Bnwo Meaning Tiktok

Clara (35F) and I (33F) have been friends for roughly 9 years. She’s supported me through a major breakup, I supported her through financial issues, and we have basically been a pillar in one another’s lives for quite some time. Needless to say, there was a lot of trust there. Back in my 20’s, I bought myself a Louis Vuitton bag as a celebration for graduating uni. I’d use this bag whenever I felt I needed a confidence boost, because it made me feel like if I could handle uni, I could handle anything…I don’t know why, it’s just how my mind works I guess. Well this bag got quite a bit of wear and tear over the years (although I’d prefer to say she was well loved), and Clara offered to get it refurbished for me while she was on holiday in Paris. I was apprehensive, but she insisted that it was a gift for helping her get back on her feet. She took the bag with her to Paris, and I thought little of it, until I got a job interview and needed my little confidence boost to complete my outfit. That’s when I realised that Clara got back from Paris in January and I still didn’t have the bag. I called her up to ask where it was, thinking she’d probably forgotten about it - I mean, I had too - and she said it must be in her closet somewhere and that she’d dig it out. The interview wasn’t for a week, so I wasn’t worried. But then I heard nothing from her. No random TikToks in my DM’s, no questioning whether game night is a go ahead that weekend, nothing. After four days, I called her again and she said she’d be over that evening with the bag. Clara showed up, she handed me a Louis Vuitton box, and said she had to go…very unlike her because usually we’d catch up a bit. As I was getting ready for my interview, I opened the box, pulled the bag out of the dust thingy, and noticed something was off. The “leather” felt a little too raised, and the stitching seemed a little too bright. I didn’t have time to think about it just then, but I couldn’t stop thinking about the way it didn’t feel the same. So when I got home, I inspected it closely. The zips are scratching, some of the inner stitching is loose, and the heat stamp has no numbering on it (as it does on authentic pieces). This bag is fake. I called Clara, and asked her what happened with my bag, and she stammered saying that she has no idea what I mean. She said she’s outraged that the store did a bad job refurbishing, and that she’s going to call them to complain…I’m sorry what? This bag isn’t even real!! I called her out, and told her that if I didn’t have the real bag back by the end of the weekend, she’d be gone from my life. The deadline was 3 days ago, and Clara has been a ghost in the wind for almost a week. A couple of our mutuals say that I should keep the peace, while some others are outraged that she would essentially steal something sentimental. I can’t help feeling guilty because she’s been there through the thick and thin with me. So AIO for putting a bag before a friendship? TL;DR: Friend stole expensive bag with sentimentality, replaced with a fake, AIO for end my the friendship? Edit: The images are of the fake bag submitted by /u/TheEllaBullet to r/AmIOverreacting [link] [comments]

Am i overreacting for breaking up with my girlfriend over a toilet plunger prank? Okay this just happened 2 hours ago and im still fuming. Apparently on tiktok the toilet plunger prank has been trending, its where you ask your partner for help with a clogged toilet and instead you actually put nutella, water and fart spray on a plunger and fling it on your partner. my gf decided to do that prank on me and normally i can take a joke. after she flung the toilet plunger contents on me including in my mouth i obviously died and went to hell, but she showed me the video she was making and i was like okay its just a prank fine whatever. BUT THEN i asked her if she bought a new toilet plunger to do this prank or if she at least washed it but no she took the regular fking toilet plunger we had to do this prank. yall im so fking mad right now. she told me shes so sorry and everything. she forgot to buy a new toilet plunger for the prank. but wtf that means i actually got fking feces in my f’n mouth. im so unbelievably angry. i told her im done with her and now shes pissed at ME?? am i overreacting. we live together so its not gonna be easy to just break up plus telling all our friends and family we broke up because of a toilet plunger prank feels so childish but i feel so disrespected. submitted by /u/AIzzy17 to r/AmIOverreacting [link] [comments]

it honestly warms my heart how,no matter how serious a topic,someone will ALWAYS come in with a hazbin hotel/dandy’s world/bfdi reaction image with a corny caption. submitted by /u/Pzcheezy to r/lovethissmug [link] [comments]

Operation make a new friend before the week ends starts NOW submitted by /u/flyawaywithmeee to r/TikTokCringe [link] [comments]

For those that don't know: Michael and Ashley are going through a controversy over actions that happened 7 years ago in a stream. The context is that Ashley read out a username with the word 'nega' in it, as in shorthand for negative. Other members mistook her for saying the n-slur, it was clarified that she didn't, and everyone involved in the stream proceeded to go on a long-running bit of laughing at the word 'nega' and it's unfortunate similarity to the n-slur. Since this information has been spread, Ashley in particular has been doxxed, harassed, spammed with explicit imagery and racial slurs. Many fans are calling for them to be fired, to boycott the movie, and sending death threats, including to those that are only involved by association. Michael and Ashley have issued apologies on Twitter. I happened upon a user on Tumblr that alleges to have started this whole thing. They claim to be a concerned (alleged) Black fan that was simply 'spreading awareness', with at least one other mutual + a friend of a friend whom they don't know. The earliest posts you will find on this topic will be from either one of us as we are the ones who began talking it first (...) Said early post is from March 27th, which is true that it is before the TADC theatrical release announcement (April 10th), thus it likely wasn't any conspiracy against the theatrical release. This does not mean that it isn't a hate campaign against the cast or crew, as these indie shows tend to inspire. The 'proof' includes a heavily edited clip of one of the nega jokes from the stream. It is a sped up tiktok brainrot style, extremely hard to make out what's being said, and coincidentally leaves out the context of where the whole 'nega' thing even started. This is their first post about TADC on their blog, in general, despite being an apparent fan. They are a faceless icon on a screen, so there's no telling that this user is even personally Black. They admit that they don't know that 'nega' is an actual not-racially-charged word to begin with. As soon as we saw the clip we dug for more context and began spreading awareness (...) I personally took a lot of time to message the TADC team and ask for them to address the situation in multiple ways on various platforms over the past month (...) As someone who's a concerned Black fan and supposedly not an anti running a hate campaign, I have to ask: Why? If the desired outcome wasn't to publicly shame them, then what would be the need to 'spread awareness'? If you weren't hoping that they'd be harassed en masse, then why does the public need to be 'made aware' of this information, which isn't hidden to begin with? Why are you spending a MONTH repeatedly contacting their bosses, if you aren't hoping that the TADC team fires them, or else be dubbed as complicit? Moreover, how does this help fight against anti-blackness, in any way? Sincerely. Why the urgency to 'deal' with this? Who did this interaction legitimately victimize, and how is this about helping them, as opposed to watching people you feel morally superior to squirm? What constructive result were you hoping to draw from this month of campaigning? As an added note: this user expressed absolutely zero sympathy to Ashley being doxxed, threatened, and barraged with actual racial slurs. Whatever this user's desired result was, it in fact victimized more people and spread more racism and heinous behavior, and it's not even a thought in their mind. The user in fact demands that everyone present during her stream should issue publicly apologies as well, for laughing at Ashley and Michael not using racial slurs. 😐😐😐 I hated Jax's character and now his voice actor Not exactly a ringing endorsement that you're a fan of the show that wasn't looking to drive a hate campaign against the cast and crew. Having opinions on characters doesn't make one an 'anti', but the fact that we're applying the actions of a fictional character to the person who performs him is not a good look. If we were sincere about racism as a topic, Jax and your opinion on him is not relevant. I personally spent a considerable amount of time answering questions, dealing with backlash and racism and anti-blackness from other people of color (...) Despite the importance stressed on spreading awareness on anti-blackness in fandom spaces, there is no proof of this on their blog. The only posts about TADC are about this drama, and they are the posts I've shown in the screenshots above. So, unless they mean elsewhere/they deleted it from their Tumblr for whatever reason, there is no indication that this user has been harassed for over a month over this. FAGMENTATION The final cherry on top is that, beneath these posts, the user has reblogged a bit where someone misspelled 'fragmentation' to accidentally include the f-slur. Others in the screenshot repeat it in humor. The hypocrisy is apparently lost on them. Now, whatever your thoughts on Michael and Ashley's use of a word or lack thereof is entirely up to you. I don't make this post under pretenses of telling you how you should feel. You're welcome to think it's weird, racist, warrants acknowledgment and apology, etc. There is nothing wrong about feeling a type of way about this interaction. However, since I happened upon it, I think it's fair to share where exactly this came from and under what intent. I think it's far, far worse to have spent a month stirring this pot, hoping it inspires some kind of harm upon the cast, and express not even a little bit concern over how it's done just that. I think it's worth it for people to see this context as they're deciding their own thoughts and feelings on the issue. submitted by /u/Successful-Buddy4667 to r/digitalcircusfandom [link] [comments]

I (47M) have a bit of a problem. I have a daughter (20 F), and my wife is 46F. She isn't my daughter's biological mother, but has been in her life since she was 13 years old. Her mother and I divorced when she was 12 due to her alcoholism. For about a year now, my daughter has got it in her head that she'll marry a billionaire, and that it will be the only way that she can be happy in this life. I can only speculate that she has got this idea from social media. She's not doing great in school at the moment, and all she talks about it marrying a billionaire, how she thinks she can meet one, what type of house they'll have, how she'll be in a private jet, etc. And she is trying to take the steps to make this happen, which has me worried. I've found out that she has, for example, spent time in hotel lobbies/bars, having a drink, trying to pick up older guys. Mind you, we do not come from poverty, and she has never experienced financial insecurity. But we are definitely not billionaires. My wife has a brother who is very well off, and my daughter has actively tried to get closer to him and his family in the pursuit of wealth. It got to the point where she ended up sharing selfies from the family house on social media, and now she's not allowed in there anymore due to the violation of their privacy. She has pulled similar stunts with other friends and family who have even a bit of a more lavish lifestyle. She also has tried to message some of my own work associated who are in a more 'glamorous' position at work than I am, and I had to find out from them after they shared what my daughter had been sending them on LinkedIn, out of all platforms. She had been sending suggestive stuff to them, and asked one of them to buy her fancy Jewelry. My daughter isn't stupid. She always has done well in school until recently (her performance is very bad at the moment), got into a good university, and is proficient in multiple languages. She also wrote a book when she was 16, and made it quite successful even. But something has happened that has made her so obsessed with money, and I have no idea what it is. She is temporarily staying with us for some weeks as shes looking for a new apartment, and for the past 4-5 days, this entire thing has had her so depressed that she hasn't got out of her bed, and keeps crying out because she doesn't have a billionaire boyfriend/husband and has to stay in places that are not as glamorous as she'd like. She cries like someone has died, and it sounds like intense grief. Every morning, we wake up to her sobbing in her room. I've tried talking to her, and have tried the loving approach of comforting her, and telling her that one day she'll find someone who loves her as much as I do. It hasn't been good enough, and she'll say nasty things like "Yeah but he'll probably be broke so I don't care". I then took a more direct approach and told her that there's only a very tiny fraction of the world's population who are billionaires, and most of them tend to marry each other (or are married already), so the statistical odds of this billionaire romance happening for her are practically zero. My wife thought I was being an asshole by being so direct with her, and that "I didn't have to ruin it for her like that". She tried defending her by saying that my daughter is still young, and that I should allow her to have her fantasies. But I just don't agree. Everyone can dream, sure, but the fact that she has already violated the boundaries of multiple people, and that this situation is getting so on top of her that it's affecting her academic performance, means that something needs to be done. This cannot be healthy in the long term. Plus her trying to talk to much older men is just dangerous, and I really worry that she's going to end up hurt. So AITAH for this approach? Edit: I've reached out to therapists, and I'm also going through my daughter's social media at the moment, which is all public. I am trying to find any glaring red flags that may put her in danger. Will update later. Thanks everyone for your suggestions aside from those who just provided a list of ways to marry rich. What happened to love? As someone pointed out, yes, love alone does not pay the bills, but what is so wrong with looking for a partner that has a stable income doing what they love? Stability is not only found in the riches. Why does this person even have to be incredibly rich? Maybe I am just being a weird old person here, but I am honestly astounded that this attitude is so common these days. I feel bad for the tiktok generation. Edit/update: It hasn't been many hours since my initial post but I am honestly trying to process everything, and I think writing this will help me. So it's Sunday, so there has been 0 response from the medical professionals I contacted. No updates there. If my daughter wants to go to therapy, I will 100% support it, and pay for it. Speaking of, many people here have blamed me for enabling my daughter. I am not quite sure how to feel about it yet. I have paid for her studies, her rent, and travel in case if she wants to go abroad to see her cousin who she is close with (and who I believe is an excellent wonderful role model, she's a successful woman who I think my daughter should definitely look up to). I do not pay for my daughter's luxuries. She has asked for me to get her designer things and trips to places like Monaco previously, and I've told her that she needs to get a job as a tutor or something similar if she wants fancy things, because she needs to understand the value of money. I have however bought her luxuries like an iPhone, a tablet, and a Macbook, but with the condition that she uses them to improve her life (i.e., using them at university to complete assignments). So, I have some things to share now that I feel may be relevant. One was that I did a thorough check of her TikTok and Instagram. She had multiple profiles, but she always followed herself, so I managed to find those. And yes, she had reposted some alarming content from various female influencers. A lot of them surprisingly were rather misogynistic, just packaged in a glamorous way. Lots of women saying things like "A rich man will choose a poor but skinny waitress instead of an overweight CEO". She had been actively reposting content of women's shopping hauls of what their rich boyfriend/husband got them. Lots of stuff about how men cannot love, and how women should look like to get a rich guy. There are some videos she liked to repost in particular where a woman just screams at her camera, telling her viewers to "wake up" and "stop dating brokies". Just horrible toxic stuff that will rot your brain. She also had posts of her own from expensive restaurants among other places where I can only assume guys had taken her out on dates. And I don't mean a 60€ steakhouse. I mean restaurants where they serve 11 course meals can cost at least 200€ per person. As she's not employed, I know for sure she's not paying for that herself. She also had a post where she explained, alarmingly, that women who want a handsome guy are "trashy" because real "high-value" (as she called it) women go for a man's resources, not looks. It was absolutely bizarre seeing her talk like that. Then there was something even more alarming. She had written a post that implied she's subscribed to some course that is supposed to make her rich and famous. Some "content creator club". Basically, as I understood it, she had paid 500€ out of her savings/the money I had given her to some Russian creator whose entire online persona revolves around provider men and her "glow up". The 500€ went to coaching sessions with said creator where she was teaching my daughter the tricks to make money on social media. It sounded like a giant scam, in all honesty. The woman seemed rather crappy as well, proudly accepting big amounts of money from desperate girls who wanted to be famous/rich. How do I know this? My daughter had several posts about it, that were all set to public (which is no longer the case, as I've asked her to make her social media private, which she thankfully has agreed to). Anyway. Then came the talk. I finally spoke to my daughter. I told her that first and foremost, she's an adult and gets to make adult choices, and whatever she does, and whoever she dates, is up to her. That said, I told her that I was concerned about her. I tried to gently ask what kind of guys she goes on dates with, and that of course she doesn't have to tell me, but if we can have an open dialogue, I think it would make both of us feel better. She did end up admitting that she goes out with much older guys, who are between 30 and 60 years old. As a dad, as much as I felt grossed out, I wanted her to feel safe to tell me, as if anything ever happens, she can come to me. I asked her why she's so keen on having a much older rich guy, and what that may bring in her life that she doesn't already have. She just mentioned the private jet, shopping trips, a big house. I told her that while those things certainly can be fun, it's not worth risking her autonomy and education for that stuff, particularly because the chance that she'll end up with someone who will financially abuse her is quite high. Well, she sort of just thought she's too smart to be taken advantage of. Go figure. I brought up a lot of bad things that can happen, and asked if she had read anything about the E-files. She hadn't. I told her that there are numerous of reports of women and girls ending up in really bad situations. It went right over her head as well. I then asked why she had been sobbing, if she feels depressed, etc, and she finally broke down in tears again. I asked if something had happened that she didn't want to tell me about, and she said yes. I froze. I thought of the worst that a dad can think of, and contemplated to go and grab a baseball bat. But nope, it was something different. She sobbed for good 15 minutes without being able to say a word, but I patiently waited until she could. She told me that around a year ago, her and her friend snuck to a party together in one of these fancy hotels. Her friend apparently is also into the whole "provider man" dating trend. They had fun, had some food and drinks there, and according to my daughter, "all the men were only into her friend", and a guy she had been eyeing for the whole night ended up asking for her friend's number instead. This then repeated multiple times over several months, where her friend would get approached instead of her. Then a little later, the girls found out that there actually was some guy who was a few years older at the university, in their program, who actually was the son of a multi-millionaire. It became a huge fight between my daughter and her friend where they began both trying to get the guy. This girl, who my daughter thought was her friend, started then spreading nasty rumors about my daughter, and also had tried sabotaging her weight loss, as my daughter has always struggled with her weight. Her now former friend is now in a serious relationship with this guy, and as a result, my daughter feels like she was "robbed" of a potentially good future with him. She also said that she feels so jealous all the time of her friend that it's consuming her. I was a bit confused. That was all? I even asked my daughter multiple times that this was all that happened, and that no one had ever done anything to her against her consent, but no, that wasn't the case. She even went as far as to tell me that she's not even active, if you know what I mean. Sure, bullying can be traumatic, but my daughter's reaction still seems indicative of something else. She wants to continue at the university, and has told me she will try again to pass some of the courses she hasn't passed yet, but doesn't seem to take it as seriously as she probably should. So all in all, not sure where to go from here. My daughter has thankfully agreed to speak to a therapist. So that's good news. That's all for now. TLDR: Daughter is freaking out because she's worried she won't ever be married to a billionaire. Her social media is alarming, filled with content that I wasn't super happy to see. Wouldn't tell me what's wrong, then finally broke down that it's all because her friend stole a rich guy from her that she had a crush on. submitted by /u/No_Reception8930 to r/AITAH [link] [comments]

like i’m actually convinced her wants whitney so bad. all he’s admitting in this video is that him and jen are producer plants and are productions b****. at the end of the day he is a grown man and he chose to pull up on whitney at a cafe. what about all the mean things he said about her when it was him, jen, and the camera ppl alone and he was calling whitney a narcissist and a parasite? did production make u say that too? what about when he was reposting mean videos about whitney on tiktok and then unreposted after he got called out? did production make you do that also? submitted by /u/Sensitive_Customer74 to r/SecretsOfMormonWives [link] [comments]

Hi everyone, first time here and I want to share some insights that I believe can truly help people and shed some light on the problem. Now, I expect that some people won't like what I have to say. That's fine, I am open to criticism and discussion, I am ready to work together to solve the problems we face. I have noticed that a lot of posts here concentrate on race issue and biological/aspect of the addiction to bnwo. I can't say that all those people are wrong, but, really, they are concentrating on the wrong things. The racism is really symptomatic in bnwo, it's just a form of expression, an excuse to have certain negative feeling, kinda. As a matter of fact, most addicts of this fetish are not racist in their everyday live and even in their true believes. The dopamine stuff is, of course, true, but that’s not the reason why people get hooked on this fetish in the first place. The BNWO is a fetish of gaslighting, betrayal and self-hatred. It’s a social phenomenon that mostly affects men and has cultural roots. Some of the boiled down narratives of this fetish are: “ she told you she loves you, but then fucks somebody else”, “she told you hight/ dick size doesn’t matter and then choses a tall/hung (balck) guy”, “she told you she cares about emotion and romance, wants kids and family, but then she want to get gangbanged or smth”. It’s “ oh, what a fool I was” kind of fetish. How does it originate? I believe it starts at feeling you are not normal, inadequate. You then assign some failure in life to your inadequacy (being short, coward, fat, small dick, etc). And now we come to the really controversial part, my hot take – the reaction of society to these problems when they are voiced by men is what really sparks this fetish. Basically, you get 2 options: the right tells you “ yes, you are, in fact, inferior men cause you’re short, go get taller and then you’ll get girls”; the left says “oh, girls would date you despite being short”, implying that yes, you are inferior men cause your short, but women are so gracious and mature, they will overlook that flow if you are a good boy, respect women and you are ready to be good house husband. None of the sides tells you, that you are a normal, valid and valuable human being, and that all that crap actually, for real for real, doesn’t matter (literally). None of them tell you can demand love, respect and experience the life to the extant that you want the way you are. The feeling of inadequacy in men is further aggravated by tiktok and reals, where motivational right-wing coaches tell you, you’re shit, not good enough, not tough enough and that you are the reason for your suffering and should change yourself. The left says how men are dumb, can’t find clit, are terrible in bad and so on. It’s further worsed by the left saying “ yes, you are terrible in bed and not manly at all, but women don’t care about all those manly things”, and then proceed to fall for the guys with all those “manly things”. Now, there is nothing wrong with falling for manly things (tall, rich guys), and falling for them doesn’t mean you can’t care about romance, emotions and platonic connections. The point is, it’s the wrong message. None of the sides tell you are good enough the way you are. They all sell you self-improvement. The right says “bitch, ur ugly, go get jacked” and the left says “ bitch, ur ugly, go respect some women immediately and admit that men are scum to get a chance at a gf”. Honestly, I have a lot more stuff to say on the topic, but this is already a lot. The key take away – we need to help men feel like they are normal, good enough and should make themselves their first priority in life. I hope I managed to express my thoughts in clear manner and that you find this perspective useful / helpful / valuable. That said, I know some folks might not like what I had to say – I am open for constructive criticism. submitted by /u/Current_Response6628 to r/Anti_BNWO [link] [comments]

EDIT/UPDATE: New post and research at https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rtd51g/update_i_pulled_irs_filings_for_the_org_that/ Website: https://tboteproject.com Support Findings: https://tboteproject.com/donate/ Repository: https://tboteproject.com/git/hekate/attestation-findings I've been pulling public records on the wave of "age verification" bills moving through US state legislatures. IRS 990 filings, Senate lobbying disclosures, state ethics databases, campaign finance records, corporate registries, WHOIS lookups, Wayback Machine archives. What started as curiosity about who was pushing these bills turned into documenting a coordinated influence operation that, from a privacy standpoint, is building surveillance infrastructure at the operating system level while the company behind it faces zero new requirements for its own platforms. I want to be clear about what this is and isn't. I am not the author of the earlier r/linux post by aaronsb and I'm not affiliated with them. I titled this to draw attention on this subreddit because the privacy implications go well beyond Linux. Every source cited here is a public record. What the bills actually require you to hand over Most reporting on these bills says something vague like "age checks at device setup." The statutory language is more specific and more invasive than that. California AB-1043, signed October 2025 and effective January 1, 2027, defines "Operating system provider" under Section 1798.500(g) as "a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device." Every OS provider must then: provide an interface at account setup collecting a birth date or age, and expose a real-time API that broadcasts the user's age bracket (under 13, 13 to 15, 16 to 17, 18+) to any application running on the system. Read that again. Every app on your device gets to query a system-level API that returns your age bracket in real time. This isn't age verification at the point of accessing restricted content. This is a persistent age-broadcasting service baked into the operating system itself, queryable by every installed application. Colorado SB26-051 (passed the Senate 28-7, now in the House) copies the same definitions in the same order, same penalty structure ($2,500 per child for negligent violations, $7,500 for intentional ones), same exemptions. The template is the ICMEC "Digital Age Assurance Act," and it's been introduced or is pending in Illinois (three separate bills), New York, Kansas, South Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, Florida, and at the federal level. New York's S8102A goes further. It requires device manufacturers to perform "commercially reasonable and technically feasible age assurance" at device activation and explicitly bans self-reporting. The AG picks the approved methods. That means biometric age estimation or government ID verification before you can use a device you purchased. Exemptions in all of these bills cover broadband ISPs, telecom services, and physical products. None contain any exemption for open-source software, non-commercial projects, or privacy-preserving verification methods. The status right now: State Bill Status CA AB-1043 Enacted, effective Jan 1, 2027 CO SB26-051 Passed Senate, in House committee LA HB-570 Enacted, effective July 1, 2026 UT SB-142 Enacted, first in nation TX SB-2420 Enjoined by federal judge NY S8102A Pending IL HB-3304, HB-4140, SB-2037 Pending Federal KOSA, ASAA Pending The privacy architecture these bills create What's concerning about these bills is they don't just verify age once. They create persistent identity layer inside the operating system that applications can query at will. The commercial age verification vendors who would provide this infrastructure (Yoti, Veriff, Jumio) charge $0.10 to $2.00 per check, require proprietary SDKs, demand API keys tied to commercial accounts, and operate cloud-only with no self-hosted option. Your age verification data goes to a third-party cloud service. Every time. Compare this to what the EU built. The EU Digital Identity Wallet under eIDAS 2.0 has a reference implementation published under Apache 2.0/EUPL and uses selective disclosure credentials. A user can prove they fall within an age bracket without handing over their date of birth. The EU's Digital Services Act puts age verification obligations on Very Large Online Platforms (45M+ monthly users), not on operating systems. FOSS projects that don't act as intermediary services are explicitly outside scope. Micro and small enterprises get additional exemptions. The EU approach is not without its own problems. The reference code is open, but the operational system is not self-hostable. You cannot run your own trusted identity provider. The wallet apps require Google Play Services or the iOS equivalent, which locks out users of privacy-focused Android distributions like GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, and LineageOS. Device attestation requirements effectively ban rooted or jailbroken devices. The zero-knowledge proof privacy guarantees only hold if you trust that credential issuers and verifiers are not colluding to correlate your activity. ZKP is a cryptographic mechanism, not a trust architecture, and it cannot solve the problem of collusion between parties in the chain. Even with those caveats, the architectural gap between the two approaches is wide. The EU model does not create a persistent age-broadcasting API at the OS level. It does not mandate commercial vendors. It does not force biometric data into a third-party cloud on every check. The US bills assume every operating system is built by a corporation with the infrastructure and revenue to absorb these costs. The EU started from the opposite assumption and built accordingly. EU approach US bills Who's regulated Platforms with 45M+ users FOSS exemption Yes, five separate mechanisms Verification method Open-source wallet, zero-knowledge proofs Cost to non-commercial projects $0 Privacy architecture Selective disclosure, privacy by design Works offline Yes Who wrote the legislation This is where it gets interesting. Rep. Kim Carver (R-Bossier City), the sponsor of Louisiana's HB-570, publicly confirmed that a Meta lobbyist brought the legislative language directly to her. The bill as drafted required only app stores (Apple, Google) to verify user ages. It did not require social media platforms to do anything. Meta deployed 12 lobbyists across 9 confirmed firms for this single bill, paying at least $324,992 (described as a "very conservative estimate"). The confirmed firms include Pelican State Partners (who also lobby for Roblox, letting Meta frame this as "broad industry support" rather than one company's project), Adams and Reese LLP (the #1 ranked Louisiana government affairs firm), and State Capitol Solutions. Nicole Lopez, Meta's Director of Global Litigation Strategy for Youth, testified at the House Commerce Committee in support. She also testified in South Dakota for a similar bill. She's Meta's national point person for these laws. HB-570 passed unanimously at every stage: House 99-0, Senate 39-0. So why did Meta need 12 lobbyists? Because the votes were never the concern. The lobbyists were there to control the text and block amendments. The key amendment battle came from Senator Jay Morris, who expanded the bill to include app developers alongside app stores after Google's senior director of government affairs publicly questioned why "Mark Zuckerberg is so keen on passing these bills." When Morris introduced his amendment, Meta went silent. The conference committee compromise maintained dual responsibility but kept the primary burden on app stores, which is what Meta wanted from the start. At that same Senate hearing, Morris directly questioned DCA Executive Director Casey Stefanski about who funds her organization. She reportedly deflected, said she "wasn't comfortable answering," then under continued pressure admitted tech companies provide funding but refused to name them. The advocacy group that doesn't legally exist The Digital Childhood Alliance presents itself as a coalition of 50+ conservative child safety organizations (later inflated to 140+, though only six have ever been publicly named). It has been testifying in favor of these bills across states. Here is what public records show about its legal status: I searched all four regional extracts of the IRS Exempt Organizations Business Master File (eo1 through eo4.csv), which cover every tax-exempt organization registered in the United States. DCA is not there. No EIN exists for this organization. I also searched for incorporation records in Colorado, DC, Delaware, and Virginia, plus OpenCorporates (200M+ companies), ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, GuideStar, and Charity Navigator. No incorporation record exists in any of them. DCA's domain was registered December 18, 2024 through GoDaddy with privacy protection and a four-year registration. The website was live and fully formed one day later: professional design, statistics, testimonials from Heritage Foundation and NCOSE staff, ASAA talking points already loaded. This is not a grassroots launch. This is a staging deployment of a pre-built site. 77 days later, Utah SB-142 became the first ASAA law signed in the country. DCA processes donations through For Good (formerly Network for Good, EIN 68-0480736), which is a Donor Advised Fund. For Good explicitly states in its documentation that it serves "501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations." DCA claims 501(c)(4) status. DCA is classified as a "Project" (ID 258136) in the For Good system, not as a standalone nonprofit. I searched all 59,736 For Good grant recipients across five years, roughly $1.73 billion in disbursements. Zero grants to DCA, DCI, NCOSE, or any related entity. The donation page appears to be cosmetic. Bloomberg reporters exposed Meta as a DCA funder in July 2025. The Deseret News detailed the arrangement in December 2025. No version of the website, across 100+ Wayback Machine snapshots, has ever disclosed funding sources. Every blog post and testimony targets Apple and Google. Meta is never mentioned or criticized. DCA's leadership traces directly to NCOSE (National Center on Sexual Exploitation): Casey Stefanski, Executive Director, spent 10 years at NCOSE as Senior Director of Global Partnerships. Unusually, she never appears on any NCOSE 990 filing as an officer, key employee, or among the five highest-compensated staff. A senior director title at a $5.4M organization for a decade with no 990 appearance suggests either below-threshold compensation, an inflated title, or something else about the arrangement. Dawn Hawkins, DCA's Chair, simultaneously serves as CEO of NCOSE. John Read, DCA's Senior Policy Advisor, spent 30 years at the DOJ Antitrust Division investigating app stores and Big Tech. NCOSE's own 501(c)(4) structure turns out to be complicated. Tracing Schedule R filings across four years reveals that NCOSE created "NCOSE Action" (EIN 86-2458921) as a c4 in 2021, reclassified it from c4 to c3 in 2022, then created an entirely new c4 called "Institute for Public Policy" (EIN 88-1180705) in 2023 with the same address and the same principal officer (Marcel van der Watt). By 2024 the original entity had disappeared from Schedule R entirely. Despite NCOSE's website describing NCOSEAction as "created by NCOSE," and Schedule R listing the Institute as a "controlled organization," all 19 transaction indicators between NCOSE and the Institute are marked "No." No grants, no shared employees, no shared facilities, no reimbursements. Zero reported transactions between a parent and its own controlled c4 while staff move freely between them. Concurrently, NCOSE's lobbying spending tripled from $78,000 to $204,000, coinciding with DCA's launch and the ASAA legislative push. $70M+ in super PACs, deliberately fragmented Meta poured over $70 million into state-level super PACs and structured every one to avoid the FEC's centralized, searchable database: Entity Meta's contribution Type Notable detail ATEP $45M Bipartisan 527 PAC Co-led by Hilltop Public Solutions META California $20M State PAC Chaired by Brian Rice, Meta VP of Public Policy California Leads $5M State PAC Union-partnered Forge the Future Downstream from ATEP State PAC (TX) Policy priorities mirror ASAA language Making Our Tomorrow Downstream from ATEP State PAC (IL) Also chaired by Brian Rice By registering every PAC at the state level rather than federally, Meta scatters filings across dozens of state ethics commission databases with different formats, different disclosure timelines, and no centralized search. Each filing is technically public. Aggregating them into a coherent picture requires manually querying each state. This is structural opacity by fragmentation. Forge the Future's stated policy priorities include: "Empowering parents with oversight of children's online activities across devices and digital environments." That is functionally identical to the ASAA framing. Of 20 Meta-backed candidates across Texas and North Carolina primaries, 19 won (Washington Post, March 12, 2026). The firm that bridges both tracks This is the finding that connects two things I'd been tracking separately. Hilltop Public Solutions, a Democratic consulting firm, shows up in three distinct contexts: Co-leads ATEP, Meta's $45M bipartisan super PAC Involved in DCA's messaging coordination, per investigative reporting Connected to Forge the Future, the downstream Texas PAC with ASAA-aligned policy priorities This makes Hilltop the first confirmed entity bridging Meta's political spending operation and the DCA advocacy campaign. The firm helping Meta elect "tech-friendly" state legislators also coordinates messaging for the nominally independent grassroots organization pushing those legislators to pass ASAA. The dark money network Meta's Colorado lobbying runs through Headwaters Strategies, paid $338,500 since 2019, with monthly payments jumping from roughly $5K/month to $14K-$30K/month starting July 2023 as state-level age verification bills accelerated. Headwaters co-founder Adam Eichberg simultaneously serves as a registered Meta lobbyist in Colorado, as Chair of the Board of the New Venture Fund (the flagship entity of the Arabella Advisors network, $669M revenue), and as founding board member of the Windward Fund (another Arabella entity, $311M revenue). The Arabella network operates four entities from the same building at 1828 L Street NW, Washington DC, with combined annual revenue exceeding $1.3 billion. NVF transfers $121.3M per year to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a 501(c)(4) with no donor disclosure requirements. I parsed the IRS Form 990 Schedule I filings across all five Arabella entities. That's 4,433 grants totaling approximately $2.0 billion. I searched for every child safety, age verification, and tech policy organization I could identify. Zero matches. The Schedule I grant pathway is definitively ruled out. If Meta money flows through this network, it would have to travel via fiscal sponsorship, consulting fees, or non-grant payments, which are inherently less transparent. The Eichberg connection matters not because it proves a pipeline, but because the person receiving Meta's lobbying payments chairs the governance structure of the largest anonymous-donor-funded advocacy network in US politics. That structural overlap is documented regardless of whether money moves through it. The company that benefits Meta's own Horizon OS (powering Quest VR headsets) already has Meta Account age verification, a Get Age Category API, Family Center parental controls, Quest Store age ratings, and default minor account protections. I scored Horizon OS at 83% compliance readiness with these mandates. Meta is not opposing these bills. In Colorado, I pulled lobbying records from the Secretary of State's SODA API and found Meta's four registered lobbyists on SB26-051 listed in a "Monitoring" position. Not amending, not opposing. Watching. On every social media regulation bill in Colorado, Meta takes an "Amending" position, actively fighting changes. Across 117 lobbying records on 22 bills: Bills regulating social media: Meta position is "Amending" (fighting) The one bill putting the burden on OS providers: Meta position is "Monitoring" (watching) Meta fights bills that regulate Meta. Meta watches bills that regulate everyone else. In California, Meta spent over $1 million on state lobbying in the first three quarters of 2025 and publicly supported AB-1043, breaking ranks with its own trade associations (TechNet and Chamber of Progress both opposed it). Meta supported a bill that creates surveillance infrastructure at the OS level while leaving social media platforms untouched. Meta's LD-2 filings with the Senate explicitly list H.R. 3149/S. 1586, the App Store Accountability Act, as a lobbied bill. The filing narrative includes "protecting children, bullying prevention and online safety; youth safety and federal parental approval; youth restrictions on social media." In the same filing, Meta also lobbies on KOSA and COPPA 2.0, which would regulate Meta directly. Meta supports the bill that burdens its competitors and lobbies to weaken the bills that burden itself. Both positions appear in the same quarterly disclosure. The privacy questions I've tried to present findings here, not conclusions. But from a privacy standpoint: Why does the company that profits from collecting user data draft legislation requiring every operating system to collect age data and broadcast it to every installed application via a system-level API? Why do these bills mandate commercial age verification vendors (Yoti, Veriff, Jumio) whose business model is collecting biometric data, while the EU's equivalent uses open-source zero-knowledge proofs that reveal nothing beyond "over 18"? Why is there no data minimization requirement in any of these bills for the age verification data itself? AB-1043 creates a persistent age signal API. Who governs what happens to the data flowing through it? Why does Meta fund an advocacy group with no legal existence in the IRS system to push legislation that creates new data collection infrastructure at a layer below Meta's own products, while Meta faces zero new requirements? Why does the company whose lobbyist drafted one of these bills write it to specifically exclude social media platforms from the age verification mandate? If the goal is child safety, why regulate the operating system, which has no direct contact with children, instead of the social media platforms where the documented harm occurs? What you can do If you're in CO, IL, or NY, these bills are still in committee. Comment on the record. System76's CEO met with the Colorado bill's sponsor on March 9 and the sponsor suggested excluding open-source software. The conversation is happening now. Contact the EFF, FSF, and Software Freedom Conservancy with the specific statutory language and compliance gap numbers. They need to know these definitions cover volunteer-maintained software with no exemption. Read the actual bill text. CA AB-1043 is searchable on leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. CO SB26-051 is on leg.colorado.gov. The definitions are what matter, not the news summaries. If you maintain software that could be classified as an "operating system provider" under these definitions, start thinking about your response now. CA AB-1043 takes effect January 1, 2027. Louisiana HB-570 takes effect July 1, 2026. Sources (all public records) Bill text: CA AB-1043 (Chapter 675, leginfo.legislature.ca.gov), CO SB26-051 (leg.colorado.gov), LA HB-570 Act 481 of 2025 (legis.la.gov), NY S8102A (nysenate.gov), TX SB-2420, UT SB-142 (le.utah.gov) Federal lobbying: OpenSecrets Meta profile (opensecrets.org, client ID D000033563), Senate LDA filing UUID b73445ed-15e5-42e7-a1e8-aeb224755267 Colorado lobbying: CO Secretary of State SODA API (data.colorado.gov, datasets vp65-spyn, dxfk-9ifj, df5p-p6jt) Louisiana lobbying: LA Board of Ethics, F Minus database (fminus.org/clients/pelican-state-partners-llc/, fminus.org/clients/meta-platforms-inc/) California lobbying: CalAccess (cal-access.sos.ca.gov), Bloomberg Government Super PACs: Forge the Future (texasforgefuturepac.com), Texas Ethics Commission, Illinois State Board of Elections, Politico (Feb 2, 2026), Washington Post (Mar 12, 2026) DCA records: WHOIS/RDAP (rdap.org), Wayback Machine CDX API (100+ snapshots), IRS EO BMF (eo1-eo4.csv), OpenCorporates, ProPublica, GuideStar NCOSE: IRS Form 990 FY2020-FY2024 including Schedule R; NCOSEAction/Institute for Public Policy (EIN 88-1180705); original NCOSE Action (EIN 86-2458921) via Schedule R history For Good/Network for Good: forgood.org, DCA donation page source (targetable_type=Project, targetable_id=258136), For Good 990s via ProPublica (EIN 68-0480736, 59,736 recipients searched) IRS 990 filings: ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer: NVF (EIN 20-5806345), STF 2024 (sixteenthirtyfund.org), DCI (EIN 39-3684798), Windward, Hopewell, North Fund, NCOSE (EIN 13-2608326), ConnectSafely (EIN 47-3168168) Campaign finance: CO TRACER bulk data (tracer.sos.colorado.gov), FollowTheMoney.org, FEC API (Meta PAC C00502906) Reporting: Bloomberg (July 2025), Deseret News (Dec 2025), The Center Square, ACT | The App Association, Dome Politics, Pluribus News, Nola.com, Privacy Daily EU framework: EUR-Lex (Digital Services Act, eIDAS 2.0 Regulation), EUDIW GitHub repository, T-Scy consortium Technical: freedesktop.org, GNOME/KDE documentation, Meta developer docs (developer.meta.com/horizon) Full dataset, OSINT tasklist, and all processed findings are published with sources embedded in each file: github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings This is an ongoing investigation. Pending: Texas Ethics Commission records for Forge the Future expenditure recipients, NCOSEAction's first 990 filing, IRS Form 8872 for ATEP, and FOIA responses from Colorado and Louisiana. If you have access to lobbying data from states I haven't covered (IL, NY, UT, GA), I'd appreciate a heads up. I am not claiming Meta wrote every one of these bills. Louisiana is confirmed by the sponsor; the others use a shared ICMEC template. I am not claiming there is a direct Arabella-to-DCA funding pipeline; I checked $2 billion in grants and found no evidence. I am not claiming child safety isn't a legitimate concern. What I am documenting is: the company whose lobbyist drafted HB-570 wrote it to exclude its own platforms; the advocacy group pushing these bills nationally has no legal existence and is confirmed funded by Meta; the same consulting firm bridges Meta's super PAC and DCA's messaging; none of these bills exempt open-source or non-commercial software while the EU equivalent does; and the mandatory age-signal API creates persistent surveillance infrastructure at the OS level with no data minimization requirements. The records are above. Draw your own conclusions. This section documents what happened when this investigation was posted to Reddit, and provides context on Meta's documented history of using astroturfing, coordinated reporting, and platform manipulation to suppress unfavorable content. What happened The original version of this investigation was posted to r/linux, where it was mass reported and pulled down pending moderator review (150 upvotes, roughly 15k views before being pulled down some 40 minutes after being posted) The content that was suppressed names Meta lobbying firms, traces documented payments, cites Senate LD-2 filings, and links to IRS records. It identifies Hilltop Public Solutions as the first confirmed entity bridging Meta's $45M super PAC and the DCA astroturf campaign. This is the kind of content that a well-resourced actor would have reason to suppress. I cannot prove the mass reports were coordinated rather than organic. That is the point of the tactic: Reddit's infrastructure makes it impossible to distinguish genuine community objections from manufactured ones, and it rewards the behavior either way by automatically removing the content. Meta has done this before In March 2022, the Washington Post reported that Meta hired Targeted Victory, one of the largest Republican consulting firms in the country, to run a nationwide astroturfing campaign against TikTok. Internal emails obtained by the Post showed the campaign: Placed op-eds and letters to the editor in regional news outlets across the country, none of which disclosed the connection to Meta or Targeted Victory Promoted stories about dangerous TikTok "trends" that had actually originated on Facebook Pushed local politicians and political reporters to frame TikTok as a threat to children In an internal email, a campaign director wrote that the "dream would be to get stories with headlines like 'From dances to danger: how TikTok has become the most harmful social media space for kids'" Meta's spokesman defended the campaign by saying "all platforms should face a level of scrutiny consistent with their growing success." Meta did not deny hiring the firm or directing the campaign. The story was confirmed by the Washington Post, Fortune, Variety, CBS News, Engadget, Tortoise Media, the Boston Globe, and Techdirt, among others. This is not speculation about what Meta might do. This is what Meta has been publicly documented doing: hiring firms to plant stories, manufacture public concern about competitors using child safety as the framing, and conceal the corporate origin of the messaging. The Targeted Victory campaign and the DCA campaign use the same playbook: fund an outside entity to push messaging that serves Meta's commercial interests while hiding Meta's involvement. Reddit's bot and astroturfing problem is structural Research published in Nature (Scientific Reports) documented coordinated political astroturfing patterns across platforms including Reddit. A separate study found that at least 15% of content in surveyed subreddits was posted by corporate trolls or bot accounts designed to manipulate public opinion. Since June 2025, bot networks have been systematically exploiting Reddit and Meta's own moderation systems through mass reporting. Thousands of legitimate Facebook groups were deleted after coordinated bot reports triggered automated enforcement. The same mass-reporting tactic works on Reddit: a small number of accounts can file reports, trigger automated removal, and flag the poster's account for site-wide spam filtering, all without engaging with the content. Venture-backed firms like Doublespeed now offer astroturfing-as-a-service across Reddit, TikTok, and Instagram, operating physical phone farms to bypass platform detection. The infrastructure for suppressing content through coordinated inauthentic behavior is commercially available. What this means for this investigation Meta spent $26.3 million on federal lobbying in 2025 and deployed 86+ lobbyists across 45 states. It funded a nationally active advocacy group (DCA) with no legal existence in the IRS system. It hired Hilltop Public Solutions to simultaneously run its $45M super PAC and coordinate DCA's messaging. It previously hired Targeted Victory to run a covert astroturfing campaign against TikTok using child safety as the narrative frame. This investigation documents all of that with primary sources. A post containing those findings was mass reported on Reddit within hours and suppressed site-wide by automated systems. Whether the reports were organic or coordinated, the outcome is the same: the content was removed from the platform where Meta has both the motive and the documented capability to suppress it. The research is published in a git repository with every source embedded. It does not depend on Reddit's infrastructure to survive. Sources Washington Post, "Facebook paid Republican strategy firm to malign TikTok" (March 30, 2022): https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/ Fortune, "Meta paid a Republican consulting firm to turn the public against TikTok" (March 31, 2022): https://fortune.com/2022/03/31/facebook-meta-paid-republican-consulting-firm-targeted-victory-turn-public-opinion-against-tiktok/ Variety, "Facebook Parent Company Defends Its PR Campaign to Portray TikTok as Threat to American Children" (March 31, 2022): https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/meta-facebook-tiktok-pr-campaign-1235218866/ Techdirt, "Facebook-Hired PR Firm Coordinated Anti-TikTok Campaign To Spread Bogus Moral Panics" (March 31, 2022): https://www.techdirt.com/2022/03/31/facebook-hired-pr-firm-coordinated-anti-tiktok-campaign-to-spread-bogus-moral-panics/ Tortoise Media, "Meta 'astroturfed' TikTok" (April 5, 2022): https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2022/04/05/meta-astroturfed-tiktok CBS News, "Report: Facebook Hired PR Firm To Smear TikTok": https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/report-facebook-hired-pr-firm-to-smear-tiktok/ Engadget, "Meta reportedly paid political consultants to smear TikTok": https://www.engadget.com/meta-targeted-victory-tiktok-smear-campaign-133139892.html Boston Globe, "Facebook paid GOP firm to malign TikTok, internal e-mails reveal" (March 30, 2022): https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/03/30/business/facebook-paid-gop-firm-malign-tiktok-internal-e-mails-reveal/ Georgetown Free Speech Project, "Facebook hires GOP consulting firm to smear rival TikTok": https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/tracker-entries/facebook-hires-gop-consulting-firm-in-dc-area-to-smear-rival-tiktok/ Nature Scientific Reports, "Coordination patterns reveal online political astroturfing across the world" (2022): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-08404-9 Medium/HR News, "Study: At Least 15% of All Reddit Content is Corporate Trolls": https://medium.com/@hrnews1/study-at-least-15-of-all-reddit-content-is-corporate-trolls-trying-to-manipulate-public-opinion-49cb302c26a5 TechCrunch, "Facebook Group admins complain of mass bans" (June 24, 2025): https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/24/facebook-group-admins-complain-of-mass-bans-meta-says-its-fixing-the-problem/ YNet News, "Public opinion for sale: The new startup causing a storm" (Doublespeed): https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/hyraenbmzx Meta Transparency Center, "Inauthentic Behavior" policy: https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/inauthentic-behavior/ The Hacker News, "Meta Disrupts Influence Ops Targeting Romania, Azerbaijan, and Taiwan" (May 2025): https://thehackernews.com/2025/05/meta-disrupts-influence-ops-targeting.html submitted by /u/Ok_Lingonberry3296 to r/linux [link] [comments]

Hello! It has been a wild ride from our last post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/1rmib59/we_scraped_the_doj_epstein_library_for_all_files/ We first need to thank each and everyone of you that supported us in any way or form. Thank you, it meant the world for us. We worked around the clock and are proud to announce that we now host on our own servers the entire Epstein files library archive and our website now works on every device and browser. Check us out at: exposingepstein.com We gathered around 1.400.000 PDF files, but since 1 single pdf like EFTA0oxt can actually hold 2 or more EFTA files inside it (when you scroll down you see it). This is why we only have 597.000 files but in reality around 1.400.000. Also all 3,200 videos with their respective formats have been converted to HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) format with adaptive bitrate streaming. This means video quality automatically adjusts in real time based on your network speed, eliminating buffering and interruptions. Whether you're on 4G, Wi-Fi, or a slower connection, you get the best possible viewing experience based on your bandwidth. This is the kind of protocol Netflix or TikTok use for video streaming. Also for videos as user u/Great-Okra-8704 suggested we added and audio graph for all videos by running an algorithm on all these videos and capturing all the moments where audio is being played. As he pointed out this might help people who watch lengthy videos and could miss a part of the audio recordings. We are very excited for this new update and we want to share our work with you, we gladly welcome all new feedback. There is still a lot of work to do. If you like our work, please support us at https://ko-fi.com/exposingepstein It really makes the difference, we would have never done this without your kind help. We also have a Telegram channel called "exposingepstein" for discussions about our project or the files, we don't want to put Telegram links here, already got our post banned once. The crazy thing is that we are just 2 young broke college students in our 20s going to class in the morning and working on this project in the evening, lol. God bless you all! submitted by /u/AquaBomber to r/Epstein [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/WhatYouThinkYouSee to r/conspiracy [link] [comments]

I check disrespect. Every time. I had one parent email and say their child is just “expressive”. No ma’am. They’re expressive with premium disrespect, and that’s why I sent his ass out of my classroom. For the those that think I’m doing too much? Maybe. But if your kid speaks to their future boss the way they speak to teachers, their “villain origin story” is going to be stocking shelves while muttering about injustice. We are educators, not emotional punching bags. Edit: One time I had a kid start raising his voice, and I straight up went “who you think you talking to??” black- mom mode Edit 2- after some reflection, I was wrong to take a jab at shelf stockers like that. submitted by /u/Emergency-Pepper3537 to r/Teachers [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/cozyrhombus to r/BestOfTikTokPH [link] [comments]

ok so with the current context i saw a tiktok about Eyes Wide Shut and since i don’t have much free will i decided to finally watch it for the first time… i honestly thought it was just some friends, maybe a little horny, hanging out. simple, funny, kinda harmless. but then it hit me… this is literally a peek into what the elite do when no one’s watching. the masks, the music, the rituals… they’re untouchable, decadent, and if you misstep, you quietly cease to exist in this world. like you were never born. meanwhile, outside, the poor claw at each other like lab rats, entirely irrelevant. when you see it, you can’t unsee it. i mean… wow. am i seriously the only one who realized this isn’t just a glamour mystery movie but a manual on elite detachment, indifference, and the quiet art of erasing someone from existence? submitted by /u/Brief-Block-9 to r/Cinema [link] [comments]

My bf(34M) and I (29F) have been seeing each other since last December. We began dating casually but our relationship became serious in June. He has daughter(8F) and I was quite apprehensive about dating a man with a child but he sold himself as a great present dad and I bought it. Occasionally, I would ask after his daughter but I didn’t want to be overly enmeshed in that part of his life since our relationship is fairly new. The issue began at the end of November when I received my niece’s (8F) Santa Wishlist which prompted me to ask my bf about his daughter’s Wishlist seeing that she was the same age as my niece. He told me he hadn’t received it and I advised him to ask for it soon or risk having all the cool stuff selling out and disappointing his daughter. He told he would. A week or so later, I asked my bf if he would like to join me on 13 December for gift shopping especially for my niece. He declined and I asked him if he had received his daughter’s Wishlist. He told me that his daughter didn’t want a gift because her love language is quality time. I told him that I had never heard of young child refusing a Christmas gift. This conversation quickly degenerated into an argument where he accused me of being obsessed with his daughter and insinuating that I believe that I know his daughter better than he does. His overreaction rose some suspicions within me so I decided that I needed to reach out to his daughter’s mother - due to the length of the post, I spare the details of how I managed to get her details. Once I found his ex’s TikTok account, I scrolled through her page and found a post with the caption “Making my daughter’s birthday extra special so she forgets that her father didn’t didn’t show up again” I hesitated quite a bit before I sent her a DM. I introduced myself as my bf’s girlfriend and explained that I don’t mean to cause any trouble but I wanted to clarify a couple of things that I heard from my bf. She took a couple of days to reply to my dm and she was obviously quite hesitant but she did agree to have a call with me. She asked me what my bf had told me about their relationship and I told her that my bf told me that they had dated briefly and the child was conceived accidentally. She laughed and told me that she and my bf had been in a serious relationship for 3 years and the child was very much planned. Their relationship issues began in the second trimester when my bf started questioning paternity and demanded a paternity test while she was pregnant. His ex was concerned for the safety of the child and told him that he can do the test once the baby is born. He moved out of their shared home while she was pregnant and didn’t attend the birth of his child. Once the child was born , he didn’t attend a few family court hearing to establish paternity but when he eventually did, it was proven that he was the father. Allegedly, he has been a deadbeat father since, not supporting his daughter financially or any other way and he last saw his daughter in April. After giving it some thought, I sent a text to bf from my parents’ home where I spent Christmas in which I told him that I have decided to end based on what his ex alleges. He has been calling me nonstop, asking for the chance to talk explain his side of the story but this is too much for me. AITAH. Update: I didn’t expect this post to draw so much attention. It is bewildering, saddening and maddening that so many women have children fathered by men such as my ex. Here are some answers to common questions asked : Why didn’t I figure out that he was deadbeat sooner? As I stated in the post, our relationship was fairly new so I was cautious not to enmesh myself into that aspect of his life until we built a stronger relationship and began future planning. He had recent photos of his daughter which he had shown me regularly but now that I think of it, he was never in the pictures with his daughter. What was he doing during the weeks he claimed to be visit his daughter? I don’t know and at this point, I have no desire to investigate this matter further. In July in particular, he took 2 weeks of vacation leave to spend with his daughter. He told me he was taking her to Disney World, I had asked to see the photos but I never actually saw them and I can’t remember why. We didn’t live together, so he may have just stayed home and I wouldn’t have known. Why did I write this post? I had been in a relationship with this man for a couple of months and I had/have feelings for him so I was questioning if I had been rash in my decision and if he deserved the chance to explain himself. One of the most important points that people have made is that mentioning his ex may result in his lashing out at her and his daughter; I had never been in this situation before so I hadn’t considered this and it was an oversight on my part but at the time I wanted to highlight that I was leaving him because he has treated his ex and child poorly, I had naively thought that that might nudge him to change his behaviour towards them - not for me because I don’t want any part of this.. I have since reached to the mother again to tell her that I had broken up with him. I admitted and apologised that I had mentioned what she told me as the reason. She seemed quite receptive to the apology and there were a few more private matters that were discussed. We wished each other well and I doubt we will have contact again. submitted by /u/MysteriousFocus1884 to r/AITAH [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Morg075 to r/katseye [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/willrobster16 to r/okbuddychicanery [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Quiet_person24 to r/overwatch2 [link] [comments]

I love that there’s more awareness for these things with the internet, but I’ve had five new clients or consultations this week and all of them have walked into my office and told me they’re neurodivergent. Of course this label has been useful in some way to them, but it means something totally different to each person and just feels like another way to say “I feel different than I think I should feel.” But humans are a spectrum and it feels rooted in conformism and not a genuine issue in daily functioning. If 80% of people think they are neurodivergent, we’re gonna need some new labels because neurotypical ain’t typical. Three of them also told me they think they have DID, which is not unusual because I focus on trauma treatment and specifically mention dissociation on my website. Obviously too soon to know for sure, but they have had little or no previous therapy and can tell me all about their alters. I think it’s useful because we have a head start in parts work with the things they have noticed, but they get so attached to the label and feel attacked if they ask directly and I can’t or won’t confirm. Talking about structural dissociation as a spectrum sometimes works, but I’m finding younger clients to feel so invalidated if I can’t just outright say they have this severe case. There’s just so much irony in the fact that most people with DID are so so ashamed, all they want is to hide it or make it go away, they don’t want these different parts to exist. Anyway, I’m tired and sometimes I hate the internet. I’m on vacation this week and I really really need it. submitted by /u/runaway_bunnies to r/therapists [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/welkikitty to r/news [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/OwnFig7924 to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Soothsayer71 to r/ufc [link] [comments]