She's a terrible writer.

Did she do some chats with Tucker Carlson?

I tv k she also had a supergirl image on her articles. It always made me chuckle.

I think she’s fine.

I have been a long-time reader, though if I'm honest, really dislike her. The whole chat group feels sychophantic - do that many people really beg for terrible pictures of her dog every single week??

Her complete and utter dismissal of anyone who dared to vote for Donald Trump also really irked me - the lack of ability to see the gray amidst the black and white (and frankly, judgment of more than half of the population) seems like a pretty poor showing for an advice columnist.

Anonymous wrote:

DCUM is a wire monkey mother compared to those kind of communities.

Love this. I've said this before, but I've found DCUM to be an unusually hostile corner of the internet. Every Internet forum has its fair share of jerks, but for some reason there is a strong contingent here that is so intentionally mean. It doesn't bother me, obviously, because I don't really care about randos on the internet, but it does make me wonder if DC is a particularly nasty place to live.

I’m a fan, but I do think it’s unprofessional to be late to your own chat. Maybe have a contingency plan, like some canned topics the producer can put out there in case of an emergency.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also hate the people who post things like “I had meatloaf for dinner last night. Divine!” Just text your peeps! No one else cares!!!!

PP. In my observation, this kind of stuff happens when there is a community with usernames where people are aware of each other and actually enjoy other's company.

RIP Wall Street Journal late 2000s online "Juggle" blog about work-life balance. I was a lurker but I think some actual friendships were formed there. They used to talk about meals there, too.

DCUM is a wire monkey mother compared to those kind of communities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Harlow

Wow. Perfect.

Sobering, lol!!

still, that’s what I come to DCUM for - excellent snark. that was not snark 101.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also hate the people who post things like “I had meatloaf for dinner last night. Divine!” Just text your peeps! No one else cares!!!!

PP. In my observation, this kind of stuff happens when there is a community with usernames where people are aware of each other and actually enjoy other's company.

RIP Wall Street Journal late 2000s online "Juggle" blog about work-life balance. I was a lurker but I think some actual friendships were formed there. They used to talk about meals there, too.

DCUM is a wire monkey mother compared to those kind of communities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Harlow

Wow. Perfect.

Anonymous wrote:I also hate the people who post things like “I had meatloaf for dinner last night. Divine!” Just text your peeps! No one else cares!!!!

PP. In my observation, this kind of stuff happens when there is a community with usernames where people are aware of each other and actually enjoy other's company.

RIP Wall Street Journal late 2000s online "Juggle" blog about work-life balance. I was a lurker but I think some actual friendships were formed there. They used to talk about meals there, too.

DCUM is a wire monkey mother compared to those kind of communities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Harlow

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t she cheat on her first husband?

They were separated and she was living back home many states away. She shared these details in a column. She ended up with a childhood friend as Husband 2.

Husband 1 is her illustrator to this day and close to her children like an honorary uncle.

The tiny Caroline caricatures he draws all the time (slim ponytailed white girl) are called Chaxies.

Many facts have been published in official interviews and columns.

Although Chump Lady dislikes C. Hax's advice on cheating, I feel that Husband 1 continuing to work with C. Hax is a pretty good endorsement that things resolved themselves in a manner appropriate to the impacted couple without acrimony. Which is only relevant because she is an advice columnist.

I have been reading her work for a long time. It's kind of like People magazine to me. Occasionally fun or thought-provoking, but I have no emotional investment in it.

My WaPo fan allegiance is to Alexandra Petri. Loved her Harris endorsement and a post-election column about Sisyphus.

I did not cancel my subscription. I don't like Bezos but I do like Amazon Prime and I'm grateful he saved the WaPo. I want traditional journalism to continue as best it can.

For the people who don't like Hax, don't like her responses, don't like her morals...
No one is forcing you to read her column. You can go do something else. And you don't have to tell us that you are going, or why.

I love her and think her advice really cuts through to the heart of the matter. She's straightforward and I feel like you don't get bull from her. If I'd been reading her when dating my now husband, I honestly think advice like hers would have pushed me to see that I didn't need to get married at the time and should have taken the time to be on my own first.

She always spends way more than an hour on the chats.

Anonymous wrote:I think you're being a little silly. I'm a long time Hax Chat reader, and this is not a common issue. I've been using a computer for work for years, and you know what? Today I forgot my charger and my laptop dies. It happens, no one is perfect.

Plus, her chat is supposed to be like 60 or 90 minutes and she's always on for at least two hours. Lighten up.

Wrong. I’ve been reading since she started and it’s been tech issues, kid issues, “I just need a break” for YEARS. And the regularly cancelled chat for no reason. And she’s on for 2 hours because she writes a novel of an answer then deletes it then starts again and apologizes, nearly every week.

Anonymous wrote:She’s a Yale grad, not Harvard.

She admits she’s not a trained therapist. I appreciate her answers to people. They are complex and try to see things from many sides.

She did not cheat on her first husband. They mutually agreed to separate. He is actually the artist for her column, nick galifinakis, related to Zack G. She has 3 boys ( including a set of twins) with her second husband, but it all happened kind of fast

She’s a Harvard grad

Anonymous wrote:I was so happy when she replied to one of my questions. She gave very thoughtful advice, rather than just coming out saying dump him. (Which I eventually did and was the right call...)

Everyone else in the chat piled on with dump him, lol. If I only listened sooner.

This is why I like her. Dumping him won't solve the problem if you're with him because of some underlying issue you have. It's not that you shouldn't dump him, but you need to get to the root of the problem or you'll just have the same issues with someone else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s a Yale grad, not Harvard.

She admits she’s not a trained therapist. I appreciate her answers to people. They are complex and try to see things from many sides.

She did not cheat on her first husband. They mutually agreed to separate. He is actually the artist for her column, nick galifinakis, related to Zack G. She has 3 boys ( including a set of twins) with her second husband, but it all happened kind of fast

Uh, it happened so fast that she was pregnant by the second guy before she was divorced from the first guy. For most people that constitutes cheating because it is against the wedding vows that she made. While all people make mistakes, those mistakes were a pile-on and don't indicate a very stable or reliable person, which makes it laughable because she writes an advice column. However, I admit I love reading her column because she is so off in her guidance that she usually makes me laugh out loud. It is better than the comics.

On the other hand, with regards to the OP, I have no idea how she is able to keep her job at the Washington Post. I know several reporters and staff there, and they have a very low regard for her. The ineptness with technology is apparently the least of it.

I love her and to me that situation would go against my wedding vows, although so would getting divorced. It bothered me at the time because I didn't think she had the same morals I have, but I don't really consider it a mistake if she is consistent in her own morals. There are lots of people who consider separated intending to divorce as the marriage already being over except for paperwork. She said she had no moral hangover from it. Do you think she's making excuses for herself?

I very rarely disagree with her advice even though I think we're very different people.