Japanâs longest-running rape crisis center has been declared ineligible to receive public funding following statements made by the facilityâ
"Japanâs longest-running rape crisis center has been declared ineligible to receive public funding following statements made by the facilityâs director which were deemed by government officials to be discriminatory against males who identify as transgender.
Tokyoâs Rape Crisis Center was founded in 1983 by six women, half of whom were survivors of sexual assault. Michiko Orita, one of the founders, first confirmed the punitive measure during a meeting held last year in May organized by womenâs rights campaign group Save Womenâs Spaces, which was primarily concerned with the potential ramifications should gender identity policies be adopted in the nation."
trans girls are allowed to be annoying and stereotypical and socially inept and hyperactive and hypersexual and various types of animalgirl and there's nothing you can do about it. in fact if you're mean to that skirt go spinny reddit trans girl i'm stealing your entire house
"Six weeks into the term, I assigned my rhetoric and writing students a 20-page article. It was the same length I had assigned for five years and the same length I had read without complaint as an undergraduate a decade ago. Not one student finished it.
When I asked why, a student answered honestly: It was too long, and she kept losing track of what the paper was about. This was not a remedial class: These were students who had cleared the admissions process and written essays good enough to get them here. Yet a routine academic reading assignment had defeated them.
Every generation of professors has complained that their students cannot read. The lament is usually overblown, but data have caught up to anecdote, and what I am seeing in my classroom is no longer a hunch. There is a measurable, generational collapse in sustained reading and writing, and the academy is responding to it with improvisation and exhaustion rather than the structural overhaul it requires.
In February 2024, Adam Kotsko, who teaches in the Shimer Great Books School at North Central College, wrote in Slate that students who once handled 30 pages of reading per class meeting now seem âintimidated by anything over 10 pages and seem to walk away from readings of as little as 20 pages with no real understanding.â Crucially, he added that this is ânot a matter of laziness on the part of the studentsâ but of underlying skills they were never given a chance to build.
The Chronicle of Higher Educationâs 2024 investigation found the same pattern across institutions as different as the Stevens Institute of Technology and Wellesley College, where the average SAT exceeds 1400. Nicholaus Gutierrez, an assistant professor at Wellesley, told The Chronicle that the baseline for what students consider a reasonable amount of work has dropped so noticeably that he has cut his readings accordingly; a 750-word essay now strikes many students as long. At Stevens, the science and technology studies associate professor Theresa MacPhail described following the mantra of âmeet your students where they areâ for so long that she has begun to feel âlike a cruise director organizing games of shuffleboard.â
Worse, the national data tell the same story in colder language. On the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) writing assessment, which is the most recent comprehensive writing benchmark, only 24 percent of 12th graders reached the Proficient level, and just 3 percent reached Advanced; another 21 percent scored below Basic. The reading side of the ledger is worse, and getting worse fast: The 2024 NAEP results released in September 2025 show 12th-grade reading scores at the lowest level recorded since the assessment began in 1992. Thirty-two percent of 12th graders now score below NAEP Basic in reading, meaning that, in the assessmentâs own language, they likely âcannot draw general conclusions based on concepts presented explicitly in a text.â And yet more than half of these same seniors reported being accepted to a four-year college. That last sentence is the whole problem in one line: We are admitting a cohort that cannot read at a college level and are pretending otherwise.
Why is this happening? One reason, of course, is smartphones.
I came into teaching as a skeptic of the anti-smartphone argument: I had a phone in my pocket throughout high school and college in the 2010s, and I read long books anyway. I now think I was wrong, because the neuroscience has caught up. In a 2017 paper, Adrian F. Ward and colleagues at the University of Texas at Austinâs McCombs School of Business showed that the mere presence of a participantâs smartphone â whether that be face down, powered off, untouched, or across the desk out of vision â measurably reduces available working memory and fluid intelligence on cognitive tests, with the largest effects on the most phone-dependent users. A 2022 study by Motoyasu Honma and colleagues at Japanâs Showa University used near-infrared spectroscopy to compare reading on a smartphone with reading the same passage on paper, and found that smartphone reading produced overactivity in the prefrontal cortex, suppressed sigh generation, and led to general lower comprehension scores; the authors argued that the sigh inhibition and prefrontal overload were causally linked to the comprehension decline.
