u/danceswithturtles286

I ordered 19 small items (about 2 miles away) from Sprouts for $90 and tipped $18 since I’m on a 2nd-floor walk-up.

When the shopper delivered, one paper bag had ripped, which caused damage: mandarin oranges split open, sushi spilled and was flipped with fillings coming out, and three eggs broke. Another item (mangoes) was overripe and bruised.

The store only used paper bags, but I’m wondering if shoppers usually have sturdier or backup bags to prevent this, especially for someone experienced (she’s a “diamond shopper”)

The store already refunded the eggs and mangoes. Sushi was edible so I didn’t report it, but I’m unsure how to rate this. I don’t want to hurt her income, but the level of damage feels below 5-star service. Thoughts?

I’m a private reading teacher and am great with kids but have never wanted one of my own. Very often the parents will ask if I have a kid and when I say I don’t they say “oh, but you’d be such a good mom!” It’s such a stupid thing to say because seeing someone interact with a kid for an hour a week is not a reflection of the type of parent they would be 24 hours a day. Or people who just know me casually socially will say I’m “such a nice person,” and would be a great mom. They don’t get that they see the social mask. Obviously I’m not going to get into telling others all the reasons why I don’t want to be a parent, but what’s a quick way to shut it down?

I developed an autoimmune disorder a few years after getting married that impacts my ability to do most things. Some days are okay and I can function, and others, I’m in bed all day in pain. I look “fine” so people often truly don’t understand what it’s like to live with an invisible disability. I worked full-time before getting sick and can now only work about 15-20 hours/week and always feel my job is in danger because I have to call off about 1x/week when I get a flare-up. The worst part is that I haven’t been officially diagnosed because there are no tests that can show what I have, just self-reported pain. I’ve been to 3 doctors now that tell me it’s “joint pain” from perimenopause, when I know it’s something much more complex. I’ve applied for disability and was denied and am going through the appeals process, but even if I received it, it wouldn’t be enough to even pay rent where I live.

I want to leave my marriage, as my husband changed after we got married and now puts no effort whatsoever into domestic labor or into connecting, but I quite literally would end up living in my car because I don’t even make enough money to afford a room where I live. As a result I feel incredibly depressed and probably sicker than I would be without these worries. I don’t have family in the area, and they live in cities where I couldn’t find work, so I stay because I don’t have any other options right now. This is a harsh reality for many women in this economy

My husband and I just started seeing a couples therapist. I’ve been in individual therapy for a long time so am familiar with the process, but for the second session, she met with each of us separately (online) and asked similar questions to the ones she asked during the initial session. I asked about how those sessions work and she explained that anything shared in the solo sessions can be shared in shared sessions, so I didn’t quite understand the point?

For the solo session, I was crying quite a bit when talking about our difficulties and also brought up the grief of suddenly losing my dad a few years ago. She didn’t offer any sort of empathy for my loss of my dad and didn’t offer any when I shared that I’m not usually as emotional as I was that day but that I’ve really been struggling lately with our issues (it’s not an abusive relationship; there are just a lot of compatibility issues/resentments that have grown). I understand that therapists sometimes need to detach from the emotions of their clients, but she felt almost cold to me.

Would you continue to see her for one more session (our next session is joint), or would you look for someone else?

My husband and I just started seeing a couples therapist. I’ve been in individual therapy for a long time so am familiar with the process, but for the second session, she met with each of us separately (online) and asked similar questions to the ones she asked during the initial session. I asked about how those sessions work and she explained that anything shared in the solo sessions can be shared in shared sessions, so I didn’t quite understand the point because I shared the same answers, as I’m very open about how I feel with my husband.

For the solo session, I was crying quite a bit when talking about our difficulties and also brought up the grief of suddenly losing my dad a few years ago. She didn’t offer any sort of empathy for my loss of my dad and didn’t offer any when I shared that I’m not usually as emotional as I was that day but that I’ve really been struggling lately with our issues (it’s not an abusive relationship; there are just a lot of compatibility issues/resentments that have grown). I understand that therapists sometimes need to detach from the emotions of their clients, but she felt almost cold to me.

Would you continue to see her for one more session (our next session is joint), or would you look for someone else?

I recently attended an all women’s event where the topic of women’s clothing choices came up. One woman shared that her 25-year old son told her that he “can’t even leave the house” without having “sexual fantasies about women all around him,” and that it’s “agitating” 😫

I reminded her that all humans experience agitation and part of being a civilized human means regulating our feelings rather than expecting others to accommodate them, which she agreed with. But the word “agitated” kept sitting with me and I finally realized why it felt so unnerving.

His reaction obviously doesn’t exist in a vacuum and reflects a broader pattern: society centers men’s comfort while expecting women to accommodate it. Positing women’s clothing as the cause of men feeling “agitated” shifts responsibility away from the individual and onto women simply existing in public.

Sure, attraction is human, but managing it is a basic expectation of adulthood. We don’t excuse other emotions like anger or jealousy by demanding others change, and sexual desire shouldn’t be treated differently.

I realized that describing himself as “agitated” at not being able to act on those feelings points to a sense of entitlement society handed him: the idea that discomfort arises because access to women’s bodies is being denied, rather than recognizing that no one is owed that access.

The standard itself is also unstable and historically contingent. What’s considered “too revealing” has always shifted, as there was a time when showing an ankle was scandalous, and when women first wore bikinis, they were policed or even arrested until widespread adoption normalized it. Men fantasize about, harass, and assault women in burqas or sweatpants and children, and even the oft-quoted phrase parroted at women to “leave something to the imagination” cites “appropriateness” to cater to men’s fantasies in a socially-acceptable way.

That moving goalpost reveals the issue isn’t objective modesty, but ongoing attempts to regulate women’s bodies based on subjective male reactions.

She later argued that men have different “hormones and biological needs,” and I responded that in the hierarchy of basic human needs, hunger trumps all else, and yet, when I’m extremely hungry and see someone else’s plate of delicious-looking food, I a) understand that it’s not mine, and b) don’t demand that the other diner cover it in my presence lest I be “agitated” at the sight of it. Servers work with food all day, often while extremely hungry. But part of being human is that ability to choose, that responsibility to regulate and mitigate whatever it is we’re feeling.

And furthermore, if men’s base impulses really mean that they are walking around “agitated” that women’s bodies don’t solely exist for their sexual pleasure, then maybe the conversation we need to be having is about managing men’s freedom in public.

A functional society depends on self-regulation and mutual respect, not restricting women’s autonomy to preempt men’s feelings.