NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, we had the first part of our 'final' for my weights class today, today we did pushups.
I dont like pushups, since it means lifting my entire bodyweight which is, trust me, not an easy task, bench, however, would be fine. Whatever, I suppose I should have expected it. Anyway, back on topic...
To get an 'B' (which to the teacher is the minimum 'acceptable' level) all the guys in the class must do at least 20 pushups. This is fine, I dont have an issue with this in any way, its a good number :P
My issue is with the requirements for the girls, they have to do TWO pushups to get a B.
Now, pardon me for saying so, but if you are in the weights class and have been doing your lifts for the full semester like your supposed to, and you CANT do more than TWO pushups, you most likely should be in regular PE.
I realize that women often arent as physically strong as men, but lowering the bar that much is simply BS. I think that the requirement is issued by the state as well, which makes me more angry.

It's called sexism.

If women want the same rights as men, they should expect to do ev everything at the same level as men.

If they refuse to put in the same input, ie 2 pushups to a man's 20,

they'll just have to accept lesser pay.

I agree with you, but for different reasons. Women have to start pulling their weight if they want true independence. They should have the same obligations as men. Pushups put you against your own body's weight. So they are no more difficult for girls than they are for boys. If the nation is to be healthy, ALL citizens must be healthy, not just men.

equality = just that, equality.

all the students should have to do the same number of pushups. simple.

I dont like pushups, since it means lifting my entire bodyweight which is, trust me, not an easy task, bench, however, would be fine.

pushups are only 60% of your bodyweight. but really, the girls shouldnt have to do as many as the guys because the strength levels are different. i do agree that 2 is a little low though.

It's called sexism.

If women want the same rights as men, they should expect to do ev everything at the same level as men.

If they refuse to put in the same input, ie 2 pushups to a man's 20,

they'll just have to accept lesser pay.
Where did pay come into this? :rolleyes:
Grow up.

While I do agree that the grading thing at HM's school is fucked I think that it's more a reflection of the idiocy of a school board than "omg women are so sexist!! Us men have it so bad!!!"

It's called sexism.

If women want the same rights as men, they should expect to do ev everything at the same level as men.

If they refuse to put in the same input, ie 2 pushups to a man's 20,

they'll just have to accept lesser pay.

So because a policy has been imposed from above that can be seen to benefit one gender, everyone in said gender should suffer?

pushups are only 60% of your bodyweight. but really, the girls shouldnt have to do as many as the guys because the strength levels are different. i do agree that 2 is a little low though.
So do pushups and strengthen up. :rolleyes:

So because a policy has been imposed from above that can be seen to benefit one gender, everyone in said gender should suffer?
Hurray for fallacious total inclusion where only specific groups were mentioned.

I agree with you, but for different reasons. Women have to start pulling their weight if they want true independence. They should have the same obligations as men. Pushups put you against your own body's weight. So they are no more difficult for girls than they are for boys. If the nation is to be healthy, ALL citizens must be healthy, not just men.

Men develop upperbody weight much more easily genetically and much more socially acceptably than women, so there has to be a sliding scale here. 2 as against 20 is ridiculous, though! :eek: 12 to 15 against 20 is fair.

Women have to start pulling their weight if they want true independence ? I suppose it depends what country you're from. In the UK, more: voluntary and charity work, childcare, caring for sick relatives, housekeeping in marriage where both partners work, and charitable contributions (by frequency) is done by women compared to men. Pulling their weight much?

pushups are only 60% of your bodyweight. but really, the girls shouldnt have to do as many as the guys because the strength levels are different. i do agree that 2 is a little low though.
Based in the the % of a persons body weight that comes from muscle, a girl should have to do 7 pushups for each guy's 10.

I think the more important question is how or why "physical education" factors into an academic setting. Abolish "PE" (or at least make it voluntary and paid for ONLY by said volunteers) and use the saved funds on, say, actual academic programs?

I think the more important question is how or why "physical education" factors into an academic setting. Abolish "PE" (or at least make it voluntary and paid for ONLY by said volunteers) and use the saved funds on, say, academic programs.
A healthy body is essential for a healthy mind.

Personally I would abolish PE in favour of teaching all defensive martial arts. Practical, useful and they keep you fit. PE? A waste of time that made me cringe.

Sports should be an option for those who want to pursue them.

A healthy body is essential for a healthy mind.

1) Then explain him ---> http://www.hawking.org.uk/home/hindex.html

2) "Healthy bodies" are essentialy only for having an excuse for "coaches" and associated bureaucracy in a steady paycheck at the public's expense. Let them get a real job (preferably not teaching, however...).

http://www.hawking.org.uk/home/hindex.html
He is hardly the average person.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/home/hindex.html
Way to bring up one absolute extreme that is of little or no comparative relevance to the average student.

A healthy body is essential for a healthy mind.
Unless of course you are in a traditional PE class in which your mind melts away and does nothing for your body.

Elgesh']Men develop upperbody weight much more easily genetically and much more socially acceptably than women, so there has to be a sliding scale here. 2 as against 20 is ridiculous, though! :eek: 12 to 15 against 20 is fair.

? I suppose it depends what country you're from. In the UK, more: voluntary and charity work, childcare, caring for sick relatives, housekeeping in marriage where both partners work, and charitable contributions (by frequency) is done by women compared to men. Pulling their weight much?
Oh no I agree here. What I meant is that in schools girls should be expected to work out as hard as boys. Health is important. Women will never improve physically if they are always treated as weaker. Same with conscription. If it exists, it should apply to both men and women.

Unless of course you are in a traditional PE class in which your mind melts away and does nothing for your body.
Exactly lol

Way to bring up one absolute extreme that is of little or no comparative relevance to the average student.

Well, you said a healthy body is "essential." Obviously it is not. We need find only one deviant case. Edit: Ok, obviously not everyone is a Stephen Hawking. However, the presence of deviant cases demonstrates that what is "essential" for students will vary, sometimes wildly, from student to student. Shoving everyone through the same cookie cutter, therefore, is wasteful and counterproductive. Edit2: Besides, I'm one of those icky individualists; I don't care about the average student. I care about me. :D

I think the more important question is how or why "physical education" factors into an academic setting. Abolish "PE" (or at least make it voluntary and paid for ONLY by said volunteers) and use the saved funds on, say, academic programs.
Physical activity increases the efficently and capacity of your circlatory and respitory systems, which means that there will be more oxygen available to your brain when you need to sit down and think. If your brain is unable to get the blood it needs to work it will not work as quickly or as efficiently as it should. Also the brain has to preform very complex calculations very quickly when you are exercising (perticularly in high speed games); your brain gets an workout when you exercise.

To get an 'B' (which to the teacher is the minimum 'acceptable' level) all the guys in the class must do at least 20 pushups. This is fine, I dont have an issue with this in any way, its a good number :P

20 pushups for a B? I can do 20 in my sleep, and I'm about as unfit as they come!

(Although, I am as skinny as a rake, so the fact I don't have much to lift up and down may have something to do with that :p )

Oh no I agree here. What I meant is that in schools girls should be expected to work out as hard as boys. Health is important. Women will never improve physically if they are always treated as weaker. Same with conscription. If it exists, it should apply to both men and women.

Oh, right, you mean physically? Cool, I see :) Absolute physical equality isn't obtainable - we're just designed differently - but I think the bar can certainly be raised from 2 pushups, yeah...:rolleyes:

I actually support the idea of conscription - say 2 years National Service - for a more intelligent, representatitive and integrated army and society; the current army in the UK scrapes the bottom of the barral for some (not all, by any means, but enough to count...) of its recruits. For both sexes? Well, it's not a bad idea... but they'd likely fail the physical (even if it was on a sliding scale)... unless they'd done the PE work at school... which is exactly what you're proposing, isn't it :D

Okay, we had the first part of our 'final' for my weights class today, today we did pushups.
I dont like pushups, since it means lifting my entire bodyweight which is, trust me, not an easy task, bench, however, would be fine. Whatever, I suppose I should have expected it. Anyway, back on topic...
To get an 'B' (which to the teacher is the minimum 'acceptable' level) all the guys in the class must do at least 20 pushups. This is fine, I dont have an issue with this in any way, its a good number :P
My issue is with the requirements for the girls, they have to do TWO pushups to get a B.
Now, pardon me for saying so, but if you are in the weights class and have been doing your lifts for the full semester like your supposed to, and you CANT do more than TWO pushups, you most likely should be in regular PE.
I realize that women often arent as physically strong as men, but lowering the bar that much is simply BS. I think that the requirement is issued by the state as well, which makes me more angry.I leg press 430lbs, 3 sets, 15 reps (I prefer to use the women's only section of my guy, and that's as high as the weights go, therego the weird number of sets and reps). I don't even know my max. I'm a strong girl.

I also took weight lifting gym for a full semestre, and can still barely bench the bar. A push-up is out of the question. Women and men are different. Not better or worse; different. Men have much more upper-body strength than women, and the potential to be much stronger than women. That should not keep women from pushing themselves to the limit, taking challenging gym classes, or developing what strength we can.

As for the bullshit about women being paid less for less imput, no feminist has every suggested that. It's equal pay for equal work that we are fighting for. I don't know what it's like where you are, but here in Canada, the labour laws are such that no worker can be forced to lift more that 35 lbs (unassisted). If a woman can't do the work, she shouldn't get the job, but most women are capable of working just as hard as your average guy.

That's pretty stupid of your school. They should at least make them do 20 of the half push-ups (knees on ground).

Elgesh']Oh, right, you mean physically? Cool, I see :) Absolute physical equality isn't obtainable - we're just designed differently - but I think the bar can certainly be raised from 2 pushups, yeah...:rolleyes:

I actually support the idea of conscription - say 2 years National Service - for a more intelligent, representatitive and integrated army and society; the current army in the UK scrapes the bottom of the barral for some (not all, by any means, but enough to count...) of its recruits. For both sexes? Well, it's not a bad idea... but they'd likely fail the physical (even if it was on a sliding scale)... unless they'd done the PE work at school... which is exactly what you're proposing, isn't it :D
Well, I am proposing the teaching of defensive martial arts, which are even more relevant to military training, except that they are based on technique rather than strength. Women and men should both be fit. This is the one area in which I agree with Hitler. A nation should be fit and healthy. I know women cannot be as strong as men, on average, yet they should push themselves to their limits.

Physical activity increases the efficently and capacity of your circlatory and respitory systems, which means that there will be more oxygen available to your brain when you need to sit down and think. If your brain is unable to get the blood it needs to work it will not work as quickly or as efficiently as it should. Also the brain has to preform very complex calculations very quickly when you are exercising (perticularly in high speed games); your brain gets an workout when you exercise.

Ok, so you've convinced me that there might be a corelation between physical activity and better performance in school.

Now, tell me why students should be forced through "physical education" classes at school. Why can it not be voluntary? Why not encourage sports activities outside of school, and focus school resources on academic endeavors? Why not hold parents responsible for their children's health? Why not let the lazy reap what they sow?

