- Posts
- 40
- Comments
- 968
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
- Posts
- 40
- Comments
- 968
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
Well damn. When I wrote this " I hope this simple answer has bought it into your range of understanding." I didn't have any intention of it being condescending. When I read it, I read as up boeat with a little happiness.
I ran your prompt through ChatGPT this is what it came up with:
“Oh, I get it — you don’t like celebrities. That’s fair. I mean, some people don’t like sports, others don’t like cooking, and there are even people who think reading is a waste of time. It’s all just hobbies, right? Yours just happens to be not caring about certain humans other people find interesting. Perfectly valid. Almost a hobby in itself, really.”
I see how that is similar. I just would have never used the last sentence.
Sincerity comes off as sarcasm to the insincere.
Saying my response was created by chatgpt is dismissive and not genuine critique.
Since it's beyond you, I'll take the time to explain. Different people have different values. Some people think it's interesting to pay attention to the intersection of culture and politics... so they take their energy that isn't devoted to the necessary tasks of staying alive and devote some of it to following this.
Some people take that energy and participate in online communities. Instead of devoting that energy to that intersection, they post and comment. Its their energy and their value system.
Some people aren't interested in either. I hope this simple answer has bought it into your range of understanding.
insurance bullshit, kid stuff
I read the rest of the list just fine, but shifted the comma over one word to the left for this. Twas amusing.
I agree with the bulk of what you're saying. I think those three points are essential. I'm even a strong proponent of collaborative learning. Hell... I forgot to include a paragraph on it, unschooling, and free schooling.
I think programs like Math Circles focus on creative engagement with the material through collaboration. The instructor engages with the conversation flow and hints in directions when they get stuck. This type of engagement is crucial and requires small class sizes. My kiddo is a talker and gets labeled as an "innovator" or just "a little disruptive".
And in no way am I suggesting making the race on to another subject, rather, engaging at different depths for subjects they've shown competency in or are actually bored with. Hell, this is true for all students. Different depths may be the thing that spark engagement.
I think segregated gifted classes are a mistake. In class acceleration, exploring at depth, compacting, interest led projects, and backfilling with a well educated teacher who, frankly, the kid likes goes a long way. For a while, he wanted to be a second grade teacher because she used to have very little rules and kids wouldn't get in trouble for being themselves. She was also probably the oldest teacher at the school with the warmest disposition.
He is, to my hesitancy, choosing to accelerate into the next grade for one subject. Normally, I'd be a pretty hard no, but he has genuine excitement to do so. That and a non trivial portion of their math is on a computer. The computer is filled with crap animation and rote engagement that it slows him down which means boredom for him.
I'm a little hesitant to back tutoring especially at this age. He's so invested in being smart that it gets in the way of being present in the way one needs to be to clarify mistakes and introduce concepts. Hell, identifying where one makes a mistake and how to guide someone back to the core concepts is a skill. And many kids need the repition to demonstrate competency. Getting a kid who just "gets it" to tutor is a mistake until they are a little older.
Kids who are gift still require unique engagement. I met a 12 year old whose math skills far exceeds my kid's ability. He was, still at that age, trying to get me to light up with his knowledge. And I was happy to. He had the math skills I had at 16 or 17, but emotionally he was a 12 years old. He was in no way suited to teach anyone yet. But he needed to talk with people who were capable and interested in hearing what he was learning. It was a lot of fun for me to do so.
So I largely agree: well fed students with competent, connected teachers who have a class size that lets them actually connect is definitely the starting point. Part of that connection, though, is tailoring the material to the specific child's needs and helping where they need it. Collaboration and creative exploration is also important. But each kid moves at a different speed and being supported by kids who are moving neither too fast nor too slow will create an exciting atmosphere for learning. At the same time, kids also need to see, for some of the time, how kids move at different speeds and still get the material.
Proper fucking shitpost.
Stay aware folks
I feel like the last two words should rhyme.Stay aware bears... No that's not it.Stay awake flakes ... Bah... I'm all out.
I wanted to comment because I've seen your comments and thought of you as a thoughtful commentator and I suspect we have similar political alignments.
My child is in an urban school district. For several school board administrations, the focus has been on equity prioritizing black and indigenous peoples. I agree with this. I think systemic racism has led to the deterioration of these communities resulting in a downward spiral that we, as a society, have to work hard and pull out of.
My child performed well enough to be invited to the alternative, accelerated program for highly gifted students. We decided noto send him as he was well integrated into his school, but his performance is an outlier in his cohort. For a number of reasons I won't go into, his current school is a language immersion school. It is unique because it was started by the language speaking community and has operated for several decades. It takes children from all over the district via lottery. It sounds like equity at first, but there's a limited number of people who can spare the time to send their kids to a school not in their district (bussing can help) and learn a language that isn't their primary one. This has helped him not be incredibly bored the entire school day.
His school is a mixture that leans towards the affluent. The language community that supports the program is a "model" minority and it attracts affluent people for the reasons stated above. The school performs well in testing and their funding reflects that. Unfortunately, this has led to the worst class room ratios in the entire district and high performing children are neglected because teachers need to make sure those not meeting the norm or need the help to meet the norm are getting that help. Giving these people that help is very important. Neglecting high performers deprives them of metacognative skills.
High performers need to accelerate and be challenged in a way that is different. Their brain solve problems weirdly, sometimes rigorously, sometimes with leaps that don't make sense to anyone but themselves. While my kid isn't in the top ten percent of the top one percent, these kids need special attention that our system can't provide.
All of this isn't to say you're wrong. I think parents perpetuate a system that lets them access the basic education that we all deserve and find perpetually underfunded.
I too remember. Why does everything hurt this morning?
For the longest time, I'd find a tip between 15% and 20% which would result in a final total that was a palindrome. That was about 20 years ago and that's the first thing I noticed in this picture.
Why won't anyone let the market decide?!? 😭
Taxes. Government handouts are funded by my taxes which the government can only take because I work hard. I don't mind taxes in principle, but not for handouts.
Not my thinking, but I had to work out the some of the internalized imperialism, so I have some experience with this.
I work hard. I follow the rules. I speak the language. I came here legally. I am a good American.
I work hard. But I always feel like some aren't. This is a great country and people like me make it great. I don't want to pay for those who don't work.
I love my country of origin. People I know were wonderful. But some don't work hard. And some come to America. They don't learn the language. They don't appreciate this great country.
There are other lazy countries and America is letting them in. They claim to be refugees. But they are lying and they are lazy and they are making America weak. America is great and kind. That kindness is allowing lazy people in and making America weak and I am paying for it.
Trump won't let these lazy people in who don't follow the rules. Only the hard ones who do follow the rules like me. See I have a green card. A great country like American wouldn't have let me in if I wasn't a hard worker. I'm not lazy like those claiming to be refugees or sneaking in. I am so proud that I will show you my green card because I'm doing my part!
One day, I hope people can have a nuanced discussion of the porn industry. Sentiments like this are true (emphasis mine):
Kytsya frequently promotes the advantages of going into the adult content creation industry, promising TikTok followers that it can prove a lucrative career choice. “The thing about my job is if you go full out you can make enough money to start your own thing whether that’s buying houses or doing Airbnbs and investing,” she says.
And she properly hedges with:
She also offers practical advice to followers who are considering working in this world, encouraging them to make sure they get tested regularly for sexually transmitted infections. She acknowledges that there are “dangers” involved in the work, and recommends that girls “who have just turned 18” should not rush into the adult industry. “Take time to think about it before you do it.”
More than taking time, the industry needs protection against exploration. Hell, success often means becoming the exploiter. You may be kinder and more empathic doing so, but that's not garunteed.
Most young women aren't going to make the money she made and hard work may not be enough. Unionization is unlikely happen industry wide since there's a so many new women showing up all the time.
Finally, it's important to see that many women in the sex work industry are being traffic. Smart legislation and enforcement can and should be used.
We have lost the art of smithing words.
"You had an arse full of farts that night, darling, and I fucked them out of you, big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little merry cracks and a lot of tiny little naughty farties ending in a long gush from your hole. It is wonderful to fuck a farting woman when every fuck drives one out of her. I think I would know Nora’s fart anywhere. I think I could pick hers out in a roomful of farting women. It is a rather girlish noise not like the wet windy fart which I imagine fat wives have. It is sudden and dry and dirty like what a bold girl would let off in fun in a school dormitory at night. I hope Nora will let off no end of her farts in my face so that I may know their smell also.”
Well, since jokes get funnier as you explain them, prepare for a hilarious adventure.
OP states that he thinks Chloe is inappropriate.Why though. Chloe is a perfectly cromulent name.
The other chicken's names are puns related to Stevie Chicks is a pun on Stevie Nicks, Princess Layer is a pun on Princess Layer.
Of course, this isn't too hard to see.
Still, why does OP think Chloe is inappropriate?
Chloe is similar sounding to a chicken's (cloaca)[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloaca]. A comedian might call it a pussy-dick-butt.
Do you see how hilarious it is now that I've explained the joke. Gafaw gafaw.