The conflict between males and females is as old as the hills, and it always finds its way in all aspects of people’s lives. Education became another platform for the clash between genders in the 20th century when women paved their way to equality in access to educational services. Ironically, men start voicing their concerns about being discriminated against in the 21st century (Kimmel 564). Many people claim that girls outperform boys due to the feminization of the system where such masculine attributes as competition and assertiveness are the subject of debates. Males lament that feminists shaped the US educational system in order to make it more favorable for females. Nevertheless, this discrimination is a topic for a political gamble and a result of certain socioeconomic shifts in the society.
We will write a custom Essay on Male-Female Conflict in Education System specifically for you
301 certified writers online
First, the gap between boys and girls does not indicate the existence of gender discrimination. Boys still outperform girls in the sciences while girls are better in languages. It is stated that the mean scores of girls are becoming better compared to boys’ scores in these subjects (Kimmel 568). However, the reason for this trend has nothing to do with gender discrimination in the form men see it. It has been found that the existing bias concerning male and female subjects make many girls choose feminine disciplines.
Only the most capable and persistent girls choose mathematics and sciences while boys who have mediocre skills remain in the field since they overestimate their abilities (Wang and Degol 119). So, gender stereotypes have an influence on certain choices, but they cannot be regarded as a manifestation of discrimination against males.
It is also essential to consider other factors affecting students’ academic performance. Socioeconomic status appears to be a more relevant predictor of young people’s academic ambitions and performance. Slightly over a third of African American students are males while approximately a half of white middle-class students are females (Kimmel 567). It is clear that race and socioeconomic status are more influential than gender. Moreover, extracurricular activities that are often favored by boys are vanishing due to the lack of funds. Boys do not have an opportunity to satisfy their needs, which leads to the decrease in male students.
Therefore, it is obvious that the discrimination against boys does not exist in the educational setting. Politicians and citizens may try to draw public attention to this non-existent problem to pursue their own goals. However, a closer examination of the issue makes it apparent that boys perform poorly due to their lack of motivation, interest, or abilities rather than some discriminatory trends. People should not try to find the adverse effects of feminists’ policies. It is essential to identify the true causes of educational shifts. Some stereotypes have been shaping young people’s choices, but this biased attitude is not a result of the plot against boys. This is an outcome of the patriarchal capitalist society where equality is not the major value.
In conclusion, it is necessary to note that gender clash in the educational domain does not exist. Certain trends and political decisions make girls outperform boys in some areas. However, male students are also successful in many academic spheres. Hence, those who focus on biological differences should stop trying to blame others and start being real men. They should compete against each other and against females. It is also necessary to stress that the modern society is becoming prepared for true equality where people choose their academic and career path without paying attention to stereotypes.
Kimmel, Michael. “A War Against Boys?” The Longman Reader, edited by Judith Nadell and John Langan, 3rd ed., Pearson, 2007, pp. 564-570.
Wang, Ming-Te, and Jessica L. Degol. “Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions.” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 29, no. 1, 2017, pp. 119-140.