Yeah, it was implied that Nazis aren’t actually socialist but rather the tankies and ccp cucks would literally defend anything that opposes western world powers.
Like the drunken Russian soldiers we get to see dieing? In other words: I doubt it. Is there actual proof for this happening? If so, how would the effect of alcohol be countered?
There’s tons of study on both alcohol and adrenaline’s effects on the body. As far as a study about sobering up because of adrenaline, a quick search didn’t yield any. Probably because of ethics concerns I’d imagine. But judging by the votes, a number of people have experienced this first hand.
I’m sure it worked the first few times. In a situation like that you’ll be under constant stress, that’s not at all comparable with suddenly finding yourself in an emergency.
I wonder if that would end up being illegal. I know that if you’re aware that someone is eating/drinking your stuff, you can’t put anything in it that might harm them, including laxatives or excessively hot spices (people have sued and won for that). But breast milk shouldn’t be harmful.
Not sure, but OSHA will have a problem with an imporerly labeled container.
Edit, thinking about it. You probably would have a solid case - especially if there are damages. Some else said it’s like putting sprem in food, but I think blood would be a better comparison [citation defintaly needed].
The theif could simply be allergic to something in her milk that’s not in the creamer. If the woman, unknowingly or not, had any sickness that can spread via breast milk, her leaving that in the creamer container where anyone could drink it is very bad. It could spread from the “theif” to their spouce, who spreads it to the mail man.
Don’t leave breast milk in a unlabeled container, public fridge or not.
The theif could simply be allergic to something in her milk that’s not in the creamer.
So… hypothetically… I make my own lunch and bring it to work. It has peanuts. And perhaps some flu virus I’m carrying. You steal it and eat it. You get sick.
And… I’m* somehow responsible?
It’s unreasonable to think you can steal things out of open containers and expect “proper labeling”.
Pretty sure that you get the benefit of the doubt if you had a feasible reason for adding/changing something about your food.
For example, you could add a laxative to your food/drink and be totally in the clear as long as you labelled your container with your name and maintain that you’ve been constipated. It’s a totally valid reason, plus it was labelled with your name so there’s no reason for anyone else to be consuming it.
That argument has been tried, but if you knew other people were stealing your food, you can still be liable.
And in this case, it would be a stretch for the person to say they like putting their own breast milk in their coffee, and the note makes it clear that it was done intentionally to upset the perpetrator.
define excessive? I love hot stuff to the point that my lunch could be considered a war crime most days and I'm not gonna tone it down because some scum fuck might want to steal it.
I’ve seen stories about this. If it’s so hot it makes someone else ill, but you can eat it, you’re fine. If you maliciously make it too hot for anyone, that’s apparently unacceptable.
As I understand it, if someone sues you because they ate your food and got sick or injured because it was too hot, you’re probably going to be fine if you can show that you routinely eat food that hot, and there’s no evidence that you did it as a trap. My understanding is that, even if you eat food that spicy, if you tell someone “Someone’s been stealing my food - they’re going to get a big surprise when they find out how spicy it is today,” you might have an issue. I’m not a lawyer, but workplace food stealing and resulting traps are apparently fairly common.
I would think it would depend on if this was labelled as hers. It’s a totally reasonable assumption a giant bottle of creamer in a common fridge is for common use unless specified otherwise
It turns out that’s not sufficient, legally (at least in the US). If you know someone is stealing your food, and you put something harmful in it, it doesn’t matter of it was clearly labeled as yours.
Right obviously if it was with the intent to harm someone who you reasonably knew would be eating it. It would be related to, but not exactly the same as, this en.wikipedia.org/…/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine
Why the fuck is everyone in here acting like fucking breast milk is akin to laxatives or "harmful substances" and that it was put in there to harm someone? Young mothers at work often need to pump their milk so
a) someone can give their baby at home said milk the next day in a bottle
b) the milk production doesn't decline.
I hope you all know that.
So that could just be the container she chose to store her milk in throughout the day. Besides… breast milk is not fucking harmful. Where the fuck have you lot been educated?
Maybe you should learn to read before you get all enraged. I specifically said that, though I know things like laxatives are illegal this way, I wonder if breast milk would be. Also, though certainly mothers pump and store breast milk at work, this clearly isn’t that because she added the “surprise” note as a “got ya” thing.
