For me, if I ask for an unpopular opinion and you say something about pineapple on pizza I’m going to assume you have no personality.
Quentin Tarantino is a pretty good director. Not great, not terrible, just pretty good.
Some people should be sterilised.
Which ones?
Anyone who throws a cigarette butt onto the ground.
Anyone who blocks an entire aisle in a store by stopping and leaving their cart on one side, then standing on the other side with 5 family members.
That’s a separate question.
that’s the kind of nuance I expect from Lemmy
People from @lemmy.world
Already took care of mine!
Hurtful
Responding to any kind of misfortune with “They deserved it.”
eg. People struggling to pay their rent should have budgeted better. People whose uber eats wasn’t delivered shouldn’t have used uber eats. People with medical debt should’ve had health insurance. etc. etc.
Not even an opinion, but the response of someone callous and deeply ignorant about how the world and people work. 😔
People killed by political violence
Pediatric cancer
Isn’t the just world fallacy a pretty popular opinion?
Popular is not the same thing as interesting. It’s boring in an ancient and odious way, but there is something interesting about how every time people bring it up they think they’re giving a hot take.
I wasn’t talking about people bringing it up as a psychological theory, I was talking about people holding it as an actual belief.
There are tons and tons of people who subscribe to it. It’s a pretty good hint as to why people support billionaires and villainize the poor.
The first one that comes to mind is the one where fat people should stop eating fast food.
Because we live in a country full of food deserts where the only option is fast food.
I mean thats not a bad opinion its just a false statement/premise from every angle.
Right, which makes it a bad opinion.
Correct, and that’s what pisses me off.
This is just such a bad way of thinking.
Why does everyone thing that fresh fruits and vegetables are the only way to eat healthy? Fresh is good, but there are plenty of healthy foods that are not fresh. Until we had refrigerators, humans didn’t eat a lot of fresh fruit or vegetables for half of the year.
You can be healthy eating rice and beans, using frozen or canned vegetables too add even more nutrition. All of which can be obtained pretty much anywhere, including food deserts, and stored for long periods of time easily.
You can literally dump a bunch of shit into a crock pot, go work a double shift, then come back and have dinner ready. So don’t give me “it’s too hard to cook.”
It’s cheaper than fast food by a significant margin.
People buy fast food because it tastes good, full of fat and salt and sugar. Food deserts exist BECAUSE people choose not to prep their own food.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t do their own grocery shopping.
I do ALL of the grocery shopping for my family of 5, not sure why you think I wouldn’t.
My wife and I put on about 12 liters of Chili to cook this morning. We regularly batch cook from scratch, and I regularly make extras at dinner just to set aside as freezer meals for the kids to reheat anytime they want.
We both work full time, have a side hustle, and all of our kids participate in sports. Our days, nights, and weekends are hectic as hell.
Without prepping, we’d be eating fast food all the time. Except… we don’t.
Your comments are a weird mix of “this thing I’m doing is not easy” and also “if I can do it, surely everyone can.”
It’s almost like some tasks are easier, and some require significant education and experience.
Dumping cans of food into a crock pot tends to be in the former, decent jobs tend to be in the latter.
I can’t back a semi-truck up into a loading bay, nor do I think it would be easy for me to learn how to do that.
Having the opportunity and energy to plan ahead is something you’re taking for granted. I think your example and advice would be way more persuasive if you had a kinder attitude about it.
I wouldn’t have the opportunity or energy to plan ahead if I didn’t plan ahead.
I know people work hard, I grew up in a single parent household with a full time working mother. She still cooked us dinner and didn’t get us fast food frequently. Lots of easy casseroles and such, but it was healthy and filling. Most importantly it was cheaper.
I keep seeing these people complaining about being poor when they’re ordering fast food for dinner for a family of 4. That person just worked 4-6 hours at a job to pay for that dinner. They would have saved time and money by working less and cooking more.
That situation doesn’t need kindness, it needs a reality check.
Well I quoted “we need a new plague” for years until it finally happened. Didn’t thin the herd as much as it could have.
Everyone wants a plague, but nobody wants to be the plaguee
When the Westerner complains about “excess people”, they never mean white people, lol.
I kind of miss the plague.
Giving everyone an equal vote is bad.
“Democracy is government of the people, by the people, and for the people… But the people are retarded.”
<insert popular contemporaneous media> isn’t as good as the stuff from <distant time period>. Yeah, obviously – they made bad media back in <distant time period> too, we just don’t talk about it any more because no-one cares. All you’re saying is “survivorship bias exists.” No-one’s out here reading trashy sentimentalist novels because they aren’t good, but they were hugely popular in the 18th century.
