Friday, July 20, 2012

Re: Questions about the Batman Shooter

You may be wondering why my last blog was about the Batman shooter, and if you haven't read it, the link is here: typically I try to avoid writing about cases like this, but because so many people I know were out opening night for the Batman movie, it just ran through my mind. Granted, nobody I knew was at that theater, but the way the news was breaking in, you'd think it was all theaters. (More on that in a bit.)

It's very rare for something that horrible, that evil to actually transpire in real life, that is brings to the table so many questions. All at once, we as humans come together to try and make sense of it all, even when the tragedy itself is senseless. But once the dust settles, and the police cars move, the camera crews move onto other stories, and all at once comes the often cold reminder that life does indeed go on.

Now tell that to the media.

I think I made it clear in my last blog that I wasn't blaming the media for the crime. I blamed the coward behind a gun. Did I question certain aspects of the media? Yes, and heavily so. But I think I was clear that only the gunman is to blame.

But in the hours after I posted that blog, a wave of fear mongering and sheer paranoia washed over every news channel I have, and now I have a few more questions, only now I have some answers too.

For starters, one question I should have added to my last blog was an obvious one. Can we blame the gun laws?

It's true, Colorado's gun laws are shamefully riddled with loopholes, even more than a decade removed from Columbine. And I've had many an anti-gun post on most of my accounts. Certainly you've been counting how many times I've called him a coward. Why? Because instead of dealing with his issues, he hid behind a few guns and blew away total innocents. That screams coward in my book.

But the gunman in this case did go through the legal method of obtaining a gun. He was given more than one background check. He bought the guns via legal means. In this instance, I can't actually blame the people who gave him the ammo. For all they knew, this could have been a cop in training or a hunter. He had no prior record, and no actual reason to raise suspicions.

Too many people will read this blog, and hide behind the 2nd Amendment, stating that "we all should have guns" when they can't even be be bothered to read the rest of said amendment. We do have the right to bear arms... IN TIMES OF WAR. A cinema-plex full of people for a fictitious movie is NOT a time of war.

But again, I must concede that unless there is a statewide ban on guns, there is nothing out of the ordinary as to how he got them.

The explosives and chemicals on the other hand, I highly question, but let's move on.

So now I'm seeing how the media is handling the aftermath, and I have to say, it's not very well. So I think I'll tackle it piece by piece.

Warner Brothers is threatening to re-cut both trailer and movie Batman: The Dark Knight Rises, to erase a good chunk of the violence. This is highly unnecessary. It's pretty clear that the gunman came in early enough into the movie on opening day, that it's highly unlikely he ever even saw the film. The movie was so tightly watched that there weren't even bootlegs available at the time of the shooting. So how can you blame the shooter for seeing a film he hadn't seen before? They don't need to cut the film. The trailer can be made shorter, to play up on the fact that this is the last in this series, and that Bruce Wayne is still Batman, or even to better introduce John Blake as the next hero of Gotham, but the movie can be left alone. Another idea is to tack on a tribute at the end of the film, which would be a show of respect on Warner Brothers' part.

NBC is pulling all ads for the movie and stores are pulling the DVDs of the last two films: The ads I can understand. You may want to hold off from posting the ads again for just 2-3 days. That's long enough to be respectful, without dropping your profits. But pulling the other movies from circulation is absurd. All three of the films combined did not start this rampage. Remember, we're dealing with one mad man, ONE time only.

News stations have up a do/don't list for the next time this happens: Next time?? There is no next time, and to tell the American people that there will be a next time is in itself a form of terrorism. You are spreading fear and lies in the name of what? Ratings? Get a grip.

First of all, the man has been apprehended. He had nobody else joining him. this is a done deal. A once in a lifetime tragedy that will not repeat itself. Many theaters are already ordering bomb and metal detectors and bringing in security guards. You have a better chance of actually meeting Christian Bale than you do ever seeing another horrid incident like this in person.

Second, half of the information they're spreading is wrong. One of the tips Inside Edition gave was to "keep flat to the ground". While this may help you survive a chemical attack in a war-torn nation, this will not get you away from a psycho with a gun. If anything, this dangerous move can ~ and will ~ get you trampled, plus you may be blocking what could be a clear exit path for you and the other patrons. The best thing you can do is to cover your head and run. You have a better chance of survival this way.

Third, you need to keep in mind that you should not ever "have to" prepare for a tragedy like this. We as a nation need to grow up, and stop living in fear of things that are in the past. 9/11 is in the past. Columbine is in the past. This is in the past, and for as evil, sad and scary as all of these violent occurences were, you can't punish an entire country for the actions of one. That's as bad as when you're in school, and one kid acts up, so everyone has to have a time-out. It's absurd. We already are at a point now where you can't even bring a pocket watch into an airport without TSA jumping you, or a nail file to K-Mart without security following you like the plague. We're Americans! Take a breath and get a grip on reality.

News Stations are also telling parents how to explain this to their children: The average American child is not watching the news right now. He's outside, running himself into an anorexic dizzy fit, trying to steer clear of the pretend obesity myth, that was based on made-up statistics, during a "wag the dog" campaign to get you to forget that our last president started two wars and managed to still, not catch Osama. Your child has a better chance of catching a torn ACL from an exercise related injury than he does ABC World News.

But let's say by some chance he does hear about the massacre. It's not very hard to explain to him what happened, in a way that won't damage him. It's easy. You just calmly do the following:

1. Sit down with your kid and look him in the eye.
2. Tell him that an evil person walked into a theater, and shot a ton of people for no reason. If you believe in religion, now's the time to explain Heaven and death, if you haven't before.
3. Explain that he was caught, and can never come back and do it again.
4. Explain that theaters are still safe places to go to, and you shouldn't be afraid of that ever happening again.
5. (Optional) Offer to see the movie with him either when he's older (Because this is not a children's movie), when it comes to TV or in a few weeks when the price goes down and people stop freaking out over it.

Total time spent with child: 5-10 minutes. That's about the length of two or three YouTube videos, which is the extent of his attention span anyway.

It may sound crazy to think it takes just this little amount of time to explain such a thing, but keep in mind, I had to explain to a 9 year old (my brother) 9/11 as it was happening ~ LIVE. In the grand scheme of things, we end up explaining to children even worse down the road, so it isn't as hard to talk to your child as the media makes you think.

Theaters are planning on pulling the movie: In Paris, the premiere was already cancelled. The Celebrities were sent straight back home just as the news was breaking. Now this was a sign of respect in Paris by some quick thinking people, but the move doesn't need to be permanent. If you're serious about honoring the dead and wounded, go ahead and pull it for a few days. But for those who still want to bring their hard earned $15-18 per ticket for the movie, let them have a screening.

Now it's true, at any time I could re-word this entire blog, but I'm an American. And as such I realize that it doesn't help anybody to spread fear and propaganda.

What will get everyone through this, is a firm grasp on reality.

Questions about the Batman Shooter

I awoke this morning at 4 to the most horrible thing I could ever imagine at a theater.

A mad man named James Holmes, age 24, a PHD student in neuroscience ~ and an apparently financially stable one at that, opened fire on a theater full of people, killing at least 12 and wounding 59.

Among the victims are a baby girl, shot right in her parents' arms, a 6 year old boy and a very small little girl.

Just 15 miles away from Columbine, he came in around 30 minutes into Batman: The Dark Knight Rises, right during a dark scene, filled with explosions, and he himself threw tear gas into the room. As patrons were trying to figure out if this was a publicity stunt, he opened fire, shooting people randomly at point blank range.

He went into three of the four rooms screening Batman that opening night in Colorado, before being taken into custody.

His apartment is said to be riddled with bombs and toxic chemicals.

In a sick twist, just 19 hours before the shooting took place, the movies Batman Begins and Bowling for Columbine were playing on several movie channels.

I can't even begin to fathom what kind of cowardly monster would not only do this, but smile about it.

In 1989 I saw my very first movie in a theater ever, it was ironically, Batman. I remember being in awe of seeing a movie on a screen so big for the first time ever. And it's a memory I'm breathing through right now.

And right now, I have a ton of questions. Call it a morbid curiosity, but I want to know exactly why this horrible thing happened.

How many children do you suppose were seeing this for the first time when the bullets rang out?

In this economy, where the average parent is holding down more than one job at minimum wage, how many parents do you think had to scrimp and save for just 2-4 tickets to see Batman? How many went into that theater that night, thinking that this was a special treat, and at $15-18 per ticket, it would be a one in a while moment, just to see ONE film?

How many went in to forget their troubles and just enjoy a new film, only to never come home again, or to come home scarred?

And what was the purpose of all of this?

The gunman was not a minority, nor is he poor. He's an intelligent 24 year old, with his whole life ahead of him, a PHD student, family friends, and yet he chose to become a monster. He chose to randomly end the lives of 12 or more, total strangers. Why?

Well I'm not blaming anyone or anything outside of the shooter, but here are some questions I have.

Can we blame the movie industry? Let's face facts here, the last nine years have been filled with nothing but drama movies.

Worse? Movies such as The Incredibles, Shrek 4 and Batman: The Dark Knight feature merchandise lines and ads with a focus on the villains, rather than the heroes of the films.

Think about that. The average movie goer in his 20's can't tell you who is the best in the Incredible family, can't remember what Batman did in the last film, doesn't care about Shrek's latest problem, but he can tell you (in oddly lifelike detail) all about Syndrome, The Joker and Rumpelstiltskin.

Syndrome and Rumpelstiltskin are murderous characters, who act very much like an aggressive internet troll. They claim responsibility for destruction (because they are proud of it) but not for their anger issues, their obsessive behavior over people they do NOT know at all, and yet they are wildly popular with 14-29 year olds.

The Joker is of course one of the most beloved villains in the Batman universe, but in the darker tales such as the 2nd Christian Bale movie and in one-shot comics like "Mad Love" the Joker is seen as less caring, more cerebral and he performs his task with seemingly little motive. 1988's "The Killing Joke" shows The Joker point blank shooting Barbara Gordon when she answers the door. He had taken knowledge of Commissioner Gordon's home address through barely known means, and opted to use it not to kill Gordon, but to torture him through his adopted daughter. At times, the post 1986 DC comics Joker sounds more like an aggressive hacker or troll, and less like the bank robbing villain Batman fans knew in the 1960's.

Do we blame media itself? I'm not going to sit here and type up an anti-video game diatribe, since even a monkey can read the ESRB warnings now, no. I do not blame video games.

I'm aiming for the kids shows this guy probably saw.

At 24 years old, he's old enough to remember G.I. Joe, Action Man, Street Sharks, C.O.P.S. (the cartoon), Captain Power, Sky Commanders, Max Steel, Space Strikers, Conan the Barbarian and countless dubs of anime originally made for adults but cut for US kids such as Cartoon Network's Gundam Wing and UPN/CW's Tenkoman/Tekkaman Blade.

Think about these shows. They were aimed at my generation, and at one point or another, standards and practices deemed them "perfectly safe" for children's television blocks.

But all of these shows featured an astounding amount of violence, brought to us by overtly-sexually-drawn characters, clad with military grade ammunition. Most of the so-called "good guys" were characters without remorse, little if any feeling, and let's be honest, if Max Steel had a YouTube account, he'd be a troll.

Each of them had an impressive toy line, and the earliest shows (such as Captain Power) encouraged young viewers to "act along" with the show, using their Mattel firearms and Hasbro weaponry. If you were born in 1987, odds are good that by the time you were five, you may not have been able to tell me where rainbows come from, but you would have told me what armaments are.

While everyone in the 1990's was wrongfully attacking games, music and movies aimed at adults, they should have been asking CBS, FOX, UPN, NBC and ABC why they were aiming these shows that glorified senseless violence at small children?

Contrary to popular myths, no real child has ever had access to GTA, but every child has had direct control of a Nerf Bazooka. Just ask your mom or dad if they remember Mattel’s line of pop guns.

Do we blame drugs? No, not the illegal kind, I mean Ritalin, Prozac, Zoloft. Think about it. ADD and ADHD medications weren't handed to my generation for actual diseases. Until a few years ago, SCHOOL TEACHERS, yes, the very people you entrust with your child's education, would up and decide that if he/she wasn't adult enough to handle your little junior, that he "must" be ADD, and they would put pressure on parents to medicate their children. And these drugs had almost ZERO testing before your child got to them.

Failure to comply meant that the school would call social services on you, and you can kiss your baby goodbye forever.

A good chunk of my generation ended up either over medicated or raped/killed in Foster Homes, you know, the places that the state deems "safer" than living with his family.

Do we blame a spoiled lifestyle? This coward was not poor, not stupid and likely never knew a day where he wanted for anything. He was a Caucasian, American boy, living a life of privilege, at least until he started studying for his latest test. That means in his short lifespan, he’s never known a day without clean water, clean food, a roof over his head, and he was going to a prestigious college for his PHD in Neurosurgery. Now you would think that a boy with all of this around him would have no desire to kill a theater full of Batman fans. Ungrateful is a word that can’t even be used here.

