AzureWolf

[QUOTE=James][font=arial]I thought I'd address this one first. My answer is simple: bingo. I am definitely not promoting a "one size fits all" approach... On the other hand, I think everyone has to acknowledge that each individual student has different learning needs...[/font][/QUOTE][COLOR=maroon]I agree with you here, however, I think learning to deal with the other sex (which is basically the only thing that is being removed from the learning environment) can be achieved through other places/things/people than just school. There are other activities outside of school people can focus on. And I remember (don't quote me, but I swear it was recent) that although people seem to be getting smarter, the new generation (after the peak of IQ kids, lol) of kids are actually scoring lower on IQs.[quote name='James][font=arial]I'm going on blind faith? Thanks. lol[/font][/QUOTE]Two things: I didn't mean you directly, and I could have worded that better. I meant, you can't really dismiss something you have no knowledge of (i.e., segregated schooling) simply because you are only familiar with something else. Like, saying black is black even though you've never seen white. [QUOTE=maroon']I've never met a boy who is physically incapable of knitting, or a girl who doesn't have the stamina to run as far as a boy. That's an incredibly old-fashioned (and very out-moded) analysis.[/quote]It was an example used to illustrate a scientific point. We can see *directly* that girls develop fine-motor skills (i.e., dexterity, subtle hand movements) faster/earlier than boys, while boys develop gross-motor (i.e., running, tumbling) skills faster/earlier. These can be seen directly, but its long-term effects, although well documented, are not as easy to explain (hence the length of this thread). The *analogy* - not analysis - works in this regard, IMO. You can see my point by taking a very young boy and a very young girl and enrolling them in a knitting class and a gymnastics class. The girl will most likely have trouble with gymnastics at first, while the boy will be frustrated with knitting. Through various complicated social and psychological factors (from Adler's inferiority complex all the way to spiral dynamics), the two will switch roles in terms of proficiency. This would NOT be the case if you took them later in life, like after the age of five, but the significance of this difference still remains relevant to this discussion (see below).[quote name='James']Of course there are differences between the genders, I think everyone would agree with that. But we don't live in a world where women need to learn sewing and men need to learn how to hunt wild boar - men and women need to have a diverse range of options and they need to be able to compete with each other as much as possible.[/quote]I don't recall seeing anything about boys and girls learning different things. Approaching things differently - yes - but not learning different things. I think that's what the primary confusion is about. Take calculus/math, a common thing that people think boys are better at. Scientifically and statistically, there is no noticeable difference in mathematical aptitude between the sexes. What IS noticeable is the approach or types of problems boys and girls struggle with. Let's say you have a sphere on the x-y-z plane. All the data is given, a volume is asked for. A boy would most likely draw a graph and solve it using either a volume equation or intuitively derive the volume. A girl, on the other hand, would most likely prefer not to graph it and mathematically figure out the problem, feeling more secure having written out the equations and derivation and theory - all through nongraphical computation of calculus. Both these ways are valid, and give you the same answer. However, some problems are more practical and feasible graphically, and there are some problems where graphing the thing is a pain in the *** and leads only to more confusion and frustration. In the former case, a boy would handle and understand the problem easily, while a girl would struggle; in the latter, roles are reversed. Notice how both the boy and the girl are learning CALCULUS. One is not knitting and the other running. I also realize there are exceptions, but those exceptions would not fare any worse or better with the segregation if you think about it since both approaches would be addressed. That's another thing: they will still be taught both methods for calculus, but extra help will be given for one method. [quote name='James']Perhaps educators might want to focus on the more complex aspects of learning environments and learning habits - it's fine to say that all girls concentrate better than boys, but what about those who don't? You know? It's still very arbitrary and general. I think some (not necessarily you, Azure) have the impression that it's the educational silver bullet. My only message is that people tend to be more complex than their gender, especially when it comes to education.[/quote] I wouldn't call it arbitrary, as it is rooted in statistics...[/COLOR] Oh, and yeah, about that article CHW posted: boys already don't seem to conform to the teaching system in the first place. Also, if you watch children play (boys and girls separately), you'll notice the school system reflects that of what the girls do more than what boys do in their games (like the rules used. If you want elaboration, just ask).

