I’m not a fan but I know they’re just trying to survive and they’re all pretty easy for me to avoid. Wasps especially are pollinators in a lot of places and almost everyone has an important role in the ecosystem. No there aren’t any species of animals that I would dedicate any time to hating even if they can be jerks sometimes
Lots are, but I think cats are very misunderstood animals. Both by owners and haters.
They’re very simple creatures, they’re not cunning, they don’t think they own you or judge you, and they’re not assholes on purpose, they’re just really simple-minded. Also they don’t “ignore” people or their owner on purpose, it’s just that the abstract concept of a “command” or an “order” fly over their head completely. That being said, cats are social as hell, and if you’re ok with having basically a big dumb cuddly creature dumber than a rat roam your house in exchange for love, cats are okay.
The U,S. Mail delivery system is owned by the Oligarch Cartel that also owns Congress and numerous govt. institutions. It’s nothing but an “ADS TO YOUR DOOR/mailbox” junk-mail delivery service. SHUT IT DOWN!!! It’s actual f*ing SPAM in physical form.
I swear, every square inch and cm of the United States is for sale. Disgusting. Disappointing.
I went outside just as my mailman got here the other day. He handed me my mail and was like, “more junk for ya. Sorry.” And then I immediately threw the mail away
Ordinary well-adjusted people with wealth and belief that the world that you bring your children into isn’t a doomed from the start. A lot of ‘well-adjusted’ people can’t afford to have kids, or they don’t believe that their kids will have anything to aspire to. I don’t want to be rude, and correct me if I’m wrong, but this comes of as any old Dick or Harry should have kids. For a lot of people in the west kids are simply out of the question if you plan to keep your current quality of life. Which is to say nice job! An actually unpopular opinion!
Also, this is the exact attitude a lot of us have an issue with. If you want to be a parent then that’s great! I fully support you in that decision and will do everything I can to help. So why can’t you support my individual decision to not have children?
My observation you’re responding to is neutral as regards providing support. I didn’t know that a) you need support, b) that you were looking here nor c) that a sentence with what amounts to a shower thought can so efficiently deprive you of some. I certainly support everyone’s decision to not have children while reserving the right to say they’re a great source of happiness and meaning in my life.
I’m in the same boat and my answer is very egocentric: I like the way life works around here: High standards for most things that are related to engineering and its applications, relative freedom to do what I like, same for everybody else, no matter the gender, a certain amount of caring for each other while ignoring each other’s quirks, at least in my rural corner of the country.
I don’t think all of this is going to survive a large influx of people from countries that work differently and I don’t like that idea.
We will need that influx though, to keep our age pyramid somewhat intact and we will get that influx because people are drawn to the higher standard of living and pushed by effects of climate change in their old homes. The only thing that could prevent that would be to have more humans raised along our existing line of values.
For a whole host of reasons. In summary, quality of life for those remaining is going to crater, together with some form of social collapse.
Most social insurances (e.g. pensions and welfare) depend on young, healthy, working people paying for those in need. As the population pyramid gets inverted, eventually this will become completely unsustainable. Meaning those who are young now will not be able to benefit from a pension in the future.
Health care costs are going to soar to unsustainable levels. To some extend, this has already happened. Again, old people tend to require health care a lot more frequently - even permanently, usually- than young people. As the population pyramid gets inverted, this means ever fewer young people have to care for ever more sick people. As an example, my country estimates that by 2050 we’ll need to spend 40% of GDP and 1 in 3 working people on health care if we want to keep the service level at today’s standards. That’s of course completely unrealistic. To some extent this is already starting to deteriorate.
Ever fewer people will have to maintain essential services. Think sanitation, sewage, construction, rail services and so on. Again, unsustainable.
The gerontocracy will mean society will become increasingly inflexible, rigid, and stuck in the past. Young people drive change, old people like to keep things as they are. Opinions don’t usually change. Instead, they die one funeral at a time.
The economic challenges caused by an aging population will require tough choices. But with the gerontocracy, such choices will likely not be made. Or they will only be passed on to next generations (who get no say in the matter, as they will be too small a voting bloc). Ultimately this will necessarily lead to some form of social collapse.
Holy shit I thought I was the only one. Monogamy is far and away the most toxic force in almost every relationship. It literally does nothing but breed jealousy and suspicion.
