DCUM Weblog

Yesterday's most active thread was one that I discussed yesterday, the thread about downward mobility of children due to college choices. That thread was active because it went completely off the rails, and I eventually had to lock it. The next most active thread was titled, "How many men would stay w/o sex" and was posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster refers to the book "Intermezzo" by Sally Rooney. Apparently, the book has a male character who is deeply in love with his college girlfriend. However, several years after college, she has a car accident which creates painful conditions for her and essentially prevents her from having sex. Her boyfriend initially wants to stay together with her, but eventually finds the lack of sex to be a problem and begins a relationship with another woman, maintaining his emotional connection to his college girlfriend. The original poster wants to know how many men would actually stay in such a situation. The problem with this sort of thread is that DCUM is not a laboratory in which a controlled experiment can be conducted. It is full of posters carrying all sorts of baggage who are in no position to speak for "men" generally. Initially, a number of male posters responded to say that if their wives were unable to have sex, they would leave them or cheat. But the conversation was soon caught up with scenarios in which wives were perfectly capable of having sex but simply didn't want to. Many posters suggested that men would leave or cheat in this situation as well. But, as other posters pointed out, the forum is full of men complaining that they are in sexless marriages and have not left or cheated. But what really dominated this thread was a dispute about whether sex is a "need". One problem is that posters define "need" differently. For some, a need is only something that being without will result in death. So, food and water are needs, but sex is not. Au contraire, say other posters. To them, sex is very much a need, regardless of whether or not they can physically go on living without it. The thread highlights the differences between individuals. There are men and women who would not be willing to continue a relationship without sex, and there are members of both sexes that either are doing exactly that now or say that they could do so.

Yesterday's most active thread was, believe it or not, the thread about the ECNL soccer league changing its age brackets. I didn't check to see what provoked this burst of interest so that will remain a mystery. After that was a thread titled, "Hegseth Hearing Live Now" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. This is the first of several threads that I will discuss today from that forum. This thread was started just as the U.S. Senate confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth was getting underway. President-elect, cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump has nominated Hegseth to be the Secretary of Defense. While Hegseth is a veteran, having served in the National Guard, he is best known as a Fox News commentator. He is a controversial choice due to his inexperience but also because of several personal issues. Like Trump, he has a history of cheating on his wives and has fathered children with three different women, in one case out of wedlock. In addition, Hegseth was accused of sexually assaulting a woman and eventually agreed on a monetary settlement with her. On top of all of that, Hegseth is said to have a drinking problem. As such, Hegseth is not exactly a model nominee. Nevertheless, MAGA Republicans are determined to see him confirmed. One Republican Senator, Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, went so far as to suggest that many of his colleagues are drunks and to say that he has committed jail-worthy offenses for which his own wife has forgiven him. It's notable that personal failings that would prevent a normal person from getting a security clearance have practically become badges of honor for MAGA Republicans. As for the thread, posters debated developments in the hearing as they occurred. For the most part, Democrats had their worst fears confirmed. Republican posters, on the other hand, either defended Hegseth or attempted to switch the conversation to Democratic officials whom they believe are also flawed. One policy-related aspect of the hearings that was newsworthy involved Hegseth's view toward women serving in combat. For years, Hegseth has railed against women in combat. But, with his confirmation on the line, Hegseth has had what Senator Elizabeth Warren referred to as a "confirmation conversion". Now Hegseth wants us to believe that he supports women in combat roles. Whether this was a conversion of convenience meant to get him across the voting threshold or an actual change of heart is, I guess, something that remains to be seen.

