Monday's Most Active Threads

Yesterday a lot of the activity involved threads that I've already discussed. The top three most active threads of the day were ones that I'll skip today because they have appeared in past blogs. Those were the Travis and Taylor, Gaza war, and Super Bowl Halftime threads. Therefore, the first thread that I will discuss today was actually yesterday's fourth most active. Titled, "About to Jump Off a Ledge Over Upcoming MIL Visit, Please Talk Me Down" and posted in the "Family Relationships" forum, the original poster writes in a very lengthy post about her distress with an upcoming visit by her mother-in-law. Apparently her mother-in-law just left after a three week long visit and is planning to return soon for another lengthy stay. According to the original poster, her mother-in-law, who is from another country, is very overbearing and controlling. When she visits, she basically takes over the house, redecorating, moving things around, and undertaking tasks that the original poster has asked her not to. The mother-in-law has a frightening personality and most of the original poster's family is afraid of her. The original poster's husband is no help and does nothing to alleviate the situation. Posters offer a lot of advice, but it is mostly things that the original poster has already tried such as simply ignoring her mother-in-law or spending more time outside the house, or suggestions that are easier said that done such as demanding that her husband set limits or "growing a backbone". Several posters argue that the original poster should become much more assertive and willing to set limits for her mother-in-law, or in lieu of that, act passive aggressively to make her visit uncomfortable. Others suggest that the problem is not the mother-in-law, but rather the original poster's husband. His refusal to support the original poster and push back against his mother is a significant hurdle for the original poster. As things stand, the original poster does not think that there is any certainty that, forced to chose between his wife and his mother, her husband would choose her. As a result, she is considering divorce. While divorce is normally the solution recommended by DCUM posters for almost anything, the idea received some pushback in this case with posters recommending less extreme solutions. One idea was to rent an AirBNB, either for the original poster or, even better, for her mother-in-law. But, ultimately, divorce was the solution proposed by some posters, especially those who have been in the original poster's situation themselves.

The next most active thread yesterday was another that I've previously discussed, the one about non-football Super Bowl talk. The most active thread after that was somewhat related. Posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum and titled, "Who would be your pick for the next SB halftime show?", the original poster suggests Dua Lipa, Sia, or Bishop Briggs. Rather than simply listing the names that were suggested by others, I'll take broader look at this topic. I watched a YouTube video yesterday by Rick Beato, a former music producer who has a popular YouTube channel in which he discussed Super Bowl halftime shows. Beato made an interesting point that I think is supported by many of the suggestions in this thread. He argued that music listening is very decentralized today and music listeners exist in their own silos. To an extent, this has always happened with listeners choosing a radio station based on musical preferences and then being exposed almost exclusively to that type of music. But, with listeners more often choosing algorithm-based services such as Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube, or others, there is an almost infinite number of silos. As a result, it is much more difficult for today's musicians to garner the broad appeal of bands or singers in the past. Beato contends that this presents a choice of old rock bands which results in 70 year olds playing classic rock music or pop musicians mostly from the 90s, which has been the case for many years including this year. Beato pointed out that even very popular singers such as Taylor Swift or Beyoncé have been around for decades, which is how long it takes to develop the kind of fan bases they have. For today's artists, that kind of popularity will be even more difficult to achieve. This leaves the Super Bowl stuck in the 90s for it's choice of halftime entertainers. While I don't think that any of the posters in this thread expressed things in quite the same terms as Beato, several posters seemed to innately recognize the dilemma. Among ideas that seemed to address this situation were to use the Super Bowl halftime show as a chance to introduce artists to a wider audience or to "mashup" artists of different genres such as the Tracy Chapman/Luke Combs duet at the Grammys. But, probably reflecting the increasing aging of DCUM's userbase, the most common suggestions in the thread were old rock artists. While that would also be my preference, I think we have to accept that rock music and its performers have reached their sell-by dates. The best compromise for us might be a rock-inspired pop artist such as Olivia Rodrigo.

Next was a thread titled, "BIL doesn’t even bring his nieces and nephews gifts" and posted in the "Family Relationships" forum. The original poster is upset that her brother-in-law — her husband's brother — never brings gifts for their children, even when attending birthday parties. According to the original poster, her brother-in-law, who is single, makes more money than anyone else who gets invited, but never brings gifts. Several posters suggested that he is simply clueless, a condition abetted by his being single. They say that if he were married, his wife would remind him to get gifts. But, the original poster says that her own brother is single and always beings gifts. Other posters criticized the original poster for mistaking gifts as an indication of carrying about her kids. But, the original poster says he doesn't show that he cares for them by any other means either. The original poster also gets criticized for being materialistic and overly focused on money. Several posters say that they not only don't expect gifts, but prefer not to get them because they already have too much stuff in their homes. Others think that attendance at a party is enough and that gifts should not be expected. A number of posters agree with the original poster and believe that even a small gift is necessary. As one says, "Basic decency and his upbringing should dictate that people bring a gift to a party." Some posters argued that even a gift card would show that he had put effort into getting a gift and would be appreciated by children. But, again, other posters took issue with this notion and suggested a gift was not necessary. Mostly this thread is the same few points being repeated over and over again.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "Why is JHU not especially popular w DC kids?", the original poster contends that Johns Hopkins University is a Top 10 university that is close to DC while still being far enough away. Therefore, she wonders why it is not more popular with DC-area kids. Of course, this is a topic that can only be addressed anecdotally. Moreover, it is not clear how many of the responses reflect actual reasons that DC-area students have not considered the university as opposed to pure speculation. At any rate, John Hopkins has often been subject to a series of specific criticisms in the forum. One of those, that it is too intense, was among the first responses in this thread. Several posters commented on the school's cutthroat nature. Other posters suggested that Baltimore generally and JHU specifically are considered unsafe. One poster cited somewhat extreme security measures that are employed at the school. Other posters claimed that the university lacks much of the "fun" atmosphere that generally surrounds universities. The result is a what one poster described as an "Unsafe, cutthroat, nerdy environment" that is no fun for most students. On the other hand, some posters suggested that the school might simply be too rigorous for many DC-area students who, the poster suggested, might struggle to be accepted. Posters with this viewpoint argued that the university is popular among those with the credentials to be accepted. One poster said that she has a daughter there now and another who will be attending next year. Her older daughter's experience has been completely contrary to what other posters described. She writes, "She hasn't found it to be cutthroat at all, is at parties every Friday and Saturday ... and the area around campus is perfectly fine." One poster claimed that he would avoid the school because there are not enough White, Catholic women (or, as he calls them, "girls") there and he wants to date while in college. He apparently won't consider dating any non-White and Catholic women and needs as large of a dating pool as he can get. Moreover, he seems to be put off by women who are in STEM programs. Recently, a Johns Hopkins official involved in diversity programs was quoted as noting that males, White people, Christians, and several other groups (many of which overlap) have unearned privilege. This has been interpreted by many posters as the school being anti-White and anti-male. As such, this is also used as an excuse by several posters in the thread. This complaint, like most of the others, does not appear to be particularly well-founded and I suspect that most applicants avoid the school because they simply aren't interested in the programs that are its strength or, if they are, simply don't have the qualifications.