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?
You must log in or register to comment.
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
they are all made up
“All words are made up”
If we’re splitting hairs, bi should be a sunset of pan.
Also, there is some need for a fourth “none of the above” label…
Upvoted, but I have a slight disagreement. I think bisexual should actually be a label under pansexual. Bisexual doesn’t necessarily account for anyone outside the gender binary.
Yes it does. Read the bisexual manifesto.
And here I thought pansexual meant you really like cookware.
Is that really what you thought, or just an attempt at humor? Be honest ;)
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.
I literally just came from another post that was talking about this.
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).
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.
Lapdogs have been around for thousands of years. It’s only very recently that they’ve been bred so extremely that they can’t breathe.
Thousands of years ago they were dogs, not fashion accessories.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
100%
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.
USA is an oligarchy. I can imagine americans disagree. But perhaps not lemmies.
Lemmy.world holding such a prevalent place in the Lemmy/Kbin part of the Fediverse makes it a major single point of failure.
They should still be the newcomers instance, but communities and users should migrate to other instances to increase the resilience of the Fediverse.
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.
If it wasn’t for their response to the pandemic, I might be inclined to agree with you.
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.
I think most people would agree with this besides the people who are doing this themselves.
I like this idea, I had never thought about it this way. But it would be hard to implement, what about owning things that does not physically exist? (Like a company)
Yea it would be a pretty radical change, requiring adjustments in many areas. But I do think it’s necessary, because people not being personally invested in the things they own (just financially) and profiting from other people’s work is imo the big problem with our society right now.
Companies would work the same way. You can own it (make decisions and get profits) as long as you work there. Ofc you can work for multiple companies, but with reasonably restrictions (e.g. 8 companies if you work 40h/week and 5h/week/company). I also think companies should not be able to own other companies, because companies cannot be “personally” involved in anything, only people can.
The COVID pandemic never ended.
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.
Here, here!
While I agree that feminism should support men, the guys who aren’t capable of having friendships with other humans are just, for whatever reason, anti-social.
I’m a single guy in my mid forties. I have a huge social group and feel incredibly loved. Where this stigma came that men can’t get therapy or can’t cry or be affectionate with other men, I don’t know. I’ve never experienced this. Possibly because, thanks to the rise of feminism, my single mother was able to raise me with a career where she was able to put in the work and climb the corporate ladder without a college education. I didn’t have some dirt bag chauvinistic father raising me to treat women like meat. My father was a carpenter, an artist, and a poet. I learned the value of friendship and community and affection in my home. If someone’s struggling with loneliness or their place in their community, I wouldn’t blame feminism so much as their own family and inhibitions.
I think you’re confusing “men” with “assholes”. It doesn’t matter what gender or sex you are, if you’re a dick, you’re not welcome and society is going to judge and punish you. In that sense, perhaps feminism has failed us in its support of all.
I don’t think you’re wrong that men are going through their own struggles.
The thing that is probably a sticking point is that a lot of the structures that support women in the modern world are largely created and maintained by the work of women. Like, the food pantries and the foster care I went through was skewed much more heavily with women doing probably 75%+ of the work in the organizations (some of them closer to like 98% of the work), both for the aspects that supported women specifically (programs for single mothers and such), and those who served both men and women (like food pantry or health services).
So the question is–why are men not banding together to support other men? You guys KNOW there’s issues being neglected by society. So…where are all the men making organizations to socially support men going through mental health crisis? Why are you not looking at the women’s organizations and taking notes and learning from how they’re structured, and taking up those tools yourself to adapt to this situation?
I don’t think it’s true that men making an organization to help other men’s mental health would be somehow driven into the ground by some group of evil feminists or something–the women I’ve seen working with “feet on the ground” for supportive organizations were not like that.
I think there’d be side-eyes if say, a new free mason organization popped up where businessmen are cutting deals in no-girls-allowed backrooms or something. The old rich-boy fraternal network of power, you know? Where people in positions of monetary or political power try to exclude others from that power?
But something genuinely out there to, say, talk with men struggling with mental health, or suicidal thoughts, and to talk incels out of being incels, and to promote a healthy way to cope with the changing world and the stress the world and “masculine” gender expectations put on people I think would get a bunch of big positive nods from the women I’ve known who’ve been volunteers for “women’s organizations”. Like–yes, it’s definitely needed for you guys! And fundamentally a different sort of support network than the old-boys networks that feminists historically protest.