[COLOR=maroon]There's no way you can address individual needs by promoting generalization. That makes no sense. Yes, it is subdivision, but it's one that has roots in science and psychology. A person who is genetically considered a "super female" has absolutely no sense of direction and spatial skills whatsoever. Are we going to ignore this fact simply so we can keep boys and girls together, which somehow makes it better to learn? I'm not saying it's going to be a better learning environment. However, it's ignorant to think it's a worse one simply because it's different. Yes, there will be problems with this method, but there are problems with having boys and girls together - if you can't see that, then you are just going on blind faith. But there's a good chance that the problems might be less or they are less severe when you separate boys and girls. Are you going to force a boy to learn to knit even though he's not physically capable of doing so? Are you going to make girls run long distances when they haven't developed the stamina? No. But will the girls and boys eventually be able to do both either through different methods or time? Yes, and that's the point. I'd like to hear a schoolteacher's opinion on this, since I've been a teaching assistant and currently help elementary to high school kids learn. It's been my experience that girls tend to see things one way, and boys another, and so on particular problems (I'm referring mostly to math and chemistry), explaining the other way usually solves their trouble of understanding it. So I don't see how separating the two is going to hurt the matter in the first place, or that either strengthening weaknesses or enhancing strengths is a bad thing. One last point: keeping everyone together is NOT optimal in any way. it's just easier. Teaching everyone in the same fashion when clearly everyone is different does not work the best. However, addressing predispositions is a great start in optimizing the learning environment in a practical way. I also think this applies only to schools: I doubt at the boys and girls club, or other afterschool or outdoor activities, the two sexes will be completely separated, lol.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I think it's a good thing to try out. Sure, everyone (except for people like Sanday) might be complaining about the goal being "to remove distractions" and therefore point out the foolhardiness of it, but anyone who has had five minutes of psychology taught to them know that males and females do indeed learn differently and the reason the ADULTS are doing this is to address those findings. Even if the kids think the reason is to get rid of distractions, that's not the point. It's like someone teaching a kid martial arts to defend himself, but all the kid sees is that it's for beating up his friends. I'm not going to dismiss it through flat ignorance. Although, I have to say, this sounds a lot like "separate but equal," which will ring a warning bell to any African American or rights activists. On the other hand, when a kid is struggling with something, you do make him focus on it and give extra time to that kid, and so the inherent/natural tendencies for boys and girls to have trouble with different things can be addressed in an optimal way. To say it quickly, it don't think it's going to hurt to try. I'm pretty sure the kids won't die from "sex starvation," lol.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]As a violinist, I'm always interested in new and upcoming things in the world of strings. However, bond (lowercase, yes, because the proper version was already copyrighted) is not necessarily something exclusive to classical music. There are several areas - such as dance, lifestyles, and dining - that promote the new "cross-over" culture. I like bond, as their taste in classical music rocks, and their modernization of these pieces is simply amazing - both from an audiophile and technique point of view. I'm always amazed at how talented or gifted these four are, especially the cellist! and Lullaby has to be my favorite song, making a shorter and therefore more enjoyable Canon by Pachelbel. However, [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf-ge421Vt8]their music videos[/url] are not the most... wonderful things.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I liked it. Yeah, the story wasn't that great, but I have ot say, as far as scare factor goes, The Grudge 2 was pretty good. What I think the major draw was the ending, which was so different than most other movies. [SPOILER]Usually there's a solution of some sort[/SPOILER], but I think that kills a great deal of the scare factor. I think that's what made it stand out. Don't get me wrong, there's still no movie that's especially fear or scare-inducing (including this one), but if I had to put my money on one, it'd be this.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]IMO, if you wanted to show off your final work and link people to it and ask for feedback, that *might* go in the art studio section, but you're better off asking a mod about that one. Otherwise, no, OB is not for AMVs.[/COLOR]

[quote name='Generic NPC #3'] I suppose that's another idea altogether.[/quote][COLOR=maroon]... What? No, that's the same principle! It works perfectly, lol, and shows the problem with these types of complaints.[/COLOR]

