Most of the time when people say they have an unpopular opinion, it turns out it’s actually pretty popular.

Do you have some that’s really unpopular and most likely will get you downvoted?

  • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We don’t need more pronouns. We need less of them.

    In my native language there is no even he/she pronouns. The word is “hän” and it’s gender neutral. You can be male, female, FTM, MTF, non-binary or what ever and you’re still called “hän”. You can identify as anything you like and “hän” already includes you.

    • negativeyoda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ll go one further: I get (and respect) the utility of they/them pronouns for a singular entity, but it IS clunky and confusing. English is ever evolving but when I hear a “they” it is still very much more abstract and plural than a more specific he or she.

      Whatever: it’s my shit and I’ll gladly deal with a nanosecond of confusion and adjust if it allows people to maintain their dignity. Point is, by insisting that there’s nothing confusing about they/them in reference to a single entity feels disingenuous. I know moderate people who are otherwise live and let live as well as receptive to basic human dignity who are turned off by the confusing abstraction, switching tenses, etc.

      They/them isn’t the elegant, seamless drop in that people say it is and it hurts the messaging. I get that being rigid and forceful is necessary with the rampant transphobia and “i’m just asking (bad faith) questions” going on, but I still fuck up semantics and tenses like whoa

      • my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        This argument has never made sense simply because of the fact that singular they/them has been in use for literally centuries. It’s even reasonable to say it’s always been in use considering singular they/them was in use in the 14th century and modern English formed around 14-17th. I can guarantee you have never batted an eye when you heard something like “someone called but they didn’t leave a message”.

        There are only two differences with recent usage: people are less likely to assume genders so use they/them more freely; and people identifying specifically as they/them. The words themselves haven’t really changed, they’re just more common now. Opposition to singular they/them is almost entirely political.

        • gjoel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          singular they/them has been in use for literally centuries

          Even if has been in use since forever, a more appropriate word can be introduced now.

      • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you.

        It’s not people using the neutral that bothers me, it’s the fact that the neutral is both singular and plural while the non neutrals are only singular/plural.

        and the plural part also alters the entire sentence structure to plural.

        “He is over there” - Singular and easy to understand

        “They is over there” - Just sounds wrong.

        “They are over there” - Both singular and plural. Is it a person of unspecified nature or multiple people of mixed ones?

        English could use a popularization of a strictly singular neutral that doesn’t carry implications of being an object rather than a being (“It is over there”)

    • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That sounds like a solution that should make everyone happy. However, the crowd arguing against more pronouns would also argue against this, just because they’re impossible to appease.

      • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wouldn’t be surprised if the (mostly) political right that seems all these new pronouns as stupid would also ironically be against giving up on their own gender specific pronoun for a gender neutral one.

    • antimidas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      And we’ve nowadays taken it even further, in spoken Finnish we’ve even got rid of the “hän” and mostly use “se”, which is the Finnish word for “it”. The same pronoun is used for people in all forms, animals, items, institutions and so on, and in practice the only case for “hän” is people trying to remind others they consider their pets human.

      Context will tell which one it is.

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel the same but with genders. To be clear if anyone identifies to a specific gender, I’ll respect that. However I don’t see why genders are necessary. We are all unique human beings and there’s no need to label everyone to a specific gender.

      • Jakylla@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We should remove the gender information from ID and other documents unrelated to the gender

        (Maybe kept the XX or XY mark on medical papers though, may be useful to avoid death from medical poisoning, but even your gender and sexual preferences have nothing to do here, so no gender mark neither)

      • dianne@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think a little bit it’s just that people typically like labels. They want to fit neatly into their little labeled box and the more labels they have, the more unique and/or complete they feel.

        I really rejected labels as a teen, I hated the idea of it. Now I realize they can be useful for some things, and you know, if my trans brother feels better because his label is now male, that’s fine it doesn’t hurt me any to call him what makes him feel good.

        • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          the more labels they have, the more unique and/or complete they feel.

          That sounds completely bonkers to me but you might be right.

          if my trans brother feels better because his label is now male, that’s fine

          No, of course if you don’t like the body you have and you want to change your “gender-defining” features, you should. It’s a bit like changing your haircut - although more impactful. You didn’t like your looks/body before, so you changed it and now you feel better so that’s perfect!

          Before I learned about the LGBTQ community, I thought of gender as something you were born with and that described your body type: masculine or feminine. Aside from that, I don’t and never believed that it defines what kind of person you are, it only defines a part of your looks.

          Now with the community there are people who describe themselves as non-binary or agender and again, I’ll totally respect that. However when I tried to think about what my gender really was, I started to realize that the whole concept of gender didn’t really make sense to me. What does it really mean to be non-binary? Heck, what does it even mean to be male or female? If it’s not just your body-type then what is it? Why do we need it? Isn’t it easier to not assign any genders at all? Just be who you want to be and love who you want to love!

  • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck ALL advertisements. Yes, even “unobtrusive” ones, especially yours. If I want your shit, I will find you. If I appreciate your shit, I’ll pay you for your time. If you want to connect, I’m all ears. Otherwise, fuck off capitalists, fuck off advertisers, and fuck off useful idiots who want to waste my finite lifespan in this miserable universe showing me ads.

    • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      How do you reach people with a new product that didn’t exist before? Or a Service? Do you want monopolys that never change because smaller business cant advertise with their stuff.

      I don’t like 99% of advertising either, especially online, but there are some exceptions.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How do you reach people with a new product that didn’t exist before? Or a Service?

        What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, “Look! This is something new"? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. No one remembers the former generations, and even those yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow them.

        —Ecclesiastes 1:9-10, New International Version

        EDIT: I’m not a Christian and I’m not trying to convert anyone to my faith (or lack thereof), I just think it’s a neat quote.

        My point really is that you can generally talk about your products in some existing forum with reference to existing things. For example, if I wanted people to listen to my music, which I have deluded myself into thinking is a unique, previously unheard-of blend of genres, I would post links onto music forums and groups who are interested in recommendations of music adjacent to the type I produce. And that is how I actually spread my music on Reddit (although not as PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S) back when it was fresh. No ads, no wasting people’s time and internet. I only reached people who already expressed their interest to receive music like mine. I got a very small following, but I achieved my goal.

        Nothing is so unique that it belongs in no forum or is of interest to no existing community, yet simultaneously needs to be broadcast to the entire world. I have no problem with people sending me stuff they believe in to my email or other inbox, blow it up for all I care, but what I do take issue with is shoving that stuff into my web browsing experience or even sandwiched into the content I’m trying to watch.

        • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          —Ecclesiastes 1:9-10, New International Version

          You’re quoting the fantasy book of a group of Bronze Age goatherders as an argument? Really?

            • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not really a very good quote. Advanced electronics, genetic engineering, quantum computing… there are a lot of things that are actually new.

              • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not really a very good quote.

                I respect your opinion.

                Advanced electronics

                Clearly an advancement from simple electromagnetism, which was the unification of the previous studies of electricity and magnetism. Not fully original.

                Genetic engineering

                Based on prior analysis of genetics, which itself descended from simple breeding, and chemistry. Not fully original.

                Quantum computing

                Hybrid of computing with quantum principles. Not fully original.

                Like I get it, we do discover new stuff and create new techniques, but (1) these physics still existed before we discovered them and (2) (much more importantly) these things are not new in the sense that they’re not totally unique, that we can compare them to things that exist because they are inspired by things that already exist.

                I mulled over whether or not to quote the Bible directly once I figured out where that quote came from, and I ultimately decided to do so because of the Bible’s reputation for needing to be “read into”. I think that particular passage says something really interesting about how, in some sense, nothing really new happens, that what we’re doing can be seen as a version of something else. This is particularly interesting as a piece of a Christian document; Christianity generally doesn’t posit a cyclical view of the world. You live, you die, you go into the afterlife, judgement day happens, and God’s chosen few spend eternity in heaven; e.g., the plot is linear. Therefore, there clearly must be some deeper context to the text.

                Regardless, it was a minor part of my original argument. The rest should stand on its own.

                Also, I went to Catholic school. I’d like to use my religion classes for something; I’m most certainly not using them for praying 😂

                • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’d like to use my religion classes for something

                  Why?

                  That’s like saying “I was poisoned for years, I should use this poison for something good”.

                • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ok so I suppose you’ll be using raw electromagnetism instead of anything that uses advanced electronics? Just because something has a history doesn’t mean it’s not new, and even if that were the case, just because something’s not new that doesn’t mean it’s not a useful improvement.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If I want your shit, I will find you. If I appreciate your shit, I’ll pay you for your time.

      This literally won’t happen because you will never find my content without ads.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        … what’s your content? If you’re not comfortable posting it, them what type of media is it? Not to rub it in, but getting your content from you, your fans, or someone who contacts me currently is the only way I will ever get your content, as I ruthlessly block advertising in every aspect of my life.

