Two parts:

1. There have been a stack of posts here about the ridiculousness of single gender schools and you're calling this the "cute feminist" part of the day? How does that jive with the idea that single gender schools are bunk? I think single gender schools, no matter how "unique" are crap. You've talked about how mad you are when people say the genders need to be separated in the classroom, yet you endorse this? I'm very confused.

2. I'm seeing young girls who are obviously smart being taught broad generalizations about how boys act, and it's all negative. Girls should learn how to be assertive and smart without having to use ridiculous constructs in order to make their point. The fact that they're between the ages of 5-10 shouldn't matter. Teaching young girls that boys are stupid and loud is just as harmful as teaching young boys that girls are stupid and should keep their mouths shut.

1) I think those kids ARE cute!

2) I don't think the girls are being TAUGHT that boys are stupid and loud, etc. I think that the girls are drawing on their own experiences of going to regular schools, having brothers, etc., and talking about why they like going to a school that is all girls. Further, I don't see any of those children indicating that boys are inferior/stupid/etc, just that they are better able to concentrate in the Girls Prep environment.

Ummm...when did I EVER say that single-sex schools were ridiculous? Seriously.

BabyPop:

This is a video talking about how great the school is, meaning that someone in the hierarchy probably had to okay the whole kit. Someone okayed the girls going on about how boys are loud and don't read and are annoying. I can't imagine that a video about an all-boys school where boys said the same things about girls would be taken with the kind of "awww cute" approach that's being seen here. Just because they're young and saying these things doesn't make them less damaging.

Jessica:

You've made posts about people calling for single gender education and how their reasoning behind it is bad. I feel the same way watching this video as I do when I'm reading that some person said that boys need their own school because girls get breasts. Girls need this school, apparently, being boys are loud and icky.

Bullshit. I went to a public school, co-ed of course, and at 7 years old we girls were naturally disdainful of boys who were disturbing the class and distracting us. No one "taught" us that boys were stupid and loud; even at 7 years of age, females are able to construct opinions of their very own.

Cute and awesome.

The anti-boy comments were a bit much for my tastes ("boys are loud", okay whatever, but the "boys hate books" bit bothered me somewhat), and any sort of gender segregation requires some degree of gender essentialism which I find suspect, but, that aside, this school looks completely awesome.

Rachel:

See my response to BabyPop. Wherever the girls formed their opinions, the school looks like they back them because they okayed this video to be made and distributed, and no doubt had final call of what was put into the final cut.

First, thank you, Jessica. I really needed something uplifting today.

Second, I'm sorry to hear that some of you (I'm directing this to anotheroneofthosedamned in particular, and in general to those who share this poster's view) think that all single sex-schools are crap. I would say there there is a right and a wrong way to go about single-sex education (for the wrong way, see this post: http://feministing.com/archives/007871.html#comments by Ann referencing a particular case in South Carolina).

However, there is a lot of research that demonstrates that a single-sex educational environment can be very beneficial to girls. I'd love to provide a reference to some of it, but I can't off the top of my head. If you're curious, go to the library or google it.

Although anecdotal evidence is flimsy (but interesting, I hope!), I'd like to say that I went to an all-girls high school, and it was one of the best experiences of my life. Spending four years in an affirming, woman-positive environment was wonderful. It shaped who I am today in many ways. It gave the me confidence that I needed to compete with men on an equal footing in college and afterwards (ok, so I've always been pretty self-assured, but nonetheless it shaped my opinion of myself vis-a-vis young men). And most importantly, it opened my eyes to the many ways that the American educational system devalues and undercuts girls. I recognize that everyone experiences this in different ways, and your experience may have been very different. But after attending an all-girls high school, followed by a traditional co-educa

See my response to BabyPop. Wherever the girls formed their opinions, the school looks like they back them because they okayed this video to be made and distributed, and no doubt had final call of what was put into the final cut.

Maybe the educators saw no need to teach the girls that their opinions are to be silenced, or to shush them and tell them to be "nice" girls.

damn,

I came to the comments section thinking I'd see a lot of positive stuff. This video is inspiring. The girls were all so motivated to learn and LOVED learning. Simple fact, we need more of that.

Great video. I've always thought that I would have had a better education if I had attended an all girls school--most of my high school classes just consisted of the teacher spending 45 minutes attempting to discipline 3 or 4 loud boys while everyone else stared off into space. A nice use of our time! I think those little girls are going to have a great head start in life.

I don't know what post you're talking about...but I'm sure I've said that segregating by gender for essentializing reasons are wrong. But this school is the ONLY single-sex elementary school in NYC--where most people have to be super wealthy to be able to send their kids to this kind of place. This school is giving parents of all incomes the option of sending their girls to a single-sex school--what could be better than that?

I hear you on the "boys are icky" stuff, but come on now--they're like eight. It's the cootie years, it's not like the school is teaching Boys are Gross 101.

Great video. I've always thought that I would have had a better education if I had attended an all girls school--most of my high school classes just consisted of the teacher spending 45 minutes attempting to discipline 3 or 4 loud boys while everyone else stared off into space. A nice use of our time! I think those little girls are going to have a great head start in life.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Co-ed schools may favor boys by letting them take over, and may perpetuate beliefs such as "boys are loud, girls are studious (but nevertheless not smart at math)".
However if lots of girls go to single-sex schools and nearly all boys go to co-ed schools, the girls at the co-ed schools will be worse off than before. And the girls at the single-sex schools will keep thinking that they should be separated for boys (because they're icky and loud and stomp on books).
It would be much better to concentrate on a learning environment that is better for all kids than to separate them. Although sometimes when I'm feeling mean I just say "let people keep saving these girls from the traditional public school system and see what happens". Cuz you know most schools in NYC are not as great as this one.

Okay, Jessica, you are right, those girls are totally adorable. But I am just still so uncomfortable with the idea of single-sex education! I know plenty of people who have gone through single-sex schooling and loved it, and who have done perfectly well for themselves, so I would never say it was a negative experience or a bad thing... especially in an environment like inner-city schools where different things need to be tried to give children the education they need. I also recognize that there are better and worse ways of doing single-sex education...

However, I think the occasional successes of single-sex schools begs a larger question - what is wrong with our regular schools that girls aren't living up to their full potential in them? (And, at the same, that some boys aren't thriving in them and do better in male-only schools.) A quote in the video that particularly bothered me was when one of the adults mentioned that Girls' Prep helps girls get away from being shy and retiring. Instead of thinking that girls can never be smart and strong around boys (something that isn't really going to be of much help when they're in a real world where *gasp* men exist!) we should figure out why regular schools reinforce the socialization of girls as shy and retiring.

"Maybe the educators saw no need to teach the girls that their opinions are to be silenced, or to shush them and tell them to be "nice" girls."

Lovely straw woman, Rachel.

Show me where I ever said that these girls had to be "nice" or "silenced". I said that if boys were saying these types of things about girls, we'd all be up in arms. And we'd be up in arms because we'd discuss how comments such as what the girls made about boys could be the beginning of a lifelong idea that girls are inferior to boys. There have been tons of discussions on this blog about how early learned ideas about gender are so easily reinforced by something such as a video showing girls making fun of boys. I never said we should silence anything they said, but I certainly think an educational institution that talks so highly about equality would mean that across genders and not just for girls. Telling the girls that saying mean things about the boys [or *anyone*] is okay isn't right at all, and by immortalizing what they've said into this video, the girls walked away with the idea that it's okay to be mean about boys because someone wants to come and listen to them talk about it.

