All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[Brattinella]

3 hours ago, jww said:

Actually the Karate Dude  should have been arrested for battery  if he first touched the gardener on the shoulder without permission and was  so close to the gardener as to be threatening which could be consider assault

Are you from California?

[Jamoche]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

Well, I've never been into martial arts. However, I had a couple friends who were really into them while we were stationed in Germany. I used to travel around with them to various kasernes for their tournaments and demonstration - as much to get out the the barracks and see the country as anything. Anyway, I saw enough to see that, while most of the teachers (maybe I should call them sensei) tried to teach a balanced program, there are always a few who were willing to promote students who really shouldn't be promoted. Guess what I'm saying is, someone who really shouldn't even be in martial arts can probably shop around and get awarded a black belt even though they may not really deserve it.

Oh, yeah, I meant "we" as in "the people I trained with", not all martial artists. I started just before the first Karate Kid movie came out and the bad school had some elements of truth to it.

[jww]

1 hour ago, Brattinella said:

Are you from California?

Actually I grew up in Fresno (if you consider that California) but have been in Texas the last 40 years.   My post was based on an event while working as a university librarian, about 20 years ago a student worker  in the library tapped a sleeping patron on the shoulder to wake him up  and tell him the library was closing.  The patron filed charges (later dismissed) and the worker was arrested.  This was before Texas became a stand your ground and concealed/open  carry state.  

[Brattinella]

8 minutes ago, jww said:

tapped a sleeping patron on the shoulder to wake him up  and tell him the library was closing.  The patron filed charges (later dismissed) and the worker was arrested

This right here is insane.  Are businesses required to accommodate sleeping people?  This has become such a litigious society and I think it is all fueled by greed.

[AngelaHunter]

So. Here's Kristi. She's 23, although she looks closer to 35 and is sporting a tat that looks unfortunately like ringworm on her arm. At her tender age she's already been married and divorced (to and from DeShawn "Shawn") and has 3 kids. Although they're divorced, Kristi still enjoys gettin' it on with DeShawn "Shawn" and doesn't believe in birth control. I'm sure they both have very well-paying positions to support their offspring.

Then we had Mr. Kiser who, in spite of the beard, managed to look rather girly. But we found out he's a real macho man who managed to beat up his strangely elderly looking girlfriend. He beat her up so badly he went to prison, but yet here she is by his side in court.  "Stand By Your Man" (or whatever) indeed!

[SandyToes]

So it seems I was right in watching the news and napping during today's "regular" episodes?  The early reruns are so much more fun these days.  If JJ is going to rant and rail on people, why can't she throw them out just for being too stupid for words?  Criminy.

[Guest]

She was extra sharp today with the lady who was suing her ex-roommate.  I know there are more than enough crackpots on the show but something tells me this lady had a legitimate complaint....only I'm not sure because JJ kept cutting her off whenever she tried to explain something. 

Angry like there was a thorn in her paw. 

When you get to the point of not doing your job properly (whether it be a judge, baker or candlestick maker) you need to bow out gracefully - but I'm thinking that train has left the station a year ago.  The passion is gone.

Maybe she should trade places with Byrd.  He wouldn't yell, he'd just stare down the fools and she could stand there and do the Jumbles, occasionally escort a youngin' out to the hallway and smirk when Byrd tells litigants how he and "Judy" have to pay for their education,  computers or dental work.

Solved that!!!

[Silver Raven]

Gizmodo.com takes notice of the meemees lady.

 

http://gizmodo.com/judge-judy-plaintiff-wants-you-to-know-she-doesnt-mess-1789812102?

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Silver Raven said:

Gizmodo.com takes notice of the meemees lady.

I love how they captured a shot with "Unemployed, 30" under her.

 

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

The passion is gone.

I bet there would be more passion and interest if the producers gave her a few interesting cases like the ones we see on TPC. (or like Patricia Bean)  How many times can anyone say, "This was your boyfriend. He's not your boyfriend anymore and now you want him to pay for rent, utilities, credit cards, TVs, etc. etc." without becoming bored into a coma at the same old, same old, dumb, boring "had went"  morons doing dumb boring things?

[Jamoche]

In a crossover with clientsfromhell.net, plaintiff is suing his website designer because his site to sell sports jerseys isn't done. Well, says def, that's because the plaintiff hasn't registered a DBA or set up a payment method because he doesn't want the govt to know about his income, because he'll lose disability. Mental, presumably; he also hasn't provided any info on the product, because he expects his bemused website designer to set up the arrangements with China to import the products. What does he expect to do as part of this business? He doesn't know, and while he nods agreement when JJ tells him what he needs to do, you can see it whoosh past him.

[augmentedfourth]

To reply to the two posts above mine, I enjoyed the website case because it was something other than the usual fare, and it seemed JJ did too, as she appeared more patient and took the time to actually listen to the testimony and see the evidence. At first I was a little worried, because web design probably SO is not her thing, but I thought she handled the case well. And yeah, the plaintiff didn't have a clue.

 

(I guess one could also argue that the medical card case was something different, but meh. I agree with a lot of people here about her faulty logic and inconsistencies, but ultimately, I think the verdict was correct - the guy just didn't have enough to prove it was the mother who used the card and not the daughter.)

[Natehersh]

I am looking for a specific episode.  I unfortunatly do not know the season or date.   I do know it was before 2013.  The reason I am looking for it is I work with the guy and want to bring it back out into the open.  Stupidness int the office around the holidays.  The premise of hi case was that he was fishing and another boat got close to him so he cut the guys anchor from his boat.  I believe that he lost the case.  I have searched all over with no luck.  I will be asking around the office to see if anyone can narrow it down to a date timeframe.  Thanks for the help in advance 

[Angeltoes]

Wow, you have to be a special kind of stupid to go on national TV and take the risk of having the other party blurt out about you that,"He gets SSI.  He doesn't want Social Security to know that he's making money under the table."  I wonder if Social Security and Food Stamps (and all the other agencies that pass out JJ's, Byrd's and my money like candy) ever find out about these shows and go after the people that are blatantly and cheerfully scamming the system.  

[Angeltoes]

Natehersh, was his name Don?

[SRTouch]

2 hours ago, augmentedfourth said:

To reply to the two posts above mine, I enjoyed the website case because it was something other than the usual fare, and it seemed JJ did too, as she appeared more patient and took the time to actually listen to the testimony and see the evidence. At first I was a little worried, because web design probably SO is not her thing, but I thought she handled the case well. And yeah, the plaintiff didn't have a clue.

Gotta agree, I think JJ was happy to see something different, and she came across much better breaking out of grumpy old lady mode. Pretty obvious she's not as clueless when it comes to the Internet and computers as she normally tries to act. 

I think boredom with the same old cases has a lot to do with the way she acts. I know that I get tired of her snap decisions. Sometimes it appears she rules based on information we're never shown, or is hostile to a litigant for no apparent reason. Like someone else said recently, for the amount she's paid, it seems she could put a little more effort into her short work schedule and come up with some new material... or just say "steak" instead of the whole "you ate..." Or here's a novel idea, instead of making rulings based on "her America ideals," maybe she could relieve some of her boredom by spending a little time researching the actual ordinances and laws in the relevant jurisdictions. One of the reasons I like TPC is that MM takes the time to tell us when she rules based on the law in the litigants' jurisdiction.

[Mondrianyone]

Isn't Judy one of the producers on her own show?  I've never looked at the credits to check, so I don't know this for sure, but it's almost a rule in TV that when a star becomes very identified with a show, that person gets a producer credit.  My point being that if she's bored with the cases put before her, she's almost certainly in a position to change that.  If she doesn't get involved to that extent, then it's on her.

And I couldn't agree more that part of her pre-show prep should include looking up local statutes.  Just yesterday there was a case where she had to ask Byrd whether the registration-expiration date would be on a windshield sticker for cars registered in New Jersey.  He just shrugged.  My non-lawyer best guess was that it's on that little corner square on the license plates (that's how it used to be in NY).  How hard would it have been to check that out in advance?

[AuntiePam]

The curious thing about the website case was that defendant was described as a former co-worker of the plaintiff.  Social Security does allow a "trial work period" for recipients, without loss of benefits.  It gives them a chance to try to work and get off the rolls.  I wanted JJ to ask them more about their previous relationship.

[Jamoche]

On JJ and jurisdictional differences: In one case she was shouting down the plaintiff who came from a jurisdiction where you can't use your security deposit for your last month's rent. Came as a surprise to me; I didn't know there were any where that was allowed. It's certainly not allowed on People's Court - what are you supposed to do if you're the landlord and you discover the place is trashed after they leave? Not go to JJ, that's for sure.

 

46 minutes ago, AuntiePam said:

The curious thing about the website case was that defendant was described as a former co-worker of the plaintiff.  Social Security does allow a "trial work period" for recipients, without loss of benefits.  It gives them a chance to try to work and get off the rolls.  I wanted JJ to ask them more about their previous relationship.

The website owner did say something about "trial work" - so if that is allowed, why was he being so dodgy? Other than innate cluelessness.

[AuntiePam]

18 minutes ago, Jamoche said:

The website owner did say something about "trial work" - so if that is allowed, why was he being so dodgy? Other than innate cluelessness.

Good point.  He was clueless.   I almost feel sorry for him.  He paid defendant almost $4K for a website he won't be able to use.  Maybe defendant should have gotten all the info he needed before starting to build the site. 

[Jamoche]

13 minutes ago, AuntiePam said:

Good point.  He was clueless.   I almost feel sorry for him.  He paid defendant almost $4K for a website he won't be able to use.  Maybe defendant should have gotten all the info he needed before starting to build the site. 

That's why I called it a crossover with clientsfromhell.net - if designers waited for clients to provide everything they'd never get started. Though if they were co-workers the designer should've known this guy wasn't playing with a full deck.

[AZChristian]

Judge Judy laid down the law with her production staff a couple of years ago - NO cell phone cases.  

[Natehersh]

3 hours ago, Angeltoes said:

Natehersh, was his name Don?

The guys I work with. His Name is Roger Dosmann.  He was the one that cut the other guys anchor line

[augmentedfourth]

3 hours ago, Mondrianyone said:

Isn't Judy one of the producers on her own show?  I've never looked at the credits to check, so I don't know this for sure, but it's almost a rule in TV that when a star becomes very identified with a show, that person gets a producer credit.  My point being that if she's bored with the cases put before her, she's almost certainly in a position to change that.  If she doesn't get involved to that extent, then it's on her.

And I couldn't agree more that part of her pre-show prep should include looking up local statutes.  Just yesterday there was a case where she had to ask Byrd whether the registration-expiration date would be on a windshield sticker for cars registered in New Jersey.  He just shrugged.  My non-lawyer best guess was that it's on that little corner square on the license plates (that's how it used to be in NY).  How hard would it have been to check that out in advance?

Only because this came up at work recently, I can tell you that NY and NJ have different rules regarding registration and insurance.

1 hour ago, Jamoche said:

On JJ and jurisdictional differences: In one case she was shouting down the plaintiff who came from a jurisdiction where you can't use your security deposit for your last month's rent. Came as a surprise to me; I didn't know there were any where that was allowed. It's certainly not allowed on People's Court - what are you supposed to do if you're the landlord and you discover the place is trashed after they leave? Not go to JJ, that's for sure. 

Oops, we did that when we moved out of our apartment a few years ago. However, we were always good tenants, and when we moved out, we cleaned thoroughly AND took pictures with a dated newspaper to prove the place was spotless the day we left. Also, we were pretty sure our landlord wanted to move one of his friends into our apartment once we were gone, so everybody won. Or at least we never got sued.

[Zahdii]

5 hours ago, Natehersh said:

I am looking for a specific episode.  I unfortunatly do not know the season or date.   I do know it was before 2013.  The reason I am looking for it is I work with the guy and want to bring it back out into the open.  Stupidness int the office around the holidays.  The premise of hi case was that he was fishing and another boat got close to him so he cut the guys anchor from his boat.  I believe that he lost the case.  I have searched all over with no luck.  I will be asking around the office to see if anyone can narrow it down to a date timeframe.  Thanks for the help in advance 

 

5 hours ago, Angeltoes said:

Natehersh, was his name Don?

 

2 hours ago, Natehersh said:

The guys I work with. His Name is Roger Dosmann.  He was the one that cut the other guys anchor line

OK, does anyone else feel weird that Natehersh joins this site and immediately his first post is about looking for information on someone he works with because he wants to "bring it back out into the open.  Stupidness int the office around the holidays."?  I'm not sure what he meant by "Stupidness int the office around the holidays."  Maybe he wants to humiliate someone at the office Christmas party?

