This thread made me decide to go looking. Redeemer Presbyterian Church has one.

I put reminders on my google calendar - appointments, things I need to do. Reminders will keep showing up till it's marked as done. For a while I used Todoist. That's also free, and easy to work with. It was more helpful to me when I had more homeschool stuff to keep track of. Lots of people like the paper bullet journal. I did that for a while too. But I found having it on my phone worked better for me.

Yes this. There seems to be so much anger about this. The fact that a hapless (and anonymous) store clerk may be misusing the word doesn't take anything away from people who are truly suffering from PTSD.

The only thing that couldn't apply to males here is cleavage, and that's simply because they don't have any. If boys are also not allowed to wear shorts that are too short (some of you might remember the short, tight shorts guys wore in the '80s, ugh), have their belly exposed, etc. then it's equal. Just because guys don't tend to wear stuff like that doesn't mean it's unequal. Covered shoulders? Does that mean no strapless tops? Gah, I'd ban those in school because they are such a distraction to the wearer. I don't think I've ever seen anyone wearing a strapless top who wasn't always fiddling with it to keep it up. Bride dresses are an exception. I guess those are so constructed they aren't going to be falling down. :-) I think something like "no skin-tight trousers" would cover leggings and skinny jeans. But even the skinniest jeans I've seen are not as revealing as most leggings.

Asphalt is softer, more giving than concrete. Not much, but enough that some people prefer to run or walk on it rather than the concrete sidewalks. I see it all the time in my neighborhood, but it is quiet so walking in the street isn't particularly dangerous. http://www.runnersworld.com/running-tips/should-i-run-on-asphalt-or-concrete ETA: Whoops, MEMama already said it.

You just made my day! I am going to get some of this today. My son has struggled mightily with acne for years. It seems to come and go. One summer, when he was at a camp for a week and swam in a chlorinated pool daily, he came home with beautifully clear skin. But the acne came back after a few weeks. We have no pool available for daily swimming. :-) He used all the "big gun" remedies and everything seemed to work for a while, then stop. Adapalene, and later, Epiduo did help, at least for a while. He was on isotretinoan (accutane) for a long time. That cleared it up well too. But then it came back. Then, his dermatologist invited him to be part of a study. For that, he had to use no medications for some period of time beforehand. His skin cleared up when he was just cleaning with a gentle cleanser. All through the study he was clear. But a few months after it ended... acne started coming back. I'm hopeful that the OTC adapalene will help, at least for a while.

If the target demographic is British women, why use an American narrator - Maya Angelou? (rhetorical question) That just seems odd to me. I dunno. Different things are motivating to different people. I never liked any form of exercise even as a kid. Well, I always liked to hike and explore. But if that wasn't available (which it usually wasn't) I wanted to stay home and read. Now I exercise because I know I have to. Hiking is not an option most of the time but I do walk daily and get out to the woods when I can. Anyway, I can see how it might be motivating to some but did nothing for me personally. Like Sparkly, I can't do most group exercises. I am clumsy and out of step. But those types of classes are too expensive for me anyway.

:grouphug: :grouphug:

I suspect that if you and I were talking this over in person, instead of back-and-forth online, we would find we are in agreement more than in disagreement. I am nodding a lot as I read your posts. The thing is - what bothers me is - that in my experience so many women put up with crap simply for the sake of having a boyfriend. I saw it so many times over the years in my work environment and still do though to a lesser extent. For whatever reason, women will start to date a guy, and know right away that he's not good, but will continue to date him, have sex and sometimes babies with him, perhaps thinking she can change him, perhaps just feeling that he is better than nothing. I was single for a long time, 12 years between my divorce from an early stupid marriage (see, I was not immune) and the time I met my 2nd (current, permanent) husband. I worked with a lot of women. If there was one thing I could have imparted to some of them, it would be: There are worse things than being alone. So many of them even knew they should have dumped the guy right off, but they did not. Instead they became more immersed and more dependent. And that is what I mean about rewarding men for bad behavior. If a guy can be a jerk, but the girl will still come running every time he calls... she's rewarded him. And I can't help but think, what if women just stopped letting guys get away with it? If by two weeks or months or whatever into the relationship, just dump him. If guys got dumped enough, some of them might change. So, I think in that regard women have more power over men than they sometimes realize. And again, I'm not talking about the woman who marries or gets into a long-term relationship with a man, has kids, etc., and it goes bad. I'm talking about recognizing that the guy is bad right from the start, but hanging in there with him.

This is quite true. But that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that women can decide to stop associating with men who treat them badly early on in the relationship, such as the coworker I described upthread. Note: I am NOT talking about battered women in long-term relationships with kids, etc. I am talking about women who are dating guys and who could just stop dating them. People respond to incentives and rewards. Guys who are inclined to mistreat women they date are rewarded when their bad behavior doesn't result in the woman leaving them. I'll repeat: I am talking about the early stages of a relationship, when people are dating and getting to know each other, and the woman perceives that the man isn't treating her well but she persists in dating him. Perhaps because she believes she can change him. I'm not talking about long-term relationships where the man becomes abusive, the woman is trapped in a marriage, with kids, etc.

You've never known any irresponsible, jerky guys who always had plenty of women doting on them, making excuses for them, always being available to them? Never known any women who enable their boyfriend's bad habits, make excuses for their bad behavior, and go running when the guy calls? I'm thinking now of my old coworker Kathy, who had a boyfriend who would call her from jail every few weeks. She'd bail him out; he'd be nice for a while, then he'd cheat on her, or otherwise mistreat her... she always made excuses and would go back to him when he wanted her. She was a professional woman, able to support herself - she didn't need him. But she wanted him - except when she didn't, because he treated her badly. There have been others but I'll spare you the anecdotes. If those guys had been refused the company of women because of their bad behavior, they might have straightened up. Seriously, you've never come across that? You think it's impossible? Or is it just not OK to say that some women are, in some part, to blame for bad behavior in men because they tolerate it?

