Board index › General Discussion › Autism Politics, Activism, and Media Representation

Time to get real

Page 10 of 12 [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 5:47 am

Gedrene wrote:
I doubt free-marketeers around the whole UK are all monstrous and evil. That would be quite a lot of people.


...ad the fact that "quite a lot of people" in the UK are thinking in a way that is monsterous *IS* what is so terrifying...

Gedrene wrote:
Because I know nothing I am supporting evil, also I know nothing.


That sorta seems to cover it...

It really *IS* obvious that you haven't got a clue what is really happening in the UK, nor even which services are responsible for failing in terms of which aspects of care...nor the extent to which they are failing, so that what you are trying to argue is based on a complete fiction that does not actually exist in hard, factual terms, before opinion enters into it.

Which, to me, is nothing to bother arguing with.

:)



Moog
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,671
Location: Untied Kingdom

26 Aug 2011, 5:59 am

Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary. The points that people are making is what you need to focus on, not the imperfections of communication. I know my spelling isn't perfect.

If you really can't work out what someone is trying to express, then you can ask them to elaborate or explicate, or ignore the posts.


_________________
Not currently a moderator


Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 6:38 am

Zeraeph wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
I doubt free-marketeers around the whole UK are all monstrous and evil. That would be quite a lot of people.


...ad the fact that "quite a lot of people" in the UK are thinking in a way that is monsterous *IS* what is so terrifying...

Except that you said that free-marketeering was the thing that was monstrous and you have said nothing else is.

Zeraeph wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Because I know nothing I am supporting evil, also I know nothing.


That sorta seems to cover it...

It really *IS* obvious that you haven't got a clue what is really happening in the UK, nor even which services are responsible for failing in terms of which aspects of care...nor the extent to which they are failing, so that what you are trying to argue is based on a complete fiction that does not actually exist in hard, factual terms, before opinion enters into it.

Which, to me, is nothing to bother arguing with.

:)
Well the problem is that what you say is actually true in schools that I have only recently just left wasn't actually happening. All you can say then is that I don't have a clue, an attempt to claw your way back without actually proving anything. Attempting to say I have no clue is cheap because nearly every sentence I have poked holes in your weird generalizations.

Also you didn't actually challenge the fact that the NHS is clearly involved with autism cases at every stage. I know. I know people with severe autism and I live in the UK. You couldn't even say the name of the body involved correctly. The only opinions I have are those proven on fact. You are just trying to cut corners to win an argument. I also think that there is always a reason to argue against someone, because human life is worth more than that. Although please, say there is no point to arguing with me. That sounds exactly like another person who couldn't admit to being told they were wrong.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 6:47 am

Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?



Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 6:52 am

Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?


It's ok Moog...it was his first offence and I have been grown up too long to go "tit for tit"... :D



Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 6:57 am

Gedrene wrote:
Well the problem is that what you say is actually true in schools that I have only recently just left wasn't actually happening.


You obviously do not realise that as long as you are still a pupil, the rule of "pas devant les enfants" still applies over anything controversial.

By the time they reach secondary level most pupils found "challenging" have either been contained in some half got way or become an invisible statistic.



Moog
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,671
Location: Untied Kingdom

26 Aug 2011, 7:05 am

Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?


Could you really not work out what Zeraeph meant by 'auger'?

I'm not saying it's not important. The very use of this forum requires some level of being able to communicate to use it. But some tolerance would be appreciated. We aren't all so mercurially gifted, eh?

By the by, I deliberately made my post impersonal, like the other one you took very personally. Don't take it so personally. It's not just you going in for this kind of thing at the moment.

I don't follow all the posts here, so if someone makes a personally attacking comment about you, do report it.

I also posted in the other thread for the benefit of other people who think that minor spelling errors need to be pointed out as part of their debate.


_________________
Not currently a moderator


Last edited by Moog on 26 Aug 2011, 7:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 7:07 am

Zeraeph wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Well the problem is that what you say is actually true in schools that I have only recently just left wasn't actually happening.


You obviously do not realise that as long as you are still a pupil, the rule of "pas devant les enfants" still applies over anything controversial.

Look, if I actually knew the students involved and was directly part of the process of special needs in schools as a helper I don't think you can use that as an excuse. Not in front of the children? Pah.

