Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Appropriate vocational training (Score 1) 599

There is a school opening just for boys to help them in the areas they are behind.

False equivalence. Helping people where "they are behind" is not the goal. The area where boys are behind that the new school purports to help is not as conducive to good jobs as the girls school.

Like you said in another post, nobody's helping people get into the toilet cleaning industry, because that's not really a worthy goal.

Comment: Re:Appropriate vocational training (Score 1) 599

Banned from that particular school, but not banned in general. It's like the girl's bathroom, Boys are banned from going in to it, but not from peeing in a separate boy's bathroom.

If there's a boys school that focuses on STEM, then it's fine, just like separate bathrooms are fine. In this article, the boys school is going to be focused on language skills.

Strangely there isn't much of an effort to get more men into toilet cleaning either, perhaps because the goal is for more people to have good jobs instead of shitty ones.

And that's the same reasoning as why the boys language school is not good enough.

Comment: Re:Hurrah for sex-segregation! (Score 1) 599

I think segregation would be okay if it were optional and not mandated by the state. If all boys and all girls (or all blacks and all whites) must attend segregated schools, that's not nice. But if there were options available so that you could attend whichever type of school you want, the arguments made in Brown would not apply.

Comment: Re:Black and White? (Score 1) 599

Simply that human nature doesn't change that quickly and the separate facilities will soon be funded inequitably because of that.

Separate facilities are already funded inequitably because of the way school funding works in most areas.

By this logic of "It didn't work out like the theoretical model and still has a lot of inequality, so we should ban it" we should ban non-segregated schools I guess. Maybe ban public schools in general? I don't know. The logic of making something illegal because it didn't work as expected just doesn't make sense. It can work in principle, that's what counts.

If you're worried about a situation where public officials start making boys schools really awesome and girls schools really bad, then make THAT illegal. Put mechanisms in place to protect against THAT. Do you think that can't be done for some reason?

Show me any time in the past where that hasn't happened instead.

I know plenty of gender-segregated schools that seem to work out pretty well.


Gender-segregation was explicitly carved out as an exception to anti-discrimination laws. "If a private school gets federal funding, it can’t discriminate against a student based on his race, sex (unless it’s a single-sex school), national origin and religion."

There are plenty of single-sex schools that A) operate legally and B) even get federal money.

So clearly segregation works and is seen as "ok" in some cases.

Comment: Re:I thought we were trying to end sexism? (Score 1) 599

Did you not read the rest of my post?

Size, attention, funding. Those are important characteristics of the movements. Since the movements to help men are much smaller, leaving out those salient points and just saying "Oh yeah, movements are afoot to help men, it's fine" is misleading.

From Wikipedia (

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result."

Comment: Re:Black and White? (Score 1) 599

Do you think that because at one time "separate but equal" was not really equal, that it *can't* be?

Separate but equal failed in the US because of widespread racism and lack of accountability among public officials. Do you have any argument to show that the same thing would happen now?

Comment: Re:Because girls just can not hack it with boys. (Score 2) 599

I've read studies that show girls (and boys) learn better in single-sex classrooms, and also when their teacher is the same sex. I think segregated schools like the one in this article are a great idea. There's nothing wrong with "separate but equal" if they're really equal... and that's the big problem here. The boys' school is not the same as the girls' school.

Comment: Re:Valve needs to use their clout (Score 2) 309

by spitzak (#49480757) Attached to: NVIDIA's New GPUs Are Very Open-Source Unfriendly

Actually you can change the monitor layout without restarting X now.

And the Gnome control for moving the monitors around somewhat works, though it is unclear if they are special casing Nvidia or that NVidia is implementing the necessary parts of xrnr. The Nvidia control works somewhat better.

Comment: Re:Apartheid Education (Score 1) 148

Seriously sounds like they are drifting towards an apartheid education system.

Aside from the negative connotations, there's nothing specifically wrong with that. We do have optionally segregated-by-gender schools and they seem to work out pretty well. As long as the segregation isn't mandated by the state, what's the problem?

Race - biological [...] was only extended into arbitrary human [...] classification purely as a result of rampant prejudice and a specific desire to exclude people from competitive access in capitalist societies

Yeah right, race consciousness never existed in non-capitalist economies. I recall reading about an isolated tribe whose name for themselves basically meant "human" and whose name for other people who didn't look like them (like white anthropologists) meant "non-human."

An egghead is one who stands firmly on both feet, in mid-air, on both sides of an issue. -- Homer Ferguson