What Cheeses Me Off!!!!

[smitty_r51]

Government bloody projects

ACT will supply a new chromebook to each senior Yr 7-10 STUDENT for this school year.

great, espcially as my eldest managed to drop his laptop at the end of the last term...means i didn't buy him a new one (neither did half the parents at the school)

now i Know school term start times are hard to find, and there is not any downtime for the education department between december and februrary but surprise.

Kids start school yestrday to be told it could be march before they get the laptops, in the meantime use their phones


so you now have kids who have to use an electronic device to perform their school workwho for the next month are working on a 4" screen or trying to grab a school pool laptop (think january sales) beause some idiot department can't isentify an easy deadline and sort their s%#t out
so do j let the poor lad suffer because someone else stuffed up, or do ibuy him a laptop that he is only going to use for a month at most

 

[Marck]

Government bloody projects

ACT will supply a new chromebook to each senior Yr 7-10 STUDENT for this school year.

great, espcially as my eldest managed to drop his laptop at the end of the last term...means i didn't buy him a new one (neither did half the parents at the school)

now i Know school term start times are hard to find, and there is not any downtime for the education department between december and februrary but surprise.

Kids start school yestrday to be told it could be march before they get the laptops, in the meantime use their phones


so you now have kids who have to use an electronic device to perform their school workwho for the next month are working on a 4" screen or trying to grab a school pool laptop (think january sales) beause some idiot department can't isentify an easy deadline and sort their s%#t out
so do j let the poor lad suffer because someone else stuffed up, or do ibuy him a laptop that he is only going to use for a month at most

Buy him the laptop. I just got my neice a second hand laptop for a similar reason. They are usualy heavily restricted on what software they can use. So good for school not great for much else.

 

[smitty_r51]

Buy him the laptop. I just got my neice a second hand laptop for a similar reason. They are usualy heavily restricted on what software they can use. So good for school not great for much else.

The laptop he has it only broke the screen so he can use it at home with a monitor (and i had just got him an ssd to speed it up).

Maybe it is the inner yorkshireman refusing to spend money, but the rant was how they can miss a f&%$#ing obvious deadline like the start of school.

given the photos in the pape this morning showing the minister for kids handing out some laptops the cynic in me suggests they couldn't start therollout without the photo opp

 

[hiluxdriver]

This is going to come as a bit of a shock to you but the old rape/sexual harassment defence of 'she was asking for it, just look at the way she was dressed' is dead in the water. So is the old 'dress like meat and they'll attract animals' line. That's 1950's talk right there, and I should know I was alive then.
We've moved on from those antiquated conservative and sexist ideals a long time ago. You remind me of my father...and grandfather, that should embarrass you young fella, especially after your chirlish comment.

No wonder your nieces ignore you. Can you even begin to comprehend why they do so? Or do you have all the answers already?

That's true, it may be an old way of looking at things, but as you were first to criticise, perhaps you can advise on how to change the mentality of society overnight so my neices can feel safe wearing whatever they like where ever they like? If not then I'll keep giving advice aimed at them protecting themselves until society changes. I am not a father so I cannot bring sons up with the correct mentality, maybe you have sons and I wonder if they objectify women. If they do then that is your fault - it's every fathers fault.

 

[GaryM]

The laptop he has it only broke the screen so he can use it at home with a monitor (and i had just got him an ssd to speed it up).

Maybe it is the inner yorkshireman refusing to spend money, but the rant was how they can miss a f&%$#ing obvious deadline like the start of school.

given the photos in the pape this morning showing the minister for kids handing out some laptops the cynic in me suggests they couldn't start therollout without the photo opp

Have you priced a screen replacement? Could be cheaper if you do it yourself. Theres often a youtube on how to deconstruct and put back together, at least for many models. Just control your static by earthing yourself, no socks on carpet etc, and try not to touch chips. Or get an anti static strap...

maybe hunt a dead (not screen wise) second hand unit the same, and pop the entire lid off and swap?

 

[loose cannon]

That's true, it may be an old way of looking at things, but as you were first to criticise, perhaps you can advise on how to change the mentality of society overnight so my neices can feel safe wearing whatever they like where ever they like? If not then I'll keep giving advice aimed at them protecting themselves until society changes. I am not a father so I cannot bring sons up with the correct mentality, maybe you have sons and I wonder if they objectify women. If they do then that is your fault - it's every fathers fault.

