wanderingviper21 said:You're right about that. I saw my doctor today to get my beta levels checked (it came back at 1350), and I'm officially five weeks along. She didn't do an ultrasound yet, though—apparently, it's still way too early for that.
I suppose the bad luck caught up with me today 👎 It isn't a massive blow, really, since we’ve only just started getting serious about this endeavor...😁 ... I mean... we have put in work before, but perhaps not with such a noble purpose in mind
Well, I suppose I can't be certain, though I did start questioning if the test was actually reliable since I haven't seen my period yet I think I'll just wait a few more days, and if nothing happens, I'll probably just run another test
I’m about four or five days late, though I did take an early detection test three days ago and it came back negative. Usually, my breasts get quite sore and swollen right before my period starts, and they actually felt a bit more sensitive and prominent about a week ago. My period hasn't arrived yet, but I noticed some thick, yellowish discharge yesterday, and I've had these mild cramps in my lower abdomen over the last few days—the kind that feel just like my usual PMS. My husband is already jokingly picking out names for the baby.
Kyle Lee7 said:I'm doing just fine, thanks for asking. We’re having a discussion here, and if you happen to interpret that as a personal critique or an attack on you, well, that's really on you, not me. I honestly have no idea how you were raised, what your life looks like now, or where your issues might stem from—and frankly, I'm not interested in digging into that. If we're being completely honest, my own family was far from perfect either. My parents definitely had their flaws, but they didn't make one crucial mistake: they never laid a hand on me or used physical punishment, and for that, I am truly grateful.
At the end of the day, nobody is perfect. Maybe one day I'll lose my cool and snap at my own child, but that wouldn't make me an abusive person. My point here is about principles and core values. To actually understand whether an action is right or wrong, you have to break it down and look at the actual causes and effects.
The reality is that children are born good. They aren't inherently bad or "broken" people that need to be fixed. Any developmental psychologist in the US will tell you that almost any problematic behavior in a child is simply a reaction to conflict within the family. Children REACT. As adults, we should know better—we *must* know better. It's much easier to resort to force than to stop and ask, "How did MY actions contribute to this situation?"
I suppose "good" is a somewhat relative term here. However, a child isn't exactly a lump of clay that you can just mold into whatever shape you desire; the old idea that we are all born as a tabula rasa has been debunked for quite some time. I think the most widely accepted view is that a person's character is shaped by their upbringing, though it’s likely influenced—perhaps to a lesser degree—by certain innate traits.
It might be because of this that some children seem more challenging to raise than others. While I don't believe in corporal punishment, I also don't think there's much difference between a firm correction and actual abuse, even if some people tend to exaggerate that distinction. Life rarely presents itself in strictly black and white; it seems to be mostly shades of gray.
Scott Miller7 said:Sure, it’s much easier to just close our eyes and pretend things aren't this bad—to act like physical punishment isn't a problem and doesn't leave scars, or that spoiled kids aren't running wild through the city because their parents don't bother to discipline them.
I don't close my eyes; I've seen plenty of hysterical, violent parents and have witnessed firsthand the lasting impact that has on children. I know this reality exists, but I find it quite difficult to believe that two-thirds of a single classroom are being physically disciplined; I used to teach, and while we had open conversations about these issues, those numbers were certainly much lower. As a teacher myself now, I can say for certain that those figures seem unlikely. A colleague of mine conducted an anonymous survey recently, and I suspect the actual numbers were far more modest. It makes me wonder what kind of environment this specific class is in if truly two-thirds of the students are facing that kind of situation.
On the flip side, kids back in the day were always getting a bit of corporal punishment, so I haven't really noticed "older generations" turning out to be psychopaths, bullies, people who can't stand their parents, or just totally traumatized... at least nothing worse than "kids today." From what I hear from folks working in schools (I know a few teachers) and from parents dealing with the current generation, things seem way more intense now. Why is that? , was it physical discipline or the complete lack thereof? I don't know, but it would be interesting to run some kind of study to see which kids are actually "worse"... the ones who occasionally got a belt, or the ones being raised with completely different methods regardless of how much trouble they get into.
Why say "nothing worse"? Because we aren't getting hit nearly as much anymore. A friend of mine, she's 17, took a hit at school and showed up the next day with bruised hips! Not to mention her back, her arms... her face stayed fine, so if she hadn't said anything, nobody would have even known. That’s what parents do nowadays. They do the exact same thing, they just hide it so they don't get in trouble. Back when we were thirty or twenty of us in a class, we all got disciplined. 🙄 And the reason kids today seem worse is because they're being raised by parents who are mentally unstable because their own parents were abused to such an extent . Just imagine what it's like for the kids in this current generation.
I find this quite difficult to wrap my head around. I suppose by "us thirty" you mean an entire classroom, and while I might believe you if you said twenty of you were wandering the city on weekends, the idea that twenty sets of parents are all handing out beatings... well, I suspect our society isn't quite at that stage yet.
I’ve read through everything here, and while I find myself agreeing with some points, I have to disagree with others. Personally, I don't believe in making mountains out of molehills—meaning, one shouldn't equate a minor correction with actual abuse. If someone decides to quit music just because they had their ear pulled once, they probably lacked the grit to begin with; they were likely just looking for an excuse to give up. Who knows, maybe someone was pulling Matija Dedić's ear back then too.
There is one thing I find myself unable to accept: the idea that authority is built through strictness or physical discipline. In my view, true authority is actually rooted in consistency. For instance, a friend of mine might send her son to his room as a punishment for making a mess. Within two or three minutes, he asks if he can come out; she feels guilty, gives in, and lets him out. The kid just laughs behind her back, walks out, and within half an hour, they're right back to the same old problems. The worst thing you can do is fail to follow through on what you say. She sent him to bed, then relented, and now he knows that next time, she'll probably cave again. Another example—a two-year-old is being restless, so the mother quickly shoves a smartphone into his hands just to quiet him down. Later, the child grabs every phone he sees, and the mother starts yelling, "Don't touch that, it's not a toy." She’s essentially just confused the child by allowing him to play with it one moment and forbidding it the next.
I wouldn't say I was actually beaten; if they pulled my ear at all, it certainly wasn't some violent twisting or tugging. I suppose I know what real abuse looks like, having had a friend who was too mortified to even wear shorts at gym class. So, if we're asking whether both of those instances count as violence or abuse, I probably wouldn't say so.
I don't think you need to lecture me on parental influence, behavioral imitation, or upbringing, as I imagine I have a decent enough grasp on those matters.
John Parker5 said:Look, parents these days are way too soft on their kids. Most of them are so slammed with work they don't have the patience for deep, meaningful conversations, so they just resort to a quick swat to get things under control—it’s like a shortcut to peace and quiet. In my opinion, kids today are definitely worse than previous generations, but you can't blame that on a lack of discipline. No, blame it on the parents who say stuff like, "Leave me alone, I'm busy," or "Just watch cartoons, I don't have time to play right now." So, what happens? Kids start acting out in every way possible, whether they realize it or not, just to get some attention from their parents.
Furthermore, our modern lifestyle demands that we earn well, look good, and maintain nice cars and houses—all of which is quite expensive. To keep up with these societal expectations, both spouses usually have to work, often pulling overtime, while children end up being left with various unskilled babysitters. By the time parents get home, they are completely exhausted and just want to sit in front of the TV to numb their brains from the day's stress. It's the typical experience for a working-class American family. I don't mean to offend anyone; I imagine that one day when I have my own children, my daily life will likely follow a similar pattern, and I'll find myself having to steal moments from work or sleep just to spend time with them. As for corporal punishment, I think people sometimes overthink the issue—I don't recall being hit hard as a child, but I do remember my parents giving me a tug on the ear or a little smack on the fingers. Of course, it wasn't meant to cause pain, just enough to make me feel a bit uncomfortable. Does that count as abuse?
It seems you’re becoming quite clear about exactly what kind of music you want played and just how much you're willing to fork over for it. I suppose there's a reason people say you get exactly what you pay for, if you catch my drift.
Sarah Taylor4 said:Does anyone happen to know where I can rent some round tables and chairs around the outskirts of the area—maybe near somewhere like Indianapolis, or even heading toward St. Louis or maybe just closer to the suburbs?
I suppose you probably won't find much in the vicinity of Peoria, and I'm afraid I don't have any particular idea regarding the Chicago area.
Kimberly White36 said:I could really use some insight or shared experiences here—should I be pursuing this kind of approach or not? Please let me know if I'm perhaps not the only one dealing with this.
An acquaintance of mine who faced a similar situation ended up having a perfectly healthy baby, though I suspect she had a C-section. Her OBGYN mentioned he hadn't encountered anything quite like it before, so he advised her to take extra precautions during the pregnancy and schedule more frequent checkups. Best of luck!
My husband came home from work today with some pretty unsettling news. Apparently, they’re renovating the hospital boiler room, and while chatting with the janitors and the boiler technician, they found out the plaster being stripped away contains asbestos. It seems nobody thought to warn them to take precautions beforehand, and even the person in charge of the renovations at the hospital claims they aren't sure if there's actually asbestos in the plaster. Their contractor is also either genuinely clueless or just pretending to be. Now they're expected to carry out the work without knowing how to protect themselves or if any truly safe protection even exists for this kind of thing. I suppose I’m feeling quite angry about it, as I feel someone should have done more than just issue a warning; they really should have educated them on the risks of asbestos. But it feels like the priority is just getting the job done as cheaply as possible, and the workers' safety doesn't seem to matter much to anyone—perhaps because they assume these men are uneducated or simply less valuable.
I'm not entirely sure I follow why there would be some sort of formal correspondence directed at a specific priest, I suppose? In my case, I was married by my uncle rather than my local pastor, and all I ever mentioned to the priest was my preference to have my uncle officiate, and that was really it.
casualhawk21 said:I'm actually from near Topeka myself. Honestly, the selection of restaurants that can handle up to 200 guests is pretty thin—desperate, even. The Biltmore is gorgeous, but you're realistically looking at a max of 80 to 100 people there. It’s the same story with Scenic View and the Fish House. I personally love Majetić Winery, but again, it tops out at 80 people; you wouldn't even have room to dance. As for prices, I haven't a clue. Just pick up the phone and call them. 🙂
Hello, Springfield residents! You have Bubati for about 170 people or Class for roughly 100, and if you need much larger venues for over 400 guests, you could look into Honda, the White House, or KTC in Napa...
Douglas James9 said:Hey everyone! I'm looking for a little musical backup—maybe a small folk band—to join us on a bus trip from Chicago to Los Angeles. We're thinking about 3 or 4 people total. Does anyone know someone, or maybe know a friend of a friend who knows some musicians from the Midwest? 😁 Just wondering what kind of rates we should expect be looking at?
Thanks so much, ladies!
I would highly recommend the TS Naša Grana group out of Phoenix; they played at my cousin's place about two years ago for roughly $850. If I recall correctly, there are five of them, and they've been performing at the Golden Wire events for quite a while now, playing both traditional folk and upbeat party music.