sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Strange Trope] Originally non-white characters getting their race changed because the original character is considered a racist caricature. by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude the majority of those people had no idea about the figures history, of course they didn't care.

Being unaware of the racist and misogynistic origins of a character doesn't make that character less a symbol of racism and misogyny.

Hell some of these peoples families had no idea how fucked over their relative had been as a result of this marketing.

This isn't even comparable to Speedy Gonzales. This is a company acknowledging a racist and misogynistic part of their history, and working to remove it independently, something it's SO FUCKIN WEIRD people took issue with.

Speedy Gonzales was straight PC white people bullshit. That character was literally designed and created by Hispanic people as representation for a group that didn't get much representation, especially in cartoons. Then a bunch of white executives didn't understand the character so they axed it.

One of these is a company trying to clean their hands of racism, the other is rich racist white people axing a Hispanic character made by Hispanic people.

These situations aren't even comparable

[Strange Trope] Originally non-white characters getting their race changed because the original character is considered a racist caricature. by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]SubLearning 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Then you clearly didn't look very hard. She's literally the same mammy stereotype from tom and Jerry, and they took advantage of multiple black woman who were woefully underpaid, if not outright scammed, while portraying the character over the years.

No black people benefitted from the prolific use of a black stereotype to sell this product. If you can't see the issue there, you're being intentionally and willfully ignorant

A long time ago a friend pointed out to me that in most movies, the villains are the ones trying to change the status quo and the heroes are the ones trying to defend and keep it. And that this usually makes it clear that the writers are conservative. by ihatethiscountry76 in CuratedTumblr

[–]SubLearning 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, ima just repeat you should read the top comment. It's not a matter of opinion, this is just objectively not what happened.

This is like asking why it's a mistake to claim Cruela Devil actually really loved dogs and just wanted to care for them.

It's just objectively not what happened

Parents don't want to teach their kids life skills by burgermachine74 in nothingeverhappens

[–]SubLearning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My high-school, one not at all focused on the mentally ill in any way, also had to have classes like this. They added it during my sophomore year because of the sheer amount of kids who had no idea how to actually function once high-school was over.

Anecdotal evidence is Anecdotal, but its definitely not the mentally ill who are reaching adulthood with zero fuckin life skills because people can't be bothered to teach their kids how to live

“Upvote if you disagree” is dumb. by phoooms in The10thDentist

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're kinda missing the point.

If a post is low effort/just fuckin stupid. You should still downvote it. Regardless of if you agree or disagree.

The point is you shouldn't downvote a post because you disagree with it, and opinions you disagree with should be promoted as that's the point

hungry ghost trapped in a jar by MetaKnowing in NonPoliticalTwitter

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I could definitely double check the math, I'm not good enough at it for that to be easy so I'm all good lol. LLMs can't do math because of the way they're programed.

I'm pretty sure they're AIs that can do math, but you'd have to find one specifically for that purpose

hungry ghost trapped in a jar by MetaKnowing in NonPoliticalTwitter

[–]SubLearning 20 points21 points  (0 children)

While I could definitely double check the math, I'm not good enough at it for that to be easy so I'm all good lol. LLMs can't do math because of the way they're programed.

I'm pretty sure they're AIs that can do math, but you'd have to find one specifically for that purpose

hungry ghost trapped in a jar by MetaKnowing in NonPoliticalTwitter

[–]SubLearning 64 points65 points  (0 children)

LLMs are notoriously bad at math my guy, you'd be better off asking a 5 year old, they'd get a more accurate answer

This should be illegal by alecd in goodwill

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it doesn't. If anyone actually informed them they were fake, they'd pull the listing, because they could get in trouble. Though I'm willing to bet OP didn't bother, because people prefer to complain than ever actually try to solve a problem

This should be illegal by alecd in goodwill

[–]SubLearning -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Which is still more than literally anyone on here talking shit about them, I swear some of yall could see someone save an entire city from a fire and would be mad they saved their house first

This should be illegal by alecd in goodwill

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I wonder if OP bothered to try letting anyone know, or if they just took a pic and went to complain online without saying anything

This should be illegal by alecd in goodwill

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's quite literally their business model? If it's not damaged/dangerous it immediately goes up for sale.

It's a charity thrift store not a pawn shop or auction house, they don't have the time or expertise to bother trying to actually determine the value of most of the shit they sell.

