Sex before Marriage

Discussion of the SES, particularly in the UK.
User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:01 am

Anti-ses. Your response is very revealing. You are happy to make sweeping generalisations (which dont rate a great deal of analysis), and when someone picks you up on your lack of experience in a matter you are so fullsome and disparaging of, you hide behind the smug assertion that I am being rude and confrontational, the implication that you are above being confrontational and you find rudeness distasteful. Funny that. You are happy to be rude and confrontational in your posts and then when someone returns the favour you refuse to answer.

To group yourself with Bella, Katy and Misty is a delusional fatasy. I at no stage suggested that Misty or Katy were indoctrinated, and I singled you out for a reason. Bella, Katy and Misty all tend to ask questions at least, but you tend to tell other people how it is. Whether this is as a result of your education or your culture or any other situation in your life, it is rude and confrontational. If you have never met anyone that told you so before now, you have led a sheltered life.

I am unashamed to admit that I returned a rude and confrontational post as to my mind that is appropriate behaviour in response to your rudeness and confrontation.

The whole point of the majority of the posts on this BB is the subtle, overarching influence of the SES doctrine on St James education policy and practice. Whether you believe that it existed when you were there or not, if you think how long it has taken most posters to recognise it for what it was, it might be another 20 years before you know for sure.

Imo, you are already showing signs of the characteristic arrogance and incapacity to deal with your own and others' emotions that is a feature of the worst effects of following the teaching as espoused at the SES, and by extension at St James. You are of course entitled to disagree.

sallyj
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:54 pm

Sex before Marriage

Postby sallyj » Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:42 pm

Been reading this thread with interest. In my class at St. James, about 10 girls joined the Foundation group, the rest of us were treated as 2nd class citizens for the rest of our time at school. Of those who did join at least 4 were married within a year of leaving school, mostly to men in the SES youth group. All a bit creepy to say the least. More than that they mostly worked as teachers at St. James after getting married but obviously stopped after having children. Women obviously can't do both!!! What scares me is that many of these children are now also St. James pupils - can you imagine their broad prospective on life? Bit of the topic I know, but there you go. I know of a large number of SES arranged marriages, some more happy than others ane yes the ones that end in divorce are just never discussed. What about the teachers who had affairs? some were married at the time? remember them?

anti_ses
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:31 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Postby anti_ses » Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:39 am

OK, here are random remarks in random order...

Keir wrote:To Misty, Katy and any other young person....It seems that as people asking what others think you are remarkably opinionated listeners. If you know it all already, why bother asking anyone's opinion?

Don't worry, Keir. I don't feel singled out :-). It may surprise you to know that I actually agree with the gist of most of the advice given on this thread. Up to a certain age, one needs to combine advice from those more experienced with their own reasoning and their own experiences. However, after this stage, every person is free to make their own decisions and should not be pressurised to act against their beliefs, provided they mean no harm to others.

Keir wrote:Bella, Katy and Misty all tend to ask questions at least, but you tend to tell other people how it is.

I can honestly say that I am very confused by your assertion that I'm telling other people how to live their lives. Like most people, I have opinions. Stating my opinions does not constitute shoving ideas down people's throats. Regarding questions, I don't see you or many others asking questions. Just because my views do not agree with many others on this forum does not necessarily mean I must spend more time questioning than others.

Keir wrote:You are happy to make sweeping generalisations...

It seems generalisations only seem to be noticed when I make them. (It would be nice, however, if you could quote specifically the generalisations to which you refer.) One generalisation about me which I cannot forget, but was probably overlooked by everyone else, is "parent"'s reference to my "way of life" in another thread. Please do not assume you know what sort of person I am. This is a generalisation in itself. Keir, your post sounds more like a psychological analysis than a discussion of the issues in this thread.

Keir wrote:I am unashamed to admit that I returned a rude and confrontational post as to my mind that is appropriate behaviour in response to your rudeness and confrontation.

Glad to know you've assumed the role of judge and jury. If I feel I have been wronged I will at the very least attempt to continue the discussion in a civil manner. I'm not suggesting you don't also have this outlook, but slanging matches just aren't very productive.

sallyj wrote:I know of a large number of SES arranged marriages, some more happy than others ane yes the ones that end in divorce are just never discussed.

In my previous posts, I have never justified any injudicious matchings in SES arranged marriages. Unfortunately, I don't know enough details about them (although I do not distrust the postings on these boards, I need firmer evidence on such sensitive matters) to form an opinion. If marriages arranged by the SES are not successful, then it does not necessarily follow that arranged marriages in general are doomed to failure.

daska wrote:In which case it sounds like you might have a very good insight into some aspects of SES even if you were never a member.

That is true, daska. On the other hand, there are several aspects of the SES with which I completely disagree (I might get on to them when I'm given a chance). But I wish to keep my anonymity, so I'd rather not give a full explanation. My wish to remain anonymous has been criticized before. I don't really want to repeat my reasons.

daska wrote:Just because you believe something to be true doesn't make it so. No matter how reasonable or sensible it sounds.

I assume this is directed at me. I apologize if the way I write has given the impression I'm stating my views as truths. On many occasions I use phrases such as "In my opinion..." or "I think..." or "I believe..." to make this clear. I'm sorry if I was not clear enough. I do not, however, apologize for holding and stating my opinions.

daska
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:29 pm
Location: UK

Postby daska » Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:55 pm

Anti-Ses you might be being a bit oversensitive there - my comments about belief and knowlege weren't aimed specifically at you. And I don't mind at all that you don't wish to answer my specific question - you're not the only one here who restricts the information they post to reduce the possibility of their anonymity being breached, I'm very careful with most of my posts as well.

Insight doesn't imply agreement with, only the possibility of greater understanding or recognition of the motivation, habits, belief structure etc.

User avatar
Keir
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:04 am
Location: London

Postby Keir » Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:18 am

Anti-ses, who do you think should be judge and jury of my opinions? You?

When I talk about what I think is appropriate action I dont claim to speak for everyone else, or make a judgement about what is appropriate for them. Maybe this is a difficult position for you to understand when you are used to being told that there is one truth, maybe you even believe it yourself.

To try and explain to you how that could be would take too long even if you had a disposition to listen, which I see no evidence of.

From where I am sitting it looks like you believe the SES doctrine, although you say that you disagree with some aspects of it which you would discuss if only people would listen. So how do you make people listen? I know how they reckoned it at St J/SES.

Thing is, on the net no one can see you fall still, so the room just keeps moving on without you :o)


Return to “General discussion of SES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests