View Single Post
Old May 16, 2013, 04:26 PM   #55
Evan Thomas
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,185
Originally Posted by Jammer Six
Promoting stereotypes is simply wrong, regardless of what the market says. Teaching, implying and above all setting the example that women need separate instruction without genuine need promotes a rather ugly stereotype.
Jammer, you're making a straw man argument here. I don't see anything in what Frank has written that supports any of the above. No one but you has said that all women should have to accept a single model of instruction.

It's hardly stereotyping to say that individuals differ in what they prefer, how they learn best, the experiences they've had, or the risks they may face; these are the main reasons why some of us think it's important to offer women-only classes.

When you get right down to it, freedom is self-determination: the ability of individuals to make choices about their lives and to act on those choices. This implies that by increasing the choices available to people, one is increasing their freedom.

How is it unethical to offer people a range of choices when the result is to increase their freedom?

Ethical teaching involves teaching what students expect to learn in the best way we know how. One piece of this is to know where students, as individuals and as a group, are starting from, and tailoring instruction to fit that. This has nothing to do with coddling them, dumbing down the level of instruction, or lowering standards.

You seem to be assuming that a women-only class must entail all of these, and will therefore be inferior to a mixed one. You may want to consider what that belief says about your underlying opinion of women themselves.
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry.
Evan Thomas is offline  
Page generated in 0.04364 seconds with 7 queries