Please keep it civil.

  • Cannacheques@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    We’re the healthiest and smartest generation in the last hundred or so years on average per person, yet due to a variety of systemic factors we’re all totally handicapped to producing positive changes towards helping one another let alone many, and it’s largely down to our systems being completely shit.

  • Moonguide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Not controversial with politically literate people, but bigots, fascists, racists, homophobes, transphobes, etc., shouldn’t get a platform to spew their shit. Public or private, doesn’t matter. And any effort by them to acquire one needs to be put down.

    It shocked me when my friends pushed back when I explained why Rogan shouldn’t have those people on his show with a freeze peach argument. Those people deserve nothing but a sock full of batteries.

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Ahh, yes. The hallmark of the supposedly “politically literate”. Wanting to physically beat everyone who doesn’t agree. Truly the most enlightened of stances.

      • ScrawnyStork@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        “doesn’t agree” here meaning “is trying to strip minorities of their rights”. Just a little intolerance should be tolerated.

        Edit: I read some of their comment history, don’t bother engaging them. Full mask off shit. Favorite quote: “I don’t give a singular fuck about voting rights.”

      • yata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It is definitely a hallmark of the politically illiterate to be completely unaware of the paradox of tolerance.

  • Spleen@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    That dogs don’t belong in cities. There should be a demarcation where dogs are not allowed to be and where it’s illegal to own them. They are disgusting…

    If you live outside in the countryside it’s fine.

  • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    A.I. should replace world leaders and it should administer our resources and the fact that we are not working towards that goal is worrying since the future and survival of humankind probably hinges on solving problems that the current leadership wont solve due to them being greedy short term obsessed pigs and just replacing them with other humans its just gonna keep the corruption cycle going.

    • alp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Is the controversial part of this opinion the fact that it’s not controversial at all so that it will create a discussion based on its controversy?

      • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        No, that would be quack genetic modification. Not my area of expertise. Eliminating the social categorization of gender as a whole.

        • Swimming_Monitor@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          No need to call anybody a quack. I’m just trying to understand your controversial opinion.

          Social categorization is incredibly vague, so it’s still not clear to me what you feel should be abolished.

          • Shit@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I think he is trying to say everyone should become a they/them and he wants to abolish he/she genders?

              • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                In an extremely blunt way, it’s correct. It obviously extends beyond grammar, and I have an entirely different stance on how 3rd person pronouns should be handled in English that described, but the premise is solid. Take where you would typically use gender, and, like, don’t. Obviously you would still have biological sex for things like medical records, but it wouldn’t be tied to who you are as a person, it would just be a letter on a paper somewhere.

            • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              Responding here since I didn’t know how to ping you in the other comment, in a sort of blunt way, you’re correct. Everyone would simply just be, not categorized into gender and the associated social expectations that come with it

    • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I agree that its ideal, but how would you even do that? Its so engrained into peoples’ brains that I doubt it could even happen unless the vast majority of people agreed to not teach the concept to their children.

  • RedBox@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    Pandering to very small percentage groups, who still just moan and whinge, this bothers me. And employing based on quotas, this bothers me. You end up with a few people carrying a load of shit.