I think it works for some couples, but it should definitely be a more socially acceptable preference. Problem is, even people who agree on open relationship often end up being jealous and bitter about it. Jealousy is really hard to get out of the picture no matter what, is it such a strong human emotion.
Here’s an opinion that’s actually unpopular rather than simply controversial: domestic flights in the UK other than to Northern Ireland (which isn’t on the same island so fair enough) should be forbidden on the grounds their contribution to climate change cannot be justified.
Instead we should renationalise the railways by letting the franchises expire without renewing them and expand their capacity as far as we can. Instead of pissing around with HS2 we fuck the NIMBYs over with an Act of Parliament which they can’t swat away or delay and extend it all the way up to Scotland.
All roads in the UK that are currently 30mph limits should be lowered to 20mph, and those at 40 lowered to 30. There should be a systematic review of those at 50 whether they should be 40. National speed limit should be lowered by 10mph.
What’s the logic behind this? I’m all for making cities more walkable but when it comes to highway roads I think we should be addressing why a faster speed isn’t possible.
Risks increasing road fatalities due to fatigue since it takes 20+% longer to get places.
Still doesn’t address the issue of bad or poorly managed roads.
Still doesn’t meaningfully decrease car usage, since walkability and public transport ubiquity should be the goal.
3a. I want drivers licenses to be harder to attain so that it’s basically a formal qualification that is renewed every 3-5 years. Major penalties for poor driving, speeding and phone usage.
After public transport and walkability is ubiquitous, roads are immensely safer due to significantly less cars. The cars that are on the road only have skilled drivers at the wheel.
The increased journey time is to encourage people to find alternatives. It needs to be alongside improving public transport. If it it currently takes 6 by train from London to Edinburgh but 7 by car, you’re more tempted to drive than if the train to 4 hours and car took 10 hours.
less cars in the roads reduce their wear. Plus dedicated cycle paths narrowing them also do this. I also don’t think I even raised this as a point.
yes. You attack from both sides. But this is meant to be a controversial opinion so I just talked about the stick part of a carrot and stick approach.
Agree but I empathise a bunch of people need to carry stuff or use the car when they get to the destination. Hence still necessary and possible for those qualified to drive.
Wear on an unused car occurs still. Better just have as few as possible.
I don’t actually think we’re disagreeing on the need for change or the mechanism of getting there. I just want to be clear that speeds need to drop in towns especially on the narrow streets.
As an Australian I feel the same about my city. Needs to be walking, taxis and public transport only. Keep cars out of the central city.
I’m all for cheaper train travel but reducing the speed limit to achieve that is fucking stupid. How on earth did you come to that conclusion? Are you 6 years old?
As a tourist that recently drove around in England for two weeks, I wholly agree. The roads are way too narrow to justify the speed limits outside of the motorways.
Edit: also, why do you guys use half of the road for parking everywhere in towns?
Isn’t the old joke that the average speed of traffic London has been about 15mph since the 1800’s. (ie you’re not going any faster now than when horses were the main means of transport)
I dislike the white filling, but I feel like the black cookie has some mysterious aroma that makes it really attractive, something unlike anything else I’ve smelled (doesn’t remind me of burned cocoa).
Context: I’m a family medicine doctor, so this is based on my personal experience, but also that of colleagues.
I think the surge in people coming out as trans is a fad and (in our population) most are autistic people who don’t recognize how they feel and therefore think they are trans. Spoiler alert: once they transition, they still don’t know how they feel, but now they are more conflicted and psychiatric comorbidities worsen.
I also believe it does possibly can add a lot of harm to children. I can only explain my own anecdotal example. When I was young, I was abused and therefore developed sexuality early on. There was a time of a few years when I couldn’t feel anything because of the constant punishment and where I was sexually exploring my body. Even back then there was a lot of media and the thought of being a women was exciting (my abuse person was a women). If back then there had been the option to go to a doctor and transition, I had probably done it as to escape the abuse. There wasn’t, but if you then add media, people and encouraging parents who tell you “you must be trans”, this can very easily manipulate a kid, even young adult to do the step. Therefore I personally believe this whole topic isn’t researched enough and there are issues a lot of people fear to talk about.
Concluding I’m happy that I didn’t have the option to transition as I’m 100% a man, but sexual thoughts, better medical options and a supportive environment, would’ve easily pushed me to change my body. With the growing depression I developed since 5 years old (thankfully largely recovered sind 3 years), this might have pushed me over the edge, on days where I was suicidal and already had the bag of belongings in my hands, to jump of the next bridge.
Edit: I want to add that I’m no expert and therefore don’t see myself as the culprit of knowledge. If doctors decide otherwise that’s the opinion I go by. I’m also not American, so I can freely talk about this, without being caught up in the heated debate of your politics. I’m not advocating to be against transsexual or transgender. I’m pro LGBTQ but wanted to add my thoughts, despite people willing to silence me.
I changed the the text a bit up to make it sound less aggressive, as I totally understand that for some children the transition is necessary as to help them develop a healthy relationship with themselves and their body.
I don’t think I’m a rare case. Children get abused every day. We know by now that abuse leads to early sexualization and that children are easily manipulated by their parents and environment. To ignore that is stupid. People are too quickly in their judgment, to protect themselves from possible harm, this collides with the willingly bias of the every day person and is unscientific.
“Even back then there was a lot of media and the thought of being a women was exciting”
I’m sorry for your difficult upbringing, but this does not meet the criteria of gender dysphoria AT ALL. No serious physician would allow you as a teenager or adult to transition based on this.
Also, we know that over sexualized behaviour is unfortunately common in children who suffered abuse. But to conflate this with LBGT or specifically trans issues is heinous, one thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
Do you think the current research into gender transition doesn’t account for autism as a variable? There is a medical consensus for the current treatment for a reason. For a person to properly transition, they will have undergone years of psychology assessment and so on, seems to me that an autism diagnosis would immediately follow. Is there any evidence of correlation between trans individuals and autism? (There may well be literature on it, I’m genuinely asking).
Also, if that were the case (autism misdiagnosed as gender dysphoria etc etc) you wouldn’t have the robust literature with follow up surveys of individuals and how satisfied with their outcome they are. The outcomes of medical treatment of gender dysphoria are quite positive; if like you said, in the end they still don’t know how they feel, these outcomes would be vastly different.
This is not so much an unpopular opinion on something which might be ambiguous or up for debate, it’s an incorrect opinion which goes against evidence.
There’s nothing to support people mixing up autism and gender dysphoria since theyre wildly different things, but there is a correlation between being autistic and being lgbt. en.m.wikipedia.org/…/Autism_and_LGBT_identities
I get the feeling you’re personally offended by this, and if so, I’ll apologize as it was never my intention.
The above statement is just an observation myself and colleagues I’ve shared my concerns with did. It might be a coincidence, but nearly all our transitioned patients had a prior diagnosis for autism, and without exception all had psychiatric comorbidities.
This also seems to be in line with the (scarce) literature on the subject. (I.e. 12)
I hope I’m wrong and my patients are just exceptions, and that we won’t look back at these years with regret.
I’m not personally offended, don’t worry. I’m not part of the LGBT community myself, back when I was studying I looked into the literature around transition and the perceived hot controversy on the issue. You’ve touched on an important issue, which is that a large percentage of people who will end up transitioning have a lot of stressors which will end up severely impacting their mental health, not just the innate stress from gender dysphoria, but the lack of support from friends and family, ostracization, etc.
This helps explain the psychiatric comorbidities, like depressive and anxiety disorders.
It seems to me that the current medical pathway for trans patients is robust, and should weed out the odd patient with transient dysphoria or patients which have serious psychiatric issues that mistakenly led them down this path.
For those that go down the path, regret rates seem to always be between 1 and 2 per cent. At this point, we can accept these rates as statistically accurate, when we have data from thousands of individuals.
Your experience speaks to something more should voice.
I remember watching speedruns on YouTube back in the day. Very tight nit Community based on playing the same game over and over again as fast as possible. While watching the streams, you could tell the community had a higher than average autistic population.
As time went on more and more of them became Trans. It never made sense to me how an already niche community would then have such a high population of Trans members unless something else was going on. People seeking identity and not knowing better/ wanting to latch onto things they see online or around them.
This is not to discount Trans people or their struggles of course, too often I feel the vocal minority ruins it for the ones just trying to live their lives. 🤷♂️
It’s the closest translation of the Dutch “huisarts” that’s available.
“A general practitioner, commonly known as a family doctor or primary care physician, is a medical professional who focuses on providing general healthcare to patients. They often serve as the initial point of contact for individuals with medical concerns. General practitioners treat a wide range of health issues, offer preventive care, make diagnoses, and prescribe medications. When necessary, they refer patients to specialists for more specialized care. In essence, a general practitioner is a key figure in healthcare, playing a crucial role in managing individuals’ health.”
Queer person here. I have a number of friends who are trans, some that are gender neutral, and a number of different sexual orientations.
The vibe I’m getting is not necessarily that it’s trendy to be trans, but a lot of people realizing that they don’t have to all be all in one camp or the other (more gender neutral). Eg, some people realizing that they can wear whatever they like without judgment. A lot of people just being more relaxed and not necessarily all blue or all pink, haha. And sure, I’m sure things will settle over the decades, but in a similar vein to the civil rights movement, women’s suffrage, the gay rights movement, etc. It’ll fall out of favor with the internet’s eye of Sauron, and something else will be the new baby.
In other words, we aren’t seeing an uptick in more queer people. What we are seeing is people who have been guarded for awhile now feeling okay to be a bit more relaxed.
And for what it’s worth, a lot of people- many of my friends- aren’t interested in surgical transitions. Most just wanna live their lives with a couple of social changes and are happier than they’ve ever been. It’s kinda sweet to see someone who has always spoken in a monotone suddenly become cheerful and way brighter :)
We have small yappy dogs one one side of us as a loud as fuck motorcycle on the other side. The motorcycle is only a fucking 400cc thing too, but this dude apparently went to the dealer and was like “I need the exhaust which wakes up the entire neighborhood please.”
I have a beagle. He’s not too big and weighs 30lbs. He is the loudest and most vocal dog ever. He’ll just start screaming for no reason. So it’s not just big dogs that bark too much lol.
I love well trained big dogs. I hate poorly trained dogs and owners who can’t control them and don’t take responsibility for them. Or who bring their dogs into places where they shouldn’t be allowed for health and sanitation reasons.
i would call this unpopular in the linux community, if it isnt, i apologize in advance
Linux, foss and their “fight for privacy” is not a fight, we are simply being tolerated by the companys who actually hold all the money and power, dont kid yourself into thinking you are making a difference
these companys have put up cages all around us so large we are effectively in one already and if they truly wanted to, they could whatever data from you they want
so stop making people feel bad if they dont use either or dont care about something like it
dont kid yourself into thinking you are making a difference
I mean, I’m making a difference for myself. And we’re clearly big enough market for companies like Proton (the mail provider) to exist. I’m not thinking I’m actually changing the world or anything, I’m just less tracked and see less blatant examples of companies stealing from me. Obviously it’s not perfect, companies still have a ton of data on me, but it’s better than nothing.
so stop making people feel bad if they dont use either or dont care about something like it
The major mail companies could easily block emails from proton servers if they wanted to. The OP is right business could crack down on it all if they felt like it.
Trying to get people to change problematic behaviour, language, or opinion through yelling, or shaming is ineffective most of the time. Obviously I can’t expect people who belong to minorities to not be angry, not everyone can be Daryl Davis, but if you are white and don’t have a personal trauma, you should use more effective methods to correct people’s problematic behaviour.
Source: I was able to get my family to stop using the N word, and even my elderly father who doesn’t actually remember that it’s bad to use the N word has stopped using it thanks to this very simple technique: every time he says that word, stop the conversation and explain why this word is harmful and dangerous to use, don’t let them steer the conversation back. Being visibly angry with them will only make them dig in their heels and seek comfort with other people who are racist, making it more difficult to get them out.
Eventually they will subconsciously stop using that word, simply because this causes the conversation to be interrupted every time. So while I don’t punish them (can’t exactly tell my father to go to his room or something), the repeated inconvenience of having the conversation halted every time will get it in their head eventually.
I think this is the most effective method to correct problematic behaviour in adults.
I may be reading this wrong. But are you saying if you are white, you must behave a certain way(refrain from yelling or cursing, etc…but if you are a minority, it’s acceptable to do those things? Or have I totally missed what you are saying?