Physical activity increases the efficently and capacity of your circlatory and respitory systems, which means that there will be more oxygen available to your brain when you need to sit down and think. If your brain is unable to get the blood it needs to work it will not work as quickly or as efficiently as it should. Also the brain has to preform very complex calculations very quickly when you are exercising (perticularly in high speed games); your brain gets an workout when you exercise.
Indeed. Your brain is still part of your body in the end. Asians are much more ahead of us in this domain. They believe that body and mind are one, and thus both must be conditioned. I cannot argue there. :)

2) "Healthy bodies" are essentialy only for having an excuse for "coaches" and associated bureaucracy in a steady paycheck at the public's expense. Let them get a real job (preferably not teaching, however...).
Somebody was consistently picked last in gym class.

Ok, so you've convinced me that there might be a corelation between physical activity and better performance in school.

Now, tell me why students should be forced through "physical education" classes at school. Why can it not be voluntary? Why not encourage sports activities outside of school, and focus school resources on academic endeavors? Why not hold parents responsible for their children's health? Why not let the lazy reap what they sow?
Because the majority is lazy. Do the math.

I think the more important question is how or why "physical education" factors into an academic setting. Abolish "PE" (or at least make it voluntary and paid for ONLY by said volunteers) and use the saved funds on, say, actual academic programs?

Sure, go and die of a heart attack at the age of twenty-five. We'll see how far your 'education' gets you then when your extra math class didn't teach you how to restart your heart.

Oh wait! You wouldn't even have been in that situation if you'd maybe had a little bit of 'strenuous' activity at a younger age. See all the fat kids around? We need more PE, not less.

But back on subject.

I was being facetious, kind of. Seriously though, equal means equal. You can't skimp on some things then expect equal things in others. Modern Feminism is no longer about making women equal to men, it's about making men second class citizens. (As compared to Traditional Feminism, which I believe in. Equality for women and men).

Also, now, I'm not physically fit at all and my upperbody strength is lacking (severely) but I can handle 20 push ups without breaking a sweat. The only problem is that my wrists click and hurt a bit when I do them... 20 seems to be a low number of pushups to do for a B in gym class.

Also, I'm a girl.

He is hardly the average person.

True enough. However, if physical health is "essential" to academic success, would it not follow that increasingly severe physical handicap/disease would result in increasingly poor academic performance?

Sure, go and die of a heart attack at the age of twenty-five. We'll see how far your 'education' gets you then when your extra math class didn't teach you how to restart your heart.

Oh wait! You wouldn't even have been in that situation if you'd maybe had a little bit of 'strenuous' activity at a younger age. See all the fat kids around? We need more PE, not less.

But back on subject.

I was being facetious, kind of. Seriously though, equal means equal. You can't skimp on some things then expect equal things in others. Modern Feminism is no longer about making women equal to men, it's about making men second class citizens. (As compared to Traditional Feminism, which I believe in. Equality for women and men).
I find that by making women do less though, they are the ones discriminated against, as it seems as if they are the fairer sex.

True enough. However, if physical health is "essential" to academic success, would it not follow that increasingly severe physical handicap/disease would result in increasingly poor academic performance?
Its not essential, yet it is conducive. He is hardly unfit by the way.

I was being facetious, kind of. Seriously though, equal means equal. You can't skimp on some things then expect equal things in others. Modern Feminism is no longer about making women equal to men, it's about making men second class citizens. (As compared to Traditional Feminism, which I believe in. Equality for women and men).

'Modern' Feminism = Radical Feminism, is that what you're thinking of, yeah? I don't see its tenets being enacted anywhere, but its theories sound a little like your concerns.

Because the majority is lazy. Do the math.
Well, but if you put it in the hands of the parents then the parents are responsable for teaching their children to grow into healthy adults. It's not a bad plan in that it's passive eugenics in a way. If parents are too stupid to teach their children to take care of themselves, then they don't get grandchildren.


But then I also think they should take obvious warning labels off things for the same purpose. If you're stupid enough to try to stop a chainsaw with your penis, then you don't deserve to have children.

Elgesh']'Modern' Feminism = Radical Feminism, is that what you're thinking of, yeah? I don't see its tenets being enacted anywhere, but its theories sound a little like your concerns.
Even if you construe "Modern feminism" (mesmells a made-up term) as RadFem, that statement was incorrect. RadFem does NOT (for the vast majority of radical feminists) mean making men second class citizens. What it does connote is the recognition that working within "the system" will not bring about gender-equality; which is the actual goal of most radical feminists. *That* is what the oh-so-scary "radical" in RadFem means. Nothing to do with imposing a new gender hierarchy. I would consider myself a radical feminist, and I know many other women who do, and are absolutely inf avour of abolishing gendered hierarchies.

See all the fat kids around? We need more PE, not less.


What we need are parents who don't fear their children. Or is "PE" the only possible solution?

Even if you construe "Modern feminism" (mesmells a made-up term) as RadFem, that statement was incorrect. RadFem does NOT (for the vast majority of radical feminists) mean making men second class citizens. What it does connote is the recognition that working within "the system" will not bring about gender-equality; which is the actual goal of most radical feminists. *That* is what the oh-so-scary "radical" in RadFem means. Nothing to do with imposing a new gender hierarchy. I would consider myself a radical feminist, and I know many other women who do, and are absolutely inf avour of abolishing gendered hierarchies.
I am a guy and I agree with RadFem.

