nm

Do you have techniques or medications you can use when you feel anxiety going nuts? I am an "anxious person" -- always have been, surely always will be -- and I deal with it in a variety of ways. You need a plan to deal with the anxiety, and just having the plan can make a huge difference in your anxiety levels, IME. Motherwort tincture is a nice herbal remedy. (I get it locally hand made, but I'm sure you can order it online.) Marijauna is the bomb for anxiety if you live somewhere you can have it legally. If you live somewhere you can get/use it legally and haven't tried it, I'd suggest you look into it. Much safer and more effective than most pharmaceuticals. Xanax is awesome, but only for occasional use, and it's a controlled substance, so you need a doctor to prescribe it. For me, it's been a huge help, as just having it on hand reduces my anxiety massively, so over the years, I needed it less and less. Knowing I have it to fall back on is a huge stress reliever, as it gives me total control. I've never used it more than occasionally, maybe a handful of times per year on average. I wouldn't want to be on it daily for long term, but for the occasional disaster control method, it's fantastic and legal. (Can't drive, though. And probably not a good idea if you have addictive tendencies, and you need to keep it securely stored, as you do with any dangerous drug.) I've probably not taken more than an average of 5-10 doses per year over the last decade, but it made a TREMENDOUS difference in my quality of life. (If I lived somewhere marijauna was legal, I don't think I'd need or use Xanax, FWIW, but it's not legal where I live. Yet.) Outdoor exercise is a *tremendous* help IME. If you can find time to walk or run or bike or paddle or whatever outdoors for an hour or so daily, you may find a dramatic reduction in your anxiety. (Lots of) running pretty much cured me of regular anxiety, relegating my severe anxiety "spells" to rare and severe situations. Running got me through my mom's Alzheimer's and other terrible stressors . . . Frequent TeA is a great anxiety reliever, IME. If it's a possibility in your relationship/marriage, daily TeA is pretty awesome for overall mental health and stress/anxiety reduction, IME. I'd encourage anyone to give themselves a RX of daily (good) TeA for a month just to give it a try. Speaking of TeA, I tried a SSRI for anxiety for a couple months once many years ago. It made me "numb from the waist down" so to speak, and I am certain that if I'd stayed on it, both dh and I would have become severely depressed, lol. I wouldn't try it again.

Name calling? Did I name call? Please quote me where I name called anyone. I used accurate adjectives to describe arguments and practices. I really don't know what you're reading, but I think you are misrepresenting my words. I trust I don't need to offer a definition of discrimination. I'll let you do your own googling on that one if you need a definition. From Merriam-Webster: Definition of homophobia : irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals

I would call the police each and every time the dog was loose. Before there is another incident (as in, ASAP), I would bring a plate of baked goods over . . . and firmly but gently tell the caregiver that they cannot have a dog loose in the neighborhood, and that it's frightening, and that they must have their dog leashed at all times. Keep it short and sweet. Then, proceed to call the cops each and every time . . . as there is little chance they will comply with your request . . . and, take pics when the dog is outside their property off leash . . . to show the police . . . I would not involve the elderly neighbor. They don't need the stress.

Ugh. :001_huh: "bully"?? That's a bizarre use of the term. I think that is actually more insulting to CW than it is to me. CW is a strong advocate for her position, with plenty of allies. You might accuse me of being repetitive, insistent, even annoying, but bullying? Just because I won't placidly accept a homophobic and discriminatory argument? This is an argument among peers, not bullying between a superior intellect and a weaker one. You are harassing me here much more personally, persistently, and directly than I argued against CW's positions. Nonetheless, I wouldn't accuse you of bullying -- as we are peers and you have no power over me, nor are you injuring me. Perhaps I'd accuse you of being annoying or repetitive, but those are not moral failings, just minor personality flaws. For consideration: From google: bul·ly noun 1. a person who uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker. synonyms: persecutor, oppressor, tyrant, tormentor, intimidator; More verb 1. use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants. From Merriam Webster: Definition of bully 1a : a blustering, browbeating person; especially : one who is habitually cruel, insulting, or threatening to others who are weaker, smaller, or in some way vulnerable tormented by the neighborhood bullyb : pimp 2: a hired ruffian 3archaica : sweetheartb : a fine chap :banghead:

