AL Teen Missing in Aruba

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

I'm quite familiar with the concept of weighted GPAs and what you have to do to get them, LOL. I went to an extremely competitive public HS where it was completely possible to get a 5.0, so if you had a 4.1 or even a 4.5, it was no big thing. I graduated with a 4.5 and I probably was in the top 10% of the class, not in the top 1% or even 3%. We didn't have grade inflation, everyone took AP and IB classes, even as freshmen.

Everyone who goes missing deserves the attention/sympathy/work their families and communities do to find them.

Great. Good for you and your high school. As I said, we went to a competitive high school, and she worked hard. She absolutely earned the right to be proud of her achievements. It's still weird to me that people so want to downplay that.

Right.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Great. Good for you and your high school. As I said, we went to a competitive high school, and she worked hard. She absolutely earned the right to be proud of her achievements. It's still weird to me that people so want to downplay that.

Right.

No one wants to downplay it. You're the one who brought up AP classes and how your high school was oh-so-competitive. You're not the only one who went to a good high school.

Just shut the fuck up. You're sounding like an idiot. I hope they resolve this case today so you'll be quiet.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

No one wants to downplay it.

Just shut the fuck up. You're sounding like an idiot. I hope they resolve this case today so you'll be quiet.

Your repeating that it's so easy to get these grades made it seem like you think it's no big deal. Also, the fact that you asked if it was "that big a deal?"

Sorry for misinterpreting that, though I do regret to inform you that you DON'T have the say on who has to "shut the fuck up". I would be ecstatic if you, for instance, would "just shut the fuck up", but alas, this is a messageboard, and that's not the way it works.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Your repeating that it's so easy to get these grades made it seem like you think it's no big deal. Also, the fact that you asked if it was "that big a deal?"

Sorry for misinterpreting that, though I do regret to inform you that you DON'T have the say on who has to "shut the fuck up". I would be ecstatic if you, for instance, would "just shut the fuck up", but alas, this is a messageboard, and that's not the way it works.

WAAAAAHMBULANCE.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

WAAAAAHMBULANCE.

Ok, I'm playing one round.

Really? Your last post was "wahhh shut the fuck up". Really?

[Kappamd]

Wtf happened to this thread?

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Ok, I'm playing one round.

Really? Your last post was "wahhh shut the fuck up". Really?

Yes, really. Shut the fuck up.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

Yes, really. Shut the fuck up.

Go boil your head.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

You do realize that you don't have the final say on what people post, yes?

Look, if you want to assume that you need to explain your association with Holloway and how you feel about Holloway, have at it. Just don't assume that my posts are talking about you.

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Correct. It is obvious that I do not, and therefore am not looking at this in connection to victimology.

Then were you being sarcastic when you said that you are looking at this through an objective lens?

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Look, if you want to assume that you need to explain your association with Holloway and how you feel about Holloway, have at it. Just don't assume that my posts are talking about you.



Then were you being sarcastic when you said that you are looking at this through an objective lens?

I do not assume that, you assume that. I simply respond to the particular post I quote. I agree to not assume, if you do the same.

I said this, "Obviously, that is not the objective lens through which I see this story." which is meant to refer to victimology as an "objective lens". I see how you could have misread it because of how it is worded. I do not see the case objectively at all, which is pretty obvious, I think.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I do not assume that, you assume that. I simply respond to the particular post I quote. I agree to not assume, if you do the same.

LOL. Back to victimology, since this isn't just about why one person feels as she/he does:

There are people who feel as though they can relate to the Holloway case. What's embedded in that is the question of which victims receive the most response based on how people can relate to them. Mainstream society is most likely to relate to victims who look like them (or fit some ideal), seemingly live like them, and people who from all accounts were perceivably "pure" prior to being victimized.

That's why saying things like "she'd be getting good grades in college" and "she was so nice" receives a certain reaction from people. Let's say she wasn't a good student and wasn't considered nice and wholesome. Is that less of a loss?

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I said this, "Obviously, that is not the objective lens through which I see this story." which is meant to refer to victimology as an "objective lens". I see how you could have misread it because of how it is worded. I do not see the case objectively at all, which is pretty obvious, I think.

Yeah, I re-read that part of your post and see what you meant. It wasn't poorly worded. I can admit when I misinterpreted something.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

LOL. Back to victimology, since this isn't just about why one person feels as she/he does:

There are people who feel as though they can relate to the Holloway case. What's embedded in that is the question of which victims receive the most response based on how people can relate to them. Mainstream society is most likely to relate to victims who look like them (or fit some ideal), seemingly live like them, and people who from all accounts were perceivably "pure" prior to being victimized.

That's why saying things like "she'd be getting good grades in college" and "she was so nice" receives a certain reaction from people. Let's say she wasn't a good student and wasn't considered nice and wholesome. Is that less of a loss?




Yeah, I re-read that part of your post and see what you meant. It wasn't poorly worded. I can admit when I misinterpreted something.

It's not less of a loss, but she probably wouldn't get the same attention. That's just reality. What sells is what gets attention on shows like Nancy Grace and Greta I-can't-remember-her-last-name. I doubt you'll find anyone who would think it's less of a loss when you're talking about a human life, especially an innocent victim of a crime. But it doesn't sell as well.

Personally, I say those things because I believe them. On tv they say those things because it helps build the sellable profile.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I doubt you'll find anyone who would think it's less of a loss when you're talking about a human life, especially an innocent victim of a crime. But it doesn't sell as well.

A lot of people think that one life is less of a loss than another. That's why some stories are more sellable than others. Nancy Grace, et al only go based on what the viewers want to hear about.

What it takes is seeing patterns in what people say and looking at what is embedded in what people say (i.e. "she was so pretty" or "she would've been something"). You can not go by the niceties in what people literally say because most people want to see themselves as nice people who would never think and say that some lives are more valuable than others.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

A lot of people think that one life is less of a loss than another. That's why some stories are more sellable than others. Nancy Grace, et al only go based on what the viewers want to hear about.

What it takes is seeing patterns in what people say and looking at what is embedded in what people say (i.e. "she was so pretty" or "she would've been something"). You can not go by what people literally say because most people want to see themselves as nice people who would never think and say that some lives are more valuable than others.

I have to say, I haven't ever heard someone say that she would be less of a loss to the world and her loved ones if she hadn't made good grades or been pretty. That includes people that are genuinely angry that her case has gotten so much attention over the years. I do not assume that because someone comments that she was pretty or smart that they don't give a shit about kids who aren't pretty or smart.

The majority of the world isn't composed of people who are blond and attractive and had great grades in high school and were well liked by peers. Do they really believe that people who are attractive and smart are more valuable than those that aren't?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I have to say, I haven't ever heard someone say that she would be less of a loss to the world and her loved ones if she hadn't made good grades or been pretty. That includes people that are genuinely angry that her case has gotten so much attention over the years. I do not assume that because someone comments that she was pretty or smart that they don't give a shit about kids who aren't pretty or smart.

Once again, this isn't about you. This is a general discussion of the trends and patterns that are observed in victimology and have been applied to cases such as Holloway's.

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Do they really believe that people who are attractive and smart are more valuable than those that aren't?

Generally speaking, yes.