Posh and Posher: Why Public School Boys Rule Britain.

[clarion]

...people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Up to a point.  If feminism taught us* anything, surely it is that we need to carefully examine our own prejudices, whatever they may be, and try to overcome them?





* me

[Attitudeless Badger]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Do they encourage them to make the other team cry??

[Pancho]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Can't say I've come across this.

But if that is the case, then it's fine to encourage competition provided it's also done in a way which encourages mutual respect. That's what being sporting is all about; being able to give all your effort and to still respect yourself and your opponent whatever the outcome.

[Clandy]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

[Wowbagger]

I'm still intrigued as to why it was that the thread was trotting along quite happily and uncontroversially and suddenly, and almost as though a command was given, two or three pages and two days after I made a long post, one particular sentence in it has unleashed the attack dogs.

[Julian]

...people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Up to a point.  If feminism taught us* anything, surely it is that we need to carefully examine our own prejudices, whatever they may be, and try to overcome them?





* me

Which is why I said "usually" and not "always."  

The usually part refers to Privilege Denying Dude and his ilk.

[Julian]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

I'm surprised someone so unobservant is allowed to teach.

[Wowbagger]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

I'm surprised someone so unobservant is allowed to teach.

I've met a lot of teachers and, frankly, I'm not.

[Clandy]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

[Clandy]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

I'm surprised someone so unobservant is allowed to teach.

I'm surprised someone so blinkered and biased and up their own unshaven feminist arse is permitted to practice law, but hey-ho. Btw, thanks for insulting my mother, someone you have never met and know nothing about.

I will add to my post on this issue that in my entire time at school as a pupil, not once were we divided into boy and girl teams and made to compete against each other.

[clarion]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

That would surprise me greatly.  I have experienced it in my own schooling (1970s to mid-80s) and that of my children (mid-90s onwards).

[Julian]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

Humour arises from the unexpected.  Therefore it is supposedly funny to have an advert saying something is so simple even a man can do it - because in real life, men do the difficult things (running the country, being high court judges, fixing technical things).  Funny.  Lol.  (Well, no, but you get the idea.)

If women are portrayed as stupid, that is not unexpected, because cultural meme has it that women are a bit weak, simple minded, etc.  So there is no humour.  

I dislike the ads very much, because they draw on unpleasant gender stereotypes, but to suggest that they are reverse sexism is bottomgravy.

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

[Julian]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

I'm surprised someone so unobservant is allowed to teach.

I'm surprised someone so blinkered and biased and up their own unshaven feminist arse is permitted to practice law, but hey-ho. Btw, thanks for insulting my mother, someone you have never met and know nothing about.

I will add to my post on this issue that in my entire time at school as a pupil, not once were we divided into boy and girl teams and made to compete against each other.

Few women shave their arses, Clandy.  If you've encountered any who do, you should also check for testicles.

My experience has been different to that of your mother, both in my own education (at a mixed primary) and then when I've done one-to-one reading at a mixed primary.  Indeed, there was a recent TV programme where they separated out the boys and then made them do a debating competition and some other competition against the girls.

[Clandy]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

Humour arises from the unexpected.  Therefore it is supposedly funny to have an advert saying something is so simple even a man can do it - because in real life, men do the difficult things (running the country, being high court judges, fixing technical things).  Funny.  Lol.  (Well, no, but you get the idea.)

If women are portrayed as stupid, that is not unexpected, because cultural meme has it that women are a bit weak, simple minded, etc.  So there is no humour.  

I dislike the ads very much, because they draw on unpleasant gender stereotypes, but to suggest that they are reverse sexism is bottomgravy.

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

So basically in your warped PC world misandry is fine and tickeyboo, but mysogeny is punishable by death.

Fuck. Off.

[Wowbagger]

My experience has been different to that of your mother, both in my own education (at a mixed primary) and then when I've done one-to-one reading at a mixed primary.  Indeed, there was a recent TV programme where they separated out the boys and then made them do a debating competition and some other competition against the girls.

If it's the same one I'm thinking of, that was a programme whose raison d'être was attempting to fathom the difference in reading ages between boys and girls in a particular school in Harlow, IIRC, where the boys' scores were even lower than the national averages in comparison to the girls'. The girls won.

[Hot Flatus]

I think you've totally missed the point about prejudice and power, Clandy.  Without the power, the -ism is pretty irrelevant.

As to bottom shaving, Julian is being a little disingenuous in taking your words literally.

Julian waxes.

[Julian]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

Humour arises from the unexpected.  Therefore it is supposedly funny to have an advert saying something is so simple even a man can do it - because in real life, men do the difficult things (running the country, being high court judges, fixing technical things).  Funny.  Lol.  (Well, no, but you get the idea.)

If women are portrayed as stupid, that is not unexpected, because cultural meme has it that women are a bit weak, simple minded, etc.  So there is no humour.  

I dislike the ads very much, because they draw on unpleasant gender stereotypes, but to suggest that they are reverse sexism is bottomgravy.

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

So basically in your warped PC world misandry is fine and tickeyboo, but mysogeny is punishable by death.

Fuck. Off.

No.  I think your self-admitted 20 years on the puff has intefered with your comprehension skills.

That advert would not be "funny" if it weren't for the fact that men currently hold most positions of power and influence.  Saying they are stupid is self-evidently impossible.  

In an equal world, there would be no humour in the ad.  People would look at each other and say "eh?  What's that about then?"  It is only supposedly funny because it draws on

a) the humour of the unexpected (a man needing something to be 'simple' - well, that's ridiculous, men clearly do most / much of the most difficult work globally)
b) the humour of reversal (that being the traditional set up of a man patronising the 'little woman' who does need things to be simple)

It is a sexist ad.  But not for the reasons you seem to think.

[Clandy]

Curiously, it does seem to be okay for primary schools to divide kids into 'boys' teams' and 'girls' teams' and to urge each one to 'beat the boys / girls.'

Really? My mother is a primary school teacher, and at no time in her 28 year career was she witness to this.

I'm surprised someone so unobservant is allowed to teach.

I'm surprised someone so blinkered and biased and up their own unshaven feminist arse is permitted to practice law, but hey-ho. Btw, thanks for insulting my mother, someone you have never met and know nothing about.

I will add to my post on this issue that in my entire time at school as a pupil, not once were we divided into boy and girl teams and made to compete against each other.

Few women shave their arses, Clandy.  If you've encountered any who do, you should also check for testicles.

My experience has been different to that of your mother, both in my own education (at a mixed primary) and then when I've done one-to-one reading at a mixed primary.  Indeed, there was a recent TV programme where they separated out the boys and then made them do a debating competition and some other competition against the girls.

So you went to a crap primary school and saw a TV programme. That warrants insulting my mother does it?

[pcolbeck]

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

It's a digression but I still think that's wrong. An "association for stopping discrimination against black police officers" fine but one you can't join unless you are black that wrong. How black do you have to be by the way ?

[Julian]

My experience has been different to that of your mother, both in my own education (at a mixed primary) and then when I've done one-to-one reading at a mixed primary.  Indeed, there was a recent TV programme where they separated out the boys and then made them do a debating competition and some other competition against the girls.

If it's the same one I'm thinking of, that was a programme whose raison d'être was attempting to fathom the difference in reading ages between boys and girls in a particular school in Harlow, IIRC, where the boys' scores were even lower than the national averages in comparison to the girls'. The girls won.

And the boys cried.  Yes, that's the one.  I thought it was a horrible programme - the boys clearly did flourish in a context of more focused attention and higher expectations with their literacy, but why the need to keep going on about the "boys team" and "you've got to beat the girls" etc.  (Well, the need was for the telly cameras, but it was  still unpleasant.)

[Julian]

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

It's a digression but I still think that's wrong. An "association for stopping discrimination against black police officers" fine but one you can't join unless you are black that wrong. How black do you have to be by the way ?

Actually you don't have to be black to join it. White officers can join if they like.  Which makes it even funnier that it's the most often cited as an example of 'reverse racism.'

[Clandy]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

Humour arises from the unexpected.  Therefore it is supposedly funny to have an advert saying something is so simple even a man can do it - because in real life, men do the difficult things (running the country, being high court judges, fixing technical things).  Funny.  Lol.  (Well, no, but you get the idea.)

If women are portrayed as stupid, that is not unexpected, because cultural meme has it that women are a bit weak, simple minded, etc.  So there is no humour.  

I dislike the ads very much, because they draw on unpleasant gender stereotypes, but to suggest that they are reverse sexism is bottomgravy.

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

So basically in your warped PC world misandry is fine and tickeyboo, but mysogeny is punishable by death.

