In my experience, french braids simply refers to a style of braid which draws hair in at each plait, like a cornrow. A cornrow can be identical to a french braid and I’ve heard people interchange the phrase. However the reversed cornrows are dissimilar to french braids. Details, details.

I don’t know I think you’re going in pretty hard, although I feel your general point. People will often say “what if it were your son/brother etc.” when trying to get someone to ease up about something, and they say it regardless of whether the person in question has children/siblings - it’s a common trope and not…

I agree with this article essentially - I would care about the nature of my daughter’s encounters, not the number. It’s her attitude towards sex I’d be seeking to police, not her number of partners. And this also goes for my son, which is something this article didn’t touch on and probably should have.

You know, in my experience I’ve only encountered people who pretend to care for like a second and then laugh. I’m lucky.

To each her own but I would no more count that than I would count any other violent assault.

Well it’s called “driving a point home”. Even a woman who lets men walk all over her will take exception to their daughter’s boyfriend doing the same - when it’s someone you care about, you often care more than if it’s just about you. But, point taken.

Are you going to eat in a restaurant? Ok, then, you have to tip. That’s the payment your server receives for taking your order and bringing your food. A fair tip is 20-25%, but people get away with 15%.

Yeah I could never hang out with them I don’t think but this family is doing a lot of good on the world stage.

So I will continue to be an optimist adding my shoulder to the Sisyphean struggle of progress and in my very being, be an example of the potentiality of another world.

We pay for others decisions all the time. For every person that has more kids than you would deem reasonable, there is someone who has no kids at all. Fussing with case by case details in an attempt to penalize people for choices that you don’t agree with just creates unnecessary administrative costs.

Well yeah, but I was speaking more about people than politicians. Even most liberal voters I know still have this attitude like “it’s a nice thing to do.” when really, no, it’s a sensible thing to do. And it’s sensible for all of us, not just people who wouldn’t be able to afford it on their own.

Seriously. It’s like people think taxes should be used for defense and nothing else. wtf. Some things are more efficiently handled by a centralized government. That’s why we have one. Let’s fucking use it.

Unrelated: Fifi LaRue is my daughter’s nickname how weird is that

Yes this is awesome, and he should definitely play at or near the funeral. Also awesome were the “Reagan: Not Dead Enough” signs I saw at a protest in the days after his death. Fuck the reagans.

I don’t know. People are bending over trying to find a way to understand and define a person who knows what right and wrong is, but doesn’t feel it themselves, and has no problem knowingly destroying a human being who trusts them and devastating their family - but we already have a vocabulary to describe these people.…

A situation like you describe is possible in theory but certainly not supported by the evidence made public in this case - do some digging and read some more of her texts. Also, for an insanity defense, they do not care what your inner morality says - they only care if you can perceive what the law and social mores…

Yeah for sure she is clearly pretty fucking heartless. The law only cares about your ability to perceive it though, it doesn’t care if you agree with it.

No actually, an insanity defense does not concern itself with your internal morality - it seeks to establish whether or not you were aware of external things such as social acceptability or legality. Think about it - if everything boiled down to how we feel about things, there would hardly be any need for laws or…

Yeah that is what people are parsing on here. But under the law there is no distinction - the ability to discern what is considered right and wrong is all that matters. Lawyers can’t argue “Yeah she knew it was wrong, she just didn’t FEEL it was wrong” for a reason.

k