Nielsen has this week thrown a spanner into the BludgerTrack works, producing a dramatic shift on the basis of a result that’s yet to be corroborated by anybody else. The big mover is of course the Greens, who have shot up five points to the giddy heights of 15.4%, a result I wouldn’t attach much credit to until it’s backed by more than one data point. Only a small share of the gain comes at the expense of Labor, who have accordingly made a strong gain on two-party preferred and are in majority government territory on the seat projection. A further point of interest with respect to the Nielsen poll is that the two-party preferred response on respondent-allocated preferences, which is not published by Fairfax, is at 54.5-45.5 considerably stronger for Labor than the headline result from previous election preferences. This may reflect a swelling in Greens support from the ranks of disaffected Labor identifiers, and a consequent increase in the Greens preference flow to Labor in comparison with the 2013 election result – which may in turn suggest the headline two-party result from the poll flattered the Coalition a little.
The other aspect of the latest BludgerTrack result which may raise an eyebrow is the strength of the Labor swing in Queensland, which also blew out excessively in January before moderating considerably thereafter. The Queensland breakdown from this week’s Nielsen played its part, showing Labor ahead 53-47 for a swing of around 10%. However, in this case the Nielsen is not out on a limb, providing the model with one of five Queensland data points from the past four weeks which all show Labor in the lead, with two-party results ranging from 51.1% to 56.5% (keeping in mind that sample sizes are in some cases below 200). The scattered state results provided by Morgan are not included in the model, but its poll release last week reported that Labor held a lead in Queensland of 51-49.
Nielsen also provides new data points for leadership ratings, and in keeping with the general weakness of the poll for the Coalition, their addition to the model puts Bill Shorten’s net approval rating back in front of Tony Abbott’s, and returns the narrowing trajectory to the preferred prime minister trendlines.
Have a good day all. Let us hope Hockey does some real reform. For the record I do not have a mortgage, negative geared or otherwise. I invest in two industry super funds, both balanced.
zoomster
[I don’t lie to kids if I can possibly help it. But I certainly wouldn’t have any trouble justifying why I was doing it if I did.]
And therein lies the paradox.
We demand honesty from kids when we’re not prepared to do it ourselves, but as adults we can justify dishonesty when it suits.
You’re using the same reason kids use: I get into trouble if I tell the truth therefore I’ll lie about it.
When does it ever end?
The US Public doesn’t care about events in Eastern Europe
___________________________
In The US Conservative Buchanan argues,that apart from a small fringe of neo-cons warlovers,the great US public and the media won’t have a bar of any conflict in Eastern Europe and deeply resent any effort to make it seem that what happens there is improtant to them
Them American people are waking up it seems to the warmongers amongst their leadrership
The Democrats,notably Clinton may find a new group among the Repubs.led by Sen.Rand Paul,which will take a very”isolationist” policy to the electors,a new way of thinking for the Repubs,who just might find wide support instead for a policy that departs the old military way of looking at every proble…..Clintion and her husband being among the worst of the ” Bomb everyone” school of though,,,,see Kosova et al
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/americans-dont-see-ukraine-as-their-cause/
I can only speak for myself.
My investments have made me financially independent when I retire.
I have provided plenty of employment in the maintenance and the renovation of the properties.
Negative gearing is not a rort, it’s legal, approved by the ATO.
I was one on many who supported Labor’s changes to the FBT rules to stop rorting. Liberals supported the rort. What makes you think the Liberals will stop negative gearing?
When the main group involved are in fact the wealthy Liberal supporters.
I do think it’s important to have ethical standards – but it’s also important to understand that human beings are fallible and that means they can’t live up to the standards they set themselves.
As an ex-Christian, the bits of the Bible I still cherish are Jesus’ warnings about judging others – because we’re all prone to get worked up about other people’s imperfections whilst ignoring our own.
We should all do the best we can to be the best we can be — but we should recognise that that’s a very big ask and not be too harsh with ourselves or others when that doesn’t happen.
