Jump to content

Your Most Unpopular Opinions


Lord BJ
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 742
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • sadj

    35

  • Governor Tarkin

    38

  • Locky

    36

  • Justin Z

    29

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Sir Craig Gordon
12 minutes ago, JWL said:

Nicholas Lyndhurst deserves a good boot in the Denis Laws.

He does come across as pretty miserable. Although i would imagine people shouting Rodney or Dave at you for the last 30 years would take its toll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ominous said:

I can't be arsed with people who wear football tops on holiday.


I avoid all contact with them, even anyone wearing Hearts gear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nookie Bear said:


I avoid all contact with them, even anyone wearing Hearts gear. 

My mate and his went on a few cruises before he retired, he always said you could tell how shit it was going to be by the amount of football tops you saw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jamie Walker Tash said:

He does come across as pretty miserable. Although i would imagine people shouting Rodney or Dave at you for the last 30 years would take its toll.

 

He comes across as being a right condescending, smarmy prick. A workmate of mine was in a bar in London and NL was in. He went into full thespian mode when leaving, tosser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ominous said:

I can't be arsed with people who wear football tops on holiday.

Just embarrassing coming back from New York Dec 2019 flying to London some knob in a Rangers top standing up looking about trying to get some attention speaking that loud with his fife accent must of been in his 40s with a print on the back 🙄 then a spotty we ugly kid strolls past my seat with a Celtic top on they had some sort of weird eye contact and a nod from the big man in the rangers top . Embarrassing!

 

 

Or you go on a beach holiday and you see some guy wearing the same Arsenal top for 10 days out of 14 pure reeking . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JWL said:

Nicholas Lyndhurst deserves a good boot in the Denis Laws.

His son no die last year quite young ? 

 

But even before that he still looked miscible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Spellczech said:

Doctors cannot diagnose everything but people want to believe they can so they pretend that they can.

 

My GP said that diagnosis was all about narrowing down the options and playing the percentages based on the patient's description of the symptoms combined with the doc's observations - and if either of those were inaccurate then the "garbage in garbage out" principle applied.  We have to pay for GP visits here, and my GP has a rule that if you return to him because his diagnosis/prescription doesn't work, he doesn't charge for the return visit.

 

He also once pointed out to me that his job wasn't to keep people alive, but to help people stay reasonably healthy as long as they were alive.  Sounds fair enough to me, and it means he doesn't end up with a 100% failure rate. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, superjack said:

Jeremy Clarkson is a brilliant presenter. 

Sitting watching who wants to be a millionaire. He's far better than Chris Tarrant ever was on this.

There's a guy on from musselburgh just now, definitely a hibby. Hope he goes home with nothing.

 

Clarkson is much better on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire than Tarrant was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

Will cause the price of smack in Lochend to increase or decrease?

Probably buy bulk in london town. Then sell a tenner bag for a fiver. Hobonomics at it's best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

Do we think he is a hobbit just because his phone a friend was his sister 

there’s a lot of good jambos in Musselburgh

 

How many jambos would want to appear on tv wearing a green jumper though? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
54 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

yeah looks like he is - seemed a decent bloke though.

 

Oxymoron, surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

If any of the men who complain about positive discrimination or other such "dispensations"  had to deal with a fraction of the shit that women put up with every day, they would have been sectioned by now.

Lies its all lies , us White blokes in our 40s or older have it tougher than anyone else now.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sadj said:

Lies its all lies , us White blokes in our 40s or older have it tougher than anyone else now.....

 

:spoton:

 

And if we're not being oppressed our existence is utterly meaningless. :oldsad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

:spoton:

 

And if we're not being oppressed our existence is utterly meaningless. :oldsad:

Fight the man 👊🏻
 

(or in this case fight everyone who isnt a man over40)

 

Viva La Revolution

 

*just realised I hadn’t replied the other night. Apologies - will correct this terrible behaviour just now.

Edited by sadj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
24 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

If any of the men who complain about positive discrimination or other such "dispensations"  had to deal with a fraction of the shit that women put up with every day, they would have been sectioned by now.

 

I think a lot of men are confused/complain about it because they're not creepy, misogynistic, dicks. Their head just doesn't live in that world.

 

19 minutes ago, sadj said:

Lies its all lies , us White blokes in our 40s or older have it tougher than anyone else now.....

 

**** off, sadj.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I think a lot of men are confused/complain about it because they're not creepy, misogynistic, dicks. Their head just doesn't live in that world.

 

 

**** off, sadj.

😮 Rude!!!! 
 

 

 

 

 

 

And oppressive!!!!!😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I think a lot of men are confused/complain about it because they're not creepy, misogynistic, dicks. Their head just doesn't live in that world.

 

 

**** off, sadj.

Prob two sides too it , the ones who are creepy , misogynistic dicks and then the ones who it just doesn’t register with as they can’t comprehend that its a thing as you say. In the middle you have the rest who get it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
2 minutes ago, sadj said:

😮 Rude!!!! 
 

 

 

 

 

 

And oppressive!!!!!😏

 

We swim in muddy waters, sadj.

That's just the game we're in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

My GP said that diagnosis was all about narrowing down the options and playing the percentages based on the patient's description of the symptoms combined with the doc's observations - and if either of those were inaccurate then the "garbage in garbage out" principle applied.  We have to pay for GP visits here, and my GP has a rule that if you return to him because his diagnosis/prescription doesn't work, he doesn't charge for the return visit.

 

He also once pointed out to me that his job wasn't to keep people alive, but to help people stay reasonably healthy as long as they were alive.  Sounds fair enough to me, and it means he doesn't end up with a 100% failure rate. :laugh:

Far more pragmatic approach than UK doctors.

 

When I was at Uni almost all the medical students I knew who were studying to be doctors, it was not because it was a calling, but because their parents were doctors and it made good money. There is about 8 years of hard graft before the money comes in but 100k minimum salary in the NHS with all the benefits of TV shows making them all out to be altruistic heroes - great job. Nowadays you can even work PT for the NHS then top up your hours privately (working indirectly for the NHS who haven't enough surgeons so have to send the patients to the private hospital across the road!) - These people get lauded as NHS heroes! LOL

 

I don't see much of any of them anymore, but I know some absolute reprobates who are doctors - one who got struck off in UK for faking his CV (now practices in Germany), another who was up in front of the GMC for running down a street smashing cars (got a slap on the wrist), another who somehow produced 4 kids with his lovely wife whilst banging every girl he could get his hands on behind her back! Another who is self-medicating addict, sexual sadist and alcoholic but a functioning Edinburgh GP. These are guys I don't trust to be alone with my wife who work as bloody doctors!...Haha And to cap it all they are getting pay rises on the back of Covid where there has been zero need for diagnosis skills, plus they get £10 per visit to give vaccines - they've just been glorified nurses - but the nurses don't get pay rises or the £10 per appointment...

 

They sicken me! Haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

I think a lot of men are confused/complain about it because they're not creepy, misogynistic, dicks. Their head just doesn't live in that world.

 

Oh absolutely, and that's a brilliant summation: People who aren't inclined to act like *****, and also never have to face that sort of behaviour themselves, remain completely blind to what folk not in their situation have to deal with on the reg. They also assume that their not having creepy, misogynistic, dickish intent must necessarily translate to that being understood on the other side. They often get very precious when it turns out that no, thanks to the actual predators and the danger women face by merely existing, that even innocently intended behaviour can come across as quite threatening.

 

But often, rather than come to grips with that, they go all Principal Skinner instead.

 

image.png.50499d0d22d8e94c51ac4179c39103a1.png

 

Maybe the most unpopular part of all this is that their resistance serves as great cover for the creepy, misogynistic dicks to use to their advantage and perpetuate the cycle.

 

Edited by Justin Z
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
9 minutes ago, sadj said:

Prob two sides too it , the ones who are creepy , misogynistic dicks and then the ones who it just doesn’t register with as they can’t comprehend that its a thing as you say. In the middle you have the rest who get it. 

