If the only way to find something is to already know it's there and exactly how to get to it then effectively it doesn't exist for anyone else because they'll never be able to find it on their own.

Cheetahs, tigers, rhinos... the list goes on.

Personal problems are way too broad a spectrum for teachers to have to deal with - that's why colleges have counselors, no?

On the other hand, there's a finite number of ways that students react to not getting the grade they want (all of which have been observed by teachers since time immemorial), and then there's whether or not they can uncouple not understanding the material from not liking the teacher and coping strategies for both of those things.

That's fine and dandy. I actually tried that approach, and was met with the stubbornness of "nope, sorry, not even going to try" replies. They were there because someone told them this was a class they had to take. They were dead set against being there and no amount of support was going to fix the problem.

It worked for you, and I concede that it works for some that are motivated enough to try. I offered up front to help students who said they "didn't like" math, but you can't help anyone that doesn't want to be helped.

So, as far as I'm concerned, the educational process is a two-way street. If you're willing to learn, I'm willing to teach. Both sides have got to put in the effort.

If I can't get through to you and you're just going to sit there and ask me to hold your hand because you decided you weren't going to bother, I can't help you, I can't fix you, and I am not a failure because you decided that you were never going to learn no matter what.

Now hold on here, let's not generalize to the point of absurdity.

Just because everyone gets an education, does not necessarily mean they come out of it educated.

Not everyone who walks into a classroom does so because they have an appreciation for education. Many do so because they think that's what they "have" to do. Ask any college teacher, and I'm sure they'll tell you about experiences with students who have made it almost antagonistically clear that don't really want to learn, they just want the job that comes with the piece of paper. It doesn't make for a competitive or in fact competent work force. It only makes a work force that's flooded with cheap, subpar labor.

If in this country we had a better attitude towards education, I might be inclined to agree with you. But I've been on both sides of the professor's desk. I've been in classes for certifications. I've been a student in online courses. If there's one thing I've learned is that there's no great vigor for education for its own sake and for the sake of improving the fields in which people are studying.

There's more vigor for making sure as many people pass the classes as possible for profiting schools, for profiting industries that enjoy a marketplace of cheap labor, for people who think the piece of paper is the only real goal and to hell with actually -caring- about what they spent so much time studying.

You want a cultural revolution? You make sure that every child wants to learn. You make sure every child remembers that when they study and gets the facts wrong, it isn't because they're the wrong color or sex. You make sure that every child remembers that life isn't fair and they don't deserve cookies for simply showing up.

You make sure that every child has it drilled into his or her head that the world owes them nothing, and they will invariably put in more than they are ever going to get back.

I too would love an educated society. But the educated society I want has to want it just as much as I do.

Former algebra-based science CC teacher here. (Admittedly, I wasn't very good, thus "former", but I don't think that nullifies the experience of student attitudes.)

I had at least one student per semester tell me they "didn't like" math. Wasn't my problem, but I was discouraged from pointing that out to students. Also had students try and haggle with me for transferable credits at the end of the semester (that they didn't earn...I had one try to go to the department head and say that the established system of grading was wrong and that based on her system, she would have passed the class.)

Now, let's talk about what college was like when I was a freshman in the mid-90's at a four-year college for EE. I had to take a "Freshman Seminar" (a forced-to, no-credit class) wherein we discussed the Dewey Decimal system (stuff people who are in college should already know), rather than, say, strategies for getting good grades and checking yourself for bad behaviors when you don't get the grades you want.

There were even classes structured around the concept of "Test Anxiety Syndrome", again, something that, if you can't cope with taking tests, college is not for you.

Were I queen for a few years, I'd have a mandatory class at every college for freshmen entitled: "You think you're the first person to have that problem?"

So, it isn't just community colleges. And it isn't a recent problem. Students have had bad attitudes and expected to be catered to long before now, it's just that we're starting to feel the long-term effects of such initiatives.

Ever wonder why water treatment plants smell so bad?

I have a hard time taking anything titled with "cyber" in it seriously.

Everytime I hear "cybersecurity" I keep thinking we're getting a call from several decades back and science fiction is looking for a lost prefix.

Or maybe they're trying to promote the theory that the guns CAN'T be controlled, and that maybe if people actually see them and not see them as some sort of amorphous threat that Government is shouting down as bad, maybe people will also ask questions about the ability of the guns to shoot, and to kill, and to be better educated about the brand new thing they're pushing as a supposed threat?

I mean think about it, the worst thing for any lawmaker trying to regulate 3D printers is for people to know exactly what a hobbyist with a Makerbot is actually capable of.

I'm only going to comment on this as you failed to digest my entire post, as the one point I made is part of a larger set of problems I find with Sarkeesian as a whole.

You can disagree with one post, you can disagree with my entire post, but to say I don't really understand based on that point alone shows that you either have no interest in actually arguing and shutting me down because I disagree with you, or because you don't understand that Sarkeesian really IS a pretty big hypocrite, and the gender signifiers thing is a small part of that problem, and you don't like the fact that I pointed it out.

It's as if you're incapable of grasping the possibility that they might both be bad actors. You want a conspiracy theory go read up on "The Patriarchy" sometime, or even better yet "Rape Culture"... which literally claims evidence against it is ipso facto proof of its existence.

Given up what exactly?

Let's put GamerGate aside and get to the real issue here.

We're dealing with someone who:

-Calls particular "gender signifiers" sexist, but insists on wearing them throughout her videos
-Claims to want open discussion, but disables comments and ratings on her videos
-Claims to want academic acceptance of her materials as part of classroom curricula, but would rather do this on the strength of public opinion rather than professional peer review
-Claims she played video games as a kid, but then later claimed she didn't really play video games
-Makes wild claims about the pervasiveness of sexist tropes in video games in wagging-finger tones, but then caps off her monologues by saying "you can enjoy them anyway", which comes across like a guy who's been making advances at you all night, and when you tell him he's not interested, he says "oh, I was just kidding".
-Makes her claims of victimhood (and ascribing them to all women, thus creating a self-perpetuating system of usefulness for herself) the frequent centerpiece of her discussions instead of solutions for solving the problems of sexism in video games

I'd like to tell you, while I shouldn't have to, I will, that I'm a gender egalitarian, I'm female, non-white, and an engineer.

I also think that both sides of the GamerGate debate are woefully off their rockers.

I wasn't offended by Dr. Matt Taylor's shirt. I wasn't scared out of STEM because of it. I HAVE experienced sexual harassment. I currently do work in an environment where there's plenty of opportunity for me to succeed and where I have not, nor have other women in my group felt threatened or abused, so I don't feel systematically oppressed.

Maybe I'm biased. Maybe I'm lucky. But the fact is, I believe that in the United States, women have far fewer problems than they used to, and the few problems they have left aren't going to be solved by jamming the gender divide into every topic, but rather globally engaging and not accusing men, and finally, just by proving you can do what they do just as well and provide products that sell.

Anita accuses, by virtue of her constant victimhood. If that's "not giving up" and "fighting the good fight", then I take personal offense because she gives a bad name to me, who does more for women - maybe locally, if not globally - day in and day out.

The problem Mr. Timothy is the dishonest characterization of her in TFS. Anita brought the treatment of women to light... by personally being one of THE leaders of a group engaging in doxing, criminal blacklisting, SWATting, and hacking targeted primarily at women and non-white gamers who dared to speak out against her and her ~90% white male peers.

But that would be politically incorrect... which is why Ayaan Hirsi Ali isn't on this list and Anita the Pick Up Artist Seminar Saleswoman is.

Better yet stick her in a room with Ayaan Hirsi Ali and don't let McIntosh feed her lines.