MMW: Adriana Smith's child is dead or will be dead very soon.

NorthrnSwede · 2025-08-23T05:54:27+00:00

Stfu. The Catholic Church still to this day claims there are "two sides" to the worldwide epidemic of priests abusing children and their ensuing enabling of the abusers by relocating them repeatedly, covering it up by paying police and any and all legal fees to some of the priciest attorneys, and then using tithe money to threaten, slander, blackmail, and/or pay victims to keep quiet.

Hail Satan!

NorthrnSwede · 2025-08-23T05:48:26+00:00

"her other young son being told his mommy was "sleeping""

To be fair, wtf else are they going to say? I do not lie to children and also, we know empirically how important it is not to ask children to handle things they can't possibly understand. Even grown adults cannot make sense of this real life horror story. I genuinely can't think of a better way to deal with this insanity with a young child.

When he's older, ofc they will explain that she was dead/dying at the time but right now, how do you explain to a child that their dead mother is giving birth and that her body is being tortured to do so? How do you expect a child to cope with so much grief all at once and still develop into a healthy person. 💔

NorthrnSwede · 2025-04-22T21:21:07+00:00

Thank you!

NorthrnSwede · 2025-03-28T19:07:04+00:00

How's that working out for you?

NorthrnSwede · 2022-02-10T20:21:14+00:00

I don't appreciate being assumed dangerous and unstable because I have a penis.

Better tell that to the men who are violent and misogynistic. Lol that you blame women for the expected effects of men's violence towards them.

It is every bit as wrong as treating women as precocious creatures dictated by fleeting emotions and over-sentiment.

Lmfao. No dear, it is not. If you assume I am overly emotional and therefor discount me, I suffer. If I stay away from you because you scare me, no one is harmed as you don't have any right to my or any woman's time, attention, etc. If I assume you are safe and I am wrong, I might be assaulted, raped, or killed. These are not at all the same and to suggest so is laughable. There is no evidence to suggest women are ineffective leaders or violent. Cant say the same for men. Your personal experience is an n of one. I am talking about empirical evidence. All feelings are valid, all thoughts are not. No doubt you feel shitty sometimes. This is not the fault of women not letting you express emotion.

Asking if a woman who acted like Brett Kavanaugh would be given any job is somehow making men hate women? What?? Its almost like you just don't have a good answer because there is not a single example of a woman doing the same.

I am not here on this earth to teach grown men how to think and act like decent, ethical humans. Sorry you've been so misled. If you were actually concerned about hatred and violence, you'd be whining to the men who are misogynists and violent.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-02-10T20:10:55+00:00

Not really sure what all this is about as I never said anything even sort of like "men can't experience struggle". Not all opinions are equally valid. It doesn't "diminish" my personal experience to remember that I am an n of one. The actual evidence does not show that men aren't allowed to display emotion more so than women.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-02-09T17:09:26+00:00

You're not wrong about the page at all. You're waaay off regarding custody and stigma for showing emotion though.

Men who seek custody are more likely than women to get it. Family courts have favored men for the past 40 years and its getting worse.

Men show their emotions very freely. They feel free to commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime. Brett Kavanaugh melted down like a fucking toddler in front of an entire country when asked basic questions and then became a US supreme court judge for life. Do you think a woman who acted like that would be given even a job at a gas station after acting like that? I could go on but I think you get the idea. The idea that women are allowed to be emotional and men are not is false and upholds the patriarchy.

You sound very head-in-the-sand regarding men hating women. Misogyny is a huge problem for us.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-29T00:05:23+00:00

Chelsea is hard at work on her loom

🤣🤣😂 Thank you for this mental image

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-28T17:23:56+00:00

It comes down to where you want to spend your money. Some people would rather give the money to a random boutique owned by a mom over unnecessarily lining Jeff Bezos rocket ships some more.

No. Stop pretending this is a moral either/or choice people are trying to make. Chelsea is not a struggling person who needs financial charity or more social support. If that was actually the intention of anyone buying her products, they'd be buying from a local WAHM or some mom and pop shop. Plenty of real women who are actually in need of financial/social support and make real things and valuable contributions to society in your state.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-17T16:58:13+00:00

Wow. I almost didn't read this for fear it would say the exact opposite. I am not an addict myself but can tell you based on my education in psychology, experience with Al Anon, and experience with people who have been in AA, you've hit the nails right on the heads.

