I’m currently 29 weeks and 4 days, after spending an awesome day with my mom we began the process of bringing things up to our apartment. Neither my husband or mom would let me carry any of the bags or help with the chairs we got so I grabbed the small package of paper towels and the lightest over the toilet rack known to man. Our apartment building is a joke the curbs are unusually tall and on the other side is loosely packed dirt, there is a sidewalk/walkway but a car is always pulled directly up to to so you have to go over the curb and onto the loose dirt. Today the dirt gave way and I fell it’s all a blur but I’m 90% sure I didn’t hit my belly but my left leg and arm are pretty scraped up and bruised and hurting. I talked to my midwife and she gave me the rundown on what to look out for, I’m sure I’m fine baby girl has been moving around like normal so now I’m just incredibly angry and embarrassed and hurting. I plan to talk to the property manager on Monday about having the spot in front of the walkway made into a no parking spot. I’m just upset and needing to vent!

Given the frequent insulting, gaslighting, lack of empathy, and defensiveness I’ve seen on subreddits like Asianmasculinity, I cannot imagine a lot of the guys who frequent such subreddits are emotionally healthy enough to raise children and build emotionally healthy families. I have a very hard time believing these guys are emotionally healthy enough to have healthy communications with their kids and have a healthy family dynamic.
And if they cannot sustain a healthy family dynamic with their kids, the problems that are currently in the Asian American diaspora will only continue.
I said earlier that I strongly believe a lot of the problems in the Asian American diaspora (namely the emasculation of Asian guys and “self-hating” Asian girls) stem from a parenting problem.
For children, parents are their very first role models in life.
If these AsianMasculinity guys have sons, they would either be the types of dads to shame their sons for being white worshipping self-haters if they date white women or they will try to live vicariously through their sons by encouraging them to date XFs while bitterly trashing AFs. Either way, I doubt they will do a good job of teaching their sons how to self-confidently navigate the challenges of the Western dating market because so many of them seem to have a very black and white way of thinking and have an unhealthy inferiority complex to White people.
And boy oh boy do I doubt these types of AsianMasculinity guys are actually capable of forming good relationships with their daughters. For some of these guys, I can totally imagine them praising their sons for dating XFs while trashing their daughters if they dare date a non-Asian man (especially WMs). If these daughters feel there is a big double standard between how they and their brothers are treated, it’s highly doubtful they will have good relationships with their dads. I highly doubt a lot of these AsianMasculinity men have the social awareness or empathy to understand a female perspective, which could be especially challenging if they have daughters. If that happens, the problems in the Asian American diaspora that are constantly talked about (“self-hating” Asian females who hate their family) will only continue.
But of course, if these AsianMasculinity guys grow to have bad relationships with their children, they will probably just blame the media or the brainwashing of the white patriarchy, without ever once self-reflecting on their parenting mistakes.
Raising a healthy family requires a significant amount of empathy, humility, and emotional intelligence. Since I doubt a lot of these AsianMasculinity guys are self-aware enough to be good role models or have enough emotional intelligence to break the cycle of generational parenting problems, it may be for the best that a lot of them don’t find partners and build families in the West. I doubt they are capable of raising sons who will present the best image of Asian men, and I especially doubt they will raise daughters who will want to associate with the Asian community.
This is not me saying Asian men shouldn’t find partners. I would be very happy to see Asian men who are emotionally healthy, emotionally strong, and have taken steps to become well-adjusted raise happy families with their XF or AF spouses because those Asian men will be the ones leading the way to build a stronger Asian American future generation.
But I do not think a lot of the guys who frequent subreddits like AsianMasculinity fit that mold. If the frequent insulting and gaslighting is representative of how they will interact with their children, I do not think they’d be great role models for their children if they have any, and I think they’ll just pass on their dysfunctions to their children and continue the cycle of emasculated Asian men who aren’t confident in dating and “self-hating” Asian women who hate their families and culture.

Ok lets get the basics out of the way, yes I am a geek. I practically came out of the womb with a gaming controller and I Currently play on PC, Switch, and PS5 (catch me on Destiny or Legend of Zelda). I learned how to read from reading Comics and I'm still a huge fan of them (Spider-Man is the best, don't agree then fight me). Anime has had a rocky road with me but ultimately I fell in love with them and will talk your ear off about Bleach.
I'm personally looking for someone geeky, doesn't have to have all the same interest but I would love some similarities. Ultimately I want someone who can handle my quirks and my jokes (lots of dad jokes and dark humor). Other than my nerdiness I do love other stuff like road trips, trying new foods, and adventuring.
If you think you are up to the task then message me with the answers of these 3 questions:
Favorite comic Charactes and why? Favorite video game/s? Favorite anime/s?

Ok lets get the basics out of the way, yes I am a geek. I practically came out of the womb with a gaming controller and I Currently play on PC, Switch, and PS5 (catch me on Destiny or Legend of Zelda). I learned how to read from reading Comics and I'm still a huge fan of them (Spider-Man is the best, don't agree then fight me). Anime has had a rocky road with me but ultimately I fell in love with them and will talk your ear off about Bleach.
I'm personally looking for someone geeky, doesn't have to have all the same interest but I would love some similarities. Ultimately I want someone who can handle my quirks and my jokes (lots of dad jokes and dark humor). Other than my nerdiness I do love other stuff like road trips, trying new foods, and adventuring.
If you think you are up to the task then message me with the answers of these 3 questions:
Favorite comic Charactes and why? Favorite video game/s? Favorite anime/s?

So I was bumped up into a security spot 6 months ago. It was a nepotism thing that honestly is screwed up but it did end up bitting me as my promotion was so irregular I only was bumped up one pay grade when I should be up 3 which in terms of concrete number means im paid ~30% less then the next lowest paid person. The division lead was sorry it happened and promised 5 grand raises every 6 months to catch me up so long as I preformed.
I preformed very well (literally top 3 in the division every week after my second week) and a few weeks back I went to my direct supervisor to talk about the raise. Direct supervisor says he knew nothing about it so I fowarded him the email where it was promised. He says okay but hell need a perfect month to get it done as its basically unheard of to get a 5 grand raise 6 months in and typically the yearly raise is just COL + 2%. 5 grand for me comes out to something above 12 %. I get what hes saying so try my best. Unfortunately we are undermanned to hell and back and in order to keep up with my job I am doing 5x-6x the expected daily task load and working 12-16 hour shifts at least 3 days a week so things happen. I got a unhappy rating because I got tired of a customer insisting we violate our compliance policy and said if she wanted her credentials she would need to acces them via our secure portal and if she was having issues navigating it I would be happy to walk her through it. She didnt like that and left a negative review and while I wasnt found at fault it would not be removed from metrics which meant my raise was gone. I asked if we could come back to this once the rating dropped off and i was told no so I said I was quiting.
He said hed talk to our division lead and next thing I know im pulled into a meet with the division lead who said I will get the raise and at the end of the week when the rating fell off he will go to the vp to get it done. He also said he really appreciated my work and im a model team member and he cant wait to see me as a manager once their done fleshing out my team (its an ongoing thing but he has shoved me into leadership 3 or 4 times now. Currently im alt shift lead in practice but theres only a handful of people on my shift so im not really a lead) To his word he did supposedly ask and it was approved but there was a logistic consideration that would take a week to sort out. There was to be a meeting friday which would iron out that concern whatever it was but a large portion of our already undermanned team called off to the point where there was more managers then grunts so the meeting was cancelled.
My raise has subsequently been delayed but ive been told he is actively working on it as much as he can and I should definetly expect something next week.
Im torn. I dont trust my company and I know promises mean jack. On the other hand im personal friends with my division lead and I want to believe him and the explanation is believable with a solid expectation in writing.
Any thoughts on the situation and what I should do? I honestly considered and almost did quit friday but talked myself down however i am considering it monday again if i dont hear anything by EOD

I was thinking, in ATSV, there's a lot of talk about "destiny" and "sticking to canon". The whole point of the movie, and what Miles resolves to do in the end, is that he's going to write his own story no matter what the higher power of reality says.
This is good and all but then I kept thinking about the title of the next movie "BEYOND the Spiderverse". It made me think, is Miles simply going to break the rules of the Multiverse or is he actually going to break THROUGH the Multiverse?
I mean, these movies have been pretty clear that they all take place in a comic, so what if in BTSV, Miles breaks through reality and meets the being(s) that control/ write the Multiverse?
I know there's a character in the comics called "The One Above All" and I think that would be a pretty good guess as to who's pulling the strings behind all this. Of course, I know they can't get Stan Lee or Steve Ditko to play him (I also know he was based off Jack Kirby in the comics so that's also not an option) but what if they get Miles' creators (Brian Michael Bendis and Sarah Pichelli) to play that role? (Or should they are designed to look like Stan and/or Ditko but they're played by someone else?)
I think it'd be hella funny if we just had Miles chew out his creators for giving every Spider-man the same story. Then, he'd tell them to be original and give him a happy ending. It would definitely help push the message of ATSV and allow Miles to do his own thing uninterrupted. (AND it'd be one huge nod to the joke that Spider-man writers are incapable of letting the character feel happiness by actually giving Miles a satisfying conclusion.)
There's also the option of the Beyonders. I don't know much about these guys so if you wanna enlighten me please do but my limited info on them is why I hadn't included them in my theory.
What do you guys think? Is Miles set to just break the flow of Spider-man stories in the Multiverse or is he gonna actually go beyond the borders of his reality?

