How to degender "separate the men from the boys"?

Question

How can one degender the phrase "separate the men from the boys"?

Examples of how this phrase has traditionally been used:

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the men from the boys in this class."

What has occurred to me so far:

Parent, talking about relative merits of several different possible independent special education evaluators: "It's the training and experience with the specific disability that's going to separate the men from the boys and the women from the girls."

Has anyone found a more concise way of degendering (is that a word?) this expression?

How about something of the form "separate the serious from the __________"? In place of the blank, hopefully a word similar to "dabblers."

I need a phrase that doesn't show disrespect for the folks who are not up to doing the difficult proofs, or who do not have training and experience with the specific disability.

Answer 1

In addition to Jacinto's answer, you can also avoid the human element altogether and use a phrase like:

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the wheat from the chaff in this class."

The Free Dictionary describes the phrase as meaning:

to separate what is useful or valuable from what is worthless; to choose what is of high quality over what is of lower quality

In response to the OP edits:

You're going to have a hard time finding an answer that doesn't slight those that don't stack up (at least on some level) because your original phrase "separating men from boys" places a measure of disrespect on the "boys", essentially calling them weak, immature, and less macho.

Any equivalent phrase, no matter how degendered, will place some level of inferiority on the, ahem, inferior.

At some point, you have to step back and look at what you're trying to say. If you're trying to say that a certain process weeds out inferior special education evaluators, the men/boys or wheat/chaff expressions fit nicely. If you're trying to encourage a student, letting them know that this task will be difficult without placing inferiority on those that don't catch on, you probably shouldn't be making a "separates this from that" comparison.

I'd instead go for something that focuses more on the victors rising to meet the challenge or the challenge itself. These immediately come to mind:

Math teacher: "Learning proofs of this type is a real trial by fire."

or

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what determines the cream of the crop."

or

Math teacher: "The crème de la crème in this class will be able to do proofs of this type.

or

Math teacher: "For some of you, learning this type of proof will be your crucible."

Answer 2

I like the pair grown ups/kids or grown ups/children. Here’s an example from Oxford Learner’s Dictionary (go to “noun” and click on “More examples sentences”; emphasis mine):

‘In a festival where easy laughs are mostly the order of the day, this is a serious piece of work that separates the grown-ups from the kids.’

And another example from The Business Insider (2014):

Compromising is a humbling lesson that separates grown-ups from kids.

I’d say this simply removes the gender while keeping the meaning and informal tone of the original men/boys. But if you want to focus attention on high achievement, without equating potential low achievers with anything in particular you could go for:

By being able to do proofs of this type is how you rise above the average.

Training and experience with the specific disability is what it will take to rise above the rest.

Answer 3

You could drop the particular idiom of "separating A from B" and wind up very close with testing their mettle:

The ability to do proofs of this type is how we test the mettle of students in this class.

TheFreeDictionary.com defines mettle as

The ability to meet a challenge or persevere under demanding circumstances; determination or resolve

...which I feel captures most of the nuances of separating men from boys.

Answer 4

"It is time to separate the masters from the apprentices" might work. Although it is probably not a common phrase, it does imply a growth in your learning level and skill while being gender neutral.

In craft working there are typically four skill levels:

1. Novice
2. Apprentice
3. Journeyman
4. Master

The phrase I suggest does gloss over two of those levels, but Apprentice and Master are probably the most recognizable on the scale.

Being used as a noun master is defined as:

A skilled practitioner of a particular art or activity

And apprentice is defined as:

A person who is learning a trade from a skilled employer

Answer 5

The ability to do proofs separates the professionals from the amateurs.

The terms have same meaning as in this quote (which is sometimes attributed to Julie Andrews) :

Amateurs practice until they get it right. Professionals practice until they can't get it wrong.

Answer 6

Consider the following example, which draws a parallel with riding a bicycle:

Math teacher: "The students who master this type of proof have truly removed the training wheels from their 'mathematical bicycle'."

Answer 7

Separate the triers from the criers.

triers, defined by Oxford Living Dictionaries

A person who always makes an effort, however unsuccessful they may be.

‘Kelly was described by her teachers as a real trier’

criers, from The Free Dictionary.

One that cries, such as a person who sheds tears more readily than others

The more familiar use of crier is (from TFD, link above):

an official who made public announcements, esp in a town or court

But the definition with the crybaby connotation is also legitimate, and is apt. Crybaby, from dictionary.com.

a person, especially a child, who cries readily for very little reason

My editorial comment: The important thing is for the student to try, and try hard. Some students may never succeed at the most difficult proofs or problems, but a wise teacher will reward sustained effort.

Answer 8

One I've actually heard in the wild from multiple people, going back more than 30 years (my 7th grade history teacher was fond of it), is "separate the sheep from the goats".