But then he makes another post and gives the other persons full name.  Maybe I'm wrong, but this feels like we're being used to fulfill someone's personal agenda.

It seems like some sort of line is being crossed here, and it's hard to explain why.  We can talk about characters on a fictional show with no problem.  We can discuss people on reality shows or news shows, because those people are now part of the public consciousness, willingly or not.  Why does this feel different to me?

[Mondrianyone]

Totally agree.  I don't feel comfortable providing the requested information either, for the same reasons you mention.

[Jamoche]

Tech support people take note: having an upcoming court date on Judge Judy is apparently incredibly hard on smart phones. There's a high number of people who had a text proving their case but oops! their phone just broke! Maybe the space around the court is some kind of electromagnetic anomaly.

[SandyToes]

Today, on "Rode Hard and Put Away Wet..."     Yeesh.

Repeat case of repossessed Jeep but didn't pay the ticket - Another two-thrown-shoes-at-my-TV litigant!  Gah, what a whiny, spoiled little witch.  More made-up documents.

And Jamoche!  ha!  No kidding!  Maybe it IS the Twilight Zone!

Edited December 8, 2016 by SandyToes

[Quof]

What happened to the verb "to say"? 

"I let her know"

"I informed him"

"He had let me know"

It's almost as annoying as the use of the verb "to go" in place of "to say"; "I went 'What do you want?' and he goes 'I want cookies.'".

[SRTouch]

Perfect example of two know-nothing back yard breeders who should not be allowed anything smarter than a pet rock. There's so much nonsense in this case it's hard to keep straight. I'm not sure if they're dishonest are just stupid. Plaintiff at least has an excuse, stupid and lame most assuredly, but she can claim this is all new to her. Defendant claims to be a animal groomer who has bought and sold dogs for breeding in the past, so she has NO excuse. Defendant knows the plaintiff's dog's history because she actually sold the dog to the plaintiff - it was a problem dog, agressive, hard to breed, and had been returned to a breeder from a previous owner etc. Instead of spaying the dog and selling it as a pet, she sells it without spaying... at a big big loss if she's telling the truth about what she paid when she bought it. She's trying to say she sold it as only as a pet, but then she turns around and agrees to provide plaintiff with a stud in exchange for two puppies. Remember, plaintiff doesn't know what she's doing with the problem dog. So problem momma bites one of the puppies when they're about a month old. Actually two puppies are injured and one ends up losing an ear. Perfect example of how ill-prepared plaintiff is, when she finds the injured puppy with a swollen infected ear she has to call around looking for a vet. I realise it's early for the first puppy shots at a month, but she's had this dog for how long and doesn't have a vet? TYPICAL OF MANY BACK YARD BREEDERS, DOG IS JUST A MONEY MACHINE AND MEDICAL CARE AN AFTERTHOUGHT JJ asks and she says puppies and mom were never seen by a vet. We don't have an emergency vet in my town, but I've called my vet a couple times after hours and been connected to a vet on call. Plaintiff says she sold puppies at eight weeks (defendant argues it was at 5 weeks) but admits puppies still hadn't been to a vet. Her story - she bought the shots at a feed store and injected them herself (WTH QUALIFIES HER TO BE INJECTING THE PUPPIES) before selling them for between $500 to $800 - says defendant told her where to buy the meds... yeah, the other back yard breeder. Defendant tries to redeem herself by acting all excited about how poorly plaintiff acted, but all I can think is that she's the one who sold a problem dog to the inexperienced plaintiff as a "Pet only dog" and then provided the stud for breeding. I really wanted JJ to ask what plaintiff is going to do with the dog - whether she plans to continue breeding or get it spayed. Probably more litters in the future, as she was suing for the papers.

Edited December 9, 2016 by SRTouch
Wording changed

[SandyToes]

Perfect recap and perfect read on that case, SRTouch. Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dummer.  Poor baby pups. Hope they are in good homes (did ANY of them really make it out, or are they still with these two wackos?)

[SRTouch]

1 minute ago, SandyToes said:

Perfect recap and perfect read on that case, SRTouch. Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dummer.  Poor baby pups. Hope they are in good homes (did ANY of them really make it out, or are they still with these two wackos?)

Well, if I understood correctly, the pup who lost an ear was donated to a service organization (Dogs for Heroes). I figure because she couldn't sell it, and maybe even claimed it as a tax break. Just hope the three plaintiff sold aren't returned when she fails to provide the promised AKC papers.

[configdotsys]

What I found astonishing in the web site case was that the owner said that the defendant was supposed to hook him up with a source for the jerseys in "China." That sure didn't sound like this dude was going to be selling authentic jerseys so in addition to cheating SSDI with this cash business, he was going to be selling counterfeit merchandise as well.

Maybe he can go into business with Kevin of "Her-meez" bag fame.

Today's repeat at 4 or 4:30 here was egg tooth auction lady.

[BusyOctober]

Plaintiff in dog case looked like a freakin' jacked up jack o lantern with those meth riddle 'teef'. Yikes.  I'm gonna have nightmares thinking about that gaping maw.  Not sure if it's just my local station, but those damn singing dental ads that run constantly during JJ need to get her in a chair stat.

[Guest]

The Plaintiff in the dog case reminded me of comedian Junior Stopka:

I just watched that loony website case and, I, uh, WTF? Dude's gonna make a website where he sells stuff he doesn't even know how to procure? I think there was something really mentally wrong with him. His whole demeanor was...off. And as for that website design, lord have mercy. I remember GeoCities pages looking better than that mess. 

Edited December 9, 2016 by Guest

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, configdotsys said:

What I found astonishing in the web site case was that the owner said that the defendant was supposed to hook him up with a source for the jerseys in "China." That sure didn't sound like this dude was going to be selling authentic jerseys so in addition to cheating SSDI with this cash business, he was going to be selling counterfeit merchandise as well.

I couldn't figure out what he thought he was bringing to the business. Apparently the Web designer was supposed to create the site, do all the set up work to include sourcing and pricing, even took care of registering the domain name, and all the while the plaintiff couldn't even provide the accounts for people to buy a jersey. Sounded like he may not have even known the defendant had registered the domain name.

[augmentedfourth]

1 hour ago, Giant Misfit said:

The Plaintiff in the dog case reminded me of comedian Junior Stopka:

I just watched that loony website case and, I, uh, WTF? Dude's gonna make a website where he sells stuff he doesn't even know how to procure? I think there was something really mentally wrong with him. His whole demeanor was...off. And as for that website design, lord have mercy. I remember GeoCities pages looking better than that mess. 

The whole time I was thinking she looked like a toothless Marla Hooch, from A League of Their Own.

Edited December 9, 2016 by augmentedfourth
missing word

[Guest]

PERFECT.

[EtheltoTillie]

Yeah she had crazy eyes! 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

On 12/6/2016 at 9:05 PM, Brattinella said:

Time to retire, Judy; you just aren't earning your keep anymore.  Go live in your ivory tower and look down on us little people.

In Judy's defense (hear me out!) I don't think she looks down on "little people" in general. I do think she's overly cranky more often than not, but it's hard to blame her sometimes. I'm sure if it was me up there, I'd throw something at somebody the first time I heard 'tooken', and 'tooken' is the least of it. Not saying I don't understand the frustration with her, but I can also see why she'd be snappish so often.

[bad things are bad]

Quote

having an upcoming court date on Judge Judy is apparently incredibly hard on smart phones

Same phenomenon as having your insurance lapse and getting in a wreck THAT VERY SAME DAY, often while LITERALLY on the way to start the process of getting insured. 

[AlleC17]

16 hours ago, augmentedfourth said:

The whole time I was thinking she looked like a toothless Marla Hooch, from A League of Their Own.

This was exactly who I thought of as soon as I saw the plaintiff!  lol  And yeah, Miss Vet Tech gave the excuse of 'I would have to charge more' for the dog has she gotten her spayed first.  If you really care about the dog, you should have spayed her first!!!  That pissed me off so much, and then she provided the stud, so in MY America, she is just as culpable as to what happened with the puppies.  I did think I heard the plaintiff say that she was going to get the dog spayed herself, since she 'lost' out on...something.  Not sure what, when she sold 3 puppies without paying for any vet care on any of them.  Hoping she did spay that dog.

