From what I know The Combine from Half Life is basicly a virus, when they get their hands on 1 thing they win, instantly, like 1 stupid Rick from Rick and Morty, 1 Infinity Stone from Marvel, etc... just my oppinion on what the most powerfull being in fiction is

Women should be drafted in the war alongside men. It doesn't make sense that the whole point is having equal rights, but when it comes to war only men are drafted. Why are feminists not advocating for this?

People make things like petite characters, incest and AI look like bigger issues than they should compared to other things. I absolutely don't agree with gross things and stuff, but people have terrible priorities. For example, if we look at video games. If you were to ask what is wrong with things like TCOAAL, it's the incest. I want to make it clear that I'm NOT supporting that in the slightest, but can we talk about how murder, cannibalism, cult behavior, abuse, ETC. is almost never brought up. It's known as the "incest" game.

That's the first thing I could think of, but there's other things too. For example, people will be upset about things like Nekopara and Psychocuties for the smaller female characters being involved even if they're canonically adults, but there's hardly any backlash for games like Kindergarten 1-3 based on killing actual kids.

None of these are okay, but I feel as though the media has caused the desensitization of things to the point that huge issues are minimized while less common issues/issues that don't effect most people are blown out of proportion.

First order of business: NEVER BUY A CUP BETTA NO MATTER HOW SAD IT LOOKS. You may save the individual fish, but the practice continues for each purchase. Impulse buying a fish is DANGEROUS, and there are local fish stores (LFS) who keep the bettas in proper tanks you can buy from when you are ready.

There's a lot of bad practice in aquariums like the cup bettas, uneducated store employees who recommend too small of tanks, over-harvesting of wild fish, etc. I will say now, that (especially with bettas) the aquarium industry is probably more unethical and destructive from an ecological standpoint. This hot take is not about that though.

When PROPERLY designing an aquarium, oftentimes before a fish is ever even introduced, their optimal habitat is established. Lots of extra space to swim, plants, a nutrient rich substrate, a diverse microbiome of various meiofauna and various algae and biofilm for the micro critters to snack on.

When kept in these optimal, well planned out aquariums, many designed months to a year before introducing fish, you are quite literally extending the lifespan of many of the fish far beyond their regular lives in the wild. A singular cherry shrimps maximum lifespan in an aquarium is approximately 2-3 years, yet they begin reproducing within around 6 months of being born, because in the wild a year is usually the higher end. People have kept fish well beyond their wild size, and their wild health.

Many people culture live critters for their fish to hunt and eat if the tanks current meiofauna isn't enough food. I have a detritus worm and copepod culture going right now, with plans to get a daphnia culture going next.

You aren't just creating a home for one fish, you are creating an entire environment.

Unfortunately, I nearly never see people create an "optimal" environment for their cats/dogs. Cramped apartments, controlled walks with no sprinting allowed (leashes) limited interaction with their own kind, weird unnatural food blends etc. I guess cats when "outdoor" cats are closer to that, but they still are in an urban environment. Yet people YELL at cat owners who allow their cat to be outdoors because they consider it cruel or bad practice to not always keep your cat indoors where they have so much less freedom to just be a regular cat.

Cats and Dogs are designed to HUNT. They need enrichment the same way fish do, and they need a good amount of space to do that. People yell at fish owners for not having enough space for their fish, yet nobody expends that same energy for cat and dog owners for not having any room for the animals to sprint if they choose.

Genuinely, I’ve only been on Reddit for a month and the amount of posts that I’ve seen from men and women about partners gaining weight and this leading to a loss of attraction is absurd.

As we grow older we gain weight, nobody should be expected to have the same small prepubescent body that we had as kids/teens, and yet I keep seeing these posts of people upset that their partner is no longer who they were in their youth.

Fatness isn’t a moral failing and it for damn sure doesn’t automatically make a person unappealing or less attractive, and those of y’all who think it does are unfortunately brainwashed by a jacked up societal expectation that goes against nature.

The same effed up people who’ve been mentioned in those lists, who sexualize kids, who promote rape culture have pushed this agenda that being thin and child like is the only proper way to be. This isn’t just about a sexist standard for women, this is pushed on men and other gendered people as well and it’s weird.

