![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 78 to 102 of 106. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on September 26, 2018, at 19:42:45
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 26, 2018, at 18:46:44
The answer is: probably not. But you gotta be in to win and so you basically save to buy lotto tickets. Each application has an associated fee, you see. I think I looked into that and it was AUD$5,000 to apply for orthopedics specialist training in Australia. That gives you some idea. Then you have the fees involved in sitting various examinations. Surgical Sciences examinations etc. The purchase of preparation material and so on.
On the other hand... They know how much you earn. And they also know who goes into the whole thing with trust funds and the like (and would expect a corrspondingly greater contribution given that).
I guess you can hope that the people behind the system / process have an eye to fair-minded. but in any individual case it is a lottery, yeah.
I mean... What's teh alternative to the system / process not being fair-minded?
The worst would be to believe it wasn't (and to give up) when it turned out that it was.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 15:37:50
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 26, 2018, at 19:42:45
what is tiresome is being required to re-invent the wheel over and over and over and over and over.
It is tiresome because we know it's there. It isn't like it took all that much of a leap to see it's there and work towards figuring out the details.
It is also tiresome because other people have done it already and could teach it which would save so very much time. Then that time could be put to use learning other things which also take time.
And in this way things could progress.
I didn't come back here to re-discover the state of philosophy in the developed world 50 years ago.
And yet, here I am. More fool me.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 15:49:51
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 15:37:50
The lack of teaching thing wouldn't be so very bad if there was sufficient time for people to learn things in their own time. I mean, if they aren't going to teach you the standard stuff (stuff that would enable you to prepare well for foreign examinations) then at least they could go light on the curriculum so the kids have the opportunity to straggle themselves up / teach themselves. Only, they don't. They seem determined to pack things out either so you are forced into group work (preventing individual study / thought e.g., by way of reading) or so you are kept busy learning something along the lines of arbitrary lists.
The stuff they teach you can even actually interfere with the stuff that you should be learning. That's a really great way of branding people to you, make it so the answers you consider right are precisely those same answers that are considered wrong by others. I mean... Talking about answers when it comes to things about the make-up of the lipid bi-layer and the like. When you have multiple choice answers like 'none of the above' vs an answer that nearly fits - but not quite. Which of those is 'best'? No marks for wrong answer or... Why not actively take marks off for wrong answer? You can even give out those sorts of questions (if you have enough of them) well in advance... Then people will 'work through' the answers (collude on the answers) in their residential hall tutorials. The answers will then clearly mark out to an examination algorithm which are the kids of the elite. Objectively. Like how 'I read the newspaper every day' contributes to your liar score (whether or not it is true for the individual is irrelevant).
The trouble with it is that it undermines meaningful activity. I mean... If you can spend literally hours looking into the nature of the lipid bi-layer... Reading Boron's Physiology and Guyton and Hall. Reading whatever dumbed down international version of Anatomy and Physiology they give you this year... And it fairly much always comes down to a choice between 2 options... That is a 'high end distinguisher' question... Because the 'right answer' is determined by collusion from people who are previously determined to be the ones who determine the 'high end distinguisher' questions...
So... What then of all those hours reading Boron's Physiology and Guyton and Hall...
More fool. That's what happens.
And people buy into this system...
And discover their own kids don't do so well because their own kids didn't get to go to Melbourne (or wherever it is that ensures their own kids are the high end distinguishers on the exams they make).
Why would you bother to work when it's random and the amount of work you do (and how intelligently you work) counts for nothing. When it's all just about sucking up to the 'right people' and writing down whatever they say because they say it.
What a horrible way to live.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:01:27
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 15:49:51
Only it is not for some people I guess.
You got these awful people who *like* to sit on Medical Selection Interview Panels. I mean, those old school ones like the panel I got. These people who liked to feel like they had some special magical power to distinguish those who are worthy from those who are not and to rank their candidates according to their preferences and judgements and opinions.