Society HAS changed. You said people were going topless at the beach and no-one bats an eyelid, we get that here in Broome too. It hasn't always been that way. The only people who get upset about it are the old fuddy duddys most of whom are religious/conservative puritanicals who get upset anytime they see people enjoying themselves. The fun police.
There is no evidence to suggest a connection between scantily clad women and sexual harassment. None. If it were the case then women wearing burkas would be safer than women wearing bikinis, they are not. It's about attitude, not clothes.
As I said, those ideas belong to another time and do not represent the reality of today's society. They belong in the era where the role of a woman was to marry, breed, cook and clean.

That's why your nieces are ignoring you. You are trying to "protect" them from a non-existent danger.

 

[hiluxdriver]

Society HAS changed. You said people were going topless at the beach and no-one bats an eyelid, we get that here in Broome too. It hasn't always been that way. The only people who get upset about it are the old fuddy duddys most of whom are religious/conservative puritanicals who get upset anytime they see people enjoying themselves. The fun police.
There is no evidence to suggest a connection between scantily clad women and sexual harassment. None. If it were the case then women wearing burkas would be safer than women wearing bikinis, they are not. It's about attitude, not clothes.
As I said, those ideas belong to another time and do not represent the reality of today's society. They belong in the era where the role of a woman was to marry, breed, cook and clean.

That's why your nieces are ignoring you. You are trying to "protect" them from a non-existent danger.

HAHAHA yeah righto. I'd think it more believable that my nieces ignore me because they are young and they think they know better. The same that I can tell young kids until I'm blue in the face not to speed, but kids die weekly from speeding. If my view are old fashioned, then why is that one one hand girls dress provocatively to attract attention (As Rog and I pointed out), but then on the other hand complain about the attention that dressing provocatively attracts. Work needs to be done on both sides and I think it's your views that are hopelessly outdated. You clearly didn't come up with any suggestions to remedy the situation.

 

[GaryM]

Thats because he cant, but youre confused. The issue was never if the girls want or like the attention, but that they were blamed for boys inability to resist and control their focus. They are being told their body needs to be controlled/covered to some unAustralian standard, almost like its a weapon. And SOME boys by implication are possibly hearing that inability is the girls fault. Its a tad ...ye olde Arab.

Id be astounded if Roger genuinely needed to ask his granddaughter, why girls dress like that. Eve did it to Adam, and/or Ms Ugg to poor old Zog.

 

[Blue_haired_man]

Thats because he cant, but youre confused. The issue was never if the girls want or like the attention, but that they were blamed for boys inability to resist and control their focus. They are being told their body needs to be controlled/covered to some unAustralian standard, almost like its a weapon. And SOME boys by implication are possibly hearing that inability is the girls fault. Its a tad ...ye olde Arab.

Id be astounded if Roger genuinely needed to ask his granddaughter, why girls dress like that. Eve did it to Adam, and/or Ms Ugg to poor old Zog.

They aren’t being told to cover their bodies in some unaustralian way, they are being told to follow the rules, aka dress code, and are having a cry about hurt feelings because the way they were told.

I will admit that at times, I definitely have been distracted by a member of the fairer sex. I would challenge anyone, male or female, who claims that they haven’t stopped what their doing to have a bit of a perve at one time or another. Both sexes, male and females generally, wear or don’t wear clothing, wear cologne or perfume, or physically act or talk differently, amongst other things, in an attempt to attract a prospective partner. It is human nature.

There is no one here arguing this is an excuse for sexual assault. Yes there are sick individuals of both genders. They do not deserve their freedom in our society, but unfortunately no amount of education, laws or punishment will ever solve that problem completely.

 

[Marck]

The problem is that the “principle” didn’t get up and say follow the rules or else. She apparently got up and went on about sexual harassment and then said that the girls where distracting the boys with there exposed body’s and colourful bras. And implying that the girls are to blame for the boys not being able to stay on task because of it.

If she had stood up and said “girls you are in breach of the dress code if you come to school Monday morning non compliant disiplenary action will be taken. A copy of the dress code has been emailed to your parents including what I have said to you today”.
That would have been perfectly acceptable.

You need to take into account that your kids and grandkids are smarter than you are (look at the Flynn Effect). They may lack the experience that you have but intrinsically are considerably more intelligent. Your kids about 6 percent your grand kids 12 percent. They comprehend things faster and better than us. Their understanding is clearer than us. They will be analysing what is said to them at 15 the way that we did a 18 or 20. So absolutely what information and how it’s delivered is important because they do lack the experience to filter the dumb stuff adults say to them but the do have the intelligence to understand deeper implied meanings even if the person delivering he message doesn’t understand what they are doing.

Anyway this is way to serious a topic for a fun place like the earth so I’m leaving it here.

M

 

[Blue_haired_man]

The problem is that the “principle” didn’t get up and say follow the rules or else. She apparently got up and went on about sexual harassment and then said that the girls where distracting the boys with there exposed body’s and colourful bras. And implying that the girls are to blame for the boys not being able to stay on task because of it.

If she had stood up and said “girls you are in breach of the dress code if you come to school Monday morning non compliant disiplenary action will be taken. A copy of the dress code has been emailed to your parents including what I have said to you today”.
That would have been perfectly acceptable.

You need to take into account that your kids and grandkids are smarter than you are (look at the Flynn Effect). They may lack the experience that you have but intrinsically are considerably more intelligent. Your kids about 6 percent your grand kids 12 percent. They comprehend things faster and better than us. Their understanding is clearer than us. They will be analysing what is said to them at 15 the way that we did a 18 or 20. So absolutely what information and how it’s delivered is important because they do lack the experience to filter the dumb stuff adults say to them but the do have the intelligence to understand deeper implied meanings even if the person delivering he message doesn’t understand what they are doing.

Anyway this is way to serious a topic for a fun place like the earth so I’m leaving it here.

M

Ah I see, you were there taking notes of what the principal actually said.

 

[GaryM]

To use that Leo, did you see the girls skirts?

People keep saying that they broke the rules. But youd have to wonder why she didnt just suspend the perpetrators. Its not going to be widespread so why the wider female pop of the school? Her story doesnt make sense because theres some significant dishonesty and backtracking, or minimising. But she cant justify, or minimise enough to make it so she never said it. She is aware she did the wrong thing.

What Marck said.

Its not that it would excuse sexual assault, or that this does not educate to solve it. Thats the wrong end of that stick. Its that someone might think it does justify it because the source of the information is the principal. Or, that some girls may see shame in it. Some kids (many of whom would not be involved) seem to deliberately take criticism the wrong way. Its her job to know these things. Its not so much we failed to stop kids, or educate them, its that this conversation has educated SOME, wrongly or compromised the anti violence or sexual assault messages.

Id be ropeable if my son was at this school because it would concern me he was being educated that it might be a girls fault, even just somewhere in his teenage hormone riddled brain, and I would have no knowledge this lesson was delivered if no one complained about the principal in the first place.

She wouldnt be the first zealous principal. I have little doubt a few girls are pushing the envelope, that has never changed, and never will. But this isnt how you deal with it. She has no right to say this to someone elses kids. If the parents wanted strict dress codes, and modesty zeal, they would send them to Catholic schools.

 

[dno67]

The sad part is we don't have any info leading up the the event,
my guess is those girls may have be behaving quite provocatively
to bring about the comments.

 

[Blue_haired_man]

To use that Leo, did you see the girls skirts?

People keep saying that they broke the rules. But youd have to wonder why she didnt just suspend the perpetrators. Its not going to be widespread so why the wider female pop of the school? Her story doesnt make sense because theres some significant dishonesty and backtracking, or minimising. But she cant justify, or minimise enough to make it so she never said it. She is aware she did the wrong thing.

What Marck said.

Its not that it would excuse sexual assault, or that this does not educate to solve it. Thats the wrong end of that stick. Its that someone might think it does justify it because the source of the information is the principal. Or, that some girls may see shame in it. Some kids (many of whom would not be involved) seem to deliberately take criticism the wrong way. Its her job to know these things. Its not so much we failed to stop kids, or educate them, its that this conversation has educated SOME, wrongly or compromised the anti violence or sexual assault messages.

Id be ropeable if my son was at this school because it would concern me he was being educated that it might be a girls fault, even just somewhere in his teenage hormone riddled brain, and I would have no knowledge this lesson was delivered if no one complained about the principal in the first place.

She wouldnt be the first zealous principal. I have little doubt a few girls are pushing the envelope, that has never changed, and never will. But this isnt how you deal with it. She has no right to say this to someone elses kids.

No I never said I was. As the article stated the boys were not present for the assembly, it was the girls only. So I am really struggling to understand how the principal compromised the anti sexual violence message.

I’ve said from the beginning that it was a very poor choice of words, but like everyone I’ve also suffered from foot in mouth on more than one occasion. Shaming them, and victim blaming, I think that is drawing a very long bow.

