Or is it a men’s movement issue because feminism is only for women and girls?

thanks.

It could conceivably be an issue worth addressing to both feminists and men’s rights activists. I think that it’s above all an issue to be addressed by educators and others involved with education policy, however. I’m currently pursuing my teaching certification, and an awareness of inequalities in the classroom has been drilled into me (particular issues we’ve addressed include boys falling behind in reading/literacy, ESL students being either placed into English-based instruction that overwhelms them or held back to be utilized as "translators" for teachers, and girls being discouraged from being vocal in the classroom). Making future (and current!) teachers aware of these things should absolutely be a priority – as an awareness of these problems, one hopes, will lead teachers to address these problems in their classrooms – as should be continuing to seek solutions to these issues. I also think that it’s worth noting that the higher up in education you get, the more it’s females falling behind (i.e. while there are more female undergraduates, more males will pursue their Ph.D.). I think the issue of particular groups falling behind should be addressed at all levels (but not by, you know, instituting quotas or anything like that).

Now they finally created and officer billet for PJs, and its called a Combat Rescue Officer, or CRO (as in the black bird) for short. Be aware though that not only is the training the same as an enlisted PJ (2 years of intense training with a 90% dropout rate), but that their are very very very few slots.

For instance, every year there are about 150 pilot slots given out to AFROTC which are pretty competetive to get. There are about 6 CRO slots per year. You have to be at the VERY top of your game, and I mean VERY top.

My recommendation is that of you wanna get a college education, then go into the Air Force afterwards with a different job, do it very well for a few years, and then cross-train into the CRO career field. It will be easier for you to get a slot, and if you can grunt it out… you have your maroon beret and have accomplished something only a handful of men ever have.

If you want an Army ROTC scholarship to be an infantry officer, then just apply for it out of high school. If you have half a brain, they will give you one. If you somehow don’t get one, then sign up for ROTC anyways and if you do well, they will give you a scholarship.

AFROTC scholarships are a little harder to get. Also apply for one out of high school. If you are like me and are well above the published standards and still don’t recieve one, then sign up for AFROTC anyways, work hard to do well, and you will get rewarded with one.

The best of luck!

The men I know who’ve graduated either worked their way through or paid off student loans.

Worked my way through 2 degrees with a combination of student loans, crappy paying jobs, scholarships and one grant that my mother’s job allowed me to get.

Both the scholarships and the grant were based only on grades, and my brother got the same grant and scholarships I did. So, I consider that money earned as much as the money that I worked summers to save.

I was lucky enough to have parents who let me live rent free too, otherwise it would have cost me a lot more.

1) Gender should be an irrelevant curiosity in modern professional society, in the same way that blood type, eye and hair color, race, and other doubtlessly biological yet socially irrelevant characteristics are. Outside the bedroom, hospital, and romantic world, gender shouldn’t matter at all.

2) Men and women are inherently different, but are equal because they possess different but equally valuable attributes. There is a certain proper set of behaviors and characteristics for men and a certain different proper set of behaviors and characteristics for women, but these sets are equally valuable, so men and women should respect each other as different but equal.

3) Men have historically oppressed women, so it is only fair and right than men should suffer some minor level of oppression at society’s hands to set the ground back equally. A certain level of scapegoating and institutional discrimination against men in the modern world is tolerable in light of what has happened historically.

…and some less general viewpoints:

a) Men are physically superior to women, so women should receive lighter sentences and more lenience in violent crimes than men, and we should be more concerned with protecting women from rape and assault than men.

b) Scholarships that discriminate against men, and ‘affirmative action’ in academia and industry in general, are acceptable for historical reasons.

c) The Selective Service, which requires men and not women to register from the draft, should remain in place.

d) Women are superior to men in raising children, so this should be taken into consideration in marital custody disputes, and women who rely on men to support them while they raise children should be admired.

e) Stay-at-home dads should be admired.

f) The oppression of homosexuals and/or homosexuality is a bad thing.

g) Rape is not broadly enough defined; if a couple has sex and one partner regrets it and feels pressured, even if there is no violence, threat of violence, or blackmail, the reluctant partner has been ‘raped.’

h) Only men can rape, and/or only women can be raped.

3

a, b, c, d, g, h

However, if she desires to be a young mother many in society scoff at her and give more warnings than praises … plus, few beyond her immediate family (husband, parents) reach out to educate her on how to do this.

What’s wrong with getting a “Mrs. Degree” in today’s society?
Please answer as if you were a School Career Councilor – Thanks.

Nothing is wrong with that option, if it is what makes you happy and gives you fulfillment.

