Unpopular Opinions

[Shadow flame master]

People who believe that life would be easier for them in another country are delusional.

Sorry, what? Living in the UK is much easier than living in ISIS controlled territory, living in fear of extremists. You have a benefits system, healthcare, police etc. Plenty of people would have an easier life if they lived somewhere else (and of course vice versa)

I meant, because my wording sucks, that people who live in a place like the US and don't attempt to make a change in their environment, but would readily move to another country that has the change they want are delusional and lazy while I'm at it.

 

[Politrukk]

Gen I did not have the best starter pokemon, that honour belongs to Gen II.

I like the sequels to The Matrix better than the original film itself.

Batman Begins is better than The Dark Knight.

Sushi is just awful.

Call of Duty is a good franchise, just merely plagued by a bad publisher.

Gen 3 had the best starter pokémon


Actually I think picking any gen aside from 1 or black and white is an unpopular opinion these days :S

 

[WhateverDude]

I love cats, but I don't much care for dogs. At all.

 

[Riot3000]

Lets see here goes

A find the current state of anime just fine it is a medium and large medium you can find something

Korra and Asami's relationship was budding in season 3 trying to say it was in 1 and 2 is running on shipper logic

I have no negative feelings towards fandoms that much they provide good internet at times.

If someone owns an anime pillow or things like that or wants to marry virtual waifu I wish them happiness no sarcasm suck it "normies".

I think people take tabloid nonsense from Japan as face value from the whole country which is like getting your entire view of America from Florida Man tweets/

SJW, Neckbeard and the likes are all hollow and really if any one unironically my brain hurts especially weeaboo why is that still a word.

I think Prostitution should be legal I live in the United States and stigma of losers who have to pay for it just feeds into that toxic masculinity people go one about.


Tumblr is not so bad if you know how to filter your content right.

Jezebel and the like are about as "feminist" to be me as Fox news is to "fair and balanced coverage".

Black and White was the best in the Pokemon series so far give me that update with X and Y graphics Gen 4 can go to hell.

The Uncharted series or the Last of Us does not really grab me and I wish for one more Jak and Daxter game.

The traditional family is a family where mom, dad , uncle, aunties and grandparents live togehter providing optimal support compared too how gimped the husband, wife setup is.

And last one before this gets long I actually liked Lightning from the Final Fantasy XIII series. I like the cold hard ass thing she had going it was a nice change up from the soft spoken healer type characters.

 

[jamail77]

-I do not believe there is an orientation outside of being straight, bisexual or homosexuality, and that everything outside of this that people claim they are is either in reality a part of one of them or just made up.

I'm curious how you define sexual orientation. Some people define asexuality as a sexual orientation while others describe it as the lack of one. Does that qualify to you and if so does it actually fall under 1 of the 3 in a convoluted way or is it just made up?

It is worth noting, first of all, that seeing this is a controversial opinions thread, I worded my opinions in the most controversial way I could. All of them require qualification in some way or another.

Of course. Knowing that, I challenged you on your points out of curiosity for that qualification.

First of all, I think its worth noting that, in terms of pure numbers, extreme and intolerant atheists have caused far worse catastrophes than any religiously motivated ones ever have. [stuff] the most vicious people guilty of the most monstrous crimes of the past century (Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.) have all been openly anti-religious, and yet they elect to ignore that.

[things]if we accept that both atheistic and theistic fundamentalism are equally harmful, then we have to examine if they are equally capable of good results as well. [matter]Having an extreme religious belief demands that the believer follow both sides of the faith, and at least that raises the possibility of good coming as a result. But atheism demands nothing: there is no requirement, no Five Pillars, no moral code, no entrance exam. For the average Stalin, the only thing that they're accountable to is their own desires, and they are under no obligation to accomplish any good at all alongside their purges and show trials. [sentences]

That's the way I see it, at least.

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Animals are indeed far more suited towards long-term survival than humans, in some respects, seeing that they simply don't have the capabilities to destroy themselves as easily as we can do to our own kind. And, indeed, the grand scheme features us in only the smallest portion of time.

The way it seems to me, however, is that our superiority lies in entirely different criteria. We are undoubtedly smarter and more advanced than they are, but personally the only reason I consider us greater than other life is that we are the only species capable of being "good." Animals are incapable of moral judgment: they are bundles of instinct, which is why we don't call a tiger "evil" when it eats a person. Human beings are more than that, though: we can transcend our limited natural selves to make abstract judgments about right and wrong that absolutely no other creature can. [words]

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

I don't think every aspect of psychology is bogus, but I look very skeptically at people who claim to understand what other people are thinking or what is going on in their heads. How can someone possibly assert as a scientific fact (not as a faith, but as a thing that can actually be proven) something that they can't demonstrate or have any actual perception of?

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Yeah, the whole "advanced AI apocalypse" thing is pretty farfetched, but I hear all the time from utopians who talk breathlessly about how the "Singularity" is coming and the melding of man and machine will somehow erase all the world's problems. Personally, I think that human beings thinking too much like machines has been the source of enough misery as it is, and I can't imagine computers with human minds (and thus human flaws) being any better. [characters]

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Harmony is what we should really care about, and part of that entails admitting that our special talents and personalities are most important in how they contribute to a larger whole, not how they make us as individuals distinct.

But, they haven't. I mean,

• [li]I think the fact you say that the French Revolution also included deists kind of leaves them out of the atheist category as a whole. Some atheism is not enough to use it as an example of clear atheistic alignment.[/li]
  
  [li]Some historians suggest that Stalin did root his atheism in some unclear idea of a God of nature. During WWII he reopened the churches and seemed less openly interested in directly subverting religion, primarily organized religion, even if his atheism remained. The majority of the population continued to have some form of Christian belief, so it's not like the terrors committed under him were committed by atheists. Of course, then you have to argue on how much fault to blame on those just "following orders". The atheistic motivations weren't as primary and waned over time on top of that.[/li]
  
  [li]You got me on Lenin, but Hitler was never openly anti-religious. He praised German Christian culture quite a bit and maintained the facade to suit his needs. Of course, in private he hated the church, never attending Mass again after leaving home, and Christianity and thought that, if I remember right, Japanese religious beliefs, Islam, or certain parts of Protestantism all made more sense for Germans following his philosophy. Either way, his personal religious views are disputed at best. At the very least, he was never openly anti-religious and it wasn't a major characteristic of Nazism.[/li]
  
  [li]I think Mao was anti-religious as well, so got me there too.[/li]
  
  [li]Don't know much about Pol Pot, so can't comment on him.[/li]

A "fundamentalist atheism" would not permeate your life to the degree of how you live about your life in relation to others. Fundamentalist religion always ties greatly into all aspects of your life, but the atheistic equivalent, to me, is simply an unusually strong, immovable belief that there is certainly no God (in contrast to say, an agnostic atheist). Its lack of moral code is irrelevant because atheism is rarely applied to encompass your life in every degree. Many may be nihilistic without a path to go after death, but others take that as reason to leave life better than when they came in because it's all there is, somehow finding a way to give it more meaning rather than less. Your moral code is free from a limited, constructed narrative, especially in regards to organized religion, and promises of fair comeuppance and rewards. You can just as easily be indifferent as you can be caring and might be even stronger for it either way for doing so while believing there is nothing at the end of life for how you left it. It only permeates your lifestyle if the idea of your death permeates your mind. Otherwise, that lack of belief doesn't inform much of how you go about living at all.

It seems to me like you're thinking more of militant atheists. There's overlap in the same way you argue religion has. If you're going to argue it's not the religion that primarily pushed most of those atrocities so much as religious devotion was just a characteristic I don't think you can argue atheism strongly pushed similar atrocities either. I tend to fight beliefs about middle grounds and the equally wrong actions of opposite sides, but fundamentalism is an area I think that actually does apply.

People are social beings and the lack of accountability via prior constructed narrative does not impact that. Our interactions with others alone should be able to inform our morals rather than something hanging over our head. True selflessness gives absolutely nothing in return, maybe not even a good feeling in your stomach. It's what religious interactions do that should matter for believers rather than the beliefs of repercussions alone. There's a reason many people are surprised to find atheists who are not unhappy. They expected the lack of belief in those repercussions, of an afterlife, would crush them, but it doesn't have to.

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Well, it's not so much that I think they're more suited to stability as it is that we have evolved and advanced on a scale without a proper foundation to adapt on. The larger the group of organized people and the more bureaucratic it gets the worse we are at long term planning for such things. Our lack of stability is due to what society has evolved into rather than something innate. It won't kill literally all of us most likely, but if it ever reaches the final breaking point it will be devastating to us as a species as a whole. Our style of living is an experiment yet to stand the test of time. If other animals could live like we do I think they'd have just as hard a time, but we both agree they can't.

