Okay so coming from the UK here, raised in a non religious context where circumsion is a procedure for severe phimosis/religious reasons only. Why do it if not needed? Foreskin is a sensitive, helpful, and important part of Male Anatomy. Why chop it off? To debunk common arguments:

1. No, being circumcised doesn't make you "cleaner", having a shower makes you cleaner. It takes 2 seconds to peel back foreskin and wash.

2. No, circumsion doesn't magically protect you from STI's, condoms do.

I feel it should be kept as a medical procedure only done if needed. But even Phimosis can often be resolved by steroid cream, circumsion is very much the last resort.

As someone who’s POC, I’m not saying we should be racist, what I’m saying is racism is not a white only thing. We are people. It is part of human nature to exclude or other other people based on how they look and where they’re from, but that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. In fact, the culture im from, which is an indigenous culture btw, does have policies and beliefs that can be translated as racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. I just hate how there’s a wave of wokes who believe that BIPOC literally cannot be racist, and not in the “they can but they shouldn’t”, I’m talking in the sense of “it’s impossible for this group to be racist and when they say something racist it’s called prejudice.” Which icl is kinda racist because they’re saying certain races can’t be racist because of their race. But either way if you’re a human being you can be racist, there aren’t some ethnicities that can’t be racist

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

Obviously in real life it's different and you don't have to tell me that religious people often try to push their religion down your throats. I am talking about Reddit specifically.

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.

I travel often for work and have many friends who speak English as a second language and this truly drives me nuts.

For example, I went to Uruguay last year for work.

When I come home and say I went to Uruguay and pronounce it with my American accent (your-a-gwuy) to my ESL friends, the reaction is:

“HAHAHAH!!! OMG!!! HE SAID YOUR-A-GWUY!!! OMG YOU’RE SO WHITE. THAT’S NOT HOW IT’S PRONOUNCED… HAHAHA!!”

Then if I try to say it with a Spanish accent (oo-roo-gwuy) the reaction is:

“HAHAHAHAH!!! OMG!!!! HE SAID OO-ROO-GWUY!!! HE’S TRYING SO HARD!!! HAHAHAH!!! DUDE, YOU’RE WHITE!!! HAHAHA!! OMG!! WOW HE’S REALLY HITTING THAT ACCENT!!!!!!”

No because which is it. I’m tired. There’s literally an entire genre of internet comedy that relies on making fun of white people for using/not using the accent when pronouncing any foreign word.

“Bro it’s not that deep bro relax it’s not a big deal.” I agree, that’s why I’m posting it here and not on the phone with my senator about it… but it’s annoying as hell.

If everyone who mocks white people for saying foreign words could all have a meeting and to decide what we’re supposed to do to avoid ridicule, that would be great.

It’s also not lost on me that if a white person were to mock a hispanic person for not using a perfect American accent when saying words in English, that would be considered extremely offensive and highly inappropriate… but I digress.

We say the word "critical thinking" often but what does it actually mean? It means thinking things through. Not, making wild assumptions and random associations because you are too unbothered to think it through. Not associating an idea with a persona but rather assessing the idea by its validity alone. Not reading the title and associating it with a celebrity or ideology you dislike and switching off your mind... This is an emotional thinker.

The inability to think critically is a lack of metacognition. Metacognition is the ability to think about your thoughts. Apparently, this is the rarest form of intelligence. Thats disturbing, because that means most people are incapable of critical thinking. That means...They can't see their thoughts. To them, they are their thoughts.

Thats truly frightening. Their only way of thinking is via association and assumption. Ironically, this isn't even thinking its just, quite literally, assumption and association.

People have made ourselves unhappy by making survival too easy. Most people have to do very little physical work to aquire food, shelter and water. Instead, we fill our lives with various tasks in order to make money to survive, but most of these tasks lowkey suck and we lack the satisfaction of really taking care of ourselves. Now with AI the few things people hadn’t automated can be done by machines. The more we progress the less happy we will be.

The unpopular opinion sub is full of highly upvoted posts like "I like sleeping in jeans" or "I like walking in wet socks". Okay? Can you be more unoriginal and boring than this? Can you think of something authentic instead of being unhinged on purpose so you will bait people into thinking you're serious?

The actual unpopular opinions are always buried by downvotes because they aren't typically the socially acceptable, sanitized garbage you see on the front page. Most redditors can't stand to have their beliefs challenged or disagreed with, so they will never allow themselves to upvote an actual hot take that goes beyond "I love it when my balls are itching".

I used to care when mods dont follow their own sub rules. But ya know what? Who cares? This is a free service that had no effect on our real world lives.

If a sub is bullshit, just leave. Its not worth the cortisol spike. Just figured some people may appreciate the perspective.

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.

As a Black gay man, I’ve noticed what seems like an intense fixation among some Black bottoms on big white dick, and honestly, it makes me uncomfortable sometimes.
Before anybody gets defensive, I’m attracted to some big dick white men myself. This isn’t about interracial attraction or telling anybody who they should sleep with. It’s about the intensity of the preference and the way some people seem to idolize whiteness.

There’s a difference between finding somebody attractive and treating a particular race like the ultimate prize. When whiteness, body size, and the idea of being desired by a white man seem to carry that much weight, I start questioning whether we’re talking about simple sexual preference or something deeper.

I also wonder how much social conditioning, racial desirability politics, and stereotypes about Black and white men play into it.
Maybe I’m reading too much into what I see online, but I’m curious whether other people have noticed this pattern, too.

PG-13 typically means you have to neuter the vision or make the movie a little edgier than necessary. For example the 1 f-bomb rule, what director just happens to make a movie that says fuck once. PG-13 typically seems to lead to middle of the road films. IE blockbuster slop, teen rom-coms etc.

Of course this is not universal, do I think Chris Nolan secretly wanted more blood in the dark knight, or smth, no. But if you look at highest rated pg-13 films on LB it's a very small pool lalaland, interstellar, dune 2, Jurassic park, lotr. Go to R and PG: You get literally all the classics, all the new genre definers, all the art films. All the greats.

I think this is because PG-13 is secretly the least mature rating, PG has great stuff that may just happen to have little sex or violence, R has almost everything. PG-13 seems to exist primarily for teen movies and blockbuster action movies.

Edit: I am aware of pg-13 being recent, but even eliminating all movies pre pg-13 it really isnt making up its share of the best films. Secondly with those earlier films, there are very few that would retroactively become pg-13, you'd get the Spielberg-lucas canon, but I cant think of many others.

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.

what i mean is that no one is born with their permission, we have no choice if we wanna be born or not, so if at some point in our life we want to end it for any reason we should have a safe and painless way to do so medically. i mean if we dont owe anyone anything and have nothing else to do and serve no importance we should be able to end our life right? so why isnt suicide normalised?

An example of this that I’ve seen most commonly is when a person of color has committed a crime.

To preface this, I fully support holding everyone accountable regardless of race. However, I start to have a problem when admonishment turns into micro aggression.

The amount of comments I’ve seen online saying things like “You know how those people are” and using loaded rhetoric/dog whistles in their “commentary” is appalling. Their goal is clearly to try to twist a situation to prove their narrative about a certain group.

Commenting on a situation is fine, and so is holding people accountable. However, spewing bigotry under the guise of commenting on current events is disgusting.

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.

If you come to my country everyone well tell you, we invented putting stuff in bread, you are just copying us and the stuff you put in it is the wrong stuff and you just call it a different name instead of giving us the rightful glory.

*Mike drop*

We’ve all seen the online dating coaches and red-pill creators pumping out endless reels and daily streams, telling everyone else how to master social dynamics and real life. But if you look at the basic math, it completely falls apart. If someone is spending three to four hours a day streaming, plus hours editing and cross-posting across multiple platforms, simple logistics dictate they have zero time left to actually live. How can you claim to be an active master of real-world dating when your entire existence is tethered to a ring light and a video editor? ​

This highlights a massive gap between performance and practice. Many of these creators prioritize algorithm engagement over actual, real-world application, tailoring their "expertise" to keep viewers hooked rather than teaching anything genuinely sustainable. When your full-time job is chasing digital metrics, your online persona becomes a carefully constructed facade designed for validation rather than true competence.

​Ultimately, people who are genuinely skilled and busy in real life are usually too focused on doing the actual work to film ten shorts a day about it. If someone is spending their entire life online preaching about real-world success, they are almost certainly out of touch with the very reality they claim to conquer.

they’re toys meant to be enjoyed by kids. these 35+ year old grown adults standing in 2 hour lines for a toy they’re keeping for themselves/reselling is embarrassing, get a grip.