So when a student tells me they âkept losing trackâ of a 20-page article, I have to acknowledge that they may be describing a measurable neurological condition. The neural pathways that support sustained attention are built by use, and they atrophy without it. Your body is a use-it-or-lose-it system, and the brain is no exception.
Another reason for the decline in student reading capability is increasing reliance on generative AI. In June 2025, Nataliya Kosmyna and colleagues at the MIT Media Lab released a preprint titled âYour Brain on ChatGPT.â They divided 54 participants into three groups writing SAT-style essays â one using ChatGPT, the second group using a search engine, the last group using nothing â and monitored brain activity with a 32-channel EEG. The ChatGPT group showed the lowest neural connectivity of the three, with up to 55 percent reduced connectivity compared with the brain-only group, and âconsistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.â Eighty-three percent of LLM users could not quote a single line from essays they had written minutes earlier. When the LLM group was forced to write without AI in a follow-up session, their brain activity did not bounce back to baseline; the researchers coined the term âcognitive debtâ for the lingering deficit.
This is the first neurophysiological evidence that early reliance on LLMs measurably alters the brainâs engagement with writing tasks, and it is consistent with what those of us in front of classrooms are watching happen in real time. When I assign analysis, I am not trying to extract a polished product; I am trying to put the studentâs mind through resistance in order to make it stronger. Offloading the struggle to a chatbot does not âfree students up for higher-order work.â It deprives them of building the strength to do any substantial cognitive work at all.
There is a final factor that is contributing to this decline in reading skills, and that is that the students arriving in my classroom today are the first cohort to have experienced Common Core-influenced reading instruction across the entirety of their Kâ12 schooling. Whatever the standardsâ original intent, the on-the-ground implementation in many districts replaced sustained reading with the practice of pulling âevidenceâ from disconnected short passages, the same format used on the standardized tests that increasingly determine school funding. The education scholar Natalie Wexler, among others, has documented this pivot in detail: Students drilled on âfinding the main ideaâ in two-paragraph excerpts never build the stamina or background knowledge that longform reading requires. The pandemic then added fuel to a fire that was already burning. NAEP scores for 13-year-olds dropped sharply in 2022 and have not recovered. A 2023 EdWeek survey found that 24 percent of secondary-school administrators described pandemic learning loss in English and language arts as âsevere or very severe.â
In July 2025, the journalist Mary Harrington argued in The New York Times that âthinking is becoming a luxury good.â The ability to read deeply and reason at length is fragmenting along class lines as ultra-processed digital media replaces text in everyday life, much as ultra-processed food has replaced cooking. Her longer treatment of the subject in First Things makes the more provocative case that we are witnessing the end of print culture itself, and with it the end of the cognitive substrate on which modern liberal democracy was built.
I see this stratification in the classroom and on the page every week. My students from districts that protected sustained reading through small class sizes, strict phone policies, and faculty who refused to teach to the test all arrive with their attention relatively intact. My students from districts that surrendered to devices and standardized testing arrive cognitively winded. A democracy that requires a literate electorate is now training one fraction of that electorate out of literacy while marketing to the other a âdeep workâ lifestyle as a luxury good. The students who cannot read a 20-page article today are the voters who will not be able to read a bill, or the jurors who cannot follow a closing argument, tomorrow.
I do what I can in my own classroom to address the problems. I break 20-page articles into two halves and assign the first half with explicit analytical tasks. I require exploratory writing before formal drafts. I model (visibly, on the board) how to track an argument across pages or distinguish a sourceâs claim from my own analysis. I make structured peer review explicit, because the workshop format I used to take for granted now collapses into âthis is goodâ and âmaybe add more detailsâ the moment I step back.