These awful people who... Lack the cognitive capacity to read about the sorts of biases that result from these sorts of interviews. These awful people who... Lack the cognitive capacity to see just how in-bred the panel looks / is... To see how they will culturally misunderstand everyone who doesn't look like them who doesn't display a willingness to people-please to them at all costs. Someone who expresses an opinion without seeking approval that the opinion is being well received (someone who will say anything anything anything anything that seems to be gaining their approval). Someone who speaks hesitantly and in response to a subtle frown frantically back-pedals...
Someone who isn't like that... Clearly doesn't want to do it! Is clearly stabotaging themselves! Whatever whatever whatever stories they tell to produce a new inbred generation just like them.
The sort who will look them in the eyes and smile 'pooh pooh pooh rubbish rubbish dear' while giving them a lethal injection (for their own good) because they lack the cognitive capacity to apprehend the inevitable forseeable byproduct of their action is... Death to the individual they are helping. For their own good. Helping take the pain away. Pooh pooh rubbish rubbish dear.
Euthanasia is always wrong always and forever!
It's black and white totally simple.
Palliative care.
Ugh.
I guess that's what it's like dealing with some of the wealthy benefactors. That's why you need to place limits on how much wealth can be inherited. Of course the little old lady I was worrying about... Well... It's pretty likely she's no fool if she's still got wealth and if she was a fool with it it surely won't last her long. She can probably mind herself. There's probably rather more to be gained by controlling money-grubs by projecting the air of foolish and wealthy little old lady...
People do seem to like panderers and sychophants.
I... Don't much. It's tiresome needing to do the mental calculus to stay one step ahead to make sure they aren't screwing you the way they are determined to in the end (they wouldn't stick around if they believed otherwise). I mean... It's a way to live, I guess. If you really don't have the capacity to seek out... Other things and work for them...
I guess that's why those people are determined to have an industry undermining the pursuit of knowledge and... Anything that's not all up in their business, really.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:10:48
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:01:27
I guess at the end of the day what they are trying to get at is.... Someone who will serve them and pander to them. Someone who will only tell them what they want to hear, and so on.
They aren't looking for the whole informed consent thing. They aren't looking to consult with someone who knows more than they do (which is why they want to ask them).
In an interview setting they ask you what you think about x and y and z. But they don't want you to inform them what you think about x and y and z, at all. They seem to want you to 'cheat' the interview by offering 'socially acceptable responses' where the 'socially acceptable responses' are to be determined by micro-feedback from the interviewer so you get little nods or smiles or eye twinkles when you are on the right track and you packpeddal when you find yourself met with a frown.
That's an assessment of social skills.
Huh.
People really want this in their doctor?
I guess that is why they say the people don't need doctors. They need friends to work for free. Well well well just stay home, people.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:25:30
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:10:48
but then they want people to work in the public health system and talk to people about their obesity and their smoking.
nooo.. they want people to work in the public health system and talk to *other people* about their obesity and their smoking.
they don't want people to work in the private health system talking to their servants about their mental health issues resulting from their servitude. they don't want people to work in the private health system talking to them about their drinking or... about anything that they don't want to hear.
or, maybe the idea is that if you pander to them for long enough then eventually they might be able to take a slight and very very very subtle suggestion that something along the lines of alterations in their behavior might result in better health for them.
honestly. i expect not all that much thought goes into it.
i imagine you got a bunch of people who like to say they are on medical selection to their friends and more importantly their acquaintances. you got people who like to meet with the other selectors (hence the appeal of the move to having more interviewers and doing what we can to introduce algorithms that make things random rather than discriminatory as they were previously). it's a whole social thing of getting together and having a yak about the field and about what it means to be part of the field. it's a whole group cohesion thing for the people who are part of it. so they get to feel part of determining the future of the field.
and you do see the worst of them... the ones who lack the cognitive capacity to see the harms that could be done and to say they don't want to be part of that process because of it.
random...
there's still veto power, though. to say 'definite no' and apparently to say 'definite yes'. or maybe they just say that to make the candidates sweat appropriately?
it feels like something from Camus... The Stranger... you need to show sweat appropriately...