You wouldn't care???? You mean, you'd be cool being friendly online (or IRL) with an avowed racist? It wouldn't impact your view of her opinions? It wouldn't move you to put her on ignore or at least minimize viewing/considering her opinions? Yoikes. You do realize this entire discussion, and nearly all of the content of the Chat board, is pretty much just us folks jabbering about our personal and philosophical opinions, bantering back and forth about what's right and wrong, yuck or yum, or good and bad, right? This discussion is just that. Just because CW (who is a good person, IMHO, based on her many posts over many years) is being given a polite-hard-time about her views on this topic doesn't mean it's mean or unfair. This wasn't her JAWM thread where she was looking for support only . . . it wasn't even her OP . . . She put her opinion out there, and it is apparently unpopular with some of us (and supported by plenty of others). No one is being nasty or hateful about it on any side, IMHO. It just so happens that some of us feel very strongly about the immorality and cruelty of her view, and so some of us are making that clear and trying to argue against her view -- whether or not she ever "gets it" or whether or not maybe some other readers might be influenced by our posts . . . or maybe it just makes *us* feel better about the world to be able to at least speak out about a topic that is (very) important to us.

Uh, have you read this thread? I'll leave it to the individual to define their own rules, their own limits, and their own priorities in life. Do whatever you want. If you say your rules are based on health/safety/whatever, that's all good with me.

Wouldn't that fall under the health/safety category? I know one kid with severe peanut allergies. He occasionally attends activities where my kids attend. For *all* of my kids' participation in the activities at that organization (hundreds of kid-hours per year), we send only peanut-free items. Just this week, we bought two huge boxes of random snack bars at Sam's because they were peanut free (and all of our old standbys are not peanut free). I would never dream of knowingly bringing peanuts into their presence, let alone their home. On the other hand, I'm severely allergic to poultry. But, I don't react to airborne particles or hand-to-hand contact, so I am able to protect myself. I don't ask anyone else to accommodate my allergies. I just ask lots of detailed questioned when visiting other homes for meals, and I choose carefully. I wouldn't mind anyone bringing poultry into my home, and in fact, dh regularly cooks it (generally when I'm not home, lol).

Well, perhaps in your situation, having your home as a "safe space" where you and your kids aren't stressed and distressed over animal welfare and/or over what the kids can and cannot eat . . . is more of a wellbeing/welfare/mental health issue. It sounds to me like that might be more the root of your "house rule" as opposed to you wanting to exert Queen of My Castle authority? Framed that way, it might be more palatable others?

Oh, I'm sure there are plenty of things that I'd object to. I'd work that out like I would if I were staying at my guest's home, or at a shared rental house, or whatever. I'd avoid the conflict, or I'd speak up and work out a solution, or I'd decide that I made a mistake by being so close to this person and make plans to minimize contact/conflict in the future, after this particular situation is over. I disagree with many things that others find acceptable or even preferable. That doesn't mean I can/should/would try to control other peoples' behaviors. Indeed, there are culturally normal/approved things that I find abhorrent. For instance, I believe that there is no god, religions are nonsensical, and that churches are a significant evil. Nonetheless, I generally keep my mouth shut when others are practicing or otherwise celebrating their religion. When companions (at their home, my home, or in some other setting) want to say a blessing over a meal, I hold hands and sit respectfully and quietly. I do my best to avoid using sacred words casually or disrespectfully. I avoid bringing up my opinions when I have reason to suspect they would be offensive. Obviously, I'm not agreeing with their practices or beliefs, but I have no need or desire to control others' actions or beliefs. Not my circus, not my monkeys . . . What I would definitely *not* do is play the "it's my house, so it's my rules" card unless I was *done* with that personal relationship. That's just not how I relate to other human beings. Who is in control should not be about who owns stuff (unless that owned stuff is in jeopardy).

And, here, I'd thought that line was an acknowledgement that the poster was a reasonable person who wouldn't require guests to practice their hosts' religion (per my clear examples of praying and church attendance). I've seen enough of that poster's posts over the years to believe/expect that she's a reasonable and sane person who would not require those sorts of clearly religious acts from her guests. You're taking it out of context and inappropriately turning it into an insult. It was not intended as such. That is rude and uncalled for.

