+
A PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM UPWORTHY
We are a small, independent media company on a mission to share the best of humanity with the world.
If you think the work we do matters, pre-ordering a copy of our first book would make a huge difference in helping us succeed.
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy
More

3 years after the marriage equality ruling, a look back at 8 anti-equality predictions.

In the run up to the Supreme Court's landmark marriage equality ruling in 2015, some opponents of marriage equality voiced big concerns.

These concerns, they'd be the first to tell you, weren't rooted in hatred or bigotry. Of course not. Opponents were simply worried about what marriage equality could lead to in the future. If this were allowed, what would come next? Now that it's been 1,096 days (but who's counting, really?) since the court ruled, we're checking in on some of the doubters to see how many of their predictions came true.

Here are eight anti-equality arguments, fact-checked.


Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images.

1. "Marriage equality will lead to legal bestiality."

This was a really common argument made by anti-equality pundits, politicians, and religious leaders leading up to and after the Supreme Court's decision.

"Watch what happens," warned Pat Robertson during a July 2015 episode of "The 700 Club." "Love affairs between men and animals are going to be absolutely permitted."

Appearing on "The Glenn Beck Show," Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) mused over a similar question. "If we have no laws on this, people take it to one extension further — does it have to be humans? You know?" Oh, we know, senator.

Verdict: FALSE.

2. "Marriage equality will lead to legal polygamy."

Another common argument against the court's ruling was the fear that it would result in people having five or six spouses and eroding the institution beyond recognition.

In 2006, Charles Krauthammer argued that because gay people believe the definition of marriage being one man and one woman is discriminatory, that it'd only be fair to consider "the number restriction ... similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible."

Just months after the Supreme Court's ruling, Ben Carson, a major opponent of marriage equality, said that now that the court has ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, polygamy was "the natural next question."

Spoiler: It's not.

Verdict: FALSE.

Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images.

3. "Marriage equality will lead to child marriages."

The talking point has its roots in anti-gay fear-mongering centered on the idea that gay men will try to "recruit" children or that they have a predisposition towards pedophilia. Obviously, none of that is true; it's just a way to scare people into seeing LGBTQ people as sexual deviants.

CNN unearthed a video of Sam Clovis, President Trump's former nominee for the role of chief scientist (despite no actual history working in science) at the USDA, offering what he believes are "logical" things to worry about if and when same-sex marriage were to become legal: "If we protect LGBT behavior, what other behaviors are we going to protect? Are we going to protect pedophilia? We're not thinking the consequences of these decisions through."

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage posed similar concerns, just as unfounded. "Will pedophiles become 'minor-attracted persons' in our culture?" he asked in a 2011 blog post. "Will courts which endorse orientation as a protected class decide down the road that therefore laws which discriminate against 'minor-attracted persons' must be narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest?"

Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh claimed in 2013 that the push for marriage equality was part of the LGBTQ community's secret plot to make pedophilia OK. "They want us to all think that pedophilia is just another sexual orientation," he said, baselessly. "You know who's gonna fall right in line is college kids, just like they have on gay marriage, just like they do on all other revolutionary social issues."

While no, there hasn't been some LGBTQ community push for the legalization of pedophilia, it is worth nothing that in dozens of U.S. states itis legal for someone under the age of 18 to marry an adult — and has been for a long time. Opponents of measures to raise the minimum marriage age are not members of the LGBTQ community, but often, social conservatives.

Verdict: FALSE.

4. "Marriage equality will lead to the outright criminalization of Christianity."

"Christian convictions are under attack as never before," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said in 2015. "Not just in our lifetime, but ever before in the history of this great republic. We are moving rapidly toward the criminalization of Christianity."

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida) lamented the fact that people might judge others who think gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married.

"We've reached the point in our society where if you do not support same-sex marriage you are labeled a homophobe and a hater," he said in a 2015 interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network. "So what's the next step after that? After they are done going after individuals, the next step is to argue that the teachings of mainstream Christianity, the catechism of the Catholic Church is hate speech, and there's a real and present danger."

Both men will be relieved to find out that no one has been jailed for believing in the Christian God or for praying the rosary.

Verdict: FALSE.

[rebelmouse-image 19397674 dam="1" original_size="750x500" caption="Anti-equality protestors have not been thrown in jail for their religious beliefs, for reading the Bible, or for calling gay people "an abomination." All of that remains perfectly legal. Photo by Ty Wright/Getty Images." expand=1]Anti-equality protestors have not been thrown in jail for their religious beliefs, for reading the Bible, or for calling gay people "an abomination." All of that remains perfectly legal. Photo by Ty Wright/Getty Images.

5. "Marriage equality will lead to more abortion."

This was a bizarre notion put out into the world by Gene Schaerr at the Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal blog. Presumably meant to target people who don't see the harm in marriage equality but oppose abortion, Schaerr cobbled together a few stats and made some ... shall we say ... creative connections.

Schaerr argued in 2015 that some would see marriage equality as devaluing heterosexual marriages and some straight couples would opt against getting married at all. "A reduction in the opposite-sex marriage rate means an increase in the percentage of women who are unmarried and who, according to all available data, have much higher abortion rates than married women," he wrote. "And based on past experience, institutionalizing same-sex marriage poses an enormous risk of reduced opposite-sex marriage rates."

His conclusion: an additional 900,000 abortions over a 30-year span. As a number of news outlets pointed out at the time, this number seems to have been pulled from thin air.

The truth is that abortion rates have been decreasing over the past several decades, largely as the result of comprehensive sex education programs and increased access to contraception. If anything will spike the number of abortions, it's likely to be proposals to embrace so-called abstinence-only education and attempts to repeal the health care law.

Verdict: FALSE.

6. "Marriage equality will lead to mass killings."

This is another head-scratcher from Ben Carson. During a 2016 speech, Carson warned that marriage equality would lead to "mass killings," adding that defining marriage as being between one man and one woman is all that "stands between peace and utter chaos."

For Carson, this seems to come down to a belief that without the Bible, there'd be no incentive not to murder every person you come in contact with. What starts with marriage turns into genocide, apparently.

"Why must they change [marriage]? I believe the reason is, if you can change the word of God in one area, then you can change it in every area," he said. "It's the camel's nose under the tent, and it will just be an avalanche of one thing after the other. We won't have anything that we can use as our reference point because we will have thrown out God's word. It'll be every man for himself, every man deciding for himself what is right and what is wrong, and that can't possibly lead to a good place."

Verdict: FALSE.

7. "Marriage equality will lead to the downfall of democracy."

This example comes from former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges itself. In it, he lamented the fact that rather than putting the question of whether non-heterosexual people should be allowed to marry up to a public vote, the Supreme Court was stepping into a situation in which it had no business. "I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy," he wrote.

He later added that "this practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves."

There's a bit of irony in Scalia having argued that it's the marriage ruling that would undercut democracy when just two years earlier he joined a 5-4 majority in striking down a crucial section of the Voting Rights Act. As a result, countless voters have become disenfranchised, effectively blocked out of the democratic process altogether.

Verdict: FALSE.

On the night of June 26, 2015, the White House was lit up in rainbow-colored lights to mark the historic occasion. Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images.

8. "Marriage equality will lead to the downfall of society."

By the mid-2000s, it had started to become clear that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) might not be as constitutionally sound as opponents of marriage equality would've liked. It was around then that they began trying to pass a bill called the "Marriage Protection Act," which would have amended the judiciary code to essentially say that federal courts weren't allowed to rule on DOMA at all.

In 2006, then-Rep. Mike Pence (R-Indiana) laid out his argument in favor of the bill, warning of the dire consequences that could come with marriage equality.

"I believe that if someone chooses another lifestyle than I have chosen, that that is their right in a free society," he said, paying lip service to LGBTQ people's right to exist. "But tolerance does not require that we permit our courts to redefine an institution upon which our society depends. Marriage matters, according to the researchers. Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin found that throughout history, societal collapse was always brought about following an advent of the deterioration of marriage and family."

The sociologist Pence mentioned, Pitirim Sorokin, published the opinion being referenced in his 1937 book, "Social and Cultural Dynamics." It was controversial, to say the least. Citing Sorokin — and later saying "marriage should be protected because it wasn't our idea," pointing to the institution's supposed creation by a higher power — was a clever way for Pence to argue that his views that some people should have more rights than others was based in concern for society as opposed to bigotry.

Pence will certainly be happy to learn that society still exists, and if there is some larger threat to it, the origin likely has its roots in the current occupant of the Oval Office, not a happily married lesbian couple.

Verdict: FALSE.

Conclusion: Turns out that all the stuff equality advocates said was fear-mongering was, well, fear-mongering.

I could be wrong, but it doesn't appear that any of the people who offered up these concerns about the marriage equality ruling have walked back these statements. I mean, if you're going to put an entire group on the hook for the downfall of civilization or the coming wave of fashionable bestiality, it'd be nice if you could pop in to say "my bad" when it doesn't happen.

For those of you wondering what's next, stop by our marriage equality #UpChat on Twitter on Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 1p.m. ET.

Science

Researchers dumped tons of coffee waste into a forest. This is what it looks like now.

30 dump truck loads and two years later, the forest looks totally different.

One of the biggest problems with coffee production is that it generates an incredible amount of waste. Once coffee beans are separated from cherries, about 45% of the entire biomass is discarded.

So for every pound of roasted coffee we enjoy, an equivalent amount of coffee pulp is discarded into massive landfills across the globe. That means that approximately 10 million tons of coffee pulp is discarded into the environment every year.



When disposed of improperly, the waste can cause serious damage soil and water sources.

However, a new study published in the British Ecological Society journal Ecological Solutions and Evidence has found that coffee pulp isn't just a nuisance to be discarded. It can have an incredibly positive impact on regrowing deforested areas of the planet.

via British Ecological Society

In 2018, researchers from ETH-Zurich and the University of Hawaii spread 30 dump trucks worth of coffee pulp over a roughly 100' x 130' area of degraded land in Costa Rica. The experiment took place on a former coffee farm that underwent rapid deforestation in the 1950s.

The coffee pulp was spread three-feet thick over the entire area.

Another plot of land near the coffee pulp dump was left alone to act as a control for the experiment.

"The results were dramatic." Dr. Rebecca Cole, lead author of the study, said. "The area treated with a thick layer of coffee pulp turned into a small forest in only two years while the control plot remained dominated by non-native pasture grasses."

In just two years, the area treated with coffee pulp had an 80% canopy cover, compared to just 20% of the control area. So, the coffee-pulp-treated area grew four times more rapidly. Like a jolt of caffeine, it reinvigorated biological activity in the area.

The canopy was also four times taller than that of the control.

Before and after images of the forest

The forest experienced a radical, positive change

via British Ecological Society

The coffee-treated area also eliminated an invasive species of grass that took over the land and prevented forest succession. Its elimination allowed for other native species to take over and recolonize the area.

"This case study suggests that agricultural by-products can be used to speed up forest recovery on degraded tropical lands. In situations where processing these by-products incurs a cost to agricultural industries, using them for restoration to meet global reforestation objectives can represent a 'win-win' scenario," Dr. Cole said.

If the results are repeatable it's a win-win for coffee drinkers and the environment.

Researchers believe that coffee treatments can be a cost-effective way to reforest degraded land. They may also work to reverse the effects of climate change by supporting the growth of forests across the globe.

The 2016 Paris Agreement made reforestation an important part of the fight against climate change. The agreement incentivizes developing countries to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, promote forest conservation and sustainable management, and enhance forest carbon stocks in developing countries.

"We hope our study is a jumping off point for other researchers and industries to take a look at how they might make their production more efficient by creating links to the global restoration movement," Dr. Cole said.


This article originally appeared on 03.29.21

We all need those adorable hats and loafers.

July is almost over, which means that a return to school is just around the corner. That also means that back-to-school shopping has begun.

But what might that look like in other parts of the world? Thanks to the internet, we need not wonder.

Moriah is an American mom who began living in Okinawa, Japan, in January 2024 after her husband got stationed there. She regularly posts videos showing just how different daily life is in her new home, not least of which being her son’s school.


In a now viral TikTok clip, Moriah shared her son’s latest school supply haul. And let’s just say…it looks a little different than what we normally see in the U.S.

Moriah began her clip by saying that everything cost 65,000 yen, which roughly amounts to $420. That’s a pretty hefty price for just one kid, but wait til you hear what was purchased.

For the first item, prepare to be overwhelmed by cute kid fashion. Moriah showed off an adorable black and white “summer hat,” to match his summer uniform. In winter, he’ll have a different uniform, and a different matching hat. Plus an outside hat…Japan has their hat game down pat.

But wait, there’s more! Moriah’s son also gets a name tag that looks like it was plucked right out of a wholesome anime, which will be pinned onto his uniform each day, in addition to two gym shirts with his name in Japanese sewed onto the front, three pairs of gym shorts, two sets of the blue short overalls, two of the button-up shirts, an art smock and last but not least…a bow tie.

“They wear this during formal events,” Moriah explained.

Of course, the boy needs matching shoes for all these outfits, which are also part of the supply haul. Then his school outfit will be complete with an “itty-bitty” backpack.

And now, we get to the actual supplies.



First up: a pianika, which is a small, portable breath-powered keyboard that’s standard for most Japanese elementary schools.

“All of the kids get these and learn how to play them and then they'll have a school event where we get to watch and see what they've learned,” Moriah explains before playing a couple of notes.

Then there’s the drawing pad, a jump rope, art supplies like scissors, glue pastels, markers and clay, all of which fit into a nifty supply box that’s top also acts as a mold for the clay that they use. There’s even a pouch that holds onto all “communications for the parents.”

Because organization is clearly a priority, Moriah says that she has to label each and all of these supplies. But she luckily has her kid’s name in Japanese on a stamp to make that task a little easier.

And that’s it! At least, for brand-specific school supplies. Moriah said her family would later go out to stores to get things like her son’s lunch mat and water bottle, which could allow for a little more personal flair.

The mom then shared that when she first attempted this three months ago, it felt really “daunting.” But now with a bit more experience under her belt, she’s “actually excited to get everything organized and ready for the start of the school year in September.”

Though Moriah and her family might only be in Japan for 3-6 years (according to her follow-up video), she’ll certainly have racked up quite a few memories while there, in addition to fun videos for us! It’s always cool to see how different cultures navigate life. Granted, even within Japan, different schools are bound to operate differently, but still, this is a prime example of how the internet is a great way to celebrate and explore differences.

To follow along on more of Moriah’s Japan journey, follow her on TikTok and Instagram.

Family

Naming twins is an art. Here are some twin names people say are the best they've ever heard.

With twins, all the regular pressures of having a baby are doubled, including choosing a name.

Are you in favor of rhyming twin names? Or is it too cutesy?

Having twins means double the fun, and double the pressure. It’s a fairly known rule to name twins in a way that honors their unique bond, but that can lead to overly cutesy pairings that feel more appropriate for nursery rhyme characters than actual people. Plus, it’s equally important for the names to acknowledge each twin’s individuality. Again, these are people—not a matching set of dolls. Finding the twin baby name balance is easier said than done, for sure.

Luckily, there are several ways to do this. Names can be linked by style, sound or meaning, according to the baby name website Nameberry. For example, two names that share a classic style would be Elizabeth and Edward, whereas Ione and Lionel share a similar rhythm. And Frederica and Milo seem to share nothing in common, but both mean “peaceful.”

Over on the /NameNerds subreddit, one person asked folks to share their favorite twin name pairings, and the answers did not disappoint.


One person wrote “Honestly, for me it’s hard to beat the Rugrats combo of Phillip and Lillian (Phil and Lil) 💕”

A few parents who gave their twin’s names that didn’t inherently rhyme until nicknames got involved:

"It's the perfect way! Christmas cards can be signed cutely with matching names, but when they act out you can still use their full name without getting tripped up.😂"

"The parents of a good friend of mine did this: her name is Allison and her sister is Callie. Their names don’t match on the surface, but they were Alli and Callie at home."

“Alice and Celia, because they’re anagrams! Sound super different but have a not-so-obvious implicit connection.”

This incited an avalanche of other anagram ideas: Aidan and Nadia, Lucas and Claus, Liam and Mila, Noel and Leon, Ira and Ria, Amy and May, Ira and Ari, Cole and Cleo…even Alice, Celia, and Lacie for triplets.

