Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[Corky]

On the flip side, Burnley and Norwich deserve more respect. All things being equal, they wouldn't be in the top flight.

 

It's nice to have teams who aren't living off certain periods decades ago and who don't bang on about being enormous clubs in this league as well.

[LiberalFox]

I feel a bit sorry for Matt Le Tissier.

[FoxesDeb]

7 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

I feel a bit sorry for Matt Le Tissier.

I know you're in the right thread, so you don't have to answer, but can I ask why? 

[Tim'llFixIt]

I think Matt Le Tis is off the mark with his Russia stuff but respect to anybody in the public eye who questions the main stream narrative ... Whilst what is happening in Ukraine is diabolical the truth will out in the years to come and we will see what has been sensationalized/under reported

[Tim'llFixIt]

Also Burnley are a proper working class club and I want them to stay. If Dyche was South American, Dutch, German, Italian or Spanish he would be lorded for the miracles he works there

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, Tim'llFixIt said:

Also Burnley are a proper working class club and I want them to stay. If Dyche was South American, Dutch, German, Italian or Spanish he would be lauded for the miracles he works there

'Fixed' it for you Tim 

[Tim'llFixIt]

Just now, Line-X said:

'Fixed' it for you Tim 

Haha cheers mate, honestly never even knew that was a word ... And somehow I don't consider myself as thick 

[SpacedX]

1 minute ago, Tim'llFixIt said:

Haha cheers mate, honestly never even knew that was a word ... And somehow I don't consider myself as thick 

There's no reason to. 

 

And all intended in the good spirit that you took it in. 

[LiberalFox]

1 hour ago, FoxesDeb said:

I know you're in the right thread, so you don't have to answer, but can I ask why? 

I don't actually know. It's just how I feel emotionally. I totally get why people are angry at him and/or think he's an idiot. Just wonder what's going on in his head/life. 

[The Horse's Mouth]

2 hours ago, LiberalFox said:

I feel a bit sorry for Matt Le Tissier.

I think he has the right mindset, but he's gone way too far with it, questioning the information we're given is important, but going down the false flag route in times of war is just moronic. Idk why people get angry with him though

[Sampson]

3 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

I think he has the right mindset, but he's gone way too far with it, questioning the information we're given is important, but going down the false flag route in times of war is just moronic. Idk why people get angry with him though

I think it’s understandable to be angry at someone peddling shite about crisis actors when we’re watching harrowing images and interviews of people losing their partners, sons, fathers and children every day and millions of families being torn apart.

 

People live the very real consequences of the war crimes committed in Ukraine, it’s both pretty insulting to their memory and their surviving families to spread  shit publicly they’re crisis actors and also reflects very badly on what you’d want the outside world to do if god forbid someone invaded the UK and started murdering and raping your friends and family in the street.

 

I mean questioning things is one thing, but you have to pretty ****ing confident in your beliefs to start going round publicly and spreading that people murdered in the street and people weeping for their loved ones dead in the street are actors or faking it.

Edited 7 April 2022 by Sampson

[The Horse's Mouth]

35 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I think it’s understandable to be angry at someone peddling shite about crisis actors when we’re watching harrowing images and interviews of people losing their partners, sons, fathers and children every day and millions of families being torn apart.

 

People live the very real consequences of the war crimes committed in Ukraine, it’s both pretty insulting to their memory and their surviving families to spread  shit publicly they’re crisis actors and also reflects very badly on what you’d want the outside world to do if god forbid someone invaded the UK and started murdering and raping your friends and family in the street.

 

I mean questioning things is one thing, but you have to pretty ****ing confident in your beliefs to start going round publicly and spreading that people murdered in the street and people weeping for their loved ones dead in the street are actors or faking it.

But it's like, it's Matt le tissier, getting angry about it suggests you take his opinion on world events seriously, which I find bizarre.

[Sampson]

30 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

But it's like, it's Matt le tissier, getting angry about it suggests you take his opinion on world events seriously, which I find bizarre.

It’s not about taking his opinion on world events seriously. I don’t know anyone who’s angry at him personally, I’m not, but I absolutely think his actions are those of someone being a dick and well past the point of sympathy. It’s the continuous spread of misinformation and a really weird thing to start spreading shite about too. It only needs to reach 1 other person to keep this fire burning.

 

The point is he’s keeping alive an incredibly mean spirited meme. It’s not about being angry at him individually any more than the thousands of others like him who for whatever reason - through ill will, ignorance or just wanting to go against the grain keep spreading at worst dangerous and best insanely insulting shite.

 

If it was a one off from Le Tissier, I’d have more sympathy but when he’s been called out on it, the fact he’s doubled down and only got more and more vocal about it over the past 2 years and says it’s “work I genuinely believe in” to “research” and spread this shite is when it becomes less and less making a few mistakes and more and more just being a dick.

