null_dot @ null_dot @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

15

Comments

1,992

Joined

9 mo. ago

Sorry I don't understand why your grandma would say that.

If she got pregnant to a guy out of wedlock she would be entirely at his mercy. Presumably your great-grandpa did the right thing all the way along. However, there would be no way to force him to contribute to the child's welfare. Additionally, your own prospects as an unmarried mother were pretty dismal I think.

In 2025 I think things have changed - there's certainly no point being married in Australia for example. The mother of my children is not my mistress, she's my partner. In the context of the law she is the same as my wife. The reason we're together is not a piece of paper or a promise, it's because every day for the last 12 years we have woken up and chosen to remain together.

Polygamous or poly-amorous relationships are more common than they ever have been?

Honestly it sounds like great grandma was saying "I stayed with the man I loved and it worked out for me but you should get married".

I don't think that this dynamic was particularly uncommon in the before times anywhere in the world.

I think it would be uncommon for a family who's daughter had been violently abducted and raped, to force that daughter to marry the perpetrator.

However, in cases where the daughter may have been manipulated with trinkets or promises of marriage, into providing consent (rape by some definitions), then requiring the guy to marry the daughter may in some cases be a desirable outcome for the daughter because it does at the very least ensure her welfare, after a fashion.

As an aside, yes this is more or less the definition of a shotgun wedding in English. Although, in 2025 it's not really rapists being forced into marriage but fathers. As in, if you get someone pregnant you might be forced (not by law but by social custom) to marry her, usually in a few months before she starts to show.

Is it only me that finds personalised / targeted ads to be very poorly personalised and targeted ?

Sorry what?

I think I've misunderstood you because this is certainly possible, and I'm sure you're aware of that.

Its this.

IDK about "lonely" exactly but I definitely dont get a lot of attention or kindness from people.

Now I think about it i dont offer much either but thats life i guess.

How do you feel if someone who is not medium attractive winks at you?

Or if they just say something weird, like a joke you don't appreciate, and wink at you?

I guess there has to be some kind of established not-a-creepy-stranger before risking a wink becomes appropriate.

I, uh... think most people are pretty unattractive when they're naked.

I've lost all faith that the populace will ever wake up, per se.

I'm happy to concede that I'm wrong about this.

When I was learning to drive my dad told me that if you have an accident, the insurer will assign fault to whomever has damage to the front of their vehicle.

I've done some very brief research and determined that I've been completely wrong about this for the last 26 years. Thanks for that dad.

Im not so sure they would be found "at fault" by an insurer if im honest.

The damage appears to be on the front of her car, but on the side of theirs.

An insurer would likely find that while the van obviously shouldn't have cut across, the hatchback is at fault.

On the first day with any instructor they will tell you to drive to the conditions. That means that if ICE is present, and kidnapping people, drive slowly enough that you can stop if they cut over into your lane.

How many armed thugs do you think this chick could've taken out?

Actually i feel more like the American populace FA period has come to an and and the FO period has arrived.

This video demonstrates my point.

Who is the person in black, with a mask, and vest, getting the close up photos / video at about 1:20?

Do you think the discipline and training will improve in time?

I mean its possible to be disciplined, well trained asshole surely.

I was wondering about this.

Suppose there was a fair election in 2 years (I know, I know) and suppose the dems won... would they dismantle ICE and prosecute these scum?

But its always the dumbest fear.

Its not like "im worried about some idiot POTUS destroying my livelihood through his own ego and a misunderstanding of economic policy" or "im not going to be able to afford health care when i inevitably get sick".

Its always "if you let gay people get married then people will marry their pets and that would be an atrocity because reasons".

Seems like a pretty good explainer:

https://bbc.com/news/articles/c5ylk9r336zo

However, i infer from your comment that youre incredulous?

Why would the BBC report it if its not true?

Ah, no... the King has very publicly stripped him of his title and evicted him from the royal property in which he resided.

While it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that Andrew would want to do this but it does surprise me that his handlers allowed him to do it so brazenly.

Even not-particularly-wealthy people can go to a resort / brothel in South East Asia and see 40 prostitutes in a few days if that's their desire. Everyone involved would very happily turn a blind eye.

However, doing it on a state visit is essentially the production and provision of kompromat.

It's interesting that the bangkok post has chosen to publish this now.

Thailand has strict Lèse-majesté laws prohibiting any negative commentary about royalty. I wonder if that applied to foreign royalty and if so, whether it no longer applies now that Andy is no longer a "Prince".

sorry what crowds ?