Haha, for the most part, we get along like gangbusters (one of those annoying “best friend” couples). We also piss each other off, sometimes very rightly so. This time he gave me the righteous anger, then he came around.

You could assume that every negative story is the sum total of a relationship, or you could—perhaps more wisely—assume that people in relationships sometimes have arguments and differences of opinion.

Be happy while single! But I love my husband too, even if he pissed me off royally last night (with surprisingly little effort on his part). I wouldn’t trade him in as a partner even if he is occasionally an idiot who forces me to ‘educate’ him.

I actually did! It took a moment to sink in.

Very true, and something that became clear post-argument... thank God. Otherwise, today would be a bad day.

He’s a smart man most of the time, but he definitely can be myopic in his point of view. A side-effect of the milkweed, I think.

The “unrealistic” is what really got me. Like, noooo... this is incredibly realistic. Women are dealing with very similar shit right now worldwide.

Reading the book, I interpreted Offred’s definition of rape (and not-rape) more as a reflection of the culture she’s living in. Like... she doesn’t get to call what happens to her rape because it’s state-sponsored. It’s like her saying she used to have another name, but not telling the reader what it is (major…

Yes.

Oh, we’ll be getting some thought pieces about Nick and The Commander, I’m sure.

Yeah, that sounds weirdly made-up to me.

I watched with my husband, and at the end, I asked him what he thought and it did not go well. I can’t remember the exact words—all I remember is static?—but at one point he accused me of trying to “educate him” and said it felt “unrealistic.”

Thank you for sharing. That is an *excellent* recap.

You misunderstand work for hire a bit. Just because someone hires a photographer to do a shoot does not in and of itself make the photographs the result of work for hire. That would make so many things work for hire! It doesn’t work like that. Work for hire happens in two specific circumstances:

Well, no. In this case, KK is a newsworthy celebrity, so the waters are muddied. News doesn’t require the same kind of permissions (even celebrity news).

Sorrynotsorry, I’m not. This is wrong:

I always forget that most people don’t know about model releases. While a photographer automatically owns the rights to their images (cogent in this discussion of KK) that doesn’t mean they can use images of people commercially without consent under many circumstances. (You also can’t sell photos of many branded…

This is a great response and more thorough than mine, though I want to let you know that in the US you don’t have to worry about architects suing you (they don’t own their buildings usually, anyway). As long as you’re on public property, you’re cool. This is VERY different outside the US — the Eiffel Tower being the…

Not really. The photographer took the photo the way any other photographer would — he/she held the camera, framed the shot, reacted to the lighting — even if the purpose of the image is lowbrow commercial, it’s still an image that was created by a person who is a photographer.

Ditto. I can already tell I am going to get really riled by this comment section, lol.