 

It’s a similar thing to Graham Linehan or JK Rowling in a different debate - they originally put their foot in a debate they probably didn’t know too much about. Got criticised for it. But instead of pulling back and taking on board they don’t know enough about it, they go on a full end head dive down the rabbit hole and become obsessed and don’t shut up talking about topics which really shouldn’t matter to them that much. 

 

And that’s exactly how these misinformation and mean spirited shite spread. I can guarantee at least 5 people genuinely have listened to Le Tissier’s opinions and are taking his opinions seriously and that people in turn will take their opinions seriously etc.

 

Perhaps it was easier to just treat people like David Icke with ridicule previously, but sadly because of social media and YouTube, these conspiracy theories are becoming way more common and I hear way more people actually promote them in everyday life. That it’s not as easy to just bat it off anymore.

Edited 7 April 2022 by Sampson

[Daggers]

I don’t care who is taking part in a women’s athletics/swimming/cycling/other event. I don’t care about their testosterone levels or if they have a penis. I just don’t give a shit - athletics/swimming/cycling/other are hobbies. I’m not remotely interested in men’s events either. 

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, pmcla26 said:

Sometimes I think those that completely dismiss conspiracy theories (depending on the theory - obviously not stupid ones like what Le Tissier has come out with recently) are much worse than the conspiracy theorists themselves. Not every theory is a crazy, radical idea. 

They’re obviously not worse. Nowhere near as bad in fact.

 

Conspiracy theorists include people who deny man made climate change, the holocaust, holodamor or think Jews control the world through some weird finance system.
 

I mean, conspiracy theorists believe dangerous shit that are an existential threat to mankind or a massive group of people.

 

Those who dismiss conspiracy theorists just support the scientific process for the most part. Which is not perfect but clearly a better way to view the world than become a conspiracy theorist. Or to go against years of expertise of scientists or historians with much less reason or experience. (It’s clearly not worse to put more trust in someone with more expertise in their field).

 

Even if of the odd conspiracy theory turns out to be true, people who dismiss them as a starting point, when the overwhelming majority of them are guff at best and outright dangerous to humanity at worst, are clearly not worse than those who believe conspiracy theories as a starting point. Not by a long stretch.

Edited 8 April 2022 by Sampson

[String fellow]

1 hour ago, pmcla26 said:

Sometimes I think those that completely dismiss conspiracy theories (depending on the theory - obviously not stupid ones like what Le Tissier has come out with recently) are much worse than the conspiracy theorists themselves. Not every theory is a crazy, radical idea. 

Perhaps we should re-evaluate the utter bollocks that David Icke comes out with! 

[frakenfox]

I tend to believe more in cock-up theory than conspiracy.

 

Sometimes we just get stuff wrong. Sometimes very wrong.

[leicsmac]

Just now, frakenfox said:

I tend to believe more in cock-up theory than conspiracy.

 

Sometimes we just get stuff wrong. Sometimes very wrong.

Hanlon's Razor.

 

It is an unfortunate fact, however, that a minority of conspiracies do in fact exist and some folks seem to treat them as justification rather than exceptions that prove the rule.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Hence why I said "depending on the conspiracy theory". I think there is some value to questioning certain things that we see happening in the world, but obviously there is a line. Likewise, it's irresponsible for conspiracy theorists to dismiss scientific process/evidence. 

Irresponsible to the possible point of *being* at least in part responsible for the downfall of human civilisation, yes.

 

And if anyone thinks that's going too far, there's a bevy of natural threats that I can supply for hypotheticals.

Edited 8 April 2022 by leicsmac

[Sampson]

9 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Hence why I said "depending on the conspiracy theory". I think there is some value to questioning certain things that we see happening in the world, but obviously there is a line. Likewise, it's irresponsible for conspiracy theorists to dismiss scientific process/evidence. 

There is a big big difference between questioning things you see in the media and being a conspiracy theorist though. The latter is more a kind of staunch opposite to who they rally against, who believes almost everything they see in the media is a lie, when the large majority of it is backed up by sources and expertise. 
 

There’s a difference between “don’t believe everything you read in the paper” and “don’t believe anything you read in the paper”.

 

And just because the odd conspiracy theory turns out to be true, it certainly doesn’t mean people who dismiss conspiracy theories off hand are worse than those who believe them off hand.

[frakenfox]

9 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It is an unfortunate fact, however, that a minority of conspiracies do in fact exist and some folks seem to treat them as justification rather than exceptions that prove the rule.

Oh indeed. I wasn't intending to suggest there was no such thing. Depends how you define 'conspiracy' of course, and the levels of involvement, but I suspect many aspects of everyday life are prone to them.

