EXPERIENCES AT ST. VEDAST (now St. James) AND THE S.E.S
It is absolutely sickening! ALL of it! St Vedast for boys was not a nice school at all, a place where you do not feel at home, but a place where you have to struggle to survive every miute of the day from the wroth of the teachers.
However as Tom pointed out, St James is different! You can the freedom the boys have now. Someone from the senior boys school might say too free?
Can you belive it? Just over 25 years and one could say it's the extreme opposite to what it had been before!?!
Balance is good.
A Shame.
However as Tom pointed out, St James is different! You can the freedom the boys have now. Someone from the senior boys school might say too free?
Can you belive it? Just over 25 years and one could say it's the extreme opposite to what it had been before!?!
Balance is good.
A Shame.
the annoyed wrote:
I am heartened by your acknowledgement that St Vedast "was not a nice school at all". I'd love to know if any current St James pupils have used their great freedom to ask Debenham, Hipshon or any of the other St James teachers who used to abuse pupils at St Vedast why they stopped abusing pupils and whether they feel any remorse for having abused them.
It is absolutely sickening! ALL of it! St Vedast for boys was not a nice school at all, a place where you do not feel at home, but a place where you have to struggle to survive every miute of the day from the wroth of the teachers.
However as Tom pointed out, St James is different! You can the freedom the boys have now. Someone from the senior boys school might say too free?
I am heartened by your acknowledgement that St Vedast "was not a nice school at all". I'd love to know if any current St James pupils have used their great freedom to ask Debenham, Hipshon or any of the other St James teachers who used to abuse pupils at St Vedast why they stopped abusing pupils and whether they feel any remorse for having abused them.
st james
I have been reading this forum with some interest for some days now.I am considering a detailed reply but feel I need to respond to some of the points raised so far.
As a former St James pupil in the late 1970's I feel I am far better qualified, not to forget experienced, to speak on these issues than some, especially those who claim to be current students.
The prevalent culture at St Vedast is well documented here but the St James school was little better, I speak as one who knows. I have to point out that many St Vedast staff also worked at St James, the nature of their behaviour is little different.
The statements from current pupils claiming the SES now runs a very pleasent school do not change the past, and definitely don't vindicate the individuals concerned.
I also note that these current pupils refuse to be named, if these people are accurately reflectling the current situation in such a positive way then why are they using annomity, surely the SES would be happy their pupils are showing the school in such a good light?
I don't really feel that this forum is a suitable place to discuss womens rights issues, this is more about what occurred at the schools involved. The Dickensian attitude of the SES towards women,not to mention pre-marital sex, should be in a seperate forum. I will submit a more full posting in the near future.
As a former St James pupil in the late 1970's I feel I am far better qualified, not to forget experienced, to speak on these issues than some, especially those who claim to be current students.
The prevalent culture at St Vedast is well documented here but the St James school was little better, I speak as one who knows. I have to point out that many St Vedast staff also worked at St James, the nature of their behaviour is little different.
The statements from current pupils claiming the SES now runs a very pleasent school do not change the past, and definitely don't vindicate the individuals concerned.
I also note that these current pupils refuse to be named, if these people are accurately reflectling the current situation in such a positive way then why are they using annomity, surely the SES would be happy their pupils are showing the school in such a good light?
I don't really feel that this forum is a suitable place to discuss womens rights issues, this is more about what occurred at the schools involved. The Dickensian attitude of the SES towards women,not to mention pre-marital sex, should be in a seperate forum. I will submit a more full posting in the near future.
Re: st james
bluelight wrote:I also note that these current pupils refuse to be named, if these people are accurately reflectling the current situation in such a positive way then why are they using annomity, surely the SES would be happy their pupils are showing the school in such a good light?
I wouldn't post anything about the school on this forum if the title on the thread did not mention St James.
Just because St james is much different than it used to be when it was St Vedast, ofcourse does not in anyway rubb away what once happened in the past.
I wish to remain annonymous because I do not desire any attention, specially on this subject as it is a very sensitive topic to all my class mates.
Further to my earlier post perhaps the SES or any "masters" from St James/Vedast would like to reply to the allegations made in this particular forum. It is of great interest to me that no formal explanation, reply or even barefaced denial has been made by such "enlightened" individuals. I, therefore, would like to invite any "masters" to actually give their account of these events in these pages, I am sure that that "the absolute" would approve of "the truth" becoming manifest.
The individuals concerned, who could resolve this situation, know who they are, as do we.
The individuals concerned, who could resolve this situation, know who they are, as do we.
Re: st james
anon wrote:I wish to remain annonymous because I do not desire any attention, specially on this subject as it is a very sensitive topic to all my class mates.
WHY is it so sensitive a topic to your class mates?
No, only a few have read the ex-pupils report. Some of the few say it's totally unbelivable, and rest of the few say it used to be like that and is not anymore. That is as far as their views go on this subject of ex-pupils, I'm afraid. It is quite understandable that the past does not really affect the pupils presently is the school, as it might still do to to the ex-pupils.
It is sensitive, because people have very strong views on it. However it seems that we are quite mature enough, not to let those minor differences get in the way of our freindship. We all have our views, and they are veiws which are personal, we have a general feel of who likes the views of the SES and who is not too keen on them, in the end no one feels the need to discuss this topic any further. It really is not a HUGE deal to us.
It is sensitive, because people have very strong views on it. However it seems that we are quite mature enough, not to let those minor differences get in the way of our freindship. We all have our views, and they are veiws which are personal, we have a general feel of who likes the views of the SES and who is not too keen on them, in the end no one feels the need to discuss this topic any further. It really is not a HUGE deal to us.
Guest wrote:
What are you saying, Guest? Do you mean that any current teachers at St James who used to brutalise students at St Vedast have changed their ways and no longer brutalise students? Or do you mean that St James does not employ any of the teachers who used to brutalise students at St Vedast?
Those people who 'used to brutalise the school' are not anymore.
[.....]
*brutalise the students
What are you saying, Guest? Do you mean that any current teachers at St James who used to brutalise students at St Vedast have changed their ways and no longer brutalise students? Or do you mean that St James does not employ any of the teachers who used to brutalise students at St Vedast?
Return to “St James and St Vedast”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests