Something I needed to get off my chest..

[Remixer]

Once again, I wish I'd never opened my mouth.
I am sorry if you didn't mean it that way, but I now feel criticized and patronised for my choices, and I shouldn't be made to feel like that on an internet forum because of my opinions. I accept that people may just feel like what they are saying is advice, and that telling me I'll find myself and won't be a goth anymore is the god's honest truth, but I don't see it that way. I was told 5 years ago that when I hit college I would grow out if it. 2 years of college went by, I am in my first year of University and I haven't grown out of it yet.
I don't like being told that I have deep-rooted problem within me by somebody that doesn't know me either. I dress tastefully. It's people who wear mini-skirts and show thongs to the world that have the deep-rooted problems. I am happy with who I am now and I wasn't before, so I can't see the problem.
I don't mean to have an angry rant here, but I feel like this is needed.
As for seeing myself, "as is" and the need to be a goth subsiding, how do you know that being a goth isn't who I am? I honestly feel more like myself being a goth than I ever have before.
And now I request we change the subject back to whether dying your hair should be acceptable in the workplace, because we have gotten off topic just from one little comment I made and I did not intend that to happen.
I can already predict I'm going to be called immature for taking offence, so please just don't bother and change the subject back.

Yes, you have misunderstood. I simply questioned your approach. Anything I ask is to be taken as neutral as possible, because I don't care about the subject at all, though I am interested in it.


No, I said it indicates a deep-rooted problem.


Women who wear miniskirts and show off their thongs to the whole world don't have a deep-rooted problem in most cases.

The problem they have is called Attention Deficit. They are also coined as "attention ******" which fits perfectly in every way to that kind of women.


I never said you'd outgrow it. Instead, I acknowledged your lack of self-confidence and asked why dressing as a Gothic gives you confidence in areas other than feeling comfortable in front of others, which you haven't answered as of yet.


If you took offense to my questions, then I can only provide you with a tissue, as there is nothing that bothers me.

Cheers




Remixer

 

[ShadowSpirit]

If you took offense to my questions, then I can only provide you with a tissue, as there is nothing that bothers me.
Cheers
Remixer

Damn. It isn't necessary to patronize the woman. She admits to being distraught enough as it is.

I can already predict I'm going to be called immature for taking offence, so please just don't bother and change the subject back.

I'm sorry if you feel like you've started a fire that you can't put out. Though despite you being discussed in example, this conversation has evolved beyond just about the goth lifestyle. It is easier for us to stick with what we know and have already invested ideas into to keep the flow of the debate going easier. Yet we are not trying to pick on you in particular, nor just single out goth sub-culture. So please don't feel offended by the things being said and try not to fret about having opened your mouth. This is a good topic with a strong presence now.

I don't like being told that I have deep-rooted problem within me by somebody that doesn't know me either. I dress tastefully.

When you talk on an open forum, you're inviting people to involve their opinions or judgments on all topics or all people participating. It helps to remember that yes, we don't know you. So don't take what people say to heart. Try to learn something from the discussions and feel free to discard the rude gestures that are given to you. Some people find comfort in putting others down to make a point or ensure their own self security. This doesn't mean you have to accept it as truth to who you are.

Maybe one day you will find something that helps you feel more confident than being a goth. If that happens and you choose to embrace it, then cool. If not, then enjoy your life as a goth. No matter what you choose, you are always you. It really can be that simple.

 

[Haruspex]

If, like in the case of Kirie Maiden, a certain way of dressing grants said person improved self-confidence and security, thus improving their effectiveness generally, it would be overwhelmingly inconsiderate and selfish to require said person to get rid of the source of confidence just so someone else may experience increased aesthetic pleasure.

It is the epitome of idiocy, and this sentence a euphemism.

 

[Kirie_Maiden]

Maybe one day you will find something that helps you feel more confident than being a goth. If that happens and you choose to embrace it, then cool. If not, then enjoy your life as a goth. No matter what you choose, you are always you. It really can be that simple.