GENY/X – and yes they do….whine and whinge about how its all the fault of baby boomers that they cannot have their McMansion with all the fruit.
kezza
[We demand honesty from kids when we’re not prepared to do it ourselves, but as adults we can justify dishonesty when it suits.
You’re using the same reason kids use: I get into trouble if I tell the truth therefore I’ll lie about it.]
Um, no, I’ve been arguing exactly the opposite – that because adults (including myself) lie to get out of trouble, then we shouldn’t be shocked when kids (with far less power to control their situation than adults) also lie to get out of trouble.
You seem to be attributing fran’s argument – that it is unforgiveable for a child to lie – to me, when I’m arguing the opposite.
Kezza #1333
“But how is that essential to good mental health?
It’s a contradiction in terms.”
The prefrontal cortex of the brain amongst a number of roles moderates social behaviour. It promotes appropriate inhibition, such that for example many "private" aspects of life are performed privately.
Persons who for one reason or another, (usually damage) have a malfunctioning prefrontal cortex often become disinhibited. As a result they may perform the range of private activities publicly and are unable to practice social mores ….. they are seriously damaged goods, often a danger to themselves and others. They expose their private selves and emotions in all areas of conduct and incur social criticism and various sanctions.
Such people put the importance of the ways in which social order is maintained into clear focus.
One aspect relates to what we say (write) to others, and when and how we say it. So a healthy, mature individual will have numerous social skills to regulate what they say.
Of course there is always "fuck off ….. it's none of your business" when others encroach on matters of privacy, but as a rule, except in severe circumstances the use of such a strategy will have other detrimental social consequences, and will not be conducive to well being and happiness in the long term. Anyone who uses that strategy as a matter of course will be exhibiting maladjustment, pathology.
And similarly physical aggression instead of negotiation, if the dominant social skill in times of disagreement will also not be conducive to well being and happiness in the long term. Anyone who uses that strategy as a matter of course will also be thereby exhibiting maladjustment.
The above examples underscore that effective, adjusted, mentally healthy persons will have numerous social skills to handle social pressures when they arise.
And one of these skills universally practised is what we call "lying".
As to the role of lying as young people individuate, it would be contra to normal development for an adolescent to provide all details of their normal risk taking behaviours to a nosey parent, just as it would indicate some mental issues for a parent who would ask / demand all details.
Adjusted adolescents wisely lie to their parents in such (but not all) circumstances.
Their was no fine line between truth and lying in my family.
It didn’t matter if you told the truth, or told a lie. You still got the same punishment. If ever there was a way to encourage lying, then that was it.
For instance, one day someone in the family ate a strawberry from the fridge. No one knew the significance of the strawberry.
Suddenly we were all summonsed to the kitchen. There were eight of us, although only six of us were lined up. I was the sixth and funnily enough six years old.
We were all asked if we’d taken the strawberry.
We all denied it. One by one. And one by one down the line we got hit with a strap (dad’s belt). It seemed to me that as each one denied having the strawberry my parents became angrier, so much so that I thought, at six years of age, I copped an angrier belt than I otherwise would have, had I been first in line.
Still, because no one owned up, there was a further punishment in store, for which I was grateful to be at the end of the line.
Mum and Dad mixed a few tablespoons of salt in some water. They made the first one drink it. He vomited on the floor. They examined the entrails. And he was pronounced innocent.
The next was made to drink the same. He vomited too. And was pronounced guilty, even though he swore he’d eaten a tomato just prior to being given the salt cure.
The rest of us were dismissed, and we didn’t see the beating but we heard it.
It didn’t make us tell the truth. It made us more convincing in our lying. And we never ever ate something that could be proved by vomiting.
Thus was the Catholic way of truth serum, in our family. And my uncle was a Jesuit.
But even he didn’t like the truth so much. Not in our family, any way.
Just musing on the Barry O’Farrell thing – but off on a tangent….
We seem to be back to the Golden Age thing – that there was an era in politics when these things didn’t happen, when politicians were honest and upright and that something has gone badly wrong in recent times.