Well, but if you put it in the hands of the parents then the parents are responsable for teaching their children to grow into healthy adults. It's not a bad plan in that it's passive eugenics in a way. If parents are too stupid to teach their children to take care of themselves, then they don't get grandchildren.


But then I also think they should take obvious warning labels off things for the same purpose. If you're stupid enough to try to stop a chainsaw with your penis, then you don't deserve to have children.
So long as schools taught defensive martial arts, any additional participation in sports/fitness is the child/parent's prerogative.

I am a guy and I agree with RadFem.

:) Good stuff.
*hands fudge brownie to Europa Maxima*

Because the majority is lazy.

So? Let them accept the concequences of their behavior. Why should I have to go out of my way to help them if they cannot be bothered to help themselves? I see no reason to care if they don't.

So? Let them accept the concequences of their behavior. Why should I have to go out of my way to help them if they cannot be bothered to help themselves? I see no reason to care if they don't.
Healthy body, healthy mind, healthy economy. Nations know this. Too bad PE is so useless that it doesn't achieve this. Whatever the case, appearances are so important nowadays, being fit to look good may be incentive enough alone.

:) Good stuff.
*hands fudge brownie to Europa Maxima*
:D My favourite kind

Healthy body, healthy mind, healthy economy. Nations know this.

Your claim that the majority is lazy would suggest otherwise. Plus, I want to see your data corelating health/physical fitness with economic performance. Edit: if there really is an obesity "epidemic" in the United States (I like how people insist on making any kind of deviant behavior, even if chosen voluntarily, enjoyed, and not directly harming anyone else, into some kind of disease...), there should be a coresponding drop in the economy.

:D My favourite kind

What about that 'healthy body' stuff back there? :p <is jealous cos he only got cold poison>

Sorry, Preebs, just joking :) But I think we must be thinking about different socio-political theories after all, my bad.

Your claim that the majority is lazy would suggest otherwise. Plus, I want to see your data corelating health/physical fitness with economic performance.
Well lets see. If being healthy does indeed mean your mind works better, then you are more likely to be productive. Healthier minds are more active, and thus less prone to error and more likely to learn fast. Higher productivity implies better economic performance.

Elgesh']What about that 'healthy body' stuff back there? :p <is jealous cos he only got cold poison>

Sorry, Preebs, just joking :) But I think we must be thinking about different socio-political theories after all, my bad.
I work out, so I can eat brownies, thank you :p

Well lets see. If being healthy does indeed mean your mind works better, then you are more likely to be productive. Healthier minds are more active, and thus less prone to error and more likely to learn fast. Higher productivity implies better economic performance.

Show me the data that proves any of this true. As I edited above, if there really is an obesity "epidemic" in the United States (I like how people insist on making any kind of deviant behavior, even if chosen voluntarily, enjoyed, and not directly harming anyone else, into some kind of disease...), there should be a coresponding drop in the economy.

What we need are parents who don't fear their children. Or is "PE" the only possible solution?

That too. But all of these bull shit excuses for parents complain to the school about how their kids have to run a mile... A mile... a fucking mile. I can run a god-damned mile. Anyone with half a brain cell can run a mile. This society is pathetic.

And then they complain about the junk food their kids eat. Don't give them money you idiot! Pack them a lunch! Don't feed them that kind of shit when their six and maybe they won't be 200 lbs at the age of 10!

What a bunch of BULL SHIT! Sometimes this country really makes me pissed off.

Elgesh']What about that 'healthy body' stuff back there? :p <is jealous cos he only got cold poison>

Sorry, Preebs, just joking :) But I think we must be thinking about different socio-political theories after all, my bad.
Well I was really replying to the person you were quoting. the poison was for them. < <

Help yourself to brownies. I just get touchy as feminism/queer is one of "my areas." :p

Show me the data that proves any of this true. As I edited above, if there really is an obesity "epidemic" in the United States (I like how people insist on making any kind of deviant behavior, even if chosen voluntarily, enjoyed, and not directly harming anyone else, into some kind of disease...), there should be a coresponding drop in the economy.
Not if you outsource to countries where the average population is healthy.

Well I was really replying to the person you were quoting. the poison was for them. < <

Help yourself to brownies. I just get touchy as feminism/queer is one of "my areas." :p
Heh mine too :p

Not if you outsource to countries where the average population is healthy.

Data. Actual Proof or evidence. Still waiting. :)

Data. Actual Proof or evidence. Still waiting. :)
If you're so curious, look for it yourself :p Its an assumption of mine. I'm not doing your work for you :) :p

If you're so curious, look for it yourself :p


Sorry, the burden of proof lies on he who makes the claim.


Its an assumption of mine.


What with all the people complaining about how Americans are fat and lazy and unfit, your assumption would predict that the Untied States would have a poor economy. This, however, does not appear to be the case. Thus, I must conclude that your assumption is unsafe. :)

Sorry, the burden of proof lies on he who makes the claim.



Good, that's all I wanted to hear. What with all the people complaining about how Americans are fat and lazy and unfit, your assumption would predict that the Untied States would have a poor economy. This, however, does not appear to be the case. Thus, I must conclude that your assumption is unsafe. :)
I still believe it could be due to outsourcing, something I plan on looking up. When I have the time. :p Not late at night.

My question still remains: Why is it the responsibility of the schools to see to students fitness?

Well I was really replying to the person you were quoting. the poison was for them. < <

Help yourself to brownies. I just get touchy as feminism/queer is one of "my areas." :p

the mind boggles :p I was always more into psychology than sociology when I was choosing uni courses, but I miss stuff like this!

My question still remains: Why is it the responsibility of the schools to see to students fitness?
Beyond my assumption, beats me.