Otherwise you self select out.
Really?
What kind of awful person would do that to another person?
What kind of awful person would want to present a group they are a part of in this way?
I guess the idea is to want to do it despite of them not because of them. To be 100 per cent clear in ones mind that one would do a better job of it than they would.
I guess that's it.
Can always say. Just say, clearly and honestly. I don't really know what this is about or what I'm supposed to say or act like but I really want to do this. If they are going to do a whole upside down and back to front thing then... Well...
Maybe everyone from the elite hall shall tie a ribbon in their hair...
What you gonna do?
Posted by Clearskies on September 28, 2018, at 16:37:11
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:25:30
Youre in a tough place.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:53:54
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 16:25:30
and of course i think i know better than them because i would have picked me (who could only apply to 2 institutions) and not the australian (who could have applied to all of the australian + 2 institutions). and i would have identified and selected out the person who was willing to be an unfair recipient of an unequal bargain when it was well in their power (and cognitive capacity presumably) to equalise the situation.
i guess everyone just wants the power to do things their way, especially when it comes to them and to their health.
i understand she would likely have been thinking i was a chump and didn't appreciate the value of money or whatever that i didn't call her on the cab thing. i suppose if you are forced to work with people then you do call them on such things or you would be a bystander and they would continually exploit you.
at the time i was actually thinking about Frank and the evolution of co-operation and the issue around why some people will tip a waitress when they are travelling but others won't . and i was thinking that she was like the person who doesn't tip a waitress because they think they won't see them again so it doesn't matter.
only that wasn't it... she was conveying to me that... she was willing to take advantage of another person - if she could get away with it?
that's an odd thing to do prior to medical selection interview. that's an odd... attitude... to work ones way into prior to interview.
i was genuinely suprised to hear she was offered a place whereas i was not.
there was an element of... 'must do this at all costs' that they liked? wtf???
who knows.
just jump through the hoops like a trained poodle so you are less likely to be put in a situation where you are at the mercy of a person who has been trained to jump through the hoops.
because that's the best we've got.
getting away from the awful as much as possible.
i've been thinking a lot about Rawls and i don't understand the stuff on peoples yet. Pogge and others have tried applying the bits everyone likes about fair contracts to international settings but Rawls didn't think it applied. They put it down to post-stroke. But...
Well... I need to think more on it. This idea that people are central or fundamental for morality in some way.
Previously I was interested in this notion of a company or corporation as a person in law. No problem with MPD / DID then there is precedent. But of course in law the whole idea is to remove responsibility from individuals and have the system... Absorb?? Absolve?? Annihilate?? Moral responsibility for individuals. So... Maybe the idea of a company or a corporation as a person is metaphoric rather than real... Maybe it isn't the solution to MPD / DID that I thought. Maybe.. Integrity of a person is required. And I do appreciate that it is something that actually is fairly rare.. The Kantian person... The will...
Anyway... There was something about Rawls... Decent hierarchical people... But something also about responsible countries not continually subsidising irresponsible countries. Something about not treating representatives of countries / countries (e.g., in a UN type setting) as persons.
Persons are primary..
It is important to realise that most countries (systems in most countries) are... Barely tolerant... Of persons. Seem mostly devoted to (serving the interests of) some small miniority with illigitimate 'interests' (e.g., in subjugation and servitude of the majority of their people).
Anyway...
The idea of duty to ones country... No... I think that might be what Rawls' was getting at. Persons is primary. National identity...
I see now that US National Identity (the whole patriotism thing) is because the US is so diverse as a nation. Diversity is destabilising and hard for people to deal with. It requires more cognitive resources to deal with difference and to process it in mature ways. it is... easier to revert to in-group out-group mentality and to exclude difference or do what one can to shut it down. But going on (and on and on) about shared ideology... Brings out the similarity / samness. So you can go on about a land of immigrants and freedom equality and justice for all.
What's the alternative?
I guess the real thing is: When given the option... Where would most people prefer to live? Most people would choose the US when it came down to choosing (with some kind of a comperable standard of living / way of life). Immigration (and visa applications) tell you so...
