Yeah, in my experience, the police tend to be a reflection of the communities they serve.
When I lived in a tight knit, rural community, … morethe police were generally very professional and trustworthy. They handled serious situations like murders and meth raids without issue and were very calm and cordial, even when you wound up on the wrong side of the law.
Now I live in a rather 'colorful' Florida beach community and the police here seem like brutes by comparison. Brutality complaints and doggycides are above average. They speed 100+ mph without sirens or lights, but paradoxically, response times are very slow. Last year, I had to keep a drugged out home-invader at gunpoint with my .22 for almost half an hour while we waited for his ride. God only knows what might have happened if he was on PCP instead of smack. At the same time, I've had a couple dealings (nothing bad) with the county sheriff's dept. and they were just fine.
In … [view original content]
I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name.
If you mean as in equality for all people, such as equality with men and women, you are thinking of egalitarianism.
The movement now deals with issues concerning both women and men.
Citation needed. The movement of feminism is to achieve equal rights for women. As said before, egalitarianism is a better movement, because it has been, is and will be a movement to achieve equality amongst sexes, races and classes.
I understand that women still have it harder
I hope you're not talking about the First World Women, because they have it quite easy (as easy as man). The "lucky" people in First World Countries have it quite easy as a whole. People should pay more attention to countries and people who really need the help.
but a social movement should have a name that accurately represents all major groups involved.
What about the minorities? Do you want to exclude the no-so-major groups?
When gay rights activism adopted other groups into its movement (lesbians, transgenders, bisexuals etc) it changed its name to LGBT. Then LGBTQ as it adopted queers. Now people are talking about LGBTQIA since intersex and asexuals are a part of the movement. So yes, movements do change their names to better accommodate the groups involved. I think feminism should do the same.
I do not understand the use of the example you used with the LGBTQIA. The name has changed with the definition. As you said before with "I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name", you clearly want feminism to keep its name but not its definition. That has no connection with the example. It is out of place. Movements change their names to better accommodate the groups involved, but we've already got a name for equality between people that are different. It is called egalitarianism.
If women want equality for all people, they should call themselves egalitarists. If men want equality for all people, they should call themselves egalitarists. "Equality for all, including both sexes" (egalitarianism) and "adding equal rights for women" (Feminism) are not the same time.
Nuclear power isn't something people should be afraid of. Per kilowatt of energy, it kills less people than any other power source. It is also a good base load power. France managed to decarbonise its electricity production in 10 years by building a host of reactors. Yes, there are disasters. But the disasters get blown way out of proportion. Fukushima radiation killed nobody. The tsunami and forced evacuations killed thousands. Both Fukishima and Chernobyl are also old designs. Modern reactors being built are far safer. If Chernobyl and Fukushima were modern reactors, those disasters wouldn't have happened. Newer designs in development right now are able to shut themselves down in an emergency. No operator needs to be present.
I'm no expert in nuclear power, so I cannot have a vast opinion.
I like guns even though I've never fired one. I've liked them ever since I first played Counter Strike many years ago. I believe most people who have guns are just normal people, not crazy, damaged, or unusual in any way. Range shooting is just another pastime, like jetskiing or archery.
So, you're saying that you like guns because you played a video game with guns and not because you actually have or use guns? Okay, sure. The rest I kind of agree on.
I've got nothing to add.
EDIT: I'm not against femenism, I just prefer a movement of equality among everybody.
I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name. The movement now deals with issues concerning both women and men. I understand tha… moret women still have it harder, but a social movement should have a name that accurately represents all major groups involved. Both men and women are both dealt with in feminism. When gay rights activism adopted other groups into its movement (lesbians, transgenders, bisexuals etc) it changed its name to LGBT. Then LGBTQ as it adopted queers. Now people are talking about LGBTQIA since intersex and asexuals are a part of the movement. So yes, movements do change their names to better accommodate the groups involved. I think feminism should do the same.
Nuclear power isn't something people should be afraid of. Per kilowatt of energy, it kills less people than any other power source. It is also a good base load power. France managed to decarbonise its electricity production in 10 years by building a host of… [view original content]
I hope you're not talking about the First World Women, because they have it quite easy (as easy as man). The "lucky" people in First World Countries have it quite easy as a whole. People should pay more attention to countries and people who really need the help.
Sorry ifI'm butting in, but I take issue with the notion that almost everyone in first world countries are well off. I live in America, supposedly a first world country. But I can also walk about a mile from my house and find plenty of people who are desperately poor, who live in neighborhoods where domestic violence and drug abuse are the norm rather than the exception. This kind of situation is far from unique. There are plenty of people in first world countries who need and deserve help as much as anyone else.
Now flame me!
Okay, sure. You have been challenged
I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name.
If you me… morean as in equality for all people, such as equality with men and women, you are thinking of egalitarianism.
The movement now deals with issues concerning both women and men.
Citation needed. The movement of feminism is to achieve equal rights for women. As said before, egalitarianism is a better movement, because it has been, is and will be a movement to achieve equality amongst sexes, races and classes.
I understand that women still have it harder
I hope you're not talking about the First World Women, because they have it quite easy (as easy as man). The "lucky" people in First World Countries have it quite easy as a whole. People should pay more attention to countries and people who really need the help.
but a social movement should have a name that accurately represents… [view original content]
I use 'they' like that all the time in speech, but it's still grammatically incorrect. God help you if you use that on a college research paper and your prof is a grammar nazi.
I have many unpopular opinions, but I'll share just one this time (not sure how unpopular it is, either):
I was against the removal of downvote button, I considered and still consider its removal a mistake.
Society needs laws, government, and police to survive. No, my 13 year old nephew, you would not do it better.
I don't even know if this qualifies as 'unpopular' or not, but all the edgy 'anarchist' teenagers out there make me think so.
I use 'they' like that all the time in speech, but it's still grammatically incorrect. God help you if you use that on a college research paper and your prof is a grammar nazi.
I don't think this is all that unpopular either. I may have my fair share of complaints about the systems you mentioned, but at their root they are necessities.
Society needs laws, government, and police to survive. No, my 13 year old nephew, you would not do it better.
I don't even know if this qualifies as 'unpopular' or not, but all the edgy 'anarchist' teenagers out there make me think so.
Then that I can respect. It's people that are for women's rights advocation and against men's that I feel have two distinct personas when it comes to rights they feel are worth working towards and rights they couldn't care less about. People that call men's rights advocates duffesses and women's rights advocates saviors.
EDIT: If you consider both groups doofusses, then at least you're consistent, even though I still disagree.
Nah, that's just because I suspected what TheCatWolf suspected and until that point I had held myself from saying anything, for fear that I … morewas reading too much into what Kenny/Lee said.
For the most part, I'm extremely ambivalent about thIs whole "gender war" thing. There are much more important wars we should be occupying ourselves with.
I am in complete agreement.
The US is just like any nation on earth. It was just lucky enough to recieve the better end of Darwins stick.… more
One thing I find rather unsettling is how the US is very worried about the prospect of Iran obtaining nuclear weaponry, yet they seem to gloss over the fact the only time nuclear weapons have been used was by the US, twice and against civillian targets.
Yeah. Not being able to avoid paying for a child regardless of want or income. Wait, no. Well, poor women being vastly under-choosen to raise their kids after a divorce. Oh, shit, hang on. Oh the tragedy of all those applicably merited women being turned away because of male worker quotas. Damn it! Poor women, always getting their genitals chopped up as babies. Crap! I'll get this! Gastly that solely women must sign up for selective service. This is hard! So sorry for women, since they have such a higher rate of suicide directly tied to social expectations. Fuck, I know I can do this! Poor women... getting whistled at. Nailed it
(Obviously this is not all inclusive and is satirical, but saying one has it worse than the other is highly dependant on context.)