        To be clear, I’m not against self promotion. For example, if you went into a video game forum and posted links to your game, that’s not advertising in my view. More importantly, I would probably actually be interested in a new video game by you if I were browsing a video game forum. Hell, if you randomly PM’ed it to me or emailed it, that would be fine too.

        • simple@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I make games and stuff. Let me tell you, it’s pretty hard to get noticed on the internet. There comes a point where whatever you’re selling will be popular enough in a closed circle that it spreads through word of mouth but before that you need to get an audience. That means some shameless advertising in social media and maybe buying some ad spaces. If you don’t get that momentum whatever content you’re making might be dead on arrival. A lot of people and companies making ads don’t actually like annoying others with them, but it’s really hard to get anyone’s attention now that there’s like a billion new things releasing every day.

          • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            That means some shameless advertising in social media and maybe buying some ad spaces.

            I’d have no problem if you just spammed my inbox or all of my communities. I’m all for self-promotion or even just promoting stuff you like. I don’t get adverts anymore, but there have been so many times where I got a negative impression of something I later found out was cool because it was advertised to me first.

            I have no problem with people being annoying in my inbox or trying to promote themselves. What I do have a problem with is the constant stream of undiluted, intrusive bullshit being sold to me since the day I was born. If I saw your game in a web ad that’s keeping me from the content I actually wanted to see, I would absolutely not be interested in it; if you or a fan blindly spammed it into my inbox 69 times in a row, I would definitely check it out.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are there a nontrivial number of people who genuinely enjoy ads?

        Maybe? My parents are boomers and they watch cable TV with ads. I’ve told them a few dozen times that they don’t need to watch them, that they could mute them or watch elsewhere, but they don’t care. My grandmother also watches the ads when she watches TV. Oh well…

    • krayj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You really should be directing your angst at the bastards who respond to advertising. If it weren’t for them, there would be no advertising at all because it would be completely unfeasible. Nobody would be willing to pay for something that has no return on investment.

      • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Disagree. Ad campaigns are made the way they are because marketing people are abusing how our brain works naturally. Some people have managed to build defenses for it, but most people simply lack the ability. That’s like blaming people on wheelchair that they can’t walk.

        • Lith@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly! I can’t even stand physical ads like billboards because the concept of reserving land for manipulating every passing person into buying something they don’t need is ridiculously perverse to me. Ads are an attack against my psyche and I will do everything I can to avoid them.

          When I want to invest in a better product or look for something that solves my wants or needs, I research my options. I will never make my decision based on an obvious ad because they are intrinsically deceitful.

    • RobertOwnageJunior@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m pretty sure ads don’t work on me. People tell me ‘ackshually they do, you just don’t notice.’ Nah, mate. They don’t. They just annoy me.

    • zer0nix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m upvoting because this should actually be unpopular. Intrusive ads are bad but less intrusive ones let you know who the patrons are of the otherwise highly expensive services you enjoy. That all of this gets paid for with ad money is nothing less than a miracle.

      If you don’t want to see ads then don’t give them your notice! I like being informed when new products go to market.

      • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I watch about fifty different people making videos and they make money from it and all I have up do is watch fifteen seconds of adverts? I love it, my genuinely unpopular opinion is there should be more things making use of them, I wish Ubuntu had an optional add bar or advert box that I could watch while working to generate money to fund development, even better if they mix in adverts for cool open source projects so I can lean they exist.

    • Square Singer@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Marketing is only manipulation. It wants to manipulate me into doing something I otherwise wouldn’t have.

      Since I don’t know how well their manipulation works, my only option is to only buy things that I have never seen an ad for.

      To make sure I can still buy anything at all, I block/avoid ads where I can.

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately there’s a lot of products that most people don’t even know exist. Hell I keep finding new tools and wondering why I’ve been doing things the hard way for so long.

      OTOH, fuck all the advertisers who use shady tactics to make sales, and especially fuck all the people who pray on the naivety of others to steal their money. I was just showing a customer an email I got the other day stating her domain hosting was past due and required immediate payment, and she asked how I knew it was a scam. Uh, hello, because —I— am hosting your domain and website (and this is exactly why I share this kind of stuff with people, to make them think before they blindly write a check).

      • Landrin201@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would argue that if there’s a product that nobody knows exist that’s not necessarily because we need to allow constant intrusive ads, and more indicative that people don’t actually need the product.

        I want to say that in any given day, 60% of the ads I see are from big, well known companies who don’t need me to see them to know they exist. Shit like Liberty Mutual (I swear I see more of their ads than anyone else and THEY ARE ALREADY MY INSURANCE PROVIDER), Coke, Pepsi, etc. 39.9% of the remaining 40% are advertisements for shit that I just don’t care about. I don’t care about the newest tech toys. I don’t care about the newest car mods, or random shit I can put on my desk, or stupid extra kitchen gadgets. Fully 40% of the ads I see are trying to convince me that I should buy a product that I straight up don’t need because the ad looked cool. Why should those ads be allowed to exist? Why should I be constantly bombarded with ads for services that I either already know plenty about or for things that are trying to manufacture a reason for their existence?

        Only about 0.5% of the ads I see are actually for things I did know know about and that seem useful to me, or like something I would like. Probably even less than that, I’m drunk rn and estimating.

        • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I keep throwing away ads from Comcast trying to sell me on the virtues of their business internet packages. Guys, I left you because your lame-ass shit was expensive as hell, slow as hell, and you couldn’t even be counted on to meet a single appointment in 6 months to bury your damn line you left laying across my yard.

          I agree with you, there’s a lot of companies that just need to be silenced. You’re allowed to send me ONE ad, and you better make it good because I don’t ever want to hear from you again.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately there’s a lot of products that most people don’t even know exist. Hell I keep finding new tools and wondering why I’ve been doing things the hard way for so long.

        For sure. I’m not against promotion in the large, but the constant and intrusive advertisements within other tasks, such as web ads that take up valuable screen real estate, or TV/YouTube commercials that keep me from the programs I want to watch.

        Like my username is literally PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S. I have no problem getting PM’ed or emailed stuff. For example, I’m subscribed to a number of mailing lists from sites I ordered from. Guitar Center can send me all the emails they want [1], sell me all the crap they want, because I can opt out at any time, and I have a work email so I can put them aside for later.

        [1] To the specific email I gave them, which I do check.

    • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hate ads as much as the next guy, but without ads get ready to start paying for things. You go to a news website, sorry you need to login and hand over your credit card to access anything. Youtube? Sorry you need to login and pay up to watch anything. You want to Google,Bing, Duckduckgo something sorry you better pay up can’t sell you data to advertisers anymore.

      Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing but it will fundamentally change how the internet works and it potentially could limit informational access to poor people.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I brought this up the last time I talked about this, but to be clear, if we must choose between advertisements and paywall, then we should choose advertisements as the lesser evil. However, we must never accept the fallacy that advertising or paywalls are the only possible choices! More generally, we must never accept the fallacy that a market is the only acceptable way to distribute goods, a corollary of which is the idea that any acceptable solution needs to compete on equal terms with existing products in a market.

        Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing but it will fundamentally change how the internet works and it potentially could limit informational access to poor people.

        Well the first part at least would be a welcome change. The issue in my view is the very fact that poor people are treated as second-class citizens in information access or any other field of endeavor.

        Youtube? Sorry you need to login and pay up to watch anything. You want to Google,Bing, Duckduckgo something sorry you better pay up can’t sell you data to advertisers anymore.

        I very genuinely want those sites to fucking die so I don’t have to coexist in a world where they dominate the internet. I would be literally thrilled to join a group of like-minded people who have to reimplement the conveniences of the modern web from scratch for free.

  • jsveiga@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Dogs were hardwired by selective breeding to worship their owners. Not long ago they at least were loyal companions. You got one off the streets, fed it leftovers, washed it with a hose, it lived in the yard, and it was VERY happy and proud of doing its job. Some breeds now were bred into painful disabling deformities just to look “cute”, and they became hysterical neurotic yapping fashion accessories. Useless high maintenance toys people store in small cages (“oh, but my child loves his cage”) when they don’t need hardwired unconditional lopsided “love” to feed their narcissism.

  • shrugal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We have blown the concept of ownership way out of proportion. No one should be able to own things they have absolutely no connection to, like investment firms owning companies they don’t work for, houses they don’t live in or land they’ve never been to.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t disagree with you on principle, but in practice, allowing the taxation of religious groups would create massive opportunities for abuse. Tax code can be structured to promote one religion and punish another, and you know for damn sure that our elected officials won’t hesitate to put their greasy thumbs on the scale.

      Do they tax income? Investments? Real estate? Spending? Endowments? Salaries? Each of those would create a disparity in how much a specific group owes. Consider how the Mormons collect and spend money vs Catholics, or how Quakers don’t have preachers, just elders, while evangelical preachers earn hundreds of millions.

      Any tax gives a massive advantage to the religions of the wealthy. You’d end up with four mega churches and a bunch of underground religious communities meeting in secret and sharing holy books smuggled in from Canada.