I am posting this again, because unfortunately the other post was hijacked by people who, in a rather non INTJ manner, focused on emotional straw mans and personal insults instead of focusing on the subject at hand. I will not be replying to any responses that are a straw man or try to deviate/hijack the topic. Due to people solely using straw mans/not understanding my main point and personally attacking me instead of using logical arguments about the main point of the post, I will no longer type text myself (if I need to, I will keep it to a minimum and try to use point forms), but will directly copy paste from sources. It is sad because I thought as an INTJ sub there would be less petulant straw mans and more focus on logic than emotion, but apparently that is not the case. So here is another try:
​
- Hypothesis: Autism is more correlated with S than N, so it would be rare for INTJs to be autistic (my guess is that ISTJ would correlate most highly with autism).
​
Core features of INTJs:
​

You casually but thoroughly devour information on a given topic until you are a near-expert, then get bored and move to a new topic. https://introvertdear.com/news/intj-personality-signs/
With Introverted Intuition dominating their personality, INTJs focus their energy on observing the world, and generating ideas and possibilities. Their mind constantly gathers information and makes associations about it. They are tremendously insightful and usually are very quick to understand new ideas. https://www.personalitypage.com/html/INTJ.html
When under a great deal of stress, the INTJ may become obsessed with mindless repetitive, Sensate activities, such as over-drinking. They may also tend to become absorbed with minutia and details that they would not normally consider important to their overall goal. https://www.personalitypage.com/html/INTJ.html [MY NOTE: It says "when under a great deal of stress", implying it is the not the norm for INTJs to be like that.]

​
S vs N:
​

Sensing (S) Paying attention to physical reality, what I see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. I'm concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real. I notice facts and I remember details that are important to me. I like to see the practical use of things and learn best when I see how to use what I'm learning. Experience speaks to me louder than words.
Intuition (N) Paying the most attention to impressions or the meaning and patterns of the information I get. I would rather learn by thinking a problem through than by hands-on experience. I'm interested in new things and what might be possible, so that I think more about the future than the past. I like to work with symbols or abstract theories, even if I don't know how I will use them. I remember events more as an impression of what it was like than as actual facts or details of what happened. https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/sensing-or-intuition.htm

​
Signs of autism:
​

Plays with toys the same way every time...Is focused on parts of objects (for example, wheels)...Has obsessive interests https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/signs.html
taking things very literally – for example, they may not understand phrases like "break a leg"... https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/autism/signs/children/
The instructions are too vague. Children might have trouble cooperating if it’s not clear what they’re supposed to do – for example, ‘Watch your shoes on the couch, Jack’. It can also be hard for children if they think they have a choice when they actually don’t – for example, ‘Do you want to go to bed, Susan?’.....They can also find it hard to shift their attention from one thing to another. https://raisingchildren.net.au/autism/behaviouunderstanding-behavioucooperative-behaviour-asd
You talk a lot about one or two favorite topics... You care deeply and are knowledgeable about a few specific areas of interest (like a historical period, book series, film, industry, hobby, or field of study)... You are very successful in one or two challenging academic subject areas. Some autistic people may do very well in some areas while also having great difficulty doing well in others... You are able to learn complex details and remember them for long periods of time https://www.healthline.com/health/autism-in-adults#autism-with-lower-support-needs
Two major symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) include repetitive sounds or movements and fixation on various things including topics and activities.[16] Hyperfocus in the context of ASD has also been referred to as the inability to redirect thoughts or tasks as the situation changes (cognitive flexibility).[17] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperfocus
Autistic individuals are also known to have the ability to remain intensely focused for prolonged periods. Fifty years ago, Lovaas et al. (7) coined the term “stimulus overselectivity” to describe patterns of focused attention seen in autistic children, although today the term “hyperfocus” is more commonly used. Within the ADHD and ASD literature, hyperfocus is often described through a negative lens. Lovaas et al. (7) claimed stimulus overselectivity was “excessive and maladaptive”. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9579965/
Hyperfocus is an obsessive interest on one thing almost to the exclusion of everything else. Neurotypical (non-disabled) people also have interests, but for an autistic person, the degree of enthusiasm will be much more intense. https://www.discover-autism-help.com/autism-hyperfocus.html

According to the sources above, it would be plausible to expect that Autism would correlate with S more than N. Using basic inferential logic, this would imply that it would be rare for INTJs to have autism.
Anybody here who has autism and thinks they are an INTJ? If so, what are your thoughts? Can autism co-exist with N? I mean, one could argue that it is possible to hyperfocus on 1/a few interests (due to the autism), but also in general act more consistent with N. This is interesting because they seem to be polar opposites.

This is an ongoing drama, one that won't stop until probably next year or even longer. But before I get into the details of the drama, let's talk about the background, and the important information to know...
TW: Sexual assault discussion mentioned about halfway.

Hockey? NHL? What the fuck are those?

Ice hockey is a sport where 6 very large, burly men put swords on their feet and glide around on ice against 6 other very large, burly men who also have sword-shoes. They carry a stick to whack around a hard little circle of rubber and each other (most often each other) with the goal of hitting that little rubber past another large burly man into a 6'x4' net. A game takes place over 3 periods of 20 minutes each, and whoever hits the rubber circle most often in the opponent's Warhammer gaming table sized net is the winner of the game. There are 82 games during the 'regular season', and then they compete in the 'playoffs' for the Stanley Cup, which is worth at least $5.
The National Hockey League, or the Ligue Nationale de Hockey if you hate everyone else in North America, is effectively the world's highest level of ice hockey. People all over the world spend their entire youth lives training to have a shot at being drafted by an NHL team, from Belarus to England, from Canada to Australia. There are other leagues in the world, but they are more or less for people who are shunned in the NHL for whatever reason, people who have retired from the NHL but still play hockey for whatever reason (Jaromir Jagr, I'm looking at you), or people who aren't good enough to play in the NHL but still good enough to be paid to play.
There are 32 teams in the NHL at the moment, but the most important teams for this story are:
1) Chicago Blackhawks: I'm going to go over the Blackhawks later in this post. It's...a lot.
2) Anaheim Ducks: A team that was originally owned by Disney based on the movie The Mighty Ducks. No, I'm not joking. They were founded in 1993 and have had some close calls with the Stanley Cup, but has never won it. They finished the 22-23 season with the worst record possible, and one of the worst records in NHL history.
3) Columbus Blue Jackets: They're young, having only existed since 2000. They've never been in the Stanley Cup finals, and have never really had a good season during their existence. They finished second to last.
4) Seattle Kraken: They're the newest team, being founded in 2021. They're actually not relevant at all to this post; they're my team and therefore am obligated to mention them.

Okay, so sword-feet and stick hitting rubber circle. What is this about 'draft'?

In order to make it to the NHL, you have to be drafted by an NHL team. Being drafted is similar to how people used to pick each other for teams during recess. You know, where you kept getting picked last. Except if you get drafted, you get a contract worth potentially millions of dollars.
The draft takes place over a series of rounds, where each team picks one person each (unless they traded their draft pick, but this isn't relevant). In the first round, the teams with the worst record draft first, all the way up to the team that won the Stanley Cup. Then in the second round, it counts down from Stanley Cup winner down to the worst, third round is from worst to best again, and so on until the draft is completed (Usually 7 rounds).
HOWEVER, there is a twist...

The Lottery

So in order to prevent teams from 'tanking', aka losing on purpose in order to get the best draft pick, the league came up with the Draft Lottery. After the season has ended, every team that didn't make the playoffs participates in the lottery. Whoever wins the lottery will jump up 10 spots in the draft. Teams who were worse during the season get higher odds. This year, the team with the best odds are the Anaheim Ducks, at 18.5% chance of winning, since they sucked hard and it wasn't even on purpose.

Okay, enough. Why is the 2023 draft important?

This year is one of the most important drafts in recent NHL history. The current highest-rated prospect is Connor Bedard. Bedard is...good. Like, really good. Like, really, REALLY good. Top NHL players are saying that Bedard already has the best shot release in hockey right now at least...and he's only like 17 years old. I won't go into it much further, but Connor Bedard is the type of player that can lead teams to the Stanley Cup by just being on the team. People are comparing him to Wayne Gretzky; if you need context for who that is, he's considered one of the best sports-people of all time out of all sports.

Side Show -- The Chicago Blackhawks, and Why Everyone Hates Them

The Blackhawks, which I'm going to call the Hawks, are an old team. They've been around since the 40s as one of the 'original six', teams that have been around since the modern NHL was a thing (well, not really, but it's not relevant). Yes, the NHL only had 6 teams until the 1960s, which is when they finally expanded into more markets, which then snowballed into what we have now (32 teams).
The Hawks have had...a rough recent history. They effectively had a dynasty for most of the 2010s, winning the Stanley Cup 3 times, and a lot of it had to do with their talent. Before the 2010s, the Hawks sucked. That is, until they drafted amazing players like Jonathan Toews (pronounced "taves", not "toes") and Patrick Kane, who helped boost them to the Stanley Cup in the 10's (They have since retired. This is important context.) These picks were already controversial; people like to claim that the NHL favors original six teams because they're massive markets, which means more butts-in-seats, which means more money. So the Blackhawks getting so many first round, top-3 picks was...suspicious to most.
But all of this is overshadowed by the sexual assault and subsequent cover up.
During the 2010 season, one of their cup-winning seasons, a player named Kyle Beach, was sexually assaulted by a member of the coaching staff. He brought it forward to the organization who did their best to make sure that the coaching staff was safe and sound. Kyle Beach never broke into the NHL aside from the 2010 season -- take that information for what it is. In 2021, Kyle Beach sued the Blackhawks for their mishandling. An independent investigation found that the Blackhawks knew about the sexual assault, and did nothing to the perpetrator. The perpetrator went on to commit more acts of sexual assault against young players.
The punishment that the Blackhawks faced? Nothing major. They were fined $2 million. Which...is basically nothing, considering they made $222 million that year. So, like...1%.
This punishment was a slap in the face to teams like the Arizona Coyotes, who lost draft picks (which means losing players that could turn their organization around) because of a much, MUCH less severe violation (In their case, the Coyotes were performing physicals on potential draftees before they were drafted, which is a violation of the NHL constitution). Other teams have lost players because of similar circumstances -- the first one that comes to mind is the Boston Bruins, who dropped a (potential) top player because it came to light he had hazed, abused, and hurled racial slurs at a black autistic player in the junior leagues.
Needless to say, this further fueled conspiracies that the Blackhawks were getting special treatment because of their status as an original six team, and how big the Chicago market is.
From the /hockey subreddit:

Didn't the NHL originally fine the Devils $3 million for the Kovalchuk stuff a decade ago? What a joke. [Context: Kovalchuk was a high-level player, and the Devils tried to do some sneaky-shady stuff in order to keep him.]
Coyotes lost high picks for getting extra physical data, Devils got fined $3m and two picks for cap circumvention, and we got fined $250k for calling out George Parros for being the joke he is. And all the Blackhawks get for covering up rape is a $2m fine?? What a fucking joke [Context: This is a Rangers fan, and the Rangers called out George Parros, leader of the Department of Player Safety, for doing nothing about player safety. They were fined $250k for making mean comments.]

It doesn't really help that Chicago fans have a poor reputation. In the NHL, Chicago fans have a reputation for being drunk fair-weather fans. Before 2010 Chicago had a rough time filling up their arena to half-way. During the 2010s? Sellout arena, every game. Going into the 2020s, when their team started sucking again, they're back to struggling filling seats.
So the hockey fandom in general doesn't really like Chicago, but how does this all tie into the 2023 Draft?

The Lottery (for real this time)

As mentioned before, the 2023 season was potentially a huge season for struggling teams like the Columbus Blue Jackets or the Anaheim Ducks. Getting Connor Bedard would turn around entire franchises, overnight.
Going into the draft, the heavy favorites to win the lottery were the Ducks at 18.5%, the Blue Jackets at 13.5%, and the Chicago Blackhawks at 11.5%. The other 13 teams had basically less than 10% odds.
The draft lottery was televised, and millions of people watched ESPN and TSN to see the results from all over the league. Top teams in the west were praying that the lottery winner would go to the Blue Jackets so they wouldn't have to face Bedard, and top teams in the east were praying the lottery pick would go to the west for the same reason. Everyone universally had the same sentiment though:

Anyone but Chicago.

The hosts go down the line to show the new draft lineup, starting from 16 and going down. Nothing seemed to change in the lineup; teams hoping for ajump up were sadly disappointed but knew they never really had a chance anyways.
The hosts get to the top 5. The reveal the 5th pick is...Montreal. Montreal fans speak French-Canadian sadly, or whatever it is Quebecois folk do.
The fourth pick is revealed. The San Jose Sharks. Sharks fans chomp sadly. Or drink their Starbucks sadly. Idk, I'm not rich enough to live in San Jose.
Then something curious happens. They cut to a commercial break, but the ESPN broadcasters say something very curious. "An upset for Columbus! It's down to Anaheim or Chicago!" Suspicion arises. The card for 3rd place wasn't revealed, how could they have known that Columbus was the 3rd pick? Conspiracy talk bumps up in the live Reddit thread. People were already saying that Chicago won the lottery. They just knew.

Nice of ESPN to state Columbus will pick 3rd before Daley ever even showed it and they went to commercials “It will be either Chicago or Anaheim”….
Elliotte Friedman tweeted out who got pick 1 and 2 during the commercial break. Said tweets have now been deleted.

The NHL lottery comes back on after commercials and reveal that CBJ wins the 3rd pick to no one's surprise. All that's left is two envelopes, one with a '2' the other with a '1'. They begin to open the '2' envelope. The hockey world goes silent, as whoever gets the 2 spot means that the other won the lottery...

The Worst Timeline

The worst-case-scenario happens. Chicago, universally hated in the hockey world, wins the draft lottery. Duck fans are outraged. Blue Jacket fans are outraged. Literally every fanbase is outraged.

hockey 9/11
why has god abandoned us
If you didn't think Chicago was getting Bedard here is your lesson of how fucked up the world is
Fuck this
Can't lose that media market now that Kane and Toews are gone!
Never forget that the Coyotes had to forfeit a first round pick for talking to a prospect before it was permitted, while Chicago protected a fucking rapist and got no reprecussions.
Coyotes: asks prospects what they ate and to wear shorts? Forfeit draft picks Blackhawks: cover up sexual assault and lie your asses off? Have a Bedard
Draft HoF talent 1st overall -> Go on a dynasty and win 3 cups -> Trade HoF 1st overall -> Draft another HoF talent 1st overall.
He went to the least deserving team.

Individual team subreddits were no better. Every fan from every team, aside from Chicago, were seething and chomping at the bit. There is an ongoing conspiracy about the NHL favoring Chicago now, and people are actively calling for the NHL commissioner's resignation.

Living in a Post-Apocalypse Wasteland

It's been barely a month since the bomb dropped. Food is hard to come by. Hope is lost. People fight each other for the barest scraps of undamaged cloth to keep warm at night since the sun was blacked out.
We don't know what will happen. Life is moving on, but is it really life if there's no will to live?
In seriousness, no one wanted this outcome. Even some Hawks fans hated this. It's hard to say what will happen to the NHL now. Some people are saying that Connor Bedard will get drafted and refuse to play for the Blackhawks, demanding to be traded. Some say he'll disappear to Europe and play in the Swedish league or the KHL to avoid the Blackhawks contract. Others say he'll be a fool to avoid the NHL and just take what he's got, and demand a trade later.
No one knows what Connor Bedard is thinking. He's not really said anything. But we do know that the world of hockey has been shaken to its core. If Bedard plays, Chicago will be a force to be reckoned with for years. If he avoids Chicago, it'll be a legendary act of defiance that will 100% cause the NHL to invent a rule to prevent that from happen again.
But for now, I must return to my fallout shelter. It's not healthy to stand in the radiation for too long.

I was camping in Galeton PA about five years ago during the height of the perseids meteor shower. Galeton is one of the few “dark forests” in the US where no man made light penetrates. It was late (probably around 1am) and my then girlfriend and I were the only people still awake, hanging by our campfire. Suddenly I noticed when I looked into the sky that the entire sky - I mean every inch of night - was a swirling mass of interlocking Fibonacci spirals. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. When my girlfriend came back from the restroom, I told her to look at the sky. Before I could comment on what I was seeing, she said (direct quote) “spirals, spirals everywhere” we watched them for awhile, until they seemed to get faster and larger, almost as if the sky were about to open.
We were so overwhelmed that we decided to take a walk and so we headed down to a man made reservoir just down the way from the campsite to just calm down a little. When we got out from under the trees and looked up, not only was the sky still a swirling, interlocking pattern of Fibonacci spirals, we could quite literally see the magnetic poles, the rotation of the earth. When I looked to the tree line I could see the silvery flash of stars whipping up and over the earth almost like white static on a TV set. I noticed at this point that I could see the earths rotation and that it was not only side to side but almost as if we were rotating up in space.
As we were observing all of this, we both spotted an orange/red orb that appeared to burst out of nothing before it began hopping across the sky like a waterbug. We followed it to where it stopped dead suddenly, almost as if disguising itself as just another star. I said to my girl - “it’s almost as if it knows we are looking at it” - right then, as soon as I said that, it exploded like a slow firework or a dandelion blowing away and was gone.
Immediately after, another one of these orange red orbs seemed to burst out of nowhere and began to skip/hop along the sky. We followed that one to where it suddenly jumped a great distance, and then immediately back to its starting point (impossible seeming) it hovered for a moment before about four to five smaller, brownish red objects seemed to come from nowhere as if pulled by some force/tractor beam. They circled around the larger orb as if in orbit exactly one full rotation before the larger orb seemed to be flung like a slingshot and disappeared instantly.
I thought surely we can’t see another one of these. Right then my girlfriend pointed and said “look, there’s two over there” - I looked, and sure enough, coming from opposite directions, two more orbs. These ones were blue and greenish like the lights of the aurora borealis. They didn’t skip, but simply flew directly towards each other at incredibly fast speed. They stopped, flashed back and forth in strange blue and purplish light as if talking to each other, and then simultaneously shot straight up into the air, side by side, and vanished.
By the point I was completely overwhelmed, even a little scared. My girlfriend was lying on the ground staring straight up in disbelief, saying she wanted to see more. I’d had enough. We went back to our tent and lay there for what felt like hours discussing what we had seen. I was worried whatever they were, they were going to come back and abduct us or whatever. Thankfully that never happened.
The next day we sat in the river and again discussed how mind blowing what we had seen was. I wanted to tell people right away. She thought we shouldn’t say anything because it wa special and if we did, maybe they would never reveal themselves to us again.
I am 100% convinced of what we saw and to this day think about it nearly everyday. Has anyone else ever seen something like this?

A friend and I are making a video called "How to go to heaven" and we've been studying deeper on this simple topic of 'how to go to heaven'.
I recently met someone who says baptism isn't required because of John 3:16 and similar verses. I am happy to hear other perspectives, especially before we release the video. For now, scripture tells me to be baptized to go to heaven, IF we are able and IF we are aware of it. It is the rule, but there are exceptions, like the thief on the cross. (I believe someone who only knows a portion of The Gospel can still be saved. For example, they accept John 3:16 and live up to ALL the light they know, God sees their heart and they will have eternal life.)
Below is an explanation of why Baptism is necessary (When possible and when informed).

Is Calling On The Name Of The Lord Enough?

God wants us to be baptized, but some people say that all you need to do is believe on Jesus and then you will be saved, because Acts 22:21 says, “Whosoever shall all on The Name of The Lord shall be saved” or even the famous John 3:16!!!!!!

You Must Review Every Data

But! To have an accurate view on any topic, whether it be the Bible or something secular, you have to review all the data on a topic. If you stop at 90 percent you may miss out on data that could change everything.
For example, there are 3 leaves on the ground and we need to know how many hidden flowers are there. You flip the first leaf. No flower. You flip the 2nd. No flower. So, if we stop here, then our conclusion would be that there are no flowers. But until you exhaust all the data, you won’t know the full truth. When you flip the last leaf you'll find a flower! If we didn’t keep checking, we would have believed a lie because there was a flower. So in order to have a clear understanding of how to go to heaven we have to look at all the Bible verses regarding that topic.
Jesus Himself says in Mark 16:16 "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Some say "Look, the 2nd half of the verse only says "he that believeth not will be damned". But that shouldn't negate the first half. The reason why believing on Jesus is emphasized more than any other step, is because it is the first step it, is the root of salvation. But repentance or baptism in it of itself does not save you. Baptism means nothing if you don’t first believe in Jesus because He is The One who paid our debt.
Acts 8:36-37 says, "Here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
You first need to believe in Jesus, before being baptized. So in Mark 16:16, unbelief in Jesus IS the root of not going to heaven. It does not need to say “he that believeth not AND is not baptized shall be damned”
John 3:18 says, "He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already"

You Need Accurate Context

For accurate research, you need accurate context.
The Bible says, “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat”
According to what we just read, we can literally eat from every tree. BUT, when we read the next verse, it now has the opposite meaning.
Genesis 2:17, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:"
Without true context, truth can be twisted. It’s like coming to a conclusion before someone finishes talking. You have to know the context. This concept even applies to the famous John 3:16, but first, let’s go back to Acts 2:21,
^{Acts 2:21,} "Peter said to them. Whosoever shall call on The Name of The Lord shall be saved."
The foundation of our salvation is based all on this. To believe on Jesus.
BUT, Peter wasn’t done preaching.
In the very same chapter Peter continues to preach.
^{Acts 22:37-38} "When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? ³⁸ Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins "
When reading in context, even the famous John 3:16 has baptism linked to salvation.
^{John 3:16} "For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
John 3:5 comes before John 3:16. And it says,
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
So when we read up to John 3:16, are we supposed to forget what He just said in verse 5?
Some people say to be born of the water is not baptism, but that it’s referring to being born from a human in a mothers womb.
Here’s why it IS baptism. John 1:12-13 says,
"¹²As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His Name: ¹³who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
Verse 13 speaks of 2 births. One is born of God, which is a spiritual birth. And the other is the opposite of a spiritual birth. Which is a fleshly birth from your mothers womb. This fleshly birth is linked to humanity. Flesh and blood. Flesh and blood do not equate to being born of God. They instead, represent humanity. It’s nature is physical, not spiritual.
^{Matthew 16:17} "Jesus answered and said, Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father Who is in heaven." Jesus is saying, man did not reveal this to you, but God did.
Again. Flesh and blood represents humanity.
Matthew 16 and John 1 shows:
"Flesh, blood, and Man" =/= God.
"Flesh, blood, and Man" = Man.
So if John 3:5 is about being born from the womb, shouldn’t it say, flesh and blood, or at least man?
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
But it doesn’t. It says water.
When you pair John 3:5 with Mark 16:16, how can John 3:5 not be about baptism?
Mark 1:8 "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."
Mark 1 shows that there is a water baptism, and a spiritual baptism. This aligns with John 3:5, bringing the context of baptism into the picture.
​

What's So Special About Baptism?

God wants us to be baptized because it symbolizes our sins being washed away. When you go under water it is honoring His death in the grave, then when you come out it honors his resurrection. The old you dies, and the new you rises.
Colossians 2:12 says, "buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him."
Romans 6:4 "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Being baptism is a symbol of being born again. And Jesus was also baptized. And Jesus wants us to follow in His footsteps.
This is why the only proper way to be baptized is through full immersion, not sprinkling. There are no Bible verses that tell us to be sprinkled in the water.
Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
The Greek definition for "baptism" in Ephesians 4 is:
G908 - baptisma - βάπτισμα " immersion, submersion"

This week I was on vacation in Bucharest. Yesterday I went to a pharmacy in Bucharest to buy some nasal spray and in front of me in line there was a guy, a young man, buying something. The pharmacist lady was talking to him and unconsciously I heard that she said something about a student, she probably asked the client a question, to which he answered "no" in an extremely trembling voice and in a different tone. I looked up to look at them and I saw him reach out to take his wallet out of his pocket, but he dropped it on the floor. And when he was looking for the money in it to pay, his fingers were running between the bills as if he was unable to grasp any of them. After he paid, and the pharmacist handed him the bag of medicines, he grabbed it hard, paused for a second, and then turned around and walked out with quick, in pressed steps as if he was at the speed walking Olympics.
Passing by, later in the evening when I was returning from visiting some museums around Bucharest (by the way, beautiful city!) I saw that boy again in front of the same pharmacy waiting for an old woman who was just leaving the pharmacy. that woman was crying and that boy looked a bit guilty, gloomy as if he was caught doing something wrong. I would like to ask you, did something happen to a student in Bucharest these days or what was the phase? That boy didn't seem to have a lot of money or to be extremely rich, but he wasn't poor either, but he looked as if he had done some tricks with some pharmacies to make money
from what happened, something makes me believe that I witnessed a mother whose child, being a student, was killed/suffered something bad. was a student killed in Bucharest these days? is there a drug world? cartels

A friend and I are making a video called "How to go to heaven" and we've been studying deeper on this simple topic of 'how to go to heaven'.
I recently met someone who says baptism isn't required because of John 3:16 and similar verses. I am happy to hear other perspectives, especially before we release the video. For now, scripture tells me to be baptized to go to heaven, IF we are able and IF we are aware of it. It is the rule, but there are exceptions, like the thief on the cross. (I believe someone who only knows a portion of The Gospel can still be saved. For example, they accept John 3:16 and live up to ALL the light they know, God sees their heart and they will have eternal life.)
Below is an explanation of why Baptism is necessary (When possible and when informed).

Is Calling On The Name Of The Lord Enough?

God wants us to be baptized, but some people say that all you need to do is believe on Jesus and then you will be saved, because Acts 22:21 says, “Whosoever shall all on The Name of The Lord shall be saved” or even the famous John 3:16!!!!!!

You Must Review Every Data

But! To have an accurate view on any topic, whether it be the Bible or something secular, you have to review all the data on a topic. If you stop at 90 percent you may miss out on data that could change everything.
For example, there are 3 leaves on the ground and we need to know how many hidden flowers are there. You flip the first leaf. No flower. You flip the 2nd. No flower. So, if we stop here, then our conclusion would be that there are no flowers. But until you exhaust all the data, you won’t know the full truth. When you flip the last leaf you'll find a flower! If we didn’t keep checking, we would have believed a lie because there was a flower. So in order to have a clear understanding of how to go to heaven we have to look at all the Bible verses regarding that topic.
Jesus Himself says in Mark 16:16 "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Some say "Look, the 2nd half of the verse only says "he that believeth not will be damned". But that shouldn't negate the first half. The reason why believing on Jesus is emphasized more than any other step, is because it is the first step it, is the root of salvation. But repentance or baptism in it of itself does not save you. Baptism means nothing if you don’t first believe in Jesus because He is The One who paid our debt.
Acts 8:36-37 says, "Here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
You first need to believe in Jesus, before being baptized. So in Mark 16:16, unbelief in Jesus IS the root of not going to heaven. It does not need to say “he that believeth not AND is not baptized shall be damned”
John 3:18 says, "He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already"

You Need Accurate Context

For accurate research, you need accurate context.
The Bible says, “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat”
According to what we just read, we can literally eat from every tree. BUT, when we read the next verse, it now has the opposite meaning.
Genesis 2:17, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:"
Without true context, truth can be twisted. It’s like coming to a conclusion before someone finishes talking. You have to know the context. This concept even applies to the famous John 3:16, but first, let’s go back to Acts 2:21,
^{Acts 2:21,} "Peter said to them. Whosoever shall call on The Name of The Lord shall be saved."
The foundation of our salvation is based all on this. To believe on Jesus.
BUT, Peter wasn’t done preaching.
In the very same chapter Peter continues to preach.
^{Acts 22:37-38} "When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? ³⁸ Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins "
When reading in context, even the famous John 3:16 has baptism linked to salvation.
^{John 3:16} "For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
John 3:5 comes before John 3:16. And it says,
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
So when we read up to John 3:16, are we supposed to forget what He just said in verse 5?
Some people say to be born of the water is not baptism, but that it’s referring to being born from a human in a mothers womb.
Here’s why it IS baptism. John 1:12-13 says,
"¹²As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His Name: ¹³who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
Verse 13 speaks of 2 births. One is born of God, which is a spiritual birth. And the other is the opposite of a spiritual birth. Which is a fleshly birth from your mothers womb. This fleshly birth is linked to humanity. Flesh and blood. Flesh and blood do not equate to being born of God. They instead, represent humanity. It’s nature is physical, not spiritual.
^{Matthew 16:17} "Jesus answered and said, Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father Who is in heaven." Jesus is saying, man did not reveal this to you, but God did.
Again. Flesh and blood represents humanity.
Matthew 16 and John 1 shows:
"Flesh, blood, and Man" =/= God.
"Flesh, blood, and Man" = Man.
So if John 3:5 is about being born from the womb, shouldn’t it say, flesh and blood, or at least man?
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
But it doesn’t. It says water.
When you pair John 3:5 with Mark 16:16, how can John 3:5 not be about baptism?
Mark 1:8 "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."
Mark 1 shows that there is a water baptism, and a spiritual baptism. This aligns with John 3:5, bringing the context of baptism into the picture.
​

What's So Special About Baptism?

