AU: Advice Unillustrated

Letter 1 is from a parent with a lazy unmotivated undriven son. Son is alive and living out of his parents' home (after they kicked him out). Do they have to reconcile themselves to the fact that he will never be a success?
Answer: Yes.
Prudie makes suggestions on rebuilding a positive relationship. I'm OK with that.

Video letter is from a woman who had a sexual fling with a coworker who rejected her after their one-night-stand. He ended up telling her that she was too ugly for him to have a relationship with. After pouting a while, she forgave him. He now wants her to go into business with him. She thinks she's over him and it could be a good idea.
Prudie says that if she's truly over him, she should consider it, if it's a good business proposition.
My advice: I really don't know why your romantic history has anything to do with it. But since you seem to think it does, don't do the deal.

Letter 2 is from a woman who just had an interview for an MBA with a sexist pig interviewer. Should she tattle? Prudie says yes. I say: I need to see just how hot you are before answering. Pictures please! (OK, Prudie is right.)

Letter 3's daughter is the result of a rape by a family member when LW was age 14. Her husband has been in the picture since her child was 2 and treats the child like his own. His family loves the child too, but often asks about the girl's father. LW couldn't bear the trauma then, and she doesn't want to relive it now. Husband says to tell otherwise they'll keep asking.
I say, tell them, and tell the police. You are no longer a 14yo girl, you are a grown woman with a supportive husband. You need to protect your daughter and others from the rapist. (But what's with the in-laws? They must know that she became pregnant at age 14, which usually means something not quite normal happened.)

Letter 4 is from a guy whose wife wanted to decorate their bedroom in pink. He got angry, and she's pouting. Just like a girl! He wants her to be happy about their new house again.
Prudie says to apologize but to force her to admit that pink is for girls and blue is for boys.
I say: If the color pink is enough to emasculate you, you must be starting at a very low level.

AI: Advice Illustrated

So I started this last week, but BF closed the window (for a good cause) and I lost my post (what happened to autosave???). Here's a quick second shot:

Letter 1 is from a woman who is convinced her husband is gay.  She's cool staying married cuz she's not into sex and he is quite a catch (other than the gay thing, of course). But her entourage is pushing her to "set him free". Should she? I say: if he wants to be "free" he knows where to find the door. But why don't you actually, I dunno, talk to him about this rather important matter? And make sure that he is engaging in safer sex practices with you and any partners he might have. Prudie worries that he will end up wanting to be "free" in a few years, when LW will be old, shriveled up and unmarriable.

Video letter is from a creepy neighbor guy who feels up the LW and makes lewd comments. She can't avoid him, so how to deal with him? Answer: mace.

Letter 2 is from a parent whose white 10yo child plays on an otherwise all-black team. Teammates are cool calling each other "niggas", and are cool with son doing so too. But this freaks out LW. I say: have the talk, of course, but as long as he's using this term only with his teammates, I find it rather charming and a step in making a horrible word less hurtful.

Letter 3 is from a girl whose father wants her to be an engineer. She doesn't. My take: don't.

Letter 4 is from a guy (I'm guessing) who has a colleague who rubs one out in the company terlet. Should he tattle? I say: What are you doing in there that allows you the luxury of enjoying a full withdrawal from the spank bank? (That said, it's gross. Guy has issues.)

AI: Advice Illustrated

Letter 1 is from a woman whose MIL is hateful but careful to keep her vicious attacks out of sight. Hubbie doesn’t believe her. LW is convinced MIL is poisoning her (she poops after dining at MIL’s). Prudie says get proof by trading plates with hubbie. I say: if my partner called me a liar, I would DTMFA.

Letter 2 is from a woman who has a perfect BF except he says “super” all the time. STFU.

Letter 3 is from a woman from a troubled home who sexually abused her younger brother. He’s forgiven her but she can’t forgive herself or tell her husband or her therapist. Prudie sqys to tell her therapist.

