. I chose to address the specific, relevant, wrong point he offered as an alternative.
Is there some huge man-woman socio-cultural hoo-hah I'm missing about what our relationship imparts on our children that would be dramatically different if I was replaced with an equally loving woman? Perhaps the pancakes would become crepes (though I'm good at that too). The whole of western civilization shudders.
There might be a real argument you have to make, axod, but you have to actually make it. Innuendo doesn't cut it.