But I want to be plain about the limits of what an individual instructor can do, and all of these solutions have costs. Scaffolding a 20-page article into halves compromises the integrity of the argument I am asking students to engage, just as modeling note-taking in a credit-bearing rhetoric course is using a college slot to teach a middle-school skill. None of the syllabi I teach are designed to deliver this type of cognitive rehabilitation, and pretending otherwise has produced credential inflation. We cannot keep conferring degrees on students who cannot do what the degree is supposed to certify.
Iâm afraid I donât have answers. I do, however, have some questions that may point us in the right direction. If higher education is going to respond to the reading crisis as a structural problem rather than a private burden carried by composition instructors and adjuncts, it has to stop avoiding the following questions: If a majority of incoming students cannot read at a level the curriculum requires, are we admitting students we cannot serve, or offering a curriculum we cannot provide?
Why are first-year writing and reading-intensive general-education courses still the most adjunctified, lowest-paid, highest-load corner of the university, at the precise moment when their work has become the most important work the institution does? What is the responsible institutional response for AI usage: Is it a syllabus statement, or a sequencing principle that requires students to demonstrate the cognitive work themselves before AI assistance is permitted?
Why are most college classrooms still phone-permissive by default? Kâ12 districts from Florida to California are now banning phones bell to bell; higher education has somehow lagged behind the public schools. Universities benefit from a pipeline they did not build and refuse to repair. What would it mean for a university system to invest seriously in the reading instruction happening in the high schools that feed it, rather than treating remediation as something to be quietly outsourced to first-year composition instructors?
The thing I am no longer willing to do is pretend this is a temporary adjustment period, or that âstudents will adapt.â They will not adapt on their own. The conditions that produced this collapse are still in place: the phones, the algorithmic feeds, the test-prep excerpts, staffing models that load the reading-intensive work onto the most precarious faculty, and now the chatbots that finish studentsâ sentences before theyâve even begun to think of them. If we want literate citizens, we will have to rebuild the conditions for literacy deliberately, against the grain of every incentive currently pointed the other way. I know the academy has the will to do that. It also has the obligation."
â Tyler Jagt, 1 June 2026, "My Students Canât Read"
The generational collapse in literacy is measurable, persistent, and likely to get worse.
âpornâ? no ive never heard that, what is it? a video of people having sex? for them to watch? for YOU to watch? thatâs a bit odd. do you know these people? you dont? thats so weird. how did you get the video? youâre streaming it online for free? i feel like you should at least pay them ⌠how do you know theyâre okay with you watching it? you dont. oh okay you dont care. why are you watching it in the first place? oh, to masturbate to? to strangers having sex? thats kinda creepy man. wait why is the woman crying and throwing up?
Men have hindered the progress of humanity by suppressing geniuses from half the human population. Women were prevented from making meaningful contributions to mathematics, biology, physics, chemistry, engineering, geology, ecology, etc. for thousands of years.
Think of all the genius women who were forced to become homemakers and housewives, overburdened with 10+ children until their bodies gave in to stress, and perished their intellect - only utilised when a man would steal their ideas without credit.
Men talk about how they "contributed everything" to history and science. The question that should be asked is, how much more advanced would humankind have been were it not for the barbarity of weak men? How much have men slowed human progression because the genius of women made them feel emasculated?
they're so concerned about "what if women ABORTED the baby who would grow up to cure CANCER" but they don't think women are intelligent enough, hardworking enough, or inspired enough to make those advances themselves, which is why it is acceptable under patriarchy to oppress women. With their misogyny it is easy for them to think the only worthy contribution a woman could make to society is to birth a male baby.
âI am so sick of the myth that "men suffer in silence," because the reality is they don't do anything in silence. A man cannot occupy a physical, social or emotional space without expanding to consume it entirely. From manspreading on public transit to demanding the emotional labor of everyone around them, their existence is inherently loud, invasive and deeply entitled. They move through the world expecting the entire room to shift around their comfort, forcing women to literally jump out of the sidewalk just to avoid harassment.
