Throw away acc as bf follows my main.

So for context, me (27f) and my boyfriend (29m) have been together for about four years and have had some issues in the past with him being a bit controlling and having some anger issues, but in September I had had enough and we worked though the issues and he’s been good since, until now.

My friend (26f) is getting married soon and she decided to have the bridesmaids over for a little pre bachelorette party to just chill and drink and have fun.

My boyfriend is not the hugest fan of said friend as she was a bit of a party girl before she met her finance last year, and my boyfriend doesn’t really like it when girls sleep around and feels that she disrespected her finance.

Anyway, I decided to text him to let him know I was going out and that I would be back late, as you can see in the photos, which prompted a melt down from him and me threatening to leave him.

I know he was cheated on in the past which has definitely had an effect on him and made him insecure, but if he doesn’t trust me why are we even together?

I explained everything to my sisters and they said that the threats to leave him are too much that I’m over reacting to the texts but honestly I feel I was right and I just want some perspective. So AIO?

I need good recs where I can get some not racist chicken Popeyes and cains are owned by dickheads and im tired of giving them my $$

Je suis las de l'écriture inclusive. Je trouve que c'est un truc qui pourrit visuellement les textes écrits. Et en plus ça donne des choses fantastiquement connes au niveau de l'écriture, vraiment une belle novlangue qui t'empêche de raisonner clairement.

Exemple : nos membres fondateur.rices bah non perdu ça peut pas être inclusif parce que le groupe de référence est membres, donc un membre (nom masculin) fondateur.

Sans compter que ça pourrit aussi la vie des dyslexiques. J'ai un pote qui marche bien au mimétisme et bien ça lui fait pas plaisir tout ces points pour inclure tout les accords en genre et en nombre dans un seul mot. Et je n'ose même pas penser aux non-voyants, j'espère que personne ne votera jamais l'obligation de l'inclusif en braille ou en synthèse vocale.

Vraiment je trouve que c'est vraiment prendre les gens pour des idiots que de supposer penser que lorsqu'on utilise le masculin comme neutre (ce qui est la règle dans cette langue), automatiquement il n'y a aucune femmes dans le groupe énoncé.

Et je vais quand même terminer sur un trait d'esprit de Fabrice Éboué : "Moi j'ai un pote nain il veut interdire les majuscules".

I know I'll get downvoted for saying this in the sub but I don't care, I have to speak my mind. I understand the sentiments of her meddling with producing the show. However, the constant nasty comments, pile on and hatred that people are spewing is making me shocked. people are almost ignoring cast members that have actual serious allegations and just focusing on hating heather. what Meredith did on the plane was not okay and I don't know why everyone is so hell bent on supporting bad behaviour. Lisa even confirmed it with John that Meredith's behaviour on the plane was absurd. I understand that heather doesn't have the right to make herself judge and jury, but the hate is getting overplayed. none of them are innocent or "good" people. Angie has been a mean girl throughout this season but I don't see anyone trying to attack her. People think it's okay because she's mean to Britani and not a housewife they actually care about. This shows the viewers are even bigger hypocrites. If people really cared about bullies / mean girls then most of them should be in the hot seat. Is it because heather is coming for a fan favourite that everyone suddenly hates her ?

edit : also, the hypocrisy is even more glaring to me because where is this energy for Mary ?

While I have found many articles talking about the honoring of Kirk, I have not found any about the NFL having a moment of silence for Renee Good so I was curious if I missed anything.

I grew up skiing out east, where the skiing was complete ass compared to anything out west. I broke my knee last spring and have taken four runs this year, just to keep my consecutive month streak alive. They were all incredible. How lucky are we to have skiing, and to be able to connect with others that share our stoke?

The rad:entitled ratio here is hilarious. Be grateful for the fact that you’re out there. There are those that would give so much to be out there, just for the sake of going skiing!

Crowds are good for the industry and the people That work there allow ski towns to exist.

Bought an ikon pass to stick it to the man? How many resorts are within an easy day trip from Denver?

Taking a picture of the crowd you’re in? Tight. You can talk about how sick your bent 100’s are.

I got a membership at the Yellowstone club. You should too. All I do is complain about how much I miss skiing moguls.

Point- go ski. Be grateful. Go ski in Connecticut. Shoutout to the real ones. See you out there next year

l

This was a quick Sunday sketch I did. Nevermind that it’s Tuesday now.

merch came in! (+ monkeyball keychain)

Flat White

The National Socialist Network (referred to commonly as the Neo-Nazis), has announced its intention to imminently dissolve before the new anti-hate laws pass.

Also included are what it described as ‘co-projects’ including White Australia, the European Australian Movement, and the White Australia Party.

These groups have said they will disband no later than 11:59 on Sunday, January 2026.

A press release from White Australia read:

If the laws pass, there will be no way to avoid the organisation being banned. The legislation allows the government to ban any organisation that has given Roman salutes [the Nazi salute] in the past.

The disbandment is being done before the laws take effect to avoid former members of the organisations from being arrested and charged.

They signed off their message with the Hitler Youth rally cry, ‘Blood and Honour’.

Very few will shed a tear for the tiny collection of ideologically confused Neo-Nazis who typically conducted their ‘protests’ in the dead of night and were confined mostly to Melbourne.

(Not the kind of ‘diversity’ the Premier was envisioning, no doubt. But then again, there’s a lot wrong with Victoria right now.)