God wants us to be baptized because it symbolizes our sins being washed away. When you go under water it is honoring His death in the grave, then when you come out it honors his resurrection. The old you dies, and the new you rises.
Colossians 2:12 says, "buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him."
Romans 6:4 "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Being baptism is a symbol of being born again. And Jesus was also baptized. And Jesus wants us to follow in His footsteps.
This is why the only proper way to be baptized is through full immersion, not sprinkling. There are no Bible verses that tell us to be sprinkled in the water.
Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
The Greek definition for "baptism" in Ephesians 4 is:
G908 - baptisma - βάπτισμα " immersion, submersion"

I just want a sweet guy, skinny muscular, that’s all. Why is it so hard? I’m sick of the inappropriate, dick pic, nude requesting DMs. I DON’T EVEN HAVE NUDES TO SHARE! Who sits there with their naked ass body and goes “oh yeah. Perfect angle” LIKE NO, AIN’T NOBODY WANTING TO SEE SOME ABOUT TO POP ZIT LOOKING TESTICLES AND A SHAFT THICKER THAN THE HEAD! I’m getting off topic, I just want a guy to talk to that won’t be as (morally) stupid as a fucking rabies infested rat. I just want a man 😭

First Previous Next ​ ​

In a bustling mining town:

Jax had been enjoying himself. The war stories and barely believable tales of antics of the Humans he'd served with he told in the coffee parlors were popular among the intoxicated of both sexes, though the admiration and further libations from the men were far less captivating than the rapt attention a very pretty woman with a lithe figure and strong tail gave him. Comely indeed, and she would come to listen to him. Though it seemed to onlookers that he had captivated her, it was her dark pools of eyes that he had dove into, and found them deep and inescapable. She kept those eyes trained on him so long as he spoke, and so he spoke, seeing in those depths possibilities.
Indeed, Jax had begun to expect that if he were to ask Rae to accompany him to the upcoming autumn festival, she might not reject the notion. Even with troubling rumors about somebody attacking a neighboring nation, and the sudden vanishing of the Star Sailors from Star Council space were far from his mind, and the minds of the other coffee patrons parlor patrons. It was in this ease and comfort that he and many other Numiindan residents found their lives shattered by horror.
It began with the burning streaks of the wrecked Space Defense Force, more law enforcement than military, fell from the sky. He was just in the middle of a story about the time his buddy Erin had gotten stuck in his own armor when he stopped and said, "Does anybody else smell smoke?"
There was a general testing of the air by the group of variably intoxicated patrons, followed by a fruitless checking of datapads for the news. "Network's down," somebody in the small crowd said.
"Well, we'll just go outside and take a look," Jax said, and Rae subtly clasped his hand. Outside, the pair squeezed each other's hands so hard they hurt. The sky was streaked with gashes of billowing black smoke of destroyed ships and fighters, and what destroyed them was descending while raining hot plasma down on anything that looked vaguely like it might be fortified.
"The Ancestors preserve us," Rae whispered.
"I'm not going to wait on them," Jax said, "we need to get under cover now, and not just the lounge!"
Someone in the crowd said, "The mines! There are some pretty big chambers down there, and it's like, miles of rock to burn through."
"Good plan," Vex said, "If they're doing areal lances like that they don't care about collateral damage, everyone, split up in groups of three or four, and get as many people as you can to get to the mines."
"What if they follow us down?" Rae asked.
"We'll flood the mines. Hopefully they can't swim."
An hour later, a press of over a hundred panicked elderly and children were running along behind Jax. The majority of the parents and other adults had elected to buy time. Jax had to focus on his mission, save the civvies, get them under cover, to keep from bolting off to join them. "As long as the pups are alive," he muttered.
The sounds of shouting and plasma lance discharges spurred him and Rae on, and though he was obliged to lead the way, she insisted on bringing up the rear. She insisted that none of the injured were left behind. Then, they saw it, salvation. The gates to the mines, and behind them, the shaft plunging down beneath the rock. There were miners with plasma cutters and force axes at the gates, and Jax knew better than to relax. Even as the miners swung the gates open and escorted their panicked charges to the shaft elevator.
"We're getting ready to flood the main shaft, and everything but the vents to the largest chamber," one of the miners said, "get everyone up against the back wall, and pray the Ancestors remember us."
Jax just nodded and gripped his crowbar as he scanned the road they had run down saying, "I'm going to need fighters. We have to hold out until the Republic gets here."
"The Republic? You think they'll come?"
"Of course," Jax said with steel in his voice, "of course."
The next day, Jax held a meeting with the others he was thinking of as the leaders, or maybe other fighters, to tell them what he thought and hear what they thought in return. They had swam to an air pocket in one of the flooded tunnels and held their conversation in the dim light of a portable glow lantern to keep the civvies from panicking at what might be said. There Jax and Rae floated with Kai, a miner and the one who had suggested sheltering in the tunnels, Mei, an engineer in from the big city to help design an upgraded refining facility, and Ash, a man reluctant to divulge his past.
"So, we have about eight hundred civvies, none of whom are in fighting shape, no weapons, no food, and a highly defensible position," Jax opened, "I believe our first priority should be arming ourselves so we can raid the surface for food."
"The first aid kits are barely adequate. They're made to deal with maybe a localized plasma burn from a cutter malfunction, or to put temporary splints on a broken limb. Not lance wounds and to stabilize breaks for healing," Rae murmured softly.
"I did a little scouting," Kai said, "Just popping up in the vent covers, they didn't see me. I saw my house. What's left of it. Anyway, I know how to get to where there are some weapons we could get if we're quick. If we're quiet."
"The flooding did significant damage to the mines," Mei muttered. "I haven't seen any signs that it's getting worse, but the quakes will probably keep on. We will have to reassure the civilians. If they bombard the town from orbit though…"
"There's not much we can do about that," Jax said firmly, "so let's focus on what we can manage. Weapons, food, medicine."
"Blankets," Ash said, "The people are cold, scared. Blankets will help with morale. Survivors. There might be survivors."
"Weapons, food, weapons, blankets, and survivors. Okay, that's a start. Who wants to tell them?"
"Will the Republic really come?" Ash asked.
"They will come," Rex said firmly.
"I can tell them," Rae said as she reached out to clasp hands with Rex. He let her squeeze his hand once, and they dove down into the water to swim back to the main chamber.
The people were understandably stressed at the news that their only protectors would soon leave them alone, but they were reassured when Rae explained that they planned on raiding the surface for supplies and planned to be gone for a few hours at most.
Later, Ash was skulking around a police station, or at least the charred remnants of one, while Jax tried to see him doing so from inside the vent cover. He had been a little aprehensive of the man's claims that he could scout the building unnoticed, but the proof of the meat was inside the shell, so he took a chance. It paid off.
"All clear," Ash whispered from outside Jax's field of view.
"You made your point," Jax said, "good work."
"It's… it's not good in there."
Jax opened up the vent cover, and dropped to all fours to creep his way to the shattered building, and his companions did so behind him.
They squeezed through a gap in the rubble and slowly shifted the rubble until they had tunneled their way to the basement stairs, which they descended immediately. They tried to ignore the singed and shattered corpses of the police officers as they crawled past or over them. They failed at this. They had marginally more success in ignoring Rae's vomit at the grizzly task.
In the basement they found chemprop weapons, magacs, plasma casters, and long distance tasers in rifle and pistol configurations, as well as some light flak armor and personal shields. "Don't bother with the casters or tasers," Jax ordered as he wrapped his hands around the familiar shape of a rifle stock, "Terrans use these for a reason." The others deferrred to his experience, and Rae went to check the other basement rooms for medical supplies.
When she cried out, Rex and the others rushed into the adjoining room, but found no danger there. Only the chief of police, a magac pistol lay at his feet, and the wall to his left was painted in a sanguine splatter. "Nim," she almost moaned in grief.
"You knew him?" Ash asked.
"My uncle."
The others murmured their apologies, none of them strangers to such loss in the past day, and Ash pulled a discarded coat over the man taken by despair. "We have to make sure the people don't decide that this is a good idea," he softly murmured.
"Okay, see what else we can find for supplies here. Kai, can we get to a clinic from the tunnels?"
"Three of them."
"We'll hit the nearest one first, then we swim out to the bay and see if we can get anything from the fishery."
Then, they once again committed to the grizzly task of crawling through the rubble.
The clinic was miraculously intact, only a little exterior fire damage from the fighting, but it was also guarded. The invaders hadn't expected anyone to actually attack with weapons, as thus far most resistance had been fierce but only armed with improvised weapons. The two guards were relieved of their duties by magnetically accelerated iron chunks that left golf ball sized exit wounds in their backs before they even knew they were under attack. Inside, there was not only a treasure trove of medical supplies, which Rae directed them to take only the most versatile or in most dire need, but there were also prisoners in one of the exam rooms. They had injuries that indicated that they were painful but not lethal. Jax was furious.
The fishery offered enough food for the next few days, and their triumphant return kindled hope in the sheltering civilians that they might just hold out.