I’ve got a family member who works in a high school, know some of her colleagues pretty well also and the stories I’ve heard, mummy and daddies little angels usually have a hell of a lot to answer for. Kids get in trouble, spew out some extremely vexatious accusations and it’s generally the teachers who are then guilty until proven innocent, AKA suspended thanks to some over entitled little brat with a chip on their shoulder complaining to mummy and daddy, who in turn demand that heads should roll.

 

[Mr Rum]

Probably should’ve put this in the jokes thread, but here seemed more appropriate..

 

[mikehzz]

This thread cheeses me off.

 

[GaryM]

No I never said I was. As the article stated the boys were not present for the assembly, it was the girls only. So I am really struggling to understand how the principal compromised the anti sexual violence message.

I’ve said from the beginning that it was a very poor choice of words, but like everyone I’ve also suffered from foot in mouth on more than one occasion. Shaming them, and victim blaming, I think that is drawing a very long bow.

I’ve got a family member who works in a high school, know some of her colleagues pretty well also and the stories I’ve heard, mummy and daddies little angels usually have a hell of a lot to answer for. Kids get in trouble, spew out some extremely vexatious accusations and it’s generally the teachers who are then guilty until proven innocent, AKA suspended thanks to some over entitled little brat with a chip on their shoulder complaining to mummy and daddy, who in turn demand that heads should roll.

I was responding to your answer to Marck. In that he wasnt there taking notes, but youre assuming the skirts were short enough to be of concern generally. Glasshouses kind of thing.

Boys will be told about what happened. For sure.

Compromised? Lets forget how it might effect a male for a second. On the flip side, she might create enough shame in a girl she is confused about what is her fault, and what is not, so in this case, making it easy for a perpetrator (husband, boyfriend) to manipulate her as a victim, and her kids when she has them. Im not saying the principal creates the monster, Im saying she creates rationale, and maybe the victims. This doesnt need to be an exact science, she should understand the risk, and refrain due to the potential. She educates vulnerable minds, some strong and convinced of their convictions, some malleable and weak.

It is her job. She is the umpire between teachers and students, she is the head of the school. If she cant grasp this fundamental aspect of the job, how can she execute her duty in regard her duty controlling and guiding the rest of the staff.

 

[Albynsw]

Probably should’ve put this in the jokes thread, but here seemed more appropriate..

View attachment 52019

This sums up the whole issue perfectly
Who would want to be a teacher

 

[Blue_haired_man]

I was responding to your answer to Marck. In that he wasnt there taking notes, but youre assuming the skirts were short enough to be of concern generally. Glasshouses kind of thing.

Boys will be told about what happened. For sure.

Compromised? Lets forget how it might effect a male for a second. On the flip side, she might create enough shame in a girl she is confused about what is her fault, and what is not, so in this case, making it easy for a perpetrator (husband, boyfriend) to manipulate her as a victim, and her kids when she has them. Im not saying the principal creates the monster, Im saying she creates rationale, and maybe the victims. This doesnt need to be an exact science, she should understand the risk, and refrain due to the potential. She educates vulnerable minds, some strong and convinced of their convictions, some malleable and weak.

It is her job. She is the umpire between teachers and students, she is the head of the school. If she cant grasp this fundamental aspect of the job, how can she execute her duty in regard her duty controlling and guiding the rest of the staff.

I would argue that is the problem, the world is full of perpetual victims and whingers. If the parents did their jobs and raised their sons and daughters, taught them right from wrong, and taught them about respect, for themselves, their peers and people of authority, then this wouldn’t be an issue.

 

[loose cannon]

You forgot one important group, children. Respect for children, who are let's face it, the most vulnerable group in society.

Respect for children from people in authority isn't really a difficult concept to grasp. Or it shouldn't be but appears to be coming up against strong opposition on this forum. Blind obedience seems to be winning the day.

If an authority figure acts in a disrespectful way to a child then that child SHOULD complain to their parents. How anyone would even attempt to argue that point I find almost beyond my comprehension.

You can't teach a child to respect themselves and at the same time have blind respect for authority. You can't have both. I'll say again, respect is a two way street. And this should be blindingly obvious but I'll state it anyway, respect can be both earned and then lost. It ain't permanent.

You are describing children who complain as victims and whingers when in fact what they are displaying is respect for themselves, the very thing you say they should be taught.

And if you think ALL school principals are perfect and must be obeyed at all times with nil regard to either their words or actions then I'm lost for words. That tells me you think my father should not have complained to his parents when beaten by teachers for the crime of being left-handed.

He did complain btw...and copped a beating for doing so, his parents said he should show some respect for the teachers.

I give up.