Round 1, Pick 26 - Graham Barton, C, Duke:
NFL: The Buccaneers fortify the offensive line with an experienced player who offers position flexibility. His elite presence on the interior should help elevate the run game and keep Baker Mayfield upright.
CBS Sports: A. This is a great pick. They have major issues at center and a question at left guard and he can play both. I love this pick. Barton will move inside from tackle, but he can play there in a pinch too.
ESPN: The Bucs got their top pick of an interior offensive lineman in Barton, who can immediately step in to fill the void left by center Ryan Jensen's retirement. While all but four of Barton's offensive snaps over the last three seasons have come at left tackle -- where he allowed just one sack in 2023 and two in 2022 -- he played 446 snaps at center as a freshman, which is his most natural fit and what caught the Bucs' eye. He plays with a great base, a good anchor and a "nasty temperament" that the Bucs' front office covets.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Likes his coffee hot and water cold which is actually reasonable.
Round 2, Pick 57 - Chris Braswell, DE, Alabama:
NFL: It's not often that a player with two college starts lands inside the top 60 picks, but Braswell did emerge last season as a jack of all trades for the Crimson Tide. At the very least, he could be a terrific special-teamer, but the Bucs likely hope to develop Braswell's pass-rush arsenal and squeeze even more out of his terrific athletic profile.
CBS Sports: A+. Had early RD2 grade on this outside rusher. Length, methodical pass-rush moves, deceptive power. Very productive generating pressure at Alabama. Sets a sturdy edge. A need in the post Shaq Barrett era.
ESPN: While the Bucs did sign Randy Gregory in free agency, he'll likely wind up being more of a rotational player opposite second-year edge YaYa Diaby. What they've needed is a replacement for Shaquil Barrett, who departed for the Miami Dolphins in free agency. Braswell's three forced fumbles in 2023 were tied for the most in the SEC, while his 42 pressures were the third most in the SEC. His eight sacks were tied for the fifth most in the SEC after having 2.5 sacks from 2020 to 2022. He also had 53 coverage snaps in 2023, which Todd Bowles does ask of his edge rushers. Braswell played 41 games with Crimson Tide but only made two starts, both of which came last season.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: He only likes the yellow part of the gummy worm.
Round 3, Pick 89 - Tykee Smith, S, Georgia:
NFL: Smith has a Mike Edwards-like projection, so it's easy to see why the Bucs took Smith here, in the same range they drafted Edwards in 2019. Although Smith is undersized and not an elite athlete, he has the nose for the ball and enough special-teams value to be a contributor in Year 1.
CBS Sports: B-. Slot defender / safety hybrid closer to slot CB size but doesn’t have those quicks. Surprisingly powerful hitter at his size and plays with a lot of conviction when tracking the football. Super-smart in coverage. Reads QB’s in a flash which helps him play faster than his timed speed.
ESPN: The Bucs see Smith as a nickel, and he played 80% of snaps in the slot with Bowles keeping a close watch on the UGA program, where his son, Troy, plays. They started undrafted free agent rookie Christian Izien last year and signed Tavierre Thomas in free agency, but their secondary as a whole needs more takeaways, which is where Smith comes in. His four interceptions in 2023 were tied for the third most in the SEC. He was also one of three FBS players with four or more interceptions and two or more sacks in 2023 alongside Michigan's Mike Sainristil and UNLV's Cameron Oliver.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Ribs. This man loves ribs. Cannot get enough ribs!
Round 3, Pick 92 - Jalen McMillan, WR, Washington:
NFL: A smooth-moving slot or outside receiver, McMillan returned from injury to help the Huskies make it all the way to the national title game. He has big mitts, good hands and more juice than he's sometimes given credit for. This is a really nice weapon to add to the Bucs' WR room.
CBS Sports: B+. Crafty, complete wideout with a trademark trait. Runs quality routes. Adequate separation. Not a burner. Not slow. Tracks it with good concentrations. Not a huge YAC type nor someone who thrives when leaping for the football in traffic. Robert Woods type with a bit more juice.
ESPN: The Bucs declined No. 3 wide receiver Russell Gage's option this year, and he was released. Mike Evans will also be 31 and Chris Godwin enters the third and final year of his contract, worth $20 million per year. McMillan can line up inside or outside but 33 of his 45 receptions came out of the slot in 2023, and he caught six passes out of the backfield. He's also a master of the post route. His six touchdown catches on post routes since 2022 are tied for the most in the FBS, while his 253 receiving yards on post route concepts since 2022 are the 10th most in the FBS.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Still willing to try and get the band back together.
Round 4, Pick 125 - Bucky Irving, RB, Oregon:
NFL: Bucky to the Bucs keeps the run on Ducks going. He's not terribly fast but can get up to max speed quickly and might end up as a decent complement to Rachaad White, even if they do similar things well.
CBS Sports: A. Bad testing figures - - despite reasonable speed - - but one of the most elusive, hard-to-corral RBs over the last few drafts. Smaller stature. Decent contact balance too. Weapon in the receiving game, and of course, out in space. Fun addition.
ESPN: The Bucs have had the league's worst rushing attack over the last two seasons (82.9 yards per game) and wanted to bolster competition. Irving is 5-9 and 192 pounds and ran a 4.55 40-yard dash at the NFL combine -- 14th among 20 running backs. While his testing was not great, the tape shows production. He topped 1,000 rushing yards in each of his two seasons at Oregon, including 1,180 with 11 touchdowns in 2023. He broke or evaded an FBS-high 144 tackles since 2022, and he had 896 rushing yards between the tackles in 2023, averaging 7.1 yards per rush. His 56 receptions last season led all FBS running backs.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: He once ate an 8 layer peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
Round 6, Pick 220 - Elijah Klein, OG, UTEP:
NFL: With 55 college starts and good length, Klein has a chance to make it in Tampa. He's stiff and might be an inside-only blocker, however.
CBS Sports: C. Smooth operator at guard. Quality run-blocking abilities. Opens the gate too soon in pass pro and not ultra experienced there. Not many true sets in college.
ESPN: The Bucs didn't re-sign Matt Feiler or Aaron Stinnie, who both started at left guard last season. Along with Cody Mauch, they finished with a combined 70.2% run blocking win rate among guards -- 16th in the league last year. None of them finished in the top 50 in pass block win rate either. The Bucs did sign free agent Sua Opeta from the Philadelphia Eagles, and Klein will compete with those two. Klein allowed 1.3% pressures at UTEP and in 45 games, he allowed four sacks with a 1.6% blown run block rate. In 2023, he allowed one sack all season.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Always wondered how Raymans hands worked if he doesn’t have arms.
Round 7, Pick 246 - Devin Culp, TE, Washington:
NFL: Culp shocked a few people when he ran a 4.47-second 40-yard dash, but his 230-pound frame figures to limit his role quite a bit. Even so, Culp improved each college season and has some unrealized potential as an H-back.
CBS Sports: B+. Smaller, speedster H-back TE type. Was very underutilized at Washington but flashed when given the opportunity. Made some impressive snags in traffic. Not much YAC-wise but can run away from second-level defenders if given space.
ESPN: The Bucs' 502 combined yards from tight ends last year was third worst, and they needed to bolster competition at the position. At 6-3 and 231 pounds, Culp ran a 4.47s 40-yard dash at the scouting combine, which was the fastest among tight ends this year. But he'll need to improve as an in-line blocker, which is where his size is a concern. He's also had some drops with six (8.8% drop rate) in 28 games.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Has soft hands… both ON and OFF the field.

At kilby block party yesterday and I had to run back to my hotel after GBV’s set and before LCD Soundsystem. Lo and behold, as I’m heading back to the party, I’m walking out of my hotel and I see a guy talking to the hotel’s valet…a guy with the unmistakable hair of one Bob Pollard. I’m not someone who approaches artists, I can count the number of times on half of one hand in multiple decades, but this seemed like an ok moment to shake the hand of the guy whose band has meant a ton to this son-of-Ohio over 25 years of my life. And so I did and he was the absolute kindest, most sincere guy a fan could ask for. I did ask for a selfie after telling him how much I loved his music and nervously blathered on about my time in Cleveland, Kent state, other Ohio things, and general gushing fan-like topics and he was sincerely cool about all of it. The whole experience absolutely made my weekend and I’ll be eternally grateful for it. And what’s also incredibly telling I feel is that after talking with Bob, I went and sat on the bench to wait for my Lyft back to the party and the valet, unprompted and with whom I never interacted as I did not have a car with the hotel, came over after seeing me talking with the frontman-extraordinaire and shared his own experience, essentially saying he’d seen a lot of celebrities come through his workplace and it wasn’t uncommon for them to be, let’s just say standoffish -which I am not not understanding of I want to say given the situation they’re often in - but not, “that guy…[Bob] stood out as being just a genuine nice dude.” Here here! Thanks for being a real one, Bob, and for crushing Kilby. Perhaps I’ll see you at the Grog Shop for my birthday like we discussed.

TW: transphobia
Okay so right off the bat I am a cis male. I have a transgender girlfriend (I’ve made posts about us before) and I do my best to support her and the community when I can.
I’m working on a freelance project right now and the manager is a retired cop (that tells you everything you need to know, really) and he was talking about how his stepdaughter came out to him as trans and he said “my stepson comes up and he tells me “hey I want you to call me “she” now” and I’m just like…IM MOT CALLING YOU THAT!” and talked about how she found an online group of friends who “fuckin manipulated him into thinking he was a girl” and said a bunch of bullshit similar to that. When he was done I just looked up at him and without thinking said out loud “okay boomer” and kept doing what I was doing. A moment later I realized three people were looking at me like “holy shit did you just say that” and the manager was just kinda like “yeah whatever” and we moved on
I have ASD so sometimes my social barometer is broken and right now I could use some outside perspective on whether or not I made the right call. My girlfriend seemed REALLY happy and proud of me for doing this, but she can be a shit stirrer (as can I) so maybe she’s not the most diplomatic person to ask. There’s the matter of not wanting to get into any trouble with the manager, but something I struggle with is trying to understand when it’s my turn to talk as a cis male. I’m not trans so it’s not like I was directly being attacked by his bullshit rant, so maybe I shouldn’t have interfered on someone else’s behalf.
Any thoughts?

TLDR: Their spam filtering is blocking everything I do, even asking for help, for no apparent reasons.
I don't know if I am experiencing some twilight-zone-level circumstances or what, but I just cannot get anywhere trying to register an account on Wordpress.org. Going through the registration form just leads to a screen saying my account needs approval which never seems to come. Days passed after my first attempt, so I reached out to the only contact point shown (forum-password-resets@wordpress.org). I got a canned response about how they're inundated with spam and moderating account creation, and a whole bunch of explanation about whether or not I actually need to use Wordpress. I have been developing websites with Wordpress for many years now and am well aware I don't need an account to use the software. However, I do need an account to participate in the Wordpress.org support forums where I can communicate with plugin developers (specifically one which currently has a couple apparently unreported bugs). The canned email response indicated I should reply to that message with an explanation about why I think I need an account. Specifically:

What you plan to use the account for
What question (if any) you intend to post on the forums/trac/github
What plugin/theme (if any) you intend to create

I wrote up the same explanation as above in this post plus mention of my desire to release some plugins I have written over the years and tried to send the email, only to have their email server bounce me a message saying it wasn't delivered due to high likelihood of spam. I tried to compose a new message to the same contact point, since at least that worked once, but got another server rejection message (spam). The email account I was trying to register with and composing the messages from is a company email, and the company doesn't engage in any bulk/subscription mailing whatsoever. The mail server domain is 100% used for very basic business use (purchasing from vendors, responding to customer inquiries, internal communication, etc.) so I cannot possibly imagine how it would be blacklisted for spam. I cannot even understand how anything about the content of the messages I composed would be triggering to spam filters. Nonetheless, I tried all the process described thus far again from my personal email on a totally different domain (and even without the VPN connection I typically use running to avoid any IP flagging issues) and the result is all the same.
So, what to do? I have even tried to compose another email, again from yet another domain and while on yet another IP, asking about the previous two registration attempts. I received a message saying those accounts can only be discussed via messages from those accounts. To which I tried to reply, "How can I do so when your filters keep rejecting anything I try to send?". I didn't receive any server rejection message thus far, but it's already been more than a day and I am afraid as soon as I try to send another message to inquire it's gonna get shot dead immediately like all those before.
I'm so frustrated. I can understand taking measures to reduce spam, but this almost feels like an extreme level of gatekeeping under the guise of spam prevention. I was even a bit taken aback at the requirement to report "What plugin/theme (if any) you intend to create" when simply needing to enroll to contribute in the forums. Why is account registration the place to also moderate plugin submissions? How are users who need support for Wordpress core or third-party plugin developers supposed to register? If they cannot, what's the use of forums which only have the devs themselves as users? I'm lucky in all these years I never needed to access the forums in anything more than a reading capacity, but now that I have a rather urgent need to do so it seems impossible. And this, as someone who could definitely make positive contributions to threads from users who do need help given my many years of experience working with WP core and countless 3p plugins.
I so very much hope someone from Wordpress.org might actually take notice of this and lend a hand, but if not thanks for reading my grievances to provide at least a little release therapy as I wrote this off my chest.

I don't know if I'm asking the right subreddit about this but I really need advice. (This account is a throwaway if anyone cares).
I (26F) have a friend Max (26M) from college that I reconnected with. We technically met in 2019 as classmates but didn't really start hanging out until 2021. Max essentially DM'd me on Instagram and worked up to asking me out on a date. I didn't have feelings for him but he asked I give us a chance and so I did and after our first date I told him I only see him as a friend. He seemed fine with that and thus started our friendship and we made great memories since we have similar interests. Things were fine until I met someone in the summer of 2022 who eventually became my BF. I didn't tell any of my friends about my BF until about 3 months in dating him. When I finally told Max about him, I thought he was cool about it. It wasn't until late Fall of 2022 where things got weird for me. I went on a trip with Max and his friends and when we came back from the trip, he told me he still had feelings for me when he dropped me home. I felt guilty and confused. I felt guilty and wondered if I did anything wrong, and I was confused he told me this knowing I have a BF now. I told my BF and he thought it was weird too but he didn't stop me from being friends with him. I tried to disregard what Max told me (bc he told me he just wanted to let me know so he can get it off his chest and move on) but it really started bothering me. I felt like I was hurting him just by spending time with him. I eventually cut Max off in the winter of 2022. I told him I felt uncomfortable spending time alone with him knowing how he feels about me. He asked me how long I wasn't gonna speak to him and I wasn't really sure so I didn't give him an exact amount of time. I just expressed I needed space. This space eventually lasted for about a year. Towards the end of 2023, I honestly don't remember the order of the events but basically Max contacted me and apologized for what happened between us. He was really upset I cut contact with him, but he learned to understand my perspective and apologized for overstepping a boundary. Around this time I was planning my bday party and so I decided to invite Max because I did miss his friendship and I appreciated his apology. After my bday party we started texting each other often again, but he kept his distance and would only hang out with me whenever I initiated the plans. I mostly spent time with my BF so I didn't see Max much but we kept in touch and would occassionally call each other.
Now fast forward to today. I broke up with my BF last week. (Long story short, we weren't as compatible as I thought and I just didn't see a happy marriage between us if we stayed together). To grieve over the end of my relationship, I kept myself busy by seeing my friends, Max included.
I went out to eat with Max recently and when we were eating he messaged his friends that he's out with me and then he got annoyed. I asked what's wrong and he told me his friends were giving him a hard time that he's spending time with me. He showed me the group chat and I saw one friend texted 👎and his other friend had to say "relax guys" in response. They then started saying that Max is aware of the "consequences of his actions" and then Max's friend texted him a meme to show me and it was a meme making fun of my college degree (I laughed it off but I thought it was random and weird). Max told me his friends were just joking but it really felt like they were coming from a place of hate or dislike. Max then reveals to me that his friends have had issues with me. They thought it was weird I didn't tell Max right away about my (now ex) BF when we were dating two years ago. They found it weird how whenever I hung out with the friend group I never said much (I'm naturally a quiet person). They felt like I don't initiate in forming a bond with them, bc I don't text them even tho I have their numbers. Max told me he's been defending me all this time, saying how I'm just an introvert and I don't owe anyone an explanation about who I'm dating.
I went home after dinner feeling like shit but I didn't tell Max. I want to process how I feel about this information first. To make things even more complicated, Max told me he still finds me attractive but he doesn't have feelings for me, or at least he doesn't have the deep feelings he used to have for me. And then he told me how much he missed our friendship when I needed space a year ago and he's so happy we are friends again.
Perhaps his friends are just joking, but idk I just get the gut feeling they aren't happy I'm back in Max's life.
Am I the asshole? Someone please tell me where I messed up. 😞 I'm hurt by this, and what really confuses me is that the friend of Max who doesn't like me the most (well technically I have no evidence she officially dislikes me I just know she's the friend who brought up the most issues about me) is someone who Max also had feelings for! He had feelings for her for years but they became best friends despite this. In fact Max told me he's completely over her but this friend accuses him of being jealous when she dates other guys. So like...why does this friend have issues with me when she's been in my shoes before? Did I fck up somewhere? I never led Max on and I never accused him of being jealous. I told him from the very beginning he's a friend to me and my break from him had no malicious intent I wad just trying to figure things out. My ex was my first BF everything was new to me.
I'm going to a concert with Max this Friday but what do I do from here? Can I keep this friendship? What do I do if Max invites me to hang with his friend group (he plans on doing so since his bday is coming up)? I kind of don't want to be around people who obviously have something against me.
I just want to know if I'm the bad person here. 😞 I'm a people pleaser (which I know is a problem and I need to work on it) but if I deserved this outcome lmk 🙃 lmao.
Thank you for your time.

Having spent a few dozen hours in the game & menu loading a save file that had 230 gold bricks……. I realized how frustrating this game was and the potential it could’ve had. I just am at a loss for words on the game. This game had SO MUCH POTENTIAl but had too much focus on the toys, & bugs or game breaking engine problems.
I haven't touched dimensions in a hot minute but.. really wish lego added more PATCHES before they shut down the game & wish it got its own remastered lego game without the toys…. or some version with a % meter & better save system…. Feel like if TT worked longer on it, they could have been better fixes with the game & the other lego ip dlc’s.
I noticed a few times HOW ANNOYED I was when my many save files from 2019, 2023, & 2024 all were gone….. on ps4 I just gave up caring and was disappointed even after completing it & saving the game to my console. so furthermore after I just stopped playing, not sure if this is a bug but was annoying.
Starting with the dlc's i noticed things felt off like each dlc was the weakest or too short for a game entry story, or more specifically the simpsons one recreating the episode with homer & the chilli cook off, of all the new story levels it was fun but felt weird. All the other lego film games got it down very well gameplay wise so, why not do a lego batman movie or a lego simpson's game? & have it's own game... instead of dimensions? ALSO THE PUZZLES THE COLOR PUZZLES THE KEYSTONES all annoying. DOING THEM EVERY DAM TIME I GOT SOOOOOO BORED… decent game, fun worlds, annoying locking content in it and no 100% to finish. Only letting the player use a character…. That was Dedicated TO THAT SPECIFIC world locking you out… is annoying also cant access mini-kits without said character… This is not fun TT…. but moving on to a few other things, did not care for switching the keystones, and using vehicles for every dam puzzle or ramp.
The best level was probably fantastic beasts & that could’ve & should have been added in its own lego Hogwarts FB saga game.
I enjoyed the lego ninjago game more then I thought I would, & the first lego movie game was cool just felt weird they put Lego Batman movie in dimensions vs its own separate actual lego game.
The movie scene cutscenes for each dlc were recreated in the dimensions in-game engine & had a fun charm to them. But at times was very disappointing as the quality difference is very noticeable. On the contrary, The LEGO Movie Game used movie cutscenes beautifully and it worked out really well. Could be a licensing issue, but if not I have no idea why they didn’t just use movie cutscenes where they could. I understand not wanting to release 60% of the movie in the game, but they could always shape it around the scenes shown in the trailer. The batman story pack felt like devs rushed it…. Not bringing actors back for discount va’s. Robin sounds like a kid in this dlc not anything like Michael cera. I can understand if they didn't get every one back for the game for rights or contract issues but just was weird. & newt or the FB story were interesting using new keystone & magic abilties. The ghostbuster ones were weird since I never cared for the movie..
There are a few differences like In the dlc levels, Batman is picked up by Alfred outside the power plant and heads directly to Commissioner Gordon's retirement party. In the film, he heads home and the retirement party is the next evening.
Some of the voice work is off. Many characters don’t sound like they did in the movie (I know they’re different VA’s) Alfred sounds nothing like movie Alfred (Ralph Fiennes), Robin sounds nothing like movie Robin (Michael Cera), etc. Other LEGO projects have had fairly good voice replication.
The LEGO Batman Movie expansion is all and all a success. It’s given us the best portal base so far, as well as the first expansion to give us 2 mini-figures which are both great. The game is great and funny as well as a decent length. The game only suffers from occasional bugs and terrible voice acting.
Maybe I just really disliked the keystone puzzles but I was really disappointed in it overall. The scenes were funny bringing in joker & all the villains, I enjoyed seeing the gremlins & agent smith from matrix & sauron’s eye but wish they made a lego Batman game not within dimensions.
If you want to play around in the LEGO Batman Movie HUB world you can access to the HUB world for maximum fun. Id say just try the hub level if you are interested but I felt bored with the lego batman movie game dlc levels. Sadly its REPLAY-Ability was a 5… compared to fantastic beasts and others.
imagine what they could've done with a full roster of batman's villains & heroes in a full open linear game with gotham, & sure we've had tons of batman games but just loved will arnett's version of batman. I really love will arnett so felt like dimensions needed more of that batman.
Too much clutter & focus on building vehicles when they aren't all that interesting or useful…. Switching from the ecto car to the ghost trap each time felt stupid. Even tho they fixed it in 2016 with the characters instant traps. Flying characters freak out when you are next to the edge of the map & fall off repeatedly or just stand there hovering… did NO ONE THINK about patching that?
I also understand this is not a typical lego game & the audience is for kids but at least try to juggle both demographics for those who dont want to waste time?
No percent on gold bricks collected, or the items…. Why couldn’t they added a save system where if you lose your file you can save & quit with the bricks you found why is it on ps4 ps5…. Somehow deleting the game doesn’t remember where you left off?? Was this a patch that they never fixed?
Also, anyone else find it weird that the courtroom from Ghostbusters 2 isn't in the world? They even have the whole Titanic, something that only appears for 30 seconds in the movie, but one of the most important scenes isn't in the world at all or hell adding more side characters or locations why not explore inside of a building?
Also X-PO talks too much, every line of him talking during hints. I've made the choice to leave the main campaign unfinished just so he can stay silent while I play other levels. In the actual campaign and cutscenes he's fine but they made a huge mistake making him react to puzzles.
The bugs and lack of polish ruin the game..massively this is a massively outdated engine and the more they keep adding to it the buggier the games get. I'd love to see a new one built from the ground up for next gen capable created of anything they can think of with some impressive graphics. When you look at the fidelity of ratchet and clank on PS Pro there's no reason this game can't look as good as the Lego movies or very close, it's just laziness and greed (lack of investment from WB wanting to just churn out content quickly on the old engine) even on ps4 its annoying losing your save file deleting the game then reinstalling It AND LOSING ALL YOUR PROGRESS!!!!
So many boring hubs, & races locking variety or enjoyment, too many hubs that had New York…ghostbusters 1980 New York, ghostbusters 2016 New York……. FB New York…..Lego Batman movie Gotham hub just looks like New York.
Characters like the witch newt Gandalf all have the same magic ability, not interesting since they all do the exact same thing.
The vehicles are very boring, not very interesting too small. Why is chima here??? Random moments that just feel weird the battle arena was fun but after a while I got bored.
Also, I kinda wish there were in game unlockable characters: Like if you bought the Sonic dlc, beating quests would unlock the ability to buy Amy, Tails, Shadow etc. or The Simpsons allowing you to buy Marge, Lisa, maggie or each of the ghostbusters, etc. with studs.
Overall there were a few interesting levels but could’ve been cooler if we got a lego Batman movie game, or a lego bttf game, or a lego ghostbusters game, yada yada..... & just surprised at it not being its own game instead of within dimensions. I know sadly this likely wont happen tho.. it disappoints me that the game is mostly looking at build instructions, back & forth again and again….. I am very upset dimensions wont ever be remastered added with better patches because what I had played felt muddied & not crafted well. I don’t mean to be so negative but it was weird having these problems front & center. in the end too many glitches & gameplay loop moments.

Hi Reddit,
I'm in need of some advice regarding my current marital situation and the potential sale of our home. To give you the full picture, I'll start from the beginning. Apologies for the length, but I feel all the details are necessary to understand the context.
I (29F) met my husband (40M) on Tinder four years ago. We dated for about eight months when my family had an opportunity to purchase a property. My then-boyfriend was also looking to be involved in a business deal of that sort, and he was interested in having his name on the property as well. My father supported this, seeing as how my boyfriend was a physician with a good income, and saw this as a way to bring him closer to our family. The opportunity came quickly, and we all signed the contract to purchase the house.
Trouble began shortly after this. My boyfriend requested that only he and I be on the title of the house, removing the rest of my family, as he saw a future with us and envisioned it as our potential family home. My father was very pleased to hear this and supported it, so we obliged. During this time, the property had increased in value, and I requested the other family members be paid off so we could buy out their shares. My boyfriend declined, feeling it was unfair.
To skim over some details, here are the highlights of the construction: My boyfriend paid more for the down payment than we initially realized would be required. Because of this, he paid no further construction costs. The construction proceeded with debt from my family until the construction loans came through. My family paid for the construction, and my father built the house for us without charging for his management services. My father was displeased with my boyfriend’s behavior and required him to pay more money for the construction due to inflation and the COVID shutdown. My boyfriend declined, and my mother and I secretly took out a line of credit to front the construction costs to my father, pretending it was from my boyfriend. Eventually, as we got the construction loans on a rolling basis after meeting construction milestones, my mother’s line of credit was paid off.
During this time, my family and I wondered why my boyfriend had not proposed. I decided that if he hadn't proposed by a certain time, I would leave him. Fortunately, he did propose on Valentine’s Day 2022. By spring of 2022, construction was coming to an end, and it was time for us to settle into the house. My fiancé felt uncomfortable with how much money he had put into the house and was worried I could leave him and make a profit. I promised him I wouldn’t leave him, but it wasn’t enough. He said he would believe me if I had a child with him, otherwise women would leave men if there were no ties. I told him I would have a child with him right when we got married. He suggested I come off birth control, as it takes months for a woman’s cycle to normalize after being on birth control for many years. I promised him I would come off birth control.
Coming off birth control was more stressful than I realized. I was very hormonal, breaking out, and felt unlike myself. This contributed to my fiancé and I fighting more than usual. In one particularly heated fight, I told him I would go back on birth control and even purchased the pills, but he told me he would break up with me if I did because he wanted to get to know the real me. I conceded, and then something switched in me and I became excited at the possibility of having a baby. I started tracking my cycle and figuring out my ovulation days. I shared this with my fiancé, and on one of those days, we got pregnant. I didn’t find out until the end of summer 2022. When I did find out, I told my fiancé and suggested we should probably get married.
My fiancé's first response was that we should wait to see if the baby sticks, and if it does, then we can plan a marriage but he wanted to wait until February 2023. I was very disappointed and angry and yelled at him. I felt alone and overwhelmed by the thought of having an illegitimate child. After discussing potentially getting an abortion, potentially breaking up, and potentially selling the house, I talked my fiancé into keeping the baby and getting married. He also wanted to keep the baby but was afraid of our situation. After many fights about when to have the wedding, we finally decided on December 2022. At that point, I was four months pregnant. During this time, my fiancé and I had major arguments that therapy couldn’t even remedy. We would yell at each other, slam doors, I would cry, and he would hold himself up in a room for hours. We had nice moments too, but they were heavily clouded over by the bad.
Finally, we got married, and things were good for a while. But then we faced some marital problems. My husband kept separate accounts and managed the finances himself. We had a joint credit card where I could pay for expenses without being questioned. He made all of the major investment decisions and major purchases. If I tried to disagree or speak up, he would get upset because this was not the submissive wife I had promised him I would be. I made significantly less money than him but lived a good lifestyle, buying almost anything I wanted within reason. Coming from a traditional family, I was upset that finances were kept separate. And so it continued that my husband would invest tens of thousands of dollars into our house so that his family from out of town would visit. We live in Vancouver, Canada, but his family is from Ottawa. In hopes of luring his youngest sister (of four) to Vancouver, my husband would make any modification to the house that his youngest sister showed the slightest interest in. This included a hot tub on the rooftop, a media system in the basement, a movie projector, and much more. After said sister got married, she made it clear that she would not move to Vancouver. Then a switch happened in my husband, and he suddenly wanted to sell the house.
Meanwhile, during all this time, I had my baby, and my husband and I were still fighting more than ever. I felt no support from him, and he felt drained by his work, our fights, and being away from his family. Recently, for the past three months, he has been consistently pushing for the sale of our house. This is where my dilemma lies. I am afraid to sell this house because my husband has kept finances separate, and the mortgage on this house has been serving as a way for me to feel secure. My husband contributes a monthly amount on a regular basis. He could have forced a sale in the past but didn’t, instead paying into the monthly mortgage on top of other bills. Now, he is considering forcing the sale of our house, but I am upset that he is citing financing as the issue when I have been begging him to save money instead of spending (his response is that $200,000 does not affect a $2M mortgage, and that he now feels burnt out and wants to retire sooner and live passively). If I don’t agree to sell, I feel unstable about moving from our home given that my husband and I fight so frequently, and I am left alone to take care of the child. It is also worth noting that my parents live right across the street and come over frequently to help with the child, or I would go over to seek their help. My husband says that he feels abandoned and uncomfortable frequently because of our proximity to my parents, but I am because there have been times when I felt truly alone, and my parents were my only solace and support. My husband would ignore me for days, especially when I was postpartum and vulnerable. My parents now see my husband as someone who doesn’t put his wife and child first. My husband says that the massive mortgage we have is too stressful for him, and he can’t take that burden. I am sad that my husband will not consider keeping this house for another three years so that I can get comfortable with the idea of selling the house and that potentially I and my family can all move to Ottawa so that we can allow my husband to be closer to his family.
I don’t know what to do at this point, Reddit. I’m currently on extended maternity leave, but it ends in six months. My husband and I will have to come to an agreement about the house, otherwise, it is likely that he will force the sale of the house even if I’m not ready to move. I’ve consistently felt rushed and overlooked in this relationship. I am tired of being the small voice that does not impact decision-making. My husband is now being nice to me and trying to show me a good time, but I see it as him turning on his charming mode so that I can say yes to the sale of this house. I’m not sure what to do. Our fights and disagreements are so bad and the marriage feels like doom sometimes (never any physical violence). I sometimes questions even staying with him, but I worry for my daughter. He is a good father to her, when he is present and off his phone.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for reading.

Stuck and need to let it out
Before i start i know i am very stupid for the choices i made. I (26f) got married to my husband (30m) when i was 21 we met from mutual friends and i fell in love with him and it was a feeling ill never forget. He was an amazing guy until he wasn’t he was always very charming and people instantly liked him when meeting him. There is more details but i am going to try to sum it up. I worked a little after marriage than covid hit and i got pregnant with my first born. He took care of me financially always and assured me i dont need to work anyways. I was with him when he was struggling i never complained as a newly wed who barley got to spend time with her husband because i understood i never asked him to take me out or anything i stood by him and now hes very successful (ill get back to why i mentioned that later) my pregnancy was very stressful in my 7th month he hit me and i had bruises on my neck and face i dont even remember what the fight was about after giving birth i struggled alot i was 22 years old i kept finding porn and videos being sent between friends which i have seen before but it started to make me feel bad about myself which i have always been confident before him i told him it bothered me and it never stopped so now im 23 and insecure and i alter my body and do a procedure thinking that will fix things (as i said i know im stupid) he strangled me 2 months after giving birth to the point that i passed out and woke up he almost killed me i never told anyone. He kept saying hes changing and well work things out so i forgave him. My family dosent believe in divorce and as much support i have from them i don’t want to disappoint them. We did good for a little bit we moved to a bigger place and than we moved again to another bigger place that i am in currently. In between all of that there was stuff that i kept seeing that hurt me and bothered me but anytime i say anything he says its me who keeps digging which is true because i grew up having a father who cheated on my mom and i saw it first hand im not going to lie it traumatized me but i did not project it on him until after he started doing the things he did. Hes a very jealous person himself he always tried to control everything he hates that im good looking he tells me all the time he should have married someone “ugly” i do NOT dress provocative at all i barley show any skin but somehow EVERYTHING always leads back to how i dress and all our problems are my fault because of how i dress he says that when we go out men always check me out and it angers him even tho i am not showing any damn skin. Anyways mothers day 2022 he hit me again but he says he didnt but the bruises on my arms say otherwise i have pictures of it and it was bad he tried to throw me down the stairs i begged him not to. Sadly i still wanted to be loved i forgave him moved on he is would buy me gifts and cards and because im so stupid i believed he was sorry anyways now its 2023 and i find out im pregnant i didnt know how i felt my first born was lonley so i thought at least they will have a sibling.. surprise its twins and i knew im going to go through it i had the worse pregnancy i almost died i developed pre eclampsia and my doctor missed it i gave birth early my whole pregnancy i was alone i was so lonley just me and my first born i cried everyday husband was working so i couldn’t complain without it turning to a fight even though its his company and he could afford to have been there a little for me it is not 7 months after i gave birth physically i feel good mentally i dont he is never there for me as a husband i been telling him i feel like he’s just a roomate at this point we have no dates barley any intimacy which had been going on for years i know hes insecure and i never used it against him but he always would to me he hates now that i bounced back quickly and like to dress up again because the end of my pregnancy i was very swollen i was wearing all his clothes. I kept crying telling him i have needs just like anyone else i want to feel loved i dont want to live like this but anytime i say anything he says i complain to much now last week he beat me over nothing it was 60 seconds into a petty argument and he attacked me i packed myself and my 3 kids he watched me packing calling me names i left to a hotel for a night nd than my moms house he got backlash from both our families i ended up having to come home for the kids im miserable hes not sorry mothers day he barley acknowledged me But we spent the day and today any time we try to talk about anything he blames me.
I know im stupid i dont know how i can start over again i have 3 kids i am in the works of going back to school so when the babys start school ill have my career because i am financially dependent on him which is my fault i worked since i was 14 but he convinced me not to anymore My oldest loves their father so much it hurts me to put my baby through this drama There is soooooo much more detail and stuff to add Hes not the worse person i guess i bring out the bad in him when all i ever wanted was to be in a healthy marriage and give my kids what i didn’t have growing up
I dont know what to do i know i have to finish school so i can get a stable job but that means i have to stay and suck it up
I never wanted to be divorced but this marriage is over i always thought cheating was the only reason for divorce i am not in love with him but its so hard to let it go i never was like this i was so out going the life of the party i dont even recognize myself i feel so sad and depressed and alone i have the most amazing friends but i cant get myself to open up

Stuck and need to let it out
Before i start i know i am very stupid for the choices i made. I (26f) got married to my husband (30m) when i was 21 we met from mutual friends and i fell in love with him and it was a feeling ill never forget. He was an amazing guy until he wasn’t he was always very charming and people instantly liked him when meeting him. There is more details but i am going to try to sum it up. I worked a little after marriage than covid hit and i got pregnant with my first born. He took care of me financially always and assured me i dont need to work anyways. I was with him when he was struggling i never complained as a newly wed who barley got to spend time with her husband because i understood i never asked him to take me out or anything i stood by him and now hes very successful (ill get back to why i mentioned that later) my pregnancy was very stressful in my 7th month he hit me and i had bruises on my neck and face i dont even remember what the fight was about after giving birth i struggled alot i was 22 years old i kept finding porn and videos being sent between friends which i have seen before but it started to make me feel bad about myself which i have always been confident before him i told him it bothered me and it never stopped so now im 23 and insecure and i alter my body and do a procedure thinking that will fix things (as i said i know im stupid) he strangled me 2 months after giving birth to the point that i passed out and woke up he almost killed me i never told anyone. He kept saying hes changing and well work things out so i forgave him. My family dosent believe in divorce and as much support i have from them i don’t want to disappoint them. We did good for a little bit we moved to a bigger place and than we moved again to another bigger place that i am in currently. In between all of that there was stuff that i kept seeing that hurt me and bothered me but anytime i say anything he says its me who keeps digging which is true because i grew up having a father who cheated on my mom and i saw it first hand im not going to lie it traumatized me but i did not project it on him until after he started doing the things he did. Hes a very jealous person himself he always tried to control everything he hates that im good looking he tells me all the time he should have married someone “ugly” i do NOT dress provocative at all i barley show any skin but somehow EVERYTHING always leads back to how i dress and all our problems are my fault because of how i dress he says that when we go out men always check me out and it angers him even tho i am not showing any damn skin. Anyways mothers day 2022 he hit me again but he says he didnt but the bruises on my arms say otherwise i have pictures of it and it was bad he tried to throw me down the stairs i begged him not to. Sadly i still wanted to be loved i forgave him moved on he is would buy me gifts and cards and because im so stupid i believed he was sorry anyways now its 2023 and i find out im pregnant i didnt know how i felt my first born was lonley so i thought at least they will have a sibling.. surprise its twins and i knew im going to go through it i had the worse pregnancy i almost died i developed pre eclampsia and my doctor missed it i gave birth early my whole pregnancy i was alone i was so lonley just me and my first born i cried everyday husband was working so i couldn’t complain without it turning to a fight even though its his company and he could afford to have been there a little for me it is not 7 months after i gave birth physically i feel good mentally i dont he is never there for me as a husband i been telling him i feel like he’s just a roomate at this point we have no dates barley any intimacy which had been going on for years i know hes insecure and i never used it against him but he always would to me he hates now that i bounced back quickly and like to dress up again because the end of my pregnancy i was very swollen i was wearing all his clothes. I kept crying telling him i have needs just like anyone else i want to feel loved i dont want to live like this but anytime i say anything he says i complain to much now last week he beat me over nothing it was 60 seconds into a petty argument and he attacked me i packed myself and my 3 kids he watched me packing calling me names i left to a hotel for a night nd than my moms house he got backlash from both our families i ended up having to come home for the kids im miserable hes not sorry mothers day he barley acknowledged me But we spent the day and today any time we try to talk about anything he blames me.
I know im stupid i dont know how i can start over again i have 3 kids i am in the works of going back to school so when the babys start school ill have my career because i am financially dependent on him which is my fault i worked since i was 14 but he convinced me not to anymore My oldest loves their father so much it hurts me to put my baby through this drama There is soooooo much more detail and stuff to add Hes not the worse person i guess i bring out the bad in him when all i ever wanted was to be in a healthy marriage and give my kids what i didn’t have growing up I dont know what to do i know i have to finish school so i can get a stable job but that means i have to stay and suck it up
I never wanted to be divorced but this marriage is over i always thought cheating was the only reason for divorce i am not in love with him but its so hard to let it go i never was like this i was so out going the life of the party i dont even recognize myself i feel so sad and depressed and alone i have the most amazing friends but i cant get myself to open up

https://mises.org/mises-daily/society-without-state
In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” — that is, an anarchist society — might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism. This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state. On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.
Nor is our definition of the state arbitrary, for these two characteristics have been possessed by what is generally acknowledged to be states throughout recorded history. The state, by its use of physical coercion, has arrogated to itself a compulsory monopoly of defense services over its territorial jurisdiction. But it is certainly conceptually possible for such services to be supplied by private, non-state institutions, and indeed such services have historically been supplied by other organizations than the state. To be opposed to the state is then not necessarily to be opposed to services that have often been linked with it; to be opposed to the state does not necessarily imply that we must be opposed to police protection, courts, arbitration, the minting of money, postal service, or roads and highways. Some anarchists have indeed been opposed to police and to all physical coercion in defense of person and property, but this is not inherent in and is fundamentally irrelevant to the anarchist position, which is precisely marked by opposition to all physical coercion invasive of, or aggressing against, person and property.
The crucial role of taxation may be seen in the fact that the state is the only institution or organization in society which regularly and systematically acquires its income through the use of physical coercion. All other individuals or organizations acquire their income voluntarily, either (1) through the voluntary sale of goods and services to consumers on the market, or (2) through voluntary gifts or donations by members or other donors. If I cease or refrain from purchasing Wheaties on the market, the Wheaties producers do not come after me with a gun or the threat of imprisonment to force me to purchase; if I fail to join the American Philosophical Association, the association may not force me to join or prevent me from giving up my membership. Only the state can do so; only the state can confiscate my property or put me in jail if I do not pay its tax tribute. Therefore, only the state regularly exists and has its very being by means of coercive depredations on private property.
Neither is it legitimate to challenge this sort of analysis by claiming that in some other sense, the purchase of Wheaties or membership in the APA is in some way “coercive.” Anyone who is still unhappy with this use of the term “coercion” can simply eliminate the word from this discussion and substitute for it “physical violence or the threat thereof,” with the only loss being in literary style rather than in the substance of the argument. What anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the state, that is, to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion.
It need hardly be added that the state habitually builds upon its coercive source of income by adding a host of other aggressions upon society, ranging from economic controls to the prohibition of pornography to the compelling of religious observance to the mass murder of civilians in organized warfare. In short, the state, in the words of Albert Jay Nock, “claims and exercises a monopoly of crime” over its territorial area.
The second criticism I would like to defuse before beginning the main body of the paper is the common charge that anarchists “assume that all people are good” and that without the state no crime would be committed. In short, that anarchism assumes that with the abolition of the state a New Anarchist Man will emerge, cooperative, humane, and benevolent, so that no problem of crime will then plague the society. I confess that I do not understand the basis for this charge. Whatever other schools of anarchism profess — and I do not believe that they are open to the charge — I certainly do not adopt this view. I assume with most observers that mankind is a mixture of good and evil, of cooperative and criminal tendencies. In my view, the anarchist society is one which maximizes the tendencies for the good and the cooperative, while it minimizes both the opportunity and the moral legitimacy of the evil and the criminal. If the anarchist view is correct and the state is indeed the great legalized and socially legitimated channel for all manner of antisocial crime — theft, oppression, mass murder — on a massive scale, then surely the abolition of such an engine of crime can do nothing but favor the good in man and discourage the bad.
A further point: in a profound sense, no social system, whether anarchist or statist, can work at all unless most people are “good” in the sense that they are not all hell-bent upon assaulting and robbing their neighbors. If everyone were so disposed, no amount of protection, whether state or private, could succeed in staving off chaos. Furthermore, the more that people are disposed to be peaceful and not aggress against their neighbors, the more successfully any social system will work, and the fewer resources will need to be devoted to police protection. The anarchist view holds that, given the “nature of man,” given the degree of goodness or badness at any point in time, anarchism will maximize the opportunities for the good and minimize the channels for the bad. The rest depends on the values held by the individual members of society. The only further point that need be made is that by eliminating the living example and the social legitimacy of the massive legalized crime of the state, anarchism will to a large extent promote peaceful values in the minds of the public.
We cannot of course deal here with the numerous arguments in favor of anarchism or against the state, moral, political, and economic. Nor can we take up the various goods and services now provided by the state and show how private individuals and groups will be able to supply them far more efficiently on the free market. Here we can only deal with perhaps the most difficult area, the area where it is almost universally assumed that the state must exist and act, even if it is only a “necessary evil” instead of a positive good: the vital realm of defense or protection of person and property against aggression. Surely, it is universally asserted, the state is at least vitally necessary to provide police protection, the judicial resolution of disputes and enforcement of contracts, and the creation of the law itself that is to be enforced. My contention is that all of these admittedly necessary services of protection can be satisfactorily and efficiently supplied by private persons and institutions on the free market.
One important caveat before we begin the body of this paper: new proposals such as anarchism are almost always gauged against the implicit assumption that the present, or statist system works to perfection. Any lacunae or difficulties with the picture of the anarchist society are considered net liabilities, and enough to dismiss anarchism out of hand. It is, in short, implicitly assumed that the state is doing its self-assumed job of protecting person and property to perfection. We cannot here go into the reasons why the state is bound to suffer inherently from grave flaws and inefficiencies in such a task. All we need do now is to point to the black and unprecedented record of the state through history: no combination of private marauders can possibly begin to match the state’s unremitting record of theft, confiscation, oppression, and mass murder. No collection of Mafia or private bank robbers can begin to compare with all the Hiroshimas, Dresdens, and Lidices and their analogues through the history of mankind.
This point can be made more philosophically: it is illegitimate to compare the merits of anarchism and statism by starting with the present system as the implicit given and then critically examining only the anarchist alternative. What we must do is to begin at the zero point and then critically examine both suggested alternatives. Suppose, for example, that we were all suddenly dropped down on the earth de novo and that we were all then confronted with the question of what societal arrangements to adopt. And suppose then that someone suggested: “We are all bound to suffer from those of us who wish to aggress against their fellow men. Let us then solve this problem of crime by handing all of our weapons to the Jones family, over there, by giving all of our ultimate power to settle disputes to that family. In that way, with their monopoly of coercion and of ultimate decision making, the Jones family will be able to protect each of us from each other.” I submit that this proposal would get very short shrift, except perhaps from the Jones family themselves. And yet this is precisely the common argument for the existence of the state. When we start from the zero point, as in the case of the Jones family, the question of “who will guard the guardians?” becomes not simply an abiding lacuna in the theory of the state but an overwhelming barrier to its existence.
A final caveat: the anarchist is always at a disadvantage in attempting to forecast the shape of the future anarchist society. For it is impossible for observers to predict voluntary social arrangements, including the provision of goods and services, on the free market. Suppose, for example, that this were the year 1874 and that someone predicted that eventually there would be a radio-manufacturing industry. To be able to make such a forecast successfully, does he have to be challenged to state immediately how many radio manufacturers there would be a century hence, how big they would be, where they would be located, what technology and marketing techniques they would use, and so on? Obviously, such a challenge would make no sense, and in a profound sense the same is true of those who demand a precise portrayal of the pattern of protection activities on the market. Anarchism advocates the dissolution of the state into social and market arrangements, and these arrangements are far more flexible and less predictable than political institutions. The most that we can do, then, is to offer broad guidelines and perspectives on the shape of a projected anarchist society.
One important point to make here is that the advance of modern technology makes anarchistic arrangements increasingly feasible. Take, for example, the case of lighthouses, where it is often charged that it is unfeasible for private lighthouse operators to row out to each ship to charge it for use of the light. Apart from the fact that this argument ignores the successful existence of private lighthouses in earlier days, as in England in the eighteenth century, another vital consideration is that modern electronic technology makes charging each ship for the light far more feasible. Thus, the ship would have to have paid for an electronically controlled beam which could then be automatically turned on for those ships which had paid for the service.
Let us turn now to the problem of how disputes — in particular disputes over alleged violations of person and property — would be resolved in an anarchist society. First, it should be noted that all disputes involve two parties: the plaintiff, the alleged victim of the crime or tort and the defendant, the alleged aggressor. In many cases of broken contract, of course, each of the two parties alleging that the other is the culprit is at the same time a plaintiff and a defendant.
An important point to remember is that any society, be it statist or anarchist, has to have some way of resolving disputes that will gain a majority consensus in society. There would be no need for courts or arbitrators if everyone were omniscient and knew instantaneously which persons were guilty of any given crime or violation of contract. Since none of us is omniscient, there has to be some method of deciding who is the criminal or lawbreaker which will gain legitimacy; in short, whose decision will be accepted by the great majority of the public.
In the first place, a dispute may be resolved voluntarily between the two parties themselves, either unaided or with the help of a third mediator. This poses no problem, and will automatically be accepted by society at large. It is so accepted even now, much less in a society imbued with the anarchistic values of peaceful cooperation and agreement. Secondly and similarly, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, may decide to submit voluntarily to the decision of an arbitrator. This agreement may arise either after a dispute has arisen, or be provided for in advance in the original contract. Again, there is no problem in such an arrangement gaining legitimacy. Even in the present statist era, the notorious inefficiency and coercive and cumbersome procedures of the politically run government courts has led increasing numbers of citizens to turn to voluntary and expert arbitration for a speedy and harmonious settling of disputes.
Thus, William C. Wooldridge has written that

Wooldridge adds the important point that, in addition to the speed of arbitration procedures vis-à-vis the courts, the arbitrators can proceed as experts in disregard of the official government law; in a profound sense, then, they serve to create a voluntary body of private law. “In other words,” states Wooldridge, “the system of extralegal, voluntary courts has progressed hand in hand with a body of private law; the rules of the state are circumvented by the same process that circumvents the forums established for the settlement of disputes over those rules…. In short, a private agreement between two people, a bilateral “law,” has supplanted the official law. The writ of the sovereign has cease to run, and for it is substituted a rule tacitly or explicitly agreed to by the parties. Wooldridge concludes that “if an arbitrator can choose to ignore a penal damage rule or the statute of limitations applicable to the claim before him (and it is generally conceded that he has that power), arbitration can be viewed as a practically revolutionary instrument for self-liberation from the law….”2
It may be objected that arbitration only works successfully because the courts enforce the award of the arbitrator. Wooldridge points out, however, that arbitration was unenforceable in the American courts before 1920, but that this did not prevent voluntary arbitration from being successful and expanding in the United States and in England. He points, furthermore, to the successful operations of merchant courts since the Middle Ages, those courts which successfully developed the entire body of the law merchant. None of those courts possessed the power of enforcement. He might have added the private courts of shippers which developed the body of admiralty law in a similar way.
How then did these private, “anarchistic,” and voluntary courts ensure the acceptance of their decisions? By the method of social ostracism, and by the refusal to deal any further with the offending merchant. This method of voluntary “enforcement,” indeed proved highly successful. Wooldridge writes that “the merchants’ courts were voluntary, and if a man ignored their judgment, he could not be sent to jail…. Nevertheless, it is apparent that … [their] decisions were generally respected even by the losers; otherwise people would never have used them in the first place…. Merchants made their courts work simply by agreeing to abide by the results. The merchant who broke the understanding would not be sent to jail, to be sure, but neither would he long continue to be a merchant, for the compliance exacted by his fellows … proved if anything more effective than physical coercion.”3 Nor did this voluntary method fail to work in modern times. Wooldridge writes that it was precisely in the years before 1920, when arbitration awards could not be enforced in the courts,

It should also be pointed out that modern technology makes even more feasible the collection and dissemination of information about people’s credit ratings and records of keeping or violating their contracts or arbitration agreements. Presumably, an anarchist society would see the expansion of this sort of dissemination of data and thereby facilitate the ostracism or boycotting of contract and arbitration violators.
How would arbitrators be selected in an anarchist society? In the same way as they are chosen now, and as they were chosen in the days of strictly voluntary arbitration: the arbitrators with the best reputation for efficiency and probity would be chosen by the various parties on the market. As in other processes of the market, the arbitrators with the best record in settling disputes will come to gain an increasing amount of business, and those with poor records will no longer enjoy clients and will have to shift to another line of endeavor. Here it must be emphasized that parties in dispute will seek out those arbitrators with the best reputation for both expertise and impartiality and that inefficient or biased arbitrators will rapidly have to find another occupation.
Thus, the Tannehills emphasize:

If desired, furthermore, the contracting parties could provide in advance for a series of arbitrators:

Arbitration, then, poses little difficulty for a portrayal of the free society. But what of torts or crimes of aggression where there has been no contract? Or suppose that the breaker of a contract defies the arbitration award? Is ostracism enough? In short, how can courts develop in the free-market anarchist society which will have the power to enforce judgments against criminals or contract breakers?
In the wide sense, defense service consists of guards or police who use force in defending person and property against attack, and judges or courts whose role is to use socially accepted procedures to determine who the criminals or tortfeasors are, as well as to enforce judicial awards, such as damages or the keeping of contracts. On the free market, many scenarios are possible on the relationship between the private courts and the police; they may be “vertically integrated,” for example, or their services may be supplied by separate firms. Furthermore, it seems likely that police service will be supplied by insurance companies who will provide crime insurance to their clients. In that case, insurance companies will pay off the victims of crime or the breaking of contracts or arbitration awards and then pursue the aggressors in court to recoup their losses. There is a natural market connection between insurance companies and defense service, since they need pay out less benefits in proportion as they are able to keep down the rate of crime.
Courts might either charge fees for their services, with the losers of cases obliged to pay court costs, or else they may subsist on monthly or yearly premiums by their clients, who may be either individuals or the police or insurance agencies. Suppose, for example, that Smith is an aggrieved party, either because he has been assaulted or robbed, or because an arbitration award in his favor has not been honored. Smith believes that Jones is the party guilty of the crime. Smith then goes to a court, Court A, of which he is a client, and brings charges against Jones as a defendant. In my view, the hallmark of an anarchist society is one where no man may legally compel someone who is not a convicted criminal to do anything, since that would be aggression against an innocent man’s person or property. Therefore, Court A can only invite rather than subpoena Jones to attend his trial. Of course, if Jones refused to appear or send a representative, his side of the case will not be heard. The trial of Jones proceeds. Suppose that Court A finds Jones innocent. In my view, part of the generally accepted law code of the anarchist society (on which see further below) is that this must end the matter unless Smith can prove charges of gross incompetence or bias on the part of the court.
Suppose, next, that Court A finds Jones guilty. Jones might accept the verdict, because he too is a client of the same court, because he knows he is guilty, or for some other reason. In that case, Court A proceeds to exercise judgment against Jones. Neither of these instances poses very difficult problems for our picture of the anarchist society. But suppose, instead, that Jones contests the decision; he then goes to his court, Court B, and the case is retried there. Suppose that Court B, too, finds Jones guilty. Again, it seems to me that the accepted law code of the anarchist society will assert that this ends the matter; both parties have had their say in courts which each has selected, and the decision for guilt is unanimous.
Suppose, however, the most difficult case: that Court B finds Jones innocent. The two courts, each subscribed to by one of the two parties, have split their verdicts. In that case, the two courts will submit the case to an appeals court, or arbitrator, which the two courts agree upon. There seems to be no real difficulty about the concept of an appeals court. As in the case of arbitration contracts, it seems very likely that the various private courts in the society will have prior agreements to submit their disputes to a particular appeals court. How will the appeals judges be chosen? Again, as in the case of arbitrators or of the first judges on the free market, they will be chosen for their expertise and their reputation for efficiency, honesty, and integrity. Obviously, appeals judges who are inefficient or biased will scarcely be chosen by courts who will have a dispute. The point here is that there is no need for a legally established or institutionalized single, monopoly appeals court system, as states now provide. There is no reason why there cannot arise a multitude of efficient and honest appeals judges who will be selected by the disputant courts, just as there are numerous private arbitrators on the market today. The appeals court renders its decision, and the courts proceed to enforce it if, in our example, Jones is considered guilty — unless, of course, Jones can prove bias in some other court proceedings.
No society can have unlimited judicial appeals, for in that case there would be no point to having judges or courts at all. Therefore, every society, whether statist or anarchist, will have to have some socially accepted cutoff point for trials and appeals. My suggestion is the rule that the agreement of any two courts, be decisive. “Two” is not an arbitrary figure, for it reflects the fact that there are two parties, the plaintiff and the defendant, to any alleged crime or contract dispute.
If the courts are to be empowered to enforce decision against guilty parties, does this not bring back the state in another form and thereby negate anarchism? No, for at the beginning of this paper I explicitly defined anarchism in such a way as not to rule out the use of defensive force — force in defense of person and property — by privately supported agencies. In the same way, it is not bringing back the state to allow persons to use force to defend themselves against aggression, or to hire guards or police agencies to defend them.
It should be noted, however, that in the anarchist society there will be no “district attorney” to press charges on behalf of “society.” Only the victims will press charges as the plaintiffs. If, then, these victims should happen to be absolute pacifists who are opposed even to defensive force, then they will simply not press charges in the courts or otherwise retaliate against those who have aggressed against them. In a free society that would be their right. If the victim should suffer from murder, then his heir would have the right to press the charges.
What of the Hatfield-and-McCoy problem? Suppose that a Hatfield kills a McCoy, and that McCoy’s heir does not belong to a private insurance, police agency, or court, and decides to retaliate himself? Since under anarchism there can be no coercion of the noncriminal, McCoy would have the perfect right to do so. No one may be compelled to bring his case to a court. Indeed, since the right to hire police or courts flows from the right of self-defense against aggression, it would be inconsistent and in contradiction to the very basis of the free society to institute such compulsion.
Suppose, then, that the surviving McCoy finds what he believes to be the guilty Hatfield and kills him in turn? What then? This is fine, except that McCoy may have to worry about charges being brought against him by a surviving Hatfield. Here it must be emphasized that in the law of the anarchist society based on defense against aggression, the courts would not be able to proceed against McCoy if in fact he killed the right Hatfield. His problem would arise if the courts should find that he made a grievous mistake and killed the wrong man; in that case, he in turn would be found guilty of murder. Surely, in most instances, individuals will wish to obviate such problems by taking their case to a court and thereby gain social acceptability for their defensive retaliation — not for the act of retaliation but for the correctness of deciding who the criminal in any given case might be. The purpose of the judicial process, indeed, is to find a way of general agreement on who might be the criminal or contract breaker in any given case. The judicial process is not a good in itself; thus, in the case of an assassination, such as Jack Ruby’s murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, on public television, there is no need for a complex judicial process, since the name of the murderer is evident to all.
Will not the possibility exist of a private court that may turn venal and dishonest, or of a private police force that turns criminal and extorts money by coercion? Of course such an event may occur, given the propensities of human nature. Anarchism is not a moral cure-all. But the important point is that market forces exist to place severe checks on such possibilities, especially in contrast to a society where a state exists. For, in the first place, judges, like arbitrators, will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality. Secondly, on the free market important checks and balances exist against venal courts or criminal police forces. Namely, that there are competing courts and police agencies to whom victims may turn for redress. If the “Prudential Police Agency” should turn outlaw and extract revenue from victims by coercion, the latter would have the option of turning to the “Mutual” or “Equitable” Police Agency for defense and for pressing charges against Prudential. These are the genuine “checks and balances” of the free market, genuine in contrast to the phony check and balances of a state system, where all the alleged “balancing” agencies are in the hands of one monopoly government. Indeed, given the monopoly “protection service” of a state, what is there to prevent a state from using its monopoly channels of coercion to extort money from the public? What are the checks and limits of the state? None, except for the extremely difficult course of revolution against a power with all of the guns in its hands. In fact, the state provides an easy, legitimated channel for crime and aggression, since it has its very being in the crime of tax theft, and the coerced monopoly of “protection.” It is the state, indeed, that functions as a mighty “protection racket” on a giant and massive scale. It is the state that says: “Pay us for your ‘protection’ or else.” In the light of the massive and inherent activities of the state, the danger of a “protection racket” emerging from one or more private police agencies is relatively small indeed.
Moreover, it must be emphasized that a crucial element in the power of the state is its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority of the public, the fact that after centuries of propaganda, the depredations of the state are looked upon rather as benevolent services. Taxation is generally not seen as theft, nor war as mass murder, nor conscription as slavery. Should a private police agency turn outlaw, should “Prudential” become a protection racket, it would then lack the social legitimacy which the state has managed to accrue to itself over the centuries. “Prudential” would be seen by all as bandits, rather than as legitimate or divinely appointed “sovereigns” bent on promoting the “common good” or the “general welfare.” And lacking such legitimacy, “Prudential” would have to face the wrath of the public and the defense and retaliation of the other private defense agencies, the police and courts, on the free market. Given these inherent checks and limits, a successful transformation from a free society to bandit rule becomes most unlikely. Indeed, historically, it has been very difficult for a state to arise to supplant a stateless society; usually, it has come about through external conquest rather than by evolution from within a society.
Within the anarchist camp, there has been much dispute on whether the private courts would have to be bound by a basic, common law code. Ingenious attempts have been made to work out a system where the laws or standards of decision-making by the courts would differ completely from one to another.7 But in my view all would have to abide by the basic law code, in particular, prohibition of aggression against person and property, in order to fulfill our definition of anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression. Suppose, for example, that one group of people in society holds that all redheads are demons who deserve to be shot on sight. Suppose that Jones, one of this group, shoots Smith, a redhead. Suppose that Smith or his heir presses charges in a court, but that Jones’s court, in philosophic agreement with Jones, finds him innocent therefore. It seems to me that in order to be considered legitimate, any court would have to follow the basic libertarian law code of the inviolate right of person and property. For otherwise, courts might legally subscribe to a code which sanctions such aggression in various cases, and which to that extent would violate the definition of anarchism and introduce, if not the state, then a strong element of statishness or legalized aggression into the society.
But again I see no insuperable difficulties here. For in that case, anarchists, in agitating for their creed, will simply include in their agitation the idea of a general libertarian law code as part and parcel of the anarchist creed of abolition of legalized aggression against person or property in the society.
In contrast to the general law code, other aspects of court decisions could legitimately vary in accordance with the market or the wishes of the clients; for example, the language the cases will be conducted in, the number of judges to be involved, and so on.
There are other problems of the basic law code which there is no time to go into here: for example, the definition of just property titles or the question of legitimate punishment of convicted offenders — though the latter problem of course exists in statist legal systems as well.8 The basic point, however, is that the state is not needed to arrive at legal principles or their elaboration: indeed, much of the common law, the law merchant, admiralty law, and private law in general, grew up apart from the state, by judges not making the law but finding it on the basis of agreed-upon principles derived either from custom or reason.9 The idea that the state is needed to make law is as much a myth as that the state is needed to supply postal or police services.
Enough has been said here, I believe, to indicate that an anarchist system for settling disputes would be both viable and self-subsistent: that once adopted, it could work and continue indefinitely. How to arrive at that system is of course a very different problem, but certainly at the very least it will not likely come about unless people are convinced of its workability, are convinced, in short, that the state is not a necessary evil.

[Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago today at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF and ePub.]

https://mises.org/mises-daily/society-without-state
In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” — that is, an anarchist society — might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism. This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state. On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.
Nor is our definition of the state arbitrary, for these two characteristics have been possessed by what is generally acknowledged to be states throughout recorded history. The state, by its use of physical coercion, has arrogated to itself a compulsory monopoly of defense services over its territorial jurisdiction. But it is certainly conceptually possible for such services to be supplied by private, non-state institutions, and indeed such services have historically been supplied by other organizations than the state. To be opposed to the state is then not necessarily to be opposed to services that have often been linked with it; to be opposed to the state does not necessarily imply that we must be opposed to police protection, courts, arbitration, the minting of money, postal service, or roads and highways. Some anarchists have indeed been opposed to police and to all physical coercion in defense of person and property, but this is not inherent in and is fundamentally irrelevant to the anarchist position, which is precisely marked by opposition to all physical coercion invasive of, or aggressing against, person and property.
The crucial role of taxation may be seen in the fact that the state is the only institution or organization in society which regularly and systematically acquires its income through the use of physical coercion. All other individuals or organizations acquire their income voluntarily, either (1) through the voluntary sale of goods and services to consumers on the market, or (2) through voluntary gifts or donations by members or other donors. If I cease or refrain from purchasing Wheaties on the market, the Wheaties producers do not come after me with a gun or the threat of imprisonment to force me to purchase; if I fail to join the American Philosophical Association, the association may not force me to join or prevent me from giving up my membership. Only the state can do so; only the state can confiscate my property or put me in jail if I do not pay its tax tribute. Therefore, only the state regularly exists and has its very being by means of coercive depredations on private property.
Neither is it legitimate to challenge this sort of analysis by claiming that in some other sense, the purchase of Wheaties or membership in the APA is in some way “coercive.” Anyone who is still unhappy with this use of the term “coercion” can simply eliminate the word from this discussion and substitute for it “physical violence or the threat thereof,” with the only loss being in literary style rather than in the substance of the argument. What anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the state, that is, to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion.
It need hardly be added that the state habitually builds upon its coercive source of income by adding a host of other aggressions upon society, ranging from economic controls to the prohibition of pornography to the compelling of religious observance to the mass murder of civilians in organized warfare. In short, the state, in the words of Albert Jay Nock, “claims and exercises a monopoly of crime” over its territorial area.
The second criticism I would like to defuse before beginning the main body of the paper is the common charge that anarchists “assume that all people are good” and that without the state no crime would be committed. In short, that anarchism assumes that with the abolition of the state a New Anarchist Man will emerge, cooperative, humane, and benevolent, so that no problem of crime will then plague the society. I confess that I do not understand the basis for this charge. Whatever other schools of anarchism profess — and I do not believe that they are open to the charge — I certainly do not adopt this view. I assume with most observers that mankind is a mixture of good and evil, of cooperative and criminal tendencies. In my view, the anarchist society is one which maximizes the tendencies for the good and the cooperative, while it minimizes both the opportunity and the moral legitimacy of the evil and the criminal. If the anarchist view is correct and the state is indeed the great legalized and socially legitimated channel for all manner of antisocial crime — theft, oppression, mass murder — on a massive scale, then surely the abolition of such an engine of crime can do nothing but favor the good in man and discourage the bad.
A further point: in a profound sense, no social system, whether anarchist or statist, can work at all unless most people are “good” in the sense that they are not all hell-bent upon assaulting and robbing their neighbors. If everyone were so disposed, no amount of protection, whether state or private, could succeed in staving off chaos. Furthermore, the more that people are disposed to be peaceful and not aggress against their neighbors, the more successfully any social system will work, and the fewer resources will need to be devoted to police protection. The anarchist view holds that, given the “nature of man,” given the degree of goodness or badness at any point in time, anarchism will maximize the opportunities for the good and minimize the channels for the bad. The rest depends on the values held by the individual members of society. The only further point that need be made is that by eliminating the living example and the social legitimacy of the massive legalized crime of the state, anarchism will to a large extent promote peaceful values in the minds of the public.
We cannot of course deal here with the numerous arguments in favor of anarchism or against the state, moral, political, and economic. Nor can we take up the various goods and services now provided by the state and show how private individuals and groups will be able to supply them far more efficiently on the free market. Here we can only deal with perhaps the most difficult area, the area where it is almost universally assumed that the state must exist and act, even if it is only a “necessary evil” instead of a positive good: the vital realm of defense or protection of person and property against aggression. Surely, it is universally asserted, the state is at least vitally necessary to provide police protection, the judicial resolution of disputes and enforcement of contracts, and the creation of the law itself that is to be enforced. My contention is that all of these admittedly necessary services of protection can be satisfactorily and efficiently supplied by private persons and institutions on the free market.
One important caveat before we begin the body of this paper: new proposals such as anarchism are almost always gauged against the implicit assumption that the present, or statist system works to perfection. Any lacunae or difficulties with the picture of the anarchist society are considered net liabilities, and enough to dismiss anarchism out of hand. It is, in short, implicitly assumed that the state is doing its self-assumed job of protecting person and property to perfection. We cannot here go into the reasons why the state is bound to suffer inherently from grave flaws and inefficiencies in such a task. All we need do now is to point to the black and unprecedented record of the state through history: no combination of private marauders can possibly begin to match the state’s unremitting record of theft, confiscation, oppression, and mass murder. No collection of Mafia or private bank robbers can begin to compare with all the Hiroshimas, Dresdens, and Lidices and their analogues through the history of mankind.
This point can be made more philosophically: it is illegitimate to compare the merits of anarchism and statism by starting with the present system as the implicit given and then critically examining only the anarchist alternative. What we must do is to begin at the zero point and then critically examine both suggested alternatives. Suppose, for example, that we were all suddenly dropped down on the earth de novo and that we were all then confronted with the question of what societal arrangements to adopt. And suppose then that someone suggested: “We are all bound to suffer from those of us who wish to aggress against their fellow men. Let us then solve this problem of crime by handing all of our weapons to the Jones family, over there, by giving all of our ultimate power to settle disputes to that family. In that way, with their monopoly of coercion and of ultimate decision making, the Jones family will be able to protect each of us from each other.” I submit that this proposal would get very short shrift, except perhaps from the Jones family themselves. And yet this is precisely the common argument for the existence of the state. When we start from the zero point, as in the case of the Jones family, the question of “who will guard the guardians?” becomes not simply an abiding lacuna in the theory of the state but an overwhelming barrier to its existence.
A final caveat: the anarchist is always at a disadvantage in attempting to forecast the shape of the future anarchist society. For it is impossible for observers to predict voluntary social arrangements, including the provision of goods and services, on the free market. Suppose, for example, that this were the year 1874 and that someone predicted that eventually there would be a radio-manufacturing industry. To be able to make such a forecast successfully, does he have to be challenged to state immediately how many radio manufacturers there would be a century hence, how big they would be, where they would be located, what technology and marketing techniques they would use, and so on? Obviously, such a challenge would make no sense, and in a profound sense the same is true of those who demand a precise portrayal of the pattern of protection activities on the market. Anarchism advocates the dissolution of the state into social and market arrangements, and these arrangements are far more flexible and less predictable than political institutions. The most that we can do, then, is to offer broad guidelines and perspectives on the shape of a projected anarchist society.
One important point to make here is that the advance of modern technology makes anarchistic arrangements increasingly feasible. Take, for example, the case of lighthouses, where it is often charged that it is unfeasible for private lighthouse operators to row out to each ship to charge it for use of the light. Apart from the fact that this argument ignores the successful existence of private lighthouses in earlier days, as in England in the eighteenth century, another vital consideration is that modern electronic technology makes charging each ship for the light far more feasible. Thus, the ship would have to have paid for an electronically controlled beam which could then be automatically turned on for those ships which had paid for the service.
Let us turn now to the problem of how disputes — in particular disputes over alleged violations of person and property — would be resolved in an anarchist society. First, it should be noted that all disputes involve two parties: the plaintiff, the alleged victim of the crime or tort and the defendant, the alleged aggressor. In many cases of broken contract, of course, each of the two parties alleging that the other is the culprit is at the same time a plaintiff and a defendant.
An important point to remember is that any society, be it statist or anarchist, has to have some way of resolving disputes that will gain a majority consensus in society. There would be no need for courts or arbitrators if everyone were omniscient and knew instantaneously which persons were guilty of any given crime or violation of contract. Since none of us is omniscient, there has to be some method of deciding who is the criminal or lawbreaker which will gain legitimacy; in short, whose decision will be accepted by the great majority of the public.
In the first place, a dispute may be resolved voluntarily between the two parties themselves, either unaided or with the help of a third mediator. This poses no problem, and will automatically be accepted by society at large. It is so accepted even now, much less in a society imbued with the anarchistic values of peaceful cooperation and agreement. Secondly and similarly, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, may decide to submit voluntarily to the decision of an arbitrator. This agreement may arise either after a dispute has arisen, or be provided for in advance in the original contract. Again, there is no problem in such an arrangement gaining legitimacy. Even in the present statist era, the notorious inefficiency and coercive and cumbersome procedures of the politically run government courts has led increasing numbers of citizens to turn to voluntary and expert arbitration for a speedy and harmonious settling of disputes.
Thus, William C. Wooldridge has written that

Wooldridge adds the important point that, in addition to the speed of arbitration procedures vis-à-vis the courts, the arbitrators can proceed as experts in disregard of the official government law; in a profound sense, then, they serve to create a voluntary body of private law. “In other words,” states Wooldridge, “the system of extralegal, voluntary courts has progressed hand in hand with a body of private law; the rules of the state are circumvented by the same process that circumvents the forums established for the settlement of disputes over those rules…. In short, a private agreement between two people, a bilateral “law,” has supplanted the official law. The writ of the sovereign has cease to run, and for it is substituted a rule tacitly or explicitly agreed to by the parties. Wooldridge concludes that “if an arbitrator can choose to ignore a penal damage rule or the statute of limitations applicable to the claim before him (and it is generally conceded that he has that power), arbitration can be viewed as a practically revolutionary instrument for self-liberation from the law….”2
It may be objected that arbitration only works successfully because the courts enforce the award of the arbitrator. Wooldridge points out, however, that arbitration was unenforceable in the American courts before 1920, but that this did not prevent voluntary arbitration from being successful and expanding in the United States and in England. He points, furthermore, to the successful operations of merchant courts since the Middle Ages, those courts which successfully developed the entire body of the law merchant. None of those courts possessed the power of enforcement. He might have added the private courts of shippers which developed the body of admiralty law in a similar way.
How then did these private, “anarchistic,” and voluntary courts ensure the acceptance of their decisions? By the method of social ostracism, and by the refusal to deal any further with the offending merchant. This method of voluntary “enforcement,” indeed proved highly successful. Wooldridge writes that “the merchants’ courts were voluntary, and if a man ignored their judgment, he could not be sent to jail…. Nevertheless, it is apparent that … [their] decisions were generally respected even by the losers; otherwise people would never have used them in the first place…. Merchants made their courts work simply by agreeing to abide by the results. The merchant who broke the understanding would not be sent to jail, to be sure, but neither would he long continue to be a merchant, for the compliance exacted by his fellows … proved if anything more effective than physical coercion.”3 Nor did this voluntary method fail to work in modern times. Wooldridge writes that it was precisely in the years before 1920, when arbitration awards could not be enforced in the courts,

It should also be pointed out that modern technology makes even more feasible the collection and dissemination of information about people’s credit ratings and records of keeping or violating their contracts or arbitration agreements. Presumably, an anarchist society would see the expansion of this sort of dissemination of data and thereby facilitate the ostracism or boycotting of contract and arbitration violators.
How would arbitrators be selected in an anarchist society? In the same way as they are chosen now, and as they were chosen in the days of strictly voluntary arbitration: the arbitrators with the best reputation for efficiency and probity would be chosen by the various parties on the market. As in other processes of the market, the arbitrators with the best record in settling disputes will come to gain an increasing amount of business, and those with poor records will no longer enjoy clients and will have to shift to another line of endeavor. Here it must be emphasized that parties in dispute will seek out those arbitrators with the best reputation for both expertise and impartiality and that inefficient or biased arbitrators will rapidly have to find another occupation.
Thus, the Tannehills emphasize:

If desired, furthermore, the contracting parties could provide in advance for a series of arbitrators:

Arbitration, then, poses little difficulty for a portrayal of the free society. But what of torts or crimes of aggression where there has been no contract? Or suppose that the breaker of a contract defies the arbitration award? Is ostracism enough? In short, how can courts develop in the free-market anarchist society which will have the power to enforce judgments against criminals or contract breakers?
In the wide sense, defense service consists of guards or police who use force in defending person and property against attack, and judges or courts whose role is to use socially accepted procedures to determine who the criminals or tortfeasors are, as well as to enforce judicial awards, such as damages or the keeping of contracts. On the free market, many scenarios are possible on the relationship between the private courts and the police; they may be “vertically integrated,” for example, or their services may be supplied by separate firms. Furthermore, it seems likely that police service will be supplied by insurance companies who will provide crime insurance to their clients. In that case, insurance companies will pay off the victims of crime or the breaking of contracts or arbitration awards and then pursue the aggressors in court to recoup their losses. There is a natural market connection between insurance companies and defense service, since they need pay out less benefits in proportion as they are able to keep down the rate of crime.
Courts might either charge fees for their services, with the losers of cases obliged to pay court costs, or else they may subsist on monthly or yearly premiums by their clients, who may be either individuals or the police or insurance agencies. Suppose, for example, that Smith is an aggrieved party, either because he has been assaulted or robbed, or because an arbitration award in his favor has not been honored. Smith believes that Jones is the party guilty of the crime. Smith then goes to a court, Court A, of which he is a client, and brings charges against Jones as a defendant. In my view, the hallmark of an anarchist society is one where no man may legally compel someone who is not a convicted criminal to do anything, since that would be aggression against an innocent man’s person or property. Therefore, Court A can only invite rather than subpoena Jones to attend his trial. Of course, if Jones refused to appear or send a representative, his side of the case will not be heard. The trial of Jones proceeds. Suppose that Court A finds Jones innocent. In my view, part of the generally accepted law code of the anarchist society (on which see further below) is that this must end the matter unless Smith can prove charges of gross incompetence or bias on the part of the court.
Suppose, next, that Court A finds Jones guilty. Jones might accept the verdict, because he too is a client of the same court, because he knows he is guilty, or for some other reason. In that case, Court A proceeds to exercise judgment against Jones. Neither of these instances poses very difficult problems for our picture of the anarchist society. But suppose, instead, that Jones contests the decision; he then goes to his court, Court B, and the case is retried there. Suppose that Court B, too, finds Jones guilty. Again, it seems to me that the accepted law code of the anarchist society will assert that this ends the matter; both parties have had their say in courts which each has selected, and the decision for guilt is unanimous.
Suppose, however, the most difficult case: that Court B finds Jones innocent. The two courts, each subscribed to by one of the two parties, have split their verdicts. In that case, the two courts will submit the case to an appeals court, or arbitrator, which the two courts agree upon. There seems to be no real difficulty about the concept of an appeals court. As in the case of arbitration contracts, it seems very likely that the various private courts in the society will have prior agreements to submit their disputes to a particular appeals court. How will the appeals judges be chosen? Again, as in the case of arbitrators or of the first judges on the free market, they will be chosen for their expertise and their reputation for efficiency, honesty, and integrity. Obviously, appeals judges who are inefficient or biased will scarcely be chosen by courts who will have a dispute. The point here is that there is no need for a legally established or institutionalized single, monopoly appeals court system, as states now provide. There is no reason why there cannot arise a multitude of efficient and honest appeals judges who will be selected by the disputant courts, just as there are numerous private arbitrators on the market today. The appeals court renders its decision, and the courts proceed to enforce it if, in our example, Jones is considered guilty — unless, of course, Jones can prove bias in some other court proceedings.
No society can have unlimited judicial appeals, for in that case there would be no point to having judges or courts at all. Therefore, every society, whether statist or anarchist, will have to have some socially accepted cutoff point for trials and appeals. My suggestion is the rule that the agreement of any two courts, be decisive. “Two” is not an arbitrary figure, for it reflects the fact that there are two parties, the plaintiff and the defendant, to any alleged crime or contract dispute.
If the courts are to be empowered to enforce decision against guilty parties, does this not bring back the state in another form and thereby negate anarchism? No, for at the beginning of this paper I explicitly defined anarchism in such a way as not to rule out the use of defensive force — force in defense of person and property — by privately supported agencies. In the same way, it is not bringing back the state to allow persons to use force to defend themselves against aggression, or to hire guards or police agencies to defend them.
It should be noted, however, that in the anarchist society there will be no “district attorney” to press charges on behalf of “society.” Only the victims will press charges as the plaintiffs. If, then, these victims should happen to be absolute pacifists who are opposed even to defensive force, then they will simply not press charges in the courts or otherwise retaliate against those who have aggressed against them. In a free society that would be their right. If the victim should suffer from murder, then his heir would have the right to press the charges.
What of the Hatfield-and-McCoy problem? Suppose that a Hatfield kills a McCoy, and that McCoy’s heir does not belong to a private insurance, police agency, or court, and decides to retaliate himself? Since under anarchism there can be no coercion of the noncriminal, McCoy would have the perfect right to do so. No one may be compelled to bring his case to a court. Indeed, since the right to hire police or courts flows from the right of self-defense against aggression, it would be inconsistent and in contradiction to the very basis of the free society to institute such compulsion.
Suppose, then, that the surviving McCoy finds what he believes to be the guilty Hatfield and kills him in turn? What then? This is fine, except that McCoy may have to worry about charges being brought against him by a surviving Hatfield. Here it must be emphasized that in the law of the anarchist society based on defense against aggression, the courts would not be able to proceed against McCoy if in fact he killed the right Hatfield. His problem would arise if the courts should find that he made a grievous mistake and killed the wrong man; in that case, he in turn would be found guilty of murder. Surely, in most instances, individuals will wish to obviate such problems by taking their case to a court and thereby gain social acceptability for their defensive retaliation — not for the act of retaliation but for the correctness of deciding who the criminal in any given case might be. The purpose of the judicial process, indeed, is to find a way of general agreement on who might be the criminal or contract breaker in any given case. The judicial process is not a good in itself; thus, in the case of an assassination, such as Jack Ruby’s murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, on public television, there is no need for a complex judicial process, since the name of the murderer is evident to all.
Will not the possibility exist of a private court that may turn venal and dishonest, or of a private police force that turns criminal and extorts money by coercion? Of course such an event may occur, given the propensities of human nature. Anarchism is not a moral cure-all. But the important point is that market forces exist to place severe checks on such possibilities, especially in contrast to a society where a state exists. For, in the first place, judges, like arbitrators, will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality. Secondly, on the free market important checks and balances exist against venal courts or criminal police forces. Namely, that there are competing courts and police agencies to whom victims may turn for redress. If the “Prudential Police Agency” should turn outlaw and extract revenue from victims by coercion, the latter would have the option of turning to the “Mutual” or “Equitable” Police Agency for defense and for pressing charges against Prudential. These are the genuine “checks and balances” of the free market, genuine in contrast to the phony check and balances of a state system, where all the alleged “balancing” agencies are in the hands of one monopoly government. Indeed, given the monopoly “protection service” of a state, what is there to prevent a state from using its monopoly channels of coercion to extort money from the public? What are the checks and limits of the state? None, except for the extremely difficult course of revolution against a power with all of the guns in its hands. In fact, the state provides an easy, legitimated channel for crime and aggression, since it has its very being in the crime of tax theft, and the coerced monopoly of “protection.” It is the state, indeed, that functions as a mighty “protection racket” on a giant and massive scale. It is the state that says: “Pay us for your ‘protection’ or else.” In the light of the massive and inherent activities of the state, the danger of a “protection racket” emerging from one or more private police agencies is relatively small indeed.
Moreover, it must be emphasized that a crucial element in the power of the state is its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority of the public, the fact that after centuries of propaganda, the depredations of the state are looked upon rather as benevolent services. Taxation is generally not seen as theft, nor war as mass murder, nor conscription as slavery. Should a private police agency turn outlaw, should “Prudential” become a protection racket, it would then lack the social legitimacy which the state has managed to accrue to itself over the centuries. “Prudential” would be seen by all as bandits, rather than as legitimate or divinely appointed “sovereigns” bent on promoting the “common good” or the “general welfare.” And lacking such legitimacy, “Prudential” would have to face the wrath of the public and the defense and retaliation of the other private defense agencies, the police and courts, on the free market. Given these inherent checks and limits, a successful transformation from a free society to bandit rule becomes most unlikely. Indeed, historically, it has been very difficult for a state to arise to supplant a stateless society; usually, it has come about through external conquest rather than by evolution from within a society.
Within the anarchist camp, there has been much dispute on whether the private courts would have to be bound by a basic, common law code. Ingenious attempts have been made to work out a system where the laws or standards of decision-making by the courts would differ completely from one to another.7 But in my view all would have to abide by the basic law code, in particular, prohibition of aggression against person and property, in order to fulfill our definition of anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression. Suppose, for example, that one group of people in society holds that all redheads are demons who deserve to be shot on sight. Suppose that Jones, one of this group, shoots Smith, a redhead. Suppose that Smith or his heir presses charges in a court, but that Jones’s court, in philosophic agreement with Jones, finds him innocent therefore. It seems to me that in order to be considered legitimate, any court would have to follow the basic libertarian law code of the inviolate right of person and property. For otherwise, courts might legally subscribe to a code which sanctions such aggression in various cases, and which to that extent would violate the definition of anarchism and introduce, if not the state, then a strong element of statishness or legalized aggression into the society.
But again I see no insuperable difficulties here. For in that case, anarchists, in agitating for their creed, will simply include in their agitation the idea of a general libertarian law code as part and parcel of the anarchist creed of abolition of legalized aggression against person or property in the society.
In contrast to the general law code, other aspects of court decisions could legitimately vary in accordance with the market or the wishes of the clients; for example, the language the cases will be conducted in, the number of judges to be involved, and so on.
There are other problems of the basic law code which there is no time to go into here: for example, the definition of just property titles or the question of legitimate punishment of convicted offenders — though the latter problem of course exists in statist legal systems as well.8 The basic point, however, is that the state is not needed to arrive at legal principles or their elaboration: indeed, much of the common law, the law merchant, admiralty law, and private law in general, grew up apart from the state, by judges not making the law but finding it on the basis of agreed-upon principles derived either from custom or reason.9 The idea that the state is needed to make law is as much a myth as that the state is needed to supply postal or police services.
Enough has been said here, I believe, to indicate that an anarchist system for settling disputes would be both viable and self-subsistent: that once adopted, it could work and continue indefinitely. How to arrive at that system is of course a very different problem, but certainly at the very least it will not likely come about unless people are convinced of its workability, are convinced, in short, that the state is not a necessary evil.

[Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago today at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF and ePub.]

Stuck and need to let it out
Before i start i know i am very stupid for the choices i made. I (26f) got married to my husband (30m) when i was 21 we met from mutual friends and i fell in love with him and it was a feeling ill never forget. He was an amazing guy until he wasn’t he was always very charming and people instantly liked him when meeting him. There is more details but i am going to try to sum it up. I worked a little after marriage than covid hit and i got pregnant with my first born. He took care of me financially always and assured me i dont need to work anyways. I was with him when he was struggling i never complained as a newly wed who barley got to spend time with her husband because i understood i never asked him to take me out or anything i stood by him and now hes very successful (ill get back to why i mentioned that later) my pregnancy was very stressful in my 7th month he hit me and i had bruises on my neck and face i dont even remember what the fight was about after giving birth i struggled alot i was 22 years old i kept finding porn and videos being sent between friends which i have seen before but it started to make me feel bad about myself which i have always been confident before him i told him it bothered me and it never stopped so now im 23 and insecure and i alter my body and do a procedure thinking that will fix things (as i said i know im stupid) he strangled me 2 months after giving birth to the point that i passed out and woke up he almost killed me i never told anyone. He kept saying hes changing and well work things out so i forgave him. My family dosent believe in divorce and as much support i have from them i don’t want to disappoint them. We did good for a little bit we moved to a bigger place and than we moved again to another bigger place that i am in currently. In between all of that there was stuff that i kept seeing that hurt me and bothered me but anytime i say anything he says its me who keeps digging which is true because i grew up having a father who cheated on my mom and i saw it first hand im not going to lie it traumatized me but i did not project it on him until after he started doing the things he did. Hes a very jealous person himself he always tried to control everything he hates that im good looking he tells me all the time he should have married someone “ugly” i do NOT dress provocative at all i barley show any skin but somehow EVERYTHING always leads back to how i dress and all our problems are my fault because of how i dress he says that when we go out men always check me out and it angers him even tho i am not showing any damn skin. Anyways mothers day 2022 he hit me again but he says he didnt but the bruises on my arms say otherwise i have pictures of it and it was bad he tried to throw me down the stairs i begged him not to. Sadly i still wanted to be loved i forgave him moved on he is would buy me gifts and cards and because im so stupid i believed he was sorry anyways now its 2023 and i find out im pregnant i didnt know how i felt my first born was lonley so i thought at least they will have a sibling.. surprise its twins and i knew im going to go through it i had the worse pregnancy i almost died i developed pre eclampsia and my doctor missed it i gave birth early my whole pregnancy i was alone i was so lonley just me and my first born i cried everyday husband was working so i couldn’t complain without it turning to a fight even though its his company and he could afford to have been there a little for me it is not 7 months after i gave birth physically i feel good mentally i dont he is never there for me as a husband i been telling him i feel like he’s just a roomate at this point we have no dates barley any intimacy which had been going on for years i know hes insecure and i never used it against him but he always would to me he hates now that i bounced back quickly and like to dress up again because the end of my pregnancy i was very swollen i was wearing all his clothes. I kept crying telling him i have needs just like anyone else i want to feel loved i dont want to live like this but anytime i say anything he says i complain to much now last week he beat me over nothing it was 60 seconds into a petty argument and he attacked me i packed myself and my 3 kids he watched me packing calling me names i left to a hotel for a night nd than my moms house he got backlash from both our families i ended up having to come home for the kids im miserable hes not sorry mothers day he barley acknowledged me But we spent the day and today any time we try to talk about anything he blames me.
I know im stupid i dont know how i can start over again i have 3 kids i am in the works of going back to school so when the babys start school ill have my career because i am financially dependent on him which is my fault i worked since i was 14 but he convinced me not to anymore My oldest loves their father so much it hurts me to put my baby through this drama There is soooooo much more detail and stuff to add Hes not the worse person i guess i bring out the bad in him when all i ever wanted was to be in a healthy marriage and give my kids what i didn’t have growing up
I dont know what to do i know i have to finish school so i can get a stable job but that means i have to stay and suck it up
I never wanted to be divorced but this marriage is over i always thought cheating was the only reason for divorce i am not in love with him but its so hard to let it go i never was like this i was so out going the life of the party i dont even recognize myself i feel so sad and depressed and alone i have the most amazing friends but i cant get myself to open up

My best friend of 21 years has left me out of her bridal party. They have included the rest of our friend group I am the only one not included For context We have been best friends for 21 years and last year I moved abroad and have been away for a year and a half. However I have kept in regular contact with the bride.
I was told the dates and important info to ensure I would be there and have enough time to make arrangments
I am probably wrong for assuming that I would be asked and I am aware that I am making it about me however I am extremely hurt by this.
She has asked the rest of our friend group including someone else who is also abroad. It will cost me thousands to come home for this wedding and being honest I am upset that I will see them altogether and be left out.
My core friend group will all be together and I wont be apart of it
The build up
The morning of
or the afters
we will also have designated seating and I will be on my own at the afters and at the ceremony
It is making me think that it wont be worth it to come home as I am currently feeling embarrassed and hurt
I do have 2 years to deal with this however I am asking for advice on how to deal with this
again I am aware I am coming across as a pick me and the bride is fully entitled to choose who she wants however I am hurt

I currently (40M) had my ex (35F) completely destroy our relationship while I was working out of town for a few months. This happened a year ago and wish I had these stories as a resource while going through it. I have just started to use Reddit and been reading the experiences of others here and have decided to share my story in hopes it will maybe help others. That way some good may come from some of the worst times of my life.
A little backstory for context for the story and insight to some of the decisions I made. When I turned 30 I left the major city in my Province (it is like a state if you are an American) because buying just a simple house is over a million dollars and I don't make near enough to afford that. My goal was to move to somewhere more rural to buy a house, meet someone, get married and have a child or two. It was my only dream I had and believed I could attain it. I lived out in the bush on my step dads property in a run down trailer I bought so I could save money for the first 3 years. I had my dog but the loneliness of living in the middle of nowhere had got to me. By then I had saved a fair amount of money, so I decided to move into the town. It was nice, it cut my commute down by 40 minutes, I had started to make a few friends and no longer felt so isolated. It was through my friends I met my future ex. Let's call her Kali. She had a long term boyfriend when we first met. Their relationship ended a couple of years after meeting her and we started dating a few months after.
We mostly had a great relationship for the next 4 years. The only thing was it was on again off again. She would dump me after I did anything really special for her for a week and beg me to take her back. It was like clockwork. I used to think it was because of her depression and that she didn't believe she deserved to be truly happy. Nowadays I actually think she might have been cheating the whole time and just felt guilty about it when I did nice stuff for her but I will never know the truth. I don't care what the reality is anymore anyway, Time has a funny way of making stuff like that irrelevant. We did have one bigger break of about 5 months. When it happened I took time off work to travel in my RV the whole time. From spring to summer. I really didn't like the town I lived in and decided to use that time to check out the rest of my Provence to figure out where I wanted to restart my life. She was basically the only reason I stayed for so long. I did have a decent job and family close by but most people I met there were not good people. Lots of drug users, liars, and general scumbags. I had only a few real friends there. After I got back and had decided where I was going to move to she had decided she wanted me back. She begged me to stay and be with her. She told me that she wanted to get serious. We started making real progress about getting married, having kids and looking at buying a house. Everything was coming up Milhouse and I couldn't be happier. So You can probably guess this is when my tale becomes interesting for you and life got real bad for me.
My career is seasonal. I work from spring to the end of fall and can go on unemployment insurance or find work. My dad had asked if I could help on his farm breeding horses that winter when I had still planned to leave my town. I had promised him that I would because it would give me a place to stay before people in my field of work would be looking for employees. This had been agreed upon before me and Kali had got back together. Now I have always been a man of my word. It's something I take great pride in. I have always hated liars. I don't mind a little embellishment to make a story more fun or if two people's stories are different as long as they both believe that was how the events happened. Everyone remembers things slightly off. She was upset that I had intended to keep my word to my dad but I had every second weekend off. The town my dad is in was only a 2 hour drive. So I told her I would be back twice monthly for weekends and that it would only be for 4 months. For the first two months everything seemed fine. During this time I started to look at rings to pop the question and booked an expensive spa for two days in May to propose. There was only one weird thing that happened during the first two months. On one of my visits she confided in me that her brother's wife had cheated on him and that their newborn baby was most likely not his. I was shocked that she not only knew but didn't plan to tell him. She said she didn't want to tell him for fear of breaking up the family. I told her that he has the right to know and that she was being a bad sister by knowing and not telling him. I also informed her if he found out she knew and didn't say anything that he would most likely kick her out of his life. She made me swear I wouldn't tell him. Even though I thought it was wrong I did agree to not say anything. It did get me wondering how she could not only not tell him but stay friends with someone that could do that to her brother. I think that's when I started to question her morals. The third month she asked that I didn't come out because she was "sick". I told her I didn't care, I could still come out and take care of her. She convinced me that she didn't want me to come so I just worked on the farm instead. I switched weekends so I could come out the next instead of in two weekends. The weekend she was "sick" her phone was off the whole time, lasting into the week. She told me her phone went through the washing machine. She was actually on a bender but I didn't learn that till later.
So I head out the following weekend. As soon as I arrive I start getting super sketchy vibes. I was already weirded out about the stuff with her brother and ghosting me for 4 days as we talked/texted multiple times a day normally. At first she acts great to me, cooks me steak and we go out to the bush to have a fire in the snow. At the fire she really started drinking heavily. She then mentions a guy she had been hanging with lets call him Brad. So alarm bells start going through my head. We go back to her house and she keeps drinking. I wanted to keep a clear head so I only had three beers all evening. She put her phone down unlocked because of how drunk she was and I took it to the bathroom with me to look up texts between them. I felt so guilty for doing it at first but once I see the text between the two of them the guilt is replaced with rage. I go to her room to confront her and she breaks down. First, how dare I go through her phone, this never would have happened if I would have broken my promise to my dad, nothing really happened between them, blah, blah, blah. I was furious and drove off. She blows up my phone the whole time. I don't answer. Ten minutes after I left her mother called me. She lives at her moms house. I took the call and her mom said she is freaking out and has harmed herself. I decide to go back and she has a bandage wrapped around her arm. Her mom hid all the sharp objects she could find. She was having a full on panic attack and begs me to not leave. I told her I would stay if she told me the truth. She admits to hooking up with him one time just that last weekend when she asked me not to come out. It kind of matches the messages and I believe her. I stay there till she falls asleep. Once she does I send Brad a text saying that she has a boyfriend with some screen shots of our conversations me and her have had that week. I was about to drive back to the farm when the dude called her phone. I pick up the call and tell him I am her boyfriend. He asks if that was a joke and I assure him it is not. He said he didn't know and actually apologized. I tell him that I'm pissed but if he didn't know I couldn't blame him. I should have asked him more questions but I was tired, not thinking straight and just wanted to go back to the Farm even though it was two am by this point. I get home and crash. Turned my ringer off because I know once she wakes up she will start calling like crazy. After getting the horses in for the night I decided to look at my phone for the first time all day. Around thirty missed calls and a ton of texts. I decide I need another day before I talk to her. Now while the whole day all I can think about is that it was just one time, she seems to be genuinely remorseful about it, how I'm 39 and really want children before I get too old. I took a call from her the next day on Sunday in the morning. She is still wasted. She hadn't stopped drinking since I was there Friday. We talk and I tell her that I am really upset but am willing to give us another chance. I still was in love with her and wanted to have kids, get married and buy a house with her. It was the dream I felt I worked so hard for. She was so happy I took her back and swore to me nothing like this would ever happen again. Basically I was a fool lol.
So I decided on my next set of days off to borrow my stepdads summer home on the river so we can have the place to ourselves. I grab food that she loves so I can cook her dinner and try to make it very romantic. I want to rekindle my love with her so I wanted to go all out on an amazing weekend. I pick her up and she is already a little drunk. I kind of wanted to hang sober but I don't wanna mess up with her so don't say anything thinking we can do a sober day when I take her out to go shopping and dinner the next day. When we get there she gets hammered. Kali had brought a big of bottle fireball on top of a bunch of white claws. I again didn't really drink that night. Once she was drunk and tired I carried her to the bed. As Kali is in my arms she looks up at me and says in slurred words "I don't know why you even felt threatened by Joe" I ask "what did you just say?". "I don't know why you even felt threatened by Brad" she replied. I put her to bed and my mind starts racing. Now her ex before me has a really close name to the one she said first but I also know she has a friend named Joe I only met a couple of times. They were not close or even hung out but were more like acquaintances. I go in her purse to look at her phone again but the battery is dead and I can't find her charger. I have an Iphone so I can't charge it up to look. I didn't sleep that well that night with everything going on in my head. I woke up at 6 am to her being very loud on the phone. I went out to the living room and she had drank all the booze left over from the night before. I ask her who she was on the phone with and she tells me an uber to leave. I ask why is she going to leave? Kali tells me she is upset that I tried to get into her phone. Guess I didn't put it back in her purse. Must have been out of sorts and forgot. I tell her I can drive her once I go to the washroom and get some clothes on. I go to do that, come out of the washroom to see Kali has already left. She was so drunk that she had left half her stuff behind. I decided to have breakfast before bringing her stuff to her house. After breakfast I packed her stuff into my SUV and noticed it had snowed that night. I could see her footprints out into the driveway. While Dropping off her stuff I noticed there were no footprints leading to her house, so I tried calling Kali. No answer. I left her stuff in the snow and decided to drive by her brothers and sisters house to see if there were footprints going into any of their houses but there were none. I sent her a nasty text about knowing she didn't go home, to go be with Brad or Joe or whoever and never call me again. It was a lot more profane than that but that's the gist of it. Cleaned up the house my stepdad lent me and back off to the farm yet again. The next day she blows up my phone and again I wait another day to talk to her. She tells me that she went home but I know that can't be true from the snow, but she says I must have been mistaken. She apologizes for getting drunk and leavening and that she is going to stop drinking after her birthday in two weeks. She has rented a hotel in the town I'm in for her birthday and wants to spend it with me. I agree just because I have to know the truth and want to look at her phone to make sure I am not crazy. She had gaslit me to the point I was questioning what I saw with my own eyes. A couple of days later I decided to send Joe a message on Facebook to see if he would give me the truth. I get a text from her telling me not to bug her friend and that she is embarrassed. I apologize and tell her I am excited about her birthday soon.
The weekend of her birthday comes so I go to meet her at the hotel. She brought her sister and other friend along. It actually is a really fun time. The girls did coke the first night into the second evening. I don't really like it but I figured she can let loose especially if she is going to stop drinking after her birthday. I also knew by Saturday night that they would all crash hard so it would give me time to look at her phone so I could know the truth. As I mentioned the weekend was really fun so I felt bad about going into her phone yet again. I did it anyway and my whole world came crashing down. Now I figured that I would maybe see Brad or Joe texts and Facebook messages. Seemed like Brad was done but Joe and her were totally hooking up. I also found out that she had slept with 3 other guys. I also saw she was using coke all the time now. She did it maybe three times a year when we dated but now it was every weekend. It looked like she started using regularly right before I left for the farm. Joe helped get it for her too, out of all the guys he was the one she hung with the most. Turns out he was also a meth head who was trying to quit for her. She also went to his house the morning she left the other weekend to hook up and buy coke. I was floored. I just staired and took screen shots till the early morning. I decided I wasn't just going to dump her but I wanted to ruin her life not realizing she was already doing that all by herself but hindsight is 20 20. So I started coming up with a plan of what I was going to do. I woke up the next morning and acted like everything was fine and went back to the farm. I was still so upset and didn't want to harm myself or others so had a family friend take my firearms for a while. I don't think I would have used them on myself or others but I knew I wasn't thinking clearly and didn't want them in my house while I was like that.
I didn't have to see her till I moved back because the next set I had off I had tickets for a concert in the city I used to live in. During that time all I thought about was how I was going to do something to ruin her life. I came up with some small things but my main plan was to pretend like we were fine and ghost her when my contract was up with my boss next winter. I had promised him another year after kali and I had gotten back together. Just typing it out makes me look back and cringe that I was so crazy. When I went to the city for the concert I told my best friend, my brother and a few others my plan. No one liked it and thought I should just go no contact, cut her straight out of my life. That probably was the smart thing to do but emotion was clouding my judgement. Also you all would get this story. They even informed me that because I would be lying to her, that I would be compromising my morals and turning into a worse person they didn't recognize. I either didn't see it that way or care. I have a hard time recalling what my brain was thinking during that time. All seems like a haze now that it's been a year. I think I was really upset that my dream and all I had worked for was ruined. A friend later said I may have been in love with the dream and not her. Maybe that's the reason I kept up all this insanity.
My time on the farm had come to an end and I was moving back to the town me and my ex lived in. I was set with my plan, excited to implement it and have what I considered just. But you know what they say of the best laid plans. My ex wanted to go to hang at her brothers as a welcome home party. I went but ended up drinking. Heavily drinking, to the point of black out. I don't remember much from that night but have had it recounted for me. I woke up in the drunk tank. Guess I couldn't lie and play it cool then huh? The story I was told later is, while at her brothers I had gotten drunk and loud. Kept waking up the new baby and we were asked to leave. So we caught a cab and I confronted her in the cab but all I could do was call her a lying, cheating, whore on repeat. She got upset and ran into the house locking me out. I had a bunch of my stuff in her house so I went to the door and demanded she let me in. All the while still only referring to her as the aforementioned 3 words. She told me to leave but my jacket and wallet were inside. It was below freezing at night still and probably wouldn't have made it home in the state I was in. I then kicked in her door to keep calling her LCW and grab my stuff. She was on the phone to the police, so I was taken away by them. One of the lowest points in my life. It still brings me so much shame to this day but it is what happened and I am not going to sugar coat it. I never laid a finger on her and I am so happy that I hadn't. Laying hands on women in that way is one of the scummiest things a man can do. I had to go back to her house once they let me out because my stuff was still there. I apologized to her mom who had been at her boyfriends that evening promising to repair the door for her. Kali begged me to talk to her and like an idiot I didn't just leave. I told her I saw everything and she only admitted to Brad and Joe. Lying about them and the others the whole time. Even when I brought up the screen shots she still couldn't come clean. I left just shaking my head. There is still a ton to this story but this is long enough. I could do a part 2 if there is interest. Catching you folks up to where I am now and the messed up things that happened in between.

Before i start i know i am very stupid for the choices i made. I (26f) got married to my husband (30m) when i was 21 we met from mutual friends and i fell in love with him and it was a feeling ill never forget. He was an amazing guy until he wasn’t he was always very charming and people instantly liked him when meeting him. There is more details but i am going to try to sum it up. I worked a little after marriage than covid hit and i got pregnant with my first born. He took care of me financially always and assured me i dont need to work anyways. I was with him when he was struggling i never complained as a newly wed who barley got to spend time with her husband because i understood i never asked him to take me out or anything i stood by him and now hes very successful (ill get back to why i mentioned that later) my pregnancy was very stressful in my 7th month he hit me and i had bruises on my neck and face i dont even remember what the fight was about after giving birth i struggled alot i was 22 years old i kept finding porn and videos being sent between friends which i have seen before but it started to make me feel bad about myself which i have always been confident before him i told him it bothered me and it never stopped so now im 23 and insecure and i alter my body and do a procedure thinking that will fix things (as i said i know im stupid) he strangled me 2 months after giving birth to the point that i passed out and woke up he almost killed me i never told anyone. He kept saying hes changing and well work things out so i forgave him. My family dosent believe in divorce and as much support i have from them i don’t want to disappoint them. We did good for a little bit we moved to a bigger place and than we moved again to another bigger place that i am in currently. In between all of that there was stuff that i kept seeing that hurt me and bothered me but anytime i say anything he says its me who keeps digging which is true because i grew up having a father who cheated on my mom and i saw it first hand im not going to lie it traumatized me but i did not project it on him until after he started doing the things he did. Hes a very jealous person himself he always tried to control everything he hates that im good looking he tells me all the time he should have married someone “ugly” i do NOT dress provocative at all i barley show any skin but somehow EVERYTHING always leads back to how i dress and all our problems are my fault because of how i dress he says that when we go out men always check me out and it angers him even tho i am not showing any damn skin. Anyways mothers day 2022 he hit me again but he says he didnt but the bruises on my arms say otherwise i have pictures of it and it was bad he tried to throw me down the stairs i begged him not to. Sadly i still wanted to be loved i forgave him moved on he is would buy me gifts and cards and because im so stupid i believed he was sorry anyways now its 2023 and i find out im pregnant i didnt know how i felt my first born was lonley so i thought at least they will have a sibling.. surprise its twins and i knew im going to go through it i had the worse pregnancy i almost died i developed pre eclampsia and my doctor missed it i gave birth early my whole pregnancy i was alone i was so lonley just me and my first born i cried everyday husband was working so i couldn’t complain without it turning to a fight even though its his company and he could afford to have been there a little for me it is not 7 months after i gave birth physically i feel good mentally i dont he is never there for me as a husband i been telling him i feel like he’s just a roomate at this point we have no dates barley any intimacy which had been going on for years i know hes insecure and i never used it against him but he always would to me he hates now that i bounced back quickly and like to dress up again because the end of my pregnancy i was very swollen i was wearing all his clothes. I kept crying telling him i have needs just like anyone else i want to feel loved i dont want to live like this but anytime i say anything he says i complain to much now last week he beat me over nothing it was 60 seconds into a petty argument and he attacked me i packed myself and my 3 kids he watched me packing calling me names i left to a hotel for a night nd than my moms house he got backlash from both our families i ended up having to come home for the kids im miserable hes not sorry mothers day he barley acknowledged me But we spent the day and today any time we try to talk about anything he blames me.
I know im stupid i dont know how i can start over again i have 3 kids i am in the works of going back to school so when the babys start school ill have my career because i am financially dependent on him which is my fault i worked since i was 14 but he convinced me not to anymore My oldest loves their father so much it hurts me to put my baby through this drama There is soooooo much more detail and stuff to add Hes not the worse person i guess i bring out the bad in him when all i ever wanted was to be in a healthy marriage and give my kids what i didn’t have growing up
I dont know what to do i know i have to finish school so i can get a stable job but that means i have to stay and suck it up
I never wanted to be divorced but this marriage is over i always thought cheating was the only reason for divorce i am not in love with him but its so hard to let it go i never was like this i was so out going the life of the party i dont even recognize myself i feel so sad and depressed and alone i have the most amazing friends but i cant get myself to open up

I live at Apartment X in Florida from August 2023 to July 2024, and renewed my lease for August 2024 to July 2025. Someone marked as an ownemanager from the leasing company signed the lease, sent it back, and that was it. Shortly after I renewed, the property was sold to new owners/management and the new leasing company said they are not honoring any of renewed leases the apartments tenants may have signed and if we want to stay for the new year we need to sign their own lease which has much higher rent. My renewed lease includes the verbiage "26.4 (g) This Lease Contract binds subsequent owners."
I contacted a lawyer thru Florida's Lawyer Referral Service and he said he will do something for $1100 but will not make any guarantees. My question is: Why? How is this not an open-and-shut? How can he lose this? The verbiage of the contract that was signed by both parties at that time says new owners are held to it, right? It seems pretty straightforward to me. I don't mind the fee if I knew that I'd be able to continue living here but the way the lawyer said no guarantees makes me think somehow this whole case is doomed and will just be a waste of my money.
Someone please shed some light on this.

Chapter one
How do memories look for you? Like flashes? Clear as day? Can you remember?
I can. I can see things so clearly. I can hear things so clearly. I can remember. But only as flashes.
I’m listening to Cathy O’Briens book and she says write. Do not speak.
Even now I don’t think it’s the same as typing.
I plan to get a notebook specifically for my memory. It’s strange. Like vomit. All mingled and mixed. And out of order. And “this memory” makes me think of “this memory.” And “this happened” but then before “this happened”. And I wish I could talk to someone but then also I’m glad I’m not. Cause what if they lead me astray. What if they make me believe it never happened.
This piece will be out of order. And for that forgive me. I want so badly to be cohesive and coherent but I’m afraid everything is jingled together.
Even now I have so much to say. The parkway. The basement at the elementary. The send off. The moving. The sexuality. They darkness. The depression. The dancing. The curiosity. The principal. Hiding under the desk. The gifted program. The dancing. The willingness. The ducks. The parties. The men. The lamp. Sergio. The face touch. The blood. The penthouse. The club. The drinks. The promises. The moments. The warnings. The desires. The memories. The tattoo. The dildos. The performance. The chat rooms. The meet ups. The hospital visits. The blood stains. The positions. The rooms. The timing. The willingness. The stretching. The exam. The scared nights. The scary movies. The drunken adults. The lumber jacks. The cia. Rox. The satanic worship. The rape of him. The unknown history of my family. The wealthy in Georgetown. The dress up. The music. The handball. The four square. The singing. The dancing. The sodomites. The teachers. The screams. The need for me. The desire for me. The bartenders. The p’mers. The stomach aches. The separation. The piss. The dark. The bath. The blue outfit. The men. The bus ride. The taxi ride. The train. The massage parlor. The neighbor. The chat rooms. The men. The parkway. The basement. The hallway. The grandparents. The crib. The dreams. The screams. The fear. The bus. The bubbles. The drinks. The cops. The piercings. The drives.
Nothing happened to me ever. I was never molested. I was never raped. I was never taken advantage of. I was protected from everything and anything.
However, by the time I was 16, I was heavily and deeply knowledgeable and accustomed to just about any and everything sexually in any and all parts of my body and also more than willing.
And I had tried committing suicide 3 times and lived with chronic stomach issues for the majority of my child hood.
For what reason I have no memory.
Cathy says to write. Write and your brain will think logically. And you will remember.
There’s so much, I don’t know where to start or what to write about. It’s different on a phone cause I can go back and add or re word and re order. I’m doing this tonight cause I don’t have a notepad. But it’s all out of order on paper and in my head. But if I write, even if out of order, maybe I’ll remember. I don’t even know why I’m posting.
But I have to unravel it. Beginning to end or not in order. There’s a lot of clarity but not a lot of memory.
And how and why does that make sense? It doesn’t.
So forgive me for this blog, for it will more than likely weave a tale that doesn’t make sense and is probably not true.
Or is that my alter telling me I will never remember. Cathy O’Brien says write. And I will.
Was I an mkultra/ human trafficking subject in the 90s and 2000s?
I hope to find an answer.

I am NOT OOP, OOP is u/AdhesivenessMurky204
Originally posted to AITAH
AITAH for separating from my husband because he refused to get a vasectomy?
Thanks to u/queenlegolas and u/Direct-Caterpillar77 for suggesting this BoRU
Editor’s Note: added paragraph breaks for readability
Trigger Warnings: PTSD, mentions of abortion, domestic abuse, verbal abuse, sexual assault, rape
Original Post: April 28, 2024
My husband (28M, who I will call Jack) and I (27F) have been together for 4 years, we have 2 young children and I am pregnant again. I have been pregnant for what feels like most of our relationship. I got pregnant 4 months into our relationship. We got married a month before our daughter’s 1st birthday and ended up with a honeymoon baby. After our son was born, I talked to my OB and she put me on birth control and I have been taking it militantly.
My daughter is now 3 and my son is 2. A little over a month ago I discovered I am pregnant again, despite taking my birth control religiously. Abortion is banned in my state, and the pregnancy was discovered too far along to attempt to obtain one out of state. While Jack and I were nervous, we also love being parents and decided that 3 young kids would be a challenge, but 3 was a good number for us. Then we went in for the first ultrasound and got some unexpected news - it’s twins.
Things have been tough financially, and while we were stressed but excited for a third child, we were not expecting a third and fourth child. Beyond the finances, I am the primary caretaker and I know that twins is going to be a lot, three children under 5 is already a lot, but 4 children under 5 is going to be really really difficult for me. Physically, I am tired of being pregnant. I’ve been pregnant or breastfeeding the majority of our relationship. It’s exhausting, it feels awful, and I don’t recognize my body anymore.
Four children is enough. I don’t want more. I told Jack that I was done with pregnancy, I’ve been pregnant enough, I’ve been experimenting with different types of birth control for over a decade and I still can’t stop getting pregnant, abortion isn’t a valid option where we live, we need something more permanent. He agreed, and suggested an IUD, I told him no - if it did fail then it could cause an ectopic pregnancy which could kill me, especially where we live. I’ve had both control fail me multiple times already and I’m not taking the chance, so I suggested a vasectomy. He was not open to the idea, and was even upset that I suggested it and told me I should get my tubes tied. I told him a tubal ligation is a much bigger surgery and I could be recovering for weeks during which time I wouldn’t be able to work or take care of our 4 young children, but he could ice his balls for a day or two and be done with it. He told me that not getting pregnant was ultimately my responsibility, and topped it off by saying “that’s what your body your choice means, YOUR body, so YOU choose.” That’s when it went from a discussion to a full blown fight.
See, when I was 19 I had another birth control failure with my boyfriend at the time (who I will call Tom). I wanted an abortion, Tom did not because he was opposed. I told him I was getting the abortion since it was my body and my choice, and Tom said some horrible things to me, including threatening me. I broke up with him and got the abortion. In response, Tom ended up following me one night and attacking me. I don’t want to go into detail but it was horrible, and he ended up going to prison for a number of charges related to the attack. Not only do I have a number of scars and some long lasting physical effects, but I have PTSD as well.
Jack knows about my history and diagnosis, and has known from the beginning. I have a pretty prominent facial scar so I was upfront about it early on in our dating. Jack always presented himself as very pro-choice, so I was shocked that he would say that. I got really emotional and started crying and shouting, and it turned into a full-blown fight.
Eventually I said that birth control is a two-way street and so far I’ve been the only one managing it and he said “and now we have 2 kids and 2 more coming, great job.” I told him he sounded like Tom and he got super pissed, basically said how dare you compare me to him, and maybe he might want kids one day with someone who doesn’t compare him to her felon ex-boyfriend. I was stunned and horrified. I said “well then let’s not waste any fucking time,”then packed up myself and the kids and drove to my parents place.
It’s been about a week since the fight. I’ve spoken with Jack a few times and he has since apologized and said he was out of line and was speaking from a place of anxiety after finding out about the twins, but also that I said things that were out of line and it was wrong of me to insist he undergo a medical procedure. He said that can move on from the things I said and that he wants to see his children and be a family again. I told him no, that I didn’t want to “move on” from the things he said to me. I can’t just get over that and I think we need space apart. Jack was upset by this and while we talked I brought up getting a separation agreement to manage custody and finances while we figure things out. He did not like this suggestion, said we didn’t need to pull the courts into this.
I haven’t told a lot of people about what’s happening but my family and a couple close friends. My sister and best friend both think I should throw the whole man away, but my brother (who is the only other one married with kids) thinks that I’m being extreme for what sums up to a fight between two scared people who both said nasty things. My mom is trying to be supportive but is occasionally reminding me that I “don’t want to be a single mother of 4” and telling me not to let my PTSD drive my decisions, while my dad is being completely unhelpful (he thinks jokes are helpful - like calling me Doorknob because I “can’t stop getting knocked up”, telling me to let the oven cool down, real knee-slappers). I don’t know what to do. My kids are happy to be at grandma and grandpas house but they miss their daddy, I’m 4 months pregnant and already uncomfortable as hell, I wish I could go back to being a happy little family but I’m so hung up on the things he said in that fight. Am I destroying my family over one bad night? Am I being unreasonable for asking my husband to get a vasectomy?
Edit: I've noticed a lot of people recommending condoms. I have gotten pregnant with condoms twice. Our second child and my first pregnancy were both conceived using condoms properly (correct fit, put on correctly, single use, not expired, no breaks, etc). I do not trust condoms enough to not fail a third time. I know the failure rate is supposedly small, but it's not personally small enough for me. Edit to the edit: I'm sorry, I didn't expect so many comments so fast and I can't keep up with them. By the first pregnancy I mean the pregnancy with Tom. With Jack I was on the patch when I got pregnant with our daughter, condoms with our son, and the pill with the twins. So far I haven't ever suspected that Jack has tampered with our birth control and always presumed that I'm a fertile Myrtle.
I recognize the comments and just want people to know I'm seeing the suggestion. I'm not dismissing it, but the thought of it is deeply upsetting and has provoked a lot of anxiety. I just wanted to make it clear that if the suggestion is only based on the condoms, that the condom pregnancies were with two different partners. While I know I always used condoms properly with Tom, I do believe that Tom could have been fully capable of sabotaging the condoms.
AITAH has no consensus bot, OOP received mixed reactions of NTAs and YTAs
Relevant Comments
deepsleepsheepmeep: NTA. Your husband is though. Your body has already been through A LOT. A tubal ligation is a serious surgery and you are right about being out of commission for a while when recovering. If he is more concerned with an imaginary future wife than he is for you, I don’t think there is much hope for this marriage.
We have 4 close friends who all got vasectomies. None of them bitched about it like your wimp of a husband. We actually had fun vasectomy themed parties for them.
On the off chance he does end up getting a vasectomy, make sure to do the follow up appointments. One of the vasectomy fab 4 did not follow through and ended up with a post-vasectomy baby.

OOP: Thank you, I feel like this is a lot of what has been so upsetting has been that he's thinking about some imaginary future wife when I'm right here, his actual wife, the mother of his children. It's like he's already imagining a future without me.

 
Update: AITAH for separating from my husband because he refused to get a vasectomy?: May 3, 2024
I didn’t expect so many comments and literally couldn’t go through them all. It seemed like the majority of people said I was NTA but I did get a lot of YTAs telling me I was trying to force him to get a medical procedure and telling me to get one instead. Besides already addressing my reasonings why I made my request in the original post (which I want you to read with real "per my last email" energy), I in no way am *forcing* him to have a medical procedure, but I am saying that I do not want to be with a partner who is not willing to be snipped. This is an issue of compatibility. The number of children you want, the methods of birth control you’re willing to use, those are issues of compatibility and a reason relationships end all the time. If he doesn’t want to be sterilized that’s fine, but then that means that we’re not compatible anymore, since it means he wants more children and I don’t. Beyond that there were some YTA comments and some DMs that were just nasty, calling me a murderer and saying my body is a cemetery. Sadly enough, I expected those types of comments, because I know there are a lot of Toms out in the world.
First I wanted to address a couple things that kept coming up, because last post turned into thousands of comments that all said about 5 different things, so to avoid my inbox becoming another echo chamber:

You’re 100% going to have a C-section anyway so just get a tubal while giving birth.

No, I’m not 100% going to have a C-section anyway. Twins are not an automatic C-section. With my birth history there is no reason to presume that a C-section is in my future. My OB agrees, and has discussed the possibility as doctors have to do but also said that based on my past two birth experiences, I'm a "perfect candidate" for vaginal delivery.
I also am not going to mince words: tubal ligations are *less* effective than vasectomies with a *much higher* likelihood of an ectopic pregnancy. Ectopic pregnancy can *kill me*. In fact I got a PM from a woman who is a fellow fertile Myrtle who had an ectopic after a tubal. I am rejecting birth control options that, if they fail, would lead to my likely death. I don’t want to be pregnant again but I also don’t want to die and leave my children motherless, and in no way should anyone assume that traveling to another state to obtain an emergency abortion will continue to be an option in the future - we live in scary times, and Gilead is a real possibility. The comments seemed to have the vibe that people think that ligations are magically more effective than vasectomies and vasectomies are more of a whisper of sterility than an actual sterilization method so for those in the back VASECTOMIES ARE MORE EFFECTIVE THAN TUBAL LIGATIONS, FULL STOP. So I really need y’all to shut up about it.

Go to another state and obtain an abortion anyway.

I appreciate the personal offers to help I received in DMs deeply, but no. I’m in my 2nd trimester, which I know is still legal in some places, however I am at a point in my pregnancy where I personally as an individual do not feel comfortable obtaining an abortion, considering I would be *even farther* along by the time I could travel (which is not only finances, but logistics as well). I am 16 weeks pregnant now, these babies aren’t just clusters of cells to me anymore, and I’m not going to expand on that since it’s not up for debate.

Why not adoption?

With love and respect to everyone who has gone through adoption in all its aspects, adoption is absolutely not for me. This is a thought process I already went through 8 years ago, and now that I’m a mother and not a scared teenager I know it’s even less for me. I personally could not go through with it and come out the other side intact. Going through a full pregnancy, having my babies, and then being separated from them would break me.

Leave him and give him full custody of the twins

No. Because going through a full pregnancy, having my babies, and then being separated from them would break me. Jesus, some of y’all.

Just have a sexless marriage.

No. I love banging my husband, obviously lol. I don't want to be in a sexless marriage and anyone who has been to an abstinence-only high school knows that abstinence is not the way lol. There were a lot of comments assuming I would be perfectly fine withholding sex from my husband and having na dead bedroom, and I wouldn't. I have a sex drive. I'm going to want to bang my husband. Wanting to have sex with your spouse is *normal*.

What you would do about birth control if you divorced and dated in the future?

I’m not thinking of dating anyone else right now, because I’m thinking more about saving my actual marriage instead of an imaginary relationship. And if theoretically I did, I would probably seek out a partner who was snipped or was ready to be to be honestly, or a woman. I’m bisexual so there’s a very good chance that my future partner wouldn’t have the right parts to knock me up anyway lol.

Jack is sabotaging your birth control

I clarified my methods in the original post (as per my last email), but I did want to address this because it came up a LOT. I don’t have reason to believe that Jack sabotaged my birth control. A number of other fertile Myrtles showed up and brought up they or their family members repeated pregnancies in the face of birth control, including tubals. Accusing my husband of reproductive coercion for no reason other than I keep getting pregnant is a big leap and a weighty accusation. I am not the only fertile Myrtle out there, there's a reason there's a whole term for it.

Your husband is a narcissist, abuser, psychopath, and he does no childcare

My husband and I historically have a really healthy and loving relationship outside of this fight. In fact, this fight is the first time we’ve really had a fight, we’ve only ever had little arguments that we’ve been able to talk through. He’s an active father, the reason that I do the majority of childcare is due to circumstance between maternity leaves, our job schedules and the fact that I breastfed my babies. Someone also presumed I’m the breadwinner, which isn’t quite true. Jack makes more than me, but we do not have deeply significant differences in our incomes. When he is home he does his fair share of cleaning and cooking (arguably more than me at times), and parenting. That being said, the things he said in the heat of the moment were deeply concerning, and we’re addressing that together.
So to get down to the nitty gritty of the real update: since the last time I posted, Jack and I have sat down together and had a real come to Jesus talk. I’m not going to go through the whole breakdown, but it basically boiled down to this: it’s the vasectomy, but it’s more than the vasectomy. It was wrong of me to compare him to Tom but it was wronger of him to weaponize my trauma against me in a very malicious way. The way he intentionally used the same language my abuser used in an effort to hurt me was not acceptable and damaged the trust between us. He agreed it was not acceptable and said that in the aftermath he was horrified and ashamed his own words, and that he (as an explanation and not an excuse) kind of snapped under the stress. Oh and what he said about his “next wife” was not an indication of him not being committed to me but was because he felt hurt and wanted to hurt me back. He has apologized numerous times and seems to feel genuinely bad about it.
As for the separation, I am still going forward with it. I need space and time and I need to take that before the babies come. I am still staying with my parents who, for the record, are not sick of me or the kids. We’re a tight knit family, I only moved out when I moved in with Jack, and my sister moved out about a year ago so they have been empty nesting, and my mom doesn’t like that we live “too far” (an hour) away. What I have realized with space and time is how deeply triggering it was, in a way that I cannot explain to those without PTSD from DV, those who know will know. It’s deeply unsettled me and I’m having a hard time “getting over it” so to speak. There is now a lot of fear of my husband that was never there before and it’s going to take a lot to repair that trust and sense of safety. I cannot make a decision while I’m in this space, and I am addressing this with my personal therapist. Overall, I told him that if he wanted to stay married to me I needed two things from him: marriage counseling and a vasectomy, and even then I still cannot guarantee him anything. He understands, but I do not know what will happen with the vasectomy right now, we focused more on talking about the fight, but he is very aware that it's now a dealbreaker. And we have a marriage counseling appointment set up for next week. I'm hoping that counseling will bring some clarity to the situation, and in the mean time for the next couple months I'm focusing on giving my kids lots of cuddles and preparing myself for two new babies to come into my world, with or without Jack.
Additional information from OOP on her relationships

OOP: I've been through a trial to convict my ex-boyfriend of trying to kill me because of an abortion in a deep red, deeply religious area. I've definitely heard worse things, and I typically have pretty thick skin. That being said, I am pregnant and pretty emotional, so it's not the best experience. That being said, I do appreciate the level-headed comments when I see them through the sea of comments kind of saying the same stuff over and over. I'm not reading a lot of them if what I can see in the comment notification starts off nasty, so a lot of it is just inbox white noise. My favorites are the ones that start off with "I'm not going to read that BUT..." and I just think lol same. Like you don't want to read my post but expect me to read your comment that was made without even reading the situation? lol nope. And there are a lot of people conflating "providing someone with a hard choice" with "forcing someone into a medical procedure" and it just makes wading through for the actually helpful comments more tiring. Thank you though, I very much appreciate the kindness. Sorry, I've gotten so much of the same nonsense I guess I needed a little vent lol.

OOP on wanting her husband to make a decision and be on the same page

OOP: I want to be honest with him about where I am emotionally because I want him to make an informed decision. While the vasectomy is a deal breaker, it's really my secondary concern. My primary concern is the way he acted during the fight and his intention exploitation of my trauma because he was mad and scared. I think that telling him "get the snip to stay with me" and then deciding to leave anyway because there are deeper issues and/or I don't feel safe anymore would be cruel. He deserves to have the full picture before he makes a choice, doesn't he?
If he doesn't want the vasectomy, that's his choice. It's not what I want, but it is what it is. If he wants to call it quits at 4 kids, then it is what it is and if he secretly wants to be the next Nick Cannon then it is what it is he should be free to do that. That is part of why I don't know where he is on the vasectomy right now and we didn't really discuss it much when we talked, I'm focusing on discussing the bigger issue for me which is trust and safety within the relationship. The only way for him to make an informed decision about whether or not he get a vasectomy is for him to have all the information about the situation. If that makes him want a vasectomy less, then it is what it is. It's not about making him want to have a vasectomy. It's about being on the same page.

 

DO NOT COMMENT IN LINKED POSTS OR MESSAGE OOPs – BoRU Rule #7

THIS IS A REPOST SUB - I AM NOT OOP

did anyone else notice or just me? forgive me if someone has already posted this but here’s my breakdown from top to bottom as someone who knows—
When he’s first over there dancing with the group in their section, that is a no go. I don’t care what event you’re at, he had to bypass the film crew, producers, security and the rope. They do not let those boundaries get crossed, anywhere, even with D-list reality tv stars. Big industry no no.
The next red flag is when he grabs the bottle of champagne and starts drinking their alcohol and approaching the cast, security would have removed them immediately. Health hazard. Unless instructed to let it play out. And if instructed to let it play out, the producers have to make sure the cast is at the very least in the know.
Another red flag, James’s aside to Brock is not shown to camera. It’s just VO meaning they dubbed it in ADR.
The vase he hit the “security guard” with is a prop glass and reminder there was a casting call sent out for this party for background and extras. If there was an actual fight going on with this level of immediate violence, it would’ve been cleared out.
And then all of a sudden Tom is involved? Babes… do you know how quickly an actual security guard would’ve cleared Sandoval’s behind out of the way?
This scene felt like an insult to the audience’s intelligence. What did Kendrick Lamar just say in his song? “the audience not dumb, shape the stories how you want, hey Tom, they’re not slow”

I am NOT OOP. OOP is u/justathrowaway282641
Originally posted to TwoHotTakes + her own page
Previous BoRU #1, BoRU #2, BoRU #3, BoRU #4, BoRU #5, BoRU 6
Editor’s Note: removed all relevant comments from older posts to make space for new updates. To see all older relevant comments, check out the previous BoRUs above
NEW UPDATE MARKED WITH ----
[New Update]: My family forgot to invite me to my grandparents funeral, but they are convinced I was there.
Trigger Warnings: death of loved ones, emotional manipulation, gaslighting, harassment
RECAP
Original Post: November 14, 2023**
I’m 30s F and caused a major blowup in my family and now none of them are talking to me. For background, my hometown is tiny (500pop) and when I went 2 hrs away to “the city” (15,000pop) for college, I loved it. I ended up staying after graduation, got married, and am happy here for a decade. I visit my home town every few weeks or so, call/text my family near daily, and thought we were all good. My family’s pretty small. Just my brother, mom, step dad, dad, step mom, and an aunt and uncle (mom’s siblings, never married, no kids). My mother's grandparents moved to my home town when I was in high school and were just down the street from us. My family has always been pretty drama free (aside from my parent’s divorce when I was a kid) and we’ve been happy. The step-parents were blended in perfectly and we share holidays and celebrations together. We’re all super close and just the perfect little group.
Ever since I moved away, the topic of “when am I moving back?” is constant, and I’ve always laughed it off. My home town has nothing. You have to drive 30 minutes for milk and bread. 60-90 minute one-way commutes to work. And floods shut down the main road every Easter. I love the town, but I love here more. I have parks, stores, community events, a library! The “city” is great. My family grumbles that I need to move back, but I refuse. I've been trying to encourage them to come here, especially since it's not an hour drive to the nearest medical facility.
Now to the meat and potatoes: both my grandparents passed over COVID times. They were both old and their health had been failing for a while so it was only a matter of time. Thankfully they didn’t catch it, but it made visiting them impossible and we survived mostly through FaceTime. They both passed in their sleep months apart. Both were cremated and kept securely under the kitchen sink for safe keeping while the pandemic blew over. That was 2021.
Well, I just found out my family held a funeral for them and scattered the ashes in my uncle’s maple grove over the summer. No one said a word to me about it. I’ve visited numerous times before and after and not one word. I only found out because my great uncle from California posted on Facebook a few weeks ago that he is entering hospice and was so thankful his health stayed strong enough for him to see his little sister (my grandma) to her final resting place. I was confused and called my mom. She was all “Yeah, the funeral we had in July, remember?” Ya’ll, I visited them for the 4th of July. They did the funeral the 8th. Not a word about it to me. They had planned this for months. Long enough to arrange for my infirm great uncle to be brought over from the other side of the country. Apparently, they talked about it “all the time”.
Everyone is convinced I was at the funeral. They SWEAR I was there. I can prove I wasn’t because Google’s got my location history. My hubby is baffled because he was supposedly there, too, but he had to work every weekend in June and July. Time clock doesn’t lie. My family straight up forgot about me. I’m hurt. I’m sad. And they’re pissed at me “for lying”. They think I’m causing drama over nothing. Nothing I say can convince them I wasn’t there. My family is united in this. And they’ve all put me “on read” until I admit I’m wrong. They think I’ve gone nuts. Either there’s a doppelganger of me attending events, or my family doesn’t want to admit they screwed up. I’m not backing down.
Thanksgiving is coming up, and my family’s been vague posting on Facebook about “forgetful kids” and mental health. It’s so freaking weird and I don’t know if I’m in bizzaro world or what’s going on. My mom’s best friend reached out and said I should just admit I was wrong and apologize, that I’m causing my mom so much unnecessary stress. I asked her if she’s checked everyone’s home for CO2. She hung up on me. (We checked our CO2, and our testers are running just fine.) I have reached out to a few people in my home town to check in on my folks, and they all say they're fine. I even spoke with the local volunteer fire fighter group to see if they could check for gas leaks. Not sure if they were able to.
I don’t know what to do. I’ve shown them the proof I wasn’t there, but they know I’m tech savvy and just assume I’ve Photoshopped it. Hubby says we need a break, and we’re going to be staying home this holiday season.
Edit: I don't know the update rules, so I'll post updates to my profile should anyone want them.  
Update #1: November 27, 2023
Not sure how to do updates on posts, so figured I'd post anything on my profile. Folks have private messaged me and this will be easier I think?
It's 11/27 and Thanksgiving just happened. Hubby and I stayed home. We got a small turkey and made our own little thanksgiving. It was nice. We ate around noon, then watched a movie, and later sat outside with a bottle of wine to watch the sun set behind the trees and neighbor houses.
We usually take the day before off, drive to my folks, stay the night, and help with the Thanksgiving Day cooking. So it wasn't until Wednesday night that my mom broke the silence. Mom called and asked when I was showing up, and I told her we were staying home this year, but for them to have a happy Thanksgiving, and to give the rest of the family my love. She was quiet for a long time after I said that, and I think she eventually mumbled an "okay", or something, and hung up. It wasn't an angry hang up. Just a hang up. On Thanksgiving day, I sent a group "Happy Thanksgiving!" gif to our family group chat. I received a few "happy Thanksgiving"'s back. No one's said anything else. There's been no posts on Facebook.  
Update #2: December 12, 2023
So, I think I mentioned in one of my comments that my dad and I usually talk on the phone every Sunday morning. We're both early risers so we'd chat over our morning coffees and watch the sunrise. Him and I haven't really spoken since this all went down and it's been tough. I'm used to talking to him, you know?
Well, I was sitting outside in my usual spot, watching the sun rise and freezing my butt off, and he called me. I'm not entirely sure how to describe the emotions I felt. It was a mix of panic, hope, terror, happiness, and dread. I ended up answering because I just had to know what he wanted. It was an awkward conversation. He didn't address the current "drama", but instead tiptoed around the situation with all the grace of an cow on stilts. For instance, a simple "How are you doing?" Type question was answered with a "Not good." And the whole conversation would stall out for a bit because he knew why I wasn't doing well. So we ended up talking about the weather, the various winter birds we'd seen in our feeders, and the Christmas decorations around town. Things like that.
Eventually he asked if we were coming out for Christmas, and sounded sad when I told him we weren't. He asked if him and step mom could come visit us instead, and I told him it wasn't a good idea this year. That hubby and I were going to spend a quiet holiday together. I let him know he should be receiving some gifts at his PO Box any day now, so to please pick them up from the post office and put them under the family tree for everyone. He said he'd ship ours to us as well.
And that was pretty much it. No crazy drama to report. The only posts on Facebook have been the usual Christmas excitement ones, countdowns, photos of Santa, silly gift ideas, photos of company Christmas parties.
On a personal note: Hubby and I are doing alright. Our health is good, our spirits high, and we're as solid as ever. We each got Christmas bonus' at our jobs, so we're excited about that. They're not large, but we're happy to have them. We have also done advent calendars for the first time ever. I got him a Lego one, and he got me a hot chocolate one. We're going to do the calendars again next year. Maybe make a tradition out of it.
Everyone please have a safe and happy holidays.  
Inheritance: December 16, 2023
I've received a lot - A LOT - of messages and private DMs urging me to check into inheritance and such. I'm really touched a lot of Internet strangers are worried about me and I wanted to ensure everyone that inheritance is most likely not an issue here. I'd almost be relieved if it was, because then it would at least make some sense. Money does weird things to people, you know?
No one in my family is wealthy by any means. After my grandparents' passed, their small estate was used to pay for their end of life expenses and remaining assets split up. Everyone directly related got an equal split (so excluded my dad and the step parents). I don't remember the exact amount I received, but it was around $5k if I recall. My brother gave me his share, too, so I could finish paying off my college debt while the interest freeze was active.
The great uncle from California has kids and grand kids, and great grandkids of his own, and also isn't wealthy. I think one of his kids makes good money doing something in finance, but I'm not entirely sure. I can't imagine he left us anything, as we hardly knew him. My mom, aunt, and uncle only met him a few times in their lives, and my brother and I even less. Grandma and him were close, but I don't think he liked my grandpa much.  
Christmas: December 25, 2023
I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas. I've received a lot of support through my posts and I'm really grateful. Writing these updates have had a therapeutic effect.
Yesterday was Sunday, but I didn't answer my dad when he called. I just really didn't feel up to a pointless chat, so let it go to voicemail. He tried to reach me a few times throughout the day, but I didn't answer.
Our bestie last minute invited us over to his house for Christmas day lunch (today), so husband and I were busy all Christmas Eve making cookies, peanut brittle, and homemade suckers/hard candies for his kids. Mom tried to reach out as well, but I also ignored her calls.
We had a BLAST at lunch! Our friend's kids are a lot of fun to be around. They got some techy presents from their grandparents (Quest vr headset and steam decks, lucky little rascals) Friend and his wife aren't good with tech, while hubby and I are, so we helped get them set up while our friend played a good host to his folks and inlaws. The grandparents didn't realize that a Steam deck required a Steam account, so we got the kids all their own accounts set up, added them to our steam friends lists, and gifted them some games. We also bought them a few VR games for their headset, and they were off to the races with Beat Saber in no time.
As for my folks: My brother texted and asked if we could talk sometime tomorrow. I think me ignoring mom and dad has caused some kind of upset. Which they deserve.  
Brother’s call: December 26, 2023
Spoke with my brother over the phone this morning.
For starters, he apologized for everything. Him and I are good (for now). For a bit of background, my brother and I are only 2 years apart. There weren't a lot of kids around growing up, so the two of us were often stuck doing stuff together. So we have a lot of shared interests and passions. He's been pretty silent on this whole matter, but still "part of the group", if you know what I mean. I think the thought of losing him out of my life was probably the most painful, because he's always been there. He was my rock until I met my husband. He's definitely a Mama's boy, though, so anything mom wanted, he made sure she got. I'm happy to have him back.
Without further ado, here's the story from the horse's mouth:
Mom apparently had a cancer scare late last year (which no one told me about, go figure), and dad had a stint put in his heart back in January (which I did know about). This "sense of mortality" has apparently lit a fire under Mom's ass to get me back home. But since I wasn't reacting to her passive aggressive hinting, she and step mom decided to go full crazy. My great uncle's health was bad, and he'd been asking about funeral arrangements for his sister (my grandma) for a while, so the moms decided to plan it. And use the event as a giant middle finger to me. They kept all the planning pretty hush-hush between the two of them, so no one on our side of the family actually knew about the funeral until like 2 weeks before. The moms said they'd invited hubby and I. No one thought anything about it. No one thought to mention, confirm, or check with me.
The plan was to scatter the ashes, say a few words, and maybe head to town for lunch. It was a small affair. The mom's didn't even tell the family that our great uncle was coming for it. Like I said, it was a small thing. Barely a footnote. No one thought it was odd because we're pretty chill people.
4th of July happens. Hubby and I are out. No one thought to mention it, as we were all busy celebrating and having a great time. Any time the topic of "this weekend" would start, the conversation would be quickly shifted by one of the moms. We went back home.
8th of July happens. Great uncle rolls into town with a few of his kids, grandkids, and great grandkids, and it's a surprise to everyone (but the moms). Everyone drives to the maple grove and the moms have brought a ton of food and stuff. It's a full blown party. No one on my side noticed I wasn't there, because there were so many extra faces outside the usual group. They did the spreading of the ashes, they said their words, they ate, they had a great time. It wasn't until our great uncle left, and all his side left with him, that they realized I wasn't there. And hadn't been there.
And this is where the crazy went up a notch. My brother says the moms were happy no one noticed I wasn't there. And that this was proof to everyone that I needed to move back because I was so easily forgotten about. Because none of them thought to reach out, right? They basically did a ton of guilt tripping manipulation bullshit and it made everyone upset at me for not showing up. Somehow it was my fault for being excluded. So suddenly everyone was on their side with "sticking it to me".
But then a few months went by, and tempers cooled, and then I guess the horror of it set in. Followed by the shame, but by then they were "in too deep". How do you undo something like this? And since I hadn't brought it up, I guess they figured they would all just stay quiet about it and hope I never asked about a funeral.
That's when I discovered the situation from my great uncle's Facebook and called my mom, who panicked and went with the stupidest solution. Claiming I was there. Don't I remember?
I ended up talking with a few friends from high school, mentioning the situation, and word got back to those in town. So suddenly town gossip and little old church ladies got involved. Was I, or wasn't I at the funeral? Did my family forget to invite me to the funeral of the only grandparents I'd ever know? Or am I just causing a ruckus? My brother said they all just went with mom's answer. Of course they wouldn't forget me. Of course I was there. Of course they're good people. And it just snowballed.
The family expected me to eventually fold. I'm usually a nonconfrontational person, so me sticking to my guns was unexpected. And then I missed Thanksgiving. And now Christmas. With no sign of backing down. And I guess the realization that I could just stop being part of their lives is setting in and my parents are panicking. He's tried just getting them to apologize and explain, but stubbornness prevails. They want to rug sweep, but I'm not letting them.
My brother is upset with everything that's happened. He's realized just how crappy it all has been and he wants nothing to do with it anymore. But since he lives with my mom, he can't "get away from it".
He has asked if he can come stay with us for a little bit. I spoke with hubby, and he's in agreement with me that my brother can come crash in our spare bedroom for as long as he wants. Brother works remotely, so it's no trouble for him to pick up and go. I believe he's making the trip today or tomorrow. Not entirely sure, but I expect crap to hit the fan when he arrives.
On a side note, hubby's stoked that my brother and I made up. The two usually game together, but haven't due to "the situation". He's downstairs right now setting up his man cave in preparation for my brother's arrival. I'm happy to see him so excited.  
Brother's Here: December 27, 2023
My brother rolled in late last night. He'd obviously been crying and when I opened the door, he just held me and sobbed. I'd never seen him like that before and soon both of us were just standing in the doorway crying into one another. He kept apologizing. Over and over again. Said he wasn't sure why he went with it. Just kept saying sorry. Hubby got him all set up in the spare bedroom while brother and I talked. My brother's a wreck. He's always been a big guy, but he's lost a lot of weight and his clothes just hang off him. If I didn't know better, I'd think he was on drugs. We talked for a little bit before bed and he re-explained everything for my husband. I'd told hubby the story, but it was just so weird that hearing it again helped.
This morning my brother was up at dawn making some coffee and getting his work day going. Hubby's off all week (lucky) so hubby made us working folk some pancakes and bacon. So far everything's peaceful. We've decided not to answer any calls from our family. They've been made aware that he arrived safely, and that we are going to spend the New Years together, and that we're not answering any calls until January 1st. They may text if they wish. I'm sure they're losing their minds. Serves them right.
Everyone, have a safe and happy new years! Don't drink and drive!  
Happy 2024!: January 2, 2024
I hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable holidays, and may the new year be full of joy and happiness!
Not too much of an update. Things here have been quiet. My brother's settled in nicely and he's a great housemate. Our place isn't very big, but we have full basement and a nice outside patio/porch area so it doesn't feel crowded at all with the extra addition. He's a quiet and clean guy. No hassle at all. He got some fresh clothes from the Walmart, a haircut, and trimmed his beard, so he's more "presentable" now. He's a lady killer when he gets cleaned up. He's made nice with the (very nosy, but kind) retired couple next door and is adapting to "city living" nicely.
Folks back home have been mostly well behaved. There's been a few texts back and forth, as we're not answering calls. Mom mainly wants to know when brother's coming back, but he's keen on staying here for a while. Mom said I can't "keep him" and I told her he's a grown ass man and can do what he wants. Brother says he has her blocked after she ORDERED him to return home.
Brother has tentatively asked if he could stay long term, should he decide to, or at least longer than a usual visitor would stay. Which we're fine with. He has a good paying job and could afford an apartment, but he's never lived on his own and I would guess he has some anxiety about it. Should that be the case, he'll start paying us some rent and we'd probably adjust to give him the basement as his own space.  
Had to change the locks: January 17, 2024
My brother is officially staying with us for the long haul. Hubby and him spent all Sunday organizing the basement and shifting things around so he now has his own area to be comfortable in. He's pretty handy and has also started fixing little things around our house. Our windows and doors have never closed and locked/unlocked smoother. He even fixed one of the closets we never use because we can never get the darn door open. Sadly, he also had to change the locks on our house and get us all new keys.
This is because while hubby and I were out this Saturday, the moms showed up. They'd been calling and texting us all week, but we weren't really answering them, so I guess the two decided to drive over and hash it out in person. They have emergency keys to my place, and just let themselves in. Brother told them to leave, they argued, and my nosy (but kind) neighbors called the police when they noticed the commotion. So, we get a call from neighbor's wife, return home to some cops in our yard, all the neighbors out "vacuuming their trees", and my nosy (but kind) neighbors standing on my porch with my brother behind them, doing their best Gandalf "You shall not pass" impression.
Had to talk with the cops, explain that we were having a family dispute and word vomited. I don't really remember what all I said, and was shaking a lot. Our local cops are really great. Fantastic guys and gals in blue, and took it all in stride. It's really cold here, so one had me join him in his cruiser with the heat on, and gave me a bottle of water to calm down while we talked. They asked if we wanted the moms trespassed but I wasn't sure if that counted as a criminal charge so just asked the cops if they could just make them leave, which the cops did with no fuss. I think the moms were shocked we were taking this so seriously. They didn't fight or scream at us. Just left quietly.
My dad promised me he'd make sure his wife left us alone. "Or else". He said he'd also have a stern talk with my mom. Him and I talked Sunday morning, and he seemed absolutely at the end of his rope. Husband jokingly told my dad he could move in, too. To which he declined.
Not sure where to go from here, but we're getting some ring cameras installed once they arrive. And everyone but my dad is blocked. Hopefully they all just leave us alone.  
Nothing New To Report: February 2, 2024
Had a lot of DMs for updates, but don't have much anything to report on. The moms are behaving themselves. All's quiet on the western front. Felt weird ignoring or copy/pasting "no updates" to everyone, so here's what we've been doing, should anyone care.
Dad got a new bird/squirrel feeder from Amazon (looks like a little picnic table for a child's dolly but has a mesh top for the bird seed. I think it's supposed to be for chickens?) It's totes adorbs. To his horror, it also works as a Cooper hawk feeder, so now he's "fortifying his defenses" and putting up some trellises around it. He'll have to wait till warmer weather before planting anything to grow on them.
We had some ring cameras installed and put in a motion-activated camera that double functions as a light bulb. It goes in the light fixture outside the front door and is pretty cool. Video quality isn't all that great, but it's a nice addition I guess. It does overlook the bird feeders, so I've been watching it on my lunch breaks on the days I have to go into the office.
Hubby and brother are feuding. They started a coop farm in Stardew Valley a few days ago and they both want to romance Leah. My husband confided in me that he's also been romancing Sebastian as a backup. I'm not sure why he's keeping this a secret, but he's pretty smug about it.
RELEVANT COMMENTS
fractal_frog I hope your dad can outsmart the hawks!

OOP: He'll be able to, I just know it. He's used to dealing with the wildlife and having hawks about, but he just wasn't expecting one to snag a meal right from his new feeder.
I told him it was "technically" still a bird feeder. Just....for bigger birds. Which he thought was funny. He said he might make a little "no hawks allowed" sign to put up next to it.

MissOP: keep the updates coming. the moms are so close to folding it's just a little bit more. LMAO also, the bro mance between your husband and brother is so cute. lol Honestly, I think your husband making sure he has a side piece of Sebastian is absolutely the play.

OOP: So far still no word from the moms, but I hope you're right. I would love an apology and for us to begin moving past this. But I NEED that apology. I feel selfish saying that, but I refuse to "be the bigger person" on this. I just won't.
As for my brother and husband, yeah, they're basically soul mates. The two hit it off immediately when they first met, and they've been thick as thieves for years.  

Update: February 27, 2024
My dad came out for a visit over the weekend. We had a good time and the weather was lovely for some grilling and beers. It was really nice to see him again and he seemed healthy and in good spirits.
Here's his report from back home: Step mom (dad's wife) has started to realize she's screwed up. I credit her change of mindset to the fact that my dad sat her down and laid it out for her: she leaves his kids alone, or she's getting divorce papers. That apparently shut her up right quick, because they had a prenup done when they married and I'm not sure the details of it, but it wouldn't end favorably for her. She hasn't worked in years, so I imagine she'd be eligible for alimony? But I'm not versed in any of that legal mumbojumbo. Dad didn't seem too worried about it, so I'm not gonna worry about it.
Step dad was pissed the police were involved in the last "mom visit" (despite no one getting arrested or anything) and was in a "the kids are out of control and need to be reigned back in" mindset. When my dad pointed out that "the kids" in question were all in their mid-30s, it took some of the steam out of stepdad's sails. According to my dad, even my mom looked a little surprised when he said that. So, part of me is wondering if a good chunk of this whole thing is my mom not truly realizing that her kids were grown, and no longer children she could make demands of. Both of the moms have left us alone. I expected my mom to continue to kick up a fuss, but I think the cops spooked her.
There was a wonderful suggestion by a comment or to get their pastor involved, which I passed along to my dad. Dad has since spoken to their pastor about everything. He's a young guy, relatively new to their church, and joked that his first month on the job he had to do 3 funerals in a row and his new "flock" were just dying to get away from him, so he's got a sense of humor which is nice. The new pastor agreed to sit down with everyone and help the family hash it all out in a true "Come to Jesus" type moment next month, so that maybe we could celebrate Easter together as our first holiday as a family. Dad said the pastor was aware our family was having some troubles, but unsure of exactly what was going on, and since he was new, the pastor didn't want to pry. He has also agreed to do a small service down at my uncle's maple grove later in the summer, as it usually floods and is a muddy mess all spring. According to my dad, my aunt and uncle are so over all the drama and just ready to move on, so I expect hugs and apologies from them when we next meet.
Stardew Valley Update: My brother was victorious in the grand fight for Leah. It was a hard battle. Well fought. When my husband exposed his plans to woo Sebastian all this time, it was quite the betrayal. Dramatics aside, their farm is really cute and I'm so happy they're enjoying the game!  
Update 4/1 - Final one I think - April 1, 2024
Happy April Fools everyone! I hope you all check your caramel apples for stray onions before taking a bite! I also hope your Easter weekend was a delightful one.
It is with great joy that I tell you all about our most recent update! Possibly even a conclusion to this whole ordeal.
The entire family (aunt, uncle, moms, dads, brother, me, husband) and pastor met at my dad's house and we all sat down to hash the situation out. As expected from what my dad said, my aunt and uncle greeted us all with apologies and hugs, which was nice. My uncle usually helps host the Easter egg hunts with the church and he brought our Easter baskets to give to us in case us kids weren't sticking around the for the weekend. I'm not sure why but seeing it made me tear up and feel stupid, because it was just a basket of candy but it meant a lot to me for some reason.
The pastor led us in a prayer and talked about forgiveness and such. He then asked us all to talk one at a time about how we're feeling and what we want the end result of today to be. No one was allowed to interrupt so everyone got to talk. It was nice. The consensus for the group was that most everyone wanted things to go back to "normal". The only ones who had any variance off this was my mom and step dad. They both wanted all us kids to move back to the area.
The pastor asked them why they wanted us back, and neither could give a good reason other than "because family", and the pastor asked us if we were thriving where we were. And we said we were. He asked if we were happy there. Which we were. He then asked my mom and step dad if they wanted us to give up our happiness to make them happy.
And Mom broke down and said no. We all had a good cry. The pastor then asked about the funeral and lies that led up to it and followed it and how it made us all feel and what we wished we'd done differently if we had the chance. It was all very emotional, but in a good way, you know? Everyone apologized and admitted they f-ed up and did a really crappy thing.
We all talked for a long, long time and the pastor was a great mediator. Eventually we all reached some sort of resolution and I think we're good now. Emotions are still high and a little raw in areas, but we stayed for Easter weekend and had a nice time. We're going to keep moving forward slowly and try to repair the relationship, but I believe we're well and truly out of the woods.
As for my brother, he's still staying with us, and mom will stop trying to guilt trip him back home. He's thinking about renting a small apartment in our area but we're not pushing him to make a decision. He knows he's welcome to stay as long as he wants. I think he wants to try dating (he's had a few girlfriends but never anything serious) and is embarrassed to bring any girls around our place, lol. He's been going to a few random classes/bookclubs at the local library for something free to do and hitting it off with all the little old ladies who attend, and they keep trying to hook him up with girls his age who they know. He has been on a few lunches/coffee dates with a couple girls, but I think he's too embarrassed by the attention to give it a real try at "dating" any of them. He's happy, though, which is all I could ask for.
I'm not sure if there will be any more updates, as I think it's all be resolved about as much as it can be at the moment. I wanted to thank you all for your words of advice and giving me a place to vent and scream into the void. Please be kind to one another and to yourselves. Thank you.
Relevant Comments
emjkr: What a nice and hopeful update, I’m really glad you stuck to your guns when everyone threw sanity out the window!
But, could your mother explain how she thought this would work out in her favour?

OOP: I don't think mom thought too far ahead. I believe she assumed it would all just magically work out the way she wanted it to. She said she wasn't sure what she was expecting to happen (which I think was a lie, but I wasn't going to push it).

mak_zaddy: This was a great update! But ummmmmm no stardew valley update? What gives? Has Sebastian been woo’ed? How’s Leah? What’s happening?

OOP: Sebastian has indeed been wooed (and whoohooed) There's kids and cows and chickens. The two are still having a wonderful time at the game. They're working on completing the community center but it's slow going as they aren't trying to speedrun and just doing things as they want. I believe they're thinking about going into the desert mines once they complete that bundle, but they're both super chicken shit about it!

-my-cabbages: I don't really understand what you had to apologize for ... but I'm glad you're happy and the situation seems to be settling down

OOP: There wasn't much of an apology on my end, as everyone agreed I had done nothing wrong. Mine was more of a "I'm sorry you didn't feel as though I would listen." Type apology, which I don't really believe is a proper apology because apologies like that push the blame back on another. I mostly expressed my feelings and the shock of it all, and how betrayed I felt.  

----NEW UPDATE----

Small, happy update: May 7, 2024 (1 month later)
Things as wonderful as the moment. Still doing baby steps with The Moms. We're texting and talking on the phones more, which is nice. Very civil.
Dad "accidentally" bought a bunch of hand crafted bird feeders at a craft fair. By accidentally, I mean: he had a little too much fun in the beer tent, went for a stroll while step mom wasn't looking, and stumbled upon a guy's booth and bought "one of each". He wouldn't tell me how MANY "one of each" was, but he cackled like a witch when I asked. Step mom said she's forcing him to give a few to me, so I'm expecting a delivery or a Dad-visit any day now.
My brother is officially "going steady" with a girl. We've met her a few times and she seems like a real sweetheart. She's our age and has a little boy (5-6 years old, I haven't asked) from a previous relationship (The dad's not in the picture from what I can gather). She's the granddaughter of one of his Book Club members, so the old ladies made good match makers in the end. The relationship is still very new and I'm routing for them.
No new Stardew Valley updates. Work has been a little crazy lately and I haven't been able to play much of anything, and brother has been distracted by his new lady friend. So, husband finally started Baldur's Gate 3, and fell for Gale's "magic trick" so now those two are a thing. I expect him to be sufficiently distracted from reality for the next few weeks.
 

DO NOT COMMENT IN LINKED POSTS OR MESSAGE OOPs – BoRU Rule #7

THIS IS A REPOST SUB - I AM NOT OOP

I just recently started playing Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition and I am absolutely loving the game! However, the only complaint I really have is the companion limit. Pathfinding makes sense why the party is limited to 6 party members. Even with my meager amount of hours I can definitely see how more then 6 party members would pose an issue. But is there anyway with mods I could increase this? I desperately want just one more party slot. Not even to use in battle or adventure with, but so that way I don't have to ditch my main core party when I find someone new. The particular case that made me frustrated, was after adventuring into a cave I came across a potential companion that was imprisoned. After freeing them I was hoping that if I ditched one of my other companions they would return to a city or something similar. NOPE, they stand there at the end of the cave waiting. Its so annoying when I just want to escort someone back to a city or an inn, I have to leave one of my own companions in the middle of no where. I understand I could work around this by only using 5 companions at a time, but I'm still relatively new. Even with 6 companions battles are tough for me. At the end of the day I still love this game and cant wait for what's to come!

Hi Fat Friends,
Using a burner account for obvious reasons. I am trying to get feedback on our budget to see if we are missing any big categories or oveunderestimating some things. I have tried to compare it to our actual expenses from the last two years and the numbers here are a little higher than our actual spending since this has estimated items like Health Insurance, home maintenance, new car, etc. that are either covered by work or annual portion of estimated spend that would only happen once every few years. We are a couple in 50’s who would like to get out of the rat race in 1-5 years based on how the numbers work for us. A little about us:
Two adults (50M and 49F) and 2 kids living in a VHCOL area – One kid has graduated and starting a job this year, and the other is in college and hopefully will be independent in 4 years. Their college expense is not included in this budget. I would like your feedback on a few items:
1. Feedback/Critique our budget – are we missing any major categories? Are we oveunder estimating any costs? Unfortunately with Mint shutting down, I only have access to the last 2 years of detailed actual spend so feedback from other fat friends will be super helpful. I have broken down the spending for a few categories into Base vs. discretionary spending. The idea is that in case of a market downturn, we would shift to Base spending only. I plan to use “Vanguard Dynamic Spending” as a withdrawal strategy when we FIRE
2. Target net Worth - Based on this spend, and given that the mortgage and property Tax does not need to be inflation-adjusted plus the mortgage rolls off in 22 years, how much do you think we need in investable net worth? I do not think we have enough invested NW right now to FIRE and I would like to get feedback from the community on what would be your comfortable number for someone to retire with this budget to see how far we are. I am intentionally not listing our NW to avoid influencing your candid response to this question.
Thanks in advance for your time and feedback!
Here is our projected budget:
Category - Cost (Base) - Cost (Disc)
Mortgage - $69,960.00
Property Tax - $33,000.00
Home Insurance - $4,156.00
Electric + gas - $3,000.00
Water - $2,400.00
Gardner - $2,400.00
Pool Cleaning- $2,000.00
Home Cleaning - $3,000.00(B) - $1,500.00(D)
Home Maintenance (estimate) - $23,000.00
Internet/Phone - $300.00
Groceries - $10,400.00
Dining Out - $10,400.00(B) - $10,000.00(D)
Car Payment (replace every 7 years) - $8,571.43(B) - $8,500.00(D)
Car Maintenance - $1,200.00
Fuel - $2,000.00(B) - $2,000.00(D)
Car Insurance - $4,000.00
Health Insurance - $24,000.00(B) - $10,000.00(D)
Medications - $600.00
Doctor and medical services - $3,000.00
Life Insurance - $2,000.00
Long Term Care Insurance - $2,000.00
Umbrella - $600.00
Clothing - $1,200.00
Other Shopping - $6,000.00
Personal Care (Salon/Hair Cut etc) - $6,000.00(B) - $3,000.00(D)
Travel/Vacation - $30,000.00(B) - $30,000.00(D)
Misc. - $6,000.00
Gifts - $6,000.00(B) - $6,000.00(D)
Entertainment/Parties - $5,000.00(B) - $10,000.00(D)
Hobbies - $6,000.00(B) - $6,000.00(D)
Person 1 Disc - $6,000.00(B) - $6,000.00(D)
Person 2 Disc - $6,000.00(B) - $6,000.00(D)
Total - $290,187.43(Base) - $99,000.00(Disc)
Total Withdrawl (20% Tax) - $348,224.92(Base) - $118,800.00**(Disc)**