not-a-people-person
Not a "People" Person
not-a-people-person

It doesn't seem to fit the usage I've observed. The rest of his message was quite normal and even somewhat formal and then BAM, profanity right at the end? Nah. British peeps use this expression to deride footballers they think have missed a good tackle or something, or they playfully call their mates a cunt when

I always feel somewhat bad for people who get fired for this stuff, because social media is ostensibly supposed to be just that; social, as in, "time out from work stuff." It's sort of like being fired for mouthing off about your office in a bar when your boss just happens to be there. On the other hand, IRL it just

I think the problem is that dressing/cutting the same shape over and over again is pretty much what the fashion big boys do, and that's what a lot of these contestants are aiming at. But even those high-fashion designers will have had to start at the bottom, working on someone else's vision and doing *mass-market*

I also think it can dial up the privilege level, even among men who truly want to and truly believe they are aware of the issues. My boyfriend will bemoan the lack of women working in his field (engineering), but is oblivious on things like (unfunny) rape jokes, or why women tend to be so security-conscious (his big

Yeah, whenever someone talks about the objectivity of science I get antsy. The thing is, many branches of science DO rely on a language/social structure that still retains a gendered coda and way of thinking. This applies less to fields such as mathematics, physics or engineering and applies more pertinently to things

Which is weird, because I doubt anyone who works visibly on PR is going to become the next Lagerfeld (why they would want to is another question...). I love PR, and I think it's one of the more original reality shows out there, but let's be honest, it's far more suitable for a designer who *wants* to become well-known

Honestly, my gut reaction to stuff like this is not to trust anyone who claims insider info. She could well have released the tape out of a cynical drive for fame...or it could just have been stolen. I just wish we lived in the kind of society where a leaked sex tape wasn't a big enough deal to make anyone famous.

I remember reading a paper on the gendered dynamics of a classically Freudian Oedipus complex, and they had a quote from a subject talking about his daughter thusly: "The way she flirts with me, you can tell she's going to be sexy. My wife hates it when I say that!"

I would agree generally, but I think she looks very nice here. It's a relief to see her in something that doesn't strap her boobs up or push them out but sort of lets them gambol around happily in the way nature intended. And the dress itself does a good job of skimming over her body- uber flattering. I'd wear it

I think this is a good point. While I personally don't see anyone explicitly denouncing staying at home here, it's worth pointing out that at some time, someone somewhere is going to have to do this stuff. And devaluing childcare as a career/personal choice isn't getting us anywhere closer to breaking down the gender

I don't think that's what Jezebel is saying at all. They're objecting to a specific portrayal of staying at home which reduces women to gender stereotypes under the guise of feminism, when feminism should be about breaking those stereotypes down and allowing women to make choices regardless of gender. It's Lisa Miller

This is the thing, though: wouldn't almost everybody, regardless of gender, prefer not to have to work? There are some people for whom their job is their vocation and passion, and they would probably do it for free, anyway, but I think the vast majority of men and women work because it's something they have to do to

Possibly would have been more effective if it just had the "Tell Jessica you're moving in!" line without any other names. Then everyone else who drives past will be mildly confused or amused, but that one guy would get that icy cold shiver running through him...

"As she broke down on air, Laws asked: "Are you unattractive?""

I find it really interesting that she says the proposal wasn't what she "expected." I think it's possible she put more emotionally into the loan than she thinks; maybe she really good about being so charitable, and now that it appears to her that her charity wasn't so necessary she feels like she's been deceived

Necessary is such a weasel word, though. The soon-to-be-fiancee may have considered his extravagant proposal a priority which usurped the loan payment. Morally I would tend to agree with you, but you can't always rely on people to share your perspective. If the lender had specified that she wanted repayment "as soon

I think it's important to look at why the lender feels annoyed in the first place; is she annoyed because she considers their spending frivolous, or is she annoyed because she actually would quite like the money back? Given that repayment didn't seem to be an issue before, I'm inclined to think she's more bothered

I'm not sure I agree with that. Lending someone money doesn't make them accountable to you for their life choices, it makes them accountable to you for the loan amount/deadline agreed upon, which in this case appears to be very flexible. The lender is working on the assumption that if he hadn't bought the

I agree with a lot of this. There's definitely an intense consumer culture around weddings and it's largely unnecessarily. But my point was more that if you don't specify the terms of the loan, including what you consider to be timely repayment and what the loan's supposed to be used for, it's difficult to be

Agreed that it's no big deal for me personally, which is why I never mind giving friends books. It also avoids those occasionally awkward "Oh! I still have your book, don't I?" moments. But I mostly buy second-hand books anyway- if I had some first-edition or author-signed shit I would be incredibly reluctant to lend