LaughingCat
-
Posts
651 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by LaughingCat
-
-
2 hours ago, sheryl said:
Yes, a reminder of playing tether ball on the pole. Instead of a ball, attach a treat dispensing toy. Just wondering if that would even "really" work. Flirt pole? Never heard of that. Do you attach a toy or something to bat around? The bike attachment I've hesitated on. I really do not want her to pull me and I take a fall! Need to YT the tutorials for that as well. 🙂
Regarding flirt pole,
- mine is a rope tug toy attached to a rope that then runs through a PVC pipe. It feels a lot more like playing with a cat and a string than playing with a tug toy though. I have way more control and can get her to run and jump for it -- just like cat with string. My dog knows "drop it" and I use that if she gets too into the pulling aspect -- however I feel like the extra rope and PVC pipe gives me way more leverage in tug games as well. Didn't use a flirt pole with previous dogs because I only heard of it about 5 years ago.
- I haven't tried putting any kind of ball or toy on it -- for some unknown reason, current dog will only chase balls outside so I just use the "chuck it" there. She will chase toys thrown inside but I know if I put any of her favorites on the flirt pole they would be destroyed (she doesn't like any 'indestructable' ones). She will chase tug toy on flirt pole either inside or outside
Regarding the bike and falls,
--so far (3 dogs) I have found that even when the dog really tried to take off after something to the side, it never felt like I was going to fall at all. The bike does sometimes move with the pull but it has never felt wobbly. I have always had plenty of momentum forward when it happened and my original version attached low -- the current version I have attaches at the seat, but so far I haven't noticed any difference. Note: each of my dogs weighed 40-50 lbs
--My dog that had issues due to pulling (mentioned above) actually pulled forward, and I was able to just use the brakes to slow us down. As far as wearing out -- this dog was the most worn out after rides due to spending so much effort pulling -- but that also meant it was hard to go any distance. Dog that loved the bike could go on 20+ mile rides and be fresh at the end. Current dog has only done short rides (although that is due to my not riding much anymore not due to her).
-
1
-
-
physical stimulation
-- I made my own pvc and rope dog "flirt pole"
-- I have a bike attachment to "run" the dog -- this depends a lot on your dog IMO though, because it was perfect for a previous dog, horrible for another prev dog (who would pull) and "ok" for current dog (it does the job but dog doesn't love it) -- you do have to work up to distance for paw toughness
-
1
-
-
On 3/21/2023 at 6:12 PM, KidsHappen said:
I am tall with a high waist and I carry all of my extra weight in my belly plus I really have no butt at all. I can only wear high waisted pants. If I buy mid waist then I need a larger size for the waist to fit around my belly and then they are too big everywhere else, plus they always feel like they are falling down. I also have the problem that shirts aren't long enough so high waisted pants keep them covered. Overall they give me more of an hourglass shape and since I wear longer shirts they don't show a big expanse of denim in the rear that screams mom jeans.
I have changed to more stretchy materials with elastic waists or tummy tamer fronts. Also yoga type pants and stretch pants with straight legs made out of the same kind of material. I also have some looser fitting or thicker legging type pants that I like. I have stocked up on these kinds of pants over the last few years that they have been popular so that I will never have to buy pants again. I also won't be caught during a dry spell with only a couple of old worn out pants.
So funny because I would describe myself the same way EXCEPT that for me, that is a description of high waisted pants (where I often have to go up 2! sizes) and mid-rise usually fit me better🤣
IMO the difference is I am too thick-waisted for high-waisted pants -- since this has been true all my life, even back in the day when I only weighed 130 lbs.
What I wish is that there was some place you could put your measurements in and find the perfect pants & jeans (not made to order but more of a "you should try X brand") instead of having to try on kazillion.
-
1
-
-
IMO the general cost of the receptions is highly impacted by the area of the country and the background of the families involved.
Where I grew up, there were two types of receptions: in the basement of the church with cake and punch or at a local hotel with hors d'ouvres. And the choice of which one people chose was generally unrelated to money. There were NO sit-down dinner receptions, no backyard receptions, no potlucks. Those just weren't "the style" there. The "expensive" version of each of those just found a prettier site and served better food (and I went to a LOT of weddings because my mom knew everyone and would often take me as her +1 once I was an adult).
Then, when I first moved away to a new area, a friend there told me that any reception without a sit-down dinner was "cheap" and she had never been to a reception without one. Of course, I had never been to a reception that had one at that point -- but the next weddings I went to were all in that area, and all sit-down dinner receptions.
Since then I've been to many different types of receptions in many different areas of the country-- from church basement to bbq in the backyard to potluck to hors d'ouvre's to sit down dinner to destination. And for each type, I've been to various cost levels from "trying to pinch every penny" to "go big!" and all levels in-between.
It doesn't matter to me because I don't use reception cost as a metric -- I use my own connection to the couple/family and my own means to judge how much to give. I can see considering a "cover the plate" type metric to look at whether my amount is changing appropriately with the times (i.e. not get stuck with giving the same amount forever)-- but once I set a new value I'd give that same amount to everyone at that same level of connection from then on.
For OP, I would give her whatever you would have given her IF the wedding had NOT been a destination wedding. I would choose to not let my costs impact my gift-giving (been there, had those same thoughts, and chose to give what I would normally have given).
-
5
-
-
I would consider it a "destination wedding" if the expectation is that everyone that comes to the wedding will stay at the "quaint hotel".
-
3
-
-
On 3/13/2023 at 8:51 AM, Idalou said:
OH NO! The woke agenda! Woke woke woke!
Just once I'd like to see someone tell us exactly what woke means, in detail. I'm guessing it's similar to the gay agenda and the drag queen agenda.
Because we're not supposed yo talk politics, correct? Guess your stupid code words don't count.
As far as I can tell, the word "woke" is just a replacement for "PC" or "politically correct" of the 80's
-
6
-
-
As someone who is like this (likes everything out but then doesn't actually 'see' the clutter or notice that something needs to be done ) -- I heartily second the recommendation of Dana K. White. I find her simple processes key to actually progress (even though I've gotten some great ideas from Cas' videos)
Also, be careful with the "butterfly" label and make sure it works for your husband -- for example, most of Cas' butterfly organizing examples are far too visually cluttered for me -- I do much better if I have something that mostly hides the stuff but still leaves a tiny bit out for me to see.
-
2
-
-
I think of blocking as actually putting the contact as "block this caller" -- which I understand means the person can't call or text me at all. So then blocking would mean you didn't see her group texts either-- if so, I can see that being an issue the way you all seem to interact on that.
FWIW, I wasn't suggesting blocking -- just silencing (which is actually called "hide alerts" when I just looked at it). So you don't hear any "ding" or pop-up but you can still see any messages if and when you care to look at them (and it still shows # of unread messages). It only applies to that particular text "channel/ thread? " --so only the private text thing with her would be quiet and any group texting she did would still ding as normal. It's not blocking her, it's just silencing that particular text thread so it doesn't "ding" or give pop-ups on the screen. (Note: this is all on iphone, I assume android would have similar)
For me, it made a big difference just not having the multiple "dings" (where I knew he was blasting me with accusations) and a second big difference of letting me be able to wait and look at the texts when I was ready to deal with them (instead of when he sent them). Both of which made it far easier to shrug off the BS.
-
1
-
-
-
Even if it would never occur to you that a bag was a bomb -- it is still within the bounds of polite behavior to see a bag apparently left behind and ask "Is this anyone's bag?" -- thinking that perhaps someone in the room left it by accident when they sat down for a rest and that you are helping them by pointing it out.
Which just shows the woman's reaction was over the top either way --no matter how you feel about whether bags are dangerous or not.
Although jumping straight to verbal attack as she did at least implies that she has had this happen before, is aware that some people react poorly to bags left around and yet has made a conscious decision to leave her bag anyway.
-
8
-
-
Reading the additional info (group vs private text & never responding) - I would put SIL on silent mode in the private text chain and not read at all anything she sent there (just delete it without reading). If she ever said anything about it, I would say I had not seen her texts (and act clueless if she pushed it -- but there are other options if clueless doesn't work for you)
Or another option -- I put my brother on silent mode like this when he went bananas in his texts after my Dad died but unfortunately he refused to participate in group texts, so I needed to still read and respond to his texts (I was executor) -- BUT I would only read them all at once sometime later -- at a time that was good for me, knowing that chances were high that I would be upset after reading them.
-
5
-
-
I earned a BS in Biochemistry at normal age, worked in the field for 2 years, decided I was not interested the paths available to me, and went back (to different school) and got a BS in Computer Science. Computer Science was a much better fit and I worked in the field for years before the children came along (and still working ~5 hour/week actually).
I only had to complete the required courses for the 2nd degree -- I did it half time over 3 1/2 years, working at a (different) biochemistry lab that knew what I was doing and allowed very flexible hours.
As a side note -- my parents, Mom especially, thought I was making a HUGE mistake and told me so in no uncertain terms--she actually apologized to me about the whole thing years later.
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, BandH said:
I think the idea of going into the interaction knowing she'll ask for something, and just planning it that way makes sense.
I think the other half of that idea is don't name everything you've already planned to cover her potential issues -- that way those plans can be offered up for her approval "you're right! they might not have enough to eat -- what about fruit? -- I have some I can cut up for <kids>" (but still planning for the extra ask as well)
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Brittany1116 said:
I think it's... intellectualy dishonest?... to act as though anyone outside of a medical establishment would casually refer to surgical removal of an already dead fetus as an abortion. No one is doing that.
You are wrong to think this distinction matters -- because unless the bill passed specifically identifies what is an abortion, then the courts will have to consider ALL definitions of abortion -- including the medical definition.
-
13
-
-
Also wanted to add -- this is also where all those variables come in IMO.
For example, when DH's dad drove us from airport to house (over an hour) -- not yet DH and I had just sat next to each other for 2+ hours on the airplane and DH had not seen his Dad in person for over 6 months -- I do not see any reading of that situation where it would have been ok for him to sit in the back with me thinking that would somehow make me feel better/safer/less vulnerable? even if I were completely stressed out about meeting his family -- I would not have wanted DH to sit in back with me. If he had tried, I would have told him to sit in front with his Dad.
Say OP does not know her son's fiancee well but fiance and son see each other regularly -- then I would generally expect son to sit in front passenger and facilitate a conversation that includes both Mom with fiancee (or not as he understands fiancee's preferences)
But maybe fiancee is a chatty Cathy type person and son is quiet -- then I would expect the fiancee to sit in front passenger seat and work to include son (or not as she understands son's preferences).
Maybe son and fiancee have not seen each other in some time -- then I would expect they would want to sit together (and if I were driver I would tell them they should sit together in back)
Etc. Etc.
However, son sitting in front and leaving fiancee out of conversation -- that is not an argument that son should sit in back, that is an argument that son needs some car etiquette hints.
-
3 minutes ago, SKL said:
I picture a mom and son easily engaging in conversation while next to each other in the front seat, with fiance having to work hard to hear and participate from the back, and how that could make fiance feel not enthusiastically included ... especially on a long car drive.
There's nothing wrong with sitting in the back. Personally I prefer it when with housemates or work colleagues ... more chance to be left with my own thoughts vs. carrying a conversation. But when there's a need to build relationships with new family members, I'd err on the side of enthusiastic inclusion.
This is a confusing argument to me -- because the engaged couple being put in the back should have already built their relationship? This argument towards building a relationship would actually go more towards putting the fiancee in front with the mom IMO -- which personally I would not have wanted until after I knew the DH's parents well (short trips would be fine -- but not an hour and a half).
And IMO it is the front seat passenger's job to include the back seat and not just chat with the driver --the front passenger spot is the one with the most control to include both driver and backseat in the conversation. Neither backseat spot has that kind of ability to include the driver. So if the son is in the front seat and not including his fiancee, that is a different issue.
-
1
-
-
54 minutes ago, maize said:
It's never in my life occurred to me to think of being alone in the front seat as driver as a lonely thing. I guess on a really long drive it could be helpful to have someone in the passenger seat to talk to to keep me alert, but it would have to be something like 12+ hours of me driving, or for some reason driving overnight (which I never do) for me to worry about that. I do almost all the driving in my family, including on long drives. Loneliness has genuinely never been an issue or something that even occurred to me.
