Postby Zathura » Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:05 pm
Wildone.
Having new governors won't destroy the school. And for the teachers, the real one's people are angryabout, for these to apologise is not only basic good sense,it is essential in making a genuine answer I think to the demands of the complainants. But even from a PR point of view for this apology to be missing the School risks more chance of being undermined than if the apologies are made.
The school won't be brought down in my opinion. It is too officially wedged into the secular and normal systems of inspection etc. So don't worry.
However for the lesser offenders to make heartfelt apologies and for nothing to come from DL CR and ND.
Well that smacks of legal protection.
The fact is certain lies have been perpetrated in my opinion in and around the report.
IT IS VERY UNLIKELY A TEACHER THREW A BOARD RUBBER ONCE.
this seems to me to be a lie.
I can dimly remember this sort of thing happenning every now and then. Not systematic abuse but far more times than once.
I also think it unlikely that ND cained on the bare butt once. What was his reason for doing this? This one time. Also why would quite a few people remember being cained on the bare behind. I don't know how many.
This surely is a legal protection lie and unfortunately I certainly don't think it 's THE TRUTH. Ironically
Now for there to be only this kind of self belief by the governors that only one board rubber was thrown and only one bare bottom caining. This strikes me as unlikely.
So it is unsuprising that the 'activists' are not believing the report not digging the Schools use of 'the report' as 'fact' and most of all are not digging the absense of an apology from ND, DL and CR.
The school is hiding. I BELIEVE THAT if at least an apology was given by these three individuals it would make a difference. Even if it is only a lip service. Better still if the true emotions of the most accused teachers are brought to bare and opened up just a little in this apology. It sounds like at least on some days they are sorry. why not say so openly.
Given the fact that St Jamers changed quite drastically over the years, the teachers themselves must feel some regret at earlier versions that they themselves changed. If you beat a lot of kids for 8 years then decided that wasn't the best education and gave the next 15 or so years of kids a different education that I assume was considered an improvement say sorry to those kids you repeatedly told the modern world was corrupt, who you repeatedly intimidated and occassionally were too violent towards. Say sorry for getting it wrong in the first ten years. For 50, a quarter, of the first 5 classes to be complaining and others to not have been reached for the inquiry, these are NOT negligable odds. For the first ten years St James was NOT wholly a good school in any shape or form. The ideas were ridged, the food was bad (and people were expelled for smoking spliff and made to look like the worst kind of criminals.) O.K spliff was illegal. But music, clothes, haircuts, private time, personal opinions and the space to not feel like you were going to be physically set upon if you spoke out of line. (some people are claiming this and I remember the less law abiding people in my class were hit far far more often. For the older classes it probably was nearer 'brutal' yet I still don't believe it was quite this bad) The encouragement of healthy relationships with girls instead of ABSURD ABSURD ABSURD school rules against it. THESE ARE NOT ILLEGAL LUXURIES. THESE ARE BASIC HUMAN FREEDOMS THAT YOU DENIED THE KIDS EVEN IN MY TIME.
If St James is now liberal about music, clothes, punishments has decent food, does not punish boys for meeting girls and vice versa, does not encourage parents to supervise all boy girl activities. Is sex still punishable if it comes to a teacher's attention with expulsion. Sure teach a healthy sex education but if you actually ACTIVELY do your best to supress it it will rear it's beautiful head up in the most irregular ways and create unatural tensions in ALMOST ALL St James kids and leavers. YOU GOT IT AND STILL GET IT WRONG ST JAMES. (in my opinion) YOU GO TOO MUCH THE OTHER WAY!!
If JAZZ POP as well as CLASSICAL is taught. If all PHILOSOPHY is taught. If boys are allowed to wear ear rings, grow there hair long, have sideburns etc. And girls allowed to wear short skirts and wear fancy make up etc. IF ALL THESE THINGS HAVE CHANGED THEN ST JAMES HAS CHANGED.
If none of these things have changed then ST JAMES is still the suppressed load of bollocks it was in my day.
These are normal freedoms all the other kids have been given. Other kids don't even realise these are freedoms. They take all the above for granted.
Does St James help gay persons come to terms with their sexuality.
NOW THESE ARE ALL THE BASIC CHANGES THAT PERSONS ON THIS SITE WOULD BE VERY HAPPY ABOUT IF ALL THESE THINGS HAD BEEN RIGHTED.
BUT THEY HAVEN'T HAVE THEY?
WOMEN ARE STILL THOUGHT OF AND TAUGHT TO BE DEPENDENT ON MEN EVEN THOUGH THEY GET THE GOOD MARKS.
Why do they get the good marks probably out of overidentification by the institution with the idea that women mature quicker than men. This idea is so strong in the S.E.S that it has produced this appalling disparity in academic prowess between boys and girls to such an extreme degree. I bet there is no other school in the country that could boast such an imbalanced male female dynamic. Maybe it is general I don't know.
But the fact is on Music, ideas about women, individual expression concerning apparel and hairdos and skirts and the assembly after assembly of partisan TRUTH lectures. THESE ACTUALLY HAVEN'T CHANGED.
Apart from the abuse this is what everyone is complaining about. CHANGE OR DON'T CHANGE. Don't pretend to change.
And apologise for the mistreatment
This is all so bloody obvious
Last edited by
Zathura on Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
No maniac thunderstorms or whippings from me. Efervescent not corporal punishment from me
lol