[quote name='DeadSeraphim][size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Bill Gates is married, cynic. Get your facts straight before you start shattering teenage idealism.[/font][/color'][/size][/quote][COLOR=maroon]lol, I know, but no one thinks he married because of love - or at least the person who married her. A lot of celebrities are married (divorced, married again, rinse, repeat...). My point was, just because you meet someone and do a worse job than your parents will probably do doesn't mean arranged marriages are any worse (or better) than... the opposite of it.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I think many people have an idealized view of love and marriage, manipulated by movies that are far from the truth. I'm all for falling in love and all, but I don't think it's the be-all-end-all that people believe it to be. That, for some magical and divine reason, if you marry the one who is not the oh-so-super-perfect-special-just-for-you person, then your life will suck. Frankly, celebrities and Bill Gates and Donald Trump seem to have it good regardless.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]You'll get a lot of financial aid packages from schools if they really want you. You can all get a full tuition scholarship if you really rock or they really want you. But for the rest of us, we just use FastWeb. It's a neat service where you have to work for your scholarships, but you usually can score quite a few.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]If memory serves, anime came from an online website called [url]www.f###inggoogleit.com[/url]. The site is still in use today, and I learned everything I know about anime from there. Wikipedia doesn't bite either.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I thought they danced pretty well, actually. On a related note, anyone else notice that Gary Broslam(sp?) kid is back? Youtube "new numa numa" and you can see him. He came out of his closet, and he's got a new site and everything. It's kind of sad/pathetic, but it's nice to see he's not staying sad and depressed about what happened to him, eh?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]If you want, you could just buy a hakama and gi. Look for a set specifically designed for Iaido (aka Kenshin's style of fighting), and I think that'll be as authentic as you can get. Retain or iron back the five creases while dying it whatever color, though. As for plastic swords, they are getting to be pretty authentic looking: I was actually stopped by police because they thought I had real swords during Halloween... X_X [/COLOR]

