3. Marked Bias Against Boys by Boyless Lesbian Mothers.

All independent studies made of female teachers in schools of all types and classes and times and places in recent decades have shown that above all male teachers are fairer to boys or girls in the classroom. However female teachers have shown consistently throughout all the studies in pedagogy that female teachers always mark boys down by 5%, 10% or even 15% from that of girls. These are fair scientifically designed comparative studies by independent bodies with no axes to grind. They are not teachers biased organisations. Nor are they government funded bodies preloaded to give the preselected and expected politically correct answer. Just based on the facts. Independent observers both male and female. Independent criteria. Scientifically sound methodology and all of these types of studies support this view. Not based on 'feelings' in dodgy self-elected surveys. Imagine how then a programmatic feminist lesbian teacher who herself has no boy's, boyless mothers,  with girls only in her brood; how biased then if she in her pre-judgements-for that is what prejudice is; she is already showing her colours by her outward personal and political allegiances; how then can we expect her to be anything but extremely and fiercely prejudiced in that classroom against all the boys in that classroom just because they are male! I strongly suggest that in any focused studies that are independent and scientifically designed on this class of woman teacher a lesbian feminist teacher or a lesbian female teacher teaching boys that she would be remarkably prejudiced against male children and should have nothing whatever to do with the teaching of little boys, infant boys, young boys or or any young male student of whatever rage at high school or at University.



Phillip O'Sullivan the title and theme is a little dated. Today the figure is 500,000 plus New Zealand Kiwi Kids 'removed' forever from the classroom of Kiwi life; to have been exactly replaced by half a million migrants who struggle to fit in Kiwi life. There must be some link between the two exactly similar figures and elsewhere I shall write about it. Not yet, there are far more urgent mistakes being made by the New Government already.

Why then is this highly prejudicial group having anything to do with education even as a curricular or a study were a theoretical pursuit whatsoever I think the buyers of the remarkable bias in the horrible nasty evil creditors forbids them prater- naturally from anything that exercises their feminism as a deliberate hate crime against male children male boys and masculine gendered people of all colours stripes opinion and tendency or gender or sexuality. These people in particular should have nothing whatsoever to do with the male sex or the male gender or male persons in the educational function whatsoever it is a perfectly ordinary natural masculist cry in the light of this fact that all these independent studies have have found scientifically these opinions and produces to be so marked in such ordinary females that in extraordinary females we should expect much more extraordinary prejudice against the male gender and the male forms of sexuality at any level of the educational enterprise. They should be barred from teaching across genders even at University. For the violation of one's human rights should not ending any way trump academic merely academic rights or academic freedom. There should be no academic freedom tolerable whatsoever for such expected predictable and apparently inherit hatred in the hate crime known as feminism on our universities. In other words these people are intellectual criminal's of the deepest dye and should be removed from the educational sector forthwith. They should be forbidden as a group – especially boyless mothers and programmatic feminists and especially Lesbians without compensation and with complete and utter contempt and extreme prejudice. Feminism is a hate crime in these persons.

Women and mothers and fathers of boys and sons should demand a cleaning out of such bigotted persons from our schools.

 

Socialists claim to running of our schools should restore all male teachers in them.

Why would parents settle for anything less in an age where there is so much educational concern for the dumbing down of learning. Men are good abstract and logical thinkers. Let men take over the best role in education. Our children demand the best.

Men neither markedly mark boys or girls up or down; their results are generally objective.

Ordinary female teachers mark boys down say 5% compared to girls.
Female teachers who have sons probably do better.
Female teachers who have both a boy and a girl slightly better than the ordinary female teacher.
While feminist mothers who are deeply imbued with feminist dogma probably mark boys down say 7% with girls slightly above at say 4%- a differential from expectation/speculation of a 11% difference between ‘their’ class of boys and girls. A feminist mother with only daughters in her brood may be expected to either mark up girls or mark down boys; in either cases or of combinations giving a variation of 15% to as much as 20%. Is this acceptable? These are all questions education authorities should have more proven answers to than mine. I am only asking and frameworking questions. I think these are absolutely important questions. We could lead the world in this. In the more serious cases of boyless mothers who are lesbians in our classrooms of whatever age I would expect differentials of pedagogic care and teaching to vary by as much as 25% on a regular basis. Is this at all good enough at all? At any level?
And if we consider the extreme cases of Boyless mothers living entirely in a girly bubble alone or with a female partner, together with their daughters, living thus in a completely obsessive ‘female world’; applying personally- as so many women do-under the rubric ‘the personal is the political’-having possibly killed a boy foetus along the way in order to maintain the girly bubble effect-and having long ago got rid of the father barely containing herself from scowling at all men in meetings and such like, attending conferences where there are only women colleagues there (no man dare shows his face) how can we but expect but a 30%-to-35% differential running exactly against boys favour in her classrooms; regularly sending boys to the headmaster with vicious complaints and for heavy punishments. Is this anomaly of a criminal level of danger to our boy children. And she gets a fresh new crop of our dear youngsters every year and has been blithely getting away with this molestation and abuse of little boys brains, understanding and educational outlook for decades; and we are to do nothing? This is happening in all our schools?
In conclusion can not the only political solution to this be the complete replacement of all female teachers with really skilled, unbiased and fairer men teachers at every level of our education system. To do anything less would be criminal dereliction of duty to all our children from five through to twenty five at University. Male teachers are always better teachers it seems.