"I hear you on the "boys are icky" stuff, but come on now--they're like eight. It's the cootie years, it's not like the school is teaching Boys are Gross 101."

By filming the girls saying those things and then showing it where millions of people will see it [including these girls], it *is* reinforcing the idea that boys are icky and telling these girls that it's perfectly fine to say such things about the opposite sex. We wouldn't be finding it cute if it was a group of boys calling girls icky, but it's cute if girls call boys icky?

Re: "Boys are loud" comments

Do you remember being 8 years-old? I do, and boys and girls alike had silly things to say about the other gender. And you know what? You grow up and grow out of it.

Why are we letting these childish comments undercut the value that this school obviously has for these girls?

And in regards to the "occasional successes" of all-girls schools, it is a real problem that co-ed schools are failing girls in the above-mentioned ways. But until this problem is widely recognized and we come up with a workable solution, what is wrong with all-girl's schools? In the meantime, single-sex schooling is producing confident and articulate young women who can work to fix the problems in our co-educational system. I don't see what's so wrong with that.

"In the meantime, single-sex schooling is producing confident and articulate young women who can work to fix the problems in our co-educational system."

My co-ed school produced confident and articulate young women, and the problem I have with single sex schools is that they enforce the idea that, if nothing else, your gender will win every time. I have to wonder what that does to someone in the long run when they end up losing in the co-ed world, especially if the winner is the opposite gender.

And I do remember being 8-years-old, and I also remember being taught that you don't say mean things about whole groups of people because of limited exposure to a few of the group. And I learned that in a co-ed environment as well.

Do understand, I'm not saying single gender schooling is inherently bad or evil, I'm saying that I think it's a step back for both education in regards to learning how to deal with its problems and also with teaching kids how to act as respectful, tolerant people to those around them. Being separated by gender means that the chances of you learning to respect the opposite gender are fairly low, given that your socialization as a child had a lot to do with your school day.

“To watch an all girls class; it’s just… it’s just different from the way boys interact. We need to encourage them to have their voice and sort of try to break those natural habits that girls have to be quiet and docile.� - Miriam Lewis Raccah – Executive Director (2 minutes in)

So no one here has a problem with this?

Sorry. Not two minutes in. The quote comes with two minutes left.

@noname:
That's exactly what I was referring to above about finding the cause of the problem rather than treating the symptoms. We should be figuring out what's creating these supposed "natural habits" in co-educational environments and fixing it, rather than throwing up your hands and saying "we all know girls just can't handle being around boys!"

Show me a school with both girls and boys, but one where you celebrate the accomplishments of famous women and the potential for girls, and where girls and boys are all made to feel comfortable, nutured, and excited about learning regardless of their gender. Then I'll be impressed.

noname,
Not really, no. That's not the kind of essentialism that says, girls just *are* this way. Since she is saying those habits can be "broken" it implies that that they are learned rather than something ingrained.

Secondhand: The adjective "natural"?

norbizness: the word "broken"?

"if boys were saying these types of things about girls, we'd all be up in arms."

Girls in the co-educational system have to deal with comments much more degrading than "girls are icky" on a daily basis. They have to deal with sexual harassment starting in grade school. As far as I can tell, we are up in arms about that - but the problem starts before these kids enter school. As of now we can't really change the fact that parents everywhere are teaching their children, especially male children, hateful derogatory stereotypes about women. That obviously needs to be addressed - but sparing some of these girls the destruction of their self esteem by keeping them away from these pernicious influences is obviously doing good already. These girls are taking a stand for their own futures.

"To watch an all girls class; it’s just… it’s just different from the way boys interact. We need to encourage them to have their voice and sort of try to break those natural habits that girls have to be quiet and docile."

I think that is a natural habit - something that is socialized as that's the way we are supposed to be. Ergo, women not speaking up for fear of being called "bitches."

The most important thing about an all girls school is that, as one of the teachers in the video said, the best person at everything will be a girl. In a single sex environment, children learn to define themselves in ways other than just their gender. Gender stereotypes are thrown at children of all ages, and in a co-ed environment it's possible to act those stereotypes out. On the other hand, single sex schools deemphasize gender and allow children to explore the other parameters of their identity.

It is a double edged sword though. Single sex education promotes a healthy and multifaceted image of one's self, but not necessarily of the opposite gender. When schools are segregated by sex, it makes it easy for students to jump the essentialist conclusions that boys and girls are inherently different. However, if the education contains some simple discussion of gender issues, the problem seems easily avoided. When boys or girls learn to respect all people, they don't need to be taught to "respect the opposite sex" (which usually means enforce traditional stereotypes).

And, anotheroneofthosedamned, we're not allowed to point out blatant sexist hypocrisy unless the perpetrator is a male and/or a republican.

secondhandsally - Natural habits can be broken by social constructs. That does not change the fact that she is saying these habits are natural to girls as opposed to being socially constructed in the first place. A central debate of gender politics has always been “nature vs. nurture�. To see the term “natural habit� applied to girls in this way and go unchallenged on a feminist website is surprising to say the least.

"Girls in the co-educational system have to deal with comments much more degrading than "girls are icky" on a daily basis. They have to deal with sexual harassment starting in grade school. As far as I can tell, we are up in arms about that - but the problem starts before these kids enter school. As of now we can't really change the fact that parents everywhere are teaching their children, especially male children, hateful derogatory stereotypes about women. That obviously needs to be addressed - but sparing some of these girls the destruction of their self esteem by keeping them away from these pernicious influences is obviously doing good already. These girls are taking a stand for their own futures."

I don't disagree that girls have it rough in co-ed schools, but to allow girls in a school, no matter the genders allowed, to say derogatory things about boys, no matter the age, isn't any better. Negative ideas about the opposite gender are being promoted by the sheer fact that the girls were taped and then that bit of tape was used. The girls who said those things have most likely been allowed to watch the tape, and most likely received attention for their participation; including the instances where they were insulting boys. What I'm seeing in this video during the last two minutes aren't girls standing up for their own future. I'm seeing girls who are being told that it's okay to be derogatory and mean towards other people.

The "natural" comment bothered me too. Girls LEARN to be quiet and docile in our gender-role obsessed culture that teaches children from birth that boys and not supposed to cry, boys are strong, self-sufficient, and need to be assertive, while girls are taught they are fragile and should be submissive. As for the negative comments about the all-girls' school, this is exactly why this type of school is necessary. Girls do not have to be submissive to boys, who become the more assertive participants because of this socialization. In this environment, girls are encouraged to be the assertive and smart ones. It is NOT that they will endure some sort of shock once they are reintegrated with males. Rather, they will have this unique experience that has boosted their confidence about their own intelligence, assertiveness, and capabilitites.

I'm with Babypop on this one.

I am aware of the nature versus nuture debate, thanks. But the whole reason that debate has meaning is if "nature" is seen as unchangeable, something not worth resisting because it is so ingrained in us. In the nature versus nurture construct of the world we can try to resist our nature, but it will only lead to disaster (in the nature-side's opinion).