Men continue to be irresponsible because women will still have sex with them. I've known so many women - not so much now, but when I was younger - who always went for the "bad boys" and ignored the good guys. There is one young woman I know, supposedly desperate to marry, who keeps rejecting stand-up guys because they're too boring. So she keeps going out with jerks who keep breaking her heart.

This is a zombie thread. I think the birthday has already passed. :-)

OK, I've read all the thread comments about the pedophile stuff. Can someone tell me why this woman should be financially and emotionally rewarded? Because when "we" (general we) watch her tv show, or buy the magazine with her on the cover, or whatever else... we are rewarding her. She sounds like she is either mentally ill or plain evil. Worthy of help and forgiveness*, surely. But fame, fortune, and adulation? I just don't get it. Sorry if I sound like I'm being nasty. I don't mean to be. I just... don't get it. ETA: *forgiveness if she has given up the pedophile boys, asked forgiveness of her children, etc, etc.

I clean our church each week after services. :-) I have found: Crumbs, lots of crumbs. Raisins. Peanuts, sometimes mixed with raisins. (So, trail mix?) Gummies. Gum wrappers. Lollipop sticks. My suggestion is: whatever it takes. :-) Most things vacuum up easily. Raisins and gummies, stepped on, not so much.

Now that is a very good idea, and one that I had not thought of. Day trips with visits to hostels on their itinerary. I think that could work out quite well. Thanks!

This is true. But also people don't have to take the billboard seriously, or they can just go "pfffft" at it as they drive by. Just like any other billboard that doesn't apply to them. I don't get why people are so outraged over a billboard. It's not obscene; it's not racist; it's not suggesting anything illegal or immoral. It's just espousing a philosophy that some people don't agree with. Maybe. No one really knows what the owners are trying to say anyway, much as we'd like to think our interpretations are correct. Sometimes I pass hand-made billboards taking Bible verses out of context. As a Christian, I find them sad but also sometimes kind of funny, in their wrongness. I still can't get worked up about it.

Yes. I was unclear (trying to be brief). It is something we had originally talked about as a day trip (long day but doable from Phila.) I started thinking about hostels and wanted to do a little pre-research on my own before putting the idea out there. Because if it turned out I was completely uncomfortable with the idea, I wasn't going to bring it up. (If they came up with it on their own, that would be different, because they are legally adults.) Of course if they would prefer not to spend the night, that'd be fine too. The older is hesitant in new situations, social skills are not great, and the processing speed and other LDs are a bit concerning. That's the boy. The girl might be inclined toward a bit reckless at times, but he would keep her from doing anything too crazy. But I don't want to suggest a situation that may be better suited to people over 21, people who are more savvy with regard to city life, etc. (We don't live in Philadelphia, but in the suburbs.) They have gone to the city on the train several times.

Yes, I saw some reviews on google and on tripadvisor. Am hoping for more personal review from people I "know" - as well as I "know" any of you! :-) kwim?

I'm talking about being in a train station and having to find the number of the train, and the track it's on, and getting to the right place at the right time. :-)

Honestly, no. I am happy for anyone who achieves a great weight loss. I don't like to see people becoming rich and famous for nothing, though. Some months ago I saw something - don't remember where so have no cite - that said "reality tv star" is a career path a lot of young teens are aspiring to. There's something icky about that to me.

Is it bad form to bump your own post? 'Cause this fell to the second (third?) page quickly and I have a hard time believing no one has anything to say. Of course I could be wrong. :-)

Vitacost.

Hmm... the best I can come up with is 'be teachable' and 'ask the locals.' So many people I come across are so black and white. X is the only way to do Y. I see that more here in Pennsylvania than I did on the west coast. Be open to new things. But accept that there may be no right or wrong way, just preferences. Someone mentioned comet for cleaning the tub. My mom would not use that. She said it scratched. She used Bon Ami. In my experience, both get the tub clean. I live in an area where there are no moose or any other large wildlife. Or weasels. So I don't need to know these things. But if I ever moved to a place that has them... I'd be sure to ask locals for advice. Oh, and RTFM. Read the ... manual. Buy a car? Read the manual. It's a used car and the manual is not there? Look it up online. I am still shaking my head over the notion that people buys cars and don't know that the oil must be changed (whether by the owner or a professional).

For a while now I've wanted to put my kids on the train to WA DC for the day. It's been a while since we all went to DC and I'd like them to experience/practice using public transportation. Lately I've added in the idea of having them stay overnight in a youth hostel. I've had limited experience with hosteling. (Like, one in the US at a national park, and one in Europe while on a group walking tour, both as an adult.) I've looked around online a bit and see there are hostels in cities in the US. The impression I've gotten so far (with limited research) is that they are not really all that cheap compared to hotels, considering you're sharing room and bath with strangers. But maybe cheap for the areas they are in. Anyway, has anyone got any experience, wisdom, knowledge to share with me? Safety, cleanliness, bedbugs are all concerns I have. My kids as a pair are well-suited to this sort of adventure. My older is cautious and always aware of his surroundings. But he is the one with slow processing speed and gets overwhelmed looking at things like train schedules - particularly if it has to be done quickly - and would have a hard time figuring out which train to take and when. My younger is adventurous, quick, and would be able to figure all that stuff out easily. They also get along well, and even better when parents aren't around. They are both legal adults so parental permission for anything wouldn't be an issue. Stories, experiences, cautions, recommendations?