KombatWombat
@KombatWombat@lemmy.world
- Comment on Anon finds a conspiracy 3 days ago:
The exact cause of SIDS is unknown.[7] The requirement of a combination of factors including a specific underlying susceptibility, a specific time in development, and an environmental stressor has been proposed.[4][7] These environmental stressors may include sleeping on the stomach or side, overheating, and exposure to tobacco smoke.[7] Accidental suffocation from bed sharing (also known as co-sleeping) or soft objects may also play a role.[4][8] Another risk factor is being born before 37 weeks of gestation.[1] Between 1% and 5% of SIDS cases are estimated to be misidentified infanticides caused by intentional suffocation.[9][10] SIDS makes up about 80% of sudden and unexpected infant deaths (SUIDs).[4] The other 20% of cases are often caused by infections, genetic disorders, and heart problems.[4]
- Wikipedia, emphasis mine
Anon is insinuating that this is used as a cover-up or euphemism for mothers killing their infants intentionally, but that’s only estimated to be 5% of cases at most, and those only because it couldn’t be correctly determined as murder. The fact that it requires an autopsy first means presumably investigators try to find a better explanation before resorting to SIDS as a fallback.
It does seem strange to have a catch-all condition for a pattern of unexplained deaths that have a lot of things in common, but it seems like it’s generally due to infants being accidentally put in a situation where they suffocate or asphyxiate in their sleep. Some situations like sharing a bed or exposing them to tobacco smoke do sound like the parents deserve some responsibility for negligence however.
Actually, I read further and it specifically says that it is a diagnosis of exclusion (meaning it’s used as a default after failing to find a better diagnosis) and that suffocation and neglect can qualify.
- Comment on Anon finds a conspiracy 3 days ago:
The post title literally calls it a conspiracy. I read it as an implied criticism like most posts here are.
- Comment on Anon finds a conspiracy 3 days ago:
It’s not fair to assume posting something means endorsing it even outside of this community. Plenty of people will post a Trump tweet or similar with the intention of criticizing it. Or they post a clearly ironic meme. Or they are sharing a personal story and want advice. Or they are just sharing news about current events. A post is just meant to draw attention to something interesting unless a community has more specific rules.
- Comment on Cheese is available 4 days ago:
I don’t know about hard drugs, but it wouldn’t surprise me if Wisconsin had a problem with them. Alcoholism is very prominent here. Here’s a map showing grocery stores vs bars in the US
- Comment on "If you can't afford to tip 40%, then don't eat out" 6 days ago:
40% is an obvious strawman, but it’s a shitpost so that’s ok.
No one likes tipping culture. But regardless of what we want to happen, the reality is in the US there are jobs that depend significantly on tips for living wage. It is a well-understood social convention, and by making a purchase you are implicitly accepting the expectations associated with the customer. By taking the worker’s time and refusing to pay that part of their wage, you are underpaying them. Your protest against tips in no way inconveniences their shitty employer or otherwise incentivises them to do better. The only one worse off is the service worker you stiffed, and nothing improves.
If you do want to actually change things, you can become politically involved to try to improve their wage so they aren’t actually dependent on tips. Or you can boycott them by taking your business to places that don’t rely on tips. That way the shitty employer actually loses business to places with better practices. But don’t be a dick to an underpaid worker while pretending to have the moral high ground.
- Comment on 1 week ago:
Riot is working on an mmo set in the league of legends universe too.
- Comment on Anon does some genealogy 2 weeks ago:
Yeah, I don’t think it really matters what word is considered a better translation. It is talking about humans becoming property.
In Exodus 21:2-11, it says Hebrew men are restricted to being indentured servants for 6 years unless they volunteer for more. And Hebrew girls/women are sold forever, just not to foreign nations. And in Leviticus 25:44-46, it directly addresses that gentiles can be enslaved, sold, and inherited with no special restrictions.
A slave by another name is still a slave.
- Comment on It has been 10 years 3 weeks ago:
- Comment on Anon is married 3 weeks ago:
I’ve heard this place described as a zoo. We’re just here to observe. Posts are not meant to endorse screeching, throwing poop, or whatever else anons might do.
- Comment on Anon is married 3 weeks ago:
Next you’re going to want us to stop downvoting unpopular opinions in the unpopular opinion community
- Comment on Choose chicken. 3 weeks ago:
Many animals we consider herbivores are opportunistic omnivores.
- Comment on pretty far from OK 1 month ago:
- Comment on Are you a "weedhead"? 2 months ago:
Anne Frank left out that night from the diary
- Comment on Anon is worried about AAA sales 2 months ago:
Neurodivergents being overrepresented likely accounts for some of the tendency of people mistakenly taking things literally on Lemmy. But I think a bigger issue is just a lack of media literacy. People tend to close themselves off from opposing viewpoints, and what does filter through is often exaggerated or otherwise misrepresented to make it easier to ridicule. This pattern leads people into thinking something intentionally absurd is in fact serious. Poe’s law is something easy to observe on other platforms too, but it’s worse on a platform with an especially political and nondiverse userbase.
