I am so so sorry - for you and your daughters. Are your daughters young adults? I seem to recall you posting in the past about your situation, but I can't remember if you have any little ones. Do you have an attorney? Does he? Are and he close to working out a financial settlement? If you have younger children and need to communicate with him regarding visitation arrangements or other matters regarding the children, you might want to move to text only so that you have a record. Some people can't even do that without excessive conflict. If you daughters are older, there should be very little you need to communicate with an ex in most circumstances. I can't even imagine being told to get used to not talking to my husband. I have talked to him daily for so many years. But that is probably something you need to live with, painful as it is. He is starting a new life and has a new relationship. As much as it hurts, he may well be following the advice of an attorney or counselor in limiting communication with you - especially if your girls are of an age to commhnicate with him directly. Is your work place of the type that you can prevent her access? Or are there security cameras? You do not want drama jeopardizing you job. I would consider whether security can help keep her out or whether you could make an arrangement to have a third party at work act as a witness if she does show up again. Did she threaten you in any way? Just as an aside, if you are using your work computer to post, be very careful! I am sorry for your awful day and hope that your love for your daughters and theirs for you will be a sustaining joy and comfort and that week by week this will get easier.

I think I never wore a two piece suit until I was in my 30s. Possibly 40s. Once I did, I realized the advantages. They tend to have better shelf support. One can buy a top piece that gives true support for running and jumping. They are easier to use the bathroom in. They tend to trap less sand in the ocean and are easier to flush out. I prefer a skirted bottom. I don't like the tankini tops so much as far as cmfort, though I appreciate the modestly.

Many men wear suits daily. I can't imagine how it could be too dressy to wear a basic conservative men's suit to a church wedding. Men can be seen wearing suits all over in a regular work week. Why wouldn't they wear one to a church wedding? I am not saying they absolutely have to, but if unsure, it doesn't seem like if could possibly be a mistake.

It's actually standard use and has been used this way for over 100 years. It was confusing to me as a child, though. It does make reporting easier. "Servicemembers" would do the same job but is bulky in a headline. It is a mess to refer by service branch because just as soon as you say, "100 soldiers" someone is going to point out that it was actually 98 shoulders and 2 marines.

I heard a report on NPR about dogs in Sarajevo during the war. So many people were displaced, thousands were killed, there was inadequate food, bombing was frequent, and yet there were people caring for dogs and feeding dogs with what food they had. One woman interviewed said that for her this made her feel human. Taking care of vulnerable dog and sharing her food with it was a way for her to feel faith in her own humanity. That really touched my heart. I'm not someone who would pay thousands of dollars for chemo on an old dog, but I do believe that humans domesticated dogs, that we depend on dogs, and then when you take a dog into your home the dog is your responsibility. Sometimes that responsibility includes choosing to let a sick dog go. Sometimes it means rehoming the dog when necessary. But choosing to not provide basic medical care for a dog when you are able to eat well, travel, have cable and eat out does not sit right with me. Not taking the time to learn how to train a dog and then training it (the basics to be able to be safe and to know how to deal with others), not providing adequate exercise and company ... I just don't understand that. I think dogs were one of Gods very best ideas and i value that.

Weddings are so hard. Just remember that it's his wedding too, and if what he wants is partly to make his parents happy, that is a legitimate want. My DH was insistent in a church wedding. He wanted that more for his family than for himself. He didn't have disfunctional need to please them and was independent, so recognizing that their feelings were important to him, I agreed. Did me no harm. I know you could plan it to suit 'her.' His mother could probably plan it to suit him. They have to figure out how to suit themselves primarily and perhaps also honor each other's desires to have a wedding that their parents will like. It's sounds like you really like him and are handling this well. Do you think maybe she is the kind of young lady who asks for advice or input more than she should? Maybe when the future in laws ask about things that she doesn't need group consensus on, she should tell them, "I want that to be a surprise!" Fewer cooks in the kitchen makes life easier.