This point and Derfels entire post really just sum up everything I was trying to say.

I never said you'd outgrow it. Instead, I acknowledged your lack of self-confidence and asked why dressing as a Gothic gives you confidence in areas other than feeling comfortable in front of others, which you haven't answered as of yet.

Personally, I thought I had answered it by saying I dress as a Goth when there is nobody around. It is all about how I see myself and I don't care what other people think of me. If I like the way I look, it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks (apart from, obviously, my boyfriend but it's safe to say that he likes how I look too...). It's not about feeling comfortable in front of others. I've never had that problem. It's about feeling comfortable with myself, which I am. Other than when I've had a few spots, I've never really thought, "I can't go out looking like this!" I've just looked in the mirror and thought, "Urgh..." really. Never really thought about how others would see me.

Case in point, I have already mentioned my black hair. I dyed it despite protests from my mother, my family and all my friends, who preferred me being Ginger. If it was all about others, I would have stayed Ginger but it's about me... so I dyed it.

I know something like this is difficult to explain, but I have tried.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

You've misunderstood. I wasn't implying that you should mind your own business from the topic, nor was I even targeting you specifically in that statement. I was asking generally, why can't people mind their own business as to those they see on the streets? Why even bother caring if a person is dressed like emo, punk, whatever? It doesn't hurt you any. My comment on this had nothing to do with you involving yourself in this thread or topic. Sorry if you interpreted it as such.

You're right though. This is turning into a circular argument. I can't possibly think of another way to convey my point anyhow. It is ok if you disagree with me, I just wish you at least understood what I was trying to say before coming to your argument against it.

It's all good, I didn't mean to come off sounding over-bearing either. To respond to your point more clearly, as you've alluded to it here, there is definitely a line at which we stop caring and move on with life. I am sure all of us here, whichever side of the argument we're on, don't care a whole lot once we're outside in public and not encompassed in the online debate. As you've already said, agree to disagree. As for why it would spill over into real life, well I think based on a wide array of personal experiences we who participate in the topic either have positive or negative impressions of people who do this kinda stuff. Unfortunately, most people I've met/seen/known who were into hair colour, acting out, playing the social outcast, etc., did not leave a favourable impression. That is not my fault.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

Apologies if I've annoyed you. That's certainly not my intention, and my claim that your attitude here is prejudiced isn't a dig at you personally. What I'm challenging is your assumption, which you have again restated above, that certain styles of appearance indicate certain underlying personality traits, e.g., that blue hair is a sign of immaturity.

It's not a universal truth that hair colour is an indication of maturity level I think that's common sense. I do challenge however the idea that needing to act-out, to make yourself noticed, to put on a little wee show for the public eye in whatever form, is equatable to completely normal well-balanced behaviour that benefits society and is therefore deserving of serious consideration. It's a nuance that really tapers off as we near our blue-haired friend since he's a doctor, is obviously intelligent, contributes greatly to society, pays more tax than any of us, etc., but the further down the ladder we go towards the common denominator, it's quite common to see the people who really take this image stuff seriously play out the same stereotype over and over again.

 

[Kirie_Maiden]

Some good points from bakaKanadajin. While it is true that some people do not judge based on hair colour, there will always be people that do. While it SHOULD be aceeptable to do whatever you want with your own body, it, in some cases, isn't. For example, it is school rules in most places that your hair must be dyed a natural looking colour (which is why I went for black as opposed to Bright Red which I also liked the look of), whereas in some cases, this may not be true.

While this debate was about whether it should matter, and I don't think it should... the fact is that it does matter. While there are people who will not judge there will always be people who will so, while still wishing to express individuality (if that is the reason), it is wise to be careful about how far you go. A tattoo can be hidden but bright red hair cannot (unless a hat is part of the work uniform ^_^).

