Is no one gunna address that Holden Caulfield was a habitual childhood sexual assault survivor and understandably traumatized and suicidal?

In Chapter 24 we literally see it happening with Mr. Antolini grooming him then petting him while he slept and Holden wakes up and freaks out: “Boy, I was shaking like a madman. I was sweating, too. When something perverty like that happens, I start sweating like a bastard. That kinda stuff’s happening to me about twenty times since I was a kid. I can’t stand it.”

And sexual assault surrounds most other characters. Holden more than once witnesses or hears about and is disgusted by sexually assault in the book (Stadlater, “Ivy League Bastard”, Luce). Holden comforts Jane when she cries over being assaulted by her step-father, and later attacks Stadlater believing he assaulted her on their date. Castle kills himself after it’s implied he’s sexual assaulted by bullies at school. And Holden is obsessed with preserving Phoebe’s innocence. The book is titled after him wanting to “catch her” and other innocent children before they “fall off the cliff” into the despair he feels.

I mean, the book arguably ends revealing he’s writing it as an exercise in the mental hospital. I think showing his negativity and disdain, even if whiney and self-absorbed, is appropriate in the circumstances. It’s a darker story than often interpreted, I suppose because teen angst is more relatable and palatable.

You need to talk to her. Say you and your boyfriend have reached the stage you’re thinking of living together, and you were hoping it would be in the current apartment you’re in. Ask her what she thinks about that idea, then listen to her thoughts. Be empathetic to her disappointment/surprise because she clearly isn’t expecting this. Tell her far enough out she has time to process and make a plan. If renewal is April then January is probably appropriate.

I know you did a throwaway line about it but understand that, assuming you’re both on the lease equally as co-tenants, you don’t have any more rights to the apartment than she does. Not even if you found it, not even if more of the stuff inside is yours. Any ideas about using your landlord/sneakily signing a renewal with your boyfriend to screw her over are bad ideas. Ethically, legally, and pragmatically. Regulated apartment tenants have renewal rights, so your landlord would need her written consent to renew with only you.

If she won’t leave then you can stay there with her or move somewhere else with your boyfriend. In theory you could also move your boyfriend into your bedroom while she stays as well. Those are the options.

And not to be that person…but it doesn’t say great things about your character that you’re asking for advice on how best to effectively evict (with no notice) someone who considers you a friend, even if it’s not so mutual. You’re 28, you know better so act like it. Have the awkward conversation. Be nice and hope she’s nice back. You never know—she might be happy for you and make other plans.

In Boston especially this is kind of a known thing honestly (and not just in the legal field). People coming out of the “best” schools can be amazing or not. People coming out of the “meh” schools can be amazing or not. Baby lawyers pretty universally are not amazing at anything yet lol except maybe effort, attitude, asking questions, taking feedback, etc. But years into practice? Gotta assess the person in front of you by what they’re bringing to the table you sit at and not by names on their resume alone.

Mine took about 4 months all told. You can try to nudge things along by replying to the email offering to make any requested amendments…but they do what they like.

This take is scary honestly. It’s impossible to read your comment and not see the inherent misogyny. You’re so desperate for the gorgeous, smart, accomplished woman to be a problem that you’re twisting yourself into a pretzel. You call her a distraction, a trap, a charicature, an obstacle, destructive. Because she has an impressive career and talked about her day with the guy she’s seeing, but you’ve projected so hard onto the main character that your own ego is threatened on his behalf. Well, sit with it bud. Be humbled. Her career is important and stressful, and her acknowledging that isn’t evil. Even if it makes Carmy (you) feel bad. I’d bet the writers included this character intending to show people with your view how wrong you are…let’s see if they succeed.

For starters I think it’s a pretty good tattoo, and not a bad coverup at all.

However—I think I get why you’re disappointed. I don’t think this piece is aesthetically all that close to your inspiration picture. It’s the same subject matter of course, and includes the same main elements in the same place, but it differs a decent amount (flowers and foliage, heavy purple and blue and orange colors, details in rope and lighthouse, etc). I dunno how much you talked about these changes, maybe it was all ok’ed by you first. I just know that if I didn’t know expect these changes then I’d be bummed to see them.

I do think this can be reworked to be more like your inspiration though! Talk to your artist once it’s healed.

I’d encourage you to invite to lunch/coffee an ADA in the office you’re eyeballing!

The angle you took in this comment is a bit off (it gives “of course violence, violence normal”) but in a sense I agree tbh. Having a ‘justice system’ built on ‘procedural justice’ to handle conflicts between folks literally intends to replace ‘vigilante justice’ (and ‘cosmic justice’). If tomorrow every person woke up and said “the justice system is too broken, no point in using it”, then society would turn back to vigilante justice. I just wouldn’t assume vigilante justice is full on murder/suicide, like I wouldn’t validate that as “inevitable”. In particular because it was money lost here and not a Gary Plauché/Jeffrey Doucet type situation.

Please try to relax a little smidge. You’re catastrophizing HARD. Try to come down to a level of moderate concern and appreciate the realistic relative likeliness of outcomes, which while some are unpleasant or not ideal none are as bad as your panic is telling you.

Here’s the reality: you will have to tell the bar what happened approximately 3 years from now, if my math is right that’s 5 years after the incident. They will see you owned up to it at the time, took accountability and were remorseful and made amends, then were forthright in your law school/bar applications, and haven’t done anything like it since and in fact have been upstanding with great integrity the 5 years since. That’s called “showing rehabilitation”. They likely will not require more from you.

Potentially they’d want to meet with you and talk about it before deciding they don’t care. This would be intimidating but ultimately an awkward/stressful chat you’d forget the details of years later.

Even less likely, they’d want to have a hearing. You’d hire an attorney who would successfully argue you’ve shown rehabilitation. The cost would suck but you’d make it work and move on.

Very improbably from the hearing you’d be told to show more rehabilitation then apply for the Bar again. You’d work as a paralegal or legal assistant for however long they say, then apply again after more time of good person-hood and maybe a class or whatever. Then you’d pass C&F and still end up a lawyer.

No one is permanently and forever barred from being a lawyer anywhere for stealing an umbrella, T shirt, and soda. Especially when they weren’t criminally convicted or even charged.

This mistake at most means a detour or two along the way. You will have detours in your career and life. Everyone does. If it’s not this it’ll be something else. Don’t make it bigger than it is. Don’t lose your mind and peace to panic. Even if something were to happen where you couldn’t be a lawyer (not this), you wouldn’t have “screwed your entire life up”. You’d have to find new career goals but that would be doable.

As far as reputation/if people will know—I have no idea, but same ‘think it through and calm down’ logic applies.

If it helps, here’s a link of a case with someone who can’t get admitted to practice for some context of what major C&F problems look like: https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/s/WqANYNlqmD

There’s literally always going to be someone with a more impressive career than you, a higher salary, etc. That’s not your business. Other people will also always have struggles and burdens you don’t know about.

Run your race friend. Try something out you think will suit you, asses if it does in fact suit you, adjust accordingly, rinse and repeat. Try and fail without shame.

You’re doing just fine. Speak to a counselor about how to manage your stress and to get to know yourself better so you can figure out your goals.

Google trial advocacy pdf.

Well you swiped right 17 times out of 59,962 and you swipe on average 1,666 times per day so that’s approx 35 days. You swiped right indiscriminately for a month then posted on here twice in one day about it saying you “guess [you] have to lower [your] standards”. Given what you’ve shown of your behavior I’m not shocked whatever you said in those 88 chats didn’t lead to dates.

Hmmm I thought a regulation could suffice as well? I was thinking that route and maybe a state medical board or equivalent having a rule about intoxication while providing care? I dunno…I’m clearly not medmal lol

So for purposes of this conversation there’s no medmal case unless there’s harm caused by negligent care, which intoxication could be a reason for negligence. If a Doctor provided that care while intoxicated, potentially even if intoxicated from a prescribed substance like a Benzo, and caused harm then that’s an area of possible liability for negligence. If there’s the sort of adequate proof I mentioned.

But I wouldn’t consider being intoxicated at times outside of performing care a medmal liability issue. (Again, not my area of law so just the opinion of a marginally more informed random person. And again for employment, insurance, licensing purposes I’d assume it’s a completely different standard going on.)

And just to be clear if there is no harm then there is nothing that can be recovered by anyone and so there is no medmal case and nothing to litigate or settle. (Though in fairness, harm can be more or less subtle than people expect. Damages are a funky area of law.)

Also just for context nearly all cases, regardless of type, are settled out of court and that’s not a reliable or legally significant standard to assume liability. While of course a person being found guilty after a trial is liable, a resolution outside court is not by itself automatically a statement on liability. People pay settlements all the time because it’s cheaper than fighting or the active litigation has collateral consequences (employment, immigration, etc), and many settlements make clear no liability is admitted. Whether that factually makes sense or was a legal CYA negotiated carefully is case dependent. And when a case is resolved outside of court often liability is not the determining factor or ultimately determined.

As an aside, while I’m not a doctor I’d be surprised if they’re able to take off 6 months easily.

—Lawyer but not medmal and not anyone here’s lawyer and not giving any legal advice. Just an academic chat based on minimal and half remembered understanding of medmal from Torts.—

I mean, I wouldn’t be shocked to hear the employing/licensing/insuring organization (i.e., hospital, state board, whatever) has standards on marijuana use that could raise issues (and of course each state is doing its own thing with recreational marijuana laws). So something to look into for OP.

But as far as medical malpractice liability from providing negligent care due to intoxication: that requires proof of negligent care and proof of damages resulting from it. Yes intoxication can go towards negligence, but then the intoxication would need to be proved if that’s the theory.* (Actually I’d guess that once causation and harm are proved that if intoxication while providing care is proved it would be per se negligence? Don’t recall specifically and haven’t checked that point just reasonable guess.)

The issue would be timing. Testing positive for the non-psychoactive compound from marijuana (the only tests we currently have to my knowledge) would not be conclusive evidence as to the psychoactive compound having effect on OP while providing care, nor would this post be conclusive to show OP provided care while intoxicated (it literally says the opposite). Any test and this post would be relevant evidence in that it would show OP does use marijuana, making use at the relevant time more likely than if the evidence was excluded, but because neither in particular show intoxication at the relevant time neither (or even both together) would be enough to prove a case.

So, seemingly the defense would be show me sufficient proof: show me the sworn statement (and then present testimony so I can cross examine) of a person present during the care describing my intoxicated behavior, show me a video or audio recording of me behaving intoxicated during (or right before or after) the care, show me a post or text talking about being intoxicated while providing the care, show me the conviction for driving intoxicated on the way home from providing the care. Show me proof I was more likely than not intoxicated at the relevant time and not some other non-relevant time.

Then also the resulting damages would need to be proved of course. There’s no medmal liability unless something goes wrong that causes harm after all.

It’s the same logic as drinking honestly—it’s not a liability issue for a Doctor to get drunk on Friday and provide standard/non-negligent care on Monday. All the proof in the world of being drunk Friday wouldn’t matter.

*It wouldn’t need to be the theory or the only theory, I focused on it because that’s kind of the point of the discussion but intoxication isn’t the only way to show negligence of course and pleading in the alternative is a thing (either negligent due to intoxication or XYZ basis).

When I was a kid my friend “helped” by cleaning her dad’s new car with some sponge that must have effectively been steel wool because as an adult I realize it completely fucked the paint job. So. Perspective I guess?

That’s overly simplistic in my opinion. One part of being transgender is body dysmorphia, and one potential reaction to the trauma of sexual abuse is body dysmorphia. Does that mean rape makes someone trans? Plainly no. Being trans is more than just body dysmorphia. However, with symptom overlap it’s hard to gauge interplay.

Additionally, transitioning is an action rather than a state right? As in—a person is trans but transitioning is something a person does. After a sexual assault it’s common to seek therapy. That’s also an environment where a trans person might safely explore their gender identity and could be a supportive environment for coming to the decision to transition. So it’s possible for sexual assault to contribute to transitioning.

I get why you’re firmly saying BS though. It’s honestly a rough spot for psychology and society right now. Data clearly shows a high rate of sexual abuse among the trans population, especially childhood sexual abuse. It’s evoked a taboo correlation/causation debate. As we embrace trans people we don’t want to diminish their identity to a sexual trauma response because that’s frankly cruel and untrue. At the same time…it’s also possibly one factor among many for some trans people and ignoring it or making it shameful is probably counterproductive to an empathetic and informed discussion.

