Letter 1 1s from a cheating harlot. Prudie tells her she's a cheating harlot. I also tell her she's a cheating harlot. I would push the legal action angle: if you're gonna ruin your relationship with the current BF, you might as well take this creep down. (But does she have the written proof of the extorsion?)
Video letter is from a future cheating harlot. Prudie tells her not to cheat. So do I, as I observe that Prudie is pretty hot when she gets riled and self-righteous (and right).
It could be so much worse: Imagine this was the fruit of your loins |
Letter 3 is from a woman whose husband wants to bring his 6-year-old from a previous marriage on their European honeymoon (Europe! Ooo la la!). Prudie says this is no honeymoon, and the inadequate mother/ex issue needs to be dealt with. I say, if you don't want the kid, you shouldn't have married the guy. But it's true this is no honeymoon.
Letter 4 is upset that a private matter involving their child was broadcast on Facebook by a well-meaning relative. Prudie says to nicely explain to relative that LW doesn't want her private business to be a subject of public knowledge. I say Facebook is the devil.
1 comment:
The ex has a possessory interest in the earrings-he found them. They do belong to him. If he fails to return them it is theft, (technically, it's embezzlement). She should call the cops.
He solicited an act of prostitution when he said he would trade what is described as 'valuable consideration' (the earrings) for sex. She should call the cops.
A contract, verbal or otherwise, that involves one person providing sex for valuable consideration, is invalid on its face.
She is screwed with the new boyfriend. I'd vent my anger by calling the cops on the ex...
Post a Comment