Tea stick -- that's so cool. I want one.
But she was naked! And all... articulate!
Mal ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
Natter 37: Oddly Enough, We've Had This Conversation Before.
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
§ ita § - Jul 19, 2005 12:47:26 pm PDT #1285 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Wolfram - Jul 19, 2005 12:49:05 pm PDT #1286 of 10002
Visilurking
It is at least possible that Nanny diarist is naive, from a priviledged and protected background rather than stupid.
Sometimes that's a distinction without a difference. I've seen some of the most intelligent people do the stupidest things.
Jessica - Jul 19, 2005 12:50:21 pm PDT #1287 of 10002
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Tea stick
That's gorgeous.
§ ita § - Jul 19, 2005 12:51:09 pm PDT #1288 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Scoop -- steep.
It's brilliant.
Of course, I'm a total whore for things that make tea.
brenda m - Jul 19, 2005 12:55:55 pm PDT #1289 of 10002
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
That's nice. I have a ton of loose tea I never drink because it's a pain.
Narrator - Jul 19, 2005 12:57:33 pm PDT #1290 of 10002
The evil is this way?
What bothered me is that the former employer decided to turn this incident into a piece for the New York Times. Whatever personal details the nanny may have disclosed on her website it likely had a very small circulation. The NYT, however, is read by millions. The former employer paints a far worse picture of herself than anything the nanny could have done.
Worse still, IMO, is the conduct of the NYT. The Times decision to publish the former employer’s piece seemed to say not only that not only was the former employer had the right to fire the nanny (and she did have that right), but that the former employer was somehow free to “talk trash” about the nanny in a paper read by millions.
The former employer acted like a school-yard bully in writing the piece. The NYT in publishing it acted like a principal who scheduled the bullying for an all-school assembly so everyone could watch.
JohnSweden - Jul 19, 2005 1:02:07 pm PDT #1291 of 10002
I can't even.
Demolished by a bulldozer.
Ow ow ow.
I don't mean to get all fucked up and emotional over something so stupid
Not stupid at all.
Allyson - Jul 19, 2005 1:07:21 pm PDT #1292 of 10002
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
I'll post the photos later.
Typo Boy - Jul 19, 2005 1:07:25 pm PDT #1293 of 10002
Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.
As to inappropriateness of sharing the URL with an employer - Bitch PHD has interesting take on that:
Et. Al has a more extended take on the subject:
[link] Edited to correct link
brenda m - Jul 19, 2005 1:30:50 pm PDT #1294 of 10002
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
Gar, I think those both go to the same place.