Others remembered name pairs that managed to sound lovely together without going into cutesy territory.

twin names, twins, babies, baby namesThese matching bunny ears though. Photo credit: Canva

“I know twin toddler boys named Charlie and Archie and they go so well together,” one person commented.

Another wrote, “Tamia and Aziza. I love how they follow the same sound pattern with the syllable endings (-uh, -ee, -uh) without being obnoxiously matchy matchy.”

Still another said, “Lucy and Logan, fraternal girl/boy twins. I think the names sound so nice together, and definitely have the same 'vibe' and even though they have the same first letter they aren't too matchy-matchy.”

Other honorable mentions included: Colton and Calista, Caitlin and Carson, Amaya and Ameera, Alora and Luella, River and Rosie, and Eleanor and Elias.

One person cast a vote for shared style names, saying, “If I had twins, I would honestly just pick two different names that I like separately. I tend to like classic names, so I’d probably pick Daniel and Benjamin for boys. For girls my two favorites right now are Valerie and Tessa. I think Val and Tess would be cute together!”

Overall though, it seems that most folks were fans of names that focused on shared meaning over shared sound. Even better if there’s a literary or movie reference thrown in there.

twin names, twins, babies, baby namesMany adult twins regret that their names are so closely linked together. Photo credit: Canva

“My mom works in insurance, so I asked her. She’s seen a lot of unique ones, but the only twins she remembers are Gwenivere [sic] and Lancelot... bonus points... little brother was Merlin,” one person recalled.

Another shared, “If I had twin girls, I would name them Ada and Hedy for Ada Lovelace and Hedy Lamarr, both very early computer/tech pioneers. Not that I’m that into tech, I just thought it was a brilliant combination.”

Other great ones: Susan and Sharon (think the original “Parent Trap”), Clementine and Cara (types of oranges), Esme and Etienne (French descent), Luna and Stella (moon and stars), Dawn and Eve, plus various plant pairings like Lily and Fern, Heather and Holly, and Juniper and Laurel.

Perhaps the cleverest name pairing goes to “Aubrey and Zoe,” since…wait for it… “they’re A to Z.”

It’s easy to see how naming twins really is a cool opportunity for parents to get creative and intentional with their baby naming. It might be a challenge, sure, but the potential reward is having the most iconic set of twins ever. Totally worth it!

Watching Reynolds keep a brave face while Jackman hopelessly struggles is everything.

Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman ended their promotional journey for “Deadpool and Wolverine” truly in the spiciest way possible.

The superhero duo appeared in the latest episode of “Hot Ones,” the internet’s favorite interview series where guests eat increasingly spicier hot wings while answering burning questions. And boy, torture never looked so good.

At first, each held their own as they discussed how the movie actually began as a fake-out plan.


“The original idea with this movie was to shoot a fake movie called 'Alpha Cop,' that was intentionally bad… It was about two guys that were sharing one brain and together they make the perfect cop…and the poster says ‘Alpha Cop: two cops, one brain, all balls,’” Reynolds explained to “Hot Ones” host Sean Evans.

“And it was meant to be kind of like horrible. Like 10 people in America would go to see this movie on opening weekend and five minutes into the movie the Marvel logo would flip up and it would actually be ‘Deadpool & Wolverine.’”

There was also a chat about former jobs, where Jackman (already beginning to tear up from the heat) recalled being a clown-for-hire.

“I literally rented a clown outfit…and we had no skills, literally no skills…I broke my rule and I did an 8-year-old’s party. I always knew they were going to find me out and he found me out and this kid yelled to his mom, ‘Mom, this clown is crap.' And I’m like ‘Shut up, kid.'”

Then around the halfway point, hilarious chaos ensued. Though both suffered through the latter rounds, poor Jackman was clearly more victimized. Poor fella goes though all the stages of spice grief—tears, sweat, uncontrollable shimmies, delirious laughter…even bargaining.

Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman Go Claws Out While Eating Spicy Wings | Hot Oneswww.youtube.com

"It tastes angry," Jackman said of the sixth hot sauce. "You know what I'm gonna eat? A bag of rusty razors that's what I'm gonna eat."

