Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Does this offend?

While I obviously supported my DD in learning letters and sounds and by reading to her, I truly did not instruct her in reading. Other than a few readings of the BOB books at 3ish, I truly did not do any of the kind of explicit teaching that, for instance, is covered in various "How to teach your kid to read" things I've seen here and there. I've had other people ask me "When she learned to read, did she..." and I'm just like, uh, I dunno, man. She couldn't read and then she could. So I believe in the seemingly spontaneous business.

Thanks. I do get quite passionate at times; thanks for putting up with it.

Lucounu these are 2 very different issues. I think you are guilty of creating a false dichotomy.

1) what should be allowed to be discussed:
(basically IQ test items and where to buy them - I can't remember the last time a saw a thread that someone started to discuss any other topics that I though shouldn't be allowed.)

2) what to do when the desire of some for free speech allows speech that is offensive or attacking or perceived as attacking of others.

It's not that my goal is avoiding offense to anyone, it's that my goal is honoring the actual parents who post here. There is very little support of the important work of parenting in general, and even less for parents of gifted kids. So I don't see the need for anyone to attack anyone else here. If I perceive that someone is being attacked, I will speak up and object - one way or the other.

I'm not a moderator. No one has to agree with me. I sent a PM to someone once and let her know that I didn't think she was trying to offend, but that I thought it likely that her words were being perceived as an attack. The poster told me that she disagreed and that was that. Nothing terrible happened to the poster as far as I can tell.

Do I think it's possible to disagree in a way that won't be perceived as an attack? I absolutely do, and I do it fairly often. I don't want to deprive anyone of the support of a variety of opinions and perspectives. I just do it kindly and gently. Even when I don't, people generally get the feeling that I am trying to help and that being helpful is my only motivation. I'm clearly not trying to score points or make my ego feel better. And that's my perception of the difference between me and the 'free speechers.' Do I want everyone else here to do find ways to disagree that are kind and not attack-y? Yes I do. I'm allowed to want that, and to try and see if I can help that happen. There is absolutely no connection between meanness and honesty. Politeness and Independent thought are not contradictory. And having the humility to accept that none of us will ever know the whole story of any poster's life leaves a lot of room for kindness.

Lucounu, I consider you to be a valuable member of this group. I don't think that you would actually disagree with anything I've said just now. You are showing a lot of promise in developing your own funny style of respectful disagreement - I'm proud of you.

I know that I lost a lot of years of practicing my social skills, first by being shunned 4th -6th grade, and then by not often having a safe enough place to share my thoughts without tremendous self-censoring. I've used posting here as a way to get to know 'what I really do think' after all these years. I'll bet I'm not the only person who has had a similar life experience, so yes, I do tend to feel protective toward folks. Sometime overprotective, but I'm trying to really stick to being of service to other gifted parents.

It's not that any of use will never make mistakes, or that something terrible will happen if one of the mods or the members asks someone else to slow down and take a second look. It's that I want us moving in the direction being here to serve.

And afterall, most of us are going to have to negotiate with school folks or community members to get our kid's needs met, doesn't it make sense to practice a strong and respectful way of stating our thoughts? We know as little about the perspectives and past experiences of our school folks as we do about each other, so doesn't it make sense to practice getting our point across without attacking or being offensive?

At the SENG training, they talked about how difficult it is for many school folks to deal with parents of gifted kids. The term was 'unguided missiles.' As a group we talk fast, use vocabulary words that are hard to understand, and care so deeply that we come across as 'Intense' and 'Difficult to please.' We expect folks to respond to logic and research results, and that isn't how most people live. We may be angry with how we were treated, or how our children have been mistreated - and we have every right to that anger. So if we are going to advocate for our children, we need to learn how to interact in a way that is respectful AND communicates disagreement.

And what about out kids? I was 'disciplined' by very sharp tongued, sarcastic, gifted parents. And our spouses? As peace-loving as I may seem to some of you, DH finds me 'too hot to handle' many times. I have that loud and fast and voluminous speech that comes across hard on my DH, particularly when my eyes start flashing. We are going to have to disagree with our kids and spouses at times, and wouldn't we rather do it in a way that looks loving and like we remember who they are at the same time? I guess a few of you probably feel that it's your duty to 'toughen your child up so that they are ready for the real world' and I'm actually working on that over the last year or so, but am I right that mostly we would prefer to disagree without full out decimation when it's our loved ones?

If I haven't complained directly to whoever is reading this, then you can be sure I don't mean you. Believe me, I'm taking every opportunity to develop my own ability to respectfully disagree. So if I haven't PMed you about it, it's not bothering me, ok? Deal?

Love and More Love,
Grinity

That's what it was like for me. You answer their questions about the ABC's and the next thing you know they are reading simple words. Then by the time, you get early reader books, they are reading paragraphs. I finally realized that I couldn't keep up with him.

I did teach him addition though!

But free speech isn't just a nice desire that some people have. It's a fundamental part of our legal system and our society in general. I may not mince words when I post, but I don't attack people or deliberately try to offend them. Yet some people may feel that way, just like I feel that way sometimes (here or anywhere else). It's part of life.


Not speaking for Iucounu here, but you're writing a bit like you're his superior at work or his mom. Do you see me that way too?


I'm not sure that this is your call to make. You can't force others to share your own personal motivations and goals, any more than I can. Do I want to write messages that are helpful? Of course. Should anyone be allowed to dictate that this has to be a major focus of this forum governing "us" as a group? No.

Isn't that true!

When I was a young child, I was nicknamed "Motor Mouth." I hated it! I was convinced there was something wrong with me. I practiced and practiced to slow my speech down.

I still consciously modulate my speech to this day to not annoy the people around me. <<sigh>>

OOoo! Oooo! Or how about this one: "but it didn't say that we had to change our shoes for gym, just that we had to have shorts or sweats and a t-shirt. I didn't know they wanted me to wear tennis shoes instead of boots too."

I haven't read this whole thread carefully, but it would help me out Val if you could show me what this is referring to. I don't perceive that the issue is that anyone told anyone that they had to do anything.

((shrugs and more shrugs))
Grinity

There's no false dichotomy. There are many different issues being discussed, and I have explicitly stated that I am trying to guide things in a direction where there are more shades of gray available here, and that I believe you're against that. I might have written the above-quoted text in haste, but I do think that in service of creating a wecloming, comforting environment, you would like to control not only what is discussed her, but also how it's discussed The latter is probably the bigger issue, but they're both issues. You agree above that you want to avoid discussing at least one issue, and there are others. See, for example, your response to Bostonian in the other forum guidelines thread:

http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/110059/6.html
Because of this and a thousand other small things, when you contact people in private to let them know that you disapprove of their posts, I see it as seeking to control the board. You're attempting to control both the medium and the message. If Ametrine had intended, for instance, to say what you didn't like that her signature implied to you, I don't think you would have been okay with it, although of course you would have had to eventually let it go.

Ametrine's signature line wasn't an attack. Bostonian's postings of his views on intelligence-- which are always at least well-thought-out and quite civil, though they may not sit well with you-- are not attacks. The word "attack" is far too strong. You don't like others posting if you feel that it creates a less welcoming environment, in your personal opinion; and that's stifling, in my personal opinion.

Like I mentioned before, nothing prohibits anyone from sending someone a PM. I don't think it's out-and-out wrong under the rules, though as we discussed in the other thread, sending a PM like that might be less than ideal. Whether or not it results in the person contacted feeling offended, though, you are trying to change the way other people are posting.

I do see you as skewing things too far from center. For example, I don't think anything will be served by everyone trying to constantly be loving, etc. This is a discussion forum for grownups. We don't need love; we need interesting ideas, and enough civility to discuss them fruitfully.

And that civility requirement doesn't mean we need to err on the side of construing every meaning of someone's words, looking for someone who might potentially feel offended. It's simply too restrictive.

I consider that to be a back-handed sort of compliment, honestly, and with apologies if you really, truly didn't mean it to be (no apology is necessary). Your compliment asserts, of course, that I still have a ways to go. Well, in my opinion, you could improve somewhat in the area of showing less passive aggression (I will have to think about whether I am recomminding more open aggression or just less aggression, but either would be better IMO; I of course feel like you have a right to be heard like anyone else). It might just be the way you come across.

I do think you have many good intentions, but can come off as a bit controlling at times.

I know you do. But I think of this as a discussion forum, where one of the things that happens by design is that people come to ask questions and get answers, and another major function is general discussion relevant to the areas that are indicated in the subforums.

"Being here to serve" shouldn't restrict the way we discuss things in general; it's too restrictive. To me, I still think it's over-the-top ridiculous that you felt it necessary to contact Ametrine in private about her signature line about elephants and tap-dancing shoes. She wasn't getting in the way of your being here to serve others, or harming the forum.

No, it doesn't make sense to use our posts here to practice speaking in the same way as we do when advocating for our children. I think that's a choice for every person to choose for themselves, not to have it forced on them, "suggested" via PM from an influential person, etc. I would be horrified to learn that a new forum guideline was in the offing, suggesting that people be on their absolute best behavior, and use speech as if they were dealing with school administrators. This is a place for discussion.

Anyway, I don't want to keep squabbling over this. I think I've really said everything I can usefully say now, and so much more...

In case some people haven't noticed, Mark has asked for comments on the new Forum Rules in this thread.