LeighA
SHARE THIS PAGE View Viral Dashboard ›
    • LeighA

      How is it unbelievable? The way hereditary power structures work is that when the person in power dies, the power goes to the next in line, regardless of how old they are. There have been child kings all through history, and surely far more child heads of houses. Usually they just have advisors help them make most of their decisions until they’re old enough, which she clearly did. Tutankhamun was almost exactly the same age as her when he became king. The only improbable thing is that it was a ten year old girl, but the rules concerning female rulers in Westeros have never been fully fleshed out (at least in the show, maybe there’s more in the books). Considering Daenerys considers herself a viable contender, it’s obviously not an impossible thing. If you mean the way she spoke, remember that she was raised to potentially fill the role she’s in (if at an older age), and she very obviously spends most of her time with advisors. She would’ve received tons of instruction on how to speak like that.

    • LeighA

      The first book is called The Golden Compass in the US. It was originally published as Northern Lights in the UK. According to Wikipedia, it wasn’t a Philosopher’s/Sorcerer’s Stone kind of decision. Apparently, Pullman was originally going to call the trilogy “The Golden Compasses” as a reference to Paradise Lost. The US publisher took it as a reference to the alethiometer, and used it as the title of the first book even after the series title was changed to His Dark Materials.

    • LeighA

      I don’t know if you’ll see this, but here are a few ideas: Barnaby — from Barnaby Rudge
      Brom — a variant of the (nick)name of the author of Dracula (“Abraham” conjures up images of Lincoln, and I don’t know if “Bram” by itself would work very well, but Brom seems pretty solid)
      Silas — from the bible, Silas Marner, and The Da Vinci Code
      Dorian — from The Picture of Dorian Gray (may be a little too soft-sounding now for a boy’s name, especially since it starts with “Dory”, but it could certainly work. Or, if you’re feeling adventurous, why not go with Gray itself?)
      Finn — from Huckleberry Finn, among others
      Cyril — from A Passage to India
      Winfield — from The Grapes of Wrath
      Moriarty — from Sherlock Holmes; obvious, but far less so than Sherlock
      Gatsby — from The Great Gatsby, obviously, but be aware that it stings of missing the point of the book
      Havisham — from Great Expectations
      Lennox — from Macbeth and The Secret Garden (probably not great with Lopez, but a nice option in general) Requisite Shakespeare list:
      Antony (Julius Casesar), Balthasar (Romeo and Juliet, and others), Cornelius and Yorick (Hamlet), Vernon and Warwick (Henry IV), Griffith (Henry VIII), Lysander and Oberon (A Midsummer Night’s Dream), Nestor (Troilus and Cressida), Kent (King Lear)

    • LeighA

      Names cycle. Usually, we think the names from our parents’ generation sound dated and the names from our grandparents’ generation sound old. But our parents and grandparents thought the names from their parents’ and grandparents’ generations sounded dated and old too, the names from our great- and great-great-grandparents generations have gone largely unused for decades (aside from the more timeless classics, like John and Elizabeth), so our generation ends up using those because they sound unusual and cute. For example, the name Evelyn is super popular right now—it was the 15th most popular girl’s name in the US in 2015. But from 1954 to 2001, it wasn’t even in the top 100. Sixty years later, it’s fair game again. Don’t be surprised if in 20 years, we have a bunch of little Lindas running around. That said, Hansel and Gretel are unlikely to become popular anytime soon, because they’re “harsh” sounding names, and for quite awhile Americans, at least, have preferred more soft, flowing names. That’s why Evelyn has caught on, but not Mildred or Gertrude. (Not just for girls’ names, either. The most popular boys’ names right now are Noah, Liam, Mason, and Jacob, and Jacob.)

    • LeighA

      Not all brands have them, and not all of Kleenex’s tissues have them. I use a lot of tissues (usually Kleenex), thanks to allergies, and I’ve never owned a single box that did this in my entire life. It looks like it’s mostly (maybe only?) for boxes you’d get either through a business or maybe at Costco or the like. Besides, if I got to the bottom of the box and the tissues became off-white, I’d probably assume they were something wrong with them, like they were old or something, unless it was made clear that they were supposed to be like that. It’s not that non-white tissues can’t be good, but when 90% of the box was white, you expect the last 10% to be white, too. And it would certainly never occur to me that it was meant to indicate something that the almost-empty box already indicates perfectly well by itself.

    • LeighA

      If you have the box above a certain height (like on a shelf), you pick it up to make it easier to get a tissue. If it’s below a certain height, you can see into the box through the plastic on the top. Either way will make it obvious when they’re almost gone.  The only reason I can think of that you’d ever not know is if you keep it in the small window between those heights (right about eye level), but even then, it feels different pulling the tissue out when the box is almost empty. In a mostly full box, you can feel the other tissues “pull” back, whereas in a mostly empty box, the tissue comes straight out. Once it starts to feel different, buy more tissues. Or, if you don’t notice that, there’s the fact that the pop-up almost always stops working right with about 5 tissues left. When that happens, buy more tissues. If you have a cold or something, that’s cutting it pretty close, but usually 5 is enough to make it a day or so, at least.

    • LeighA

      So if you’ve relied on the completely common sense notion that the box is almost empty when the box is almost empty and never consciously noticed that the bottom few tissues are a different color, or if you’ve never seen a box that does this, or if you’ve only seen it someplace like school or work where for all you know it could just mean the box had been sitting around for years and yellowed, you’re a moron? Okay. Also, if—as you said—your “hand is deeper in the box,” you’re using the tissues wrong, because Kleenex boxes pop the next tissue out of the box and you just pull it the rest of the way out. Your hand is never in the box unless that fails, which usually only happens on the last few tissues (another clue they’re almost out!). But do go on about how everyone else is an idiot.

    • LeighA

      Or you’d call your friend with really uptight parents and forget that they insisted on you saying, “Hello, this is [name], may I please speak to [friend]?”, and you’d have to get a mini-lecture on manners before they called your friend to the phone (because saying “Hello, is [friend] there?” is just so rude). Which reminds me—having to ask if someone was there when you called them, because it was actually possible for them not to be, and having that one friend who usually wasn’t.

    • LeighA

      Um…that’s all well and good, but most places don’t even have payphones anymore. I haven’t seen one in a good ten years. Worst case scenario, you’d ask someone to use their phone. As for the VCRs, do you not have DVR? It starts recording instantly when you press the button. Some cable companies even start it a few minutes before or even at the beginning of the program, as long as you were already on that channel.

    • LeighA

      I almost never think the movie is better than the book (and yet I still always have to see movies based on books I like), but there are a few: 1) Lord of the Rings
      I know it’s a controversial opinion, but the lack of dialogue in the books makes it less enjoyable for me, and I prefer the alternating structure of the second movie to the abrupt jump in the book. Not The Hobbit, though. The book was definitely better than the movies for that (and I swear, it takes longer to watch the movies than it does to just read it). 2) Harriet the Spy
      The movie takes place in the 1990s in some nondescript city, while the book takes places in the 1960s in New York City, with all the differences in culture and language that implies. Some details make more sense in that setting, particular with regards to Ole Golly, but it’s a prime example of how the setting can practically be a character in a book. The movie strips that and focuses on the actual characters and plot, and I think it benefits from that in this case. I liked classics as a kid, but for whatever reason, books from the 1950s and 1960s never seemed quite as natural (in terms of language) as books from any time before or after, and this was a prime example. 3) Matilda
      I actually don’t even remember the book that well, despite having read it several times. The only difference I remember is the ending, and I prefer the movie ending, though I don’t generally approve of changing that kind of thing. I also don’t know why they made them American, and I certainly wouldn’t have, but it was a pretty good cast. Out of every book I’ve ever read, and out of all the ones that have been made into movies, those are the only ones I can think of where I preferred the movie, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that for all three, I saw the movie before reading the book. There have been others where I’ve done that and preferred the book, so it isn’t just that, but it’s certainly a factor.

    • LeighA

      #12 I just tried another kind of these last week and I was actually a little surprised at just how different they looked from the picture. I know it’s a TV dinner and all, but they’re a fairly high-end one and don’t give off the impression that the filling (chicken, in my case) is literally mush. Tasted okay, I guess. #18 Officially jealous of Australia. We literally only have two Drumstick flavors, regular and chocolate (of the ones that look like that; the ones that are a ball covered in chocolate have a few more, like mint). And honeycomb seems like what we call sponge candy, which is delicious and I have never heard or thought of combining it with ice cream, but now I really want to try it.

    • LeighA

      Or filter them and only check around your birthday. If you use gmail, you can even just add +birthday or something before the @ so you can filter all of them at once. But it actually isn’t that bad. I signed up for free birthday ice cream from Coldstone, and I get one or two emails a month, and every couple months they send me a buy one get one free coupon just because. (Most of the rest are “look, new flavor!” or “Enter this contest for a year of free ice cream” kind of things.)

    • LeighA

      I have an insulated $10 Aladdin water bottle that comes apart so you basically have a cup, a piece shaped like the top of a disposable bottle, and a lid, which is super easy to wash by hand (and dishwasher-safe). I also have a few others, costing from $4-15, that would suck to wash by hand but are dishwasher safe. I don’t get the point of paying $33 for a water bottle that’s harder to clean than all of those and isn’t insulated. Also, since you mentioned $85 S’well bottles (?!), Target has a line by them for $25. They seem pretty awful to clean, though.

    • LeighA

      While it’s silly to use a neutral term when specifically talking about males, pretty much everyone uses the word “cow” to describe the animal regardless of gender.  “Cattle” is plural and has no singular form, so if you want to talk about one of several non-gender-specific cattle, what word do you suggest people use? Should they use the word everyone already uses for that and understands (“cow”), or are they required to say “bovine”? Maybe they should just use the scientific name, would that be better? Nobody would know what they were talking about, but hey, at least it’d be correct. Of course, mankind would never stand for using a technically gender-specific word to apply to both genders, right?

    • LeighA

      From Wikipedia: “In all modern states, some land is held by central or local governments. This is called public land.
      The majority of public lands in the United States are held in trust for the American people by the federal government and managed by [federal agencies].
      In general, Congress must legislate the creation of new public lands, such as national parks; however, under the 1906 Antiquities Act, the President may designate new national monuments without congressional authorization.” So it seems that, officially, federal land is public land.

Load More
Loading...