Give me something juicy
You must log in or register to comment.
7-11 was a Part Time JOB!
I’m sure I have a bunch, but for the fediverse I think the most controversial is that I think neopronouns are a bad idea. DISCLAIMER I support queer folks, and I also use neopronouns when requested (because there’s zero reason to be a dick about it), but I think everybody would be better off without them.
The entire purpose of pronouns is to offer a quick, generic (i. e. non-individual) way of referring to people or objects without using their names. Using neopronouns which have to be communicated and learned first is the opposite of that. So in my view they’re not really pronouns, just additional names one has to learn for a person.
I think the most sensible way of accommodating all genders is using whatever pronouns are present in the language (usually male and female, or a generic pronoun), plus a non-binary pronoun if needed, like singular they in English.
This has also been a really controversial take of mine. But I have an even more controversial opinion that if I’m not well aquanted or friends with you, using they/them to refer to you is not offensive. I can barely remember peoples names much less your specific pronouns
I think this is a less controversial take tbh
It’s pronounced “gif”
No it’s pronounced “gif”!
Hot take? Maybe. Conspiracy theory? Probably a better description for what i am about to say.
I truly believe that the reason the “No Child Left Behind Act” was made/passed, at least in part, was to try and make kids “blind”, so to speak, as to the wrong/evil that the government is doing.
Or at the very least, that’s why book bans are a thing.
Suicide should be a human right. You should have to prove that you’re of sound mind and that you’ve considered and tried all other options. But once you’ve proven you’re not manic, psychotic, intoxicated, being coerced, etc and no other option will reasonably bring you peace you should be able to do it and get help making sure you don’t get stuck halfway or receive comfort care only until it’s over. Also every psych unit I’ve worked requires suspension of a DNR which terrifies me for involuntary admits.
- Some people absolutely need to be killed for the greater good of society.
There is no moral way to raise a cat.
Either they live inside and live an entire life in a few thousand square feet at best for 16-20 years, or you let them outside to hunt and they kill tons of wildlife and are exposed to becoming roadkill/coyote food etc.
My personal dodge is to adopt old cats that have already been indoctrinated into inside life and who could never be let out anyway.
Some people shouldn’t have kids, and some children probably shouldn’t be born.
Lol I wasn’t “supposed” to be born, legally speaking
I was born in violation of the One Child Policy in China
Sometimes I feel so special, that a law that tried to end me failed to do so.
But other times I face adversity in life and I feel like I’m in Final Destination and the bad lick I’m getting is death is out to get me cuz “I wasn’t supposed to even be alive”
Everyone (including kids and teens) should have full bodily autonomy. This includes how they express gender. Parents should not be allowed to circumcise/mutilate their kids’ genitals for reasons that aren’t medically necessary, nor should they be allowed to lay their hands on their kids in a violent way (and yes, that includes “only” spanking). Parents who hit/spank their kids should be charged with assault and child abuse.
Kids and teens having basic rights might not be controversial here, but in the rural area that I’m from, it certainly is.
In the rural are I’m in, my year old neighbor recently spanked her 2 year old grandson in front of me, on the street, because… he was walking into my yard while the adults were chatting. Which was a total non-issue. The kid’s mom, her daughter, wasn’t there. I’m cordial with the neighbor, but we’re not friends, and she had zero reason to think I’d condone it. It was so matter-of-fact. My own 9 year old was aghast. It’s awful.
Corporal Punishment Sucks.
No one should feel obligated to be an organ donor. And telling someone they must because they “aren’t using their body anymore” is fucked up. If a person has to be coerced, guilted or bullied into giving the “gift of life” they aren’t doing so freely. If they have to be manipulated into it then it’s not a gift. It’s theft. Nevermind the fact that corporations make big bank off the organ and tissue trade by piecemealing out donors and sellings the parts, but no one talks about THAT because lives are being saved.
(I’m not against organ donation. I just don’t like that we use manipulation tactics to procure body parts and that there isn’t transparency about who is profiting).
My controversial opinion is, everyone should benby default an organ donor, unless stated otherwise.
My controversial opinion is that you shouldn’t be able to opt out.
A man of principles I see
I agree. If you have not opted out for whatever reason, you get harvested. In a similar vein, euthanasia and assisted suicide should be legal for those with terminal illness or over a certain age.
idk about over a certain age, but euthanasia for terminal illness is legal in more places than you probably think, and many of those places will take refugees from the barbaric countries/states.
There’s nothing barbaric about blowing your own brains out to save a few bucks! This is America!
Nevermind the fact that corporations make big bank off the organ and tissue trade by piecemealing out donors and sellings the parts, but no one talks about THAT because lives are being saved.
When you donate an organ after death, your family gets nothing. But, the receiver can pay $80,000 -100,000+ just for the organ.
But, the receiver can pay $80,000 -100,000+ just for the organ.
Not the default situation, worldwide.
Children should be treated as human beings and deserve autonomy.
“I don’t like how it looks”, “it scares me” or “it’s annoying” aren’t a good enough reasons to kill an animal. No, not even that one.
How’s the bedbug colony treating you?
I don’t think Epstein was a spy for any government. What kind of idiotic spy leaves thousands of emails as written proofs of crimes? I get it that he’d use gmail to seem inconspicuous, but you can easily delete your own emails. You rarely hear of spies, because they’re very good at covering their tracks.
I think he was just a degenerate rich guy hanging out with other degenerate rich guys.
Being mtf or ftm trans is conforming to gender stereotypes with extra steps. Abolishing gender stereotypes and letting everyone express themselves however they want would be far better for society overall.
I don’t mean that in a negative way and fully support respecting self identification because that has the best outcomes in the real world.
You don’t actually know that. You can identify as male, female, nonbinary, agender, genderfluid etc. all while conforming or not conforming to male or female gender stereotypes. One is intrinsic, the other extrinsic.
The fact that you have to define yourself as conforming or non-conforming is what’s being griped here.
Sure, but if you’re gonna claim that trans people having either binary gender identity is necessarily conformity to gender stereotypes, then you need to accept that a cis person being either a man or a woman is even more so.
So the thing is, deviating from the norm is always going to be a bigger thing that just going with the flow.
There are masculine women, feminine men, and a wide spectrum in between. Many drag queens are playing the role of exaggerated gender stereotypes without identifying as a woman outside their act. A woman wearing pants was a huge thing in the US in the last century and that was just about not needing to follow gender norms separate from self identification. Cis doesn’t mean actively choosing to conform to gender stereotypes, it just means accepting the label society slapped on the person.
Yeah, and? All that is true of trans people, too.
The US isn’t the great Satan, they are quite contemporary satan. Russia, China and Iran are all imperialist, anti democratic and have even worse human rights violations.
You don’t have to pick a side, these are all asshats, some more than other though.
People have gotten way too comfortable with censoring speech. I understand the fight against intolerance and propaganda and how hopeless that fight can feel, but we’ve sometimes taken things too far and that’s only going to hurt us in the end. The left is not going to be the one that will take these compromises to the limit. We will be the most hurt by every bit of erosion we allowed to happen.
Specifically, I’m referring to efforts to get right wing platforms taken down not by being banned by a Facebook or Twitter or something, but by attacking the infrastructure on which a right wing website it run (such as attempts to get Truth social shut down by going after AWS, ISPs and other basic Internet infrastructure). It’s a similar approach as is sometimes done when they target payment processors and trying to shame them into banning these platforms from processing payments.
These types of attacks on speech should never be allowed no matter if it’s the left or the right. We can ban people from our private business or gathering place, but we shouldn’t be able to stop them from creating their own. And no, basic Internet infrastructure shouldn’t get to play the ‘private business’ card. They are effectively the roads, utilities and other generic infrastructure of the digital age.
Those attacks are no different from the right’s constant attacks on abortion clinics by attempting to subject them to needless and pointless regulations meant for full hospitals. Or as if we’d allowed a water company to start selectively shutting off water to places they don’t like.
We need more protections for the neutrality of infrastructure (both physical and digital) and keep the fights firmly restricted to end user platforms. Lest we find that someday our enemies have taken these tactics and beat us with them with far greater ruthlessness than we’d ever use.
Organizing for ethnic cleansing is neither speech nor an opinion, it’s domestic terrorism in the literal sense.
There is no right to plotting to destroy the fabric of society and countless people’s lives, nor should there be.
Fair, but that shut down should come from the government, not by having Internet infrastructure arbitrarily apply their executives personal morals to the situation.
I mean, sure in principle, but we know that’s just as flawed if not more in its application than public pressure on companies.
So we’re all just ok with the mostly conservative, white men that own these companies being our unelected moral compass then. Not much of a solution…
Neither are those mostly conservative white men running our respective governments, looking to leverage what you propose to their own benefit i.e. censoring their critics on the left, labeling them domestic terrorists, rather than the fascist groups we were discussing.
Also you’ll note I said public pressure - commercial brands can be a lot more responsive to bad press than political parties.
Just because that’s the most helpful course now in our completely broken democracy doesn’t mean that’s how it should be.
And ultimately that was my point. It’s temporarily helpful, but we will not win with this weapon. We can do minor amounts of damage with it, but conservatives can use it to devastating effect. Deliberately keeping it open as an option is only going to bite us hard later.
So we once again just need to overthrow capitalism, huh.
