u/SeaCookJellyfish

For context, I signed a lease for a rental some months ago through TurboTenant but when I entered the rental, there were dozens of dead bugs around the area (wasn't there initially when I was touring). I was never able to move in and I notified my landlord with proof of the infestation. My landlord was supposed to send in someone to take care of the infestation, but I'm not sure on which dates or what exactly they did, and I'm pretty sure you're supposed to send a clear notice 24 hours beforehand for entering the premises.

Eventually I told the landlord that I wanted to end the lease early and I would return my keys ONLY IF it meant getting my rent and security deposit back. They said they would accept my keys but didn't confirm that I would get a refund, so I did not return the keys. They ended up rekeying the house without telling me. Later they did refund the rent but did not refund the security deposit, saying that it would be used for the rekeying fee. The TurboTenant lease states that the tenant will be responsible for the cost of rekeying if all keys are not returned upon vacating.

The landlord never sent me the itemized receipt of this security deposit until much, much later (specifically they only sent the receipts more than 21 days after I moved out). They added the receipts to TurboTenant and now they are pretending it was here all along. The receipts also include numerous typos, the wrong address, and blurry pictures.

Now they are also asking for additional money because apparently the rekeying fee was more than what my security deposit covered and they're telling me to cover the fee within a time limit. Not only that, but they're saying that I owe them another fee (around one months' rent worth) for terminating the lease early. In the TurboTenant lease, it states that if a tenant terminates their lease early, they must pay a termination fee but there are exceptions, such as if the rental was uninhabitable. I consider the rental to be uninhabitable due to the widespread cockroach infestation that was there when I entered. It feels like they're tacking on these additional fees they never brought up before as a form of retaliation for trying to get my security deposit back.

I'm thinking of taking them to small claims. Do I have a case with this? I'm worried that they will pretend that the itemized receipts were there all along and try to dodge returning the money but I know California often sides with the tenant.

Edit: TurboTenant sends emails when the landlord shares receipts. I rechecked it and it definitely was way past 21 days when they sent the receipt.

For context, I signed a lease for a rental some months ago through TurboTenant but when I entered the rental, there were dozens of dead bugs around the area (wasn't there initially when I was touring). I was never able to move in and I notified my landlord with proof of the infestation. My landlord was supposed to send in someone to take care of the infestation, but I'm not sure on which dates or what exactly they did, and I'm pretty sure you're supposed to send a clear notice 24 hours beforehand for entering the premises.

Eventually I told the landlord that I wanted to end the lease early and I would return my keys ONLY IF it meant getting my rent and security deposit back. They said they would accept my keys but didn't confirm that I would get a refund, so I did not return the keys. They ended up rekeying the house without telling me. Later they did refund the rent but did not refund the security deposit, saying that it would be used for the rekeying fee. The TurboTenant lease states that the tenant will be responsible for the cost of rekeying if all keys are not returned upon vacating.

The landlord never sent me the itemized receipt of this security deposit until much, much later (specifically they only sent the receipts more than 21 days after I moved out). They added the receipts to TurboTenant and now they are pretending it was here all along. The receipts also include numerous typos, the wrong address, and blurry pictures.

Now they are also asking for additional money because apparently the rekeying fee was more than what my security deposit covered and they're telling me to cover the fee within a time limit. Not only that, but they're saying that I owe them another fee (around one months' rent worth) for terminating the lease early. In the TurboTenant lease, it states that if a tenant terminates their lease early, they must pay a termination fee but there are exceptions, such as if the rental was uninhabitable. I consider the rental to be uninhabitable due to the widespread cockroach infestation that was there when I entered. It feels like they're tacking on these additional fees they never brought up before as a form of retaliation for trying to get my security deposit back.

I'm thinking of taking them to small claims. Do I have a case with this? I'm worried that they will pretend that the itemized receipts were there all along and try to dodge returning the money but I know California often sides with the tenant.

Edit: TurboTenant sends emails when the landlord shares receipts. I rechecked it and it definitely was way past 21 days when they sent the receipt.

As many of us know, it's incredibly common for women to be stared at, leered at, and gawked at, especially by men. These stares can be predatory or creepy and often times they will last several seconds or even minutes, completely unbreakingly. Some men may smirk, others may look at you like they're undressing with your eyes, etc.

It's blatantly disgusting and rude. Honestly I know not everyone agrees, but I consider it a genuine form of sexual harassment. But I've noticed that a lot of people downplay the harm of staring. Why?

You'd think it'd be universal to know that being stared at is uncomfortable. How would you like it if it was done to you? But when it's done to women it's always excused. I think that staring should be a more prominent issue brought up, since it makes the victim feel unsafe and it's potentially a precursor to even worse behavior.

After Britney has been making the news again and again, people keep insisting that it was wrong to let her out of the conservatorship, as if we don't have tons of proof that her family was abusing her via the conservatorship. It's sickening. Her conservatorship caused these problems, so it's not the solution. If you were to put her back with her family again, it'd make the situation worse, not better.

Even if you were to put her under another conservatorship, it CANNOT be with her abusive family. That should be obvious. They completely took advantage of her.

And even if you don't agree with everything Britney says or does today, that doesn't ever mean the bullying and abuse she received from her family and from others was retroactively justified. Like c'mon.

There are other solutions to this situation than just to lock her away with her abusive family again.

Why does everything require a phone call? Even with our technology nowadays it feels like we are being needlessly thrown into phone calls constantly just to get disability support when phone calls are inconvenient and overly clunky.

Problems with phone calls:

• Waaaaaay too slow. Takes forever just to get any help because they have to read out every single keypad option you're given.
• The phone call often struggles to recognize my voice and what I say, making me repeat things unnecessarily. I can imagine it'd be worse if you have a voice-related disability or an accent.
• Even if you do get connected with an actual human being, many of them are rude and intentionally not helpful. There are so many bullies throughout the healthcare system, whether its a hospital phone operator or a hospital receptionist, being forced to deal with people like that constantly is tiring on top of the disability itself. It feels abusive.
• Not all phone lines are available 24/7, so you have to call within specific times which can be very inconvenient to any disabled person with time blindness or executive dysfunction.

I get that some things DO require a phone call, but a lot of things don't. Literally just make it accessible through websites or through email (preferably the former). Only require a phone call when you absolutely must.

Not only that, I can't imagine what it's like living with any disability that impairs your ability to speak, then being forced to speak just to get support. It's stupid, backwards, and ironic.

Edit: I really appreciate that so many people are talking about their own struggles with phone calls, because it really goes to show that the disability community is extremely diverse and filled with unique perspectives, yet they still manage to screw us all over equally... 😅

My recent suicidal/depressed post just got voted. I looked around to see if it was happening to anyone else and yeah, I actually do see a lot of depressed posters being downvoted (search through New).

I’m aggressively upvoting every downvoted poster besides myself because why in the fuck would you downvote someone on a mental health subreddit. A lot of the downvoted posts just had regular depressed people, they weren’t even being mean or problematic they just wanted to fucking speak. Like c’mon

I used to have insurance and a prescription for prozac but now both have run their course/expired. Now I am feeling like I need prozac again but I'm trying to figure out how to access it at an affordable rate. I can't really afford a doctor's visit without insurance as it'd be too costly. Would it be possible to cheaply get prozac/fluoxetine without insurance or a prescription?

Obsession is a horror movie that recently came out which depicts a young man named Bear who is too cowardly to deal with his crush, Nikki. He ends up making a wish to make Nikki fall in love with her. The movie then depicts everything that's wrong with that wish, making Nikki act crazy, obsessed, and not at all herself. But most importantly, Bear takes advantage of Nikki during the movie which includes acts such as raping her, but the viewers of this movie cannot always decisively say that it was rape nor can they decisively agree on where Bear crossed the line or where Bear should've realized that things were wrong.

I noticed some of these takes being posted on other social media platforms. Like for example I saw one comment that read,

"I doubt he fully comprehended or accepted that it was the wish and she was not in control the last time they slept together (on screen at least). It’s easy for us to call it rape, but put yourself in his shoes would you be so fast to believe that a random gag gift did all that?"

To me it's a huuuuuge red flag that people cannot identify rape when they see it. It's rape. Call it what it was. It was rape.

I've had players before where I've given them various chances to do something and they stay silent or do nothing. Then later on during the session they complain that their character has gotten nothing to do the entire session.

I always try to share the spotlight for all players but some players just won't jump at the opportunity to do something with their characters. I ask them if they want to do anything and they stay silent or say "I don't know".

These examples are from some old campaigns/oneshots I had so I can't talk to my players about this directly anymore but I'm looking for advice for the future. It just feels a little unfair.

Something I’ve always found odd is how romance novels often have female readers who will not only tolerate but willingly accept romance novels with overt misogyny.

Not only that but the fandoms for these romance novels will have a fanbase that’s majority female who will despise the fictional female characters for minor things (such as being annoying) while being attracted to fictional men who do way worse things.

A lot of the readers say that it’s harmless fun, that they can enjoy whatever they want so long as it’s fictional. But a lot of their tolerance for fictional misogyny seems to also be accompanied by actual misogynistic beliefs. What do you think? Is it harmless or not? It feels like a lot of this behavior is just an example of choice feminism, but maybe that’s just me.

Men are becoming increasingly prone to adopting alt-right policies. People often blame leftists for not reaching out to men enough and instead alienating them by focusing on women’s rights.

But what I don’t get is what they expect leftists to do. Fighting for gender equality inherently means calling out the men who abuse their privilege or calling out the men who passively benefit from it and don’t hold other men accountable. Are people not allowed to call out sexism, in fear of alienating men? Are people not allowed to be hurt or angry at the men who do these things, in fear that it’ll push men further to the right?

I know it’s “not all men” who do these sexist things. I know that other genders can be sexist too, not just men. But it is overwhelmingly men doing these things. How are leftists supposed to reach out to men when so many men are sexist or otherwise bystanders to sexism? Why are leftists being blamed in the first place for men choosing to turn to the alt-right when it was their individual choice to make? It all feels unfair.