This is a biblical reference (Matthew 25). The basic idea is that the two types of livestock are being used as a metaphor for those who have earned salvation (sheep) and those who haven't (goats).

A couple of caveats if you want to use this one yourself:

1. Different people have different emotional reactions to hearing biblical references. Sometimes bad, sometimes good.
2. If you say this to a modern person who isn't familiar with that passage, or livestock, they are likely to not understand that one of the two is considered better than the other (I'll admit to being in that camp, until I looked it up).

Answer 9

You could use:

....is what separates the veterans from the rookies.

I like how TFD defines the original expression:

separate the men from the boys
(Fig.) to separate the competent from those who are less competent.

On a sports team (or in other avenues of life), we often use the term rookie mistake, so the term rookie already carries some semblance of "less competence".

So, the math teacher could easily say, "The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the veterans from the rookies in this class." Since veterans and rookies are all part of the same team, the expression is not marginalizing the "rookies," but it does let everyone know the litmus test for mastery of the material.

Answer 10

Separate the cream from the curd.

Although in countries which do not celebrate a strong dairy culture this may prove sour. Perhaps I should let my brain churn a bit more on this one.

Answer 11

Separate the fish from the fry.

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the fish from the fry in this class."

Answer 12

The 8th of March is International Women's Day. Chinese students have long designated 7th March as Girls' Day. The thinking is that a girl may be only one day away from becoming a woman.

In the expression to separate the men from the boys it is important to remember that a boy may be only one day away from becoming a man. Every man was once a boy. Every boy, regardless of his personal qualities, merit or competence, will become a man. It is not the case that only the strongest, best or most macho boys turn into men. All boys become men. Therefor I feel that ideas such as wheat and chaff. sheep and goats, etc., miss the point that a boy and a man are intrinsically identical in all essentials, differing only in how far along they are in life.

A particular man is not superior, as a being, to a particular boy. When the boy is older he may be a better man or a worse one (however we define a good man). When the man was younger he may have been a better or worse boy.

I also do not like words like kids or children or lambs in this context. A boy may be an older teenager, on the verge of manhood, no mere kid.

Suggestions that the concept behind the phrase is not effective as a means of promoting learning may be right, but that is a separate matter to how the phrase might be degendered. I like suggestions re apprentice and master, or rookie and veteran, although master is masculine (to me) and I wrongly associate rookies and veterans as male.

So I am going to suggest "here" and "near" as distinguishing between those who have already reached a particular standard, and those who may be as little as one day away from reaching it.

The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the here from the near in this class."

However this doesn't fit well with the second example so perhaps "really" and "nearly" might work.

It's the training and experience with the specific disability that's going to separate the really from the nearly."

Answer 13

Your hope is to convey a comparison between skill sets, and highlight a specific skill set that is vital to one's ability before they can call themselves "proficient".

With that in mind, I would offer:

This is what separates the Pros from the amateurs.

If you don't like amateurs, these can work with "pros":

• Amateurs
• Novices
• Newbies
• Wannabees

Here's some other choices that have specific tandem partners that give a certain synergy

• masters - students
• proficient - non-proficient (pretty bland, though)
• big kids - little kids
• adults - children
• makers - fakers

A different phrasing that has a slightly different meaning of one that is more like a pass/fail situation:

This is what will make or break you in this class.

It seems like you might want to convey that, but I'm not quite sure.

Answer 14

There is no need to "degender" the expression. The implication is that men, being what boys grow up into, have more experience than the boys and that the knowledge and toughness that this experience brings will make them more effective. It's a very obvious and clear metaphor.

Imagine instead that we were discussing separating the sheep from the goats or any other such metaphor. There would be no need to assume that a comment were being passed about sheep and goats in real life.

Similarly, when men and boys are the exemplars of mature and immature, there's no implication that the female of the species aren't covered, nor is there any suggestion that they are in any way less than the male of the species.

Answer 15

"Separate the determined from the dilettantes."

'...men from boys' is of course macho and taunting. While my suggested phrase doesn't have a snappy rhyme, it's artfully alliterative.

[**> dilettante noun [ C ] US ​ /ˈdɪl·ɪˌtɑnt, -ˌtænt/ usually disapproving

​ a person who is or seems to be interested in a subject, but who is not involved with it in a serious and determined way: To serious artists, he was merely a dilettante.**]1

Note: I find it troublesome to include children in any of these euphemisms. It has a negative connotation in which children are inferior to adults.

Given the OP is interested in neutral/inclusive language, and 'men from boys' has an undertone of "macho," a gender-neutral phrase needs to be absent of hierarchical intent, thus be actually, "neutral."

The analogy here is that matriarchy and patriarchy are not mirror images of each other, they differ from each other in more ways than they are the same. So in 'de-gendering' a phrase, it is incorrect to transfer any gender-based bias. The phrase chosen ought to be devoid of comparing/contrasting adults and children. It's rude.

Answer 16

The challenge of de-genderizing this particular phrase is that the underlying purpose is to remove the unwanted message of separation by sex, but not of ability. Is the intent though to separate, or to identify a distinctive difference? Why hang onto separate then?

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what distinguishes the motivated achievers in this class."

Parent, talking about relative merits of several different possible independent special education evaluators: "It's the training and experience with the specific disability that's going to reveal our optimal choices."

Just as there are very good social reasons to rebuild language with fewer gender barriers, there are good reasons to remove the winner/loser polarization when it is not really necessary.

Answer 17

It seems like a lot of these answers are trying to abstract away the subject, whereas I'd probably go the other way and use the context to de-gender it.

In essence with regard to the Navy:

This is what separates the Seals from the Sailors

or in academics:

This is what separates the scientists from the hobbyists

Relevant to the special education evaluation comment you might say:

This is what makes the difference between surviving and thriving

Answer 18

In both cases I believe you are trying to show that some individuals have achieved a milestone which is a clear differentiator. Math skill in general and completing proofs specifically are tied to brain development. Also, in alignment with theories of brain plasticity, overcoming a disability can be tied to the ability of the brain to reroute either from congenital or acquired disability. In this case answers that separate based on motivation or attitude while technically good English, are not accurate in describing the underlying problem. Thus we can rework the first sentence.

Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type shows that the student has aptitude for success in this class."

In the next sentence it seems you are talking about the doctors or educators responsible for special education, not the 'disabled'/differently-abled.

Parent, talking about relative merits of several different possible independent special education evaluators: "It's the training and experience with the specific disability that's going to separate those who can make a difference from those who will just attempt to."

I recognize that your title is asking for a specific answer about degendering, but just in case you actually are in situations to use the problem sentences, I am suggesting a different cognitive approach to the problem.

Answer 19

Brainstorming here (the answers have been helpful, but I'm not sure any of the phrases is completely working yet). Looking forward to hearing what others think of this idea (based on voting):

Separate the distinguished from the decent.

It's alliterative; the "decent" are better than mediocre....

Answer 20

You need to take care. It isn't always going to be correct to replace that statement with a gender neutral one. A lot of times that exact phrase is meant to either convey uniquely male issues, or issues that are that the expressly meant to convey a "macho" or male dominant attitude.

In fact that exact phrase is very much supposed to invoke macho, male dominated, harry chested, "mine is bigger then yours" feelings.

For example, "committing and trying to be a good father is what separates the men from the boys."

That said your exact example is a good place where we could probably do away with that sentiment.

The general idea in that phrase, aside from the uniquely male feelings it invokes, is the separated group needs to have come from the "from" group by way of "being better", while at the same time, implying that staying in the larger group is a negative, and undesirable.

Because your talking about math your sample should focus on math:

Solution from the problem.

or

Serious mathematicians from those that can barely use a calculator

or

Expert mathematicians from the amatures

may work well.

When choosing you need to keep the scorn being in the larger group conveys. That's rather the point.

You don't want to be a boy you want to be a man (macho feelings again).
You don't want to be a amateur you want to be an expert.

Answer 21

1. Math teacher: "The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the Phds from the Bachelors in this class."

The second version is trickier, depending on the disability of the students in question, and their age, when looking for the perfect candidate (the parent is strategizing with an ally, deciding whom to accept, reject, or insist on) you could use the following concept

2. "It's the training and experience with the specific disability that's going to help find the jewel in the crown."

I would think this British English idiom is easily understood, and heard in the US but I might be mistaken.

Collins Dictionary defines it

jewel in the crown
the most valuable, esteemed, or successful person or thing of a number

Answer 22

Surely the most correct way to remove the genderization would be,

separate the adults from the children

which you could characterize in any number of ways e.g

separate the supercomputers from the pocket calculators

separate the marlins from the minnows

separate the factorials from the fractions

or indeed,

separate the serious from the slackers

or less defamatory,

separate the serious from the satisfied

etc. etc.

Answer 23

I'd suggest:

"The ability to do proofs of this type is what separates the mathematicians from the parlor beauticians in this class."

Pros:

• Similiar in grammatical structure to the original
• "Men", "Boys" = 1 syllable each; "Mathematicians", "Parlor Beauticians" = 5 syllables each. So maintains the equi-syllabic meter.
• Has a derogatory and condescending aspect to it, not dissimilar from the original; and OP did only ask to de-gender the expression.

Cons:

• Almost all "parlor beauticians" are women and that role is associated with women and with femininity.
• May sound too contrived.
• Boys eventually grow into men; beauticians rarely become mathematicians (although they can; actually, they can even be mathematicians at the same time).

---

A second suggestion, which departs much further from the original, could be:

"The ability to do proofs of this type is what tells me who has actually bothered to learn anything in this class.