This woman is not saying that. She is saying, let's resist, let's change this.

i was way more traumatized by other girls in school than boys.

"What I'm seeing in this video during the last two minutes aren't girls standing up for their own future. I'm seeing girls who are being told that it's okay to be derogatory and mean towards other people."

Like someone said before, no one is teaching these girls to say that - they are forming their own opinions based on their personal experiences. Looking back on my personal experiences at that age - I thought the same thing and I don't think I was wrong. I think that once these girls begin to learn more about history and gender and sociology they will be able to come to a more balanced view of gender relations that can frame male/female actions within the social systems in which they occur. These girls are expressing their cooties and I think its kind of disturbing actually that those of you who have chose to focus on this are so intent on attacking the entire premise of this clearly beneficial school on the grounds that the teachers aren't doing a good enough job of shutting down these girls personally derived opinions about the opposite sex. Men are the entitled sex in our society and I think that if girls are aware of that ingrained difference early on, they have a much better chance of taking a stand and NOT buying into the system in the first place.

chosen*

"Rather, they will have this unique experience that has boosted their confidence about their own intelligence, assertiveness, and capabilities."

Exactly - and I can only imagine that when they enter a co-ed classroom without the shyness, quietness, or fear of peer retribution that prevents so many young women from having fulfilling educational experiences, they will set a positive example for those of their female classmates who have learned the negative habits unwittingly taught in most elementary classrooms. Seeing a female classmate who is unafraid of disputing another student's assertion and who doesn't hesitate to raise her hand with a question or answer, can only be an encouragement to other young women to do the same.

"I wanna be a vampire!"

I love that they feel special, instead of like outsiders getting the short end of the stick. That was really awesome.

“I am aware of the nature versus nuture debate, thanks. But the whole reason that debate has meaning is if "nature" is seen as unchangeable, something not worth resisting because it is so ingrained in us.� – secondhandsally

You think that people on the “nature� side of the debate think natural behaviors are completely unchangeable (i.e. no amount of socialization can alter them)? Maybe you are thinking about impulse as opposed to behavior?

Oh my God, I adore the little girl who wants to be a vampire when she grows up. Talk about ambitious!

"I think its kind of disturbing actually that those of you who have chose to focus on this are so intent on attacking the entire premise of this clearly beneficial school on the grounds that the teachers aren't doing a good enough job of shutting down these girls personally derived opinions about the opposite sex."

Bubblex, my focus is on the fact that feminism is supposed to be about equality, and by calling these girls "cute" when they're saying derogatory things about boys is a double-standard. If this post had been about an all-boys school and the boys started saying mean things about the girls, I think the comments would have filled up with confusion as to why the people in charge of the school allowed that part of the video to be used. We would be discussing how generalized opinions, no matter the age of the generalizer are harmful to people. When people generalize on something and aren't corrected in their behavior to consider *individuals* as opposed to the larger group to which they belong, it sets up stereotypes and inequality. Just because they're adorable little tots doesn't mean what they're saying is right. And it doesn't make it cute. And whatever the role of men in our society, they don't deserve, at any age, to be insulted or degraded in the ways we're always talking about being so offensive and degrading to women.

Having spent a lot of time in classrooms with 6, 7, and 8 year old children (as both a parent and a future teacher), I can attest to the fact that I have seen a couple of boys (in EVERY classroom I've been in) throw things on the ground, stomp on books, and disrupt the class on an almost daily basis. I have only seen one girl (out of approx. 25 or so classes) do so. Why? I don't know, but that has been my (admittedly anecdotal) experience.

If you've spent a lot of time with children at that age, you know they almost always talk about people in general terms when telling their own experiences. They will tell you that "moms do A" even when they know other moms who don't. They will tell you that "little sisters don't like to play with B" when they know someone else's little sister does. When asked, my daughter and her friends (3rd and 4th graders) will tell you that all boys are gross. If you ask is that really true, they point out that boys X, Y, and Z are nice and don't do gross things, and just most boys are gross. They recognize that their generalizations aren't entirely true, but just don't articulate it that well because they are kids. It's the same way with the children in my family and other students I have dealt with (boys and girls alike). I imagine that if you asked these girls, most of them could put a specific name or place to every generalization they made.

As for whether or not it was a good idea for the school to use the girls' comments, I'll agree with you - probably not. It wasn't their best choice as far as PR goes, but I don't think it's necessarily an endorsement or indicative of what the girls are being taught. However, as someone who generally likes kids and appreciates all their silly quirks (including the generalizations they make), I do happen to find it incredibly cute. And I would have been equally amused if it was a group of boys who think that all girls have cooties.

I think there is an important point that hasn't been discussed yet. Problems with sexism (particularly sexual assault) will never be solved unless men take responsibility for it. The only way this will ever happen is if we start teaching young boys to take responsibility for their interactions with girls. What message do all girls schools send to the boys left in co-ed schools? What about the boys who don't learn in a noisy, competitive environment?

Instead of segregating children based on our perceived beliefs about their gender, we need to learn how to create non-violent safe spaces for all children in schools. Separate but equal anyone? Gender segregation, regarless of it's short term benefit for these girls, leads to more of the same sexism and patriarchy.

Let's remember that boys aren't the problem, they NEED to be half of the solution. Patriarchy and violence are the enemy, not little boys.

I went to a single sex school - and while I hated it, and was bullied horribly by fellow pupils, I still think it benefited me in some ways. Mainly in that I didn't spend that time competing for male attention - I think if that had been in the background during all my teens I might have grown into a shallower person somehow.. I remember at about 13 saying to my grandma I wanted to be a rocket scientist, and her laughing and saying that would need too many qualifications, and that got me really angry even then, as I totally believed I could do it. And while my school was shitty in some ways, I think that point that's been made about "the best at anything is a girl" helped give me that belief in myself.

Oh how cute, they are wearing little uniforms like soldiers or burger-flippers at McDonald's. I suppose the mirror of this is the all-boy school that only hires male teaches (except for one token women). Members of the wrong gender need not apply. Also, I don't recall the boys that age being particularly stupid or unable to complete the English or Math assignments.

Kids say the darnedest things. :)

Wow, show a video of girls getting a great education and the MRA trolls come out in force. "BUT THEY SAID BOYS ARE ICKY!" they scream, and in doing so totally derail any real discussion about why co-ed systems generally suck. Really, anotheroneofthosedamned, the whole "reverse-discrimination" mindset is tiring and inane. If you think 7-year-old girls (or boys, for that matter) calling the other sex "icky" is somehow evidence of reprehensible semantic violence, then you need to get out more. You're just playing the crotchety old misanthrope and everyone's bored with it.

"However if lots of girls go to single-sex schools and nearly all boys go to co-ed schools, the girls at the co-ed schools will be worse off than before."

"Problems with sexism (particularly sexual assault) will never be solved unless men take responsibility for it. The only way this will ever happen is if we start teaching young boys to take responsibility for their interactions with girls. What message do all girls schools send to the boys left in co-ed schools?"

For that matter, what message would one send to a small town's schoolboys left in an all-boy school, if all the schoolgirls within commuting range are sent to an all-girl school instead and none are left to desegregate the school with the schoolboys in it?

After all, not every area is densely populated enough to support a wide variety of schools to schoose from.

For example, I grew up in a school district which had only enough resources and only enough students for one college-level calculus class per year (the rest of the school day the calculus teacher taught geometry to 9th and 10th graders). Who should have been kept out of college-level calculus class, teen girls or teen boys?

Likewise, I've heard of the Jim Crow laws impoverishing rural school districts by having them struggle to run two elementary schools, black and white, when they could barely afford one elementary school...

"Wow, show a video of girls getting a great education and the MRA trolls come out in force. "BUT THEY SAID BOYS ARE ICKY!" they scream, and in doing so totally derail any real discussion about why co-ed systems generally suck"

...as if single-sex schools can't suck too, whether it's a female-only high school in which quilting counts for math credit or a male-only high school which keeps teen girls out by having nowhere to change pads or tampons?

A school that even has more than the typical smartie per class to be that excited about learning and be so visibly happy deserves accolades, not baseless criticism that attempts to make these little girls into misandric women who carry a chip on their shoulders due to the opposite gender.

C'mon, icky? Come to think of it, it would be quite laughable for a grown woman to describe men that way...

Point is that everyone has gone through this stage of ickyness...boys are icky and girls are yucky - try watching a kissing scene on tv with a 7 year old. I absolutely agree with manda in that their articulation is not developed to fully comprehend their generalizations or make them more targeted. They are kids! They are happy little girls and despite some misgivings on these comments, I strongly believe that this gender separation will not be a detriment later on in life. It is not as if they are being completely insulated from any male contact with boys their age...they will learn to maneuver social interactions in all sorts of environments just fine.

Sheesh!

A little girl saying, "I don't like classrooms with boys because they do X, Y, and Z" is not derogatory. It's a re-telling of her personal experience. And a lot of these girls obviously share that sentiment. None of them said, "I hate boys." They simply explained why they enjoy learning more when boys aren't in the picture.

A school that even has more than the typical smartie per class to be that excited about learning and be so visibly happy deserves accolades, not baseless criticism that attempts to make these little girls into misandric women who carry a chip on their shoulders due to the opposite gender.

I agree that the school deserves accolades (see my above post). However, I think you misunderstand the criticism. Some of it is certainly misguided, but it's not baseless. I don't think anyone is claiming the girls in the video are evil man-haters. What they are claiming is that it's hypocritical to celebrate a video that devotes a significant portion of its length to asserting negative male stereotypes.

By the way this video makes me want to have a daughter, move us to NYC and send her to this school.

I don't think anyone is claiming the girls in the video are evil man-haters. What they are claiming is that it's hypocritical to celebrate a video that devotes a significant portion of its length to asserting negative male stereotypes.

Well, but no. That portion of the video addresses a facet of the benefits of a same-sex female education. While it could be articulated maybe more fully by the administrators in the video, letting the girls speak for themselves from their own experience both clarifies the issue (that boys are often more boisterous in school, and girls can find this distracting if not intimidating) and presents it in an appealing way (adorable little girls waving their arms around and wrinkling their small noses). I don't think adults are meant to walk away saying, "Damn, those 7-year-olds are right on! Boys suck! Banish the Y-chromosome!" I would guess that the desired reaction is more along the lines of, "Yeah, that's right, I've read that girls might be able to focus more easily in a same-sex academic environment," followed by something along the lines of what SarahMC just wrote.

I think the issue to focus on is not this video's acknowledgement of the observed differences in boys' and girls' learning styles, but the rigid gender-role system we have in our culture that tends, in coed school situations, to tie kids to those styles, and often to privilege one over the other to everybody's detriment. This school -- any same-sex school -- doesn't really address that system, it circumvents it. But until there's a better alternative, I'd definitely consider sending my (imaginary) daughter to this place.

I'm not against single-sex schools at all. I think it all depends on the child. I wouldn't hesitate putting my child in a single-sex school if I believed that his or her co-ed school was doing him or her a disservice.

Girls Prep looks like a really good school. The students are confident and intelligent. However, like others have said, they're still learning gender stereotypes from somewhere, most likely at home. No one can help children learning gender stereotypes, but it is the responsibility of teachers and parents to teach children that just because some boys act in a certain way doesn't mean they all do. I think Girls Prep provides a good environment for such a lesson to be taught, since the girls are already being taught that girls can do anything boys can do. Such a discussion can start with "What do you think of male nurses?" or "What would you think if you had a male teacher?"

My dad went to a boys' high school. He became a teacher. He married a fellow teacher. I went to a girls' high school.

Dad's one comment about going to a boys' school was that he wasn't forced to grow up too fast. He felt that he could be himself, at an age where his co-ed schooled friends were thinking about how girls thought of them.

I felt a similar way at my girls' school. I gave up my best friend at the age of 8 because neither of us could take the teasing from the boys of our class. Yes, he was a boy, I was a girl (we were both redheads, which added another dimension to the teasing). At high school, I was able to develop as I wanted, with much less societal pressure. I studied languages, sciences, math and excelled. I got a part-time job after school, played sport and met friends' brothers in order to learn how to relate/talk to guys.

The general consensus in our family has been that anything which helps the child concentrate & learn is beneficial, and if they miss out on something due to that decision, then find another way to satisfy it.

The only way this will ever happen is if we start teaching young boys to take responsibility for their interactions with girls.... Let's remember that boys aren't the problem, they NEED to be half of the solution. Patriarchy and violence are the enemy, not little boys.

I recognize the importance of positive all-female spaces - I have had many in my life. But I think that having the main part of a child's life be single-sex sends the wrong message - that gender is a one-size-fits-all, non-fluid category, which I think we can all agree is not true. And while all-female spaces can be great self-esteem-builders, I think not having plenty of co-ed experience too does kids a disservice.

"I recognize the importance of positive all-female spaces - I have had many in my life. But I think that having the main part of a child's life be single-sex sends the wrong message - that gender is a one-size-fits-all, non-fluid category, which I think we can all agree is not true."

Good point. That reminds me, what do promoters of single sex schools think of intersex little kids, transsexual teens, etc.?

As a student at an all women's university, the video made me smile because those very young girls are realizing things that many women do not realize until they pick an all women's university.

I think single-sex education is powerful, and it really creates ownership for women as far as their education goes.

There's a lot of evidence that supports single sex schooling for girls, but there's also a lot of CONFLICTING evidence that does not.

Look up ASU's report on Single Sex Schooling. It reviews all the data gathered from hundreds of studies. The gist of it is that there is not evidence to support single sex schooling for girls OR boys.

Also, separating girls from boys for protection seems a bit detrimental in the long run. Wouldn't separation just create a sense of "otherness?" What happens when these boys and girls grow up and have to work in the real CO-ED world? Separation might also create feelings of inferiority. Like having all female math classes because females are generally behind males in this field. Girls might think "Oh, I'm too stupid to be in the boys' math class because I'm a girl, therefore I am not even going to try to do well because my sex is inherently bad at math." That's the kind of message that single sex schooling sends.

Single sex schooling also reinforces stereotypes that kids may already have about the other gender. The girls in the video said "boys are loud", and they may or may not have come to that decision on their own, but what are the teachers doing to break them of these generalizations?

Gabbi, you raise some good points. Here's my take:

Wouldn't separation just create a sense of "otherness?" I don't think so. The sense of otherness would come from being in an environment geared towards boys. Nobody is telling these girls that they are "other," the message sent to these girls is that they are central.

Separation might also create feelings of inferiority. Like having all female math classes because females are generally behind males in this field. I think this could be a risk for older students. In elementary school, everyone is learning the basics of things like math, and they haven't internalized a lot of gender stereotypes yet. This reminds me of when I was in 7th grade. My algebra teacher stopped class to tell us that some people claim boys are better at math, but that it's not true and not supported by any evidence. At the time, I was surprised to hear her say that, because I thought math was part of school, most girls were good at school, and most boys were troublemakers. The point is, gender stereotypes can take a while to set in on school kids, and single sex education can allow kids to explore their identities before they're hit by those stereotypes.

Single sex schooling also reinforces stereotypes that kids may already have about the other gender. It doesn't really reinforce it, but does create an environment that could allow it to develop. So if the teachers are doing something to warn against generalizations, it's probably not much of a problem.

@ rileystclair: man do i ever agree with you. boys were easy...girls? girls were scary.

Most of the people who immediately jump all over the notion of single sex education are those who have never experienced it. I went to an all-girl high school. Catholic with uniforms and the whole shebang. Most of the knee-jerk criticisms about not learning how to interact with the opposite sex or about becoming little automatons because of the uniforms are patently absurd to anyone who's been there.

There are legitimate questions. Individual schools vary drastically in quality and philosophy, but that's something that holds true for both single sex and co-ed education.

The fundamental issue is there will NEVER be one educational model that works for everybody. Kids are different. They have different behavioral styles, different learning styles, different needs for structure, different tolerances for distraction, etc. An environment that will help one child to thrive may cause another to stagnate. I believe that good education policy respects that reality and offers a variety of educational environments.

Single sex education is one such environment, and there's no question that it will help some students. Other students will work better in other environments. Choice, options, individuality - that's the issue. I'm thrilled to see public school systems offering these kinds of choices that used to be the exclusive province of the wealthy. I would encourage more options.

I went to a girls school from the age of 12 to 16. I can honestly say that it was the thing that made me strong today. It is definitely what made me a feminist.

The first year I was there was the last for our headteacher. She was incredibly ambitious for her girls and would push us to aim for careers that had under-represented women in it, just to show the boys we can do it too. She received a knighthood before she retired and she pushed us really hard to be the best.

And the thing about seeing a girl being the best at everything is so important to stop us being limited... It also helps develop a sense of sisterhood when girls are normally encouraged to compete over guys at that age. No, it didn't work for everyone but the support system I developed has given a foundation that would be a lot harder if guys had been present. It gives a solid identity that isn't subject to pleasing someone else.

As for the little girls saying those things- which of us didn't at that age? It's the cooties stage and quite frankly boys ARE allowed to indulge in unacceptable behaviour just because they're boys. Those girls don't have the maturity yet to understand it's not an inbred thing. So what? That will come.

Oh- and as for relating to guys- has never been an issue. I'm less tolerant of the laddish behaviour but slipping into my co-ed college was completely natural. Same for all my girlfriends so the fact I'm asexual has nothing to do with it.

"Wouldn't separation just create a sense of 'otherness?' What happens when these boys and girls grow up and have to work in the real CO-ED world?"

...or even before?

For example, what if the "boys are yucky!!!" crowd decides that being best friends with the boy next door or inheriting her mother's moustache and beard or whatever makes a 5th grade girl masculine enough to be yucky too? If they bully and/or ostracize her for it, would that be a cruel reaction to human diversity...or an understandable reaction to "masculinity" in what adults promised would be an all-female environment?

"Most of the people who immediately jump all over the notion of single sex education are those who have never experienced it."

I did experience it. A few of my high school classes were all-female (when the school's small and not every subject can meet every period of the day, it's hard enough to get most kids most of the classes they want even without trying to keep sex ratios 50-50). Usually some of the girls dominated the discussion by constantly echoing their friends while not letting anyone else get a word in edgewise, and the teachers let this happen as if "consensus" is for girls and "debate" is for boys. My coed classes, even the one in which I was the only girl, let me participate more.

"Choice, options, individuality - that's the issue. I'm thrilled to see public school systems offering these kinds of choices that used to be the exclusive province of the wealthy. I would encourage more options."

Isn't that urban privilege?

For example, offering an all-black-male school with a well-stocked chemistry lab and 3 foreign language options may be feasible in a school district which has thousands of black boys within commuting range. Now what about a rural or small-town school district which would have to put 5 kids in a one-room schoolhouse with no chemistry lab and no more than 1 foreign language option in order to offer an all-black-male school?

"As for the little girls saying those things- which of us didn't at that age?"

I didn't.

"I don't disagree that girls have it rough in co-ed schools, but to allow girls in a school, no matter the genders allowed, to say derogatory things about boys, no matter the age, isn't any better."

Are you SERIOUS? We've already mentioned sexual harassment as something many girls undergo as part of their co-ed schooling- not to mention the daily assaults on their confidence by being told
"girls can't do...."

Are you REALLY saying that these girls saying boys are loud is comparable?

I thought boys were icky when I was 7. I had eyes and ears, I watched my brothers and male classmates disrupt again and again and again. These girls will be just fine and I'm sure in a few years they'll think boys are just great- but they won't feel those boys are worth more than they are, or are more intelligent than they are. win-win situation, i think.

But wait, I forgot.. it's all about the meeennzzz.

The other weird thing about Charter Schools is the way they get to pick their students or get rid of them. That was a bunch of extremely articulate and privileged girls talking on that video - hardly a representative sample of NY elementary school kids in the public school system.

Of course they wanted to look good on the video so they clearly selected who got interviewed quite carefully, but it begs the question what classes of people this school is serving.

the interesting thing about single-sex environments, especially schools, is that they are usually associated with "traditional cultures," and often have no place in a "modern" environment.
however, the more i think about it, the more i think that these sorts of spaces are beneficial for kids and adults too, to learn how to perform one's gender in new and healthier ways.
as one that identifies as a man, it seems to me that an men's only space would be a positive place to start working out new ways of how to be a man, not conform to the patriarchal models that run prevalent today. for instance: i am in an environmental and economic justice activist group, and at the end of the year, we had a retreat to see where we're going, to see where we've been. at one point, we split into gendered spaces, and we discussed our experiences as women and men. it was really fruitful.
there's a really interesting book called, "mystics, mavericks and merrymakers" about Hasidic girls, and the author comes to the interesting conclusion that a single-sex schooling environment was a positive factor in their personality development, never having to play the submissive role to appear coy and attractive to young men.

"The other weird thing about Charter Schools is the way they get to pick their students or get rid of them."

Hmm...

"however, the more i think about it, the more i think that these sorts of spaces are beneficial for kids and adults too, to learn how to perform one's gender in new and healthier ways."

Wouldn't that depend on how the people running the space set the rules? For example, what if a charter school promises to be all-male and some students perform their gender in ways some teachers, admins, and/or other students' parents deem effeminate? Should those kids be allowed to stay or would that violate the charter?

yeah it's great to see little kids so enthusastic.
it's great to have little girls excelling.
It is not great to suggest that single-sex education is a fix-all for schools(I would have been out my MOTHERFUCKING MIND if there were no girls in school, becauseother dudes are rowdy). No one who's decrying the post and it's reaction even tangentially qualifies as MRA or troll--feminism IS about equality, and to suggest that little boys saying the same things about little girls and the commenter base giving the same reaction? Boll.ocks.

I like this. These girls are encouraged to have big dreams and love their gender. In public schools, girls become conditioned to fight with one another all for the favor of boys. In this school, however, they are encouraged to work together and appreciate one another. If a school can do that, then I'm for it, even if the poor, poor men feel left out. Maybe when men stop encouraging boys to be rowdy and excusing it with "boys will be boys", girls will stop thinking of them as disrupting their learning environment. I was surprised to hear such young girls say they couldn't learn because the boys in the classroom were making it difficult. Surprised because they WANT to learn, and shouldn't be driven from that, and surprised that they could pinpoint exactly what was bothering them. Maybe public schools need to re-evaluate how they allow their children to behave. Until then, if girls are happy in a school like this, then let them start choosing their own path. I really enjoyed seeing a bunch of girls so enthusiastic over school rather than listening to how girls are obsessed with dolls, makeup, Barbies and kissing.

"I like this. These girls are encouraged to have big dreams and love their gender. In public schools, girls become conditioned to fight with one another all for the favor of boys. In this school, however, they are encouraged to work together and appreciate one another. If a school can do that, then I'm for it, even if the poor, poor men feel left out."

...and even if the girls who don't totally fit the "feminine" label feel left out? For example, when I was in 6th grade the classmate who asked me if I should have been born a boy was another girl. Think about how much worse that kind of thing could have been for at a school which doesn't accept boys...

Um, this may be a little late, but why was my comment deleted? (It was just about the third one in)

First of all, I wouldn't assume that girls who don't fit the "feminine" label feel left out. Actually, between myself and another couple of friends, each of whom attended single-sex schools at one point or another in our education, single-sex schools (when done a certain way) can actually widen girls minds on what can be considered female behavior, moreso than coed schools (where girls are more likely to define themselves relative to boys)

I think whether or not single-sex schools are a good idea all comes down to sort of an "individual's rights" vs. good of society kind of thing. Like yeah, it would be a hell of a lot better if parents and teachers everywhere were really dedicated to teaching both their /sons/ and their daughters in a gender equal society. However, the parents of these girls can hardly control how the boys at public schools act. Some of the parents of these girls (like those from the Bronx) may very well not have gotten a very good education themselves, and are trying to give their girls an advantage and self-confidence they never had.

I can say from experience, that going to a liberal-type single-sex school can be confidence building. It's not like you won't know how to interact with guys, because duh, you're going to interact a lot with guys in other contexts anyway. But not having to define yourself in a context where boys factor into the picture can help you to learn about other parts of yourself. My grade school years, even at 8 or so, were a living hell, and a lot of that was b/c I didn't fit my gender stereotype and was unattractive to boys.

Ultimately, I wasn't terribly happy at a single-sex school, and I didn't stay there for very long. But I could definitely understand where it could help boost girl's/women's self-confidence and sense of self-worth, and that for many girls it was a very beneficial thing.

Why can't we support this school without it automatically meaning that we support single-sex education for everyone, at every level, all the time, no matter what?

These girls are smart and excited to learn. They are also young and silly. They want to be vets and doctors at the same time, they want to be vampires. They'll grow up and realize those ideas aren't practical. They'll learn the same about their thoughts of "boys are icky." They are not developing or parroting truly harmful or sexist ideas and not once did a girl say that boys weren't as smart as they were. I think they were reflecting that boys rowdy behavior at that age (which very may well stem from an acceptance of "boys will be boys" mentality) affect them. One girl responded, when asked why boys weren't allowed in the school that it was because they didn't "have the uniform."

I doubt they'll develop a feeling of "otherness." A single-sex education does not prevent them from knowing boys. And, after all, they (most likely) have male relatives- dads, brothers, cousins, uncles, grandfathers or neighbors or family friends. They'll still live in the patriarchy and be exposed to the media/society/culture telling them what they should be as girls/women. But at that school they don't have to compare themselves or each other to boys. No one is telling them they can't or they shouldn't because of their gender, something opposite of "otherness."

If this is an environment that is positive and encouraging and seems to have a solid base of support with great teachers and parents, than we should celebrate it. We should celebrate ANY place that provides this for young girls. I think we can do that without making broad generalizations about what every school should look like.

Lastly, Mina, I'm not sure that a single-sex environment is necessarily going to define girls in a strict "feminine" label. I think that being a girl could be a lot more fluid if there was no "opposite" sitting next to you in class that you knew you weren't "supposed" to be. Does that make sense? That's just a thought and it seems that with your personal experiences, you would know better than me. I do agree with you, that single-sex educational experiences would be difficult for people who do not identify with their assigned/assumed gender. (Nothing's simple, I guess?)

whoa, mindmeld acranom, except for you were more articulate, so good job

"Why can't we support this school without it automatically meaning that we support single-sex education for everyone, at every level, all the time, no matter what?"

Good point! After all, this one is in a school district which has enough population density to offer other options too instead of going "we can offer an all-female option *or* a science-centric option *or* a dual language option..."

"These girls are smart and excited to learn. They are also young and silly. They want to be vets and doctors at the same time, they want to be vampires. They'll grow up and realize those ideas aren't practical."

Either that or the one who wants to be a vampire will grow up to draw blood from people, perfect that new system rumored to turn A, B, and AB donations to O, etc.? :)

"Lastly, Mina, I'm not sure that a single-sex environment is necessarily going to define girls in a strict 'feminine' label. I think that being a girl could be a lot more fluid if there was no 'opposite' sitting next to you in class that you knew you weren't 'supposed' to be. Does that make sense?"

Yeah. OTOH, there's still an "opposite" who's banned from class.

Would that girl who thought my body was part male (even though I'd switched from my mom's bleaching advice to removing all my facial hair in 5th grade, I still had a "bearded lady" rep in 6th) have accepted me as 100% female if our school was girls-only, or would her "Mina should have been a boy" attitude have been "Mina should have been someone banned from class"? Would today's counterparts of her? I'm not so optimistic about that...

Mina,
By your comment I'm guessing you never went to a same-sex school or ever knew anyone who did.
I'm from St. Louis and same-sex catholic schools are HUGE here. Each school has it's own reputation which is why you get a lot of "where did you go to high school" questions here and there is a lot of pride in them.

I will tell you that NONE and I mean NONE of the girl's schools were hyper-feminine where any girl who didn't fit with that was teased. That was a huge thing we and other girls at their schools would say - we didn't have to give a shit everyday. We could be ourselves. We could go to class looking like hell. We could do or say whatever we pleased and we didn't have to act "feminine" for fear of getting teased or offending boys.

In fact, when you'd visit the school during 8th grade that was an actual selling point. If you visited St. Elizabeth's, Ursuline, Cor Jesu, Notre Dame, or any other girl's school today I promise you you'll hear that. And it's absolutely true.

I had girls in my class who had facial hair - extremely noticeable facial hair - and I never heard anyone make a comment about it to their face or to other people. Why? Because no one freakin' cared! Everyone wanted to be comfortable so they're not going to criticize someone else. Everyone was themselves. There wasn’t a defined “feminine behavior� that everyone felt they had to adhere to either. So no one was criticized for not “acting like a girl�.

