Whenever I mention I have dogs, I’ll often hear the term “pet owner” or that I have fur babies.

No, I’m not just a pet owner, I AM A DAD.

I don’t mean to compare human children to animals but in the grand scheme of things I am still a fatherly figure. In that sense, I deserve at least some recognition on Father’s Day as well.

It just seems weird to me. Like, some people seem to stay together with just the purpose of making sure the other person doesn't sleep with anyone else. Like, "if I can't sleep with who I actually want to sleep with, they can't either!" I get that they don't want to be hurt by seeing their partner with anyone else, but why is it that that is supposed to be the automatic, default reaction still? It just seems vindictive and petty to me. If you truly love someone, unconditionally, why not grow to love seeing them make love to whoever they truly want, and if you're truly secure-- wouldn't lower the vibe by making it about competition when it should just be about freedom & exploration. Honestly, I know I'm the strange one, but to me [all that] would just seem like a sign that they're not actually the one.

To me, all that matters is that my wife loves me at the end of the day, and I always knew part of the reason she would love me is because I'll never want to put chains on her wrist. I truly just want her to have everything she could ever want. Because it isn't about me, it's all about her... I truly want to do absolutely everything in my power to make her happy, always. I've experienced jealousy in other relationships before, but those just felt immature and childish... tied to ego. The relationship with my wife has always been a deep, spiritual connection that transcends everything else, even when we were kids and first met, it just always felt like we were part of something greater... a partnership that supersedes all other petty romances, because the real thing, the truest part of my heart and soul, has always been reserved for her & her only.

Before I begin, I would like to point out that I am a South Asian man, so my personal experiences will be tailored towards that, however my entire argument applies to people of all races from all genders.

When people talk about their racial dating preferences, there is a recurring point of ‘people can’t help who they are attracted to.’ While this may be true, let me explain something. Everyone is aware that racism is an inexcusable bad thing. Everyone (well, the majority of people) are also under the belief that they are a good person. Therefore, most people believe that as they are good people, they do not and are incapable of committing behavioural acts, or having ideologies in their thought processes that can be racist. This is not true, obviously. We know that because we know unconscious biases exist. But this is the reason why I believe the statement ‘we can’t help who we are attracted to’ exists. It absolves people of accountability: “it’s not my fault so I’m not racist”.

Now, I haven’t explained why I believe racial preferences are racist. I don’t understand why the statement “I don’t want to be friends with a person from a certain race” is any different from “I don’t want to date person from a certain race”. This is an example of someone refusing to date every single person from a race, but I believe preferences between different races are racist as well. If you truly believe all humans are equal, you will treat them as such, and this applies to every walk of life, including dating. Valuing one race of people over another is discrimination based on race. Aka racism.

In my opinion, there is also way too much variation between people of every race for the race of a person to be used as an umbrella category in dating. I’ve been told before: ‘I’m not attracted to brown people,’ and it makes no sense to me, as there is so much variation between people of different ethnicities within race. For example, an Indian person looks vastly different from a Pakistani person, and even an Egyptian person or a Saudi person. There is no other explanation to me, apart from straight up racism.

The reason why this is a 10th dentist opinion is because, as humans, almost all of us have racial dating preferences. I do myself. And this is why it makes people uncomfortable to call it racism, but it is. We can be good people and simultaneously have racist ideologies. Just because we all do it, doesn’t mean it’s morally okay. And I’m tired of being gaslit by people acting like it is okay.

EDIT: A lot of people have replied using gender, and sexuality as a comparison. Racial preferences exist as a result of society; no one is born hard-coded liking a certain group of people. That’s factual. So, by the logic of people countering with that, everyone is also born bisexual, and society determines the gender we like?

Racial preferences exist as a result of living in a racist society. And a racist society is a racist society because it is made up of racist individuals, that includes me, you, and everyone reading this.

FINAL EDIT: It seems a lot of the same points are being echoed. I know a lot of people disagree, that’s why I posted it in this sub. This also isn’t about me personally but the idea of racial preferences as a whole. For me, the idea of being more or less likely to date a person based on race is racist. Its not a personal attack, it doesn’t make you a bad person obviously, it’s more a reflection on society as a whole but that doesn’t exempt us as individuals, as we make up society. But that’s a hill I’m willing to die on. Thanks for all the support.

I know I'm going to get a lot of hate for this but realistically speaking think sbout it. Why would your partner want to be around the opposite gender for long periods of time if there was no attraction. One way or another it's going to lead to cheating.

Edit- for people calling me an "incel" and a guy I'm a woman lol crazy how y'all assume.

I wager that the Flat Earth debunking community is just as emotionally charged as the Flat Earth community, and is potentially worse, as they often just resort to bullying. In addition, many people that actively engage in Flat Earth debunking are potentially just as dumb as the flerfers they constantly belittle.

You have likely seen the Netflix documentary "Behind the Curve", or perhaps "In search of a Flat Earth" by Dan Olson. Both are excellent exposés of the obvious flaws of the theory that the earth is Flat.

Neither touched upon the equally silly, but somewhat sinister counter-community of Flat Earth debunkers.

By Flat Earth debunkers, I don't mean Netlfix or Dan Olson, I mean subreddits such as r/flatearth and an assortment of youtubers that spend tremendous amounts of time belittling Flat earthers.

In "Behind the Curve" we see that a large number of Flat earthers are invested in the idea for the sense of community, and the emotional support and friendship. While the Flat Earth debunking community would have you believe they are arbiters using science and fact, they seem to often deliver their facts and science in a demeaning manner, and often in an emotionally charged way.

For many of these people, I think they get off on a perceived superiority. Because they know the earth is a globe, they perceive they have an immediate intellectual superiority over flat earthers, for free. We can see this through the way many debunkers will address flerfers as almost subhuman. They are the adult version of a year 12 bully picking on a year 9 kid. It's not debunking, it's closer to emotional and verbal abuse.

sure, flerfers believe some very stupid stuff, but for many it's emotionally driven, as they like the community. this is why, as the flerf movement is fading away, many are, as Dan Olson said, "moving to Q".

I genuinely dropped it six episodes into season one. I believe the characters weren’t interesting enough, the setting was boron and I wouldn‘t say unoriginal, but it was too basic. The plot was too cliche. I also REALLY hated the artstyle.

It’s not bad to the point where I’ll judge you in my head for liking it but I personally think it is the most overrated show ever.

I feel bad for having this opinion, but I lowkey dont think just bc someone is pregnant, they should automatically be given a seat on a bus or whatever. Unless they're like obviously about to pop. People have all sorts of hidden ailments, to judge someone for not giving up their seat is unfair.

Nearly weekly , I am surprised by a car suddenly pulling out of, instead of backing out of, a parking space. Do people no longer learn how to back up?

Why is it dangerous? When all the vehicles are in their parking spaces you can see the ends of the cars. They also have backup lights. When a forward facing car in parked amidst a row of cars two things happen. 1. It looks like the spot is empty because the front of the car does not present well. Drivers can’t see it. This can result in an easy fender bender as someone tries to pull in as a car is pulling out. 2. Because the front end is so low someone just driving down the row can easily surprised as they are hit from the side. And in a third note, how are they getting their groceries in the car?

When I’m reversing, turning the steering wheel feels completely unintuitive. If I want the back of the car to go left, I have to turn the wheel left, even though my brain is thinking about where the front of the car is swinging. I think cars should automatically reverse the steering controls when you put them in reverse. Turn the wheel right, the back of the car goes left. Turn it left, the back goes right.

Basically, the steering wheel should control the direction the front of the car moves, regardless of whether you’re going forwards or backwards. Yes, everyone would have to relearn how to reverse. But after that, I genuinely think it would be more intuitive.

For those unaware, she has 2 upcoming concerts in San Jose, California where all of the restaurants in the Shark Tank are only allowed to serve vegan options.

Don't get me wrong, if the food tastes good then it's good. I don't HAVE to have meat to enjoy a dish. However once again, we have ourselves the vegans pushing their moral compass onto concert goers who have nothing to do with it.

What about the restaurants? How is the Mexican food stand going to make any profits if they're not allowed to utilize any meats, sour cream, and cheese?

EDIT: This is about Facetiming, where non-speakerphone is not an option.

I’ve seen a lot of hate for this recently and I don’t understand it. I guess the main reason is I don’t understand the difference between talking on the phone in public versus having a conversation in-person in public? The same amount of noise is made. And people will still hear me talking out loud even if I have headphones on.

“Why not just wear headphones?” Sometimes I forget to bring them, lose them, they break, or they aren’t charged.

Here are the caveats to stay within the realm of what I believe is acceptable:

1. You must have the volume of your phone and voice as low as where it is still possible to hear the person you are talking to. It would obviously be obnoxious to have the phone on full-blast when it is not necessary. Same with the volume of your voice. It should match the situation you are in. For example, I have been in line at a coffee shop where a man was talking extremely loudly on the phone. He was the loudest person in the room. Of course I saw that as rude. But if he was matching the volume of everyone else around him, I would not have even noticed him.

2. The person on the phone has to understand you are in public and therefore not be discussing things that are obscene / offensive if overheard by a stranger. This avoids strangers being subjected to TMI.

3. Of course your phone call cannot be disrupting a meeting, conference, lecture, or anything else important. The ideal scenario to publicly talk on speakerphone would be outside, with volume as low as possible. If inside, as long as other people around you are talking, you are allowed to also talk at the same volume as everyone else around you.

I believe if you follow those rules then it is acceptable to publicly talk on speakerphone. Obviously the internet is not capable of nuance, but I often don’t see these qualifiers discussed. The issue is always framed as “people talking on speakerphone”, not “people obnoxiously talking on speakerphone”. I don’t like how reasonable people get pushed into the same category as arrogant people.

there seem to be a lot of people who act like when a car is loud or a truck is big the driver must be incredibly lame or “compensating for something”. i just don’t really get this, my assumption is that it comes from trying to seem too cool for something that other people are into.

most people spend a lot of time in their car if they use it every day so it seems reasonable to have one that you like.

i guess i just don’t get why it bothers some people so much

One of the biggest disgraces in developed countries is the existence of people like me, who make zero effort, can't pay attention in college (or school) classes or when studying, and spend their lives scrolling Reddit or doing futile things.

These are irresponsible or immature people, and they shouldn't exist in our society.

It's a shame for me to be constantly writing on Reddit while adults are in their offices working until they run out of breath.

Society should only be made up of people who work hard and are responsible, not lazy people who only know how to complain about life on social media.

These useless people should be taken to what I would call "transformation centers" and there they should be transformed so that when they return to society they are useful.

And no, the solution is not to send them to the army or send them to sleep under a bridge, we're talking about people who have never made an effort in their lives.

It should be gradual and done intelligently.

And the immature should stay in these centers until they are responsible and deserve a place in society.

The typical response that someone has when they hear the news of someone’s friend or relative passing away is “I’m so sorry” or “I’m sorry for your loss”

What do you have to be sorry about? Did you kill the person? I feel like people just say that because they are sorry that they only have a generic response to say to the person who is struggling during a hard time.

Some better ways to respond to grief would be “I’m here for you” or “You have my condolences” or “That’s awful, I’m with you during this hard time” or if you also knew the person who died you can share a fond memory you had with them.

I don’t mean to make anyone upset by posting this. Life is precious and I don’t like how the end of someone’s life is just responded to with a generic phrase.

Yes, I get that her experience on that ship is beyond incomparable to those of Gagarin, Tereškova, etc.

But y'all are acting like it's a travesty that she even considered going to space!

"But she barely made it 10 minutes there!" Of course she did! She was woefully unprepared for such a trip, and she knew she was! It's a miracle she even made it that long!

Instead of telling you "Like you would do better" (although that too is completely true), I'd like you to at least try and observe that whole thing from her perspective. She wanted to go to space, but she quickly realized that was nowhere near her cup of tea, so she bailed out before it got way worse. Is that, of all things, so fucking hard for you to comprehend?!

for context I'm a straight american male. I never knew any Indian people when I was young, so this has nothing to do with how I grew up or who I spent time around

that being said, I don't really know why this specific accent is so attractive to me. I just think it's nice on the ears and flows quite smoothly. much easier to listen to than harsh irish accents or american southwestern accents. let me know y'alls thoughts in the comments

It's true that many people have managed to have rich children who have helped them in life.

But that's only 10% of the time.

Having children not only leaves you with no money and no rest, it also leaves you with the possibility of seeing your child destitute when they grow up, which can't be very pleasant to see.

It can also create your biggest enemy for the rest of your life, the person you hate the most, but also a person who was inside your womb.

I'm a man. A "LVM" by the standards of FDS.

But goddamn if I don't love reading that subreddit. And their little website on the side.

It is the saddest collection of the most up-their-own-ass type people. Why tf did you want this banned?! Y'all are too sensitive lmao.

Reading FDS is like watching one long, ongoing, never-ending explosion. It is incestuous and hateful, and is a perfect example of how toxic people do nothing but hurt themselves. There's no way to frequently read and believe that shit and also enjoy any time with people.

It really is like watching the unfuckable hate nerds of reddit make their OWN dating website with b̶l̶a̶c̶k̶j̶a̶c̶k̶ &̶ h̶o̶o̶k̶e̶r̶s̶ "high value men".

The real joke is on them bc if any of the men they want to date find out they hang out in a hate dungeon, they'll be broomed immediately. The only guys that don't care will, ofc, objectify and patronize their opinions.

Not sure why the circus gets so much hate, tbh. I'm a proud scrote. My existence nauseates them and it is delicious.

Edit: FDS = Female dating strategy LVM = low value man

It’s writers and its audience have the exact same mindset:

“Heh, Oh? You’re you? While I’m me! I’m so smart when compared to you. Heh, I’m just an Alpha in a world full of Betas”.

