Give it a break...

Discussion of the children's schools in the UK.
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Give it a break...

Postby AntonR » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:17 am

Post deleted
Last edited by AntonR on Wed May 17, 2006 8:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

ross nolan
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:10 am
Location: Melbourne Australia

agree -- next step?

Postby ross nolan » Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:24 am

Hear,Hear ! Anton -- I have lost all idea of what the verbal exchanges on the St James pupil's thread(s) are trying to acheive or what relevance they can have to either reform or 'reconciliation' -- surely most of this is idle gossip and can be PM'd to whoever thinks it important and spare the rest.

I am more interested in the entire school (as in SES/SOP) and it's ongoing psycho damage which has not been subjected to any enquiry or asking what it is trying to acheive.

In totality the junior schools were only meant to be 'breeding grounds' for the next generation of the 'master race' or whatever description the SES/SOP gives it's cadres of "realized men" or 'enlightened beings ' -- it seems the initial experiment failed somewhat and might be being revised to avoid a bit of bad PR but overall the thing marches on ... to where?

Probably only a small fraction of the inductees to the day schools were ever expected to 'qualify' for continuation in the mainstream of the cult's primary activity -- the 'drop outs' seem to have suffered quite a few unfortunate side effects but that must be accepted as the neccesary cost of continuing 'the work'......... which is ?

There does not seem to be any repudiation of the adult school 'curriculum' or teaching methods and it seems to me to be undeniably deceptive,secretive, callous and heading towards or at least capable of some sort of really ugly cult type 'finale' . There is little to no analysis of the school in toto and the day to day detail of life in the English(day)
schools will not lead to any such understanding ( with the exception that techniques of indoctrination can be discerned at work in their somewhat garbled logic and delivery )

The SES IS a matter of public concern if only because they advertise extensively in mainstream printed media and railway billboards obviously seeking new members and expansion -- most other cults have to be sought out or else you see what you are going to get (like joining the Hare Krishnas, 'if you like that sort of thing....') or like the Jehovah's Witnesses they bombard you with lots of their printed material that purports to tell you about their 'product' eg the "Plain Truth' , "Watchtower' etc .

The SES is different in that it keeps its cards concealed and requires you to play the game to find out what you are involved in (even then you do not really know)

As the most experienced poster to this forum can you give a brief overview possibly and then maybe some thoughts on how this thing should be dealt with ? Should it be stopped in fact ?

Some level headed and informed discussion would be appreciated.


Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:31 pm

Re: agree -- next step?

Postby nilsabm » Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:22 pm

ross nolan wrote:I have lost all idea of what the verbal exchanges on the St James pupil's thread(s) are trying to acheive or what relevance they can have to either reform or 'reconciliation'... Some level headed and informed discussion would be appreciated.

I agree Ross.
I opened a thread to discuss how old and new pupils might be reconciled and it has, to date, been completely ignored by them.
I am coming to the conclusion that reconciliation is not on their agenda at all, despite the occasional platitudes.

quote error fixed. mind the quote tags please -- mike

User avatar
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:23 am

Postby Stanton » Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:55 pm

Please see Achilles on thread Experiences at St James.

Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: LONDON

Postby Jerome » Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:12 pm

AntonR, I disagree. Do not be so quick to dis-regard what current pupils have to say, teenagers can make just as valid comments as older people. I think you mis-read what i said, I was actually being sympathetic. No, my mother is not in the SES, and actually she's against it but no-worries. What I was saying is that I understand why people are angry and upset and wish for more action. Now, If thats not welcome on this forum then what is? Also you claim I am in no position to speak of whether we are in-docrinated or not. Well, look up in the dictionary before you comment. Yes, we are subject to a watered down half heartes doctrine of a sort, yet as we are saying it is up to the student whether we take this up. Now, if we were brain-washed into believing the teachings, then we would be in-doctrinated, but as you have heard the current pupils are in no way forced.

Peace out
Jerome Mowat

The O
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:38 am
Location: St James Senior Boys School

Postby The O » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:48 pm

Ok, where do I start, I honestly have no idea. 1st off, I would like to make the point that we have work to do for school, we do not have all day to sit here and debate with you all, even to we might want to. :Fade-color

This isn't just about truth. This is about revenge


2. The SES does not actively influence the school in any way despite many of the staff being members, they are all intelligent people and can think for themselves, they are not brainwashed.