I'm not sure why you'd think a same sex environment of women would automatically have strict labels for how everyone should look or act. It's almost like hearing a man say "women get breast implants for other women". No! Women don't care what other women look like until they're in a place where they're forced to care, compete, and adhere to whatever is defined as attractive. When you don’t have other people’s strict standards being imposed on your life everyday, you’re free to act and look however you want to and you don't care what anyone else does.

"I will tell you that NONE and I mean NONE of the girl's schools were hyper-feminine where any girl who didn't fit with that was teased."

I wasn't expecting girls to be teased for merely not being hyper-feminine. I was wondering about girls being teased by other girls who assume they should be in the group not even allowed to enroll.

"I had girls in my class who had facial hair - extremely noticeable facial hair - and I never heard anyone make a comment about it to their face or to other people. Why? Because no one freakin' cared!"

Were the teachers serious about cracking down on bullies, or did your class luck out and happen to not have bullies in it? Either way, cool. :)

"I'm not sure why you'd think a same sex environment of women would automatically have strict labels for how everyone should look or act."

I wasn't assuming they'd insist everyone strictly fit a "hyper-feminine" label. I was assuming they'd insist everyone strictly fit a "not male" label. Meanwhile, having other kids label me part male sure hurt and sadly I doubt the female ones would have been nicer if the school banned the category.

"No! Women don't care what other women look like until they're in a place where they're forced to care, compete, and adhere to whatever is defined as attractive."

When I was a kid, I sure cared about what other girls thought because I was lonely and wanted to make more friends (even if I couldn't find any 100% unsuperficial kids in town and had to be a partly superficial kid's friend in order to be a friend).

OTOH, that argument for single-sex schools can makes sense if noone's lonely enough to care what another girl thinks (a la "I wish I was her friend") and everyone's straight or closeted enough to not care what another girl thinks (a la "I wish I was her girlfriend").

I don't quite understand what you mean by "I was wondering about girls being teased by other girls who assume they should be in the group not even allowed to enroll." Could you please explain?

The people who are allowed to enroll are the ones who get in - the ones who had the good grades, the extra-curricular activities, talent, and whoever impressed the faculty in their 1 to 3 hour interviews. There isn't a set look or behavior that allows a person to enroll. You know everyone else around you went through the same difficult process you did so they are at least just as worthy as you if not more so.

"Were the teachers serious about cracking down on bullies, or did your class luck out and happen to not have bullies in it? Either way, cool. :)"

Actually, it wasn't just my class, it was the whole school. It was the environment. I remember once, when I was a freshman, there was a small group of girls (5 or 6) that refused to sit at a lunch table with another girl for some reason. Girls in my freshman class, the sophomores, juniors, and seniors stood up for the lone girl and collectively scolded the group of girls right then and there. It was the only time I'd ever seen any meanness and it was quickly squashed. My school was smaller so I knew everyone in my class and just about everyone in the classes above and beneath me. So if there was an injustice, everyone heard about it.

I'm really sorry that some girls labeled you as part male. I can't imagine how you felt. But I'm not quite understanding what you mean by "they'd insist everyone strictly fit a "not male" label" Are you talking about females who have facial hair? Females who dress in more male style clothing?

My school did have girls who had facial hair or who dressed in guy's clothing. But then, like I said, that was and still is a selling point for the all-girls schools here, that you can dress and look however you want without having to care. When you're allowed to be yourself you want to be comfortable and accepted and you realize that other people also want to be comfortable and accepted too. So your frame shifts.
You're not going to stand there with your bed head, mismatched clothes (because you threw stuff in your backpack earlier that morning for after school activities), and unshaven legs (let me tell you how rare it was to see shaven legs at school) pointing to someone else saying "She looks like a guy!"

I understand what you mean about wanting to be friends with certain people or just wanting friends in general so you care what people think. But to me, that's different than saying an all female school would foster some strict guidelines in how the enrolled females think other females should look or act in order to be accepted therefore some girls will be lonely and outcasted whereas it wouldn’t happen in a co-ed school. Not saying it couldn't happen to an individual in a same-sex school or that a certain same-sex school couldn't have a restrictive environment – they could, but it wouldn’t be because it’s same-sex. That kind of stuff happens everywhere. I’m assuming you went to co-ed schools and you know personally that it happens there, so I don’t understand why you’d use that as an argument against same-sex schools especially when there’s less pressure to be traditionally feminine.

BTW, we had at least one outed lesbian in my high school. We voted so that she could bring her female date to prom when the administration said no. It was cool to see how often we all stood by each other.

You know, I'm not crazy about this.

Let me preface my comments with some information. I went to a women's college and loved every minute--I'd do it again in a heartbeat if I were to be 18 again, God forbid. I'm also very pleased to see active, articulate girls excited about learning.

But.

First of all, I'm very unhappy about a public single-sex school. Public schools should be open to all. That's what makes them public. Feminists have fought long and hard against government support of sex-segregated institutions, because it is immoral, we said, for public funds to be used to exclude half the population, because this is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and that means all the people. And that principle has served us well, too well for me to support abandoning it for the sake of an elementary school.

I am not opposed to single-sex education. I greatly enjoyed and benefitted from my experiences with it. But I am opposed to government-funded segregation; private schools can do what they like, but public schools have a greater set of obligations to meet. And I am deeply uncomfortable with a public school being segregated by sex.

Next, I am doubtful about the supposed benefits of single-sex education. My experiences with it were at the college level, and at an avowedly feminist institution, and the excitement of being in such an atmosphere was integral to my college years. But in terms of scholarly achievement, I have read pieces--pieces written by feminists--arguing that their success is an artifact of the excitement and confidence the administrators and teachers bring to the project. Consider what these schools are being compared to. Any school which is started by administrators and teachers who are excited and dedicated to their mode of teaching and confident in their students has an automatic advantage over the typical overcrowded public school staffed by teachers and administrators who have seen years of their good ideas being turned down, who have spent years breaking up three fist fights a day, who have seen their funding cut again and again and again. It's the same effect you see in charter schools: obviously a school whose very founding represents a success for the administrators and teachers, which is brand new and doesn't have years of disappointment in its walls already, and whose teachers have bonded over a shared philosophy and positive view of the future is going to do better.

Finally, I have a real problem with school uniforms. I don't think children should have to wear uniforms, period. Perhaps more relevant to a feminist discussion though--why are all those little girls having to wear dresses? Talk about enforcing normative modes of femininity! There isn't a mixture of pants and dresses in those pictures--it's all dresses, all the time. Why can't little girls wear pants? They're warmer in the winter time, especially because you can put long underwear under them. You can swing by your knees from the monkey bars without your skirt falling over your face, exposing your underwear (and if you think only little boys are going to sing "I saw Lucy's underpants," you are the more mistaken) and blocking your vision. You can run and fall without automatically skinning your knees. I don't like seeing kids in uniforms, and I definitely don't like seeing little girls all in a row wearing dresses, unless I'm reading a Madeline book.

EG,
I completely agree with you! I went to an all-girls high school and I loved it. I will defend same-sex schools as long as they're private and not mandatory.
I see way to many problems with forcing public schools to segregate - funding for girls vs boys, what kinds of teaching methods used for girls vs boys, and so on.

