Unpopular Opinions V5: "I still don't like Half Life 2." - General

[QUOTE=proch;49215733]Crash at my place[/QUOTE] Im not swimming an ocean for beer.

really getting tired of how overly conservative sensationalist headlines is getting

[QUOTE=Agent 47;49217078]really getting tired of how overly conservative sensationalist headlines is getting[/QUOTE] There is no middle ground in SH everyone always has to be fucking harsh and angry and pissed off about everything

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49217153]There is no middle ground in SH everyone always has to be fucking harsh and angry and pissed off about everything[/QUOTE] It'd be interesting if we just deleted SH the way we did a lot of other sections probably won't happen though I'd be glad to see all the bullshit go, but FP is kinda where I read my news :v:

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49217153]There is no middle ground in SH everyone always has to be fucking harsh and angry and pissed off about everything[/QUOTE] Well, it sorta is in the description of SH after all. ''News gets more informative the more outraged you are by it'' And the news these days is bad news mostly. Maybe they should allow news like ''Florida Man shoves two hammers up his bum'', complete with Austin Powers jokes, in SH again to lighten the mood more.

[QUOTE=Jordax;49217180] And the news these days is bad news mostly. Maybe they should allow news like ''Florida Man shoves two hammers up his bum'', complete with Austin Powers jokes, in SH again to lighten the mood more.[/QUOTE] I'm sick of everything that's in the news now, and I think it's entirely because of SH. I hope some other shit comes along to overshadow the current news, not that I think that the current bad news should be ignored or anything iunno, I just feel like everything that had to be discussed has been discussed and it's always the same shit in SH threads

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49217217]I'm sick of everything that's in the news now, and I think it's entirely because of SH. I hope some other shit comes along to overshadow the current news, not that I think that the current bad news should be ignored or anything iunno, I just feel like everything that had to be discussed has been discussed and it's always the same shit in SH threads[/QUOTE] Reading the news is meant to enrage you. When a person gets enraged after reading the news, they get it in their head they must do something. It creates a sense of unwarranted self importance in a negative way thats bad for you. [url]http://joel.is/the-power-of-ignoring-mainstream-news/[/url]

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49217237]Reading the news is meant to enrage you. When a person gets enraged after reading the news, they get it in their head they must do something. It creates a sense of unwarranted self importance in a negative way thats bad for you. [url]http://joel.is/the-power-of-ignoring-mainstream-news/[/url][/QUOTE] Nono, the news itself doesn't enrage me, the discussion in SH threads does

[QUOTE]Nono, the news is not what enrages me, the discussion in SH threads does[/QUOTE] You are getting pissed at something thats not in the room with you. Still not healthy. If its due to people not having the exact opinion as you, that may be a problem. If its due to people being legitimate morons, best not waste your anger on them. You'll destroy yourself that way. Personally, I do not care either way which people swing. People are still people.

I think I should maybe stop looking at SH for a while or something and just look at the news sites I usually visit Anyway, Does anybody else hate the term 'SJW'? I can't really take people who use 'SJW' unironically seriously this is not meant to be a knock against any gamergate people or whatever I just really hate the term

[QUOTE]Anyway, Does anybody else hate the term 'SJW'? I can't really take people who use 'SJW' unironically seriously this is not meant to be a knock against any gamergate people or whatever I just really hate the term[/QUOTE] If it bothers you so much, maybe it is time to either deal with the people who give liberal ideas a bad name, or its time to question your ideals. Ask your self, what do I really want to manifest in the world and are my ideas creating those results? If your ideals tend to attract intolerable people who act like shitheels in the name of tolerance, then perhaps your ideals are not meant to generate tolerance in the first place?

Well, in my opinion the term itself is just dumb, it to me has just become something that's used by an extreme stereotype of gamergaters that people against gamergate use to make fun of them, if you know what I mean. Can't people just find a different way of explaining what they mean, without using 'SJW'?

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49217377]Well, in my opinion the term itself is just dumb, it to me has just become something that's used by an extreme stereotype of gamergaters that people against gamergate use to make fun of them, if you know what I mean. Can't people just find a different way of explaining what they mean, without using 'SJW'?[/QUOTE] I prefer the name social justice jerk. Its more accurate however read above, about questioning your ideals. What are your values? Would tolerance be important? If so, why? What practical good comes from a more tolerant society?

The Wehrmacht is overrated. [QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;49217274]Nono, the news itself doesn't enrage me, the discussion in SH threads does[/QUOTE] I find it pretty easy to disagree with somebody and not hate them.

-shit wrong thread please disregard-

Weaponwank: Submachineguns were oudated by 1950 in terms of operational and strategic viability. They should be reserved for anti-terrorist forces, not regular soldiers. Continued research of submachienguns is moot as the P90 is the farthest we can go with SMG advancement until the creation of reliable caseless munitions.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49217329]If it bothers you so much, maybe it is time to either deal with the people who give liberal ideas a bad name, or its time to question your ideals. Ask your self, what do I really want to manifest in the world and are my ideas creating those results? If your ideals tend to attract intolerable people who act like shitheels in the name of tolerance, then perhaps your ideals are not meant to generate tolerance in the first place?[/QUOTE] This could be applied to just about literally anything

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;49218094]This could be applied to just about literally anything[/QUOTE] Yes it can. It still a good idea.

almost all of the (non-classical) music from Fallout 4 is really really awful

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49217784]Weaponwank: Submachineguns were oudated by 1950 in terms of operational and strategic viability. They should be reserved for anti-terrorist forces, not regular soldiers. Continued research of submachienguns is moot as the P90 is the farthest we can go with SMG advancement until the creation of reliable caseless munitions.[/QUOTE] but they look cool

I don't understand asking a woman's father if you can marry her like wtf it's not him that's getting married, seems like a really possessive thing to do.

[QUOTE=bdd458;49218857]I don't understand asking a woman's father if you can marry her like wtf it's not him that's getting married, seems like a really possessive thing to do.[/QUOTE] archaic traditions upheld by people who don't stop and think about the modern world. doesn't make sense that people practice this stuff today but it's not like it's harmful (other than [I]maybe[/I] to the relationship) [editline]30th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49217784]Weaponwank: Submachineguns were oudated by 1950 in terms of operational and strategic viability. They should be reserved for anti-terrorist forces, not regular soldiers. Continued research of submachienguns is moot as the P90 is the farthest we can go with SMG advancement until the creation of reliable caseless munitions.[/QUOTE] i still think they have a place in military vehicles and special forces units, but you're otherwise 100% right. I can't wait until FNH makes a P91 in caseless 9mm equivalent

[QUOTE=bdd458;49218857]I don't understand asking a woman's father if you can marry her like wtf it's not him that's getting married, seems like a really possessive thing to do.[/QUOTE] You re marrying the family. Not just her. So, yeah he gotta say "yes" too.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49219031]You re marrying the family. Not just her. So, yeah he gotta say "yes" too.[/QUOTE] you are literally not marrying the family

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49217329]If it bothers you so much, maybe it is time to either deal with the people who give liberal ideas a bad name, or its time to question your ideals. Ask your self, what do I really want to manifest in the world and are my ideas creating those results? If your ideals tend to attract intolerable people who act like shitheels in the name of tolerance, then perhaps your ideals are not meant to generate tolerance in the first place?[/QUOTE] Some people are being really kneejerk about it, describing the entirety of liberalism as "SJW"-territory. While I get the "PC bro" joke and its legitimacy, some people have taken it as a blank check to completely kill off liberal intentions. It's the exact same thing as the unfounded hate for the entire Republican ideology because of the vocal crazies.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49219031]You re marrying the family. Not just her. So, yeah he gotta say "yes" too.[/QUOTE] Kind of badly worded, but I do sort of agree with what you're saying. It's a bit of a nicety to get the approval of the family that you'll be a part of, though you & your SO reserve the decision to marry regardless of what they say.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49217400]The Wehrmacht is overrated. [/QUOTE] Are you talking about Wehraboos or....?