Yesterday's most active thread was titled, "Why do so many idiots ask to switch seats on planes these days?" and was posted in the "Travel Discussion" forum. The original poster says that he will not change seats so that another traveler can sit together with their spouse or kids. The poster says that he ordered a special meal and if he switched seats, it would create difficulties getting the correct meal to him. The original poster goes on to complain that "morons" don't book seats together in the first place. He concludes, "Just sit in your own damn seat people and shut up." This is a strangly hostile post for such a common and rather mundane interaction. Calling people "idiots" and "morons" seems pretty over the top. As several posters point out, families often end up separated through no fault of their own. Flights get cancelled and, despite booking seats together — and paying extra for them — travelers get rebooked into seats they did not request and which are not together. Sometimes even when passengers are willing to pay more, seats together simply aren't available. The original poster assumes that passengers are intentionally not booking seats together and, therefore, it is their fault that they are separated. But as countless posts explain, that is not always the case. Two different posters described booking three seats together but then having their planes changed to other models. They were offered two seats in an exit row and one elsewhere in the plane. Since kids can't sit in exit rows, their young children (one was four) would be expected to sit far from their parents. But the original poster's reaction to this and other posts was to say, "Boo hoo. It's not my problem as a passenger who may have picked their seat." The issue here is not whose problem it is, but basic civility and kindness. Many posters expressed a willingness to make reasonable accommodations. For instance, an aisle seat for an aisle seat or, even better, a middle seat for an aisle. Other posters describe how they have had other passengers switch with them so that they could sit with their children. But the original poster was not swayed in the least. The original poster's attitude was so unreasonable that I began to suspect the poster was actually trolling. I came across a post in another thread from the same poster that complained that Americans are no longer courteous. The original poster concluded that post by saying "Everyone in the US is all about I got mine and F you these days." This is a perfect description of the original poster himself, though I am not sure he has the self-awareness to recognize that.

The most active thread over the weekend was the one about the Los Angeles fires that I've already discussed. Skipping that one, the next most active thread was titled, "Were Attendance Levels Status Quo Today?" and was posted in the "Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)" forum. The entire text of the first post was "Subnet says it all." The original poster should have done two things: 1) wrote a more explanatory post, and; 2) proofread before posting. She obviously meant "Subject says it all". Almost every day last week, a thread about the Fairfax County Public Schools system being closed due to snow was the most active thread of the day. I finally locked that thread on Friday when the schools reopened, albeit two hours late. That thread had reached 220 pages in length, and posters were clearly not done talking about snow. This thread was started almost immediately after I locked the previous one. On the face of it, this thread is supposed to be about the attendance levels at school on Friday. In reality, it just became a continuation of the thread that I had locked. The point of opening schools two hours late is to allow any morning freezing to begin melting. However, it throws off the schedules of many parents who have to be at their jobs on time, not two hours late. This is especially problematic when parents need to be involved in getting their kids to school, either by taking them there or walking them to the bus stop. Some of these parents believe that schools should have opened at the normal time. Others argue that schools should have closed for another day. As I have said in other posts about school snow days, school systems will be criticized regardless of what decision they make. There is simply no possible way for them to please everyone. Some posters reported that attendance was way down, though it was not clear how they were able to know that. Teachers that posted tended to report that attendance was essentially normal, though at least one said that about half of her students were out. In many ways, this thread simply highlights the reversal of fortunes of the two sides to the snow day debate. Those who favor closing schools had been getting their way throughout the week. Now they weren't. So now they were upset that the shoe was on the other foot. Their attitude towards those who wanted schools to open didn't change, however. Just as in the other thread, the pro-closing posters accused the pro-opening posters of not wanting to parent their kids and preferring to spend their time at the spa or Pilates classes rather than caring for their kids. One poster who was especially upset about the opening claimed that it was disruptive to her job. It is not clear to me how closing schools for the day would have been less disruptive if she, indeed, would have spent her time caring for her kids. There was an interesting discussion about whether sending kids to school when roads and sidewalks might be icy is risky or whether the challenge might actually be healthy for kids who are being too overly protected these days.