I wasn't aware of any Biblical teaching that required a believer to impose their views on unmarried sex on others. I wouldn't be friends with someone who made racist, misogynist, homophobic or similar rants. I wouldn't have them in my home, period. Do you similarly impose your beliefs on someone who'd overeat in your home? Would you take away their dinner plates after their second serving? Refuse their request for a second or third helping of dessert? Confiscate their bags of candy? Do you similarly impose your beliefs on someone who doesn't choose to go to any church, let alone your church, on Sunday when they are visiting you? Or at all? I'd guess that you're sane enough not to insist that your houseguests pray with you, go to church with you, or otherwise practice your religion. I impose my religious and moral beliefs on myself, not others. If others have beliefs I find reprehensible, I don't associate with them, period. Furthermore, it is none of my business what others do in the privacy of their bedrooms, whether that bedroom is in a hotel, their own home, or my home. I would not want others to police my sex life, and I'm not about to police others sex life. Nor do I police whether they eat 2 pounds of Reese's cups in their cars, bedrooms, or my own home. Their body, their choice, their life. Not my circus, not my monkeys. I encourage you to consider this concept, and just disengage your mind from regulating others' morality/religion.

For the record, I contracted Lyme Disease 2 months ago, and it was *very* severe involving multiple hospital visits, excruciating pain, and now visits with specialists and ongoing problems. There is a good chance that our frequent doggy-house-guest helped give it to me, as she *loves* to hang out in our mostly-wooded yard most of the day, and may well have brought in a "hitchhiker tick" that then infected me. My inappropriate-guilt-ridden friend whose doggy we often babysit was distraught to think her dog might have played a part in my illness. When we pet-sit her next month for 3 weeks . . . We have brain stormed together, and my vet-husband has come up with a plan . . . and said doggy (who we love) will be on double-tick-protection including one that repels ticks (to minimize hitch hiker ticks) in addition to her standard one that kills them after some hours . . . I was forthcoming about my concern, and my friend was /is *eager* to make sure that I am both protected from illness as well as *comfortable* in my home . . . I think that people who care about each other should be able to communicate and solve problems together. This works for me. Essentially, we don't have guests who aren't considerate people . . . If you have to have asshats for guests, then clearly this won't work as well.

There WILL be a difference. If you're not re-coating the entire room, I'd get it switched out.

I have asthma and pet allergies, so it's not that I don't understand the issue. :) I also have a life-threatening allergy to poultry meat, so I'm totally understanding that some allergies are more severe than others. This is exactly what I was thinking about when I wrote an entire paragraph noting the exception for health/safety issues. It so happens that the majority of discussions I've seen on this topic are not related to significant health/safety issues: + Bf/Gf sleeping over + pets visiting with no mention of health concerns + alcohol or pork consumption + no shoes in the house + etc. Personally, I choose to have people in my life who are both loving and respectful of others. This means that folks visiting me wouldn't bring pork or alcohol if they knew I was opposed. It also means they'd understand if a health issue precluded their pet visiting. It also means no one would dream of smoking in my house, nor of flagrantly using illegal substances on my property -- as they wouldn't dream of stinking up my home (ALL smokers know that smoke stinks up a home) nor of exposing me to legal problems. Personally, I also choose to be respectful of those who I love or otherwise have as guests. This means that when folks visit me, I accept their gifts graciously. It also means I don't tell them what to eat, smoke, or drink, so long as it isn't significantly damaging my property or someone else's health. It also means I wouldn't dream of telling them who to sleep with. It also means I will tolerate their pet, so long as it isn't pooping or peeing in my house . . . I make choices like investing in hard flooring throughout my house to minimize allergy issues. And having a HEPA filter in each guest space along with keeping the doors closed 24/7 when not in use to prevent my own pets from going in and filling the space with allergens . . . And keeping my fridge stocked with things I know my guests might like . . . etc. I can make choices that both make my guests comfortable and make my family comfortable . . . My family generally removes shoes when we are indoors. This is a "family rule" for the most part. My house is pretty nice, and guests often think they should remove *their own* shoes when they see us in bare feet or socks. I always tell them, no, no, do whatever makes you comfortable. I'd much rather get some extra dirt/wear/tear in my house than make a guest uncomfortable. When I go to someone's no-shoes house, I take my shoes off . . . When I go to a Mormon household, I don't bring alcohol . . . I make efforts to be a good guest, as we all should, and I also make an effort to be a good host, as we all should. IMHO.

I guess at the end of the day . . . The person who wants to be with their gf/bf or dog . . . is choosing between love (for their partner or pet) and love (for the person they want to visit). The person who wants to protect their house rules . . . is choosing between love (for their potential visitor) and their pride in their home (in case of not wanting a dog) or desire to enforce their own morality on others (bf/gf) or simply their desire to be king/queen of their castle (pride, pride, pride). I think being hospitable is important. I don't go so far as the Ancient Greeks, but I think the general concept of the host going to significant effort to make their guests comfortable is a good one. The whole "my house, my rules" thing is possibly appropriate when we are raising kids, but not fine when we are dealing with adult guests, IMHO. So, in my mind, the whole concept of house rules is a little sketchy. I have rules for my own kids, but I really don't have rules for visitors. Essentially, if I want to host someone, then I love them enough to be hospitable, which pretty much, to me, means letting them do what they want to do and making them as welcome and as comfortable as possible. If I had a significant health/safety reason for having a house rule, then that'd be different. I.e., if I had a family member with fragile health and a severe pet allergy, then, OK, no visiting pets. I'd explain the reasoning to a potential pet-bringing-guest, so they'd know I was making a choice between protecting my loved one's life-threatening-health-concern and their love for their pet. Hopefully, they'd get it. (That said, I have asthma and am allergic to both cats and dogs . . . This doesn't stop us from owning quite a few house-cats and house-dogs and welcoming a dog visitor regularly). I think the essential question boils down to: what are you & your guest choosing among . . . If it boils down to I'm the boss because I own the house . . . then, to me, that's pretty ugly and selfish.

I'd just leave it to the cops (+/- CPS) to figure out if there's anything illegal or concerning to authorities. I'm sure different areas would have and apply differing laws . . . Clearly, it's not illegal for adults to be on their roof. Kids? I dunno. Personally, I'm more concerned about the OTHER kids. The mom knows her 12 yo is playing with fire . . . those other kids are likely pals whose parents are NOT informed . . . One way or another, it's likely that involving the cops will get the parents attention and/or get the kids to stop playing on the roof . . .

I'd call the cops next time. I might take a couple pics the same time I was calling 911. I wouldn't be able to live with myself if one of those kids got killed and I hadn't at least reported it. The cops can scare the kids and/or hassle the parents enough to motivate them to find a safer summer rebellion. Yoikes.

I'd skip the accent wall and put a nice big painting over the piano. :) Or a collage of smaller art and/or family pics.

I am still thankful every day that we got rid of every inch of carpeting in our remodel a couple years ago. I love, love, love having a no carpet house. Go for it. You'll love it.

Food allergy? I'd start a food diary and track things carefully, to see if you can find a connection. I'd also set him up with an allergist appointment as well as a pediatrician appointment.

Pretend what? I'm not pretending anything. I'm trying to be respectful of other people's beliefs/prayers/oaths that are apparently important to them, so I'm trying not to be distracting or disruptive or disrespectful, while waiting it out and, in my own head, wondering why on earth people find that beneficial and what's wrong with people that want to say those things . . . all, silently, in my own head. Yes, it's exactly that same feeling you have in those circumstances. That's exactly it.

Good grief. I don't actually cross my fingers!! That was a metaphor! I'm not 8 years old, lol. And, generally, as I age, I've become less concerned about annoying people, so, yes, today I rarely speak the words if I'm not in agreement. I sit, head bowed, and wait. Up until 5-10 years ago, I felt more compelled to go along with the norm and say the words. Now, I'm more at ease in my own skin, so I am comfortable sitting quietly. However, that said, I am always repulsed by hearing the words aloud, so it's not a pleasant experience for me to sit and listen to them.

LOLOL, I'm a high maintenance wife. Always have been. Always will be. Apparently, my dh *likes* being able to meet my high maintenance needs, lol. I'm not selfish . . . I give at least as good as I get/want/demand . . . But I get/want/demand a *lot* I'm totally cool with high maintenance friends/partners. I think that is very much a personality preference . . . High maintenance can correlate with high intensity. Some folks just thrive on the intensity; others on the mellow . . . I don't think either is good or bad, but knowing your preference is helpful . . . Because if you thrive on intensity, you can choose someone who is intense/high maintenance . . . and also generous & reciprocal (I.e., intensely loving) . . . or you can choose someone who is just intensely selfish and demanding (i.e., just intensely taking). . .

I'm pretty sure our dentist does x-rays once a year. The other 6 month visit, no x-rays.