Anonymous wrote:Make sure it's an adjustable burr grinder. Blade grinders are cheap.

Mine's a Breville BCG800XL

Mine, too: http://www.breville.ca/the-smart-grinder-protm.html

It's glorious, and not really that loud at all.

My god, what have we done?!

If clothes do it for you, and you're into that, go for it. If not, just put some clothes on and get on with your day. Unless you're gonna take a betch shopping, STFU about what she's wearing. Her body, her choice.

A woman's greatest threat is clearly the bs judgments of other women. This is pathetic!

Anonymous wrote:Mostly it's fear that this will happen to them. Or denial that it *is* happening to them.

Exactly. There's a name for it, this tendency to blame those going through difficult circumstances as a means of psychologically distancing ourselves from the possibility of that being our reality too someday, but I can't remember it and my google fu is weak.

The "I never liked him anyway" stuff, while hamfisted, is probably a show of support. It's still toxic, and you should ask them to quit it, but it's probably coming from people who are trying to be kind, in their awkward way. They love you, and only want good things for you, so clearly it's his fault that this "bad thing" has happened.

And yeah- marriage is supposed to be The Thing. The thing of your life, forever and ever, amen. It really freaks people out when you acknowledge that the reality of marriage is that it doesn't always work for everyone, even when there's no obvious dealbreaker. You'll hear from the "be a martyr" types (seems they've already found your thread), and the "clearly it was all a sham anyway" types, but it's not about them so who cares what they think. Don't even bother trying to point out how we got marriage as a social construct in the first place, or how tremendous it is that women now can choose to divorce without it crippling them for life (at least, under good circumstances; not all women are this fortunate). Just do what you have to do to find peace, and follow Wheaton's Law as much as you can in the process.

Anonymous wrote:

ThatBetch wrote:I'm with the PP(s?) who said you sound jealous. She's been through a lot, she's worked hard to reclaim her body, and she's enjoying the results. Her life is all about her right now, and that's probably healthier than you seem to think. I'm sure you've been "obsessed" for a time with something important to you, or something that made you feel good, right? Maybe a bit myopic about Thing You Were Into? This sounds pretty human to me.

I think it's fair to call your friend out for scheduling a date with some new guy *while she was out with you*, because that's messed up. You're well within your rights to tell her that you'd prefer she be present with you when you're with her.

I think the rest of your judgments are inappropriate. You should keep that to yourself, and possibly spend some time considering what the roots of your frustrations really are (which is the proper application of that "self-awareness" bit you mentioned).

OP here. If being totally fixated on yourself and no one else is considered healthy, I don't want to be it. I find self-absorption one of the most off-putting traits there is. It has nothing to do with jealousy. I have always found this trait hideous in people. It is possible to be beautiful and not obsessed with your appearance and everyone after you. I have many gorgeous friends that are not totally self-absorbed. They may take time to look good but they have other interests and conversations beyond themselves. If taking constant selfies, looking at your reflection in every window/mirror you pass by, primping for hours, talking about yourself and all the men after you, texting men and sending selfies every couple minutes while you're out to eat with others, and not being able to engage in much conversation other than yourself is normal to you, than you may be a shallow person as well.

You seem really cranked up about a person whose behavior has nothing to do with you, and very little bearing on your life at all. Again, you may want to explore why that is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read that yesterday! Holy crap it's crazy! Who would do that!? She's so lucky she is white.

Fixed.

Dammit man! That is so true.

Yes, they're so lucky they got to serve jail time. What luck.

Beats getting shot!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 50 year old sister is like this. Talking about everything she eats, liposuction, her nose. I told her she changed and I don't like it.

I'm a lot like your sister. I talk about my faults because I feel guilty that I have faults. I let everyone around me including strangers know that I am working on my faults. For example I currently have a zit in my eyebrow, I have told countless people that I am sorry I have this awful zit here, I popped it and I have been putting something on it a few times a day. I tell people because I find my zit offensive, I don't want others even strangers to think I'm trying to offend them with my zit. I own my flaws and I work on them. Having someone see my flaws like my zit or that I'm 20 pounds over weight makes me feel awful. No one should have to look at or be around someone who isn't pleasing to them visually.

You need therapy. Seriously. This is not normal. No one wants to hear about your zit. You are making things much worse by talking about them. And you need some serious help with your self-esteem. Please get help.

Psst... Obvious troll is obvious.

Anonymous wrote:

ThatBetch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am with Larla's mom on this one, OP, and think you are probably a bit of a twat. I mean, look at the use of the word "snowflake" in your subject line. Who talks about children that way?

Are you in North Arlington, by any chance? Sounds like it.

Assume I did that intentionally, with a goal of ruffling feathers. Specifically yours.

And no, I'm not.

See, that's a character defect. You're damaged.

Thank you, Dr. DCUM.

I see the snark was lost on you. You, like the PP I was responding to, must be new here.

I'm with the PP(s?) who said you sound jealous. She's been through a lot, she's worked hard to reclaim her body, and she's enjoying the results. Her life is all about her right now, and that's probably healthier than you seem to think. I'm sure you've been "obsessed" for a time with something important to you, or something that made you feel good, right? Maybe a bit myopic about Thing You Were Into? This sounds pretty human to me.

I think it's fair to call your friend out for scheduling a date with some new guy *while she was out with you*, because that's messed up. You're well within your rights to tell her that you'd prefer she be present with you when you're with her.

I think the rest of your judgments are inappropriate. You should keep that to yourself, and possibly spend some time considering what the roots of your frustrations really are (which is the proper application of that "self-awareness" bit you mentioned).

Anonymous wrote:Read the q only. Not all kids are the same. But it is best if the child just goes to the nurses office for the cheerios or whatever. My child is 12 and we still dont have any 'official' diagnosis about his blood sugar, but they/dr absolutely believe us when we say he'll go down/crash/faint if it happens. So, we never asked to have the class changed, and that is obviously a worried parent you describe. But no, anybody who thinks my kid is the same as theirs is wrong. Especially if they havent carried out a kid in their arms, Which isnt as easy to do once their over 100 pounds. Face it, parents who know their kids would rather the kid have a preemptive snack than either passing out, or worse, having an emotional melt down and then being labeled a problem. For my kid, he can go 2 to 3 hrs, not 4.

That sounds terrifying. I'm so sorry you haven't even been able to find an explanation for it yet, either. I hope that changes for your son and your family, and you find some answers, and ideally some easy solutions.

I don't think all kids are the same, no. I agree with you that kids with special circumstances should have special accommodations rather than expecting the whole class to shift. The point should be to minimize distraction and problems, not draw attention to them, or perhaps make a problem (like a sugar rush/crash, or messes, or jealousy/shame issues, or snack fights...) where none actually existed previously.

Again, I hope you can find some answers. Sounds like you've got a workable strategy in place already, and I hope you continue to have support for same, but I can imagine it's incredibly stressful to not have a name for what you're up against.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know everyone hates the silent treatment but for me sometimes I really need to not talk about whatever it is for awhile until I calm down and organize my thoughts. Otherwise I could say things I don't mean in anger

I don't think that's what OP's talking about. It's one thing to say, "Look, I need to cool down and give this some thought". It's another thing entirely to just cut someone off without them maybe even knowing why!

Not OP, but +1 to this. Taking a break is one thing, and best if you can say when you'll be back to reopen the discussion. Flouncing off in a snit is another.

Contrary to what a different PP said, I think this is less an example of "person w/o power" and more a power play. It's childish at best, and can be considered abusive if habitual (see also: stonewalling).

You either want to talk or you don't. I think either's probably fine, if you own it. It's when you actually want/need to talk and resolve the issue, but can't express yourself well enough to make your point clear, so you get flustered and quit w/o warning/explanation that it becomes a losing strategy. Or when you don't really care enough to be having the conversation in the first place, but lead someone on so you seem "nice" or "polite" and then quit before the conversation is resolved.

As for how long I can tolerate this, well, I was married to someone like this for a decade! But now that we're separated, I'd put this in the definite dealbreaker category, for reasons I just stated. This behavior tells me that the person I'm talking with isn't really interested in, or perhaps capable of, civil conversation. Being able to converse, even about tough things (or especially about tough things!), is a critical component of a healthy relationship. If the silent treatment is a common theme with your partner, I wouldn't waste much time tolerating it. People here suggest counseling, but I didn't find that helped my situation at all (as he'd just stonewall the counselors, too).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boy, OP, I think you sound pretty hangry yourself. Or like your just a shit stirrer and really proud of it. I'm sorry that's your life. Be well.

Seriously. And given you sign in (and the id you've chosen) I am going with the latter.

The ID is merely an acknowledgement that I'm frequently outside the status quo, and usually judged harshly for same. I think I'm allergic to fake "nice" posturing, and it shows. I sign in because I'm okay with owning my words here (and in general). If you're going to think I'm a betch anyway, and you probably would because I'd say to your face the kind of things you'd say about people here behind cover of anonymity, might as well run with it, right? I'm not at all sorry for my life. In fact, I think the world could use a few more women like me.

I do find how much people care, um, let's go with "interesting". Look at how many posts on this thread are about me for posting it. Who GAS what That Betch thinks?! Yet the same people who fault me (and other OPs; this isn't unique) for posting just can't help but post something themselves. You (and all the other "who cares" posters) cared enough to comment. That's fascinating to me, truly. It's one of the things I like most about this site.

So thank you for caring, I guess. I don't feel especially hangry, but if you happen to have any Ring Dings, I'll take one.

Anonymous wrote:Boy, OP, I think you sound pretty hangry yourself. Or like your just a shit stirrer and really proud of it. I'm sorry that's your life. Be well.

I think you have me confused with plastic knife guy.

Anonymous wrote:

ThatBetch wrote:Assume a 4.5 hour gap between the meal and the end of school (it's less, but for argument's sake...).

Let's say the kids are somewhere around 8.

In that scenario I'd be pro-snack. Everyone flags a bit in the afternoon anyway, and being hungry on top of that just seems to stack the deck against them. Will they die of starvation? No. But if a snack revives their energy and gets them across the finish line, why not?

OP, is the problem that you find this mom annoying generally?

I find people in general annoying. These particular people are constantly, erm, "looking for things to improve" is probably a polite way to word it. I have to be "nice" now, lest people here think my sense of snark represents actual angst. Truth be told, I give no actual fscks. My kid won't suffer if class gets interrupted for snack time, nor will my snowflake (which is a no-no word, or so I'm told by someone who thinks "twat" is fair play ) face undue hardship if they're forced to wait until after school to eat more. There are some privilege issues that irritate me, esp. as we're at a high-FARMS school, so "just have everyone bring an organic cheese stick (and a way to keep it cold) and some organic fruit!" is a bit rich. And the "kids do better if they're not hungry" folks, at least those on the listserv, would be horrified if I sent my kid with some Skittles or a Ring Ding (yes!!!) for a quick carbohydrate boost. There are some "Jaysus, don't we already ask enough of our teachers?!" issues, too. Were I to give enough of a damn to post directly, that would be my main point. But ultimately, teachers are adults who can speak for themselves and I don't really care enough either way to get involved. I just thought DCUM might, and you didn't disappoint!

Personally, I've sent my kid with a snack for after school if it's been one of those days or a growth spurt or they've been especially "hangry" of late. But I would never tell my kid to ask to interrupt or leave class to go eat. I definitely wouldn't rally the troops on a school-wide listserv about it.

It's not at all a "we must be rail thin" thing, at least, not from me. More an opportunity to understand that life gets uncomfortable sometimes, and this is an easy way to start teaching kids how to handle that concept w/o actual risk. I recognize I'm in the minority when it comes to seeing that as a valuable lesson; I know plenty of adults who can't handle being uncomfortable!

If you're unmanageably hangry if you don't eat every 4 hours, maybe you should get that checked. I mean, do you wake your kids for night feeds, too?

Don't know, don't care. Then again, if I'm posting about it here I've either said it to your face already, or would (if I decided I cared enough), and you already know how That Betch feels about you.

Anonymous wrote:Give all the kids a bag of peanuts. Survival of the fittest.