Of course, this is bull.
In the early ’80s, we bought a run down house in a wilderness which had been laid out as a suburb a hundred years before (our house was so isolated at the time that I once went out to gather wood at night and got lost – I couldn’t see a single house light in any direction).
Yet, within about 200 metres from our place, there was a railway station, with a regular train service.
This intrigued me. Why would a railway end up in the middle of nowhere?
Then I read “The Land Boomers’ – a history of early Victoria.
In those days, of course, politicians weren’t paid. So you couldn’t even afford to go into politics unless you had monetary backing. You were either already rich, or going into politics with the certainty of becoming so.
And one of the ways politicians took advantage of their position was to buy up land cheaply and then ensure that the railways went there.
Absolutely blatant self interest, and the reason why, over one hundred and fifty years later, Victoria’s rail system is a mess.
If you’d told one of these eminently respectable gentlemen that they were corrupt, they would have regarded you as mad.
Huh! Here’s a post which puts it all better than I can (re politicians and corruption) —
http://left-flank.org/2014/04/19/barrys-fall-anti-politics-authority-corruption/#sthash.qJrmfJ8V.KoZgNjhO.dpbs
zoomster
[Um, no, I’ve been arguing exactly the opposite – that because adults (including myself) lie to get out of trouble, then we shouldn’t be shocked when kids (with far less power to control their situation than adults) also lie to get out of trouble.]
Actually, sorry, you weren’t arguing that at all. Or if you were you didn’t make any effort to clarify it. You were arguing that you, as an adult, could justify lying to get out of trouble.
Fran didn’t argue that it is unforgivable for kids to lie (there’s your rhetoric again, others would say strawman) nor that she couldn’t understand why kids lie to get out of trouble, much less being shocked by it, she was saying how she took steps to find out the truth of a situation and then to remedy what happens when kids lie.
There’s a difference.
deblonay
150,000 troops to the Ukraine ? Was it General Turgidson or General Ripper’s suggestion ?
kezza2
Dad had a fave family strawberry story about when he and his four brothers got sprung. . They figured out a cunning plant to raid the strawberry patch when grand dad wasn’t looking. Gumboots on and following exactly in the boot marks left by grand dad.
The cunning plan fell apart because my fathers boots we quite a bit smaller. They all got busted.
Zomster
[as for you never lying, that’s nonsense. I remember perfectly well you stating something which was untrue, providing you with the evidence that proved it was untrue, and you refusing to accept the evidence because you didn’t want to admit that you might have, er, lied.]
That’s a serious charge, for which I will seek a citation, or an apology. Over to you.
Oh shit, I left the arse end off the strawberry story.
Years later, and I mean many many moons later, 50 years in fact – at the wake after mum’s funeral in 2002 – my younger brother, who was four at the time of the incident, confessed to us that he’d pinched the strawberry from the fridge.
He’d felt guilty all those years. And my second oldest brother had carried the resentment for an ill-founded beating all those years.
When I was 12, I copped a similar beating from my father. I had to go to school the next day and explained away the belt marks on my legs – the eyelet and buckle marks – as having been trapped in the swing.
That wonderful teacher I told you about earlier rang my father and demanded to see him. She tore strips off him for his use of corporal punishment on his kids. And said she’d report him if he ever touched me, or any of us, again.
[Promptly after O’Farrell’s fall, Greens MLC John Kaye put out his party’s suggestion: “All meetings between businesses seeking a favourable government decision and ministers, parliamentary secretaries, senior bureaucrats or ministerial staffers must be minuted and made publicly available,“ he said.]
A good start, but we can do better than that:
Unedited, high quality audio-visual recording from the moment the
lobbyistrent-seekerspivthieving scumbaghumble supplicant steps into the pollie’s office to the moment they leave, with all business conducted in the official office, on the formal record (including all paperwork), for all to see any time they wish, absolutely no meetings or discussions conducted anywhere else, and not a single ‘gift’ of any kind exchanged, ever.There will be a few exceptions where limited redaction is justified, like matters involving personal information, particularly when related to individual victims of crime, especially children, for example.