If they taught defensive martial arts with the idea in mind to ensure citizens could protect themselves, and thus restrict crime, I could understand. It would also achieve fitness. However, PE on its own, I have no idea. Maybe to encourage more kids to get into sport and represent the country?

Data. Actual Proof or evidence. Still waiting. :)
Well, the obesity epidemic is said to be effecting kids way more than it is adults, and most kids don't have jobs that are significant to the economy. But hasn't the US economy been in recession since 2000?

My question still remains: Why is it the responsibility of the schools to see to students fitness?
For the same reason we entrust them with our children's mental development. I'm not sure there's much of a difference between them. The mind/body split is being knit together again these days, read your psychology journals :D

Actually, don't, it's a very lonely life...

I think in my school girls have to do 75% as much as the boys for the same grade. I think that's fair, if you take the strength differences into account.

However, there are quite a few girls in the school who could rip my skinny ass apart...:cool:

I think in my school girls have to do 75% as much as the boys for the same grade. I think that's fair, if you take the strength differences into account.

However, there are quite a few girls in the school who could rip my skinny ass apart...:cool:
Girls also have to do more flexibility/agility exercises I think, though in my opinion, boys and girls should do roughly the same load of work.

So long as schools taught defensive martial arts, any additional participation in sports/fitness is the child/parent's prerogative.

And for those who do not have an obsession with martial arts, and would rather the traditional gym class? :rolleyes:


I hear a whole lot of "this is what I want so everyone should fall in line" here.

And for those who do not have an obsession with martial arts, and would rather the traditional gym class? :rolleyes:


I hear a whole lot of "this is what I want so everyone should fall in line" here.
Its not a matter of obsession. Its a matter of teaching people to protect themselves so as to avoid becoming victims.

I hear a whole lot of "this is what I want so everyone should fall in line" here.

Finally, someone gets to the root of the issue.

Finally, someone gets to the root of the issue.
Public education is prescribed by the government. It will always be a matter of what policy makers consider to be most suitable.

So long as schools taught defensive martial arts, any additional participation in sports/fitness is the child/parent's prerogative.
When I was growing up, my mom didn't want me to learn martial arts (yes, I asked) she told me "Good girls don't learn how to fight."
At 7, I lost most of my respect for my mother with that one phrase.

When I was growing up, my mom didn't want me to learn martial arts (yes, I asked) she told me "Girls don't learn how to fight."
At 7, I lost most of my respect for my mother with that one phrase.
Heh many people still think this way, sadly.

Heh many people still think this way, sadly.
What's really sad is that when she claims that when she was in highschool, she was among the girls in her class fighting for the right to wear pants to school.

She also had a watch (she still has it, actually) that says "Time for Peace" in psychadelic writing it's all colourful.

Yet her ideals died before she was even old enough to vote.

What's really sad is that when she claims that when she was in highschool, she was among the girls in her class fighting for the right to wear pants to school.

She also had a watch (she still has it, actually) that says "Time for Peace" in psychadelic writing it's all colourful.

Yet her ideals died before she was even old enough to vote.
Hopefully women in the new generation will think more progressively than this. I think you are on the right track though :)

Public education is prescribed by the government.

This needs to change. :)

Its not a matter of obsession. Its a matter of teaching people to protect themselves so as to avoid becoming victims.
It also teaches the bully new techniques.:p
Accually, when my school started teaching Tae Bo (sp?) it wasn't used to for bullying purposes. The school did cancel the program because they though that was the case, but if the school admin paid attention, they would have realized they were still using the same WWF & WCW moves as they had been for years. The last time I checked Tae Bo did not teach DDT's, stunners, or power bombs.

This needs to change. :)
The alternative being what? Private school education? Or regionally controlled education? Both have their respective flaws.

It also teaches the bully new techniques.:p
Accually, when my school started teaching Ti Bo (sp?) it wasn't used to for bullying purposes. The school did cancel the program because they though that was the case, but if the school admin paid attention, they would have realized they were still using the same WWF & WCW moves as they had been for years. The last time I checked Ti Bo did not teach DDT's, stunners, or power bombs.
:rolleyes: Defensive martial arts like aikido give the defender the advantage, and without learning specific forms of them (which require serious devotion), they cannot be used in offence. So that would not be the case. Tae Bo is a fitness regime.

:rolleyes: Defensive martial arts like aikido give the defender the advantage, and without learning specific forms of them (which require serious devotion), they cannot be used in offence. So that would not be the case. Tae Bo is a fitness regime.
Kids won't use the martial arts they learn at school anyways. They know wrestling moves hurt alot more and look alot cooler.

Kids won't use the martial arts they learn at school anyways. They know wrestling moves hurt alot more and look alot cooler.
Mainly because they learn martial arts as sports rather than self-defence regimes. :rolleyes: Real martial arts are far more effective than wrestling moves. Wrestling looks cooler, especially in bullying, yet when it comes to defending yourself, it won't help you much in the real world.

The alternative being what?

In the United States: Abolish the federal Department of Education. Keep administrative and funding functions preferably at the city and county levels (state level at the most). With torches and pitchforks in hand, storm the school district administrative offices and kick the bureaucrats and politicians out into the gutter where they belong. Fill the newly emptied office space with parents and teachers. Put the responsibility for non-academic extracurricular activities into the hands of parents and the community. Use these savings to fund actual academic activities, preferably to pay the wages of competent and well-educated teachers. Abolish standardized testing, and focus classroom activities on actual critical thinking and learning, instead of on what order to fill in the little bubbles on the exam form so Mr./Ms. Teacher will look good.