I believe I picked up the word lonely from another post - a better choice would have been "excluded from the conversation" I suppose.
IME, it is much easier to be included in a front seat conversation from the back (if you are interested enough to do so which I often am not) -- then to be included in a backseat conversation from the front (ETA: especially as the driver, who cannot turn their head to the back). So IMO leaving the driver alone is more excluding the driver vs leaving one passenger alone lets them decide if they want to do the work to be included or not (especially when the "shotgun" person tries to include them).
And FWIW I've sat in the back alone many, many times -- including when I was my DH's fiancee and was meeting his parents for the first time. I did not feel like a "vulnerable stranger" as someone else posted -- I just felt like I was sitting in the back seat. No different than any other time I've been the one sitting in the back seat. I'm just not getting what's the big deal with sitting in the back? It's not some horrible, unacceptable spot, only do-able if someone else is sitting back there with you.
-
I answered other because my answer depends on many variables-- but I would consider it strange if they both sat in the back. Yes, it can be lonely in the back by yourself-- but one person is going to be lonely in this scenario no matter what. It should never be the driver IMO (unless the driver is the one that requests/suggests that).
-
Sadly, for this particular cancer, the prognosis is extremely poor -- and she's already had the treatment with the best (although still extremely low) survival rate (20% five year survival). A number of radiation therapies for it are considered only palliative even. This of course does not mean this particular therapy should not happen -- but it makes it even worse to my mind that you believe giving up your entire life will be demanded of you, with very low chance of making a difference for your MIL.
Hugs for you as it seems your DH and FIL (and possibly MIL) have not come to terms with this -- and especially your DH if he thinks the best solution is to co-opt his wife's life without permission. I hope you will find a way to help your DH see that this is not a good plan for your MIL, for you, or for your kids.
-
7
-
-
Based on how my brother was -- I would not make any plans that included leaving MIL on her own some place (even with other siblings dropping in).
Obviously, that would also depend on where your MIL is at physically right now-- but also need to keep in mind that the treatment will most likely be debilitating for her over the 6 weeks.
-
1
-
-
Wow! I would have a lot of negative things to say if my DH came up with this plan with no input from me.
However, I would also like to point out a different issue -- this daily 4 hour trip for 6 weeks seems like it would be extremely hard on your MIL. She is not going to be able to handle that long drive every day IMO -- this kind of cancer treatment has huge effects on the patient that would make such a daily trip very hard. Not to mention that this type of cancer by itself can cause a lot of discomforts that would make sitting in a car for hours extremely hard on the patient as well, and I would think that would be even more the case especially when she's already had the other surgery (trying to leave out the specifics -- but my brother passed from this same cancer a couple years ago)
Is the suburb you need to take her to the same one that the adult siblings live at? If so, I would suggest that MIL needs to live with one of them during the week for her own comfort.
-
19
-
-
13 hours ago, KSera said:
I don't think this is a fair characterization of any of the concerns that have been raised. I don't find the idea of either adoptees finding birth mothers or birth mothers finding the child they placed negative in any way. I brought up the scenario of a sexual assault in the context of a birth mom who does not respond well to being contacted. That is a scenario for some people and is one that might explain some birth moms not wanting contact. I think it's legitimate to wonder what this technology means for those women and for future women in that position. Doesn't mean other people won't have positive outcomes from their searches. I don't know where the suggestion that some people think it's okay one direction but not the other comes from. I haven't seen that in this thread.
I did not read the concerns on this thread the way you are stating them here. The concerns I saw on this thread about sexual assault (and other negative possibilities) very clearly implied that the search should not happen at all because of these possibilities and the possibility that the birth mother would not want to be found.
Heck, multiple people stated that Scarlett was overstepping boundaries by reaching out to someone who had put both their DNA and contact info out on Ancestry to be found by anyone on Ancestry -- saying that Scarlett should assume that person had made a mistake and actually did not want contact!
