Jur wrote:


That's essentially what leveraging the fucked up chick social hierarchy achieves. An 11 year old girl’s primary group is their social group. To include, exclude, ”forgive” or “allow to return” the group must come to consensus and act as a group. The difficult part is that anyone who would steal from someone within her own group, is unlikely to willing admit it and will not be above turning the tables and claiming that her accuser is a liar. If the girls are equally liked and equally trusted, the accuser is at as much risk of being expelled from the group for lying as the accused is of being expelled from the group for stealing. Furthermore, there is the risk that the group will divide into two opposing groups, or that both girls may be excluded from the group simply to maintain the peace within the group. Therefore, before going public, a girl needs to be reasonably sure that she will have majority support. To do this a girl needs to forge an alliance with a girl or girls whose influence combined with her own will pull in majority support. The most efficient way to do this is to go as high up the food chain as you can. Girls at the top of the chain have a vested interest in keeping the social group intact, because if the group divides girls at the top lose a portion of their power base within the larger social group of the class/school/neighborhood. Therefore just the possible threat of “going public” with the situation gives a girl lower down the chain leverage with girls higher up. Higher up girls typically handle situations privately, involving as few members of the group as possible, using threats and promises of bringing the majority to bear upon the issue. This is usually adequate to get the offender to acquiesce without involving the entire group, thus maintaining the social order and the peace.

ubarose wrote:


This is why chicks write the best vampire novels.

S.

Geez, Uba

Now when I look at my one and a half year old daughter and single tear rolls down my cheek and my wife asks what's wrong I'll just talk about how I'll miss this fun time without going into detail...

One month ago I would have called uba's post utter nonsense, but since then I've had one woman and former co-worker try and expel me from a group of mutual friends and co-workers for untruthful reasons the woman made up in order to cover up her own mistakes which I but hardly anybody else had witnessed.

Looks like I need to emphasise that the first line of my post, the police impersonation, was not meant to be taken seriously.

The second paragraph, approaching the parents (no kids involved) to return the 'borrowed' items, was serious.

Msample wrote:


I think it is best that the parents confront their daughter without Pete there actually.

Cut off a hand, and then her tongue if she lies about it.

"Looks like I need to emphasise that the first line of my post, the police impersonation, was not meant to be taken seriously."
That the police thing was taken seriously is the unintentionally funniest thing in this thread.

Pete, go see the damn people already!

Alternative: maybe this thread could run all year, just snowing Pete with advice long after the matter has been dealt with / corrected /overcome / survived.

mjl1783 wrote:


Sad fact is I thought about that. For real.

UPDATE:
Denial, denial, denial. Several stories from "I never saw it" to "yeah I saw it" to "I picked it up and put it on the shelf" to "It wasn't that, it was a ping-pong game my friend gave me."

Daughter jumped in her shit on the bus, made her cry, told her I was going to call the cops and have her tossed in Juvi. Proud of her. So, I'll be calling the cops Thursday, filing a report, and subsequently prosecuting. BUT, this is Kentucky where no inequity goes punished, so I'll probably sue the fam in civil court.

Schweig! wrote:


Don't masturbate at your desk and this won't happen again, Schweiggy!