 

Oh I think almost everyone gets it, but some kick back a little as they harbor an inner resentment at being chucked in with the creepy, misogynistic, dicks on account of lazy generalisations like 'white men in their 40s'.

 

p.s.

 

We need more reprobate doctors imo.

Edited by Governor Tarkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
5 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Oh absolutely, and that's a brilliant summation: People who aren't inclined to act like *****, and also never have to face that sort of behaviour themselves, remain completely blind to what folk not in their situation have to deal with on the reg. They also assume that their not having creepy, misogynistic, dickish intent must necessarily translate to that being understood on the other side. They often get very precious when it turns out that no, thanks to the actual predators and the danger women face by merely existing, that even innocently intended behaviour can come across as quite threatening.

 

But often, rather than come to grips with that, they go all Principal Skinner instead.

 

image.png.50499d0d22d8e94c51ac4179c39103a1.png

 

Maybe the most unpopular part of all this is that their resistance serves as great cover for the creepy, misogynistic dicks to use to their advantage and perpetuate the cycle.

 

 

Whilst there's no doubt a truth in this, I think it does a lot of people a huge disservice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

Oh I think almost everyone gets it, but some kick back a little as they harbor an inner resentment at being chucked in with the creepy, misogynistic, dicks on account of lazy generalisations like 'white men in their 40s'.

 

Indeed, their dummies are ever at the ready to be launched at mach 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

Indeed, their dummies are ever at the ready to be launched at mach 2

 

How dare they be upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

How dare they be upset.


I know. All they've done is, say, complained about special dispensations being made to ensure the safety of others, too—something they take so much for granted they're blind to even the need for. When this is pointed out, they've merely responded with "What a lazy generalisation! Not all men!" and received a frosty reception to their tonedeafness.

 

The poor dears, not having their feelings centred 100% of the time. Whatever will they do.

 

Edited by Justin Z
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
3 minutes ago, Justin Z said:


I know. All they've done is, say, complained about special dispensations being made to ensure the safety of others, too—something they take so much for granted they're blind to even the need for. When this is pointed out, they've merely responded with "What a lazy generalisation! Not all men!" and received a frosty reception to their tonedeafness.

 

The poor dears.

 

Another lazy generalisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Justin Z said:

If any of the men who complain about positive discrimination or other such "dispensations"  had to deal with a fraction of the shit that women put up with every day, they would have been sectioned by now.

There is nothing positive about positive discrimination. It is also discrimination. 2 wrongs don't make a right. 99% of people will support any effort at equality, far less see fairness in tipping the see-saw the other way on purpose...That is simply intended to be provocative so why are people surprised when it pans out that way? You end up with fair-minded people standing with the 1%. As a strategy it is, frankly, stupid.

Edited by Spellczech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

Another lazy generalisation.

 

27 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

How dare they be upset.

 

Yet somehow not lazy 17 minutes prior? Not all men get upset at such trivialities, Tark.

 

:interehjrling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spellczech said:

There is nothing positive about positive discrimination. It is also discrimination. 2 wrongs don't make a right. 99% of people will support any effort at equality, far less see fairness in tipping the see-saw the other way on purpose...That is simply intended to be provocative so why are people surprised when it pans out that way? You end up with fair-minded people standing with the 1%. As a strategy it is, frankly, stupid.

 

Short answer: equality versus equity. In your post you're playing the role of the tall person in this example. Option 3 would be best. Option 2 is an improvement. You're advocating for option 1.

 

Equality-equity-justice-lores.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Short answer: equality versus equity. In your post you're playing the role of the tall person in this example. Option 3 would be best. Option 2 is an improvement. You're advocating for option 1.

 

Equality-equity-justice-lores.png

??? I suggest you re-read my post. I am not advocating anything. I'm merely saying positive discrimination is inherently counter-productive. It is a blunt tool to fix a delicate problem. Personally if I support anything it is a meritocracy. Your picture is fine for physical aspects, but it is simplistic. Should stupid or lazy people get help to make them equal with clever or hard-working people? That is why Communism failed. You cannot give everyone the same reward for different contributions.

 

If people want to do away with discrimination, the place I would start would be the class system - titles, royalty, nobility, patronage - all that anachronistic rubbish.

Edited by Spellczech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

??? I suggest you re-read my post. I am not advocating anything. I'm merely saying positive discrimination is inherently counter-productive. It is a blunt tool to fix a delicate problem. Personally if I support anything it is a meritocracy. Your picture is fine for physical aspects, but it is simplistic.

 

You are advocating against something, if you say "positive discrimination is inherently counter-productive", which appears verbatim in this passage I just quoted.

 

Of course it is simplistic. It is an analogy to aid understanding. It doesn't cover everything.

 

A meritocracy would be fab if there weren't structural barriers in place to keep that meritocracy from operating on the basis of merit alone. By advocating against any effort to attempt to address those structural barriers, you end up contradicting your own claim in favour of meritocracy.

 

2 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Should stupid or lazy people get help to make them equal with clever or hard-working people?

 

Not sure what this question has to do with anything presently being discussed, but you were just saying 99% of people would support any effort at equality. Are stupid or lazy people not to be afforded equality?

 

6 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

That is why Communism failed. You cannot give everyone the same reward for different contributions.

 

Were you not just complaining about the graphic being simplistic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

??? I suggest you re-read my post. I am not advocating anything. I'm merely saying positive discrimination is inherently counter-productive. It is a blunt tool to fix a delicate problem. Personally if I support anything it is a meritocracy. Your picture is fine for physical aspects, but it is simplistic. Should stupid or lazy people get help to make them equal with clever or hard-working people? That is why Communism failed. You cannot give everyone the same reward for different contributions.

 

If people want to do away with discrimination, the place I would start would be the class system - titles, royalty, nobility, patronage - all that anachronistic rubbish.

I could be wrong, but isn't Communism about each according to their ability, each according to their need? 

 

Not everybody gets the same regardless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, AlphonseCapone said:

Pierce Morgan is alright sometimes. 

Never!  It's all calculated bull just to help sell his breakfast show and himself.  Don't fall for it, he is the personification of evil.   

That and he gets to sit next to susanna reid in the morning. 

He dirty snidey man who has unnecessarily put people through hell.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

You are advocating against something, if you say "positive discrimination is inherently counter-productive", which appears verbatim in this passage I just quoted. You are quoting from my second post, not my first - it was my first post you said I was advocating something, which I wasn't.

 

Of course it is simplistic. It is an analogy to aid understanding. It doesn't cover everything.  Are you understanding your own picture then? The below seems to indicate you don't...

 

A meritocracy would be fab if there weren't structural barriers in place to keep that meritocracy from operating on the basis of merit alone. By advocating against any effort to attempt to address those structural barriers, you end up contradicting your own claim in favour of meritocracy. Positive discrimination doesn't address the structural barriers though, far less the systemic barriers. It just tweaks them leaving even more people unhappy! Even in your own picture, it aims to do 2 not 3, but it doesn't actually do 2. It is not a solution, it is a fudge.

 

 

Not sure what this question has to do with anything presently being discussed, but you were just saying 99% of people would support any effort at equality. Are stupid or lazy people not to be afforded equality? I'm saying "equality" cannot be selective. ie Efforts to address it should not be limited to race or gender (or height) - by doing that you draw focus to the very thing you want to draw focus away from.... Personally if I was ever to be an HR director, the first thing I would do is filter out all the flags from applications - no name, no sex, marital status (though I think most people don't bother now). I remember having a discussion with a partner from a professional service firm. I'd mentioned that I once rejected every application which contained spelling or grammar mistakes. He was like" You cannot do that..." until I explained that one of the specified job requirements was an "excellent attention to detail". Some good applicants no doubt slipped by, but as a filter it worked fine.