My personal experience and my family member's (adopted siblings and their children) experience has been that everyone involved has bent over backward to be considerate of feelings -- but I know that is not always the case (and agree it should be).
-
7
-
-
From my experience, just signing up for Ancestry doesn't give you all the warnings -- it is doing the DNA testing that gives you the warnings.
BTW, those of you bemoaning the horrific idea of adoptees finding their birth mothers and ruining their lives do realize that a lot of birth mothers search too, right? Are they ruining the adoptees life? If you believe it is ok one way and not the other -- then IMO you need to sit down and consider that thought a lot more carefully.
This type of searching (both adoption and people trying to figure out if their parents are actually their parents) has been going on for many, many years --it is not new at all, it is just made somewhat easier with DNA testing (and now includes people who didn't realize they should be searching)
note: my birth mother found me pre-DNA testing & post Texas changing their laws to allow adoption agencies to share more information with both sides (back in 1990's)
-
6
-
-
DNA siblinghood doesn't force someone to become part of a family but to think of it is nothing is just as wrong.
Speaking as someone who has met 5 half siblings only as an adult over 30 (and with 2 more I haven't met).
-
3
-
2
-
Toys, games for Shiloh that are mentally stimulating and physically demanding (within reason to tire her out)
in The Chat Board
Posted · Edited by LaughingCat
Are you saying you buy a dog "teaser/wand" and run it through the pvc pipe? And, your pup bats away at it? Are you able to upload a pic when convenient?
My "flirt pole" is a super simple DIY except for the tug toy because I was too cheap to buy one. Our dog likes it a lot when she's in the mood for it, but doesn't love it, so I've never upgraded.
To make it I took a short piece, ~3 ft, of PVC pipe, and pushed a rope through it with about 3-4 feet of rope sticking out one end and a tug toy knotted on to it and on the other end a knot to keep the rope from pulling through the PVC pipe). This was all stuff we already had around the house (and I'm sure I found some DIY site describing that but it is too long ago now to know where)
If I were to make one specifically for outside, I would definitely make the PVC pipe (+ rope) longer to make her run more, but I made it originally for something to do indoors when the weather's bad and our downstairs ceiling is quite low. (Note: dog loves fetching the ball outside so that is our go-to when outside)
I swing it around and up and down, and turn from side to side or in a circle, or slide it along the floor -- same as I do the cat's much much smaller teaser toy. The dog chases it around and jumps trying to catch it in her mouth - running and jumping 100x more than using the tug toy in the regular way. Really the only difference from the cat is she doesn't bat at it with her paws and that once she's got it in her teeth, she pulls on it like a tug toy. The PVC pipe makes the tug of war much easier too-- you would think that this small bit of PVC pipe wouldn't make much difference but it does -- I think it must be that it allows using different muscles when pulling back. Even my very petite younger daughter could pull the dog around with it (now she's big enough that she could do regular tug toy but she still uses this). I don't let her tug too long before I make her drop it and start over, but my kids usually will let her tug a lot more. One funny thing is that the dog really loves and wants to play with this toy on some days -- but on others she acts completely uninterested (this is really why the ball has stayed the go-to outside -- she always wants to chase the ball but only outside 😂).
Shiloh runs 60-64 lbs and very muscular but light as a feather (my dh calls it) running upstairs. LOL! She has great control. I just assumed most/all dogs would be worn out on bike walk. But, it's interesting your pups varied in their responses. The dog that went 20 miles - small breed?
Dog that went 20+ miles and still fresh -- Australian Shepherd -- 40 lbs -- I'd be going 15-20 mph and he'd just trot along next to me. I don't think I ever got him to flat out run, even going downhill (but I am not into speed -I'm sure I didn't go much more than 25 mph at fastest). He loved to do the bike runs.
Dog that pulled so couldn't go as far-- also Australian Shepherd 😂 She was a ball fetching/frisbee catching dog, #1 most important thing in her world.
current dog is Border Collie + possibly Lab mix (rescue said lab but I just don't believe it, but haven't done anything to find out otherwise) -- 40 lbs -- I think she could have done the 20+ miles in her prime if I'd still been biking a lot, she just didn't love it enough to motivate me to get out more and life got too busy otherwise.