That was my exact thought :)

My default was always active listening. It took me a while to develop real skill at it, then longer for it to no longer be something I had to turn on.

There’s exceptions of course, but most people that are expressing emotion publicly do just want a chance to vent and be heard, no matter what that emotion is. Anger, grief, confusion, fear, whatever it is, just having someone gently say “hey, I can see you’re having a rough patch, can I help?” Is all it takes usually.

Sometimes, you might have to go further, draw out the personbehind the emotion. Sometimes, they don’t want to be bothered at all, and just couldn’t find somewhere private before they broke. In that case, you’d be surprised how often they still pull themselves together for someone offering real support, and you can then guide them somewhere they can break down alone, if that’s what they really want.

But mostly, just being present, really listening and giving just enough feedback that they know you’re paying attention instead of just being a fencepost, it helps.

But tears? That’s easy. If they’re giving you those tears, you accept them as the gift they are. Especially if someone breaks through the usual barriers with strangers and reaches for physical comfort, you just give them that shoulder and make soft noises while supporting them. If they aren’t in contact, extend a hand, just a hand, to where they can reach it if they want to, but not so far it becomes insistent. Then you just listen and let their tears wash away enough of the raw emotion until they can talk.

At some point, most people wind down a little and start apologizing. When you give them a genuine smile and say something akin to “hey, it’s okay, we all have to look out for each other”, or “it’s okay, we’re in hospital, it’s gotta come out sometime; I’m just glad I was here to listen”. If that’s a genuine thing, if you mean a sentiment like that, it’s like aloe on a sunburn. It doesn’t fix the problem, but it takes the edge off long enough to regather and cope just a little while longer.

I’ve been on both sides of it. Hell, three different sides: patient, family member, and caregiver. There’s no single,perfect path through it, but someone even trying to help and fucking up is still a great balm

I’m stuck in DDD land too. It totally sucks, and you have my sympathy

We got to pick, though most people stuck with the closest version to their real name. I did.

But we could pick any name, if qe wanted, which was pretty cool

Well, obviously it depends on which myth/legend/author is in play.

That being said, vampire myths were not prone to syringe teeth. The bite opens an artery, or just tears a patch out, and the blood comes out either under its own pressure, or assisted by sucking (I vant to suck your blood).

Typically, and I haven’t read every vampire fiction piece so ymmv, when syringe teeth are used, it’s for injection rather than extraction. Typically some kind of anaesthetic and/or blood thinner, with consumption still being via the mouth rather than the teeth.

Werewolf (or other therianthropes) shedding is less clear cut. In myths, I never saw any mention of it at all. At most, shedding skin entirely, or otherwise leaving behind parts of one shape when transforming was involved, but that was in creatures far away from what could be called werewolf. So, shedding hair like a dog or cat does isn’t part of traditional lore.

Unlike vampires, however, it does appear in modern fiction. Most often as a joke or aside, but it is present. The apparent reasoning being linked to how long the individual stays in their wolf/animal form.

In other words, it seems most writers have an assumption that the “wolf” won’t shed unless it spends enough time in that shape to have hair reach the end of its growth cycle. However, I don’t recall any examples of that applying in reverse. When in human form, it’s rarely covered, but the default is that weres who only shift monthly do have normal human processes, including shedding hair as it cycles.

But there are references to both here and there (please don’t ask me to remember which books, I have read way too many urban fantasy series to keep track of exactly which author uses what system). Wolves shedding when in wolf form even when only in it overnight does happen. As does humans not shedding hair, or regrowing hair they cut or otherwise lost, after returning to human form.

When it comes to this kind of stuff, there can be difficulty sorting out older myths from those that get passed around now due to stuff like dracula, the old universal movies, etc. Most of the scholarly, historical information is hard to find nowadays. It’s buried on the internet, and local libraries are more likely to have secondary works interpreting old lore than direct translations of the small amount of written records of such legends. But it is out there, if you have reason and motivation to slog through shitty ai search results.

Here follows geek/writer stuff, be warned.

Now, personally, I’ve used both shapeshifters and vampires in both written fiction and rpg play. My choices tended towards a time based factor for shedding. Since hair takes time to be shed in humans or other animals, my default is that any hair or fur is “new” upon the shape change. Thus, shedding would only be a factor after extended time in a shape. Indeed, one version of were-being I use has reduced aging because of that. Each form ages slightly slower than normal by virtue of the thing that causes the power (in my main worlds, it’s a magically linked quasi-virus symbiote), and each change hits pause on the other form, leading to life expectancy into the two hundreds or more. However, they would also shed less because the symbiote prefers a stasis when possible. It’s linked to fast healing.

