Hi Poirot,

That's quite an impressive post.

That post is akin to the actions of the swaggering school bully who's finally had his nose pushed in and is running shrieking to the headmaster, telling everyone on the way that he's being bullied. I remember a school bully like that at Chester Hill PS: his dad was the headmaster. I wonder how often that's happened.

Rarely do you have anything valuable to say to the topic and when others seek to find out your opinion you just retreat or attack them. Abusing these forums as a way of avoiding your insecurities shows a complete lack of respect for those who come here with genuine motives. That's okay, we all have insecurities.

You Poirot, make a habit of jumping on a thread to sprinkle your constructed scenarios. You then label these imaginings, "fact". Never mind that they have no actual basis in fact, and are merely suppositions - you demand that anyone you happen to address should answer them...pronto!

If they don't respond to your suppositions, you then get quite snarky. And if they do, you get even more inflammatory and diversionary, a bit like a wounded swan.

When your arguments are shot down in flames, you come out with the most ridiculous retorts.

Regarding runner, you seem to have a desperate tactic to sit at your keyboard calling people who might defend him bigots and haters. Some of us would call that out for the brazen vacuous cowardice it is, but I am more forgiving.

"It appears to me that 90 per cent of your contributions are devoted to trying to hurt others..."

You're a typical bully.

You don't like it when you can't manipulate the discussion. You don't like it when someone out-manoeuvres your agenda and calls you out for your embroidered commentary. You don't like it when someone stands up to you.

Have I got all that right ?

Trolling is fun, but perhaps can we get back to evidence-based discussions ?

Cheers,

Joe

Yeah, thanks, Loudy....

You're such a clever vegemite, I can hardly stand it.

You'll have to tell us how you developed your considerable talent at being able to deliver a witty rejoinder while simultaneously managing to leave out the actual wit!

It's a considerable talent.

You fellas hate it when someone stands up to you...it gets right up your nose.

There's phanto strewing his "questions" all about - and "demanding" we answer them - and impugning us if we choose not to.

But woe betide anyone who tells it like it is.

Then Joe will come out with absolutely nothing of his own - not even his usual trusty bag of sarcasm (at the cleaners is it?) - and say "Trolling is fun...let's get back to evidence-based discussions."

Lol!...you appear to be defending phanto with your latest whizz-bang copy-cat post...he's the guy whose argument rest is making stuff up and demanding we comment on it

Poirot:

Well you walked right into that. If you are so innocent then you would have stopped reading my post after the first sentence. Instead you have read it all and gone to great lengths to defend yourself.

It was a simple question really – why do you feel the need to hurt people on this forum? Of course if you answer it will be because you agree that you do.

phanto,

"It was a simple question really – why do you feel the need to hurt people on this forum? Of course if you answer it will be because you agree that you do."

The question is why do you stomp about on this forum posting supposition and demanding people answer your "questions"...and then when someone stands up to you, claim they are hurting people?

You're the one strutting around the forum putting the boot into a bullying victim...because he's gay.

I have no idea what your insecurities are, but the gusto with which you have constructed a paradigm with which to crucify that young man ....because he is gay...is quite telling.

Not to mention harassing Foxy because she refused to respond to your confected blather.

Do you often go about being deliberately antagonistic in your approach - and when you receive some flack for your efforts, resort to yelping..."Oh now you're being nasty"?

What do you suggest my approach should be, phanto?

Should I read that runner calls me perverted and say nothing? runner is always calling me perverted. runner calls anyone perverted with whom he disagrees.

Should I sit back and allow him to call me a supporter of perversion for fear of "hurting "him"?

You called me a voyeur a few post back who needs to smirk at other people's fixations...butting into an exchange I was having with the delightful runner.

"And you ever the voyeur needing to smirk to the group about other people's fixations"

You get as good as you give from me on this forum...so stop being a sook.

Hi Poirot, could not agree more. It was clear very early on in this tread that phanto, hi phanto, was being motivated by his homophobia, and not some sense of outrage that the government was being wronged by this kids legal action. Although that was the veneer he used to justify his homophobic paranoia. Possibly phanto is a "poofter basher" from way back.
On the eve of the 'Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras' in Sydney we can reflect on how much (some in) society have shifted in their acceptance of the rights of gay people, we even had a police apology of a sorts from Superintendent Tony Crandell from the Surry Hills Local Area Command for the vicious police bashing of 53 people who took part in the first mardi gras parade in 1978, the 78'ers as they have become to be known. Openly gay Liberal member Bruce Notley-Smith made a formal apology on behalf of the NSW Government.
Unfortunately, there are still many bigoted people in society who do not respect gay people for who they are, the right wing yobbos, the religious nutters, this forum is a microcosm of Australian society to some extent. Although it has attracted a disproportionate number of well aged right wing crazies, they know who they are, no need to name them.

Paul1405:

I think you may be getting your threads mixed up. In this thread I have tried to point out the discrimination in the Safe Schools Program which creates special programs for kids with sexual issues. In the other thread I was talking about the manipulation of the kid who is taking the education department to court. One of his tools is to dramatise what has happened to him and I simply compared it to much bigger issues to put his drama queen antics in perspective.

This is not just an issue of some kid being bullied and that we should feel sorry for him. He himself has made it much bigger than that by going public in the media and then trying to manipulate public opinion into feeling sorry for him.

There is absolutely no need to go to the media. Other people take the education department to court for failures to do their job. They do not go to the media and try to manipulate public opinion in their favour. If he has a reasonable and logical argument for his legal action then the place to present it is in court. If it is justice that he really seeks then that is all he has to do.

But it is not only justice he seeks but attention. If he wants to get the media on his side then it should be enough to tell them that he has been bullied and that the school did not respond appropriately. No one needs to know why he was bullied – just the fact that he was bullied. All bullying in school is outlawed – it does not matter why the person is bullied.

cont.