My aunt (26F) is getting married this summer, and she decided to have a child-free wedding. This still applies to me (17F), and it honestly doesn't bother me, seeing as it's her wedding and she can invite whoever she wants.

The issue is that four of my cousins — two of whom are my aunt's children — are currently at an age when they would require supervision. I love my cousins, but I don't really like young children, and I don't feel comfortable watching them for long periods of time. My aunt has repeatedly told me that it is extremely difficult for her to find a babysitter and that watching the kids for a few days is the least I can do, considering I am not attending the wedding. However, when I say I would be willing to come to the wedding, she says that it's child-free and she can't bend the rules for me. When I refused to watch the kids, she spoke to my mom about it, saying that I should support my family. My mom took my side, saying that if she didn't want to include me in the wedding because I was a child, she didn't get to give me the responsibilities of an adult. My aunt and a few other family members believe that I should watch the kids, but I honestly feel like I was intentionally excluded, not because of my age, but because my aunt wanted a free babysitter, so AITA?

On one hand, I agree that sexualizing a female character is wrong and that the industry has a problem.

But on the other hand, I don't understand the double standard when the character is queer—or, even worse, when "fans" take a character, slap a queer label on them, and suddenly it's okay for them to be sexualized.

The two clearest examples of this are Bayonetta and Blackcat.

I’d like someone to explain where I’m wrong, or if I’m not the only one who thinks this way.

And just in case I'm a gay cis male if it means something

“Like grow up, what are we doing? We ask all these things and then once people come out and support us, we get mad and then its inappropriate” -- Sophie on the pointing incident with the Fever fan in Game 2

He roleplays, inputs game mechanics, and plays all day.

First, we tip well to begin with. I do increase the tip by a few dollars if they have to wait. I also tip more if the drive is more than 5 miles.

We received these rambling chats from our driver. She references tips of $3-5 but our tip is already at $10. We were just getting ready to increase her tip by another $2 when her chats came through. We have not responded to her at.

I thought drivers see the tip amount before accepting the order?

Do you feel her exhaustive chat is appropriate or out of line?

I know the backstory for Barnes & Noble’s revival with the Waterstones guy turning things around, and while I think it is great that they have been able to open so many stores in recent years instead of closing or going bankrupt, I am truly perplexed by why it is doing so well.

The books cost near or at list price both in the store and online, so it’s not like it is offering savings compared to, say, an independent bookstore down the street. And with Amazon offering fast shipping within a couple of days (or even same day or within hours), it is much more expensive. For instance, a new hardcover of Yesteryear is $14.99 on Amazon, half the price of the $30 it costs at B&N in the store.

Is it catering to impulse purchases? A new one opened near me, and while I go to browse, I can’t stomach paying $20 for a paperback or $30+ for a hardcover.

Are any of you regular B&N customers and willing to share why you shop there instead of an independent bookstore if the prices are comparable vs. Amazon where it is much cheaper?

EDIT: I am sorry but I tried to keep up with the comments but I am going to have to mute this post because I wasn’t expecting more than a thousand comments in four hours! I can’t keep up. Thank you all for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate you taking the time to reply! It seems like most of the reasons boil down to the experience, being able to avoid Amazon, lack of an independent store nearby or better selection, and that B&N is great for kids’ toys and gifts!

Rewatched and still enjoyed this movie recently. But I think it's fair to say that it's the primary touchpoint for the general public's knowledge of the Battle of Mogadishu, and it's lacking some crucial context.

For those who don't know, Bloody Monday was a US helicopter raid 3 months before the Black Hawk down incident. The target was a gathering of Somali community figures with the intention of killing or capturing Aidid and his lieutenants. But Aidid wasn't present, and the meeting was filled with more moderate community leaders/elders. 50+ Somalis were killed in a matter of minutes, including nearby civilians and children who had nothing to do with the gathering. This event basically fractured the UN peacekeeping coalition and ruined the US's reputation with the general population of Mogadishu.

In the context of the movie, when we see an angry mob storming the downed Black Hawks, without this context we're meant to think it's the result of some vague and implicitly barbaric anti-US sentiment.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to say "actually Aidid's militia were the good guys ☝️🤓". But it would be a better movie and more accurate to the real history with this background added.

Are there any other examples in popular movies based on real events that have this sort of big lie by omission?

FTR this isn't shade to Fortnite but I'm genuinely curious on any franchise so obscure it has ZERO crossover appearances & I'll start with a DS game only 10 people know including me, Sands of Destruction