I was gonna write something political but nah.
Pokemon Mystery Dungeon are some of the best Pokemon games, better than most of the (especially newer) main series games. I started with Pokemon Mystery Dungeon so I may be biased though.
Pokemon Pinball is better.
The Last Jedi is the best Star Wars movie since the OT. Then they “course corrected” after listening too closely to online discourse, and ended up really ruining the franchise.
I loved the “anyone can be special” message, even when rammed down our throat by having the slave stable boy force pull the broom to himself at the end of the movie.
I hated them undoing that and going “hahahaha, no, you’re actually one of the two special families!!” in Rise of Skywalker.
God forbid a Star Wars movie be interesting or play with fan expectation. Trying to please the Star Wars fandom is like a battered woman trying to make sure that dinner is ready and hot when he gets home.
Cars > public transportation. I forget things & often have to turn back, and I like the freedom to change my mind at any point, stop where I want, and go wherever I want. I also hate being forced into shared public spaces. I also hate the idea of trusting the government to make any of it in any way near efficient. Fuck public transportation.
Your are assailed by many threats: the religious, the nihilists, the corporatists, the fascists, and the alleged “collectivists”. Extreme authoritarian “leftists”, A.K.A. “tankies” (i.e., apologists for Lenin, Stalin, Mao, the CCP, the DPRK, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Xi Jingping, etc.), are threats to a free, egalitarian, and open society, are just as violently authoritarian as their religious, corporatist, and fascist competitors, and should be treated with the contempt, distrust, and ridicule they deserve.
They claim to speak and fight for the proletariat, promising a new utopia, never before seen, once their revolution executes the last “class-traitor”. In practice, once they’re finished with “seizing the means of production”, they’ll never relinquish control and become the new ruling class.
They’ll assume the mantle of an enlightened elite post-revolutionary administration to guide the proletariat to their promised utopia of “each according to their ability, to each according to their need”. In practice, "the party leadership needs the most, because they’re obviously the most able” in reorganizing the economic and political structure of society. The utopia of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” will never exist, only the dictatorship of the “revolutionary party”. Repression and execution await those who question their claims and decisions.
These supposed champions of labor are really harbingers of death - of the mind and the body. They claim to be the true authoritative “voice of the people”. Understand what they really are; power over everything and everyone, forever, is what they seek. They want you either as a true believer (a willing pawn) or dead, just like all of the other supposedly benevolent dictators who promised utopias throughout history.
They’re akin to the pigs in Orwell’s Animal Farm, the loudest voices in the revolution, usurpers of a righteous cause, but a bit “more equal” than everyone else after the farmer is done away with. Fortunately, the pigs, like the farmer, got their comeuppance in the end of the story. Make these pigs squeal.
Monogamy feels like an archaic social convention enforced by unhealthy possessive behaviors and jealousy
Vegans oppose animal cruelty.
Vegetarians don’t, as the production of eggs, milk, etc is cruel.
Onions taste gross and have no tangible benefit to cooking. Fight me.
Eating meat and dairy is not sustainable in terms of resources and greenhouse gases, and non-vegan environmentalists are clowns on the level of people flying private jets to climate conferences.
Well the main flaw in your reasoning is thinking that it’s an issue addressed at the individual level rather than a greater systemic issue that cannot be addressed by the choice of individuals. And on top of that you colpevolise would-be allies whose life you don’t know, ironically playing right into oil tycoons and meat industry’s hands
It has to be both. Our World in Data puts it one way:
We have a number of options – some fall on the shoulders of consumers; some on producers.
Or to cut through the flowery language - farms need to stop producing meat, and people need to stop eating it.
The biggest reduction would come from the adoption of plant-rich diets. Emissions would be halved compared to business-as-usual.
And that’s cool and all but ain’t no way you will convince everyone to quit eating meat. Especially given that it’s not always a matter of choosing. Even then acting morally superior ain’t helping.
It’s the same discussion with cars, people will do whatever is most convenient and available, if you don’t want people to use cars you don’t go around telling tjem not to use it, you act on the city’s design and public transport to make it so it is convenient to use the alternatives and then you start banning cars from city centers, then move towards the periphery, etc etc. All these are actions taken at the source. Sure telling people to mot use cars as much, to carpool, etc will help a bit but it ain’t gonna solve your issues chief.
Maybe we can’t convince everyone to quit eating meat, but I would hope that we could appeal to self-described environmentalists, who have a stated interest in making sustainable changes.
That’s the OP’s point, after all. That the science unambiguously states that we need to stop eating meat if we care about meeting our climate goals. Any environmentalist who learns that this needs to happen and still chooses to eat meat is acting against their own ethics.
Death is fine and jail is mental torture. People with downs syndrome and similar are forced to live a tortured existence by people who think they’re good for subjective them to that.
The stock market should not exist. Investing in companies is fine, but we shouldn’t be able to buy our sell investment shares like a commodity.
All subsidies should not exist. They only alter the supply/demand in unnecessary and damaging ways. This must come with ending commodities trading like stock market investing.
An opinion so strongly shared by a vast majority is worth being sceptic about.
This is how you get flat earthers.
No, the one saying “you’re all wrong” was the first person to say the world is round. Even a minority of one can be correct about something against all popular opinion.
Andor was a garbage show, and The Batman (Robert Pattison) was a garbage film. Both are lauded and deserve less than none of the praise they get
My opinion is this: if you can’t be bothered to use proper grammar and spelling and express yourself clearly, you should shut the fuck up.
Parents who purchase animal products care more about their “personal choice” than the world they’re leaving for their children. Bacon is more important to them than their own kids.
Myers Briggs is posh astrology.
I think that’s actually been proven at this point hasn’t it?
That doesn’t stop an absolute fuck ton of people believing in it. One of my friends is quite deeply into it, she’s in FB groups about it, and decides what everyone’s type is upon meeting them. According to her I only think it’s nonsense because I’ve only done the free online tests, not the proper one. She wouldn’t listen the other day when I tried to put her right about flouride in the water, either.
Sounds like the test itself isn’t the problem but how it’s used and how much people attach to the results, like with IQ tests. Neither that nor Myers-Briggs should be part of interviewing for a job either but apparently some US companies do it anyway.
No, the test itself is definitely the problem. Regardless of whether you believe a personality type test can be effective, the MBTI is particularly and provably ineffective in just about every measurable way:
It’s not reliable. It has terrible test-retest reliability. If I’m X personality type, I shouldn’t test as X type one time, and Y type the next, and Z 6 months laters.
It’s not predictive. If a personality test accurately judges someone, it should mean you now know something about someone’s behaviours, and can extrapolate that forwards and predict behavioural trends. MBTI does not.
It fundamentally doesn’t match the data. MBTI relies upon the idea that people fall neatly into binary buckets (introverted vs extroverted, thinking vs feeling, etc). But the majority of people don’t, and test with MBTI scores close to the line the test draws, following a normal distribution. So the line separating two sides of a bell curve ends up being arbitrary.
And finally, it’s pushed very hard by the Myers-Briggs foundation, and not at all by independent scientific bodies. copying straight from wikipedia:
Most of the research supporting the MBTI’s validity has been produced by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, an organization run by the Myers–Briggs Foundation, and published in the center’s own journal, the Journal of Psychological Type (JPT),
I risk sounding very “AKSHUALLYY” here, but online tests do a huge harm to the credibility of MBTI, no wonder it gets such a bad rep when the tests are so unreliable and people nevertheless base their entire personalities on it… Originally it’s not supposed to be based on the binary choices of the 4 letters but the “cognitive functions” as defined by Carl Jung, which a lot of people will find to be just as much non-sense but with the right attitude I think they’re a useful tool to learn about ourselves and others.
I used to think this, but I think the new posh astrology is mental disorders in general. It costs thousands of dollars to get professionally assessed, whereas MBTI is a free quiz online. Crippling anxiety, depression, OCD, panic attacks, etc., are the new ENFP
Jesus this is a bad take
This is insulting to astrology, but yes lol
It shouldn’t be taken as scientific truth but it can help you know yourself and others better, and it’s an insult to compare it to astrology because at least it’s not based on completely random things like the position of the planets when you were born. The issue is that most people only know MBTI as online tests, which are self-report and have extremely vague and stereotypical questions that can very easily be manipulated to get whatever result you want, with the worst offender being the most popular one, 16personalities, which isn’t even an actual MBTI test but a BIg 5 one (which is not to say Big 5 is bad, but it’s very misleading to map it to MBTI types). In reality to use MBTI somewhat effectively is going to take studying Carl Jung’s work, how MBTI builds on that, lots of introspection, asking people about yourself, and lots of doubting and double checking your thinking. And very importantly you have to accept that in the end this all isn’t real and just a way to conceptualize different aspects of our personalities and it’s in no way predictive, you have to let go of stereotypes, anyone can act in any way, it’s just about tendencies.
This should be a popular opinion honestly, because it’s correct.