As sometime else said, what would your feelings be if it was a guy putting seamen into it? That’s not harmful, either.
If there is a little less in there than she expected every day, it might take a few days until she realizes that someone is using it… so this hasn't got to be the gotcha thing at all
And the mere notion that someone really thinks sperm and breast milk are even in the remotest sense comparable in this context is utterly laughable to me. In a really upsetting kind of way. I mean... have you ever for even two seconds thought about the notion that breast milk has absolutely no sexual component whatsoever? Like... none at all.
I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith. Read that label in the pic and tell me you honestly think it was an accident.
And no one said the two were the same. You argued that you can’t compare breast milk and a laxative because breast milk can’t hurt you, so I’m asking about seamen, which also can’t hurt you.
But this whole chain was wondering if it would be illegal if done intentionally, and none of your outage is touching on that.
Right, again, I’m curious about the legality. You don’t want to drink it, but if you drank someone else’s drink from the work fridge and then found out it had pee in it, could you claim damage/injury?
In terms of blood-borne viruses (like HIV and hepatitis), breast milk is considered in the same risk category as semen or vaginal secretions, only blood is higher. Whereas piss and shit are only considered a risk if they contain blood. Obviously there’s other reasons why you don’t want shit in your food, but it probably won’t give you anything really nasty and long-lasting. Piss it’s pretty much totally safe, but I reckon you could still get in trouble for secretly feeding it to someone.
You ancestors also had social anxiety nerd. Like yeah maybe great great great grandpappy went through wars and famines but he still stuttered in front of your great great great grandma and laid awake at night thinking about it.
A literal excerpt from re4 remake: Date: April 13 I shared the news of my achievement with that pretentious bastard colleague of mine. His face went white! Then, he started scribbling something in his notebook. I thought he’d be impressed, but instead, he actually had the nerve to warn me of the so-called dangers.
He’s a fool. I have everything under control.
Date:
The subject went wild and escaped from its cryogenic tank.
Nope, just of sexual abuse. Which is, like…. Come on New York what’s the fucking difference here? Especially when you hear the story of what happened. I don’t understand how they talked the court down from rape to sexual abuse.
A conviction leads to sentencing (normally) in a criminal matter. A cival court is settling a cival matter, not a criminal one. Criminal courts convict you of a crime and sentence you to some kind of punishment. Cival courts can make you pay a fine, but not convict you of a crime.
But there’s more to it than just semantics. There’s also the level of certainty - civil trials have a dramatically lower standard of evidence than criminal trials.
So when you say he’s been convicted of rape, you’re saying that 12 people were convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed rape. But that’s not the case - instead a judge was convinced it was at least slightly more likely than not that he committed rape. That’s a very different standard.
There is some field dependency - mathematics is notoriously fast. The other one I talk about below is the PhD portion of an MD/PhD. In some fields (mine included) there’s 2 years of coursework plus lab research so it was heavily results driven.
I dunno how, but my brother got his PhD in three years and was a doctor by the age of 21. Yes he was pretty smart to begin with, but he really did it in record time. I don't think it would be the same today, I think requirements have changed a lot since then.
Also the sheer level of sadism that comes out in a relationships story about infidelity
Everything short of admitting to fantasizing about murdering the cheater gets you called a doormat these days, and victims of very concerted deception efforts get called idiots for being deceived.
I remember an Ask Reddit for people that cheated. Most of them were in an abusive or manipulative relationship of some kind, yet most still felt guilty for acting out. Some chose to cheat and be caught because everything else they tried to get away hadn’t worked—obviiusly even that didn’t work in some cases.
Yeah but those aren’t usually the people who get the reddit stories specifically about them,
Honestly I think that explains the phenomenon, it’s a reporter effect, everyone lashes out so hard at cheaters because the ones they hear about aren’t deliberately trying to escape a toxic relationship, they’re selfish and narcissistic or lead into that mindset enough to destroy someone else’s life over it.
Honestly I just think it’s a sign that we need more supporting resources available to people, like state run shelters and stuff, because not being able to find security if they leave is what traps so many people in abusive relationships to begin with.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.