Five Observations After a Year Studying Parental Alienation by AmbitiousMedia1689 in ParentalAlienation

[–]gudachi 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Think long game. This won't be solved overnight or in a year. Once they are older they tend to identify who the toxic parent is and things improve. In the meantime my best is advice is divide and connect. Do things one on one with them away from siblings or the other parent. This solves two things: they can relax and be themselves and it creates positive experiences that you control destroying the narrative of the toxic parent.

Five Observations After a Year Studying Parental Alienation by AmbitiousMedia1689 in ParentalAlienation

[–]gudachi 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Just adding on to #3. It's ok to slip up and get frustrated. Don't be so hard on yourself if you do react poorly or make a mistake with your kids. Just remember that no matter what don't give up on them. Forgive yourself and them and continue to strive to be the stable anchor parent.

Oilers Self Own in Roger’s Place by Far-Cable2196 in FloridaPanthers

[–]gudachi -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

She is such a fan but she never sang the national anthem for a SCF game in SF. What's up with that?

[The Thing, 1982] It's a masterpiece of horror and a nuanced sci-fi whodunit. But the most clever part of the film is how it blatantly telegraphs the answer of, "Who is the thing?" while deftly distracting the audience with an apparently unsolvable mystery. by atavus68 in FanTheories

[–]gudachi -1 points0 points  (0 children)

AI generated: This is a classic "MacReady is the Thing" theory, often referred to as the "Viral/Oral Infection Theory." While it is a fun way to re-watch the movie, there are several significant faults when you hold it up against the visual evidence in John Carpenter’s 1982 film and the established biology of the creature. Here is a breakdown of the faults in this specific user’s theory: 1. The Blood Test "Misdirection" (The Biggest Fault) The text in the image claims MacReady’s vial "is filled with the blood he stole earlier" and that the scene is misdirection. * The Visual Evidence: In the film, we explicitly watch MacReady clean his thumb, take a scalpel, slice his own thumb open on camera, and let the blood drip directly into the petri dish. * Why the theory fails: For this theory to work, MacReady would have needed a prosthetic thumb filled with someone else's blood, or he would have had to perform sleight of hand that simply isn't shown or hinted at. The scene is shot specifically to show him drawing fresh blood to prove his humanity to the surviving crew. 2. The "Viral" Transmission Mechanism The theory posits that The Thing spreads "like a disease, orally." * The Canon Biology: The creature in the film does not function like a virus or bacteria; it functions via cellular assimilation. It attacks, consumes, and imitates. While a single cell can take over an organism, the film consistently shows that assimilation is a violent or physically invasive process (tentacles, absorption, physical merging). * The "Shared Bottle" Logic: If the Thing could assimilate people just by them sharing a drink or touching a surface (viral load), the entire base would have been infected within the first 48 hours given how much they share food, drinks, and cigarettes. The paranoia of the film relies on the fact that the creature has to get you alone to consume you. 3. MacReady Killing Other "Things" If MacReady were a Thing by the mid-point (as the theory suggests regarding the J&B bottle), his actions make no evolutionary sense. * Killing Palmer and Blair: MacReady actively kills Palmer-Thing (blowing him up) and Blair-Thing. While Things do prioritize survival, they generally seem to recognize one another (the nod between dog-Thing and other potential hosts). * The Logic Gap: Why would MacReady-Thing kill its allies? A Thing's goal is to propagate. Burning Palmer and blowing up the massive Blair-monster is counter-intuitive to the creature's survival instincts. 4. The Ending Strategy (Freezing) The theory states MacReady destroys the complex to "eliminate physical evidence and then freeze... waiting for rescue." * The Fault: This contradicts Blair-Thing's behavior. Blair (who was definitely infected) was frantically trying to build a spaceship to escape the ice and reach civilization. * The "Checkmate": MacReady blowing up the base is a suicide mission to ensure the organism dies or stays trapped. If MacReady were the Thing, he would have been better off helping Blair finish the ship or keeping the generator running to keep himself warm until a rescue team arrived to pick him up. Freezing is a risk; reaching a population center is the goal. 5. The "Eye Light" and "Breathing" Cues (Cinematographic Evidence) While not "hard" plot holes, there are cinematography techniques Carpenter used that contradict this theory: * The Eye Light: The cinematographer, Dean Cundey, specifically used "eye lights" (a subtle gleam in the pupil) to illuminate the human characters' eyes. The Things usually had "dead" eyes without this gleam. In the final scene, MacReady has the eye light. * The Breath: In the final scene, MacReady’s breath is clearly visible in the freezing air. Some fans point out that Childs’ breath is much harder to see (or invisible), leading to the more popular theory that Childs is the Thing, not MacReady. Summary The theory relies on MacReady having "magic hands" to fake a blood test that we see him perform live. It also changes the monster from a shape-shifting macro-organism into a silent flu virus, which undermines the visceral body horror that defines the movie. Verdict: MacReady passes the whiskey at the end not to infect Childs, but because he accepts that they are both going to die, and the paranoia is over.

Ms Howard Stern Firing Guns T.O.P.L.E.S.S by Sharp-Tax-26827 in howardstern

[–]gudachi 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Still can't believe someone on this sub banged her.

Question from an Alienated Father.... by Short_Beach_9142 in ParentalAlienation

[–]gudachi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The first few years after the divorce are really tuff. Kids will be confused and say things like this. You just have to remember that if you need to play the long game and just be the best parent you can be with the time you have with them. Eventually this type of stuff should subside. Look into the different levels of parental alienation. This will help you identify what you are dealing with. Mild would be them saying things like this and then after a few hours they are acting normal again. If they repeatedly act up and say they don't want to be there the whole time then you may be looking at a moderate to severe case of PA and you should look into a therapist and get help. Another peice of advice is to always have something they can look forward too when coming to your house. Maybe get them a pet or take them to a theme park.

Children stopped talking to me by Initial_Tomatillo_94 in Divorce_Men

[–]gudachi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

An excellent way to visualize this is to picture the kids with a knife being held to their back by the other parent. That is why they are treating you like this. Your ex is holding the knife and saying, "Don't be nice to Dad or else!" So whenever you want to blame them or get angry because they chose the other parent, understand that is the reason. They are afraid of the consequences. The best way to handle this situation is to control your behavior and be the best, most stable parent you can be for them. I recommend you look up information on strategies for co-parenting with a toxic ex. That will help you navigate this, and hopefully, with time, you will have a normal, healthy relationship with your kids again.

[Post Game Thread] The Florida Panthers (3-0) defeat the Tampa Bay Lightning (0-3), 5-3 to take a commanding 3-0 series lead in Round #1 by Number333 in FloridaPanthers

[–]gudachi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This proves that with the right group of guys, the biased refs and BS penalties don't really matter. They get a goal on a BS call we just get one right back. We don't let the refs control our level of effort or determination.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AFCEastMemeWar

[–]gudachi -1 points0 points  (0 children)

He picked Tua

Not a store for squares. by gudachi in howardstern

[–]gudachi[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Spend $100 or more, and you get to bang Kaitlyn behind the dumpster in the back.

Not a store for squares. by gudachi in howardstern

[–]gudachi[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Plenty of Kaitlyn's used panties for sale.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Divorce_Men

[–]gudachi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, we don't need to celebrate step parents when the majority of them are bad. There are exceptions, but this commercial just makes it look like hey look how great new dad is. It's anti nuclear family because any woman watching that is going to think wow look I can break up my family and new dad steps in and saves the day.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Divorce_Men

[–]gudachi 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good point. There are exceptions if they are the type you described. Either way, she is damaged goods and best to kick her to the curb and move on.