Don't be Intimidated by St. James Staff or SES Parents!

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:29 am

Personally, I found that Zathura had quite a lot of important things to say. It is just that important meaning can be lost when so much text is posted at once without spaces between paragraphs. It's hard to read online as you would in a paper document, as there is no double-spacing.

Thank you, Zathura, for taking the time to think through what you went through and to add to our discussion board. As for "getting into it", I find that the best method, once you are pretty sure that someone isn't genuine, is to ignore him.

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:18 am

Well I might have the higher post count, but by now I reckon Zathura more than has the award for WORD count :)

Zathura - I WILL take the time to read your posts (hopefully tomorrow) but please do take on board posts how formatting (para breaks etc.) can help a person trying to read on-screen. Bullet points are a good suggestion, as is trying to be succinct.

Also keep in mind that the SES way of talking/writing a point is SO convoluted that all true meaning is lost. Long, rambling, dense and essentially ambigious posts (after one has sorted thru the chaff for an hour or so) - well they just don't get the message across. I can't say if your latest posts have been in "SES speak", but certainly I think an earlier one about confusion was playing around with this way of debating.

In the interests of clarity, please avoid if you can. But maybe this is hard if you've been emeshed in the SES for a long time?

This, of course, does not explain Ross's verbosity ;)

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:12 am

Just a thought Zathura,

Have you read the post about anger problems? I think you may find an aspect of the shared heritage of the SES St J upbringing there.

I share your concern about Justice's apparent bandwaggoning, but then if it helps people to focus on what the media and law would find interesting then who am I to question the overall good of his postings on what is essentially a freely accessed board?

Instead of fighting over who is the most genuine, why not just PM each other with a CV. Better yet, work together to explode the cult of secrecy that seems to surround everyone to do with the SES that inspires people to use psuedonyms instead of their real names.

This secrecy is a large part of what is wrong about both the SES and St James then and now.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Postby bonsai » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:46 am

There are a lot of views being expressed on this BB. Some quite vociferous and even antagonistic. This is not surprising to many of us given the harm many of us feel the SES and St James has done to us as individuals or those we care about.

I believe that everyone has the right to express themselves and what they feel and believe. I don't, however, need to be told what to believe or what to do. After all this is the main thing I object to about my upbringing.

If we wish others to understand our point of view then we must express our reasons for our point of view and why we hold it. We must also show that we allow others to hold views that are different to us.

Zathura you have given us a lot of detail about what your view is and your reasons for holding it. I hope Justice also will give us the reason behind the view that he/she holds and their connections with the SES or St James

Bonsai

Zathura
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:05 pm

Postby Zathura » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:20 am

I don't have a message

The law is longwinded. When it's shortened like in Justice's posts it looks more threatening. You go into detail and you begin to unloose the menace. I would presume that the persons who are making comments about verbal diarreoh wouldn't be making those comments if they agreed with my attitudes or had sympathy with my position. It isn't a comfortable position for those with 'severe' grievences I'm sure hence the predicted tongue lashing on my part. Well my whole point is to challenge both the 'militant/s' and the schools from a middle position. I spend a third of my life typing and have very active fingers in other ways too.

You'll see that I have some rather good hitherto un posted quotes coming up that make the schools look rather stupid too. I notice that Justice has not mentioned what laws he plans to prosecute under and forgets that at the witness stand if it comes to that the school will provide an equall balance of positive witnesses. What is the point of going on about the Crown Courts and the Police if under the surface of this 'loudness' basic knowledge of the law 'could' be lacking. I am not a legal expert. But as far as I know what I said about the three year time limit is true though not in the United States where there is a law that allows for prosecution up until a year of surfaced memories.

Justice has become a tad more human which I appreciate. A joke or two! However he has not actually made concrete his vagueness when it comes to his very concrete looking posts. I actually found the cult books very informative. I would love to get a copy of the Secret Cult.

Stream of consciousness is very stylish from a litrary point of view in my opinion. However I am sorry to bring my literary tastes into a formal context like this. However a certain amount of warming up points and getting lost in the detail is vital tactics to an author who wants to break up another persons post or point of view. The length after the go ahead from Tom Grubb who I respect as a genuine representative of the whole rather than Justice was intentional. Short sounbites are one sided and one dimensional. Perhaps those that haven't got the time to read are rather scared of opening the debate and seeing a broader picture. They want to keep the arguments tight. If there is one thing I'd like to do is ease everything out. Whether I'll be successfull is a matter for experiment. I wasn't a part of the guini pigs Alban but I was around while they were still in the school.

I at the risk of derision and in irony repeat my comment about length. I don't think thinking between the lines is dioreoh.

To MM.

My position is I have a problem with St James ideology and 'some' affection for some the teachers. This causes my perceived split. It's that simple. It's an emotional thing. I don't like the ultra extremists on this site. This is emotional too. I find it slightly heartbreaking that in my opinion a small number of persons are unnecessarily painting a darker picture than what actually happened. If you are intimidated by 'me' then I will say that is your problem not mine. You were not even vaguely in my consciousness. The S.E.S obviously is a cult. But how much of a cult? I think this is still open to debate and I think there are varying degrees of assimilation and cultish behaviour in different parts of the school and with different members. I hate these blanket statements either by books, cult agencies or by ex parents who just read books and talk to cult agencies. Of course cult agencies are just going to have the bad stories that disaffected members came to them with.

Often these disaffected members of which I am one are more variant in their experience and disaffection than any of the cult agencies can tell being by necessity a place the worst affected can turn too. I have never reported the S.E.S to the cult agencies and I know about 20 ex S.E.S members who haven't either. We don't feel that strongly about it I presume even though some of us are pretty pissed off in a way that the 21st 22nd and 23rd might be more.


Are you really saying the Catholic Church is something you can come and go from if you were born into it. Most Catholics like St James pupils were brought up with this intolerant religious bug shoved down their throats. Not to say there aren't some good things that the Church does just like it is the same with the S.E.S. I know Catholic people and they share everything in common with me as an ex member of the S.E.S. The Catholic Churches moral principles are in the main completely twinned with those of the S.E.S. (Sex/divorce/gays) I am interested to hear of future withdrawals but in terms of current withdrawals I address my case back to Justice.

My 'scary comment' refers to Free Thinker and perhaps others who have expressed a distaste for Justice's style of address. I could have been way way out of line there and for this I apologise. As Kier mentioned and I am finding out one can sometimes get a bit carried away. If you still find it scary then I suggest you stiffen your nerves with some smelling salts. Is the S.E.S a cult? Well if a book says it is and you say it is it must be. I was speaking from a wider more general perspective. from a point of view that the whole of society is one big vast cult. I could bring out from under the carpet the whole post structuralist view of life but you might find that too 'philosophical' for a site SO concerned with abuse. I will remind you that this is a site discussing in a general way the S.E.S. I'm afraid both you and anyone else would find my philosophical and religious views long and convoluted but I might just share them with Kier if he isn't scared of me. I look forward to getting back to Alban if I am still welcome too. If MM wants to go into more detail later cool.

My problem with Justice is his raving exists on at least 7 listings on the 1st page of the site. This is disproportionate. If you have a problem with my views you should be thankful I have not plastered each one on a new thread. In short Justice pisses me off. Is that a good enough motive?