"Actually, it wasn't just my class, it was the whole school. It was the environment."

Awesome. :)

"I'm really sorry that some girls labeled you as part male. I can't imagine how you felt. But I'm not quite understanding what you mean by 'they'd insist everyone strictly fit a 'not male' label' Are you talking about females who have facial hair? Females who dress in more male style clothing?"

I'm talking about the adults not letting boys in, and then the kids adding a "shouldn't be here" label to any girls they're labelling boys for whatever reason.

"Not saying it couldn't happen to an individual in a same-sex school or that a certain same-sex school couldn't have a restrictive environment – they could, but it wouldn’t be because it’s same-sex."

Exactly! Being single-sex wouldn't cause the caring-what-other-people-think pressures, and it wouldn't totally remove those pressures either.

"It's the same effect you see in charter schools: obviously a school whose very founding represents a success for the administrators and teachers, which is brand new and doesn't have years of disappointment in its walls already, and whose teachers have bonded over a shared philosophy and positive view of the future is going to do better."

In fact, Girls Prep is a charter school, right?

RE: School Uniforms.

Get over it. Seriously. I'm from the UK and here I doubt there is a single primary school in the country that doesn't have school uniforms. It's only when you move on to further education that you drop them. The entire nation is not scared for life. Yes, I would debate the skirts only option that seem apparent in this video but most schools that have uniforms have a trouser or skirt option for girls.

"Yes, I would debate the skirts only option that seem apparent in this video but most schools that have uniforms have a trouser or skirt option for girls."

Yeah. Likewise, I've heard of dry-clean-only school uniforms in a school in Australia but some other schools with uniforms allow washable clothing.

I'm not sure why I should get over it, Tcupnewt. I never claimed that children wearing uniforms would make an entire nation "scared for life." I didn't bring up my reasons for being opposed to uniforms in general, but if you're interested, I refer you to Katha Pollitt's essay "Madchen in Uniform" In Subject to Debate. I essentially believe it's the restriction of children's free expression and individuality for no good reason whatsoever.

You may claim that most schools have a trouser or skirt option, and that may be the case in the UK, but here in the US I have never seen a schoolgirl wearing trousers as part of a uniform. Never. When I was growing up, no public schools had uniforms, but private and religious schools did, and the girls always and only wore skirts. I currently live near both a Catholic school and a public school, and girls on their way to each always wear skirts. They hamper girls' freedom of movement and delineate traditional gender lines for no good reason; they infringe upon the gender expression of children and when the girls start to go through puberty, uniform trousers are almost never cut to accommodate or flatter. "Get over it" doesn't address any of those issues, so I remain unconvinced. School uniforms basically exist to make children the expression of adult ideas of cuteness and regimentation, and I don't find those ideas valuable at all.

Wow. ONLY all-girls public school? Are there all-boys public schools?

Here in Ireland, just a couple of years ago the balance tipped and there were more co-ed schools than single-sex (though I think that was at secondary level - in any case, single-sex state schools are very usual). One of the big points about my primary school was that it was co-educational (and more unusually, multi-denominational).

And as for 'boys are icky' - well, as a four, five, six, seven, eight-year-old and onwards, in a mixed school, I must say that was my experience too. Much as I agree with the idea of changing things rather than making girls move, and much as I, too, deeply loathe 'boys will be boys' (and get away with it), little boys DO stomp on books on the floor, they do shout, they do throw their lunches, hit people (though the girls did that last one too), spit, etc., and I used to try and physically crawl into myself in misery when they started up, checking the floor every time I moved my feet in case I'd step on something disgusting (usually fairly benign, like cheese). And the boys were just meaner, too, in the first few years. So at the age of the girls in that video, I would have much preferred to be in a single-sex school because I didn't like boys, because of the way they behaved.
These days, however, I don't really agree with single-sex schooling, at secondary level anyway, mostly on the basis that as soon as you separate, you can discriminate. Also school is meant to be about education, so deliberately limiting students' experience of the world by shutting out sections of humanity probably doesn't help, except in limited terms of academic results.

My school was quite interesting. FYI I'm from the UK, this was an independent school in the midlands. It was mixed sex, in that boys or girls could attend. From the age of 7 to 11 classes were mixed. At the age of 11 you made the leap to the secondary part of the school, where many many more pupils who didnt attend the prep school joined, and the two genders were seperated. The school had two sites, divided by a small road, one site was the boys school, one site was the girls school. We were taught seperately, but saw each other all the time. At about 14 the occasional class became mixed, like art, home economics, CDT (woodwork and metalwork) and music. The following year a couple more classes became mixed. When we went up to sixth form at age 16, the classes were completely mixed again, and also made smaller (12-15 pupils per class).

Basically, I had the best of both worlds - I could excel at woodwork, maths and physics with no pressure to study more "feminine" subjects. I could also frolic with boys whenever I wanted, although the school actually introduced "The Twelve Inch Rule" - we were not allowed to go more than 12 inches near a boy... stricter teachers actually enforced this, others didnt bother. Still amuses me to this day though.

I'm from the US, and I had to wear a uniform from Kindergarten to the end of my high school career when I was 18, and through out all 13 years of school, girls were allowed to wear the uniform skirts, pants, shorts, and/or pinafores. The entire city's private catholic schools were interconnected, and every last one of them had the same uniform options.

In fact, my high school got rid of the skirts my senior year, b/c the girls had been rolling or hemming them too short. So, everyone wore pants.

I'd just like to say, I too would like to be a vampire when I grow up.

Awesome! Thanks, Jessica. I would have loved to have been able to go to a school like that.

"You may claim that most schools have a trouser or skirt option, and that may be the case in the UK, but here in the US I have never seen a schoolgirl wearing trousers as part of a uniform."

I heard that UK schools with uniforms allow girls to wear trousers more than US schools with uniforms do because a UK school with uniforms is more likely to be a public school obliged to serve local families including the observant Muslim ones (who make up a higher % of the UK than of the US) and a US school with uniforms is more likely to be a private school free to say "if you don't wanna bare half your legs then leave!!!"

Meanwhile, there's this interesting article about school uniforms in Nanjing:

"Parental pressures have forced a technical school in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, to give up its plan of changing its uniforms, fashioned after South Korean uniforms where it's trouser suits for boys and skirt suits for girls. It would seem that parents object to the new uniforms for being too provocative...

"...Meanwhile, an official from the Nanjing Education Bureau told the Jinling Evening News that there are no rules on uniforms in Nanjing; schools are free to decide what uniforms to have. However, he acknowledged that most elementary and secondary schools have opted for the sports tracksuit..."

[BTW, those tracksuits are for all classes, not just gym. Sounds comfy.]

"They hamper girls' freedom of movement and delineate traditional gender lines for no good reason; they infringe upon the gender expression of children and when the girls start to go through puberty, uniform trousers are almost never cut to accommodate or flatter."

They also don't allow a girl with genes like my family's to conceal her leg hair when it grows back before her razor burn heals and it's safe to shave again.

"and through out all 13 years of school, girls were allowed to wear the uniform skirts, pants, shorts, and/or pinafores."

Cool. :)

Oops, forgot to post the URL of the Nanjing article! Sorry! Here it is:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/MATERIAL/196464.htm