One of the few things that horrified me when I arrived in Australia (in 1999) was to discover that, several years ago the high school physics curriculum was “feminized”. In other words, to make it more appealing to girls, our curriculum’s designers substituted formulae with essays! What a disaster…
— Professor Michelle Simmons of the University of New South Wales (UNSW)
Quantum physicist Michelle Simmons, a dual British-Australian citizen, has decried the dumbing down of high school and university-level physics to try and attract more female students in Australia. Sadly, the huge (and very justified) support that followed Professor Simmons’ comments shows how cucked academia and the educational system in general has become. It took a female academic, whose job would never be threatened by uttering such “controversial” words, unlike a male colleague, to point out how feminism has twisted the way scientific subjects are taught.
Did you think physics was about equations? How wrong you were! Thanks to a special form of gender-norming, Australian physics students have been writing essays about the history and sociology of physics. Whilst I think that the liberal arts, a pillar of Western civilization when done right, receive too much bad press, their use to serve feminist and SJW ends is atrocious enough in the social sciences, let alone the physical sciences.
But this mind-numbing state of affairs does not just concern the Land Down Under. In both Australia and across the rest of the Western world, feminists and other do-gooders have blamed gender bias for why less women pursue physics and other related sciences. For example, when large numbers of female physics students from the University of Melbourne reported how the discipline was too hard for them, Return Of Kings-hating Fairfax Media and those it interviewed blamed the girls’ woes on the field’s male-dominated nature and overall cultural programming. Whenever women fail, “patriarchy” is to blame, right?
When will the self-serving blame game end?
So, again, the tired-old boogeyman of so-called entrenched sexism continues to rear its ugly head every time the subject of women in STEM is raised. At England’s University of Oxford, supposedly one of the most prestigious institutions in the world, only 22% of successful undergraduate applicants for physics are female and the authorities there are clearly not happy about it. So they’re trying to increase the pool of undergraduates and teaching staff, all without explaining how they intend to both maintain standards and prevent male students from being discriminated against. It is fair to say that many of these women have received extra support throughout high school (and will during their time at university) purely because they vaginas. What Michelle Simmons said is merely the tip of the iceberg.
And remember, many students at Oxford and Cambridge come from the most illustrious schools and wealthiest families in the United Kingdom and beyond. Even when they compete close to as well or as well as their wealthier, privately-educated peers, poorer, state-educated students are four times less likely to be accepted by either of these universities. So why aren’t hordes of rich girls managing to find their way into these physics programs? Last time I checked, rich parents have about as many daughters as they have sons and have every interest in seeing their child get into both the university and university course of their choice. Generic allegations of “sexism in STEM” are pathetic and need to be given substantial meat before they are ever entertained as serious explanations for any gender imbalance. Presently, the “evidence” for misogyny in physics has as much substance as a Madonna diatribe at a women’s march.
When boys underperform in education, the blame is put squarely on their “poor” attitude and the lesser time they spend studying, despite ample evidence that the curriculum and teaching methods have been adjusted to suit girls’ needs. But men are expected to take responsibility for whenever girls are not equally represented or over-represented in particular subjects. It is high time that more men in higher education pointed out this perverse blame game first. Nonetheless, it is doubtful that universities would allow males to have the basic right to call for common sense, not to mention exercise a more generalized academic freedom on really contentious issues.
The education system and the workplace are being increasingly geared towards making life easier for women at the expense of men
The situation behind Michelle Simmons’ comments are worrying, but should not surprise anyone half-clued in to the world around them. In the United States, national defense is already being diluted and sacrificed in the name of feminism, with physical standards being repeatedly lowered to accommodate more women. In addition, companies in places such as Norway and France require a minimum number of women on their boards, with no commensurate need whatsoever for these women to be even close to as qualified as their male peers. Expect many more cop-outs like this in the future, too, especially as a backlash against the rise of “misogynistic” Donald Trump.
Apparently men now oppress women by expecting them to do physics equations in physics instead of essays about feelings and feminism (these two F’s really being the same thing). Whereas scientists may look at natural forces often invisible to the human eye, feminists are focused on “sexist” forces that are invisible–because they don’t exist. There’s no discrimination in physics, women are just usually not good enough.