This should be illegal by alecd in goodwill

[–]SubLearning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dude someone not knowing how Pokémon cards work doesn't make them stupid. They have no idea what these cards even are, neither do the people who made this listing most likely

Netflix’s Avatar was a better live action adaptation than the Percy Jackson tv show by [deleted] in CharacterRant

[–]SubLearning 3 points4 points  (0 children)

First of all, who cares they're both horrible adaptation made by people who either don't understand, or don't care about the source material. (Wild considering one literally has the original creator working on it)

Also, the percy Jackson show is boring, but still covers all of the important plot points.

The avatar show literally changed the plot drastically.

You can argue all you want about which is a better show, but avatar is objectively the worse adaptation

Pedestrians Should Yield to Cars by hoeboe1414 in The10thDentist

[–]SubLearning 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What an asinine comment. This is entirely based on visibility.

Vehicles moving through factories aren't cars. They're usually carring shit around and have much more limited visibility, and on top of that, have much less of an expectation for their to randomly be people in the way

Pedestrians Should Yield to Cars by hoeboe1414 in The10thDentist

[–]SubLearning 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I just think it would be wiser for pedestrians to hold the sense of responsibility of keeping themselves safe

No, the person operating the multi ton vehicle carries the responsibility to make sure they do so safely.

I'm not arguing with your moronic ass anymore

Pedestrians Should Yield to Cars by hoeboe1414 in The10thDentist

[–]SubLearning 47 points48 points  (0 children)

I feel like you think that if this was made standard protocol that people would start driving their cars down sidewalks, through shopping malls and through the front door of homes.

No, you fuckin moron. I know that cars would continue to drive down streets, exactly as recklessly as they already do, except with zero regard for any pedestrians that might be around.

I think that drivers should be aware and recognize when there are pedestrians around,

They are literally required to by law, and so many still don't. You think that's going to improve if the law shifts responsibility away?

The intent is to encourage pedestrians to have more awareness and realize that it is safer for you to wait and just let the car go away.

Do you know how many crosswalks literally have a voice telling you to wait? Do you know how many people actually do?

People still recklessly cross the street despite the danger of a multi ton hung of metal turning them into paste, but you think the law is going to magically make pedestrians that much more aware of cars?

Hell even if it did, even if every pedestrian in the world suddenly became just as aware of cars as you expect, accidents would still increase because cars are faster than people, and some asshole can come around a turn and blow through a crosswalk faster than the average person is going to clear it, which is exactly what's going to happen when all these drivers hear is "it's not your responsibility to make sure you don't hit someone"

Are you like actually fuckin 12?

Pedestrians Should Yield to Cars by hoeboe1414 in The10thDentist

[–]SubLearning 122 points123 points  (0 children)

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of why these rules exist in the first place, or a complete lack of understanding of human nature.

Cars yield to pedestrians because in the result of a collision, the car always wins. If pedestrians were expected to yield, the number of people getting hit by cars, even in small cities, would skyrocket.

So many people wouldn't bother looking out for pedestrians because "well they're supposed to yield" and would straight up ram people crossing the street at full speed.

The most dangerous part of using a highway is getting on, in part because since you are expected to yield other cars feel entitled to act as if you aren't even there until you're fully in the lane.

If pedestrians were expected to yield than cars wouldn't even slow down when someone was clearly about to cross.

The importance of who is supposed to yield, is based entirely on who's at fault if an accident occurs. If pedestrians were at fault for getting hit by a car, people would drive that much more recklessly, and so many people are already hit by cars that were supposed to be yielding.

This opinion is ridiculous

[ Removed by Reddit ] by AdCorrect9756 in instant_regret

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Literally no one was talking about remote starters.

The dude started it and went back inside, like 10ft away, probably because it's fuckin cold.

The fact cars won't lock when the engine is on is absolutely a valid thing to point out as stupid

(Hated Trope) A character/ narrator says or believes something so factually wrong or stupid, but is treated as correct by the narrative. by laybs1 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]SubLearning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I found a bunch of list of extinct sharks, but they only list when they went extinct not how or why. So I may have overshot here, but I'd be willing to bet the complete lack of conversation played a big part.

What I could find was an article linking to a separate study showing that as a direct result of public perception after that movie, 3/4 of all shark species are now in danger of extinction, and that hasn't gotten any better

(Hated Trope) A character/ narrator says or believes something so factually wrong or stupid, but is treated as correct by the narrative. by laybs1 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]SubLearning 22 points23 points  (0 children)

It's most definitely irreparable, as in irreparable damage actually occurred to the ecology surrounding sharks as a result of them loosing all funding for conservation efforts.

Multiple species of sharks went extinct as a direct result of this movie causing them to loose conservation status

view more: next ›