Zeraeph wrote:
By the time they reach secondary level most pupils found "challenging" have either been contained in some half got way or become an invisible statistic.
What? No. Of course not. If anything secondary schools bring up new issues never before met for special needs students and so forth. It is actually secondary school that is considered crunch time. Also what does invisible statistic have to do with anything? They're still there Zeraeph.



Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 7:08 am

Moog wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?


Could you really not work out what Zeraeph meant by 'auger'?

I'm not saying it's not important. The very use of this forum requires some level of being able to communicate to use it. But some tolerance would be appreciated. We aren't all so mercurially gifted, eh?

By the by, I deliberately made my post impersonal, like the other one you took very personally. Don't take it so personally.

I also posted in the other thread for the benefit of other people who think that minor spelling errors need to be pointed out as part of their debate.


It's ok Moog, Gedrene and I chat privately a lot and have developed a dynamic that permits of a lot of things that might be deemed offensive outside the comtext of that personal dynamic. :)



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 7:19 am

Moog wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?


Could you really not work out what Zeraeph meant by 'auger'?


Can I not correct her? Or is doing so somehow seen as automatically wrong? Such an assumption would seem paranoid.

Moog wrote:
I'm not saying it's not important. The very use of this forum requires some level of being able to communicate to use it. But some tolerance would be appreciated. We aren't all so mercurially gifted, eh?

See, you're making an assumption that when I was correcting her I was trying to make a dig at her. That Augur one? I actually made sure to dissect the point where I was criticizing her thinking and the correction because I knew people would end up making the mistake that I can't make a dispassionate helpful correction in the same post as making a strong criticism of other people.

Moog wrote:
By the by, I deliberately made my post impersonal, like the other one you took very personally. Don't take it so personally. It's not just you going in for this kind of thing at the moment.

Yes I did, because I was the only one who could have made this 'mistake' that you said I made.

Moog wrote:
I don't follow all the posts here, so if someone makes a personally attacking comment about you, do report it.

I don't mean to question your ability but there are some pretty big threads on here detailing how I am various things according to a particular person including a racist, trash and an NT faking as an aspie.
I have sent you messages, and your response has been ambivalent.

Moog wrote:
I also posted in the other thread for the benefit of other people who think that minor spelling errors need to be pointed out as part of their debate.
Well, that's fine. But why are people getting away with claiming that I am just ill-informed and a eugenicist and I have to prove them wrong? Surely that's a more pressing point.



Moog
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,671
Location: Untied Kingdom

26 Aug 2011, 7:25 am

Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Moog wrote:
Note to people in this forum: focusing on people's spelling or grammar is weak and unnecessary.


Calling me a eugenicist or badly informed is weak and unnecessary.
Also, maybe telling people how to spell was meant with the best of intentions, because it was with me.
Grammar is necessary so why is telling people the Grammar makes their argument unintelligible not?


Could you really not work out what Zeraeph meant by 'auger'?


Can I not correct her? Or is doing so somehow seen as automatically wrong? Such an assumption would seem paranoid.

Moog wrote:
I'm not saying it's not important. The very use of this forum requires some level of being able to communicate to use it. But some tolerance would be appreciated. We aren't all so mercurially gifted, eh?

See, you're making an assumption that when I was correcting her I was trying to make a dig at her. That Augur one? I actually made sure to dissect the point where I was criticizing her thinking and the correction because I knew people would end up making the mistake that I can't make a dispassionate helpful correction in the same post as making a strong criticism of other people.

Moog wrote:
By the by, I deliberately made my post impersonal, like the other one you took very personally. Don't take it so personally. It's not just you going in for this kind of thing at the moment.

Yes I did, because I was the only one who could have made this 'mistake' that you said I made.

Moog wrote:
I don't follow all the posts here, so if someone makes a personally attacking comment about you, do report it.

I don't mean to question your ability but there are some pretty big threads on here detailing how I am various things according to a particular person including a racist, trash and an NT faking as an aspie.
I have sent you messages, and your response has been ambivalent.

Moog wrote:
I also posted in the other thread for the benefit of other people who think that minor spelling errors need to be pointed out as part of their debate.
Well, that's fine. But why are people getting away with claiming that I am just ill-informed and a eugenicist and I have to prove them wrong? Surely that's a more pressing point.


If your messages contained links to events that needed direct attention, I have missed them. In future could you be more direct? I am human and I have my own communication difficulties at times.

The problem seems to be, that I am addressing that one thing in the greater context of the tone I am detecting in this forum in general... I apologise that I did not convey that properly.