It's called sexism.

If women want the same rights as men, they should expect to do ev everything at the same level as men.

If they refuse to put in the same input, ie 2 pushups to a man's 20,

they'll just have to accept lesser pay.

Maybe they should test flexibility. And the men should be required to match the women.

In the United States: Abolish the federal Department of Education. Keep administrative and funding functions preferably at the city and county levels (state level at the most). With torches and pitchforks in hand, storm the school district administrative offices and kick the bureaucrats and politicians out into the gutter where they belong. Fill the newly emptied office space with parents and teachers. Put the responsibility for non-academic extracurricular activities into the hands of parents and the community. Use these savings to fund actual academic activities, preferably to pay the wages of competent and well-educated teachers. Abolish standardized testing, and focus classroom activities on actual critical thinking and learning, instead of on what order to filling the little bubbles on the exam form.
This all sounds great, yet how do you ensure that each school maintains an acceptable standard? In addition, national exams such as SAT IIs or A levels help universities select students. If students did not study material appropriate for these, how would the universities select students? One school may teach well in excess of what an SAT II requires, whereas another may barely cover the minimum.

Maybe they should test flexibility. And the men should be required to match the women.
20 pushups to two would be like being required to bend over while they are required to put their leg behind their head.

Oh no I agree here. What I meant is that in schools girls should be expected to work out as hard as boys. Health is important. Women will never improve physically if they are always treated as weaker.
Perhaps everything shouldn't be measured by male characteristics.


Same with conscription. If it exists, it should apply to both men and women.

Agreed.

In the United States: Abolish the federal Department of Education. Keep administrative and funding functions preferably at the city and county levels (state level at the most). With torches and pitchforks in hand, storm the school district administrative offices and kick the bureaucrats and politicians out into the gutter where they belong. Fill the newly emptied office space with parents and teachers. Put the responsibility for non-academic extracurricular activities into the hands of parents and the community. Use these savings to fund actual academic activities, preferably to pay the wages of competent and well-educated teachers. Abolish standardized testing, and focus classroom activities on actual critical thinking and learning, instead of on what order to fill in the little bubbles on the exam form so Mr./Ms. Teacher will look good.

OMG! OMG! OMG!!!!!!!!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

IT MAKES SO MUCH GOD-DAMNED SENSE! I THINK ALL PEOPLE THAT HAVE A BRAIN HAVE THOUGHT OF IT!

Too bad those who have brains aren't the administrators in our school systems. I hate the Feds. Education should be left to the states.

20 pushups to two would be like being required to bend over while they are required to put their leg behind their head.

I don't agree that 20 push-ups to 2 is a fair ratio, but you got my point.

This all sounds great, yet how do you ensure that each school maintains an acceptable standard?


Edit: State and local government can ensure an acceptable standard within their respective jurisdictions.


In addition, national exams such as SAT IIs or A levels help universities select students. If students did not study material appropriate for these, how would the universities select students?


Students can do like I did and work hard to establish an excellent academic record, either in high school or community college, that the universities can use to judge actual merit. I went the community college/transfer route, built a college record and high GPA, and am now attending one of the top 50 public universities in the United States. Never took the SAT.

Perhaps everything shouldn't be measured by male characteristics.

I did say that both genders should be required to put their best effort in, men with regard to flexibility, women with regard to strength exercises.

I don't.



Students can do like I did and work hard to establish an excellent academic record, either in high school or community college, that the universities can use to judge actual merit. I went the community college/transfer route, built a college record and high GPA, and am now attending one of the top 50 public universities in the United States. Never took the SAT.
Universities would dislike this as it would mean more work for them. Furthermore, if you cannot ensure that each school maintains an acceptable standard, how would such a system work?

Universities would dislike this as it would mean more work for them.


Boo-hoo. :D

The bureaucrats can work for once. If they don't want to, they can take their place in the gutter. Simple as that.


Furthermore, if you cannot ensure that each school maintains an acceptable standard, how would such a system work?

I edited my previous response. State and local governments can ensure an acceptable standard within their respective jurisdictions.

I don't agree that 20 push-ups to 2 is a fair ratio, but you got my point.
Must be only relatively because I have no idea what you were going for.

Boo-hoo. :D

The bureaucrats can work for once. If they don't want to, they can take their place in the gutter. Simple as that.



I edited my previous response. State and local governments can ensure an acceptable standard within their respective jurisdictions.
Wouldn't that limit students to local universities then?

Wouldn't that limit students to local universities then?

How many and what kind of students go outside of their state to go to university?

How many and what kind of students go outside of their state to go to university?
Those who want to get into the very best uni out there?

Wouldn't that limit students to local universities then?

Plus, I see no reason why states cannot coordinate academic standards. I also see no reason why such coordination requires a federal education bureaucracy.

How many and what kind of students go outside of their state to go to university?

Um. Tens of thousands.

Plus, I see no reason why states cannot coordinate academic standards. I also see no reason why such coordination requires a federal education bureaucracy.
If they can pull that off, then I'll really take my hat off to them. Heck, I hope they implement such a system in the EU sometime soon.

Plus, I see no reason why states cannot coordinate academic standards. I also see no reason why such coordination requires a federal education bureaucracy.

Although I disagree with your view re the Department of Education, your plan wouldn't require coordinated academic standards if the SATs and ACTs were left in place. Those aren't administered by the feds.

