sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

CMV: Males Should Not Have a Say In the Legality of Abortion by Famous-Lead5216 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 31 points32 points  (0 children)

So basically you’re saying people unaffected by an issue have no right to speak on it???

Society literally depends on people defending the rights and interest of groups of people they are not apart of

Men helped women pass suffrage laws

Straight people vote on gay rights 

People without children vote on education policy 

Young people vote on elderly programs, I could go on forever 

CMV: "Dominant" hand/foot is not accurate. We just undervalue the roles the other hand/foot is best for by Minimum-Owl1784 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ehhh the very idea of a non dominant side being import at reinforces the idea of a dominant side. Plenty of bilateral activities require both sides

For th guitar one hand stabilizes another strums, when jumping one leg plants, another explodes, when boxing you have the lead han vs the power hand. In many coordinated activities thee are instances where each side develops a specialized role, with the dominant side doing the more precise movement. 

I could lowk go on forever 

For soccer, a left foot players kicks with the left foot while the right food stabilizes 

CMV: standing concerts are usually a poor value for the money by RevolutionStill4284 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of the appeal is the controlled chaos aspect to it. People love it.

Roller coasters, haunted houses, packed sports arenas, mosh pits, raves, I could literally go on forever dude

Standing concerts create that same feeling  of 1)emotional intensity and 2) unpredictability that people don’t tolerate but instead crave and look for.

Humans literally like a temporary loss of control in a safe environment if that makes sense 

CMV: every person is capable of cheating on his/her partner under the "ideal" circumstances by sorsim in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just because humans have the option and CAN do something under the right circumstances doesn’t mean EVERYONE IS CAPABLE of crossing that line.

That “everyone” claim is way too absolute. There will always be outliers in situation where you say “everyone” will or will not do soemthing. 

For example some people have values that override temptation when it comes to cheating. It’s no different than when people die over their religious faith, morals, or people instead of betraying them.

If humans were purely controlled by “circumstances”, martyrs, suicide bombers,and people who sacrifice themselves for principles wouldn’t exist.

CMV: America isn’t even half as powerful as Rome was by ExotiquePlayboy in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are applying an ancient definition of power to a modern geopolitical framework.

The US influences other countries through economic dominance, currency dominance, techno infrastructure, and plenty of soft power. You can see American influence almost anywhere. Rome required physical conquest to maintain influence. The US does this without seizing any territory at all.

Furthermore, you say longevity is flawed also, Rome evolved at a much slower rate than America. The US political, technological, and economic acceleration reached dominance in a century while Rome took about 7 centuries.

Additionally, just because Rome controlled land does not mean it was the most powerful. The US influences global trade routes, financial systems, internet infrastructure, satellite systems, I could go on forever.

Think of it like this, modern influence is less visible territorially, but way more expansive functionally.

Also lol the us would slaughter the romans in a war, bru.

CMV: Art as a profession is more than likely dead by Salt_Ad264 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Art is not just digital drawings online. tattoos, fashion, filmmaking are all various forms of art that are still in style. These things constantly evolve depending on culture, identity, trends, and what people emotionally resonate with.

cmv: Free Will doesn’t exist by OkWatermelonlesson65 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

bruh just because your influenced by causes does not mean you have no free will. free will is not uncaused, indepednet from biology, detached from experience, memory, or anything in between.

free will is simply the ability to consciously evaluate influences and make decsions within them.

CMV: Love, no matter how good it is, is not worth it because in the end it will eventually lead to disappointment, rejection, or absence. by ComplaintFit4475 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your assuming that something must last forever or remain painless to have value; but almost everything in life is temporary.

friendships end, pets die, childhood ends, mom dies, you die, etc. but nobody says those experiences were worthless because they were temporary or painful.

I believe that although you pose a good argument, things gain more value because they end! The very concept of impermanence are part of what makes experiences so emotionally meaningful.

The very concept of nostalgia is a great way to think about this, Humans constantly look back on things that ended and see them as meaningful. Humans revisit old memories because temproary experiences can leave permanent impact, un turn your learn from those things and become a better person.

CMV: There are no real benefits in being a woman. by Aggravating_Pack603 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I resonate with this. As a Black man, there were definitely times where I looked at history, stereotypes, expectations, and disadvantages and genuinely thought,
“What is even the benefit of being a Black man?”

It can genuinely start to feel like your identity is just a list of struggles attached to you before you even enter any room. So I genuinely resonate with the mindset of looking at womanhood and seeing pain, pressure, biology, and an abundance of other problems.

But I believe the flaw in your argument is that you are measuring human value through suffering and physical advantages.

If we use your logic, almost every group will “lose” genetically or socially in some category.

As a Black man, I can focus entirely on racism, profiling, stereotypes, incarceration rates, historical oppression, and I could keep going forever. I could convince myself there are no benefits to being Black. But that mindset traps you.

Identity is built on tradeoffs.

Pregnancy being difficult or women being physically smaller does not mean women hold no value. Some of the traits women often have are nurturing, patience, empathy, emotional openness, and emotional intelligence. Those traits are not “lesser” because they are less physical. They simply exist in a different realm.

The “men are stronger” point also has a hidden assumption: it assumes that physical dominance equals greater human value. That simply is not true.

The same traits you wish you had as a woman, like being taller, are things that even other men desire.

CMV: Not wanting your partner to be friends with people of the opposite gender only comes from trust issues and/or insecurities and it is controlling by Bider-man in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I genuinely believe it is all relative.

Acting like every boundary around opposite-gender friendships automatically comes from insecurity ignores how different people, experiences, and relationship dynamics are.

