"Chemicals" in food. Literally every substance, every food and people are composed of them. The common usage has bastardized the meaning and latched on to the naturalistic fallacy. Snake venom is natural. Cyanide is natural. Arsenic and Uranium are natural. Botulinum toxin is natural. Something being naturally occurring does not automatically make it good for you just as something being made in a lab does not equate to being bad for you.
I feel like that’s one of those things where the conversational use of chemicals and scientific use has drifted apart
There’s plenty of examples but the only one I can think of is evolution, like In every terrible sci-fi movie ever using evolution to describe the individual evil monster gaining some change
Anyways 100% agree with you tho
The word theory is another one.
I find myself thinking this a lot. Someone goes; "and that's my theory about..." And I'm like; that's not a theory, that's a hypothesis...
Like how some creationists try to dispell evolution by saying that it's only a theory.
AI. In the real world, AI is any computer process that can make decisions as if it were smart. Expert systems, genetic algorithms, hell even fuzzy logic. A smart lightbulb is artificially smart. Artificially intelligent.
In movies and bad tech blogs, AI means a sapient machine and that's why LLMs aren't actually AI.
Same thing with people thinking that organic food is healthier. Organic food might be good for the environment, but not necessarily the climate or your health.
I worked in produce as a quality inspector for a couple years. Organic generally just means lower quality for higher price. No one is regulating it as far as I know, they can just skip pesticides, do everything else the same and charge more for the same product that actually cost them less to produce. We refered to it as a hillarious scam when the boss wasnt around.
That depends on where you live though. Here in Denmark, as an example, we have a certificate called "Statskontrolleret økologisk" which basically translates to "Government-certified organic". There are specific guidelines and rules that need to be followed, to be allowed to use this seal on your product.
We have a similar system in the US. The US department of agriculture has a stamp they put on food that has strict criteria for what goes in it
I can count the ingredients on my hands, and the "processing" is like 4 steps max.
"Unga bunga me invent new process for food. It called cooking. Make less parasites in meat. Very good."
"Cooking bad, garg. We no want processed food."
A guy at a deli counter slicing cold cuts and assembling them into a sandwich is "processed food". Using the term as a health concern marker is meaningless.
Even Kraft Singles, the posterchild of "processed food", famously disallowed to legally call itself "cheese" on its packaging, what is it made of? What hellish process hath humanity wrought? Cheddar cheese, sodium citrate (a mundane variety of salt), and water. That's it.
It's not forbidden from being called "cheese" because it's a bastard concoction of mad scientist chemicals that approximate cheese to ruse consumers. It's simply cheese, literally watered down to the point that you can't call it cheese anymore.
All that the sodium citrate is doing in this situation is acting as a binder that helps the cheese solids hold on to the water. This action is what gives many dishes, sauces, and the like their smooth, creamy texture. But use the word for that -- "emulsifier" -- and suddenly people think you're trying to poison them, because that's a scary chemical word.
Why does this product exist? Because it offers a unique melty texture that people appreciate in certain contexts. It's a niche product with a niche function. Treat it like one.
tl;dw The chemicals used in chemotherapy are naturally occurring, and science uses what we know works. So when people say "you should use natural remedies", what they really mean is, you should use something:
we don't know whether it works
we know doesn't work
we know is actively harmful
And the first two categories aren't necessarily bad, an Epsom salt bath can feel really nice, but don't think it's a replacement for proper medical science.
I love when they compare food labels from two countries but don’t notice the ingredients are the same just described in different words or with different levels of verbosity based on the local regulations.
Have you heard about the chemical dihydrogen monoxide?! It's 100% fatal! Too much causes death, too little, death! Massively addictive.
On one hand I agree with you, the way "chemicals" are used in everyday speech differs from the text book definition.
On the other hand, if we take our heads out of our asses and stop the "well actually"s I kinda have to agree with being against "chemicals" in food. Arsenic is naturally occurring, sure, but at what concentration? Radioactive uranium is a naturally occurring element, but I would hardly call nuclear fallout something natural.
Cyclists, some people just see red when they came across cyclist at the road.
Cycle infrastructure, even.
Bike lanes are car infrastructure. We cyclists are perfectly within our rights to cycle in the middle of the lane at a speed comfortable for us. And it's safer for us to do that than hug the shoulder and risk getting clipped by an impatient driver. A bike lane gets us out of your way so you can drive the speed limit. It's for your benefit.
That's why it's hate for no reason!
The same hatred from the same haters for public transport too: if everyone else is in public transport there more room for you on the road.
It's a bizarrely prevalent attitude from a bizarrely large portion of car users.
We had some nice mini-traffic island things separating a cycleway on a road, drivers kept hitting them and damaging their cars. They complained and the council removed them despite it being obvious to anyone that they were doing extremely what they were supposed to do: stopping those idiots from hitting actual cyclists!
There's really no winning as a cyclist when most people are in cars. If you stop at all stop signs, and obey they right-of-way, people will yell at you and/or try to wave you through ahead of your turn dangerously. If you do an Idaho stop (which is the safest way to approach a stop, whether it's legal or not), people will honk and yell at you and possibly try to run you off the road.
I used to commute by bike a lot during rush hour. If there was a lineup of cars waiting at a red-light, and I just waited in line, people in cars behind me would honk at me as if me preventing them from being one cars-length further ahead in line would somehow affect them. If I filtered forward, like I should, people would actually edge their cars over to try and block me.
I think for the most part, it's misplaced anger from drivers who don't want to face the fact that they are the source of danger on roads. The worst bicycle collision is way less severe than a car crash. They also really hate when bicyclists can get anywhere faster than them, which is often the case because it shows them just how much time they waste being traffic.
If it were codified like this as law everywhere, people would accept it better. The rule breaking is what pisses a lot of people off. It would be much more predictable and safer too.
Trans people, seriously, they just want to live their lives in peace. They're not here to radicalise anything or to "trick" anyone. They just want to get on with their lives and be left alone.
the other replies to this comment reaaaally prove your point.
Are people really stupid enough to think that every single trans person is a loud screeching SJW?
Not to mention trans people are constantly under attack in most places and NEED to speak up.
Are people really stupid enough to think that every single trans person is a loud screeching SJW?
Even if they were so what? You have to be cynical about these things and figure out how much danger every given person represents. I am in far less danger from someone who yells loudly on Instagram compared to some proud boy marching on the street. One makes the internet kinda boring the other sets off bombs.
Furries. They're some of the nicest people ever. I'm a cosplayer and our worlds intersect a lot. They raise more money for charity than any group as small as they are, they're kind and accepting, and they're wicked talented. I trust Furries before muggles anyday
they're wicked talented
Sincere question: what specifically are their talents?
haven’t seen it in the thread yet, but (most) GMOs. The foods and technology aren’t the problem, it’s a solution to ending hunger. It’s the corporate interests that squash competition that’s the problem.
Nickelback. I mean they're not good but they're not really bad either, just a complete nonevent. They don't deserve the hate they get, they don't really deserve anything
Yeah, most of the hate is because they were super overplayed for a solid decade. For years the popular radio stations in my area didn't seem to play anything but Nickelback, green day, Lady Gaga, and pink. In a vacuum, they're fine. "How you remind me" is pretty good imo. I don't care for anything else from them. I've heard that their guitar player is actually really talented, but I haven't listened to them enough to know myself
Ah, the common paradox. Nobody wants to listen to Nickelback because it's overplayed, and nobody drives in New York because of all the traffic.
