this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
19 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

47726 readers
1 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nobody should own dogs. They were bred as slave animals in a time before we understood that they were just as sentient as any other being, with pain receptors and emotions just as real as our own. And we have bred them to be miserable when we are not there giving them attention. Their apparent affection is an illusion, a food-gathering instinct honed by countless generations of selective and cruel in-breeding directed by humans who want to pretend that these animals actually love them, when they're really just pretending because they are rewarded for it.

Also, if you own a dog and let it bark for any length of time, ever, or let it wander unrestrained where it might bite or harass a stranger, or let it take shits and don't immediately clean that up, you deserve to be put in a cage.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Remember to sort by controversial. Top comments are always going to be the popular opinions.

[–] macrocarpa@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

The rise of feminism has seen the steady devaluation of the contribution of men in those areas of society where they should be most active. Rather than celebrate and recognise what's right, the focus is on attacking what's wrong.

The majority of men are lonely, isolated and uncared for. Many feel unvalued, unsafe and vulnerable. There is less community support for men than there has been in the past, less institutional support, and a continued decline in the tolerance of men being in shared places. The minimisation of value in societal roles is yet another way that men are cut off.

This seems to escape the vision of feminism. There is always claim of ideological alignment, where the empowerment of women directly benefits men, but when it comes to any form of concrete action that helps men that need help, or celebrates men that contribute - it's nowhere to be seen.

Men kill themselves. They kill themselves. In their thousands. Leaving cratered families, trauma, guilt from the survivors, many of whom are female. Because they feel valueless, helpless and can't see a purpose to going on.

Accountability goes both ways. In demanding support from men, feminism must support men.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

My unpopular opinion is that too many people give way, waaaaaayyy too much attention to "correct use of gender pronouns" and they should all just stfu.

I understand why that is a big deal for trans people, because they make their gender the defining aspect of their character. Something I consider a mistake, nobody's main defining characteristic should be their gender.

[–] IonAddis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I guess you're right that that's unpopular.

But let me put this metaphor out there--if someone shows up in the ER and their leg is badly broken and there's blood everywhere and the bone is sticking out, it is logical to triage that and take care of it first. But if lesser injuries are being taken care of instead, it's logical and appropriate to raise a fuss. The person fussing about their broken leg isn't really making it their entire personality no matter how strident and loud they are--they are simply in urgent pain and need the problem attended to.

Given plenty of trans folks end up suicidal, which is the mental health equivalent of a major physical injury, it's logical and appropriate to try to shed light on what's happening so it can be corrected. That can seem like the community is being "loud" or that an individual is "making gender their core characteristic". But it's more that that is the thing that is currently hurting, so it moves people to try to stop the hurt. Once things have evened out, there's less need to be loud about it, and it will naturally fall into place as a background aspect, like any other facet of a person.

This is generally the case when ANY minority is "making a fuss"--it's happening because there's pain that needs to be attended to. A wound that needs healing.

I've seen more than one "well meaning" person online get upset about how this or that minority is being loud with a tone they don't like.

The thing is--if a person is in pain, they're not necessarily in a mental spot to perfectly frame their arguments just for you, in exactly the tone you need to be able to hear them. Someone in pain can be pretty harsh and mean-sounding, and it's important to recognize the times when YOU are unburdened by that pain and thus have an easier time of being "logical" than the other person who is currently crying out in pain and sounds "harsh".

Basically: have mercy on other people, and understand some harsh things they say because they are in pain, and that you, too, would probably have your discipline fail at some point if you went through something just as harsh.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It makes sense, but I feel like complaining about gender pronouns specifically is more akin to whining loudly about a small finger cut, while the leg is still broken.

I understand that they go through hell, as the majority lose any sort of social safety net: friends and family, and are generally shunned upon by society at large. That shouldn't happen and I understand that the problem is cultural first and foremost, people hate being told their worldview, the stuff they learned, is wrong.

Still, your insight was something I didn't take into account. For that, I thank you. Maybe this is also the only fight they have the power to fight. Small and maybe even petty, but that's all that's within their reach.

[–] what_is_a_name@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I think you’re close to understanding WHY then the trans community is such a stickler about pronouns

Let me give you an example that may further close the understanding loop for you.

I moved from US to Scandinavia. This place, despite being always described as heaven for the queer community … is, on the surface, entirely devoid of them. You hardly ever notice. There is hardly ever any discussion, politics, or fuss. You struggle to spot queer couples on the street. There just isn’t a loud community shouting about queer and trans issues on the street. When you spot queer or trans folks they are just people doing their daily life.

Why? Because they are not under attack. When a community is being attacked it becomes tighter, builds rituals and ways of living that identifies members of the group. It becomes louder and with a uniform voice on the political scene. Because the coordination and loudness is necessary for their political goals- of not being attacked.

(I guess groups not on the defensive but on the offensive would do the same. I guess you have to look at the goals to understand which is which.)

But here’s my point - in conditions where the trans community is treated with respect, they again become free to NOT make their life about bathrooms and pronouns.

And thus - I argue pronouns are such a hot topic because trans folks are being deliberately misgendred as an attack by their political opponents.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Nonameuser678@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Everyone should try and reduce the amount of meat they eat as much as they can. Same goes for flying and driving.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HunterLF@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago

To be loved and hated at the same time, you just have to choose a side in politics, so, fuck Trump. I don't have a problem with the Republicans/conservatives. I think conserving one's nation and culture is important, but not attacking anyone and everything with discrimination. And I won't even get started on tariffs. The ones that will pay for it will be the everyday person, not the multi-billionares and milionars.

"We're gonna nuke each other up boys 'Til old Satan stands impressed" - As the world caves in, Matt Maltese

[–] TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pub 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Corporations should only be allowed to exist as long as they're doing more good for society than the damage they do. Businesses should either be a net positive or run by people who are individually and jointly liable.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Lifecoach5000@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

The Beatles were overrated.

[–] toomanypancakes@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

There's no ethical way to kill someone who doesn't want to die. This applies to more than just humans.

[–] krayj@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Non-human predators that hunt, kill, and eat other animals...do you consider them unethical, or is it only unethical for animals capable of inventing the concept of 'ethics'?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Dismissing social norms because they're "only social constructs" is ridiculous, because all social constructs are a product of our biological brains. Gender norms exist because sex chromosomes affect brain chemistry, not because some evil global patriarchy cabal in 200,000 B.C decided they should.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

the military is a cult that tricks children into dying for the wealth of the owner class. they tell you you're defending "freedom" but you're defending the gravest enemies of freedom that currently exist.

[–] colonial@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Too many people conflate the evils of corporatism and corruption with the general concept of "capitalism"/a market economy.

Now, I'm hardly an advocate of laissez-faire economics. But I'm not a full-on socialist either. I think the majority of problems people attribute to modern market economies can be corrected with aggressive anti-trust and pro-consumer regulation.

(The keyword here is majority. I'm sure it makes sense to socialize some things, but those details are best left to people smarter than me.)

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In order to actually fight climate change, we should start by trying to reduce the population in the future. Less people = more resources per person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] takoman@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

I don't believe in prison for punitive justice. Prions should be used to keep society safe from dangerous people, not punishing them imo.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

If you're obese you should not be allowed to work in a health care related field.

I never can say this out loud, but it legitimately rubs me the wrong way.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] redpen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] El_guapazo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Jesus won't come for his followers until after the great tribulation. So all these people believing in the rapture and post apocalyptic world are wrong. That's why evangelical Christians don't believe in global climate change because it won't affect them if Jesus scoops them up before they face consequences.

[–] ClockNimble@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I could probably do a better job running your country than the guy you elected since I know when to give the problem to someone more qualified.

[–] cum_hoc@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I used to think like this but now I realise that being in power is much harder than I thought, especially in the context of a democracy. Inevitably, in order to get something done, you usually need the cooperation of your political opponents, which usually requires to make compromises that you're uncomfortable with or make you go back on campaign promises.

That said, I think I could do a better job than Trump since I think I could at least manage to not put myself in so much legal trouble.

[–] ChilledPeppers@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I depends on the country, but definitely yes. And this is even more the case if you said β€œyour city”. Most local politicians are just straight up bad.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I have quite a few. I don't believe in copyright laws or IP in general. I think it holds back innovation and exists solely to benefit megacorps like Disney or pharmaceutical companies.

For example - you develop a new drug that really helps some people. You charge $50 a pill even though it costs you $5 to produce. Without the government protecting IP, another company will come around and produce it and sell it for $6 a pill, providing cheaper access to healthcare.

People will say "what would give someone the incentive to make new things?" Without actually thinking it through. For a great example of how lack of IP is a good thing, look at how Shenzhen went from a fishing village to a Chinese San Francisco in a few short decades.. one company will take the product of another and iterate on top of it.

Another unpopular opinion is I'm pretty absolutist with free speech. I think certain things like calls to violence or intentional defamation of character should be restricted. But pretty much everything else should be fair game.

I believe in open borders and think the US should return to the late 1800s style of immigration. We're gonna need the population to compete with China in the coming century.

I also think that the primary investment into climate change at this point should be preparing for the inevitable changes instead of trying to prevent the inevitable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Negative motivation is the real way to make changes.

It's great to have goals and positive things to look forward to when you reach those goals.

But to be consistent in doing the hard work to reach that goal it's better to scare the shit out of your self by asking

"what happens to me if I don't do the work?"

[–] loffiz@feddit.nl 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

No word is inherently bad, it's all about what you mean and how you use it. Most people have a no-tolerance with a few words though.

For example, all words would be ok in educational purposes.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

Bernie would have won had he not been blatantly cheated in the 2016 DNC primary. We’d be in a MUCH different timeline had he won.

Edit: Corbyn was done dirty in the UK too.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

The kWh is a silly unit. Joule (J) is the one true unit of energy.

Also, common time units suck as much as inches, pounds, feet and whatever nonsense units you Americans still use. Just use seconds with the appropriate SI prefix instead.

Cubic meters and tonnes suck too. Just use kl and Mg instead.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not racist if I say I hate Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Religion is not a race, it's fundamentally an assertion of an ontology based upon the primacy of the god of Abraham/Ibrahim, Yahweh/Jehovah.

The belief in the existence, omnipresence, and infallibility of such a being as described by their texts is a detriment to our species and may ultimately catastrophically destroy civilization.

One chooses to believe or continue believing this. One can't choose their ethnicity. If I say I hate those religions, I'm saying I hate their ideas on how reality works, not where they're from or what they look like.

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί