Spurge Monday’s Workwear Report: Patti Wool-Twill Jacket
This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.
I’m really into this collarless jacket from Nili Lotan. The cut is timeless, and the gold-tone buttons provide just a little bit of pizzazz. I could see this being one of those pieces that gets passed down from a chic aunt or to a fashion-obsessed granddaughter.
The blazer is $1,290 at NET-A-PORTER and comes in sizes XS-XL.
A couple of more affordable options are from Frame ($298 on sale at Saks Fifth Avenue) and Quince ($89.90).
Sales of note for 5/30/25:
- Nordstrom – The Half-Yearly Sale has begun! See our full roundup here. Lots of markdowns on AGL (50%!), Weitzman, Tumi, Frank & Eileen, Zella, Natori, Cole Haan, Boss, Theory, Reiss (coats), Vince, Eileen Fisher, Spanx, and Frame (denim and silk blouses)
- Nordstrom Rack – Refurbished Dyson hairdryers down to $199-$240 (instead of $400+) + Father's Day gifts up to 60% off
- Ann Taylor – 25% off tops & sweaters + extra 30% off sale
- Banana Republic Factory – Sale extended: 50-70% off everything + extra 25% off
- Boden – 1100+ sale items!
- Eloquii – $25+ select styles + extra 50% off all sale
- J.Crew – Up to extra 50% off select sale styles, and women's shorts, tees and more from $24.50
- J.Crew Factory – Up to 60% off everything + 60% off clearance
- M.M.LaFleur – Lots of twill suiting in the sale section! Try code CORPORETTE15 for 15% off
- Rothy's – Up to 30% off everything
- Spanx – Free shipping on everything
- Talbots – Select summer styles marked 25-40% off
Finally a piece of beautiful clothing that I absolutely love!
…and it costs how much?!?!
I think I’d wear this a lot, and absolutely love wearing it. Does anyone have experience with this brand, quality etc? Is it truly exceptional and worth the price?
IDK but I had something nearly identical out of worsted wool and fully line from Talbots back in the 2000s. I got it from an outlet. Had I not sized up a bit over the decades, I’d have loved to have kept it.
Also, the stuff at Talbots Outlet is real Talbots wear. They don’t make a diffusion line just for their outlet stores. It’s off-season or odd colors, but sometimes there are real finds. Worth a look especially if you aren’t the sweet spot of sizes 6-8 in clothes or a size 7.5-8.5 shoe. This is likely your store then.
It’s a fashion editor favorite. Not my thing personally so can’t attest to quality. That particular jacket is similar to one at Veronica Beard for about half the price. Albeit still not cheap.
I think you need to buy it and let us all know how it is!
I bought it!
To any Boulder readers- I hope you and your loved ones are safe and sound. I know Pearl Street is a bustling area
It wasn’t an attack on busy Pearl St generally – it was a targeted act of violence against a group meeting to help the Israeli hostages still held by Hamas. It was antisemitic and despicable.
Exactly this.
She didn’t say it wasn’t.
She didn’t acknowledge the basic facts.
What happened to assuming good intentions when someone is offering kind concern?
Come on. Can’t anyone express sympathy without doing it “perfectly”?
If there were a peaceful protest to raise awareness about the hostages, but the protesters weren’t Jewish, they were of another faith, would you still say the attack was antisemitic? I’m trying to understand if there is any situation where an attack on civilians motivated by opposition to Israel would not be considered antisemitic, but rather anti-Israel terrorism.
hopefully a hypothetical that never needs to be answered. no one should be attacking anyone
Most certainly. But this assailant specifically targeted a pro-Israel group, not a gathering of Jews.
Israeli POWs
the hostages being held by Hamas are most certainly not POWs.
Some of them are
Dear Lord. I suppose you’ll be glad when others respond with “Israel targeted the Palestinian combatants in the kindergarten classroom,” huh?
Hamas is not holding any children. I think it has been a long time since they held any children.
i’m the OP and I am Jewish and I purposefully left the post vague because while I realize it wasn’t a random attack on Pearl Street, it’s not like this took place in a desolate area and there could be people who witnessed the attack who were not involved in the demonstration, or impacted in other ways and it is still jarring to have this happen in your community (at least it would be to me), no matter the topic of the demonstration
Yes violence against innocent civilian populations is bad.
I saw “No other land” last week, 1,5 h of hate and horrendous acts,
it should be showed in all the cinema theaters in USA.
I threw up after watching that film and it took me about 30 minutes in the car to collect myself before I could drive home. I’ve never been in a movie theatre where no one gets up to leave when the credits start rolling. Most people stayed until the screen turned black.
This is small in the grand scheme of things, but I hate how AI use has become so ubiquitous and at the same time the results are uncanny in a way that makes me question reality at every turn. My company has started using AI to generate clipart images for internal announcements. The latest is a stack of books with covers that blend together and have spines on the wrong edges. It feels cheap, like “pockets” in 90s low-rise jeans. Like, just stop pretending and forego the fake artwork; this is worse than not having an image at all.
My hill to die on is that if you feel you need to use AI to write a condolence card or congrats card for a loved one, don’t bother sending one at all and consider your life choices. It doesn’t take a robot to say “I’m sorry for your loss. I have so many fond memories of ____.”
I have a lot of trouble coming up with condolence card messages! Most of the cards I send are to a friend, acquaintance, or colleague whose parent has passed. I’ve never met the deceased person so I don’t have any fond memories of them. I just want to express my support during a really hard time, but I never know what to say. I feel like I always write the same thing. “So sorry to hear of the loss of your mom. I’m keeping you and your family in my thoughts.” Kind of impersonal, no?
Whatever you write yourself is still better than faux sympathy by machine. There’s a reason sympathy cards with poems (long predating AI) are considered tacky.
Sounds like you’re doing a great job. AI is not going to accurately be more personal.
Also, the mere act of sitting down and thinking of what to say is an essential part of being human.
Me too, words are just not my skill. I will plan a funeral, bake you cookies, take you to doctors appointments, do all the heavy lifting for life’s traumatic events but writing words in a card is not something I can do well.
Heck, writing is a big part of my job, and I consider myself a good writer. However, writing professionally and writing emotionally are two different skillsets, and I don’t feel like I excel at emotionally expressive writing. (Though I do try!)
This is such a weird take. AI is a tool. People use tools in a way that suits them. I don’t think anyone needs to question their life choices because they use a tool to help them formulate something appropriate to say. It generates ideas. The same way when I was young I used a quote book to help me find something meaningful to say about death when a neighbor died and I was making a card for their family. I didn’t know the language around death and needed help.
I think using AI to give yourself something to work from rather than a blank slate is an appropriate use, but using a tool to completely outsource care without providing any personal input cheapens the whole human exchange factor.
Personally, I prefer the human contact element, even if awkward and sloppy, rather than a card. Especially when I know the other person viewed that card as a chore to check off their list rather than an actual expression of care for me. Perhaps that is an example of a personal love language preference, though, where I value quality time more than I do gifts?
I hear you, but AI just isn’t good at this. It’s not good at providing appropriate examples of what to say.
Well I do not have unlimited time and getting a first draft done by AI means I get the notes out and the rest of life handled. You know you don’t have to copy it word for word right?
Cop-out. It takes two minutes to write a basic “I’m so sorry for your loss” card, longer for someone you know well (and therefore someone you really shouldn’t outsource this for). It is not. Hard. to find that time. I don’t care who you are.
I think you just hate AI. Is it any different than calling my mom (I wouldn’t actually do this, but I know people who would) and asking her what I should write?
Yes, it’s different. Drawing on the unique wisdom of a loved one is obviously different.
Troglodyte is not something I aspire to.
I agree! I was looking on instacart for “tiramisu” and instead of actual items from the store, a bunch of AI pictures of weird, glossy cakes popped up. I don’t want to see that, they can’t actually sell that, what is it even for?!
The AI-generated alternatives for my Whole Foods delivery are the reason I stopped using the service. You’d think that the human shopper would realize the suggestions are bizarre but no. My favorite was when macadamia nut milk was out and they suggested chocolate bars instead.
I see that my younger child is now an instacart shopper.
I wish the environmental impact of AI was discussed more.
+1
Agreed, along with the impact on our energy infrastructure.
Agreed. I really don’t get what AI is getting you here. If you really have no ideas, just google what to write in a condolence card
+1000
Agreed!!
Anyone had a layover in Heathrow since the ETA went into effect? You don’t need to get one if you’re only transiting through the UK, right? Route is US-UK-Europe, or more specifically Chicago-London-Geneva.
I have not. But I thought that you didn’t have to do this if you’re only laying over. Looks like it depends on what exactly you’re doing.
https://www.gov.uk/uk-border-control/layovers-and-transiting
I traveled thru Heathrow recently. I purchased the ETA out of an abundance of caution but did not need it because I never left the international terminal. My route was Raleigh Durham – Heathrow – Frankfurt.
Hive, help. I am struggling with how to dress during endo-related bloating. Roughly every other month for 2-4 consecutive days. My abdomen swells and it is noticeable to others, not just me. Worst part is zero pants fit comfortably during that time. I own dresses, but a lot of them are more straight cut. I have an athletic build, 5’3, 110ish lbs, am “tall” for my family so no one to borrow from. Probably looking for a dress that somehow flows over my midsection without looking like a tent? Anything constricting from ribs to pelvic area – even elastic, drawstring, a belt at empire waist – feels awful when this is happening. I would guess I need 3 outfit options. I tried a “Jersey trapeze dress” but it really showed the abdomen when I walked and made me feel uncomfortable. Ditto ribbed fabric. My normally kind/not overbearing mother asked me if I was pregnant out of wedlock last week AND a shop clerk asked my due date, so this is not just in my head :( Looking for comfort but also something that can fly in a business/business casual office.
You need a dress in a woven fabric, not knits. They have more structure and won’t cling to your body the way a jersey or rib knit will. Since it’s summer, look for fabric names like poplin, linen, cotton, seersucker, eyelet.
Right, but wovens are very unforgiving for body fluctuations. You could buy them in a bigger size, I guess, but the proportions will be off in other areas.
I’m sorry, OP. Endo sucks. I would stick with the jersey dresses and stretchy fabrics, even if they aren’t ideal. Comfort comes first.
I think that the right woven material is often better than a knit. Maybe layered or a loose dress (those Zuri Kenya ones, for example; they also make shirts, one of which I keep for high-bloat days). Knits on my bloated abdomen just (to me) highlighted that they were under a bit of strain and showed every lump and bump (unless a very matte black or vivid print). A stiffer woven hanging from my shoulders or a loose waist looks like a garment just hanging loose as it should. Elastic waists and untucked outer tops are your friend.
I think it will be hard to come up with a solution that isn’t already associated with maternity fashion, especially if tunics and pants are out.
Join Nancy’s Nook if you haven’t found an actually good endo doc yet.
Have you tried a dress in a non-knit fabric? Like a looser linen shirt or shift dress, perhaps in a busy pattern?
Try a shift dress in a woven fabric, not a knit, as knits will be more form-fitting. Something like this: https://factory.jcrew.com/p/womens/categories/clothing/dresses/linen-dresses/linen-blend-sleeveless-mini-dress/
https://www.quince.com/women/linen-sleeveless-dress
I have a content in mod with some links, but look for woven sheath dresses. For me these conceal the whole mid-section, but I am also pretty busty; it might not work as well if you are not.
Sorry I mean SHIFT dresses! Not sheath
Try Karina dresses: https://www.karinadresses.com/. I have celiac and occasional bloating. These dresses are my go-to when other clothes are uncomfortable. I find they run generously, and I buy to fit my top.
Many styles are slightly high-waisted and all are forgiving around the middle. A bonus is they are women-owned and made in the U.S. (New York State). They might not win fashion awards, but they are flattering and appropriate in my office when I’m under the weather.
My mind went to straight-fitting shirtdresses – something like this?
https://oldnavy.gap.com/browse/product.do?pid=705704002&cid=15292&pcid=15292&vid=1&nav=meganav%3AWomen%3AShop%20Women%27s%20Categories%3ADresses%20%26%20Jumpsuits#pdp-page-content
Might be a touch short: https://oldnavy.gap.com/browse/product.do?pid=766884002&cid=15292&pcid=15292&vid=1&nav=meganav%3AWomen%3AShop+Women%27s+Categories%3ADresses+%26+Jumpsuits#pdp-page-content
I have this body all the time – 5’2 and 118 with a round tummy. Jersey is the worst thing you can buy, it clings. You do not want a knit. Shift dresses are your friend. Not a tent but something skimming the body not clinging to it. Nothing stretchy. The shape and fit of the dress is key not the softness of the fabric.
The Universal Standard Geneva dress is perfect for this. Anything with an empire waist will make you look pregnant.
I had a linen jumpsuit that didn’t have a waist when I was doing IVF and it was a godsend.
I have endo and dresses are a favorite of mine! When I do wear jeans/pants, Spanx brand or another style of jeans with light stretch are ideal. I think those saying they have a hard time finding flowy dresses probably have a different body type that doesn’t require looking too hard for them. I have had luck over the years at the following stores: Anthropologie, Hill House Home, J Crew, Everlane, Madewell, Gap, J. Marie, occasionally Boden or Free People, and always any local boutique that sells mid-priced dresses…these styles are popular in the under $100 range at these types of boutiques because (I suspect) they fit lots of body types. When I go to a department store website (Dillards, Nordstrom, etc) I search terms like “A-line,” “shift dress,” “babydoll dress,” “fit and flare,” and “drop waist.” Also, if you find one dress you like, try reverse google searching it to find similar styles. Best of luck! Endo is the worst and having cute clothes really helps.
I forgot to add Tuckernuck and English Factory! Although returns are a little bit difficult at English Factory from what I recall.
Comment is in mod but I know this struggle well and have lots of ideas for you!
Hoping someone more knowledgeable on this subject can chime in. Is divorce always considered an adverse childhood experience, or is it strongly dependent on the situation and type of divorce? My basic assumption is that an amicable divorce where both parents are happier (and have appropriate housing for kids) will not have lasting bad effects, but maybe that intuitive feeling is dead wrong. I also “feel” like any divorce that allows a mother to escape an abuser must be better for her and by extension the kids.
It’s always going to be considered an “adverse childhood experience” clinically, but obviously the impact of the divorce on the children varies hugely based on what the marriage was like, how the parents separate, and how amicable they are afterwards.
I do think saying an “amicable divorce where both parents are happier (and have appropriate housing for kids) will not have lasting bad effects” is a bit of an overstatement though. It’s certainly better than a terrible divorce with parental alienation or an abusive marriage, etc., but that doesn’t mean it’s no big deal.
I think that’s true. If Dad is is the one who moves out and kid’s home, neighborhood, and school are all the same, it’s still Dad around 100% to maybe one dinner with Dad on a school night and seeing Dad every other weekend. It’s not like Dad is deployed (known, has an end-point, other kids in same boat in a military town) or dead, but it’s a significant shift and never for a happy reason (and often with a ton of regret, wishing, guilt, worry). Dad repartnering can also cause a lot of drama or at least existential worry (I’m a stepparent, and have a stepson I adore who is an adult now, and pretty early on I told him I’d keep him in all of the red meat dishes he wanted and otherwise not bother him or get in the way of him spending time with his dad and he has been nothing but a delight for almost 15 years now).
I think the timing also matters a lot, with it being easiest with really little kids who won’t even really remember the family being together and middle school probably being the worst possible time for the parents to split. My 7 year old has several friends with amicably divorced parents, and they’re doing great and seem just as well-adjusted as any other kid. But the parents all divorced when they were <4 and they don't really remember life any other way. On the other hand I know several people who got divorced with tweens/young teens and those kids took it HARD and in many cases got pretty messed up.
You’re probably right that on average it’s easier when kids are younger, but that doesn’t mean it’s nbd. My parents split when I was a baby and both handled it poorly. It’s true that I don’t know anything different. But not knowing anything different than perpetual chaos, conflict, and financial instability isn’t really a good thing either. Definitely folks on the outside would have said I was super well adjusted and turned out well, and now I have my own happy marriage almost 20 years on. But it was really really hard, and I have had a ton of therapy.
Sorry you went through that. I agree and wasn’t trying to imply it’s always no big deal if kids are young, just that it’s better. How the parents handle it still matters so much. I was referring to families that are financially stable and don’t seem to be in constant conflict — in fact one of the sets of parents is so amicable they jointly took the kid to Disney. But I think even the most amicable divorce in the world is soooo hard when the kids are in that really vulnerable 10-14 age window.
It’s especially hard when it happens during these formative years and the parents move on with new partners quickly, before the kids had even fully processed the divorce and how their family had changed.
Agree with this. My husband’s parents were divorced in one of these best case scenario divorces, reasonably amicable (no abuse or fighting but they really don’t like each other), enough money that it wasn’t a dire issue, and it’s so clear that they were just not at all suited for each other. They’ve both been happily married to much better partners for decades for now. But I still can see the huge toll it took on him, in terms of having the fundamentals of his home and family ripped away as a young child and not feeling like he could count on anything to last. He’s so conciliatory, always trying to meditate between people, and I have to try hard to make sure I don’t just run over him with my opinions and preferences. There are a lot of reasons we don’t have kids, but this is definitely one of them- I think he just missed out on having a close relationship with his dad and understanding what a good parent child relationship could look like. I don’t wish his parents hadn’t gotten divorced, and there are certainly worse childhood traumas, but I feel so sad for that poor little boy. I do sort of blame his parents for having kids together in the first place, or at least not handling the divorce a little better.
This is a fair, compassionate viewpoint of the long tail of divorce.
I’m going through a divorce. We share custody and actually live around the corner from each other.
The other day, my six year old had my phone and was looking through those videos that iPhones automatically make. He cried when he saw the photos of us as a family before all this happened.
I would not go through with a divorce to be happier; it would hurt my kid too much. I left my marriage in the same way that a bear caught in a trap gnaws its arm off.
Yes. And I believe most women who leave are in the same situation. Divorce is the best out of a list of bad options. Life is complicated. Some of the comments in this thread are seriously lacking in compassion.
+1.
Same, except mine was quite a few years ago. We are both now remarried and kid is doing great. She adores both stepparents. But there are times when she finds it hard to have two homes and divorced parents. We keep her in therapy so she has a neutral third party. I do my absolute best to give her the easiest divorced parents experience possible but it’s still a Thing That Makes Me Different for her.
I’d say even a non-amical divorce is better than a kid being in a yell-y scream-y fight-y house day in and day out. My DH and his exW are generally able to be civil if the interact rarely. She hit him when moving kiddo out of a dorm one year (which I can’t imagine how bad this was to their child), so that level of drama is generally on off when they aren’t in proximity to each other. Some years it was very bad, only communicating by e-mail. I imagine it may get going again if kiddo gets married and we have a wedding to get through, but generally kid was better because there was much less strife. I always felt bad for kiddo and let kid/dad to whatever even if I was a passenger in my own family life at times (plenty of joint vacations with just them), but I’m an adult and can decide to do something for the greater long=term good and just get a pedicure and eat at restaurants no one but me likes. If more adults adulted, maybe these divorces wouldn’t need to happen (and maybe they shouldn’t have gotten married, but sometimes you learn the hard way that the crazy that makes people hot isn’t a good crazy to have in a partner). n
I am not sure it’s better for the kids to have 50% solo time with an abusive father than for the mother to be there to protect them 100% of the time.
Define abusive though.
It’s often that the two adults can’t adult with each other. Solo, they may be quite placid. If a parent is actively abusive (physically), they don’t tend to get the solo time the way you are imagining (and it’s often a challenge to get the dad to use his parenting time; often, it’s in there just to reduce child support).
So you think it’s better for kids to be shuttled back and forth between two homes with 50% of the time in each so they have no real “home,” be subject to a tug-of-war between the parents over their extracurriculars, and watch dad remarry and prioritize his “new” family, all so they don’t have to be exposed to some arguing?
Watching several high school students in my rural town attempting to cope with the parental arguing right now and I so wish the parents would grow up and just get the divorce already. At least the kids are old enough to dip out to friends’ houses when it gets loud. They already don’t have a “real” home, assuming your definition is a place where they can feel grounded, comfortable and “at home”.
Knowing when to break up or divorce rather than sticking in a doomed relationship is an underrated skill.
Signed,
Child of divorced parents who shouldn’t have stayed married for the kids.
So you think these kids’ parents should get divorced, split custody, and then remarry and start big stepfamilies and possibly “new” families with additional children? I struggle to see how that wouldn’t be worse than living with parents who argue. At least if your married parents argue you can put your headphones on and retreat to your own room in your own home.
How often does a divorce even help if the parents are immature and won’t grow up already? It’s not actually better to have to listen to the arguing between mom and her new bf and dad and his new gf instead.
Yes. It sounds like you think the parents should endure in a miserable household to save the child some familial trauma. This is just one of many things the child will have to overcome in their life.
Exposure to arguing isn’t an adverse child event; divorce is.
“Exposure to arguing isn’t an adverse child event; divorce is.”
Strong disagree. “Exposure to arguing” is a vague phrase that does not come close to describing the emotional turmoil of observing your parents’ unhealthy relationship dynamics.
As for Anonymous at 10:22, you can feel a sense of home in a place you only live in 50% of the time, and a marriage license won’t prevent a parent from being checked out, failing to prioritize a child, or engaging in tug of wars over extracurriculars. Weird take.
I’m sure there are many people you wouldn’t let care for your children who aren’t physically abusive?
A parent who yells and screams isn’t going to therefore lose custody. A parent who wakes the kids up at 10PM on a school night because chores weren’t done to his satisfaction and they need to start over isn’t going to lose custody. A parent who lets kids fend for themselves when it comes to meals (or even requires them to prepare meals for him like servants), doesn’t bring them to the doctor when they’re sick, forgets about sunblock, isn’t going to lose custody over it. But the kids would still be much better off physically with someone who actually takes care of them. They’re honestly probably going to be better off in a environment where Mom is taking the brunt of the yelling and screaming than when it’s directed solely at them.
Exactly.
Not sure what you’re getting at here. Ideally, we have ideal parents. But we have the parents we have, divorced or not.
My sister often wished her ex were dead vs divorced, because then she’d not have to worry about getting money monthly and she wouldn’t have to deal with him.
The point she’s making is that if dad is a horrible person the kids will be better off if mom is there to protect them. They will be worse off when dad gets 50% unsupervised parenting time.
I’m saying that it’s got to be harder on kids if the one parent who cares about them doesn’t seem to care about them enough not to abandon them with the parent who doesn’t.
Mom can divorce an unsuitable partner, but kids can’t divorce an unsuitable dad. So Mom gets to escape, but the kids get stuck dealing with the same guy Mom couldn’t endure staying with, but now with no responsible adult present at all.
What are you talking about. The examples you cite sound like an extreme re-telling of a kid having to do chores. I get the sense that you have some very personal experience with divorce and I’m sorry about that.
Sunblock. Seriously?
So you think it’s okay for dad to return a kid to mom with a severe peeling sunburn, tired from being up doing chores and being screamed at in the middle of the night, without having eaten regular meals, and sick with symptoms they were having all weekend that Mom now has to take them to the hospital for?
Yes it sounds like extreme chores and ordinary parenting fails which is why every societal authority is fine with it.
Kids should land with the safe and caring parent so they can have a stable home life and you know, be safe and cared for. Parents have way too many rights and children have far too few.
I don’t trust you as a reliable narrator.
Thanks for proving the point then.
This is a family court problem. Please be thankful you haven’t been through this.
It’s such a hard position to be in. The alternative to leaving is to stay. So your kid watches you get abused, grows up thinking that’s how women should be treated? That that’s what love is? If he’s abusive to the kid, you can’t prevent it every time, even though you’re living in the same house. So kid thinks you’re ok with them being abused too? Blamed you for not getting them out at least 50% of the time?
I was the kid in this scenario. Kids are not stupid. They know that this is not how their mother should be treated. I resented that my mom didn’t get me out, but starting in my mid-teens I understood why she couldn’t and that she had done her best.
If they had divorced and my father had any solo parenting time, I probably would no longer be on this planet because there would have been no one around to stop him.
It’s the courts that send the message that abuse is okay with the 50% nonsense.
YES.
In my state, it doesn’t matter if the father abused the mother; it only matters if the father also abuses the kid.
The standards for DV are also insanely high, like, it’s not “really” DV unless it involves a baseball bat or a gun.
Hell of a message to send to wives and children.
When I was a kid I asked for help at was told nothing could be done if my parent didn’t leave a visible mark. There was no way that as a child in a divorce case I would have had a way to advocate for myself and “prove” the abuse to prevent the perpetrator from getting parenting time.
As a child of divorce where both parents walked away much happier but I did not, I would say divorce is probably always a hardship. At a minimum, its challenges are way underestimated by most adults. My parents’ divorce was one of the hardest things I dealt with and I think my parents were too absorbed by their own issues to notice or help me adjust.
That said- life is complex, and I do believe that divorce can be the better of suboptimal options. Even if it’s better than the alternative – that’s not a reason to underestimate or dismiss how challenging it can be for kids, and it’s not a reason not to make sure they’re supported through any major changes it may cause. I’m probably projecting a ton here and obviously individual circumstances vary, but I do want to push back on the common view that “kids are resilient, they want their parents to be happy, and divorce is the best for everyone”
I had the exact same experience.
Not all divorces are worse for the kids. For example, if one parent is abusive or they are consistently yelling at and demeaning each teach other. But if it is a generally stable household, divorce is often worse.
FWIW, if you are considering divorce, I’ve always heard that the research shows that it was the lowest impact when the kids are really young. And that it’s generally worse when it’s a teenage kid and the house has been basically stable.
Anecdotally, I agree with your second paragraph.
Divorce is hard on the kids, even when it’s the best thing for the parents. By no means do I believe that a parent should stay in an awful marriage “for the kids,” though. In my sister’s case, her ex-DH was emotionally abusive and it was wearing her down to the point where she was having suicidal thoughts. That is not tenable. There was also a lot of conflict in front of the kids. He is a suboptimal dad who is Mr. Good Time but has failed on some basic fronts since the divorce, so I don’t expect this to get magically better for the kids but it’s still better than being in a home where there is yelling and fighting on the regular.
I don’t have any charitable feelings toward the individuals I know who divorced because they wanted to pursue someone else, or already had. They rocked their kids’ worlds for their own selfish desires, imo. In those cases, the silver lining is that the divorces were amicable enough and the former couples are coparenting effectively.
It’s so hard to say. Life is hard and complex, and the circumstances are unique to each family.
It is hard. Even the yelling and fighting isn’t 100% clear to me, since sometimes the yelling and fighting was happening because there was an adult in the home to stand up for the kids and their needs (vs. potentially putting kids in a situation where there’s no one there to do that).
If dad is abusive and mom gets 100% custody of the kids, it’s a positive. In any other scenario, a negative. The negative is compounded if either parent remarries.
Totally agree and so wish family court could be more friendly towards involved and caring moms.
What do you mean? Even with “involved and caring moms,” in the US, there is often a 50/50 joint legal and physical custody presumption, which is to benefit the kid (and: an involved dad is likely to pay support, which is important).
More time in the care of uninvolved and uncaring parent doesn’t benefit the kid. It would take a LOT of child support to make up for all the harm of being foisted on an uncaring parent.
I remember being flabbergasted in family law class when it was taught that 50/50 was the modern standard and was intended to benefit the child. It’s just so the dad doesn’t have to pay as much, or any, child support. How on earth does it benefit a child to have no real home or stability? To be prevented from pursuing extracurriculars or getting braces unless both parents can agree on every detail? I think the primary caregiver presumption is infinitely more child-friendly.
“To be prevented from pursuing extracurriculars or getting braces unless both parents can agree on every detail”
That’s not really how it works in practice with joint custody. Typically parents “own” different spheres, and whichever parent is managing the thing like braces is in charge. In an amicable divorce, the parent who’s not managing the braces wouldn’t intervene or object. They’re not going to be discussing every detail about it on a daily basis. Unless there is a huge clash in values on a big issue like vaccines – and then you go to court for a judge to decide – there isn’t usually a lot of conflict about this stuff. (Fun fact, the author Blake Crouch took his ex-wife to court to allow him to vaccinate the kids. But in practice that sort of thing is rare.)
“To be prevented from pursuing extracurriculars or getting braces unless both parents can agree on every detail” This absolutely can and does happen in 50/50 situations, and it happened to me. I eventually went to live with my dad because the constant conflict and instability was just too much, and there were a lot of things I didn’t get to do (e.g., team sports) because my mom would just refuse to take me to activities during weeks when I was with her. I really hope most parents are more mature than mine, but I don’t think that’s always the case.
I don’t think that conflict over medical issues is rare at least when there’s a diagnosis. Maybe it’s rare in the sense that childhood illness is rare, but co-parenting issues come up constantly for kids with conditions that require a lot of parental compliance (whether it’s something like restricted diet or something like actually administering meds).
There is nothing like being forgotten by your parent as they go on to create a new family.
Yes, this.
I honestly think it can be especially hurtful when the parents are happier and the kids are not. Happiness does not always trickle down, and kids aren’t always resilient to the sacrifices they’re making.
Also if mom and kids can escape a problematic dad, that’s one thing, but if mom is escaping and kids are getting left with him on a recurring basis, that can also be a bad situation.
Moms are not always the saints in these scenarios. There isn’t a lot of discussion around badly managed mental illness and that being a cause for a lot of broken marriages.
I know zero divorced dads who are good people.
That seems like a huge generalization! I agree most abusive parents are men, but my kids have several friends who have divorced parents, and all their dads seem like good dads and good people (maybe not good husbands, but honestly a lot of married men aren’t good husbands either!)
Raises hand!!
My own parents divorced when I was very young (they were teenagers who got married due to an unplanned pregnancy) and I will not claim my 21-year-old father was a wonderful or responsible parent. He was not. But he remarried, had two more children, divorced his second wife when she developed a drug and alcohol problem, got full custody, and absolutely dedicated the next 20 years to being the best parent he could possibly be (and succeeded). And he did all of that with the example of an absent father to follow (his own father was married to someone else when he impregnated his teenage girlfriend).
I realize bashing men as a category is popular here, but I will stand up for my Dad anywhere and anytime.
I know a few. Usually, their wives developed problems with drugs and alcohol. Sometimes, their wives cheated on them.
I know zero men who divorced “crazy” women who are good people.
Oh wow. I do! I know a few. I’m certainly not #notallmen, but like truly sometimes divorce is necessary, and the parents do the best they can after.
I’ve also known many men to divorce their problematic spouses–sometimes for alcohol abuse, but usually for their extreme immaturity (yelling, hitting, insults, throwing gifts that weren’t good enough out the front door or into the trash can.)
I’ve known plenty of men to cheat and leave, too. All people are complicated, but I don’t give women a general pass as the “default good parent.”
Lots of gross stereotyping in this thread. Anecdotally, I know two divorced families well enough to comment on how the parents raise their kids (I’m in a coach/Scout leader type role with the kids). I don’t know the reasons behind the divorces but believe there was nothing egregious like abuse or substance issues on either side. In both cases the dad is the far more responsible parent and the mom is the one who’s always forgetting permission slips, never picking the kid up on time, never lifting a finger to volunteer with the organization, etc. I like the dads a lot more and from what I can see, the kids (one boy, one girl) both have a better relationship with their dads than their moms.
Sure and dads sometimes get full custody in those situations. But I really believe there’s a double standard.
I’ve never seen a dad get full custody where the mom didn’t have a severe drug or alcohol problem or took up with a child molester.
Sure there are some bad moms, but overwhelmingly it’s abusive dads, sorry not sorry.
My dad was a super dedicated single parent at a time when it was pretty uncommon to be a divorced dad with any amount of custody, and my mom was neglectful and abusive. Men/dads certainly don’t have a monopoly on sh*tty behavior.
Hard agree. Lots of irresponsible generalizing here about the sainted abandoned mother and the careless and abusive father.
My MIL has a host of untreated mental issues and having heard descriptions of the various battles over my husband’s childhood, she was able to weaponize the presumption that she was the better/more fit parent to the detriment of her kids. That said, both MIL and her first husband remarried a few years after their divorces and are still happily married to their second spouses.
My ex-BIL dumped my sister (understandable) and the 4 kids they had together, got married to his affair partner (who had 4 or 5 kids) and now they have 3 more kids of their own in diapers. I am convinced that he enforces his visitation rights so that the girls can babysit (and he can lower his support payments) and he can watch his boys play baseball. I cannot think of what a long tail this leaves on all 11 or 12 kids involved and I feel bad for all of them. IDK how they even act civilly (and that household is apparently just the yelly screamfest that he had with my sister during the 3+ years he was in / out of the house deciding if he wanted to bear the financial cost of a divorce vs just cheat).
Not a therapist. However, I divorced my ex while our children were young, and asked this of my therapist. Here is what I heard:
Yes it’s one of the Adverse Childhood Experiences.
In my opinion, the best you can do as a mom is to put in place as many Protective Factors as possible.
May I ask why you are asking? When someone questions divorce, it does make me a bit annoyed, because I’m so personally grateful that I was able to get divorced without having to be hospitalised etc. There’s an interesting statistic that suicide rates for women went down when no fault divorce was legalised; https://www.nber.org/digest/mar04/divorce-laws-and-family-violence
I am choosing not to pursue any relationship until my children are much older, because in my estimation it’s not worth the risk of things not working out. It’s not easy, so YMMV!
Amen.
I find it annoying too. Then again, most of the people that I know who crab about the divorce rate are people who are in long-term, mostly happy marriages and go to a church that wants people to feel bad about getting divorced. IME, they people are not people who went through a divorce of their own.
Frankly, it’s a big deal to end a marriage, but sometimes shit happens. And leaving isn’t even really a new phenomenon – people who weren’t well off used to just leave one another without any sort of formal proceeding.
Is this just a weird hypo?
It’s become that.
Sometimes you only have bad options and you just have to pick the one you hope will be less bad. Yes, a mother escaping an abuser is obviously the right choice. But the fact of the abuse, the subsequent abandonment by the father (whether emotional or physical abandonment, an abuser is clearly checked out either way), those still have negative impacts on the child.
I agree — we’d see kids get removed from abusive homes at court and the kids always wept. Maybe their dad beat them, but their home was their hole world and it was never not hard for them to leave that. It was all they knew and they couldn’t see it through adult eyes.
I used to daydream about being removed.
Boarding school was my escapist fantasy as a kid.
Those kids were being removed from their home and their mother. The right solution would be to remove the dad and give him no contact, which sadly family courts are unwilling to do in divorce cases.
Maybe you could say what the dad does / did? Because absent abuse (documented, something other than an unspecific accusation of yelling) or agreement, dad is going to be in the picture. And if dad is removed from the picture, a judge needs to decide based on saying something and proving something and giving dad an opportunity to respond. Like we have laws and a system in the US? Having kids with the wrong guy looks like this.
Maybe spend some time in court?
Often, there is no dad in the home to begin with. Maybe 1 set of stable grandparents. But with no dad around, if mom has a drug or drinking problem, there is no one left to put the kid with. With strangers is generations of people not having a relationship with the kid and/or a stable home situation. You see all kinds of sad situations that the legal system can’t fix.
“Having kids with the wrong guy looks like this”–so you would rather punish the kids by letting them be with the guy unpservised? And sometimes you can’t tell he’s the wrong guy until after the kids have arrived, or he develops a mental illness in midlife.
My abusive older brother used to threaten to have me sent to foster care. It worked to get me to shut up and take the abuse.
I mean, many kids now have unmarried parents who can leave or break up fairly easily. And I’m a bit older than average here, so many couples I know (of all types) have un-coupled. I can say that many people are poorly matched and after that, there are some addiction / mental health issues that just make it untenable for the other parent to stay. I can’t say that physical abuse has been an issue in any of them (I know of plenty where the couples have chosen to stay together, including two sets of neighbors, which is always dicey). Plenty of people get very mean when stressed and many people handle stress quite poorly.
One couple that divorced a lot time ago split when the dad hit a very young kid in anger. Dad regretted it, got help, got his temper under control, but that was it. He was from a generation that was told to just bottle up your fingers, there had been a lot of financial stress and stress due to a very premature baby, and I think now there are a lot of avenues to avoid catastrophe when circumstances throw this at you, but often losing all of your relationships will be what causes a person, particularly a man, to take the first step to getting help. I think they were all better off with space (and safety) and he eventually had good relationships with both of his children.
“many kids now have unmarried parents who can leave or break up fairly easily”
Really? In the US? Maybe this is regional but I don’t know anyone who had kids before marriage, except a couple of high school classmates who got pregnant accidentally in their teens, and my elementary age kid has no classmates with unmarried parents except for a few divorces.
Anyway, I think with kids involved a breakup is never easy and uncomplicated, even if you’re not legally married.
40% of American children are born to unmarried parents. It does vary regionally, but it’s pretty high everywhere.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/unmarried/unmarried.htm
Yes, but surely it’s also correlated with socio-economic status? I feel like in the US it’s very rare among affluent, educated people and almost never done intentionally. Whereas in Europe it’s much more common in that demographic and often an intentional choice.
Ime no, it is not only low income folks. I know several biglaw associates (all men) who had children out of wedlock. Some eventually married the mother, some didn’t. I also know several biglaw partners (all men) who had affair babies that are openly acknowledged.
I know a few women who had kids in HS and have managed to climb the ranks. Of the unmarried women who got pregnant during their careers, the couple either got married very promptly or the woman left her position and stayed home. I don’t know any women who have chosen to have children with their longterm nonmarital partner and still have promising careers. I assume this is because single moms and especially never-married moms face biases that unmarried dads don’t.
Please become more aware that you live in a bubble of privilege (!).
Yeah some of the comments here today are totally wild and clearly within a certain sphere.
I’m in my 40s and have friends across ages late-20s to mid-60s. I definitely know more people with grandkids born out of wedlock than kids. But I have a handful of friends who have kids and have never been married. Some never intend to marry and intentionally (sometimes with IVF) had children with their longterm nonmarital partner. Marriage isn’t always seen as a prerequisite to kids or buying a house together. I live in a purple state in the burbs and I’m a biglaw partner, if any of that matters.
This thread seems like it could have been written in the US (but in the 1970s) or some non-western country that has encoded laws preferring men over women generally (could be 1970s or today). Like I read my mom’s old Women’s Day magazines but don’t think they’d read like this now.
It’s giving a strong “defense of marriage at all costs” vibe. Some of these commenters probably object to no-fault divorce, too.
When I had kids, it became my obligation to put their interests above my own until they reached adulthood. This means that even if I’d be happier on my own, it’s my responsibility not to put them in a position of being tossed back and forth between two homes. If their father turns out to be a bad parent and I can’t get 100% legal and physical custody, it’s my repsonsibility to prevent them ever from being alone with him.
The reason you get divorced is that your spouse is a bad person who does bad things. Why would you ever let your kids be alone with that person?
“The reason you get divorced is that your spouse is a bad person who does bad things. Why would you ever let your kids be alone with that person?”
I’ve sen this comment basically verbatim here before and it never makes any sense to me. Plenty of people are bad husbands (or wives) but good people and parents. Also not every marriage ends because someone is “bad” — sometimes people just get married too young and aren’t well-matched to each other, but they’re both great people and partners and no one did anything wrong. I agree you shouldn’t divorce lightly in the latter situation if you have kids, but this idea that you must be A Terrible Person if your spouse divorces you is just wild. What about people whose spouses cheat on them and leave them for the affair partner!? They should lose their kids because their spouse decided to cheat?! What on earth.
In that case the cheater is a bad person, so it just proves the point.
So? Doesn’t make them a bad father. Mom doesn’t get to make that determination.
No it doesn’t prove the point. You said if you file for divorce you’re letting your kids be alone with a bad person. By that logic the person who doesn’t file for divorce is the bad person, but that can be the person who was cheated on. Or what if you file for divorce, but it’s because your spouse won’t stop cheating? What if both people are cheating or doing other bad things? Who is “the terrible person” who should get no custody? This black and white view of the world is so childish and just wildly unrealistic to most divorces where there is mess and fault on both sides and no one who is all wonderful or all terrible.
Also while I despise cheating, have never done and am not sure I would be able to look past if if it happened in my marriage, it doesn’t impact one’s ability to parent and I think it’s crazy to say an otherwise loving and involved parent should lose access to their children forever because of infidelity. That would do far more harm to the kid than a relatively amicable divorce. Lots of studies show that healthy relationships with both parents are more important than “an unbroken home.”
In that scenario surely the cheater is the bad person who did a bad thing.
FWIW, I have some friends who were dating, got pregnant, got married, and had a really stressful relationship. I’m pretty convinced that the cheater cheated because they knew it was the only reason their spouse would ever divorce them, and the cheater wanted out. They are both very happy with other people and their kids seem fine.
I don’t think it is possible to be a good parent and a bad spouse. How you treat your child’s other parent is part of parenting.
Absolutely not the case. Some people are fundamentally a bad match. It doesn’t mean each parent can’t have a separate and good relationship with their children.
I get what you’re saying on some level and how you treat your children’s parent is an element of parenting, but not being a perfect parent isn’t grounds for losing all access to your kids. It’s infinitely more damaging to children to have no relationship with one parent than to have a relatively amicable shared custody situation.
What in the Leave It To Beaver nonsense is happening in this comment section today?
This is a fringe opinion. Men get applauded for completing the simplest parenting tasks and told they are such good fathers for doing the bare minimum. I’ve known plenty of “such a good dad”-types who are crappy spouses.
Do not believe that your last paragraph is common.
I can imagine that people who can more easily afford divorce may divorce over less serious issues, but I would have made the same generalization as that last paragraph based on what I’ve seen where I’m from.
I urge you to spend some time in Family Court or speak with any attorney who handles divorce. People get divorced for any number of reasons, some of which are the partner doing bad things and not all of those bad things impact their ability to parent.
Also, people (ahem, women) do not lose their humanity, need and interests upon becoming a parent. There are absolutely times where moms put their children’s needs above their own, but to require that a women entirely subjugate her needs is to make her entire identity that of “mom,” a martyr and a shell of a human.
If moms don’t protect their children, no one will. Society doesn’t care and men sure don’t.
This is not responsive.
It is responsive. As a mom, you are the one and only line of defense for your children. If you don’t put their interests first, no one else will protect them.
This is a terrible thing to say to someone who might be in a no-win situation.
The reality is terrible.
Listen, the commenter clearly just wants to scream out loud about their martyrdom. Just let them.
Agreed. If my daughter was in an unhappy marriage and wanted to leave, I would support her even if there are kids involved. I’m sure I will adore my grandkids if I am lucky enough to have them, but my daughter is my #1. She does not lose #1 status if she has kids.
And her kids will be her #1.
Seems like you think you’re clever by setting up a little catch-22: don’t divorce frivolously, but if you’re going to divorce for very good reasons, you’re still wrong because it will result in shared custody.
You’re insufferable.
The situation really is insufferable for women and their children who are caught in the catch-22. It’s our divorce law that sets up the catch-22 by defaulting to 50/50 custody.
Fathers have a right to raise their children, too. I struggle to see why 50/50 should not be the default.
Because the children are the ones who are supposed to have rights. Including the right not to live with an abusive parent, and the right to have a stable permanent home.
We should all have the right to a stable and permanent home, but that’s not how life works for most people in the world.
Convenient. So you appear to believe that a legal framework that does not automatically sever paternal rights upon divorce and which also allows no-fault divorce deprives children of rights, by producing a system in which children can be subjected to either an unstable home (i.e., split custody) and/or partial custody by an abusive parent. And, apparently, you believe that children are the only parties with rights.
And since you presumably don’t believe that paternal rights should be immediately severed upon divorce, including no-fault divorce, to effectuate these “children’s rights” you believe in, no-fault divorce disappears.
So who loses rights? Women, apparently, when they marry and bear children.
No thanks.
Paternal rights should be severed by default. The burden should be on the father to show that he is fit to parent alone and that his parenting time will benefit the children.
Sorry your dad sucked, but a lot of us like ours and wildly disagree with you.
It really doesn’t matter if the unsuitable parent is paternal or maternal.
But it’s not right that children have so little recourse.
+1 million to 3:28. You need therapy to unpack your hatred of men and dads. And I’m not normally one to be defending straight guys! I know way too many beautiful, brilliant, kind women in relationships with men who don’t deserve them. But “paternal rights should be severed by default” is an absolutely wiiiiiiild take.
“The burden should be on the father to show that he is fit to parent alone and that his parenting time will benefit the children.”
No. This is s*x discrimination.
Well, I’m still dealing with trauma from my parents divorce over 20 years ago. It was an experience that cast a dark cloud on my entire childhood. Can you make the divorce experience less traumatic on your child than my parents did? Absolutely! But it’s still going to have at least some impact, no matter how amicable. I don’t believe enough consideration is given in a lot of divorces to the true upheaval it causes children. FWIW, I’m not saying divorce isn’t appropriate in many situations, rather that people need to do more to help the children. I am a firm believer that children are not “resilient”, they just don’t have a choice.
Co-sign. I came of age with no-fault divorce. So many of my friends have divorced parents. And I think that is why most of my friends have decided against children.
No fault divorce saved my life.
Our laws around divorce and child custody disgust me. If my mother had been able to get 100% custody and enforceable child support, my entire life would have turned out much differently and so would hers. The law forced her to remain, with lasting consequences for her and for me.
It’s an adverse childhood experience, but may be a smaller ACE than having parents constantly fighting.
The abuse the mom is escaping is already the adverse childhood experience.
And being stuck alone with the abusive dad will be another ACE.
I can’t believe people are posting this stuff and it’s not 1955. What’s the line? Does the mom stay with the abusive spouse until he puts her in the hospital? How about he kills her? Is that enough for you? That would be SO great for the kids!
So she should save her own skin and leave her kids to take the brunt of it?
If your main accomplishment for today is being an anonymous a-hole to women who are being abused, you need to go rethink your life.
My mom stayed with my abusive dad so he wouldn’t unalive me. If you haven’t lived it, you can eff off.
Women need better options. The status quo is dangerous. Moms and kids really do get hurt. People should not be in here defending the courts and the laws on this.
What’s stuck in 1955 are the laws that say an abusive dad can have custody of the children.
These replies are wild. It’s another reminder that unless you live life exactly by the book, you will get judged by a bunch of people who don’t know you but have a lot of stupid opinions about your life. The arrogance of it all. You get one life. That’s it. You can live miserably with someone who you are not compatible with, or you can get divorced and lead a happier life. My ex and I divorced because of his alcohol addiction and untreated depression. The children spend as much time as they can with him, and they see him 5-6 times a week. He is the best father he can be within his ability. I have all overnights due to his late night drinking. They are happy. Would they be happier if we hadn’t divorced? Maybe. Was the divorce an ACE? Yes. But I made the best decision I could for MYSELF and the children. I have no regrets. If it wasn’t this trauma, it would be another. Half you are from intact households and are still miserable af, so…..
These replies are a bit nuts. Your experience sounds like the best case scenario for the situation outlined. I’m glad it’s working.
Some women stay in miserable marriages and want a cookie.
Some women married good husbands and think there was no element of luck in it.
There is a huge element of luck. Many men are master manipulators and keep up the act until a woman is trapped (pregnant). Then the mask comes off and abuse begins.
You met my ex husband I take it….
Divorce is for abusive situations. Nobody who hasn’t been abused themselves has a right to have an opinion on divorce.
Divorce is for other situations as well.
Yes why is everyone acting like divorce = abuse!? I admit I live in a privileged upper middle class bubble but I would say 99% of divorces do not involve abuse!
Right. Just because one parent leaves the other does not mean abuse happened. And yes, there is a high bar to proving abuse because there is a wild range of what we view as OK vs not ideal behavior being highlighted as “abuse” in this thread. Courts may not always get it right but they do have a broader perspective.
Abuse was one of the things OP specifically asked about.
I think upper middle class more often divorce over things that aren’t abuse because divorce is expensive. I’m happy when a divorce leads to a better situation for everyone! That’s probably also more likely when people just grew apart.
Divorcing over non-ideal parenting that doesn’t constitute abuse can endanger children (a lot of non-abusive parenting is still dangerous!) and create a worse status quo vs. staying together (because of course a parent is going to lose custody over just being bad at parenting if they’re not abusive). So that is why people are also talking about non-ideal behavior that is not abuse, like patterns of lower level cruelty and neglect.
Thinking that courts generally have children’s best interests in mind to me is a little like thinking that schools do. My experience of childhood was that children’s interests come last if there’s any conflict with what adult society would find more convenient.
Really? Because I’m told that my divorce doesn’t involve abuse because it wasn’t a baseball bat or a gun. He put me in a wheelchair.
My life improved greatly after my parents divorced when I was around 14 years old. I have few to no memories of them ever being happy together and it was awful to grow up in a house with yelling and fighting (after we went to sleep, as if we wouldn’t wake up?) and miserable adults who clearly didn’t respect each other.
The divorce itself posed no issues. It was the bad relationship and its impacts that caused the issues.
The OP says divorce is better for kids if it allows the mother to escape abuse. People are responding to point out that if she leaves it will leave the kids with the abuser, so she often makes the rational choice to stay. That’s not some weird 1950s defense of marriage at any cost. It’s pragmatism about our messed-up legal system. It’s very naive to think that “a happy mom will make kids better off” when they are left alone with the person who put their mother at risk.
Feeling run down today. Physically exhausted because I haven’t been able to sleep through the night in several days, but also mentally
In the short term, mint iced tea while sitting outside. In the long term, what’s preventing you from sleeping? Is there stress you can jetison?
Time to see a doctor.
I need to ship a large (10×13 feet) wool rug internationally. Has anyone done this before and have suggestions for how I package it?
Behnam Rugs has a good “how to pack a rug” post; link to follow.
https://behnamrugs.com/how-to-pack-a-rug/
When I shipped home rugs from Afghanistan, the dealers always folded the rugs into squares, wrapped them in heavy duty black plastic, packing taped the heck out of that, and slapped the postage on.
I use suncreen but I hate it because it always feels sticky and hair winds up sticking to my face. I am usually not a sensory person and can tie my hair back on a windy beach, but for an office job and dog walking in surburbia, those baby hairs and bits of layers near my face are making me have Issues big time. I have a sampler to work through to see if I find anything, but if you know of something that isn’t like this, please post a link.
Asian sunscreens are known for being less sticky and easier for daily wear.
Agree. I like the Japanese version of the Biore UV. I also like Aqua UV brand.
I like Neutrogena’s Sheer Zinc dry-touch mineral sunscreen for my face. It doesn’t completely disappear but it isn’t sticky and has more of a matte finish than others I have tried. Note, however, that it does not wash off easily unless you use an oil cleanser.
I use Paula’s Choice Super-Light Wrinkle Defense SPF 30. It is a mineral sunscreen, so probably not a great fit if you have darker skin. It has a matte finish and isn’t sticky at all. Also not waterproof, but I don’t care about that for daily use.
I don’t use sunscreen for a day in the office with minimal outside time like walking the dog. Sunscreen tends to stay at the top of my skin instead of absorbing and I get the same feeling of discomfort always feeling it in weird ways.
I’d rather have the minimal sun damage (I don’t believe this is a big deal) than deal with the sensory issues (which are a very big deal).
Same here.
I just got the Vacation Super Spritz, it’s a face mist with SPF 50 that is not sticky or heavy on my face. It does have a fragrance but I like it.
EltaMD if you’re ok with chemical sunscreens, MD Solar Sciences mineral creme if you want mineral.
Oh, and for work, I use Revision Intellishade Matte, which is a tinted moisturizer. I stopped using foundation entirely sometime during Covid and just use this +setting powder now.
EltaMD has a mineral sunscreen too that I don’t think is too sticky.
I use a facial moisturizer with SPF, and layer a light foundation with SPF on top, and I think it gives me decent protection and isn’t sticky. My combo is Paula’s Choice Essential Glow Moisturizer with SPF 30 (I love that it’s dewy and not matte) and Bare Minerals Complexion Rescue with SPF 30.
La Roche Posay Anthelios Sunscreen for Face is the only sunscreen I’ve been able to stand for daily wear.
That’s funny. I wear this one because I’m very prone to freckling and pigmentation and it’s supposed to be the best for preventing that (although no sunscreen works as well as a hat for that, in my experience), but I hate the feeling of it on my skin.
Interesting! It’s one of the few that actually absorbs into my skin instead of just sitting on top of it, making me crazy.
You seem to be in the majority, so I guess it’s just me!
This one. It’s excellent and I’ve tried so many!
This is what I use daily too. It’s feels like a moisturizer for dry skin on my face. It doesn’t feel sticky.
My dermatologist recommended this one to me too.
La Roche Posay Anthelios Mineral Ultra-Light Face Sunscreen Fluid SPF 50
It’s dries down to a powdery finish. Not greasy at all. Also good under makeup.
This japanese sunscreen is my holy grail: Biore UV Aqua Rich Watery Essence Sunscreen SPF 50+ PA++++
It goes on SO nicely, it’s like a milky, lightweight moisturizer. It doesn’t feel sticky at all, actually a nicer texture than my drug store moisturizer. I’m obsessed, I’ve been using it for years. The only thing is that you can’t get it in the US, so I usually order through YesStyle.
Supergoop Unseen sunscreen (and its Trader Joe’s Invisible dupe) are not sticky at all. I also find that applying makeup and powder over sunscreen prevents the tackiness issue.
or Vacation’s Crystal face gel (similar as well).
For an office job and a suburban dog walk, can you just use moisturizer with SPF? I use matrons or cereve for this.
Make sure you’re using enough. Most people use just a dab and that’s effectively like an SPF 2 or something.
I like the Mad Hippie Daily Protective Serum, with 30+ UVA/UVB Zinc Oxide Sunscreen with Vit C and Hyaluronic Acid for everyday use, without makeup or under makeup. It is not heavy, greasy or white and feels good on the skin.
People who have taken Anatomy and Physiology in college (particularly in summer school), please hit me with any advice you have. I feel like I am sprinting through this and there is a LOT of material in this class. I’m grateful to my prior science teachers, because I’m really leaning on all my prior knowledge. But OMG I feel like I am struggling not to fall fatally behind. It’s 6 hours in class and then there are readings and quizzes. I feel like I could devote a full weekend every week and still be behind (and I’m not used to struggling; I’m 2 weeks in out of 8 and dreading a workload spike at work as people roll off on vacations).
Axial = armpit; that is new knowledge
I took a summer class before while working and maybe a 3-credit non-science class that met once a week gave me a false impression of how a 4-credit lab science would be. Previously, school was either easy or I could grind it out if I needed do. Now it’s hard and the grinding isn’t keeping up.
Summer classes are fast-paced. The rule of thumb is that you should be putting in 2 hours outside of class for every hour of class. 6 hours a week of class time for a summer lab science actually sounds low. When I took a summer lab science course it was 12 hours a week.
No advice, but, good luck from an AP Anatomy survivor. Can you find a study buddy to meet up with for an hour or two between classes? For quizzing each other, moral support, dividing and conquering.
I was not STEM destined so why did I do that to myself…
It’s a hard class and you just keep working at it
I took it twice to try and get a better grade. That is how I learned the health professions weren’t for me. I’ve heard of students using Notebook LM to turn lecture notes into a podcast, maybe a tool like that could help you fit in extra study time? I recall it being lots of memorization, maybe get a classmate to study with?
I’m a bio prof. Summer classes are intense and A&P is a famously intense class even in the school year. If you’re taking it during the summer, the expectation is that you can devote a significant amount of time to it. Like the poster above says, if you’re spending 6 hours in class, the expectation is that you should spend another 12 hours outside of class. If you don’t have that much time, you’re going to struggle, no way around it. You also need to be able to study effectively (and in a class like this, be decent at memorization), but there’s no shortcut for just being able to put in the time. If you can’t do that, I’d drop the class and take it again during the academic year when it moves at a more reasonable pace. And if you’re looking for general study tips, these are good, evidence based suggestions: https://learningcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/studying-101-study-smarter-not-harder/
Good luck!
Summer courses are always a sprint- it’s really hard to keep up when material is that far condensed. You may find that summer course + technical subject isn’t the right mix for you- can you drop and enroll in the fall? If you’re committed:
There’s a ton of new terminology in anatomy and you can’t really understand the material until you’ve grasped the jargon. Making a master list of terms or flashcards can be really helpful. Likewise, take notes in the margins of your books.
It also helps me to do the readings before the lecture- making sure I’m anticipating what’s coming means I get more out of the lectures. Most textbooks also have knowledge checks- do them before class, so you understand what you know and don’t know.
Lastly, having to explain something to someone else is the best metric of truly understanding something. Studying with someone else can really help burn in information, time and schedule permitting. If you’re not going to office hours, go to office hours.
What are you hoping to achieve with this? If professional school, MD, DO, DDS consider it a taste of the 4 years of school that are coming. It IS a huge amount of time necessary and honestly I don’t see a way to decrease that if you want the grade that will get you IN to professional school.
I took anatomy and physiology 1&2 concurrently in a summer course. It was busy! I was also working part time. It consumed most of my life and added up to more than a full time job.
My med school professor always said that studying is like eating pancakes. You like pancakes! They are yummy. That’s why you are in class. Every day you are in class you get one pancake. If you eat it right away (stay on top of your studying) you will enjoy it! If you put off eating your pancakes, you’ll come to the weekend and have 7 pancakes to eat before Monday and suddenly pancakes aren’t so fun anymore.
Eat your pancakes!
Anatomy and physiology is different from other HS/college science classes in terms of the nature of the material and how you’re required to learn it, in my view. I found it less conceptual than other sciences and it required much more rote memorization and distinctly remember lots of smart premed kids getting knocked on their heels, because you can’t just extrapolate conceptual knowledge to the same degree. I loved it, but it was just a slog of material to get through. Flashcards and blank diagrams that you fill out are your friend. Do not fall behind – study early and often.
Just FYI, it’s your Axilla, not Axial.
Got an abnormal Pap smear for the first time (atypical glandular cells) and am freaking out a bit. No HPV, but have some abnormal bleeding. Seems like there is a good chance it is cancer/precancer, but could also be nothing. Any words of wisdom or experience? Obviously working with my gyno, but my appointment isn’t for a week.
From what I understand, cervical cancer is a very slow growing cancer. If this is your first abnormal, typically they’ll call you back for another pap in 6 months and see if it’s still abnormal. If it is, you’ll get a culpo, which is a biopsy of your cervix. If that is abnormal, I think the next step is a LEEP, which is a laser removal of a thin layer of cells from your cervix to try to remove all the abnormal cells. I’ve had a culpo but not a LEEP.
Insist on pain management for the culpo and if they shrug and say you won’t even feel it, find another doctor. I’ve only had to have one, unmedicated, but I screamed and jumped off the exam table when they cut me. They didn’t get a big enough chunk so they had to cut me again. I was in tears. The only good thing I can say is that the pain didn’t last long, I went directly back to the office after. Up to you whether you’d prefer a day off work with anesthesia or a quick detour in your day with intense but brief searing pain. There is a growing movement about this sort of thing – hat tip to Kat about the IUD articles the other week – so hopefully this has improved in the ~15 years since I last had it done.
I’m the anon below and while I didn’t scream during the colposcopy, I definitely felt it AND had a vaso vagal incident and fainted as I was leaving the building. so +1 to pain management and build in some extra time around your appointment in case you need to lie down and drink juice for a few extra minutes.
Hi I was in your shoes last year! I had an abnormal pap with the high risk HPV strains (so fun) and was beyond anxious. I got a colposcopy (it hurt and I bled a decent amount, not going to sugarcoat that) and the colposcopy came back clear. I now get paps every 6 months and each one has been abnormal but not with the HPV. My doctor doesn’t seem worried so I’m taking that as a good sign.
Cervical cancer is apparently really slow growing most of the time, so I am sure you’ll be fine. There’s a Reddit that I found comforting to read because a lot of women had an abnormal pap, a colposcopy, and then maybe a LEEP and are totally fine now. Sending you healthy vibes!!!!!
I had an abnormal pap in my early 20s. I did have a high risk strain of HPV (I’m old enough that the vaccine was not standard yet, but I got it in my 20s) colpo, and then “cold knife cone” biopsy completely took care of it. Then another abnormal pap a couple years later, after my first pregnancy. Same deal. That was 10+ years and two kids ago, and all my paps have been normal since then. My gynocologic oncologist kicked me out after 6 years and I’m back to normal gyn and normal pap schedule now.
I remember being really scared for my own health and my future fertility after the first bad pap. So, hugs to you, but yes cervical cancer (if that’s even what it is) is very slow growing. if you’ve been getting regular paps, they’ve probably caught it very early, and it’s very, very treatable at that point.
For what it’s worth, I had the same finding a decade or so ago. I then had a colposcopy and then an intrauterine biopsy (fun!) and they never found anything. I’m still here and kicking.
Best of luck!
Can you all please help me with a marital debate? My husband says our food expenditure is too high/not comparable to what other families “must be spending” based on average family incomes.
We spend about $2000 per month on food for a family of 5 (three kids under 5), which includes all of our meals (kids eat lunch at home or packed lunches and husband and I WFH). We get takeout 1x per week (pizza, $30) and eat at a restaurant about 2x per month ($2000 doesn’t include restaurant meals). We shop at Costco, WF, Trader Joe’s and butcherbox. We do eat meat with every meal (mostly grass fed/pastured) and lots of fresh produce (some organic). I cook 5-6 nights per week. We live in NYC suburbs.
My life is nothing like this (childfree, live in a LCOL city), so my spend probably doesn’t relate, though $2000 does not seem like an overly huge amount for that many people eating good food! My big suggestion is if he thinks it’s too much, then he could grocery shop and prepare the food!
It’s quite a bit higher than our food spending, but doesn’t seem crazy to me, considering our family is only 3 people total, we live in a LCOL area and we eat a decent number of vegetarian meals.
That doesn’t sound high to me. We spend about $800-1000 for just the two of us adults (no kids), and we’re in a rural midwestern state.
Meat with *every* meal? Breakfast, lunch, and dinner? There’s a great way to save money right there–cut down. Better for you, the planet, your wallet.
No meat with breakfast – eggs or yogurt.
You’re not helping your case
What “case”? She’s allowed to eat what she wants.
Our grocery spending is $600 per month for a three adult (one is a home for the summer college student) household. That includes more than food, things like paper products and cleaning supplies.
That’s insanely cheap to me! A typical weekly grocery shopping at a generic, non-fancy store approaches $300 per week for us, and we have a younger kid and eat out quite a bit.
We don’t eat much meat so this is mostly focused on vegetarian meals, although we do cook nearly all of our meals at home. We also do a significant amount of baking and try to minimize food waste, so many of our meals are planned out with leftovers that become another meal (or two). We tend to do a lot of farmers market shopping and aim to cook with whatever produce is in season (and thus cheaper) in a given week.
I would agree with your husband. Under the USDA’s “liberal” food plan, eating all meals at home for a family with two kids aged 2-3, one kid aged 4-5, and one female parent and one male parent each aged 50 or under should cost $1,534.25 per month.
I think this fact weighs in OP’s favor, not her husband’s! National numbers like this are always very low.
Agreed! To me that says her spending is totally normal
Exactly. If the national average for something is $1,500 and you’re doing it on $2k near NYC, I’d say you’re doing very well! I know food costs don’t scale like housing does, but it’s definitely still more expensive in HCOL areas.
These debates are always challenging. You can look at the USDA average estimates and see it ranges 1000 to 1600 for a family of 4. At the end of the day though, I don’t think a debate on averages is helpful. Does he help with the grocery shopping/meal planning? If not, bring him into the process so he can see what each thing is costing and can suggest specifically where he would cut cost.
Whole Foods and Butcherbox are where all that $$$ is going. You can get grassfed organic beef, organic milk, etc. at Walmart for a lot less. The one thing I will buy at WF is Bell and Evans chicken breast because it doesn’t have the woody texture that all other chicken has, but I limit that to once every couple of weeks and rely on chicken thighs, ground chicken, or fish otherwise.
But like. What’s the actual problem? I never set foot in Walmart because I make enough money that I don’t need to
Clearly her husband doesn’t think it’s worth hundreds of dollars a month just so she can have the fun of shopping at Whole Foods instead of Walmart for the exact same organic food.
This. Maybe WF is closer to her. Maybe she likes it better for some reason. Etc.
If they can afford the food and are enjoying their meals, then the only reason to change is to satisfy a vague complaint by the husband. Which means he can figure out how to do it cheaper and get the same meals…
totally this. What cost savings does he propose and will he support?
Yes, this! You guys have created an eating lifestyle that currently costs $2k a month. I’m not sure how much it matters whether a different family with the same income has chosen the same/different lifestyle around food. You can change that lifestyle and spend less, if you like. There are always ways to cut! It sounds like he wants to do that. Do you?
Or they could just shop for the exact same food at less expensive places.
And get hormone-fueled meat instead of grass fed, pasture raised, cage free organic?
Cheaper stores sell grass-fed organic meat.
They could just not eat meat or eat less of it.
You’re choosing some expensive options (grass-fed meat, Butcherbox, WF), but I guess it comes down to what tradeoffs you’re willing to make. My family of 4 comes nowhere close to $2K a month, but we also stick to the local big-box grocery store, don’t shop at specialty places, and don’t have meat at every meal.
We also are a family of 5 with 3 kids under 5. We spend about $1000 per month on groceries. We shop mostly at Wegmans, Costco, TJs, and Aldi. Lots of organic produce here too, though less so for things with thick skin like bananas and oranges. A big difference is that we rarely eat meat. Suburbs outside a large NE city.
OP here – I miss Wegmans so much! (lived for many years near Wegmans stores)
That’s pretty high. We spend around $500 for two adults eating pretty much every meal at home and I don’t feel like I’m scrimping at all. There’s plenty of room to bring it down if you want to, but it’s also reasonable to decide you’d rather spend on good food at home rather than eating out.
Fresh produce is expensive, organic or not, but that seems very high. I would guess that what’s driving your grocery bill up is the meat, the shopping at Whole Foods and Butcherbox, and probably snacks and packaged foods like fancy yogurt, kombucha, snack bars, granola, etc. At Publix, which is less expensive than Whole Foods, it’s $9 for a box of 5 snack bars my kids like, $3 for the yogurt I like, $4+ for a single-serve bottle of kombucha depending on the brand, $9 for a small bag of the granola my husband likes, and $5 for a bag of low-carb snacks that he eats in a single sitting. You can decide to prioritize spending on these daily luxuries, or you can start shopping at Walmart and/or shift away from fancy packaged foods and save like $1,000 a month.
Costco and Trader Joe’s are the places to go for those little treats.
It might not be quite as good as the Whole Foods versions, but they cost half as much.
Are you doing all the shopping and budgeting, and your husband gets sticker shock? Sounds like a great time for him to take over the meal planning; let him find the savings.
+1 People who don’t food shop are always surprised at the cost.
Particularly since the price of food has skyrocketed in the last few years.
It’s a reasonable amount to spend I think. If you want to spend less but still eat healthily, try swapping meat for lentils in some meals, and adding beans (like kidney beans etc) with the meat in some meals.
Or…let him do meal planning, shopping and prep for 6 months.
You don’t need to swap in lentils, you just need to stop shopping at Whole Paycheck.
This is going to vary so widely depending on where people live. I think you could spend less if you want to by buying less expensive groceries, especially meat–eat less beef, more conventional meat and produce, and stock up staples including meat when they are on sale–but I assume you are choosing those options for reasons that are important to you. We are a family of 2 adults and a tween in Brooklyn and averaged under $1K/month on groceries in the last 12 months, but if you add in restaurant meals and delivery, its closer to $2K a month.
Does that include all your non-food purchases at the grocery store? Like toilet paper, paper towels, laundry detergent, etc? That stuff can add up quick and as a family of five you would go through a lot.
That seems really high to me, but you are picking to shop at expensive places (WF) and picking expensive items (organic, grassfed, meat with all meals). Assuming you can afford it, only you and your husband can decide if those priorities are worth it.
In your case (and assuming there isn’t a legitimate financial concern), I would probably tell my husband that he can live with it or we can redistribute chores so that he’s doing the cooking and grocery shopping.
I don’t think the husband should have to take over cooking and shopping just to get her to stop shopping at Whole Foods. That’s just pouring money down the drain.
I kind of agree with this. She is choosing some of the most expensive options available!
Maybe WF is in a more convenient location? Ease of use plays a big factor.
Why not? Why shouldn’t she shop where she likes?
Because she is literally pouring money down the drain?
Because her husband thinks its a problem and that’s the kind of decision married people don’t make unilaterally.
Then her husband can do the shopping and provide a solution!
If the husband were the one shopping at Whole Foods and then demanding that she take over shopping if she didn’t like it, we’d call that weaponzied incompetence.
Whole Foods had gotten very cheap since Amazon acquired it.
About $700 for one person, but I eat what I want and good quality. I live in a VHCOL area.
I have leaned into high quality, high priced convenience meals during a hard season of my life. Shopping is largely Publix, Whole Foods, Fresh Market, and a local tiny grocery store that sources mainly locally produced food. I will admit to sometimes buying very pricy bourbon banana bread there.
Do you waste food, or eat everthing you buy? Do you enjoy the food you eat? Can you afford it?
As long as it’s affordable to you and you don’t have too much food waste, it’s a good thing that some people choose to buy the best practice produced food!
I do think it’s high. We probably spend closer to 1000/month but with two kids. If you use grocery delivery, that can drive the price up quite a bit vs shopping normally. I think the complainer should have to budget and shop, so maybe he gets a new hobby if it bothers him.
It sounds like you eat a lot of high quality and fresh foods. It also sounds like retail prices are high where you live, which just comes with HCOL. Yes there are people who are spending less by relying more on bulk grains and legumes and cheaper meats and frozen vegetables. But does he really want to eat different meals?
If you want to spend less on similar quality food, it’s probably possible to cut out the middle man a bit more and source from farms, but it will cost you in convenience so it should be the decision of the person who cooks 5-6 nights per week.
Also where you shop matters. Whole Foods vs Market Basket (suburban Boston. iykyk..) can swing over $50 a shopping trip easily for produce and other weekly essentials for my family of 4. We actually tested it two weekends in a row. It…was…staggering.
I’m close to half that with a family of four and I’m not careful with spending. I shop weekly at Trader Joe’s and supplement with instacart. We don’t eat a lot of red meat but do eat a lot of salmon, which is pricey. Are you eating beer and pork at every meal or do you mean poultry too?
Haha meant beef – but if there is fancy beer in your cart that would get pricey too :)
I think it’s hilarious that people are suggesting making the husband take over. The solution is obvious–get rid of Whole Foods and Butcherbox.
Why? It works for OP and she doesn’t seem to have a problem with it.
Because they have joint finances and he doesn’t agree with wasting money just for a luxury shopping experience?
Then he should probably take over the shopping and solve the problem that he identified. WF isn’t Chanel. My Trader Joe’s and WF are in the same shopping plaza. I have only a couple hours to get grocery shopping done in a weekend. I’d rather pay a premium at WF (sorry, I mean have a luxury shopping experience!) than spend my entire Sunday driving around to save a couple buck
I am dying laughing at WF being a “luxury shopping experience”. Yes to high prices for high quality. But my trip to a local WF yesterday was an absolute shitshow. I left 10x more stressed than when I entered.
My “luxury shopping experience” is Fresh Market, with classical music playing lightly in the background, complimentary coffee while you shop, plenty of room to navigate the store even when a bit busy, and a largely very polite clientele.
I think you’re being willfully ignorant about how “luxury shopping experience” is being used here.
I feel like there’s an “intern with the Birkin” joke to be made here for the OG readers.
This!! These may be the most convenient options for her. If she has a lot of other stuff on her proverbial plate, that means a lot.
I have zero patience for complainers who just “feel” like something is wrong without contributing to the solution.
I mean, you could turn your zero patience on its head and ask her how she’s planning on bringing in more money to contribute to the solution. Because if money is tight now, what happens when those babies grow a little . . .
I’m not sure why you’re so committed to demonizing the OP. But anyway! Nowhere in her post does she indicate that the food budget is a hardship. Just that her husband feels like it should cost less.
Family of 5 in the Boston suburbs. We spend a little less but this number is tricky- is that $2k JUST food groceries or does it include toiletries and the other misc that creeps into the grocery cart? Also, our kids tend to buy lunch more than bring from home.
Our weekly major grocery shop is ~$250-300/week. Then we usually have a secondary shop that’s more like $50. We don’t usually do restaurants, but I’d say we do takeout 1-2x/week, plus during the peak of sports seasons we do what I call “grab and go sideline dinners” which are dinners made up of stuff in the grocery store (local chain or Trader Joes) pre-made case like salads or sandwiches, so add another $20-50/week for those.
It’s just the two of us but we have this debate pretty often. DH is fine with non-organic, hormoned-out stuff. I want to support ethical farming practices and at my income level we can afford healthier options. Here are some of our compromises:
– he does the grocery shopping but agrees to get only the no hormone organic etc stuff that I prefer
– him being in charge of shopping means he shops for the best deals, which I admittedly wouldn’t do
– we freeze a lot of meat, like the manager specials that are going bad in a few days. It’s also cheaper to buy in bulk; buy a beef tenderloin and have the butcher cut it into filet mignon portions for you (for free). We’ve become more organized so we actually use the freezer meat.
– he’s REALLY good at cooking weird or low quality cuts of meat. That flank steak can be amazing with some extra care and the right cooking method.
– spatchcocked chicken always seems to be way cheaper than chicken breasts or even a whole chicken, and it cooks more evenly than a whole chicken. You can also break down a few whole chickens rather than buy just chicken breasts.
– we’re looking into buying part of a cow from a local farmer rather than getting beef from the store. It works out to be cheaper than what we’re currently paying. Even though it’s probably more than big box store, DH is excited about the prospect of getting a cow from a local farmer.
we’re also a family of 5 but my kids are school-age, and $2000 is a little high if it’s just groceries and for little kids, but with weekly pizza takeout and higher end meat and produce, it sounds reasonable. I shop at TJs, Safeway/Giant and Costco, and do not seek out organics. We also do not eat meat every day.
Our food budget-killer is fast casual when we’re out and about, and we also splurge for milk and egg delivery from a localish creamery.
In NYC, albeit in a poor neighborhood so groceries are less than in other neighborhoods. For 2 adults our groceries including cleaning & paper products are around $1000-1200/month. We eat meat for dinner 4-5 days/week, and all meat, all eggs, and most produce comes from the farmer’s market, so I know I’m not bargain shopping. Agree with others that if your husband wants to save, he needs to be actively involved in the solution.
I’m impressed you’re able to feed 5 people with $30 worth of takeout pizza! For just me and my husband we usually spend close to $50 with delivery and tip.
Reread the prompt – they’re all toddlers. They probably couldn’t eat more than a slice each!
Yes, we get 1 pie and I usually also make a homemade salad/vegetable with it.
5 year olds are not toddlers and can definitely put away several slices of pizza! But $50 for pizza is wild to me. An extra large cheese pizza at our local place is $18 and feeds our family of 3 with lots of leftovers.
I guess pizza is just more expensive where I live.
$50 is very high.
Nah, that’s what I spend too when I order from the local mom & pop and not a big chain. A 2-topping pizza is $30, delivery fees are another $10, and then I tip the driver $10. Sure I could order from dominos but I like supporting a local business and the food is so much better.
That’s delivery pizza then, not takeout! You too could feed your family with $30 of takeout pizza if you took it out and didn’t have it delivered.
I agree it’s high, but that’s not your real problem. What does your husband wish the money was going towards instead? Savings? A fancy vacation? Home repairs? The answer really impacts how much this should matter and whether it makes sense to keep hashing this out. If you are short on emergency savings (< 6 months spend) but shopping at Whole Foods, that's very different scenario than you shopping at Whole Foods and him wishing he could lease a nicer car to drive to the office.
I do think you need to work on budgeting, though, because once those little ones get bigger, you're going to be dropping $3,000-$4,000 a month if you keep it up. And that's probably part of why your husband is concerned.
I think we easily spend that for two of us, no kids.
Wow, that’s impressive.
Sounds like your husband needs to take over shopping and cooking.
If you wanted to save money, you could cut down on meat and still have extremely high quality, nutritious food shopping wherever you like.
If that doesn’t include restaurant spending then I do think that is a lot. We are a family of six in the NYC suburbs, including a 10yo that eats man-sized portions. For all our food and beverages we aim for $1500/month. On a bad month, like May when we hosted a party, it’s still less than $2000.
We try to be somewhat frugal and quality of food is important to me, but I don’t feel like we limit our food consumption much at all
High but I get it on the hormone free meat and organic produce, especially berries.
Can you lean into Costco and watch sales? I find that to be the best value. And frozen organic berries with occasional fresh berries is a better value . The meal kits also work well to divide for work lunches.
If you’re cooking at home 5-6 nights a week with 3 young kids, that’s doing pretty well.
Can you sub out a little bit of meat for tofu/beans/lentils? And can you switch from beef to chicken for some meals? That would reduce costs and as a bonus is more climate friendly (said as a meat eater!).
I’m just providing another data point: our family of 4 spends $1,850 per month (this includes paper products and any other Costco items but not dog food and not eating out). We cook and eat out at the same frequency as you (although our pizza here is $60 unless it’s from Costco). I try to buy the best quality meat and produce within reason. I don’t have time to shop sales or farmer’s market (plus veg at farmer’s market is weirdly expensive here). I’ve also throught about our food budget and how much more money we spend now than five years ago (about twice). This year, I’m going to try buying a quarter cow share and see how that goes. I already buy farm chickens which, while more expensive, are much tastier and more filling. I’m also thinking about a bread machine and getting my nine yo to run it instead of spending $15/week on “fancy” but still mediocre bread.
Lifelong soft sided luggage user here, curious about the hard, clam shell luggage, as I need a new suitcase for myself and my two elementary aged kids. My hesitation about clamshell are: 1) do they take up a lot of space in hotel room because you have to open them all the way flat? Is that an issue? 2) do you need to use packing cubes with them or everything gets crazy? I’m not so keen on packing cubes but I guess I could be convinced. Not sure why everyone likes them, especially for relatively short trips (week or less).
They don’t work with hotel luggage racks. They take up a lot of space and have to be opened on the floor or the bed, two places where you are not supposed to put your suitcase if you are trying to avoid bringing bedbugs home. They look awful after one trip under the plane.
What? I open my hard sided case on the luggage rack every time I travel. I have been a road warrior for over a decade. I think you have no idea what you are talking about.
I assume you tend to use something with a non-suitcase shape like maybe a weekend bag or backpack? I can’t say that there is much difference between suitcases with hard sides vs flexible sides for the aspects you asked about. Packing cubes are highly useful but not mandatory. Almost every hotel room has a rack and a corner of space to lay open the suitcase, which I definitely want to do regardless of hard or soft sides. The alternative is to unpack the whole suitcase, but I only do that for longer stays.
Hard-sided suitcases can’t be opened on the hotel luggage rack because it only supports one side.
You can rotate it 90 degrees and open it the other way on the luggage rack, at least with a carry-on size bag.
Hard shells definitely fit on basically any normal sized luggage rack. You open the suitcase in front of you like a book, with the luggage rack rails running left to right under both sides of the shell. The shell hangs off all around but as long as you have it centered and not very overloaded in one far corner, it works without problem.
Tried clamshell recently and the need to lay flat was a dealbreaker. Went back to soft sided.
1- yes. I find it really annoying
2- no you don’t need to
I’ll use my hard shell until it breaks but I preferred my soft sided luggage
We have clamshells and it’s fine, although I do find it really annoying to have to open it fully flat to get things out. Honestly, I’ve never found a luggage brand that holds up really wear to frequent use (and I don’t think I’m that hard on luggage) so we’ve gone back to just buying cheap ones at Target and figuring we’ll replace them pretty frequently. The last Target one lasted 3ish years and we travel a lot, so the cost per use was very low.
Spinner wheels are very important for kids, particularly kids under the age of 8 or so. It’s much easier to push luggage than pull it. Except after red-eye flights, my daughter has been fully independent with her own luggage in airports since she was 4 or so, and that wouldn’t have been possible without spinner wheels.
I’ve used a Victorinox clamshell carbon fiber bag for over a decade. If there is a luggage rack or dresser, I can open it with one half upright against the wall. I wouldn’t have anything else.
Are you talking about carry on or checked, or both? My personal preference for carry on is a hard side because they tend to be quite a bit lighter, and I’m short and often trying to pack for a week on business so it’s easier to lift up, wheel around, etc. I do use packing cubes, and laying flat isn’t a big deal for a carry on size. An underrated feature of hard side carry ons is they either fit in the overhead bin or they don’t; no overstuffing a soft side then trying to jam it in, it getting stuck, holding up boarding, etc. If I’m checking a bag though, I prefer my expandable soft side with interior organization. Honestly the most important thing about suitcases is quality of the wheels and handles, after that I look at weight and overall quality. Having a suitcase fail on a trip is a miserable experience.
I prefer my soft clamshell backpack for air travel when possible, but do like my hard clamshell roller suitcase when we are traveling by car. I can balance the hard clamshell on a small surface without it flopping over and dumping on the floor, which the soft clamshell doesn’t necessarily do well. My hard shell has inner straps and zipper covers so I don’t have to use packing cubes to keep things contained, but I still prefer to use cubes because they help me more easily separate dirty things from clean.
I find clamshells very annoying and vastly prefer my Travelpro soft-sided rollaboards. Lightweight, hold up well to wear and tear (aka checking with connections), versatile, and not $$$$.
I’ll be going back to a soft sided suitcase once my current one bites the dust. I hate it for all the reasons posted by others.
I’m a lifelong hard sided luggage user. No, you don’t have to use packing cubes, but you certainly could if you want to. I’ve never had a problem fitting it on a hotel luggage rack. You just put it sideways and open it up. Half or each side hangs off the edge but that’s never been a problem with a hard sided bag. To me, hard sided feels more durable, and I also think it protects the contents better. If you pack something breakable inside, and you use good padding, it will survive. I once packed a bottle of wine inside my hard sided bag and checked it, and it arrived fine (of course I put it in a plastic bag just in case). I would’ve been really worried about doing that with a soft sided bag. The key to a great bag imo is the quality of the wheels and how easy it is to roll. I recently replaced my hard sided with a different brand (Cal Pak) and the new one is heavenly.
I check wine all the time in my soft sided luggage. It is my fave Europe souvenir – inexpensive but fabulous. No incidents. Just bury them in dirty clothes so they’re cushioned and don’t have room to shift in tr-sit.
All of this. I don’t understand the soft side love. For air travel nothing beats a hard side. A soft tote is what you take in the car to the country house.
I don’t think anyone is advocating for weekender bags, which I agree are only for a short driving trip. There are structured roll aboard carry-on suitcases that are softer and not clamshell style, so you can get things out of the bag without opening it up fully flat. Like this: https://travelpro.com/products/crew%E2%84%A2-classic-carry-on-expandable-spinner
Has anyone traveled to Tunisia? I’m thinking of a 10-14 day trip to Tunisia and Morocco with my 21 year old daughter in January. I would love any recommendations/tips.
I have not but did go to Morocco and loved it. You could EASILY spend that long in Morocco alone – it is a big country and some of the most interesting places, e.g. the big cities and the Sahara desert, are far apart. I would go back in heartbeat.
With 10 days I would spend the whole time in Morocco. We had 7 and wished we could have had a few more (time for 2 city bases + mountain-slash-desert experience).
Thanks, I should have said that I have already spent a week in Morocco, so I am more focused on the Tunisia portion.
Tunisia is a very, very small country, so I’d recommend spending the majority of your trip in Morocco. I’ve only been to Tunisia, so I’ll let others comment on Morocco. I personally loved Tunisia, but I kept it more low key, and that might not satisfy you. In Tunis, definitely go to the old city and take the tram/metro up to Carthage. I love Tunisian food for its mix of African, Arab, and French influences, but if you don’t like harissa or seafood (especially tuna), your options will be more limited. I like ruins, so seeing troglodyte (AKA underground) ruins was fun, whether it was Roman ruins or what was used as sets for Star Wars. You can take Le Lizard Rouge (a train) out to the border with Algeria, but it has no activities except for seeing the desert. Djerba is your classic Europeans-head-south-on-holiday resort area.
What I liked most about Tunisia was the biodiversity. You’ve got Tatooine-like desert, rolling fields like France around Djerba, and an honest to goodness deciduous forest in the north.
suggestions for a current summer sandal/heel with a solid heel, no more than 2 inches. white or gold or silver or “nude” can be open toed or not. i have very casual slides or black. need something new.
to wear with a midi length summer dress. thanks.
https://www.nordstrom.com/s/jeffrey-campbell-adapt-slingback-sandal-women/7255674
I’d like to create a summer work “uniform” and am looking for suggestions. Have you come across any short sleeved or sleeveless dresses that I could buy five of and rotate through all summer? Or do you have a suggestions for a summer work outfit “recipe” that I could very easily put together? I’m back in the office five days a week and having a “uniform” for winter/spring really helped simplify my mornings so I’m trying to do something similar this summer. And thanks to the people who recommender the BR Factory Forever Sweater when I asked this question a few months ago. I bought five and they’ve been perfect!
The Boden Amelie dress may work for you.
My basic summer formulas are:
Neutral top + solid-colored cardi or blazer + black or navy pants
Solid-colored top + neutral topper + neutral pants (basically the reverse of option 1)
Short-sleeved top with some kind of interest + neutral pants
I’ve decided that this month, I’m wearing dresses on M/W and a pants or skirt outfit on T/Th. The decide-once principle. I’ve found that I need fewer clothes to get by in the summer, thanks to WFH on Fridays, vacations, fewer meetings to dress up for, etc.
Oh, almost forgot that I’m in a short-sleeve sweater moment and have been using them a lot over the past 6 weeks or so.
If you want to wear a dress, I think shirt dresses are a good staple. Lots of retailers have them this time of year. You could also try a linen button down like the ones at J Crew or BR (or their factory sites) and similar bottoms you were wearing earlier in the year.
I do not have this dress (yet) but I’m very tempted
https://www.marinelayer.com/products/camila-maxi-dress-5
Forced myself to do some in-person shopping this weekend, and I think my best course of action is to ride out the high-rise pants trend and keep using what I have, even if it’s less than ideal. They don’t fit me right, at all, and inevitably give me a stomachache after sitting all day. I tried many sizes, styles, brands, curvy vs. straight, and none were right. Even a few pairs labeled mid-rise came up to my belly button, and I have a long rise/torso! I am done.
I just saw a pair of jeans with a rise of 9.5″ labeled “low-rise.” Some years ago that would have been “high-rise.”
I know! For a long time after high-rise became the norm, Madewell had an 8″ low rise that fit me perfectly… now their lowest rise is 9.5″.
I have a very short torso and long legs, and I was pretty demoralized by a recent in-person shopping trip. Many of the pants I tried on grazed my ribs! And left puddles of extra fabric around my groin. High-rises and even what are labeled “mid-rise” are both uncomfortable and unflattering on my short-torso-ed, long-legg-ed self.
Does anyone know of any retailers offering genuinely low-rise pants? Like the early-2000s Editor pants from Express? Those fit me so well.
I have this body type too! Despite the name, the “Mid Rise Easy ’90s Loose Jeans” from Gap are actually low rise. In the “beach pebble” color, at least, the “Mid Rise UltraSoft Baggy Jeans” are also low rise (but caveat emptor, the waist band is cut off!)
Have you not bought new pants in the last 10 years? High rise is not exactly a new trend.
Thanks for the snarkiness. I have. The current high-rise is much, much higher.
Measure the rise on pants you like. Then shop online. In store is just the trendiest stuff. Nordstrom lists the front and back rise and inseam of pants online, for example.
Spendy option but… Amo jeans are my favorite as someone who hates sitting in high rise jeans.
I am the poster from 2 weeks ago who discussed the passing of my DH’s mother and the complicated relationship we have with his family. I have an update, and need some advice.
DH has 6 sisters, one of whom is a criminal, a number of whom have intense problems with boundaries. One in particular, we’ll call her H, is known for overstepping with her siblings and their lives. For example, when her older sister had a child, H decided her sister was “too strict,” and called her sister’s husband to tell him she “planned to do something about their parenting style.” Nothing came of that thankfully, likely because the older sister lives 14 hours away.
Recall that DH’s family has refused to meet me, did not attend our wedding, and DH is generally civil but largely estranged from them. Also recall H intentionally tried to set my DH up with another woman when she first learned he and I were dating 3 years ago. After that, DH blocked her. She called my cell phone (retrieved my number form her mother’s phone) to tell us his mother was dying. His family knew she was ill for 13 months and none of his family told him. My DH had 13 hours to prepare for his mother’s passing.
H lives 90 minutes from DH, me and our baby. At their mother’s funeral, she made a threatening comment along the lines of, “Well I still need to meet [your baby] so that will happen soon.” DH is afraid to block her again and cut ties because he is concerned she will show up at our home, telephone his place of work, telephone my place of work, or find a way to reach out directly to my family. She has a history of all of these activities, with him and his other siblings. My DH is genuinely afraid of her; the first time I have ever seen him afraid of anything. She also has a history of “using” the kids–for example, when DH blocked her, she had her step-children texting him saying how much they missed him, how he should just leave me and move home, etc.
I don’t think we have enough for a TRO in our jurisdiction. What are my options? I’ve been sick to my stomach worrying she’s going to show up at our home when DH and the baby are at home, and I’m at work. I want to do all I can to guarantee she never comes near our family again. She is dangerous, likely mentally ill, and has no interest in seeking help for her issues. All recommendations welcome. I am a new mom, and I am afraid.
The comment about wanting to meet your baby, without all the backstory, doesn’t seem threatening to me, but I can see how it could come across as ominous given all the history. Talk with DH about what the plan would be if sister shows up at the house when (a) you are both at home; (b) you’re at home alone with the baby; and (c) he’s home alone with the baby. Act out some scenarios. Hopefully that will give you confidence that if the worst happens and she shows up, you and he both have a plan that you’re both comfortable with.
OP here – this is very helpful. Thank you.
You’re very welcome and I hope you find some peace. One more scenario to plan for: (d) you’re both out and the baby is home with a babysitter.
I like this advice. Get a video doorbell so that any visit is recorded. Also just agree that the answer to any of the scenarios above could be as simple as “call the police and report a trespasser”. You don’t have to explain who the person is to the police – just tell them a trespasser is on your porch banging on your door and you are afraid they are trying to break in.
It doesn’t seem that H has ever been violent, correct? Then you’re worrying about harassment, which, while troublesome, does not put your family in danger. Take a breath and try to keep distinguishing between bothersome harassment, which can be solved with a restraining order, and violence, where there’s actual fear of bodily harm.
OP here – I definitely take your point about harassment vs. violence. Unfortunately, I have some friends who have dealt with harassment of their young children, and it has detrimental impacts on the kids, so I’m doing all I can to shield my child from that scenario.
But literally she has done nothi g
OP here: She’s done this on more than 10 occasions to my DH and his ex-GFs and to her other sisters. She’s called their jobs, cold call in-laws, shown up and walked through unlocked doors in homes she’s never been to before because she has a “right” to as a “sister.” There’s a really long history of this behavior. You’re right she’s done nothing directly to me or my child yet. I’d love to keep it that way. But I’m afraid now that’s she’s clearly got us in her sights.
I believe you that this woman triggers fear in you and I support you staying away and having no/as little relationship with her as possible.
“ At their mother’s funeral, she made a threatening comment along the lines of, “Well I still need to meet [your baby] so that will happen soon.” is on its face not a threat at all. Can you okay the tape to the end- you think she’ll show up and knock on your door and then what? You could simply not answer it, right? I’m trying to understand the physical threat you think you are in, stripping away all the rest.
OP here – my husband has not been able to articulate what he thinks would happen should she show up, but he visibly shakes when he talks about the possibility. For the record, he’s 6’3 250 lbs, and I’ve literally never seen him afraid of anything.
Sounds like he’s just afraid of the unpleasantness. Which is valid.
I drew the conclusion that there’s more context there that he hasn’t been able to convey to OP. Agree with the poster below that talking to an expert seems wise, to get to the bottom of it.
If he has this kind of physical reaction, I would gently suggest that he needs to seriously consider therapy focused on this relationship with his sister. A therapist can also help talk through what to do if she comes to the house or wherever else he’s afraid of meeting her. Sending good wishes to both of you.
+1
Eh, I think that comment can be delivered in such a way that it’s received as “threatening” – not a threat of violence but a threat that she’s going to disregard OP/DH’s preference and just show up and force an interaction, positive or negative. So, I don’t think it’s productive to get in to semantics of threat or not … it was perceived as a threat of some kind.
That all said, OP, I really like the first comment – have a plan with your DH. What do you do if she shows up? Decide now if you call the police? Simply lock the door and do not answer? What do you do? I think that’s all you can do at this stage.
I’m sorry you’re having to go through this. I have incredibly complex in laws in different and similar ways to you. Wishing you resolution and peace.
I agree. Saying it WILL happen soon could absolutely be said in a threatening manner. She’s not asking, she stating her intention to see the baby regardless of anyone wishes.
Well no wonder he didn’t want you to attend the funeral! It sounds like you’re leaving some things out probably because you don’t know the whole story here. I don’t know what kind of crimes we’re talking about or what the basis for “dangerous” is. But can DH talk to a DV counselor who would understand the situation better and also know the options for staying safe now? It sounds like he needs therapeutic support right now if he is this afraid over something that may well happen (her showing up). I don’t know the context for why keeping the doors locked and checking the security camera and calling the cops if she tries to break in isn’t enough of a plan for now.
I should say that I believe you that she’s dangerous; I just don’t know what the danger is (is she armed? etc.) so I’m not sure what the precautions should be either.
OP here – thank you for this comment. DH and I share concerns about her banging on the doors and windows while our child is in the house. We’ve both experienced harassment of that kind as children, and vividly remember how fearful it made us. We’re trying to avoid that kind of situation at all costs, if we can.
But. She’s never once done that.
OP here: She’s done it more than 10x to my husband and his ex-GFs, and to her other sisters. She has a long history of that behavior.
Doesn’t matter. OP and her husband feel afraid. Making a plan will help them feel less afraid. End of discussion. It totally does not matter whether that fear turns out to be justified.
Can we please just trust that OP is a reliable narrator of her own da mn story and her perception of the potential threat – whether it physical or emotional – is real? Jesus. This board sometimes..
I’m sorry you had to go through that; I had nightmares about this when I was a kid and it had never even happened to me. It is also unfortunately not an uncommon experience for people I know who have a severely mentally ill family member.
If she does do this, it is worth calling the cops over. It will also help towards getting a restraining order. I hope that having a plan for what to do in this situation will help.
I forget how young your baby is, but I really hope the whole situation will improve before they’re old enough to understand. That doesn’t help you and your husband though who already understand!
Nothing you’ve said makes her sound dangerous . . . You even said she hasn’t followed through on previous promises to be annoying.
OP here – thanks for this perspective. I deem an intent to harass and frighten to be dangerous behavior. Particularly when an infant is involved. This comment was helpful to me in that it does clarify how each person perceives this kind of behavior can vary.
I think he sounds a bit crazy. Just don’t engage. Block her and move on
If she does show up, you’d want to make sure that’s the first and last time. Consult a lawyer, specifically someone experienced in abuse/harassment. It’d be good to understand what you’d need to file a restraining order + to make sure documentation collection is in order and correct the first time through.
It’d probably also be a good time to update home security system, security cameras and ensure locks and windows are in good working order+ fix them if they’re not.
If you have any online presence or services, taking that to a minimum + cancelling accounts + locking down could help. A friend with an abusive ex spouse played havoc with her home automation – he got access to her heating/automated lights/cameras.
You can also change numbers or setup google voice, so that unwanted calls are routed to a voicemail account and not directly to your phone numbers.
Lastly, as awful as it sounds, informing your employers ahead of time, means they have a plan for if she calls/shows up.
OP here: This list is incredibly helpful – thank you.
One other thought, OP – does she have access to any social media (maybe via a sibling? taking a glance at someone else’s account?) that gives her visibility in to your lives or whereabouts? That’s one thing we had to do. We weren’t heavy social media users but to really insulate from one problematic family member we just ceased posting altogether. We didn’t want this person to deduce when we were home, not home, at school, the soccer fields, etc.
OP here: Thankfully DH is not on social media, and I have her blocked on any and all channels. Sadly I’ve had to block his entire family, because H is known for taking others’ phones, using their social media to stalk folks, etc.
PS: I’m so sorry this is happening to you and your family.
‘the gift of fear’ is the recommended book for stalking (skip the abuse chapter, which is terrible). The biggest point of the book is that you+ DH are afraid of this person and whether or not you can articulate it there’s probably a reason for it, and you should prepare accordingly.
Thank you, I am ordering this book now. I appreciate your kindness. I’ve been really shaken by this, and then kindness of strangers is comforting in this moment.
One additional thing to add: if your child is with a sitter, nanny, daycare, school, church nursery, etc., it is awkward but worth the peace of mind to have a conversation with each of those providers about H and how you want it handled should H show up.
We went through a similar scenario with an estranged grandparent when our own child was very young. At the beginning of each school year, we let the office and administration know we had a rando obsessed relative – no restraining order – that was NOT under any circumstances to have access to or contact with our child. No school pickups, no checking out for appointments, no attending events during the school day, the grandparent was completely prohibited and had no rights. The office usually had a formal report they had us complete for their files; we also had a quick conversation with each new teacher directly to make sure the info was conveyed to them and not buried in a drawer somewhere. Nothing ever did come of this beyond a couple of birthday cards the first few years. Our child is an adult now.
I’d only add that these kinds of heads up messages are not particularly uncommon.
Yep, the school and the large church we had to do this with even had a template form all ready for this. It was not uncommon.
Typically we dropped our child off at the sitter’s house and the estranged grandparent would not have known anything about that person, so we just noted that if anyone besides us – even if they claimed to be a relative and bore a family resemblance – tried to pick our child up, that was a 911-worthy event. We never had a different sitter come to our home, but if we did that’s where I would have a more serious conversation about what to do if someone else shows up at the house.
I had a staff member give me a heads up about this once. I know it was hard, and I appreciated her candor, as I don’t want someone to ever feel unsafe or threatened at work.
I’m sorry, I will out and say it since others seem to be dancing around it. You sound unhinged. You want a restraining order…because your SIL said she needs to meet your baby? That’s bizarre. It’s also not clear to me how you can both be upset that your family-in-law broke no-contact to tell your DH that his mother was dying AND that no one told him his mother was dying. Of course they didn’t — that’s how estrangement works!
Despite your very earnest efforts, you really haven’t described any behavior from any member of this family that is remotely threatening, harassing. Of course, if you don’t want your SIL to meet your baby that is absolutely your right as parents! But you might also consider trying to get some help to understand why you’re experiencing these relationships with an intensity that really outstrips the on-the-ground reality.
Respectfully, be grateful your life experiences have not given you a frame of reference to understand what OP is talking about and sit this one out.
OP here – I appreciate your perspective. I think the other commenter may be right: it sounds like you have different life experiences that don’t give you clear insight into some of the events here. She doesn’t just want to “meet our baby.” I promise you, her clear intent is to terrorize us and our baby, consistent with her very long history of doing so to my DH, to his siblings, to their children, etc. We’re experiencing this at a heightened degree of emotion because her patterns of behavior warrant it.
I’ll say it— this is a really rude response. The OP stated that the sister has a criminal record and has a history of violating physical boundaries of her husband and the other siblings, including walking uninvited into an unlocked home bc she thought she had the right to be there.
She also said that her husband is having a similar scared reaction. All of that is evidence that the sister might come to the house to try to scare or intimidate.
She may or may not know the intimate details of what happened between husband and sister, but her knowledge is surely indicative of the “on the ground reality” moreso than the judgment you’ve formed after reading a few posts on a message board.
OP, nothing substantive to add but just support. My father was like H, and I was constant afraid of him doing something unhinged but other than a few angry voicemails had nothing specific to point to. He was horribly abusive to me as a child/teen but acted normal around other people so no one ever believed me when I tried to explain. I cut all contact as soon as I was an adult. When I heard he died, it was literally an enormous weight off my shoulders.
HR people — how do you know you aren’t hiring remote workers in North Korea? Fascinating piece on my NPR station right now. Like these guys are remote working multiple jobs and apparently it’s a thing.
I couldn’t find the story so maybe there’s something more to it, but I mean, we have competent people check I-9 documentation like a real company… and manage our people so that their manager knows what they’re doing and whether they have the skills to do it. I guess there are always serious fraudsters.
The story is from 2024.
This is one of the strangest questions I’ve ever seen here, and I’ve been reading for a very, very long time.
It doesn’t touch the poster who was mad that her secretary who had been vomiting blood wasn’t letting her know how long she’d be out!
That wasn’t as strange (as someone who’s ex-big law it was very believable!) but definitely horrible.
As someone who is currently seriously ill I’m so thankful my boss is not a cr@zy person and has no problem with me taking time even with an undetermined return date on occasion.
I’m glad my friend isn’t calling in sick to work for me then wondering why my boss has questions.
The friend communicating with HR was a different thing from the secretary who told her boss she vomited blood.
+1000000
There was a WSJ article on this last week and it was the most bananas thing I’ve read in awhile. I told my DH about it and he thought I was nuts until he read the article.
To answer your question, since NK has successfully infiltrated Fortune 50 companies with presumably tight cybersecurity, there’s really no certainty one can have at this point. Obviously I-9s are frequently forged as the WSJ article pointed out.
https://www.wsj.com/business/north-korea-remote-jobs-e4daa727?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAjzh1v_Af2kyJnZ6P4Ayq8NZ1oIQlkvXmw4RKZGKlBLjL_D2yhI2WxMK_aV894%3D&gaa_ts=683de034&gaa_sig=6aLhOMaw6CmaDc_AenxkVtBLOX-ea6EfSTgzDWtYU8-OE5KScLo_gQjP214CkgYBgD9HomZc_v3akZfuGe-6bQ%3D%3D
Not an HR person, but I have cybersecurity experience. This story reeks of fear mongering aligned with an agenda of RTO. There are so many far more concerning things to grapple with.
Anyone have a good recommendation for a slip I can wear under a linen dress (this one in green: https://www.uniqlo.com/us/en/products/E474072-000/00?colorDisplayCode=53&sizeDisplayCode=003)? Preferably $50 or less.
Doesn’t a slip kind of negate the point of a linen dress?
Peruvian Connection sells a 100% silk slip in white, dark beige or black, for $89. I line in a climate that is hot and humid in the summer and find it to be suitable year round. I did size up so that it doesn’t cling.
I got one at target for a linen dress I was seeing through. It was like $25 and works great.
The Jockey brand slip at Target, under 20, the bottom can be trimmed without finishing if it’s too long and it comes in black and nude.
What problem are you trying to solve for? I only wear slips when the dress is see-through without one, or when the cling is too much to fight (jersey midi with tights). Would skimmies or slip shorts work for you?
Depending on the lighting you can see the shape of my legs through the dress.
Everyone knows you have legs.
Bahahaha.
The problem I have with a standalone slip under a shorter, loose dress like this is that the slip is going to migrate around on its own separately from the dress. Slips tend to be slim-fit rather than loose, so they need to be significantly shorter than the dress itself to avoid being visible like a weird thigh cuff. When I walk or especially when I sit, the slip is visible, but if I shorten the slip enough that it doesn’t stick out, it is micro-mini length and lumps up across my buns. This is why I prefer slip shorts or just accept that people might see my outline if I am backlit. This is also rarely a problem with a darker color.
Apologies if this shows up twice, I tried to post earlier and I think it got eaten. I have a friend’s baby’s first birthday party coming up. I was planning on getting some board books as a gift. Does anyone have suggestions for newer ones? I got them a collection of ones I remembered from my childhood when the baby was born, so assume they have ones popular in the 80s/90s already. or if there are better ideas for presents, I’ll take those as well. I don’t have kids and am somewhat clueless when they are that young.
I really like Hooray for Fish and other books by Lucy Cousins. It’s going to be a touch beyond a 1 year old attention spans, but by 15 months the baby will likely sit for it. My 18 month old likes them a lot. They’re a nice graduation up from board books.
My 1 year old likes the Sandra Boynton books, and anything with touch/sensory pages. The That’s Not My [animal] series is a big hit right now.
Sandra (Sondra?) Boynton! Loved reading those to my kids when they were little. Absolute classics and fabulous.
Kids universally love Hand Hand Fingers Thumb, IME.
The creepy monkey book!
Sandra Boynton!
Also, if you are shopping locally, your bookstore proprietor is a great resource for other suggestions. Just tell them what you said here and they can point you towards what is popular now.
Here are my kids’ favorites:
Good night moon
Pat the bunny
The very hungry caterpillar
Jamberry
I buy these four board books for most babies in my life now!
Counterpoint: we got at least 4 copies of each of these except Jamberry, so they went straight to Goodwill. I’d recommend something more unique.
I like the soft touch or touch-and-feel type books for 1 year olds.
Not a board book, but Indestructible baby books are really handy. They’re smaller than board books so they fit well in diaper bags. Especially as the baby is going into toddler hood, having some lightweight books they cannot break and can be tossed around is useful.
+1 one to these! our 1 year old loves them
Honestly, go into a bookstore and pick a few that look fun. I really like getting books as gifts! At that age, my baby liked Sandra Boyton, Dr. Seuss, Spot, anything interactive (flaps you can lift, stuff you can touch with texture, etc – not the annoying ones that make noise, she loved those too but as parents they will drive you nuts), and a board book version of The Paper Bag Princess. She was also very into the Lovevery books with pictures of actual babies (don’t think Lovevery sells outside of their subscription, but you can probably get books with real pictures at any store.
Aside from what’s already been named, these are some that were very successful for us:
All the World by Liz Scanlon
Bubbles and Blankie with Narwhal and Jelly
Let’s Find Momo series
For Narwhal/Jelly and Momo, make sure you get the ones that are board books and not the regular paperbacks, which are for older readers.
We love Sandra Boynton but have received a lot of them. Recommend for recent books that are great but not frequently given: I Took The Moon For A Walk and I’ll Love You Till The Cows Come Home.
Totally agree with the Sandra Boynton books (Dinosaur Dance, All the Hippos Go Berserk, Dinosnores & Pajama Time are faves in our house). Also love the Little Blue Truck series and the original Pout Pout Fish book (was not impressed by the rest of the series though).
Pout pout fish, guraffulo, there’s a bear in my chair, llama llama red pajama, any of the touch and feel type books (“that’s not my….[mermaid, dog, truck, etc]” is a cute series).