âThe idea that they are quiet, silent sufferers is a joke when you look at how much room they violently and casually steal every single day. If a man is inconvenienced, the whole world has to hear about it. If he is angry everyone around him has to manage his behavior. They don't suffer in silence. They make their presence, their entitlement and their general audacity everyone else's problem by default, and then expect a medal for "enduring" a world built entirely for them.
âactually transgender people have existed throughout the whole history!â imagine if that was true.
imagine men being like guysss im actually a woman! so stop viewing me as a human. please burn me in a witch hunt. sell me in exchange for cattle. mutilate my genitals and bind my feet and stretch out my neck and put hot iron on my chest. yo come on canât you see iâm a woman in a manâs body
oh so men beat and kill people but women are mean sometimes? maybe even behind your back? wow and thatâs so subtle and insidious. and moreover, people seem to think thatâs not as serious as beating and killing people. which, if you think about it, kind of makes it even WORSE. this will blow your mind since everyone has always believed women are moral angels, but sometimes theyâre wicked nasty bitches. worse than men actually if you think about it.
like. âif we count verbal/relational aggression as violence, women are as aggressive as menâ and if we count mice as kia sorentos then a man will see a car and eat it. if we count ocean water as drinkable and rocks as food then no one should be going hungry or thirsty. like youâre not disproving something youâre changing the terms.
like i canât even come up with funny comparisons. yeah if we count murder and spreading rumors in the same category of aggression we can erase the reality of gendered violence. if i count rejection and sexual harassment in the same category of facilitating an environment of sexual dissatisfaction then itâs a zero sum game and weâre all the same. do you see how this works?
Friendly reminder that all women know what men are.
Old conservative ladies know that men are violent rapists, so they promote finding The Good One and being an obedient wife so you don't trigger a violent outburst and stay protected from other violent men.
Libfems know that and they propagate legal prostitution so that men rape only one cast of women, and not all women. Besides, if you just say yes to all sex, you are unrapeable amirite.
Trans "men" know that and they choose to pretend to be men and blend in so that they are not targets of their violence.
Mothers know that and they dont let their teenage daughters go to shady parties. Fathers know that and they teach their teenage daughters that boys only want one thing.
Pickmes know it and they hope that they can doormat their way into men's loyalty and draw their attention to le ugly feminists instead.
Normie het women know it and they message the guy's license plate to their friend chat and invent elaborate ways to signal SOS when they go out on a date.
Boymoms know it as they are often the ones to cover their sons' horrifying crimes, obviously.
Every single group of women knows it. They just cope with it differently. Stop this bs with socialization because somehow, throughout the varieties of cultures and times, men end up just the same.
Do you remember the response to when the UK required adult pornography sites to require ID as age verification? The horror when men had to cope with the fact that the pornography they watch may be linked to their own identity, that the illusion of anonymity online was being suddenly pulled apart? They fear the slightest chance that what they watch, things perverted, disgusting, violent, horrifying, may affect how others see them.
Thereâs a weird balance to it, when one considered the human beings, and oftentimes women, who are at the receiving end of objectification for the camera. The more vulnerable they are, the more abused, the more their body is exposed and the more their âselfâ or ego is degraded for viewing pleasure, the more anonymous and protected the to the outside world the viewer needs himself to be.
These men claim that their privacy is a human right. And itâs that privacy they use to enjoy the complete removal of privacy from others. A net-conservation of privacy, if you will, is a more accurate description of what they demand. And youâre not supposed to ask about who falls, no, who is pushed onto either side of this equation, you sex-hating puritan.
Doesnât it make you feel bad to be so full of hate?
Like, donât you see how you people give feminism a bad name?
Iâm genuinely curious. Iâm not trying to start an argument here, Iâm just curious if you people know how.. hateful you people sound. If thatâs even a good enough word to describe it.
You know whats hateful?
Hateful is when a ten year old girl gives birth to her uncle's child
Hateful is when a teenage girl is hooked up to a feeding tube, because everyone told her it would be better if she starved herself
hateful is a woman face covered, her eyes covered, her hands and her hips all all of her humanity hidden as if her existence were impure , hatred is prohibiting her from feeling the sun on her skin
hateful Is when men look for confirmed raped and murder victims to jerk off too
hateful is when the top search in pornhub is incest, pedophilia and rape, hateful is when men orgasm to women being choked, sodomized, while crying
hateful is the 80,000 women killed a year, for the crime of being women
hateful is b*tch c*nt and wh*re being the last things a girl hears before shes is brutally taken out of this world, hateful is laughing these words off as not a big deal
hateful is mutilating the genitals of a five year old girl, hateful is watching her squirm and cry while you cut her up, thinking about the feelings of the man who will rip her open
hateful is forcing a woman to give birth, hateful is turning a human being into an incubator, hateful is prohibiting women control over their own fucking organs, their own fucking lives.
hateful is rape.
hateful is women only having 'equality' and rights, in 8 countries. on earth, total. out of 195.
Hateful is making god, the creator male, hateful is making very system of belief around women as a resource, women as second to man, women as a birth giver and nothing else. hate is removing women from the divine and the powerful
hateful is male criminals in womens prisions, hateful is solving their rape with condoms, hateful is letting it go on, hateful is sacrificing women's safety for male egos, hateful is destroying rape shelters, hateful is defining women by front holes and uterus havers, hateful is mutilating them when they dont conform, hateful is young lesbians being groomed to sleep with men, lest they're bigoted. hateful is defining women as a sex doll, as a gender role, as femininity, as a personality.
hateful is menstrual huts, hateful is letting women die of hunger, poison and cold, hateful is saying menstrual blood makes them impure, inhuman. hateful is saying being a woman is karmic punishment.
hateful is driving needles up a baby girls skull, its drowning her in milk, its leaving her out for the wolves. hateful is seeing a girl be born as a curse, its killing her upon sight.
hateful is binding a seven year olds feet. breaking her bones, and smashing them together, its locking her up, never be able to walk or dance, will never be able to play, for men, for men to fuck her, for men to own and want her. an object, a status symbol.
Hateful is purchasing a womans body to use, as a toy as an object, hateful is seeing a young girl, starving, and putting your dick in her mouth, hateful is defending this, hateful is purchasing rape, hateful is advocating for it.
hateful is removing women from history, hateful is writing your name over their accomplishments, hateful is to ban them from reading from writing, from learning, from being human, hateful is never letting a woman touch the world, hateful is locking them up, never to be seen or heard
hateful is burning her at a stake, hateful is lobotomizing her, hateful is locking her up, its the straight jacket, the asylum.
hateful is cutting her open, is shaving down her bones, is injecting poison into her face, oil into her lips, inserting silicone into her body, its sucking out her fat with syringes. trimming her stomach, burning her skin.
hateful is demanding were nice. hateful is demanding that we smile. hateful is being annoyed we dont care about your fucking feelings while were being brutalized, hateful is pretending feminism has anything to do with 'looking good', hateful is coming here pretending youre innocent to ask why im not sucking your fucking dick while talking about the dehumanization of four billion human beings, souls, people. WOMEN.
you know whats not hateful? calling this shit out. I feel great, I felt the best I've ever felt being so 'hateful' about the hatred of women. I no longer look the other way, I no longer rack up my brain for explanations, and excuse, I no longer get caught up in the performance of being nice and giving feminism a good name and instead focus on getting shit DONE.
if you wanted nicer women, you shouldnt have fucking killed them. now shut the fuck up and stop pretending you ever gave a shit about women and feminism. people like you are happy to jerk off while the world burns as long as you 'look good' while doing it.
"Men struggle with empathy" men do just fine with empathy when it comes to rapists who might have their lives or careers slightly derailed by prison time. They understand empathy when it comes to their bros getting dumped. They've got empathy when their mate misses the work target.
They just can't muster up a scrap of it for women.
ellievsbear
dailybridgerton
2087
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
stormborns
