Today’s Dutch papers focus on separating the boys from the girls and how the future of pensions is splitting the Dutch unions. Meanwhile, financial big wigs come in for criticism from Britain’s Labour leader and from beyond the grave ...

Boys and girls: better off apart?
AD and nrc.next feature photos of doting Dutch parents looking on devotedly as they drop their pride and joy off for his or her first day at school. But these schoolkids could be heading for “his” and “hers” education if modern-day experiments with single-sex classes take root. All the Dutch dailies report on the pros and cons of separating boys and girls at school in the interest of giving both a better education.

“The idea isn’t to turn back the clock” insists Wim Kuipers, the man behind the initiative, in AD. De Telegraaf explains that “teachers are learning to work with the differences between male and female brains”, acknowledging the fact that boys and girls develop at different rates and employ different learning strategies.

De Volkskrant reckons that “keeping boys and girls apart isn’t such a crazy idea”, especially when it comes to maths and languages, the subjects where the differences are most marked. NRC.next asks whether segregation is “old fashioned or progressive” and warns that “opinion is deeply divided, largely because of the major differences to be found among boys and girls.”

Lads will be lads, however, and AD’s columnist Vincent Bijlo is all in favour of the new initiative but on one condition “as long as I get to be the only boy in the girls’ class”.

Boys and girls: what happens when they get together
For all the alleged differences between boys and girls, today’s Trouw reveals one striking similarity: once they get a bit older, both of them wait for the other to bring up the subject of safe sex during a romantic tryst, with the inevitable result that the condom gets left in the packet. The Dutch are launching a campaign to help them overcome their bashfulness.

Trouw’s interview with one of the people behind the campaign suggests it’s based on a good deal of research, asking “young people to describe their ideal condom moment” –an interesting concept in itself! Apparently the trick is to appeal to girls as “strong young women” and to guys as “a good lover who thinks about what his partner wants”.

All well and good, but they might have come up with a catchier slogan: “Mention condoms before your pants come off” doesn’t exactly set the world on fire.

Dutch unions divided over “casino pensions”
All today’s papers report that the biggest bloc within the FNV trade union federation has categorically rejected a new pension deal brokered by the federation, the government and employers’ organisations.

De Telegraaf reports that their “no” vote deals “a sensitive blow” to FNV leader Agnes Jongerius, with the intention of “sending her back to the negotiating table”. The paper compares the power struggle to “a bout of arm wrestling” that looks set to continue until all the unions have cast their ballot.

AD talks to economist Sweder van Wijnberg who sees the divisions within the unions as a “battle between generations”. He backs the opponents of the current deal, which he argues “is good for the older generation but bad for the younger generation [...] when it comes to their turn, the pot will be empty.”

De Volkskrant explains that the naysayers object to what they call “the casino pension”, worried that pension funds will spend too much too soon gambling on revenues which may not materialise. The paper concedes that “such objections are partly justified” but warns that “deep internal divisions in the FNV federation means it runs the risk of excluding itself from the process, giving the government and employers free rein to impose a far more disagreeable pension plan”.

England’s riots: political corruption to blame?
The papers are fascinated by the political fall-out of the riots in England. De Volkskrant notes that the “political battle over the riots” has begun, with Labour and the Conservatives presenting radically different visions of where the trouble lies.

While British Prime Minister David Cameron points the finger at “progressive politicians’ refusal to make judgements about right and wrong”, Labour leader David Milliband sees the “money-grabbing behaviour of bankers and politicians” as a contributing factor.

An opinion piece in nrc.next echoes Milliband and draws a comparison between Britain’s rioters and violent looters in Kenya, South Africa and Mozambique in recent years: “people acting like they have nothing to lose”.

The paper reckons that one topic in the riot debate has been conspicuous by its absence – acknowledgement that “political corruption has a devastating effect on the ordinary citizen’s sense of justice”. In other words, “why should I abide by the law when those in power trample all over it?”

Dutch retail king hits out from beyond the grave
Bankers and big business also take a hammering in De Telegraaf today, this time from beyond the grave. The paper reports that the late Jaap Blokker, head of the Dutch retail chain that bears his name, has unleashed “a posthumous tirade in his final annual report”, lambasting bankers “who in their pursuit of millions for their own private gain forget they have only been able to hold onto their positions thanks to the tax payer”.

But then, the paper reflects, “Jaap Blokker wouldn’t be Jaap Blokker if he didn’t lash out mercilessly one last time to denounce social and political abuses”. The retail boss’s inimitable style was illustrated by the fact that he published his annual report in comic book form since 1999.

While accusing today’s bankers of “losing all touch with reality” Mr Blokker demonstrated that he hadn’t, confiding that he vented his opinions “without the illusion that I have any influence on social matters. It just does me good to get these things off my chest ...”