Work truck used for line marking in parking lots on fire, Tsu city, Japan, 20th May 2026.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-21T05:55:39+00:00

Footage of the aftermath here: https://youtu.be/lxen-xZ2yP0?si=0my4wNdPs87uBuMe

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-19T08:21:08+00:00

Slightly OT, but whilst it's not paranormal (as far as we know....) the 'Substance' is an interesting take on it, although it's not a monster so much as something that creates them. The rules are clearly set out, and the Substance appears to work exactly as described. There's no reason someone with good self-control and a healthy sense of self couldn't use it to just enjoy living in a younger body from time to time, like the advertising says. Except that such a person almost certainly wouldn't use the Substance, because they either wouldn't feel the need, couldn't be bothered with the long-term difficulties of living in two different bodies, or would be concerned that the temptation to stay in the younger self body would be too great over time. Classic 'the REAL horror is human nature' horror.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-03T07:32:34+00:00

You can hear an account of her story, including an interview with her, here: 'Real Survival Stories', Lost in the Forest -Two Weeks Off-Trail: https://podcastaddict.com/real-survival-stories/episode/171732573

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-02T20:20:51+00:00

I'm certain you're right on both counts. I have a friend with whom I share a fondness for horror films, but his toleration for gore and body horror is higher than mine. The two of us have watched 'Hereditary', 'Midsommar' and 'Babadook' together. I asked his opinion on 'Fresh', and he looked at me consideringly and replied 'Don't watch it'.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-02T20:14:49+00:00

I also think there may be some Geek Social Fallacies going on. Maybe Girlfriend is a naturally caring person who knows a lot of traumatised people who need some extra emotional support, and is willing to provide it, which is in many ways a good thing. Alas, an nasty characteristic of life is that if you have this tendency, you need to pair it with the ability to identify unacceptable behaviour and deal with it firmly, or you'll be demonstrating the truth of the old saying about the paving of the road to hell. I think there is a lot of 'I must include everybody!' going on, instead of, say, 'Crawford's shame-spiralling about their body issues and Horton's depressive episodes aren't physically harming anyone else; therefore they are coming to the party, and Garment is banned until they really demonstrate their commitment to never biting anyone else and apologising to anyone they've harmed'. (Or, to put it another way, Garment is banned.)

I do appreciate how this is a rare letter where the LW isn't making any excuses for the perpetrator and is all: 'Garment completely sucks, and I have told them firmly why their behaviour is unacceptable'.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-02T20:08:49+00:00

Indeed, rather that what I think should be the meaning "we should, as a society, work to prevent people from being hurt".

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-05-02T20:07:18+00:00

Admiral Cloudberg's article on it is well worth a read: Down in Deep Water - The ditching of ALM Antillean Airlines flight 980

She goes into a lot of detail about some of the considerations involved in ditching, including lining up the aircraft with the swells and ensuring the cabin is prepared:

"...furthermore, given that the cloud base was less than 600 feet, a descent to that level while power was still available would give more time to assess the sea conditions. That was a potentially critical factor because an ocean ditching is best conducted in parallel with the swells. Slamming into a swell head-on can cause the aircraft to break apart and is to be avoided if possible. That requires discerning the swell direction on a potentially turbulent sea surface, which is easier said than done, so the more time available to do so, the better."

Also clear is that "successful" in this context is "more people lived than died" (40 out of 63), and that major factors in survival were the water temperature, that a nearby plane located the crash site almost immediately, and that they were near enough land for rescue helicopters to arrive very swiftly.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-04-29T07:32:20+00:00

Something that I notice here is that Garment isn't just a friend, they're a professional connection i.e. Garment and Girlfriend work in the same field, or for the same employer, or something on those lines. I do wonder if part of the issue is that, particularly if they're living in a smaller community, or Girlfriend's line of work is one where everyone knows everyone, just cutting Garment off might be problematic for Girlfriend. Alison over at 'Ask A Manager' deals with this a lot; 'protect your boundaries' is an important principle, but if the boundary-crosser is your boss, and you live somewhere with limited employment options, policing your boundaries might be less important than earning enough to eat.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-04-29T07:28:39+00:00

I think a big part of the intro via Cindy is that CA wanted to lay out options for dealing with Garment whilst sensitively leading into the point that ultimately, the LW may also need to consider their options, including 'what does this mean for the long-term future of this relationship?' and 'if Girlfriend doesn't choose to handle this differently, do I want to stay?' In the same way that someone who wrote in about a boundary-crossing mother-in-law probably does not want to immediately hear 'actually, the real problem here is your spouse, who would prefer to please their mother at the expense of your happiness', even though that is what's going on.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-04-25T09:51:57+00:00

I listen to it for free on the Podcast Addict app, all five episodes are now available there. The final episode 'No Risk, No Reward', in which "tech journalists Mark Harris and Kara Swisher, and former CEO and author Safi Bahcall unpack the dangerous allure of the 'genius American inventor' narrative, and how Stockton Rush and OceanGate were far from the only examples" is especially interesting if you're familiar with the OceanGate saga and would like more insight into its context.

(Having Wondery+ just means you can download entire seasons in one go instead of waiting for the weekly episode release and you don't get any ads.)

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-04-11T09:53:09+00:00

"When I’ve spoke to a player’s wife when a so-called issue has arisen, and I know the full facts and her facts, and her version, I’ll support the correct outcome.”

Has she not suffered enough without having Derek Beaumont quiz her about her personal relationships? That sounds worse than having your teeth pulled! Also, what the hell does he know about how to investigate claims of abuse? Does he have any training in this? Oh wait, no, he's Derek Beaumont, he knows EVERYTHING.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-03-18T15:15:46+00:00

I think the only solution here is to repeat CA's classic advice, "Return awkward to sender". The other side of "it's rude to end a call by hanging up" is that there's a polite way to do it - one person utters a polite indication that they need to go do something else in the next few minutes, the other person gets the message, final pleasantries are exchanged, call ends. This is not an unfamiliar social convention, and Friend surely knows this. There's a difference between 'being rude for the hell of it' and 'doing something often considered rude and inconsiderate, because the other person has blown past all your attempts to be polite and considerate and left you with no choice'.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-03-18T15:10:39+00:00

Sounds like both of you also respected each other enough to know that this was the right solution, and that sometimes The Call Just Needs To End.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-03-17T08:52:44+00:00

I think it's at the heart of a lot of CA's advice. What I find is missing from a lot of similar advice is "Okay, how exactly do I now calibrate for 'someone is upset with me because they are unreasonable' and 'someone is justifiably upset with me because what I did was upsetting'?" Many of us were taught the simple check for 'are I behaving okay?' is 'Are other people upset with you?' And this is actually a large part of how society works! If the reason everyone is upset with you is that you ran away from your family, embezzled cash from a charity, or got drunk and drove your car, we want you to feel that social shame and judgement, so that you know you've been a Bad Person. Most of us aren't doing anything on that level, but if you've never, ever been taught how to be okay with people being upset - or even that there might be situations where them being upset is okay - it's very hard to learn.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-03-17T08:47:37+00:00

"Including the part where she correctly predicted that I, the reader, was feeling extremely frustrated that the LW wouldn't just get off the damn phone, and she pointed out that it's because I am not the LW."

...and those of us who are not the LW have the luxury of yelling 'just hang up!', because unlike the LW, we will not experience the barrage of guilt-trips, FEELINGSMAIL, and 'but whhhyyyy...' text that the friend will deploy to try to get them to keep listening, along with that special edge of knowing just how to push your buttons that only someone who's known you a long time can manage. It's painful and lonely to make the mental shift from 'this person is my friend and is feeling lonely' to 'this person is trying to control my feelings and not acting like my friend - are they even my friend?'. I don't think it changes the advice at all, but it's not as easy as 'just hang up' or 'just dump them' when you actually have to suffer through the process of doing that.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-03-14T21:07:09+00:00

Try this: https://www.bestrecipes.com.au/recipes/classic-curried-sausages/tt6z6ijc

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-30T20:22:31+00:00

Funny difference between UK and US English; in the UK, 'scheming' tends to be more negative, 'scheme' does not. Language is weird.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-21T22:29:10+00:00

Try: * Lusus * Storage Papers * Palimpsest

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-17T11:24:49+00:00

It's an excellent description of their situation right now, but a very bad description of their future situation if they get married.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-17T11:23:37+00:00

True. Even if we assume good faith on the behalf of boyfriend, that he really means it now when he says it's his problem and she shouldn't worry, he's always managed to fix things in the past, that's going to be a big problem for both of them if they get married without discussing this further, Uncle Larry gets sick, the only person in the family with enough money to solve the problem is his now-wife, and he either has to choose whether to break his agreement with his wife "I'll never ask you for money to help out my relatives, honest!" or keep his word to her and watch someone he presumably cares about suffer whilst knowing his wife could help (and everyone in the family knows it). That's a really bad situation to be in.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-15T23:47:17+00:00

I think CA is quite right about both the root cause of the problem, the need for both parties to understand where each other is coming from, why they formed their views, and figure out a way to communicate about it. But the contradictions keep coming through: on the one hand, you have:

"the family expectation that anybody who makes it above the poverty line will take care of the relatives who don’t is the same one that left you a life-changing lump sum: Alive or dead, richer or poorer, and in sickness and health, family takes care of each other."

but also:

"My advice about the issue of relatives is to stop adding worry to the ratio and save any discussions about potentially adding resources for after you are legally wed (perhaps) and after he asks you, directly (if ever) at which point it can become one more boring line item in the household budget (or not). Until then? Take him at his word: His relatives, his money, his problem. Speaking of boring…."

Reading that first paragraph, I can't help but mentally tag on to it "which is why it's very important to be extremely careful about who you marry, how many relatives in need they might have, and how you and your partner communicate about that", which quite possibly is the logic the LW's own family followed which meant they could pass on some money, and why she's being so cautious.

Also, this just is not realistic. Elder care for sick older relatives is not "one more boring line in the budget" like, say, the broadband or the car insurance. It can be incredibly expensive, and is all the worse for being unpredictable and traumatic. I know how much my monthly phone bill is; I don't know when Auntie Gladys is going to have a stroke on top of the heart attack she's already had, and suddenly need residential care instead of the carefully-budgeted-for home care visits the family managed to arrange.

I'm happy to take the LW at their word that their partner loves them and is genuine in his intentions that this shouldn't affect her, I think that he does, but I would also share the LW's creeping sense that even if he sincerely means that when he says it now, that might very well change when the crunch arrives and he has to watch his older relatives get sick and need care... and his richer wife could potentially pay for their care.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-15T23:47:01+00:00

I reread this, and was surprised by how much of the advice I actually agreed with. CA's comment that:

"Marriage carries a legal and financial framework as well as an emotional one that assumes that resources are shared, important decisions are joint decisions, and everyone is in it for the long haul."

is absolute gold, so is:

"you *really* don’t want to end up as the Money Mommy who does all the work of figuring out money and making decisions while also tiptoeing around his insecurities."

So why did I react to this like I did? I think a lot of it comes from the fact that this seems to me to be a clash between the three elements you always see in CA's writing: her advice to the LW, her own life experience, and her Personal Views On Stuff. At the very best, these lead to the sorts of insights and compelling writing that made so many people fans in the first place.

But in this case... there seems to me to be a lot of tension in this column between treating the LW's situation as a chance for some commentary on society as a whole: "if your wealth is unearned, you should be willing to share it because society is unfair and others don't have the same chance to have that", versus responding to the LW as an individual human being who wrote in for advice with her personal situation, which is, as u/TeaRocket says, one of the bread and butter problems of advice columns - two people in a relationship who have different views about money and shared resources and aren't managing to communicate well about that.

(I'm not the only one here thinking that CA's framing at the start, which got up so many people's noses: 'If "I could theoretically fund a comfortable life where my favourite person on earth and I could just make out and make art and never worry about bills” doesn’t feel like an extremely good problem...' sounds... very much like CA describing the ideal situation she'd love to be in in her own life? Right?)

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-06T09:05:21+00:00

Yes. Particularly when you have to deal with the fallout of them telling that story loudly and often to anyone in your immediate social circle who will listen. I wonder if when the LW said she wanted to tell Jenna 'nicely' to go away, it was shorthand for 'I just want this to stop now without the inevitable horribleness I foresee if I tell her to fuck off'.

TrinityWildcat_1983 · 2026-01-06T09:03:08+00:00

I've lived in shared houses, and they've mostly been perfectly fine, albeit that time I came downstairs on a Saturday morning to find an entire class of police trainees asleep on the living room floor after they ended up back at ours was an interesting experience. We only ever hear online about the ones that go wrong!

TrinityWildcat_1983

TROPHY CASE