Back to the blue-haired doctor... the fact is none of his patients cared about his hair, and they complained when he turned it back to a natural colour. In some other places, he might not have been trusted with this hair (for example... if he had moved to a new practice). It was the patients who already knew him and knew he was an excellent doctor that didn't judge him based on his decisions, but new patients may not think that way. It is all based on personal choice and while it is mature to think that you can't judge based on looks, it is impossible to say that nobody will ever judge based on looks, because people always will.

I would also like to say sorry for taking offence. I'll state reasons such as a 'bad day' and 'female problems' because it is true. Looking back, the comments might have annoyed me slightly but there is nothing in them that should have caused that huge rant.

And final point about the Blue Haired Doctor. I'd like to reveal that his name is Nicholas. Yeah... Doctor Nick. Any of you watch The Simpsons? (Yeah... that was off topic but I thought I'd give some people a giggle in this serious discussion)

 

[Haruspex]

One of my former classmates was sent home cause he was wearing a Cannibal Corpse T shirt with

on it.
They also wanted to send me home for wearing a Manowar T shirt with a chopped off head.
I rofl'd so damn hard its unbelievable. When there was sort of a meeting with teachers and parents attending, the guy that wanted to send me home told them that the Satan has entered the class (im translating literally lol), and that such evil images cannot be tolerated.

Shortly after, during a class trip like five of us decided to do some proper corpse paints to piss the cretin off. I need not tell how shocked the guy was.

What I was going to say was that this guy wanted to violate my rights of self-expression and freedom of belief (shame I was unaware of this at the time, geh), and this is an upholder of justice we're talking about, a warrior of the light here.
I mean, honestly, is being ill-informed excuse for being a retard? I mean, the guy was genuinely alarmed that we were forming some sort of evil sect or whatever, and that our souls were at stake.
Now, the society does not seem to care about this sort of inbred imbeciles, when in truth their presence is genuinely malicious and disturbing, and isn't a pseudo-threat like that of persons with unusual looks. And all the brainless fools concurred, like sheep. Educational institutes should be the centres of free thinking.

 

[Remixer]

Derfel,

in all honesty, if I were to be a teacher/principal at a school and one of my students would show up with a T-Shirt that sports an image like that, I would also send that person home.

That is extremely disguting.




Remixer

 

[Haruspex]

European Convention on Human Rights

Article 9 – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

1 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom,
either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and
observance.

2 Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to
such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of
public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and
freedoms of others.

Now, one could argue that suck actions would be for the protection of morals, but note the "and" after the word "law". So it must be prescribed by law.

Again, if we look at Article 10 (which isn't exactly in point, but could be cited) there is an "and" after "law" again. So its pretty much GG.

 

[ShadowSpirit]

One of my former classmates was sent home cause he was wearing a Cannibal Corpse T shirt with

on it.
They also wanted to send me home for wearing a Manowar T shirt with a chopped off head.
I rofl'd so damn hard its unbelievable. When there was sort of a meeting with teachers and parents attending, the guy that wanted to send me home told them that the Satan has entered the class (im translating literally lol), and that such evil images cannot be tolerated.

Shortly after, during a class trip like five of us decided to do some proper corpse paints to piss the cretin off. I need not tell how shocked the guy was.

What I was going to say was that this guy wanted to violate my rights of self-expression and freedom of belief (shame I was unaware of this at the time, geh), and this is an upholder of justice we're talking about, a warrior of the light here.
I mean, honestly, is being ill-informed excuse for being a retard? I mean, the guy was genuinely alarmed that we were forming some sort of evil sect or whatever, and that our souls were at stake.
Now, the society does not seem to care about this sort of inbred imbeciles, when in truth their presence is genuinely malicious and disturbing, and isn't a pseudo-threat like that of persons with unusual looks. And all the brainless fools concurred, like sheep. Educational institutes should be the centres of free thinking.

Geez Derfel. I have a feeling you're going to start a storm with this one.

I don't know if what that teacher did is in violation of any freedom of expression per se. It really depends on the school's policies which usually supercedes local laws while a student is attending that school. This is how things go in the US, I can't speak directly on behalf of where you went to school. Though it is some suggestion that you should have checked the policy to see if you were in violation of it or not.