Like, there’s a big difference between alcoholics anonymous and a college frat known for abusive hazing practices. There’s a big difference between a group of vets talking together about their war experiences (like all the vet lodges for WWII and such), and a professional organization for people in a given career that doesn’t (for example) admit female members. One type of organization focuses on the mental health and well being of its members, the other type of organization is hoarding power. It’s the “hoarding power” types of organizations that feminists protest.
Another problem with helping men with mental health is that often men don’t listen to women on certain topics. There seems to be a dire need for male leaders who will approach other men and talk with other men about these squishy, emotional things. Because one dude being an example is one of the few things that can get through to other dudes sometimes.
But there’s a social stigma for men who are too “emotional” and “vulnerable”, so it’s hard to get volunteers for this to kick off the trend. But someone has to do it? And it’s only something other men can do?
I think a lot, sometimes, about the Captain America scene where Steve is going/half-leading post-snap support group. It’s a fictional example, but it basically showcases/envisions the type of leadership that needs to develop for dudes. And it’s not a position a woman can easily step into, because plenty of guys who need help are already rejecting women for any variety of reasons (bitterness, resentment, fear, anxiety, whatever). Some guys need to step up to the plate and be like Captain America, on a local level, so local support groups for guys can happen.
I honestly don’t think “women” would get in the way of an organization like this–or at least, the women in the circles I hang with wouldn’t. I think it’s more the lack of men willing to put their necks out there (judging by the gender imbalance in volunteer and support organizations I’ve been exposed to), because it’s certain to get plenty of pushback and blowback and be hard work for little recognition and little pay.
I have very little to add to this excellent comment, other than my heartfelt praise. Thank you.
That is an important point. But why it’s unpopular is that it’s not “feminism’s” job to do this. Feminism is a struggle to give women equal opportunities to men. They do not include race, poverty, and definitely not men’s issues in this.
To put it bluntly: It’s not women’s job to fix men.
Men’s loneliness crisis may have come about as a result of modern societal changes. Including equality for women. But it’s men who need to organise and fix that.
(And honestly- as someone who has moved around the western world - this seems uniquely American problem. European men have rich social lives. Even in the most feminist nations)
Nah, it comes from “feminists” making men the villains. And women listening to those “feminists”. It doesn’t concern me personally - I’m a man who’s pretty comfortable with who I am and some power-tripping psychos who hide behind feminism don’t really change anything about that, but sometimes I’m really sorry for men who are less sure of themselves or who internalized hearing they are the bad guys from all sides.
Because they feel valueless, helpless and can’t see a purpose to going on.
I strongly believe this has nothing to do with feminism and is just a problem of the capitalist society we live in that only treats labour and hardwork like shit unless it can generate 1000x profits year on year. Building and serving a community isn’t rewarded. Everything is about greed and more profits. Feminism can’t solve capitalism. It can’t stop people from feeling it’s fucked up consequences like loneliness, feeling unvalued and committing suicide.
God damn this is the most real thing I’ve read in years.
I find it insane that the same people who are anti-fossil fuel and want only green energy is also anti-nuclear power. I also want fossil fuels gone, but nuclear is the only way we are able to get to where we need to.
Eugenics sounds really cool. Not the mandatory sterilisation style, but breeding superhumans? Don’t pretend that wouldn’t be cool.
Personally, with the advent of gene editing I think breeding “superhumans” will inevitably become the way of the future.
It will likely only be available to those who can afford it and will create an even deeper rift between the “haves” and “have nots” than is already in place.
CRISPR is a really recent development, and I don’t think people truly realize how earth-shattering this new technology will be. Natural evolution is dead for all intents and purposes and we stand at the brink of a new era where the reigns to our own evolution have been thrust directly in our hands. Shit’s gonna be wild.
The problem is, you and me wouldn’t be superhuman. Being a broken-ass, second-rate, classic-style human in a world of superhumans would absolutely not be cool.
sure but you wouldn’t like being told who to have kids with just make gmo babies if you want superhumans, much faster and cheaper some dude in China did it already
Tax is not theft
deleted by creator
I think it is, but it can balance out the theft imposed by the ultra wealthy its all about the nuance of the wording ngl
the govt takes ur money - this is theft monopolies and duopolies take ur money for basic goods and services - this is theft
It’s not theft, IF the government puts that money to good use e.g. health care, education, maintain roads, utilities, …
