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?

  • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months 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.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months 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.

  • ReallyKinda@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    11 months ago

    The average person shouldn’t be allowed to drive. It’s extremely dangerous and most people are desensitized to it and absolutely don’t take the natural responsibility towards others that comes with having the ability to kill someone with a finger twitch (or a slight lapse in attention) seriously enough. I don’t think it would be allowed if it was just invented this year.

    • Synthead@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Too many places let you drive if you do the happy path stuff right: stopping at a stop sign, changing lanes safely, etc. But the most important time of your driving is when you’re about to hit a semitruck and you need to get your car out of the way, and there is no training material for this at all. People often panic and slam the brakes and aggressively turn the wheel, which is a perfect setup for understeer and losing control of your car. They are literally getting in a situation where they are about to die and they choose to greatly increase their risk due to negligence.

      It’s cheaper to run simulators than purchase cars and hire trainers. Get em in nasty situations and teach them how to get out of it. For real, if mom and dad can’t evade sinking their freeway missile into a van full of kids, they shouldn’t be able to get behind the wheel and be presented with opportunities where this might happen any time they drive.

    • ndguardian@lemmy.studio
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is why I personally am looking forward to fully self-driving cars. We’re a long way off, but when self-driving cars can completely replace the human element, I think the world will be a much safer place.

      • STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is short-sighted. We need to entirely divert away from using cars as our primary mode of transportation.

          • STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            How about spacial inefficiency? A car only carries 1-6 people compared to a train which carries dozens or even hundreds. Or a bus which carries dozens.

            Explain to me how self-driving cars will fix that

            • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Traffic and parking are the biggest issue i see with cars and space efficiency. Both can be significantly improved on with self driving. Especially if most people opt for public ownership of cars and not private. Something think will become more popular as self driving takes over and lowers the cost of taking the self driving equivalent of a taxi or Uber.

              By the way i think self driving cars will make trains more popular. As trains suck at first and last mile transportation. Self driving solves the first and last mile issues.

              • STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                If we’re going to opt for public ownership then why would you choose the less efficient single passenger method over already-established public infrastructure like trains and trams and buses which have been proven to work well in other countries?

                Also please elaborate on how self driving cars will improve parking issues. And as for traffic, while self-driving cars will be less likely to cause accidents and jams, hundreds of independent low-capacity vehicles are in no way more effective than a single locomotive carrying those hundreds of people in a smaller space.

                You’re allowed to like self-driving cars, but buses and trains are objectively more efficient in the large scale and all you have to do is acknowledge that. The more people realize this, the more room there is for us to make progress

                • Catsrules@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  If we’re going to opt for public ownership then why would you choose the less efficient single passenger method over already-established public infrastructure like trains and trams and buses which have been proven to work well in other countries?

                  Simple we have already chosen cars in the US. It is far easier to use the existing roads to our advantage then try and redesign the entire country to fit a train and tram and bus model.

                  Also please elaborate on how self driving cars will improve parking issues.

                  In a public car the car will drop people off and drive away to pick up other people. There would be no need parking at all. Just a small drop off and pickup location.

                  Now this won’t work as well if we are talking about private ownership cars, but it would be better as the car can drop you off and then drive to a centralized parking location. This would remove the need for street parking or parking lots next to restaurants and stores. Or if your planning to stay a long time for exmaple if your going to work for 8 hours. I think many people might want rent out their car during the day. Car drops me off at work and I tell the car to join the “public car” network for 8 hours and it can go find some people to transport.

                  And as for traffic, while self-driving cars will be less likely to cause accidents and jams, hundreds of independent low-capacity vehicles are in no way more effective than a single locomotive carrying those hundreds of people in a smaller space.

                  Oh sure it won’t be as effective but it will be much better then what we have now. And there are benefits cars have over trains. For example after a the world pandemic scare I find traveling in my own space a much more pleasant experience then sharing with many other people. Also I really like listening to music in a car as full volume very enjoyable experience that you just can’t do on a public train :). A car will be a single vehicle to my destination, I can get in a fall asleep if I want. Buses and trains are usually multiple vehicles and you need to be some what alert to know when your stop is.

    • BurritoBooster@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Germany’s driving test (and school) is fairly strict and will fail you for small mistakes which is good for beginners but after all, there is no test or reinsurance after some years of driving. After some time, people will see driving as a right not a privilege. This is the case for the vast majority of counties. This is the problem.

    • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Problem is that there’s no other alternative for most people. Unless you live in a city, public transportation isn’t a valid option. Most people living in most locations (at least in the US) have to have personal vehicles to attend school/work, shop, and socialize.

      Once self driving cars become commonly available, driving will no longer be a requirement and I think that driving licenses should be stricter on who’s allowed to drive.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If cars became restricted, other options would come up. Better public transport would become available.

        You would need an exception though for rural areas

  • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months 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

    • Treefox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I agree. All the little bitty addages don’t make sense. You can be bi and still have preferences. Just keep it simple gosh dangit.

    • cosmicsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      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.

    • pizza-bagel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      And asexual

      But I agree. The bi community already collectively decided we are trans and nonbinary inclusive. We don’t need to further separate it out.

    • doggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      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…

    • gamermanh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Not understanding what words mean isn’t an unpopular opinion, you’re just wrong

      Not about the first bit, that’s arguable

      You definitely DO need more labels than straight, gay, and bi. For example: asexual or sapiosexual, those don’t fit into any of the 3 you listed

        • SpyingEnvelope@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Can’t agree more. The microlabels are too much at this point. You do not need mix sexual orientation, which is the sex we are naturally attracted to, with having preferences, which are the qualities we find attractive in a person or a relationship. The two are completely separate.

  • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months 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
      ·
      11 months 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
        2
        ·
        11 months 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.

      • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months 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”)

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months 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
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months 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)

        • scout10290@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          26 days ago

          I just like the thought of removing genders.

          You are what you are and what you want to be.

          The only difference is you over there have a vagina and you over there have a penis.

    • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months 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
        1
        ·
        11 months 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.

  • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months 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

    • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      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.

      Something disillusioning from the field of psychotherapy research: Our best, most interdisciplinary, low-threshold therapeutic strategies allow people to, on average, lose and hold the loss of up to 7-10% of the weight they’ve started with. Which isn’t even enough to get most people out of the obesity range. What you’ve been through is exceptional. By far most people will never manage to lose that much, not even with professional help.

      To put it this way: If we look at obesity like a mental disorder it’s one of the hardest to overcome, harder than depression or anxiety.

      I get why so many people share your opinion on this, I just feel like it’s missing context. Because sure, physiologically its possible for a depressed person to “just go out more” or an anxious person to “just stop breathing so fast” or an overweight person to “just eat less and move more”, but this is such an oversimplified way to look at how humans work and why they do what they do that is simply stops being correct. Every now and then you’ll meet someone who managed to do all this just like that, but for the vast majority it’s an unrealistic and unfair thing to ask.

      Obesity is a chronic disorder and will continue to be until we get better treatments.

    • Vlyn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I totally get that, same here.

      But ultimately you can’t just blame people. There is literally an entire industry trying to sell you cheap carbs and fat. Down to the sound a bag of chips makes when you open it (this is not a joke).

      So on one hand you have evolution, your body still being stuck in the past where food was scarce. On the other hand you have too much food and it’s highly engineered to be addicting on purpose.

      It’s no surprise most people are going to lose that challenge.

    • Lumun@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve been thinking about this topic a lot lately and your comment is interesting. Your first sentence is definitely phrased in a more controversial way than the rest of your comment, but I can’t help seeing it as very similar to “Being depressed is a choice the vast majority of the time, and I have a huge bias against depressed people.” Is that an unfair comparison?