With college curricula, you have to realize that they are determined by what classes have enough students to make money (and pay salaries, etc.). Home economics classes do not have much demand these days, so they are not economically feasible for colleges.

If your goal is a "Mrs. degree," remember that you can choose all sorts of majors to do that. Why not major in education or nursing, for example? Those would be wonderful skills to contribute to a happy family.

However, I am able to start a scholarship program for women, just because they are women…..

As a mother of both girls and boys I find that sexist and down right ridiculous.

What do you think?

If you fund a scholarship – you can decide who gets the money.

First, the college’s financial aid office and website has a list of private scholarships offered from outside organizations and companies. Sometimes a college major’s website will list scholarships, too.

Second, the public library has a book listing scholarships with some not even listed on the web.

Third, fill out the FAFSA form because it is the way to apply for government grants. However, the government grants are need based. It takes into consideration your income and savings along with your parents’ income and savings unless you are an independent student under current regulations. The form becomes available on January 1 for the upcoming fall semester or quarter.

Fourth, your high school’s guidance office will have a list of local scholarships and state scholarship programs.

Fifth, search Google.com and Yahoo.com for any grants and scholarships in your state for education majors. Some states have a program to encourage students with a certain GPA to enter into the teaching profession.

Finally, I recommend joining several free membership scholarship search websites, but the best I have located is Scholarship Experts since they have a very thorough and lengthy survey to complete compared to Fastweb. There are scholarships for a variety of things including ethnicity, clubs, hobbies, and even wearing duct tape to the high school prom. Most are updated on a regular basis. Most offer a customized search based on information entered onto a form on the website.

Good luck!

The College Sports Council has done a study of NCAA Division I athletic scholarships and come up with some surprising (to some) conclusions. Here’s the CSC’s summary of their findings.

In "gender symmetric" sports, i.e. those in which both sexes participate, scholarships available to women far outnumber those available to men. And since far more boys than girls take part in high school athletics, the ratios of scholarships to male candidates, versus scholarships to female candidates is radically unequal. As CSC chairman Eric Pearson said,

This new study appears to provide prima facie evidence of disparate treatment of male students by the 28% of NCAA Division I schools that don’t sponsor football teams.

The study removed football scholarships because that is not a gender symmetric sport.

Using NCAA data, the CSC found that overall, there are 2,653 women’s teams versus 2,097 for men in Division I, a 26.5% difference. In gender symmetric sports, women’s scholarships outnumber men’s by about 62%, 32,656 to 20,206.

The findings regarding the number of athletes per available scholarship include the following,

In every "gender symmetric" sport with the exception of gymnastics, men face longer odds against getting a scholarship than women. By far, the most difficult athletic scholarship to obtain at the Division I level is in men’s volleyball, where there are 489 high school athletes for every full NCAA scholarship. Similar long odds exist for men competing in Track and Field/Cross-Country (221 to 1), Soccer and Water Polo (196 to 1) and Tennis (136 to 1).

Those who object to the CSC’s findings point to the fact that the data exclude football scholarships. To them, the fact that all football scholarships are given to males balances the inequalities of the gender symmetric sports. How a football scholarship is supposed to benefit a boy whose sport is tennis or volleyball, these critics don’t explain. Likewise, how a school that doesn’t field a football team should be able to ignore the requirements of Title IX because other schools elsewhere do offer football goes unexplained.
" can’t comment on a study I’ve never seen, nor can you.
How can you be certain the claims made above are indeed correct? You can’t because you have no evidence."

Usual and typical comment from a feminist..
They will release any shady, lying as well as questionable report but whoa and behold should anyone dare to suggest that they are sexist watch the fireworks..

Feminists are liars, this is a proven and obvious fact..

Its the same old story: if it disadvantages women its sexism, but if it disadvantages men its equality.

How do they get away with this? Moms and Dads and schoolkids should totally reject this policy. I would go as far as to say a boycott is warranted to correct this problem.

Edit
Object of Its Ire: "That’s discrimination against girls in the sport of wrestling".
LOL! This is what feminism is all about – shaping the world to fit the needs of lady wrestlers. In fact last year in the UK a large amount of government funding was allocated to training women wrestlers. And how many women wrestlers are there in the UK? Last I heard nobody was found to take the funding. Feminists had demanded the funding on principal but there was no real need for it. And of course the money could have gone to sports that people actually want to take part in.

A serious problem with modern feminism is this freeloading mentality – minority lifestyle choices should get government funding out of proportion any possible benefit to society. Except of course to see angry feminists wrestle each other (… hmmm… might be onto something here).

Where does the money come from? You can bet it won’t be from feminists, unless they get a handout from the government through pester power.