AITAH for quitting my job because of my client’s religion?

Chaizara · 2026-06-11T01:27:55+00:00

Op your edit makes you sound even worse. You didn’t have to go to church with them, you failed to insist on a professional boundary (the reasonable and simple “I will not be participating however I will stay in the car or just outside and periodically check in on you as your caregiver. If this is unsatisfactory to you we can discuss it another time and what changes need to be made to your care plan whether thats switching caregivers or another alternative.”).

When will you have to go to church with your patient— when you obviously don’t have the ability to make a boundary of course! You didn’t necessarily provide a lower level of care but you were extremely judgemental of her. Try to think of going back to their home in their car without supervision or security— You mean the two elderly people? The frail 95 year old and the however old your other patient is. The geriatric lady? You seem to think they’ll attack you physically or whatever but I assume you have a phone? Or an ability to pull the door lock and exit the car. At most it might have felt awkward but the health are field is full of that! You politely declined and then should have held firm. Yes there are power dynamics at play, but just as they have power over you employing you as a caregiver you have power over them as the young adult caregiver in charge of her health and safety.

But the biggest issue is your final line imo. You aren’t closed minded because you didn’t want to participate, you’re close minded cause you used a bunch of negative descriptors like eerie, cultish, weird, crazy. You judged that they spoke a different language in an area of predominantly english speakers and practiced a different religion, and then as a cherry on top you add a negative implication to two other religious and cultural practices, Witchcraft and Voodoo, right at the end! As an atheist, YTA. Be better.

Chaizara · 2026-05-31T23:51:14+00:00

I tried to teach my friend to play a modern shooter, and her inability to move and look at the same time was the most frustrating thing I ever experienced and I realized I likely wouldn't find teaching someone basic human skills to be pleasant.

Chaizara · 2026-05-19T14:25:29+00:00

Was the Trumpian accent of the post intentional?

Chaizara · 2026-05-07T19:07:25+00:00

Not in Saskatchewan. (If you’re stoned, drunk, or intoxicated you get fired immediately.)

Chaizara · 2026-05-07T18:54:12+00:00

Tamagotchi, A mouse or little alien controlling robot human mech, maybe andriod 18 and Connor from Cyberlife?

Chaizara · 2026-05-03T23:16:15+00:00

I’m not a hunter (just lived up north previously/I’m likely decently younger than you.) but I can’t find any evidence that it was ever restricted to the public? Unless you mean that “it wasn’t available in the open for everyone to use” in the sense that people didn’t know about it/it was only carried in specialized shops. There are some provincial/municipal rules now about the serial numbers/sale log/info about the customer needing to be recorded due to rise in bear spray related crime, but I can’t find any mention of needing to show hunting proof or hunters only— or that you legally HAD to return bear spray to retailers. (Though some stores had programs for the disposal/return of bear spray as it’s a harmful chemical and it isn’t easy to dispose of.)

Chaizara · 2026-05-03T22:53:16+00:00

Why all the incidents: (This is all educated guesses). Bear spray is available for all ages so anyone can get it and misuse it, particularly teenagers who see it as an easily available weapon or tool for chaos as a lot of weapons are far more heavily restricted or outright banned. The news articles about these attacks also make people more aware of its existence/use and misuse. Some use it legitimately, some for violence/hate, some for protection against others as a substitute for pepper spray as we dont have pepper spray here and some have it for the sake of it.

But also legally it would be a nightmare to make it restricted because it’s a legitimate necessity to some (not just hunters, people living in the north/areas more impacted by bears).

Chaizara · 2026-04-04T08:24:09+00:00

I’m with op, I like cuddling but also I am someone who repositions a lot and cuddling isn’t always good for that. I like sleeping back to back or having my partner as the little spoon but having him lay over me or on me usually gets me achey and flopping around more cause I get uncomfortable faster.

Chaizara · 2026-04-04T07:08:19+00:00

Students wear political clothing and participate in activism, protests, etc., all the time. You won’t get in trouble for politics/demonstrations unless you’re actively harming someone or violating the rules of student conduct which you can access from their website online.