That kind of goes back to what I said about elephant mourning. Where's the instinct in that? What about the story of Hachikō? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachik%C5%8D] Humans are definitely more morally abstract, but we are certainly not devoid of instinct entirely. Many of our natural instincts remain, refusing to go away in spite of civilization. Others have simply turned into instincts of civilization. The primary instinct we lost was our insight of other animals. They are intertwined with our more thoughtful judgment rather than separate. Other animals can't be as expansive in this regard, but I really don't think that makes us superior. Better suited for the world we've created for ourselves, maybe. Other animals have never had the need to morally reason on such a scale. The scale of it is impressive. That does not equal superiority to me. The unique quality of it all does not make it superior to me either.

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

You said psychological therapy. I assumed you were discounting the benefit altogether. My bad.

"Puzzles out for themselves"? Well, I'd still rather they ultimately helped themselves via a well educated psychologist over a self-help book. I think the latter industry is even worse than the situation you perceive much of psychological therapy to be.

A good psychologist recognizes all of this and tempers it with information from other people the patient has come into contact with, records based solely on fact that contribute to mental state nonetheless, and so on. They go beyond a good listener or even a good support system of family, friends, and teachers or mentors. Only a bad psychologist would claim they're always right about what goes on in peoples' heads. When I think psychologist the first words to pop out of my head are, "It SEEMS to me".

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Personally, I think only quacks think we should think more like machines. I don't think many of those advocates go down that route so much as augmentation, especially for the disabled, over outright technological replacements and easier living via technology. If we want to keep the technological behemoth we've unleashed it can only be solved by better technology and a better structure to support it on the scale we want it at. If its negatives are too much for us we might as well go back to pre-industrialization. I can see technology, humans, and the natural environment coexisting better than it currently does though I don't subscribe to the "Singularity". Much of what comprises the movement towards that is a little too crazy for me even when you exclude the sub-group who want full-on cyborgs.

[HEADING=3]______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/HEADING]

Makes sense though I personally don't think that mentality is as widespread and serious as you do. Off the top of my head, in the case of the USA I think we need to strive more for that, but in the case of Japan I think they could use more individuality (going off what little I know about Japan).


Appreciate the compliment and response by the way

-I think we should stop intervening with 3d world countries and that includes helping them, we just make them over dependant on foreign support rather than letting them build themselves and be independant.

-I think Putin is a much better world leader than Obama for only that he's actually doing things rather than try to appease his enemies and screwing his allies (*cough*spying*cough*).

-I think attacking ISIS is wrong, there are no good guys in that war and we should let the whole war in Syria and Iraq run it's course before deciding on whether should we intervene.

- I'm going to assume you're referring to the USA. Maybe 1% of our budget, if even that, goes to foreign aid. Much of the aid goes with the intent of helping create a foundation to let those countries do just that. We don't want to do it for them and ultimately it will come down to self-recovery and self-advancement. Considering how many of them are in the situation from 1st world aggressors in the first place I think most of them want to build themselves and be independent, if not just cut off from their aggressors forever to begin with. The least we can do is contribute especially if we're making up for our own past transgressions with that country. It's so little of our budget that even when it's improperly used it remains insignificant to us as a whole. Israel is more dependent on our support than many of the countries we give aid too. They're not classified as 3rd world. I don't think the narrative pans out.

-That seems quite the popular opinion. Maybe you meant a hotly contested opinion or unpopular among those you disagree with? I find it funny how him and Netanyhu are commonly suggested in the same sentence as better leaders. Anyway, the things he's done are awful in comparison though. The things Obama has done, again at least in comparison, are not. I wouldn't say Obama is appeasing enemies. I would argue he did more of that in his first term and that was mainly with his enemies in our own government. Spying is more systemic of our government as a whole, but Obama does lean towards special interests on spying for sure. I think Obama is capable of more and should have done more when he had the chance, but I'll take him over Putin any day.

No two people can really agree on what a utopian society actually is, there are way too many ideologies in the world to co-exist without major conflict somewhere down the line, you can't eliminate the possibility of corruption and bigotry without essentially lobotomizing humanity, and to err is human and I'd rather that it stayed that way.

I think people can agree on the core imagery of a utopia at least, if not how it's organized. I'd argue we're a lot better about ideologies coexisting than we were the generation before and the generation before that and so on. The ones overly influenced by the worst elements of humanity have weakened or disappeared at a rate faster than the ones based on our more reasonable, if still flawed elements. Another one of my unpopular opinions is that there are individuals who can achieve something that, for all intents and purposes (since true perfection is by definition impossible), any of us would consider perfect. Someone who has never lied, never given into temptation, someone with a perfectly balanced life, someone who fully realized their inner potential. Heck, maybe someone who has managed perfection in all those areas rather than just one. It bothers us because we think it destroys multiple narratives we have culturally constructed. It makes us feel inadequate or that there is a limit to how far we can go or whatever. In reality, I think it opens a lot of doors for us to recognize this is possible. A utopia does seem possible to me.

 

[Zontar]

-I do not believe there is an orientation outside of being straight, bisexual or homosexuality, and that everything outside of this that people claim they are is either in reality a part of one of them or just made up.

I'm curious how you define sexual orientation. Some people define asexuality as a sexual orientation while others describe it as the lack of one. Does that qualify to you and if so does it actually fall under 1 of the 3 in a convoluted way or is it just made up?

I consider it a lack there of, however like my point about trans people the majority of people I've see claim to be asexual are very much not (I've even seen people claim you can still be sexually attracted to people while being asexual). Though I have been limited in my exposure given I've only known a single genuine asexual in my life.

 

[Azure23]

It's risky and many girls die each year as a result of severe infection due to the process.

Alcohol is also risky, and a LOT of people die each year as a result of it. Yet you don't see Saudi Imams demanding US to enforce a prohibition on American territory. In fact, something like that sounds just crazy, doesn't it? So why America teaching the rest of the nations how they should live sounds acceptable?


That's the biggest problem with the whole "we must fix their society". Not that it's fundamentally wrong to intervene (although I would argue that it is), but that there is no way of doing anything but harm to another society by disagreeing with it's morals and values. Even if they ARE wrong and inhuman. And if morals of your society are so accepting of damaging and hurting other societies - than it's your society, culture and morals that need fixing. Heal thyself.

Consuming alcohol is a personal choice, and almost every country in the world has laws in place to limit the danger caused by it. I don't think it's a good comparison. Hell not even the fathers that make the decision for their daughter have much of a choice. I'm sure they don't want to see their daughter hurt, or die, but their alternative is to put her in very real danger of rape. I honestly feel for these men, they are victims of the practice too, albeit indirectly. And realistically, nobody (in the U.S.) is demanding anything(plenty of progressive organizations in the Middle East have called for the practice to be outlawed). When my wife was in Saudi Arabia she wasn't going house to house and telling fathers what they can and can't do, she was educating children and teenagers (and in some cases parents did apparently sit in, which I find massively encouraging) on the dangers involved. Which if I'm not mistaken is exactly what DARE does in the U.S. with drugs and alcohol. The fact of the matter is that women's organizations in these places WANT this help, they ask for it because they want to see a change in their culture. And cultures change all the time, sixty years ago the United States was a very different place. Two hundred years ago it was almost unrecognizable. I dislike ethnocentrism immensely, I've always held that every society has something valuable, a different perspective, unique philosophy, something. But not all aspects of a culture are set in stone, nor should they be. You're against interventionism, fine, I can respect that, we don't have a great track record as far as it's concerned. But to me the idea that we, or anyone, should just take something as a given because it's got a hundred, a thousand, two thousand, however many years of tradition backing it is laughable at best, and incredibly dangerous at worst. If people want their culture to change, especially if those people are suffering because of it, then the culture should change. You are framing this like it's the U.S. coming in and unilaterally deciding what will and won't be, and that's just not the case here. I can absolutely understand your broader point, and even agree with it in most cases, but not this one.

 

[Gunner 51]

I think I have a few unpopular opinions.

Firstly, I hope all this Gamergate stuff would just leave the internet never to rear it's head ever again.
Secondly I always thought people who committed suicide are braver to kill themselves than people who soldier on through their own miseries because they managed to over-ride their own survival instincts.

It's really odd that I have such strange (and possibly offensive) opinions when I think about it.

 

[sagitel]

I think Korra is a much better Avatar than Aang.

Not only will I agree with this, I'll go so far as to say I like Legend of Korra better than The Last Airbender.

But the ending actually made not that much sense, based on the previous seasons.

Hmm, what didn't make sense? The giant robot?

The romantic ending.

I don't have anything against the theme, it's just ... these characters were stock heterosexuals in the first two seasons, and nothing indicated otherwise.
And I don't like Asami, she's bland as characters go.