Reynolds, on the other hand, was doing far better at keeping his cool. As well as his sarcasm.

"Hugh has never felt physical pain so for him as a pampered starlet, this is important, an important rite of passage," he quipped.

This dynamic was, undoubtedly, everybody’s favorite aspect of the interview.

“The funniest part is watching Ryan provide deep, in-depth responses to Sean's questions and Hugh just fighting for his life in the background,” one viewer said.

Another echoed, “Ryan cracking jokes and Hugh just fighting to survive is funnier than it has any right to be. This is one of my favorite ones to date.”

Some else astutely wrote, “You know the friendship is real by how much they enjoy seeing each other suffer. Like brothers, really.”

But of course, even though Reynolds and Jackman have projected animosity toward each other for laughs, underneath all those jabs is a true friendship.

"Most of our conversations are very vulnerable,” Reynolds revealed.

Jackman even praised Reynolds as a “great father, great family, great family, loves his job, loves his work.”

He continued, “and I don't have anything -- apart from making me do this and he said if you don't I'm gonna just disparage you and make fun of you and tell all of Australia that you just didn't have the guts and Canada is better -- but apart from that, I have nothing. There's nothing [bad to say]."

As Evans put it, they bravely “climbed the hot sauce mountain together,” and we love them all the more for it.

An anry wife shares her thoughts with her husband.

A husband invited some new coworkers over for dinner and instead of properly introducing his wife, he made a sexist joke that she felt was belittling. The wife, who goes by the name Sadie on Reddit, shared the story on the AITA forum to ask if she responded correctly.

Spoiler alert: Yes, she did.

“My husband invited his new coworkers over for dinner. When they arrived, he introduced me by gesturing at me and saying, ‘This is Mrs. Smith (he didn't even say my name)...the housewife!'" Sadie revealed.

“I looked at him for a second, then I started laughing hysterically,” Sadie continued. “I then told said, ‘No, honey, I work full time, and YES I still act like a housewife when I'm home because you simply can't bother to help.’” After Sadie’s remark, the guests stared at the husband, who tried to laugh it off and then changed the subject by asking them if they wanted a drink.


The rest of the dinner was awkward, with the husband and wife exchanging angry glances. After the guests left, the husband blew up at Sadie, saying that she laughed like a “lunatic” and that she ruined “his image.”

“I told him he was wrong to lie about my status and deny my degree, to begin with,” Sadie continued. He said I could've talked to him about it privately later but not like this, and making his coworkers think he's useless.” Sadie asked the online forum if she was out of line, and they responded with a collective no.

People overwhelmingly supported the wife, raising an issue far beyond the fact that her husband was seriously inconsiderate. It’s a big red flag in a relationship when one spouse diminishes or belittles the other in public or private.

“Men who diminish their partners to look better at the office are gross. He only seemed to care about his embarrassment and not yours. I'd be mortified if my husband used a lie that robbed me of my success and accomplishments to prop himself up," Geranium27 wrote.

“It's a red flag for the relationship. He doesn't want a partner who is an equal. He wants a dependent woman who he can provide for completely so he can feel like a man," RedWanderingLizard added.

Some also noted that it was wrong of him to disparage homemakers.

"He diminished (being a housewife is not a ‘low’ role, but he meant it that way) you in public, you corrected him. In public. As he deserved,” LetThemEatHay wrote.

The viral post received over 24,000 comments, highlighting the idea that belittling your partner is a serious sign of a dysfunctional relationship that should not be ignored.

According to Psychology Today, backhanded compliments, digs and subtle put-downs are attempts by one partner to make the other feel small and themselves feel big. “Although cleverly disguised as a joke or a compliment, these comments may qualify as ‘toxic’ if they sting, cause confusion, and replay in a person’s mind for days, disrupting their peace,” Erin Leonard, Ph.D. writes.

Ultimately, commenters overwhelmingly agreed that Sadie was right not to let her husband's belittling compliment go unnoticed. By sharing it online, she opened up a meaningful discussion about appropriate humor in relationships. Studies show that it’s healthy for partners to joke around with one another, but when the comments are thinly veiled put-downs and backhanded compliments, it’s no laughing matter.


This article originally appeared on 5.9.24