As to that most bogus of excuses for avoiding proper scrutiny, the old ‘commercial-in-confidence’ scam… Feck that. Straight corruption, IMHO. If you are pitching for publicly funded contracts, then it is all done in the open, (again with a few exceptions, like some military and intelligence goods and services, etc).
But otherwise, do it all on the public record, or piss off.
[1248
confessions
Also because people identify the govt as being more the leader now than in the past.]
You sure about that? If anything I would have thought that people pay less deference to formal authority now than they ever did.
As to the substantive point Zoomster, it is true that teachers lie. I’ve met them. I have a very low opinion of those who do.
As to children, although it is disappointing, children are by definition, learning how to be adults, including the business of negotiating boundaries with each other and adults. When there’s an appropriate moment to do so, I take the students through the issues of personal ethics and why speaking and acting “in good faith” is foundational to being a successful adult, and how disrespectful lying is to others.
Something for all in this tweet from Joel Fitzgibbon
[
@fitzhunter: Adam Bandt refuses to retract “coal is the new asbestos” comment. C Milne must now do it for him & apologise #auspol]
[poroti
Posted Saturday, April 19, 2014 at 3:29 pm | PERMALINK
kezza2
Dad had a fave family strawberry story about when he and his four brothers got sprung. . They figured out a cunning plant to raid the strawberry patch when grand dad wasn’t looking. Gumboots on and following exactly in the boot marks left by grand dad.
The cunning plan fell apart because my fathers boots we quite a bit smaller. They all got busted.]
That’s fantastic. Just goes to show the inventiveness, or the initiative some would say, of kids.
Kids, for all our reasoning of having every base covered, never ever think of the forensic ability of adults, especially when they’d done the self-same thing, and been caught out, as kids.
As mum often said as we looked bewildered when caught out: I didn’t come down in the last shower!
On the issue of people claiming to never lie usually raises a red flag as for some reason i have noticed that people who claim to never lie or claim to be nice or claim to hate backstabbers tend to be the first person to do so.
I find the best people never tell you what they are but rather show it by their actions.
The word lie is a bit like corruption a bit overused
psyclaw @ 1358
Now that you think you’ve described me as a mal-functioning person, aw bugger off, how about you answer the questions I posed.
That you think:
1) lying is essential to mental well-being; and
2) there are secret questions that everyone will lie about
Thanks for the defence Kezza
You’re quite right. In the case of this boy, he was isolated when I first encountered him. I made his attribute of honesty a virtue, and celebrated it. And although the mischievous were occasionally miffed the others who were doing the right thing were glad that they couldn’t be falsely accused, and learned a practical lesson about honesty. They thought he was brave and clever when really he was indifferent to them and clever.
He was indifferent to me as well — that was his condition — but the mischievous students knew that I had a special interest in him and were very careful to avoid bullying him because they knew he would speak up and teachers would believe him.
One of the things good teachers do is celebrate the gifts children have, whether these are academic, sporting or social. This boy had a prodigious left-brain intelligence and yet treated everyone with respect — as if they were his intellectual and social equals. That impressed most of them, including those who found him seriously eccentric.
[mexicanbeemer
Posted Saturday, April 19, 2014 at 3:45 pm | PERMALINK
On the issue of people claiming to never lie usually raises a red flag as for some reason i have noticed that people who claim to never lie or claim to be nice or claim to hate backstabbers tend to be the first person to do so.]
Yes, I agree, for myself.
I claimed never to have lied to my kids. I didn’t say about anyone else. In fact, I have claimed to be a liar extraordinaire. Who to trust, in my case?
And I totally agree that people who accuse other people of stuff, generally are guilty of same.
It’s hilarious, isn’t it.
Kezza2
Very much so, the joys of the human condition.
