Retraction
Sometimes, in a textual medium, typos are made. Errors of other varieties are, on occasion, an unfortunate reality. A formal correction to previously written information may become necessary. Hence, the need, when appropriate, for a retraction.
This is, perhaps, one of those times.
Several days ago, in a comments thread on Highlander's blog, I made a statement indicating that my ex-husband was a high school drop-out when I met him (in 1983). I hadn't realized it at the time, but he pointed out to me, recently, that I was in error. (Technically, what he said was that I had "lied" about him being a high school drop-out. Insisting, as he did, that he had graduated with his class, and that I'd inaccurately presented the information.)
It was pointed out to me that he had, indeed, participated in the graduation ceremony at his high school (which was not news to me). Therefore, he argued, he was a high school graduate. Case closed.
The fact that he was not given his diploma at any point during the ceremony, did not, in his eyes, make him any less a graduate. It's logic that doesn't quite work for me, but perhaps I was, in fact, mistaken.
In my eyes, the indisputable point that he was short credits and, though he was allowed to get his pomp and circumstance on, had not actually fulfilled the requirements for graduation, meant that he had not earned the degree normally conferred in the ceremony. That he did not return to high school at any point thereafter to correct the shortfall in his credits (and thereby receive his diploma), led me to believe that he had, in effect, "dropped out".
I will tell you, though, that he definitely doesn't see it that way. It matters not to him that he stood up with his classmates in a ceremony in 1976, but didn't get the diploma acknowledging his graduation from high school until 1984.
If my eldest daughter (or any of them, actually) tried to make me (or potential future employers) believe that, because she had marched down the aisle in a cap and gown without benefit of receiving a diploma, she was a high school graduate, it would be a wasted effort. If she then elected not to do anything about getting that diploma for eight more years, that would be a thing. I find it difficult to believe that her father wouldn't see that, either.
See, at my school, if you didn't have the bang to GET the diploma, you weren't invited to the ceremony. And if you continued to avoid getting the 'bang' by not attending school, you were considered a drop-out. Admittedly, I didn't graduate from the same school that Baron attended. Maybe, the rules are different there.
Now, as I originally indicated in Highlander's comments threads, he did, eventually, and with my help, take a correspondence course and obtain the missing credits that allowed him to obtain the elusive diploma. So, if I am mistaken and, in actuality, the status of 'high school graduate' is earned by walking down the aisle in a funny outfit, and NOT by earning the diploma, I'd like to tender my apologies. Formally.
I'd like to note, however, that a quick google search on graduation requirements for the state gave no mention of the ceremony being instrumental, though it did list out the credits required to obtain graduate status.
Perhaps, my comment should be corrected to read..."He, at that time, had not received his diploma, despite having left high school more than seven years prior."
It is my sincerest hope, as we embark on a new year, that this retraction/correction will help to clarify matters and show exactly how it is that I arrived at my perhaps erroneous conclusion that my ex husband was a "high school drop out". You see, I perhaps foolishly assumed that if you had not managed to earn your degree from high school, and you spent the next seven years ignoring any and all requirements to obtain said degree, with the apparent earnest intention to continue ignoring such requirements for the rest of your life until gently guided by your girlfriend at the time, well, that would qualify one as a "high school dropout" for that seven year period.
But this could well be an entirely subjective and perceptual issue. My most heartfelt apologies for any deceit I may have inadvertently perpetrated with my presentation of my interpretation of these events.
This is, perhaps, one of those times.
Several days ago, in a comments thread on Highlander's blog, I made a statement indicating that my ex-husband was a high school drop-out when I met him (in 1983). I hadn't realized it at the time, but he pointed out to me, recently, that I was in error. (Technically, what he said was that I had "lied" about him being a high school drop-out. Insisting, as he did, that he had graduated with his class, and that I'd inaccurately presented the information.)
It was pointed out to me that he had, indeed, participated in the graduation ceremony at his high school (which was not news to me). Therefore, he argued, he was a high school graduate. Case closed.
The fact that he was not given his diploma at any point during the ceremony, did not, in his eyes, make him any less a graduate. It's logic that doesn't quite work for me, but perhaps I was, in fact, mistaken.
In my eyes, the indisputable point that he was short credits and, though he was allowed to get his pomp and circumstance on, had not actually fulfilled the requirements for graduation, meant that he had not earned the degree normally conferred in the ceremony. That he did not return to high school at any point thereafter to correct the shortfall in his credits (and thereby receive his diploma), led me to believe that he had, in effect, "dropped out".
I will tell you, though, that he definitely doesn't see it that way. It matters not to him that he stood up with his classmates in a ceremony in 1976, but didn't get the diploma acknowledging his graduation from high school until 1984.
If my eldest daughter (or any of them, actually) tried to make me (or potential future employers) believe that, because she had marched down the aisle in a cap and gown without benefit of receiving a diploma, she was a high school graduate, it would be a wasted effort. If she then elected not to do anything about getting that diploma for eight more years, that would be a thing. I find it difficult to believe that her father wouldn't see that, either.
See, at my school, if you didn't have the bang to GET the diploma, you weren't invited to the ceremony. And if you continued to avoid getting the 'bang' by not attending school, you were considered a drop-out. Admittedly, I didn't graduate from the same school that Baron attended. Maybe, the rules are different there.
Now, as I originally indicated in Highlander's comments threads, he did, eventually, and with my help, take a correspondence course and obtain the missing credits that allowed him to obtain the elusive diploma. So, if I am mistaken and, in actuality, the status of 'high school graduate' is earned by walking down the aisle in a funny outfit, and NOT by earning the diploma, I'd like to tender my apologies. Formally.
I'd like to note, however, that a quick google search on graduation requirements for the state gave no mention of the ceremony being instrumental, though it did list out the credits required to obtain graduate status.
Perhaps, my comment should be corrected to read..."He, at that time, had not received his diploma, despite having left high school more than seven years prior."
It is my sincerest hope, as we embark on a new year, that this retraction/correction will help to clarify matters and show exactly how it is that I arrived at my perhaps erroneous conclusion that my ex husband was a "high school drop out". You see, I perhaps foolishly assumed that if you had not managed to earn your degree from high school, and you spent the next seven years ignoring any and all requirements to obtain said degree, with the apparent earnest intention to continue ignoring such requirements for the rest of your life until gently guided by your girlfriend at the time, well, that would qualify one as a "high school dropout" for that seven year period.
But this could well be an entirely subjective and perceptual issue. My most heartfelt apologies for any deceit I may have inadvertently perpetrated with my presentation of my interpretation of these events.
posted by SuperWife | 8:10 AM
4 Comments:
Needs more cowbell, but the sarcasm was just right.
I really don't like being called a 'liar'. Especially since I didn't think I did. Being honest is pretty much a 'thing' for me, and he knows it. (Ironically, the same time he told me I'd lied about it, he paid me some of the money he owed me in cash. I asked him if he wanted me to sign a receipt. His response? "No, I can trust you.")
I guess it's easier to call me dishonest, than it is to have to explain himself to his significant other.
Hey, just to clarify, that first comment was mine. For some reason blogger was being a little bitch and not letting me sign in.
I guess it was just being eejull (my word).
I knew it was you all the time!
Actually, I did. It showed up under your nom de blog in my email, but for some reason (and a few others did this as well), it shifted to anonymous. Could be a byproduct of me changing from "old blogger" to "new blogger".
Post a Comment
<< Home