Unpopular Opinions.

wonderfulname

eth0 wrote: »

Who no doubt will try to blame me and try to get my hobbies made illegal because they 'corrupt' children.

Something tells me you're not a knitter... so what are these hobbies you speak of?

flutterflye

Apparently it is unpopular to believe that in general guys are very easy to get into bed. (I must be living on a different planet to everyone else!)

Dudess

flutterflye wrote: »

Apparently it is unpopular to believe that in general guys are very easy to get into bed. (I must be living on a different planet to everyone else!)

Bit different to what you said, which was: an ordinary young guy will have sex with any non hideous female at all if she acts a bit sexy.

If you mean when there's alcohol in the equation, that might be a bit closer to the truth, but you haven't said anything about alcohol.

It's easy to get a man into bed if he really fancies you, yeah - seeing as... he really fancies you.

flutterflye

Dudess wrote: »

Bit different to what you said, which was: an ordinary young guy will have sex with any non hideous female at all if she acts a bit sexy.

If you mean when there's alcohol in the equation, that might be a bit closer to the truth, but you haven't said anything about alcohol.

It's easy to get a man into bed if he really fancies you, yeah - seeing as... he really fancies you.

Yes! Now that you mention it, all the observations I have made to lead me to this conclusion have had alcohol in the equation!
Is that where the problem lay?

Dudess

Elba101 wrote: »

I think the recession has given a lot of people an excuse to be lazy

In what way?

Chavways

Hardy Bucks is the most unfunny show I've seen in ages

eth0

wonderfulname wrote: »

Something tells me you're not a knitter... so what are these hobbies you speak of?

Well I don't mind the odd blashteen off the shotgun like. Even pellet guns are great craic but incredibly hard to get here due to 'think of the children' regulation dating as far back as the 60's

smegmar

Bigamy: men just need more sex then one woman wants to give. If I can despise and hate 10 men equally, I can love 2 women equally.

Nuclear Power: get out of the 1980's. LFTR technology is safe, clean powerful and reliable. idiots who criticise nuclear don't even know what Thorium is.

Chivalry: It's not about opening doors and wearing a suit of armour, it's a real way of life that should be more common. (PS, it's possible too, I've held the laws of chivalry for 3 years now.)

Same sex marriage is a bad idea. don't even start me on gay couples adopting.

We all have to learn Chinese. Yeah there's 2,000,000,000 of them, and soon they'll own us.

Expressive dance is a load of ****. "should I call the doctor, are you having an epileptic fit?"

Democracy isn't all that. Yeah it's better then some, but it's still ****.

Strawberries taste like ****, and they go mouldy too quickly.

Fat people should be taxed and ridiculed and deprived of food.

Anorexics are ****ed up, but better then being fat.

Heavily retarded babies should be put down. It's a mercy killing really, do you think they enjoy a life like that.

A strong, informed, benevolent dictator is better then weak government.

Dudess

Expressive dance is popular?

How can a tax be put on fat people? Do they fill out a form with their picture or something? Does everyone get that form?

Siuin

smegmar wrote: »

Bigamy: men just need more sex then one woman wants to give. If I can despise and hate 10 men equally, I can love 2 women equally.

Someone just hasn't met the right woman! :P

4zn76tysfajdxp

smegmar wrote: »

Same sex marriage is a bad idea. don't even start me on gay couples adopting.

What's wrong with gay couples adopting?

Dudess wrote: »

How can a tax be put on fat people? Do they fill out a form with their picture or something? Does everyone get that form?

I think you have to collect fifteen Snickers wrappers and send off for it.

eth0

Dudess wrote: »

Expressive dance is popular?

How can a tax be put on fat people? Do they fill out a form with their picture or something? Does everyone get that form?

They have to give up 500g of body fat every year. To be removed by a trained fat removal technician ie. some lad after a 4 week FAS course under supervision of a doctor ie. Doctor: "G'way there and do those 20 fatsos queueing up while I finish reading the examiner"

Even 500g is worth a lot of money. If America started harvesting these people for their fat they might even be able to pay back their debt to China

Dudess

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

What's wrong with gay couples adopting?