I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name. The movement now deals with issues concerning both women and men. I understand tha… moret women still have it harder, but a social movement should have a name that accurately represents all major groups involved. Both men and women are both dealt with in feminism. When gay rights activism adopted other groups into its movement (lesbians, transgenders, bisexuals etc) it changed its name to LGBT. Then LGBTQ as it adopted queers. Now people are talking about LGBTQIA since intersex and asexuals are a part of the movement. So yes, movements do change their names to better accommodate the groups involved. I think feminism should do the same.
Nuclear power isn't something people should be afraid of. Per kilowatt of energy, it kills less people than any other power source. It is also a good base load power. France managed to decarbonise its electricity production in 10 years by building a host of… [view original content]
Hmm, I don't know about that since where I live there's much more disapproval than acceptance of the LGBT community, so most people I know who claim to support it are in fact real supporters, but yeah, I believe there must be people like that. Even though I agree that people shoudn't support something only because it's the ''cool'' thing to do now, I still think it's better to join the tolerance club than the intolerance club.
* I feel like this generation idolizes LGBQT people because it the cool thing to do now. I just feel like a lot of people in this generation… more, teenagers especially, see LGBQT people and tolerance for them as a club that they can join because it will make them feel like they are just so accepting of others. There are some people who take that title simply because its the "in" thing to do now.
To me, it feels like that atheism is starting to get out of hand, and people are just starting to hate religion because it's the cool thing to do. I'm not really a religious person, and if you don't like religion, that's perfectly fine, but I think it's starting to go a little overboard. (I do however, agree that there are a shit ton of stupid christians in America, but a lot of atheists from what I've seen just treat it like ALL of them are stupid)
Also, please keep in mind, I'm not hating on atheism. As I said earlier, if you're atheist, I don't really care. Please don't take this the wrong way. Because a lot of people on other forums certainly have.
Society needs laws, government, and police to survive. No, my 13 year old nephew, you would not do it better.
I don't even know if this qualifies as 'unpopular' or not, but all the edgy 'anarchist' teenagers out there make me think so.
Yep . The more people or 'Weepers' (crazed plague people) you kill the more people hate you, the more the plague spreads, the more evil people you like become and you get the bad ending.
I keep hearing feminists drone on about how feminism helps both men and women. I'd very much like feminism to ditch its current name and adopt a new one (maybe egalitarianism, or gender rights activism), something that represents equality better. I actually agree with you on most points. First world women have all the rights men have, and are already mostly as well off as we are. There's just some minor tidbits that feminists bring up from time to time (eg how women are underrepresented in STEM fields).
It's ironic, that feminism would support the LGBT movement changing its name to include more people, yet they staunchly resist changing their own name, even though they claim to fight for more than just women.
I like guns not JUST because I played a shooting game years ago. That game simply started my interest in them. From then on, I was fascinated. From time to time, I read about them and watch youtube videos of people handling, shooting and talking about them. Here are a couple channels I like:
Now flame me!
Okay, sure. You have been challenged
I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name.
If you me… morean as in equality for all people, such as equality with men and women, you are thinking of egalitarianism.
The movement now deals with issues concerning both women and men.
Citation needed. The movement of feminism is to achieve equal rights for women. As said before, egalitarianism is a better movement, because it has been, is and will be a movement to achieve equality amongst sexes, races and classes.
I understand that women still have it harder
I hope you're not talking about the First World Women, because they have it quite easy (as easy as man). The "lucky" people in First World Countries have it quite easy as a whole. People should pay more attention to countries and people who really need the help.
but a social movement should have a name that accurately represents… [view original content]
I'm actually relieved that you share a lot of the views I hold on this matter. I agree with pretty much everything you said. There are just some tidbits feminists bring up sometimes, like how men are more numerous in the highest paying jobs.