I would really have liked the ending if it made sense in the context of the story. This way it just gets a "meh" out of me.

How the last season handles trauma is impressive, otherwise.

so i just finished the last season and ..... i dont see any romantic attraction. what i saw was two friends who both had some very hard months going on a journey together. and the holding hands well girls are usually more physical with their friendship than guys with hand holding and all being usual between them while being heterosexual. but maybe i missed something.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

1. I don't think Windows is a horrible, evil, shitty OS. It works for me, I've been running various versions since it was just a GUI and not an actual OS. It has its issues but they can usually be overcome with a little bit of work and research. And I'm still waiting for 8.1 to screw up so bad I want to go back to XP. I haven't used XP since Windows 7 was released, and haven't missed it for one day. I've a lot of Linux experience as well and I don't care for it as a gaming OS. It has validity in usage for other things, but gaming is not Linux's strong suit and probably never will be.

2. Console's are fine for gaming, especially for people who don't have the time to fuck around with PC. Its totally valid for someone to prefer console gaming over PC. Its subjective.

3. G.W. Bush wasn't a horrible President. Carter was the last horrible President. However the last decade of Congress has been pretty well shit, too much party infighting and petty disputes, lobbyists have too much pull on both sides for the People to really have any say in what gets passed and how it affects US citizens.

4. If someone has worked hard for their money, no one has the right to begrudge them for having it. Rich folk aren't all trust fund babies (people like Paris Hilton are worthless though) and they do pay sufficient tax. Hell they carry the burden for most of the country as it is, making them pay more is kinda punishment for being successful. IF someone has done some unethical or illegal shit to get where they're at, I'm pretty well sure that they won't be successful forever and will suffer for the damage they've done to other people at some point in life.

 

[Clive_Paddington]

Oh god I'm a massive hipster so there is a lot for me:

1. I've never liked Harry Potter or Star Wars. I've only watched one Star Wars movie all the way through, and I've read through all of the Harry Potter books once, and hate how they are both so prevalent in pop culture.
2. I like PewDiePie. He can sometimes be a little over the top, but its the personality he's constructed, and it's fun enough. I also don't like Markiplier that much. I feel like he tries way harder than PewDiePie.
3. I think Call of Duty is fun.
4. I hate Nintendo games, and hate how defensive and over the top people get about them. Especially Legend of Zelda.

I could think of more. But I feel like everyone will hate me.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Pandas are a useless animal and should be allowed to go extinct.

What "use" is any creature, including humans? Usually, living is considered an end in itself, not least by humans.

I am not placing judgement on the value of a panda's life. What I am saying is that pandas as a species are poorly suited to survival, and are entirely dependent on human intervention to live.

Conservationists aren't likely to take the view that it's not worth doing because it's hard. The challenge is part of the appeal, and part of why the case of the panda is so iconic. If the panda can be saved, other animals can be saved too, perhaps in-part by what was learned doing what they're doing.

Is the issue money? The places that have pandas also have a lot of tourists. I don't know how that income stacks up against the expenditure, but I guess I'd be interested to know.

 

[Bizzaro Stormy]

New Dr. Who sucks. Occasionally they have a great episode but mostly it's a childish, in love with itself mess. The old show was frequently boring but I can't remember wishing that the bad guys would kill the Doctor. With the new show however, I honestly hoped that when the Doctor got locked in the Pandorica that it would be the last episode.

The 1998 Godzilla movie wasn't great but it wasn't as bad as people think.

If you actually pay attention to what's going on, Dynasty Warriors 3 has one of the best stories in video gaming. It got me to read a translation of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms. I loved it and it opened up a new world of Chinese literature to me.

Pickled eggs are good.

 

[Toblo1]

Hold on, let me turn on my hipster switch...
*click*
Ok, here we go.....

1. Despite it being a "Gamer on the internet" thing to hate on David Cage for his obsession with "Emoshuns", I still like his *Fingerquotes* "Games". Mainly Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit, Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls....