[QUOTE=wauterboi;49219623]Some people are being really kneejerk about it, describing the entirety of liberalism as "SJW"-territory. While I get the "PC bro" joke and its legitimacy, some people have taken it as a blank check to completely kill off liberal intentions. It's the exact same thing as the unfounded hate for the entire Republican ideology because of the vocal crazies.[/QUOTE] Well I see any form of fanaticism as intolerance. Leftist ideals seem to generate fanatics. Therefore the ideal is not going to create tolerance in the long run. I've dealt with my fair share of SJWs. So Ive tried to generate a new idea of what creates tolerance. You however I would describe you as a good person. [QUOTE]Kind of badly worded, but I do sort of agree with what you're saying. It's a bit of a nicety to get the approval of the family that you'll be a part of, though you & your SO reserve the decision to marry regardless of what they say.[/QUOTE] This is why I am against gay marriage. I know that not popular but the original intent of marriage (I'm talking when it started, way back in the stone age) was to tie the political and financial fates of two families through a child. It was never or ever about love. It helps, but no...... I am however not against the idea of creating multiple forms of marriage after a primary couple has sealed the deal. A marriage where lets say wants to add another person temporally to the marriage for what ever reason (lets say the woman wants to get to know another woman a bit more intimately) then that I believe to be the solution. The problem in the west is we have one idea what marriage means. Kinda like having just one brand of peanut butter. We need more "brands" of marriage or more ideas. Islam I believe is one culture that does this. Has different types of marriages for different situations. Not sure bout other ones. We as a culture should follow suit. The reason I am for this idea I have presented is it does solve two issues. The first issue? I have noticed that in todays world, there are single mothers. The children are either left with relatives or friends of the parents. The problem with this is such people may not be of the best of people. The other is reliability. Eventually the friends or relatives may have lives of their own. It becomes a different set of rules day to day. Im sorry to say this but children can be liars. So they never learn discipline or stability and end up becoming cheaters of sorts to get out things they dont want to do, but would be good for them in the long run. situation of the children bouncing from care taker to care taker. Which leads to having multiple different sets of rules. They never become moral. Just learn how to exploit people. The second scenario is they are left to fend for them selves. The latter is a sure invitation for delinquency and emotional instability through the persons life. There as cases where both parents are trying to work and which creates the same situation. Which lead to same results. Latch key children sand children lacking discipline and a firm sense of morality and guidance. Under my system, a couple if they want to, could having someone else to be a stay at home parent, while the primary couple does what they need to do. The reasons for the secondary could be for whatever the couple and the secondary may desire. The second issue is when done properly, it creates a "clan" of sorts. By doing this, you give people a sense of belonging and community. This reduces fanaticism and fills the needs most people end up adhering to a political idea for. When this is created, when the people follow an idea, it would be because they genuinely want to follow, not because they want to have a false sense of importance, or a reason to screw other people up (or bully) or get attention. You would be left with genuine people

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49220842] This is why I am against gay marriage. I know that not popular but the original intent of marriage (I'm talking when it started, way back in the stone age) was to tie the political and financial fates of two families through a child. It was never or ever about love. It helps, but no......[/QUOTE] Fucking what

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;49221310]Fucking what[/QUOTE] Did you read the rest of the post? I am for it, just in another format. I came up with my own way of marriage that would allow it through another form. The idea of a marriage between just two people is what I am against. Only reason people rated me dumb and funny are anti children, against using ideas from other cultures about marriage (thus pro western culture, thus racist) and are against the idea a woman can have as many partners as she wants. Thus sexist.