Although I disagree with your view re the Department of Education, your plan wouldn't require coordinated academic standards if the SATs and ACTs were left in place. Those aren't administered by the feds.
The schools would have to ensure that the material they taught complied with the SAT/ SAT IIs then. I went to a British private school, and the school was pretty much free to do what it wanted, so long as we got through the A levels with good grades. It works rather well.

Um. Tens of thousands.

I suppose it is a lot. Question (and point, whatever it was) withdrawn.

The schools would have to ensure that the material they taught complied with the SAT/ SAT IIs then. I went to a British private school, and the school was pretty much free to do what it wanted, so long as we got through the A levels with good grades. It works rather well.

Meh. The SATs test verbal and math skills. There is no need to teach special specific material for students to prepare for the SATs.

I suppose it is a lot. Question (and point, whatever it was) withdrawn.

:)

Boo-hoo. :D

The bureaucrats can work for once. If they don't want to, they can take their place in the gutter. Simple as that.
And they will raise tuition fees and hire someone to do it for them.
I edited my previous response. State and local governments can ensure an acceptable standard within their respective jurisdictions.
What if your county decides that it is acceptable to lower the requirements for each letter grade in order to make their students more appealing to universities?

Meh. The SATs test verbal and math skills. There is no need to teach special specific material for students to prepare for the SATs.
What about the SAT IIs though? In Europe we are striving to create a common examination system, the European Baccalaureate, which is mostly being adopted by private schools. It would make going to foreign universities easier. Each private school, as with the A levels, is pretty much free to teach the curriculum as it likes, provided that the students can do well in the examined components. Its quite an interesting system as it encourages a broad education.

Although I disagree with your view re the Department of Education, your plan wouldn't require coordinated academic standards if the SATs and ACTs were left in place. Those aren't administered by the feds.

I suppose the SATs and other standardizes tests could serve to create academic standards. I just need to be convinced that schools will spend their time actually teaching and educating, instead of reviewing test materials and getting caught up in the related bureaucracy. I figure that parents, teachers, and the community would have an interest in keeping high standards in their own local school districts to the extent that this wouldn't be so much of an issue.

I suppose the SATs and other standardizes tests could serve to create academic standards. I just need to be convinced that schools will spend their time actually teaching and educating, instead of reviewing test materials and getting caught up in the related bureaucracy. I figure that parents, teachers, and the community would have an interest in keeping high standards in their own local school districts to the extent that this wouldn't be so much of an issue.
Hey if this comes into place, and a form of standardised exams exists to work towards, then I see no problems with it. Schools which failed to do well in the exams on the whole would be forced to raise their standards. So yeah, its a great idea. :)

And they will raise tuition fees and hire someone to do it for them.


Good. Perhaps parents will value and take education more seriously if it actually costs them some pain to achieve.


What if your county decides that it is acceptable to lower the requirements for each letter grade in order to make their students more appealing to universities?

When the universities find that the quality of their students is decreasing, they will discover the scam and adjust accordingly. The county in question will have to change it ways, or no one will take it seriously anymore. The resulting backlash among the voting public, composed of parents and students, will bring the county in line.

Good. Perhaps parents will value and take education more seriously if it actually costs them some pain to achieve.


When the universities find that the quality of their students are decreasing, they will discover the scam and adjust accordingly. The county in question will have to change it ways, or no one will take it seriously anymore. The resulting backlash among the voting public, composed of parents and students, will bring the county in line.
Based on the free market consumer/ supplier principle, that could work. In a market with many suppliers (the universities), the consumers would have more power in ensuring the suppliers deliver. Competition would destroy them otherwise.

Well, I am proposing the teaching of defensive martial arts, which are even more relevant to military training, except that they are based on technique rather than strength. Women and men should both be fit. This is the one area in which I agree with Hitler. A nation should be fit and healthy. I know women cannot be as strong as men, on average, yet they should push themselves to their limits.

So you want to teach kids to fight "defensively". Have you ever been in a gym class? It usually ends up the bigger kids making the weaker ones feel like dumbasses anyways, you think teaching them fighting skills defensive or not would create a healthy environment? I'm sure the teachers would love to have them testing all the new moves they learned in the hallways as well. Usually martial arts training tends to come with some sort of teachings on when to use it and how to avoid conflict. I hate to tell you but most kids today won't listen to any of that in a school. The athletic kids will develop better technique than the dorky unathletic ones just like any sport. But now they will be moves that give you more opportunity to hurt the other student. Sorry, I know many people are probably martial arts enthusiaists but this is a bad idea for public schools.

So you want to teach kids to fight "defensively". Have you ever been in a gym class? It usually ends up the bigger kids making the weaker ones feel like dumbasses anyways, you think teaching them fighting skills defensive or not would create a healthy environment? I'm sure the teachers would love to have them testing all the new moves they learned in the hallways as well. Usually martial arts training tends to come with some sort of teachings on when to use it and how to avoid conflict. I hate to tell you but most kids today won't listen to any of that in a school. The athletic kids will develop better technique than the dorky unathletic ones just like any sport. But now they will be moves that give you more opportunity to hurt the other student. Sorry, I know many people are probably martial arts enthusiaists but this is a bad idea for public schools.
Funny, because children in Shaolin monasteries never encountered such problems. They learnt their arts and many went on to become masters. Perhaps they were indeed cleverer than kids nowadays. Who knows. Defensively need not be contained in quotation marks. Some martial arts are almost exclusively defensive, and quite a few, both in their offensive and defensive forms (eg Krav Maga, Wing Chun, Hapkido, Aikido etc) are technique dependant, not strength reliant. They do work on the practitioner's fitness through exercise regimes, yet these are separate to the actual techniques used.