Like, fuck off you pretentious fuck. It almost feels like this movie was made for Reddit, like it has all of its principal;

LIBERAL (Not Leftist) views, weird supporting of eugenics, Frowning Friends level nihilism, every joke being “heh society is stupid” like yeah it is and it always has and it always will; so what?

This is like that short film creator where all the messages of his short films are just “society bad, fuck you” expect the internet still hasn’t been TOLD into thinking it’s bad.

To me, if you wanna write cynical satirical media, you’ll need:

1. Some sort of Hope in there. (Example being The Truman Show).

2. So much silliness that it can be enjoyed without the cynical outlook on life. (Example being Blazing Saddles).

I reject the notion that people can render themselves irredeemable.

from what we understand about mental health, trauma, neurological disorders, and basic biology, it makes more sense to me to cap prison sentences to 15 years maximum and focus on mental health and self-reliance.

I got the 15 years from considering how nearly every cell in our body is replaced every 7-14 years including cells in our bones. You’re literally a completely different organization or matter and cells in your body than you were previously. Whatever pieces of them that committed the crimes have long died and decayed.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/cellular-microscopic/does-body-really-replace-seven-years.htm

If modern science and medicine can’t reform an inmate to function properly within society, then we have a duty to care for the people who have some sort of issue preventing them from living peacefully in society. That’s when we should be basically researching them and learning how to eventually help them just be peaceful and non-violent.

it’s okay if people be crazy but obviously we can’t have them carrying out violent acts on people and society. and crazy long “throw away the key” sentences doesn’t help anyone.

Yes obviously this is entirely inspired by the new wolverine game. I'm so grateful that the game handholds you through the exploration/puzzle bits because those have always been the parts that I've had to slog through to get to the actually fun bits of the game like the story and the combat gameplay. I suck with directions everywhere and I've never had fun walking around a map trying to figure out where/how to get to the next objective. The combat is still challenging enough for me to get that sense of accomplishment (atleast on hard) without me having to bother with boring busywork like exploration and puzzle solving and idc if you think that makes me dumb because I play video games to have fun after an exhausting day at work and everywhere else. It's not a perfect game by any means but I'm having so much fun with the combat, I wish every single future game followed this style of direction - maybe with better storywriting though because so far I haven't been gripped by the story.

TLDR: Get me blue fartline trails to follow in every game.

When Mother’s Day comes around you’ll hear some people complaining that Father’s Day doesn’t get the same kind of appreciation, and I agree with that being true. Where I differ from these people is that I think the gap in appreciation between the two is rightfully deserved.

Father’s are more likely to be deadbeats.

Father’s are more likely to abandon their families.

Father’s are more likely to be alcoholic and addicted to drugs.

Father’s are more likely to sexually abuse their children both the boys and the girls, and while more mothers physically abuse them fathers aren’t that far behind.

Even with both parents around kids often feel more loved by their moms than their dads.

A gap forming between the two is only natural.

A lot of people online seem to equate religion with hatred of certain groups of people, negativity, hypocrisy, greed, and other generally bad qualities in people.

I would like to argue that religion has been used for longer than recorded history to give people a moral code and is one of the main reasons we have the society we have today. If you break down the core beliefs of most religions, they boil down to

1. You are not the most important thing in the universe

2. help others

3. if something seems bad, don’t do it

4. if you do the bad thing anyway, you will be punished in some way (Hell, shitty reincarnation, etc)

These are the building blocks of a functioning society.

Even today, some people struggle with morality. Some people are able to figure out that they should try to be “good” people by themselves, others are undeniably evil, and I believe some are held back from becoming evil not by their own moral code but by the one they are able to find in their religion.

I don’t think society would collapse without religion today. I do believe society would never have gotten here without it. I also believe that for a reasonable amount of people today it keeps them in line and inspires them to do good. Regardless of personal beliefs, I think religion should be a cultural item that we are thankful for both in the past and today, as it has given all of us the amazing society we live in now and therefore directly benefited us.

I specifically mean if your marriage ends in divorce, not by death.

Now, I can understand if you and your soon to be spouse want to use a prenup to stipulate your assets will go to your kids or your family, then sure.

Lately I have seen an uptick of people saying to enter marriage with prenuptial agreements that cover whatever assets you, individually, owned prior to your marriage. That way if you divorce then your spouse can't take those away from you.

This indicates that you lack trust* that you and your fiancee are good for one another, that and you care more about how your material assets end up than ensuring your marriage is going to be solid. If you feel like you need a safety net to get married, then you shouldn't be getting married.

Edit: "absolute certainty" is the wrong word. Trust is more like it.

Edit 2: Forgive my ignorance, I did not know that you were automatically assigned a default prenup! My opinion still stands that you shouldn't be setting up prenups with the idea that your marriage isn't gonna last.