Teen Commits Suicide Due to Bullying

[GommeInc]

It's an opinion, but why oh why does Lady Gaga tend to be a silent type 100% of the time until speaking out about something controversial, it comes across false and created.

In my eyes her personality looks like its fed from the record label because she's always silent when being spoken to alone (From what i've seen of her)

I didn't have you down as the sort to find music labels behind the actions of their singers I've mostly seen Lady Gaga acting under her own steam when protesting and petitioning. I'd hardly say this is a controversial matter either! Singers, writer and actors have gotten involved in tackling injustices before

I think Lady Gaga's involvement is positive, the boy got in contact with her afterall and to ignore it would be pretty low for someone of her standing with the public. Though it won't go anywhere in the US Government to abolish bullying, she's made people feel aware of the causes of bullying and you never know, she might of made people feel the need to watch out for it.

[Accipiter]

I'm glad you took the time to tell me that though there is no real evidence to prove that, so I'm afraid your cynicism concerning pop music isn't going to achieve much here. Anyway, either way I couldn't care because I like her music, performances, message etc so I couldn't really care less if it came from her (which it clearly does) or a group of men in suits...



Well clearly we just disagree entirely



Lady Gaga is a silent type!? hahahahahaha, that's a good one

When you see her walking off stage, talking to cameras, talking on shows or talking on stage (conference style that we see her do) she is silent with words and speaks through clothes, which you cannot deny, so you get some sort of sense of inability to publicly speak alone.

Mind you I only saw short clips of the footage of her on stage with that meat suit, but from what I saw of it she wasn't speaking very loudly or confidently!

[Judas]

When you see her walking off stage, talking to cameras, talking on shows or talking on stage (conference style that we see her do) she is silent with words and speaks through clothes, which you cannot deny, so you get some sort of sense of inability to publicly speak alone.

Mind you I only saw short clips of the footage of her on stage with that meat suit, but from what I saw of it she wasn't speaking very loudly or confidently!

That's because she was crying and singing LOL

I've seen her live and many of her interviews and I will tell you now that she's definitely not quiet... And if you've only seen small clips of her then I don't really see how you can tell me I cannot deny what you're saying.

[Accipiter]

You can deny what i'm saying, but its just a feeling I get whenever I see her in the lime light!

**** my grammar is appalling I feel dyslexic sometimes.

[Catzsy]

I'm not arguing against proper discipline which is what I constantly argue for, i'm arguing against legislation.

So how far would this unregulated discipline go? Bring corporal punishment back? What you do you think teachers should be allowed to do?

[-:Undertaker:-]

So how far would this unregulated discipline go? Bring corporal punishment back? What you do you think teachers should be allowed to do?

That is quite correct, yes. The system would be a nationwide-grammar schools system mixed with private, which would allow for schools in this country to uphold standards rather than having un-runnable large comprehensives of the sort we do now, with mixed ability (which is about equality and not education). But yes, I would allow schools to have corporal punishment as recent polls showed around 50% support for its return and I believe strongly in corporal punishment having witnessed myself the chaos schools have to put up with concerning naughty children.

See, in a libertarian world - you would be entitled with fellow left wingers to set up a comprehensive without corporal punishment (like the ones we have now across the country) and send your children there, meanwhile I and many many others would choose the opposite, opting for the grammars/private/religious schools...

...Like many of the Labour Party and Conservative Party do for their own children (front bench names provided upon request).

[Judas]

UPDATE: Three boys may be charged for hate crimes concerning Jamey's suicide

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

Thoughts?

I think it's good they are being punished, especially after reading this as well http://unicornbooty.com/2011/09/jame...at-homecoming/

I can't believe some of the stuff written on his Formspring either...

'JAMIE IS STUPID, GAY, FAT ANND UGLY. HE MUST DIE!'
'I wouldn't care if you died. No one would. So just do it It would make everyone WAY more happier!'

[Catzsy]

That is quite correct, yes. The system would be a nationwide-grammar schools system mixed with private, which would allow for schools in this country to uphold standards rather than having un-runnable large comprehensives of the sort we do now, with mixed ability (which is about equality and not education). But yes, I would allow schools to have corporal punishment as recent polls showed around 50% support for its return and I believe strongly in corporal punishment having witnessed myself the chaos schools have to put up with concerning naughty children.

See, in a libertarian world - you would be entitled with fellow left wingers to set up a comprehensive without corporal punishment (like the ones we have now across the country) and send your children there, meanwhile I and many many others would choose the opposite, opting for the grammars/private/religious schools...

...Like many of the Labour Party and Conservative Party do for their own children (front bench names provided upon request).

Well I do not agree with corporal punishment but they should have more powers including the right to search. I think you are referring to quite old labour dogma here as Labour itself bought in academies and tech schools.
We could argue all day about the differences between Comprehensives and Grammars. They are still streamed into abilities and I believe it is the running of the school rather than the labelling of it that it the problem. Discipline at the end of the day starts with the parents. If you go with Grammar schools a high proportion of
children would be written off at the age of 11 which can't be right. Also so much emphasis on academic as opposed to vocational training has been a mistake for those who perhaps won't make the grade at GCSE. There are still rights to have free schools and private schools now that are out of the control of the LEA so whats so different about that and your idea? I am not saying it is right or wrong - time will tell.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well I do not agree with corporal punishment but they should have more powers including the right to search. I think you are referring to quite old labour dogma here as Labour itself bought in academies and tech schools.We could argue all day about the differences between Comprehensives and Grammars. They are still streamed into abilities and I believe it is the running of the school rather than the labelling of it that it the problem.

