Popular Comments Across MetaFilter

By phunniemee in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

phunniemee — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:10:50 GMT

I'm really not sure how I'd manage to call it off this close to the wedding date.

I know personally so many divorced women who had this thought prior to their marriage, and I indirectly know many, many more. They went through with a marriage they already felt iffy about because the inertia wrapped up in the wedding event felt too big. And then they were stuck. If you are having this thought, the marriage is already over.

Because this is SO COMMON, several years ago I decided this was a service I was going to offer any woman in my life upon the announcement of her engagement: I will call it off for you if this thought crosses your mind. I will call your grandma and let her down, I will call the caterer, I will call the hotel where you've got rooms blocked. I am certain there are friends in your life who would also help you with this.

You are NOT alone and you do NOT have to affect the entire course of the rest of your life because of some party plans.

By ftrtts in "Big Mean Trans Thread" on MetaTalk

ftrtts — Sun, 29 Mar 2026 08:38:24 GMT

Transphobia is routine on this website. We get textbook, overt TERFs a couple times a year. We discuss a transphobic incident on MetaTalk once every month or two. To a large extent, I think this is a reflection of the world. We are a sufficiently large, public, US-centric community that talks a lot of politics in 2026. But I also think we could respond more effectively:

1. We need transphobia-aware moderation. Historically, moderation of transphobia has been "delete the transphobic comment for being against the guidelines" and then "scold mefites for responding to it." This needs to change. Mods need to justify deletions of transphobic comments with specific reasons that demonstrate an understanding of transphobia. For example: "Scaremongering about men pretending to be women is a classic transmisogynist trope. We don't do that here. Comment deleted for transphobia. If you do this again, you will be banned." Mods should not scold trans people for responding to transphobia.

2. We need mod coverage. Are mods officially not working weekends? I hope the switch to volunteers will address this, but if not then this should be made very clear. Moderation can only be effective if it happens within some reasonable timeframe.

In the following two points, I am primarily addressing cis mefites, but my thinking is born out of reflecting about my own participation on this site as a trans person:

3. We need to collectively round down when evaluating low-effort bigotry. In that thread, someone addressed the transphobic commenter with "On the off chance that you are willing to listen." This is an example of rounding up. When dealing with low-effort bigotry, rounding up is counterproductive. If they are posting in bad faith, you are giving them more credit than they deserve. If they are posting low-effort bigotry because they are triggered, you are inviting them to post a followup, which will probably also be filled with bigotry. Finally, by playing the role of the patient, willing-to-explain mefite, you're setting up another (likely trans) mefite to look angry and irrational by comparison. This is where we fail over and over as a community that historically has loved the idea of being 'polite' towards bigots.

4. Refuting an argument point-by-point is not the only way to challenge bigotry. It's sometimes not the best way. When someone is posting drive-by bigotry, a direct point-by-point refutation is expensive to both write and read, perhaps especially so if you're trans. It can work, but you're starting at a disadvantage. Other ways to respond:

• Sometimes, anger is appropriate. As a trans person, seeing a timely "what the fuck" after a bigoted comment makes me feel much better than seeing a five paragraph essay.

• Sometimes, it's better to just move the conversation forward. I like this approach. Figure out what triggered the bigot and continue that conversation. Here I always think of Toni Morrison saying that the purpose of racism is distraction.

• Long term, I hope we can lean on flagging. Flagging only works if we have effective moderation (See #1 and #2) but I think it is the best approach when it works.

• Finally, if you must engage with the argument directly, I suggest framing it as "to anyone reading this who's confused, let me explain why this comment sucks" instead of "let me try and convince you that you are wrong."

These approaches all understand one thing: your audience is not the bigot - it's everyone else who is reading!

And with that, I am logging off for the rest of the weekend.

By hepta in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

hepta — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:48:56 GMT

Sorry, maybe a total derail but you can't touch the thermostat while somebody's driving is a completely incorrect take. That person immediately seems either to have totally different norms or else is very invested in coming up with a justification for their shitty behaviour.

By Sweetchrysanthemum in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

Sweetchrysanthemum — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:10:39 GMT

I wish I could sit down and have a three hour long coffee with you and talk this out. Nothing you've written here changes any of what I said last time.

You said above it doesn't feel "fair" to cancel the wedding. My tough love response to this is "who cares?!"

You should only get married if you are truly deep in your bones excited to build a life with the other person even if they're not on their best behaviour (which your partner clearly is right now and even on best behaviour doesn't sound...kind to you).

It doesn't matter if it's fair; you are allowed to be wildly unfair if it means not legally enmeshing yourself with someone who doesn't make you feel 100% safe and joyful who meaningfully improves the quality of your life.

By phunniemee in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

phunniemee — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:31:56 GMT

I think your husband and rude and controlling. I don't have productive advice for what you should do about it, but I do want to validate it.

By jacquilynne in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

jacquilynne — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:17:23 GMT

What is the cycle of abuse?

He has not changed and he will not change and this was never a communication issue.

Your abuser knows you are serious about leaving him because you did, but also that he only has to hold out on not abusing you for 1 more month before you are legally bound to him in ways that will make it more difficult for you to escape and 2 more months before you are publicly bound to him in ways that will make it more embarrassing for you to escape.

The therapist also mentioned that people do much worse things to each other and stay together anyway

Your therapist perpetuated exactly the problem that is the reason why you shouldn't go to therapy with abusers. I mean, yes, it is probably true that people do much worse things to each other and stay together anyway. But here are a few problems with using that information as a reason why you should stay:
1. It assumes that you two are 'doing things to each other' and not that he is abusing you. That is continuing to assign blame to you for triggering him.
2. It assumes that together is, by default, a better state than not together, that it is okay and maybe even necessary to endure a bit of abuse in order to keep the relationship together because the alternative -- not being in a relationship with this specific person or not being in a relationship at all -- is somehow worse.
3. Your standard for the way you are willing to be treated doesn't need to depend on the way other people allow themselves to be treated. He makes you scared and unhappy. Just because other people have it worse doesn't make you less scared and unhappy.

By octaviabutlerfan in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

octaviabutlerfan — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 18:07:16 GMT

In what way are those examples "trivial and dumb"? On the contrary, I found them absolutely chilling on many different, serious levels.

Just for some perspective, I'm a therapist, and if someone came to me solely with these examples, I personally would refuse to do couples counseling with them because it is unethical to engage in couples counseling when one of the partners is abusive.

I would only be willing to meet for individual therapy with A.

By mephron in "Big Mean Trans Thread" on MetaTalk

mephron — Sat, 28 Mar 2026 20:21:35 GMT

Hi!

This is the first one of these that actually got transphobes in it, so I must be doing something right. Honestly, the expressions of support for me have been a huge personal help for me, and I am touched and a little sniffly seeing it.

(One of the things coming out as trans has done to me is that I'm more likely to cry at stuff. I nearly cried at the PA Motor Vehicles office on Thursday when I finally got my Real ID with my Real Name, not my deadname, on it, and thanked that person so much.)

What I said in my (second) reply to Grokus is true: making those posts hurts sometimes. But it's important to document it, to show it to people who might not see it in their regular lives. And yes, there's a lot of bad news, but that's why I also look for the good news - it helps me bandage things up.

Also, if anyone wants to give me any kind of sponsorship, I can provide my paypal.me, venmo, and ko.fi links!

(Kidding!!)

By onomatomania in "Claude Code is written with Claude Code" on MeFi

onomatomania — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 11:14:26 GMT

they have 50+ functions with _DEPRECATED in the name that are still actively called in production

Son, I got bad news to tell you about every large code base, ever.

By Stacey in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

Stacey — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:15:33 GMT

I believe meaningful change about uncontrolled anger *can* happen . I do not believe it can happen in three months. I do not believe someone who accounts for his behavior with "I was trying to upset you" rather than taking responsibility, or who didn't believe you when you said you were scared, is anywhere near making meaningful progress.

I believe anyone in your life who loves you would rather eat the cost of some travel reservations than to have you move ahead with marrying and having children with someone who has not yet made meaningful change and then *sustained* it, on the order of years rather than weeks. No one who loves you would want this for you.

Please cancel the wedding. If you really feel you must keep trying to work this out, do it without a wedding ring. Preserve your ability to leave without legal ties.

But if you do nothing else, hold off on getting pregnant. You can make choices for yourself that are really not okay to make for children, and a life with this guy as he is now is one of those choices. Don't subject your hypothetical children to this.

By Winnie the Proust in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

Winnie the Proust — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:32:28 GMT

It is not a good idea to get married because your fiance wants to get married.

It is not a good idea to get married because calling off the wedding would inconvenience some friends and relatives.

It is not a good idea to get married because your mother will be mad at you.

It is not a good idea to get married because that's what will be best for other people.

You should only get married because that's what you want and that's what will be best for you for the rest of your life.

p.s. The therapist sounds terrible.

By Blue Jello Elf in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

Blue Jello Elf — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 19:20:58 GMT

The fact that everyone has to go to bed when Spouse B wants to go to bed, and that Spouse B is micromanaging another adult's pajamas is a *real* eyebrow-raiser. Some of the specifics from the other examples are worse, for sure. But that one's such a huge red flag about how entitled they feel to control everyone else in the family.

By EarnestDeer in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

EarnestDeer — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:56:52 GMT

"The standard pattern for this quarrel would be for A to object that B was being unkind and bossy, seems to mostly express annoyance instead of warmth, and doesn't show sensitivity to A's feelings when she communicates them. B will argue that his annoyance was justified because A spoke up in the wrong manner or at the wrong time, that A is just imagining any negative affect perceived in subsequent interactions, and that A is the aggressor for avoiding B after this."

DARVO = deny, attack, reverse victim and offender

By Faff in "'I thought, what the hell have I done?'" on MeFi

Faff — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 06:04:10 GMT

"Realistically, Swizzo's just not my cup of tea"

and the prize for Most Australian Shortening of a Country's Name goes to....

By jb in "Craig Newmark: "Billionaires, Stop Whining and Give Your Money Away"" on MeFi

jb — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 16:14:48 GMT

I know almost nothing about Craig of Craigslist - including his last name (until this link). But, based on this brief article, I think he has his head screwed on just right. He knows that he doesn't "deserve" to be rich, it's an accident of having the right skills at the right time and in literally the right place in San Francisco. (I mean, he could have done the same in Cornerbrook, Newfoundland, and he would have ended up with a useful local website that probably wouldn't have had so many users and thus spread around the world.)

That said, this article that was linked as being related is even more interesting: The Impossible Math of Philanthropy. tl;dr: "More often than not, charities work to mitigate harms caused by business. Every year, corporations externalize trillions in costs to society and the planet. Nonprofits form to absorb those costs but have at their disposal only a tiny portion of the profits that corporations were able to generate by externalizing those costs in the first place. This is what makes charity such a good deal for businesses and their owners: They can earn moral credit for donating a penny to a problem they made a dollar creating."

Anand Giridharadas also has a very entertaining (and cynic-creating) book focused on the "elite charade of changing the world".

This is not a criticism of Craig at all, or most of the people giving their money away. He is, in the scheme of the rich and powerful, just one not-that-big person and is no more responsible for the system than I am for the plastic in my (fake) recycling.

But it's good to remember that charity is a stopgap, a not-very-sticky bandaid for systemic issues like poverty. I'm still donating to my local foodbank, but I really wish I didn't have to, and instead could give that money to pigeon groups or family history societies or whatever I liked because I knew that no one was hungry.

----

and because this topic is so huge - you can look at the giving from the point of view to where it goes, or you can just think about the impact of the giving on the giver. It probably would be better for the megarich themselves to have most of their money given/taken away; being that separated from the rest of society and having that much power in their hands isn't good for them, either.

By secret about box in "Big Mean Trans Thread" on MetaTalk

secret about box — Sat, 28 Mar 2026 21:04:35 GMT

i will restate what i said in the thread:

metafilter must be zero-tolerance when it comes to transphobia. no warnings, no second chances, swift and immediate bans once identified. these people should feel unwelcome here; mefi should be a hostile place for transphobes.

the site has had a transphobia problem for a long time and this approach has not been tried. try it.

By warriorqueen in "Update on the anger management issues question" on Ask MeFi

warriorqueen — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:20:52 GMT

I will say more later but...I think you should think about the wedding and the marriage separately.

The wedding is literally a day. Would you sign up for a 30-year career in something that impacts you negatively every day because you booked a graduation party? No, you would not. This is not any different. So please put that in your thinking.

By Frowner in "Scenes from a marriage" on Ask MeFi

Frowner — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:48:50 GMT

This is a thing where it would erode my feelings about my partner and relationship over time. If it had been going on for a while and B didn't think anything was wrong, and it was frequent enough to happen multiple times over a couple of weeks, I would personally call it out as a pattern that was really, really damaging the relationship and imperiling it as a long term thing.

If this is newish and B is under a lot of pressure, I would be more inclined to point it out and ask what we could do as a family to support B and reduce the stress, because the snapping is making everyone miserable.

Sidebar: I think that commenting on Tween's dating in front of Tween probably wasn't the route I would have taken, since it could cause anxiety for Tween. Although I think that seeing A slap B and then double down on the action is much worse.

Seriously, if someone reflexively bats someone else's hand away and then says they are sorry and that they weren't thinking, that's one thing. But slapping a hand and then defending the action bugs me.

I really do not like:

1. Slapping
2. The obvious "I cannot bear to be wrong so if I did something wrong I'm going to tell you that you ALSO did something wrong in order to take the focus off my actions" bit where you have to deal with the conflict about who should apologize rather than the action. That is really toxic.
3. All the second-guessing with the soda bottle (!!) and the pajamas. What, were you supposed to apologize that you didn't hear the soda bottle?

For me, I would constantly be walking around with a little voice in the back of my head wondering about the next interaction with B, and it would really be lowering my quality of life.

B sounds like - whatever other qualities he has - he absolutely will not accept that he can be in the wrong when something comes up between you, and that it always has to be your fault or at least BOTH your faults.

I would go to counseling. B has already shown that he cannot hear you on this issue, so maybe a third party will get through to him.

By rory in ""There is a great deal of ruin in a nation." - Adam Smith" on MeFi

rory — Sat, 28 Mar 2026 10:35:14 GMT

Great piece, what a smart guy.

I'm annoyed to be roped into this by your sarcastic allusion to my brief comment way up above, and am tempted just to ignore it and move on, but fuck it. I've got some time spare—why not launch Operation Epic Furious Reply without regard for any collateral damage? All the best global hegemons are doing it.

To be clear, when I write "It's a great piece", full stop, paragraph break, as the third comment on a fresh single-link post about a think-piece advertised as being 7k words long, after two commenters have briefly said they intend to read it, what I'm really saying is:

Hey, fellow Metafilter readers who have been following all of the many, many threads about the Iran War over the past month because you, like me, are aghast at this criminal war with all of its world-changing implications. You may be wondering if this seven-thousand-word blog post is worth taking the time to read. Well, I read it this morning when I saw it linked on Bluesky, and I'm here to tell you it is! It's by an intelligent writer who brings valuable insights from his own area of expertise on military strategy in the ancient world. He doesn't go deeply into the moral and ethical side of it here because he's focussing on what he in particular can bring to the debate as an ancient and military historian, but (as we all know) there are many other people commenting on other aspects of this war, so it seems fair that he didn't feel compelled to cover all of them in this already-long blog post. Obsessively online readers, including but not limited to those who regularly read his blog (I don't myself, but I've followed Mefi links to it in the past), will probably remember his October 2024 blog post warning about Trump's fascist agenda and will already have a good idea of where his own concerns lie in that respect, but even those who don't can assume that saying "this war is dumb as hell" indicates that he thinks it's dumb on all fronts, not only on strategic fronts; a war that one sees as strategically doomed but morally righteous would be a war you'd call something else, like "morally justified but doomed". We can also assume that "dumb as hell" is from a US perspective, rather than making light of Iran's reasons for fighting back, which are as clear as day whatever one thinks of the Iranian regime; and that "dumb as hell" doesn't preclude other possible labels, like "disruptive", "criminal", "murderous", "outrageous", or "a betrayal of America's allies of the entire past century, all of whom will suffer from its effects". And look, you fellow readers of Mefi know all that, and you already think this war is awful on all fronts, so all you really need to know is whether reading this blog post will add to what you already know. I'm here, as I said, to tell you that it very well might, because it did for me. It's a good post—maybe not a post for the ages, not one that you'd carve in marble and leave standing for a military historian to find in two thousand years' time, not "great" in that sense, but hey, it's better than all the crap the White House has been pumping out for the past month. So why not have a look? I'd tell you all of this if I had time, but I have to leave the house in half an hour to be somewhere else by 6.15pm, so I'll just write "It's a great post" and leave it at that. Hmm, except that seems too slight to be worth posting at all; I'll add a paragraph to observe that this is going to be a year of hell. That's a bit stark, though; how about I make it "a hell of a year", to give it a layer of irony to make the bleakness more palatable. It's just a brief heads-up, it isn't as if someone's going to drop into the thread to disparage all of Metafilter and every member's response to the war on the basis of it.

Rei Toei, I see that your comment above is your first Metafilter comment on this war, or indeed on anything directly to do with Donald Trump since November 2016, and I appreciate that you'd want a comment like that to be meaningful, to make clear that you're opposed to the war for more reasons than that it's not being conducted well from a strategic point of view. You're opposed to it, you're saying (and I'm inferring), because it's morally wrong, it's a flagrant breach of international law, it's causing untold pain and suffering, and for many other reasons—all the many reasons that many of us here are opposed to it too, as many of us have made clear in our many comments on many Metafilter threads and at other places where we comment online. My own blog posts about this war to date have the titles "Epic F-Words", "War Crimes" and "A Year of Hell". Not "Hey, I Wish the U.S. President Was a Bit Better at Strategy, Because I'd Love to See Him Pull This Off".

How about giving people the benefit of the doubt and not accusing everyone in this thread and on the entire site (apart from you) of "general yep-yepping" and "not thinking too hard about it"? And by "people" I'd include Bret Devereaux.

TL/DR: It's a great piece.

By mattiv in "Apple employee has worked nearly 50 years for the company" on MeFi

mattiv — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 22:13:59 GMT

The risk in hiring so young is that he'll just jump ship for one of those startups asking for 50 years of FAANG experience as soon as he qualifies.