In low orbit over Numinda:

Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon surveyed his glorious conquest. Glad he was to have received orders to seek out resource rich planets, for instead of wasting his talents spilling unworthy blood to sate the thirst of Axzuur, he had instead found a race worthy of toiling for his glory. They could never be true warriors, Five days, and he had obtained control over the system and planet. Truly, the pathetic resisance offered by their so-called fleet had dismayed him, but the reports of the ferocity with which the males and some of the females on the orb below fight against his warriors armed only with what is to hand, and sometimes merely tooth and claw, excited him greatly.
It would be pleasing to elevate the lion's share of Axxaakk serfs to more worthy work, to more… worthy services. This new acquisition would even free up many serfs to become warriors, even, which would mean more sacrifices to Axzuur, which would mean greater favor. Although, there were still pockets of resistance across the planet. Even though his forces controlled the communication infrastructure for the planetary and superluminal networks, these pockets seemed to somehow act in concert to keep vital positions outside the Axxaakk's rightful reach.
It would seem that a mere scout group was insufficient, so he was being reinforced by, Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn, who had been reassigned to a subjugation group including a battleship, three frigates, and their escorts. This should provide sufficient warriors and equipment to properly subjigate the planet, freeing Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon up for the much more pleasant task of crushing the next planet's defenses. Just two days of further drudgery until Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn arrived to take on the unenviable task of crushing the indipendent spirits of the new serfs. At least he had a few specimens for his own research in the best methods to do so to occupy his time.
Two days later, Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn had sent his counterpart sprawling off of his own dais with a metalic backhand slap, "WHY ARE YOUR ESCORTS NOT INTERDICTING HYPERSPACE EXITS AROUND THIS POSITION?"
Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon staggered to his feet in a fury, "BECAUSE MY SCOUT FLOTILLA WIPED AWAY ALL RESISTANCE IN LESS THAN A DAY!"
"Observe," Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn said coldly as he slammed a data crystal into an input, and the display screen lit up with the scene of a Terran fleet engaging an extraction fleet, and far from being swept away, they were fighting the extraction fleet to a slow defeat.
"Is that a stone temple?" Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon blurted out.
"It is."
"Why?"
"To show they can," Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn said with disgust.
Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon's eyes went wide as he asked, "How did that curiser take hits from behind."
"The Terrans apparently use kinetic weaponry, they fired the munitions in a slingshot trajectory while another ship forced it to maneuver into the line of travel."
"The calculations involved…"
"It is my belief that this is not even the main fighting force of the Terran military, for observe further," Acolyte-Lord Narrex-Quinn twisted the crystal to display a split video of several systems on the screen. "These look like merchant vessels with guns strapped to them, and Priest-Lord Tiglach-Pilexer agrees that is likely the case. These fleets are likely auxiliaries sent out to probe our strength while the Terrans gather their true forces."
"Thank you for relaying this, I shall indeed run hyperspace interdiction at the next world."
"Your orders have changed. We are to extract what we can, and carry it off to the Dominion. The expeditionary fleet is insufficient."
Acolyte-Lord Gukea-Sarvon resisted the urge to spit upon the floor. "I too have information. These… these mammal-worms are worthy of at the very least toiling underneath the Axxaakk. Though their forces are defeated, the people fight on, just as the serfs did before they were broken and rebuilt to Axzuur's glory, may the stars tremble at his step."
"They are mammals, hold hostage their young, as we do for an unruly serf."
"This is a good plan, brother."
"We must not allow the Terrans to surprise us as they did Acolyte-Lord Xamxi-Avav."
First Previous Next ​ ​

Hello friends, So today I (19)f have come to a realization. I could easily make my father’s (42)m life a living hell if I could try. So a little back story. I am the eldest of my fathers 3 daughters. So when I was younger my father was terrible he physically abused me for years until one night he Sexually Assaulted me. At 11 years old my whole life was turned in a living hell, I was scared and the physical abuse never stopped until at 15 my father dropped me off at school screaming at me that I was worthless and if I couldn’t act right to not come back. and that is what I did. He continued with verbal abuse over text and call, telling me how worthless I was and how I am treating him terribly. Fast forward a few years at this point my parents had been well divorced for years. Although, we were still going through a custody battle with my sisters. To make a long story short, this court was in a town with maybe 200 people this being said things were kind of janky here. So the case is being held the bring a lawyer to talk to me about my parents and what has happened at this point I hadn’t told anyone I had been SA’d by my father. He asked me a few questions and didn’t write any of my answers down. the court hearing went on and I had confessed to my mother what my father had done years ago, due to the stress of the situation and the build ups of ptsd I had been having at the time. We went through a therapist and even spoke to a social worker about how I was SA’d all for this to be thrown in the thrash and told since my father was intoxicated and it was so long ago they couldn’t do anything. All the pain relived for nothing. I know this is all over the place but stay with me. Fast forward to our last hearing the court did not let me speak, the court did not hear any of my mother family but did hear my fathers. The court ruled that my father could keep my sisters and gave my mother supervised visits because my younger sister and father’s family that my mom manipulated me in to lying about the abuse I endured all of my childhood. While my younger sisters had also endured his abuse and his family had seen it. I haven’t seen my sisters in 2 years. I haven’t spoke to them either I have no clue what has happened to them. This being said, Nothing can be legally solved now every thing has been “resolved” via court. I want to take revenge, I have a throw away account I felt exposing him through could work. But I need legal an down right evil revenge on the man who took everything light in my life away who has made me a trainwreck. I have worked on my self mentally to finally feel relief from what happened and I have healed but I feel deep down I can’t full heal until he feels sadness like did, anger like i did. Thank you reddit friends in advance!

Hi all, I (27/195 cm/111 kg) just had an endoscopy and colonoscopy today. I've had a history of health issues that began with papillary carcinoma in thyroid and hyperparathyroidism which were resolved by (para)thyroidectomy and RAI. Then I had an emergency surgery on my gallbladder in January. After that, my health never really recovered, and I've been facing deficiencies in Vitamin B12, iron, magnesium, and folic acid alongside reflux and insulin resistance (which seems early enough and still reversible). My nutritionist requested an endoscopy and colonoscopy to find out why I haven't been absorbing these nutrients properly.
Although everything is currently being biopsied and I won't have the full results back until Tuesday, the preliminary results are as follows.
Endoscopy:

• Congestive Antral Gastritis
• Probable Endobrachyœsophage (Barrett's Esophagus) complicating "cardial incompetence" [béance cardiale]
• Beginning esophagal candida

Colonoscopy:

• Rectosigmoiditis [recto-sigmoidite congestive]
• Inflamed Coecum [coecum congestif]

From talking with the GI after, she seems to think that it's bacterial, but I'm super nervous about all of this.
I'm only 27 years old and am exhausted from all of these health issues. Any guidance or support would be deeply appreciated.

A friend and I are making a video called "How to go to heaven" and we've been studying deeper on this simple topic of 'how to go to heaven'. I recently met someone who says baptism isn't required because of John 3:16 and similar verses. I am happy to hear other perspectives, especially before we release the video. For now, scripture tells me to be baptized to go to heaven, IF we are able and IF we are aware of it. It is the rule, but there are exceptions, like the thief on the cross. (I believe someone who only knows a portion of The Gospel can still be saved. For example, they accept John 3:16 and live up to ALL the light they know, God sees their heart and they will have eternal life.) Below is an explanation of why Baptism is necessary (When possible and when informed). Is Calling On The Name Of The Lord Enough? God wants us to be baptized, but some people say that all you need to do is believe on Jesus and then you will be saved, because Acts 22:21 says, “Whosoever shall all on The Name of The Lord shall be saved” or even the famous John 3:16!!!!!! You Must Review Every Data But! To have an accurate view on any topic, whether it be the Bible or something secular, you have to review all the data on a topic. If you stop at 90 percent you may miss out on data that could change everything. For example, there are 3 leaves on the ground and we need to know how many hidden flowers are there. You flip the first leaf. No flower. You flip the 2nd. No flower. So, if we stop here, then our conclusion would be that there are no flowers. But until you exhaust all the data, you won’t know the full truth. When you flip the last leaf you'll find a flower! If we didn’t keep checking, we would have believed a lie because there was a flower. So in order to have a clear understanding of how to go to heaven we have to look at all the Bible verses regarding that topic. Jesus Himself says in Mark 16:16 "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Some say "Look, the 2nd half of the verse only says "he that believeth not will be damned". But that shouldn't negate the first half. The reason why believing on Jesus is emphasized more than any other step, is because it is the first step it, is the root of salvation. But repentance or baptism in it of itself does not save you. Baptism means nothing if you don’t first believe in Jesus because He is The One who paid our debt. Acts 8:36-37 says, "Here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” You first need to believe in Jesus, before being baptized. So in Mark 16:16, unbelief in Jesus IS the root of not going to heaven. It does not need to say “he that believeth not AND is not baptized shall be damned” John 3:18 says, "He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already" You Need Accurate Context For accurate research, you need accurate context. The Bible says, “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat” According to what we just read, we can literally eat from every tree. BUT, when we read the next verse, it now has the opposite meaning. Genesis 2:17, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:" Without true context, truth can be twisted. It’s like coming to a conclusion before someone finishes talking. You have to know the context. This concept even applies to the famous John 3:16, but first, let’s go back to Acts 2:21, Acts 2:21, "Peter said to them. Whosoever shall call on The Name of The Lord shall be saved." The foundation of our salvation is based all on this. To believe on Jesus. BUT, Peter wasn’t done preaching. In the very same chapter Peter continues to preach. Acts 22:37-38 "When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins " When reading in context, even the famous John 3:16 has baptism linked to salvation. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:5 comes before John 3:16. And it says, "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." So when we read up to John 3:16, are we supposed to forget what He just said in verse 5? Some people say to be born of the water is not baptism, but that it’s referring to being born from a human in a mothers womb. Here’s why it IS baptism. John 1:12-13 says, "12As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His Name: 13who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." Verse 13 speaks of 2 births. One is born of God, which is a spiritual birth. And the other is the opposite of a spiritual birth. Which is a fleshly birth from your mothers womb. This fleshly birth is linked to humanity. Flesh and blood. Flesh and blood do not equate to being born of God. They instead, represent humanity. It’s nature is physical, not spiritual. Matthew 16:17 "Jesus answered and said, Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father Who is in heaven." Jesus is saying, man did not reveal this to you, but God did. Again. Flesh and blood represents humanity. Matthew 16 and John 1 shows: "Flesh, blood, and Man" =/= God. "Flesh, blood, and Man" = Man. So if John 3:5 is about being born from the womb, shouldn’t it say, flesh and blood, or at least man? "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." But it doesn’t. It says water. When you pair John 3:5 with Mark 16:16, how can John 3:5 not be about baptism? Mark 1:8 "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." Mark 1 shows that there is a water baptism, and a spiritual baptism. This aligns with John 3:5, bringing the context of baptism into the picture. What's So Special About Baptism? God wants us to be baptized because it symbolizes our sins being washed away. When you go under water it is honoring His death in the grave, then when you come out it honors his resurrection. The old you dies, and the new you rises. Colossians 2:12 says, "buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him." Romans 6:4 "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." Being baptism is a symbol of being born again. And Jesus was also baptized. And Jesus wants us to follow in His footsteps.

A friend and I are making a video called "How to go to heaven" and we've been studying deeper on this simple topic of 'how to go to heaven'.
I recently met someone who says baptism isn't required because of John 3:16 and similar verses. I am happy to hear other perspectives, especially before we release the video. For now, scripture tells me to be baptized to go to heaven, IF we are able and IF we are aware of it. It is the rule, but there are exceptions, like the thief on the cross. (I believe someone who only knows a portion of The Gospel can still be saved. For example, they accept John 3:16 and live up to ALL the light they know, God sees their heart and they will have eternal life.)
Below is an explanation of why Baptism is necessary (When possible and when informed).

Is Calling On The Name Of The Lord Enough?

God wants us to be baptized, but some people say that all you need to do is believe on Jesus and then you will be saved, because Acts 22:21 says, “Whosoever shall all on The Name of The Lord shall be saved” or even the famous John 3:16!!!!!!

You Must Review Every Data

But! To have an accurate view on any topic, whether it be the Bible or something secular, you have to review all the data on a topic. If you stop at 90 percent you may miss out on data that could change everything.
For example, there are 3 leaves on the ground and we need to know how many hidden flowers are there. You flip the first leaf. No flower. You flip the 2nd. No flower. So, if we stop here, then our conclusion would be that there are no flowers. But until you exhaust all the data, you won’t know the full truth. When you flip the last leaf you'll find a flower! If we didn’t keep checking, we would have believed a lie because there was a flower. So in order to have a clear understanding of how to go to heaven we have to look at all the Bible verses regarding that topic.
Jesus Himself says in Mark 16:16 "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Some say "Look, the 2nd half of the verse only says "he that believeth not will be damned". But that shouldn't negate the first half. The reason why believing on Jesus is emphasized more than any other step, is because it is the first step it, is the root of salvation. But repentance or baptism in it of itself does not save you. Baptism means nothing if you don’t first believe in Jesus because He is The One who paid our debt.
Acts 8:36-37 says, "Here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
You first need to believe in Jesus, before being baptized. So in Mark 16:16, unbelief in Jesus IS the root of not going to heaven. It does not need to say “he that believeth not AND is not baptized shall be damned”
John 3:18 says, "He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already"

You Need Accurate Context

For accurate research, you need accurate context.
The Bible says, “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat”
According to what we just read, we can literally eat from every tree. BUT, when we read the next verse, it now has the opposite meaning.
Genesis 2:17, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:"
Without true context, truth can be twisted. It’s like coming to a conclusion before someone finishes talking. You have to know the context. This concept even applies to the famous John 3:16, but first, let’s go back to Acts 2:21,
^{Acts 2:21,} "Peter said to them. Whosoever shall call on The Name of The Lord shall be saved."
The foundation of our salvation is based all on this. To believe on Jesus.
BUT, Peter wasn’t done preaching.
In the very same chapter Peter continues to preach.
^{Acts 22:37-38} "When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? ³⁸ Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins "
When reading in context, even the famous John 3:16 has baptism linked to salvation.
^{John 3:16} "For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
John 3:5 comes before John 3:16. And it says,
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
So when we read up to John 3:16, are we supposed to forget what He just said in verse 5?
Some people say to be born of the water is not baptism, but that it’s referring to being born from a human in a mothers womb.
Here’s why it IS baptism. John 1:12-13 says,
"¹²As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His Name: ¹³who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
Verse 13 speaks of 2 births. One is born of God, which is a spiritual birth. And the other is the opposite of a spiritual birth. Which is a fleshly birth from your mothers womb. This fleshly birth is linked to humanity. Flesh and blood. Flesh and blood do not equate to being born of God. They instead, represent humanity. It’s nature is physical, not spiritual.
^{Matthew 16:17} "Jesus answered and said, Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father Who is in heaven." Jesus is saying, man did not reveal this to you, but God did.
Again. Flesh and blood represents humanity.
Matthew 16 and John 1 shows:
"Flesh, blood, and Man" =/= God.
"Flesh, blood, and Man" = Man.
So if John 3:5 is about being born from the womb, shouldn’t it say, flesh and blood, or at least man?
"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of The Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
But it doesn’t. It says water.
When you pair John 3:5 with Mark 16:16, how can John 3:5 not be about baptism?
Mark 1:8 "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."
Mark 1 shows that there is a water baptism, and a spiritual baptism. This aligns with John 3:5, bringing the context of baptism into the picture.
​

What's So Special About Baptism?

God wants us to be baptized because it symbolizes our sins being washed away. When you go under water it is honoring His death in the grave, then when you come out it honors his resurrection. The old you dies, and the new you rises.
Colossians 2:12 says, "buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him."
Romans 6:4 "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Being baptism is a symbol of being born again. And Jesus was also baptized. And Jesus wants us to follow in His footsteps.

Okay, let me preface this by saying that I haven't read a lot of the comics and that most of the information I know is second hand (that's what this theory comprises of, not 100% accurate information, so feel free to correct me if I missed something).
But I was thinking, in ATSV, there's a lot of talk about "destiny" and "sticking to canon". The whole point of the movie, and what Miles resolves to do in the end, is that he's going to write his own story no matter what the higher power of reality says.
This is good and all but then I kept thinking about the title of the next movie "BEYOND the Spiderverse". It made me think, is Miles simply going to break the rules of the Multiverse or is he actually going to break THROUGH the Multiverse?
I mean, these movies have been pretty clear that they all take place in a comic, so what if in BTSV, Miles breaks through reality and meets the being(s) that control/ write the Multiverse?
I know there's a character in the comics called "The One Above All" and I think that would be a pretty good guess as to who's pulling the strings behind all this. Of course, I know they can't get Stan Lee or Steve Ditko to play him (I also know he was based off Jack Kirby in the comics so that's also not an option) but what if they get Miles' creators (Brian Michael Bendis and Sarah Pichelli) to play that role? (Or should they are designed to look like Stan and/or Ditko but they're played by someone else?)
I think it'd be hella funny if we just had Miles chew out his creators for giving every Spider-man the same story. Then, he'd tell them to be original and give him a happy ending. It would definitely help push the message of ATSV and allow Miles to do his own thing uninterrupted. (AND it'd be one big nod to the joke that Spider-man writers are incapable of letting the character feel happiness by actually giving Miles a satisfying conclusion.)
There's also the option of the Beyonders. I don't know much about these guys so if you wanna enlighten me please do but my limited info on them is why I hadn't included them in my theory.
What do you guys think? Is Miles set to just break the flow of Spider-man stories in the Multiverse or is he gonna actually go beyond the borders of his reality?

Yesterday as I was getting ready to jump in the shower before work, my wife (A) was playing with our almost 3 year old daughter (B). B sees a bruise on A’s leg and asks “what’s that?” A says “it’s a bruise” and B replies “why” and my wife says jokingly “daddy hit me.” My jaw dropped to the floor; to be clear I’ve never been in a fight, have never hit anyone, man or woman and definitely never A. I told A that’s not ok and she corrected herself with B, that she fell or ran into something. I jumped in the shower and for sure had shower thoughts, a little time to process and realize this isn’t the first time. After I finish showering, I approached my wife and told her I was mad at her and why, but then I had to leave right away because I needed to be at work early. When I got to work, I composed myself and sent a lengthy text, and her response was to go on the offense and throw her usual go-tos in my face (how I’m on my phone too much, how much more she does for B than me, etc). Nice whataboutism.
Maybe six months ago I heard A say to B, again jokingly, “daddy doesn’t love you” and I freaked the fuck out. My divorced parents used to shit talk each other all the time and I hated it, like they were trying to poison me again at the other. I told A don’t badmouth me to our daughter, I’m very aware that she’s always listening. I’m always very careful what I say around B, especially since an incident while I was driving with her in the car and made some comment to another driver, which she repeated. Luckily, it was tame, only “later loser” but it shows my point. B is in that stage now where she not only hears everything, she’s often repeating everything.
Case in point, just this morning. After dropping my wife off at work and garage saling, I was carrying B up the stairs and I said to her, “B, I love you. Do you love daddy?” and she says to me “no, you’re rude.” Rude is a word my wife uses and overuses. So clearly she’s poisoning the well, whether she means to or not. I’m going to have a long talk with A, but I don’t know what to say. Evidently our talk six months ago did nothing. Generally we have a really good, strong marriage but A’s continuing bad behavior has me extremely vexed.
​
TLDR - just like the title says, my wife has been badmouthing me to our daughter and I don't know what to do about it.