I'll use a story of myself for an example. I can't believe I'm about to reminisce on my immaturity. I was 14 and a freshman in high school. Over the previous summer I had bought a funny shirt I found in a novelty shop. It was a white t-shirt, with a bunch of tiny pictures on it of differenty cartoon animals engaging in sexual situations. Positions included: on top, doggystyle, oral, 69, etc.. No penetration being shown, only suggestive themes. Well, in my infinite wisdom, I thought it would be a good idea to use this as my Physical Training shirt for school. Needless to say, the PT teacher was immediate against it as soon as she realized what the animals on my shirt were doing (Most people didn't even notice right away. They had to pay attention and stare at the shirt for awhile to realize it.) Here is where the problem came in for the teacher. She couldn't send me home nor make me change shirts, because that shirt was not in violation of the school's policies. I pointed it out to the principle, that the policy says (in relation to sexual activity). "The imagery cannot show persons engaging in sexual relations. The imagery cannot show sexual genitalia or penetration. The imagery cannot induce sexual urges." From which I said. "The characters on the shirt are animals, not people. You can't see their genitalia and no penetration is visible. There is nothing about watching animals have sex that gives me sexual urges. Does it to you?" From which they asked. "Then why do you have the shirt on?" Easy reply. "Cause it's funny. It doesn't make me horny, but it does make me laugh." With that, I got to keep the shirt. Score one point for the annoying class clown!

 

[Remixer]

European Convention on Human Rights
Article 9 – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
1 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom,
either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and
observance.
2 Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to
such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of
public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and
freedoms of others.
Now, one could argue that suck actions would be for the protection of morals, but note the "and" after the word "law". So it must be prescribed by law.
Again, if we look at Article 10 (which isn't exactly in point, but could be cited) there is an "and" after "law" again. So its pretty much GG.

The legal standpoint you have quoted is obsolete in this case.

No court in Europe would allow that law to be quoted as a pro-argument to allow such imagery be worn as clothing on school grounds.

Also, as ShadowSpirit has already mentioned, school policies on etiquette and dress codes supercede national laws.

You wouldn't win the debate, and if you really did, the debaters on the other side of the argument were weak and should be kicked out.

EDIT: Nor would you win a debate on legal systems against me, as I already have plenty debating experience in that field and am listed to immatriculate into Oxford Law School next year, if I choose to go there.




Remixer

 

[Haruspex]

Geez Derfel. I have a feeling you're going to start a storm with this one.
I don't know if what that teacher did is in violation of any freedom of expression per se. It really depends on the school's policies which usually supercedes local laws while a student is attending that school. This is how things go in the US, I can't speak directly on behalf of where you went to school. Though it is some suggestion that you should have checked the policy to see if you were in violation of it or not.

ECHR prevails over national law. This system is implemented in various ways in various countries, but whenever you hear that an aggrieved party went to Strasbourg and won, the anal pounding of a state organ usually commences and the violated right is restored.

As for the story, it made me laugh. Whenever an oppressor is left frustrated im a happy man.

 

[Haruspex]

B. European Convention on Human Rights

The protection of human rights, which is primarily a matter for the state in whose territory the rights may be enjoyed, cannot today be confined within national boundaries. The European Convention on Human Rights was signed at Rome in 1950, was ratified by the United Kingdom in 1951, and came into force among those states which had ratified it in 1953. The Convention is a treaty under international law and its authority derives solely from the consent of those states who have become parties to it. It was a direct result of the movement for cooperation in Western Europe which in 1949 created the Council of Europe. Inspiration for the Convention came from the wide principles declared in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. The Convention declares certain human rights which are or should be protected by law in each state. It also provides political and judicial procedures by which alleged infringements of these rights may be examined at an international level. In particular, the acts of public authorities may be challenged even though they are in accordance with national law. The Convention thus provides a constraint on the legislative authority of national parliaments, including that at Westminster.