[BubblingKettle]

I can't imagine what defendant Miss Moon must be like behind the wheel after seeing her slow processing time during JJ's Q&A period. Mouth agape with thumb-sucking teeth on display, "double-linedded," and Dad Moon looked like something out of the Sunday comics.

And what in hell was going on in the house of Mr. Wallen, Pat, Miriam, and (I missed the defendant's name)? What a mess.

[Brattinella]

Miss Moon's dad is doing her no favors by letting her believe the accident wasn't her fault.  Good Lord she was still insisting when she dragged herself out of the courtroom.  I weep for the snowflakes.

[Quof]

Quote

while LITERALLY on the way to start the process of getting insured. 

We call that "just fixin' to".

[Ilovecomputers]

I'm a little surprised that Judy permits people to show print-outs of alleged text conversations. It would be soooo easy to create a phony graphic representation of a text conversation, and as long as I stood up straight, didn't cross my arms and didn't drink the forbidden water, JJ would probably believe me. If the opposing party tried to quibble about my fake text message print-outs, I'd counter by saying, "Of course he's denying it."

[AZChristian]

53 minutes ago, Ilovecomputers said:

I'm a little surprised that Judy permits people to show print-outs of alleged text conversations. It would be soooo easy to create a phony graphic representation of a text conversation, and as long as I stood up straight, didn't cross my arms and didn't drink the forbidden water, JJ would probably believe me. If the opposing party tried to quibble about my fake text message print-outs, I'd counter by saying, "Of course he's denying it."

Agreed.  Judge Milian on TPC always asks to see the actual phone.  She has teenagers.  LOL.

[Maharincess]

I lost a lot of respect for her on the episode with the backyard breeders when she spoke of the many puppies she has "bought" over the years.  I know it's not a big deal and frankly none of my business but I hate that.  There are so many great dogs that need homes, I hate hearing about somebody buying a puppy. 

I'm also damn sick of the way she treats people who choose to live together without the "benefit" (lmao) of marriage.  I have my 28th happily unmarried unniversary next May.  A couple who has a piece of paper saying they're married are no more committed to each other than my man and I are. We are happy, committed to each other and still very much in love.  How many marriages last 28 years these days?  Not too many I would guess.  I have nothing against people who choose to marry but that piece of paper means nothing to me. 

She needs to realize it's not 1955 anymore. 

[DoctorK]

Quote

people who choose to live together without the "benefit" (lmao) of marriage

However, like it or not we have a legal system that defines and manages state sanctioned "marriages" and we don't have a legal structure for people who are not married and want the courts to sort out their property issues. If you choose to maintain your relationship without a legal marriage, that is you choice (and may the best choice for you). The courts are not set up and don't have jurisdiction to clean up the messes we see all too often on the court shows.

Edited December 10, 2016 by DoctorK
spelling

[Intocats]

5 hours ago, CoolWhipLite said:

And what in hell was going on in the house of Mr. Wallen, Pat, Miriam, and (I missed the defendant's name)? What a mess.

The defendant was Laura, and I don't often feel sympathy toward JJ litigants, but I felt bad for her. Mr. Wallen was a class-A jerk, and Miriam sounds like a snake in the grass. She had no reason to be in the courtroom except to rub Laura's face in it. My take on Pat is that he is Laura's platonic friend who offered a shoulder to cry on while Mr. Wallen and Miriam (her best friend!) were getting it on. 

Laura, if you are reading this...you're better off being free of that tractor-coveting snaggle-toothed little gnome! Find yourself a mensch, not a schlemiel.

[Jade Foxx]

2 hours ago, Intocats said:

The defendant was Laura, and I don't often feel sympathy toward JJ litigants, but I felt bad for her. Mr. Wallen was a class-A jerk, and Miriam sounds like a snake in the grass. She had no reason to be in the courtroom except to rub Laura's face in it. My take on Pat is that he is Laura's platonic friend who offered a shoulder to cry on while Mr. Wallen and Miriam (her best friend!) were getting it on. 

Laura, if you are reading this...you're better off being free of that tractor-coveting snaggle-toothed little gnome! Find yourself a mensch, not a schlemiel.

Poor Laura Brown was absolutely DISTRAUGHT over that real life Bozo masquerading as a man! 

As we've said many times: LADIES IT'S OKAY TO BE SINGLE