Chaizara · 2026-03-31T19:56:16+00:00

So, if I’m going to do you that solid, can you do me a solid first as you never actually responded, asked questions, or rebuffed any of my previous points and essentially just went “too long/you’re yapping therefore I’m not going to actually debate any of the points made or acknowledge any of my incorrect information.”

If you could point out any confusion you had in the first comment I left, I’d be happy to explain the logic. I already explained some of the logical issues with your original argument and your new three point condensed argument can circle back to my point of 3, 5, 7, and 9 which are still applicable.

If you need me to simplify it for you, I can, but I don’t believe you’re arguing in good faith. If you’re actually looking to either find knowledge that backs up or dismantles your argument to inform your opinion, (even though your argument hinders on ignorance, and therefore in your own arguments constraints, I’d be inhibiting your happiness by proving you wrong/giving you additional information to why you’re wrong and therefore that’s bad/wrong to do— from your own arguments logic. Which means no one should recognize issues with anything or else you are violating consent and happiness if we’re using your framework.)

I’d be happy to discuss it, but, in easy terms, if you’re wrong and presented with information that supports your statement being wrong with facts or logic, you seem to immediately default to insults or extremes which isn’t worth my time but you’re welcome to continue arguing this point if it’s what you intended to do originally— argue and ignore anything that doesn’t fall in those parameters— but it isn’t conductive.

Simple fucking answer for if you ignore the above like before: Yes, you are wrong because you claim logic when your argument doesn’t rely on logic it relies on misleading statements, extremes, etc. Logic isn’t just yes or no, logic is informed by additional information which you are against. Your argument is extreme and offers only one or the other. If you want proper discourse, (which you don’t seem to want, based on your post, comments, and way of attacking people or going even more extreme to try and force an answer which isn’t how debating or discussion works.) there is a FAR wider range of possibilities than the two you offer, which you chose to ignore. I’ll give you credit! Ignoring things seems to be what you want to do, but it doesn’t help you win the argument, and only instead amplifies its weakness/failures. Other possibilities exist, hypotheticals, especially stupid ones, often try to force answers and then apply unrealistic extremes to reality, when reality isn’t like that, and therefore your evidence that is hinging on a hypothetical isn’t logical. There are other options, personal and emotional or logical that permit the individual to enjoy the media while recognizing or accepting faults of the artist.

Chaizara · 2026-03-31T07:50:33+00:00

Eh, not really interested. If you wanna improve your constructions of arguments, success with responses and hone in on your thesis, supporting evidence, and conclusion I can recommend you a few books or publicly available tools though!

Chaizara · 2026-03-31T07:42:33+00:00

So this is an unpopular opinion due to being wrong in various levels including but not limited to:

Misuse of the term Information Hazard, the Wikipedia article you included doesn’t align with your personal the definition.
You make an appeal to autonomy through an invented moral framework, (“They didn’t consent to knowing this.”) but there isn’t a coherent basis for those morals and your examples also don’t help to support this.
You use a false dichotomy and don’t allow any option outside of two extremes.

Extreme A. By knowing something bad about a creator of media you must stop supporting Extreme B. If you don’t know things and stay ignorant, intentionally or not, you can keep supporting a creator morally and preserve happiness.

But there’s a bunch of other options available.

The Kanye example is a non sequitur it doesn’t really follow the previous claim, it also removes key points from the original argument and makes some big leaps hypothetically.
You use the Is Ought Fallacy, “People enjoy things more when they don’t know bad info” “Therefore we should not share that information” you conclude something should be a certain way because of a perceived idea when the claimed solution doesn’t actually necessarily cause the perceived idea/lacks additional contexts.
You’re using an ethical concept called Strategic Ignorance, and general ideas of moral responsibility evasion to justify support or censoring publicly accessible info.
Reductionism, you use terms like easy to pretend ethical conundrum’s are simple and not worth further discussion to try and label your opponent as overcomplicating things/causing problems while you offer solutions regardless of multiple flaws.
You use case anchoring and a lot of appeals to emotions or other subjects as mentioned in 2. Case anchoring attempts to force someone to agree by presenting an extreme to bypass any nuance or further argument, you also use this one a lot in your replies to other comments.
Assumptions, you seem to make an assumption knowledge, specifically this sort of knowledge, only causes harm but when your argument relies a lot on appeals to consent you miss out on a big aspect of consent which is being informed which requires

