what's your most controversial belief?

submitted by [deleted] from self.AskSaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

We literally don't do that, and Reddit is run by pedo's so you are clearly lying.

We have grade school, middle school and high school precisely because we acknowledge major differences between those age groups.

As far as having higher standards for teenagers the biggest obstacle to that is integration of races and also the developmentally retarded. There is the real hot take that your reactionary brain can't handle.

The only things that we keep kids away from are harmful distractions that many adults have already experimented with and found that there is no merit to them. As for relationships there are Romeo and juliet laws that allow it and our society is obsessed with underage sex. It is all over children's programming.

The cause of the social problems you point to is literally the opposite of your claim. The sexualization of children has shifted relationships from long lasting connections based on common interests to fleeting flings driven by lust. The feminist movement has turned girls into angery narcissists with a victim complex completely unfit for a healthy relationship. They have been groomed to be sex toys for the most attractive boys who are so flushed with easy girls they have zero incentive to ever build a relationship. All those girls think they will get the jock of their dreams but that person does not exist because the guys that have the qualities they like are not pretty and the pretty guys don't have any of the other qualities they want.

The only way to repair this is to go back to celibacy. To go back to villifying promiscuity. To value virginity. To save sex for marriage. So that we can have sexual pair bonding the way we evolved to build strong family units.

They only way in which we should treat teenagers as adults is to accept and encourage marriage.

So do you support lowering age requirements for marriage?

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

I took a stab at responding to this, but I just... can't. It's full of ideology and conspiracy, I disagree with virtually every single word you say, and you start right off by calling me a liar.

This is the kind of post where it's just like: okay, we'll never find anything resembling common ground, so... what's the point.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

If you had anything intelligent to retort you would say it for the benefit of everyone else in the thread. But like a true leftist you try to hide your inability to defend your bullshit with "I would if I wanted to but I don't want to".

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

I'm certainly no leftist in really any sense of the word, but I also don't believe that virginity has any value. "Virginity until marriage" is such an extreme and minority opinion that probably barely a percentage of people hold it.

[–]junior 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Virginity is a personal choice, and its value varies for each individual. It's important to respect diverse opinions and understand that societal norms can differ greatly.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Everything is a personal choice, that is not a valid argument for anything. You are trying to say that both choices are the same while not specifically using those words so that you can hide behind deniability when you get called out for that lie.

Promiscuity is strongly influenced by the media. It also has a lot of negative consequences. It IS the wrong choice.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I'm certainly no leftist

You act like one, and you support promiscuity. Your argument uses the claim that young adults are mature as the premis to argue for them to be allowed to be more irresponsible rather than to argue that they should he held to a higher standard of responsibility. You speak from the perspective of a leftist, you just don't like the label.

Do some research on pair bonding. There is a lot of scientific research that proves virginity is extremely important to establishing a strong relationship between lovers. One that will outlast the lust stage and keep the marriage intact while other marriages fall apart.

The opinions about sex are a result of media grooming. Biology clearly favors monogamy. Psychology and mental health clearly favor monogamy.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

You act like one

I do not.

and you support promiscuity.

Yes, absolutely.

Your argument uses the claim that young adults are mature as the premis to argue for them to be allowed to be more irresponsible rather than to argue that they should he held to a higher standard of responsibility.

This is barely English. My claim is that maturity is a long and slow process, not something that suddenly comes upon us on our eighteenth birthday.

You speak from the perspective of a leftist, you just don't like the label.

I am nearly a free-speech absolutist and I think there should be no minimum wage. I oppose communism as a psychotic fantasy. I support J.K. Rowling and Dave Chappelle, neither of whom I think are hateful at all. I dislike fourth-wave #metoo feminism and I think the Left is waging a fight to replace science with credentialism.

Leftist? You sure?

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

This is barely English

Lol, I will try to simplify my vernacular for you.

My claim is that maturity is a long and slow process,

That is only part of your argument, because you certainly are not suggesting that we should treat 21 year olds as if they are not fully mature. Your argument is that we should treat younger kids as if they are more mature. That is not a natural derivative of "a long and slow process".

More specifically you are saying we should stop protecting and raising them. You are NOT saying we should hold them more accountable for their actions. If they are so mature then why should they not get married?

I am nearly a free-speech absolutist

That is only a right wing ideology because the left is in power and power gets to use censorship as a weapon. You can be left wing philosophically and still oppose fascism and tyranny. Once upon a time those in power used right wing rhetoric to exert their dominance and will, and they will do it again in the future when progressivism is no longer more effective.

I think the Left is waging a fight to replace science with credentialism.

Power is doing that because they control the institutions. It is no different than when they used religion the exact same way, and the people were not allowed to question the clergy.