Other than that, I pretty much agree. First world women on most counts have the same rights and opportunities as men do.
I understand that women still have it harder,
Yeah. Not being able to avoid paying for a child regardless of want or income. Wait, n… moreo. Well, poor women being vastly under-choosen to raise their kids after a divorce. Oh, shit, hang on. Oh the tragedy of all those applicably merited women being turned away because of male worker quotas. Damn it! Poor women, always getting their genitals chopped up as babies. Crap! I'll get this! Gastly that solely women must sign up for selective service. This is hard! So sorry for women, since they have such a higher rate of suicide directly tied to social expectations. Fuck, I know I can do this! Poor women... getting whistled at. Nailed it
(Obviously this is not all inclusive and is satirical, but saying one has it worse than the other is highly dependant on context.)
I am afraid of socialism. I want the opportunity to gain wealth and to have my effort rewarded. I don't want complete socialism to take that away from me. I support as little market regulation as possible.
On the other hand, I like the idea of protecting the unfortunate. I like societies that have safety nets for those who need them. I heard that completely free markets are inherently unstable (not sure if this is true or not), so I wouldn't mind some regulation, though I'd like regulation to be as little as possible.
So yes, I like capitalism, along with some some "socialist" systems that can complement it (eg universal health care).
I'm not worried about overpopulation. Truth is, the higher a society's living standards, the less children will be born per household, and the lower the rate of population growth will be. Word population is still growing, but the rate of population growth is decreasing. Population growth rate is lowest in first world countries and highest in third world countries. And it will continue to decrease as countries continue to gain higher living standards. That gives me hope.
I think the Walking Dead game is far too sad. But I enjoy the characters, so I come back here from time to time.
I don't believe that we have to abandon civilization and technology in order to save the planet. I believe technology can play a vital role. With modern agriculture we can grow more food for a given amount of resources, than we could in the past. It is due to modern technology that the Earth can support 7 billion people without being run down. Future technology will allow us to be ever more efficient with our resources. And like I said before, population growth will eventually halt.
I am afraid of socialism. I want the opportunity to gain wealth and to have my effort rewarded. I don't want complete socialism to take that… more away from me. I support as little market regulation as possible.
On the other hand, I like the idea of protecting the unfortunate. I like societies that have safety nets for those who need them. I heard that completely free markets are inherently unstable (not sure if this is true or not), so I wouldn't mind some regulation, though I'd like regulation to be as little as possible.
So yes, I like capitalism, along with some some "socialist" systems that can complement it (eg universal health care).
I'm not worried about overpopulation. Truth is, the higher a society's living standards, the less children will be born per household, and the lower the rate of population growth will be. Word population is still growing, but the rate of population growth is decreasing. Population growth rate is lowest in f… [view original content]
Another unpopular opinion, that is actually extremely unpopular.
Dr. Pepper is one of the most disgusting things I have ever had in my whole life. I would rather drink raw sewage.
Comments
I think English really needs a gender-neutral 3rd person pronoun. Like a singular version of 'they'.
Maybe it became so because it's something that actually happens in real life?
I think that there about sums it up.
That's a pretty popular opinion actually :P
I love it too.
Bro for bro.
Okay, sure. You have been challenged
If you mean as in equality for all people, such as equality with men and women, you are thinking of egalitarianism.
Citation needed. The movement of feminism is to achieve equal rights for women. As said before, egalitarianism is a better movement, because it has been, is and will be a movement to achieve equality amongst sexes, races and classes.
I hope you're not talking about the First World Women, because they have it quite easy (as easy as man). The "lucky" people in First World Countries have it quite easy as a whole. People should pay more attention to countries and people who really need the help.
What about the minorities? Do you want to exclude the no-so-major groups?