Conservatives seem to really hate electric cars for some reason. You'd think that for all the bitching they do regarding how Dark Brandon is personally hiking gas prices as part of his pinko commie agenda they'd like to stick it to him and stop paying for gas, but no, they take personal offense as if an electric car is somehow emasculating.
Honestly I don't understand how the right hasn't co-opted solar energy as a libertarian sort of grid independence thing. Seems like an easy win considering how much opportunity there is for politicians to throw subsidies at manufacturing in their states.
Because there aren't any "real" libertarians. Here's what happens when people actually try that stupid shit...
True survivalist/libertarian types have always loved solar power.
I don't know how solar lost its space age coolness, though, aside from active lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to try to kill it. For awhile solar was undoubtedly the power source of the future, the same thing that was on our space probes and satellites.
I have old oil-crisis era books and magazines on my shelf which absolutely loved solar power and billed it as the cheap energy solution for the common man. Somewhere we went wrong, and I think it was Reagan (in many ways...)
on the flip side, the further left you go the more you get people who hate cars in general
They are paid to "take personal offense" by lobbyists. They actually don't give two shits one way or the other about electric cars.
Idk I see a lot of stupid memes on conservative mocking groups on Facebook that they post. Perhaps they don't care.
The people in charge don't give a shit, but again, they're paid to care so they spew the hate to their followers who eat that shit up like a fat guy at an all you can eat buffet. They're really good at doing what they're told
Living in apartments.
In a lot of cities and towns living in apartments is seen as something that young adults who are renting short term do, and definitely not families or older couples.
Living in an apartment is considerably cheaper for my situation. I drive so much less, I pay for less power, and I have all this parkland around me.
I'm a car guy and I don't have a garage, that's annoying, but I commute by escooter now and drive on the weekends. It's much better.
Possums. They are immune to rabies and eat disease-spreading ticks. Salute your local possum
Women
Ethnicities
LGTBQ+
Drag Queens ( they are so entertaining)
Inconvenient truths
People who hang toilet paper the wong way
The French (cowards? They won more battles than anyone and have mastered the art of standing up for themselves)
Furries
Pineapple on pizza ( its good, Ill die on this hill)
Bronies
Caillou - not, that whiney snot deserves it
Marijuana
Ned Flanders
Bell bottoms
Satan ( the word in acient hebrew that we translated to Satan first appears in the book of Job, and would more accuratly be rendered as accuser of prosecutor. In the whole bible satan only goes after 10 people, and only when god tells satan to do it. Half way through satan is like 'um god? This guys like, broken now. Call it good?' But that rapscallion god was like 'no, he could still recover keep hitting him' and all that because god 'knew' Job was the most loyal and devout of his followers and his narcisism just couldnt help but make a grand display of proving it)
The pinapple on pizza one is weird to me, do these people not enjoy the idea of contrasting and complimentary flavours?
Savoury + sweet is a good combo and they dont seem to have a problem with tomato on pizza if they are getting technical over 'fruit' being an ingredient.
Nope, nope, nope. I hate it. Savory + sweet is not my jam. But, you do you. I don't care what other people eat.
Well, I hate pineapple and putting it into things just kind of ruins the thing you're adding it to anyway, so there's that.
Drag queens are wonderful. I finally got into Drag Race (just not a reality show viewer generally), and those queens will totally tug your heart strings if you just watch, and they're real artists too. RIP Chi Chi DeVayne.
Socialism/Communism/Anarchism. Barely anyone who actually understands them and the theory supporting them hates them, but tons of people have been fed Red Scare propaganda on the matter.
Well, those who most benefit from the status quo also understand those concepts quite well, but oppose them.
VEGANISM!
It's great for your health, we'd solve like 25% of the climate catastrophe overnight and it redeems billions of our fellow earthlings from the unimaginable suffering we inflict on them 24/7.
It's a ridiculously obvious and easy step we should take as a species, yet even hardcore leftists turn into irrational idiots and go full Bullshit Bingo when you bring it up. Because they have become accustomed to a taste.
Best thing I ever did for myself.
I think it’s less veganism and more how noisy and evangelical the loudest vegans are.
If you’d just said veganism, I’d agree, but you went on to emphatically tell us all the reasons why veganism is better. All legit, sure, but all the underlining gives it a particularly condescending tone. It’s not veganism that irritates me, it’s how condescending so many vegans become. Same camp as CrossFit for me. They’re both cultures I don’t really care to be a part of.
Eating animals is doing so much harm on a personal and global scale, yet people mostly choose to ignore it. So we get louder to confront your cognitive dissonance. I know it is annoying to you, I was annoyed too. But it's necessary and it's working. We're not a cult, quite the opposite: Vegans act according to scientific facts. Do you want to have a heart attack? No. Do you like torturing animals? No! Do want to wreck our planet to the point our children won't be able to live on it anymore? If course not. Veganism is not the only answer to all this, but no solution will suffice without us stopping to abuse animals. Think about that when you're out in the supermarket next time. It feels good to actually live up to you ethical values.
Also, #7 and #30, bingo!
I try to tell people to ditch beef as a compromise. I'm flexetarian myself and try to avoid meat, but beef is by far the worst offender when it comes to climate.
I think the average person doesn't want to give up all meat dairy and eggs all in one go. Removing beef is highly effective and a first step into a more conscious diet.
Eggs are a super food, too. They're cheap, delicious, and have dense nutrition. And, if you live anywhere close to rural, you can get farm-fresh eggs from ethically treated, well fed chickens for cheap.
We minimize our meat consumption, but we eat lots of eggs, and I don't see any ethical concerns with people's backyard chicken coops.
I have been toying with baking the last two months and vegan bread is a challenge. It isn't just taste. Take my basic bread and cut out milk+butter and all I have left is oil. The bread rises funny and the crust is totally different. Yes I have tried a good friend of mine has a dairy allergy.
Just saying it isn't like there is a ready solution I can grab.
Male abuse/SA victims. It's already not taken seriously enough when it happens to women, but when it happens to a guy they get put down even more and told to "man up", sometimes even by people who'd support them if the sexes were swapped.
Being one of those victims, it's honestly worse than that. My (very former) best friend went on to marry and raise kids with the woman that he knew SA'd me.
Even more so, it's turned into a hot button topic where people will be actively pissed of at you if you try to bring it up in discussion, calling it a "dog whistle" for nazi / anti-women ideology.
I'm a female queer SA survivor if they ever try that bullshit on me lmao.
I'm a cishet white male feminist and proud ally... And it took me years to process my own sexual assault as an assault. I was supposed to be happy that it happened and I got to fuck a pretty girl, right? So my confusing feelings about it must have been stupid and out of place, even though I was drunk and having an emotional breakdown when it happened. Even later on, I considered it a "bad decision" until a woman I was with challenged me to reverse the genders. She said something like "Imagine I'm drunk, having an emotional breakdown, abandoned by my friends and end up at the apartment of a man I barely know because they left without me and no one made sure I got home OK. This man starts kissing me, undresses me, lays me in his bed, starts going down on me and then puts his penis in me... with NO protection or discussion. He never asks if I'm OK with it, never asks if I want to, he just does this to me. What just happened to me??" And I was like "Oh yeah! That IS what happened to me!"
But NOW I frame it as a way toxic masculinity / patriarchy is bad /harmful to men and when I frame it that way I get ZERO hate. Toxic masculinity told me I was supposed to want that to happen to me, supposed to brag about it to my friends, supposed to collect the memory as a notch on my belt. The patriarchy told me it was my right and privilege to have a woman fuck me and take care of me like that. Toxic masculinity also told HER her behaviour was OK, that OBVIOUSLY a man would be into it, that I was getting lucky and I should be happy and excited a hot girl like her would want to do that to me. I forgave her easily, because I'm SURE she didn't process it as SA either... for the same bullshit cultural reasons.
Male SA survivors get hate because they they get pedestalized and used by MRA assholes as reasons to "bhut whut about..." at feminism. And THAT is unfortunately real. I don't think people hate Male SA survivors, I think they hate MRA bullshit and with good reason.
The idea of using public transportation. It's something for "them" (the poor), not for "me" (rich). Changes significantly from country to country, I suppose, but it's a prevalent thought here.
here
That certainly clears things up ...
Is that necessary to clear up though? It's a perfectly fine anecdotal statement that doesn't require exacts unless you're just trying to argue they're wrong. No one else is having problems responding with the information provided.
Brazil as a whole. Better?
Public transportation is good. Sanitation on public transportation in America is bad.
I got very adept at touching nothing while riding a bumpy subway car in New York, but even that couldn’t always save me from the puddle of piss that ran like a heat seeking stream from the legs of the mentally ill.
Idk at least in the US, riding a train is a nice experience. I liked it. But riding busses is often rather unpleasant. But I only have limited experience to only a portion of the US.
I noticed in the States that if its a bus, its a chariot for the poor. If its a train, its for everyone.
I am by no means poor and I save a lot of money by not having a car, but the fact of the matter is that people give me rides more than I would like. Even in Portland, a city with relatively good transit for its size given that it's in the US, most of the city is still quite inaccessible.
I think the issue is with normalizing unhealthy bodies. idc how you look as long as you're healthy, but society is becoming increasingly accepting of obviously unhealthy lifestyles and bodies. It's no better than anorexia.
Yeah, being fat shouldn't be a qualifier for anything IMHO. Like, let people live their lives in peace! There are pleasant and unpleasant fat people, as there are thin, so why does weight have to do with anything?!
It is baffling to me we have to work so hard to humanize fat persons. Fat bias is so ingrained in our culture people think is ok.
Some of the fat people I've worked with were so much more hard working than others. But on other hand
some customers I've dealt with were the worst customers. There was a notorious mother daughter duo that my co workers labeled the "Thunder Cunts". The sad part is they had kids that probably.lived a life of hell.
Satanists get persecuted a lot; although, they do a lot to protect religious freedom.
It's important to note that when you hear a story about Satanists using freedom of religion to install a statue of baphomet in a public space, or citing religious freedom acts to protect safe access to abortion, you're hearing about the Satanic Temple. When you hear about Satanists practicing "chaos magick" or talking about how liking blue cheese means you're gay, you're hearing about the Church of Satan. Here's a handy reference from TST:
I don't enjoy his flavor... but the dude is just living his best life and gets an absurd amount of hate. It's actually really funny to me how disproportional the hate is, but I sometimes feel bad for him.
I'll forever get three people mixed up: Guy Fieri, Gordon Ramsey, and Anthony Bourdain. I would need to see all of their pictures side by side to distinguish them one from the other. (RIP Mr. Bourdain)
It is literally a font. Sometimes when some corporate partner is annoying me I will pdf lock a document, with a signature, to them in comic sans.
It's also supposed to be an accessible/helpful font for dyslexics.
That's a happy accident not an intentional feature of the font. I think modern fonts that specifically target dyslexia are preferred, I've heard good stuff about https://opendyslexic.org/
Caring about people who are different from yourself
furries
While I agree and have no problem with furries, I think the issue is people seeing, what a lot of people in their own community see as linked to a sexual kink, being brought out into public spaces.
"Sexual attraction to furry characters is a polarizing issue. In one survey with 4,300 furry respondents, 37% answered that sexual attraction is important in their furry activities, 38% were ambivalent, and 24% answered that it has little or nothing to do with their furry activities."
"Another survey at a furry convention in 2013 found that 96.3% of male furry respondents reported viewing furry pornography, compared with 78.3% of female; males estimated 50.9% of all furry art they view is pornographic, compared with 30.7% of females."
So like clearly there is a large sexual component to the fandom, and I think it weirds people out and makes people uncomfortable when they see these people wearing their fur suits out in public. Which again to be clear is not something the entire community does or even tolerates, but there's enough people who do so that it's become part of the cultural zeitgeist.
But it's also just the fact that it's so far from normal vanilla experiences. Everyday people think role playing sexually is already adventurous and out there. Now add big animal suits that are typically associated with mascots for entertaining children and I think anyone can see why everyday people think it's weird.
I don't understand the furry thing. If anyone wants to explain it that would be cool.
I've gone to lgbtq+ bars and sometimes 1 or two people will have leather dog masks on. I don't understand it though. Is it a sub/Dom thing? I'm kinda new to to the LGBTQ+ culture.
I don't think those are necessarily related.
Furries are just people who like animal mascot type characters and made a whole subculture around that.
They chose to be commercially popular. They CAN absolutely shred, they ARE very talented. But they chose the top 40 route and are laughing all the way to the bank.
Everyone has a price, if you're an artist and you havent "sold out" its because nobody offered you enough money.
Music is a medium and playing is a craft. Some people play to express themselves in artistic ways and others play to make a living. It's all music, even when it's not art.
Nobody hates the guy who paints walls for a living for not being Picasso, but when it comes to music, everyone looks at any guy with a guitar expecting him to be the next artistic genius.
Sometimes he's just there to play three chords, get paid and go home.
I don't really like Nickelback's music, but if I ever need a house painted, I'd call them before calling someone who hasn't "sold out". I think that's their appeal.
The "sold out" thing bothers me sometimes, yes the ARE bands who come from less popular genres towards more mainstream sound because thats where they found commercial success and wanted/needed that money to keep doing what they do.
But there are also many bands who change genres and sound over time and some bands just enjoy playing that kind of 'radio friendly' music. Personally i feel like nickleback are in the 'we just like this kind of music' category.
(Personally I cant stand nicklebacks genre, so no bias here)
Oh they deserve it, just not because of their music. I used to hang with a few guys that grew up in the same town, the stories they would tell...
do tell
They were always taking photographs of everything. Ugh.
There's always atleast two sides to each story and more often than not the truth is somewhere in the middle. If you think something is clear-cut you're almost guranteed to be mistaken and misinformed and many of your dearest beliefs are totally wrong.
I think social media, particularly Twitter, has bred this. Twitter is designed in a way that makes it impossible to have an actual structured debate and instead encourages short and unambiguous statements which cannot possibly accurately encapsulate an issue
encourages short and unambiguous statements which cannot possibly accurately encapsulate an issue
Conservatives in a nutshell. (I'll add the /s here for anyone not getting the joke that I'm doing the exact thing we're talking about)
I needed that /s, lol.
Because isn't that literally what conservatives do? Pick wedge issues then make quick soundbites about "common sense" "solutions" that align with simple black & white thinking and conservative values?
Yes, social media has destroyed nuance. Recognizing that a person can understand a position without believing that position is also gone. And people are often performing for likes and “ratio” and discussing in bad faith and being intentionally obtuse in the hopes of getting more attention.
Optical discs (blu-rays, DVDs, cds, etc...). I hate that I have to justify buying one or having a collection.
How dare you store media on a reflective plate?!
Non-monogamists. Not referring to simply polyamorists or even relationship anarchists, but non-monogamists in general. When I saw LGBT equality unfold in the first world, I thought "yay we're finally throwing off those norms" but here we are a decade or so later and polyamory still gets everyone saying "meh". The only time I've ever seen polyamorists in late night media was in an episode of The Resident, and it was used to illustrate the man as a cult leader, which tied into the show like pineapple ties into pizza (I do not miss that show). But you have an LGBT couple in every five episodes.
I think this one is tough. I know a few people that consensual non-monogamy has worked out well for (long term), but most of the people that I know who tried it out it hasn't gone well. So I'm not against it in theory, but it comes with a lot of caveats. I don't personally know anyone who began a monogamous relationship, transitioned to poly, and had it end well. I tend to think of this scenario as a sign of relationship trouble, or a cause of it. Maybe it's not polyamory's fault that so many people in relationship trouble are drawn to it.
I know a lot of people for whom monogamy hasn't turned out well, too. Lots of divorces and broken hearts. If you think of all the relationships that don't work out, the ones that do are miracles.
That's fair for sure. I do think I've lived long enough to know a few predictors of failed relationships though, and if someone tells me they're opening up the relationship, then I expect them to be done within a year.
It's pretty common to the point of being cliché that "we opened up out relationship" will fail. Usually the people involved are going to come at it in an extremely hierarchical way. Often there are existing problems that aren't being addressed. It's almost at the same tier as "let's have a baby to save our relationship"
People who are non monogamous from the start I expect have similar success rates as anyone else.
I don’t “meh” is hate. Just don’t think people are interested in non-monogamous relationships. I find it funny though because people still cheat and we have a high divorce rate, yet people still shame others for being promiscuous and desire to be in monogamous couples.
Yeah, I understand not wanting it in one's own relationship, but other people should be allowed to do whatever they want. I don't understand getting upset at a polyamorous couple. If you don't like it then just don't do it yourself
Yeah I'm sure this is for no reason
There’s a ‘polyamorous’ couple in You and they’re a terrible representation of polyam. They’re more swinger, which I know a lot of and they’re cool, but not the same.
Polyamory is wildly misunderstood and gets a lot of negative feedback as a result in my experience, and while I know it’s not for everyone, ENM is a solution that would let a lot of people be a lot happier than they are today.
I know you probably already hate me for mentioning it, but foot fetishes. It's a very common fetish people have and I don't think people should be ashamed of it. It's not even the weirdest fetish out there when it comes down to it. I understand the stigma comes from weird dudes asking girls for feet pics in creepy ways and I feel like that's reasonable. But most of us are just regular people just trying to live our best life. I used to feel comfortable telling women I'm with that I have a foot fetish and most of them were even down to give it a try. Nowadays I'm too embarrassed or ashamed to even mention it and when I do I get shot down more often than before because of this stigma. I'm more comfortable these days telling someone that I'm bisexual than telling someone I like feet. Which I guess is a win for the gay part of me, but it still sucks.
I'm not into that at all (tbh I find feet kinda disgusting) but I've never seen it as something really weird because it really isn't that weird.
You should avoid judgemental sexual partners anyways. Foot fetishes are considered "weird" if that's how you phrase it. Generally speaking, it's not that uncommon. Don't open up with a partner about kinks unless you trust them not to run their mouth.
In that regard I definitely agree with you. It could even just be the people I associate with. If anything the people that have given me the most shit for it are other guys that I have as friends.
I spent some time explaining amputee fetish to my CW the other day (which is actually called body identity integrity disorder). I'm just glad there are people who like their limbs and appendages attached.
Pit-bulls. Most of their bad reputation comes from organizations that campaign against their very existence and people will quote pit-bull bite statistics with the same lack of irony as a white nationalist quoting FBI crime statistics about people of color.
I worked as an insurance agent. In the states I had my P&C licenses in, we were legally required to base rates on data. i.e statistically how much the company paid out in claims given certain factors. One of the things we based rates on was the breeds of dog people owned. Pitbulls and certain other dog breeds do not just have a bad reputation because people irrationally fear/hate them, they actually do pose a greater risk. Just like teenagers by and large, aren't as safe drivers. It isn't "fair" in that the dog didn't choose to be the breed it is and some of them really are good dogs but statistically, averaged over the whole, they are more of a risk than other dog breeds are.
How many owners are morons that wanted cool mean dog though. I've known dog owners that get those breeds specifically and they have no understanding of how to treat a dog. Like they'll get a working dog and an cage it all day then wonder why it's aggressive. I'd like to know the difference. Because too many people get dogs for looks and don't actually give a fuck a about the dogs soul.
Sorry if I come off aggressive, I just talk like that... I'm genuinely curious about this.
Sure but then the problem is moron owners, not the dog or it's breed. Those morons could be just as cruel to a German Shepherd, Boxer, Rottweiler, Presa Canario, Bullmastiff, etc. Nature vs Nurture I guess.
Okay, I'm trying to understand your argument here. Are you saying that pitbulls are being racially profiled and that information from other dogs aren't being collected or that bites of the same severity by other dogs aren't being correctly gathered or are bring suppressed? And, if so, what are the factors that should be taken into account when discussing dog bites or dog aggression?
The other user who responded to you, @evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world, does a good job of analyzing the core idea here. To quote Benjamin Disraeli, there's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Black people are no more "innately inclined towards criminality" than a pit-bull is innately inclined towards mauling people. Where people of color have been historically over policed, profiled by the criminal justice system, and generally set up to have a higher rate of criminal statistics than other ethnic groups, pit-bulls face similar statistical problems. Bite statistics are often self-reported by people who either witnessed a dog attack or who were themselves victims of one. Identifying a dog's breed by sight, especially for mixed breed dogs, is nearly impossible, and more error prone than accurate. And for a pound, any "big dog with a blocky head" immediately gets labeled as a pit-bull, even if it has literally no pit-bull DNA. These dogs are routinely adopted by people who explicitly train a dog to be mean to people, as opposed to socializing them. The fact that they also have this reputation as guard dogs or attack dogs exacerbates their reputation.
"Chemicals" in food. Literally every substance, every food and people are composed of them. The common usage has bastardized the meaning and latched on to the naturalistic fallacy. Snake venom is natural. Cyanide is natural. Arsenic and Uranium are natural. Botulinum toxin is natural. Something being naturally occurring does not automatically make it good for you just as something being made in a lab does not equate to being bad for you.
I feel like that’s one of those things where the conversational use of chemicals and scientific use has drifted apart
There’s plenty of examples but the only one I can think of is evolution, like In every terrible sci-fi movie ever using evolution to describe the individual evil monster gaining some change
Anyways 100% agree with you tho
The word theory is another one.
I find myself thinking this a lot. Someone goes; "and that's my theory about..." And I'm like; that's not a theory, that's a hypothesis...
Like how some creationists try to dispell evolution by saying that it's only a theory.
I just say "so is gravity"
AI. In the real world, AI is any computer process that can make decisions as if it were smart. Expert systems, genetic algorithms, hell even fuzzy logic. A smart lightbulb is artificially smart. Artificially intelligent.
In movies and bad tech blogs, AI means a sapient machine and that's why LLMs aren't actually AI.
Same thing with people thinking that organic food is healthier. Organic food might be good for the environment, but not necessarily the climate or your health.
I worked in produce as a quality inspector for a couple years. Organic generally just means lower quality for higher price. No one is regulating it as far as I know, they can just skip pesticides, do everything else the same and charge more for the same product that actually cost them less to produce. We refered to it as a hillarious scam when the boss wasnt around.