I have come to see a lot of the self-critique as coming from a place of... Security and stability to allow that. Here.. Much is shut down. I have felt in recent years people have been more interested in silencing me than in listening to anything I have had to say. I mean... Question time in seminars, even. Nobody is speaking up about our lack of building legislation and so on... Everyone just keeps their mouths shut and believes that is required for them to have their jobs and.... Democracy is so fragile here.
I am looking forwards (fingers crossed) to back to Auckland. More international. More immigrants. Less... Inbred elite. Here has changed a lot in the last 2 years since I've been here. Didn't really see any Maaori down here until last year. Apparently there are Maaori here, you just never hear about them. Around 5,000 signed the Treaty in these parts... I don't know how many consider themselves local, today.
I always thought there weren't really Maaori down here. But maybe I am wrong on that. If there are Maaori down here they have been well and truly hidden away...
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:04:28
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy » alexandra_k, posted by Clearskies on September 28, 2018, at 16:37:11
because genuinely there is a concern about hegemony. a concern about dominant ideology vs genuine progress. there is a tension between us... learning more about triangles and making progress in politics... vs a kind of in-breeding of thought in a way that is untimately self-defeating or undermining.
and so you need to allow.... different things to develop...
because it might be that there are differnet ideal theories of rationality. or different ethical systems or whatever. genuinely different endpoints. pretty sure i went to a talk once that purported to offer a proof of precisely that.
so maybe some of the hierarchical peoples will develop their own... alternative... to the rawlsian (for want of a better term) hegemony...
but it is hard becuase there does seem to be something obviously right...
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:08:56
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy » alexandra_k, posted by Clearskies on September 28, 2018, at 16:37:11
> Youre in a tough place.
sigh.
yeah. gotta get this draft handed in tonight. then my supervisor writes her reccommendation and it goes to 2 externals. then all that goes to the dean and she decides whether i've done enough or whether they are going to torment me for longer... any longer will mean another year of my life will have been wasted.
delay delay delay...
so tired of the idle
remind me of that when things are going as well as they can hope to in this country when they ensure i have no time to idle - because it is so very clear to all the good use to which that idle could be put.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:39:06
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:08:56
it freaks me out because of how arbitrary it is. or, how not-fair it is, more to the point.
becuase i have come to fear / believe that it is decided more on the basis of things that shouldn't be relevant. but it is decided on the basis of those things. and we end up with this whole... pandering thing.
that's why people's work is just repeating what their supervisor told them to do. becuase that is all their supervisor would acknowledge. because their supervisor makes them revise things into the way their supervisor wants things to be.
which is fine if you want a replicate of the supervisor, i guess.
only, is that what the supervsior did during their early years? or did their supervisor 'strike it lucky' in finding a way through that didn't involve such pandering? is that how come the supervisor goes on to contribute something differnet to the field? gee, i wonder.
there isn't any accountability, really, when it comes to people finishing. if you have something lined up then you have something to finish for. if you have a job someplace that depends on your being finished there is incentive for the people you are working for to let you go. but that is rare. they expect you to finsih before you get a job. but why would the supervisors let you do that when they can just keep saying 'you aren't ready yet' and make you keep working on their stuff. why would they turn down free labour? why would they free their slave?
lots of people have been writing about it.
auckland said i needed to be finished in 9 months. and you look at an undergraduate workload and one years worth of work is done (in these parts) in 2x13 weeks. that is one years worth of work that they have apparently condensed into that space of time. so... one year of thesis should be able to be done in a shorter space of time than 12 months calender year.
but will they let me when they can (by delaying for 10 weeks even) make it such that i have nothing else to be getting on with next year.
i guess that's teh problem, really, you need some excuse of why you can't just hang abotu being their slave. my mistake was to tell them that if they delayed me then they would effectively be making it such that i was idle for most of next year.
at which point they go 'hey! we could have her work on this for most of next year!'
at which point Auckland goes: It took you 2 years do to 1 years worth of work? We refuse to acknowledge your qualification.
sorry... please start again.