Constitutional and Administrative Law
A W Bradley and K D Ewing 13th edition, p.409

The Strasbourg court will hear cases related to violated Convention Rights if the litigants pay. Now in this case the litigants would probably not pay for such a small matter. The court decides on matters of law, not on matters of morality.
As for your debating experience, and your future matriculation... they are grossly lacking in authority. You can't just go, boastfully show off, and claim that by virtue of how amazing you are, your point is right.

 

[ShadowSpirit]

ECHR prevails over national law. This system is implemented in various ways in various countries, but whenever you hear that an aggrieved party went to Strasbourg and won, the anal pounding of a state organ usually commences and the violated right is restored.

Well. I'll just have to take your word for that. I'll leave Remixer to tackle you on the debate of whether you were in any violation or not, as he seemed quick to list his academic credentials before you even had a chance to accept his challenge.

As for the imagery choice. It is dark and composite of violent behavior. I choose personally not to promote violence. Yet I more am a believer of expressing one's self and can recognize the difference between fiction and fact. That's how I've managed to be watching horror movies since I was 4 and never once tried to attack someone with a weapon nor harm any living creature (animal or otherwise.) Example being: drawings of someone being gutted that are on a Cannibal Corpse shirt are harmless. Domestic violence is not.

By the way. Before anybody gives Derfel too much cr@p about his personal choice of expression. Lets not forget that a lot of people like to walk around with an emblem of a man being impailed to a cross around their neck. Complete with spilling blood and a thorn crown to amplify the gore. Though this is considered completely acceptable in many cultures.

 

[Haruspex]

Well, im of the opinion that ambitious claims require corresponding authority. Claiming that my opinion is downright wrong is quite ambitious. An implicit statement to the extent that "I can provide authority whenever I want, look at who I am!" is not legal authority. It is not proof for a legal point, only for a gross lack of modesty.

 

[Kinsao]

Derfel: Love the shirt! I really do! ^^" - although understood that if I was representing my company and attending a conference the bosses wouldn't be all that impressed - as it might make some of delegates feel nauseous - not giving a great impression of the company. ;-)

As for legal stuffs - I think it would depend if the school had a written constitution/rules about what imagery can be worn, and if the person had broken it... if there was nothing in the rules the pupil might have a case in law...

Anyway, more on topic...

Kirei Maiden, I hope you are not really upset by what people have written here... Personally I think it is a shame you were under-confident, but if you have found a style that makes you feel more confident, that's great. In years to come, perhaps you will feel confident about yourself regardless of how you are dressed... let's hope so... but of course, that's no reason to stop dressing Goth... sometimes you don't need to wear a style just as a confidence boost, but simply because you like that aesthetic.

Following on, I don't see why that issue is about dressing Goth or in any other 'non-mainstream' or 'sub-culture' or 'standing out' style... for example, when I was a teenager, about 15 years old, I was very concerned about my appearance (normal for that age, I reckon!), and I didn't feel very confident in my appearance if I didn't think I looked nice. To me, looking nice meant being in something reasonably fashionable (not with designer labels... I never liked them >_< ...) and that I thought was flattering... usually quite 'revealing', I don't mean of skin but of the figure (i.e. I hated to wear baggy stuff cos I thought it made me look fat). These days, I can feel confident in more or less anything, because I feel 'hey, actually I don't look too bad in myself, even if I am forced to wear these hideous pink overalls' (or whatever).

The point is that everyone feels better in what they think they look nicer in. That doesn't have to be Goth or outlandish in some way - in the cases of most people it's normal mainstream 'street' fashions or casual wear or smart 'boring' clothes.

I don't think that *any* young person who dresses Goth actually thinks they are being 'oh so individual', unless they are a complete m0r0n. It is a distinctive style that you can see 'examples' everywhere on the high street of the average English city (can't speak for elsewhere though).

