I read that the birthday book is bound. Is this true?
I am very amused to see Leavitt doing her spin. Too funny.
I read that the birthday book is bound. Is this true?
I am very amused to see Leavitt doing her spin. Too funny.
Thank you for the correction. ![]()

Peter Mandelson was fired as Britain’s ambassador to the United States on Thursday after his ties to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein became another unwelcome problem for the embattled Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
Who will they fire next? Prince Andrew?
Andrew may be ‘outed’ but as this case has taught us, the wealthy still win - we arrest pills and jons trafficking at hotels - we let this slide. Even if we see arrests, which I doubt, these folks have had freedom far longer than deserved.
And frankly, we are still barely anywhere on this.
They pretty much already did.
Haha! ![]()
The release of the files was blocked. We will not see anyone held accountable.
I agree that no one is likely to be held accountable by the authorities. However, a group of victims is putting together a list of men who assaulted and victimized them, a list which they intend to release publicly. When that list is released, there should be serious public accountability even if the authorities do nothing about it.
Not owning it. It was giving up the title or becoming homeless.
It was tongue in cheek (sarcastic)– I should have been clearer. Too subtle- my bad
In the NY debate last night, they talked about how to end prostitution - should they arrest the girls.
Curtis Sliwa said - no - they are victims.
They should arrest and publicize the johns.
In some ways, Prince Andrew is - not that the victim was a prostitute, but per her book, she was paid $15K. So he’s, to me, a john.
He’s still going to be wealthy.
Is there any way to change his residence to a prison? That’s where he - and others who victimized these young girls - belong.
And they are still refusing to swear in Rep. Grijalva.

Grijalva, D-Ariz., won a special election to the House more than three weeks ago but hasn't been sworn in yet amid the government shutdown.
Edited to add, I see this thread is not in the politics forum; feel free to flag or delete my comment if inappropriate (I’m not sure).

When former Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers was pursuing a romantic relationship with a woman he described as a mentee, he turned to a longtime associate for guidance: convicted sex offender Jeffrey E. Epstein.
One would hope that The Crimson’s reporting will bring about the firing of Summers as well as his shunning. The nickname they use for the woman he’s trying to seduce — disgusting. A racist and a misogynist, I can’t for the life of me figure out how the Democratic Party establishment continues to listen to him. How is Summers still teaching undergrads?
Because too many people celebrate this behavior as some sort of sign of virile manhood, which to them translates to the man being someone who should be treated as godlike. Guys like this elevate other guys like this, and that is how Epstein’s web grew and thrived. And until we demand that everyone involved in Epstein’s web - regardless of their political leanings, monetary donations, or “value” to some company or institution - be exposed and punished, this will continue unchallenged as it has throughout history.
The nickname they use for the woman he’s trying to seduce — disgusting.
Also, an academic asks a senior scholar for comments on a paper draft, and that gets characterized as “sound[ing] needy :) nice”?!?
Just leaving aside the betrayal of trust for a moment (that sort of request is not just a sign of respect, it’s a sign that this person trusts you enough that they’re willing to show you a draft, with the belief that you are ethical enough to, for one, not steal their ideas), the idea that someone asking you for input on an academic paper is “needy” is just so da*n bizarre.
I’m senior enough and well known enough in my little corner of my field that I get occasional requests to look at paper drafts. I try to say yes to as many as I can, because I know some of the minefields that junior scholars don’t, and I figure it’s a service to the discipline to help good ideas make it through. But it would never occur to me to think that any of them are being “needy”—if anything it’s the exact opposite, in that they’re at some level feeding my ego, by acknowledging my status in the field. So how in the world are these two trying to interpret a collegial professional interaction through some sort of psychosexual lens? It’s so divorced from reality that it has legitimate psychosis vibes.
End of rant. Dang, but sometimes I really hate humans, you know?
I have brought up employee-student relationships before in a non-PF thread, including a 70 year old professor and 22 year old student, and opined how they are always predatory in nature. But the response from every female in the thread was, “It’s legal and consensual, so more power to them!”, and stating that I was just trying to control women.
There may be some guys propping up other guys as you say, but resolving the issue lies mostly with women.
That is a huge over simplification.