- Comment on Wacky 2 months ago:
Humans lack many sharp teeth and have unimpressive jaw strength. It’s a much more beautiful show of trust with my dog.
- Comment on I'm not saying that I agree. But I understand. 2 months ago:
I’m ok with people being British, just not in front of children.
- Comment on Triangle 2 months ago:
Others have already pointed out that her distress calls were most certainly not ignored. But even if it were true that others did casually allow her to die, their disregard for her life wouldn’t have been because she was a woman. Her navigator, Fred Noonan, was a man on board and also suffered the same fate as her. Inventing a sexist conspiracy over an unfortunate tragedy accomplishes nothing productive.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
It’s cherry picking because it’s choosing which pieces of the bible to give credence to and which to ignore based on preference. Paul was chosen as God’s chosen vessel; I don’t see why his instructions to the early church should be cast aside.
Jesus did say to love thy neighbor, yet it is easy to find examples of God condoning slavery and demanding genocides. Unless you intend to also deny those parts, it’s pretty clear he’s willing to contradict that commandment against whoever he considers sinful. For gay men, he prescribed the death penalty, although that was part of the covenant with Israel. I don’t think the new testament says how they should be punished, just that it’s a sin.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
I believe you are right for the old testament commandments, but it does seem like cherry picking to say the early restrictions should only apply to the Israelites, and later verses that would expand the scope in letters from Paul shouldn’t be accepted.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
When you say intentional, do you mean it’s interpreted that way as part of an agenda? Why would someone do this? Other versions of the verse make similar purity claims as well. From the surrounding verses, it sounds to me like Jesus is saying what you eat does not matter in the context of morals/sin rather than it being symbolic of people with different practices.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
For the unclean foods bit, Jesus may have retconned that with Mark 7:19.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
Gay sex is disparaged in various verses, some of which come from Old Testament commandments. It’s not just in letters.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 2 months ago:
Christians tend to pick and choose which parts of their word of God are actually infallible and which parts don’t apply anymore. There’s no reason to think God changed His mind on gay sex, tattoos, or wearing garments of mixed materials, because there was no justification for banning them in the first place. If a Christian is a true believer, they should be satisfied with “God said it, so it must be true”.
That’s the problem with relying on an external authority for morality. When it tells you to do something you don’t like, you have to either change your behavior accordingly or realize that you actually don’t trust it as an authority. Christians being by and large massive hypocrites, they tend to do the latter without admitting to it. Because if they did admit it, they wouldn’t be Christians anymore.
It’s pretty rare to find someone who genuinely takes it all on faith, that stealing cookies from the cookie jar indeed warrants eternal punishment. For everyone else, if they were honest with themselves, they would admit that if you only follow the rules you agree with, they were never actually rules for you.
- Comment on [deleted] 3 months ago:
+2
- Comment on I blame Obama 3 months ago:
Women can have 76% of a day
- Comment on Get. Out 3 months ago:
Isn’t that good though? I also have a fairly high income and live in a high income country. Compared to people in poorer countries, we would be the upper class living very charmed lives. In fact, the US poverty line is at $15,000 in annual income, or just over $40 a day. But someone making this much would be richer than 83% of the world. People in less privileged countries should have better access to well-paying jobs to help mitigate the disparity.
- Comment on The Duality of Lemmy 3 months ago:
That’s the general outline for the story relevant quests, but at least in some games you can read the flavor description for the optional ones and it would be something like a spoiled princess wanting a new dress made from the monster hide.
- Comment on Highguard Developer Makes Layoffs Affecting "Most of the Team", Two Weeks After Launch 4 months ago:
What should happen is that some people shift to continued support, and some move to a new project. If a company really needs workers only for a short time, they should hire contractors who can then move to something else afterwards. Treating employees as disposable like this is not just super disrespectful, it’s also a poor use of resources.
- Comment on I've wondered since I was a youngin 4 months ago:
Tropes can easily become cliches if done poorly, but in essence they’re just common concepts in storytelling. The idea of having a protagonist struggling with finding what lines they won’t cross, and accepting what consequences result, can make for a really compelling internal conflict. And having a no-kill rule is often a practical one for longer series in particular.
Imagine if Batman’s rogue gallery couldn’t be re-used unless the writers had them always be able to get away when their plans are foiled. When Batman instead sends them to jail, they can be shelved for a while without making Batman look very selectively incompetent at actually catching criminals. Instead, it’s justified as a principle that he upholds, while giving the writer opportunities to also show character growth for villains. And if you argue he should focus on the greater good by permanently eliminating threats, then it can be viewed as a character flaw that gives him depth.
- Comment on Anon lives on a budget 5 months ago:
General blood donations do use that delay, but just plasma replenishes much faster. I don’t think either is good at making you lose weight. It’s basically dehydrating yourself.