Vampires in my main fiction and trrpg worlds are also symbiote virus based. Part of that is being able to inject a bolus of the virus through the fangs at will (and sometimes involuntarily), so fangs are essentially syringes in that setting. I have played around with the fangs being able to suck up blood, but it isn’t really viable on a “realism” level (yeah, it’s fantasy, but I try not to hand wave bullshit when it isn’t essential). The mechanisms for sucking parts in real world animals/creatures just don’t match what could work in human sized fangs, much less alongside injection.

That being said, my main universe has a vampire planet. And there are things there that can both suck and inject via the same body part. Larger predators there, which originated before the symbiote got there, developed fangs capable of doing the job. Humans that arrived there were not dominant as a species for quite some time. The large arachnid-ish predators there were particularly fond of human juices. Even after alterations by the symbiote, it took time before the new vampires had the power to be on equal footing, and much longer before they got powerful enough to dominate the planet.

Anyways, that’s the geek gush over lol

Sterility isn’t necessary for safe water. You only need it to be pathogen free, and lack dangerous contaminants.

So, beyond that, it kinda depends on what you think “clean” means.

I took a quick gander at how Ireland’s drinking/tap water is regulated.

Assuming whatever location is actually following regulations and standards, y’all got some damn nice water out of the tap. The EU regulations are great. There shouldn’t be anything pathogenic at any concentration to worry about. Since water there is treated, I doubt you’d have much of anything reaching your tap at all. You’d have more particulates than anything else, some trace minerals (which is a good thing), maybe some organics here and there (think bits of algae swept along).

Think about it like aquariums. You don’t want sterility; you want a healthy, flourishing biome because all those bacteria eat bad things.

It’s the same in water pipes; you get a good biofilm growing, and pathogens aren’t going to be able to set up shop, even if they do get past whatever treatment is going on at the source. I’ve even seen arguments against chlorination in water treatment because it’s indiscriminate. It can kill off the friendly stuff and make the system as a whole less resilient to unexpected blooms of something pathogenic.

If you ever set up ponds, you actively encourage bacterial growth as part of the process. There’s aquaculture guides where between the right plants, fish, and bacteria, you can end up with water so clean you’d want to drink it, and can, even starting from sewage contaminated water.

If you then slap a filter on to catch particulates, you’re left with something that’s more pure than if you sterilized the source water by chemical or other means.

Anyway, the EU standards for drinking water are top tier. Go look them up, it’s a really comprehensive and science driven set of standards. If your locale is even half-assing things, you’ve got great water indeed

I do not hate myself for loving her.

Was and is one of the most badass rock artists out there

Like the comment protist copied from Wikipedia, it’s generally considered to be a mix of coming out with the truth, and having skeletons in the closet. Back in the eighties, that was the explanation I heard most often when hanging out with gay folks.

Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s absolutely factual, I’m not aware of anyone that’s really dug into it with serious historical rigor. But it is at least the accepted explanation. And it makes sense, so I’ve never gone digging beyond talking to people alive and active during the early gay rights era of the seventies.

Only dead ones

Hi, my name is salmon, and I’ll be doing your skin care today

You can’t help others if you don’t take care of yourself.

So, you can’t take care of others’ shit if you don’t take care of your own shit first.

Which is a valuable lesson I learned while wiping asses for a living while having IBS. It just happens to apply here as well

Most of the time. There’s rare exceptions. It’s the old “if your only tool is a hammer” thing.

Sadly, part of those are just not wanting to take on a high risk patient at all.

But there are surgeons that will give advice based on the actual patient needs and recommend other treatments, and outright refuse to do a surgery.

But, yeah, surgeons in general assume that a patient coming to them needs surgery. That’s partly because they don’t tend to get patients walking in the front door independently. They’re going to be seeing patients referred to them by someone else that thinks surgical intervention is a possible best choice.

They’re also trained to think like surgeons. Once they’re into training as a surgeon, they learn the human body, and thus the application of medical science, as something that gets operated on. Every problem becomes one to address in that way because they’ve spent years shaping their minds to be very good at that.

It’s really no different in that regard than an it guy thinking of a computer problem in terms of their specialty, or a mechanic wanting to rebuild something that might be fine with a spray of wd40 and some duct tape.

Hell, surgeons regularly have to deal with patients insisting on a surgery when other modalities are more appropriate. It’s a thing they gripe about

Have you heard the original Dolly Parton version of I will always love you? She’s got a less forceful voice in general, and her version was a much gentler delivery on top of that.

Not saying anything about you liking or not liking the song, just curious if it’s Whitney that’s the problem, the arrangement, or the song itself.

Honestly, I tend to be pretty capable of tolerating songs I don’t like. It’s artists and a small range of genres that give me trouble.

About the only song I can think of that comes close was that first backstreet boys song. Can’t remember the name, but it was the one that was all over the radio from their first album.

I liked other songs, but that one was such a generic pile of dreck that it came close to being intolerable from the beginning, and eventually got there. But even that, at first, it was just something I didn’t like and disliked strongly, but I could sit through it if necessary. It took a week or two before it reached nails-on-chalkboard levels.

Now, genre wise, contemporary christian just grates on me. Even the songs that are otherwise almost listenable suffer from the bland composition and empty lyrics that make them annoying. Since I’ve also dealt with people in the industry around the genre, including performers, knowing that those lyrics are utter bullshit to the vast majority of the idiots singing them makes it a very unpleasant thing.

CC suffers from the same cookie cutter writing that Nashville country does, but lacks the redeeming qualities of at least being catchy if you don’t pay attention to the lyrics.

Which, cookie cutter country isn’t something I can handle a lot of at once. But I can tolerate it.

Then again, I listen to death and black metal regularly, so I know damn good and well that what one person can enjoy is abrasive to others, and vice versa. So I tend not to judge the listener by what they listen to.

Familiar

So, mint with cinnamon

Well, the key word is usually

Late term vanishing twin syndrome is a thing. It comes with its own set of issues as well. Since its also extremely rare, you’d have to be some kind of nerd to know it exists unless you’re an obgyn or at least a maternity nurse. I am neither an obgyn or a maternity nurse.

When it happens late term, and 7 months is very late term for it, you get an increased rush of complications, some of which can negatively impact the development of the remaining fetus. Hell, from what I remember, late term absorption tends to happen because there’s something going wrong already. Iirc (and don’t try to cite me on a test or anything), just being a little too cramped can trigger it, though it would be a very rare trigger for an already absurdly rare thing.

So, my best guess as a non doctor with zero access to the records of the pregnancy in question is that something happened to put the pregnancy at risk, and either your mom’s body or yours set off the cascade leading to the failure of the other fetus. It isn’t something that happens that late without some triggering event that’s outside of a normal pregnancy. When it happens early on, it’s a different story, it can happen for no detectable reason at all. But late term? Something went wrong that made it happen.

I’d have to go digging, and I’m currently brain fried, but one of the more common triggers worldwide is/was malnutrition. When the mother isn’t getting resources to grow both critters, either her body shifts to support one exclusively, or one of the two essentially cannibalizes the other. That one (again, I’m old and tired, so the iirc factor is iffy here) is most likely to happen when the twins share a placenta, or something like that (see, old man brain missing details).

Since you’ve said in comments that you were placed in an unusual orientation and/or location, that would point to some kind of issue with the uterus not having enough room for both fetuses (fetii? I think I like that better despite it not being duet correct lol). I seem to recall a case in India where a woman prone to twins had a pregnancy where this happened because her uterus had lost the ability to stretch the way they normally do. Something about scar tissue maybe? Been ages since I read about this stuff.

Anyway, late term vanishing twin syndrome is the terminology I know of. If there’s another, more formal terminology, iam not aware of it.

It’s a reference to a movie of the same name.

The gist is that at one point, Sophie is forced to choose which of her children die.

One of these days I’m going ti watch the entire existing seasons. I’ve only caught some here and there, so this was totally new for me :)

Oh damn, looks like I’m about to stick my foot in it.

First, it’s stupid that this is a criminal matter. If home boy is allowed to shoot a deer, cut it up, eat it, and make shoes out of it, who gives a flying fuck if he fucks the body first? Yeah, it’s gross, but does it really need to come to jail time? It’s a fucking waste of resources. Nobody fucking a dead animal is going to be rehabilitated by jail, period. Ain’t happening.

With that out of the way, lemme step into the way back machine.

Now, there used to be dark corners of reddit, and there have always been dark corners of the internet.

So, for anyone that never took a shitty energizer flashlight and went poking into those dark corners looking for entertainment and/or education, I am the proud bearer of bad news.

This ain’t a one-off event. People fucking their dead prey is sooooo not a new thing. While it’s fair to call it rare, it’s not exactly a 1 in a billion thing either.

On reddit, there were multiple people willing to admit to this behavior, and back in the early days of the internet past the aol era, there were a ton of chat rooms where the ugly side of humanity was there for the viewing. If one is able to stay relaxed and non judgemental in their responses (no matter what’s going on in your head), people will open up about anything.

When it’s something this deviant (and I mean it in the literal sense, not as an insult), you might be amazed how many people want to share their darkness.

So I’ve talked to people for whom this is a fantasy, as well as those that have done it.

Most of them, and they were all men except one, talked about the adrenaline rush of hunting leading to heightened arousal. In that sense, it’s really the same underlying motivation as people fucking after their team wins the Superbowl, or after their own sport victory (and lemme tell you that arousal after contact sports or martial arts training is a very potent thing and can lead to much fun).

It’s only the detail of it that’s deviant, not the underlying mechanisms. It’s wanting to fuck an animal, and wanting to fuck something dead that’s unusual, not the wanting to fuck after a big spike of emotions and chemicals. Couples that hunt together are a perfect example, because there is plenty of fucking in camp when people succeed in their hunt. Hell, doesn’t even have to be a hunt. Fishing camps can be a fuckfest. Birders cam get frisky when they find something rare to point their binoculars at.

But, a lone hunter feeling that arousal on doe days? Yeah, I’m betting it happens way more than even what I’m aware of. I know there’s guys that have shoved their things into bucks to begin with, so a doe with an actual vagina? Anyone without a very tough inhibition filter that also isn’t bothered by the idea to begin with is a deer fucker waiting to happen.

I’m not saying I approve of it. I’m not even saying that it isn’t a sign of some serious issues. I’m just saying that humans like to fuck. And there’s a very primitive part of us that doesn’t really care what. The barriers to fucking things other than sexually mature humans are largely learned, not inherent in our brains.

You ever hear the saying that every mouth feels the same in the dark? In terms of raw sensation, our most primitive segments involved with arousal and orgasm have zero concern about what’s providing the stimulus, only that it’s there. There’s a reason that victims of sexual assault can not only experience physical arousal no matter how much they hate what’s happening, but can be forced to orgasm. It isn’t a purely voluntary process.

So, if someone is already willing to ignore social mores and standard ethics or morals, the step from being willing to fuck some random animal to fucking a dead one isn’t a big leap.

And those folks that were willing to talk about their urges to fuck their prey? They weren’t usually freaks in general. They held down jobs, had families, had friends, they just got caught up in the rush of it. It’s like those folks that will escalate risk taking to the point of self destruction just for a buzz from it. Yeah, there were truly antisocial people doing it, but they weren’t the majority.

Now, this guy? Dude very likely could benefit from extensive therapy. Might even be the sort to let his inner self switch from animals to human bodies. No clue, but I still don’t think jail is a useful solution to the problem he poses. Mandatory treatment? Yeah, maybe, and that has to go through criminal proceedings, but it’s really closer to something like alcoholism in the way it needs to be sentenced.

Which wave?

Or are you just talking in the general sense?

I ask because I’ve heard the term applied specifically to the Chinese workers on the railroads in the late 1800s, here in the US, plus another that came between the end of the first World war and some time after the end of the second.

In the specific senses, it’s too far in the past for me to think of it much at all. The more modern wave has essentially integrated and their descendants are just plain old americans for the most part; meaning they hang onto the parts of their ancestral culture to the degree they want, and otherwise may not have any connection in that regard. So it’s more a point of historical interest than something influential on current events. That seems to be the prevailing take I’ve run into with others as well.

More recent immigrants, I don’t have enough experience to have formed an overall take. My area doesn’t run high to Chinese immigrants. We get more folks from the Americas and African nations. But I haven’t had any standout bad encounters, nor have I seen any patterns that would make it seem like a bad thing.

Can’t lie, racism against asian folks in general is present here. It isn’t as prevalent as that against Latinos, Africans or African-Americans, but it’s there. Afaik, nobody thinks of it as an overarching “thing” at all. Folks here tend to look at immigration on a smaller scale than a diaspora. If there isn’t a significant inrush of a given group, nobody really notices.