STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Journal Claims Boys’ Advantage in Physics Comes Down to Peeing
By Joe Jarvis - November 04, 2017

We found the difference between men and women. It took years of study, professional research, and a scholarly article to pinpoint the cause. Ready for the bombshell? Men have penises.

Today we are going to delve into one of the lesser known ways men use their penises to oppress women.

Physics.

The government is always trying to entice more women into STEM fields: science, technology, engineering, and math. But researchers have finally cracked the code on why despite the best efforts, men are still vastly overrepresented in scientific fields like physics.

Now we know that boys’ natural advantage in physics comes from peeing. A scholarly article has detailed the theory. The authors suggest that boys gain a practical knowledge of the physics of projectile arcs by having the natural opportunity to manipulate arcs of urine several times daily.

Because boys enjoy such activities as writing their names in the snow and finding high rocks to pee off, they have a massive head start in understanding advanced sciences.

All this is experienced up to five times a day, so by 14, boys have had the opportunity to play with projectile motion around 10,000 times. And 14 is when many children meet formalised physics in the form of projectile motion and Newton’s equations of motion for the first time.

All joking aside… their conclusion does make some sense. After all, Newton is said to have come up with the theory of gravity through observation–but of an apple falling, not peeing.

The real silliness is proposing to do anything about it. Luckily the authors don’t suggest castrating boys to even the scientific playing field. They suggest rearranging education curriculum.

The paper says that most advanced physics lessons start with projectile motion. By starting with a subject that–as they argue–favors the natural experience of males, women are more likely to fall behind at an early age. If classes started with a physics subject matter equally alien to both men and women, then women might not be so discouraged. They would be more likely to go further in the sciences, instead of feeling inferior to their classmates who quickly relate the complicated science to a pissing contest.

If girls’ experiences of formal, mathematically codified physics start with a topic that males have already experienced more learning in relation to, it is perhaps unsurprising that both students and teachers construct conceptions of boys as having deeper understanding and being more naturally suited to physics.

Of course, there is no simple way to provide girls with the same opportunities for exploring projectile motion that boys have in playing with pee. Nor do we suggest that projectile motion not be taught or assessed…

However, we can make a change: it’s not necessary for physics curricula to begin with projectile motion. Other topics, such as energy conservation, which is more central to physics, could be taught first instead.

Of course, another thing that could happen is fewer people, boys and girls, would advance in a confusing subject. Already fewer and fewer westerners seem to choose advanced fields like engineering and physics. Why discourage anyone by starting with something less relatable? It could be that instead of keeping more girls in the subject by switching the order things are taught, they instead scare away everyone.

So instead I propose that public schools everywhere distribute the following product to girls: the Go Girl. It allows women to pee standing up. You may want to invest heavily in the company in anticipation of their massive sales to all public school girls.

Modern people just cannot seem to face the facts that men and woman have natural differences. That is not always a problem in need of solving.

There may very well be natural advantages that one sex has and the other does not. When it comes to potential career fields, perhaps men have an advantage in some and women in others.

But why would we seek to cripple a man’s advantage? If boys get natural experience in projectile motion by peeing, great! Start with that subject in physics, because it is something they can relate to. They can more easily get the hang of it, and let their curiosity draw them in further.

That doesn’t mean girls can’t be interested in physics. Separate the physics classes if need be, and start with a different subject.

But don’t handicap the boys in the hopes that it will make the subject more interesting to girls.

All too often “leveling the playing” field means bringing everything down to the lowest common denominator.

Their solution to boys’ natural advantage in physics will not mean more girls join the field, it will mean fewer boys do.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Samarami

    “…Because boys enjoy such activities as writing
    their names in the snow and finding high rocks
    to pee off, they have a massive head start in
    understanding advanced sciences…”
    And by the time they reach octogenarian status they’ll be lucky to be capable of peeing in the standing position without soaking their shoes and pants-leg.
    Ship me one o’ them “Go Girls”….Sam

    • Don Duncan

      Sad…but true, damn it.
      I still have most of my mind though, and that’s what I live for, e.g., reading, listening to ideas, analyzing, and learning.

      • ThomasJK

        Could it be that during the tribal hunter-gatherer phase of human history that a tribe (or clan) that had women whose memory capabilities were such they could remember where the most productive gathering of edible plants could be had in past years while the men of the tribe (or clan) had projectile motion problem solving abilities with which that they could predictably hit a wabbit when they thwew a wock at said wabbit?

        And could the difference be in part due to the superior wock thwowing physical abilities of men? And while we are at it, take a look at
        the physique of the typical Neanderthal — Maybe it was their inferior wock-thwowing, spear-chunking abilities that provided the survival advantage to anatomically modern humans over the Neanderthal. Maybe a bunch of great linebackers or catchers among a tribe of Neanderthals, but not a skillful quarterback or pitcher to be seen in the whole crowd. Someone who can’t thwow the wock with enough force to kill a wabbit (or some other prey animal) doesn’t have much practical use for native projectile motion problem solving abilities.

        And, finally, maybe somewhere in there can be found a perhaps compromise work-around evolutionary bottle neck solution that was provided to creatures whose brain capacity
        had reached its limits due to the inability of women to give birth to babies whose skulls were large enough for the child to grow to an adult who possessed highly versatile mental capabilities.

      • mctrnr1951

        Some second-hander will surely come up with a knock-off.

      • Ephraiyim

        And not having to pee all the time!

    • mctrnr1951

      Some second-hander will come up with a knock-off featuring telescopee.

    • Number 6

      Throughout most of my late teens and twenties I did most of my pissing whilst blind drunk, so I didn’t have much control over my appendage or indeed see the results of my physics experiment and now I mostly piss in the dark much to the toilet seats and my girlfriends dismay. So personally other than the obvious convenience of standing up, I see no real advantage 😉

    • Col. Edward H. R. Green

      Also, once one reaches sexagenarian status, one should never trust a fart.

  • Don Duncan

    Or…”we” could do away with the “we” thinking, i.e., all of us do the same thing. How about no coercive institutions because society (the majority) do not value the use of force? How about millions of experiments and let the best dominate? How about assuming the so-called experts cannot possibility compete with the “moving hand”? Could it be that freedom actually works? Could it be we don’t and never did need to forced “for our own good”? Could it be our common good is found in the good each of us finds by themselves or voluntarily cooperating with small groups? Could it be that voluntary social interaction is superior to forced union, i.e., centralized control of all, with the consent of most, but not all. Could it be the few dissenters are the innovators? Could it be the happiest and most efficient society has the most freedom? Could that freedom be infectious and inspire more and more innovation until even the dullest, laziest, is inspired. Could this paradigm change from force to choice be “one giant leap forward”?

  • Harry Skip Robinson

    Sadly according to the Department of Education or maybe it was the CDC, once the cute little things hit puberty, they go in a downward spiral with their math and science skills and increase in running their mouth, I mean English skills.

  • lulu

    Strange enough and point taken since in general girls do better in elementary school than do boys. There has been much talk about the curriculum being female oriented thereby enabling girls. Along with that the suggestion that boys need different programs of study with specialized expectations to meet their needs. So it seems that all factors considered, all factors are not considered. There is still much to learn and the need to figure out how to enable the best for all.

  • gomurr

    I can’t even read this nonsense, but I will say, it’s been my experience that most men can’t control that “arc” they practice numerous times a day. Otherwise, they wouldn’t pee on the seat, and down the front of the toilet, where it’s left to drip on the floor. But take that theory and run with it.

    • Hookshot

      I realized that long ago. That’s why I piss in the sink.

  • Fred

    And one of the hottest topics in physics these days are black holes. The great equalizer???

  • chicken little

    Way-to-go, DB, over the years you’ve grown raunchier and raunchier. You started out classy and “intellectual”, now we’re descending into intimate body parts. Giggle giggle. I’m officially *done* with you.

    • Fred

      You prefer ze and zir? A little humor can be an effective way to criticize.

      “Modern people just cannot seem to face the facts that men and woman have natural differences. That is not always a problem in need of solving.”

      • jrrrr

        Yeah, like families and motherhood might be preferable to lots more women than math, so why arbitrarily tax them for the benefit of women who prefer math. That leaves everybody free to pursue their individual differences into a personally satisfactory lifestyle. A successful solution currently obscured by socially engineered gender wars that presume women are all alike, as are men.

        Best of all socially engineered females would quit picking on men, and all the PC sneering at family oriented females would end, as well; both the result of social engineers convincing graduates that too many males in one place is “proof” of feminine victimization.

    • jrrrr

      Did you forget, it was our intrepid social engineers who upchucked this idea, not DB.

      Since using taxes to bribe women into STEM careers is failing, cause must be assigned to either insufficient female opportunities to accept the bribes, or men. Because when social engineering fails to alter the disparity statistics social engineers use to assign victim hood, no one must realize that disparity statistics have nothing to do with victimization. That would interfere with the socially engineered pretense that replacing education with social engineering propaganda is not the cause of today’s overgrowth of SJWs, whining about their non-existent victimization.

    • davidnrobyn

      Chicken–
      You, James, and George seem to be confusing the messenger with the message. I think that’s willful misunderstanding on your part. As for me, I thought that if there was any silliness in what Joe wrote, it was that he gave way too much credence to the basic idiotic idea. Am wondering what YOUR collective commentary would be on such pseudo-scientific ruminations as this “scholarly article” presents? Go for it. I dare you, Chicken, James and George. Your vast intellectual prowess should be on full display to benefit all of us.

    • Jenevieve

      good riddance to you – bye bye

  • James Clander

    What a fascinating & interesting article. NOT !
    The game definitely needs lifting.

  • georgesilver

    Just returned from from holiday and find the the DB staff and its 13 year old Joe Jarvis have turned it into a kids comic.
    It was in the tea-leaves that this was going to happen as the |DB seems to be backed by a huge operation that is out to dumb down people.
    Don’t think I’ll bother anymore.

    • Alan777

      Joe is just pointing out the idiocy that passes as scientific study these days.

    • davidnrobyn

      That would be great, George. PLEASE don’t bother anymore.

      • georgesilver

        That’s OK Joe Jarvis or whatever handle you’re using to write replies.

  • Alan777

    This just emphasizes the ludicrousness of today’s progressive thinking and the PC culture that has to require equal percentages of each gender, race, etc. for every job. Of course, projectile motion is only one subject in the vast subject of physics and for some knucklehead to come up with this kind of explanation reveals more about his/her lack of comprehension/intelligence in said subject.

    • Jenevieve

      Or a morbid interest in watching boys peeing

    • Sheila

      They wear blinders and focus on the “haves” instead of the “have nots.” They notice that most CEOs are male, but fail to notice that the people in the most dangerous and dirty (and often low-pay jobs) are also male. The next time one of them says “There aren’t enough women working as X,” I’m tempted to say “Are there enough women working as garbage colletors? Because I’ve never even seen ONE doing that.”

      • Alan777

        You’re so right…

        • Sheila

          People weave a cocoon around themselves and feel secure in it.

  • Praetor

    I’ve come to the conclusion, that many women are overly fascinated by the male protruding appendage. In the US women rule over the education system and no one should deny that, but I’m sure some will.!!!

  • SnakePlissken

    Kurt Vonnegut wrote a satirical and dystopian science-fiction short story called “Harrison Bergeron” where everyone is deliberately handicapped in order to enforce equality.

    • Sheila

      That is the one Vonnegut writing I managed to get through. Wonder if he knew how prophetic he would turn out to be?

  • Jenevieve

    They don’t want to handicap the boys – they want to annihilate them.
    I guess it was all started by the (so feminine) revenge of women being cheated upon. Kill all the cheaters

  • Varangian Guard

    In my misspent youth I knew a young lady that could write her name in the snow as good as any young man out drinking with her. She was a sheer joy to watch indeed. She needed no assistance than her own natural abilities and talents. I do believe she has been on the District Bench for over a decade now……………She was a fine and intelligent person, perhaps there is something to this article with respect to the test and not the gender performing the steps.

  • r2bzjudge

    “But why would we seek to cripple a man’s advantage?”

    We aren’t. They are. They being radical leftists. It is about political agenda. Math and science are being politicized. A math professor at University of Illinois proclaimed that math is mostly whiteness, as most mathematicians are white. Math has no color, unless it is representing the wavelength of colors of the visible light spectrum.

  • r2bzjudge

    “Other topics, such as energy conservation, which is more central to physics, could be taught first instead.”

    The author wants to teach politics, instead of physics.

    Khan Academy: “Learn about the basic principles that govern the physical world around us. Solid understanding of algebra and a basic understanding of
    trigonometry necessary” Not a word that energy conservation is central to physics. Looks like math is central to physics, according to Khan Academy.

  • r2bzjudge

    “The paper says that most advanced physics lessons start with projectile motion.”

    The key word here being- advanced. Well, it seems one has to go through the basics first, so it would seem that physics lessons don’t actually start with projectile motion.

    Thus the problem isn’t really what lesson advanced physics starts with, it is more likely that women are generally less interested in the subject to begin with.

  • robt

    “Luckily the authors don’t suggest castrating boys to even the scientific playing field.”

    That wouldn’t work anyway. Only de-penising will solve the problem.
    One wonders if there is a problem: girls could be meditating on the nature of gravity and the speed of sound waves while they do their business, if they were really interested.
    Seeing most women with a baby, to the exclusion of most every thing in the world including her husband, and excepting everything that her baby needs, suggests that maybe they’re not that interested in things like advanced physics at all.

  • Q46

    And despite all that practice and experience from childhood, adult males still cannot piss straight and hit a lavatory pan.

    I think that rather contradicts the conclusion of the ‘research’.

loading