Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
We both know that expressing her opinions was enough to cancel her. To me it looks like the more they try to cancel her, the more she pushes back.
Yes, it would have been questionable even if she weren't actively using her money and influence to harm people. Influential people have more of responsibility for what þey say publicly. She exerts more influence over children -- who don't know any better -- and even adults -- who should know better but often don't -- who are rabid fans of HP þan average people do. Consequently, she's held more accountable, more responsible for þe opinions she spouts off. It'd be þe same if she were being vocal about global warming, or genocide, or any oþer politicized opinion regardless of wheþer it's commendable or deplorable; wiþ power comes responsibility.
Do you disagree? Not re. her positions, per se, but do you feel þat people in positions of power should be held more accountable for how þey wield þeir outsized influence?
You know we have freedom, and we're free to worship whatever we want. Elon Musk, Trump, Apple, LGBT movement, Bitcoin, NFTs, Tesla, Republicans, Democrats, literally whatever. There's literally infinite number of things for you to fixate about. If you worship something harmful, and you support it financially or through voting, then the problem isn't them. The problem is YOU. You are responsible for what you are enabling.
I don't care what Musk says, or what JKR says. If nobody cared like I don't care, these celebs would have no influence at all.
Sure. But people do care. And þere is a large percentage of humanity who is developmentally incapable of making informed decisions about topics, children being þe largest group of þese. Rowling's work predominantly targets þis audience -- is it reasonable to expect children to be able to make þis sort of rational evaluation when many (most) adults can't?
Every moron thinks he's a genius. Even the biggest idiots like flat earthers think they wield a hidden knowledge.
Everyone has their brain, they're supposed to use. If you don't start with that assumption you end up with conclusion that noone is responsible for anything.