Has Black Lives Matter Changed the World? - A new book makes the case for a more pragmatic anti-policing movement—one that seeks to build working-class solidarity across racial lines. - link
Fox News Doesn’t Do Apologies - Rupert Murdoch may have to pay for Donald Trump’s 2020 election lies, but who’s going to reimburse American democracy? - link
Clarence Thomas’s Friend of the Court - Thomas claims that Harlan Crow’s extravagant gifts were tokens of friendship. Why do the Justices so often emphasize personal relationships? - link
It’s Earth Day—and the News Isn’t Good - New reports show that ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting faster than anticipated, and other disasters loom. - link
The Gospel of Candace Owens - The Daily Wire host is waging a far-right fight for the soul of pop culture. - link
From Vox
Why are you crying? -
Getty Images/iStockphoto
Consider where, when, and around whom you cry.
Here is a non-exhaustive list of things that have made me cry: Any time I must chop, dice, or mince ingredients; a group of sea lions barking in the sun; sad music; receiving a free hot dog; the film 500 Days of Summer; a messy house.
The one emotion tying all of these experiences together, according to Ad Vingerhoets, an emeritus professor at Tilburg University and one of the world’s preeminent experts on crying, is a sense of powerlessness. Even in the context of positive tear-jerking events — like encountering a very small puppy or watching your best friend walk down the aisle at their wedding — there is a feeling of overwhelm, Vingerhoets says. “You also feel small and helpless and humble,” he says.
Humans come into the world crying, and we never really stop. As babies, we cry in order to get attention from our parents, signaling to them that we’re angry or scared or in pain or hungry or tired. In childhood and adolescence, we cry from physical pain, like a scraped knee, but as we develop empathy in our teenage years, external catalysts — like books, movies, and other people’s pain — elicit tears. As we get older, we may be moved to tears by beauty, awe, wonder, and sentimentality, says Lauren Bylsma, an associate professor of psychiatry and psychology at the University of Pittsburgh.
For some people, the well of tears has run dry. The stereotype that criers are seen as weaker or less masculine contributes to the well-trodden notion that boys (and men) don’t cry. Indeed, women report crying more frequently than men and with shorter gaps in between crying episodes than men. Then, there’s that thorny feeling of vulnerability associated with sobbing; to betray the veneer of stoicism is deeply uncomfortable for some, to admit you need help can be seen as a failure.
But have you ever stopped to consider why you’re crying? The root cause of the sadness or overwhelm? What about what you can learn from your tears? Mining the depths of your emotions can shed light on deeper insecurities, fears, pleasures, and relationship complications.
What our tears tell us
The presence of tears signals one basic message, says Randolph Cornelius, a professor of psychological science at Vassar College: I need help. “We’re asking other people to aid us,” he says. Research suggests tears are so effective at eliciting help because criers are seen as sadder, more helpless, less aggressive, and in need of interpersonal connection. According to one of Vingerhoets’ 2017 studies, people are more likely to offer help to a crying person compared to just a sad person with a dry face. “Recognizing that people [are] crying and in need of help is a pretty automatic process,” Cornelius says.
Throughout the entire lifespan, some of the most common triggers of tears, Vingerhoets says, are bereavement, heartache, and homesickness. (Though women do cry more often in general over more mundane and conflict-driven situations, “the difference between the sexes is not that big” when it comes to these main motivators of crying, Vingerhoets says.) Then there are the positive cries: Weeping not just over a separation, but a reunion; crying out of relief and not fear; shedding tears when receiving a gift, not only when having it taken away. “All of these negative situations that provoked tears, they all seem to have their opposite,” Vingerhoets says, “which also induces tears.”
We receive the most support when we cry in front of a partner or a friend, Bylsma says, someone who is best equipped to console and emotionally support us. Research shows that the presence of visible tears can also bring people closer together and promote social bonding. “If you are stressed, it’s important that you receive social support from others,” Vingerhoets says, “because that can buffer the negative effects of stress on your well-being.”
Subliminally or not, we may realize that turning on the waterworks gets us what we want. “I have a 10-year-old grandson and he can turn crying on and off,” Cornelius says. “Kids learn how to manipulate adults and so that stays with us.” Much has been written about the weaponization of tears, especiallyby whitewomen, in order to protect privilege and garner sympathy. Research finds that fake criers are seen as manipulative, less reliable, less warm, less competent, and less accepted as friends, colleagues, or neighbors. But usually, Cornelius says, adults keep their tears in check, having learned the socially appropriate places to cry (in private, on the side of the road when you have a flat tire) and opting not to cry at our desks at work when we feel frustrated. That is, unless the situation is uniquely overwhelming, Cornelius says, like in the face of an unexpected tragedy.
Why the context of the cry matters
Popular convention maintains that crying is a cathartic experience, that we feel cleansed and weightless following a good weep. “That’s not always the case,” Bylsma says, “and it really depends on various contextual factors.” We’re likely to reap the most benefit from crying if we can shed a few tears in a safe place, Bylsma says. “We found in research if someone were to cry in a place where it might be embarrassing, where people might react in a negative way, like crying in front of people you don’t know well in a workplace setting, for example, someone’s going to feel worse after crying,” she says, “versus if you cry in a more supportive environment, like in front of a partner or friend that you’re more likely to have a benefit from.”
In one of Vingerhoets’ and Bylsma’s studies, they found that people who are depressed, anxious, or experiencing burnout cry more, but they did not feel relief after crying. Those who felt shame and embarrassment were less likely to feel better following a cry, too. People find more catharsis after crying when the situation that made them weepy was controllable — like a fight with their partner — as opposed to an uncontrollable event, like a death.
Bylsma also notes that chronically suppressing tears is associated with negative emotional effects, like less empathy and emotional support, based on surveys. So if you feel the need to cry in the middle of a work meeting, try to get yourself to a bathroom and let it out. On the contrary, for those who have no reason to cry and forgo weeping for a long time, even years, there’s no harm in that, Vingerhoets says. However, persistent bouts of crying and ruminating over the same issues might be a sign you need to change your approach to crying, Bylsma says. Try seeking the help of a therapist or mental health professional who can help you cope.
What crying reveals
Regardless of what made you cry, whether it be a sad movie or a beautiful sunset, there is a deeper meaning. The presence of tears reveals what matters to you. “Sometimes our tears are signals to ourselves about the significance of events,” Cornelius says.
Consider the last time you cried. Was it an argument? An exhausting day? A delicious cupcake? What about those situations stirred up emotions? In the moment of the crying episode, try to process what, exactly, is making you cry, Cornelius says. “We do have an inner drive to know ourselves,” he says. “I think recognizing our emotions, giving them their due, allows us to do that.” Over time, you may recognize patterns in your emotions: I feel resentful in these situations, those comments make me feel embarrassed.
Having this bit of insight can help you reframe the situation: This isn’t an argument about taking out the trash, it’s an argument about respect. Sometimes tears can help reveal these underlying messages.
“When you have a realization about yourself, and that allows you to see yourself in a different way, you do feel empowered,” Cornelius says.
Where are all the apartments for families? -
Eye Ubiquitous/Universal Images Group via Getty Images
Cities are finally starting to build more housing — but not for people with kids.
Roughly 40 percent of American millennials have four-year college degrees, and if there’s one thing these highly educated young people have liked to do over the last 15 years, it’s move to big cities.
Researchers find they (well, we) have accounted for more than half the population increase in “close-in” urban neighborhoods in the country’s largest metro areas since 2010, and they credit our migration (and our taxes) with accelerating urban revival. We don’t have to guess as to why: Millennials like diverse, walkable environments with good public transit and bike lanes. They like the rich cultural amenities, including bars, restaurants, and concert venues. And they like the higher-paying work opportunities available.
All this might make you think millennials have moved to cities permanently. But as they get older, the number of urban children has continued to drop. Lower birth rates are part of the story, but economists say the strong correlations with population shifts strongly suggest that “out-migration” of cities explains a big portion of the loss. In other words, millennials now in their mid-30s and 40s with young kids have started decamping for suburbs to raise their families.
Some older adults nod smugly, seeing these suburban migration patterns as proof that there was never any meaningful difference between their preferences and that of millennials at all. Millennials did not start the trend of moving to cities in one’s 20s: Plenty of baby boomers and Gen X moved to urban areas in young adulthood, and then back to the suburbs to raise a family once they coupled up and needed more space.
And certainly some millennial families really do crave the kind of lifestyles found in suburbs: the bigger houses and lawns, the schools, and safety.
But for many other young people looking to start families, the choice to stay in the city or move to the suburbs doesn’t feel much like a choice at all. There simply aren’t many family-oriented housing options in cities, let alone ones young couples could afford.
For years now the shortage of housing, and the dearth of new housing built to accommodate a growing population, has been getting more attention. But only more recently have people started to discuss that, even in places that have loosened their zoning rules and authorized new housing construction, the overwhelming majority of new units are studios or one- and two-bedroom apartments, built with singles, childless couples, and adult roommates in mind.
Advocates for more housing say they’re aware that cities are losing families with kids, even in areas that are adding new units to the market — and they argue that it’s one reason why reforming zoning is only the first step toward building cities that house more people.
“Yes, there’s been a ‘build baby build’ attitude because we’re so far behind, but there are big asterisks and caveats to that,” said Matt Lewis, a spokesperson for California YIMBY, a pro-housing group. “If you just do zoning, you will end up with a whole lot of one- and two-bedrooms.”
Zoning reform is necessary but not sufficient
Housing demand outstrips supply in major cities, leading to rising costs for tenants and prospective homeowners. A top culprit for this scarcity is local zoning laws that bar new construction and empower homeowners who gain financially from restricting new housing to decide whether or not to make room for more neighbors.
Over the last decade, there has been a growing movement to loosen zoning rules to facilitate more construction. And among those few places that have changed their zoning laws, evidence suggests it has helped contain rising rents, largely by reducing competition among individuals for units.
Addressing restrictive zoning is a crucial first step to making cities more affordable, and most communities still haven’t even taken that step.
Orphe Divounguy, a senior economist at Zillow, analyzed the top metropolitan areas sourced from the American Community Survey and found that the most “doubling up” — meaning a family living with another family — occurs in the nation’s most expensive cities, like Los Angeles, Boston, Denver, Seattle, and Washington, DC.
While some might simply prefer these living arrangements, Divounguy observed that nearly 70 percent of families doubling up in these high-cost cities had incomes of $35,000 or less — suggesting their choices to live in closer quarters may be driven byfinancial need. “We need to build more units,” Divounguy told Vox. “If we had more units then buyers and renters would have more buying power and prices would go down.”
Christopher Leinberger, a longtime land use strategist, agreed that upzoning — altering rules to allow more densehousing in places previously zoned only for single-family homes — is the fundamental prerequisite for creating more family-oriented housing. Without that, he argues, land prices will remain “completely out of whack” and drive up prices.
“A few decades ago, the plot of land itself would be no more than 20 percent of a home’s price,” Leinberger said. “Today it can be up to 50, 60, or 70 percent.”
Higher land prices is also a top reason developers don’t bother building entry-level starter homes anymore, even in areas they’re legally allowed to; the increasingly expensive plot of land can’t justify the expense of building a low-cost affordable house.
Emily Hamilton, the director of the Urbanity Project at the Mercatus Center, echoes Leinberger and Divounguy in saying that liberalizing zoning laws would help expand family-oriented housing. “Freeing homebuilders to serve a wider variety of households at a broad range of incomes is the path to abundant housing,” she wrote recently in Discourse magazine. “It would allow more parents to have shorter commutes, freeing more time to spend with their kids.”
Other regulatory barriers stand in the way of family-oriented housing
The problem is, as housing advocates are learning, upzoning is not enough.
The basic back-of-the-envelope calculations of housing developers in America today are such that if a builder canconstruct more housing in cities, they will almost always build one- and two-bedroom apartments because smaller units generate more rent per square foot. Developers are, in effect, incentivized to try and pack inas many units as they can.
One option is to pass laws that require developers to include more family-sized units in their portfolio — more three- or four-bedroom places, for example. But housing experts say trying to force developers to build family-oriented housing will probably backfire. “Dictating to developers what their product mix should be is going to be difficult,” said Leinberger. “If you get into the business of legislating that, they’ll just go to some other town.”
So if you’ve fixed your city’s restrictive zoning, now what?
Lewis, of California YIMBY, said they’ve been learning out in the Golden State that the next step is to look at the building codes and other regulatory barriers that influence the types of housing developers choose to build.
“It’s like whack-a-mole,” he said, meaning just when pro-housing advocates think they’ve defeated the last barrier to new construction, new ones come into clearer view. “These are all arcane rules that no one was paying attention to until five-seven years ago.”
One such building code restriction is the requirement that most multifamily buildings have two stairwells. This is a rule rooted in fire safety, though most other countries allow one stairwell andopt for other fire safety strategies instead. One consequence of the double stairwell model is it ends upmaking architecture more homogenous and inefficient. (This is why most apartment buildings in America have long central hallways, with apartments on either side.)
Housing activists lately have been rallying around “single-staircase” reform, changing building codes to eliminate this requirement for a second stairwell. These reforms will make it easier to use different floorplans andhopefully make it more cost-effective to build family-oriented housing in cities — perhaps a three-bedroom, one-and-a-half bath apartment, with only one bedroom having a walk-in closet.
Other barriers include regulations like minimum lot sizes, “set-back” requirements that give towns power to dictate how far back from the curb a home can be built, and “floor-area ratios” — the ratio of a building’s total floor area to the size of the land on which it’s built.
California Sen. Scott Weiner has been leading the way in his to state to push bills tackling these barriers. “We need to reform zoning, but we also need to end loopholes that make it impossible for our communities to actually build the multifamily housing for which we have already zoned,” he said.
The risk-averse banks also need to be convinced
Unfortunately, adding more homes for families in cities will likely require even more than just making these land-use changes.
Bobby Fijan, a developer who has been trying to build more family-oriented housing in cities, said one of the biggest challenges is convincing American real estate investors that these projects are worthy bets. “I firmly believe it is a chicken and egg problem,” he told Vox.
“Real estate in the US is very conservative, they want to back things in a very standardized way, and they want to look and see heaps of data showing something already works,” he said. “In industries like tech and retail, people are obsessed with the question of ‘what does the customer want?’ That’s not a question that’s really asked in real estate.”
Right now, because the housing supply and demand gap is still so wide, it’s likely that real estate investors will keep backing projects that look like what they’re already building: buildings that cater to childless adults. These are safe bets, with strong track records of delivering returns.
But this doesn’t mean real estate trends can’t change. Fijan has been working to get financing from private equity and is hoping he can build enough “proof points” of successfully profitable family-oriented housing in cities to get the more risk-averse banks to bite in the future.
It’s a gamble that holds a lot of promise. Plenty of young families will still opt for the suburbs’ greener pastures, but many parents would be happy to stay put in their beloved dense cities and raise their kids. To make that a viable option, though, they need somewhere they can actually live.
As the end of Title 42 nears, Congress is no closer on immigration overhaul -
Rebecca Noble/AFP via Getty Images
Proposed GOP immigration legislation is too harsh, even for some Republicans.
House Republicans put forth an immigration package Monday which proposes some of the harshest restrictions on migration through the southern border, virtually ending the right to asylum for anyone not crossing through legal ports of entry. Though Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) has put forth a set of recommendations on immigration, as yet there’s no competing legislation to help manage an expected influx of migrants through the southern border this spring and summer.
The GOP’s extreme border package — which includes an effort to impeach Department of Homeland Security head Alejandro Mayorkas — is unlikely to gain enough votes to pass with the Republicans’s slim majority, but time is running out to pass comprehensive immigration legislation before the Covid-era Title 42 order is set to expire May 11. That order allows the government to deport migrants for public health reasons, without giving them the opportunity to apply for asylum.
The end of Title 42 likely portends a fresh wave of migrants coming to the US border to apply for asylum protections — an event for which the system has long been ill-equipped. But instead of providing resources to speed up asylum hearings, for example, perhaps the most alarming aspect of the Republicans’ legislation is that it targets the ability to even seek asylum, which is affirmed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The US, as a signatory to the declaration, has an obligation to uphold its principles, but the UDHR is not a legally binding document.
Previous legislation, introduced by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), set out similarly harsh policies; his bill would allow the DHS head to stop all border crossings of undocumented people through any point of entry so DHS could maintain “operational control” of the border. That legislation, first introduced in January, proved shocking even to some within Roy’s party, including Rep. Tony Gonzalez of Texas.
“Trying to ban legitimate asylum claims — one, it’s not Christian, and two, to me, it’s very anti-American,” Gonzalez said. “So a lot is at stake.” Vox reached out to Gonzalez’s office for a comment on Wednesday’s legislation but did not receive a response by press time.
The latest package is divisive among House Republicans, too, for its attempt to impeach Mayorkas — something House Speaker Kevin McCarthy threatened to do as part of his turbulent leadership campaign. But in a sharply divided majority, some Republicans see the impeachment efforts as misplaced; “This is really Joe Biden’s policies, more than Mayorkas, and are we going to impeach the president on this? No,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) told the New York Times.