That depends on where you live though. Here in Denmark, as an example, we have a certificate called "Statskontrolleret økologisk" which basically translates to "Government-certified organic". There are specific guidelines and rules that need to be followed, to be allowed to use this seal on your product.
We have a similar system in the US. The US department of agriculture has a stamp they put on food that has strict criteria for what goes in it
My least favorite is "it's processed"
I can count the ingredients on my hands, and the "processing" is like 4 steps max.
"Unga bunga me invent new process for food. It called cooking. Make less parasites in meat. Very good."
"Cooking bad, garg. We no want processed food."
A guy at a deli counter slicing cold cuts and assembling them into a sandwich is "processed food". Using the term as a health concern marker is meaningless.
Even Kraft Singles, the posterchild of "processed food", famously disallowed to legally call itself "cheese" on its packaging, what is it made of? What hellish process hath humanity wrought? Cheddar cheese, sodium citrate (a mundane variety of salt), and water. That's it.
It's not forbidden from being called "cheese" because it's a bastard concoction of mad scientist chemicals that approximate cheese to ruse consumers. It's simply cheese, literally watered down to the point that you can't call it cheese anymore.
All that the sodium citrate is doing in this situation is acting as a binder that helps the cheese solids hold on to the water. This action is what gives many dishes, sauces, and the like their smooth, creamy texture. But use the word for that -- "emulsifier" -- and suddenly people think you're trying to poison them, because that's a scary chemical word.
Why does this product exist? Because it offers a unique melty texture that people appreciate in certain contexts. It's a niche product with a niche function. Treat it like one.
I really liked this post by Hank Green regarding "natural remedies".
tl;dw The chemicals used in chemotherapy are naturally occurring, and science uses what we know works. So when people say "you should use natural remedies", what they really mean is, you should use something:
And the first two categories aren't necessarily bad, an Epsom salt bath can feel really nice, but don't think it's a replacement for proper medical science.
I love when they compare food labels from two countries but don’t notice the ingredients are the same just described in different words or with different levels of verbosity based on the local regulations.
Have you heard about the chemical dihydrogen monoxide?! It's 100% fatal! Too much causes death, too little, death! Massively addictive.
On one hand I agree with you, the way "chemicals" are used in everyday speech differs from the text book definition.
On the other hand, if we take our heads out of our asses and stop the "well actually"s I kinda have to agree with being against "chemicals" in food. Arsenic is naturally occurring, sure, but at what concentration? Radioactive uranium is a naturally occurring element, but I would hardly call nuclear fallout something natural.
Cyclists, some people just see red when they came across cyclist at the road.
Cycle infrastructure, even.
Bike lanes are car infrastructure. We cyclists are perfectly within our rights to cycle in the middle of the lane at a speed comfortable for us. And it's safer for us to do that than hug the shoulder and risk getting clipped by an impatient driver. A bike lane gets us out of your way so you can drive the speed limit. It's for your benefit.
That's why it's hate for no reason!
The same hatred from the same haters for public transport too: if everyone else is in public transport there more room for you on the road.
It's a bizarrely prevalent attitude from a bizarrely large portion of car users.
We had some nice mini-traffic island things separating a cycleway on a road, drivers kept hitting them and damaging their cars. They complained and the council removed them despite it being obvious to anyone that they were doing extremely what they were supposed to do: stopping those idiots from hitting actual cyclists!
There's really no winning as a cyclist when most people are in cars. If you stop at all stop signs, and obey they right-of-way, people will yell at you and/or try to wave you through ahead of your turn dangerously. If you do an Idaho stop (which is the safest way to approach a stop, whether it's legal or not), people will honk and yell at you and possibly try to run you off the road.
I used to commute by bike a lot during rush hour. If there was a lineup of cars waiting at a red-light, and I just waited in line, people in cars behind me would honk at me as if me preventing them from being one cars-length further ahead in line would somehow affect them. If I filtered forward, like I should, people would actually edge their cars over to try and block me.
I think for the most part, it's misplaced anger from drivers who don't want to face the fact that they are the source of danger on roads. The worst bicycle collision is way less severe than a car crash. They also really hate when bicyclists can get anywhere faster than them, which is often the case because it shows them just how much time they waste being traffic.
what's an Idaho stop?
If you are on a bike, you treat stop signs as yields, and red lights as stop signs. Iit has been shown to be safer.
If it were codified like this as law everywhere, people would accept it better. The rule breaking is what pisses a lot of people off. It would be much more predictable and safer too.
But not the cyclist as the cycle right through it.
Except Berliner cyclists. They scare me.
Trans people
But... bathrooms!!! With the children!!! /s
A lot of that is just unavoidable lookism sadly, maybe I'm too doomer
At the individuated level, it likely plays a part, but it's got nothing to do with the systemic institutional hatred
Women.
Misogyny is extremely widespread and socially acceptable.
Add men to the list.
Misandry is also extremely widespread and socially acceptable.
IMHO both groups have bad apples. In conservative societies, women are often mistreated. In modern/contemporary societies men are often misstreated.
adult men are treated fine in modern societies, it's boys/teenagers who are feeling increasingly out of place and are turning to misogyny as an outlet
Trans people, seriously, they just want to live their lives in peace. They're not here to radicalise anything or to "trick" anyone. They just want to get on with their lives and be left alone.
the other replies to this comment reaaaally prove your point.
Are people really stupid enough to think that every single trans person is a loud screeching SJW?
Not to mention trans people are constantly under attack in most places and NEED to speak up.
Even if they were so what? You have to be cynical about these things and figure out how much danger every given person represents. I am in far less danger from someone who yells loudly on Instagram compared to some proud boy marching on the street. One makes the internet kinda boring the other sets off bombs.
Furries. They're some of the nicest people ever. I'm a cosplayer and our worlds intersect a lot. They raise more money for charity than any group as small as they are, they're kind and accepting, and they're wicked talented. I trust Furries before muggles anyday
Sincere question: what specifically are their talents?
Setting up/maintaining network infrastructure, coding, providing orgasms, UX design.
One of those is not like the others...
Damn design work.
Diverting attention from other nerdy/niche groups who don't seem weird at all in comparison?
generally furries are really good creatives in a wide variety of differnent areas
Art, animation, etc. See furry art to know more.
No, thank you.
I saw on YT a furry that held several patents for their mask
the US military uses a personal cooling vest that was invented by a furry to keep cool in his fursuit
Reading this not as a list but as a sentence makes it crazy specific.
Wow. That is dark as hell.
But I laughed at your comment.
Oh... Oh nooooo.
Nuke the unborn disabled child sex workers for world peace!
Yeah but children are fucking insane
People need to stop being children
Lol. Fair enough.
haven’t seen it in the thread yet, but (most) GMOs. The foods and technology aren’t the problem, it’s a solution to ending hunger. It’s the corporate interests that squash competition that’s the problem.
Nickelback. I mean they're not good but they're not really bad either, just a complete nonevent. They don't deserve the hate they get, they don't really deserve anything
Yeah, most of the hate is because they were super overplayed for a solid decade. For years the popular radio stations in my area didn't seem to play anything but Nickelback, green day, Lady Gaga, and pink. In a vacuum, they're fine. "How you remind me" is pretty good imo. I don't care for anything else from them. I've heard that their guitar player is actually really talented, but I haven't listened to them enough to know myself
Ah, the common paradox. Nobody wants to listen to Nickelback because it's overplayed, and nobody drives in New York because of all the traffic.
"All the right reasons" is a solid album by them. Nothing groundbreaking or unique in terms of sound but it's an enjoyable listen.
Also a phrase that sums up their entire career. And that's fine. They're like the musical equivalent of comfort food.
Striking workers.
Conservatives seem to really hate electric cars for some reason. You'd think that for all the bitching they do regarding how Dark Brandon is personally hiking gas prices as part of his pinko commie agenda they'd like to stick it to him and stop paying for gas, but no, they take personal offense as if an electric car is somehow emasculating.
Honestly I don't understand how the right hasn't co-opted solar energy as a libertarian sort of grid independence thing. Seems like an easy win considering how much opportunity there is for politicians to throw subsidies at manufacturing in their states.
Because there aren't any "real" libertarians. Here's what happens when people actually try that stupid shit...
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling
Guy made the story into a book, you may have heard of it. "A Libertarian Walks into a Bear"
They have lol: https://4patriots.com/products/patriot-power-generator-1800
True survivalist/libertarian types have always loved solar power.
I don't know how solar lost its space age coolness, though, aside from active lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to try to kill it. For awhile solar was undoubtedly the power source of the future, the same thing that was on our space probes and satellites.
I have old oil-crisis era books and magazines on my shelf which absolutely loved solar power and billed it as the cheap energy solution for the common man. Somewhere we went wrong, and I think it was Reagan (in many ways...)
on the flip side, the further left you go the more you get people who hate cars in general
They are paid to "take personal offense" by lobbyists. They actually don't give two shits one way or the other about electric cars.
Idk I see a lot of stupid memes on conservative mocking groups on Facebook that they post. Perhaps they don't care.
The people in charge don't give a shit, but again, they're paid to care so they spew the hate to their followers who eat that shit up like a fat guy at an all you can eat buffet. They're really good at doing what they're told
Living in apartments.
In a lot of cities and towns living in apartments is seen as something that young adults who are renting short term do, and definitely not families or older couples.
Living in an apartment is considerably cheaper for my situation. I drive so much less, I pay for less power, and I have all this parkland around me.
I'm a car guy and I don't have a garage, that's annoying, but I commute by escooter now and drive on the weekends. It's much better.
Possums. They are immune to rabies and eat disease-spreading ticks. Salute your local possum
Opossum
Both are correct.
Oh lots of things
Women
Ethnicities
LGTBQ+
Drag Queens ( they are so entertaining)
Inconvenient truths
People who hang toilet paper the wong way
The French (cowards? They won more battles than anyone and have mastered the art of standing up for themselves)
Furries
Pineapple on pizza ( its good, Ill die on this hill)
Bronies
Caillou - not, that whiney snot deserves it
Marijuana
Ned Flanders
Bell bottoms
Satan ( the word in acient hebrew that we translated to Satan first appears in the book of Job, and would more accuratly be rendered as accuser of prosecutor. In the whole bible satan only goes after 10 people, and only when god tells satan to do it. Half way through satan is like 'um god? This guys like, broken now. Call it good?' But that rapscallion god was like 'no, he could still recover keep hitting him' and all that because god 'knew' Job was the most loyal and devout of his followers and his narcisism just couldnt help but make a grand display of proving it)
The pinapple on pizza one is weird to me, do these people not enjoy the idea of contrasting and complimentary flavours?
Savoury + sweet is a good combo and they dont seem to have a problem with tomato on pizza if they are getting technical over 'fruit' being an ingredient.
Nope, nope, nope. I hate it. Savory + sweet is not my jam. But, you do you. I don't care what other people eat.
Well, I hate pineapple and putting it into things just kind of ruins the thing you're adding it to anyway, so there's that.
People who hang toilet paper the wong wayWait, there's a wrong way?
Yes, and I will die in this hill.
I told my wife ten years ago that if she hangs it so it’s close to the wall spiders will make their nest there.
After that day it’s always been hung correctly.
There are two right ways, and 1 wrong way.
The right way,
"I have a cat/dog/toddler"
The wrong way.
You are one of Them, aren't you?
T R I G G E R E D ! ! !
Drag queens are wonderful. I finally got into Drag Race (just not a reality show viewer generally), and those queens will totally tug your heart strings if you just watch, and they're real artists too. RIP Chi Chi DeVayne.
Gay people
Socialism/Communism/Anarchism. Barely anyone who actually understands them and the theory supporting them hates them, but tons of people have been fed Red Scare propaganda on the matter.
Well, those who most benefit from the status quo also understand those concepts quite well, but oppose them.
VEGANISM!
It's great for your health, we'd solve like 25% of the climate catastrophe overnight and it redeems billions of our fellow earthlings from the unimaginable suffering we inflict on them 24/7.
It's a ridiculously obvious and easy step we should take as a species, yet even hardcore leftists turn into irrational idiots and go full Bullshit Bingo when you bring it up. Because they have become accustomed to a taste.
Best thing I ever did for myself.
I think it’s less veganism and more how noisy and evangelical the loudest vegans are.
If you’d just said veganism, I’d agree, but you went on to emphatically tell us all the reasons why veganism is better. All legit, sure, but all the underlining gives it a particularly condescending tone. It’s not veganism that irritates me, it’s how condescending so many vegans become. Same camp as CrossFit for me. They’re both cultures I don’t really care to be a part of.
Eating animals is doing so much harm on a personal and global scale, yet people mostly choose to ignore it. So we get louder to confront your cognitive dissonance. I know it is annoying to you, I was annoyed too. But it's necessary and it's working. We're not a cult, quite the opposite: Vegans act according to scientific facts. Do you want to have a heart attack? No. Do you like torturing animals? No! Do want to wreck our planet to the point our children won't be able to live on it anymore? If course not. Veganism is not the only answer to all this, but no solution will suffice without us stopping to abuse animals. Think about that when you're out in the supermarket next time. It feels good to actually live up to you ethical values.
Also, #7 and #30, bingo!
I try to tell people to ditch beef as a compromise. I'm flexetarian myself and try to avoid meat, but beef is by far the worst offender when it comes to climate.
I think the average person doesn't want to give up all meat dairy and eggs all in one go. Removing beef is highly effective and a first step into a more conscious diet.
Eggs are a super food, too. They're cheap, delicious, and have dense nutrition. And, if you live anywhere close to rural, you can get farm-fresh eggs from ethically treated, well fed chickens for cheap.
We minimize our meat consumption, but we eat lots of eggs, and I don't see any ethical concerns with people's backyard chicken coops.
I have been toying with baking the last two months and vegan bread is a challenge. It isn't just taste. Take my basic bread and cut out milk+butter and all I have left is oil. The bread rises funny and the crust is totally different. Yes I have tried a good friend of mine has a dairy allergy.
Just saying it isn't like there is a ready solution I can grab.
Vegan.bingo that’s amazing I’m gonna just refer to that for every one of those conversations from now on
trans people
Male abuse/SA victims. It's already not taken seriously enough when it happens to women, but when it happens to a guy they get put down even more and told to "man up", sometimes even by people who'd support them if the sexes were swapped.
Being one of those victims, it's honestly worse than that. My (very former) best friend went on to marry and raise kids with the woman that he knew SA'd me.
Even more so, it's turned into a hot button topic where people will be actively pissed of at you if you try to bring it up in discussion, calling it a "dog whistle" for nazi / anti-women ideology.
I'm a female queer SA survivor if they ever try that bullshit on me lmao.
I'm a cishet white male feminist and proud ally... And it took me years to process my own sexual assault as an assault. I was supposed to be happy that it happened and I got to fuck a pretty girl, right? So my confusing feelings about it must have been stupid and out of place, even though I was drunk and having an emotional breakdown when it happened. Even later on, I considered it a "bad decision" until a woman I was with challenged me to reverse the genders. She said something like "Imagine I'm drunk, having an emotional breakdown, abandoned by my friends and end up at the apartment of a man I barely know because they left without me and no one made sure I got home OK. This man starts kissing me, undresses me, lays me in his bed, starts going down on me and then puts his penis in me... with NO protection or discussion. He never asks if I'm OK with it, never asks if I want to, he just does this to me. What just happened to me??" And I was like "Oh yeah! That IS what happened to me!"
But NOW I frame it as a way toxic masculinity / patriarchy is bad /harmful to men and when I frame it that way I get ZERO hate. Toxic masculinity told me I was supposed to want that to happen to me, supposed to brag about it to my friends, supposed to collect the memory as a notch on my belt. The patriarchy told me it was my right and privilege to have a woman fuck me and take care of me like that. Toxic masculinity also told HER her behaviour was OK, that OBVIOUSLY a man would be into it, that I was getting lucky and I should be happy and excited a hot girl like her would want to do that to me. I forgave her easily, because I'm SURE she didn't process it as SA either... for the same bullshit cultural reasons.
Male SA survivors get hate because they they get pedestalized and used by MRA assholes as reasons to "bhut whut about..." at feminism. And THAT is unfortunately real. I don't think people hate Male SA survivors, I think they hate MRA bullshit and with good reason.
The idea of using public transportation. It's something for "them" (the poor), not for "me" (rich). Changes significantly from country to country, I suppose, but it's a prevalent thought here.
That certainly clears things up ...
Is that necessary to clear up though? It's a perfectly fine anecdotal statement that doesn't require exacts unless you're just trying to argue they're wrong. No one else is having problems responding with the information provided.
Brazil as a whole. Better?
Public transportation is good. Sanitation on public transportation in America is bad.
I got very adept at touching nothing while riding a bumpy subway car in New York, but even that couldn’t always save me from the puddle of piss that ran like a heat seeking stream from the legs of the mentally ill.
Idk at least in the US, riding a train is a nice experience. I liked it. But riding busses is often rather unpleasant. But I only have limited experience to only a portion of the US.
I noticed in the States that if its a bus, its a chariot for the poor. If its a train, its for everyone.
I am by no means poor and I save a lot of money by not having a car, but the fact of the matter is that people give me rides more than I would like. Even in Portland, a city with relatively good transit for its size given that it's in the US, most of the city is still quite inaccessible.
MSG
Fat people. There, I said it.
I think the issue is with normalizing unhealthy bodies. idc how you look as long as you're healthy, but society is becoming increasingly accepting of obviously unhealthy lifestyles and bodies. It's no better than anorexia.
Ime fat people are pleasant to hang out with.
Yeah, being fat shouldn't be a qualifier for anything IMHO. Like, let people live their lives in peace! There are pleasant and unpleasant fat people, as there are thin, so why does weight have to do with anything?! It is baffling to me we have to work so hard to humanize fat persons. Fat bias is so ingrained in our culture people think is ok.
Some of the fat people I've worked with were so much more hard working than others. But on other hand some customers I've dealt with were the worst customers. There was a notorious mother daughter duo that my co workers labeled the "Thunder Cunts". The sad part is they had kids that probably.lived a life of hell.
Socialism
Our road system, retirement benefits, health system (except USA), public school system, national parks are all socialist.
Fucking commie! /s
Satanists get persecuted a lot; although, they do a lot to protect religious freedom.
It's important to note that when you hear a story about Satanists using freedom of religion to install a statue of baphomet in a public space, or citing religious freedom acts to protect safe access to abortion, you're hearing about the Satanic Temple. When you hear about Satanists practicing "chaos magick" or talking about how liking blue cheese means you're gay, you're hearing about the Church of Satan. Here's a handy reference from TST:
most satanists are just cute in personality lol
And most of them are just trolling-atheists/agnostics.
Guy Fieri
I don't enjoy his flavor... but the dude is just living his best life and gets an absurd amount of hate. It's actually really funny to me how disproportional the hate is, but I sometimes feel bad for him.
I'll forever get three people mixed up: Guy Fieri, Gordon Ramsey, and Anthony Bourdain. I would need to see all of their pictures side by side to distinguish them one from the other. (RIP Mr. Bourdain)
Comic sans.
It is literally a font. Sometimes when some corporate partner is annoying me I will pdf lock a document, with a signature, to them in comic sans.
It's also supposed to be an accessible/helpful font for dyslexics.
That's a happy accident not an intentional feature of the font. I think modern fonts that specifically target dyslexia are preferred, I've heard good stuff about https://opendyslexic.org/
Bidets!
Not sure if they get much hate but they sure get a lot of shit
Caring about people who are different from yourself
furries
While I agree and have no problem with furries, I think the issue is people seeing, what a lot of people in their own community see as linked to a sexual kink, being brought out into public spaces.
So like clearly there is a large sexual component to the fandom, and I think it weirds people out and makes people uncomfortable when they see these people wearing their fur suits out in public. Which again to be clear is not something the entire community does or even tolerates, but there's enough people who do so that it's become part of the cultural zeitgeist.
But it's also just the fact that it's so far from normal vanilla experiences. Everyday people think role playing sexually is already adventurous and out there. Now add big animal suits that are typically associated with mascots for entertaining children and I think anyone can see why everyday people think it's weird.
Hello.
I don't understand the furry thing. If anyone wants to explain it that would be cool.
I've gone to lgbtq+ bars and sometimes 1 or two people will have leather dog masks on. I don't understand it though. Is it a sub/Dom thing? I'm kinda new to to the LGBTQ+ culture.
I don't think those are necessarily related.
Furries are just people who like animal mascot type characters and made a whole subculture around that.
Nickelback
They chose to be commercially popular. They CAN absolutely shred, they ARE very talented. But they chose the top 40 route and are laughing all the way to the bank.
Everyone has a price, if you're an artist and you havent "sold out" its because nobody offered you enough money.
Music is a medium and playing is a craft. Some people play to express themselves in artistic ways and others play to make a living. It's all music, even when it's not art.
Nobody hates the guy who paints walls for a living for not being Picasso, but when it comes to music, everyone looks at any guy with a guitar expecting him to be the next artistic genius.
Sometimes he's just there to play three chords, get paid and go home.
I don't really like Nickelback's music, but if I ever need a house painted, I'd call them before calling someone who hasn't "sold out". I think that's their appeal.
The "sold out" thing bothers me sometimes, yes the ARE bands who come from less popular genres towards more mainstream sound because thats where they found commercial success and wanted/needed that money to keep doing what they do.
But there are also many bands who change genres and sound over time and some bands just enjoy playing that kind of 'radio friendly' music. Personally i feel like nickleback are in the 'we just like this kind of music' category.
(Personally I cant stand nicklebacks genre, so no bias here)
Oh they deserve it, just not because of their music. I used to hang with a few guys that grew up in the same town, the stories they would tell...
do tell
They were always taking photographs of everything. Ugh.
Dispassionate takes on controversial issues.
There's always atleast two sides to each story and more often than not the truth is somewhere in the middle. If you think something is clear-cut you're almost guranteed to be mistaken and misinformed and many of your dearest beliefs are totally wrong.
There is, of course, a relevant xkcd - it's yesterday's https://xkcd.com/2898/
I think social media, particularly Twitter, has bred this. Twitter is designed in a way that makes it impossible to have an actual structured debate and instead encourages short and unambiguous statements which cannot possibly accurately encapsulate an issue
Conservatives in a nutshell. (I'll add the /s here for anyone not getting the joke that I'm doing the exact thing we're talking about)
I needed that /s, lol.
Because isn't that literally what conservatives do? Pick wedge issues then make quick soundbites about "common sense" "solutions" that align with simple black & white thinking and conservative values?
Yes, social media has destroyed nuance. Recognizing that a person can understand a position without believing that position is also gone. And people are often performing for likes and “ratio” and discussing in bad faith and being intentionally obtuse in the hopes of getting more attention.
Clowns. I never found them entertaining, but they just want to entertain kids and people at circuses.
Yeah. And only a minority of them are sex killers.
Optical discs (blu-rays, DVDs, cds, etc...). I hate that I have to justify buying one or having a collection.
How dare you store media on a reflective plate?!
Non-monogamists. Not referring to simply polyamorists or even relationship anarchists, but non-monogamists in general. When I saw LGBT equality unfold in the first world, I thought "yay we're finally throwing off those norms" but here we are a decade or so later and polyamory still gets everyone saying "meh". The only time I've ever seen polyamorists in late night media was in an episode of The Resident, and it was used to illustrate the man as a cult leader, which tied into the show like pineapple ties into pizza (I do not miss that show). But you have an LGBT couple in every five episodes.
I think this one is tough. I know a few people that consensual non-monogamy has worked out well for (long term), but most of the people that I know who tried it out it hasn't gone well. So I'm not against it in theory, but it comes with a lot of caveats. I don't personally know anyone who began a monogamous relationship, transitioned to poly, and had it end well. I tend to think of this scenario as a sign of relationship trouble, or a cause of it. Maybe it's not polyamory's fault that so many people in relationship trouble are drawn to it.
I know a lot of people for whom monogamy hasn't turned out well, too. Lots of divorces and broken hearts. If you think of all the relationships that don't work out, the ones that do are miracles.
That's fair for sure. I do think I've lived long enough to know a few predictors of failed relationships though, and if someone tells me they're opening up the relationship, then I expect them to be done within a year.
It's pretty common to the point of being cliché that "we opened up out relationship" will fail. Usually the people involved are going to come at it in an extremely hierarchical way. Often there are existing problems that aren't being addressed. It's almost at the same tier as "let's have a baby to save our relationship"
People who are non monogamous from the start I expect have similar success rates as anyone else.
I don’t “meh” is hate. Just don’t think people are interested in non-monogamous relationships. I find it funny though because people still cheat and we have a high divorce rate, yet people still shame others for being promiscuous and desire to be in monogamous couples.
Yeah, I understand not wanting it in one's own relationship, but other people should be allowed to do whatever they want. I don't understand getting upset at a polyamorous couple. If you don't like it then just don't do it yourself
Yeah I'm sure this is for no reason
There’s a ‘polyamorous’ couple in You and they’re a terrible representation of polyam. They’re more swinger, which I know a lot of and they’re cool, but not the same.
Polyamory is wildly misunderstood and gets a lot of negative feedback as a result in my experience, and while I know it’s not for everyone, ENM is a solution that would let a lot of people be a lot happier than they are today.
Even LGBT is far from being actually free.
Speaking out against intervention in [current war]
Speaking out in favor of past interventions in [previous decade's wars]
I know you probably already hate me for mentioning it, but foot fetishes. It's a very common fetish people have and I don't think people should be ashamed of it. It's not even the weirdest fetish out there when it comes down to it. I understand the stigma comes from weird dudes asking girls for feet pics in creepy ways and I feel like that's reasonable. But most of us are just regular people just trying to live our best life. I used to feel comfortable telling women I'm with that I have a foot fetish and most of them were even down to give it a try. Nowadays I'm too embarrassed or ashamed to even mention it and when I do I get shot down more often than before because of this stigma. I'm more comfortable these days telling someone that I'm bisexual than telling someone I like feet. Which I guess is a win for the gay part of me, but it still sucks.
I'm not into that at all (tbh I find feet kinda disgusting) but I've never seen it as something really weird because it really isn't that weird.
ngl, having my toes sucked sounds good rn
You should avoid judgemental sexual partners anyways. Foot fetishes are considered "weird" if that's how you phrase it. Generally speaking, it's not that uncommon. Don't open up with a partner about kinks unless you trust them not to run their mouth.
In that regard I definitely agree with you. It could even just be the people I associate with. If anything the people that have given me the most shit for it are other guys that I have as friends.
I spent some time explaining amputee fetish to my CW the other day (which is actually called body identity integrity disorder). I'm just glad there are people who like their limbs and appendages attached.
Poverty.
Age gaps in partners.
Depends on the gap lol
I do :(
You know what you did
You're doing great. :)
XANADU
[wanders away singing] ♫_A place where nobody dared to go,
The love that we came to know,
They call it..._♫
George Michael
Pit-bulls. Most of their bad reputation comes from organizations that campaign against their very existence and people will quote pit-bull bite statistics with the same lack of irony as a white nationalist quoting FBI crime statistics about people of color.
I worked as an insurance agent. In the states I had my P&C licenses in, we were legally required to base rates on data. i.e statistically how much the company paid out in claims given certain factors. One of the things we based rates on was the breeds of dog people owned. Pitbulls and certain other dog breeds do not just have a bad reputation because people irrationally fear/hate them, they actually do pose a greater risk. Just like teenagers by and large, aren't as safe drivers. It isn't "fair" in that the dog didn't choose to be the breed it is and some of them really are good dogs but statistically, averaged over the whole, they are more of a risk than other dog breeds are.
How many owners are morons that wanted cool mean dog though. I've known dog owners that get those breeds specifically and they have no understanding of how to treat a dog. Like they'll get a working dog and an cage it all day then wonder why it's aggressive. I'd like to know the difference. Because too many people get dogs for looks and don't actually give a fuck a about the dogs soul.
Sorry if I come off aggressive, I just talk like that... I'm genuinely curious about this.
Sure but then the problem is moron owners, not the dog or it's breed. Those morons could be just as cruel to a German Shepherd, Boxer, Rottweiler, Presa Canario, Bullmastiff, etc. Nature vs Nurture I guess.
I don't hate the breed or agree with breed bans but both my niece and my friend's daughter were badly bitten by pits and they do make me nervous.
Okay, I'm trying to understand your argument here. Are you saying that pitbulls are being racially profiled and that information from other dogs aren't being collected or that bites of the same severity by other dogs aren't being correctly gathered or are bring suppressed? And, if so, what are the factors that should be taken into account when discussing dog bites or dog aggression?
The other user who responded to you, @evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world, does a good job of analyzing the core idea here. To quote Benjamin Disraeli, there's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Black people are no more "innately inclined towards criminality" than a pit-bull is innately inclined towards mauling people. Where people of color have been historically over policed, profiled by the criminal justice system, and generally set up to have a higher rate of criminal statistics than other ethnic groups, pit-bulls face similar statistical problems. Bite statistics are often self-reported by people who either witnessed a dog attack or who were themselves victims of one. Identifying a dog's breed by sight, especially for mixed breed dogs, is nearly impossible, and more error prone than accurate. And for a pound, any "big dog with a blocky head" immediately gets labeled as a pit-bull, even if it has literally no pit-bull DNA. These dogs are routinely adopted by people who explicitly train a dog to be mean to people, as opposed to socializing them. The fact that they also have this reputation as guard dogs or attack dogs exacerbates their reputation.
Quest 64
Head cheese
Ambrosia salad