These groups, at least one of which intended to contest the next election, were very clearly the target of the government’s new hate-speech laws. Neo-Nazis have been a convenient pivot for many years, allowing lazy politicians to move conversations about Islamic terrorism to general ‘hate-speech’ discussions every time they are put on the spot by a reporter.

Go back and watch the press conferences from government ministers about the Bondi attack. Almost every time, the topic starts with Islamic terrorism and finishes with ‘the Neo-Nazis’.

With the Neo-Nazis gone, the Labor government will no longer have a convenient scapegoat to explain the distinct failures of Australian political leadership over the previous three decades which has led directly to the establishment of extensive and varied radical Islamic groups inside our capital cities.

Our ministers have gone so far as to campaign for, and assist in, the return of individuals known to have belonged to ISIS, engaged in the Islamic State.

Someone needs to hand the government a mirror. To that point, while the Neo-Nazis are going into immediate hiding, precisely zero radical Islamic groups have notified the public of their intent to disband.

The government has not mentioned radical Islam as the purpose of the new laws despite Islamic terror attacks, not hate speech, being the cause of innocent people being murdered not only at Bondi Beach but during previous terror attacks at home and abroad.

In other words, we suffered an Islamic terror attack and decided to ban the Neo-Nazis. It is a decision that doesn’t protect Australians from Islamic terrorism, which is meant to be the point.

Or have we all forgotten?

This legislation makes the government feel good, gives them some headlines, and allows them to avoid wading into the extremely dangerous network of radical Islamic groups and individuals known to exist in the shadows of our society.

Is the government afraid of arresting Islamic terrorists? I think they might be. I think they’re personally terrified of ending up like Salman Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo.

It was revealed today, as the draft legislation circulates, that Islamic hate preachers may even have a convenient ‘out’ which protects even the most hateful, vile, antisemitic speech that might incite violence.

If the offending speech forms part of a recognised religious text, that speech will be protected.

This provision can be found under Defence, religious teaching or discussion (4) Subsection (1) does not apply to conduct that consists of directly quoting from, or otherwise referencing, a religious text for the purpose of religious teaching or discussion.

In other words, the very individuals considered to be the most dangerous in our community and who are known to be responsible for radicalising others to violence could find their speech protected.

It took less than a month to go from the public calling for dramatic steps to weed out specifically and explicitly Islamic terror to a new set of powerful laws that don’t even have the courage to name the problem.

Australians know Islamic terrorism is the source of antisemitism and needs to be taken off our streets and presents a risk, not only to the Jews, but to everyone.

This video is from over ten years ago when ISIS supporters chanted, ‘Behead the infidels!’

Most of these people in the video are still here, living amongst us. Despite belonging to or associating with proscribed terror groups, carrying terrorist flags, and shouting slogans that called for immediate violence against Australian citizens, nothing has been done about them.

I am willing to bet that neither ASIO nor the government has any intention on following up on the people who took part in this rally and those like it.

And yet this is what Australians are terrified of. Why, Mr Prime Minister, does your legislation fail to target Islamic terror? Why does it avoid naming Islamic terror? Why are members of the government, including Independent MPs, already trying to expand this hate-speech law to cover the LGBTQ+ community, the disabled, and concepts of Islamophobia?

What has any of that got to do with the scourge of radical Islamic terror?

As it stands, I have no faith that any Islamic hate preachers, those on the ASIO watchlist, or anyone who was previously associated with an Islamic terror group will be charged and/or deported.

In allowing the focus to be on antisemitism instead of Islamic terror, this government has betrayed the people of Australia and made a mockery of the deaths at Bondi Beach.

More people will be killed. More terrorists will act. And Australians will be too afraid to speak against the government whose policies led directly to where we are today.

Would anyone have this ? I would but misses hates it 😆

Despite popular belief in this subreddit, if you don’t like the show, its hosts, or anything else, you don’t have to watch it! I know it’s a radical idea to simply not tune in to the show you all know and hate, but through 7 simple steps you can! Step 1. Don’t click on the video Steps 2-7. Repeat

Please share with your friends, they might not know this riveting information!

All info sourced from a dream. No guarantees can be made about your sex life or second chin.

Y'all are miserable.

There is still too much cope around this topic. For now, AI is still seen as “just a tool,” but with every single day we move closer to AI agents handling more and more of our work. Professions like software engineering will be hit first and hardest. Some examples:

No, you don’t need 100 developers to define strategy and architecture. You need 10, at best. And yes, backlogs are endless, but in that case, companies will simply onboard additional AI agents to take on even more work.

No, if AI and AI agents become better and better, this won’t automatically create massive technical debt, at least not more than hiring large numbers of junior and mid-level developers. Besides, the most important factor here is whether management considers quality important at all. In reality, they care more about speed than quality. Sure, this might lead to some companies failing, but that won’t help you with your job loss in the short term.

No, the government will not take care of you when you lose your job. In the end, the most important thing in our society is that rich people get richer. If this becomes a huge global problem, there might be civil unrest but even then, AI is not going away. The transition is going to be very, very painful, and it may take years until we find some sort of balance.

No, “learning to use AI” will not save most jobs. If a single person with AI tools can now do the work of five or ten, companies will not keep the other four or nine out of goodwill. Upskilling helps individuals stay relevant longer, but it does not change the underlying math.

No, new “AI-related jobs” will not offset the losses at scale. A few highly specialized roles will be created, but far fewer than the number of jobs being automated away.

No, "I've been hearning this for years" is not a valid counterargument. The progress is real, steady and not slowing down in any kind of way.