Me: 39M, healthy, tall, educated, reasonably attractive, not on any medication, full hair, finances not quite what they should be at my age (that's what academia does to you) but better than ever before and improving, so no obvious red flags as far as I can tell and no downward tendencies in the last few years that would be an obvious reason for why I'm in a sexless marriage. I'm as fuckable as I ever were. So it's probably not that. I also have no unorthodox sexual desires, let alone recently developed ones, so it's not that either. I used to enjoy a hedonistic sex life in my 20s until I realised that it didn't fulfil me. Started looking for more calm waters and more meaningful connections, fell deeply in love with who would become my wife. The way I'm phrasing the story is relevant because sex was never a priority with her from the start. It was good, not great, it was fun/frequent enough but I loved her for other reasons and I mostly believe I still do.
Her: 37F, still very attractive to me, her body outright refuses to age, used to have some chronic endocrinological health conditions (thyroid issues) that were resolved beautifully when she changed her diet into a (now not so strict anymore) paleo direction and became a bit obsessed with gut health, gluten-free, yoga, supplements, etc. But her health seems to be proving her right ever since. Otherwise in good health and no psychological condition or trauma I'm aware of and no medication other than thyroid hormones.
Timeline: We met in 2010, split up for almost a year in 2015 (she left and asked me to take her back), we decided to go all in after that. Started trying to have kids around 2017, which turned sex into a chore with obsessive timing and zero passion whatsoever from her side. That phase really took the joy out of it for me as well and I was glad when we decided to stop and instead go with IVF, wich got us a wonderful little boy and my favourite human in 2019. There was no diagnosis that would have explained the difficulties. IVF took a second attempt as well. We also got married in 2018 but since then have had sex for fun exactly twice (once in 2018 and once in 2019). And of course it wasn't great, but why would it be after such a long time? I really enjoyed the intimacy with her though and suspected that we'd be able to have actual fun again. Interestingly she initiated both times (I have stopped trying a long time ago.) and both times happened on vacation in a hotel room. Make of that one what you will, psychologists. Maybe she was trying to find out if optimal conditions would make her enjoy it, I don't know. She's not easy to talk to about these things and acts very intuitively.
Fast forward to now. She has zero interest in sex and/or intimacy whatsoever, she says she never masturbates, has no sexual thoughts or desires whatsoever, she has just become completely colourblind to sexuality. She is a non-sexual entity and I've kind of started accepting her that way. But sex isn't the only thing that's lacking in our relationship. Any kind of non-sexual intimacy is extremely rare and our emotional connection is clearly damaged, as we both don't seem to show the kind of resilience and patience with each other anymore that family life demands of partners. I'm under the impression that couples who have a sex life are just more resistant to outside stress. Well, we clearly don't have that anymore. We're a functional team, most of the time. She's a wonderful mother, we still have our moments, and I don't think our marriage is 100% doomed quite yet. But I'm feeling some resentment and maybe even contempt building up on both sides when times are stressful and my general level of frustration shows.
And I honestly don't think anyone else but myself is to blame for my decisions. I don't feel deceived in any way and I'm also not viewing her decline to zero as in any way linked to external issues, trauma or health. I knew perfectly well that her sex drive and probably her whole experience of sex was near the lower limit of what I'd be able to live with, even in our 20s. I knew that she was just wired a little differently and that there would always be a chance that things could get worse. Her pregnancy issues kind of confirmed that intuition. Interestingly, her sex drive faded even more with her improving health, if she wasn't pretending that she ever had it in the first place. I couldn't blame her. I also appreciated (and still do) the great influence she is on my life in terms of values and self-care. Choosing her was like eating my vegetables. Maybe even punishing myself a bit for the life I've had before (again, nothing crazy, just flings with lots of women and no attachment). But it was eating my vegetables with someone I truly loved and who was (and still is) crazy attractive to me. But I should have seen this coming. It was wishful thinking all along. And that's completely on me.
So what now? Ever since my Dad passed away somewhat surprisingly in his late 50s, I'm starting to ask myself how many years of health I have left and I'm starting to think that I cannot live like this until I die. The idea of having sex with her now seems more weird and awkward to me than with a literal stranger, because of all the history and baggage. I honestly can't see myself doing that anytime soon but I'm also sure that it won't be asked of me. I'm going through some kind of midlife crisis 15 years too early, but for pretty much exactly the same hormonal reasons (on my wife's end).
Here are the options that I would suggest if I were the reader:

1. Suck it up. Life could be worse. I have a somewhat functional marriage and a lovely son who needs a functional family. We are his world and he deserves his world not to be fucked with. Pun intended. All the sex I've had in my 20s didn't make me happy either. Eventually my testosterone levels will drop and I will find more appreciation for the extra time I have. During this marriage, I've painted some badass Warhammer armies. But then again, my early midlife crisis is kicking in hard right now. I'm not ready to die. Maybe using something like excessive exercise or a new hobby etc... could it be possible to redirect the unused sexual energy. Does anyone have experience with something like that? Does it get better or worse if you hit the gym 6 times a week?
   
2. Seek Professional advice. I'm pretty sure at this point that I couldn't get her to seek medical advice. She has no unmet need, I do. Call it selfish, maybe this is something I need to bring up more. As far as she is concerned she has never been a very sexual person. Psychological: No idea. My wife will be very skeptical because she's a therapist herself (not for sexual issues though) so she probably knows the limitations better than anyone. Maybe she's just comfortable with the situation and has no regard for how I feel, so there is no pressure to fix things.
   
3. Leave. I couldn't do that to my son. I don't want to talk to him at 16 or whatever (if he still talks to me then) and tell him sorry son, that you had a fragmented, guilt-ridden and emotionally confusing childhood, but I had to leave because turns out I really like pussy. Impossible. Really not the kind of life the little guy deserves. So hard no. Of course this doesn't mean that my marriage won't blow up in my face eventually but I see no need to pull that plug preemptively.
   
4. Talk her into an open marriage. Not gonna work. She actually brought that up herself, as if I had asked already. And despite not wanting sex, I believe a total lack of jealousy would be horseman of the apocalypse, more than anything else.
   
5. Cheat and don't get caught. I'm thinking about this "solution", also knowing that some day I will have the opportunity to do something really stupid after three drinks and possibly will end up paying for it dearly. So why not do it intelligently instead? After about 3 years of sexlessness I hooked up with an old acquaintance from my university days a few times. It was incredibly easy for me to do, no guilt whatsoever. Because after all, I clearly wasn't giving anything to her that my wife would have wanted. Whatever we have isn't monogamy, it's zero-gamy, so to speak (couldn't be bothered to look up the greek word). I guess that's what you get for viewing your wife as a non-sexual entity. It felt amazing to be appreciated and the experience itself was a blast, but I wasn't able to fully relax because instead of guilt, I felt a sense of shame because I never thought this is the man I was going to be and also a kind of paranoia for fear of getting caught and destroying my son's family in the process. Taking off your wedding ring before entering a hotel room is such a gut-wrenching degree of personal failure that I dread ever being in that situation again (strangely that move was out of respect for the institution, isn't that absurd? Of course my friend knew I was married). Also the fear of getting another woman pregnant or jealous etc.. is a fear I'm not sure I'd be able to cope with long term. Ultimately, I'm not sure if that means that this path isn't for me or if I'd just need to get used to the pressures. Right now I don't want to. But how do you even approach "ethical" cheating? Lying to one woman is stressful, lying to two is bound to fail. So given that your affair needs to know that she's just that, what kind of woman is both comfortable in a situation like that AND trustworthy/stable enough for you to gladly put the fate of what's left of your family into her hands? It doesn't seem worth it and even though said former uni friend is probably both of those things, she has her own issues (and a failing marriage) too, and ironically, it seems wrong to be part of that in any way. So am I looking for a woman with lower ethical standards than my own here? How do you even approach that? Cheaters, please let me know how you do it. No judgement.
   
6. Prostitution. No. Just no. For a million reasons. Feel free to try to change my mind but no.
   

Here is what I am doing though. In order to fight my early onset midlife crisis, I made a pact with a friend who's also turning 40 by the end of the year to try to get ripped until our respective birthdays. I've been into some martial arts in the past but extreme personal fitness has never been a real goal of mine so this is what I'll be doing until the end of the year, hoping that spiking my testosterone isn't going to be all it does, thereby increasing the chance of doing stupid things. I'm hoping that being physically exhausted all the time makes me calmer and better able to vent my frustration and looking the best I ever have might also serve as a test for whether there is any sexuality left in my wife at all or if everything is truly lost and dead in that department. I'll also keep it in my pants for now as there doesn't seem to be a solution.
Thank you for your time, any comment is very much appreciated, including those telling me to grow a pair.