Duh... it's icky! :rolleyes:

willmunny1990

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

What's wrong with gay couples adopting?


I have no problem with Gay people but IMO gay couples should think long and hard about adopting. Whether we like it or not same sex families aren't the norm and by adopting its putting the child in a vulnerable position.

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.
Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

wonderfulname

eth0 wrote: »

Well I don't mind the odd blashteen off the shotgun like. Even pellet guns are great craic but incredibly hard to get here due to 'think of the children' regulation dating as far back as the 60's

Everyone I knew had one of those when I was a kid, I still have both eyes... Was, and still am, completely oblivious to how legal that was...

4zn76tysfajdxp

willmunny1990 wrote: »

I have no problem with Gay people but IMO gay couples should think long and hard about adopting. Whether we like it or not same sex families aren't the norm and by adopting its putting the child in a vulnerable position.

Well, it'll never become any closer to normal if it's objected to all the time by people whose lives it doesn't impact.

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.

Kids will bully each other anyway regardless. They're not exactly reasonable, thoughtful people, these bullying kids. Anyway, by stopping gay couples adopting kids as a preventative measure to stop bullying, aren't you in a sense endorsing the bullies and their beliefs?

Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

If a gay couple is introducing a child to a safe, secure home away from temporary foster families and/or orphanages, isn't that in the interest of the child?

smegmar

Adding a few things to my last post.

Mandatory Parenting class: you've got nine months to prepare, if you can't raise a child properly it's taken from you.

Renting real guns at a shooting range is awesome.

Mr.Bean was an Alien.

Usury Laws would have saved us from this economic crisis.

Parents should be allowed to beat their children (within reason)

Feminists are "guano" insane and should be locked up.

---

Siuni wrote: »

Someone just hasn't met the right woman!

Is that a proposition?

Dudess

willmunny1990 wrote: »

Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

What are their selfish needs? Giving a child a loving, stable home?

Wouldn't that from a gay couple be better than the child being neglected?

Dudess

smegmar wrote: »

Feminists are "guano" insane and should be locked up.

Which ones? There's many types. Some even like sucking cock.

Siuin

smegmar wrote: »

Is that a proposition?

Lol, not quite! I'm pretty sure that a large amount of women have a higher sex drive than men, it's just not exactly ladylike to announce it (unfortunately!)

Dudess

Fuk ladylike! I've an extremely high one! :pac:

smegmar

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

If a gay couple is introducing a child to a safe, secure home away from temporary foster families and/or orphanages, isn't that in the interest of the child?

Short answer No, long answer No.

As a child is developing it needs a role model from both genders in a loving relationship to build a picture of it's role in life and relationship with the opposite gender. I'm not saying that gay parents will always have gay children, but it gives a false image of the world and confuses the child. What role model would a girl have for herself raised by two gay men?

pragmatic1

smegmar wrote: »

Bigamy: men just need more sex then one woman wants to give. If I can despise and hate 10 men equally, I can love 2 women equally.

Nuclear Power: get out of the 1980's. LFTR technology is safe, clean powerful and reliable. idiots who criticise nuclear don't even know what Thorium is.

Chivalry: It's not about opening doors and wearing a suit of armour, it's a real way of life that should be more common. (PS, it's possible too, I've held the laws of chivalry for 3 years now.)

Same sex marriage is a bad idea. don't even start me on gay couples adopting.

We all have to learn Chinese. Yeah there's 2,000,000,000 of them, and soon they'll own us.

Expressive dance is a load of ****. "should I call the doctor, are you having an epileptic fit?"

Democracy isn't all that. Yeah it's better then some, but it's still ****.

Strawberries taste like ****, and they go mouldy too quickly.

Fat people should be taxed and ridiculed and deprived of food.

Anorexics are ****ed up, but better then being fat.

Heavily retarded babies should be put down. It's a mercy killing really, do you think they enjoy a life like that.

A strong, informed, benevolent dictator is better then weak government.

Thank **** you arent anywhere near power and never will be. If I'm ever in power you're the first one in the gulag.

smegmar

Dudess wrote: »

Fuk ladylike! I've an extremely high one! :pac:

Siuin wrote: »

Lol, not quite! I'm pretty sure that a large amount of women have a higher sex drive than men, it's just not exactly ladylike to announce it (unfortunately!)

hmmm....maybe all three of us should meet together for.....coffee. did I mention I'm totally into bigamy.

4zn76tysfajdxp

smegmar wrote: »

Short answer No, long answer No.

As a child is developing it needs a role model from both genders in a loving relationship to build a picture of it's role in life and relationship with the opposite gender. I'm not saying that gay parents will always have gay children, but it gives a false image of the world and confuses the child. What role model would a girl have for herself raised by two gay men?

Nah. None of that's gonna happen. The child in question will be exposed to more couples than just their own parents. He/she will see his/her friend being raised by hetero couples, single parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts and any number of different combinations. Highly unlikely a kid's gonna develop a warped world view by being raised by gays more than anyone else. What role model would a boy have for himself raised by a single mother?

Sky King

Diamonds are a complete rip off and buying them is not only a waste of money, it's buying into the biggest marketing coup of the 20th century.

karaokeman

willmunny1990 wrote: »

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

What's wrong with gay couples adopting?

I have no problem with Gay people but IMO gay couples should think long and hard about adopting. Whether we like it or not same sex families aren't the norm and by adopting its putting the child in a vulnerable position.

I suppose it depends how the gay couple goes about family planning. I would be more open to the idea of two gay men adopting at least two girls if they wanted a daughter. I don't think a son and a daughter for example would be good because that way there would be no other female influence in the house with the absence of a mother. If the girl had a sister however she would have someone to confine with rather than if she didn't manage to click with her brother and two fathers. Likewise if two lesbian women wanted a son I would say two would be the better option.

willmunny1990 wrote: »

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.
Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

Agree with previous posts that bullying happens anyway and adopting allows a child to be in a safe civilised home. Remember also that the child will have a better life if he is adopted by actual parents who will make sure he/she gets an education and develops the personal and social skills to do well in life.

willmunny1990

Dudess wrote: »

What are their selfish needs? Giving a child a loving, stable home?

Wouldn't that from a gay couple be better than the child being neglected?

The selfish needs are the fact some of these people are so hell bent on having kids and a family they fail to see or acknowledge the down sides.

Obviously a gay couple giving a child a loving home is better than having it be neglected, all I'm saying is that their are obvious downsides and pitfalls that some don't want to accept.

Whether you or I like it, Its not yet universally accepted to be gay, let alone bring a child into a gay couples situation.

Also the line "kids will bully no matter what" doesn't wash in my view, all kids will go through trials and tribulations but the majority wont have to contend with the confusion and utter embarrassment of having a mam/dad in a same sex relationship.

Every kid will have problems, most however wont have to deal with the above, Gay couples should think of that IMO first before trying to be the "gay couple" who tried to make society change at the expense of an innocent child.

wonderfulname

willmunny1990 wrote: »

I have no problem with Gay people but IMO gay couples should think long and hard about adopting. Whether we like it or not same sex families aren't the norm and by adopting its putting the child in a vulnerable position.

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.
Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

This thread is for unpopular opinions, not ignorant ones, you're just randomly validating a baseless belief of yours, if you actually looked into it you'd find gay adoption to be necessary and beneficial to the children involved.

smegmar

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

Nah. None of that's gonna happen. The child in question will be exposed to more couples than just their own parents. He/she will see his/her friend being raised by hetero couples, single parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts and any number of different combinations. Highly unlikely a kid's gonna develop a warped world view by being raised by gays more than anyone else.

So you're admitting that the gay parents are insufficient and can't do a vital task? No I'm sorry, If you're going to raise a child do it right, it's a human beings life, not your pet. Besides who's going to breast feed?

Children look up to their parents unlike anyone else, their wired to do so. There can be no substitute. To miss a vital component in that is just damaging.

Saige Wooden Mocha wrote: »

What role model would a boy have for himself raised by a single mother?

I never said that was any good either.

smegmar

This thread is called Unpopular opinions....

So far I think I'm winning.

willmunny1990

wonderfulname wrote: »

This thread is for unpopular opinions, not ignorant ones, you're just randomly validating a baseless belief of yours, if you actually looked into it you'd find gay adoption to be necessary and beneficial to the children involved.

Excuse me but it is my opinion that gay couples should think carefully about the pros and cons of adoption and how their lifestyle is going to effect the child in question.

Its an unpopular opinion because people like you don't like to be questioned and call people with different opinions i.e me, ignorant.

Siuin

karaokeman wrote: »

I suppose it depends how the gay couple goes about family planning. I would be more open to the idea of two gay men adopting at least two girls if they wanted a daughter. I don't think a son and a daughter for example would be good because that way there would be no other female influence in the house with the absence of a mother. If the girl had a sister however she would have someone to confine with rather than if she didn't manage to click with her brother and two fathers. Likewise if two lesbian women wanted a son I would say two would be the better option.

Agree with previous posts that bullying happens anyway and adopting allows a child to be in a safe civilised home. Remember also that the child will have a better life if he is adopted by actual parents who will make sure he/she gets an education and develops the personal and social skills to do well in life.

I find this idea of needing a ratio of each sex so bizarre. My boyfriend grew up with a single mother and his grandmother and he didn't turn out weird just because he didn't have a 'male influence'. There are so many other adults in a child's life; teachers, friends of the family, coaches -- so long as the kid is being loved and provided for it's really not that big of a deal to not have a parental figure who is the same gender as them.

4zn76tysfajdxp

smegmar wrote: »

So you're admitting that the gay parents are insufficient and can't do a vital task?

Yup. I am absolutely saying that. Well read. You are very smart.

No, I was saying that kids aren't gonna be confused about gender roles by being raised by gays. I mean, it's not like they've been implanted with this information since birth that "Mommy Daddy good, Daddy Daddy bad" and they'll malfunction once they're exposed to something contrary.

No I'm sorry, If you're going to raise a child do it right, it's a human beings life, not your pet. Besides who's going to breast feed?

Who breastfeeds when hetero couples adopt?

Children look up to their parents unlike anyone else, their wired to do so. There can be no substitute. To miss a vital component in that is just damaging.

How damaging? How does it damage them then? Give us a practical example of how a child could be damaged or have their perception skewed by being raised by a gay couple.

I never said that was any good either.

Do you think that children being raised by single parents should be taken away then, since it's no good?

Logical Fallacy

smegmar wrote: »

This thread is called Unpopular opinions....

So far I think I'm winning.

Yeah, but that's kind of like... http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/bush_vote_retard.jpg

allandanyways

'Imagine' is a terrible, terrible song with inane, boring lyrics and even more boring piano chords.

stupidusername

willmunny1990 wrote: »

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.
Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

The last thing I am is PC, but I was bullied in school because I had frizzy hair - does that mean couples with curly / frizzy hair shouldn't be allowed have children?

Paparazzo

smegmar wrote: »

Expressive dance is a load of ****.

Ohhhhh, controversial

wonderfulname

willmunny1990 wrote: »

Excuse me but it is my opinion that gay couples should think carefully about the pros and cons of adoption and how their lifestyle is going to effect the child in question.

Its an unpopular opinion because people like you don't like to be questioned and call people with different opinions i.e me, ignorant.

No, I mean ignorant as in unaware of the facts, there are no cons involved in gay adoption.

Like I said, you should read up on it. Luckily I always have a report* or two to hand

If you're going to persist that your "opinion" holds any merit it should be based on something.

*pre civil partnership but definitely worth a read for you, especially the case studies

Napper Hawkins

stupidusername wrote: »

The last thing I am is PC, but I was bullied in school because I had frizzy hair - does that mean couples with curly / frizzy hair shouldn't be allowed have children?

Damn straight, Curly Curly Frizzface. :P

mickrock

Children should be allowed beat their parents (within reason).

It never did mine any harm. They now know right from wrong and what is and isn't acceptable.

K-9

willmunny1990 wrote: »

What's wrong with gay couples adopting?


I have no problem with Gay people but IMO gay couples should think long and hard about adopting. Whether we like it or not same sex families aren't the norm and by adopting its putting the child in a vulnerable position.

It leaves the child open to bullying and being ostracised by its peers.
Gay couples should put the interests of the child first rather than their own selfish needs.

Same used to be said about single parent families, mixed race and religions, times change, societies adapt, abnormal becomes normal.

cesc77

stupidusername wrote: »

The last thing I am is PC, but I was bullied in school because I had frizzy hair - does that mean couples with curly / frizzy hair shouldn't be allowed have children?

Yes,:pac:

Paparazzo

smegmar wrote: »

So you're admitting that the gay parents are insufficient and can't do a vital task? No I'm sorry, If you're going to raise a child do it right, it's a human beings life, not your pet. Besides who's going to breast feed? Children look up to their parents unlike anyone else, their wired to do so. There can be no substitute. To miss a vital component in that is just damaging.




I never said that was any good either.

You do realise that you don't need milk producing boobs to feed a baby? You can get formula and bottles in almost any supermarket in the country.
My mates father left when he was 4. I must tell him he's damaged.

smegmar

Paparazzo wrote: »

You do realise that you don't need milk producing boobs to feed a baby? You can get formula and bottles in almost any supermarket in the country.
My mates father left when he was 4. I must tell him he's damaged.

Breastfeeding is an important part of a babies development and bonding with the mother. I know there's formula milk available but the child may have social problems if he was never breastfed.

I'm not saying that homosexual couples can't raise children, but their making an already difficult task much harder then it has to be. Statistically children of single parent homes are more lightly to be involved in crime and have troubled relationships themselves.
I'm not saying that single parents are bad or lazy or unable, but it's like driving with one hand behind your back, some people might pull it off but the rest will have a few dents....

There isn't really good numbers and statistics on gay couples adopted children yet but I imagine it'll be the same.

As for your mate, I couldn't tell you how he is. Realistically you'd need a control group (exact clones of him living in his exact setting but with a father) to know how it's affected him. There's every chance that he's a perfect chap, I'm making a statistical judgement, not a specific one.

smegmar

Just imagine for a second that this man is (one of) your father(s).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XKE3dIrRIbg#t=35s

Rick Deckard

smegmar wrote: »

the child may have social problems if he was never breastfed.

This is sheer class. I haven't laughed like that in years..

Where's your control group clones for this "statement"..

Jaxxy

smegmar wrote: »

Paparazzo wrote: »

You do realise that you don't need milk producing boobs to feed a baby? You can get formula and bottles in almost any supermarket in the country.
My mates father left when he was 4. I must tell him he's damaged.

Breastfeeding is an important part of a babies development and bonding with the mother. I know there's formula milk available but the child may have social problems if he was never breastfed.

I'm not saying that homosexual couples can't raise children, but their making an already difficult task much harder then it has to be. Statistically children of single parent homes are more lightly to be involved in crime and have troubled relationships themselves.
I'm not saying that single parents are bad or lazy or unable, but it's like driving with one hand behind your back, some people might pull it off but the rest will have a few dents....

There isn't really good numbers and statistics on gay couples adopted children yet but I imagine it'll be the same.

As for your mate, I couldn't tell you how he is. Realistically you'd need a control group (exact clones of him living in his exact setting but with a father) to know how it's affected him. There's every chance that he's a perfect chap, I'm making a statistical judgement, not a specific one.

Social problems!? That post is probably the most idiotic post I've read here in AH.

You and the "if you don't breast-feed your child you're a bad mother/parent" brigade can fcuk right off.

Fishooks12

smegmar wrote: »

I'm not saying that homosexual couples can't raise children, but their making an already difficult task much harder then it has to be. Statistically children of single parent homes are more lightly to be involved in crime and have troubled relationships themselves.
I'm not saying that single parents are bad or lazy or unable, but it's like driving with one hand behind your back, some people might pull it off but the rest will have a few dents....

Do Gay people morph into one entity when they adopt or am I missing something?!

Crazy Horse 6

Dudess wrote: »

The Diana hysteria was hilarious, but it doesn't seem to me like she had sex with any more men than average.

Yeah but not whilst married. Angel she defo was'nt