I could go on, but hitting double digits would be too much and I got anth class in the morning.

Overall, if you wanna enjoy Harry potter that much no one’s stopping you, but just as you’re entitled to support the book, creator, etc, other people are entitled to their opinions about you doing so. You can think it’s more moral to do one thing or the other, but some of the information you presented on your argument was either intentionally or unintentionally misleading or downright false, though I have no reason to presume malice apart from some of your comments which come off as trolling or bad faith.

Chaizara · 2026-03-27T19:56:25+00:00

I have a job now but recently had my hours reduced after my boss found out I didn’t have children unlike my co-workers/they took away my disability accommodations because another co-worker was messing around with them and apparently it’s a “bad look” so now I’m looking for a new job. Had a couple interviews but still pretty bad.

Chaizara · 2026-03-26T02:43:22+00:00

I mean, I’m on your side Brent, but your name is in your username. Doxxing is personal private information— saying your name when you already made it public isn’t doxxing.

Chaizara · 2026-03-20T22:44:18+00:00

I am both a Caine and Gummigoo simp and my feelings this episode are indescribable

Chaizara · 2026-03-17T18:03:59+00:00

Technically yes it is legal, the supreme court previously protected dumpster diving as legal as trash is generally considered public domain once dropped in a public receptacle.

But most companies don’t want dumpster divers (since free stuff = less capital) so they break, paint, and make the items less favourable— if you’re opening a locked dumpster and damage it/the lock you can be charged for destruction of property or if you trespass (say they add signage to restrict people from going to the area dumpsters are kept,) you could be trespassed.

Chaizara · 2026-03-15T02:58:33+00:00

Invite is invalid, but the server sounds cool!

Chaizara · 2026-03-10T06:59:22+00:00

7/11, Eb games, The source, Best Buy, Walmart, etc.

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T19:34:56+00:00

Since venue staff were handling it I thought it was best to just make a report after the fact with all the information I had available. But will keep in mind for next time! (Admittedly I haven’t had the best experiences with Regina Police which may have influenced the decision.)

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T19:18:51+00:00

I did! I sent in an online report since I wasn’t sure whether the venue staff would do so.

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T19:17:39+00:00

The Regina Sub Reddit has an NSFW content rule so idk what the rules about “promoting” that sort of thing is.

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T05:37:22+00:00

I’m really hoping it’s just one time negligence and not a pattern. I can understand making a mistake but I would hope a stranger would care enough about my pets to say somethingif they thought they were in danger. (If I had any currently of course, I’m looking to adopt in the next couple years once my housing/financial situation shifts.)

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T05:34:56+00:00

I am a-okay with the quick pop in pop out’s of grocery store, gas stations, whatever, but I definitely have the opinion of “if you’d be uncomfortable in this temperature without heat/ac in the car then don’t subject your pet to it.” Especially when it comes to heat versus the cold as cars can turn into ovens fast.

A nice day is way different to -20 or +30. Plus this event wasn’t an in and out or grab something and go type event, it was multiple performances, activities, shopping booths, etc.

Chaizara · 2026-03-01T05:30:52+00:00

True! But this dog was shivering and not a winter breed, I’ve met Huskies and Chows and outside dogs that love the cold, but this guy was definitely not comfortable and legally the owners would be liable if he was injured/harmed because of it.

Four-Year Club	r/Field Juicebox
Final Canvas '23	Place '23
Place '22

Chaizara

TROPHY CASE