This Explains So Much...

Post Reply New Topic

Hi DW_a_mom,

If your phrasing of personal attacks against my impairments don't violate the TOS here, your phrasing of which walls you yourself are placing your polemics behind being solidly criticized is not in violation of TOS, either, esp. sans impairments in yourself, individually, of purview, but as criticized as widely presented by Barbara Ehrenreich elsewhere of the same.

Tadzio

I regret that you caught my more knee jerk reaction before I had time to re-think it, but on your interpretation of who is violating TOS how, I would be more than happy to invite a moderator to review this thread. Shall I?

And who are you to say I have no impairments? I never said I was "sans impairments," and it would make no difference under the TOS regardless.

There were, by the way, many ways you could have gotten me to politely leave this conversation and stay out, but you chose to post otherwise.

We all make our own beds, to at least some degree.

Hi DW_a_mom,

Doing those numerous edits again, eh?

I cited the entire body of your posts that were cited the last two of my posts these times, since you argued previously that citing most relevant parts of your posts opened the "out-of-context" possibilities.

Tadzio

Citing things outside of the order of the conversation also removes context.

But I will also note that people say odd things when someone is working hard to get under their skin, and that factor was at play in my posts as well (ie it has consistently felt like you want to get under my skin). Perhaps that works both ways, even though I never intended to do the same (which doesn't mean I couldn't have unintentionally), which leaves only one question: why are either of us still talking?

Edit: took me a while, but I've now realized I fell for your redirect.

You may not have cut and pasted the posts (although pulling the whole posts out of order IS distorting), but you very much cut and pasted in your summary of the quoted comments, pulling disparate concepts for disparate situations together in trying to support your incorrect conclusions about me. May as well quote "I love chocolate cake" and "I don't like pea soup cake" to conclude that I like to talk out of both sides of my mouth.

As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter what I say. If I were to support completely data oriented hiring, you would tell me that it too often has disparate impact. If I talk about a more subjective process, you'll tell me that is an invalid approach. If I say I'm sorry you've had it rough, you think I'm being patronizing. If I don't, you think I'm ignoring your posts. If I suggest ideas I've seen work for others, you suggest I'm trying to send you to the back of the bus. And yet you think I am a perfect example of all things wrong with the world, with nothing to really base it on except, apparently, the fact that I didn't check the "diagnosed AS" box on my profile. If I offered you your dream job tomorrow, would you even take it?

Which does continue to beg the question: why are either of us still talking?

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 15 Jan 2012, 7:44 pm, edited 5 times in total.

lol to be fair, codarac is at least being consistent.

The next time you pop out of your hole to make one of your typical throwaway comments, could you do me the courtesy of providing a citation (page numbers) for your claims about the Bell Curve?



Because I've read the Bell Curve and I don't recall the authors saying this. It would be highly unusual for social scientists to write a book about intelligence and make normative claims like the cognitive elite should rule over those with a lower intellect.

subtext and motivation, as evidenced by content.

well not that strange for "social science" paid for by the pioneer fund.

Link to the wikipedia on the pioneer fund.

Exactly. No, they didn't literally say word for word "the cognitive elite should rule over those with a lower intellect", but that was the general message I was paraphrasing. You want page numbers for the direct quotes? Here ya go, I took the effort to google it...

"people in the underclass are in that condition through no fault of their own but because of inherent shortcomings about which little can be done." pg 523
"a significant part of the population must be made permanent wards of the state." pg 526

this just shows how the right uses stupidity to control the masses. Why would a decent human being want to devote a career to abducting off the streets and incarcerating dark people and poor "defective" white people?

Why would intelligent people uphold ridiculous laws and abduct people off the streets, sexually molest them, and hand them over to private companies to keep them in bondage?

Last edited by Daj on 16 Jan 2012, 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hi pandabear,

I've learned never to put much trust in anyone, except for some members of my own family.

I tried to regard violations of trust as unusual events that I happened to be unlucky with in experiencing, but.....

Before adolescence, trust seemed a Catch-22 with cases now called "Mad Church Disease" and Special Education classes being more of a problem than a benefit. When the schools lost my records during Middle School, and I was finally free from Special Ed, I then made, and continued to make, the honor roll until adolescence. Trust in Special Ed being beneficial seems to have been ill founded.

Trusting my High School teachers & administrators proved somewhat disastrous. This still seems to be "Forbidden Knowledge", as an epilepsy website already edited away my inquiries involving sexual assault by trusted officials, despite the consequences for Penn State for doing much the same with others, so with all the threats of ToS, it may continue to be "Forbidden Knowledge" with suppression whenever possible by most current otherwise "trusted officials". In High School, my "trusted" vice-principal told me he had "heard about my spells". He told me that shortly after the start of my second appointment with him in his office, in response to my telling him that my teacher had again forcibly sodomized me. He ended the conversation my telling me that I'd better keep quite, and had better forget the allegations, or ELSE. I decided to keep quite, despite all the jokes about my blood stained pants both times, and just ignore my teacher whenever he made any orders that might result in my being alone with him. This worked for a while in stopping bodily contact with him, but by reports from my classmates, in the middle of an automatism seizure with me sitting in my desk wadding up pages from my notebook with one hand, my teacher grabbed the desk and flipped me and my desk over, grabbed me by my ankles, dragged me out into the hallway, pulled my pants and underwear down, starting undoing his own pants, but on gaining awareness that most of the class followed him out into the hall, with other teachers and students also taking note of the ruckus, he took off running down the hallway. When I more fully regained consciousness, I pulled up my pants, and took off running toward the front of the school (which was the opposite direction). While someone called the police, the police never contacted me. Afterwards, during school interrogations, I heard various scenarios, from rape, to protesting the war, to nothing happened, to it was consensual and didn't meet statutory rape, and that I seduced my teacher, since I was well known for fellow students forcibly hold me down so they could pet my large Becker's Nevus. I was "banned" from classes, and had to spend rest of the school year in the library. Weeks later, the vice-principal stormed into the library, and seeing me, he stormed back out. Later, I found out that another student was also assaulted by the teacher, and that day, he had sought revenge by setting the classroom on fire during his lunch-break. But about like Penn State a few decades later, everybody better just keep quite, and not violate any "trust".

My next encounter with trusted officials was with the Church and associated job opportunities with businesses. I was stupid enough to have my shirt off while doing yard work, and when the father seen my Becker's nevus, he asked the question "What kind of weirdo are you???" It turned out I was just the kind of weirdo he wanted.

I then ended up in the SF Bay area, and social services in dealing with street-people was directing people to available services, including the Peoples Temple of Reverend Jones, but I was lucky enough not to be one of the chosen ones, due to a lack of trust.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bodie ... estown.jpg


Other violations of trust are rather comparatively "bland", but agents with the U.S. Department of Treasury did try to intimidate me over my medical records and the violations of trust in High School. An IRS-EEOC Revenue Officer summarized that as dealing with the American Gestapo for maintaining the trust in the official truth.

Tadzio

I think I know why. Many of our laws are arbitrary and unjust. If the Cops were too intelligent they might start to have Second Thoughts about enforcing such bad laws. What our masters insist on is that servants of the State carry out their order without questioning them.

ruveyn