Yeah! This one has always bothered me!
At work we had the radio on in the workshop, and the topic among us were my preference for 90s music.
Then some shite song came on that I remembered from decades past, and I had to add “but as you can hear, there was plenty of garbage back then too”
Been listening to a lot of 90s music recently but hearing the lyrics properly for the first time on modern equipment… yeah. A lot of them don’t deserve to be remembered fondly.
Hmm… I actually can explain why certain things were better in the past compared to today. It comes down to market research, consumerism/saturation of capitalism.
Take modern music, for example. The 60s and 70s was a time where the music industry hadn’t flattened out in any way. The labels and publishers were trying to work out what people responded to. And people were responding to all kinds of stuff. It was just a mishmash of tastes and people liked what stoked their imagination.
And with regards to the artists and musicians, they were mainly just making whatever the hell sounded good and felt good. No one quite had any idea what they were doing.
Almost everything was really original for the above reasons.
You had bands who released albums, containing what you could vaguely call rock but with many other influences, containing three tracks, one of which was 20 mins long and the other two being 10 mins each. And such a band would go on tour selling out stadiums and selling millions of copies of said album.
Of course, there was bad music then. But the sheer proportion of amazing music was insane.
And it was because we hadn’t yet been market researched into oblivion. It was like the wild west; anything goes.
I’ll give another example… car design. Market research has managed to narrow car design down to a very generic form that is not the most beautiful but the least offensive and somewhat pleasant to the most amount of people, to guarantee sales.
Back before such deep market research, designers were artists who would take a risk and design something in their vision. Not everyone would like it. Perhaps the design would be divisive. Ok, some bad ugly cars would come out but there would be some incredible designs. Now, almost every car looks like a generic blob.
You realize there is incredibly varied, deep, impossibly different and complex music being made all over the world at all times right? In my small-ish city I can see a different show every single night, made up of mostly local and touring artists in small DIY venues that are 100 people or less. And just to show you I’m not bullshitting: https://arcane.city/
The advent of the internet has exploded creativity in so many different ways. Bands starting out can connect with other artists and fans in a DIY sense and play local gigs or tour without any kind of funding or record deals from corporate interests or private equity. Hell, I’ve gone to “clubs” that were like an old auto body shop ran by my friends, absolutely way past capacity in the hood, to see my partner open for acts from Kenya or at a tiny bar that had a really sick grindcore band from Brazil. It’s hard to say things like that happened regularly back in the day but who knows
And it’s not like people still don’t get big. I saw Alex G play in like backyards and tiny venues 12 years ago and now he plays one of the biggest venues in my city when they tour.
The view that music is washed up now just because the radio plays the same songs is pretty narrow. There was plenty of crap same-y boring music on the radio back then too. There’s a reason why all the rockers you’re talking about hated disco lol.
The creative types are always going to keep seeking out this type of thing and flourish. You could say the same about underground hip hop and rap, the club scene, punk, hardcore, jazz, EDM, folk, etc etc.
IIRC a lot of the generic blob design is driven by aerodynamics
And optimizing for maximum interior space and comfort for aerodynamics
Of course there are practical elements to design. That hasn’t changed. We didn’t suddenly discover aerodynamics when cars became blobs toward the 2nd half of the 90s. It’s been a factor in car design for a very long time, so this does not negate my point at all.
My original point was to negate the notion that the claim of things being better in the past was unfounded.
Of course, there are examples of mediums and things being better more recently, such as animated TV series. The quality of today’s far outshines that of 30 years ago, for example.
But some of the most culturally important areas were better previously. Music and film clearly are important elements of culture.
That cave painter really must’ve thought he was The shit.
No-one’s out here reading trashy sentimentalist novels because they aren’t good, but they were hugely popular in the 18th century.
I mean, trashy sentimentalist is like half of Shakespeare tbh. Its all jokes about women, dick jokes and violence.
Shakespeare didn’t write novels in the 18th century? I’m referring to a particular literary movement that started like 200 years after Shakespeare’s death.
That homelessness is a choice and the people sleeping on the ground and being nibbled on by rats are somehow gaming the system.
Even if people did choose to do so, it should be a huge red flag to happen then. If people would rather sleep on the street than participate in society, maybe shit is fucked up.
Diseases of Despair
Just because someone choose something does mean they deserve to be in that position in the first place
Think that one, the opinion itself, varies in boring/interesting depending on where you live. Likewise varies in truthfulness.
What do you mean by “depending on where you live?”
It (edit: the idea you’re quoting) has more credence or less depending on your town.
- Are there a lot of charities and free services that homeless people can use? Couple that with a notably generous population and you might see actual wilful homelessness.
- On the other hand, I don’t think homelessness is ever a choice or comfortable in very car centric city with gang violence.
I suppose nobody is “gaming the system by being homeless” because even if it’s comfy, you’re not gaining more than you would be by not gaming the system of homelessness. But i think it’s undeniable that, in certain places for various reasons, people choose/pretend to be homeless.
Are there a lot of charities and free services that homeless people can use?
Depends on the type of homeless. Folks who were just evicted and need someplace safe so they can get back on their feet? Sure. People with severe mental health issues or drug addictions? not so much.
Going to a shelter involves giving up certain freedoms that living outside affords you. If you’re dealing with a heroin addiction, they won’t let you bring your drugs in. Got a pet dog companion? No dogs allowed. Going with a friend or partner? Expect to be split up. Also shelters often fill up and the next shelter with space may be an hour walk away.
It also doesn’t help that the shelters are all separate charities and don’t really coordinate.
So as miserable as it is, many people prefer living in tents and won’t even accept a shelter when they’re offered help as their tent encampment is being cleared by authorities.
As someone who works with homeless people in an area with a generous population, lots of charities, and free services, you are repeating one of the most dangerous types of misinformation. It’s the kind that draws our attention to 0.1% that is technically true, while diminishing the conversation about the actual problem.
The “tourists”, as we sometimes call them, are the 0.1%. They come and go and there is always one or two around, but they are not the ones with the serious problems. Some might think of them as outliers in the group, but I wouldn’t even group those 0.1% with the other 99.9%. We still make sure they are okay, but they are not the problem when people talk about “homelessness”.
I’m assuming you are good hearted. All intelligent good-natured people have mistakenly repeated points before understand the nuances. I just hope you and anyone else reading might consider a different way of thinking. Repeating this talking point makes it very hard for the people trying to fight homelessness. Funding drys up and people die because public discussion often focuses on the “tourists” and not on the actual problem.
I got hit with this by an elderly person one day. They went on about how there’s so much food out there that they could just forage for, but they choose to beg for it. I was working, so all I could do was smile and nod, but that smile was just frozen in place like a grimace.
During this whole rant my boss and I kept glancing at each other like they were insane. I can’t remember the exact details, I cleansed my brain of that garbage, but there were a few times my boss’ eyes flashed and I thought he was going to flip out.
They left like they were the avatar of mercy and understanding. I may have forgotten what they said exactly, but I’ll never forget how they looked, because that went right down in my mind under “people I’ll never become”. I mean… you have to actively try to become that ignorant, right?
…Right?
Remember that their generation were the same ones who beat black protestors and spit on drafted Vietnam vets. They’re also going to die off soon and the world will be better without them
Unfortunately that generation is doing a pretty good job of screwing up everything so there won’t be much left to enjoy when they die off.
I don’t have boring one.
I believe in corpoal punishment for children - as is some spanking with hand. Not beating children.
If you are using a belt that means you are hitting harder than your hand would take, so that’s abuse territory.This. There’s a lot people who cant seem to tell apart a light “stop, this is bad” spank from from Wrestling dropping your kid.
Especially if there’s a clear stating of “if you continue doing [bad behavior] you’re going to be spanked” and the kid keeps doing it.
When I was a kid, I got warnings before getting spanked. If there’s a clear line drawn and you continue crossing it you should get some kind of punishment.
That being said, I view spanking as the nuclear option nowadays. It needs to be a “credible threat” (aka an actual option), but you want to avoid escalating to that point because there’s nothing else to escalate to.
Strong disagree from me. Using violence as a deterrent teaches kids that it’s OK to use violence against others in the future. Does it work immediately? Yes. Does it do long term damage? Also yes.
The subconscious correlation between “being right” and “being the strongest” is a source of a huge amount of problems.
I never once threatened violence or used any sort of violence against my kids, and they never used violence as they grew up.
This is probably the real unpopular opinion though, I don’t expect many people to agree with me on this one!
Using violence as a deterrent teaches kids that it’s OK to use violence against others in the future.
Except as others have pointed out, there’s cases where a violent response (or the possibility of one) is necessary. There’s a couple of good adages on the subject:
It’s better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war
A man that is incapable of fighting isn’t peaceful, he’s helpless
And like one of the other responders, I was spanked as a child but that didn’t lead me to resolving problems with violence as an adult.
I never once threatened violence or used any sort of violence against my kids, and they never used violence as they grew up.
Tbh, that sounds more like they were fortunate enough to never be in a situation that required violence
I’ll disagree with your point on violence teaching violence. I was spanked as a child, and even hit with belts etc (balkan parents) and yet now in my adult life I avoid violence whenever possible and believe it is wrong in 95% of cases. However that means theres 5% where it is unavoidable, and even necessary.
Also I would counter this argument by saying that if we teach people that violence is never the answer, we raise them to be the kind of people who will let others step all over them (an extreme example is peaceful protestesters against corrupt/outright evil governments - unfortunately it doesnt work most of the time). Now does that mean we should teach that violence is the easy solution you should jump to from the get go? No. It should be stressed that it is only for situations where there is no alternative and the transgression is severe enough to warrant a severe reaction/consequences. So for example, no matter how many times a parent tells their child to do the laundry and they don’t, violence isnt the proportionate consequence. However if a parent catches their kid bullying or endangering others, then yes the “crime” is severe enough in my opinion to warrant a violent response if the child repeatedly engages in that behaviour.
I think that’s a reasonable take but I do disagree. Violence is necessary sometimes. You should always aim to avoid violence, but if the other party is not able to resolve conflicts without it, you have to be able and willing to use it as a fallback. If you examine how people operate in situations where nonviolence is not an option, you will notice they suddenly become okay with violence. What is pretty universally recognized as bad is using violence when it’s not necessary.
TL;DR: Speak softly and carry a big stick
You know, looking at my down votes I wonder if they are against punishment, or me calling them abusers?
PiNeApPlE oN PiZzA eWwW!!!1one
I’m so sick of pretend pearl clutching over this non-issue. If you don’t like it, don’t eat it. If you do, that’s fine too.
And for the record, my stance on pineapple on pizza is… drumroll
Tap for spoiler
Who the fuck cares?
I’m about to do ham and eggs on a pizza.
Breakfast pizza is amazing. Replace the tomato sauce with sausage gravy, sprinkle on the scrambled eggs, diced ham, and any other toppings of your choice, add the shredded cheese, and bake at 400F for 10-15 minutes (depending on your oven).
The one thing I tried on pizza that was unexpectedly gross to me was broccoli. I actually really enjoy broccoli but on a pizza it made the whole thing taste nasty.
That’s called an Aussie, and it tastes great.
Tell me more. How’s the egg cooked? Whole?
Crack them right on top of the ham. We used two this time because one is not enough. Got the idea from a Neoplitan pizza place in Florida.
My mouth is suddenly all watery. Looks so good.
That’s not a boring unpopular opinion. It’s a boring popular one.
Charred fresh pineapple is completely different than pale bland lumps from a can too. Hawaiian style pizza can be good but blandness is death.
But the bigger car makes me feel safer
And so should the deadlier gun but at some point you risk becoming a danger. Ofc if you have no morals you won’t care but if you do, then you’ll think about it at least twice.
How about…
“I don’t like politics.” Proceeds into political rant about why.
It almost always means “I don’t like to have to defend my lack of morals/humanity” but since they feel found out they feel pressured to lie about it to keep up appearances.
Children are just as evil as adults
One of the most memorable examples of bravery I’ve witnessed was my Italian coworker who straightened his back and said with firm conviction that he enjoys pineapple on pizza.
At least he died looking good.
Automobile rear window tints should be banned outright
God forbid anyone have privacy.
Illinois is crazy. So here you have two main options, you can black out your back window and the side back windows if it’s a 4 door or those little side backseat windows in a 2 door. Or you can do 35% all around, besides the windshield.
It’s even more complicated than you made it sound
You can install 35% VLT on all windows (except windshield).
All windows behind driver can legally have any tint percent, but only if front side windows are not tinted.
Front side windows may have 50% light transmission, but only if no window behind driver is tinted under 30% VLT.
On vehicles with factory-installed window tint of any darkness on any back window, front side windows must have over 50% VLT
I remember tracking the bill through the state congress that allowed the front windows to be tinted. I immediately went and got my 35% all around when it became legal.
Personally I would take inspiration from Tennessee’s laws on the subject, but just the part where you can have any darkness above the AS1 line. Have some comparable equivalent (top 2-3 inches) of all windows allow whatever darkness to get the sun out of your eyes, then the remainder of the windows should be tint free. It’s really annoying when rear windows are so tinted that you can’t even see the brake lights of the next car in line through the car ahead of you.
Ah I was thinking you must have lived somewhere else because you can rent say a Uhaul in every state I figured, and they clearly don’t even have rear windows. I too prefer to be able to see the lights through the vehicle in front of me but I’m not so sure I think my preference there should override others choice of privacy. I’d like to think it is the safer option though