For me, I tend to group things together like that, and sometimes it doesn't make sense to other people. I have a holistic way of viewing events, and perhaps you look at things more specifically.

Perhaps the posts in the other thread I just made may help fill in some context.


_________________
Not currently a moderator


Last edited by Moog on 26 Aug 2011, 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 7:27 am

Gedrene wrote:
Look, if I actually knew the students involved and was directly part of the process of special needs in schools as a helper I don't think you can use that as an excuse. Not in front of the children? Pah.


Really? How admirable...and it must have been such hard, time consuming work to go around getting to know all the kids who have been excluded from school since they were 7 due to "challenging behaviour" or taken into care for "truant" because they, their parents, or both, genuinely could not stand any more and no-one was giving them an option, as well as all the kids who's parents found ways to send them to private special schools or teach them at home...



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 7:34 am

Zeraeph wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
Look, if I actually knew the students involved and was directly part of the process of special needs in schools as a helper I don't think you can use that as an excuse. Not in front of the children? Pah.


Really? How admirable...and it must have been such hard, time consuming work to go around getting to know all the kids who have been excluded from school since they were 7 due to "challenging behaviour" or taken into care for "truant" because they, their parents, or both, genuinely could not stand any more and no-one was giving them an option, as well as all the kids who's parents found ways to send them to private special schools or teach them at home...


Since I said in a school I don't know exactly how you managed to start talking about homeschool students. Also I don't think you understand about exclusion do you? That often means being sent to another school. We were talking about children with medical issues, not children with violent histories. I said I worked with students who had autism. Although you omitted that part of the post.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 7:40 am

Moog wrote:
If your messages contained links to events that needed direct attention, I have missed them. In future could you be more direct? I am human and I have my own communication difficulties at times.

That's fair enough. You're fallible, I'm fallible. I'll make sure to be very direct. My first direction is look at the last page and read carefully. You'll find what I just said was unnecessary about me.

Moog wrote:
The problem seems to be, that I am addressing that one thing in the greater context of the tone I am detecting in this forum in general... I apologise that I did not convey that properly.

If you say so. The problem is that I was being told that I was doing something I wasn't, which is trying to snipe people.

Moog wrote:
For me, I tend to group things together like that, and sometimes it doesn't make sense to other people. I have a holistic way of viewing events, and perhaps you look at things more specifically.

I have a holistic method, but extradordinary persistence in pounding at the gravewl until I have the details I want is my forte.

Moog wrote:
Perhaps the posts in the other thread I just made may help fill in some context.

It did to some extent.



Zeraeph
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 592

26 Aug 2011, 8:02 am

Gedrene wrote:

Since I said in a school I don't know exactly how you managed to start talking about homeschool students. Also I don't think you understand about exclusion do you? That often means being sent to another school. We were talking about children with medical issues, not children with violent histories. I said I worked with students who had autism. Although you omitted that part of the post.


Because the homeschool students, the home excluded etc ARE those who's needs are not being met due to financial constraints within the educational system as per my original argument which you thought to counter by claiming superior knowledge because you had just left secondary school...which, as you have only so recently left, you will know amount to basing argument on invalid premise, which, you are far less likely to know, tends to set my personal teeth on edge.

All of which relates to me contesting your contention that the UK system is currently based on meeting need rather than Social Darwinism.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

26 Aug 2011, 9:27 am

Zeraeph wrote:
Gedrene wrote:

Since I said in a school I don't know exactly how you managed to start talking about homeschool students. Also I don't think you understand about exclusion do you? That often means being sent to another school. We were talking about children with medical issues, not children with violent histories. I said I worked with students who had autism. Although you omitted that part of the post.


Because the homeschool students, the home excluded etc ARE those who's needs are not being met due to financial constraints within the educational system as per my original argument which you thought to counter by claiming superior knowledge because you had just left secondary school...

Which is interesting because in the UK a lot of children with special needs go to schools and they haven't been forgotten about by the state and the newfinancial constraints have not worsened this fact. If anything the major spending cuts have been on various parochial services but supporting children in schools has not suffered in the same strike across the back and from what I know the support system outside hasn't collapsed.

Zeraeph wrote:
All of which relates to me contesting your contention that the UK system is currently based on meeting need rather than Social Darwinism.
Well the problem is cost-cutting doesn't prove social darwinism, certainly not this level. I doubt given my evidence that the UK is throwing children to the dogs as you say. If they're being stupid twits though that I will acquiesce.