Some Republicans also object to changes to a program called E-Verify, which businesses use to cross-check employees’ documentation against DHS and Social Security records. Requiring businesses to use E-Verify could dramatically affect the functioning of the agricultural industry, which relies on undocumented migrant labor.
The end of Title 42 means more people seeking asylum
With the likely end of the Title 42 policy fast approaching, there will be a probable corresponding uptick in asylum seekers, too, as the government won’t be able to use the public health order to remove them. As of December 2022, Title 42 had been used an estimated 2.5 million times to expel migrants since it was put in place in March 2020, the Associated Press reported at the time.
But, as both Democrats and Republicans have said, the immigration system is unprepared to manage the thousands of people who will attempt a border crossing after Title 42 ends. As Vox reported in December,
The fact remains that the immigration system is overstretched and inefficient; the average wait time for immigration cases has skyrocketed from around a year in 1998 to around two and a half years in 2021, according to Syracuse University’s TRAC Immigration system. Migrants are held in substandard, unsafe conditions under the Remain in Mexico program, and both nonprofit and government resources designed to assist them after they reach the US are already overwhelmed.
US immigration policy has not seen significant changes since the Immigration Act of 1990, and the pre-Title 42 asylum system had not been altered since 1980. The Obama administration introduced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA program, to protect undocumented people brought to the US as children, but otherwise there has been almost no movement to reform the immigration system since 1990. There has been an overall increase in people attempting to enter the US via the southern border — which the right has turned into a culture war bogeyman, best exemplified by former President Donald Trump’s attempt to build a border wall.
Under the proposed GOP legislation, migrants would be barred from applying for asylum in the US for a broad swathe of reasons, as Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director at the American Immigration Council, wrote in an April 19 blog post.
Almost all migrants who lived in the US undocumented for more than a year or did not apply for asylum in a third transit country would be barred from the asylum process, as would many people fleeing persecution in their home countries, Reichlin-Melnick wrote. That’s because the bill significantly narrows the definition of who can apply for asylum based on targeting for their political opinion, and would cut off paths to asylum for those fleeing threats from non-state actors, guerrilla or terrorist groups, or gangs.
“Taken together, these provisions would eliminate the US asylum system as it has existed since the Refugee Act of 1980,” he wrote. “Only those who have the money to buy a direct flight to the United States would have any real chance of access [to] the asylum system—and even then, most would be unable to win given the proposed narrowing of asylum law.”
What are the alternatives?
Menendez, the Democratic head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday set out his own plan for managing the influx of migrants, relying primarily on executive orders, rather than congressional action.
“Successive U.S. administrations have designed their domestic and foreign policies to respond to shifting needs at the border, an approach that has not created a sustainable long-term solution to a mixed flow of migrants and refugees,” Menendez told CNN This Morning on Wednesday. “If we continue down the road where we’ve been, which is reactive and responsive and an enforcement-only mechanism, we’re going to continue to have the same problem.”
Menendez’s plan suggests Biden issue executive orders which would increase resources to process asylum seekers at the border — as well as provide for expedited removal for those who don’t qualify. Menendez’s plan also calls for increased access to free legal aid and for people to await asylum hearings in humane conditions, or “non-detention settings.”
The plan also calls for increased cooperation with Latin American nations to reduce the conditions, like economic necessity and violence, that cause migration, as well as helping Latin American and Caribbean nations manage migration more safely. To that end, the US, Colombia, and Panama have also agreed to work on limiting migration and smuggling through the perilous Darien Gap, which has recently become a popular route for people attempting to enter the US.
Menendez’s tactic of going around Congress and advising the White House to issue these orders does, at this point, seem to be the only likely way to make any changes on immigration for the time being. But unless and until there’s any effort from Congress to address the US’s immigration system as well as the causal factors that drive it, these programs are always in danger of elimination by the next administration. With just a year and a half till the 2024 elections, the programs Menendez suggests could be eliminated before they can prove effectiveness.
In the meantime, the GOP is continuing to move forward with its extremist immigration policies — without a guaranteed winning strategy, but also without a clear legislative alternative that can manage the arrival of thousands of asylum-seekers and migrants over the next several months.
From The Hindu: Sports
50th Birthday: the A to Z of Sachin Tendulkar - As India’s favourite son Sachin Tendulkar completes his 50th birthday on April 24, his life and times chronicled in an alphabetical manner. It could be people, places and events related to the great man
Wrestler Bajrang Punia on protest against WFI: ‘Nothing has been done so far to resolve our issues’ - Top Indian wrestlers, including Bajrang Punia, Vinesh Phogat, Ravi Dahiya, and Sakshi Malik, on Sunday gave details about the legal process in their dispute against the Wrestling Federation of India
Wrexham seal promotion to English Football League with blockbuster win - All eyes were on the Welsh club owned by Hollywood actors Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney.
Gervonta Davis knocks out Ryan Garcia with body shot in Las Vegas - Gervonta Davis delivered a stunning body shot in the seventh round, causing Ryan Garcia to stumble back and then go to a knee, ending a highly anticipated bout with a knockout at 1:44
India makes a strong case for including wrestling, archery and kabaddi at CWG’s regional meet - While kabaddi was never a part of the Commonwealth Games programme, Indian athletes have excelled in shooting and archery before they were done away during previous Games in Birmingham
From The Hindu: National News
13 red sanders smugglers held, logs worth ₹71 lakh seized in Tirupati -
Alliance for an Energy Efficient Economy to help A.P. govt. implement energy-efficiency projects - Energy Conservation Cell is a thoughtful step towards encouraging efficient use of energy and ensuring reduction of consumption, says AEEE president Satish Kumar
Chhattisgarh Police arrest 3 Naxalites in Narayanpur district - The three people were active under the Nelnar area committee of Maoists and allegedly involved in incidents of murder, planting IEDs, and blocking roads by felling trees, an official said
Amul-Nandini was made emotional issue due to Karnataka polls: Nirmala Sitharaman - Nirmala Sitharaman was responding to a question regarding the Amul-Nandini controversy, during the interaction with Thinkers Forum, Karnataka
JD(S) candidate B.A. Mohiuddin Bava and his wife have income tax dues of ₹1.17 crore - Mr. Bava, who contested on a Congress ticket in 2008, 2013 and 2018 polls, moved to the JD(S) following denial of ticket from the Congress
From BBC: Europe
Michael Schumacher: Magazine editor sacked over AI-generated ‘interview’ with seven-time F1 champion - The editor of a German magazine that published an artificial intelligence-generated ‘interview’ with Michael Schumacher has been sacked.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Family’s heartbreak at Putin critic’s jail term - Vladimir Kara-Murza’s wife Evgenia does not know if she or their children will see him again.
Russia’s Belgorod sees mass evacuations over undetonated bomb - An undetonated bomb was found in Belgorod, where a jet accidentally dropped another bomb days earlier.
Flambé fire kills two in Madrid restaurant - Another ten people are injured after plastic plants caught fire as a waiter flambéed a dish.
Paris synagogue bomber convicted after 43 years - Hassan Diab refused to leave Canada to attend the trial into the murder of four people.
From Ars Technica
A warmer planet, less nutritious plants and … fewer grasshoppers? - Higher levels of carbon dioxide are changing micronutrients in grasses, trees, and kelp. - link
In the end, Picard became the fan-service TNG reunion it always should have been - Final season finally gives the TNG crew a better send-off than 2002’s Nemesis. - link
When a plan comes together: Inside a massive Eve Online corporate heist - “It all needed to appear as business as usual.” - link
Access to abortion pill is spared; SCOTUS freezes lower court’s order - The court did not explain its reasoning. - link
Apple will launch a journaling app in iOS 17, but that’s bad news for some devs - It could monitor users’ activities through the day in ways other apps can’t. - link
From Jokes Subreddit
My paraplegic girlfriend just broke up with me. -
She said all I do is push her around and talk about her behind her back.
The principal asked his student. The kid replied, “D-d-d-dav-dav-david, sir.” “Do you have a stutter?” the principal asked. The student answered, “No sir, my dad has a stutter but the guy who registered my name was a real jerk.”
During the War, some German PoWs were working in a field in England when one of them called out to the guard. -
By the bank of a nearby river a small boy was screaming for help. His dog had jumped in the river and couldn’t get out. The German yelled “I go help, ja?”. The guard gave him the okay and the German ran and jumped in the river.
In a few moments he had freed the dog from the weed it was tangled in, and he was helping the dog up onto the bank. He scrambled up and said to the tearful boy, “Take home the dog straight avay and mit a rough towel give him good rub down. Put his basket near the fire. Give him little bit varm vater and milk to drink, also tiny spoonful of brandy if you haff. He be fine by tomorrow.”