That said I feel after MM's comments that I was completely unfairly talking for other people in my opinions against Justice and should have just kept the opinion as my own. I take that back and I am sorry Justice. I now feel there was no need to be so bitter or kind of rude. I can understand where you are coming from. I too have a grudge but just nowhere near the size of your own

Some of my posts have been rather laborious. ( I'm expecting someone to copy and paste this sentence)It is for Justice alone and although it was fun to write I certainly don't expect anybody but Justice to read it. It concerns his claim of a data protection leakage by me. Just incase I'm in trouble which I'm so obviously not I wrote it more to kind of unravel Justice than out of any fear I may be taken to court

I was walking down the road yesterday and beneath all the mental zoning out and basically what amounts to a brainwashing of a different kind I realised how absurd Justice's chances of bringing a case against me to do wirth data protection were. Unfortunately I think there is a similar weakness in his more important threats of legal suites. Completely on the level I say if you want to win or at least get a good airing. research the law and tell us on this site what the laws are. Otherwise people's hopes might be risen to unrealistic levels. This is only fair and wise.

mm-
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: LONDON

Postby mm- » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:18 pm

Zathura,

If you are intimidated by 'me' then I will say that is your problem not mine. You were not even vaguely in my consciousness


I am not in the slightest bit intimidated by you.. I feel sorry for you. I read your often confusing and long-winded posts and wonder how it must feel to be in no man's land.... I see in you the final product of a St James education.

If you still find it scary then I suggest you stiffen your nerves with some smelling salts.


I am not here to enter into a slanging match with you, I don't feel that this is what this BB has been set up for. However, I can see how the reader may feel intimidated. You often use patronizing, offensive and rude language to get your point across and quite frankly there is no need for it.



Is the S.E.S a cult? Well if a book says it is and you say it is it must be


This is a fact...and a point that has already been argued on this BB. I won't waste my time or anyone else's by stating the obvious.



Are you really saying the Catholic Church is something you can come and go from if you were born into it.


As a practising Catholic and having attended Catholic schools I can definitely say that you can come and go as you please. Questions are not asked when the parish priest doesn't see you for weeks on end. I was not given the third degree when I chose a supposedly non-denominational school for my children instead of a private Catholic one. I don't have to ask for permission when making choices in my life. I can come and go as I please.

You will find that the Catholic church is a much more forgiving and tolerant place now. Parishes openly welcome gays, divorced, single parents. People are not ostracized for being disabled or sick. Those that don't belong to the church are not deemed to be asleep. All faiths are respected. It really is as simple as that...can members of the SES say the same?


Most Catholics like St James pupils were brought up with this intolerant religious bug shoved down their throats


When my parents chose to educate me at a Catholic school they knew what and how I would be taught. The Catholic Church does not open schools and advertise them as non-denominational with the intention to later shove Catholicism down the throats of young, vulnerable innocent children and their unsuspecting parents. That is the difference. Please do not use the comparison between St James and the Catholic Church, it is wrong and unfair.

I hate these blanket statements either by books, cult agencies or by ex parents who just read books and talk to cult agencies.


I am a current parent at the school. I base my opinion not only on the books I have read or the people at various cult charities who have kindly taken the time to give me information but on the many parents I have spoken to who are going through this today at St James. I base my opinion on the countless lies I have been fed both by current St James staff and other manipulative SES parents. Primarily, I base my statements on my own experiences at the school. I am not a neurotic mother who is making this all up.

St James prides itself on truth (and if I can quote from the senior girls prospectus; " We do not have a spiritual or religious doctrine of our own") but in reality it hides under the invisible umbrella of the SES.

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:09 pm

I see in you the final product of a St James education.


Having finally read Zathura's posts, and having met others who 'speak' like Zathura, I would agree with your summation MM. Zathura may no long be in the SES, but it's all still there!

I know the SES like Shakespeare - are they also a fan of Joyce?

Goblinboy
Moderator
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 4:07 am

Postby Goblinboy » Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:04 am

a different guest wrote:Having finally read Zathura's posts, and having met others who 'speak' like Zathura, I would agree with your summation MM. Zathura may no long be in the SES, but it's all still there!

I know the SES like Shakespeare - are they also a fan of Joyce?


Molly Bloom doesn't strike me a big fan of the laws of Manu, ADG!