Maybe he was rich, maybe he wasn’t, but he was certainly more privileged than many of his victims.

UPDATE: Just as AMC Theaters is starting a ban on masks, fake weapons and "suspicious costumes" as they begin a hiring spree of new security guards, we learn more about the coward James Holmes.

James Holmes, 6'3, born December 13, 1987, has no criminal background, outside of a speeding ticket. He has no ties to terrorists and he has no accomplices. He has no ties to any military force.

He is described as having been both shy/quiet and a bit of a class clown. He was also a loner, choosing not to keep many friends. (Though many tried to befriend him.)

His family are friendly, outgoing people, active in their San Diego community. He on the other hand was a quiet child.

He has no Facebook, Twitter or YouTube. Once tried MySpace but lost interest in it quickly.

He legally owns all of the weapons he was found with. Colorado has relaxed gun laws (even after Columbine) and he did pass all of the screenings.

He couldn't find a job right after graduating from college the first time, so he used extra money he already had to go for the PHD. (Though his college had him in a teach-as-you-learn program, with the intent to hire him on.) He was considering dropping out. He was studying the biological basis of psychiatric and neurological disorders.

He is a football fan. He also loved Will Ferrel's Anchorman. Talked with a man at a bar the night before the rampage about the Denver Broncos. Liked Techno music.

A total of 71 people have been confirmed shot by him.

Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates said the gunman wore a gas mask, a ballistic helmet and vest, and leg, groin and throat protectors. He said he had an AR-15 military-style, semi-automatic rifle, a shotgun and two pistols. Initially, news reporters were claiming that he wore a red wig and a Bane mask, telling people "I am The Joker" though the details remain sketchy.

His family (a mom, dad and younger sister) is devastated by his actions, obviously, and have requested their privacy. I hope this is granted to them.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Atheists vs. Scientists vs. Religion and other things I want OFF of my Facebook feed.

For the record, this post is not written from a religious standpoint. In fact most religions as they stand now seem to be nothing more than cults, spreading more hate and fear than anything “Satan” could ever dump on us.

… But this isn’t an anti-God post either. Read carefully.

So I just saw, I don’t know, the trillionth pro-atheism post on Facebook, touting that all the world exists because of The Big Bang Theory, and that science is the only thing responsible for anything in existence. It was followed by the trillionth "like this 4 Jesus" photo.

But I don’t think that anybody ~ atheist or not ~ actually understands the issue with science or even the theory of the Bible. So let’s look a little more closely, shall we?

First of all, the Bible is a man made, man edited book. Throughout the ages, the book has been mistranslated, edited and has even had whole sub sections chucked out, to suit political wants and needs. (Google a woman named “Lilith” and tell me what you read.) So if you’re not a hardcore believer in the book, I understand. No church has been able to adequately answer one, simple thing from the book of Genesis. And that is the idea that it took God one week to make the earth.

Well… by who’s standards? By all available documents, it’s clear that Gods typically run on a different time frame than us. Think about it. From Noah to Jesus, several hundred years pass by, and God does not age. Nowhere in the book does it ever say that God is an old man, getting older with the generations. He appears to the humans as unchanging, so what’s to say that a week to Him is around a billion years to us? Wouldn’t that adequately explain a proper timeframe for the dinosaurs, cavemen and mammoths?

Another issue is that the book again is man edited. And Humans have always been rather cocky. We’ve always heard of politicians proclaiming who was the dominant race, so why should we believe that humans weren’t the same back then? The Bible itself actually plays off of that! So with that said, what’s to say that some human decided “WELP that’s it. Adam had animals, Eve and that’s that. Nobody else EVER happened, we’re dominant, the end!!” Let’s also not forget that the dinosaurs were still hidden beneath the Earth at the time this book was written. It’s not like the Genesis writing staff is going to go back and say “Oh yeah, there were dinos” these folks weren’t even alive at the time the dinosaurs fell.

A great example of Bible editing is in the Bible itself. And in the Torah! Moses was originally handed three tablets from God. He smashed one, during a moment of anger. That tablet had other commandments. Bible editing. Read it!

Most religions these days can’t be taken seriously. If you truly believe in a relationship with God, don’t follow a religion.

I really mean that. Most of the worlds wars have been based on religion. And yet the people killing others in the name of religion, and judging and bullying others over the same, miss two very important lines in their Holy books:
1. One of the 10 commandments is written crystal clear by God: THOU SHALT NOT MURDER.
2. Jesus tells people to “turn the other cheek” to those you do not like.
Where do you get “judge and kill” from those two lines? We judge others every day. We tease people over religion every day. We go against what we were told not to do, and for what, religion? This is the thing keeping us away from God, if you actually read the book!

Christianity as we know it didn’t really get off the ground until one year after Jesus was on the cross. Back then, the Romans called fans of Jesus “Christians” which was a slang term meaning “follower of the Christ” and it wasn’t meant in a friendly light. Christianity isn’t really brought up in the Bible. In fact, the one passage involving the modern day church that’s in there, involves Jesus turning over a change-table in anger, blasting a church for taking money from people who want to be close to God. Not kidding, read it!

Ironically? The most religious, enthusiastic people on this planet are Atheists. They are so zealous about their non-faith, that it has become a faith! I’ve even caught these people even scream in the faces of children, proclaiming that anybody believing in God needs to “grow up, wake up and follow THEIR truth”. An Atheist has more in common with an Evangelical than a common Christian. Difference being? They don’t shoot at people against their faith, they just Facebook spam.

As far as science goes, I have a ton of questions.

The Big Bang Theory itself leaves science with more questions than answers. And the theory comes in two halves.

1. The big bang supposedly begins with two large rock formations, slamming into each other, thus creating Earth.

2. The big bang theory is also the theory the theory that the universe originated sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from the cataclysmic explosion of a small volume of matter at extremely high density and temperature, resulting in a “balloon” effect in which heat rises, pushing away galaxies and planets.

… Ok. I was pretty stellar at science… and that’s why I have issues with this.

Let’s look at theory 1, which has been re-published time and again in many science magazines. First and foremost, science teaches us that nothing can come from nothing, meaning that we all came from somewhere, right? Good, ok, follow along here.

So if this is the case, then the rock formations that “created us”… by the law of science itself… had to have come from SOMEWHERE. For a rock to exist, something had to have made it. So if this was even close to true, where do the rocks originate from?

Have you ever been outside? Have you ever seen jagged rocks on a beach? We know that those rocks do not just “POOF” appear. The rocks are formed from minerals over the course of a billion years.

Minerals that come from Earth.

Now if we know this about rocks, then what kind of space minerals made these “Big Bang” rocks? And where did they come from?

Now for theory two. The theory is that matter hit matter, created an explosion, which cased the big bang, causing the balloon effect.

Again, same questions as before. WHAT created the matter that caused the explosion, science again, science tells us that NOTHING exists from NOTHING, and second, why would it cause us all to keep drifting away?

Think about it. Think very hard. By this logic, we should have drifted away from the sun sometime during the Middle Ages by this logic, if indeed we are “blowing away”. Furthermore, if we were crusted on top of this “heat” prior to blowing away, then I should not even by typing this out. Earth, as tiny a planet as this really is in the grand scheme of things, should have been a fried dust particle ages ago.

There’s also the matter of gravity. How can this have blown galaxies far away from each other? Aren’t these the same people who told us that a certain amount of gravity keeps all of the stars and planets inside of a galaxy? By this logic, the force should be more than enough that our galaxy should have been ripped apart years ago. No way we should be able to even see Mars by this logic, and yet anybody with a junior telescope can find it.

Another issue I have? The word “theory”. Science itself states that this has NOT been proven as a fact, so why do we pass around theories as facts? A theory is an educated guess, an idea that at any time could be disproven, lest we forget that they recently found evidence of the God particle ~ a name that just tickles me.

Let’s also not forget that like religion, science is a man made belief. And while science has led us to great discoveries (cure for polio, atomic bombs, ect.) it’s not perfect.

One example. Since we were children, we’ve been told that Darwinism proves that we evolved from monkeys. Well if that’s the case then why do we still have them? This planet has had all species of monkeys, apes, gorillas, chimps and the like for around the same amount of time. Shouldn’t they all have evolved from Chim-Chim to Steve by now?

And if we’re that close to monkeys, then why is it that we keep testing drugs on mice? The only thing we have in common with mice is that we are mammals. Genetically speaking though, we have more in common with pigs. (Look it up.)

Darwinism contradicts itself. These scientists believe that Pterodactyls de-evolved into birds, and yet at the same time they tell us that all of the Pterodactyls just died out. Which is it? They can’t de-evolve into Robins AND all die out, that goes against science itself!

Scientists are also the same bright boys who more than 100 years ago, claimed that Mulattoes “can’t” ever breed. They are born sterile. Guess who has a hard time believing that? Quadroons and other mixed-race people, born from Mulattoes. Yeah, nice going “science”.

In the 1950’s, scientists used to tell teens that if you pop a zit, it could lead to brain damage. I actually have a few of these textbooks in the house. There is no link between acne and brain damage. If there were, all hope for future generations would die out by the time you reached age 11.

These are also the same geniuses that told us that Thalidomide was a “safe vitamin” for pregnant women. That DDT was a kid-safe chemical, proven to kill ticks on dogs. That Red No. 2 was a tasty chemical of choice for M&M’s. REALLY??

They can’t even lie and say “WHOOPS! That was a mistake.” NO!! History has proven that these people made up these theories, pushed them into schools, pressured the public into buying all of it as the truth, and then acted surprised when we ended up with dying and deformed children. And this isn’t even a full list of blunders made by man-made science.

So with science and religion having their dirty laundry aired out, the real question is “What SHOULD you believe?” Well I think that’s an individual question to answer.

Now personally, I’m happy with my ever changing, Jewish lifestyle. I’m also happy with the idea that somewhere in outer space, there is a God and a Jesus and that somehow the elder started a Big Bang. I don’t think I need to shove it down your throat, and I actually like praying alone, so I don’t expect you to ever want anything to do with this.

You can believe whatever you like.

But one thing you can do, is pass this around, next time you’re on Facebook. Click to enlarge:

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

A homely man, a bracelet, and yet another reason why I don't watch reality shows.

*_* I just found another reason why I hate reality shows.

I just put on the E! network, solely because the Soup is on. It's the only show I watch on this channel.

I tuned in too early, and ended up watching some reality show. Whatever it is I don't know and I don't care, but there was a husband and a wife on there.

Judging by the tiny people on screen that look just like the husband (who by the by looks like he's been bludgeoned with the ugly stick) I'm going to guess that the wife has bared these children for him. Are we all in agreement on this? Good. Let's keep going.

So the husband bitches and moans that the wife doesn't show him enough affection, and just isn't serious about a relationship with him. He wants a physical symbol of their unity.

So the wife hands him what appears to be a hand crafted his and hers bracelet set. Picture a more adult version of those “best friends” bracelets 13 year olds make for each other, but with porcelain and with a more plain design. The bracelet has something hand painted on it, something about love and togetherness.

His reaction? In front of a table full of family? “Oh hee hee that is a so niiiice. It’s so cuuuute. That’s cute that you finally understand my role in the relationship. You know if it didn’t clash with my style, which it so obviously does, I would like totally wear this everywhere. That’s so cute, so nice that you are finally willing to show me your affection.”

… What?

Ok this dude first of all looks like death warmed over. There is no body fat to him, and no muscle tone either, we’re looking at a skeleton with skin here. And second, I thought he was her father at first. This chick can’t be any older than maybe 27, and he looks like he’s about 50. And third, I see in the commercial for whatever show I just subjected my eyes to, that he’s self-centered and has a habit of putting people down, including his own friends. Dude, you’re lucky ANYBODY would want you in their lives, let alone this chick.

And call me crazy, but I think she showed you her affection when she bore you more than one of your homely children, and still stayed with you!! REALLY DUDE??? Her hips are NEVER going to be the same again. Her body is forever changed from having carried your seed to full term ~ more than once I might add.

And she puts up with you. And your nasty assed attitude. And your clear drinking problem, because let’s face facts here, even with that cardboard dry turkey dinner you just had catering bring you, and the dry, dairyless bread, you can’t seriously need three bottles of wine to finish it. Three bottles of wine, and a martini, and some other see-through drink with an umbrella ~ in ONE dinner ~ screams to me that this is an alcoholic. But she puts up with it. All of this.

And you still needed a bracelet to figure out she cares?? A BRACELET!?

Oh real nice. And the kids were sitting at the table for this entire fiasco. Can you imagine being six years old, and having your dad (soused as hell) telling your mom that her birthing you wasn’t as big of an “I am committed to this relationship” sign to him as a bracelet? Fantastic.

My advice to whichever nameless chick this was? Pawn your half of the “Best Spouses Forever” bracelet, and save the money. You and your kids are going to need the money for therapy.