Again, as I said earlier, in my experience only (and this is all personal opinion of course so take it with a grain of salt would you?) the kids who did this kind of thing often did so at the expense of participation in school. They rejected clubs, activities, friends, social circles, etc., because of perceived inner inadequacies or what have you. Rather than spend time and effort excelling in their weak areas they simply accepted their status and played on their role as the 'rejects', the angsty 'no one gets me' types, and put resources into piercings, hair-do's, in some cases drugs etc. instead.

I don't know who you've been associating with but you seem to have got pretty unlucky. Being nearly the same age as you I've obviously had a more fortunate experience of humanity, or perhaps just of Goths. Most Goths I've known have actively participated in 'society' in general, done rather well academically, and the majority not involved with illegal drugs to any great extent. Just goes to show it's impossible to completely extrapolate from one's own experiences. ;-)

if there was no one else on the planet, would you still do the things you do, act the way you act, dress the way you dress?

I can only speak personally there, and of course the answer is 'yes'. If I wasn't happy with my choice of clothing, why the hell would I wear it every day?! Of course, if no one else was around I could go naked on hot days.

If being goth was truly a real, soulfully-rooted way of being we'd see more gothic seniors wouldn't we?

Again, I think we must live in rather different worlds, because I know (and have seen many more) people who are 'gothic seniors'; who are older than, say, 25 or 30 and dress Goth. It's never occurred to me to even think twice about this. I assume that some people can't 'dress Goth' every day of the week because their jobs have dress codes or uniforms; other people (including myself) are luckier and can dress however they want... such is life. Believe me, there are plenty of 'gothic seniors' out there. I'm well on my way to becoming one myself. ;-)

Sorry for all the focus on 'Goth' in this post, but felt the need to stick up for Kirei Maiden. Maybe a bit as a fellow Goth ;-) but also I couldn't honestly say I am a 'full Goth' or whatever... I don't dress like that all of the time... my style just varies from day to day; it tends to be quite eclectic and always noticeable... maybe as a kind of attention-seeking to say 'look at me' about the appearance and at the same time hiding the 'real' person behind it? I did wonder that. And being quite old (welllllll... not tooooo far from 30... <blush>), of course it's something that I've given thought to. I'm not generally a 'poser' type of person, nor do I need to put on a 'persona' or 'costume' to have my confidence. With me, it was more about coming to terms with my appearance. I like aesthetic things... I'm a painter... I like 'beauty' (however you define it) and the visual side of things... to look at interesting things is enjoyable for me. So kind of, you could say I wanted to turn myself into some kind of 'art work'. I know I would never be looked at for my great beauty, but I have long come to terms with that (since those days 15 years ago, lol), but damn, I wish to draw attention to myself, not as a roundabout way of hiding myself but because I love visual stuff and style and things that look great and exciting and bright or different and make the world a better place! and it feels good! I can't count the number of times people have made positive comments about my clothing and said how it made them smile and sometimes that they look out for me everyday to see what I'll be wearing next. I have no illusions, it's not 'me' they are admiring, and I wouldn't want it to be either! It's like they are admiring my 'creation', it's nothing about hiding who I am, not at all.

Phew - nuff said, I think...

 

[Haruspex]

Derfel: Love the shirt! I really do! ^^" - although understood that if I was representing my company and attending a conference the bosses wouldn't be all that impressed - as it might make some of delegates feel nauseous - not giving a great impression of the company. ;-)
As for legal stuffs - I think it would depend if the school had a written constitution/rules about what imagery can be worn, and if the person had broken it... if there was nothing in the rules the pupil might have a case in law...

It was a small school, and never had similar issues before, so my guesses are that there wasn't such a code, but I am unsure. It was not used by said teacher as an argument. His argument was purely based on his own morals and views.

Well, yeah, a conference is a different issue. I mean, I don't mean to say that school isn't "serious business", but the formality of a conference is much higher, especially considering that we're talking about Hungary, where you don't even have to wear a uniform in school.

 

[ShadowSpirit]

but also I couldn't honestly say I am a 'full Goth' or whatever... I don't dress like that all of the time... my style just varies from day to day

What's this you say? You mean you *gasp* dress however you like? Are you sure you're not just insecure and hiding behind the gothic ensemble to cloak your angst for being rejected by society? Maybe you're confused and that is why you switch off between various styles? I hope my sarcasm is thick enough for this post.