3. I see the leafleting as wrong, did they have a right to do that? I think not. You should all remember that misrepresentation is a crime, as is slander. Much of what was written is false, or only partially true. People talk about the SES as if they've been there their whole lives. They don't know enough about the SES to make such extreme judgements about it.

4. The school are not in denial, as I don't think as far that they've made a statement as far.

5. The School's ethos has changed somewhat over the 12 years I have been in the school. I have noticed this mostly since Mr Boddy has come in. This, I believe is a change for the better. The teachings are not primarily based on Eastern Teachings as you are all seem keen to point out, but are in fact based on many other sources, philosophers and truths, such as Plato, who's writings, I hasten to add is one of the underlying features in our society. Other sources include Rumi, the mystic poet that sells more than Shakespeare, Also Aristotle, and even modern philosophers have been a topic of debate in philosophy sessions, such as Prof. Dawkins theory of religions.

6. MGormez, I believe that the
ceasing of the perceived attack on the schools
would only happen when you stop involving us in what you are saying. My attention was drawn to this site wen I heard that what was being said on this site about us was completely untrue. Why should we take this? I say it again, we have done nothing wrong, much of what happens is that you criticise us, ridicule us and on occasions rudely, yet we have done nothing wrong, all we have done is stand up for what we believe in! What is so wrong about that? When we have come up with good coherent arguments, many have stooped down to criticising grammar and spelling, what impression does this give to us of you? I'll tell you, these people call us brainwashed, we clearly show that we are not, ad yet they cannot come up with a proper coherent argument to counter ours, doesn't this say that you might be the ones brainwashed, you are the ones that cannot accept anything we say without trying demeaning us.

There is so much more that I can comment on, but shant. I would just like to ask if you could private message me, as I would like to talk to you one on one. It would be a hell of a lot easier that way. If you ask em questions about the ethos of the school, how I've understood it, you may come out with different opinions. I still cannot believe that you went hwo ever loong it was without realising "what you were exposing your kids to."

Theo Gould

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:00 pm

My attention was drawn to this site wen I heard that what was being said on this site about us was completely untrue.

"about us" ???

No one here was talking about YOU, or any other current pupil. We were discussing the inquiry and the Govenor's response.

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

Postby Keir » Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:50 pm

The O,

So how did you like your rant? Satisfied? Good, then we can have a rational discussion.

I spent about 15 years in the SES, how long have you spent in it? As you maybe didn't know I had spent a while in it, how can you have known if I hadn't? Maybe you should have sent some PM's yourself to check before writing the post.

I have based my opinions on 'indoctrination' of the current pupils by the responses we have seen on this board, and my own experiences of becoming aware of the level of 'intervention' in my life and the life of my family at the time. It took me a very long time to untangle what was SES thinking and what was my own after I left the organisation. I fail to see how someone still so surrounded by its influence would be a good judge of their own indoctrination.

I realise this doesn't leave you anywhere to go, as you will not by words convince me of your freedom of mind, and to be fair, I don't know you and refuse to trail you for the next ten years to see if my opinions are well founded or not.

So we have an impasse. I hold one opinion, you hold another. I don't call my opinion the truth or seek to destroy your opinion (or your school). Even when vexed by some offensively rude and dismissive postings from current pupils the most I have ever resorted to is telling them to live their life and see what happens, oh yes, and that they were being rude and dismissive.

People are allowed different opinions, it is after all a democracy. I am glad that you felt able to join the debate/discussion about the SES with reference to the current ST J school. Current information was sorely needed to lift the discussion out of the realms of supposition. But I do note that you assert your opinion in a dismissive and mock authoritarian way. Something that I have seen first hand in my many years in the SES. Coincidence?

This isn't about revenge for the majority of posters on this board. If you had read a large number of the later posts and quite a few of the earlier ones too (not that you should jeopardise your current schoolwork to catch them now) you would see that moderation oozes from the discussions until someone insults the posters.

Such as: angry ignorant posters that deny that anything bad or serious happened to members of this board, that they should get a life, leave it out, or any other dismissive and revisionist opinion.

Such as: apologies that don't sound like apologies but like press releases aimed at reassuring the press that there is 'nothing to see' here.

Such as: A clear lack of willingness to address the findings of the inquiry, the articles of which completely largely ignored the cool headed requests of the people it was instigated to placate.

I respect your right to post on this public thread but you will forgive my 'hard-headedness' if I do not subscribe to your views, and criticise what I perceive as gaps in their logic or understanding.

User avatar
Sam Hyde
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:33 pm
Location: St James boys school

Postby Sam Hyde » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:05 am

Theo mate, I tried this privately yesterday but obviously you need reminding publically...........CALM THE FUK DOWN! Be carefull not to accuse others of exactly what you are guilty of yourself. Go for the reeewind brutha!

Sam xox
thats old now, like me, only 4 weeks to go!!!!!
"I've never let my schooling interfere with my education"

Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:14 pm
Location: Leeds (currently in NZ)

Postby james » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:11 am

Im going to repost somthing ive just posted in the "ST JAMES AND LOVE" thread. Sorry if uve allready read it.

What is going on!

"It seems what started out as a group of recent ex, and soon to depart pupils of St James putting forward some much needed positive support for St James has gone out of control!

Guys (and girls!) we started well, being gentle, understanding and not insulting, but it seems that we have been dragged down. If we are going to put forward our argument we have to listen to other peoples.

We can't go round saying we don't give a damn about the awfull experiences of pupils before us. Please use some sense, by doing this were only digging ourselves a very big hole, people will just stop listening to us, if they havn't allready!

Just needs to be said here I think.
Im in a cult? You think? Don't worry the spaceships will be coming soon.

The O
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:38 am
Location: St James Senior Boys School

Postby The O » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:11 am

You see what I mean? in your first sentance you mean to demean me
So how did you like your rant? Satisfied? Good, then we can have a rational discussion.

Just get lost, I didn't insult you, is that the only way you can attempt to prove a point? Perhaps you should read what I said more closely as you seem to have misunderstood what I have been saying. I'm not trying to prescribe you my views, I just feel that you should know how I feel, which is perfectly ok do to so. You are obviously not over your
SES thinking
you obviously can't think straight if you're going to be so blunt and rude, or as you put it,
. Personally I think that we are not the answer, only the messengers, as it were. The only way you can be convinced that the school and the SES really are different places are by going to see them for yourselves, I have not heard of one person doing that yet. Why don't you start the trend, and then you can post lovely things that you have seen. :B-fly: Times change, as do people and organisations. Maybe you should take a look for yourself, as we have been urging you to do for sometime now.

By the way, is there any chance you actually telling me what you hope to achieve by doing this campaign, please, it would really help us understand your mentality. It would be easier if you private messaged me, if you're going to reply, because I may not be on for a number of days.

Thanks mate, Peace
Theo Gould

Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 4:07 am

Postby Goblinboy » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:12 am

The O,

Sam and James' advice in this thread is worth heeding.

If I was a parent or prospective parent of St James pupils, I would be concerned at the both what is being expressed and how it is expressed in your posts.

It may be that this board is still around in a few years. Suggest you return then, and re-read your posts. I suspect you'll find them revealing. Nothing Keir hasn't observed already.

Also please be assured that the majority of the posters do not appear to be intent on damaging the current St James school.



Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:32 am

Postby AntonR » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:13 am

Post deleted
Last edited by AntonR on Wed May 17, 2006 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Keir » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:15 am

My apologies The O,

I should have put an emoticon in there to show you that it was meant with humour. Something I thought you would undertand, but there you go.

I dont think that I insulted you apart from saying that you said what you had to say in what I regarded as a mock authoritative and dismissive way. It is how I feel and is therefore equally valid and ok to say.

I think that on balance I showed some empathy to your situation in my post. I certainly don't think I was being blunt or rude.

I have PM'd you with what I hope to achieve by discussing my thoughts and opinions (not mounting a campaign) on this board.

As for visiting the schools - it really isn't necessary to be shown round a 'happy' school, as I know that sort of excercise doesn't show the whole story (why else all the posts on this board when visitors were shown round our 'happy' school).

I have no problem with the fact that things change, I just have very exacting ideas about what constitutes change and what areas are important and fundamental to change and which are superficial.

If you don't understand what I mean, please take some time to read my past posts.

In future, if you are not clear about my use of a sentence you can always try asking me what I meant.

Return to “St James and St Vedast”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests