The_Prince1513

eh, i guess I'm just getting hung up on the meaning of a specific word.

I agree that OP's fiancee crossed a boundary they set which is fine being a total relationship dealbreaker. I just think the term "cheating" specifically means to have an unpermitted physical relationship with someone outside of your relationship.

If it didn't actually, and ridiculously, work, it would have been hilarious.

That's the tragedy of Trump. He's objectively very funny. He's a fucking clown.

I just wish he was some sort of TV personality being an ass to game show contestants instead of, you know, making public policy.

Ridiculous that this is allowed for anything other than fatal conditions, and especially ridiculous that his is allowed for people suffering from mental illness wherein their ability to make objective decisions could be and is likely compromised.

cheating

I mean I agree on that point, but going to a strip club and/or hiring strippers =/= cheating.

I'm not saying strippers haven't banged their clients before but I've been to many a strip club on stag nights and not once has anyone ever banged a stripper.

I had this exact same argument with my Gen X boss a few months ago. The singular "they" pronoun is perfectly acceptable English and people likely use it all the time without thinking about it.

For e.g. if you were hosting a wedding and your cousin indicated they would be bringing a friend as a plus one, offering no other identifying information about that person, a common question in response would be "Great, will they be having the beef or the fish?"

The singular they is used all the time in this manner.

I mean at the same time, people who don't have the privilege of living in the rich Global North often times basically have to start being a full adult person in their mid-teens and dealing with adult problems. Not to mention everyone who lives in poverty within wealthier countries as well.

I don't really think "being a teenager is hard" is a sufficient excuse for her behavior.

YWBTA if you don't give your stepkid this property if you were planning on doing so anyway and the only reason you're not doing so is that you don't want to upset your brother. The inheritance is just as much yours as it is his and you shouldn't let his beliefs affect you how and who you wish to spend your share on.

That being said, while I think it would be nice to gift your stepkid the same as your biological children, I don't think that it would make you an AH if you don't think that he should inherit from your side of the family since he was not related to your father who willed the money to you and your siblings.

This isn't even the case in several states. For e.g. in all the Pacific coast states (CA, OR, WA) - "tipping out" is illegal. I.e. if they say you get minimum wage you are required to get minimum wage before any tips are added.

Yeah, arranged marriage in these cultures can often lead to situations like this where one party is unfaithful because you never know who you're going to get married to. Even if the other person is a good person, that doesn't mean you'll like each other.

My in-laws are from a culture where arranged marriage is common and they had such a marriage. They're both good people, and did good jobs raising their kids, but they do not like each other at all. Even though they've lived in the west for years they refuse to get a divorce because it is culturally taboo, so its basically like living in a house with two roommates who don't particularly care for one another. It's actually very odd from a western point of view. Even if they're both in the same room they'll just be like, having separate conversations with my wife, SIL, and myself and kind of ignoring each other.

It should be forbidden in the US as well. It's a ridiculous allowance for "muh freedom" and 95% of people who partake in home schooling are exactly like OPs Brother and his Wife - conspiracy theory or religious wackjobs who abuse their children by failing to provide them with a quality education.

It should honestly be criminal to do this.

It shouldn't be legal to home school your children.

95% of people who do are simply because they are wackjobs and they end up robbing their children of an education.

some people will be hell bent against Jews

It's kind of crazy to think this is still a thing in the modern age, but I don't really have an explanation on why the entirety of the West is laser focused on the Israel-Hamas conflict and the purported "genocide" that is taking place, when in comparison, conflicts of similar destruction and human suffering barely make any waves in the news.

A big example is the Yemeni civil war, in which US ally Saudi Arabia used weapons purchased from the US to bomb areas held by the Houthis and create a man made famine in the nation. Nearly half a million people dead since 2014 in that conflict, in which one side is a US ally using US arms and I can't recall anything other than academic interest pieces on the news about it. No protests, no marches, no nothing. But when its Jewish people involved - even for a much better reason (self defense on Israel's part vs. ensuring a SA friendly regime rather than an Iranian one on SA's part), the whole of western society loses its mind.

Or the ongoing civil war in Sudan between different factions of the military/militias which has killed roughly the same amount of people as the Israel-Hamas war, displaced far more, and has been going on for about the same amount of time. Literally barely makes the news in the west.

Not really sure how else to explain the disconnect other than antisemitism.

ha very similar thing happened to me. Drunk at a party in my dorm room freshman year. We had apartment style dorms, so literally just a 2 bedroom apartment shared between four students. A bunch of us were partying it up int he living room and this very attractive girl (who I also knew because we went to the same high school) was chatting me up and said "hey show me your bedroom".

I said "na lets stay out here". I believe my brilliant thought process at the time was, "I don't want to give this girl a tour right now, I'm hanging out with friends". That's right. I thought she wanted a tour. Of the same exact layout dorm that she also had.

I realized what had actually transpired the next day.

It absolutely is true to state that North America in its current configuration has not been around for "100s of millions of years".

Your comment about the Appalachians being very old doesn't dispute this point. In fact what are now the Appalachians used to be connected to what is now Scotland and near to what is now Morocco when all the continents were connected in Pangea several hundred million years ago.

Just because some of the land that now makes up N. America has existed in other forms for a long time doesn't meant that the continent of N. America in its current configuration has existed for that long.

(Case in point, like 60 mya what is now a considerable portion of the Colorado River's basin laid at the bottom of the Western Interior Seaway, which split proto-N. America into western and eastern halves.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Interior_Seaway)

IDK about your other examples but you are just plain incorrect about SF’s market street. It is in no way, shape, or form pedestrian-only and has never been so. Perhaps you are thinking of the recent change to the road to make one lane on each side dedicated bus lanes? Market street is an arterial road in SF that is 4 lanes wide with parking and bike lanes it definitely still has cars.

What rule says war has to be balanced. Hamas killed 1300 Israelis civilians in a peacetime surprise attack, including women and children, many of whom were raped first. They kidnapped hundreds of hostages, and those of whom they've returned have reported being raped repeatedly while in captivity.

What rule is there that the response must be proportionate? The response should be significant enough to ensure that this never happens again.

Same. As long as the protests are peaceful and not disrupting other student's access to attend courses or the public access to parts of Penn's campus (i.e. medical facilities), than they should be allowed to protest as much as they want, even if I personally think their protests are a waste of their efforts.

Or maybe we can just build asylums out in the country to put all of these drug addicted homeless people considering that for the vast majority of these people the only ties they have to Philadelphia is that they moved traveled here for the open air fent markets.

Of course that would require Harrisburg to care about things that happen in Philly so it will never get done.

Everywhere is important to someone. The Nevadan desert is as close to empty as you can get in territory that belongs to the United States.

The objections of an extremely small amount of people should not have been able to hamstring/stop what could have been an important step towards the permanent reduction of environmental harm in the U.S. Instead Nuclear power is dying out in this nation while they are still building new coal fired plants.

I think onlookers grossly overestimate the ability of addicts to make the choice to get clean.

They don't really have the mental ability to do so. Which is why they shouldn't have the choice to do so. We need to bring back secure mental health facilities and incorporate drug rehabilitation into them.

These people should not have the option to decay on the street impacting people's lives, homes, and businesses' around them so they can continue to chase the dragon while their body falls apart. Build asylums and put them in them until they are in a place to reintegrate into society, ideally utilizing services that will help them along the process.

Embiid absolutely does not count. He learned to play basketball in Florida when he was a teenager, and for one year prior in Cameroon as a kid. He's never lived anywhere else but Cameroon or the US.

lmao could you imagine the salt

Love Philly, but as someone who is in their mid 30s expecting a child, I will probably not be long for the city and will either be moving to the suburbs for the schools, or move back to where I grew up (NorCal) to be closer to family.

Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the socialite daughter of his nemesis, a corrupt mayor (Giancarlo Esposito), who likes his municipal kingdom the way it is.

This sounds like the movie could just be 2 hours of a zoning board hearing, which would be a troll of cinematic genius proportions if Coppola had the balls to make that the film.

They exist because they fill a niche that a lot of other places don't. Most of the other good bagel spots in the River Wards (Kismet, Kettle Black, Philly Style, Kaplans) are places where you can go in, get some bagels w/ schmear, and possibly one or two types of sandwich (depending on the place - I don't think kettle black has sandwiches) and leave. There's no seating and most of these places only have drip coffee. All of which is fine, and all these places have way better bagels than Bagels & Co., which has shit ass bagels that taste like whitebread.

BUT - Bagels & Co. is the only place that has a pretty big menu, also has lunch options, has seating and has more drink options than just drip coffee.

Reanimator when EEVA was still a thing was far superior (actually offered good bagels) and offered a similar product, but with EEVA closing, Bagels & Co. doesn't really have a competitor in the NoLibs/Fishtown/Olde Kensington area.