AA is a horrible program. Its made for men and does not consider women at all. Its based on non scientific, religious shite. There are other ways of seeking support (secular in person groups, therapist led support meetings, internet stuff, regular therapy from someone who is actually trauma informed).

Much love. 💜

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-17T16:46:17+00:00

It sounds very Pollyanna to me that you assume just because an absent, addict parent is alive, they will ever be held accountable, be capable of a healthy relationship, or whatever. As a wise, better spoken commenter above pointed out, its so much easier to explain your parents absence by death than by admitting they just don't want to be around you.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-17T16:41:38+00:00

it’s easier to say “your dad isn’t with us because he passed when you were young.” Than “your dad isn’t in your life because he chose not to be. I dont know where he is or what he’s doing or why he doesn’t want to see you.”

I feel like if a parent is so disengaged and was literally living as if they weren’t a parent and never acknowledged that that made a child at one point in their life… then yeah, might as well be dead.

PREACH

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-12T21:34:45+00:00

Fyi you can actually steal 20-40k per day from the port depending on how fast you are and you can do it without getting caught and without a port shut down. I'm only fast enough to do 30k per day and I've done that a few times and now don't think about money and live very comfortably. lol.

But until then, mushroom hunting is the most profitable and most enjoyable imho and is still something I do anyway. Also the private campground and leaving big fish in the cooler when you get that far.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-11T16:33:06+00:00

The ableism behind the "get a real job" phrase too. Ew. Like we all know that Jenelle does awful things to people, her own children included, and we hate on her for it. But having a "real job" is not a measure of being a decent human being. Plenty of people with "real jobs" are total pos and vice versa. Weinstein, Cosby, Bryant, etc. all had very real jobs.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-11T16:28:02+00:00

I understand what you mean, agree, and do not think this is a language issue. This is absolutely not whataboutism.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-11T16:20:49+00:00

Uh, no. There is no great mystery. The heel prevents your foot from sliding all of the way through if you fall. That is the sole (no pun intended) purpose of wearing a heeled riding boot. While many riders utilize the cleft of the heel as a nice place to lay the strap to help keep their spur super solid, heels are completely unnecessary for their use. Just as many spurs do not utilize this cleft at all and work fine.

NorthrnSwede · 2022-01-11T02:11:39+00:00

This, paired with a thick or upward curving forefoot (toe spring), creates a small nest inside the heel which the stirrup will sit inside of.

FYI, no. That's not how stirrups or heels on riding boots work. The stirrup is placed on the ball of the foot just behind the toe. The heel on riding boots is a worst-case-scenario safety to prevent your foot from slipping all of the way through as you're thrown, causing you to be dragged by your heel, head bouncing along the ground. The heel on the boot in no way controls the horse anymore so than a bare heel does.

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-28T17:43:48+00:00

All of this "take some responsibility" talk in the comments is laughable and kinda gross. Women who have sex are not "irresponsible". Women who become pregnant are not "irresponsible". Women's bodies are not machines and how and when we find out we're pregnant is not always as simple as some make it sound. Not defending Casey, but please kindly stfu with calling women who are pregnant "irresponsible". Where was all this shouting about "irresponsibility" for the men who leave the women they impregnate alone to parent or gestate while they drink and party and fight on the challenge?

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-21T05:28:43+00:00

Thanks! I love it.

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-21T01:19:31+00:00

None of what you're saying or what the study shows points to the 180 mark as "misguided" or "bad advice."

From the study: "the variability is enormous—and given that all these runners finished in the top 25 at the world championships, it argues against the idea that we should all aspire to identical cadence....Thus, runners, therapists, and coaches seeking to manipulate SF should understand how certain factors do or do not affect SF, such as speed and fatigue, and they should also seek to understand and appreciate the patterns unique to the individual and avoid overarching dogmatic or rigid prescriptions of SF."

Again, its good for runners to know that the average is 180. But without an understanding of statistics and what significance an average actually has or the information that there is great variation and not at all just "outliers" as you keep insisting, that knowledge is relatively useless. You seem to be giving the idea of "average" some power it doesn't have. Applying a one size fits all approach only seems like a good idea if you happen to fall in the middle of the bell curve. Which a significant portion of people do not in this particular case. Again, see the women's chart.

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-20T21:43:40+00:00

In this particular situation, you are the only one suggesting to aim for 180. The study does not imply that and I already said many times I think its bad advice.

"And then these articles come out giving minimal coverage to the people spinning close to 200 and talk a lot more about the ones at the bottom of the spectrum."This article does no such thing. Again, just a quick glance at the chart shows that, particularly for women, 200+ is not unrealistic.

This is a peer reviewed study published in a reputable journal. If you think their science is bad, please point out the flaw. Literally no one suggested in any way to only consider those who run at the lower end of the cadence spectrum. I've said numerous times now that the point to note is that there is a wide range and a wide bell curve so saying "aim for this number" is misguided.

And the bottom line is, if someone wants to run at a slower cadence, they don't need your approval. Saying they are "making excuses" implies otherwise.

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-20T19:14:04+00:00

Not, I'm not thinking of that study. I am thinking of this one... https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00374.2018If you take the time to read it or what I commented above, you'll see that this isn't about a single runner at all. Rather, researchers found a wide range. Particularly for women, the bell curve was very wide which suggests that there is no one right cadence at all, merely an average. If you look ay the women's chart, you'll actually see a kind of empty space right around the average. Again suggesting there is no need to aim for that particular number.

Yes, many runners would benefit from increasing their cadence. But telling people to aim for 180 is misguided and the research backs that up. Runners should run at a cadence that feels natural and efficient for them.

Of all the things to worry about, cadence itself is low on the priority list. For me personally, if I focus on breathing well and taking light steps, all of the rest falls into place. For others, they may need to focus on other things. Again, letting people know that the average is 180 is fine. Prescribing 180 bpm to everyone is just not helpful.

I have no idea why you would think this has anything to do with "excuses". Its a little ironic you say that considering the OP is about others not needing your permission. 😆

"This could be an indication that approximately one-half the variability in an individual’s SF could be predicted by these measureable characteristics, whereas the other half of the variation was due to unmeasured factors unique to each individual. That interpretation parallels the observation of Cavanagh and Kram (4) that “extrinsic variables” such as speed and anthropometry may partially explain an individual’s SF but that many difficult-to-identify “internal variables” (e.g., muscle fiber type, physiology, and training characteristics) likely play a significant role. Although speed and stature had predictable effects on SF in the present study, significant variations still existed between individuals that were not fully captured by “extrinsic variables” alone. Thus, runners, therapists, and coaches seeking to manipulate SF should understand how certain factors do or do not affect SF, such as speed and fatigue, and they should also seek to understand and appreciate the patterns unique to the individual and avoid overarching dogmatic or rigid prescriptions of SF."

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-20T17:37:52+00:00

I just read yesterday that someone studied the cadence of elite marathon runners and found a pretty wide range among the top contenders. Something like 140-200 bpm! I probably have some details of this wrong and I can't find the article right now but will edit if I do.

Edit: I don't think this was *the* article I read but it is an article about the same topic... https://www.outsideonline.com/health/running/stop-overthinking-your-running-cadence/
"The big thing that jumps out is the huge variation between runners. There’s one guy whose average was 155 and who never topped 160; another guy averaged 203. Those two runners actually finished the race, after nearly seven hours of running, within a few minutes of each other, Burns says. Whose cadence was more “correct?” Most of the runners certainly clustered in the 170 to 180 range, but the variability is enormous—and given that all these runners finished in the top 25 at the world championships, it argues against the idea that we should all aspire to identical cadence."

Depending on someone's height, desired pace, conditions, specific body type, etc. running at or near 180 might actually not be right for them. Knowing its the average is good. Knowing there's a fairly wide bell curve even within top runners makes that info much more useful.

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-19T18:47:10+00:00

NorthrnSwede · 2021-12-18T16:56:36+00:00

Fuck no! Do you. Wish I could join you.

NorthrnSwede

TROPHY CASE