I’m a curmudgeon about fashion and I do not say this lightly: I LOVE IT. I want it. I want it in multiple colors. Take my money.

Trump got a BS in real estate from Wharton, back when the acceptance rate was 40%, after transferring from Fordham (and his brother called in a favor from a family friend to get the interview). https://www.phillymag.com/news/2019/09/14/donald-trump-at-wharton-university-of-pennsylvania/

Are we somehow comparing that to being one of only 27 women in a class of 235 to get a JD from YALE LAW (and turning down a Harvard Law acceptance at that because a Prof said to her, a prospective student, “we don’t need more women”)?! https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2016/11/08/clintons-early-years-helped-mold-her-political-career/

I always believed Profs used that as a vibe check. If you were generally fine or not very notable and did ok on the exam, probably no change in grade. If you were actually pretty good in those areas and did poorly on exam day then they throw ya a lil bump up. And if you were a total shitshow the rest of the time but somehow aced the exam then they knock ya down a peg. I have no confirmation of my theory, just my gut instinct is that Profs don’t track these things very closely and have it on the books as an avenue to help out or humble as needed.

So I tried it lol

(Verse 1)

Caught in the whirlwind of love's sweet embrace,

We danced in the end zone, lost in your grace.

But like a fumbled pass, our love slipped away,

Now I'm left alone, watching you play.

(Chorus)

Oh, Travis Kelce, our love was a dream,

But now it's shattered, torn at the seam.

Your touchdowns used to light up my sky,

But now they're just painful goodbyes.

(Verse 2)

From touchdowns to heartaches, the story unfolds,

In the game of love, we lost our hold.

Your jersey hangs in my closet, a silent reminder,

Of a love that faded, lost in the grind, sir.

(Chorus)

(Bridge)

I'll cheer for you still, from afar I'll stand,

But I'll find a new anthem, a new marching band.

For in the game of love, we both took a fall,

But I'll rise again, standing tall.

(Chorus)

To further clarify, per your linked article (which was cool, thanks for sharing!) he then made concrete and proactive steps to not engage in racism/bigotry but also to not think in racist/bigoted terms.

Brendan started taking steps that seemed to indicate his sincere commitment to change. Brendan hired a diversity, equity, and inclusion consultant to advise him, enrolled in therapy, began meditating, and started working his way through a list of educational books.

Which he’s alleged to have kept up with for years. Interestingly, despite having thoughts that tread those tracks still he actively/consciously disagrees and disengages with them. It’s a common belief that people ultimately “are” the dichotomy of what they instinctively are and what they consciously choose to be. So in a way, he is less racist/bigoted in part because of taking MDMA—or more specifically/accurately his choices in reaction to the experience.

But, yea I see your point that we can say it’s still a self-serving or self-centered decision. He decided racism/bigotry hurts him and so elects not to do that or be that. But I could also see the quote being a semantics/imperfect delivery thing, or something that’s evolved beyond the self with time, or even see the argument that people are inherently ego-centric even in empathy (i.e., empathy is understanding/sharing the experience of another and that inherently involves the self to do).

Oh my. I’m so so sorry OP. This is just awful on top of awful. You’re getting hit from all sides right now and should be proud to have made it through this time. You’re not a fool. Not even close.

So firstly, can you take a semester off? Would you if you could? Have you talked to anyone about that possibility? I really think taking some time to address your health and your family’s health is reasonable here.

If that idea isn’t for you, I still think there’s a way to turn this around career-trajectory wise. If you can find one prof to be in your corner, that can become one internship, and that can become one job, and that can become one promotion, and so on. Realistically, yea some doors are closed for now. But you’re still at a good school and still have a scholarship. All hope is not lost. It’ll all be ok.

Hot boxing is real, as in if the car was actively filled with clouds of smoke and you sat in that cloud of smoke you would get high from repeatedly breathing in and out the smoke. But contact high is not real, as in a car merely having the smell of smoke soaked into the fibers and giving off an odor cannot get you high. You describe a smell, not smoke. Additionally, while cigarettes and weed both produce smoke and a smell the smell of the two is not even remotely similar and you originally believed the smell was cigarettes. I do not see how you could possibly have been high from the stinky car ride. You were stressed and tired, it happens.

Women gotta thread a needle, men gotta walk through a doorway.