(Chris McGovern writes on how feminism has affected our schools in the latest of our series of articles to ‘celebrate’ International Women’s Day on Wednesday.)

In terms of academic achievement there has never been a better time to be born a girl and never a worse time to be born a boy. Last year a Bristol University report for Save the Children showed that by the age of 5 girls are ahead of boys in all 152 local council areas across England. They are, indeed, twice as likely as boys to have the basic literacy and communication skills to cope with the start of formal schooling.


We have known for a while that girls are beating boys at GCSE, at A-Level and at university. Among the under-performing male half of the school population, it is white working class boys who do worst of all. They are at the bottom of the pit even before they start school.

For boys, then, the rot sets in early and many never recover. Our prisons are over-loaded with disaffected and disengaged young men who lack the literacy and numeracy skills to ever break a vicious circle of unemployment and crime. And things are not a lot brighter for that vast majority of male school leavers who stay out of prison.

In a modern Britain whose direction of travel is increasingly determined by feminism and other forms of political correctness, it is boys, most of all, who are being cast adrift. Even the term, let alone the concept, of ‘masculinity’ is disappearing under the weight of the new language constructed around feminism – “andocenticism”, “intersectionality”, “patriarchial binary thought”, “phallogocentric”, “TERF” (trans exclusionary radical feminists), transmisogyny, and “SWERF” (Sex Worker Exclusionary Radical Feminists) and so on.

In Britain the teaching profession has become very heavily feminised with a lack of male role models. Eighty five per cent of primary school teachers are women and so are 74 per cent of secondary school teachers. To this can be added the host of overwhelmingly female classroom assistants and ancillary staff. A consequence of schools being run largely by women is that they provide fertile territory for promoting the feminist agenda.

This has included a public examination system that for years has been built around coursework that mostly suits girls far more than it does boys. Such has been the advantage provided for girls, reflected in their results, that the government has finally been forced to make changes. A new generation of exams will do away with much of the coursework.

Too little, too late, alas! The Save the Children report should be re-named, “Save the Boys”. It makes clear that, in general, schools aggravate the problem of male underachievement. Reducing coursework in public exams at 16+ is a belated move in the right direction but it will no longer do much to solve the problem. Those boys who were behind at the age of 5 are four times more likely to be behind by the age of 11. Primary schools are unable to plug the learning deficit and matters get worse at secondary school.

‘Educated’ within an overwhelmingly female environment and subjected to an increasingly feminist ethos, many boys are failing because they are switching off. It is small wonder that male pupils are under-achieving and becoming alienated.  This is dangerous for society.

Every action produces a reaction. The feminisation of our school system is turning the amenable male Dr Jekyll into the less amenable Mr Hyde. Discipline in too many schools is poor. This is partly because disengaged boys are lashing out as they become increasingly marginalised by feminist ideology.

A few days ago I saw a play, “Snow in Midsummer”, at the Royal Shakespeare Company Swan Theatre in Stratford-on Avon.  It was a clever feminist re-working of a famous medieval Chinese drama about injustice. In one key scene the central female character, the ghost of Dou E’, tears the living heart out of a male counterpart and parades it to the audience.

Needless to say, this was not a part of the original Chinese version. It is, nevertheless, a powerful and compelling play. It does for feminism what the talented Leni Riefensthal did for Nazism. It seduces and it persuades. The “Triumph of the Will” has become the Triumph of Feminism.

Performed by one of the greatest theatre companies in the world, it confirmed the extent to which feminism has entered the lifeblood of our society. The tearing out of the heart from a male breast was an apt metaphor for the feminist take-over – in our schools and beyond.

(Image: Luminici)

32 COMMENTS

  1. Just wait until this generation of boys grow up and realize that it wasn’t their choices but the whole system was stacked against them. Can anyone spell violent revolution?

      • Not sure I agree.

        Of course good fathers will help and bad ones will hinder.

        But no father can possibly overcome all the issues thrown at boys by the system.

        Having a helpful and encouraging father is a help of course but then some girls have those too.

      • Given the legal biases, dads can certainly override the system if mom allows. Even then it can and will be used against him in the future if mom so chooses.

  2. Dominance of women in primary schools is nothing new. In my day (late 60’s early 70’s) there were 2 out of 11 teachers who were male + the headmaster.
    In my secondary school days I would say it was 50:50, with the only avowedly feminist teacher I can recall being (typically) the arts mistress.

    • Yes I think the key is changing teacher education. I doubt any balance in the gender of teachers is even possible unless pursued over decades. I don’t start from the idea that women are inevitably and universally male hating. What I do think is they get no help in the specific “needs” of boys in being taught successfully and a lot of ideological input.

    • From my own experience of school, my first school was entirely made up of female teachers during the early/mid eighties – upon reaching middle school there were a few males, about a quarter but no more than a third. Highschool was around 50:50.

      This leads me to think that female teachers naturally prefer lowers age pupils and men prefer to teach older children. I think it could be linked to patience levels.

  3. Generally I think it important to separate the ideology taught in teacher education and training and the teachers themselves. For the very practical point that the gender balance won’t change in the profession any time soon.
    On a second point my contact with schools as a parent and more pointedly more recently professionally has concerned me in terms of teachers ability to deal with difficult behaviour. Put simply boys particularly teenage boys can be intimidating, not least in size and energy (also applies to some girls too) . This seems to lead to a constant shifting of responsibility as such boys are sort of passed around to doctors (with meds for “conduct disorders” ), teaching assistants, special schools etc. as “problems”. Yet usually the core problem is that they are “frightening” and know it.
    We’d had some real success with teachers locally in a very “rough” high school, really using some pretty basic behavioural approaches.
    Now its not that we are somehow super clever. But it does seem that teachers don’t get some of the tools to deal with the “big and boisterous” (male and female) . I think we do them (boys in particular) no favours if we are not accepting the genuine challenges particularly as we’ve extended the years in education and don’t give teachers the skills to deal with the inevitable human context of trying to control classes of energetic and awkward children especially teens, whose youth and inexperience means they don’t see the worth of sitting and learning.
    In a way too much appears to be expected of pupils to self manage and teachers appear ill equipped to put in the structure and maintain it, when needed.

    • Groan. Public schools have often recruited masters who have had combat experience. A recent obituary for a former housemaster at Christ’s Hospital described him as former cavalry officer who then passed selection for The Parachute Regiment ,winning a MC in Normandy and then served in Palestine. The master served in Special Branch as well. He graduated with a degree in Zoology from Birkbeck College and ran the CCF, Judo and boxing clubs at Christ’s Hospital. Public schools still employ masters who have served as officers.These type of teachers can earn the respect of tough boys. Most middle class female teachers are inherently fearful and critical of rumbustious boys behaviour and criticise it with a finger wagging, priggish, swottish, censorious, self righteous and patronising manner which is counter productive.

      I suggest it is more an aspect of character. Too many comprehensive teachers lack a any adventurous, practical, buccaneering and humorous qualities and these deficiencies are more common in women than men.

      • I wouldn’t disagree. But one has to deal with the profession as it is (and likely to be for many years) I think it lets the female profession off the hook to simply say they are incapable. They could and should do better.

        • Groan. I agree but the problem of th enfeeblement of society and in particular middle class teachers, is increasing. A tough woman, who has a degree in languages or STEM subjects and say played for Durham University at hockey has many career choices. If she wants to go into teaching she will be welcomed by public and grammar schools. Most comprehensive female teachers appear whiny, sour and anti-competitive and as result hardly any of these schools produce good sports teams. Give a problem to an engineer and they will give you a solution- Sir Alan Cockshaw FR.Eng . Give a problem to most female comprehensive teachers and they will whine: the concept of being cheerful in the face of adversity, to adapt, improvise and overcome is alien to them.

          In the late 60s/early/ 70s there were teachers who had grown up during the war or the period of rationing afterwards. People were brought up to grin and bear it. If one’s Father had seen combat they tended not to tolerate whiny brattish self pitying children, especially if they had witnessed starvation.

          In general birds of feather flock together. I was recently talking to a very tough cheerful young lady reading Geophysics at Imperial College: I cannot imagine her going out with a wimpy man. Tough practical men with a sense of humour are unlikely to find flabby humourless and whiny women, good company.

          What I think what may help is setting up University Technical Colleges rather than grammar schools. The sooner rumbustious and adventuress children, both boys and girls can escape from the fainted hearted self righteous priggish milksops who comprise much of our comprehensive teachers, the better.

  4. Dead right Chris.
    My girls have all thrived in schools-getting booster incentives if they went into sciences etc. My boys did not. Simple as.
    Boys are at far more risk of violent attack, more prone to suicide and addictions and belittled and denigrated under cover of “equality”-the Alinsky segments in the public sector who get licenses to this clearly have their own issues. And blame boys for it, instead of their media obsessions, false memories and bitterness towards partners, dads and siblings.
    Add to that the serial underachievement of boys in school-especially white ones who don`t live in the big cities-and you have a perfect storm of empty unearned privileging of one sex over another in the Culture War that we live with every day.
    These synthetic mockups of grievance cultivations is very Chomsky, Gramsci and Euniversal these days, Real women don`t need this crap-we love both sexes, and want equal opportunity for both-not the likes of Harriet Harman or Lady Annabel Heseltine thank you!
    Let alone the preposterous Womans Hour…thank heavens for Trump, this site and Jesus eh?

  5. “To be born an Englishman is to draw the booby prize in the lottery of life”
    With apologies….

  6. Chris, an outstanding article, to which I’ll link in a moment. William Collins, an important blogger on gender issues, penned a piece, ‘The Trouble with Boys in Education’. He pointed to the replacement of ‘O’ Levels by GCSEs in 1987/8 – almost 30 years ago – as the start of the education gender gap. It’s a myth that boys are advantaged (relative to girls) by examinations, but it’s true that girls are advantaged by continuous assessment, because teachers’ pro-girl bias leads to higher grades. Collins’s article:

    http://mra-uk.co.uk/?p=121

    We know from the response to an FOI request we sent the Dept of Education a year or two ago, that they have no interest in reducing the education gender gap – in feminist terms, there is no problem, it’s something to celebrate. Both the current Education Secretary, Justine Greening – a lesbian – and the former one, Nicky Morgan, have also been Ministers for Women and Equalities.

    The problem goes right to the top of the government. Theresa May infamously posed for the cameras whilst wearing the Fawcett Society’s “This is what a feminist looks like” T-shirt. Conservative MPs are cowards, and surrender to feminist narratives, almost without exception. Only two exceptions come to mind – Philip Davies, recently appointed to the Women & Equalities Committee, and occasionally (at least with respect to the education gender gap) Karl McCartney.

  7. I was taught by women teachers until I left primary school. It did me no harm that I’m aware of.

    Of course, that was many years ago and the women I’m talking about still had traditional views about the aims of education, and they stood for no nonsense in the classroom.

  8. A factor, not the only one obviously, which disadvantages WWC boys, is the increased propensity of boys to indulge in substance misuse, (especially damaging is cannabis).

    Kids using cannabis or similar in their early teens become unteachable, heavy users tend to be permanently damaged.

    They fail to reach their academic or physical potential.

    • – and cannabis legalisation is one thing the bien pensants are very keen on … I wonder why?

      • It is inexplicable.

        The worst offenders in this respect are the LibDems, especially Norman Lamb and Nick Clegg.

        They campaign (rightly) for better provision of mental health services yet also for cannabis legalisation. Since cannabis is a major cause of mental ill health in teenagers, it is bizarre.

        Caroline Lucas of the Greens also favour cannabis legalisation.

        There is nothing “Green” about putting cannabis chemicals into the lungs or brain.

  9. Many women who were encouraged to go back to work after childbirth found the teaching profession to be the easiest to get into. It gave them the holidays, and the hours to suit family life. No one can blame them but it meant that many were not teaching for the right reasons. It also enabled many feminists to push an agenda. My son left nursery school in 1981 able to read well, write to a good standard, count up to 100 and understand the concept of multiple numbers. He was one of eight boys in his nursery class, all of whom were achieving these standards. Within six months of starting his primary school he had gone from a confident 4yr old to a sullen, can’t do little boy. On talking to the female teacher I was told he was put to the back of the class until the slower pupils caught up and he learned to do things quietly. My boy was a boisterous, fun loving boy. He loved school and learning. Needless to say I found another more suitable school for him. It was a small faith school.

  10. In my 1950s primary school more than two thirds of the teachers were female. There were four female form teachers, plus a female head teacher, and then one rather effeminate single, middle aged man plus an excellent totally normal, older man who taught us in the year leading to the 11+ examination. Then in the Grammar School most of the teachers, about 70% I’d say from memory, were men. So to a eleven year old entering the secondary school, the new school provided a far more masculine environment, emphasising the leap in scale and nature from primary to secondary level.

    • The Lone Ranger wrote:

      When the male backlash comes to this BS it will be devastating.

      That’s a fantasy. What is going to happen is the total collapse of all feminised Western societies, following which the lumpen mass of brain dead men will willingly suffer so that women do not and gallantly and stoically set-to to sort out the mess and rebuild from the ruins, while the women sit back and watch, all the while complaining that things are terrible for them and easy for us.

      There is never going to be a male backlash.

  11. Boys are behind girls when they start school because of feminism? Really? Nothing to do with developmental differences between girls and boys? Nothing to do with children in the UK starting formal education far earlier than the majority of all European Countries and those Asian countries we envy so much for their educational success? All down to female teachers?

    Problems in education can be addressed – by looking at the curriculum, the age at which formal education begins, and by teaching parents to support their children at home.

    Our prisons are over loaded with illiterate young men? Most of whom come from a care system which has utterly failed them. They go missing and no one cares. Female teachers fault?

