Our thanks to Paul and others for this. Extracts:
White working-class children should be motivated to become more aspirational in schools and “push themselves” the way those from other backgrounds have done, the shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, has argued.
In an interview with the Spectator, Rayner said a focus in the educational system on women and minority ethnic groups had perhaps inadvertently [J4MB: this is from an article in The Guardian, so this is a typo. ‘Perhaps inadvertently’ should read ‘advertently’.] had “a negative impact” on the attention paid to white working-class boys…
Asked about the low position of such boys when it came to university admissions, she said: “I think it’s because as we’ve tried to deal with some of the issues around race and women’s agendas, around tackling some of the discrimination that’s there, [J4MB: What discrimination would that be?] it has actually had a negative impact on the food chain for white, working [class] boys. They have not been able to adapt. [J4MB: Adapt to what? Schools systematically failing them, in order to privilege girls? No shit, Sherlock.]
Justice for Men & Boys 
“Schools systematically failing them”, Precisely as evidence I’d point to the funding and attention that has gone into Black Boy’s education attainment over a decade in Gtr. London. It has contributed to the widening gap between black boys’ attainment in the Capital and other major conurbations where there have not been such concerted efforts (including my own). Clearly putting time effort and money into improving attainment does work! Whatever the supposed “culture” schools can do better if they do their job. As you say blaming the boys just doesn’t cut it.
LikeLike
There is little point in aspiring to success if the system has been systematically biased against one. Since that is the basis of all feminist argument, you’d think an avowed feminist might understand the problem before blaming the victims of her misandrous ideology. The silly cow is clearly entirely unaware of her own irony.
I once heard a ‘Tory Grandee’ describe Denis Healey as a thug, which was not inappropriate. I think of la Rayner as very much in that mould, although considerably more so; her ‘debating’ style is just to ignore anything and everything her opponent says and to talk over him relentlessly, in a monotonous yet aggressive drone. She’s a one creature / thing argument against universal suffrage, which, in view of its disastrous consequences, I have long thought really ought to be spelt sufferage.
LikeLike