You must log in or register to comment.
I’m frustrated more people are complacent with the state of the world, including myself.
Lemmy users project their toxicity towards Reddit. This place can be quite hostile if you don’t echo the ‘correct’ ideals.
The Lemmy users who call themselves “Leftists” are garbage human beings. Shitty, hostile, unnecessarily combative, will disagree with you about anything you say even when you’re on the same page.
And most of them aren’t really that left. Trying to talk about abolition of police and prisons is something they would never agree to, even though it’s a fundamentally leftist ideal. They’re just bad people.
Barrage of insults against leftists
Says leftists are insulting
The Lemmy users who call themselves “Leftists” are garbage human beings
And most of them aren’t really that left. Trying to talk about abolition of police and prisons is something they would never agree to
wait, is this a roundabout way of calling yourself a garbage human being?
Most users of those so open source, decentralizing apps are from the USA so, go figure…
Can second this
Black liquorice tastes good
I prefer rap music by white artists because it’s less likely to feature the N word.
That isn’t just an unpopular opinion, but a very interesting one. Bravo.
I think 10 years ago this would’ve been unpopular, but today maybe not so much:
systemdis great software. I don’t use distros that refuse to ship it. Especially the init system. Thanks, Lennart!Abortion should be mandatory.
People keep arguing over whether abortion should be legal or not, but my opinion is that it should be forced on everyone whether they want it or not. Late term abortions up to 100 years after birth should also be considered for inclusion in this rule.
One of my favourite activities is finding controversial opinions, then taking an opinion so extreme that it makes everyone else look like a centrist.
Kill everyone now, legalise first degree murder, advocate cannibalism, eat shit!
But where would we scrape up the funding?
That’s a good argument for including very late term abortion. Inheritance tax.
Graveyards are a disgusting waste of space. Their existence communicates to society that many dead people are more entitled to space on this Earth than some living people will ever have.
From everything I read in this thread… you won.
Graveyards don’t exist for the dead, they are a place where living people can mourn the loss of the dead person and remember older days.
I realize they’re not really for the dead, but the living decide that their dead bodies are entitled to more space than some living. Plots cost thousands of dollars. We ostracize the unhoused. Our priorities are broken, and graveyards are yet another thing for those “with” that those “without” will not have.
I don’t know. Personally I don’t need a “place” to go visit someone that is deceased, but I have very close family that needs that place in order to grieve. Pets or human family, they need to be buried and have a marker.
When I lived in a more urban environment the only way to achieve that was through graveyards/pet cemeteries. With some land and the option I’d rather bury people at home now, but lots of people don’t have that luxury, but still have the need to “visit” deceased loved ones, and know where they “are.”
I’m not one of those people, sounds like you aren’t either, but that doesn’t mean that a graveyard doesn’t serve a useful purpose for the majority of people.
Could they be more efficient? Sure, maybe. But honestly do they really take up THAT much space?
Definitely fits the unpopular opinion tag, but I think you’ve got some blinders on your empathy if you don’t see their value.
Desktop computers are way better and more fun than using phone for browsing, wikipedia, news, and Lemmy
I rarely use my phone for anything other than texting. I like using my desktop computer to browse and post.
not necessarily more fun, but definitely much, much, much more usable and convenient
Fair point! Fun is def not the correct word I should have used. “Practical” is the better choice.
The Beatles suck.
The Eagles are not as amazing as everyone thinks.I didn’t really like the Beatles until I started listening to all the non-#1 hit songs.
Me and my GF both agree that Beatles songs are fantastic… when performed by people who aren’t the Beatles.
I enjoyed the music in the film “Yesterday (2019)” muuuuuch more than i enjoyed the original versions.
Maybe it’s the 60s style of it, idk. I just don’t really get along with it
Agree in principle. Haven’t seen Yesterday, but Across the Universe soundtrack is my go to Beatles cover album.
too many dudes in this thread thinking eugenics and pedophilia are unpopular. They’re very popular and that’s a very bad thing
- Black is a color!!
- Dolphins are fish!!
These threads always attract a variety of reactionary opinions
[edit] whoops, didn’t mean to reply. Yours were not the reactionary opinions lol. after the revolution, all tetrapods will rightly be understood to be fish
I don’t see a problem
Suicide is perfectly acceptable and should be a right, we should all have the choice of when we want to go. Some pain, physical or emotional is too much, or loss can be too great.
I don’t care if I could or can get better, I should be able to down some hemlock and leave.
I’m with you.
Many years ago I read a sci-fi story about a society where crimes are punished by extending your life (which is dreary in some way - I don’t remember). The protagonist keeps committing suicide but being brought back to life by advanced medical technology and punished with more time to live.
In the end, he manages to completely destroy his body, so the state takes a cell from an old blood test, clones the person from it, and adds the punishment to the clone.
That story stayed with me since then. It really shed light on the point of view that not wanting to live can be natural and forcing people to live in pain can be very cruel.
Talk about a relevant username!
Becoming a parent is not a right, it is a privilege (I guess). You need a license to get married, drive, hunt or fish, your dog needs one. There should be some sort of class and background check you must pass before being allowed to procreate. Just the basics like: this is the level of care and support this small helpless mammal needs to be healthy and grow to maturity. This is how much, minimum, that quality upbringing will cost and do you meet that bare minimum level of competence and income to raise a healthy baby.
The problem is that then you need the government’s permission to procreate. There’s always the valid concern that the government would prevent you from having children to remove some undesirable trait from the population and justify it as being a danger to a child. I know you described basic competency skills, but there would always exist a very credible threat of it being politicized.
In fact, this already happens for things like queer couples being rejected for adopting children or the Uyghur population being quietly genocided in China. And Eugenics was historically practiced such that criminals would be sterilized as part of their punishment.
It’s worth pointing out that governments already intervene with unqualified parents by removing the child from the household. Shifting the burden of proof from the government needing to show neglect to parents needing to prove themselves worthy is a dangerous amount of authority to cede to a centralized, corruptible power.
Also, it’s not clear how you handle unlicensed parents. People are going to have unsafe sex no matter how illegal you make it. Would you push for preemptively sterilizing everyone and trusting it can be reversed after a license is acquired? Forcing abortions? Confiscating the child after birth?
Also the amount of effort and wealth expended by the medical profession just so that some people can reproduce is mind boggling.
This is an extremely popular opinion among those who’ve not unpacked that what you’re describing is eugenics
It is not, at all, eugenics. Nothing in my unpopular opinion has anything to do with genetic traits
whatever metrics you use to decide who gets to procreate, you will certainly bias the gene pool. That’s eugenics
I feel like the problem with this argument is that it’s consequentialist. You can never be 100% certain which parents will raise their children well. There’s no metric that will conclusively tell you.
But you can start them off on the right foot by making sure they have the knowledge and the means to do the job correctly
I mean I guess not every aspect of eugenics was bad per se, but I’m not so sure about this level of social control.
Protecting children from been born into terrible families is not social control.
If you want to have a system which determines which people will or won’t make terrible families, only permitting the former to reproduce, you want a system of social control. If children were delivered randomly by storks it would be something else. Aviation regulations? Avian regulations? Something like that I guess.
Not all social control is bad. Society and its institutions often limit what people can do. But of late we’ve mostly determined that restricting reproduction should be used sparingly, not defaultly, and I tend to agree.
For all the reasons others have described, this is problematic. However, I propose a middle ground: develop permanent, reversible, side-effect-free birth control, and apply it to every child at 10 years old. When you turn 18, you can have it removed. You just need to show up at a government office, sign a form, and have the procedure completed. It is completely free, and you are out the door in an hour. The treatment can be reapplied at any time.
What happens? No more accidental pregnancies. No more getting knocked up in high school. No more scares after one night stands. No more becoming impregnated by a rapist. Everyone can fuck to their heart’s content, but babies only get made if both people actually want a baby. Most of the problems you are talking about typically occur when either one or both of the parents don’t want or weren’t expecting a child. Make pregnancy opt-in, and you’ll solve 90% of the problems.
That’s not middle ground. That BS! And it doesn’t even have anything to do with what OP said. It just prevents pregnancy.
For fuck’s sake, I know people think differently and I try to accept and respect that but, some of you make me really wonder how tf we can think SO differently…
Great idea except for the part where this is eugenics
Eugenics is trying to erase particular traits from a genome which is not, at all, what I stated in my unpopular opinion. I just would like people who are wanting (or whoopsing) a child into the world to have the bare minimum knowledge and tools to do the job “correctly.”
It is a basic biological function so you could say pooping is a privilege too.
I am not worried about helping people poop better
Who decides who can pro-create? What is the criteria?
I don’t see a scenario where this works out well.
I laid out some bare minimums: knowledge about how to take care of and raise a healthy human child and the financial means to do so.
In the United States, political violence has ensured overrepresentation of minority populations below the poverty line. Requireing the financial means to have a child thereby limits minority procreation.
To address this, a universal basic income as well as a stipend for parents would be necessary. In the US, this is far away from ever happening, eere actively moving in the opposite direction. Mandatory birth control in this country is eugenics.
How tf does this shitty reply have 17 upvotes? How the fuck did 17 COMPLETE IDIOTS show that and though: “Hmmm… He is right!”
Like, hw stupid can you all be? Who’s going to decide? Obvious professionals who know of kids and have worked with them. Social workers, pedopsychiatrist, teachers, etc.
This isn’t even something new. This is how it’s done with adoption. You can’t all be so ignorant and dumb. I hate democracy because of idiots like you…
Are you that blind to the world? Do you really look at something like… The Trump administration, and think “Like, hw stupid can you all be? Who’s going to decide? Obvious professionals who know of kids and have worked with them. Social workers, pedopsychiatrist, teachers, etc.”.
Very clearly professionals and the people who have the best in mind are not the ones who are chosen by those in power. Get real, truly pathetic take
Thinking that Trump and your shitty country is the only one in the world is pathetic to say the least. Nothing will work in your country (and I’m not talking just about kids but in general) but that doesn’t mean it won’t work in other countries as well 🤦♂️
Challenge: USAns not be the dumbest nation on this planet for one day (impossible)
Lmao, not an American, but let’s use… Germany as an example. In the 2025 elections, the AFD (hard right fascists) doubled their seat count in parliament. I don’t think you have a solid understanding of how bad eugenics can get, or how it actually would take effect in a modern world. Actually, it seems you don’t understand much of anything.
Jeez, this thread is scary, I forget how many crazy opinions people can have.
Mine is probably that non-human animal lives matter, maybe not exactly in the same way that human lives do, but in a comparable and important way. I believe that murder is murder no matter the animal killed.
And also a maybe close second (not really an opinion but you could argue that I’m too dark about it) is that climate change is far past the point of no return and that in 50 years we are all going to live extremely hard lives (if we even survive) that right now would seem like an apocalypse type fantasy movie.
Climate change is not a lost cause. We are beating any estimates on wind and solar deployment, solar is cheap as fuck, and overall, were just no that bad off.
Jack black isn’t funny at all. He’s worse, incredibly fucking irritating and annoying and a try hard. He epitomizes mainstream US “comedy”; obvious, loud, overstating the delivery of jokes with overwrought physical humor. He and Horatio Sanz must have studied under the same Sithlord. Can’t stand him.