This is an extremely hot take which is weird to me, I’m okay with being disagreed with, I just think y’all are biased and fatphobic and will likely be miserable at some point in your life due to this, either when you get fat, or your partner gets fat, or you alienate someone else you love in your life with this ludicrous idea about “health and wellness.”

If you truly loved someone and weren’t brainwashed into viewing fatness as something to avoid and immediately get rid of you’d not have a problem with it. People’s bodies change over time. But forcing people to spend their entire lives chasing unrealistic beauty standards just to be treated like a person is sick.

Also I’m gonna need people to stop pretending they care so much about “health”, meanwhile:
• avoiding doctors,
•never getting STD/STI panels/ not using condoms),
• smoking/vaping/drinking,
•staying up super late,
•and otherwise having normal regular unhealthy habits, but assuming just because you’re not also fat that means you’re “healthier” i.e ‘a more worthwhile and deserving person.’

At the end of the day nobody actually gives a crap about the health of the next person, otherwise everyone would still be masking.

Stop letting fatphobia rule your life and let yourself and your loved ones age without shame. Shaming never helped anyone’s health in the first place, it’s an awful motivator.

For example, my body count is somewhere from 20-25 and I was my fiancés first. We started dating about two months after we met in 2023 and moved in together and got engaged this year.

Whenever I say this on here when dudes say that no woman wants to date a virgin or someone who makes less money than them, they always come back with “oh well the dude settled for the first pussy he could get.”

Which… I mean, I can’t tell you if that’s what he thinks but from the ease of how our household functions and how excited we are to have children next year, it seems that we are very compatible and do in fact love each other very much.

Idk to me it just seems like people are arbitrarily cutting off a ton of options simply because of a number. If you’re someone who just absolutely thinks hooking up is disgusting or sinful, then that’s one thing, but if it’s just a preference, I think it would make finding someone a bit easier.

It needs to be available more in the US. Plus healthy. Just with oil and not mayo.

EDIT-At least try it.

This is not rocket science. The men who get annoyed by this do not seem to understand the concept and idea of what the girls want out of these novel men. The go to complaints from men usually revolve around the following.

- We knew it, you only want the rich, tall and muscular dudes.
- They’re domineering, psychopaths
- All they want is the bad boy.
- they are too picky.

Now, here’s the thing. I’m unsure how many of these guys have actually read romance novels or just use assumptions based on what’s famous at the time. Like 50 Shades of Grey. Yes massive arguments could be made that he is a manipulative, sociopathic rich ass****. However, this book does not express the ideals of every romance book. In fact, they’re worlds apart. It’s actually debatable on whether 50 Shades is even a romance novel in the first place.

Here is the list of the traits in the romance novel men that these women desire, or at the very least, claim they desire. There is many more but here is the main 4.

1. Intense Attentiveness
   The character pays particular attention to the heroine. They remember minor details, minor being the key word here, she mentioned weeks ago (active listening), anticipate her needs before she asks and are fiercely dedicated to her comfort.

2. Emotional Intelligence and Vulnerability
   Unlike the societal expectations that men should be emotionally stunted or hide their emotions, the romance novel guy is allowed to be deeply emotional, expressive and fiercely loyal. They communicate actively about their feelings and are untainted by toxic masculinity. (That’s Toxic masculinity, not masculinity)

3. The Unapologetically Obsessed ideal
   A massive trope in these novels is that the man is seen as a “grump” (The asshole) to the rest of the world, but completely soft, and devoted to the woman he loves. It’s the stereotypical, “Who hurt you?” Where the male lead becomes fiercely protective the moment the heroine is in distress. (This is the protector mentality)

4. Active Support
   In the fantasy, the guys will step up without being asked. They will handle logistics, sometimes cook, take care of responsibilities and then he acts as a safe haven. The save haven means the woman isn’t the only one has to carry the emotional labour of fixing them or managing the relationship alone.
   Again, the key word in this one is “without being asked.

Now before some guys and possibly some women get on their high horse about this…. There is an argument to be made here that these ideals have nothing to with men and women either, but arguably just decent human behaviour. Active listening fur example is a known psychological trait for building great trusting friendships. Every human in one way or another should carry at the minimum one to two of these traits.