Poroti re General Turdgidson and Dr Stranglove
____________________________
I get your point but they are still about in Washington and dying(“??)to get their fingers on that Nucleur Button
Lovely question on your part I got the message
\Actually several US commenators have made the same point,,,but the talk by Buchanan of US bluster which being unadle to go beyond that …is very different from the old Colw War days
An article below looks at the fury of the Hawkes in the Repub Party at Sen Rand Paul and his call for a withdrawal from the US self-apponted role as world policeman ,,,yet there is evidence that he has much support on the street,where ordinary Americans are sick of wars ,especially in the M East
Militarists like McCain,the miltary establishment,the military-industrial complex,the zionists,all who want to continue warmongering polices are against him…but as Rand Paul said…”nobody supports me but the American People”
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/peter-king-and-the-hawks-hysterical-attacks/
Fran
You’re very welcome.
As I said, you remind me of the only teacher I ever had who respected us, and individually who thought I was any good at anything, at all.
She gave me hope. Even if it was for two years only, when I was 11 and 12 years of age. I wish she’d been there when I was 13.
I could have done with a lot more like her, like you, in my life.
But at least she showed me there was a way to get round the hypocrisy in the world. Even though it took me another 20+ years to discover what she was trying to teach me.
Poroti …..
John Pilger writes today in Counterpunch of what he calls “The Strangelove effect”
In simple terms he says the warmongering Neo-cons would be prepared to risk a nucleur war with Russia and China to preserve US hegemony,and will even pretend that such a nucleur war would be “limited” in effect
a terrible thought
Oddly Craig Paul Roberts,,also Reagan’
‘s Tres and a solid Republican now says that the USA menaces the human race an amzing statemen
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/18/the-strangelove-effect/t………. from one ,who was also Editor of the Wall Street Journal
_______________________
Kezza2
I was in a state of shock when I read you comment about the beating you father gave his children and then you were supposed to lie to your teacher. I was one of those fortunate children who was brought up strictly but fairly, my dad did not believe a man should hit a girl as “he did not know his own strength ” so any corporate punishment was left to my mother for both my sister and myself and boy could she use the strap or anything else she could find in a hurry, think I would rather have dad as he was so conscience of his self imposed edict he should not hit a girl. In hindsight was not fair to my mother as I loved her dearly but adored my dad . BTW We did not have much but had an almost idyllic childhood brought on a farm .
POROTI’
‘PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS AND HIS STATEMENT THAT THE USA MENACES ALL HUMANITY WITH IT;S INTERVENTIONIST MILITARY POLICIES AND THE THREAT OF NUCLEUR WAR
________
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/04/13/washington-humanitys-worst-enemy-paul-craig-roberts/
deblonay
The weird thing is General Ripper may be responsible for the Fluoride nutters. Lordy an article in The Onion caused book burnings of Harry Potter.
Look how similar Ripper’s tone is compared to the anti fluoridation nuts.
[General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk… ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children’s ice cream.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: (very nervous) Lord, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: You know when fluoridation first began?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I… no, no. I don’t, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works……………..
General Jack D. Ripper: Fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face. ]
Kezza #1362
“Fran didn’t argue that it is unforgivable for kids to lie (there’s your rhetoric again, others would say strawman) nor that she couldn’t understand why kids lie to get out of trouble, much less being shocked by it, she was saying how she took steps to find out the truth of a situation and then to remedy what happens when kids lie.”
Well here is a cut and paste of what Fran said, and it was this that led to my comments about lying.
“For me, lying is a very grave offence — far worse than many other human failings. When someone appears to be lying to me, it’s hard for me to give weight to other virtues they may have.”
It seems to me that what you say Fran said, is far removed from her actual sentiments expressed. Her’s is a view about lying that goes very close to actually saying that which you said (in your first few words quoted) that Fran is not saying ie that “lying is unforgivable”.
Her last 13 words especially seem to me to indicate a harsh perspective about lying. It suggests a view “lie to me mate and it’s all over ….. you’re now crap in my book!”