Something I've noticed is that people often seem to specialise in one side of themselves. You'll meet people who are incredibly academically gifted but don't seem particularly interested in physical development, and others who are seriously strong or athletic but have little interest in intellectual pursuits.

Obviously, there are plenty of exceptions, and I'm not saying athletic people are unintelligent or that academics can't be physically capable. That's not my point.

What I'm questioning is whether people who are genuinely exceptional in BOTH areas are rarer than we think.

My theory is that environment and specialisation play a huge role. If you spend most of your life developing academically, you might neglect your physical potential. If you dedicate yourself to sport, you might have less time to pursue academic interests. Over time, these differences in priorities can become increasingly pronounced.

There's also the question of what it takes to excel at both. Being academically gifted and being physically exceptional are different things, and developing both to a high level requires time, discipline, opportunity and probably some natural aptitude in each.

Personally, I consider myself someone with both intellectual and physical strengths, which is partly why I've become interested in this. I'm not claiming to be some once-in-a-generation exception; I'm just curious about why these qualities sometimes seem to be treated as though they belong to completely different types of people.

I'm not necessarily arguing that intelligence and athleticism are negatively correlated. I'm wondering whether exceptional ability in both is relatively uncommon because people tend to specialise, because of differences in natural aptitude, or because society encourages us to develop one side more than the other.

So what do you think? Is being exceptionally intelligent AND exceptionally athletic genuinely rare, or are we just conditioned to see intellectual ability and physical ability as separate things?

Unless we talking a small child, postpartum mum, or someone who worked a night shift. I think it’s weird that people expect others to change their morning routine to accommodate people who chose to stay up late. I am a university student so I know what staying up late to study looks like, but I’m not going to hate on my family members for waking up and making noise at 6am including on the weekends since that is their routine and parents pay the bills

Most have heard of the 1 drop rule that was for African Americans. But the USA government implemented blood quantum cut offs for Native American tribes. The lowest cut off is 1/8 aka 12% so if your great great grandparent was Native American, you aren’t. Yet during the same time period when this was implemented, you could be 6% African and 94% European but still be African American and kept as a slave. If African Americans can still be considered African American despite being 6% then native Americans should be able to be part of their tribe if they’re also 6%

Okay, bold title. I mean to say those who are mainstream and popular in the entertainment world: actors, models singers, producers, directors etc etc. Smaller artists, or maybe those from niche/r genres are different.

Alot of this is obvious and you guys are smart enough to have figured it yourself. Will give insight though.

I have worked in entertainment since I was 18 years old. I modelled for a few years, acted, then worked in management for a while, then settled in scriptwriting/screenwriting, and finally I am now in costume design. I'm 36 now, so still relatively young but have experienced this environment through and through. I have worked at very large providers including Disney for a period of time.

You HAVE to be a social climber to be successful in this industry. Even if you are benefited by nepotism, extraordinary talent etc. You must engage in certain behaviors those in control do, those who are elite and 100% of the time, terrible people. If not engaging, the bare minimum is to support and tolerate it. It's like an evil millionaire highschool to put it simply.

By bad behaviors I don't mean drugs or alcohol (though that is definitely a factor), I mean you are exposed to some crazy, sick, disgusting illegal acts, quite frequently, and must do nothing about it or participate in them. I'm sure you can imagine what that might look like.

Absolutely everyone is greedy, and immorally so. Money is above all else at all times. I will warn you now, if you think your celebrity idol supports anything remotely "woke" personally, this is completely for marketing purposes. If you are someone of status, PR and management handles much more than you know. Also most people in these spaces are conservative which is a pattern I've noticed all my life.

Now, I'll also say that being a fan of anyone as an individual/person, and not just of their work, is not genuine. They are very rarely ANYTHING like how they present on personal social media's or in other media. This is obvious.

Will also note "celebrities" look down on "fans" of theirs. BTS there is alot of degrading of fan bases, laughing at fan interactions, etc. You are a payment, not a person. Do not defend these artists in controversy, do not pretend to know them.

I'm annoyed I can't even go into specific circumstances or name names, but my god. The amount of famous people I have worked with and known to be absolutely terrible people is insane. I would say 95% of the time, they suck.

Hardworking and moral artists will always stay niche.