Fuck. Off.

No.  I think your self-admitted 20 years on the puff has intefered with your comprehension skills.

That advert would not be "funny" if it weren't for the fact that men currently hold most positions of power and influence.  Saying they are stupid is self-evidently impossible.  

In an equal world, there would be no humour in the ad.  People would look at each other and say "eh?  What's that about then?"  It is only supposedly funny because it draws on

a) the humour of the unexpected (a man needing something to be 'simple' - well, that's ridiculous, men clearly do most / much of the most difficult work globally)
b) the humour of reversal (that being the traditional set up of a man patronising the 'little woman' who does need things to be simple)

It is a sexist ad.  But not for the reasons you seem to think.

My comprehension skills are fine thank you very much, and obviously a lot better than your own. The mere fact that you think there is 'reverse-sexism' and 'reverse-racism' proves that. There is only sexism, just as there is only racism. TV ads that go out of their way to denigrate men are just as sexist as they would be if they were denigrating women.

[pcolbeck]

Back on topic surely the reason why public school boys rule Britain is because they think they can. They are given the confidence and aspiration to do such things and combine that with better than average grades getting them into the best universities and the network of like minded and well connected friends that school and university gives them they end up with a much higher chance than average of making it to the top.
Imagine being at one of the top public schools and saying that you wanted to be PM. It wouldn't seem ridiculous or a flight of fancy to your peers or teachers, now try that thought experiment with an average comprehensive.

[pcolbeck]

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

It's a digression but I still think that's wrong. An "association for stopping discrimination against black police officers" fine but one you can't join unless you are black that wrong. How black do you have to be by the way ?

Actually you don't have to be black to join it. White officers can join if they like.  Which makes it even funnier that it's the most often cited as an example of 'reverse racism.'

Thanks Julian. I didn't know that and it's never mentioned in the media.  It should be. You learn something every day.

[Julian]

Isms are privilege plus power.  This is why people who talk about "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are usually talking out of their bottoms.

Ah yes, that old chestnut. So TV ads proclaiming 'So simple even a man can do it' are just friendly banter are they? TV ads depicting men as hopeless and unable to deal with a cold are just 'friendly banter' too I suppose? When if the same ads were aired saying the same about women there would be an almighty stink created by feminists.

Humour arises from the unexpected.  Therefore it is supposedly funny to have an advert saying something is so simple even a man can do it - because in real life, men do the difficult things (running the country, being high court judges, fixing technical things).  Funny.  Lol.  (Well, no, but you get the idea.)

If women are portrayed as stupid, that is not unexpected, because cultural meme has it that women are a bit weak, simple minded, etc.  So there is no humour.  

I dislike the ads very much, because they draw on unpleasant gender stereotypes, but to suggest that they are reverse sexism is bottomgravy.

Would you now like to do "why it is that we don't have a White Police Association, surely that's reverse racism?" followed by "But What About the Able-Bodied Direct Action Network"?

So basically in your warped PC world misandry is fine and tickeyboo, but mysogeny is punishable by death.

Fuck. Off.

No.  I think your self-admitted 20 years on the puff has intefered with your comprehension skills.

That advert would not be "funny" if it weren't for the fact that men currently hold most positions of power and influence.  Saying they are stupid is self-evidently impossible.  

In an equal world, there would be no humour in the ad.  People would look at each other and say "eh?  What's that about then?"  It is only supposedly funny because it draws on

a) the humour of the unexpected (a man needing something to be 'simple' - well, that's ridiculous, men clearly do most / much of the most difficult work globally)
b) the humour of reversal (that being the traditional set up of a man patronising the 'little woman' who does need things to be simple)

It is a sexist ad.  But not for the reasons you seem to think.

My comprehension skills are fine thank you very much, and obviously a lot better than your own. The mere fact that you think there is 'reverse-sexism' proves that.

C- for comprehension; see above (first bolded passage).  I called it 'bottomgravy.'  That means I don't think there is such a thing.  

There is only sexism, just as there is only racism. TV ads that go out of their way to denigrate men are just as sexist as they would be if they were denigrating women.

See above; bolded passage 2.  "It is a sexist ad."  

What was that about your comprehension skills again?  

As to the one-size-fits-all understanding of -isms, I agree with Ural Kunst here:  

I think you've totally missed the point about prejudice and power, Clandy.  Without the power, the -ism is pretty irrelevant.a