As I wrote earlier, this strong attitude belies the usefulness and widespread occurrence of lying as a social tool.
Once again, I distinguish pathological lying and exploitative lying from lying-as-a-social-tool.
Kezza2
Like mari i am a little shocked as to the extent of abuse experienced by you and your siblings. So sorry that you had to deal with that. Parents should be protecting their children from harm.
mari
I wasn’t expected to lie to the teacher. I was expected to ‘save face’ for the family.
There was absolutely no way I was going to dob on my parents’ treatment of us. No way.
When the teacher called me out, ostensibly to ask a maths question (was that a deceit on her behalf?) she asked me what had happened. And I refused to answer. I lied to the other kids, but not to her.
I told her I couldn’t tell her what happened.
She asked if I would get into trouble again if I told her. And I whispered: Yes.
I was in terrible fear when I saw my father at the schoolroom door, later that day, and saw the teacher wagging her finger at him.
After he went, she told me not to be afraid any longer. I was petrified. But dad no longer spoke to me at home. For a year or more.
She wasn’t a lay teacher. She was a nun. I think in the same brand as Mary MacKillop. Not afraid of men and their hypocrisy.
Just in case there’s a false impression developing here, I value honesty very very highly. It’s just that I recognise that humans are fallible, and that there are scales of dishonesty.
psyclaw
[Once again, I distinguish pathological lying and exploitative lying from lying-as-a-social-tool.]
Nice justification for your stance, but once again, you have avoided the questions.
That you think:
1) lying is essential to mental well-being; and
2) there are secret questions that everyone will lie about
So tell us about lying being essential to mental well being, and the secret questions that you say everyone will lie about.
It’s not too hard, is it.
Psyclaw
[As to Fran “never ever lying” she must have had an extremely open relationship with her parents as an adolescent, being prepared to acknowledge all her social “experiments” to them as she reached out into the adult world.]
Let’s be clear. I don’t claim never to have lied. As a child, I was as inclined and disinclined to lie as anyone else. Lying to my parents was something I trembled at doing, because that was a big rule in my family. I often passed on doing things precisely so as to avoid having to lie about it later. But outside the family, I often lied — to teachers, other adults other children. I did learn though that the benefits of lying were much less impressive than I’d imagined when I’d felt inclined to do so.
By the time I was 16 though, I’d worked out the rule that “less is more”. The less you tell about yourself, the less likely that you will feel a need to make stuff up. I became good at declining comment and deflecting questions from my parents. I recall saying to my mother at about this time that she had better accept that I was no longer a child and that my personal space needed to be respected.
My attitude to lying sharpened when I became an activist. It struck me that my public commentary was not merely about my needs and feelings, but about my role in shaping a better world — one built on equality and justice — and therefore one where I was obliged to assist others in being their better selves in the hope that they would reciprocate. Yet how could I be trusted if I weren’t honest? Who would stare back at me in the mirror each morning if I had misrepresented my ideas or conduct? My politics from 1977 onwards moved sharply left and my tolerance for deceit in others entirely vanished. Deceit, it seemed to me, had a political character — and was a weapon of the ruling class. In a society where lies were tolerated, the principal beneficiaries were likely to be the rich.
[Similarly as an adult she apparently has never been put into a position where someone inappropriately enquired into her private life, or into a position where it was in her own self protective interests to lie.]
It is possible both to decline to answer, and to avoid situations where one is likely to fell under pressure to lie. Lying is corrosive of identity and ethics. Refusal to lie also tends to foreclose acts that a willing liar might rationalise away.
[I’m sure I can pose a few questions to her whereby she will certainly lie in response, or at least not give a full honest answer.]
You probably can pose questions that I will decline to answer. That’s not lying however.
[Used appropriately as social beings, lying is an important social skill, and essential to good mental health.]
I disagree. It’s certainly a skill, and can be useful, but one’s successes built on lies are like ashes in one’s mouth. Each lie makes the journey to insight into oneself harder, isolates one from one’s friends and peers and invites others you trust to deceive you. The tears may not arrive immediately, but arrive they will.