Yesterday's most active thread was once again the snow day thread in the "Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)" forum that has led almost every day this week. Yesterday, that thread gained nearly 800 new posts. But cheer up FCPS parents, schools are opening today, albeit two hours late. The next most active thread yesterday was the thread about the Los Angeles fires which I've also discussed already. Therefore, I'll start with yesterday's third most active thread which was titled, "So you let your kids read at the dining table" and posted in the "Elementary School-Aged Kids" forum. I must have missed some sort of backstory to this thread because I am not sure to whom the allegation in the title is addressed. At any rate, in the body of the post, the original poster asks whether those being referenced allow their kids to read during meals. As it turns out, some posters do allow their kids to read during meals. Some posters even have "reading meals" in which everyone brings a book to the table. Some of these posters claim that parents modeling reading helps encourage their kids to read. Other posters allow kids to read during casual meals or when the child is either eating alone or only one or two others. These posters prohibit reading for formal meals and family dinners. Others, of course, don't allow reading at the table under any circumstances. These posters consider such a thing to be rude and, in one case, "the lowest of low class." This thread is mostly characterized by a flame war between those who allow and those who don't allow reading at the table. One of the posters who doesn't allow reading claims that those who allow reading are raising "brats" who are "uncivilized" and lack manners. The pro-reading posters almost all emphasize that they only allow reading books or magazines, no phones or tablets. They counter the accusations that they are raising brats by arguing that it is better than kids playing games on phones. Those against reading at the table, of course, would not allow game playing either. The no-reading crowd sees a lot of value in learning good manners, suggesting that those without good manners will lose opportunities later in life. They also argue that meals should be spent talking with each other rather than being isolated behind a book. Some of the pro-reading posters insist that books can help stimulate conversation and that they talk to their children about what they are reading. Some of these posters also offer an alternative view of manners. Rather than viewing manners as one set of rules that is followed everywhere, they argue that different manners are appropriate for different situations. They say that their kids know that it is acceptable to read during a casual meal at their own home, but also know that reading would not be appropriate when eating at someone else's home.

Once again, the thread about school snow days that I discussed on Monday was the most active thread yesterday. Skipping that one doesn't really change things much because the next most active thread was also about a school snow day. Just as the first thread I discussed yesterday was about the potential for Montgomery County Public Schools to have a delayed opening yesterday, today's thread is about the same school system possibly having a delayed opening today. Titled, "MCPS delayed Thursday?" and, of course, posted in "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)", this is a 37-page thread that is basically a more intense version of the earlier thread. MCPS was closed yesterday, and posters immediately turned their attention to what would happen today. Up bright and early, the original poster started this thread yesterday at 7:17 a.m., predicting that schools would have a delayed opening today. As in all the other snow day discussions, this one is roughly divided between posters who think schools should open and open on time and those who are happy to keep them closed. In the middle are those who see a delayed opening as a sort of compromise. In the view of the "open schools" crowd, only the gross incompetence of MCPS administrators who are acting at the behest of lazy teachers are keeping kids home. They argue that plenty of time has passed, both school parking lots and county streets are clear of snow, and kids should get back to school. On the other hand are posters who say that their streets are still not clear, that freezing temperatures create a likelihood of icy streets in the morning, and, despite the anecdotal reports, nobody can be sure that all 211 schools and offices have been cleared of snow. There is a debate about virtual school, which some posters believe should have been implemented this week. For many posters, "virtual school" is a phrase that they hope to never hear again, and they react very disdainfully to that suggestion. Those who are content to have schools remain closed accused those who want schools to open of being bad parents who don't want to spend time parenting their children. Those supporting reopening argue that they have jobs to which they must attend. One poster actually claimed that the only real solution was to return to a time when one parent stayed at home so that a parent would be available to cover childcare on snow days. That seems a bit extreme to me. At any rate, these arguments went on for 35 pages. At that point, a poster copy-and-pasted an update from MCPS saying that schools would open two hours late. One poster's immediate reaction was to claim that there would be lots of bitter teachers. It was not clear to me that teachers actually wanted schools to stay closed. Rather, this seemed like nothing more than a gratuitous swipe. Moreover, I always marvel at the contradictory expressions of contempt for teachers while simultaneously wanting them to care for children for several hours a day. If teachers were really as bad as some posters would have it, I would think that they wouldn't want their kids anywhere near a teacher. They should support every day being a snow day.

Threads about school snow days have been among the most active for the past two days. As they say, three is a charm. So, lucky us, today another snow day thread is the first to be discussed. The most active thread yesterday was actually the same thread that was the most active on Monday and the first one that I discussed yesterday. The second most active was another thread that I previously discussed, the one about Blake Lively. Skipping those means that the first thread for today was titled "MCPS delayed Wednesday?" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. This thread was started by a teacher who lives in Frederick County, Maryland, but who teaches in the Montgomery County Public Schools system. She says that the roads where she lives have all been cleared, but she wants to know how things are in Montgomery County and whether there is likely to be a delayed opening today. This post immediately highlighted an anomaly with this storm. The storm band was fairly narrow and didn't reach very far north. Whereas it is normally the northern sections of Montgomery County that get hit the hardest by snowstorms and are the long pole in the tent, so to speak, for getting the system back up and running, this time it is the central and southern parts of the county. While posters in northern Montgomery County and, like the original poster,  further north have cleared streets, many posters in Bethesda and downtown Silver Spring have yet to see a plow. Generally speaking, once a parent's own street is clear, they are ready for their kids to go back to school and they have little concern for those who are still snowed in. As a result, there is an immediate division between those whose streets have been plowed and those whose streets haven't. Moreover, there are disagreements about how much hardship should be endured in order to get kids to school. Some posters expect fully cleared sidewalks and streets free of any hint of snow or ice. Others complain about the current generation of "soft" kids who are unable to handle a little snow. These posters typically hail from upstate New York and proverbially walked 8 miles to school in 12 feet of snow. Up hill both ways, of course, and at a time before snow plows had even been invented. To those posters’ chagrin, fairly early in the afternoon, MCPS announced that schools would be closed today. Then the blame game began. Teachers were blamed for being lazy and preferring to sit home drinking hot chocolate instead of teaching, despite the fact that they had no say in the decision. MCPS was blamed for not clearing parking lots and school sidewalks, although posters reported that they were, in fact, clear. Montgomery County was blamed for not clearing roads quickly enough. Some posters, likely more accurately, simply blamed the storm which had dumped enough snow that it was taking a while to clear. Then the discussion turned to what this would mean for the school calendar. The closures meant that the planned snow day allotment had been used up and that something would need to change to make up for another day. Basically, posters preferred any solution that didn't impact their own interests. Often, those posters were in favor of taking away a professional day or a holiday that they personally don't celebrate. Teachers, on the other hand, want their professional day, which they use for grading. They generally prefer extending the school year by a day.

One of the most active threads that I discussed yesterday was about schools closing due to snow. That thread was in the Fairfax County Public Schools forum. But the Montgomery County Public Schools forum is no slouch when it comes to snow days either. The FCPS thread led the most active list of yesterday's threads, so I'll skip it and go to the second most active which was titled, "MCPS closing/delaying on Monday?" and, of course, posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. This thread was started a week ago in response to predictions of snow and it reached almost 20 pages before there was a single snowflake. Posters added almost another 20 pages yesterday. From what I've read in this thread, which admittedly is not a lot, the discussion is similar to that in the FCPS thread and, for that matter, every other snow day thread we've ever had. Some posters don't want schools to be closed under any circumstances. The most common reason for this position is their lack of childcare. This is particularly frustrating to them if they don't get a snow day from work themselves. Ironically, work-from-home policies that are normally very convenient can be a hindrance in these circumstances. No amount of snow can really justify a snow day when you are working from home. But regardless of the reason why parents must work, school closings frequently cause childcare issues for them. On the other hand are the parents who want schools to close at the slightest potential for the smallest amount of snow. The creativity with which they come up with justifications for closing is something to behold. One thing I noticed is that the anti-snow day posters tend to be pretty clear that they are upset because they personally are being inconvenienced. The pro-closing crowd is much more likely to argue that they are looking out for others. It's not that they personally have a need or interest in schools being closed, but rather they are concerned about bus drivers, school groundskeepers, kids with special needs who might miss important services, and perhaps to a lesser extent, teachers. A few of the pro-closing group, however, see a snow day as an opportunity for fun with their children and are very happy to have the day off. But even some of these parents start to have a different attitude when the prospect of a single snow day turns into the reality of multiple days. This resulted in calls for virtual school, which reignited many of the arguments of COVID closings. One topic of discussion that was unique to this thread was a video celebrating the snow day produced by MCPS Superintendent Thomas Taylor. Many posters were critical of the video, arguing that Taylor should be spending his time doing more to get schools reopened instead of making silly videos. Other posters applauded the video and argued that making it would not have taken much time or effort.

The most active thread over the weekend was one that was only started yesterday but managed to reach 34 pages in that short time. Titled, "Golden Globe Awards 2025" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum, the thread is, of course, about last night's Golden Globe Awards show. This is one of those topics about which I know very little and care even less. As posters started making predictions about movies, I realized that I hadn't even heard of most of them and have not seen any of them. I did note that the first poster declared that the gathering would be one of the largest of "known rapists and pedophiles in America". So, right up there with the Republican National Convention and maybe even rivaling one of President-elect, cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump's future cabinet meetings. In contrast, another poster predicted that "Wicked" would win because the movie "highlighted diversity, minority, and women as main characters." Apparently, the Globe judges are the wokest group of rapists and pedophiles ever. As for the thread, I didn't really need any TV or movie knowledge because the posts were dominated by photos of the attendees. This is really more of a fashion thread than anything else. Based on the comments I read, none of the DCUM posters liked what anyone was wearing. I suppose someone may have won an award for something, but you really wouldn't know it from this thread. Instead, it is photo after photo, often with repeats. Zendaya seemed to be a thread favorite as she appeared over and over again in different poses and even different outfits. I don't really have much to say because there is not much to summarize other than there were a lot of pictures. As for my own opinions about the awards, the only strong one I have is that "The Bear" should have won an award for gratuitous yelling. After watching that show, I instinctively yell “YES, CHEF" at the top of my lungs whenever someone talks to me while I am in the kitchen. I really have no opinions on the night's fashion. That's even further outside my area of expertise than movies and television. There was some discussion of the hosts, but since I didn't watch the show, I didn't know to what the posters were referring. However, based on the feedback in the thread, Ricky Gervais was a bit too hostile, and Nikki Glaser exceeded expectations.

The two most active threads yesterday were ones that I've already discussed — the New Orleans attack thread and the Blake Lively thread — so I will start with the third most active. That thread was titled, "Civilizing details that you missed during childhood- share here" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. The original poster says that she grew up not learning the "basics" of what I guess we might call proper behavior, though that is probably not the best way to describe it. For instance, she didn't start using washcloths when showering until she learned about them from roommates later in life. Similarly, she didn't know to wash her hands before preparing food until she worked in a restaurant in high school. Her husband grew up not using napkins when eating and washed all his clothes in a single load regardless of the color. He also didn't use mattress pads or pillow covers. Quite a few of those responding say that they don't use washcloths, so that may not be as much of an indication of being civilized as the original poster perceives. In fact, washcloth usage sort of dominated the thread, which it could be argued is actually a thread about washcloths. Disagreement on what is actually appropriate occurs throughout the thread. Another example is offering to pay the tip when a wealthier person offers to pay for dinner. The opinions about this range from it being almost required to it being merely polite to not at all necessary. A disconcerting number of posters were not taught to wash their hands after using the bathroom. I am pretty sure that the original poster meant this thread to be somewhat self-critical in that the posters are meant to reveal things that they now understand to have been shortcomings. That, however, didn't stop posters from being judgmental and piling on posters for their revelations. Some posters had strong differences of opinion regarding the propriety of overhead lights. Some posters were taught that overhead lights are low class and that they should not use them. Lamps only for them. Other posters were taught the exact opposite and consider lamps to be "trashy." Another poster objected to the use of the term "trashy", apparently feeling that not being taught to avoid the term was one more civilizing lesson that had been missed. This is a 12-page thread and I only skimmed it, but it looks like another topic that was subject to much dispute was bathroom usage. Apparently, the arguments about this had less to do with missed lessons and more to do with different cultural norms in various parts of the world. If I understand correctly, the origin of this disagreement was an attempt to prove to one particular poster that even the best upbringing could not possibly prepare her for what is or is not considered appropriate in every situation. It might have been better for these posters to stick to discussing washcloths.