By : Feminists rarely give birth to new ideas, but one is budding in their wombs in a way that cries out for abortion.
Should men in STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) be encouraging their women peers with vacuous praise? An emerging feminist trope is attempting to goad men into giving college women science students unexpected and possibly unwanted “attaboy” (attagirl?) acknowledgements in order, it is supposed, to stem the flow of women out of STEM classes. This nascent effort is laden with traps designed by feminists specifically to destroy men’s lives with false accusations of creating hostile environments for women.
College men need to hold their tongues and ignore this damseling dudgeon.
The new trope, which doesn’t even have a name yet, comes from a study by Dan Grunspan at the University of Washington about the gendered differences between how male and female students estimate each other’s competence and achievements. The results of this study were recounted in a badly written blog post in the WaPo by a man-hater named Danielle Paquette.
I’m going to dub the new problem “mangrading” and the proposed solution “vagboosting.” But first, some background on the purported problem.
In the study, women predicted within a tight margin the grades of other students, while men tended to estimate the grades of their male peers as being higher than the actual grades.
Should men in STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) be encouraging their women peers with vacuous praise? An emerging feminist trope is attempting to goad men into giving college women science students unexpected and possibly unwanted “attaboy” (attagirl?) acknowledgements in order, it is supposed, to stem the flow of women out of STEM classes. This nascent effort is laden with traps designed by feminists specifically to destroy men’s lives with false accusations of creating hostile environments for women.
College men need to hold their tongues and ignore this damseling dudgeon.
The new trope, which doesn’t even have a name yet, comes from a study by Dan Grunspan at the University of Washington about the gendered differences between how male and female students estimate each other’s competence and achievements. The results of this study were recounted in a badly written blog post in the WaPo by a man-hater named Danielle Paquette.
I’m going to dub the new problem “mangrading” and the proposed solution “vagboosting.” But first, some background on the purported problem.
In the study, women predicted within a tight margin the grades of other students, while men tended to estimate the grades of their male peers as being higher than the actual grades.