No. What I mean is that yelling and cursing is not effective at changing people’s behaviour so it is best to avoid that, but at the same time I can’t expect a black person who has suffered personally and directly from racism to remain composed and polite, while it is relatively easier for someone who isn’t from a minority group and never been a victim of to remain composed.
Given this is Lemmy/Reddit overspill I think the more unpopular opinion mentioned here would be “you shouldn’t be apathetic towards social problems and instead actually try to do something about them”
That’s not what I meant… I meant that the method of correcting problematic behaviour that I usually see from fellow progressive is ineffective, and that opinion seems to be unpopular among leftist circles.
I’ve been trying to be more willing to listen recently. Of course there are some people who don’t want to have a dialogue and will just post their anger and run. I don’t engage with these posts cause the user was looking for a reaction rather than a conversation.
But if someone is willing to explain why they feel the way they do about something, willing to hear criticism, and perhaps even ask me questions, I’m more likely to engage with them.
I am pro death penalty, and its not even a thing where I live. I’ve heard all the arguments against and I simply don’t agree. I also don’t consider it an ethical problem in regards to state sanctioned murder.
I am however in favour of painless executions and every effort should of course be made to ensure the event is as stress free as possible. I’m not a complete animal
that’s a tough one I can’t lie. if the death penalty is on the table, there really needs to be a better justice system with a much harder burden of proof involved
For sure, I agree it should be used only in cases where we’re absolutely sure that they did it. For example, mass shooters that are taken into custody mid-shooting and there is an absolutely undeniable chain of custody to ensure that the wrong person isn’t getting killed.
That doesn’t seem possible, at least in my country. The fact that we have executed people that turned out to be incocent later makes my stomach turn.
I don’t have a problem with the state killing people in principle. I just have a problem with the state killing the incorrect people (actual, guilty people that don’t deserve to live).
In a perfect world, I’d agree - if law officials were to perfectly convict guilty people each time, and if execution methods were absolutely flawless with painless/instant death. However, that’s not what happens in the real world.
There’s an amazing video by Jacob Geller on execution methods, where he talks about the history and the present of death sentences, but in short, not an insignificant amount of people get falsely convicted and then executed, and the execution methods US are using focus more on “appearing humane” rather than effective/painless, and the incompetence of the executors turning some of those executions into hours of agonizing pain.
Death penalty is final, there are no take backs. One mistake means a life is lost with no possible way to resolve it
Even life in prison, after decades, if fixed means you can give a person back some semblance of relief, especially if the prison system stops being punitive, but rehab based.
The whole point of being in jail, is to learn of your mistakes and not do it again. If you die, you don’t learn anything. The others do but that way of someone learning is quite cruel and not fitting in a democracy because fear is undemocratic.
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.
I acknowledge that social constructs are inherently “natural” as they develop over time and are shaped by their environment. Basically, they’ve followed the process of natural evolution.
However, it’s also our understanding that evolution does not result in the “best case scenario”, just something that vaguely fits the circumstances.
I think it’s perfectly valid to “dismiss” social norms in the pursuit of something better because a lot of social norms just developed by happenstance rather than having real thought or wider considerations worked into them.
While that’s true, gender norms has shifted due to the society progressing. Women no longer need to be baby factories and men don’t need to be emotionless food-providing machines.
There might come a time where those gender norms will be needed again for the survival of our species (like something apocalyptic that wipes most of us out), but until that happens, why shouldn’t women enjoy doing whatever they want because the society can support them?
It’s not that your premise is wrong, your conclusion is.
No his premise is wrong as are your examples. Men have never had to be emotionless providers. Ever. And women have not historically been baby factories. All throughout human history across tons of cultures men and women have served various purposes in society. Women only being birth machines is a result of patriarchal society influence from Europe during only a certain time period.
To expand on this, I say that the existence of transgender folks proves that there is biological reality to gender. Think about it, if it was just social conditioning, infants must be an agendered blank slate, with their identity constructed over time by conditioning. But some individuals just know from an early age that the gender that they were presumed to be is wrong. Not just wrong, but wrong, and they are most definitely something else. There’s clearly another force at work than nurture, which must be nature.
The fact that various people’s have had different social views on gender and sexuality and that it was literally beaten out of them by white Christians and Arab Muslims would definitely say that no, it’s not true that our gender norms are the result of sex chromosomes. Your viewpoint is completely ignorant of actual history
Add comment