Letter 4 is from someone who referred to the fact that a white couple’s child is adopted, in front of the child. Now the couple is irate. Prudie says the couple is crazy, but to apologize profusely. I say that whether it’s obvious or not that the child is adopted, LW has no business or reason to talk about it, let alone in front of the child. In any case, LW has no idea what, and more important, how, the parents have talked about the adoption.

AI: Advice Illustrated

Letter 1 is from a woman whose fiancé thinks she stinks. She has good hygience. Should she call off the wedding?
First step (it's hard): find a person you trust to tell you if you stink. You don't smell yourself. Maybe you stink.Maybe you have a medical problem (there's  possible person you trust). Maybe he's ultra sensitive (there are super smellers... but apparently you're the only one, so I doubt this is the case). Maybe he's just a dick. What does the Pruditron say?
She says to see a doctor, and points out that he must like her if he's put up with the stench for so long.

Video is from a  late-middle-aged woman whose older husband flirts with the young waitress. He's making a fool of himself. Duh. Service people flirt. It's good for the atmosphere and tips. And a bit of fun for him. Prudie thinks she's over reacting, bizarre, and a little nuts. Prudie suggests professional help.

Letter 2 is hard to summarize, but is quite interesting. He it is in extenso (image has nothing to do with it, but I ran across it while searching and it begs to be published):
My wife's younger sister recently got a job with a housecleaning company that pays decent wages and offers benefits. This is the first stable job she's had in almost two years due to a severe substance abuse problem. While she was in trouble, we took in her young son, who was in a bad situation. We love him dearly and practically consider him our child, and our daughter considers him a brother. My nephew now spends one to two days a week with his mother. Because of concerns about her relapsing, unbeknownst to her we closely monitor her social networking sites—she’s never shy about broadcasting her activities. She recently started a blog on which she has been posting derogatory comments about her clients and photos of their homes. Now she is adding personal information, such as their addresses and alarm codes. My wife is sure that if we tell her to quit the blog, she'll just shut us out. If we contact her employer anonymously, she’ll probably be fired and potentially slip back into drugs and alcohol. What do we do?

My advice? Time to think about the kid. She is clean (maybe... but this is kind of nuts), she is behaving totally irresponsibly, if not illegally, and will lose her job. I would seek custody of the kid, if that's possible, and let her ruin her life if she wants. How crazy is it to start a blog just to bitch about (and endanger) her clients? What does Prudentia say?
Emily says the SIL sounds like O'Brien on DA. I guess both are kind of nuts, with the soap thing, but I don't really see the connection. SIL's more like Thomas, if anyone. Anyway, Prudence agrees to see a lawyer about gaining custody.

Letter 3 is from a mom who is living in a sitcom or something. She knows that some kids (but not who exactly) had sex while staying overnight in her house. Whom should she blab to? Her husband? Her child who invited the sluts? Their theater director? The HS principal? The mayor? The NY Post? Ban Ki-Moon?
I say: Shut up about it. Kids have sex. Surprise! These used protection at least. It was uncool for them to frolic like that, but given the circumstances (see the letter), hardly unexpected. What does the Lesser Sage say?
Prudie says to keep this in the family circle and to use it as an opening to talk about safer sex with their son. Sounds good.

Letter 4 is from a person who has been helping a friend apply for grad school. But friend is hopeless and will never get in, and if he does, will fail. Among other problems, he can't write. LW is tired of working on this hopeless project. How to get out of it?
Prudie says to tell him the truth, and suggest he has a learning disability (because he seems bright but can't write). I have no objection.

Advice Illustrated

Letter 1 is from a jealous husband. Prudie tells him not to be jealous. He's really pathetic.

Video is from a woman who works in an office next to a belcher. Prudie says to get all those indisposed by the belcher to gang up and go see the boss. I don't believe this: she can hear a belch from another office (with a wall, not a partition, between them), and hear it over the sound of music? And dozens of others who one would expect don't share a wall with him also are so disturbed? FAKE.