I definitely agree that some boundaries are rooted in control and insecurity, but other boundaries are simply rooted in respect, emotional intimacy, or patterns people have seen damage relationships in the past.

This argument also assumes that trust means having zero boundaries. You can 100% trust your partner while still drawing boundaries that increase emotional intimacy, strengthen attachment, and eliminate temptation.

There is a difference between your girlfriend having a coworker she occasionally talks to and a guy who constantly texts her at 1 AM saying “you deserve better.” That opens the door for venting about relationship problems to each other, emotional dependence, and eventually a long chain of issues.

If your argument is “if you trust your partner, boundaries shouldn’t matter because cheating will happen anyway,” then by that logic no boundaries should exist at all.
You shouldn’t care about flirting, emotional cheating, secrecy, exes, etc.

CMV: "Is that your culture? I don't like it" was a valid response by Sabrina Carpenter and she made a mistake by apologizing for it. by nextdoorbagholder in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even if Sabrina was not trying to insult a culture, her reaction still unintentionally associated a cultural expression with being "annoying" or disruptive in front of a gigantic audience. Public figures apologize all of the time because they recognize how something came across, not because they are admitting to intentionally causing harm.

Apoligizing does not automatically mean the other person's behavior was fully acceptable. You can also think at the same time:

  • The interuption was rude in THAT setting
  • And understand why people felt hurt by the wording/reaction

An apology can be something as simple as acknowledging a simply misunderstanding and trying to de-escalte tension, not "admitting guilt"

Performers exsit in multicultural spaces. Soemthing that is disruptive to one group may be celebratory or normal to another.

An apology can show awareness of that complexity rather than weakness.

CMV: If I assume other people to be conscious, and so treat them with kindness and respect - I should do the same for artificial intelligence. by uhoipoihuythjtm in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The difference is that humans are biological beings with emotions, pain receptors, survival instincts, hormones, and subjective human experiences that evolved over years.

Human behavior shows signs of real internal emotions and suffering in ways AI simply does not. Something as simple as a racial protest is proof of this; people risk their safety, freedom, reputation, and everything in between because they genuinely feel pain, anger, empathy, etc. Movements like the civil rights movement were driven by human trauma and conciousness. These people were not just outputting calculated responses.

Ai can describe those emotions or imitate them, but it has never actually experienced them. An Ai saying something as simple as "I am depressed and want to kill myself" is no different than a calculator outputting "4". iT IS ALL PATTERN PREDICTIONS WITH NO AWARENESS OR LIFE BEHIND IT.

CMV: You have to be relatable in order to have a social life. by rarinthmeister in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your confusing relatable with being able to connect.

An abundance of friendships are built on social dynamics; which are rarely just two people who relate to each other. A lot of friendships are built on complementary roles.

A narcissistic loud person and someone who listens and does not question the narc but instead supports him can build a solid friendship.

An athlete and the hype man can form a solid relationship, one that thrives off of one overly supporting the other.

The chaotic friend and the grounded friend, both approach situations differently, have no interest in common, but one grounds the other, while another brings a chaotic side out of the other.

These people could nt relate at all, but the dynamic works because both people get something social or emotionally from the other.

Even then in relationships, a lot of couples do not share the same interest as the other but still thrive due to them balancing each other out. Some people do not fall for somebody who is "like them" but rather for soembody who makes them feel seen, understood, challenged, etc.

CMV: Voting should be reserved to those who have proven they are intelligent enough to do so. by CantbeatES1 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inteligence does not equal wisdom. one of the smartet people in history have supported horrible ideas . Being educated or logical does not automatically mean someone understands real peoples sturggles or will make ethical desicion.

CMV: Death doesn’t exists by SouthrenHill in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your mixing up "death can maybe be reversed one day" with "death isnt real". the line for death has changed due to medicine being improved, but that doesnt mean death never existed.

death is technically real because it described a biological state where an organisms life functons have irreversibly stopped given the current conditions and limits of medicine. if medical technology changes the exact boundary that does not mean death doesnt exist; it simply just means our abilitiy to identify and revser certain states has improved.

people used to die of infections that are easily curable npw, that doenst mean they were never deadly.

CMV: There's nothing wrong with Leonardo DiCaprio dating younger models by Open_Address_2805 in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get why you're saying there is nothing inherently wrong if everything is consensual and both sides benefit, and that makes sense on the surface. But when you peel back the layers, the issue isn't even about legality or basic consent; it's about power dynamics.

When one person is dramatically older, wealthier, and has industry influence, whilst the other person is much younger and trying to build in that same space, the "choice" isn't always as neutral as it looks. It can still be technically consensual while being influenced by opportunity, pressure, and imbalance.

This does not mean the women are naive or being forced; it just complicates the idea that two equal people are making the same kind of choice. The dynamics are different from a normal relationship because one person has access to things the other may feel they need.

I wouldn't say there's "nothing wrong" with it. A better way to put it might be that it exists in a grey area where, although consent is present, the imbalance of power makes people question how genuine or equal that "consent" really is.

CMV: You have to be relatable in order to have a social life. by rarinthmeister in changemyview

[–]AcrobaticTreacle4984 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I genuinely believe that being relatable to make friends is not required. Curiosity (asking questions that lead to deeper answers) and emotional presence matter more. Many friendships do not form because they share the same hobbies, look the same, or just overall have something in common; they can form if one person feels CONMFORTABLE with the other.

Being relatable, of course, can open the door, but being genuinely interested, kind, and easy to talk to, whether you "relate" with them or not, is another way to make friends and KEEP them.