Margaret, I still remember you encouraging and calming me early in this process. Thank you! It was very hard to have those 60 seconds (60!) but also a relief to see him March off and know we had checked all the boxes and it was accomplished!

No don't be! He is thrilled to be there and I am proud of him and grateful he has this opportunity. It's just part of the deal.

At the US Military Academy. It could not have been a more beautiful day at Westpoint - - warm, breezy, golden-lighted loveliness. It was also a bittersweet day - a mix of pride/fear/sorrow/joy. I held it together. I did go to the rest room after our 60 second goodbye, and I went for the usual reasons but was not surprised to walk in to find about 20 weeping mothers.

But they aren't. They aren't on the same page. It happens. Sometimes one parent goes along with the other without making his or her feelings known to the child because the issue isn't of such importance to that parent. In fact, that happens a lot and is healthy. But sometimes both parents feel strongly and are not getting on one page. Neither is willing to falsely pretend to think differently to the child. I think a 16 year old can handle knowing that Dad doesn't like or approve of a certain way of dressing or makeup, and Mom disagrees with him. It's okay. Really. I would, at that age, have learned more from and appreciated the honesty of parents who presented differing opinions. And if my husband said my daughter looked 'trashy,' at that age I would have no problem saying to both of them what I think about that characterization. It might make him mad, but sometimes you just have to let someone be mad. If I were so afraid of making him mad, I would wonder whether his anger is being used coercively. Why would I pretend to agree with something I found so belittling? And why would I set an example for her of protecting his pride over her sense of worth?

Double post

Even at 120 pounds, and using the calculator provided, if I have a drink with dinner, I have a BAC of .039. An hour after finishing the drink, my BAC would be .024. I drink a drink most evenings (and hardly ever go out at night). I would be well below the legal limit an hour after a drink, at .024. Being below the legal limit, though, doesn't mean one's reflexes/judgment etc aren't reduced. If there were any other issues (tired, eyes dried from wearing contacts all day) that would need to be considered. But I have driven an hour or so after one drink and think doing so is fine for me. However, if I had a drink and another drink an hour later, an hour after the second drink I would have a blood alcohol of .048. That is well below our legal limit, but I actually would not do that. Maybe it's because alcohol can make one sleepy, but I don't feel like driving for me would be safe enough to make that choice, legal or not.

Well, I tend to think so much is sexual in a way that we are not even aware of. Or maybe "sexual" isn't the right word, but so much of what we do is about appearing a certain way, much of which is about being competent in a gender role and drawing the admiration of the opposite sex and, to some extent, the same sex. Men wear suits. Men might wear "power suits." Power ... money... these are about sex on some level, not exclusively, but partly. Men don't wear "muscle shirts" (or business suits) because they want to have sex that day with someone who sees them on the street. They are just living their lives. Women don't wear makeup or heels because they are on the prowl. I'm not talking about really high heels, which are and impediment, for most of us, to living daily lives. Some men dress in a way that shows off their biceps. I mean, sometimes those muscles are LITERALLY hanging out of a man's shirt so that everyone can see them. Muscles are about strength. Power. Very sexually appealing. They are also very useful and make one competent for tasks that are not about sex. Men show them off, boys want them and want to show them off. It's very cute. Women have breasts and hips (and also muscles, of course). Some women choose clothes that put their breasts on display. Breasts are very sexy. They are also pretty darn useful. If a girl pretends to have breasts or displays what she does have, it's not seen as cute at all. It's seen as slutty. Breasts identify a female as a female, much like muscles do for a man. But we are comfortable with a boy wanting to be muscle bound, masculine man. We are okay with a girl wanting to be a Mommy, but get uncomfortable if she wants to pretend to nurse. And we are not comfortable with her wanting to pretend to be women by stuffing her shirts or swinging her hips. But to me, at heart, boys and girls are doing the same thing - play acting with what feels very "adult" for their gender. And I think this says a lot about how we see women and how we see men. Much of what children and adults wear is very much the same. Both wear jeans, t-shirts, khakis, polos, sundresses, raincoats, etc. There are few clothes that adult men wear but boys don't. Even boys find themselves obliged to wear suits to weddings. Mostly the clothes I can think of that men wear but boys don't (except for play) are professional clothes - police uniforms, army fatigues, lab coats. And when I was a kid, boys spent a lot of time playing "Army" or "Police Officer." What do women wear that girls almost never wear except in play? Professional clothes as above, of course. Nursing bras and maternity clothes. Also heels, handbags, elegant dresses, makeup. II don't know many girls who want to feel adult by wearing nursing bras. I know lots that enjoy playing dress up with Mommy's heels and makeup. And they aren't thinking about how sexy they want to look. They want to feel how it feels to be a woman, and not in the aching breasts, tired feet, anxiety about bills kind of way. It would be nice if girls could associate being a woman with being brave, professional, strong, adventuresome. And I am sure most parents want to cultivate that in their girls. But it doesn't surprise me at all that girls might like bumping hips and trying on Mom's makeup and heels. And I don't see why adults can't look at that indulgently and recognize the sweetness and innocence of it.

I do wonder why it's always cute when a boy wants to appear tough and macho - flexing his biceps or wearing sports gear, but when a girl wants to look like a grownup female - she is judged as looking sl@tty. Most adult women wear makeup. Why shouldn't a girl want to dress up look like a woman sometimes? Is there something wrong with wanting to look like a woman? More so than a boy wanting to look like a man? Is it only okay if the woman she wants to play act is a mommy with a baby? We have some unhealthy views of gender in our culture. But given those cultural images of what men are like and women are like, why is it so bad that a kid wants to play with those roles? I don't expect a seven year old girl to reject what she thinks would be fun about being a woman because it promoted sexism any more than I expect a boy to ponder whether the idea of biceps and competitiveness as defining masculinity is ultimately limiting for men. They are kids!

Leather - or leatherette. Yes it is hot here in the summer. One can use a seat cover. It's is also muggy here, and it absolutely rains pollon. We are all about leaves, and that seems to make the world dusty. When I look at the layer of dust/pollon/God knows what that I wipe from my dashboard, I am not willing to have that in my cloth seats. I like being able to easily wipe it away. I also like the way leather/leatherette seats feel overall, though I agree they would feel gross on the back of sweaty skin.

What I read here is 1. Other people want to say goodbye and 2. You wanted support When you are dying, your life can become a lot of 'goodbyes' and for some people, that is simply exhausting. If he wants to decide how to spend time remaining, he might realize that saying goodbye to old colleagues and friends is just not something he wants to expend limited time and energy on. I can see wanting to spend a lot of time with the few people I most love rather than with a list of people I care about but who are not my most primary beloved. I can see just wanting to be alone with my husband and children if I were dying, and I definitely would want time with my husband if he were dying. I would just want to shut the world out and be alone together. I did need support when my dad was dying - but I needed a couple of friends - not a group. Maybe they are the same way and don't realize you would find comfort in having more people to share it with. vut even if they do know that, I still think their desires are normal and take priority.

Grades: depends on the kid, the goals, the price of college. Relationship with parent - mostly up to the kid. Routine hostility would make me question paying. But not communicating much, having some arguments and the like would not. Purposefully cutting us out completely would be a problem. Not really prioritizing us or enjoying us would not. Drugs and alcohol are to some extent the kid's business. Same with friends and church. But I am paying for four years. Getting arrested, dropping out, failing classes - these things can make college take longer and the kid will have to figure that out. I care about the relationship and won't use money to control my child. If behavior means failing grades, I will address the failing grades. However, I will not pay for a car for a kid who I have reason to believe is drinking and driving or using drug heavily, nor will I keep him on my insurance. Occasional marijuana use would not be enough. I don't approve, but my kids won't always do what I wish. I am less concerned about spending money on college than I am my personal liability for a kid I can't trust driving. That puts my home and my old age at risk.

Perhaps not selfish. Perhaps it's just honest. I think it's also not selfish for a man to be honest and acknowledge that sex is a fundamental desire for him (if that is the case, and it isn't always). I am not sure how such a situation is can be well resolved. I don't think it's matter of who is right and who is wrong. Certainly there are those who simply can not have sex. Ever again. I know one couple who have apparently have found creative, sexually intimate solutions. I get the idea (without asking details) that this requires more energy than intercouse generally does (and energy is the major impediment to sex, which is why I mention that). There is a flat inability in that case, so no (I hope) resentment. I don't feel qualified to have opinions about what a couple should do when she is 'done' and not interested in pursuing all solutions, and he most decided isn't done. That is between the partners. But I have tremendous sympathy for the suffering of both.

I think it's the other way, really. I think the message promoted is that women, especially older women, don't like sex. But I think we can all agree that there is a great range of "normal." I am an introvert too and absolutely feel no apologies for reading alone. I need a lot of alone. But when I read married Women talking about zero desire, and just flat giving up sex, i do wonder about whether a safe and effective way to Increase pleasure or desire would be a good thing. If my husband told me he had zero desire to talk to me and wanted to stop taking unless for an essential household management reason, I would not be happy. Even if that were in the range of normal, I would feel rejected and unfulfilled. And I consider my needs for taking and emotional intimacy to be low compared to other women. But I need some. If both partners are ok with no talk or no sex, great. If a person isn't in a marriage, great. No reason to work on intimacy (physical or emotional) if neither party cares or if a person is single. But for the rest of us, there is another person to care about. And since most of us are going to care and are going to have sex at least occasionally, one might as well pursue ways to enjoy/desire it more. For young mothers, often desire increases as exhaustion decreases, so getting alone time, help, sleep etc can improved the situation. But if the major factor is biological, and a simple safe product can help, I would try that.

I agree. This is a depressing thread! I suspect I am older that a lot of you, and definitely not all about drinkng tea daily. But there are things in life that are (to me) about pleasure. Food. Wine. Sex. Poetry. Music. Conversation with a best friend, a difficult hike and the luxuriating in just being there ... a dog. Most of these things require energy and I don't do them on command. But if I stop enjoying them at all, I would want to work in 'fixng' that. I assume that pleasure is what you have left as an old person if you are lucky. I hope to at least enjoy my food and music when I am in my dotage, and if I still have a man, I greatly hope to still want him now and then.

Yes. Not rape. Attempted rape. They dropped the rape charge.

WARNING. FRANK DESCRIPTION BELOW (hopefully the young and/or sensitive to this have already gone elsewhere). I am not sure what you mean. In California, as I understand it, rape is based on sexual intercouse. Any penetration, even slight, with his penis would be rape. When I said 'complete the act" I meant any penetration with his penis. No ejaculation necessary. I assume the rape charge was dropped because the defendant was apprehended in the act, tackled and restrained, and there was no evidence his penis was ever involved. There was no physical evidence of penal contact (no semen) and he had his pants all zipped up, and no witnesses saw otherwise (victim can't remember). But he admitted to penetration with his finger, and under California law that is apparently charged as assault via penetration with a foreign object. Attempted rape, but not completed, because he never got the chance to penetrate with his penis.

Not hard at all. If he didn't get to finish what he planned, attempted rape is the correct charge. Had it not been for the men on the bicycles, he may well have raped her. It's the same for murder. People are charged with murder only if the victim is dead. An unsuccessful murder is charged as 'attempted murder.'

I like lobster but have not cooked it in my home. i think about that awesome Annie Hall scene.

Of course. SKL asked about what to tell sons. I responded with what I have told my sons. Maybe it's not realistically what happens, but I think it's good advice. Have sex with people who want to have sex with you, and who are adult enough to acknowledge that by light of day.