If the bigger kids were slow in catching on to the techniques, the situation would be that they would feel dumber. Nevertheless, young children are less shy and learn easier than adults, so teaching these arts at a young age would be ideal. Size differences also tend to be minimal at young ages, so by the time that they do come into play, the students have learnt the techniques necessary.

Good. Perhaps parents will value and take education more seriously if it actually costs them some pain to achieve.
It does cost the students pain to go to university. I think that the average uni student graduates with $25000 of debt. Parents tend to pay for what the can and let their kid take the rest of the debt.

When the universities find that the quality of their students is decreasing, they will discover the scam and adjust accordingly. The county in question will have to change it ways, or no one will take it seriously anymore. The resulting backlash among the voting public, composed of parents and students, will bring the county in line.
It will take some time for universities to notice that some counties are scamming them. The county would be able to get many underqualified students into university before the scam backfires.
There is also the possiblity that some major universities will put out their own standardized tests and local school districts could decide to train their students to do well on the uni's exam and not teach anything else.

Yay! I killed the thread! What? It's back to life...

Funny, because children in Shaolin monasteries never encountered such problems. They learnt their arts and many went on to become masters. Perhaps they were indeed cleverer than kids nowadays. Who knows. Defensively need not be contained in quotation marks. Some martial arts are almost exclusively defensive, and quite a few, both in their offensive and defensive forms (eg Krav Maga, Wing Chun, Hapkido, Aikido etc) are technique dependant, not strength reliant. They do work on the practitioner's fitness through exercise regimes, yet these are separate to the actual techniques used.

If the bigger kids were slow in catching on to the techniques, the situation would be that they would feel dumber. Nevertheless, young children are less shy and learn easier than adults, so teaching these arts at a young age would be ideal. Size differences also tend to be minimal at young ages, so by the time that they do come into play, the students have learnt the techniques necessary.

Because in that culture discipline is better than in (most) countries in the west

Because in that culture discipline is better than in (most) ciuntries in the west

I have to agree with the potato-man here in that we're not comparing like with like; there are huge cultural differences, including discipline, to take into account.

Because in that culture discipline is better than in (most) ciuntries in the west
Lamentably yes. Although I am all for freedom and individuality, one must learn discipline and respect alongside these two. Without discipline, one's mind cannot focus. We are becoming a culture of disrespect and laziness.

Okay, we had the first part of our 'final' for my weights class today, today we did pushups.
I dont like pushups, since it means lifting my entire bodyweight which is, trust me, not an easy task, bench, however, would be fine. Whatever, I suppose I should have expected it. Anyway, back on topic...
To get an 'B' (which to the teacher is the minimum 'acceptable' level) all the guys in the class must do at least 20 pushups. This is fine, I dont have an issue with this in any way, its a good number :P
My issue is with the requirements for the girls, they have to do TWO pushups to get a B.
Now, pardon me for saying so, but if you are in the weights class and have been doing your lifts for the full semester like your supposed to, and you CANT do more than TWO pushups, you most likely should be in regular PE.
I realize that women often arent as physically strong as men, but lowering the bar that much is simply BS. I think that the requirement is issued by the state as well, which makes me more angry.
I agree. Isn't it enough that on average women weigh less than men so they're already lifting less weight with each pushup, and 20 pushups isn't a whole lot. Anyone in decent shape should be able to manage it pretty easily.

Lamentably yes. Although I am all for freedom and individuality, one must learn discipline and respect alongside these two. Without discipline, one's mind cannot focus. We are becoming a culture of disrespect and laziness.

Only 'becoming'? :p :D

I agree. Isn't it enough that on average women weigh less than men so they're already lifting less weight with each pushup, and 20 pushups isn't a whole lot. Anyone in decent shape should be able to manage it pretty easily.

They 'weigh less'...yep... a lot of that missing weight is upper body mass, including a lot of 'missing' muscle. We're built differently!

Having said that, 2 is a ridiculous target. 12-15 is a more realistic gradiant from the bloke's 20.

But this area's already been discussed a lot, so I'll stop here :)

Elgesh']Only 'becoming'? :p :D
:p Alright, we are! Even I am guilty of it. Its just that we cannot allow it to continue ad infinitum. The Asians are so disciplined, they walk all over us. If they are seen as more intelligent as us (here I refer to Japanese), its because they are so focused.

I agree. Isn't it enough that on average women weigh less than men so they're already lifting less weight with each pushup, and 20 pushups isn't a whole lot. Anyone in decent shape should be able to manage it pretty easily.
I can barely get to 5 and I am in decent shape.
:p Alright, we are! Even I am guilty of it. Its just that we cannot allow it to continue ad infinitum. The Asians are so disciplined, they walk all over us. If they are seen as more intelligent as us (here I refer to Japanese), its because they are so focused.
I say we blaime the all the pornography on the television. We should march to the networks... screw it. I'll wait for the tv to make me disciplined.

Funny, because children in Shaolin monasteries never encountered such problems. They learnt their arts and many went on to become masters. Perhaps they were indeed cleverer than kids nowadays. Who knows.
:snip:


Stop right there, it is just like Because in that culture discipline is better than in (most) ciuntries in the west
what he said.

They grew up in a monastery. Not in a broken home or the inner city. They didn't watch power rangers on tv and drool over girls on television. I personally think western culture is doing just fine as long as you have good parents to guide you through it. But sadly many don't and (which yea I guess has something to do with the culture blah don't want to get into that) they won't follow the teachings that go with martial arts training. Thus, to them it is just fighting. Once again bad idea for public schools in the west.