A bit off topic, but the lack of clarity of a lot of SES-speak is beautifully illustrated in this piece by a member of the Melbourne School of Philosophy - under the banner "Practical Philosophy for Everyday Living" ROFL! The irony is exquisite. http://www.schoolofphilosophy.org.au/index.php?module=Website&action=Text&content=1130206476278-4410&parentContent=1129092876578-6986

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:06 am

GB - I was thinking more the writing style, including lack of paragraph breaks in Portrait. I vaguely recall being required to read it at school, but my eye kept on sliding off the page and I never manage to get very far into it.

As for Ulysses - also occurs to me that any book that can inspire the motto "grow old disgracefully" would hardly be SES fare. :D

and nice bit of SES speak you found there GB! :)

User avatar
Free Thinker
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Free Thinker » Fri Feb 17, 2006 5:55 am

Zathura - that last post was much easier to read, even if it was still long. On screen, the streamofconsciousness thing really doesn't work well. I have a good friend who writes like that and e-mailed me things and I just couldn't read them. (I had no way to print at the time.) And thank you for not starting a zillion threads.

Since you are knew, you don't know that while we have, in the past, talked about many issues related to growing up in, attending the schools of, or being members of the SES and its related clones, since the inquiry has occurred and been published, we have been focusing on the abuse aspect since that is what the inquiry was established to investigate. If you look back 6 months ago and more, you'll find many threads discussing other areas of the SES, including its philosophy. Feel free to resurrect any of these you care to discuss by adding to them and therefore bumping them to the first page.

People like me, who did not attend SES schools where the major abuse happened, who aren't participating in the inquiry, have found the other aspects of this website to be the most helpful. However, since so many here have been involved in the inquiry, I have stepped back and let that take the front burner, as it is so important. There will come a time where members will start to discuss other issues more frequently but that will have to wait while we all digest what has been published and figure out what to do next.

ross nolan
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:10 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Justice's motives etc

Postby ross nolan » Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:54 am

Dear All, just lost two quite long postings due it seems to an insistent "cookie" that keeps popping up asking me to subscribe to 'Errorsafe' so I'll keep this short.

!. Attacks on Justice! -- as far as I can see Justice has done a lot of good and posted practical advice and links -- he started this thread so it is a bit harsh to use it as a rod to his/her back -- so what if he/she does not disclose their relationship ( if any) to SES ? You all (unlike me) choose to hide behind pseudonyms ,'nicknames' etc and expect anonymity , either Justice! has no history of being abused or chooses not to 'compare scars' but either way is hardly likely to be a 'plant' for the SES . What good could it possibly do them ?

Perhaps it is time to go to the next step having unequivocally established mistreatment and culpability by the SES and teachers at ST James .

2. Use of the law -- this seems appropriate and might both curb the damage being done by the present school and punish the perpetrators while compensating the victims of the past.

At least Justice is proposing some sort of action which could have an effect -- hangwringing and further detailing 'war stories' will not have any effects on the guilty parties -- maybe there is residual fear of the organization that prevents you victims from taking any positive action on your own behalf (or even some perverse "stockholm Syndrome" at work where you identify with your tormentors -(?) -- not unlike the penultimate scene in life of Brian where, whilst on the cross he thinks he is to be rescued by the Palestinian people's front suicide squad who instead of helping him and rising up against the enemy simply all fall on their swords (commit suicide) -- a comedy yes but with a real message .

The turgid and rambling dissertation by Zarutha (Z) could be punctuated at regular intervals by the words 'on the other hand' .... it is like thinking out load (SOC with an echo) -- it is pedantic to focus on Justice's comment about how many parents are choosing to remove children or what the law on privacy might say .... a waste od time.

ADG is her old trite self -- she usually adds nothing to the conversation and seems only to have a voyueristic interest -- apart from just putting (rhetorical mainly) questions or repeating something from a link she has acheived the dubious distinction of adding the technique for sucking Tim Tams to this forum. Best ignored . Z, I prefer your postings at least having something to say to short vapid chit chat and don't let ADG's acid tongue deflect you too much .

If you think the Catholic church is all open and free then try marrying a Catholic and see what happens -- I was engaged to a Catholic girl and vividly remember the Priest insisting that I sign an undertaking to bring any children up as Catholics -- not negotiable ..

Two wrongs don't make a right and other religions are also cultish but "established" -- would we be better off with one less ? If so then do something to rid us of this one . Justice! keep at it for mine .

Ross.
Skeptic

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:40 am

I knew I shoulnd't have posted that quip about Ross's verbosity - I suspected, even at the time, a flippant commant (with wink) would result in a personal attack.

Ross you acuse me, amongst other things, of being "voyeuristic" yet I wonder at your own interest here.

You attended the introductory course and found it bullcrappy. OK, why not ask for your money back? If that was not forthcoming, you could always contact Consumer Affairs. But no, what do you do? Get on the net, find this site, and, at times, near take over it with your longwinded ramblings. You are on a mission. You want this evil cult destroyed. Why do you feel so strongly?

Is it because they dismissed your snopes.com research on Chief whatsisname?

Your relationship with the SES is hardly personal. Unlike me you do NOT have relo's deeply enmeshed, sending their kids to the day schools.

I would not say you presence here is voyeuristic, as this is DEEPLY insulting (both to the accused, and the ex St James students posting here) but I would say it was misplaced.

If you have so much time on your hands I suggest you find a cause that has affected you more personally.

Alban
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:23 am
Location: London

Re: Justice's motives etc

Postby Alban » Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:49 am

ross nolan wrote:2. Use of the law -- this seems appropriate and might both curb the damage being done by the present school and punish the perpetrators while compensating the victims of the past.


I think I talk for a number of people when I say that we are not out to "Punish" the school or to get "Compensation". We just want recognition by the schools that they made (and to a certain extent are still making) grave mistakes regarding the education of the children in their care. While this is not forthcoming we are attempting to highlight these mistakes to parents that either have children at or are intending to send their children to the schools.

Oh, and enough of the bickering please - it really doesn't add to the content of the site. We all have our differences borne from different experiences and it is a tad hypocritical damning the schools for attempting to force their views on children if that is all we are doing on this site. Tolerance is an area in which the schools have historically been shown to be lacking - lets not sink to that level.

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: Justice's motives etc

Postby mgormez » Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:32 pm

ross nolan wrote:Dear All, just lost two quite long postings due it seems to an insistent "cookie" that keeps popping up asking me to subscribe to 'Errorsafe' so I'll keep this short.


Ross, here is info on Errorsafe. It does not originate from this site:
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/av ... rsafe.html
Mike Gormez

leon
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:13 pm

Re: Justice's motives etc

Postby leon » Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:06 pm

ross nolan wrote:You all (unlike me) choose to hide behind pseudonyms ,'nicknames'


ross nolan wrote: 'compare scars'



ross nolan wrote:hangwringing and further detailing 'war stories'


I found this post incredibly insulting. To term the testimonies and reminiscences here as mere "handwringing", ?swapping war stories? to criticise posters as 'hiding behind pseudonyms and anonymity? is an affront to all those here who took the courage to post their experiences in the first place. What gives you the right to attack those who have had a far more direct and deeper involvement with SES than you will ever have of ?not taking direct action?, and to then offer some cod pscyhobabble by way of an explanation?

You have no interest in reconciliation between pupils and past teachers, In fact this would probably not be of help to your personal agenda. You wish for the abolition of St James and I suspect all faith based schools institutions and organisations. Fair enough, many share that view and I can respect it. But at least be consistent. The public nature of this board allows anyone to use posted material to further whatever cause they are pursuing, however to do so then later petulantly criticise and discard past pupils experiences after no doubt having used them as ?ammunition? is grossly insensitive and insulting.


Has it not dawned on you Ross that (as your posts indicate) you share the one common factor that all Cults and fundamentalist Religions have with one another, a complete lack of tolerance for those of different beliefs and customs? A particular lesson I learnt from SES and St James by it?s conspicuous absence was that empathy and understanding are the key to successful relationships between people and communities, not constant attack and destruction.


Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest