On hearing about the butter scent, I assumed the chemical was diacetyl. Which would mean it could be dangerous to aspirate vaginal secretions; you want to avoid getting Popcorn Workers Lung. Let me tell you, this was an interesting Sunday afternoon conversation we had today.
But further investigation tells me that the smells are similar to rancid butter, which contains short-chain aliphatic fatty acids. So not diacetyl. So no Popcorn Workers Lung from aspirating vaginal secretions. The acids in question (collected during “a double-blind study using a new tampon method, [in which] 682 samples of vaginal secretions were collected from 50 healthy young women attending a university”) are various C2-6 acids such as propanoic, methylpropanoic, butanoic, methylbutanoic and methylpentanoic.
If you are so inclined, and happen to remember any of them, would you send me thread and post number for the classic LK de-bunkings? I’m putting together a master post that we can just refer to or paste into any thread he starts (covering top hits like Genetic Defects! Custody! Prison!)
I can believe he went to law school because quite a few of them will take virtually anyone with the money to pay for it. Passing the bar is another thing altogether. And that is some phenomenal stupid up there.
Can’t quite believe that anyone still responds to LinusK. Masochists, all of you.
I can’t help it. He posts unbelievable crap, and there’s something wrong on the Internet and I just can’t help it!
I mean what is this nonsense about women have custody in 85% of divorces, but only 5% are litigated, but it’s actually all divorce law, but really it’s all NOW, but it’s really, really all FEMINISM!!! Does he even read what he’s typing for comprehension?
And earlier today he was arguing (I think) that Feminism was the root cause of the polarization of American politics. Sheer gold right there.
He and iiandyiiii just had an exchange about whether Linus could speak for what women find attractive in men. WTF, right? Linus refuses to acknowledge that he can’t speak for women on that topic. For any woman, let alone the collective. It’s astounding.
Add in JackAss, and it’s almost as entertaining as the Ben Carson thread. Jack can bloviate with the best of them. I’m thinking he gets paid by the word. He’ll spew out 50-100 words. All sound and fury signifying nothing by the time your read it. I mostly look at his posts to be entertained by Miller’s takedowns. Let’s see if he’s summoned by the mere mention of his name again.
That thread is kind of like a slot machine. You type something, hit return, and wait for your random nonsense reply to come back.
It does seem to be computer generated! Like one of those automated customer service systems with imperfect voice recognition.
I love how he confuses traditional and non-traditional gender roles. What feminist has ever argued that women should always get custody? Does indeed suggest that his problem is with women. Which we’ve always know. Maybe he’s never actually met one in person?
I read the first amendment and photography thread and it was even dumber than I expected it would be. “The press has a constitutional right to photograph your demented mother in her nursing home bed” is not an argument I’d expect to hear from a freshman theatre major much less a lawyer.
IIRC, his narrative is that he was the stay at home dad for most of his marriage. Then when divorce came, his wife ended up with primary custody of the kids, despite (according to him) him being the primary caretaker. If that was the case, this is indeed unfortunate, and explains why his primary focus is in divorce law and custody cases. He was unfairly treated in his case, and he sees everything in that lens and perspective.
I am sorry for the case, but I also dislike the implication that parents who do not have joint custody (or 50-50), are bad parents. My dad still had full guardianship of my older siblings, but the arrangement was that they spent most of the time with their mom, and dad got the classic visitation rights. But that was the minimum. He still went to school events and took my sibs to their doctors and even school if their mom couldn’t. He also made sure they got a good relationship with their paternal side of the family (and even with the step-maternal side). And considering my siblings’ mom babysat me, he got to see my siblings frequently when he was the one picking me up at their house. Parenting is what you make it, and if you seize the time you have and are as involved as you can, there is no reason you can’t be a good parent. Despite not having a father all the time in the house, my siblings definitely had a paternal presence, and someone they could go to when they needed. And that is what is most important.
As an aside, my dad, a lawyer who didn’t do a 50-50 split, is also wary of automatic joint custody for children of divore. His claim is similar to what was mentioned in the threads as reasons why NOW opposes it. If the father wasn’t the primary caretaker (or close to it) before, he shouldn’t be the primary caretaker after. He also suspects a lot of the push stems not for “what is best for the kids”, but as a way to avoid paying child support or decreasing the amount paid.
Agreed that if that was the case, there was injustice. I’ve heard similar stories. My brother was the primary caregiver for his daughter. His daughter’s mom (they were not married) was convicted of a few different (fairly) minor crimes, and also physically threatened and battered my brother. He still had to fight for custody. He did win, despite that sexist kneejerk reaction that women are better parents and caregivers.
And this is how LinusK and people of similar bent make hay of these things. You say “fight for custody” as if the odds were completely stacked against the father in this case. But in reality wasn’t it simply a matter of two parties who couldn’t agree and the court having to make the more or less obvious decision that the father was the better choice for the kids in this particular case?
What I’m asking is: was it really much of a “fight”?
With the caveats that he’s my brother and I am partial to him, I didn’t live in the same house, and I may not remember everything precisely, I really don’t think so. I saw my brother and his daughter almost every day during that time. He was, and is, a pretty great dad. (As much as I disagree profoundly with my brothers on many things, they are loving, involved parents.)