      While I’d love to see churches start paying their fair share, I also see the way our tax code works now. We can’t get economic elites and the well connected to pay their fair share, what makes you think that it will happen with the religious economic elites and the religious well connected? It’s always the little people who suffer the most.

    • zer0nix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’d give loopholes for good works and define them specifically

      If you really do mean no exceptions then that is genuinely an unpopular view.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who are strongly against nuclear power are ignorant of the actual safety statistics and are harming our ability to sustainably transition off fossil fuels and into renewables.

    • sadbehr@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I come across you in a dark alley and we’re all alone then you better be ready cos I’ll accept your opinion and offer some other suggestions of movies that we might like, such as all 3 Lord of the Rings (extended editions of course).

    • aCosmicWave@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the last day of my college internship a senior VP at my little company invited me into his office presumably to get to know me prior to extending a full-time offer. To break the ice he asked me what my favorite Star Wars movie was. I smiled and replied that I could never get through any of them.

      As I was uttering these words I began to notice the giant Star Wars poster directly behind the gentleman. It then dawned on me that his office was chalk full of Star Wars memorabilia.

      The man did not ask me any further questions. He shook my hand, thanked me for my great work, and I never stepped foot into those offices ever again.

    • Lumun@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I downvoted because this is a popular opinion. MCU is the same thing. Most people probably don’t have a strong opinion on Star Wars either way, but for the people who do there are plenty who think it sucks.

      • MiddledAgedGuy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I agree with this take.

        I like Star Wars fine. If they make something, I’ll probably watch it. But I don’t consider myself a fan. I don’t keep track of the lore and would be hard pressed to tell you the plot of anything I hadn’t seen recently. Which is a long way of saying I’m in the don’t have a strong opinion camp.

  • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Being fat is a choice the vast majority of the time, and I have a huge bias against big people.

    I used to be fat (250ish lbs (110ish kg) at 5’8"ish (172ish cm)), and as much as I would like to blame my shit on anything else, the person feeding me, the person sitting at the computer for hours, the person actively avoiding all physical activity was me and no one else. After I got diagnosed with some weight related shit, I turned my entire life upside down, am at a much healthier 150 lbs (68ish kg), and feel so much better, both physically and mentally.

    I’m aware of my bias, and I make every active effort to counter it in my actual dealings with bigger people. Especially because there are certain circumstances, however rarely, where it may not actually be their fault. But I’d be lying if I said my initial impression was anything except “God, what a lazy, fat fuck.”

    Edit: Added metric units

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The worst maker mistake humanity has ever made was not killing every nazi after ww2.

    I’ve gotten some nasty responses to that one lol

    But I’m fucking right

  • MrFunnyMoustache@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trying to get people to change problematic behaviour, language, or opinion through yelling, or shaming is ineffective most of the time. Obviously I can’t expect people who belong to minorities to not be angry, not everyone can be Daryl Davis, but if you are white and don’t have a personal trauma, you should use more effective methods to correct people’s problematic behaviour.

    Source: I was able to get my family to stop using the N word, and even my elderly father who doesn’t actually remember that it’s bad to use the N word has stopped using it thanks to this very simple technique: every time he says that word, stop the conversation and explain why this word is harmful and dangerous to use, don’t let them steer the conversation back. Being visibly angry with them will only make them dig in their heels and seek comfort with other people who are racist, making it more difficult to get them out.

    Eventually they will subconsciously stop using that word, simply because this causes the conversation to be interrupted every time. So while I don’t punish them (can’t exactly tell my father to go to his room or something), the repeated inconvenience of having the conversation halted every time will get it in their head eventually.

    I think this is the most effective method to correct problematic behaviour in adults.

  • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Pansexual, polysexual, and omnisexual are all microlabels and are all subsets of bisexual. You don’t need more labels than gay, straight, and bi.

    Edit: I forgot about asexuals. But I specifically only care about bi subsets. They’re dumb, and you only need bi

  • Sombyr@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most conservatives, however deeply red, are not intentionally hateful and are usually open to rational discussion. People just don’t know how to have rational discussions nowadays and the few times they do, they don’t know how to think like somebody else and put things in a way they can understand.

    People nowadays think because a point convinced them, it should convince everybody else and anybody who’s not convinced by it is just being willfully ignorant. The truth is we all process things differently and some people need to hear totally different arguments to understand, often put in ways that wouldn’t convince you if you heard it.

    It’s hard to understand other people and I feel like the majority of people have given up trying in favor of assuming everybody who disagrees with you knows their wrong and refuses to admit it.