[quote name='Charles']If you're just getting into this genre, the best place to start on Playstation 2 is Silent Hill 2 (if you have not played the first it does not matter) or the Fatal Frame (especially the second one) games.[/quote][COLOR=maroon]I don't know, Silent Hill 2 pretty much put me to sleep - in fact, it was the first (and as of this writing, only) game that I actually fell asleep while playing. I kid you not: just running back and forth, back and forth, going around and around with unstimulating scares... zzzzzzz I mean, yeah, it's depressingly depraved, but I wouldn't consider it scary, you know? Fatal Frame 2, on the other hand, had a very interesting premise that kept you on the edge of your seat, not to mention that the story was very interesting. Looking first-person at a deranged ghost has that effect. How you read about some of the ghosts and their backgrounds also enhanced the atmosphere. I've heard that either part I or II was based on a true story or grounded in some Japanese myth, but I have yet to find any confirmation of that. [QUOTE]Back when I first bought the Playstation 2, I had a game called Shadow of Destiny, in which you would constantly witness the main character die and then find a way to change his fate. I don't know how it would hold up now, since it's been years since I've played it, but it was really awesome and the fact that I still remember it is meaningful. If you could dig that one up for a low price then I recommend it. At this point it's probably $10 or less.[/QUOTE]HOLY F###! You too? I thought I was the only loser with that game! I seriously loved it, and yes, I recently played it again and it still holds up. Even the graphics, although clearly outdated, have their charms about them, especially if you are an anime fan. Shadow of Destiny isn't the most challenging game (then again, no horror game is...), but it's a thinker, with mutliple endings. I still highly recommend it, although you should be warned that you can beat the game in 5 hours, and get all the remaining endings in another five, tops. Still, it's worth it.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]Oh snap! They caught me! Did you see that? I was the one crying out for BoA. What? She's 20? Yess, thank God Asians look so young! If you like Asians, you can be a legal pedophile! Wooo[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=John]False. If deriving medical uses directly from plants via an almost trial-and-error process of estimation were better for you than, say, legions of trained medical professionals devoting their lives to pinpointing the exact causes, down to the cell parts, of an affliction, then I feel pretty comfortable that most governments wouldn't hesitate much in revoking those scientists' multi-million dollar budgets. I'm sure there's a few natural alternatives that work just as well or better than their popular medicine counterparts, but that doesn't hold up against the fact that the latter have been exhaustively proven safer and more effective than the former.[/QUOTE][COLOR=maroon]That's just the problem, though. The reason popular medicine counterparts have been *exhaustiviely* proven is because there's money for research. You have to realize that pharmaceutical drug reasearch is an area that is funded in the US by over 75% private sectors (that means groups/companies who have interest/bias - usually people who can make money off the drug being tested). If an off-the-garden alternative was proven just as effective, that's not really something they are interested in putting money into. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that alternative medicine is as good as what we have now, or that it's even a replacement. Rather, I'm saying that the conundrum we are in is that there's no incentive for people to invest in research to prove the effectiveness of - say - ginseng because you can get that from anyone-anywhere. Things that are naturally found in nature - like ginseng - are not patentable, and so once it's found to be great for whatever the hell it's claimed to be great for, then no one company can capitalize on it. Of course, now synthesized drugs (or *a way to synthesize* a natural product) can be patented. As more and more Eastern influence is hitting the US, though, alternative medicine seems to become more and more viable. For example, it's only recently since the NIH has officially acknowledged acupuncture therapy as a medical technique. I'm not going to condemn the woman because there's no cure for AIDS and there might be a good reason she's sticking to home remedies?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]My mom... Yeah, I kid you not, he really does. =([/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]Your theory is correct. If you've ever heard songs that have two or three different versions (but are exactly the same otherwise - tonalization, key, just the words are changed), then you tend to prefer the one you first heard, even though they are the same at heart. Good example of this would be to take one of BoA's most awesome songs: Valenti, which can be found in English, Korean, and Japanese (and I *think* Chinese) - and you can find them all on youtube. I will add a corollary to your theory though: there are times when the english version of both songs and anime tend to be worse, regardless if you've heard it first or not, because you realize how lame the... execution(?) is. Let's face facts: very few songs are poetic and amazing as people think they are, so when you hear it in a different language, you think it's poetic because you don't realize they are saying, "My cheese face." The translation tries to capture the meaning, not the words, so don't say you read the translation of the show and that's why it's beautiful.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]Yeah, DeadSeraphim is right: I only make like, 60 bucks a month but it' sreally random how much you get (although I don't think you have to "plaster" your site). Like I said, it's only useful for out of pocket expenses. I have heard people who get much more though - don't know if it's true. And yeah, google pays you different amounts based on usage: if people click, then you get more than if the ad just shows up on your site. And if you refer someone you get the most possible money. Of course, referrals are also the hardest thing to get.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I used to get the Carvel ice cream cake, but now I just don't have time (I still do that for my little bro, though, even if it does piss him off, haha). The only semi-traditional thing is going to a local cold stone creamery and getting the free birthday ice cream thing they have if you let them know your birthday on their website. God, I feel like I'm advertising instead of telling people things, lol![/COLOR]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']That sounds pretty interesting... how does that work? I remember hearing something about blogging for money, but I didn't really pay much attention to it.[/size][/quote][COLOR=maroon]Well, the basic starting point is the same: you sign up with google's adsense program. Then how well you advertise yourself or refer people will determine how much you get paid. A lone blog that no one will probably never see won't get you much, so blogging in communities or places that help with referrals and the like (and most importantly, ALLOW google adsense) helps. I blog at three communities, but really, I'm using the same post for each place. Just more $$$ because it gets more exposure. Money comes from google, and who can't trust google? (which admittedly, is a bit scary)[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]I'm a student. I blog for money, but really, I live off my parents, scholarships, grants, and government loans (increasingly leaning more on the latter every year). Blogging just really keeps your out-of-pocket expenses in check. I'd like to say ladies put dollar bills in my pants, but that's just not true.[/fail] =( [/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]Whoa, Papa Smurf, I totally agree with you and all, but isn't Retribution a moderator? Don't you have to treat them extra nice or else you get banned? O_o Isn't your post gonna get you banned for pointing out the obvious in a too harsh a manner? Just to add nothing more than an analogy, I find it silly to believe that someone else taking revenge for you (if we're willing to stretch it even that far) is the same as getting real revenge. It's like one guy commits two murders, and two people go after him for revenge. One of the guy gets the revenge, and so you're assuming the other guy got... revenge done for him? O_o wtf? Is suicide automated revenge? And to get back to what everyone SHOULD be talking about: The killer shouldn't have killed himself, but gotten a trial by peers and then raped.[/COLOR]

[quote name='Mimminx][FONT=Tahoma']So, like, I'm kinda fooling around with Photoshop and might be able to produce a wittle baby within a day or two .... unless you've already found what you're looking for[/FONT][/quote] [COLOR=maroon]So you're just going to abort it?! =O[/COLOR]

[COLOR=maroon]Sorry to bring back a dead thread, but I just remembered who it was that was on the tip of my tongue. [url]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5009207270086582589&q=Alizee[/url] She's French, 'nuff said. My only gripe with her is that she's hot enough that she doesn't need to dance or dress like a slut. In most of her performances, she either dresses very exotically, or dances really promiscuously, (like the video above), or both.[/COLOR]