I have ridden a bike multiple times a week for as long as I can remember, except during my time in North America. The increase in car size and distracted drivers combined with the decrease in physical buffers, separated bike paths, and legal protection meant that I just took the bus or rented a Car2Go for trips I'd usually bike. Some unpopular-ish opinions I currently hold: - There's no reason to eat meat every day and meat shouldn't be as cheap as it is - Eating healthy should be easier and cheaper. I am a staunch proponent of the traffic light system for food labels. - Your memory isn't as good as you think it is - Being famous is probably terrible - Recreational use of non-addictive drugs should not be an issue
Weed, shrooms, LSD, to name a few. The problem is that there isn't enough properly-done research to really know the full consequences of most drugs. In my ideal world, governments research and regulate it all and are the only good supplier of destigmatized substances that you can only consume in restricted environments like at home.
I don't disagree at all with your larger point but you can pretty well get addicted to anything. Physically: no, not at all. Physchologically: yes. Has anyone hit bottom and sucked dick for weed? Highly fucking doubt it. Actually, I support to some degree full decriminalization of all drugs with an appropriate and effective support and rehab based health system to go with it. No way any amount of health care for junkies is as expensive as the drug war and its mass incarceration.
I don't know the science of the addictive qualities (or lack) of marijunana... but I will say that anecdotally, I know LOTS of people who can't seem to function without marijuana. I know people who have. They may not have "needed" it.... but they certainly wanted it bad enough to do what they did. I'm not suggesting that weed (or shrooms, or LSD) is or isn't addictive. I think some science still needs to happen here.Has anyone hit bottom and sucked dick for weed? Highly fucking doubt it.
I suspect you're assuming that because a) you're not famous, b) you don't want to be. People stay where they are because the pros outweigh the cons. You want to be admired by the thousands of people? Those paparazzis are annoying, but if this is what you have to do to remain admired? I'd trade that for such a goal. With abusive relationships it's more complex, but the core is the same. You're persuaded to the idea that you aren't worthy of love, and when someone comes along that gives you that love, you admire them. Now, at least, there's some honey in the barrel of smut. Better than no honey at all. You stay because you perceive it as being loved, though it hardly ever is so. Leaving that one person who loves you is a terrifying thought because surely, nobody will love you afterwards... right? Matt Damon has been quite eloquent about it when talking about his mother's job as a teacher and his as an actor:Being famous is probably terrible
A teacher wants to teach! Why else would you take a shitty salary and really long hours and do that job, unless you really love to do it?
The reason to eat meat every day is because I want to and it is delicious. I mean, there's no grander reason than that even for people who eat meat every day. Food labels are a waste of time because people don't care and if they do then they already use the labels on there to care. The big reason that eating heatlhy and cheaply is hard is because there are a ton of foods that don't keep (fruits and vegetables) that are healthy, and because you can only mark up a salad so much before it becomes ludicrous. So marking up meat and fat based dishes makes a restaurant a lot more money. Memory is terrible. That's why it's awesome. I can re-write everything at will. Revisionist biography. Excellent. Being famous for acting and being pretty is probably terrible. Being famous for being rich is probably awesome. Bill Gates does not look unhappy. You are absolutely correct about the drugs.
That's the same logic I used as a kid. "Why bother telling people about something better? Those who don't care about it won't use it, and whose who do, will". It's the kind of deterministic logic that pushes away progress and education. "If they want to learn, they'll learn". Yes, well... Some people are just unaware of the same benefits you have in your head when you cite whatever it is you cite. Maybe they grew up in an environment that demotes creative thinking or education as a whole. Unless it is your job to care about this, you don't have to... but then, if it isn't and you do, how is your opinion relevant? You don't have the knowledge of the person possessing the skills to make these decisions for a living; why should we listen to you? At least food labelling is a step towards healthier eating. Not bothering is not. Never seen someone so excited about the prospect of lying to themselves.Food labels are a waste of time because people don't care and if they do then they already use the labels on there to care.
Memory is terrible. That's why it's awesome. I can re-write everything at will. Revisionist biography. Excellent.
It probably indicates that I took the easy road - see Quatrarius' post. :)