    Rather than bashing out anti-feminism rhetoric it would be interesting to compare educational attainment of boys in the UK with boys in Scandinavia for example. But that probably wouldn’t make the anti-feminism rhetoric look so good, would it?

    • Why doesn’t feminism make light of this problem and seek out solutions to this problem. They are a “gender equality” movement right, so they would support the betterment of both genders *equally* right? Of course not. Feminism shares a large piece of the blame. Feminism does not support this problem and instead continue to focus on women’s education, when men are falling behind.

    • Underachievement of boys is the same even in Scandinavia, and it’s even worse in Sweden: indeed in Sweden there’s even more feminism.

  12. The problem is character. What made Britain great were the adventurous, buccaneering , rumbustious, practical, down to earth, thrill seeking, humerous poetic, tough hale and hearty traits which have drastically declined in most middle classes, especially those in education and amongst women. If one looks at universities, very few teachers, especially women come from the tough sports playing ones, such as Durham. If one looks at the womens olympic hockey players if they taught at school because more boys would be interested. If there were female teachers such as Nancy Wake SOE officer teaching French I am sure more boys would be interested in the subject.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Wake
    What has become the dominant traits in teachers is a prissy, feeble, brittle, feint hearted,timid , milk sop, finger wagging, self important, self righteous, impractical , non scholastic ( few teachers are true scholars ), humourless, censorious character which removes all competition, fun, toughness, humour, enjoyment and adventurousness from school. Mothers who have sons often marvel at how they can have apparently ferocious fights, be covered in mud, bruises and even blood and then put it behind them and come in doors and say ” We are starving, whats for lunch, tea, supper, dinner, etc, etc”.

    Few women can laugh at themselves or like practical jokes and generally take criticism personally. The best men can laugh at themselves, be the butt of practical joke and be given a dressing down, learn the lesson and then shrug it off.

    Many boys enjoy running around out of doors in all weathers, playing sport, fighting( rough and tumble ) and experimenting with life. Chemistry was fun because it was full of stinks and bangs and history was about battles. The stories of Robin Hood and his merry men are ideal ways of making boys interested in Medieval History and those of Arthur and Raleigh teaches boys about gallantry. Men who are tough but lack gallantry and an ability to laugh at themselves can easily become thugs. The toughest boys can often have a fight and then shake hands and make which very few girls can, instead they spitefully hold grudges. Consequently schools which have rugby and used to teach boxing can produce happy tough young men. It was Labour woman MP who had boxing removed from schools in the mid 1960s and which I suggest led to an increase in thuggish behaviour from young men. Consequently there are no masters who can say to boys who are fighting to meet in the gym and sort out their differences in the boxing ring. Boxing teaches the feeble to stand up for themselves and the bully can be placed in the ring and taught a lesson by someone who is a better boxer. Consequently boxing levels out the fighting ability of boys. Bullying happens when a a more domineering person can impose their will on someone without suffering any pain. If a smaller boy is attacked and keeps on fighting, their spirit unbroken and lands a few good blows on the bully and leaves a mark, they earn respect and most likely not be attacked again. Bullying is about bending someones will to one’s own.

    G Orwell in his essays of the late 1930s and 1940s assessed the character of the middle class intellectuals extremely well . He described H G Wells as a boiled rabbit lacking any sense of adventure. He described most middle class intellectuals as swan necked ( as opposed to bull neck), rather feeble types who despised physical courage, patriotism and have a totalitarian outlook. British culture ( be it cooking, sports, betting, vaudeville) has a rumbustious, down to earth, slightly bawdy, irreverent, practical and adventurous qualities.

    To summarise , too many teachers are humourless censorious boiled rabbits which is not what one needs if one is to educate future Drakes, Brunels, Nancy Wakes, Violette Szabos or P Leigh Fermours.

  13. “This has included a public examination system that for years has been built around coursework that mostly suits girls far more than it does boys. ”

    This has been going on for decades and needs reversing. More exams are required and less coursework.

  14. Those men who dream of a male backlash remind me of so many native peoples in America and Australia who indulged in more and more spirit ceremonies to ward off evil. Delusional escapism. Having met since 2007 several hundred newcomers per year, most of them when they try to fight the system only further strengthen it. The internet is the modern equivalent of the spirit world, like and share on FB, comment from personal experience and then argue when anyone points out this is a target rich environment funded by the taxpayer. Attack the ideology, expose the biased funding, withdraw funding until the toxicity of gender politics in education is eradicated. Same applies to family courts, waiting rooms in GP surgeries and hospitals extolling DV one view posters, police stations with ‘arrest the man’ irrespective of action.

Comments are closed.