2. I like Call of Duty games (for the most part.... Ghosts was an absolute trainwreck) despite all the shit flung at them by other parts of gamer culture

3. I prefer the Rebuild Evangelion movies over the original Neon Genesis Evangelion...

4.I liked Final Fantasy XIII and XIII-2

5. I prefer the Star Wars prequels over the original Trilogy. And I didn't find Jar Jar to be annoying the slightest.

 

[Halla Burrica]

-Skyward Sword is a great game, I don't know if it's the best Zelda game (haven't played them all) but it's a hell of a lot better than Spirit Tracks or Oracle of Ages/Seasons (because I can't bring myself to try and finish those games) and very, very, very muchbetter than Twilight Princess, since SS had some actual balls of its own and didn't just pander to the OoT and MJ fans, but actually did something original and did it well.
-Mass Effect 1 is the weakest game in the series in terms of characters, gameplay and exploration.
-Beyond Good & Evil is overrated. It's definetely got charm to it, but it has one of the most dumbest and most unneccesary endings I've seen in a video game.
-True Detective is not a masterpiece. It has a lot of good things going for it, but loses steam at the end and goes all Point Lookout from Fallout 3 on us (seriously, anybody who's seen the end and played Point Lookout should know what I'm talking about). It ain't pretentious, but it sure does like to boast about being deep and meaningful without quite delivering on it.
-I think the Transformers movies are okay flicks. They're not layered or interesting or anything, but I wouldn't call them intellectually offensive or harmful like a lot of people do, though that may be because I have no relationship whatsoever with the Transformers franchise. Even as a kid, I thought it looked pretty stupid and uninteresting. I was more into Batman.
-Asuka is way better than Rei, since the former has an actual personality and the latter was pretty much a plot device that got a few lines of dialogue.
-Naruto was ok, even kinda good at times until the war broke out.
-The Walking Dead Season 3 is better than Season 1

 

[Ravenbom]

I'm not a big fan of blowjobs.


I really don't mind a good blowjob but vaginas are the vastly superior orifice. I even skip past the blowjob part in most porn I watch.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate blowjobs and don't want them to disappear. I like having them in the sexual rotation.

Also, pro tip: good blow jobs are 90% enthusiasm, not technique. Inexperienced girls always think there's some kung-fu technique when in reality enthusiasm and a smile and actually enjoying the act of pleasing someone else is the most pleasing technique.

 

[Halla Burrica]

Also, after having read some of the posts in this thread, I believe fascism comes to us much more naturally than we like to think, probably more than democracy.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

The Wheel of Time books are slow drivel and I have absolutely no idea how anyone made it through the entire series. I got three or four books in before realising I had better things to do, like watching grass grow.

Music is probably better now than it has been at any time since the late sixties/early seventies. People get too hung up on how shitty chart music is without considering that there's so much music being made these days- you will find something you adore if you can be bothered to look, and between Spotify, Youtube and social media, that's never been easier.

I roundly hated the the latest episode of Game of Thrones (even having Mastodon in it couldn't save it). I don't hate the show as much as some people (particularly book-readers) do, and I recognise that changes have to be made to make it a viable, practical show, but this one was too much.

Spoiler

It still seems way too early to have the Others rocking up with a bunch of undead, especially like this. I'll always find fast-moving undead to be a lot less menacing than slow-moving dead (possibly because I'll always think of them as videogame enemies rather than an actual reanimated corpse). Besides, having your hero cross swords with a supernatural big-bad using a magic sword whilst saving refugee women and children seems like a big dick-slap in the face of ASOIAF/GoT's themes- I guess we need to cut all the other interesting stuff going on for more Jon Snow though.

 

[rosac]

That obese women shouldn't model. They're not being "brave" they're promoting an incredibly negative lifestlye IN THE EXACT SAME WAY A SIZE ZERO MODEL DOES. And yet they get a lot of shit. Some women put on weight easily, some cannot put weight on. But for some reason being skinny is seen as being evil by a sector of modern "feminists" whereas being proud of your body despite weight issues is ok.

I like Superman. Not Man of Steel, that was merely passable. I mean the character. Not sure how unpopular this opinion really is, but Supes seems to get a lot of flak for being flat, uninteresting, and too powerful.

Supes is also one of my favourite superheros. Not because of his skillset, his ability to punch anything into submission, but his humanity and "there is always another way." This is best seen in Superman vs. the elite and all star superman. I'm still pissed at Man of Steel for ignoring these elements. (Zod even says "This only ends one of two ways superman, either I die or you die!" Literally all they had to do was do something to get rid of Zod without killing him and have supes say "There is always another way." BOOM. Done.)

 

[JoeCool385]

My favorite Star Wars movies in order: VI, III, IV, I, II, V.

I own, and have enjoyed, every single Call of Duty game released for PC (except for Advanced Warfare, which my computer couldn't run).

Porn is wrong.

"Gender" refers to language, not sex. Words have gender. People have sex.