I can empathize. My cleavage naturally begins where it once ended. I hoisted the girls back up to their former glory days with an underwire bra similar to a steel girder cross restraint bridge. The cups plunge so the girls still look appealing with a scoop neck tee. At least my partner says so.

Don't forget "carbon copy" for the old folks.

Here you go. All it took was web search "little house on prairie dresses for women." http://ourgrandmascloset.net/women.htm

Yes and yes. I never knew that not everyone experienced lucid dreams until friends started a conversation about their dreams.

I suspect that *part* of the defense of his parody is that his schtick is to hold himself out as wholesome family-values comedian.

It could be that she is surrounded by underlings who were hesitant to speak up for fear of losing their livelihood. It's part of the hostile work environment dynamic. Still in this day and age, she should have picked up on it.

It is neither funny nor offensive, just old, easy and tired buffonery. I expect people who hold themselves out as comedians to be more clever and original, but I concede that comedy is a very personal thing. The color pink is typically associated with femininity. I do not like it when pink is used as a form of humiliation such as the Arizona sheriff who forces inmates to wear pink panties or when the lottery winner added a gym wing for hometown highschool with the caveat that the lockers in locker room for opposing team be painted pink or for making fun of effeminate males. This brand of easy-pickins humor is a putdown to both genders.

I have not read any of the Paula Deen coverage and had never heard of it until the WTM board. However, my gut reaction to your question is another question: why would being white exempt anyone from discomfort of a workplace that tolerates racism and sexism?

Frederick's of Hollywood. Local tasteful sex shop. Good Vibrations. Blowfish. Wearing period costumes and engaging in verbal exchanges can be fun, but acquiring period pieces is pretty impractical. The imagination works just fine and is much more thrifty.

Once in awhile, I unintentionally find myself going over the speed limit, but never by very much. I do not go more than five miles over posted limit on non-urban area expressways. On other roads, I comply with posted limits. I've received two speeding two tickets in forty years of driving; one was for five miles over limit.

We prefer convenience and privacy of a backyard pool. My partner did virtually all of the pool and jacuzzi maintenance. I may hold a different opinion if I had to do the maintenance.

When were leggings ever considered sleepware? Throughout my straitlaced mail order full figure clothing catalogs are photos of models wearing leggings with a tank or cami and a "big shirt" over the top. Granted the tanks and camis do not show midriff. I am gobsmacked to learn that what I thought was appropriate casual clothing is considered inappropriate by some people; I'm not offended at all. Rather I find it oddly intriguing. I can type "lol" for once and mean it literally. To the poster who thought, prior to WTM, that "modesty" was used in regard to flashy displays of wealth, my experience mirrors yours. Same with term "courtship" which was nothing more than a synonym for dating in my culture. The TSA agent is out of line to comment on any traveler's choice of clothing unless it is in violation of regulations.

This is wise sensible advice that would apply regardless of mother's like or dislike of fiance. When a grandchild is not being adequately supported by its parents, it does not make good sense to spend any more than a minimal amount on wedding festivities. Same applies when the adult child does not have marketable skills: allocate resources to vocational training or a functional college education. I am often flabbergasted by the amount that people are willing to drop on a wedding.

This is what I was thinking. The original poster's family size is thirteen, assuming the entire family participated in any summer outings. In planning family outings, a single group of 13 would significantly impact requirements for facilities, food and events.

At laundry time, have him help you check pockets of all family members' clothing articles.

It would be considered normal in my extended family's culture. However, there would be deference given to the hurting b-i-l if he expressed discomfort with her potential presence. By this, I mean that the family members hosting the wedding would discreetly ask him how he felt about them inviting the ex-wife and an escort. As for the other family members, they should not have a say in who is invited or not. If they are uncomfortable with ex sil being there, I suppose they could decline and tell host family why they declined. Generally speaking, I think it is wonderful that family members can maintain friendship bonds with exes, whether there are children involved or not.

My cell phone lives in my purse most of time. When I am at office, it sits on my desk ready to receive calls from family. At home, my purse sits on master bathroom countertop. In car, purse sits between two front seats.

The ring belongs to the person it was given to, the original poster's sister-in-law. What good would it do for original poster to get involved? If police are called, wouldn't the rightful owner, the sister-in-law, be the one to lodge the complaint against the jeweler? Wearing the ring would be the best way to honor the family's history. I agree with other posters who suspect that s-i-l exchanged it for something she preferred or sold it. Either way, it was her property to deal with as she wished. I do wonder, though, why she felt should could not be honest with her family about the disposition of the ring.

Many humans understandably have a fear of the unknown and unknowable and resort to supernatural myths to explain and placate fears brought about by uncertainty. No, religious beliefs will not go away although they may evolve and/or dwindle as our scientific knowledge advances.

Interesting. Religion was all around me but it never "took." Situation was pretty much same for my husband. Like your son, I found Santa every bit as unlikely as deities but pretended to believe as young child to prevent disappointment in certain relatives. With my own children, we played the "Santa game" at Christmas.

Jean, that must have been a harrowing ordeal. I am glad everything turned out ok.

No and no.

I am a "natural" lifelong atheist, i.e., some people are born unable to give themselves over to magical thinking. I am not offended by Christmas lights; we have a long standing tradition of annual Christmas light viewing pilgrimages. Although I do less and less each year, in past years I tried my best to put up elaborate light displays that would elicit twinkles in the eyes of children. I think it is a waste of energy to nitpick about which holiday belongs to whom. Also I agree with whatever poster stated that she has experienced more Christians carrying on about war on Christmas than nonbelievers. Like other posters, I agree that decidedly religious symbols should not be on public land or paid for from public coffer since our government is not supposes to favor one religion over another.

I am answering this without reading other responses. My take on it is that agnostics feel that the existence of deities is unknowable whereas atheists advocate that one can draw a tentative evidence-based conclusion that deities most likely do not exist. My guess is that some agnostics believe in fuzzy nebulous higher powers while others do not. Personally the most common self-proclaimed "agnostics" I have encountered are those who are questioning and re-evaluating their long-held religiuos beliefs, but my sample is biased because of the cultural dominance of religion in my area.

I welcomes any positive thoughts or energy, prayer included, especially when I am in a hurting place. I do not know if karma is considered a spiritual belief. I do not believe in any system of future rewards and punishments. However, I do believe that if one has a developed conscious, he will suffer internally for his wrongdoings. Does that make sense? Atheist means nothing more or nothing less than a viewpoint that deities probably do not exist. It does not speak to beliefs in other supernatural beings or happenings.