*jumps up and down, waves a flag, and points to Kinsao* Take note here people. We have yet another person who is just trying to be herself and isn't trying to rebel against society or mask a wounded ego. These are the examples that come forth whenever people attempt to stereotype or assume a person's intentions behind their lifestyle. My fashion per mood coincides with Kinsao's philosophy as well. There are too many interesting styles out there to stick with just one.

 

[Remixer]

Well, im of the opinion that ambitious claims require corresponding authority. Claiming that my opinion is downright wrong is quite ambitious. An implicit statement to the extent that "I can provide authority whenever I want, look at who I am!" is not legal authority. It is not proof for a legal point, only for a gross lack of modesty.

Yes, I tend to be immodest about these things and brag a great deal.


Regardless, I will provide an argumentation to negate the one you have provided.

I am quite confident in being able to debate on the subject of the legal status of schools and their policies within the law system in the context you have given, otherwise I wouldn't bother.

The reason I am likely to immatriculate into Oxford Law School is mainly because of my confidence in my legal debating skills. I like to intimidate my opposition with heavy, authority-like terminology. I enjoy this a great deal; please forgive my rudeness.

However, I will have to excuse myself from this debate for at least 3 days, since I will be traveling to Brussels tomorrow morning for a business trip and will not be able to put the concentration and time into this debate I deem necessary for it not to be wasted.

Cheers




Remixer

 

[Haruspex]

You will? Whether you have negated my argument will fall to be decided once you have provided a counter-argument.

Confidence is great, and it will helps make a point, but whether that point is well-grounded has nothing with confidence.

Authority-like terminology is only intimidating to those lacking in confidence or knowledge, neither practitioners nor academics are susceptible to this, though I will agree, it is useful for fooling the facile and the weak. Proper authority need not be intimidating, its purpose is not to scare people into believing something, it is merely proof.

I personally do not care much about the measures people use. If it is acknowledged in the legal sphere, it is probably a method reliant highly on authority, if it is not, my goals are furthered as it will only stir disapproval.

 

[Remixer]

You will? Whether you have negated my argument will fall to be decided once you have provided a counter-argument.
Confidence is great, and it will helps make a point, but whether that point is well-grounded has nothing with confidence.
Authority-like terminology is only intimidating to those lacking in confidence or knowledge, neither practitioners nor academics are susceptible to this, though I will agree, it is useful for fooling the facile and the weak. Proper authority need not be intimidating, its purpose is not to scare people into believing something, it is merely proof.

I hope you heard of the phrase "No ****, Sherlock?". It applies here, my dear friend.

Maybe you like to point out the obvious, I don't know.

We all have things we like to do.




Remixer

 

[Haruspex]

I hope you heard of the phrase "No ****, Sherlock?". It applies here, my dear friend.
Maybe you like to point out the obvious, I don't know.
We all have things we like to do.
Remixer

In the vacuum of modesty, I genuinely felt the need to point out the obvious, lest it go unobserved.

 

[Remixer]

In the vacuum of modesty, I genuinely felt the need to point out the obvious, lest it go unobserved.

I merely reasoned my immodest approach for you.

The direct conclusions one can derive from my reasoning can be pointed out, of course.

However, it does add little to the information available.

As I said, we all have things we like to do. I like to brag and delightfully enjoy the wonders of sarcasm.




Remixer

 

[Haruspex]

Fact remains fact. You failed to live up to the expectations your behavior, namely your words implied: a ready and timely counter-argument. I am not going to reprimand you, as that is not within my power, but I will make this clear: reading your comments, I came to believe that you would provide a timely answer before the course of discussion changes. I believe that the reasonable person would have reached the same conclusion.
This leaves me with the belief that your great self-confidence was unfounded.

I will agree that we all have things we like to do, for me that would be pointing out immodesty.