[Sampson]

8 minutes ago, frakenfox said:

Oh indeed. I wasn't intending to suggest there was no such thing. Depends how you define 'conspiracy' of course, and the levels of involvement, but I suspect many aspects of everyday life are prone to them.

I think the point is as much the “theorist” than the “conspiracy” part.

 

Anyone can question authority or what they  see/hear/read, but to be a conspiracy theorist means not just questioning that, but outright believing alternative ideas and theories of what happened, against the prevailing view of experts who’ve studied that thing for years.

 

For example, anyone can question why the US flag was flapping on the moon, maybe they don’t understand or realise there’s scientific explanations, which is fine. But a conspiracy theorist believes outright that man didn’t land on the moon and uses that as evidence when scientific and historical consensus from experts is that they did.

Edited 8 April 2022 by Sampson

[The Horse's Mouth]

13 hours ago, Sampson said:

It’s not about taking his opinion on world events seriously. I don’t know anyone who’s angry at him personally, I’m not, but I absolutely think his actions are those of someone being a dick and well past the point of sympathy. It’s the continuous spread of misinformation and a really weird thing to start spreading shite about too. It only needs to reach 1 other person to keep this fire burning.

 

The point is he’s keeping alive an incredibly mean spirited meme. It’s not about being angry at him individually any more than the thousands of others like him who for whatever reason - through ill will, ignorance or just wanting to go against the grain keep spreading at worst dangerous and best insanely insulting shite.

 

If it was a one off from Le Tissier, I’d have more sympathy but when he’s been called out on it, the fact he’s doubled down and only got more and more vocal about it over the past 2 years and says it’s “work I genuinely believe in” to “research” and spread this shite is when it becomes less and less making a few mistakes and more and more just being a dick.

 

It’s a similar thing to Graham Linehan or JK Rowling in a different debate - they originally put their foot in a debate they probably didn’t know too much about. Got criticised for it. But instead of pulling back and taking on board they don’t know enough about it, they go on a full end head dive down the rabbit hole and become obsessed and don’t shut up talking about topics which really shouldn’t matter to them that much. 

 

And that’s exactly how these misinformation and mean spirited shite spread. I can guarantee at least 5 people genuinely have listened to Le Tissier’s opinions and are taking his opinions seriously and that people in turn will take their opinions seriously etc.

 

Perhaps it was easier to just treat people like David Icke with ridicule previously, but sadly because of social media and YouTube, these conspiracy theories are becoming way more common and I hear way more people actually promote them in everyday life. That it’s not as easy to just bat it off anymore.

Linehan and Rowling are quite different infairness, they were both lauded to be trans rights activists, said something slightly against the narrative then went deep in a hole and just got obsessed (more linehan tbf, who I'd say I sympathise more with him than le tiss ). 

 

Thing is though, in that example if someone is taking le tissiers opinion as gospel and then spreads it about, it's more of an indictment on the individual rather than le tiss, and in that case had le tiss been you know save the vegans and all that they'd have just got the narrative from someone else. 

 

I could understand the outrage if he had a prominent position and spouted it to a bigger audience maybe, even though I wouldn't agree. But he seems to merely retweet dodgy stuff rather than report it as his own 

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, Sampson said:

I think the point is as much the “theorist” than the “conspiracy” part.

 

Anyone can question authority or what they  see/hear/read, but to be a conspiracy theorist means not just questioning that, but believing alternative ideas and theories of what happened, against the prevailing view of experts who’ve studied that thing for years.

 

For example, anyone can question why the US flag was flapping on the moon, maybe they don’t understand or realise there’s scientific explanations, which is fine. But a conspiracy theorist believes outright that man didn’t land on the moon and uses that as evidence when scientific and historical consensus from experts is that they did.

Quite. Also there's a difference (say) between believing some of the wilder JFK conspiracies, and finding the idea that LHO acted alone as utterly absurd.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Linehan and Rowling are quite different infairness, they were both lauded to be trans rights activists, said something slightly against the narrative then went deep in a hole and just got obsessed (more linehan tbf, who I'd say I sympathise more with him than le tiss ). 

 

Thing is though, in that example if someone is taking le tissiers opinion as gospel and then spreads it about, it's more of an indictment on the individual rather than le tiss, and in that case had le tiss been you know save the vegans and all that they'd have just got the narrative from someone else. 

 

I could understand the outrage if he had a prominent position and spouted it to a bigger audience maybe, even though I wouldn't agree. But he seems to merely retweet dodgy stuff rather than report it as his own 

This is an interesting point, actually, because it does seem to be true.

 

What drives a person to go as conspirational as all that? I think I remember someone talking about it all when QAnon were all the rage in the aftermath of the January 6th coup attempt, and there was something along the lines of it feeding a narrative of personal importance, making someone believe that a person who might not have much else that they really do mean something.