Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 210 guests, and 14 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    streble, DeliciousPizza, prominentdigitiz, parentologyco, Smartlady60
    11,413 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 253
    A
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 253
    Val,
    Freedom of speech includes both people. The one with the signature and the one who expressed concern about it.

    We can't know the motives of the one who PM'd Ametrine; they may be as mean-spirited as you suggest, or they may be acting out of sincere kindness. How can we know? Why assume the worst?

    I love your stand against bullying (we need more of that in the world!), but let's be slow to label without adequate proof. As much as I love freedom of speech, I abhor name-calling.

    I don't think anyone on this thread is in the wrong. We are all just learning about different perspectives (me too!)

    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    �Other parents don't want to be reminded that their hothoused (gifted or not) children are somehow "less" than those children that teach themselves.

    I don't think that's true. �

    �or we will minimize the non-hothoused kids (those parents are lying).�

    I don't think that's true.

    I think that is a commonly expressed �set of feelings that you're stating. �I feel like gifted kids can put 2&2 together but they were exposed to it. �They just take it further than other kids. � �They got the original information somewhere and ran with it to reach further conclusions. �JMO.
    I'm not offended but I disagree with the presumptions frequently stated that everybody prefers gifted osmosis to guided instruction because I, at least, am not convinced.
    I like this quote:
    It sums how I'm always pleasantly surprised by the unpredictability of the answers I read here.
    Everyone was writing from their own perspective, experiences and even insecurities and they were all so very different.


    Youth lives by personality, age lives by calculation. -- Aristotle on a calendar
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Originally Posted by annette
    Here is my view on it (assumptions and all):

    Ametrine has experienced parents judging her as a hothouser and it annoyed her. Some of us truly do have children that teach themselves amazing things with little to no teaching on our part. It can be annoying to be have your reality rejected by others. So she expressed this in her signature, feeling safe on a forum such as this where others share her sentiment (I certainly do).

    Her signature was vague enough to be misread from her original intent. Someone else on this forum realized that it might be considered offensive and in an act of kindness--since she herself would want someone to tell her if she accidentally offended--she chose to write Ametrine in private. I highly doubt the person writing meant to censor Ametrine, only to alert her to something she may not have realized. I would appreciate someone doing the same for me and wouldn't find it critical, but some might. We all vary in how defensive we are, and we all have different sensitivities. If you had a grandmother that was always correcting your speech, a PM like this might anger you.

    Ametrine was curious how her signature came across to others. I'm often curious about the same thing, and it's very difficult to see outside of your own perspective. Clearly, Ametrine is open-minded and considerate of others around her or she wouldn't have asked. This alone tells me that her signature was not meant to offend.

    All of us in this thread found it an interesting question and chose to think about it, post about it, and enter into debates about wonderful things like freedom of speech and politeness and hothousing. Everyone was writing from their own perspective, experiences and even insecurities and they were all so very different.

    Ultimately, it's a natural human desire to "be the best" and especially, to want the best for your children. So those with non-gifted children don't want to be reminded that their children are "less" in some way. Other parents don't want to be reminded that their hothoused (gifted or not) children are somehow "less" than those children that teach themselves. Sometimes confronting an uncomfortable truth, we will minimize the gifted kids (like the bumper sticker mentioned above) or we will minimize the non-hothoused kids (those parents are lying).

    Personally, I have always found the "My child is an honor student" stickers annoying, and not because of insecurities, as I was an honor student, but solely because I can imagine all the parents sitting in cars behind that one who have non-honors students who are feeling despair, jealousy, anger, insecurities and in general, a feeling that their child is less. I had friends like that with parents like that, and I remember well how they compared us.

    Now, for all those with feathers ruffled because you have a sticker just like this. I'm sure most parents place this sticker to show their children how proud they are of them. For some parents, that sticker is something they have been wanting for a long time. I get it.

    I guess my point is this--so much of reality is filtered through our unique perspectives, and how lovely to have a thread like this to open our eyes to how different the world looks to others.

    I don't think we should censor what people say, anymore than I think that we should censor someone's right to complain about what someone says. Aren't both valuable?

    I've highlighted the most pertinent part of your post, but have included the entire quote because you have done a very good job of explaining my thought process in choosing to change my signature line. It was exactly for the reason that someone may misinterpret the meaning of it that I chose to delete it. It was too vague.

    As for bowing to "bullies", I feel one is only "bowing" if they feel bullied. I never did.

    Honestly, when I put up the line, I figured it would have offended parents in a typical online parenting forum. Not anyone here...but that was because I interpreted it to mean, "MY child is a tap dancer and not an elephant that I forced shoes upon to make them one.

    I have a solution to those who feel it was a perfectly fine line. You have my permission to use it. I like it and know what it is conveying. If someone comes to this site and is offended and leaves, so be it. I can't be held responsible for the perceptions of every visitor, and I know nobody here expects that.

    Because I have an IRL history of saying things that I thought were understood, yet were "taken wrong" and offended, I decided the PM was a legitimate concern. I've also, IRL, asked for clarification from my husband/mother on comments made to me by others. I don't know if this is a touch of Asperger's, or what. My dad has many of the signs of being Aspie, so maybe I've inherited his social awkwardness.

    Maybe that makes me a "softie" who isn't secure my own voice. But when you've been told many times by those you love and who love you that you have a tendency to accidentally offend when it's not your intent, you can understand why I did what I did in asking for opinions and ultimately realized that it was right for me to delete the line.






    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Originally Posted by La Texican
    �Other parents don't want to be reminded that their hothoused (gifted or not) children are somehow "less" than those children that teach themselves.

    I don't think that's true. �

    �or we will minimize the non-hothoused kids (those parents are lying).�

    I don't think that's true.

    I think that is a commonly expressed �set of feelings that you're stating. �I feel like gifted kids can put 2&2 together but they were exposed to it. �They just take it further than other kids. � �They got the original information somewhere and ran with it to reach further conclusions. �JMO.
    I'm not offended but I disagree with the presumptions frequently stated that everybody prefers gifted osmosis to guided instruction because I, at least, am not convinced.

    I'm of the opinion that a non-gifted child can have the same instruction as a gifted child and the non-gifted child will learn, yet not to the extent and breadth that the gifted child will take that instruction.

    It's just not in the non-gifted child's makeup.

    That is why hothousing comments made to parents of gifted children is so offensive, imo. It literally means forcing unnatural development on children and the assumption that any child who is not of typical I.Q. or talent must have therefore been hothoused.


    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    I agree that gifted children will carry a conclusion to a further extent and that other kids might not even notice the same lesson. I'm just one who homeschools preschools my little cheetah so I find many of the statements about hothousing and giftedness don't address my frusteration with judginess and I need to keep saying this when it comes up until I can refine it to a more clear way to say it.

    Eta: it's not judginess I'm struggling with, it's one size fits all that seems to be getting in the way a little bit. It's in my mind and not so much in this forum.

    Last edited by La Texican; 08/24/11 11:44 AM.

    Youth lives by personality, age lives by calculation. -- Aristotle on a calendar
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 3,428
    U
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    U
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 3,428
    I was one of those who said in this thread (I did not send the original PM!) that I could see how the signature could potentially be construed as offensive, but I think this thread is blowing the whole thing up totally out of proportion to what has occurred. The OP was genuinely curious, seems to have seen that the sig might usefully be changed, but doesn't appear to feel censored. Can we let it go? I think it's okay to sensitively call people's attention to it when they say something offensive, just as I also think it's not necessary to constantly censor oneself. I have seen some things on this board that were personally offensive to me, and at times I have said something. I feel both the poster of the sentiments and I were within our rights.

    Last edited by ultramarina; 08/24/11 02:01 PM.
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 1,777
    P.S. I'm being extra sensitive about hot-housing and modern ideas about appropriate early academics because my late birthday boy (by 1 measly little month) can't go to preschool this year because Texas state law has drawn a hard line at 4 by Sept. for pre-k, even though the local principle looked at his worksheets and said she's happy to let him in if it's do-able. �In my search for info I talked to a regional gt person and explained my son a little bit and she said the public school probably will never do a good job meeting his educational needs. �I said, well I knew that but I know about ALEKS and EPGY and the Davidson Gifted public forum. �I think I can find ways to help his educational growth, just school would be nice too. �This would be a good year for him to do pre-k because he wants to and would like it and would fit. �Not once has the issue or the word hothousing came up but giftedness did and that's what they called it. �I just think the discussions about "early giftedness is by osmosis and not education" is obviously a necessary conversation because that's apparently what some people are going through. �It's also a vocal movement and a counter-productive sentiment to my current situation. �Not that your nerds are less valid than mine. �Lol at the tiny iPhone screen typo. I meant not that your needs are less valid than mine. �LMAO


    Youth lives by personality, age lives by calculation. -- Aristotle on a calendar
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    La Texican..

    I think you have a very good topic for a dedicated post.

    When you're able, I'd love to comment in that.


    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Originally Posted by ultramarina
    I was one who said the signature could potentially be construed as offensive, but I think this thread is blowing the whole thing up totally out of proportion to what has occurred. The OP was genuinely curious, seems to have seen that the sig might usefully be changed, but doesn't appear to feel censored. Can we let it go? I think it's okay to sensitively call people's attention to it when they say something offensive, just as I also think it's not necessary to constantly censor oneself. I have seen some things on this board that were personally offensive to me, and at times I have said something. I feel both the poster of the sentiments and I were within our rights.

    I think that it's probably a good idea to let it go for 24 hours and then toss it. It's dirty laundry, imo.

    Mark? Julie?

    What say you?

    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 3,296
    Val Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 3,296
    Originally Posted by annette
    Freedom of speech includes both people. The one with the signature and the one who expressed concern about it.

    Not quite. Freedom of speech doesn't extend to telling other people what they can and can't write ---- this is actually the foundation of free speech. It's perfectly okay to say, "I didn't like what you wrote," or "I disagree with what you wrote." But it's not okay to tell someone, "You have to remove what you wrote because I think you should."

    Originally Posted by annette
    We can't know the motives of the one who PM'd Ametrine; they may be as mean-spirited as you suggest, or they may be acting out of sincere kindness. How can we know? Why assume the worst?

    I agree that we can't know someone's motives unless the person explains them to us. This is why I'd still like to hear them from the person him- or herself.

    I watched a film about a dystopian future in country X recently. Two characters came from elsewhere. They kept saying, "How could this have happened? How they have let things get this bad?" I kept thinking that the answer was, "One small step at a time."

    I see acceptance of speech-policing by people who aren't moderators as a small step toward a distasteful culture on this board. I'd hate to see that and think that the quality of the discussions would suffer as a result.

    Last edited by Val; 08/24/11 02:38 PM. Reason: Fix mistake
    Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    New, and you'd think I'd have a clue...
    by astronomama - 03/24/24 06:01 AM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    Son 2e, wide discrepancy between CogAT-Terranova
    by astronomama - 03/23/24 07:21 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5