The grammar vs comprehensive issue is at the heart of the debate over education - grammars allowed the best (because there does exist a better class of pupils who are brighter just as it existed in the Soviet Union, no matter as much as we and they pretended everybody is 'equal') even if they were poor to attend the best schools with like-minded pupils. Its not at all 'old Labour dogma' - it still exists because the Labour Party is more socialist than ever before. Infact I am sure it was only a decade ago that is was made so that its now actually illegal to set up grammar schools in this country.

I attend, as much as I love the people and the place, a dreadful outer-city comprehensive school - I have seen it first hand; the brightest pupils were sat there bored while the teacher struggled to control the class or had to keep those at the top of the class behind because the rest of the class could not grasp the topic. It's un-runnable by its sheer size and has appalling results even with exams being easier than ever before.

Discipline at the end of the day starts with the parents. If you go with Grammar schools a high proportion of children would be written off at the age of 11 which can't be right. Also so much emphasis on academic as opposed to vocational training has been a mistake for those who perhaps won't make the grade at GCSE.

The system wasn't perfect, infact the German model is the best (interestingly the first thing East German parents did when socialism fell was to bring back the grammar schools) which is more flexible and is decided by a joint decision between teacher, parents and pupil.

But as for condemning pupils, we do this every year, with every generation - the bright children who happen to be poor are condemned to bad education in comprehensives, along with those who are quite bright but are let down by the schools system. In this country if you want a good education you can either pay for it or buy into an expensive catchment area of a religious/one of the remaining grammar schools - the rest have to make do with the comprehensives.

There are still rights to have free schools and private schools now that are out of the control of the LEA so whats so different about that and your idea? I am not saying it is right or wrong - time will tell.

Because the poorest don't have access to private schools which may be based on ability - they are stuck with inner-city comprehensives which basically condemn them to poor education. We've had generations of politicians pledging to 'fix' the education system - it can be fixed, bring back the grammar school system. Grammar schools are probably one of the only good things a government can do for the poorest.

UPDATE: Three boys may be charged for hate crimes concerning Jamey's suicide

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

Thoughts?

My thoughts are, as nasty as the comments may be - that it is beyond wrong to charge anybody for saying, writing or texting an opinion.

[Catzsy]

The grammar vs comprehensive issue is at the heart of the debate over education - grammars allowed the best (because there does exist a better class of pupils who are brighter just as it existed in the Soviet Union, no matter as much as we and they pretended everybody is 'equal') even if they were poor to attend the best schools with like-minded pupils. Its not at all 'old Labour dogma' - it still exists because the Labour Party is more socialist than ever before. Infact I am sure it was only a decade ago that is was made so that its now actually illegal to set up grammar schools in this country.

I attend, as much as I love the people and the place, a dreadful outer-city comprehensive school - I have seen it first hand; the brightest pupils were sat there bored while the teacher struggled to control the class or had to keep those at the top of the class behind because the rest of the class could not grasp the topic. It's un-runnable by its sheer size and has appalling results even with exams being easier than ever before.



The system wasn't perfect, infact the German model is the best (interestingly the first thing East German parents did when socialism fell was to bring back the grammar schools) which is more flexible and is decided by a joint decision between teacher, parents and pupil.

But as for condemning pupils, we do this every year, with every generation - the bright children who happen to be poor are condemned to bad education in comprehensives, along with those who are quite bright but are let down by the schools system. In this country if you want a good education you can either pay for it or buy into an expensive catchment area of a religious/one of the remaining grammar schools - the rest have to make do with the comprehensives.



Because the poorest don't have access to private schools which may be based on ability - they are stuck with inner-city comprehensives which basically condemn them to poor education. We've had generations of politicians pledging to 'fix' the education system - it can be fixed, bring back the grammar school system. Grammar schools are probably one of the only good things a government can do for the poorest.



My thoughts are, as nasty as the comments may be - that it is beyond wrong to charge anybody for saying, writing or texting an opinion.

Well I have some sympathy for your comments abput the Grammar v Comprehensive debate. The only reservation is that what happens to late developers? Their future could be cut off at the age of 11. If there were ways to transder pupils who deserve it at say at 12 or 13 I would probably support it. Could we not go even further though and have vocational colleges for less academic pupile where the 3rs are dealt with on a less academic basis but training for employment is paramount? Harrassment via texting is already dealt with under the law of this land and the police can issue a warning notice however the answer surely is to get a new number and only give to those you trust. A lot of this could have been avoided.

The hate crimes - I am not sure about this. It is very tragic indeed but there were ways to stop it I feel. The bullying via the internet could have been sorted by accounts being been closed and new ones with a new identity made and the parents perhaps did not realise how this impacted on his mental health.