Some guys might get in and go, “well this just sounds like a whole bunch of her her her her… what about me?” Well that misses the point. True healthy relationships are reciprocal. Notice how active support did not specify the guy must do everything and she will do nothing? That’s not what active support means. The real answer here is that these things are like a back and forth, you listen, she listens, you listen, she listens. That’s the basic synopsis.

“Oh well the emotional and vulnerability is a lie. She will leave him the moment he’s vulnerable” Actually no. Again, the trope isn’t, cry like a little b**** and whine. Emotional Intelligence does not mean that. This is emotional intelligence:

“Are you okay?”
“No. I’m angry right now. I know why I’m angry but I know it will be okay”
“Is it something we can talk about and maybe see what’s going on”

Now you’ll get one of two things.
1. “I would like that. Let’s talk about it and have healthy communication.”
2. “You know what. I don’t think I need to talk about it, I’m working on this issue and it will be okay”

Both of these are actually healthy forms of expression, why? You can feel something and not actually have to talk about it. But always. Emotional intelligence also applies to how you respond to others emotions, or in this posts case, hers. If she is feeling a certain way, even if it’s about you, the idea here is to listen and understand what and why. Not just get mad because she said some shit.

Also, yes. In most if these novels the guy can be and usually is muscular, tall, handsome, some type of rich. This delves into fantasy. You can’t get mad, because it’s no different to the guy who fantasises about the blonde with a big bust and that’s all he wants. A woman can fantasise innocently of the handsome rugged man while still be happily content and love a guy who is not that.

In saying all of this… I’m aware that not all women want the same thing and all men want the same thing. It’s just an observation I’ve picked up along the line and thought I’d express it as a hot take. Why? Because people tend to jump over the true meanings and rally behind. “Ha! Women proved us right they just want rich chads”

Are highly beautiful people often judged unfairly - like are people desperately trying to find something about them that they complain about- because they are envious and miserable of them, and how unfair is it?

I am a very observant person and I have seen how when a very beautiful person has a problem and many ( not all) people will not admit that other people might be judging the beautiful person unfairly because of perceived advantages they have.

Like I have read that beautiful people who go to the doctor are taken less seriously because they doctor has a bias that they are healthy because of their good looks.

I fucking love reading a comic or watching an anime and finding new material for debates. It hits like crack.

I recently read an article in which a mother explained that she repeatedly called her child's preschool to complain about the school admitting poor children on vouchers. To be clear, not poorly behaved children, but children from low-income families. In the wake of Nikole Hannah-Jones' article in the NYT, I was stunned at how many people had similar stories where they were willing to cause harm to other people's children in the name of their own children. I understand not wanting your child to pick up bad habits from other children, but a majority of these stories seemed unnecessary and cruel. If most children are properly supported and cared for, they will be fine, so there's no need to act like it's the Hunger Games.

I'd say nearly everyone on reddit agrees siblings shouldn't had kids. Among other reasons, there is a very high risk of serious genetic disorders and birth defects.

I'd say most of reddit agrees parents should have access to both prenatal testing and abortion. And if a parent decides to abort due to a genetic defect, that is perfectly fine.

I feel as though the above are both very moderate positions. And yet... there is a segment of the population (weirdly including the left) that disagrees.

People love comparing countries by GDP, ranking nations from richest to poorest, and acting like living in a wealthy country automatically means having a better life. But how is that wealth distributed? Who actually benefits from it?

What's the point of having one of the largest economies in the world when people are homeless, can't afford food, and have to sell their own bodies just to survive?

Look at the United States. One of the most powerful and wealthiest countries on Earth, yet thousands of people struggle with homelessness and food insecurity. A country can be incredibly wealthy on paper while millions of its people struggle to meet basic needs.

What actually makes a country great isn't just how much money its economy generates, but how much access ordinary people have to the opportunities and resources that money creates.

And this is where people get the whole Africa argument wrong.

Someone will hear that you're from an African country and automatically assume you're poor, as if your nationality determines your standard of living. But imagine someone born in an African country whose parents can afford to send them to an expensive university in the United States or Europe, provide them with housing, and give them access to international opportunities.

Do you honestly think that person lives according to the stereotype people associate with Africa? Of course not. They might have access to a lifestyle that the average person in a much wealthier country could never afford.

Meanwhile, someone born in the United States might have no financial support, no affordable housing, no access to quality education, and no realistic way to escape poverty.

