Well we're not married (yet), but one time my boyfriend playfully spanked me. Hard. I know he didn't mean to hurt me, but I was mad about it all. Day. Long. I just couldn't get over the fact that he technically hit me! I started to consider things like, "Is he really sorry?" "Will he do it again?" "Should I leave him?" And gave myself reasons like "He didn't mean to!" "He's been apologizing all day!" "He was just playing!" "He meant to have fun, He's sorry!" Yet countered it with one simple statement, "Yeah that's what all abused women say." In the end, I felt the question that should determine whether or not I should leave is: "If I stop talking to him tomorrow and can never see him or speak to him again, will I be okay with that?" and the answer was "No", so obviously I shouldn't leave him. He is very well aware that I was considering leaving him, (I have a very strict 0 tolerance policy of abuse in my relationships, as I was abused terribly growing up,) and he still apologizes to this day, but he has certainly made it a point to never do that again. I definitely trust him, and he actually was being playful, but otherwise that has been the only "real" hitch we have come across. I mean, we argue, but that's only when either of us are mad, and it's usually over small stupid stuff. Like, really stupid stuff. We argued over traffic signs before, LOL. It always leads to me saying the argument is completely retarded and we drop it and just cuddle or something. Really not worth getting worked up about. Edit: Fixed some typos. I'm on my phone so my thumbs can't quite reach LOL. Question: How long or wide is the woman's tolerance policy towards abuse? Options: A. Just 1 B. Greater than 1 C. 0, No tolerance at all D. not enough information === The correct answer is
C

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered a thinly veiled criticism of China, even while insisting on closer relations with Beijing, during a speech Friday in Singapore. Speaking at the annual Shangri-La Dialogue defense conference, Modi called for the Indo-Pacific region to embrace freedom of navigation, territorial integrity, and respect for all nations, regardless of their size. "We will promote a democratic and rules-based international order in which all nations, small and large, count as equal and sovereign," the Indian prime minister said. "We will work with others to keep our seas, space and airways free and open." While those comments did not specifically mention China, Modi's remarks are seen as a reference to Beijing's increasingly assertive behavior toward its smaller neighbors in disputed areas of the South China Sea. Modi also implicitly criticized the United States. He slammed growing protectionism, presumably a reference to recent tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump. He also said nations should keep their commitments a possible reference to Trump's decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal. India has grown close with the U.S., especially as China projects its growing military power beyond its shores. The U.S.-India relationship, Modi said, "has resumed new significance in the changing world." An important aspect of that partnership is "a shared vision of an open, stable, secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific," he added. For decades, India has embraced a non-aligned status, which means it does not choose sides between world powers. In keeping with that position, Modi warned against a "return to great power rivalries." The Indian prime minister also insisted that "Asia and the world will have a better future when India and China work together in trust and confidence, sensitive to each other's interests." India is the world's largest democracy. It has the world's seventh-largest economy. Within a decade, it is expected to pass China to become the world's most populous country. Question: Modi probably believes that: Options: A. India must cooperate with both China and the US B. not enough information C. Tariffs will help India's economy D. Larger nations should get more respect than smaller ones === The correct answer is
A

Q: The dumbest thing that actually worked? I joined Tinder. Reason I say it was the dumbest is because I still acknowledge that it's not my kind of dating scene even though I ended up meeting the love of my life through the app. Other than that? Nothing was wrong or dumb. I have done nothing much because the man I am currently dating sent me a superlike after I was on the app for less than 12 hours. I joined, created profile, went through possible matches, and then went to bed. I didn't have enough time to do something dumb. Now my boyfriend on the other hand was on the app for 45 months prior to me joining and him finding me. His story is that he had been in there long enough to end up matching with some bots (robots that somehow end up joining or hacking the app. I have not a clue how) that he would have conversations with to test if they were legitimate people. He would also match with different people who would either immediately block him because he came as weird or he would block them because they came off as weird. When he found me, what he saw in my profile was that I was local, I was a legitimate person because I knew someone that he knew through Facebook, and I had multiple pictures of myself that looked genuine. I also had a description where I stated my intention for using the app which was that I was looking for a serious relationship. What he did after I connected with him was talk to me and then test me as the conversation progressed. How did he test me? He told a corny joke which I laughed to. If I hadn't have found his joke funny, he probably wouldn't have asked me out on a date. I hope that answers your question. I know it wasn't very. eventful. Question: What app was used in the article? Options: A. A dating app. B. A test preparation app. C. A map app. D. not enough information === The correct answer is
A: A

Q: Well we're not married (yet), but one time my boyfriend playfully spanked me. Hard. I know he didn't mean to hurt me, but I was mad about it all. Day. Long. I just couldn't get over the fact that he technically hit me! I started to consider things like, "Is he really sorry?" "Will he do it again?" "Should I leave him?" And gave myself reasons like "He didn't mean to!" "He's been apologizing all day!" "He was just playing!" "He meant to have fun, He's sorry!" Yet countered it with one simple statement, "Yeah that's what all abused women say." In the end, I felt the question that should determine whether or not I should leave is: "If I stop talking to him tomorrow and can never see him or speak to him again, will I be okay with that?" and the answer was "No", so obviously I shouldn't leave him. He is very well aware that I was considering leaving him, (I have a very strict 0 tolerance policy of abuse in my relationships, as I was abused terribly growing up,) and he still apologizes to this day, but he has certainly made it a point to never do that again. I definitely trust him, and he actually was being playful, but otherwise that has been the only "real" hitch we have come across. I mean, we argue, but that's only when either of us are mad, and it's usually over small stupid stuff. Like, really stupid stuff. We argued over traffic signs before, LOL. It always leads to me saying the argument is completely retarded and we drop it and just cuddle or something. Really not worth getting worked up about. Edit: Fixed some typos. I'm on my phone so my thumbs can't quite reach LOL. Question: How likely do you think it is that the writer's boyfriend will spank her again? Options: A. He will probably hit her again soon. B. not enough information C. Not very likely. D. He will definitely hit her. === The correct answer is
A: C