angrymnk wrote:
Boy's Parent A: "That damn no good kid .. I told him, wazzit, I told a million billion times not to go there. But did he lissen? No, he was always a stupid basterd. Good riddance. *spits*":
Boy's Parent B: "Where am I? Who are those people and where is my horse?"
Boy's Parent C: "Huh?"
Boy's Pared D: "Ca-ching" (totally stoled it - sorry Joph)
Hardly biased and completely legitimate. The parents may just be too stupid, drunk, or both to notice that the kid is doing something stupid*.
*being 17 and stupid is often synonymous.
Almalieque wrote:
So, do you understand that the boy's father would legitimately see the situation differently based on the same facts? Do you believe his feelings are justified given the same circumstances?
What facts from the scenario supports your claim? I can create a Romeo and Juliet story as well where the father says that if he catches her with that boy again, then "he's a dead man". However, none of that is supported by the evidence that we know.
So, do you or do you not see how the boy's parents would legitimately see the SAME situation differently based on the same facts?
Why the "Ca-ching"? Are you referring to receiving some sort of money? Where is this money coming from and why?