 

Were you not just complaining about the graphic being simplistic? You saying I'm wrong? The only things the Communists got right in Russia was getting rid of the class system. After that it was all about brutal suppression of individuality but inevitably the Party started to take greater rewards for them and theirs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/02/2021 at 01:43, EH11_2NL said:

There are only 2 sexes. You're male or female. Everyone else in the non-binary, non-cis, trans.....blah, blah, blah world is an attention seeking diva, prima donna, drama queen. That is a universal truth. So shut your face and get on with your life.

My fav so far :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Zico said:

That thing you like was not better back in whatever period your misguided nostalgia tells you it was. You just got old and boring. 

Football definitely used to be better back in the day. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

Do we think he is a hobbit just because his phone a friend was his sister 

there’s a lot of good jambos in Musselburgh

You ****ing know it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Norm said:

I could be wrong, but isn't Communism about each according to their ability, each according to their need? 

 

Not everybody gets the same regardless. 

I was commenting on its failure in practice. The implementation of the ideal failed after about a week and a half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

You are quoting from my second post, not my first - it was my first post you said I was advocating something, which I wasn't.

 

And the bit I quoted from your second post certainly appeared to be a short restatement of what you said in your first post. So I'm still not seeing the problem with making the observation that you had a stance you were advocating for/against, sorry.

 

5 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Positive discrimination doesn't address the structural barriers though, far less the systemic barriers. It just tweaks them leaving even more people unhappy! Even in your own picture, it aims to do 2 not 3, but it doesn't actually do 2. It is not a solution, it is a fudge.

 

This is at least debatable. I tend to agree with you that 3 is far preferable to 2. It's still quite the claim to make that 2 doesn't address the structural barriers at all, or merely tweaks them, and I'm not comfortable accepting that at face value.

 

7 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Personally if I was ever to be an HR director, the first thing I would do is filter out all the flags from applications - no name, no sex, marital status (though I think most people don't bother now).

 

Yeah, this is sensible for sure. In my EU Labour Law course we briefly discussed a guy who makes a living firing off copies of the same CV, one with his real name, which is Arabic in origin, and another with a generic British name like John Smith. On all the ones where "John Smith" gets called in for an interview but the guy's real name does not, he files a grievance, and the companies, not wanting to go to the tribunal to explain themselves, quickly settle.

 

He claims—though I guess we have no way of knowing for sure—that there has never been an instance where his real name got called for an interview and "John Smith" did not.

 

While I think this is a gratuitous use of the current system, it neatly illustrates the problem. It also addresses your previous complaint with "method 2". If not this system, what system? Obligating HR people to do as you suggested? Sound, but there would still be interviews, there would still be even unconscious bias based on appearance, accent, etc. How do we get to 3 without first going through 2? I don't have the answer, but sticking with 1 would be unconscionable, so here we are.

 

12 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

You saying I'm wrong? The only things the Communists got right in Russia was getting rid of the class system. After that it was all about brutal suppression of individuality but inevitably the Party started to take greater rewards for them and theirs.

 

I'll defer to Norm here. Maybe we both need to read more theory. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

My fav so far :thumbsup:

 

Same, especially since attitudes like EH11's lead to hatred like this. Imagine a throng of grown adults calling a five-year-old child "it" or "thing". Absolutely putrid.

 

It's a five minute video but worth a watch imo. If that's an unpopular opinion, sod it. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Stu_HMFC said:

 

Or you go on a beach holiday and you see some guy wearing the same Arsenal top for 10 days out of 14 pure reeking . 

 

And its a top from around 5 years ago, not even the current season's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
1 hour ago, Justin Z said:

 

 

Yet somehow not lazy 17 minutes prior? Not all men get upset at such trivialities, Tark.

 

:interehjrling:

 

WTF are you on about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Marvin said:

 

And its a top from around 5 years ago, not even the current season's.

What tops this is when you see guys in 40/50 junkie looking fans in a top with a name and number of a player who is 18yo 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maple Leaf changed the title to Your Most Unpopular Opinions

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...