Forum Index
»
Schools and Education General Discussion
"Mean Girls"
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| 18:40 - what is wrong with you? |
Anonymous
| She's obviously a bully. |
Anonymous
| Yeah, I'd say the Mean Girls are pretty defensive about their tactics..... |
Anonymous
|
Oh that's right. Just because you make an accusation, and in the absence of any specifics (nevermind evidence!) people are skeptical of your claims, they must be bullies.
Did you ever read "The Crucible" by Arthur Miller? If so, did you understand it on either the historical or the metaphorical level? |
Anonymous
|
Rules for internet mommy-boards:
1. An OP who complains about someone IRL (presumably not on the board) is one of us and therefore entitled to sympathy. 2. She, like us, is much nicer than that unknown evil bitch who set her off IRL and who, mercifully, isn't here to present a different POV. 3. Any subsequent poster who gently points out that there might be a different, more productive way to look at the situation is told she just doesn't understand. 4. People who leap to OP's defense and add fuel to the fire are embraced as helpful and as providing the reality check (i.e. affirmation) OP needed. 5. Anyone who points out the hypocrisy of this dynamic is not "one of us." In fact, she's probably one of them -- you know the very sort of person whose evil bitchitude prompted this thread. 6. And because we're nice -- I mean, didn't we all just mutually confirm our collective niceness? -- we can't be being mean when we pile on and call that sort of person names, can we? We are not the bullies -- she is the bully! 7. At which point the not-us poster(s) resort(s) to sarcasm, literary allusions, and metaconversational analysis and hopefully everyone just turns wearily away after a few final parting shots.... Lather rinse repeat. |
Anonymous
|
21:36 - Congratulations, you just might pass first semester mail order law school. Naaaaahhh.....
Have you any other irrelevant points? Or are you still washing your hair? What gives you a right to be nasty (read: hypocrite) just because you don't like what some one is saying? No wonder you don't understand the question. You are doing exactly what you accuse the posters of doing, and you STILL refuse to acknowledge the question. Wouldn't it be more reasonable to pose a specific question for the poster. Or do you prefer a soapbox? Don't forget to correct the grammar. Spelling? What is it Ms. Holier-Than-Thou-Pay-Off-The-Teacher? I'm done here. Best wishes, OP. I'll bet you anything PP is in our children's next class. We'll spot her a mile away...she won't even know what hit her.... |
Anonymous
| I wouldn't be so sure she's not on this board. |
Anonymous
|
It's hard to tell who is more pathetic. The bird-brain OP? Or her mentally challenged sock-puppet/cheerleaders?
14:01 for example, is so dumb she has delusions of adequacy. |
Anonymous
She's not being nasty. You're just too dense to understand what she's saying (as revealed by your largely irrelevant and rambling tangential reply). And spare the "meanness" accusation. In this case, truth is the ultimate defense. |
Anonymous
| Wow, someone really wants the last word here. My money is on the kid who's parent did *not* have to pay off the teacher, however. The verbose one is a victim of same, no doubt! |
Anonymous
| Do you ever wonder how many of us who post actually have children? |
Anonymous
|
OP,
Could you elucidate a couple of points? It's still unclear exactly how the teacher was "paid off." Was it cash or check? Did you see an actual transaction occur? If not, the PP observation is correct "one man's trash is another man's treasure." It's possible that what you think is worth $500 is effectively worth practically nothing, and this could be the source of great misunderstanding. (Or it could be a reflection on your taste...) Also, can you clarify exactly how your child is suffering? Surely if the gift-giver had actually paid the teacher to mistreat your child (as you implied) you would have taken this to the administration. Yet you did not do so; so obviously this is not so cut and dried. (You can see how this leaves your claims open to accusations of, shall we say, hyperbole?) What makes you so sure the gift-giver is targeting your child? After all, why would this be worth it? What kind of threat can she be? She's of your gene pool and educational influence, n'est-ce pas? It would be so much easier to advise you if you'd give complete answers to honest questions. Your reluctance to do so is, frankly, suspicious. It casts doubt on your veracity. I'm sure you'd understand that - if you could. |
Anonymous
|
PP - What makes you think it can't be proven? Providing such information would serve no purpose here. Would it make you happy to see the child's name here? The guilty sure are guilty here, aren't they? The way you are responding makes it obvious you have engaged in this behavior, so tell us: WHY?
What might your motivations be exactly for such gift giving? What exactly do you get out of it? Other than trying to corner those who ask questions about things certain parents should not be doing? Gosh, you must be making yourself dizzy trying to avoid the whistle blowers. "Was it cash or check?" Wouldn't you like to know.... |
Anonymous
| If you had proof you would tell her and not the administration? Yeah, right. |
Anonymous
You do realize that your continued prevarication only proves the implicit point that you're a drama queen, don't you? Your inability to answer the question about direct payment indicates that we are talking about a gift with a "so-called" value, after all. Thus, based on your demonstrably poor judgment, it's difficult to believe it could be anything other than a small trinket that most of us would consider a polite hand-me-down. It sounds like the underlying problem is that you're jealous of the other parent's wealth, more than anything. The fact that you perceive direct questions to be so personally threatening suggests that you realize the full truth would expose your hyperbole for what it really is: attention-seeking behavior. Your paranoia, furthermore, is probably why you find yourself seeking validation on the internet instead of in real life. In real life, throwing out your bizarre accusations at the same people to whom you've supposedly appealed for advice has probably earned you the reputation of being more than a little unbalanced. Deservedly. Really, nobody wants to see your child's name on the internet because nobody cares about her. (Aside from feelings of pity, of course.) And wouldn't we like to know more? Well yes, of course! But, not about the cash v. check question, as that's already been determined. Please do share more of your thought processes, however. As trainwrecks go, you're becoming quite entertaining. |