Letter 2 is from a woman who was mildly abusive to her son, and is now disappointed that he isn't as loving as she would like. You damaged your child and your relationship, and apologizing now, however sincerely, just can't make him love you the way you think he should. I'd say you need to work on being a great grandmother, even if that means taking some long car trips to spend more time with his family.

Letter 3 is from someone who works for a large company she'll soon be leaving. Before she leaves she has to write an evaluation of a less-than-stellar assistant on a short-term contract, one that would allow him to stay on after. He's struggling to make ends meet as he supports his siblings. Should she lie and help him keep his job? She doesn't care at all about the company. I say: You may have just been a terrible boss. Companies don't care much about the feelings of their employees so I wouldn't worry too much about hurting the firm. If he's really hopeless, he'll be fired soon enough with or without your letter.

Letter 4 is cacapoopoo. LW works at home and is incommodée par her cleaning lady who shits a big smelly poo before leaving, every single time. Should she tell her to hold it? Prudie says: Are you crazy? I agree. Install a portapotty in the backyard and tell her it's the servants' loo.

French educational TV claims you can identify a person's personality by looking at their hair under a microscope

France has a lame version of Mythbusters called "On n'est pas que des cobayes" (We're not just guinea pigs), broadcast on educational public TV network France 5.

You can watch it (in French) for a few more days here: http://www.pluzz.fr/on-n-est-pas-que-des-cobayes-2012-02-17-20h35.html

Hélène Clauderer, an "expert" from a company called the Centre Clauderer, is brought in with her microscope to tell us which of the three hosts has the strongest hair. She also explains that you can tell the personality of people by the structure of their hair.

She's asked: "Is is true that with a person's hair you can tell their characteristics?"
She answers: "Yes, but first I have to show how the microscope works."

She examines the hair of the first host and says: "We see you have an excellent diet. We can also see that you're very emotional. You speak your mind, and quickly."
The host asks: "How can you see that?"
Reply: "In the structure of the hair. That's it."

About the next host: "Vincent has a hair that would be great for pulling a car. You are very determined. When you decide to do something, you really do it."

The last host is healthy but "is very stressed".

ARRGGGGGH.

OMG n'importe quoi ! Quand France 5 fait l'apologie de la pseudoscience dans une émission scientifique

Lors de l'émission du 17 février de la pâle copie de Mythbusters proposée par France 5 (On n'est pas que des cobayes), la question du jour c'est "Peut-on tirer une voiture avec des cheveux?".

http://www.pluzz.fr/on-n-est-pas-que-des-cobayes-2012-02-17-20h35.html 
(attention : l'émission sera disponsible encore quelques jours seulement)
Hélène Clauderer, "experte" du centre Clauderer, utilise un microscope pour nous dire lequel des trois animateurs auraient les cheveux les plus résistants. En passant elle explique que l'on peut comprendre la personnalité des personnes à travers leurs cheveux. (!?!)

On lui demande : "C'est vrai qu'avec le cheveu, vous pouvez avoir les vraies caractéristiques d'une personne ?"
Elle répond : "Oui, mais d'abord il faut que je vous montre comment ça [le microscope] marche."

En visionnant les cheveux de l'animatrice, elle dit : "On voit que vous avez une excellente hygiène alimentaire. On voit aussi que vous êtes très émotive. Elle dit ce qu'elle a envie de dire, et elle le dit très vite."
L'animatrice demande : "Comment vous pouvez voir ça ?"
Réponse : "Dans la structure du cheveu. Voilà."

A l'animateur suivant : "Vincent a un cheveu qui marchera très très bien à la traction. Vous être très déterminé. Quand vous décidez que vous voulez faire quelque chose, vous le faîtes vraiment."


Du dernier : "David est sain, mais un très grand stressé."

Promouvoir une pseudoscience tellement ridicule (et sans rapport avec la question posée, mais présentée comme un acquis) sur une émission de vulgarisation de la science est inacceptable. Et sur une chaîne publique, prétendue éducative, c'est un scandale. Honte à cette émission, à cette chaîne, et à France Télévisions !