BigDaddy0790
BigDaddy
BigDaddy0790

My opinion is that she should have ended things way before marriage, or at the very, very least, not get married for crying out loud. If she chose to go through with it, expecting anything to change DAYS after is irrational. Obviously she was expecting to continue being with him if she vowed to spend their life

If he was acting this way leading up to the marriage, it should have been cancelled or postponed. Or did she expect him to change a few days later because “it’s a honeymoon phase”? I just don’t follow the logic here.

Moving out or taking a break, fine. But I don’t think complete breakup and divorce after 4 days of marriage is fine unless something drastically changed/escalated, which it didn’t apparently.

Do tell me about a single case when screaming caused death?

We also only know one side of the story, and I know people who can start crying during a tiniest argument, without any yelling or anything, so who knows.

That last part is my main problem with this. Why marry a guy with such red flags, and then expect things to magically get better in 4 days when their overall situation didn’t get better? Either the guy was always an asshole and not worth her time, or the problems they are facing haven’t been resolved yet and she needs

Because people handle tough situations very differently.

Well the thing is, you don’t notice abusive relationship in 4 days, you do it over months. Meaning she knew exactly what was up, yet decided to marry regardless. Which is rather odd to me.

No. Why would that matter?

That’s a great point - why marry such a person then? That’s extremely irresponsible.

All I meant was that circumstances matter, and things may well change once their life situation does.

She doesn’t owe anything to anyone. I just expressed my personal opinion, that ending everything so quickly is not the way I’d handle things.

While that is indeed unacceptable behavior that should be talked about, I do not believe relationships are that black and white, sorry.

I’m not sure why are people so negative about the first situation.

Based on? It seems rather obvious that Outbreak was basically a test for this. Concept is identical, except this also has an entire campaign.

What about Crysis though? That was probably the biggest leap for me after PS2. People literally wouldn’t believe it was real-time back then I recall.

Eh, for me it’s not that art is worthless, but how much it’s worth.

I actually think BF3 had one of the best military/realistic FPS single player campaigns of all time.

Firefox has become pretty great, but my point was that it is still by far the most popular browser. Also has the most extensions.

Because of...what? Bright screens? No research about those confirmed any sort of permanent danger so far.