September 27th 2008

  Buy Issue 2789

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: Malcolm Turnbull topples Brendan Nelson

EDITORIAL: Defence: new situations demand new policies

GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM: Landmark terrorist trials in Melbourne and London

FINANCIAL AFFAIRS: Why Wall Street imploded

ECONOMIC AFFAIRS: Australia facing external economic pressures

SCIENCE: Global-warming - myth, threat or opportunity?

REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: Breaking the truce on abortion

STRAWS IN THE WIND: The undeserving poor / The bolt from the blue / Sarah Palin / Ladder-kickers / Peter Costello

UNITED STATES: Sarah Palin appointment leaves Left apoplectic

ASIA: Rocky road ahead for Malaysia

HUMAN-TRAFFICKING: Vietnamese slave-labourers in Malaysia

COLD WAR: The spy who teetered on the edge

EDUCATION: Co-educational secondary schooling's drawbacks

SCHOOLS: Queensland school bans cartwheels

Water resources (letter)

Hearing the arguments (letter)

Palin for president? (letter)

Bio-fuels (letter)

BOOKS: 10 BOOKS THAT SCREWED UP THE WORLD: And 5 Others That Didn't Help, by Benjamin Wiker

Books promotion page

Co-educational secondary schooling's drawbacks

by Lucy Sullivan

News Weekly, September 27, 2008
Historically and anthropologically, all human societies have separated girls and boys during their adolescent years, writes Dr Lucy Sullivan.

Catherine Sheehan's review (News Weekly, August 30, 2008) of Maggie Hamilton's book, What's Happening to Our Girls, paints a horrifying picture of the sexual bullying to which teenage girls today are subjected by their male peers, and of its effects.

What I would like to highlight here, however, is a major source of the problem - the institutionalised exposure of teenage girls to young male antagonism on a daily basis in our predominantly coeducational secondary schools.

Historically and anthropologically, all human societies - our own included until past the middle of the last century - have separated girls and boys during their adolescent years, the time in which they are physically maturing, and psychologically defining themselves, sexually.

With institutional separation, they identify with the adults of their own sex to whom they are responsible, and learn culturally approved adult attitudes and modes of behaviour towards the opposite sex.

Hamilton's book makes patent - and this has been evident to the concerned observer ever since the experiment was begun - that if boys are not socially defined as male in this manner, they prove it to themselves through contempt, antagonism and aggression towards the girls of their peer group, from whom society has not seen fit to formally distinguish them.

In our ideologically gender-neutral society, their emphasis is naturally on the one dimorphism that cannot be eradicated - explicit sexual behaviour at its most animal level.

Coeducational schooling was made virtually universal in Australia in the 1970s in the supposed service of equality for women. It was asserted that separating boys and girls in their adolescent years fuelled male notions of superiority and disrupted the development of mutual respect essential to a society in which men and women were equals.

But this was a mere hypothesis, implemented without prior verification. However, the processes of human development are biological as well as social, and it is now clear that it was disastrously wrong, and bitterly harmful to girls.

And harmful to boys as well. I cannot believe that the behaviour described in boys, although they appear to have the upper hand, reflects a happy self-confidence. It is bound to disrupt their eventual prospects of forming the trusting and protective relationships with women that are so essential to their eventual happiness. The high suicide rates in older adolescent boys and young men are surely evidence that all is not well with them.

Teenage socialisation

It would be easy to reverse this false move in teenage socialisation if we really had the political and moral will. Although state high schools were often nominally coeducational before the 1970s, in fact boys and girls were often in separate classes and had separate playground areas.

This could easily be reconstituted without the need for extensive re-building. Although some pupils of both sexes would still determinedly seek each other out, it would at least ensure for girls a generous space where they were free to develop their own certainties and values, away from the critical gaze and comments of juvenile males.

- Lucy Sullivan, PhD, has written on families, taxation, child-rearing and education for the Centre for Independent Studies.

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Memo to Shorten, Wong: LGBTIs don't want it

COVER STORY Shorten takes low road to defeat marriage plebiscite

COVER STORY Reaper mows down first child in the Low Countries

COVER STORY Bill Shorten imposes his political will on the nation

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Kevin Andrews: defend marriage on principles

CANBERRA OBSERVED Coalition still gridlocked despite foreign success

ENVIRONMENT More pseudo science from climate

News and views from around the world

Menzies, myth and modern Australia (Jonathan Pincus)

China’s utterly disgraceful human-rights record

Japan’s cure for childlessness: a robot (Marcus Roberts)

SOGI laws: a subversive response to a non-existent problem (James Gottry)

Shakespeare, Cervantes and the romance of the real (R.V. Young)

That’s not funny: PC and humour (Anthony Sacramone)

Refugees celebrate capture of terror suspect

The Spectre of soft totalitarianism (Daniel Mahoney)

American dream more dead than you thought (Eric Levitz)

Think the world is overcrowded: These 10 maps show why you’re wrong (Max Galka)

© Copyright 2011
Last Modified:
November 14, 2015, 11:18 am