There are as I said above, settings where lying is compelled, where irremediable harm to compelling interests would attend truth-telling. Responsibility for this falls upon those whose failures caused the threat. Outside of such considerations, we who favour human wellbeing are all bound, IMO, to work for authentic community — by definition a setting where none need feel inclined to lie.
and kezza’s response to psyclaw is a CLASSIC strawman…
Kezza 2 1385
I don’t care whether is is to “save face” for the family or what, like Victoria just said I am in a state of shock, that a father can treat his kids like that. My OH and I shared any punishment of our kids(at my insistence) but rarely resorted hitting, but occasionally a smack. The worst punishment the kids reckoned was when they were fighting and I made them hug each other and say sorry to each other Absolutely hated that 😀
BTW THey did the same thing with their kids!
psychlaw
[Once again, I distinguish pathological lying and exploitative lying from lying-as-a-social-tool.]
Isn’t lying-as-a-social-tool what we call white lies? Not really “lying”.
When you have to answer questions like
“Does my bum look big in this?”
“Do I look good in purple?”
“I hope you liked the secondhand jumper I gave you for Christmas.”
kezza, I believe psyclaw professionally deals with the aftermath of abuse. Which – while bringing that up may be some kind of fallacious appeal to authority (by me) – may help with understanding :).
[zoomster
Posted Saturday, April 19, 2014 at 4:35 pm | PERMALINK
Just in case there’s a false impression developing here, I value honesty very very highly. It’s just that I recognise that humans are fallible, and that there are scales of dishonesty.]
I am not accusing you of dishonesty. I wouldn’t be a teacher for quids because it’s too fucking hard to maintain consistency.
I just think in Fran’s case, she has managed that. What the rest of us can’t do. But I’m not saying she’s perfect, either.
As for scales of dishonesty, that’s the problem, isn’t it. That scales are taken for reality, instead of accepting that honesty is very difficult.
I got fired from a job for being too honest; for sticking up for underlings who were being treated woefully. I went to court about it. For unfair dismissal. Because I prepared my own case, I was accused by the tribunal of having a lawyer assisting me, even though I had not. That I was too smart to have brokered my own defence. I lost the case on a technicality, one that I had pointed out to the court – in my favour – yet was turned round to rout me.
I’m sick to death of honesty, quite honestly.
Annie Lennox asks a relevant question.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhpu2N4rQZM
vic
Don’t cry for me, and the way we were treated. We weren’t unique. That was the Catholic way in our neck of the woods, back then.
All of us. There were only some very few families that didn’t dish out the same punishments. Perversely we felt sorry for them, that their parents didn’t care enough to belt the living daylights out of them.
The main difference in treatment was size of family. Those that had few kids were treated well. Those who had large families, were treated with the rod.
Our parents didn’t tell us what financial or other woes they had. When it all got too much, and there were too many mouths to feed and clothe (because of their own actions) they had to take it out on someone, and that was us.
It didn’t make us very good citizens.
It may be useful to distinguish (from the norm) situations which are adversarial, i.e. where others may (potentially) work against you.
Kezza
[I got fired from a job for being too honest; for sticking up for underlings who were being treated woefully. ]
That’s terrible of course but the reason for doing right is that it is right. If you happen to get a tangible personal benefit from it or avoid a personal loss, that is great, but what none can take away from you for doing right is proof to yourself of your value system and its integrity under challenge.
That is worth having, IMO.
BTW
In case people think I am remembering through “rose coloured glasses” my childhood. My mum caught me lying when I was about 7 and put a bit of curry on my tongue, to this day can’t eat curry but suddenly became very honest or a better liar, take your choice 😀
Children have to learn about lying, in all its forms and degrees. That it happens and why, and how and when to both deal with it in others and do it themselves.
A core skill in negotiating your way through our sometimes deceitful and dangerous human world.
mari, if you have trouble eating curry then you need to eat more to acclimatise yourself ;).