What are your most extreme, honestly held views?

In My Humble Opinion
401

I’ve always felt that strippers and porn stars are the same as athletes and should be treated as such. It is only our puritanical aversion to sex that has us shaming the sex industry while another industry who similarly uses their bodies for entertainment is exalted.

Think about it: Athletes either are born with natural talent or work hard to get it or a combination of both. They do completely arbitrary things like put a ball into a hole or dance on skates over a frozen pool. We fill up stadiums to watch them use what they were born with or worked hard to get for entertainment.

Strippers and prostitutes do the same thing. They are either naturally good-looking or worked hard or had surgery to become beautiful in the eyes of most people. They do arbitrary things like dance on a pole or work their tongues around a cock and people pay them for it. Some are good at what they do, some are not, and just like athletes they are overwhelmingly youthful and in shape.

I think all obscenity laws should be immediately eliminated and anyone can show any sexual thing on TV with no restrictions. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it. Eventually we’ll normalize people’s thinking of them.

402

Fair enough, but I’ve got to respond a little to this. First off, you don’t have a penis, and there really is not an analogous body part that both sexes share. It is a strange mix of sensitive and relatively insensitive regions. Your hand is by FAR more sensitive, and a poor comparison. A better comparison might be your toes. Put on a sock, a thin one, and notice the difference in the areas that matter: Texture, temperature and moisture. With a latex barrier the sensitivity to the first two is significantly lessened, and the third is not longer a function at all. Most women do not have a lot of texture or strong gripping power anyway, and not all women have “hot” vaginas (relative to their partner’s temperature) either. So now you have the double whammy of insulating against a delicate texture, a variable temperature and no sensation of wetness at all.

Even with a dedicated partner, it isn’t a 99% experience. For most men it is more like a 50 to 75% experience with a regular condom. There is a reason men don’t like to wear them. For some men with less sensitive penises or psychological issues it could well be something along the lines of a 25% experience. Even a man’s hand transmits more heat and texture then most vaginas do when using a regular condom.

Condoms are safe, simple and effective. They are currently the best form of non-invasive birth control, and until we figure something better out I’m all in favor of their use where appropriate. The newer, thinner ones are even better since they transmit body heat. It is fallacious though to insinuate that men who complain about decreased sensation are merely whining. The experience can be a total let-down, particularly if you engage in a lot of pre-condom foreplay.

403

It’s the intimacy of sex that’s the stumbling block. It’s socially intimate by its nature, not gregarious. Therefore people who perform it gregariously are looked on as unusual.

404

I would agree with Chopper9760 here. Most of the horrifically batshit insane ideas in this thread can only be imposed by a paternalistic big government. Therefore, the safeguard is not big government paternalism but rather severe limits on what government can do.

405

Not sure I like this idea because there’s already evidence that conservatives are using imprisonment as a way of caging votes.

406

Is that actually what you believe? That a condom will deliver 99% of a warm, wet vagina experience? If so you are wildly ignorant about what penises experience despite your attempts to sound like you know what you are talking about. Hint… you don’t …you’re just babbling. Owning a vagina does not make you an expert on penis sensitivity.

The real thing with skin to skin contact is FAR more pleasurable than with a condom. Lots of guys aren’t really going to press the issue as the condom has benefits for them as well, but don’t make the mistake that lack of militancy on this issue by men indicates it’s anywhere close to the real thing sensitivity-wise.

407

Many other horrifically batshit ideas can only be prevented by a strong big government. In the long run, it’s a wash.

408

I don’t think a hot 20-something year-old woman who sleeps with an underage teenage boy is as bad as the middle-aged man who sleeps with an underage teenage girl. Double standards? Yes, and so there should be.

People should be allowed to use extreme or even deadly force against burglars in their home if they catch them in the act.

I believe that humans eating cows, pigs, lambs and other sentient mammals is unethical.

Not that extreme but it should be illegal for strangers to walk up to you on the street and ask for your money. This includes begging, handing out advertisements/pamphlets, telling you about their products, charities asking for your membership, etc… no one should be forced to interact with strangers in such a fashion.

I think saving the lives of a few people is less important than preventing a huge environmental disaster.

I’m fine with capital punishment, in theory.

Heck, I’m even fine with assholes being euthanized. By assholes I mean people whose sole purpose in life is inflicting pain and misery on others. People who constantly attack, steal, abuse people and animals, vandalize, litter and engange in other sadistic and/or destructive behavior, yet offer nothing positive to society.

409

Yes about the first part, but big government isn’t necessary to keep everybody out of each others hair. Any sized government will do, as long as they are sufficiently slow/thorough, and weigh enough pros and cons’ to each issue. After all, I doubt most of the people in this thread are willing to go the political distance to actually get their views enacted into government policy.

We need a thread: wat are your most extreme honestly held views, that you have undertaken political action for (other then voting, signing petitions, forwarding info to aqaintances).

410

If you mean because she’s 20, I agree. If you mean because she’s a she, no. Either way, I wouldn’t call it extreme. The former view is common among reasonable people, and the latter is common among sexists.

Now that *is *extreme, and ridiculous, and in direct opposition to the first amendment. You’re not *forced *to interact with anyone. Just say no and/or keep moving, problem solved.

411

I believe that all people, whether they will own up to it or not, enjoy The Hustle by Van McCoy.

412

I believe that dominance/submission behavior exists, not just within the confines of sexuality, but throughout human behavior, especially in the way human beings arrange themselves in social hierarchies, whether they be social, political or economic. It’s basically straight-up animal behavior, you can see the same stuff among other species of great apes, such as chimps, gorillas and baboons.

The people who wind up at the top in any sort of hierarchy tend to claim it is the result of their rising to the top in a merit-based sort of way, however, mostly the people who rise to the top in any hierarchy get there primarily because they are good at rising to the top in hierarchies, which is primarily a matter of political/social skills and natural aggression rather than other kinds of skills.

This has had a deleterious effect throughout human history, because the people who are the best at rising to the top in social hierarchies are rarely the smartest or most qualified among us. So we have collectively made a lot of stupid decisions, especially earlier in human history, and we’re still minting stupidity at a very rapid rate.

There are undoubtedly a lot of other ways to organize ourselves that are much more rational, just and efficient than social hierarchies, but we human have difficulty with that because we’re wired to do it the chimp way, evolutionarily speaking. (Great example: the attempts at Communism in Russia and China, which was quickly recognized as just another form of hierarchical organization and soon had the usual thugs at the top. In fact, when the Soviet Union fell apart the old Communist bosses became the new Russian Mafia. It didn’t matter how the country was organized so long as the underlying issue of hierarchical behavior among humans was not addressed.)

People who are into dominance and submission sex games are in an excellent position to see through the pretensions in human hierarchical behavior … to see that power is given to the dominant individuals within a group by their subordinates, and that it’s reasonable and sane to limit the ways in which dominant individuals exercise their power. But dominance/submission fans are no more prone to be reflective than others, and many simply accept the social status quo as is.

If we could think clearly about this phenomenon and address the issue of downplaying hierarchical behavior among human beings and work hard at developing more rational ways of organizing human activity, human life would be much better throughout the world, and the society that managed it first would have a considerable advantage over all others. But it will be hard, and the people at the top of various hierarchies would be fighting it every step of the way, because one of the chief skills of the people who are good at hierarchies is recognizing threats to their dominance, and this would be the nuclear bomb of all such threats.

This is easily the most extreme belief presented in this thread, perhaps by an order of magnitude.

413

I don’t think that’s the most extreme belief in the thread at all. I think that honor would have to go to AHunter’s whole (very confusing) idea about children being “oppressed” and needing to be “liberated.”

ETA: Here it is:

I’d really like to hear a specific and detailed explanation of how and why this idea should be implemented, if the author is up for it - WITHOUT using lots of academic-speak and jargon, please.

414

My view calls for every government, corporation and organization of any kind to be systematically restructured. Maybe families too. I’ll grant you though that Hunter’s ideas, if followed through, would also change things a lot. But lacking a rationale, Hunter’s views don’t amount to much. Perhaps Hunter’s response would establish the primacy of their extremity.

415

Having been raised in a religion that was anti-vaccination, I can assure you that in most states, getting religious exemption is a relatively simple process. (I do remember Colorado being one exception to this.) However, it is true that nearly everyone in public schools are vaccinated simply because religions that are anti-vaccination are on the decline. Or at least, mine is.

416

Me too, mostly because I suspect I’d agree with a lot of it. As a kid I never really saw myself as a separate species from adults, and as a teen I found the binary adult/not adult based on arbitrary age basis to be bizarre and irrational. As much as I loved the academic environment in general, I found it’s rigid structure and ancient didactic methods antiquated. The one size fits all attitude was juvenile - it was so clear that different people have different learning methods, and what structure there was should account for that, but beyond that, there should be a greater focus on facilitating self-paced learning, lab/workshop environments, and real life skills and environment/context specific internship style training/experience. Most importantly, it seemed cruel and patronizing the way minors are basically treated as though they are past criminals doing 18 years of probation, especially in the way that rights that anyone of any age or ability/capacity should have, like freedom of speech, were trod on.

417

Oh God! My secret shame exposed!

418

(post 412)

Really? I agree with it 100%, and the most extreme view I hold is this:

Buttermilk is great to drink! Yum, dammit, yum! It’s like a slice of cheesecake in a glass!

419

My extreme view is that people from the sub-continent are whiners of the highest order. Particularly Indians.

I first became aware of this through being a cricket fan, but then I read some of the Indian media. I found out that there are at least one billion people on this Earth who have a major chip on their shoulder and honestly feel that they’ve been screwed by… well… everybody.

Everything, no matter how small, that goes against them is seen as (yet more) evidence of a racist conspiracy. And it is beyond tiresome.

420

Disclaimer: I know perfectly well that many of these things are completely unworkable in the world we live in and the reasons why this is. This is simply a picture of an ideal world according to my own personal beliefs.

I believe:

  • In universal health care and education. Everyone has a right to proper health care and a good education regardless of their income.
  • The minimum wage should be something that one can actually live on without relying on tips – it’s your employer’s job to pay you, not everyone else’s; it’s time they lived up to their responsibility to do so.
  • What you choose to do with your own body and who you choose to love is your own business. This includes the legalization of such things as abortion and euthanasia (in these instances, with appropriate, unbiased counselling to ensure this is what you really want) to the legalization of all alcohol, cigarettes and drugs (though everyone should be educated as to the possible effects and misuse of these to make their own decision – this would save an enormous amount of wasted money on attempting to ban these and/or tell people to stop using them who are clearly not going to listen; I also bet a lot of harmful drugs will suddenly seem less appealing when any adult can buy them legally – however, certain activities such as operating a vehicle, performing medical operations as a doctor, etc. while you are under the influence of a mind-altering substance should be banned – you are only free to harm yourself, not others, if you do choose to partake) to the abolition of marriage as a legal institution (any two or more consenting adults should be allowed to marry if they so choose – the legal part should only come into it where money, children, etc are involved in the event of a breakup; regular, garden-variety legal contracts are perfectly suited to this as they are for any other transaction).
  • Churches and other religious institutions should be taxed like any other business.
  • Theories of intelligent design do not belong in the science classroom as they are not science.
  • People are free to believe whatever the hell they like, so long as they do not force their beliefs upon others or use their beliefs to justify harming others.
  • People should be free to immigrate to whichever country they want, so long as they are first tested for any serious communicable diseases and are background checked (criminal record, etc. and verifiable references from people who can confirm you are not a sociopath, etc.). After you have proven your ability to be a responsible citizen (through such things as gainful employment, no criminal record, character references, paying of taxes, etc.), you may receive citizenship.
  • If you wish to seek political office, pay for it yourself - however, only a certain modest amount will be allowed and you must provide evidence of your spending in order to stop only rich people from seeking public office. You must also provide evidence that it is your own money and you have not been funded by corporate sponsors or anyone else.
  • Prospective parents must show evidence of ability to support a child, character statements demonstrating that you take responsibility for yourself and your actions, etc. They should also be tested on their ability to take care of a child (things such as first aid, child nutritional requirements and how to meet them, etc.). If they are unable to do this and a child has already been conceived, they must either choose to abort it or put it up for adoption to a prospective parent who is suitably qualified to take care of a child (by demonstrating ability to raise a child through the above means). Also, no one should get tax breaks for choosing to have children.
  • If people decide to break into a home or vehicle, attempt to harm someone else, etc. and end up getting harmed by their prospective victim, it’s their own damn fault.

My most radical belief is that all of us expend so much time and energy arguing over categories that we invented in the first place. Therefore, in the deepest sense, you are what you believe yourself to be, even if the social consensus has drawn the line elsewhere. For example, people of transgender experience are the men, women, any number of alternative forms of gender identification (third sex, both, neither, etc.) they see themselves as regardless of what other people would consider them on the basis of biology or social presentation.

Or, more radically, let’s take people who feel out of place in their culture, say an American who feels they should have been British or a German who feels they should have been Nigerian, or whatever. This happens too, regardless of whether or not the person has actually ever been to the country they identify with the most (though presumably, they have immersed themselves in the language, culture, etc of that country and know a lot about it if they feel that way). In my opinion, a born and bred Australian whose deepest allegiance is to the United States, for example, is an American – though the US government might not feel the same way about it, of course. You could perhaps describe such a person as “Australian by citizenship, American by soul” or something similar – or to steal someone else’s line that I absolutely love, “born American, but in the wrong place.” (This is also why I believe people should be free to live in whichever country they feel suits them best, which isn’t necessarily going to be the one they happened to be born in.)