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
    3
    ·
    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.

  • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    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

    • GreenMario@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year 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.

  • El_guapazo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 days 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.

  • 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

    • CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      Here’s an unpopular opinion: you don’t need any labels at all. You love who you live, you fuck who you fuck, you can advertise what you’re looking for if you want to but all this identity business obscures the reality that humans are far more diverse and interesting than the boxes we build for ourselves.

      Most people who call themselves straight would fuck someone from their own gender if there weren’t cultural expectations against it hammered into them from and early age. Most people who call themselves gay would wander if they found someone they connected with. Very few of us rest at one end of any spectrum or matrix. Most of us are somewhere in the middle, and far more mobile than we might realize.

    • Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      As a pansexual I feel that Bi and Pan have enough differences to both be justified while the others are micro labels (not invalid, just less useful as labels).

      But I recognize I’m drawing that line very conveniently for myself.

    • doggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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…

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

  • 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.

  • tweeks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Euthanasia should be available for anyone at any age. You don’t choose to be born, life has no inherent value, suffering is strictly personal. Suicide is a terrible option with lots of drama, an extremely high failure rate and lifelong treatments or medication that are seen as the solution by society is a conservative convulsion of keeping people alive under any circumstances.

    We could set up three sessions with a therapist, to keep people from losing loved ones too fast. But honestly, to me that would feel patronizing. That other people find it important someone stays alive is their problem. If it hurts them too much they can do the same.

    There is joy in life and that’s beautiful, but on a scale suffering has the possibility to be more intense. Let people die without drama, let them say goodbye if they want with a ceremony, let them choose.

    That’s the next step in the mentality of a modern civilization. It will fix the drama of wars, hunger and pain as you always have a simple painless solution if the suffering gets too heavy. Just end it, peacefully, whenever you want.

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

      It’s a very brave take, but I don’t think I can agree with you 100 percent. Some people have depression (we think of it as a disease), and younger people tend to be… immature that they make decisions impulsively and regretted their decisions later. Euthanasia is a one way road, there is of course no going back after you’re dead.

  • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • colonial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year 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.)

    • Stovetop@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think I understand what you’re getting at but just keep in mind that there are two sort of separate discussions in regards to that.

      The WHO and the health organization of various countries are usually pretty specific in their definitions. The “public health emergency” of COVID is over because:

      • There is no longer a need for a coordinated international effort.

      • The population is no longer largely at risk due to vaccinations/immunities.

      • The mortality rate has dropped significantly.

      But I don’t think anyone would deny that COVID is here to stay on a global scale. It’s just that the health systems of most countries are now equipped to manage it without all of the lockdown precautions.