Home » Tuck Talk » Chapter by Chapter » Tuck #108
Tuck #108 [message #3092] Sun, 06 February 2005 18:05 Go to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
I don't have a lot of time before I need to get back to work. But this episode was nothing like what I was expecting, starting with the fact it's another non-Tuck perspective episode. At least I have the overall feeling the good guys have managed to get the situation under their control. It's ineresting watching the shift from reacting to acting. Much more later.

icon6.gif  Re: Tuck #108 [message #3093] Sun, 06 February 2005 18:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hart
Messages: 16
Registered: October 2004
Location: New Orleans, LA
Junior Member

Thanks, OE:

I tend to check barkingduck every week or so and here daily so I might have gone almost another week before seeing and reading this one.

-vicious smile- I kind of like the thought. I expect to see at least another off-perspective episode or perhaps a mix of Tuck and non-Tuck for a short while if not. He is still not able to do much and things are happening.

I HIGHLY loved the port and message his laptop utilized, though. -giggle- Anyway, back to a reread. -wave-

-r
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3095] Sun, 06 February 2005 22:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
Some more, slightly disjointed thoughts:

I suppose it could be just me, but "Be seeing you" is not, to my mind, a rare enough turn of phrase to worry somebody. Unless you're a Prisoner fan, that is. And I seriously doubt the cheerleaders are fans, assuming they've even heard of the show. (On the off chance a Tuck fan has somehow missed it, run don't walk to your local DVD pusher and grab it. Incredible stuff.)

What the heck does Sheila want to see Tuck about? (I've got a couple of guesses, but who knows.)

I checked, and there were only four in the original attack. Where the hell did #5 come from, and why aren't we told who it is? It's not the guy with the laptop, which was my first guess. Travis would be my next guess, but I have no idea how or why that would have happened. Pure paranoia, which fits this episode.

It didn't really hit me until this episode just how fundamentally, truly hurt Tuck is at this point. I though the combination of the care Tuck had gotten & finally waking up meant Tuck was past the worst of it. Which may actually be true, but the current situation is horrible, pure and simple.

I had been putting off re-reading until we got another Tuck perspective chapter, since I figure the next time we get inside Tuck's head we'll get a lot of answers to various questions. But, after this one, I'm going to go back again. I have a lot of ideas about where this is going, but I want to review things before I start spewing out updated theories.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3097] Sun, 06 February 2005 23:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Well, "Be seeing you" has been used in other shows. At least in Babylon 5. Though that hasn't happened yet in Tuck's timeline.

But even in the original, it's all about *context*.

"Be seeing you" isn't threatening or scary. By itself.

But coming from a person that you suspect has good reason to wish you ill, and has the capability to wipe the floor with you is an entirely different thing, *regardless* of the tone it is delivered in.

It's an excellent way of threatening someone who is at least moderately intelligent without it being a *provable* threat.

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3099] Mon, 07 February 2005 00:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sir Lee  is currently offline Sir Lee
Messages: 440
Registered: October 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Senior Member
About the "Be seeing you" thing:

First, the "Prisoner" quote may go over the head of the cheerleaders, but it DIDN'T go over the head of Bill and George -- and probably Mike. The relevance here is for George to get the state of mind of Sarah.

As to the threat value, well, even if the cheerleaders couldn't recognize the quote, the meaning is obvious, especially punctuated by the licking-a-hand-bloody-from-crushing-a-soda-can. It's a veiled threat. This is not unique: even pre-Terminator, for instance, if someone walked out from an unresolved confrontation declaring "I'll be back" you could pretty much guess that he wouldn't be returning in order to swap cookie recipes. It's all a matter of context and delivery.

On another note, did anybody else notice the port Tuck chose for the "phone home" service? 1337 = "leet"...
Also, I wondered about the message itself and looked around... I found an old tagline:
PKZIP PEASANT.EXE "Help, help! I'm being compressed!"

I found a second-hand reference to Dust Puppy (from the User Friendly webcomic) having said it once, but I couldn't locate the exact strip. However, this cannot be the intended reference, since on Tuck time, User Friendly won't debut yet for a couple months (the first strip is dated Nov 17, 1997) and Dust Puppy still later (Dec 03, 1997). I guess Illiad also liked that tagline...

Sir Lee


Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3100] Mon, 07 February 2005 00:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
Sir Lee wrote on Sun, 06 February 2005 21:29

About the "Be seeing you" thing:

I agree pretty much completely with what you said; it was Jill throwing the line at the cheerleader that I'm not sure she'll get. Her delivery is enough to get Shannon's attention, but I'm sceptical that she would even remeber those was the same words Sarah used.
Sir Lee wrote on Sun, 06 February 2005 21:29

"Help, help! I'm being compressed!"

Quite possibly, Tuck came up with the play on the Monty Python quote on Tuck's own. It's funny, but not so original that multiple people couldn't figure it out by themselves.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3101] Mon, 07 February 2005 03:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
OtherEric wrote on Sun, 06 February 2005 19:34


I checked, and there were only four in the original attack. Where the hell did #5 come from, and why aren't we told who it is? It's not the guy with the laptop, which was my first guess. Travis would be my next guess, but I have no idea how or why that would have happened. Pure paranoia, which fits this episode.


Since it was for a restraining order .... possibly just for one of the cheerleaders being focused upon during the police investigations?

No reason to believe Travis is involved other than to speculate a possibility of inadvertantly "outing" Val to one of his friends while he is drunk and his friends take it from there. But that would only be speculation...

This could be merely misdirection on Ellen's part because attorney Groton was interrupted by Bill, which leaves an ambiguity of where Groton was going with his statement. For all we know it could have been a restraining order on five cheerleaders instigated by Sarah and had nothing to do with the initial attackers fingered by Tuck.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3103] Mon, 07 February 2005 05:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
OtherEric wrote on Sun, 06 February 2005 19:34

I checked, and there were only four in the original attack. Where the hell did #5 come from, and why aren't we told who it is? It's not the guy with the laptop, which was my first guess. Travis would be my next guess, but I have no idea how or why that would have happened. Pure paranoia, which fits this episode.


Well, there were 4 that attacked him. But one of them may have implicated someone else.

I just checked. The attack was definitely 4 (Tuck 103 "The Tuck Stops Here"). But Tuck may have named the folks who chased hium earlier. No point in *not* naming them now. After all what are they gonna do to him?

And we know that at least one of the cheerleaders was arrested.

And if the cops find prints on that lock or the locker (more likely that they'll find some inside it) then the fit will hit the shan if the prints don't match the girl's. I'm relatibvely sure that the *school* can force the students to submit prints to the police.

BTW, I do hope that someone figures out that Dobson needs support against the School Board.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3104] Mon, 07 February 2005 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Lost an entire 90-minute message while looking something else up. Most annoying...

A few notes:

Given the fact that the unsatisfactory discussion between Dobson and "Arlene Raleigh the hatchetwoman" was interrupted by complaints about yet another threatening incident, Raleigh should by all rights have suspended Dobson immediately. (I don't know that she'd have the authority to fire him, but if she was there responding to the original emergency, she'd almost have to be able to make whatever temporary moves she judged to be necessary, and she'd be convinced that the situation was completely out of Dobson's control and that any delay in dealing with it would put students in danger.) And it'll get even worse if Debbie's plan to frighten all the female G&Ts is successful. Even if Tuck, Debbie and the group can find a way to make Dobson the hero in solving all the problems, it wouldn't change the fact that as principal he was responsible for them (and, undoubtedly, for future litigation against the school district) in the first place. I'm not convinced Ellen can write Dobson's way out of that one...

Brooke wrote on Mon, 07 Feb 2005 02:41

I just checked. The attack was definitely 4 (Tuck 103 "The Tuck Stops Here"). But Tuck may have named the folks who chased him earlier. No point in *not* naming them now. After all what are they gonna do to him?
True, but since there's no physical evidence against the people who chased him, the DA's office wouldn't be able to prove a case against the others without strong eyewitness testimony, and they've had no opportunity yet to find witnesses at school. So I can't see them arresting anyone in that category just on Tuck's identification. And if the fifth guy was someone arrested in the apparently (to the authorities) unrelated drunken house party, it seems to me that it'd be awfully hard for Marshall to get a restraining order on him.

Apparently the test results Susan was expecting in #106 WERE the medical ones from the tests she and her mother took after Tuck's situation was diagnosed. (And apparently Susan wasn't able to get them on Sunday before she left as she'd hoped.) That'd seem to be one of the two phone messages from unfamiliar numbers that Bill found on his answering machine. The other MIGHT be the call to Sarah that Trish was waiting for in #107...

Eric

[Updated on: Mon, 07 February 2005 23:03]

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3105] Mon, 07 February 2005 10:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Janet  is currently offline Janet
Messages: 74
Registered: December 2002
Location: Valley of the Sun
Member

OtherEric wrote on Sun, 06 February 2005 20:34

Some more, slightly disjointed thoughts:

{snip}

What the heck does Sheila want to see Tuck about? (I've got a couple of guesses, but who knows.)

Ellen does, but I doubt she'll answer right away... =)

What are your thoughts?
Quote:

I checked, and there were only four in the original attack. Where the hell did #5 come from, and why aren't we told who it is? It's not the guy with the laptop, which was my first guess. Travis would be my next guess, but I have no idea how or why that would have happened. Pure paranoia, which fits this episode.

It wouldn't surprise me if the fifth is the cheerleader and the arrest is pursuant to the second attack.

Quote:

It didn't really hit me until this episode just how fundamentally, truly hurt Tuck is at this point. I though the combination of the care Tuck had gotten & finally waking up meant Tuck was past the worst of it. Which may actually be true, but the current situation is horrible, pure and simple.

It may be that this is related to your question about Sheila. Everyone has been focussing on Tuck's physical injuries. I think that the interchange with Tuck and his Dad about his perceived failure regarding the attack is just the tip of the iceberg. Even though Tuck is the victim, he is going to feel in some way that it was his fault.
Quote:

I had been putting off re-reading until we got another Tuck perspective chapter, since I figure the next time we get inside Tuck's head we'll get a lot of answers to various questions. But, after this one, I'm going to go back again. I have a lot of ideas about where this is going, but I want to review things before I start spewing out updated theories.

I think we're all looking forward to hearing them. =)


Janet

All that glitters is not Iron Pyrite
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3106] Mon, 07 February 2005 11:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cate
Messages: 78
Registered: September 2002
Member
In the story we only have what Ellen has revealed to us so far.
There is a gap between Tuck's head being banged against the locker, and hir discovery in the utility closet. There may very well be a flashback in an upcoming episode showing the arrival of a fifth participant [male or female]. Tuck may have been partially aware of this newcomer's involvement. Just because it hasn't been revealed to us doesn't mean Tuck didn't tell this to the po-lice.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3107] Mon, 07 February 2005 14:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
maltor  is currently offline maltor
Messages: 83
Registered: July 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Member
Cate wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 11:33

In the story we only have what Ellen has revealed to us so far.
There is a gap between Tuck's head being banged against the locker, and hir discovery in the utility closet. There may very well be a flashback in an upcoming episode showing the arrival of a fifth participant [male or female]. Tuck may have been partially aware of this newcomer's involvement. Just because it hasn't been revealed to us doesn't mean Tuck didn't tell this to the po-lice.


But Bill put bugs into the room while so he could hear what Tuck told the police. Therefore, if Tuck had told the police anything about a 5th attacker, Bill would already know.

Janet wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 10:45

Quote:

I checked, and there were only four in the original attack. Where the hell did #5 come from, and why aren't we told who it is? It's not the guy with the laptop, which was my first guess. Travis would be my next guess, but I have no idea how or why that would have happened. Pure paranoia, which fits this episode.

It wouldn't surprise me if the fifth is the cheerleader and the arrest is pursuant to the second attack.


If that was the case, why did they wait until Monday afternoon, after school was out, to arrest Jody instead of getting them all on Sunday like they did the guys?

Maybe the 5th person arrested on Sunday is related to something one of the guys said in their interogation. Based on the description of his arrest, James Yancey might have been the easiest one to break. Perhaps James gave up the identity of this mystery person from #104

Quote:

"And he was hiding in the locker room, dressed in her uniform? My
God. How gross!" How delicious. "What'd she do when she found him?"
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3108] Mon, 07 February 2005 15:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
Janet wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 07:45

It may be that this is related to your question about Sheila. Everyone has been focussing on Tuck's physical injuries. I think that the interchange with Tuck and his Dad about his perceived failure regarding the attack is just the tip of the iceberg. Even though Tuck is the victim, he is going to feel in some way that it was his fault.


Interesting how your perception was that Tuck looked upon it as victim's guilt, that he felt he may have done something to put himself into that position and failed to get out of it(I use the masculine pronoun because he was Tuck at the time). It appears that Bill took that same perspective as well. I had viewed it as Tuck's increasing self perception of diminished masculinity and was misunderstood by Bill. We also get Bill's internalization of his Nam experience - it probably would have helped Tuck had he expressed this more explicitly as in the "Dancing with Death" episode.

Brook wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 02:41

BTW, I do hope that someone figures out that Dobson needs support against the School Board.

Unfortunately, only Debbie and Tuck knows about Dobson's personal interest. Mike only knows that Dobson's aware of Tucks alter ego, not Dobson's alter ego. Thus, only Debbie can orchestrate this. However, da Boyz and the Pack are approaching increasing entropy on retaliation and it may spiral out of control.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3109] Mon, 07 February 2005 17:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
Frankly, a lot of it is Dobson's fault. He's the man at the desk, the one steering school policy. That there were not enough guards to make students safe is his responsibility. If he could not get the board to pay for it, it is his responisibility to take it to the parents to force the board to insure student safety.

Unfortunately, almost anything Dobson did in that way might blow back on him and ruin his career. But yes, he did have the responsibility to do it.

Knowing Tuck was in danger, he should have called in not just the teachers but responsible students and gave them the assignment to keep Tuck safe. That's probably the least he should have done. Legally, he's up the creek. An argument could be made that he should have suspended Tuck for refusing to name his attackers. Harsh, but his responsibility extends just as far as a parent's does in regard to school.

- Erin
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3110] Mon, 07 February 2005 17:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tux.  is currently offline Tux.
Messages: 13
Registered: August 2004
Location: Europe
Junior Member
Note that while Sarah seriously doesn't like having Debbie in the group, she's dealing with Debbie in an at least very civilized manner later on. Can't help thinking she's staying close to a potential threat, while still working with her on 'Operation Poster'. *mumbles something about 'keeping your enemies even closer'...*
Hm. If these two ever really decide to trust each other, that'd be a really dangerous combo. o.O

The phone home trick with the laptop was really cool. http://ateros.com/tuckerspawn/images/message_icons/icon10.gif
With gr34t ph34r, they mu5t all ph33r Tucker's m4d sk1llz!
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3111] Mon, 07 February 2005 18:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Erin Halfelven wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 14:15

Frankly, a lot of it is Dobson's fault. He's the man at the desk, the one steering school policy. That there were not enough guards to make students safe is his responsibility. If he could not get the board to pay for it, it is his responisibility to take it to the parents to force the board to insure student safety.


And he had time to do this exactly when?

He inherited a school with an all too common problem. The "culture" of the school was set long before he got there much less before he became principal.

He's had what, a couple of months to work on changing this. And at most a few days between the onset of violence that could be pointed to as anything more than "normal stuident hijinks" and the attack on Tuck.

Getting the board to apoprove or deny anything just ain't gonna happen in a few days.

BTW, things like the extra contests on Field Day show that he was *trying* to change the culture. But that sort of thing takes either years or draconian measures he probably couldn't justify even *now* (and that would be as apt to backfire as to result in positive changes)

Erin Halfelven wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 14:15

Unfortunately, almost anything Dobson did in that way might blow back on him and ruin his career. But yes, he did have the responsibility to do it.


He's got resonsibility, but *ability* is a different matter. And as I pointed out, time wasn't on his side.

Erin Halfelven wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 14:15

Knowing Tuck was in danger, he should have called in not just the teachers but responsible students and gave them the assignment to keep Tuck safe. That's probably the least he should have done. Legally, he's up the creek. An argument could be made that he should have suspended Tuck for refusing to name his attackers. Harsh, but his responsibility extends just as far as a parent's does in regard to school.


I rather suspect that telling the teachers would be *worse* from a liability standpoint. Because Tuck isn't the only student at risk. Just the one most likely to be attacked.

And as for calling in students, the lawyers would eat him alive. And just how is Dobson to know that the students he picks aren't going to make things worse? For that matter, how is he going to know what students to pick.

"Every complex problem has a simple, easy-to-understand, *wrong* answer..."

It was a no-win situation. And Dobson was trying.

Falling into the all-too-common "solution" of finding a scapegoat to blame everything on when said person couldn't *really* have saved things isn't gonna help.

Not that the School Board won't try.

On the other hand, I suspect that they may leave him in place until the Tuckers name him in a suit (assuming that they do). Because I bet you that they won't be able to find anybody who will accept that hot-seat.

The Board is actually in a worse no-win than Dobsopn. They just don't know it yet.

Because it can be shown (easily, I'd bet) that the situation only came to a head under Dobson, not that he had anything to do with it.

I wonder what sort of records of incidents and complaints could be dug up by a determined investigator. Especially ones that the *Board* brushed aside. Ones going back *years* to show a pattern of indifference or worse...

If they are anything like most school systems, I bet the answer is "enough to get the board lynched" *now* even though the public didn't care *then*.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3112] Mon, 07 February 2005 22:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
Let's see...

Responibility is not the same thing as Fault. I don't think any of this is Dobson's fault, or at best very little; but a lot of it is his responsibility. Me being pedantic again, but I still think it's a good point.

As to Shelia: she doesn't need Tuck to talk to her, she needs to talk to Tuck. That has to be a clue, but I don't know what it means. As to what, I suspect it has something to do with Tuck's double life. I understand why most people aren't really concerned about that right now, but I think the attack is going to have a big impact on what Tuck thinks about the situation. It feels conspicuous by it's absense, if you know what I mean.

Who is #5? Tuck named four. Dad apparently didn't ding the name as somebody who shouldn't be on the list, or I suspect he would have raised the issue by now with someone. I doubt it's the cheerleaders, because they were getting busted after the scene where we learned of #5. I suspect it's somebody we would think belongs on the good guy list, or why the combination of calling our attention to it and then hiding it? My guess would be Travis (worried about Val, checking up, and being in the wrong place- wrong time;) Jack (Same, but somewhat less likely;) or Lisa (She saw Debbie upset about Tuck and hired some thugs to put her revenge vow from #43 into effect.) None of those characters are mentioned by name in 104-108, for the nickle that's worth...
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3113] Mon, 07 February 2005 22:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
He had time to do it if he had time to do anything. Student safety is primary, not a secondary consideration. It gets taken care of before grades are argued about. I wasn't careless in how I phrased things, it not only is his responsibility, it is his fault that it was not done.

Granted, he's just the proximate responsible person; the board, the community and lots of parents are at fault too, including the Tuckers. And including the other students at the school.

Yes, it might have been impossible for him to accomplish but he made insufficent effort in that direction. And don't think he doesn't know that, I believe Ellen has painted a picture of Dobson's guilt in those few deft strokes.

And yes, responsible students should be known and ready to help, it's how these things are kept under control. That Dobson doesn't know who to call in and ask for help is another failing on his part. And that the other teachers aren't aware of this and doing something is their fault, too.

The Tuckers' have grounds for massive lawsuits. I have a friend who goes to court for the insurance companies of schools, he's not a lawyer, just an adjuster, but he usually negotiates with the plaintiff's lawyers. Cases like this he just tries to keep out of court because a jury can award practically anything.

- Erin
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3114] Mon, 07 February 2005 22:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Brooke wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 15:13


[Dobson] inherited a school with an all too common problem. The "culture" of the school was set long before he got there much less before he became principal.

He's had what, a couple of months to work on changing this. And at most a few days between the onset of violence that could be pointed to as anything more than "normal student hijinks" and the attack on Tuck...

"Every complex problem has a simple, easy-to-understand, *wrong* answer..."

It was a no-win situation. And Dobson was trying.

Falling into the all-too-common "solution" of finding a scapegoat to blame everything on when said person couldn't *really* have saved things isn't gonna help.

Not that the School Board won't try.

On the other hand, I suspect that they may leave him in place until the Tuckers name him in a suit (assuming that they do). Because I bet you that they won't be able to find anybody who will accept that hot-seat.


As I said earlier, I think Arlene Raleigh had the (correct) perception that they were dealing with an emergency situation, and one in which the school administration had lost control -- a situation that got even worse with the discovery of the posters. (Whether or not the situation had ever been under control really isn't relevant to what has to be done immediately. If the school board doesn't act, they're more vulnerable in whatever litigation gets filed against the school district.)

Under those circumstances, I think she has to at least suspend Dobson and leave an assistant principal or dean temporarily in charge, whether anyone outside the school would accept the position permanently or not.

That scenario would bring up the interesting question as to whether Dobson, once ousted, would want to join the Tucker group in whatever "solution" they're working on, in hopes of getting his job back or at least putting a more positive spin on the situation. (And of course he IS serious about improving the educational atmosphere at McAllen, and might work toward that end even if it means giving the credit to the new administrator.)

(It almost justifies Nickerson's behavior. I'm sure any administrator would tell you that repression beats anarchy -- if only because if he doesn't act on that premise he doesn't figure to be around long enough to justify himself.)

Eric

(BTW, when I woke up today I realized that since the plan behind the posters isn't specifically to implicate the attackers who got arrested, it doesn't matter whether or not they were in jail when they were posted or not. I've deleted that paragraph in my previous comment.)
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3115] Tue, 08 February 2005 00:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lynna  is currently offline Lynna
Messages: 10
Registered: June 2004
Junior Member
[quote title=Brooke wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 15:13][quote
I wonder what sort of records of incidents and complaints could be dug up by a determined investigator. Especially ones that the *Board* brushed aside. Ones going back *years* to show a pattern of indifference or worse...

If they are anything like most school systems, I bet the answer is "enough to get the board lynched" *now* even though the public didn't care *then*.
[/quote]

I can vouch from personal experience that the schools don't care what happens as long as the teachers and school board keep their cushy jobs. Don't rock the boat.

A student can be beaten to a pulp repeatedly, continously harassed, and threatened with deadly weapons; and they do absolutely nothing to protect the student.

This is doubly so when the culprits are the "Devilspawn" Evil or Very Mad of politicians, Twisted Evil prominent community people, and the school jocks. Shocked

When a "nobody" like Tuck get attacked, it seems that unless a lawsuit is filed, they just sweep it under the table.
Tuck IS lucky to have family & friends to help.
"One is the loneliest number....."

I can't wait to see what Ellen has up her sleeve.

"Revenge is a dish best served cold" Old Klingon Proverb

Lynna
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3116] Tue, 08 February 2005 00:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Another thing I thought about after #108:

Nobody wants to learn that they're carrying a recessive trait that'll make life harder on any potential children, and it's an obviously important thing for a family to know about in advance and to test for in both partners before marrying or trying to conceive. But the Tuckers, in dreading a positive test result, seem to be treating it as, if not the kiss of death, at least the Sword of Damocles. Is that really justified?

How desperate would Tuck's condition have been if it had been possible to discover the chromosome condition before or just after birth? From Sarah's explanation and what little I've read elsewhere, I assume XXYs normally identify as male. But would the XX side have mitigated this to the point where Tuck could have identified as female while growing up, if the doctor had chosen to give Tuck a clitoris rather than a penis?

In any case, surgeons could have immediately corrected whatever actual damage existed inside Tuck's body, and the later physical problems could have been handled by hormone treatments upon reaching adolescence. As people here have pointed out, Tuck might be capable of fertility even now, though I'm inclined to doubt that. Still, if the situation had been identified early enough, it might have been possible to increase that likelihood. (And if nothing else, Val's sex life with Travis would have been easier.)

I'm assuming that the asthma was a separate issue; Sarah doesn't list respiratory problems among an XXY's common traits. If that's true, Susan's children would be more likely to have one problem or the other rather than both. And if Tuck hadn't suffered from asthma and pneumonia so much when younger (and again now, of course) along with the genetic condition, life would certainly have been a lot easier for all of the Tuckers, and Tuck would be less frightened of medical treatment in general.

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3119] Tue, 08 February 2005 03:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
Tuck isn't XXY, the proper description of the Tuck's genotype is XX/XXY. Tuck is a mosaic or chimera, the distinction being whether Tuck started out as one egg or two. This condition is unlikely to be "inherited" in the usual sense, that is, it is improbable that Sarah or Susan suffers from it or could pass it to other children.

But I think Tuck has another problem, a biochemical one. I think Tuck has PAIS, Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Some forms of this have little effect on female carriers but can produce various levels of feminization in males becaue their bodies, tissues actually, do not react correctly to androgens.

I don't know if this can be detected by any test on a female, to see if she is a carrier. I suspect it can. I'm less certain that a test for the genes involved is available but a biochemical test might exist. Susan or Sarah or both could conceivably be carriers of this gene, harmless to females but a difficult life for males.

Some versions of PAIS would make females infertile, obviously Sarah does not have one of these. Smile

CAIS, complete androgen insensitivity exists but Tuck does not have this since even females need a little androgen sensitivity to get nipple erections and have proper orgasms.

- Erin
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3121] Tue, 08 February 2005 06:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Thanks, Erin. Sorry if I wasn't clearer.

16:39 25 Sep

“The syndrome, the collection of symptoms that Doctor Klinefelter identified,” Mom continued, “is a lot rarer. Still, there’s some common problems, that show up more often in XXY people than in others. Difficulty with language, sterility, and morphological abnorm- Body deformities,” she changed when someone looked baffled, I guess. “Usually in the genital area. Also breast enlargement and lack of body and facial hair later, during puberty.” ‘Ooooh,’ went everyone as the light bulbs came on over their heads. “Sounds very familiar,” I sighed at Susan’s chin.

That's what I was referring to: Sarah's generality about XXY's, not Tuck's specific XXY/XX.

The question I had about Tuck's XXY/XX condition was whether the XX part would have been sufficient to allow Tuck to identify as female while growing up, if the genital "correction" at birth had gone in that direction instead of the way it turned out. Based upon Sarah's description above, it seems clear that Tuck's body, at least, was obeying the XXY blueprint and to some extent still is, whatever the XX directives are doing to Tuck's hormone balance.

Erin Halfelven wrote on Tue 8 February 00:37

But I think Tuck has another problem, a biochemical one. I think Tuck has PAIS, Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Some forms of this have little effect on female carriers but can produce various levels of feminization in males becaue their bodies, tissues actually, do not react correctly to androgens.

I don't know if this can be detected by any test on a female, to see if she is a carrier. I suspect it can. I'm less certain that a test for the genes involved is available but a biochemical test might exist. Susan or Sarah or both could conceivably be carriers of this gene, harmless to females but a difficult life for males.


It seems to me that's inconsistent with the way Tuck's tests were described and diagnosed. You've mentioned before that if PAIS were the problem, Tuck's body would be unable to respond properly to testosterone injections. If the tests had discovered that, (1) it would definitely have been relevant to Sarah's lecture and she wouldn't have overlooked mentioning it, and (2) the doctors wouldn't have recommended the injections after getting the test results. (It's nothing more than conjecture, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they recommended the cosmetic surgery that the Pack described, feeling that it'd be urgently needed to bolster Tuck's male self-image.)

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3122] Tue, 08 February 2005 08:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachel.greenham  is currently offline rachel.greenham
Messages: 290
Registered: November 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Senior Member
Eric wrote on Tue, 08 February 2005 11:42

It seems to me that's inconsistent with the way Tuck's tests were described and diagnosed. You've mentioned before that if PAIS were the problem, Tuck's body would be unable to respond properly to testosterone injections. If the tests had discovered that, (1) it would definitely have been relevant to Sarah's lecture and she wouldn't have overlooked mentioning it, and (2) the doctors wouldn't have recommended the injections after getting the test results. (It's nothing more than conjecture, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they recommended the cosmetic surgery that the Pack described, feeling that it'd be urgently needed to bolster Tuck's male self-image.)

Eric


Would they know Tuck had PAIS before attempting androgen therapy? My own experience knowing intersexed people seems to indicate there's still an awful lot of trial-and-error in this field, and I'd imagine endocrine response isn't something you can adequately test in a test tube; by definition you need the whole organism.

I can see androgens being pushed at Tuck as a 'diagnostic tool'. And probably honestly too, not as a pretext.

[Updated on: Tue, 08 February 2005 08:14]


Rachel
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3123] Tue, 08 February 2005 09:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Janet  is currently offline Janet
Messages: 74
Registered: December 2002
Location: Valley of the Sun
Member

sluggo wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 23:28

{snip}
The second was Mike's unconscious plot to get Tuck back and get rid of Valerie. When Kim and Jill were talking to him about the Parkers, he was hinting that he didn't think that Tuck would go back to babysitting. He hasn't liked the dual life at all or Valerie to a lesser degree. He wants his brother back. This is Mike's chance to try and make it happen.

I don't think that Mike meant anything other than what he said. If you think about Tuck's injuries, It's gonna be a good couple months or more before Tuck would be physically fit enough to even think about baby sitting. He just wouldn't be able to handle it.

This discounts the pulmonary issues, which could keep him out for even longer. Face it, Tucker is gonna be sick for a very long time.

Mike's been so overloaded in the past several days that I doubt that he's had the time to cook up any sort of plot to get rid of Valerie.

And, why would he do such a thing now? He's known about Valerie for a long time and hasn't done anything about it other than confront Tuck with his opinions.

Mike doesn't impress me as being the sort of person who would do such a back door sort of thing. He would take the direct route (as he has done) and work is out with Tucker directly. I can't see him ever hitting Tucker when he is down. That's not his style.


Janet

All that glitters is not Iron Pyrite
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3124] Tue, 08 February 2005 13:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Eric wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:43

Another thing I thought about after #108:

Nobody wants to learn that they're carrying a recessive trait that'll make life harder on any potential children, and it's an obviously important thing for a family to know about in advance and to test for in both partners before marrying or trying to conceive. But the Tuckers, in dreading a positive test result, seem to be treating it as, if not the kiss of death, at least the Sword of Damocles. Is that really justified?


I don't see them treating it that way. I see them worried about what the tests might say. and that's a somewhat justifiable worry.

They don't seem to be worrying *excessively*.

Eric wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:43

How desperate would Tuck's condition have been if it had been possible to discover the chromosome condition before or just after birth? From Sarah's explanation and what little I've read elsewhere, I assume XXYs normally identify as male. But would the XX side have mitigated this to the point where Tuck could have identified as female while growing up, if the doctor had chosen to give Tuck a clitoris rather than a penis?


The doctor didn't choose to give Tuck a penis. We don't have the capability of doing that *now*.

What he did was "correct" a "minor birth defect" by re-routing the urethra to the penis.

That's a fairly "common" procedure for borderline intersexed babies as I understand things.

Eric wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:43

In any case, surgeons could have immediately corrected whatever actual damage existed inside Tuck's body, and the later physical problems could have been handled by hormone treatments upon reaching adolescence. As people here have pointed out, Tuck might be capable of fertility even now, though I'm inclined to doubt that. Still, if the situation had been identified early enough, it might have been possible to increase that likelihood. (And if nothing else, Val's sex life with Travis would have been easier.)


First of all, it's not "damage". And second, there really isn't anything *to* correct. It would have taken some rather expensive, dangerous and invasive tests to determine that Tuck had an ovary and that "tissue mass" instead of normal testicles.

At birth they are in pretty much the same place as I understand it. The testes descend into the scrotum later.

Doctors *will not* assign "female" to a baby with a "penis" over a certain length. Not now, and certainly not 20 years ago. Tuck obviously exceeded that length.

Also, you are falling into the trap of "Must be male or female". The intersex community doesn't thionk much of that viewpoint. Nor do they think much of making decisions *for* kids who are too young to make their own decisions.

Eric wrote on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:43

I'm assuming that the asthma was a separate issue; Sarah doesn't list respiratory problems among an XXY's common traits. If that's true, Susan's children would be more likely to have one problem or the other rather than both. And if Tuck hadn't suffered from asthma and pneumonia so much when younger (and again now, of course) along with the genetic condition, life would certainly have been a lot easier for all of the Tuckers, and Tuck would be less frightened of medical treatment in general.


Tuck isn't an XXY. According to Tuck 96 he's an XX/XXY mosaic.

But yeah, the asthma may be a seperate issue. On the other hand, it may not.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3127] Tue, 08 February 2005 19:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cate
Messages: 78
Registered: September 2002
Member
My comments about not knowing what Tuck may-or-may not have said to the police about a fifth attacker applied to us the readers. I would fully assume that Bill would have had that info before the cops.
As regards secondary conditions that might have afflicted Tuck from birth, CAH [congenital adrenal hyperplasia] is a more likely culprit than PAIS. This condition can afflict the mother or the fetus. A 21-hydrolase deficiency causes excessive production of progesterone, and androgens. The result is virilization of female fetuses [including labial fusion, and clitoromegaly that can be mistaken for a hypospadic penis]. The severe form of this condition [salt-wasting CAH] causes the neonate to have a comprised respiratory system [sometimes fatally comprised]. And, she will suffer from asthma throughout childhhod [at a minimum].
Another side-effect is the late onset of speech [sound familiar?].
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3142] Wed, 09 February 2005 22:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Luthien  is currently offline Luthien
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2003
Junior Member
Cate wrote on Tue, 08 February 2005 19:11


...congenital adrenal hyperplasia...


This is too perfect.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3144] Wed, 09 February 2005 23:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Cate wrote on Tue, 08 February 2005 16:11

My comments about not knowing what Tuck may-or-may not have said to the police about a fifth attacker applied to us the readers. I would fully assume that Bill would have had that info before the cops.

But it's Bill who's surprised by the fifth perp:
from #108

“Five?” Bill interrupted. “I only heard about four.”

Cate, again

As regards secondary conditions that might have afflicted Tuck from birth, CAH [congenital adrenal hyperplasia] is a more likely culprit than PAIS...

Wow.

Just one last question: I know you said "congenital", but is it something that can and should be tested for among the family, male and female, once Tuck turns up with the condition?

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3150] Thu, 10 February 2005 12:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tux.  is currently offline Tux.
Messages: 13
Registered: August 2004
Location: Europe
Junior Member
Cate wrote on Tue, 08 February 2005 16:11

My comments about not knowing what Tuck may-or-may not have said to the police about a fifth attacker applied to us the readers. I would fully assume that Bill would have had that info before the cops.
As regards secondary conditions that might have afflicted Tuck from birth, CAH [congenital adrenal hyperplasia] is a more likely culprit than PAIS. This condition can afflict the mother or the fetus. A 21-hydrolase deficiency causes excessive production of progesterone, and androgens. The result is virilization of female fetuses [including labial fusion, and clitoromegaly that can be mistaken for a hypospadic penis]. The severe form of this condition [salt-wasting CAH] causes the neonate to have a comprised respiratory system [sometimes fatally comprised]. And, she will suffer from asthma throughout childhhod [at a minimum].
Another side-effect is the late onset of speech [sound familiar?].

Impressive.

Could CAH also screw up the embryogenesis enough to give rise to an XX/XXY-mosaicism?
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3151] Thu, 10 February 2005 15:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
No, that's a separate issue.

But CAH is normally detected in infancy, it isn't a subtle disease usually. It can be treated rather successfully with adrenal hormones.

But there are other symptoms that Tuck does not exhibit, essentially CAH masculinizes female embryos whereas Tuck's ambiguous state is due to incomplete masculinization caused by being in part xxy.

Hyperpilosity is also common in CAH (excessive hairiness). I know two people with CAH, one of whom is a writer on FM. Neither of them has the delicate build that Tuck exhibits, such a build is uncommon in sufferers of CAH who tend the other direction. Wide faces, muscular bodies and hairy arms and legs are common in CAH victims.

Tuck's xx/xxy genotype is sufficent to explain almost all the symptoms seen. Asthma is not uncommon in genetic mosaics along with other autoimmune disorders and xxy frequently causes late beginning of talking.

I suggested PAIS not so much to explain the symptoms seen but as a dramatic complication, one more wall of the box Tuck is in.

- Erin
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3152] Thu, 10 February 2005 19:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cate
Messages: 78
Registered: September 2002
Member
Hi,
To Tux, CAH would be a side issue with Tuck. The XX/XXY condition is entirely unrelated; and cannot be caused by CAH.

Eric, it can be tested for, but it is not something that is a big risk. Therefore, I doubt that even if Tuck did have it, that hir family would be tested.

As, to the hirsutism, that usually doesn't manifest it self in newborns with 21[I]-[I]hydrolase deficiency CAH. From what I have read that usually is a symptom of later onset CAH.
If Tuck had suffer from that at birth, there would have been treatment for it then. This might have had the effect of negating it [hirsutism]. Another side effect in female fetuses with CAH is increased spacial abilities more consistant with male ranges.
Tuck would probably fall into the last group of kids born prior to mass fetal screening for CAH; because the first specific test for it was developed in 1977. With Tuck being born in 1981, there still was a possibility Sarah wasn't tested for it during her pregnancy.

A good source of information on this condition is v.30 #1 of ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA (March, 2001)
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3153] Thu, 10 February 2005 19:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
I didn't mean that the newborn would be hairy. Smile Though that does happen, even without CAH; my brother had sparse, six-inch long, red hair all over him at birth but he was overterm and Mom suffered from kidney/adrenal problems. The hair fell out within days.

Still with treatment, the virilisation that causes hair growh would be less likely to happen to a female child. No mention of such treatment for Tuck. And this can be a life-threatening illness, most infants get diagnosed fairly early. Tuck does not fit the profile for most forms of late onset CAH, either, from my reading.

A Google on the subject brings up tons of articles. Smile

- Erin
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3154] Thu, 10 February 2005 20:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sir Lee  is currently offline Sir Lee
Messages: 440
Registered: October 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Senior Member
A good place to start might be the Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_adrenal_hyperplasia

Sir Lee


Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3157] Fri, 11 February 2005 01:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bianca  is currently offline Bianca
Messages: 9
Registered: February 2005
Junior Member
About the *five* restraining orders, could they possibly be for the cheerleaders, and not the guys from the original attack? Bill cuts off the lawyer as soon as he says "five", so we don't know what the rest of his sentence would have been.

From the description of the cheerleader attack in #104, the names of 4 cheerleaders are given as part of the attack, and another one was mentioned that I am not sure about:

Ashlee, Shannon, and Jordan - mentioned prior to Mike's arrival.
Jody Martin - confesses to hitting Tuck.
Holly Porter - was in the gym, and was in the office when Dobson suspended the cheerleaders that were involved.

Bianca
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3158] Fri, 11 February 2005 02:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
Bianca wrote on Thu, 10 February 2005 22:34

About the *five* restraining orders, could they possibly be for the cheerleaders, and not the guys from the original attack? Bill cuts off the lawyer as soon as he says "five", so we don't know what the rest of his sentence would have been.

Unfortunatly, no. They only start arresting the cheerleaders after we hear about the restraining orders; the timeline doesn't work. (By the way, welcome to the group, Bianca.)

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea that Lisa was the 5th person they got.
Tuck 43

She'd bide her time, but if anything else happened to Debbie, and there was the least chance that Tucker was at the root of it, she'd make sure he'd pay for it himself in blood.

Debbie was obviously having a lot of problems this week that were related to Tuck. She very well may not have wanted to go into much detail over them with Lisa. It's been suggested that, for all that the attackers had reasons in their minds to pick on Tuck, the attack was a bit more of an escalation than we might normally expect quite yet. I could easily see Debbie & Lisa getting into a fight over Tuck being attacked, espically if Lisa was (unknown to Debbie) behind it. So, Debbie & Lisa may not be talking to one another right now; that would explain why Debbie didn't know Lisa was fingered by the actual attackers.

A large part of me wants to just file this as a kook theory. But, at least at my first glance, it seems to hold together better than I would expect.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3162] Fri, 11 February 2005 10:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Leesya  is currently offline Leesya
Messages: 9
Registered: October 2003
Location: Inside the Beltway
Junior Member
About the *five* restraining orders:

How about the simple explanation? The four who attacked Tuck had a lookout outside the locker room to make sure they were not caught (they're used to victims refusing to identify them), and one of the arrested perps fingered the lookout, or the cops otherwise discovered the lookout's identity.

Leesya
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3169] Sun, 13 February 2005 02:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
Here's another subtopic for this thread...
I'd been waiting for a discussion between the Bill or Sarah with Susan about Valerie and it glares at me that none has occurred. Why? Brian was involved in the family discussion on Oct 5 when Tuck was caught because Tuck's action will affect Brian downstream, why not Susan? As Tuck #108 ends (Sun, Oct 12), it's been only a week and a half since Sarah caught Tuck (Fri, Oct 3). At least have a discussion to let Susan know what's been transpiring in the Tucker household since she previously left. Now she's returning to class Monday and the subject of Val never brought up? Isn't Susan considered mature enough within the Tucker household as an adult to have this discussion and subject of Val both recent and large enough? I'm sure Susan would provide some constructive insights to Sarah or Bill, even if she parses what she knows to both help and protect Tuck.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3170] Sun, 13 February 2005 03:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
lurker wrote on Sat, 12 February 2005 23:49

I'd been waiting for a discussion between the Bill or Sarah with Susan about Valerie and it glares at me that none has occurred. Why?

Two possible reasons come to mind.

First one: it did come up, but for some reason Ellen didn't want us to see it, or didn't feel we needed to see it to forward the story.

Second reason: Mom was deliberatly avoiding the subject, because the priority was the attack on Tuck and she knew she wouldn't be able to keep her cool when talking to Susan about the subject. (Unlike Brian, Susan was in on Tuck's secret already. The situations are not comparable, IMO.)

Either way, I think it's safe to assume that Susan was told that they now know about Val. It may have been limited to "We know this, we know you know about it, but now is not the time to discuss it."
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3173] Sun, 13 February 2005 04:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
OtherEric wrote on Sun, 13 February 2005 00:07

lurker wrote on Sat, 12 February 2005 23:49

I'd been waiting for a discussion between the Bill or Sarah with Susan about Valerie and it glares at me that none has occurred. Why?

Two possible reasons come to mind.

First one: it did come up, but for some reason Ellen didn't want us to see it, or didn't feel we needed to see it to forward the story.

Second reason: Mom was deliberatly avoiding the subject, because the priority was the attack on Tuck and she knew she wouldn't be able to keep her cool when talking to Susan about the subject. (Unlike Brian, Susan was in on Tuck's secret already. The situations are not comparable, IMO.)


But Bill and Sarah don't know that Susan knows.

OtherEric wrote on Sun, 13 February 2005 00:07

Either way, I think it's safe to assume that Susan was told that they now know about Val. It may have been limited to "We know this, we know you know about it, but now is not the time to discuss it."


I don't think there's any evidence pointing at Susan knowing. She's never *had* to cover for Val to the parentals.

She found out in Tuck 28/29. And I don't see any reason for Tuck to mention to them that he told Susan then. Or later. It wasn't relevant to what he was being raked over the coals about. No need to get her in trouble *too*. Especially since her only "crime" would be not telling the parentals about Val.

Sarah and Bill not talking to Susan about it is a bit unusual, but given that she's away at college it could be that they figured it didn't affect her much and it wasn't worth dragging in a side issue right now.

My money is on Susan getting told later, after things calm down a bit. Whether or not she reveals what she knew is a good question.

I kinda suspect that she'll ask about when they found out and what they did about it. And then Blast the parents up side and down the other for stressing Tuck out that badly and then letting him go to school while so vulnerable. But that's a rant I made a couple chapters back... Sad




Re: Tuck #108 [message #3176] Sun, 13 February 2005 06:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Brooke wrote on Sun, 13 February 2005 01:20

But Bill and Sarah don't know that Susan knows...

I don't think there's any evidence pointing at Susan knowing. She's never *had* to cover for Val to the parentals.


Certainly they know that Susan knows. For one thing, they would have reasoned out that anyone who ever met Tuck at the Parkers' must have known about Valerie, and Susan never had a reason not to let them know she'd been there. (Even if it hadn't come up sooner, on 26 Sep when Mike got permission from Sarah and Bill to take Tuck on the weekend hike, Susan accompanied Mike to the Parkers' and drove Tuck's car home.)

As for the last point, she DID have to cover for Valerie when Val came back from L.A. without changing clothes.

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3177] Sun, 13 February 2005 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Yeah, in bed last night, reading on my handheld, I suddenly recalled that when the parentals got upset at Tuck having a boyfriend they'd never met, he told them that Susan had met his boyfriend.

So now that I've recalled that, I'm leaning towards the idea that Bill and Sarah figure thered's nothing they can tell Susan about Val that she doesn't already know.

They may get upset at her later (for not telling them), but "now" isn't the time.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3178] Sun, 13 February 2005 18:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sir Lee  is currently offline Sir Lee
Messages: 440
Registered: October 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Senior Member
On the opposite direction, I'm not sure if anybody else even told Susan that Val had been busted by the parents. Mike would have been the logical one to update her, but there was nothing mentioned in the occasions when they would be able to talk.

Sir Lee


Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3180] Mon, 14 February 2005 03:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
Brooke wrote on Sun, 13 February 2005 13:56

Yeah, in bed last night, reading on my handheld, I suddenly recalled that when the parentals got upset at Tuck having a boyfriend they'd never met, he told them that Susan had met his boyfriend.


Unable to locate that reference in canon Tuck - can you pinpoint? Closest reference I found was in one of the newer posted fanfics, Facing The Real Thing by Caylin - 18 Feb 2003. Which, of course, doesn't count.

The reason I brought the subject of Susan and the parents is that I was trying to get a better handle on family dynamics between Bill/Sarah and the children. If lying by Tuck was such a deal that Sarah reacted violently with Tuck at the Mall, and the family's moral justification is the inability of the parents to effectively protect the kids, wouldn't collusion to aid in such an offense also warrant a punishable reaction by the parents? With that logic, I don't think Susan would ever volunteer her knowledge of Tuck's double life. Susan indicated as much during the family session with Sheila when Tuck's physical problems were identified on Sept 25. I suspect that Bill will eventually figure this out. Would he give Susan a pass on the matter and not tell Sarah ("OK Susan, although I know you intended to protect Tuck, $100 fine and laundry duty when you're home or I tell your Mother!"), or will he mete out some penalty with Sarah's knowledge....

BTW - where does all the money from levied fines on the kids go? Beer money for Bill? Laughing
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3181] Mon, 14 February 2005 07:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
If I've put it together correctly, I think you're confusing two different, if similar, mechanisms there. Bill can accept cash from Susan, and she can perform any work duty around the house that Bill had been assigned (I'm not sure we know of any of the latter) as a bribe for not telling Sarah something, though as I said in a couple of previous notes I can't think of anything important about the issue that Sarah doesn't know already.

(She DOES know that Susan knew about Valerie, though Sarah may not know that she'd known for months rather than days, or that she covered for Tuck on the return from L.A., or that she kept Valerie away from the rest of the family when they otherwise would have run into each other in the mall. Then again, Tuck may have mentioned any or all of those things during the weekend inquisition, or one of Bill's inquiries might have provided some of that detail.)

Fines and punishment, on the other hand, appear to be directives that can be handed down by either of the parents unilaterally on behalf of both. Those being punished have the right to appeal, double or nothing; that may be the only way in which they can debate the point or present evidence in their favor. (We're not exactly talking due process here.) Whether someone being punished can direct an appeal to one parent for a punishment or fine handed down by the other hasn't been made clear. Except for major offenses like Tuck's latest, there seems to be a going rate by which one can make payment in lieu of other punitive measures, though it's probably almost prohibitively high since we've never seen it used.

So under the rules that seem to apply, Bill wouldn't be able to sentence Susan to fines and housework in exchange for his not telling Sarah something; she'd have to negotiate with him if she wanted him not to tell. And if Bill did sentence her, Susan wouldn't be able formally to prevent Sarah from knowing about something, though she might be able to convince Bill, monetarily or otherwise, that HE'D benefit from information not reaching her.

Tuck paid a negotiation fee to Bill in order to convince Sarah to accept a "no reprisals" clause, so to speak, in learning where Tuck changed his clothes each day. I'm assuming that comes under the first category (negotiable) rather than the second, but there does seem to be some middle ground there.

(BTW, assuming "no reprisals" represented a promise that Rachel wouldn't be punished for providing closet space, I'm not exactly sure what Sarah could do to Rachel anyway. It's not like she could fine her or ground her, or take away her telephone or disconnect her computer or break her door lock. If "no reprisals" meant no reprisals against Tuck, I can't see how precisely where he changed would make any difference. If she saw any point in confiscating Valerie's clothes from Rachel's closet, once she found the clothes she wouldn't need to know whose closet it was to do that. I suppose the Tuckers could prohibit Tuck from going to Rachel's place and/or stop letting her come for dinner on Sundays, but is that really worth the hassle?)

I'm inclined to think Susan would tell them everything and take responsibility for an error in judgment rather than risk greater potential punishment by lying to her inquisitors about something they could find out elsewhere. But she presumably has better information than we readers do about family precedent on this sort of thing, which could lead her to a different risk assessment than I'm making.

Eric
Testing for What? [message #3182] Mon, 14 February 2005 08:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
I'd like to get back to what's left of my original question. What are the Tuckers being tested for that would make a positive test by Susan a significant concern? (I think it's a safe assumption that the technicians wouldn't be phoning them for a consultation ASAP if the results were negative.)

The word here has been that mosaicism isn't hereditary or predictable, so they're presumably not testing for that.

Is there a predictor for an XXY genotype and if so would both males and females in the family need to be tested? (In other words: Can XXY come from either an (abnormal) doubled X from the female and a normal Y from the male, and from a normal X from the female and an (abnormal) XY from the male? And could a test identify someone more likely to contribute two chromosones during conception rather than the usual one?)

Even if the answer to both questions is "yes", it wouldn't seem to me that it'd be something where Sarah Tucker could tell Brian (at Sheila's, 9/25),“We still need to get the results back; you might not have the worst form of it.” Would it?

As far as I can figure, that just leaves the biochemical anomalies like PAIS and CAH, and from what I'm reading in this thread so far, it doesn't sound as though that's the answer:
Cate, 2/10:

[CAH] can be tested for, but it is not something that is a big risk. Therefore, I doubt that even if Tuck did have it, that hir family would be tested.
Rachel, 2/8:

I'd imagine endocrine response isn't something you can adequately test in a test tube; by definition you need the whole organism.
(And I still think my own point applies, though I've gotten objections here: If they decided to test the family for PAIS, it could only be because Tuck tested positive. And IF he'd tested positive, the doctors wouldn't be recommending injections for him.)

Where does that leave us?

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3183] Mon, 14 February 2005 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Damn. A quick check of where I thought it was fails to locate it.

So I guess I got confused by the fanfic.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3184] Mon, 14 February 2005 13:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cate
Messages: 78
Registered: September 2002
Member
In response to Eric's question, I am assuming that the tests are meant to find some type of genetic error that might cause a Tuck-like condition in any offspring Susan or Brian might have. Something findable at the chromosomal level. While, I don't think a transposition error (like SRY or SOX movement to the "wrong" 23rd chromosome) has been known to cause a Tuckereque condition; there's a bunch of new research ongoing that might be hiding something on those lines.

My guess is, that it's more likely, the tests are looking for other similar anomolies to check for an unexplainable familial tendency to reproductive oddities.

Or it could just be a plot device to keep the pot boiling [bubble, bubble]. I have no objections to any "Machina de Ellen" plot twists. She GOOD at plot twists! Twisted Evil

[Updated on: Mon, 14 February 2005 13:02]

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3185] Mon, 14 February 2005 16:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

after much too long, i have returned. i'm still of limited computting and internet capabilities i'll keep it short and just say what i'm thinking instead of looking it up first. I have been putting off re-reading until i get back on my computer where i have my character lists and calendar of daily events.

first, i had looked up CAH back when we were first pondering tuck's medical issues. I had to abandon it, even though it fit so well. I just figured that tuck would have had to been getting shots all his life. they would have noticed things more. tuck would have been dead by now if he had gone undiagnosed. and if they knew he had the deficientcie, they would have known the cause, thus his genital issues wouldn't have been a mystery

the next thing is that 5th student thingy. I'm just thinking off the top of my head here, but didn't the police go visit James? James has been beeten up recently and looks like someone tuck could have hit. the other kids could have implicated him, even though he was compleatly innocent. it could be kinda a last little joke.

i'm probably compleatly wronge about this, but i can't check right now, my B/F is dragging me away from the computer to do valentines day stuff Embarassed

[Updated on: Mon, 14 February 2005 16:15]

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3186] Mon, 14 February 2005 19:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sir Lee  is currently offline Sir Lee
Messages: 440
Registered: October 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Senior Member
Wrong James. The James who is Mike's "little brother," the one who got beaten, is James Tiberius Cooper. The one the police visited, presumably one of the four jocks who attacked Tuck, is called James Yancey.

By the way, he was the only new name of the four Ellen has given the readers -- Kyle Dawson was known from the start. And, since Tuck had to look at the yearbook pictures to identify them, the other two should also be new names. So, probably not Rob Walsh, nor Bobby McPhearson, or Frank Donner, or Tom Lenich.

McAllen has no shortage of assholes, apparently. Let me see, besides the ones listed above, there is "Mannie Whatsisname the human-rhinoceros crossbreed that’s on the football team", Cody Mitchell, and the two (three?) remaining ones from the four (five?) who attacked Tuck. Ten already, probably more.

Another thing about the attack on Tuck is that we're not sure about the original intentions of the jocks. In one hand, there was the earlier incident with (unindetified) goons seeming pretty angry at Tuck. This MIGHT be in retaliation to an earlier event, say the fight with Tom Lenich at the mall. OTOH, the only one of Tuck's attackers he did recognize at first glance was Kyle Dawson, who we hadn't seen before (the only previous mention to his name was in a list of local assholes). So, apparently the ones who DID attack Tuck had no personal axe to grind with him beyond the general animosity of jocks toward geeks.

So, we have two possibilities: either the attack began as one generic example of school bullying which escalated because Tuck resisted, OR Kyle & Co. were doing revenge by proxy for someone else (probably Lenich).

Sir Lee


Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3187] Mon, 14 February 2005 22:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Sir Lee wrote on Mon, 14 February 2005 16:52

...we have two possibilities: either the attack began as one generic example of school bullying which escalated because Tuck resisted, OR Kyle & Co. were doing revenge by proxy for someone else (probably Lenich).

Actually, I thought the evidence, such as it was, pointed to a more current reason for revenge: Tuck spitting on an unnamed female friend of Shannon at cosmetology class that morning.

However, there were three groups that Tuck had to cope with that day:

11:33 9 Oct

“Hey FAGGOT!” someone roared angrily. I looked around, and there were a few too many goons coming my way. LARGE goons. Large ANGRY goons.
Since Tuck was with Mike at the time, I'd put that tally at five or more. It seems to me that Tuck's description of them as "angry" seems to reflect his impression that there's a specific reason for their anger at this time and place.

(still)11:33 9 Oct:

I ran down the hall looking for a specific classroom. Unfortunately, Rob Walsh and a few of his crew were right there, and Rob tried to grab me.
This appears to be a separate group, taking advantage of a fortuitous opportunity to bully Tuck. There's no evidence that the Large Angry Goons were trying to send Tuck in this direction; he's headed there by choice, to make his window escape. "Rob and a few of his crew" implies no fewer than four additional adversaries.

And then of course there's Kyle Dawson's four guys in the restroom, some if not all of whom could have been among the nine or more guys he escaped in the morning. I may be getting too much out of this:
12:36 9 Oct

“You are gonna DIE, faggot,” Kyle announced, so he’s the one I hit first.
But that wording gives me the impression that these four guys aren't just looking to bully Tuck on general principles, he's done SOMETHING, most likely either the spitting incident or his successful escape that morning, that makes them vengeful rather than just malicious.

Still, that wasn't a preplanned attack unless they had someone tailing Tuck, waiting for him to be alone, which doesn't seem to be their style.

All of which isn't very different from what Sir Lee said in the first place, except in offering a different incident as the catalyst.

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3188] Mon, 14 February 2005 23:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bianca  is currently offline Bianca
Messages: 9
Registered: February 2005
Junior Member
Back in 104, there was a conversation between Ginger and someone named Reina, where Reina alluded to a possible reason for the attack.

Quote:

***

"Do you know what happened with the helicopter today?" Ginger asked
as she played with a pencil and glared at her pre-calc homework.
Reina replied, "I dunno, but I saw Kyle at a gas station and his
face, man; it's like someone got him good. You think that had something
to do with it, like he got in a fight or something?"
"I dunno... Maybe. He's a jerk, any-"
"Man! You know what happened last month with him, right?"
"No?" Ginger prompted.

***


The incident where Tuck and Mike replaced someone's car tires with blocks of ice would fit the time frame, but I don't think we ever knew who's car that was done to.
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3189] Mon, 14 February 2005 23:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Having re-read the breakup with Debbie and after just a couple days ago, I note that Lisa didn't seem to be present at any of "discussions" the Pack had with Debbie about Tuck's side of things.

So if some of the stuff with Lenich at the mall got to Lisa a bit distorted, she may have deicided to sanction Tuck.

Say by spreading the word that he was a fag, or putting a bounty on him. Either would explain the rather large number of peiople who weren't "organized" but were apparently *actively* searching for a chance to nail Tuck.

Three seperate groups all going for Tuck in the span of a few hours, with at least two of them *looking* for him rather than taking advantage of a chance encounter is more than a bit suspicious.

And the planning behind planting him in the girls locker room is a bit much for spur of the moment.

Spitting in that girl's face would get some folks mad at him. But this seems evidence of things having moved to a whole new level.

I suspect that Ellen is holding back *at least* one "startling revelation" that will re-arrange a bunch of "random" events into a nasty little pattern.

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3190] Tue, 15 February 2005 00:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
OK, the whole "Lisa organized the attack" theory seems to be gaining some speed. It does seem like separate groups are picking on Tuck, some of which might be "just" escalation of all the normal crap. But some of Tuck's attackers were not known to Tuck by name until Tuck looked at the yearbook. Tuck normally seems to have a pretty good idea of who the normal hostiles are without such a reference.

I don't think we need to go back to the Lenich incident for Lisa's anger at Tuck, necessarly: Debbie's reaction to meeting with Tuck's mom might have been enough to trigger her. Or, the two in combination could have done it.

Lisa is more than resourceful enough to cover her tracks under normal circumstances. (I suspect she arranged for the beating of Ellen's attacker, for example.) It wouldn't suprise me if she got somewhat stupid when it came to something invoving Debbie & Tuck, though. Espically if she was annoyed at Debbie not wanting to dump on Tuck. Lisa knows Tuck & crew are also smart & resourceful, but I suspect she has no idea what they are like when they get serious about this sort of thing.

On a completely different note, I have another example on why we didn't see the parents talking to Susan. For the same reason we haven't seen them talking to Mike about the same subject. I'm not %100 percent which of the two or three reasons that have been suggested apply, but we haven't seen the subject of Val come up with either of them that I recall.

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3202] Thu, 17 February 2005 00:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Brooke wrote on Mon, 14 February 2005 20:15

Having re-read the breakup with Debbie and after just a couple days ago, I note that Lisa didn't seem to be present at any of [the] "discussions" the Pack had with Debbie about Tuck's side of things.
True, though I think it's more likely that she feels a duty to take Debbie's side in this regardless of the actual chain of events. We don't know how much she knows now; Tuck's probably a forbidden subject when she and Debbie get together with the rest of the Pack.
Brooke, continued:

So if some of the stuff with Lenich at the mall got to Lisa a bit distorted, she may have decided to sanction Tuck.
Trouble is that she'd have gotten that story from Debbie, and Debbie was appreciative of the rescue and glad to be rid of Lenich -- the latter point of which would have pleased Lisa.

I'd say that she DOES have a motive for escalating things right now, but it doesn't have to do with that. Debbie's exposing D&E to potential financial danger as long as Val's on the payroll, and faced with a clear opportunity to get off the hook last weekend, Debbie instead risked physical mayhem to keep Val on the job. Lisa doesn't trust Tuck anyway and now knows that she can't trust Debbie to make logical decisions involving Tuck, so if she's convinced there's a real danger to the company (or if Lisa has emotional issues that make it easy for her to think so), she knows that to solve the problem she's going to have to go unilateral.

Brooke, continued:

Say by spreading the word that he was a fag, or putting a bounty on him.
I don't like it. I can't see how the first option would focus any more action on Tuck than he's getting already from people who take it for granted, or don't care whether it's true or not as long as he makes a convenient doormat and there's no public outcry against attacking him. It can't enlarge the field by that much, and it wouldn't be that easy to do since Lisa's at another school.

The second makes more sense, and she certainly has the money. It doesn't feel right to me, but the only points I can make against it are that Lisa would be doing this over Debbie's objections on Debbie's turf; that by using McAllen people rather than Red Bluff people for this, she's taking more of a risk of discovery and/or blackmail than usual; and that without Debbie to referee, she may have trouble afterward determining who deserves the reward. Certainly none of those objections are unsurmountable.

Brooke, continued:

Either would explain the rather large number of people who weren't "organized" but were apparently *actively* searching for a chance to nail Tuck. Three separate groups all going for Tuck in the span of a few hours, with at least two of them *looking* for him rather than taking advantage of a chance encounter is more than a bit suspicious.
Not necessarily. The first group's out to get him -- I assumed it was in revenge for the incident in cosmetology class. Lenich's group isn't. Kyle's group probably includes at least one of the morning attackers, who would feel that Tuck one-upped them (he did, after all, make a provocative gesture to them after his escape) and in any case that they didn't complete what they started that morning.

FWIW, cheerleaders Carol Daley and Jordan Tessier say that Kyle's determination to beat up Tuck stems from a specific incident. (From #104: “I wish somebody would beat the shit out of the little faggot, show him what-” “Oh, he’s gonna get it. Kyle said that he was gonna kick the fag’s ass for what he did...”) To me, that seemed to point to the cosmetology class incident, especially since the cheerleaders in particular are out for blood.

Brooke, continued:

And the planning behind planting him in the girls locker room is a bit much for spur of the moment.
It's tough for me to see it as premeditated. They couldn't have known in advance that they were going to catch him near the gym and especially in the locker room, a place that they haven't seen him all year. If he hadn't been in a location convenient to the girls' locker room, they would have had trouble dragging him all over the school building without being noticed. And we've only seen one person, the one with Ashlee's locker combination, who knew the plan, plus one other who's accused by Kyle of having thought it was a good idea.

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3203] Thu, 17 February 2005 01:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
OtherEric wrote on Mon, 14 February 2005 21:47

I have another example on why we didn't see the parents talking to Susan. For the same reason we haven't seen them talking to Mike about the same subject. I'm not %100 percent which of the two or three reasons that have been suggested apply, but we haven't seen the subject of Val come up with either of them that I recall.

I'm not clear as to whether by "talking to" Mike and Susan in this instance you mean giving them information they didn't already have or confronting them about decisions they made. In the first case, there's really no similarity between Mike and Susan -- Mike isn't missing any crucial information about Val at all. Susan is missing the important fact that the Tuckers learned of Valerie's existence last weekend.

I'd agree that Susan's unlikely not to know the latter by now, except that it brings together two otherwise curious points: that Susan never got a chance to converse with Tuck at the hospital, and that Bill and Sarah never mentioned it to Susan in our hearing despite our getting segments from all three of their POVs. And we've seen Ellen sneak something a bit like this through us before: it wasn't until months after the relevant conversation that we learned Travis never knew that Val wasn't a girl fulltime.

On the confrontation side, we've discussed all this before, I think; with Mike, there's little that it would accomplish. His primary loyalty is to Tuck specifically, not to the family as a whole, so they can't be too upset that he misled them when Tuck did. Since Sarah and Bill aren't his parents, they can't punish him. Sarah and Bill can express their disappointment that Mike didn't see the danger in Tuck's working as Val and talk him out of doing so when it first happened, but as Bill already said about Tuck, "that's why we don't let [16-year olds] vote." Furthermore, having let Tuck make his own decision to keep the job that weekend, the Tuckers aren't in much of a position to second-guess now.

(In fact, I find it a little odd that Bill made as much of an effort as he did to question Mike after Tuck's interrogation. He knows very well that Mike won't give him any information that Tuck hasn't provided already, even to the point of remaining silent until he and Tuck can compare notes. And we later learn that Sarah doesn't want to interrogate Mike until she finds out whether or not he's Tuck's lover -- and she's already promised Tuck not to press that point until Saturday.)

Susan, on the other hand, IS vulnerable. She's 18, which makes her a responsible adult by Bill's definition. The Tucker parents know that she definitely knew about Val after Sarah's lecture, because she went with Mike to the Parkers' to pick up Tuck's car so that Mike could take Tuck hiking. (What Bill and Sarah know about Susan meeting Valerie a lot earlier depends on what Tuck told them about the summer.) So she'd either have to justify her actions or accept punishment.

Eric
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3204] Thu, 17 February 2005 02:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

Brooke, continued:

So if some of the stuff with Lenich at the mall got to Lisa a bit distorted, she may have decided to sanction Tuck.
Trouble is that she'd have gotten that story from Debbie, and Debbie was appreciative of the rescue and glad to be rid of Lenich -- the latter point of which would have pleased Lisa.


She *could* have gotten it from Debbie. But it's equally possioble that Debbie didn't want to talk to her about it, and she heard about it from someone else first.

Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

I'd say that she DOES have a motive for escalating things right now, but it doesn't have to do with that. Debbie's exposing D&E to potential financial danger as long as Val's on the payroll, and faced with a clear opportunity to get off the hook last weekend, Debbie instead risked physical mayhem to keep Val on the job. Lisa doesn't trust Tuck anyway and now knows that she can't trust Debbie to make logical decisions involving Tuck, so if she's convinced there's a real danger to the company (or if Lisa has emotional issues that make it easy for her to think so), she knows that to solve the problem she's going to have to go unilateral.


Okay, possible.

Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

Brooke, continued:

Say by spreading the word that he was a fag, or putting a bounty on him.
I don't like it. I can't see how the first option would focus any more action on Tuck than he's getting already from people who take it for granted, or don't care whether it's true or not as long as he makes a convenient doormat and there's no public outcry against attacking him. It can't enlarge the field by that much, and it wouldn't be that easy to do since Lisa's at another school.


Now, they don't "take it for granted". Fag is just an insult.

Having it confirmed is a different matter.

Though now that I've gotten farther in my most recent re-read, I find that the danger to confirmed (or at least strongly suspected) "fags" may be exaggerated in the mind of Tuck and his friends and family.

In Tuck76 there are references about 2 of the other three guys in the cosmetology class being people that you didn't want to "drop the soap" around.

No mention is made of them getting extra hassles. Nor of them being large or otherwise "scary" such that folks *wopuldn't* hassle them.

Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

The second makes more sense, and she certainly has the money. It doesn't feel right to me, but the only points I can make against it are that Lisa would be doing this over Debbie's objections on Debbie's turf; that by using McAllen people rather than Red Bluff people for this, she's taking more of a risk of discovery and/or blackmail than usual; and that without Debbie to referee, she may have trouble afterward determining who deserves the reward. Certainly none of those objections are unsurmountable.


Especially given that your arguments thjat Lisa isn't thinking especially clearly on the subject.

Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

Brooke, continued:

Either would explain the rather large number of people who weren't "organized" but were apparently *actively* searching for a chance to nail Tuck. Three separate groups all going for Tuck in the span of a few hours, with at least two of them *looking* for him rather than taking advantage of a chance encounter is more than a bit suspicious.
Not necessarily. The first group's out to get him -- I assumed it was in revenge for the incident in cosmetology class. Lenich's group isn't. Kyle's group probably includes at least one of the morning attackers, who would feel that Tuck one-upped them (he did, after all, make a provocative gesture to them after his escape) and in any case that they didn't complete what they started that morning.

FWIW, cheerleaders Carol Daley and Jordan Tessier say that Kyle's determination to beat up Tuck stems from a specific incident. (From #104: �I wish somebody would beat the shit out of the little faggot, show him what-� �Oh, he�s gonna get it. Kyle said that he was gonna kick the fag�s ass for what he did...�) To me, that seemed to point to the cosmetology class incident, especially since the cheerleaders in particular are out for blood.


Though we don't know which specific incident they are thinking of.

Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 21:14

Brooke, continued:

And the planning behind planting him in the girls locker room is a bit much for spur of the moment.
It's tough for me to see it as premeditated. They couldn't have known in advance that they were going to catch him near the gym and especially in the locker room, a place that they haven't seen him all year. If he hadn't been in a location convenient to the girls' locker room, they would have had trouble dragging him all over the school building without being noticed. And we've only seen one person, the one with Ashlee's locker combination, who knew the plan, plus one other who's accused by Kyle of having thought it was a good idea.


It still feels odd for a "spur of the moment" thing.



Re: Tuck #108 [message #3205] Thu, 17 February 2005 02:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
Eric wrote on Wed, 16 February 2005 22:20

I'm not clear as to whether by "talking to" Mike and Susan in this instance you mean giving them information they didn't already have or confronting them about decisions they made.

Well, as you point out, Dad wanted to talk to Mike rather badly after Tuck's interrogation. The conversation Dad wanted to have with Mike then apparently hasn't happened yet. I figure, if Bill doens't bring up the subject with Mike because of the attack on Tuck, Bill won't bring it up with Susan either. That's all I was trying to say.
And I think you're probably wrong when you say the Tuckers don't have effective means of punishing Mike. They wouldn't have as many options as with Susan, but I think they could do a lot, starting with limiting access to Tuck or even the rest of the family. Mike does a lot of stuff with the Tuckers as a group. (Range, Camping, Eating, ocasional employment, etc.)
Re: Tuck #108 [message #3260] Sat, 05 March 2005 04:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
sluggo wrote on Fri, 04 March 2005 21:53

I was just thinking that Sheila wanting to meet with Tuck as soon as possible could mean that she wants to be sure that Tuck didn't cause this to happen to prove the point that he feels safer as Val than as Tuck. Their sessions never pointed to the fact that he would intentionally hurt himself, except for the discussions about the hiking trip. I think she needs to find out quickly that is the case so that she can order some treatments before the discussion of letting Tuck go home ever come up.



No. She'd have to be a real idiot to think that. What Tuck has told her doesn't point at that. Besides doing that would require *asking* him stuff, which she's specifically said she didn't need to do.

Tuck 108

"You want to WHAT? No," Bill said, not even having to think about
it.
"But I think it would be important, if he's willing-"
"He needs to sleep, and he's not going to be willing to talk to you
for a-"
"He doesn't need to talk," Sheila said, which surprised him.
"Then what's the point?"


That little interchange makes it pretty clear that she needs to talk *to* him.

So the most likely scenario is that she's going to tell him about all the negative stuff he's feeling (and trust me, he is) and explain that it's natural and that he shouldn't be blaming himself, etc etc.

Pretty standard trauma counseling stuff.

Re: Tuck #108 [message #3262] Sat, 05 March 2005 16:31 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
sluggo wrote on Sat, 05 March 2005 09:11

Brooke wrote on Sat, 05 March 2005 01:29


No. She'd have to be a real idiot to think that. What Tuck has told her doesn't point at that. Besides doing that would require *asking* him stuff, which she's specifically said she didn't need to do.

Tuck 108

"You want to WHAT? No," Bill said, not even having to think about
it.
"But I think it would be important, if he's willing-"
"He needs to sleep, and he's not going to be willing to talk to you
for a-"
"He doesn't need to talk," Sheila said, which surprised him.
"Then what's the point?"


That little interchange makes it pretty clear that she needs to talk *to* him.

So the most likely scenario is that she's going to tell him about all the negative stuff he's feeling (and trust me, he is) and explain that it's natural and that he shouldn't be blaming himself, etc etc.

Pretty standard trauma counseling stuff.



In either case she still needs to talk to him and Tuck will have to respond. She can't know what is going on in his head. He could be feeling many different things that conflict with each other. If she says that feeling something specific is normal, and he isn't feeling that one, it could cause him to feel worse.



Respond can be stuff like facial expressions. And as a trained (and apparently, pretty good) therapist, she knows how to go about it in a way that minimizes that sort of bad effect.

And I doubt you'd catch any therapist worth their license saying that feeling a certain way was "normal" unless the client had *said* they were feeling that way. Especially not to the sort of basket case Tuck probably is right now.
Previous Topic:Tuck 109
Next Topic:Tuck #110
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Dec 17 02:57:02 EST 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03281 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 2.7.7.
Copyright ©2001-2007 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software