Polyamory

durnesque-esque:

dawsonisnotagirl:

Polyamory is the desire to have a relationship with more than 1 person at a time. It is consented between ALL partners. If one partner doesn’t consent or know about it, it’s NOT polyamory. Its cheating. This has been a PSA.

It’s also not an easy way out of commitment. It requires more commitment and communication, not less.

Mansplaining protip:

bendingsignpost:

daughter-of-rowan:

kaylapocalypse:

kestrel-tree:

When a man starts
explaining a concept you already told him you understand,
instead of saying “I know” over and over until you die, try one of these:

  • Ok, which aspect is confusing you?
  • It seems like
    you have the basics down; Would you like me to recommend some good articles so you can get a more nuanced understanding?
  • So did
    you have a specific question, or do you just want a more in depth
    explanation?

SAVAGE

teacher-zone him

My cousin is an asst psych professor. Her new boss brought up how male students sometimes challenge female professors. He asked how she handles that: she says ‘hold on: let me take notes’, grabs a pen & paper, and proceeds to take no notes. If he asks why, she says ‘Tell me something I don’t know & I’ll have something to write’; no student has tried twice. Her boss laughed and asked her to mention it at the next staff meeting.

Additional tip:

If you need to bring up a topic you think he’ll argue against, ask him if he knows what it is, nod along as he tells you, and then build on the argument he’s just made for you by laying the base. 

aka, I had a mansplaining coworker who used to trigger the shit out of my PTSD, so one day I asked him if he knew what “trigger” meant as a psychological term. He proceeded to explain my own panic attacks to me and ended up having a facial Oh Shit when I responded with “Yes, that’s exactly what happens to me when you do X, I’m glad you understand.”

It’s very hard to claim ignorance of the subject when you’ve just been so very proud of showing off your knowledge of that subject. 

cameoamalthea:

Legally a house can be haunted and failure to disclose that the property is haunted can constitute fraudulent misrepresentation and is grounds for recession of contract. Meaning poltergeists are legally treated the same as termites or other pests.

This sounds like a cryptid post but this is actual U.S. case law

The issue came up in a case where a family bought a house and later discovered it was on a ghost tour. The buyer had no way of knowing the house was haunted since that’s no something buyer’s usually ask, but the previous owner knew and should have disclosed it. Since the owner had reported paranormal activity in both local and national publications describing at length how  haunted the house was court decided they couldn’t very well say there’s no such thing as ghosts now.

This resulted in legal precedent that recognizes the existence of haunted houses. Also the court’s opinion is probably the most entertaining legal opinion you will ever read.

This post does not constitute legal advice