Cambridge and Oxford universities are openly and unashamedly working to deliver equality of gender outcomes in degree grades (not in degree numbers of course, because 60% of degrees are awarded to women, so there’s no problem to be addressed.) Our thanks to Jeff for this. The start of the piece:
Cambridge academics are being discouraged from using terms such as genius, brilliant or flair in feedback for fear of alienating female students.
It is one of a series of moves lecturers say will help women – including changing exams and even removing portraits of men from the library.
Dr Lucy Delap, lecturer in modern British history, said ‘vague talk of genius, brilliance [and] flair carries assumptions of gender inequality’. She said some women ‘don’t find it very easy to project themselves into those categories’. [J4MB: Hmm, might the same be true for ‘some men’?]
Some female students suffered ‘imposter syndrome’ – where they feel they don’t belong – in a ‘male-dominated’ environment, said the academic. Dr Delap revealed exams were being overhauled in a bid to tackle a ‘gender differential’ which sees women outshone.
This could mean more coursework, take-home exams, [J4MB: a cheat’s charter] group work or a portfolio of essays. [J4MB: Basically, anything and everything which can help raise the grades of women relative to men, because vagina.]
Later in the piece:
In 2015-16, 31 per cent of women gained firsts in history at Cambridge compared with 39 per cent of men. A university spokesman said it was reviewing subjects to see how it could address ‘variations’ between different groups. [J4MB: Presumably a key explanation of why a higher proportion of men than women get firsts is precisely the same as in other areas in which men and women compete. More men than women are ‘work-centred’, i.e. they have a strong work orientation – Dr Hakim’s Preference Theory (2000)]
Feminists demand ‘variations between different groups’ be stamped out at all costs, needless to say. Other than in areas such as healthcare provision, workplace deaths, killing unborn children, genital mutilation, access to children, support for domestic violence victims, homelessness, prison sentencing… you know, the small stuff.
Lucy Delap’s webpage at the University of Cambridge is here. Her apparent inability to smile even for a moment for an official photograph strongly suggests she’s a feminist, and as a feminist ‘academic’, by definition a taxpayer-funded parasite. Her biography on the same page confirms it:
Lucy Delap is a historian of modern Britain, with a particular interest in gender history, the history of feminism…
Her Amazon author page is here.
If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 
You can’t identify people as stupid and now you can’t identify them as genius, so I guess we are all restricted to mediocrity now. Aren’t the lies of social justice/relativism, political correctness perpetrated by the weakness of feminism wonderful?
LikeLike
Insanity. I had to look into this to be sure it wasn’t from The Onion, but it is real. In the future we will look back on these days and wonder how human beings could ever wander so far from reality.
The word “genius” has the same root as the word “gender” itself. Etymologically speaking, it is as gender neutral as the word “gender”.
There is no arguing with these people. They are beyond the influence of rationalism.
LikeLike
Is there no end to this march of idiocy?
As I said in my post in relation to Oxford University’s decision to introduce “take home” exams for female students for the express purpose of closing the ‘gender gap’ between men and women at the top end of the academic achievement scale, this blatant corrupting of the exam system for openly ideological reasons will simply bring that system into total disrepute, and will not go unnoticed by potential employers.
Yes, this is indeed a ‘Cheat’s Charter’, and will leave any woman who achieves exam results similar to those of men at the top end of the scale under this kind of exam regime wide open to suspicion of having cheated, something that may not have occurred to the academic “geniuses” who have thought up this lunacy.
LikeLike