Sunday, April 17, 2016

Something that puts the left-wing cry-bullies who call the tune in our "multiculturally correct" universities on the defensive

Check out Bill Whittle's cheeky new video commentary "Appropriate This!"

Whittle's targets are students of color who attack whites who wear their hair in dreadlocks, or eat General Tho's chicken in the cafeteria, or have mariachi bands at their parties, or hang a Dream Catcher on the rear view mirror of their car.

To leftists, these whites are cultural thieves rapaciously appropriating the intellectual property of oppressed minorities.

Like all effective satirists, Whittle puts the shoe on the other foot and asks these radical students how they feel about appropriating the intellectual property of the white Wright Brothers when they fly on an airline...

About stealing the cultural work of white innovators like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs when they use a computer...

Or about taking advantage of dead white male Alexander Fleming when they use penicillin to get over strep throat!

Faith schools 'shunning poor pupils': Report says middle classes are tightening their grip on the best primaries

Church schools are shunning the poorest children as the middle classes tighten their grip on the best school places, according to a new report. Educational charity the Sutton Trust found there are 1,576 primary schools in England which are 'highly socially selective'. Each has a proportion of disadvantaged pupils that is at least 9.2 percentage points different from the communities they serve.

It said many of these select on faith-based criteria, which prioritise middle class families who are more likely to be regular church-goers.

And it added that research by the Education Datalab showed socially selective schools are more likely to be high-performing – so deprived children are being barred from some of the best schools.

It comes as hundreds of families across the country will find out which primary school their child has been allocated on Monday, which has become known as National Offer Day.

Trust chairman Sir Peter Lampl said: 'Disadvantaged young people should have the same chance of accessing the best state school in their neighbourhood as their better off neighbour.

'Today's findings warn us that primary school admissions are far from a level-playing field.'

The research examined the difference between the proportion of disadvantaged pupils in a school's intake and that of its local neighbourhood.

It revealed many schools employing complicated and narrow admissions criteria appeared to be taking a disproportionate number of wealthier children from neighbourhoods.

The research also identified correlations between a school's performance and its socially selectivity. Just 1 per cent of schools in the bottom 10 per cent for performance at age 11 are also in the top 10 per cent most socially selective schools.

In contrast, 14 per cent of schools in the top 10 per cent for performance at age 11 are also in the top 10 per cent of socially selective schools.

The most socially selective primary schools tend to use more complex oversubscription criteria than the typical school, which uses about five criteria.

Of the 100 most socially selective primary schools identified by the brief, one used as many as 18 different oversubscription criteria.

Areas with particularly socially selective schools included London, Blackpool and Hartlepool – with many using faith-based – often Catholic – criteria.

Dr Allen said: 'There are many benefits to giving parents a choice over where their child is educated, but our new research shows that that there is not equity in access to many primary schools, either because higher-income families are advantaged in their ability to exercise choice or because their admissions criteria favour certain pupils.'

Under the School Admissions Code, faith schools are allowed to prioritise children of their faith when they are over-subscribed.

They must be fair and transparent, and must not disadvantage unfairly a child from a particular social or racial background.

New academies and free schools with a faith designation can only prioritise up to half of their places by reference to faith, where they are oversubscribed.

A Department for Education spokesman said: 'Determining admissions policies on the basis of wealth is both morally wrong and against the law.

'All schools must follow the School Admissions Code which should make sure school places are allocated fairly, with an admissions policy that does not unfairly disadvantage children from a particular social or racial group, or those with a disability or special educational needs.

'Parents with concerns should report them to the Schools Adjudicator, who can intervene.

'Our recent White Paper is aimed at empowering parents to hold schools and the system to account. Alongside this, we will also be consulting on amending the mandatory School Admissions Code.'


