Londonrake wrote:Well, IIRC it started out in another thread as a debate (interesting but as always "animated"
) on Labour's proposals for the public school sector. Then, with your revelations about the bad experiences you had and the psychological damage done, it morphed into something which to me seemed entirely different.
But, come on, you clearly couldn't give a Tinker's cuss about both CG's and my kid's positive views and outcomes. It's a personal grudge thing.
In the other thread I explained clearly why I support such schools no longer getting subsidies from the exchequer to build things like swimming pools when they already have facilities far in excess of what state schools have. I explained why I also supported the idea of incorporating such schools in to the state system, namely that of not exposing anyone's children to the unnecessary increased risk of harm that such schools cause. I created this thread in response to the constant shouts on the other of 'prove it' and 'you can not prove it' and the like. 9 out 10 of the top Australian 'public' schools, as listed by Paphitis, have histories of sexual abuse of children at those schools with some like Geelong having multiple instances of serious sexual assaults over decades. 1 out of 10 of the top state schools in Australia by exam results has any history of sexual abuse and that was a consenting relationship between a female pupil and an older teacher. As I said before I presented this evidence I did so
in the knowledge and expectation that you Londonrake in all probability will not judge that evidence with an open mind, will not even attempt to do so. With the expectation that you almost certainly will however use the presentation of such evidence to try and denigrate me as an individual and person as a result
Have you said anything about the shocking levels of sexual abuse occurring in public schools ? Was there even a murmur from you when Paphitis tried to claim that convicted and jailed serious abuser of children in these schools had NOT ever been tried, not ever been judged, not ever been jailed and that it was just all made up by kids who probably had been thrown out of the schools for drug taking. No not a peep out of you on any of that. But still plenty of time time to 'pop in' and try and denigrate my character as a person. So predictable.
As for the positive experience of your daughter I again ask what part of 'on statistical average' was ambiguous or unclear ? I will ask again because the last time you put up this straw man argument I asked and you just ignored the question. Only to ask it again now. Have I ever said ALL children that attend such schools will have a bad experience ? Be damaged by that experience ? No I have not. My personal negative experience is no more indicative of the average than your daughters positive one. However the hard data is just that, hard data and it does speak to the average. This you ignore because you do not like 'where it leads', so you seek to cast aspersions on me as a person, which is exactly what I predicted you would do.
