onehotredhead
One_Hot_Redhead
onehotredhead

I absolutely ADORE rats. I have had pet rats for about 18 years now minus a short break after one pair passed on where I told myself I couldn't keep doing that anymore (that lasted a short while before I missed having them so much I caved and bought a pair of very sweet girls, one of which I still have). Rats make the

If a person is willing to cheat on their spouse it means they do not value the vows they made to them. So yes, whether both parties are aware of it or not that generally does mean the marriage is not doing all that great.

If the spouse is cheating, the marriage is already in shambles. No one is just popping into a perfectly healthy marriage and somehow seducing the innocent person away from their spouse, there by destroying the marriage. If the person's marriage is not doing well and they choose to cheat rather than fix the marriage

I appreciate you taking the time to clarify and amend your statements and views a little better instead of becoming obstinate and rabid as many commenters on Gawker, Jez and the like do.

I think a lot of people here, from many comments that I have read, seem to feel that it's not our place to throw judgement and accusations at other people when we don't know them or their life story and situation. You come off (at least initially) as feeling that there is never any excuse and that all people who are

I don't think a man oogling a woman on the street is outrageously terrible compared to adultery. I simply brought it up because that was an analogy/comparison that you had made. What I would like to say is that you seem to feel both parties in the infidelity are equally at fault when only one of them promised to be

Either you are a troll or your logic is beyond hilarious. In your comments you compare adultery, which is an act that involves two consenting adults (only one of whom made a promise of fidelity to another) to violent crime such as rape, murdering your dog, and public oogling of another's body. All of the latter things

If the wild animals were being taken into captivity for the sole purpose of providing food I would view it only slightly different. Because they are still wild animals, which are wholly different than domestic animals in many ways. I do find it more offensive to take a wild animal's freedom away and abuse it for

I have met many dieticians and nutritionists who would heartily disagree with you that meat isn't important. But then, they have met far too many vegetarians and vegans who are unhealthy and not intelligent about their diet. Food is important and different than entertainment in that many view meat as essential on some

The big difference is that food animals are consumed after they die. They are killed and eaten and there is a purpose to their death. A wild animal in captivity that has a drastically shortened lifespan due to said captivity is not eaten. It lives a miserable life for the purpose of human entertainment then tragically

There is a huge difference between animals that are slaughtered for food before they die of old age and a wild animal that could live 50-80 years in the wild but in captivity dies of illness or other issues at 20 years of age, etc. Big difference, so not really a correction on your part so much as stretching the facts.

Food animals are viewed as different because they provide us with meat/milk/etc. They are generally not animals that exist without human intervention (except pigs, who are hearty mofos). Wild animals that are trapped in cages are different because they are generally shorter lived and damaged by their captivity and are

So I saw Blackfish and it was heartbreaking. What's worse than Sea World is the smaller marine parks that have even less ethical treatment of their animals (which was shown in Blackfish and is probably what started the severe mental trauma of the killer whale that took the life of his trainer). However, Sea World

How does this cross over to other hormone-related methods like the patch and Nuvaring? Is it about the same? I am overweight and have never had any issues with the patch or the ring, but I am unable to take pills because of how my body reacts.

It may be biased of me to say, but I feel like the system fails all abuse victims. With so many chances given to avoid a trial and a domestic abuse conviction I don't know how useful a database would be unless plea deals were off the table. Then it would be nice.

That would depend. If she or anyone else complained and tried to fix the situation and the higher ups willfully ignored the situation when they knew what was going on then they are also liable for creating a hostile work environment.

As the relative of a flight attendant (in the business for over 30 years), I safely say that yes they in fact do. Management can and will play favorites and give beneficial treatment to certain employees or bully and harass others if it suits them. I have seen several flight attendants undergo bullying treatment over

So movies with all white casts are just movies but movies with an all black cast are race-themed? Good to know. Guess I learned something today. I also learned that Scott Bowles is an idiot.

Men who abuse women often get away with it repeatedly. Having gone through domestic abuse and the ensuing legal process myself I can say that the DA told me they get repeated chances (and repeated chances to keep it off their record with minimal effort on their part). I am, of course paraphrasing with brutal honesty

I am not proud to admit that the minute the third kitten came on I exclaimed out loud "Oh my God! Look at the floofy floofy one! He's so tiny and floofy!" Apparently fluffy kittens have the ability to reduce my vocabulary to that of a small child...