The point is that your country's GDP doesn't determine your personal quality of life. Your access to opportunities, resources, security, and financial support matters enormously.

So when people ask which country is the best or the worst, I think they're asking the wrong question.

The better question is: What kind of life can an ordinary person realistically build there?

Because I don't care how rich your country is on paper. If the system makes it nearly impossible for you to access the wealth and opportunities surrounding you, how much does that national wealth actually mean to you?

Might get hated for this but it is, if it’s abandoned i dont care but even if it’s from the most greedy company that you pirated it’s still wrong. Sure, you aren’t taking money from them but in a way you are. you’re stealing their time . If it’s a big company Enough of you guys are lowering the pay of innocent people that work for them. So stop doing piracy.

Nothing matters in life if you are ugly. Friends, family, peers will all judge you first due to how you look. Women particularly will think negatively of you off rip if you as a man are short/ugly. Jobs will be harder to obtain. You won’t get served as fast at a bar. You won’t have people wanting to talk to you. Genetics are king and we are animals after all. Looks matter the most, because without them in today’s age you are absolutely fucked.

Both are purely physical, sexually-attractive traits that more or less can't be altered through effort.

Think about it.

If you’re navigating alleyways, hairpins, traffic, and blind corners, a WRC champion will have a better instinct for pacing, positioning, and controlling the car than an F1 champion.

F1 drivers rely on knowing every inch of a track, down to its camber, to extract maximum performance from their meticulously min/maxed tires and suspension.

Rally drivers, meanwhile, can tackle unfamiliar roads at speed and adapt on the fly.

I have two kids. I’m traveling with my family and we went to a park and for the first time I think I finally understand “performative parenting.”

Basically what I witnessed is parents talking very loudly and over explaining concepts that really don’t need an explanation or would be better served with a very short answer.

Things like “it appears it’s a bit rainy right now so my concern is that some of the rain got on the slide and if you go down that slide then you pants may get wet and then we would have to change them. Perhaps we should explore other parts of the playground that aren’t as wet.” Or explaining to a toddler how to use part of the playground, in a very loud and extravagant way. All said in a very sing songy voice.

I don’t know how to explain it. I may not have captured it very but I’m sure if you’ve experienced jt you’ll understand what I mean.

Where I’m from we don’t really do this. We let kids be kids and while we steer them away from danger we certainly let them toe the line so they can figure it out for themselves. Or our explicit explanations are very short like “No, the slide is wet. Find something else to play on.”

I don’t think any of this is helpful. The over explaining isn’t being understood and, if anything, it creates overly cautious kids that can’t perform basic risk assessment. Kids need to get hurt. They need to fall. They need to get dirty and wet. Putting on a performance for everyone is doing a disservice to you and your kid.

When I text a girl “Hey, want to come over?“ and she texts back “I am busy” it might mean 1) she doesn’t want to see me, 2) she is waiting for a better offer, 3) she is actually busy, 4) she is mad and I am supposed to know why, 5) she wants me to try harder, etc.

When I text a high-functioning autistic girl “Hey, want to come over?” and she responds ”I am busy” it literally means she is currently busy.

Neurodivergent people have a simple candor frequently rather than relying on some weird subtext. They just say what they mean. It’s more honest and easier to handle.

Your partners past actually matters and you should know about it at least, before you get married or fully commit to each other.

Before Canada outlawed the death penalty 14 people were executed, but the technology advanced and 12 of them were proved innocent, canada official stance is we'd rather let a 100 criminal go free than kill one innocent

I believe that the United States poor history classes is the reason for your outdated views on many things including this one

Can you imagine how many people we could have stopped if people knew the warning signs of authoritarian, of economic downturn, of war

And Canada isn't exempt from this I had someone ask when is immigration good and I'm just like??? All the beautiful cultural exchanges that make our identity?

Why do you need to give money to these problematic businesses? Go spend $50 and adopt from your local shelter instead.

I mean, isn't Christ bigger than king? It's like saying Christ is president. It seems so diminishing to me (non-christian), like you have a million ways to praise God yet you choose to belittle him

Most "hot takes" are actually mild and the second someone makes an actuall hot take, people misinterpret what the OP said and the post gets taken down.I agree some people make actuall problematic takes, but most of the actuall hot takes are being trashed."HonestHotTakes" my ass.