At which point... Somethign something abuot shoot the face off. Can't say I didn't do everything in my power to become a person in this country.
they've managed to delay me and waste my time considerably over the last 10 years...
they just keep refusing to progress me.
But if I moved overseas... Well, I don't think I can do that. I will look into it but I have managed to get myself thousands upon thousands of dollars into debt for here while learning precisely nothing that they will acknoweldge.
But other people do really really really really well living here. All the rental properties they own and so on. Really great life for them.
And their kids who get to go on skiing holidays with their residential hall (and have tutors to tell them the answers to tohe multi-guess).... People have an interest in not letting people like me (people capable of reading textbooks) through... Becuae it's nicer for them to have skiing holidays than to study...
Or becaue the illusion of skiing holidays is supposed to motivate people from lesser halls to work harder?
I don't speak whatever language...
But I do go to seminars and hear them talking about the vermin who use the public health system and see that the fact that I have been identified as a service user means that in tehir perspective I cannot have an academic voice.
The trouble with Australia is my supervisor had spent too mjuch of his life living in New Zealand. That was the problem. Everyoen had a hard time working for him. But he did pick me out as someone who he could... Fail to acknowledge. And basically... Intimidate me into not getting done on time. And if yo udon't get done on time there is no point doing the thing.
That's the thing. If they don't accept it then I'm done.
That's teh requirement on completing a qualifcation in NZ in teh last 5 years. Our qualifications have come to this, now. It's all about the whims and vagaries of...
This country surely seems to be trying to teach me some kind of a lesson.
It isn't about how many hours of focused work you can do (what you can do in a compressed space of time). Nobody cares how fast you can swim a 50 meter. Everyones focused on swimming the channel or whatever and if you don't take regular breaks with your support crew they will get cranky and you will not be allowed to swim the channel at all!
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:49:37
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:39:06
and when i submitted my softcopy i emailed the dean and my supervisior to say that i'd done it and my supervisor starts YELLING AT ME BY EMAIL that it is NOT READY and HOW DARE I DO THAT and i will be FAILED OUT and so on.
because i am not going to stay in teh field and so she has nothign to lose?
i don't really understand.
and then she starts up about how she has to write this thing and so on...
and I'm like: just do the f*ck*ng thing, already. it asks you for your opinion just state your opinion, already.
I guess she wanted a tea party where I pander to her for however long to try and ply her into a warm and fuzzy mood so that she no longer wishes to murder me in my sleep.
I'm not the kind of person who can put on a false smile in the pandering kind of a sense. I have no game like that. I just don't. I don't appreciate it when people treat me like that and I don't treat others like that. Maybe it is a deficit that I am unable to play this game when this is the game that people want me to play. I think about how much of my life has been wasted by people who have lied to my face because they thought they could get away with it and they tell themselves that it was kinder that way that they were just socially smoothing or whatever... It's disingenuous. It lacks integrity. This whole mode of social interaction...
But people mostly seem to want to kill / destroy / exclude me because of it, yeah. Especially when they see that I'm capable of doing things...
It's these awful people in charge of those at the lowest levels who will not allow the people in their vicinty to get started. And I'm not young enough to be able to huddle in with a school leaver herd and there arent' mature students...
Everyone really has just left this country.
Posted by Clearskies on September 28, 2018, at 17:58:40
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:49:37
:0
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:02:10
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:49:37
the grading thing...
i thought that she was fair minded and stuff but now i guess i see that she just didn't care. just pass them all and they will come back next year and we will get more money. that seemed to be the idea. so they hand in work late, great. i guess that's how they build a solid graduate school of people doing all the crappy jobs nobody else wants for low pay.
i don't trust her ability to be professional and that is sad because I (wanted to believe) that she was professional, before. i don't trust her to be able to sit down somewhere quiet and focused and actually read what i have to say with an open mind trying to understand it. I think it more likely that she'll be multi-tasking and skimming and will jump to a conclusion that i haven't explained well enough if she's missed something.
i think that her skimming largely absent mind will mean she will overly focus on things that are most easy to attend to. that means she won't be focussed on the ideas or on understanding but she will be focused on the superficial aspects like whether there seems to be an appropriate number of references on the page or whether i hvae full stops in the references in teh appropriate place.
i think now about how much time i spent grading. about how i often had the suspicion that i spent more time grading (and writing comments) than my NZ students spent writing their essays. but i alwasy thought: But I'm the one being paid, here, and what are the costs of my being wrong? I was always really very concerned about not crediting a student appropirately for work they had done (e.g., because they had brought in ideas from another course that were hazy to me because I hadn't studied it). I tried to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I guess all this means I do feel that I have deserved or earned things that other people have not.
I know some other people don't have work spaces where they can engage in focussed work.
I know some people lack teh cognitive capacity for focussed work.
Some people don't have ideas really, at all. Does that mean I should be failed because it's not fair that I do?
This whole thing is awful.
The Dean was professional. I don't know that I trust examiners / the examination process, though. We learned that my supervsor thought that she basically had the final say and if she thought it should fail then she'd simply tell the externals that and they would collude. Or if it was passed to them they would assume that it should be passed because the supervsior thought it was okay. It turned out that she was... Just passing the things that came to her, in other words. I told her that I passed her undergrads without penalty when they submitted late like she said. Because I was working for her. But it burned, rather, becuase I worked my *ss off as an undergrad to get my work in - on time.
And now I think she's... Experimenting? With this new-found 'professionalism' to... Use her power to... Try and undermine my completing / being done.
I don't know.
I have manged to conduct myself well. Mostly because I've had here to dump on. (((pc)))
I do not think it is a good idea to process stuff with people IRL. I just don't. I think it makes boundaries /professionalism muddy and unclear. I know people here don't trust me because I don't engage in gossip / dumping with them... I thnk their gossiping / dumping with each other IRL means they have more trouble with professinalism IRL, however.
It is the separation....
The veil of ignorance when it comes to getting on with the f*ck*ng gjob and grading things on their merits and so on.
Anyway...
It is hard because I need to hand in something I know is not perfect. The hard thing is wehther the Dean will sign off on whether I have done enough or not. So far I have been impressed by her professionalism. Also her... She's got that other thing where after having talked to her people behave more professionally. My supervisor. Me. I think she's a good one. Yeah. It's just a... Scary time. Yeah.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:17:47
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 17:39:06
> they just keep refusing to progress me.that is not it. it was that i saw the blind alley.
the person who had the power to fail me if i didn't appropriately pander.
this...
the dean is the most professional person i've managed to find who was given veto power on my completing a qualification.
that was why i did things this way.
she hears from 3 judges (1 must be from overseas)
and i would hope that if all of those reccommended i fail she would give me a shot at an oral defense.
no undergraduate qualiflication offered me any such thing. just the bottleneck opinion of... 1 person.
med.. apparently there is pressure to pass them because their places are limited and if one leaves / drops / is failed then their place can't go to another. i think (hope) the trick will be more in lining up work and places to go. like i already know... the good people in our public system here, are never here for long. and the people who seemed happiest here... turns out they were the ones without qualifications who the DHBs hired cheaply...
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:33:40
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:17:47
when i was in Auckland last time Maaori vetoed me out. I probably was the only person they vetoed out.
partly it would have been because they would have heard someone say 'these students cant' get in from first year becuase they don't have the educational background, but they will have a genuine chance after doing a degree - perhaps your health science degree'. and, on that basis, they would have somehow justified failing me for their paper (as chemistry fails so many of 'their' students) so that i was in the same place as their students (fairs fair) of not being able to apply from first year.
never mind how many years work i'd put in previously... or how hard i worked at chemistry so that i wasn't being failed for chemistry...
they would have (genuinely) thought they were being fair. sigh. that's actually where things are at.
also... they thought i wasn't engaged. i have having such a hard time. you go and they spout stuff about how it will cost htis country too much money to help Maaori. because the freaking evil economimists in this country (easiest place in the world in which to do business!) go around bullying people in ways like this. they think they are being so very clever in stuff like 'there is an inevitable trade-off between equity and efficiency and if maaori do better that means everyone in theis country will be required to do worse'! and stuff like that. Or... whatever... people get hold of these puzzles. and then they teach like these are the facts they want you to regurgitate.
we are a developed nation (we aren't). we have a high standard of living (most of our people do not).
these are the sorts of 'facts' they want to hear back.
otherwise...
in essays...
when i disagree... doesn't matter about reasons or references or anything... they think i have failed to understand or i'm.. whatever. they fail me. because i'm not towing the party line where the party line is one leading to the extinction of their peoples.
sigh.
i think it has been after that year that they no longer have veto power. the particlar course i was failed for (they didn't expect anyone to actually be failed for it since they pass stduents who fail most of everything else)... the particlar course i was failed for no longer is a necessary pass for med application. so if i were to do over that year (in other words - which i can't -- but going into the future for other people) they can't do that to any more people. they can fail people if they want but that doesn't matter for med application anymore. they have shown they can't be trusted to do that.
my thesis has to be partly about maaori so they can see that i have an eye to maaori development. i have no speaking rites but anyone who has the capacity to read it and who is connected to world literature and nze literature (teh treaty and so on) will know that i mean no harm to maaori and i am knowledgeable about and concerned about maaori issues and abotu being fair minded.
because i guess that... me being me... it might well be likely that going into the future... if i do get into med... i might get into trouble with gatekeepers for maaori at some point. i will do my best to smooth and keep my head down and so on... but there is only so mjuch i can do and i might possibly need a hand at some point with that. so this thesis needs to be good enough to make me worth it.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:35:50
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:33:40
worth the bother, i mean. understandable. it needs to be enough to make me understandable. to show a genuine aspect of fairminded and respect for persons. respect for maaori as persons and the spirit of the treaty as being about fairminded cooperation between persons for mutual benefit. not for cooperation when expedient and cheating and swindling when you can get away with it. not 3 per cent pay raise on your not even living wage in exchange for 25 per cent pay raise on my million per year life is better for us both interpretation of rawls....
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 19:20:35
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:35:50
i think people will look back on this period of nz history as something along the lines of the cold war, after the treaty.
we pretty much are in a state of internal war.
all the... working to undermine. promotion of confusion. beating the people down. the culture of fear and opression.
it is mostly internally created / of our own making.
who would voluntarily live in a war zone?
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 19:26:17
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 18:35:50
actually i take back the 'where would people rather be' thing. i don't know anything about most of the world.
i've been influenced rather a lot by american tv.
i know next to nothing of non-english speaking nations.
a bunch of people would rather be in israel, for example.
mostly people are hierarchically focused and just want to be up the hierarchy wherever the hierarchy may be.
unless they have family ties, or whatever, to make location important.
here is pretty clear that the latter is the only reason for people to stay here.
i sort of think it is the people who choose to be here that preclude the formation of ties, but what would i know.
i'm just feeling... frantic. about a wasted life. what a f*ck*ng waste of a life. to be born (when i really did not ask to be) for the sole purpose of frustrating most every need and desire. wow. for the jollies of others. wow. what a wondefful world.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 19:33:10
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 19:26:17
and it wears thin to see things change *after* me. to read that they are going to consider disability as equity criterion probably soon (but not in time for me) in these parts. that they aren't going to allow maaori power to veto someone out of a non-core social course because they didn't parrot the tutor (but not in time for me) and so on.
it's just great to take the series of hits. to make a ruckus. to see things change so nobody else needs to take that particular hit.
but i had to take the hit. and there was no reason at all why that needed to be - since we are reinventing teh f*ck*ng wheel because people here have been dragging their f*ck*ng heels. dragging their f*ck*ng heels but no, please, let me take this bullet for you so you can refuse to acknowledge the fact that i'm the only one who saw it coming but didn't have teh power to get away oyu dragging limpet you.
what a wonderful life they have made for us, here!
Posted by alexandra_k on September 29, 2018, at 0:35:51
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 28, 2018, at 19:33:10
alex went to the gym. and she's feeling MUCH better, now.
she's writing away on it...
her supervisor is a nice person. her supervisor has been there for her emotionally when she needed someone. she just stepped in and was really great.
and her supervisor does care about her and wants her to do well. she is doing her best. as am i. as are we all.
it's a stressful time.
try not to undermine myself.
yeah.
there is an element / aspect of that to me. been kicked at... sensitive... internalise things. i do have a brain that holds onto some of the things that hurt the most. and so on.
i need to get better about being more pro-active about looking into things... instead of just thinking that i can't or that that is ruled out for me.
i will look into the whole STEP thing... I won't get expectations up. i think europe would be more likely... but you gotta be in to win and other people do it, so...
and i won't be too quick to dismiss registration, either. i think that is a bit like tenure. being on payroll i mean. job security. you don't want to find yourself in a succession of temporary posts... however many years later still doing the stuff that was only supposed to be temporary...
i guess i've learned a lot in this.
and i won't tell everyone my plans for what i'm looking into. it's a shame. but, yeah. most people will exploit what they can when they can. i need to really remember. to call them on it, too. it's the little doormat test they do to see if they can treat you like crap and you will be okay with that. will you stand up for yourself? that's the way they see it.
i wonder what they think of me... of my take that their doing that means i think they fail the sociopath test.
i wonder if they ever saw it that way.
Posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 8:47:06
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on September 29, 2018, at 0:35:51
I think I am not going to go to talks, anymore. I feel like I've been taken for a chump. Other people get paid to give talks. Other people get paid to go to talks. People go to talks who are progressing on qualifications that will position them to be paid to give and / or go to talks.
I don't get paid. So... Why should I go? Why should I expend energy and effort listening to people... Rehash work they did 10+ years ago? Why should I be expected to not ask questions because other people decide to exert their power to ignore me? Why should I be expected to ask questions because nobody else has a question and so it's just uncomfortable?
The whole thing feels like an awful sham of a facade. There is no spirit of inquiry. There isn't even all that much in the way of quality work done... It's just a whole pile of sh*t for people who... Uh... F*ck even knows. I don't know who got to be in charge or why they got to be in charge or what they think they're playing at... It's just all too awful for words.
If they wanted me to feel differently about it they really should have thought twice before treating me like disposable garbage. Never mind, I'm sure there are plenty more lining up to do whatever it was they got out of me...
Whatever.
Awful people.
Posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 16:58:12
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 8:47:06
> Never mind, I'm sure there are plenty more lining up to do whatever it was they got out of me...
And of course, there's not.There's nobody here.
All the corner shop-spaces are empty. Empty empty empty empty empty.
There's nothing here.
Just a bunch of people greedy to abuse your children.
Who wants to be an international student in NZ?
Things really are that awful, here.
Posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 17:04:18
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 16:58:12
I submitted on the 14th of September.
I got an email something about my supervisor filled out a form that she thought it was ready to submit sometime last week.
I think... I think it hasn't even been sent to external examiners, yet. I think they have literally been doing absolutely nothing with it over the last month.
Something something about sending off a form to ask people to be external examiners and then you just have to wait for them to reply...
Is the whole thing really that corrupt?
Really?
All around the world, or just here?
Posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 17:37:27
In reply to Re: Partlycloudy, posted by alexandra_k on October 14, 2018, at 17:04:18
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12142201
They probably don't want him to see the conditions in our public high schools.
They probably don't want him to experience the cold and leaky buildings he will be expected to teach in.
They probably don't want him to experience the illiteracy of many of our young people.
They probably don't want him to see that it's less about teaching and more about trying to keep however many students actually in the classroom to be babysat for however many hours of the day.
One job: And all of that money is supposed to be spent on disposable consumer items that comes in on the harbour ships from overseas. All the end of the supply chain low value rubbish.
I don't know why things are supposed to be better that way.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.