I do not understand the use of the example you used with the LGBTQIA. The name has changed with the definition. As you said before with "I think feminism should adopt a more gender-neutral name", you clearly want feminism to keep its name but not its definition. That has no connection with the example. It is out of place. Movements change their names to better accommodate the groups involved, but we've already got a name for equality between people that are different. It is called egalitarianism.
If women want equality for all people, they should call themselves egalitarists. If men want equality for all people, they should call themselves egalitarists. "Equality for all, including both sexes" (egalitarianism) and "adding equal rights for women" (Feminism) are not the same time.
I'm no expert in nuclear power, so I cannot have a vast opinion.
So, you're saying that you like guns because you played a video game with guns and not because you actually have or use guns? Okay, sure. The rest I kind of agree on.
I've got nothing to add.
EDIT: I'm not against femenism, I just prefer a movement of equality among everybody.
It.
It is an impersonal that has serious negative conotations when used to refer to a human being. So no, I don't think it will work.
It still technically counts, even so.
You beat me to it.
Well, you mentioned it first, I just posted it here. So, the credit is still yours.
Sorry ifI'm butting in, but I take issue with the notion that almost everyone in first world countries are well off. I live in America, supposedly a first world country. But I can also walk about a mile from my house and find plenty of people who are desperately poor, who live in neighborhoods where domestic violence and drug abuse are the norm rather than the exception. This kind of situation is far from unique. There are plenty of people in first world countries who need and deserve help as much as anyone else.
I use they as a third person pronoun. 'They don't know what their talking about'.
I use 'they' like that all the time in speech, but it's still grammatically incorrect. God help you if you use that on a college research paper and your prof is a grammar nazi.
Society needs laws, government, and police to survive. No, my 13 year old nephew, you would not do it better.
I don't even know if this qualifies as 'unpopular' or not, but all the edgy 'anarchist' teenagers out there make me think so.
Me too. I miss being able to randomly downvote everyone for no reason and watch as the entire thread loses their shit about it. It gave me life.
Let's throw some bricks at store windows, that'll make the corporate fat cats take us seriously.
"It doesn't know what it's talking about."
I don't think this is all that unpopular either. I may have my fair share of complaints about the systems you mentioned, but at their root they are necessities.
Does it have a soul?
Bro bro bro bro bro bro bro.
Personally I don't think anything does, so I'd have to go with a no by association.
I never really played Dishonored, it seems very cool though. I'll check it out! Thanks
No problem . Hope you enjoy.
Btw (if you do play i recomend killing as few people as possible)
Then that I can respect. It's people that are for women's rights advocation and against men's that I feel have two distinct personas when it comes to rights they feel are worth working towards and rights they couldn't care less about. People that call men's rights advocates duffesses and women's rights advocates saviors.
EDIT: If you consider both groups doofusses, then at least you're consistent, even though I still disagree.
Yeah. Just like any other nation.
Cough Saudi Arabia
Cough North Korea
Cough varios African countries
Cough the list goes on
Yeah. Not being able to avoid paying for a child regardless of want or income. Wait, no. Well, poor women being vastly under-choosen to raise their kids after a divorce. Oh, shit, hang on. Oh the tragedy of all those applicably merited women being turned away because of male worker quotas. Damn it! Poor women, always getting their genitals chopped up as babies. Crap! I'll get this! Gastly that solely women must sign up for selective service. This is hard! So sorry for women, since they have such a higher rate of suicide directly tied to social expectations. Fuck, I know I can do this! Poor women... getting whistled at. Nailed it
(Obviously this is not all inclusive and is satirical, but saying one has it worse than the other is highly dependant on context.)
Hmm, I don't know about that since where I live there's much more disapproval than acceptance of the LGBT community, so most people I know who claim to support it are in fact real supporters, but yeah, I believe there must be people like that. Even though I agree that people shoudn't support something only because it's the ''cool'' thing to do now, I still think it's better to join the tolerance club than the intolerance club.
Haha, why? Is there a karma system or something?
A shit ton of people lately, from what I've seen (not on this forum), have hated on Steven Universe, saying it's pandering to SJWs or some shit.
To me, it feels like that atheism is starting to get out of hand, and people are just starting to hate religion because it's the cool thing to do. I'm not really a religious person, and if you don't like religion, that's perfectly fine, but I think it's starting to go a little overboard. (I do however, agree that there are a shit ton of stupid christians in America, but a lot of atheists from what I've seen just treat it like ALL of them are stupid)
Also, please keep in mind, I'm not hating on atheism. As I said earlier, if you're atheist, I don't really care. Please don't take this the wrong way. Because a lot of people on other forums certainly have.
My friend actually thinks Anarchy DOESN'T mean chaos. These people don't do research.
Yep . The more people or 'Weepers' (crazed plague people) you kill the more people hate you, the more the plague spreads, the more evil people you like become and you get the bad ending.
Challenge accepted
I keep hearing feminists drone on about how feminism helps both men and women. I'd very much like feminism to ditch its current name and adopt a new one (maybe egalitarianism, or gender rights activism), something that represents equality better. I actually agree with you on most points. First world women have all the rights men have, and are already mostly as well off as we are. There's just some minor tidbits that feminists bring up from time to time (eg how women are underrepresented in STEM fields).
It's ironic, that feminism would support the LGBT movement changing its name to include more people, yet they staunchly resist changing their own name, even though they claim to fight for more than just women.
I like guns not JUST because I played a shooting game years ago. That game simply started my interest in them. From then on, I was fascinated. From time to time, I read about them and watch youtube videos of people handling, shooting and talking about them. Here are a couple channels I like:
https://www.youtube.com/user/Iraqveteran8888
https://www.youtube.com/user/FPSRussia
https://www.youtube.com/user/DemolitionRanch
I also enjoy reading about guns on wikis and in books. I also like tanks and aircraft. Someday I'd very much like to shoot a gun.
PS. I don't care much for feminism either. I would prefer to have gender-neutral, race-neutral movements for equality.
I'm actually relieved that you share a lot of the views I hold on this matter. I agree with pretty much everything you said. There are just some tidbits feminists bring up sometimes, like how men are more numerous in the highest paying jobs.
Other than that, I pretty much agree. First world women on most counts have the same rights and opportunities as men do.
Abortion should be legal.
I am afraid of socialism. I want the opportunity to gain wealth and to have my effort rewarded. I don't want complete socialism to take that away from me. I support as little market regulation as possible.
On the other hand, I like the idea of protecting the unfortunate. I like societies that have safety nets for those who need them. I heard that completely free markets are inherently unstable (not sure if this is true or not), so I wouldn't mind some regulation, though I'd like regulation to be as little as possible.
So yes, I like capitalism, along with some some "socialist" systems that can complement it (eg universal health care).
I'm not worried about overpopulation. Truth is, the higher a society's living standards, the less children will be born per household, and the lower the rate of population growth will be. Word population is still growing, but the rate of population growth is decreasing. Population growth rate is lowest in first world countries and highest in third world countries. And it will continue to decrease as countries continue to gain higher living standards. That gives me hope.
I think the Walking Dead game is far too sad. But I enjoy the characters, so I come back here from time to time.
I don't believe that we have to abandon civilization and technology in order to save the planet. I believe technology can play a vital role. With modern agriculture we can grow more food for a given amount of resources, than we could in the past. It is due to modern technology that the Earth can support 7 billion people without being run down. Future technology will allow us to be ever more efficient with our resources. And like I said before, population growth will eventually halt.
Now, let the flame game continue once more!
Another unpopular opinion, that is actually extremely unpopular.
Dr. Pepper is one of the most disgusting things I have ever had in my whole life. I would rather drink raw sewage.
So basically you want a Keynesian Economy? That's actually the dominant economic system worldwide, so I wouldn't call your opinion unpopular.
I agree I don't like the stuff either