      I know that treating fatness/obesity as a disease is kinda controversial but I feel like folks give people dealing with mental health a lot more grace than people dealing with health issues related to being fat. I’ve also heard that for some people they can be perfectly healthy at a higher weight (though this is clearly not the case for many fat people who are seeing health impacts). I guess I’m assuming that a lot of fat people would potentially like to be less so, but can’t (for any number of reasons) quite get there. This seems really similar for me to people dealing with depression, anxiety, etc who want to change things but keep falling back into the problem.

      I guess my question is do you have bias against people who can’t escape other bad cycles like mental health or even stuff like alcoholism? Or is it more just that you think it’s fair to judge people without the discipline/willpower to get out of a state they didn’t want to be in, like you did.

      • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is a fair question. I guess maybe my statement could’ve been less broad. If just “being fat” is the primary problem, that’s what I take issue with. If the problem is deeper, and being fat is a secondary issue (like a result of depression, hypothyroidism, or some other mental/physical ailment), then that’s a different situation. My stance in that case is that the person should be actively trying to treat the primary problem. I know depression almost never just goes away. Sometimes it even sticks around with therapy and medicine, and that sucks hard. But at least they’re trying.

        • WillFord27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          This is an old thread, but taking your first comment into account, doesn’t this make them guilty until proven innocent in your eyes? If your first thought is “what a fat lazy fuck” without knowing their story? That seems unnecessarily judgmental, and I can’t help but wonder if it comes from a place of insecurity, maybe left over from your own history with weight

    • nkiru@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I would’ve thought you would’ve learned kindness out of that ordeal. Didn’t people make fun of you? How’d it feel, even if you knew they were right? It’s just rude and inappropriate. There’s no need. eve

    • GreenMario@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sure.

      But that doesn’t mean go out and harass fat people. Trust me we fucking know. You can’t lose weight instantly. Some of us may actually be working on it.

      Also fat people have the right to be happy. People hating on “happy at any size” is just being assholes for the sake of it.

      • LUHG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t believe that anybody deep down is happy at being fat. That’s a lie and they know it.

        Nobody I know who’s lost weight has said they were happy with the Extra weight.

        • KuroJ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Oh I’ve actually been told by fat people that there’s no way that I actually enjoy working out and that I’m forcing myself to go to the gym while not enjoying it.

          Guess it’s weird I like improving my physique and enjoying seeing how I can reach new goals ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • limeaide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Hmm I think that for a lot of people, it wasn’t a choice to get fat. I know a lot of kids who are already obese and they aren’t even in their teens.

      However, I do think it’s a choice once you’ve realized it and have the ability to actually do something about it.

      Kinda related but unrelated: it irks me when someone comments how easy it is for me to be skinny, bc it isn’t. As a previously underweight person, I think gaining and losing weight are just as hard. I had to control my diet, work out, and have a lot of self control to not lose the habits I was building. I folded and stagnated a lot, and yeah it was demotivating but I still had to make a choice to keep going.

  • Sombyr@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 months 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.

      • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        And their response to LGBT+ issues, and their response to Trump’s crimes, and…

        Yeah, no. Republicans have had more than enough opportunities to redeem themselves. There is no remaining doubt to give them the benefit of.

    • Elderos@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It is very hard to have rational disccussion when people disagree on the basic observable facts, ignore the “rules” of debate, and are struggling with critical thinking. You can meet difficult people on all the political spectrum, but certain idealogy attract more difficult people, and certain stuff mainstream conservatives believe right now has absolutely no basis in reality.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months 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.

  • jsveiga@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months 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.

  • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Blaming slow drivers for your dangerous driving to pass them immediately and dangerously has the same energy as a rapist blaming what the victim was wearing: The other person made me do it. I have no agency over my own reactions.

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

  • BynaD@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

    • val@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      wouldn’t say this is an unpopular opinion. many people share your pov