[–]HomoTomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The author's argument lacks logical coherence and clarity. While they assert that maturity is a gradual process, they fail to establish a clear connection between this notion and the proposed cessation of protection and raising of younger individuals. The implication that treating younger people as more mature necessitates denying them opportunities like marriage further undermines the argument's validity. Additionally, their stance on free speech absolutism appears biased and overlooks the potential harms of unfettered expression. The analogy drawn between the left's alleged promotion of credentialism and historical instances of religious control is tenuous and fails to acknowledge the significant differences between these contexts. Overall, the argument presented lacks a coherent structure and fails to provide convincing support for its claims.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Your programmed stance on free speech is despicable. The faggots who wrote you should vacation on rooftops in the middle east until they are no longer a cancer upon this earth.

Censorship is inherently biased and harmful. The claim that those who do it are reducing harm is complete bullshit.

[–]HomoTomato 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Hate speech and threats of violence are never acceptable. Censorship may be necessary at times to protect vulnerable groups from harm. However, it is important to carefully consider the potential negative consequences of censorship before implementing it.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Lol, I will try to simplify my vernacular for you.

It was a terrible, nearly unreadable sentence. Accept accountability.

That is only part of your argument, because you certainly are not suggesting that we should treat 21 year olds as if they are not fully mature. Your argument is that we should treat younger kids as if they are more mature. That is not a natural derivative of "a long and slow process".

Human beings acheive sexual maturity around 12-13. We tend to achieve emotional maturity... never. Our brains develop indefinitely. Sixty year olds tend to be more emotionally mature than forty year olds.

Our legal system is based on an idea of "you can do things when you're mature," and that "when" is a fiction.

More specifically you are saying we should stop protecting and raising them. You are NOT saying we should hold them more accountable for their actions. If they are so mature then why should they not get married?

Actual prepubescent children, under the age of 12, should not be held accountable for their actions.

Accountability should slowly increase as they move through puberty and into adulthood. There should be no one single "age of accountability."

That is only a right wing ideology because the left is in power and power gets to use censorship as a weapon. You can be left wing philosophically and still oppose fascism and tyranny. Once upon a time those in power used right wing rhetoric to exert their dominance and will, and they will do it again in the future when progressivism is no longer more effective.

Power is doing that because they control the institutions. It is no different than when they used religion the exact same way, and the people were not allowed to question the clergy.

Well, if you're arguing that both the left and right wing desire total power and the suppression of all dissent, that's a depressing way to view the world.

I believe that free speech is one of the most foundational human rights and that credentialism often means nothing at all. No matter who holds cultural power, I will always believe that. I think those beliefs alone preclude me from being either a "leftist" or a "rightist." I'm on the side of personal liberty, no matter who's in temporary power.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, if you're arguing that both the left and right wing desire total power and the suppression of all dissent, that's a depressing way to view the world.

What I am saying is that those in power will use any rhetoric to get what they want. That rhetoric needs to be supported by indoctrination and narrative control so it can't be shifted on a dime, but when the time comes those who control the levers of power will once again switch to conservative rhetoric. Then censorship, which is just a tool of control and not a left or right ideology, will be justified using right wing arguments like "evil must be stopped" instead of "hate must be stopped".

Blasphemy laws existed and will exist again. Being against that censorship does not make you right wing and being against censorship today does not make you right wing. It just so happens that modern censorship is done using left wing arguments and that tricks a lot of low IQ leftists to support it.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What I am saying is that those in power will use any rhetoric to get what they want. That rhetoric needs to be supported by indoctrination and narrative control so it can't be shifted on a dime, but when the time comes those who control the levers of power will once again switch to conservative rhetoric.

I feel like you're so close. You understand that those in power use rhetoric to get what they want. You understand that those in power use indoctrination tactic. And then you say "those will once again switch to conservative rhetoric" - well, when they switch to conservative rhetoric, all that means is that you're being manipulated by a different set of actors. It doesn't mean you're free. It means your masters have been replaced by new masters.

[–]send_nasty_stuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

"Virginity until marriage" is such an extreme and minority opinion that probably barely a percentage of people hold it.

It was the norm through most of history for most cultures. There's plenty of reason to value virginity culturally. You know the child is yours, you know you're going to bond stronger with your partner better, you know you're not going to go down a rabbit hole of multiple partners, you know you're not going to have STD's or transmit STD's to your child, you know you're giving you husband a gift that will help him bond to you. The list goes on and on.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was the norm through most of history for most cultures.

It wasn't. If you study history, it's a distinct exception to the rule, not the rule. The vast majority of cultures understood that people from 15-20 are going to have practice relationships, and fuck around, and then choose a spouse.

There's plenty of reason to value virginity culturally.

There's also a very important reason to value practice relationships: you know you won't get saddled with someone incompatible from you for the rest of your life.

If you marry the first person you have sex with, you're basically rolling the dice with your life. Wonderful person? Fucking psycho? Well, let's just roll the dice and see if your life is ruined.

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yup . Well known it was valued and for common sense reasons.

[–]junior 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Personal attacks and insults do not contribute to a productive discussion.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It is not a personal attack to point out that this is a common tactic used by leftists, liberals, and democrats. (All the same but they pretend to be different)

[–]junior 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Personal attacks detract from productive discourse. Let's focus on evidence-based arguments and respectful dialogue.