conuly: (Default)
conuly ([personal profile] conuly) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-27 07:00 pm

(no subject)

Dear Prudence,

My parents preferred my siblings my whole life. I was never abused, but they just weren’t as interested in me. They said my school events were too boring, but went to every game my siblings played in. I had everything I needed at home; I never went without food or essentials. But I didn’t get much attention, and I never got focused on time together like my siblings did.

They gave me a small amount of help with college, but I also took out loans and got scholarships. Both my siblings got fully paid for undergraduate degrees. I got a $200 check to help me with my first home, while both siblings got fully covered 20 percent down payments. They prioritized my siblings emotionally and financially, and eventually, I accepted that it wasn’t changing.

I dealt with this through therapy, and building my own support network of friends. My husband and I are close with his parents. My dad passed away during the pandemic. My mom died suddenly a few months ago, and I’m still processing it. I really wish we could have been close, and knowing that the door is closed forever hurts. She hired a professional to manage her estate, and I assumed she would do in death what she did in life. I didn’t expect to receive much.

Instead, I’m apparently receiving 3/4 of her estate, and an apology. It’s not millions, but it is shocking and I don’t know what to think. My siblings, with whom I’ve had a vague, surface-level relationship as adults, are furious. My husband says it’s late but deserved, while my siblings say it’s selfish and clearly Mom wasn’t in her right mind. Meanwhile, I’m just sad that she didn’t act in life, and instead left me an apology after death. How do I handle this?

—Sad on the Seacoast


Read more... )
magid: (Default)
magid ([personal profile] magid) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-27 01:11 pm
Entry tags:

You Can Be Warm Without an Embrace

From the NYTimes’ Social Q’s; gift link here. Posting because yay for boundaries!

I recently saw an occasional collaborator — with whom I’ve built a nice rapport — at a concert. When I approached him, I instinctively went in for a hug. His body stiffened, and he kept his arms at his sides. I thought: Oh, this was a mistake! I backed off, and we exchanged pleasantries. But his response felt excessive and rude. Should I let this go?

FRIEND


It’s easy to feel defensive — or chastened — when we accidentally overstep with friends. But it is wrong to blame others for our unwanted touching. Your collaborator had no obligation to return your hug or to make you feel better about it. So, to answer your question: No, you shouldn’t let this go. Instead, rethink your instinct to hug people who you aren’t sure will welcome it.
ysobel: (Default)
masquerading as a man with a reason ([personal profile] ysobel) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-26 03:18 pm

zero to nuclear?

Dear Eric: My wife has three living adult kids from three different fathers — ages 22, 29 and 32. The 32-year-old has a husband and two kids of her own. I allowed all of them to live with us since they couldn’t get along on their own.

Last year, my wife’s fourth adult child died so I inherited her 3-year-old.

We had nine people in our home. I am not their father but tried to give them an opportunity in life until I realized they didn’t want help getting on their feet, they wanted to be taken care of.

So, I filed eviction on all of them. This obviously created some hard feelings and things got very ugly. I’ve decided to cut all ties with my wife’s family due to this which obviously causes problems for her because I will not attend family functions, holidays, etc. Do you think I am wrong to do so?

— Stepfather


Stepfather: My first question is, where is your wife in all of this? I don’t know the financial setup of your marriage, of course, but the home you live in is also her home so one would think that she gets a say in who gets to live there and who gets evicted, particularly if they’re her own children. And maybe there was more joint discussion about the adult children not contributing enough to the household — nine is a lot of people — but it reads like some of these decisions were unilateral and that can cause a lot of conflict.

There are many people who don’t have smooth relationships with in-laws. Sometimes that’s unavoidable. But your wife is your family, and so her family is your family. Refusing to engage with them puts her in an impossible position. Who is she supposed to choose?

You don’t have to let them live with you, but more conversation will be helpful here. Getting into the habit of making joint decisions with your wife, even if it requires more compromise than you’d ideally like, will help your marriage. And finding a way past some of the animosity with her adult kids will help everyone.
conuly: (Default)
conuly ([personal profile] conuly) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-26 04:11 pm

(no subject)

Hi Carolyn! I have a 5-year-old, “Jane,” and a 2-year-old. Jane is a highly physical kid and loves to roughhouse. She also ALWAYS is chewing on things that aren’t food. There have been times recently where she has hurt herself doing something that I’ve already warned her not to do and inside I’m just screaming, “I told you so!”

Two examples in the past week: Jane is enjoying running and sliding in socks on our wood floors. I tell her she might bump into something so maybe take the socks off. She ignores me and within a minute has bumped her head and shoulder into the wall and bursts into tears. Last night she was chewing on a pen that had a little pompom on a chain. I tell her to stop or it will break. She continues chewing and somehow latches the clasp on a small gap between her teeth. It gets stuck, takes my husband and me about 10 minutes of holding her down screaming so we can unhook it.

In cases like these, I really want to say something after she calms down, like, “Honey, I give you warnings to stop something because I don’t want you to get hurt.” My husband feels like a lecture after she’s been crying isn’t going to help. Who is right?

— Natural Consequences


Read more... )
conuly: (Default)
conuly ([personal profile] conuly) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-26 12:59 am

(no subject)

Dear Carolyn: My daughter got married a year ago. It was an immediate-family-only affair, which is how she wanted it, since even then the guest list was over 100 people. Many of my friends did send my daughter a gift anyway — not a huge gift, but at least a nice acknowledgment and gift card, and it was so thoughtful. I’m disappointed in two very close friends who didn’t do anything and am having trouble getting over it. I have sent very generous gifts to their kids. One of the weddings we couldn’t attend and the other we did. They contributed $35 to a shower gift.

I know it isn’t a tit-for-tat thing and I know the rule of thumb is that if you aren’t invited, then you aren’t required to send a gift, but — they’ve known my daughter forever. And having given their kids really nice gifts, I would have expected them to do something. What do you think?

— Disappointed


Read more... )
denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)
Denise ([staff profile] denise) wrote in [site community profile] dw_news2025-08-26 12:24 am

Mississippi legal challenge: beginning 1 September, we will need to geoblock Mississippi IPs

I'll start with the tl;dr summary to make sure everyone sees it and then explain further: As of September 1, we will temporarily be forced to block access to Dreamwidth from all IP addresses that geolocate to Mississippi for legal reasons. This block will need to continue until we either win the legal case entirely, or the district court issues another injunction preventing Mississippi from enforcing their social media age verification and parental consent law against us.

Mississippi residents, we are so, so sorry. We really don't want to do this, but the legal fight we and Netchoice have been fighting for you had a temporary setback last week. We genuinely and honestly believe that we're going to win it in the end, but the Fifth Circuit appellate court said that the district judge was wrong to issue the preliminary injunction back in June that would have maintained the status quo and prevented the state from enforcing the law requiring any social media website (which is very broadly defined, and which we definitely qualify as) to deanonymize and age-verify all users and obtain parental permission from the parent of anyone under 18 who wants to open an account.

Netchoice took that appellate ruling up to the Supreme Court, who declined to overrule the Fifth Circuit with no explanation -- except for Justice Kavanaugh agreeing that we are likely to win the fight in the end, but saying that it's no big deal to let the state enforce the law in the meantime.

Needless to say, it's a big deal to let the state enforce the law in the meantime. The Mississippi law is a breathtaking state overreach: it forces us to verify the identity and age of every person who accesses Dreamwidth from the state of Mississippi and determine who's under the age of 18 by collecting identity documents, to save that highly personal and sensitive information, and then to obtain a permission slip from those users' parents to allow them to finish creating an account. It also forces us to change our moderation policies and stop anyone under 18 from accessing a wide variety of legal and beneficial speech because the state of Mississippi doesn't like it -- which, given the way Dreamwidth works, would mean blocking people from talking about those things at all. (And if you think you know exactly what kind of content the state of Mississippi doesn't like, you're absolutely right.)

Needless to say, we don't want to do that, either. Even if we wanted to, though, we can't: the resources it would take for us to build the systems that would let us do it are well beyond our capacity. You can read the sworn declaration I provided to the court for some examples of how unworkable these requirements are in practice. (That isn't even everything! The lawyers gave me a page limit!)

Unfortunately, the penalties for failing to comply with the Mississippi law are incredibly steep: fines of $10,000 per user from Mississippi who we don't have identity documents verifying age for, per incident -- which means every time someone from Mississippi loaded Dreamwidth, we'd potentially owe Mississippi $10,000. Even a single $10,000 fine would be rough for us, but the per-user, per-incident nature of the actual fine structure is an existential threat. And because we're part of the organization suing Mississippi over it, and were explicitly named in the now-overturned preliminary injunction, we think the risk of the state deciding to engage in retaliatory prosecution while the full legal challenge continues to work its way through the courts is a lot higher than we're comfortable with. Mississippi has been itching to issue those fines for a while, and while normally we wouldn't worry much because we're a small and obscure site, the fact that we've been yelling at them in court about the law being unconstitutional means the chance of them lumping us in with the big social media giants and trying to fine us is just too high for us to want to risk it. (The excellent lawyers we've been working with are Netchoice's lawyers, not ours!)

All of this means we've made the extremely painful decision that our only possible option for the time being is to block Mississippi IP addresses from accessing Dreamwidth, until we win the case. (And I repeat: I am absolutely incredibly confident we'll win the case. And apparently Justice Kavanaugh agrees!) I repeat: I am so, so sorry. This is the last thing we wanted to do, and I've been fighting my ass off for the last three years to prevent it. But, as everyone who follows the legal system knows, the Fifth Circuit is gonna do what it's gonna do, whether or not what they want to do has any relationship to the actual law.

We don't collect geolocation information ourselves, and we have no idea which of our users are residents of Mississippi. (We also don't want to know that, unless you choose to tell us.) Because of that, and because access to highly accurate geolocation databases is extremely expensive, our only option is to use our network provider's geolocation-based blocking to prevent connections from IP addresses they identify as being from Mississippi from even reaching Dreamwidth in the first place. I have no idea how accurate their geolocation is, and it's possible that some people not in Mississippi might also be affected by this block. (The inaccuracy of geolocation is only, like, the 27th most important reason on the list of "why this law is practically impossible for any site to comply with, much less a tiny site like us".)

If your IP address is identified as coming from Mississippi, beginning on September 1, you'll see a shorter, simpler version of this message and be unable to proceed to the site itself. If you would otherwise be affected, but you have a VPN or proxy service that masks your IP address and changes where your connection appears to come from, you won't get the block message, and you can keep using Dreamwidth the way you usually would.

On a completely unrelated note while I have you all here, have I mentioned lately that I really like ProtonVPN's service, privacy practices, and pricing? They also have a free tier available that, although limited to one device, has no ads or data caps and doesn't log your activity, unlike most of the free VPN services out there. VPNs are an excellent privacy and security tool that every user of the internet should be familiar with! We aren't affiliated with Proton and we don't get any kickbacks if you sign up with them, but I'm a satisfied customer and I wanted to take this chance to let you know that.

Again, we're so incredibly sorry to have to make this announcement, and I personally promise you that I will continue to fight this law, and all of the others like it that various states are passing, with every inch of the New Jersey-bred stubborn fightiness you've come to know and love over the last 16 years. The instant we think it's less legally risky for us to allow connections from Mississippi IP addresses, we'll undo the block and let you know.

minoanmiss: Minoan statuette detail (of a buxom Minoan lady) (Statuette Boobsy)
minoanmiss ([personal profile] minoanmiss) wrote in [community profile] agonyaunt2025-08-22 10:54 am
Entry tags:

Ask A Manager: fighting to be the only woman in the firefighter calendar

this one is currently active but I HAD to bring it here. Content advisory: nudity Read more... )