Australia: Another university grievance mongers’ song and dance

What a marvellously McCarthyesque moment. On the ABC’s 7.30 this week the shamefaced former collaborator admitted to his inquisitors that he saw the error of his ways. James Dunn, a big burly country boy who’s treasurer of Baxter College at the University of NSW, acknow­ledged that even last year he was involved in the college’s annual Boys Night Out activities where they chanted “appalling” songs.

Now that furious students are protesting against these “disgusting songs which glorify rape”, he has seen the light. “I’m condemning my own actions at this time,” he blushingly disclosed.

And the lyrics of the song 7.30 described as “hideous”?

I wish that all the ladies were buns in the oven

And if I was a baker

I’d cream them by the dozen

Crude? Yes, bawdy and lusty, but also a typical drinking song, the type of vulgar sexual ditty that has been part of our culture since before Chaucer’s time. I remember the girls at Ascham School romping through a performance of the Canterbury Tales that included the memorable lines:

And prively he caughte hire by the queynte,

And seyde, ‘Y-wis, but if ich have my wille,

For derne love of thee, lemman, I spille.’

Not so different. But, then, these female fascists probably would like to ban Chaucer too.

The Baxter drinking song speaks not of rape but of men’s desire for sex, an urge some feminist lobby groups appear to regard as reprehensible. Here’s Jocelyn Dracakis, a student rep on the UNSW Council: “It shows lyrics that glorify acts of rape … It’s completely revolting that this kind of behaviour has been allowed to take place in the college.”

Among the lyrics sung by students and replayed on 7.30 was this little gem: “I’d like to tickle their clitoris.” Rape culture? On the contrary. Isn’t this exactly what we women have long been asking for? How it is possible that this nonsense was the leading story on our ABC’s top current affairs program? Let’s hope Michelle Guthrie takes note.

The most depressing aspect of this whole affair is the lobbyists have persuaded the university administration to cave in to their strident demands that such songs be verboten. The university released a statement saying it was “appalled by the sexist and demeaning attitudes and behaviours” and had “taken steps to insure that incidents of this kind do not occur again”.

Surely our intellectual elite should have the guts to stand up to these crazy grievance mongers. OK, young men’s right to sing a dirty ditty isn’t actually a noble cause. But there are important issues at stake in the inability of university authorities to withstand such silly, vexatious campaigns.

This month the University of Sydney Union gave in to protests and decided the 88-year-old Catholic Society at the university should face deregistration on the grounds that it was discriminatory to require senior members to be Catholic — that’s despite the union funding a “women’s room” and a centre for indigenous students. Similarly lily-livered behaviour now characterises some of the world’s leading universities.

Late last year British columnist James Delingpole wrote a marvellous column in response to the decision by Oriel College at Oxford to give in to student demands to remove a statue of Cecil Rhodes, British imperial hero and founder of the Rhodes scholarship. Delingpole penned the letter he wished Oriel College had sent to the black South African student demonstrator. It included some memorable statements:

“Of course, you are perfectly within your rights to squander your time at Oxford on silly, vexatious, single-issue political campaigns … We are well used to seeing undergraduates — or, in your case, postgraduates — making idiots of themselves. Just don’t expect us to indulge your idiocy, let alone genuflect before it. You may be black — ‘BME’ as the grisly modern terminology has it — but we are colourblind.

“We do not discriminate over sex, race, colour or creed. We do, however, discriminate according to intellect. That means, inter alia, that when our undergrads or postgrads come up with fatuous ideas, we don’t pat them on the back, give them a red rosette and say: ‘Ooh, you’re black and you come from South Africa. What a clever chap you are!’

“No. We prefer to see the quality of those ideas tested in the crucible of public debate. That’s another key part of the Oxford intellectual tradition, you see: you can argue any damn thing you like but you need to be able to justify it with facts and logic — otherwise your idea is worthless.”

Where’s the logic in claiming a song about tickling the clitoris contributes to the rape culture? A trivial issue, perhaps, but symptomatic of a wider malaise.


No comments: