Hot Takes

the only reason people dislike turkey is because they let it dry the fuck out. if people truly cooked the turkey well the masses would realize turkey is one of the best poultry
and there are so many better ways to cook it than shoving the whole thing in the oven for four hours!

First of all, smoked turkey. Holy balls, smoked turkey. I also like to boil smoked turkey neck bones with garlic and scotch bonnet peppers to make an incredibly flavorful broth for soups, chili, ramen.... I also made a recipe for herb crusted turkey breast cutlets with a sweet maple/mustard sauce. Turkey has a MUCH more rich flavor than chicken. Chicken can gtfo
 
disclaimer: have sensory issues, slight bias. vegetables are only good when they're raw. steamed, boiled, baked, sun dried? all suck. theyre just mush at that point. raw vegetables have that C R U N C H and they actually taste like something. perfection.

as for bird: duck is the underrated champion. if u eat ur bird meat dry u have no taste buds
 

Many

Ehehehehh
is a Tiering Contributor
disclaimer: have sensory issues, slight bias. vegetables are only good when they're raw. steamed, boiled, baked, sun dried? all suck. theyre just mush at that point. raw vegetables have that C R U N C H and they actually taste like something. perfection.

as for bird: duck is the underrated champion. if u eat ur bird meat dry u have no taste buds
ever heard of stir fry
 
  • Like
Reactions: BP
Now the supplementary points are the same premise reworded: justification through God cannot be debated due to the nature of God. Why do you think this is, any more so than any other centric moral code? What in particular makes "divine right" any less challengeable as an argument compared to someone's moral code or other intrinsic values they have? You claim this but make no argument for it.
To me, the main distinction is that when morality or laws are given by a deity rather than self-derived, a challenge to those impositions could stop at "because X said so." If a god tells me I shouldn't masturbate and someone challenges that it could end at "god told me so." If I come to that conclusion myself, it could be challenged and the question "why?" wouldn't end in "because I was told." The challenge could go further than that as I will have to justify my own view.
Of course, it's not to say that it would be a binary- people could still say "because X told me so" about a person instead of a deity, but then that person could hypothetically be engaged with in some form.

Rather than Religion being some "higher level" justification for tragedies around the world, it is far more likely that tragic events occur due to a myriad of complex grey reasoning. You seem to be in the typical anti-theist state of young adulthood (one which I myself went through when I was 17 or so). I strongly recommend researching cultures outside of your own. The blanket statement of accusing a broad cultural pillar of religion when your exposure to it is exclusively the Abrahamic triad, and a shallow Western view at that, is telling.
I want to make clear that I don't think the absence of religion will mean that all tragedies will stop or even the tragedies I had mentioned, but rather the religious basis on which those tragedies may form would be eliminated, thus reducing the amount or the issues that religious based tragedies bring. However, I do see what you are saying in your points about human nature.

If you are interested in actual literature to read through to try to expand more can be found below:

Understanding arguments against jure divino arguments (divine law)
Two Treatsies of Civil Government - Locke
Critique of Pure Reason - Kant

Understanding ontological arguments (proofs of God)
Plantinga
Meditations on First Philosophy - Descartes
I am interested, thank you. I will check these out especially now that I have a bunch of free time on my hand. I want to say also that the points I didn't respond to that you had made were sound and having not read the material yet or looked into the religions you cited, I don't feel like it's in my place to respond to those particular points without doing those things first.
I suppose as far as my original post goes, I will now specify western religious institutions/the abrahamic trio as I do not have experience with other religions (outside of Santeria, as I have family members and friends involved and I'm pretty familiar with it- but this isn't one that you cited in your responses.). I do still hold my opinion about those particular religions and about the concept of deriving morality/laws from a deity as a whole, but I will look into other belief systems and how they function first before applying my original points to them as well.
 

Myzozoa

to find better ways to say what nobody says
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
If you eat your steak well done you are a massive degenerate, enjoy your charcoal
I used to think this, but I think it's a sort of constitutional problem that these people have where they think the pink in their steak is blood and can't stand the thought of eating blood. This might be thought of as type of aversion to the mythos of steak as a 'bloody' (and possibly therefore masculine) food. I have cooked a few steaks for such people and usually try to talk them into letting them down to letting me take their steak off at 140-145 (medium) in order to save it from a horrible fate. I honestly can't understand what it is they get out of their steak. I can appreciate that for a lot of more w.e cuts of meat it doesn't matter that much. But once you're up to cooking a ribeye or T-bone it's pretty obvious to me what you lose by cooking it to medium versus medium rare.

So 2 myths pervade these well done steak orderers:
1. 'ew blood' and pink=blood (hence why medium rare they cant handle)
2. less common but not unheard of is the the person that thinks if you order a steak medium rare it won't get seared, which is simply untrue and the key to a good medium rare steak is an aggressive searing.
 

McGrrr

Facetious
is a Contributor Alumnus
If you eat your steak well done you are a massive degenerate, enjoy your charcoal
My parents eat steak well done because they grew up in a country where quality and hygiene standards, or lack thereof, meant that undercooked meat was a legitimate health risk. Pork dominates meat consumption there, which is much riskier to undercook, and this impacts the perception of every meat and how meat should be cooked.

I think people are generally pickier eaters in the developed world. This starts young and once they become conditioned to enjoy the texture and flavour of a food, change is not always easy. Well done might just be familiar and delicious to them because that is how they have enjoyed it throughout their life.
 
Last edited:

McGrrr

Facetious
is a Contributor Alumnus
If your opinions have not changed at all in 5 years, then you have not adequately examined them to adjust your point of view for nuances.

Your understanding of the world is basic and flawed. You know almost nothing beyond surface level knowledge about anything, and you knew even less 5 years ago. If your opinions have remained unchanged in that time, then you bring nothing useful to a debate. The first opinions that you should question are your own, not those of someone who disagrees with you.

Left vs Right: "he's talking about you!"

1586852255518.png
 
Last edited:
If your opinions have not changed at all in 5 years, then you have not adequately examined and adjusted them for nuance.

Your understanding of the world is basic and flawed. You know almost nothing beyond a surface level knowledge about anything, and you knew even less 5 years ago. If your opinions have remained unchanged in that time, then you bring nothing useful to a debate. The first opinions that you should question are your own, not those of someone who disagrees with you.

Left vs Right: "he's talking about you!"

View attachment 237126
This is by and by the greatest take of all time.
 
the solution to the net neutrality problem in america, and indeed, the problem of isps being ridiculous huge monopolies that can do whatever they want, is widespread municipal broadband. i feel like almost nobody's talking about this. the option of using internet provided by the city or even maybe like, the county that you live in seems like it should be, like, kind of a common sense thing. like duh, you need the internet to do basically anything these days. why would it not be a public utility? nobody likes Big Telecom anyways.

also if you cook eggs and your yolks aren't runny what's wrong with you
 

cookie

Internet Ombudsman
is a Forum Moderatoris a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Moderator
If you eat your steak well done you are a massive degenerate, enjoy your charcoal
one of the constants on internet discussion forums: ragging on those who eat steak well done

my steak-related hot-take is that steak in and of itself is a waste of the potential of beef. I enjoy a good steak cooked to my liking, but the flavours and textures available to you making a meatball, kofte, salt beef, smoked brisket to name a few make the relative simplicity of steak an indulgence.
 
Here's something a little less "political": Frozen is the best animated feature-length film to have ever been produced by Walt Disney Company. In terms of music, characters, plot, voice-acting, animation, and use of the "Disney formula," it is superior to all other animated films produced by Disney.

Please note that this does not mean that other Disney films are bad - The Lion King is easily a close second and tbh I could see them tying for various reasons (I think Frozen's soundtrack is the best one that Disney has ever produced, by TLK has a more consistent progression of story and plot development, though I think Frozen teaches a more relatable and memorable lesson). I simply believe that Frozen is the best animated film that Disney has ever produced and if you were to compare it side-by-side with any other animated Disney film, it would always rank higher in my books.

The plot is easy to follow and not overly convoluted, the main character (Anna) is extremely likable and relatable, Elsa is one of the most memorable Disney characters to have ever been created, the plot "villain" twist is well-timed and successful, the message is sweet and was not really seen before in Disney (at least not explicitly as it was portrayed in Frozen), the comedic relief is also memorable and actually helps progress the plot instead of just dragging it on, and the soundtrack is easily the catchiest and most powerful collection of music that Disney has ever produced. There's a reason "Let it Go" still manages to receive tens of thousands of views every day on YouTube (it just hit 2 billion a few days ago, actually).

Many people only hate Frozen because of how much of a success it was and the few issues it has are easily overshadowed by the dozens of successes and positive-traits that the film possesses. It's the movie that pulled Disney out of the commercial and creative slump that it had been experiencing during the early to mid-2000s and helped remind people of what Disney was truly capable of. Its success both in and out of the box office is just a small testament to the massive economic, social, cultural, and personal impact that this film has had around the world.
 
The Hunchback of Norte Dame is the best soundtrack to ever come out of Disney. It might just be an alright film, but that freaking score is tops.

Hot take on Frozen: Idina Menzel has a limited range and most of the time struggles or sings in an unpleasant tone in order to reach the notes.

Hot take in Frozen 2: the scene where Elsa repeatedly runs into the ocean, then is attacked by and tames the water horse, then the entire song that follows is one of the best animated sequences of all time.
 
The Hunchback of Norte Dame is the best soundtrack to ever come out of Disney. It might just be an alright film, but that freaking score is tops.

Hot take on Frozen: Idina Menzel has a limited range and most of the time struggles or sings in an unpleasant tone in order to reach the notes.

Hot take in Frozen 2: the scene where Elsa repeatedly runs into the ocean, then is attacked by and tames the water horse, then the entire song that follows is one of the best animated sequences of all time.
Agreed with both. I don't think she's the best singer but I think she fits the voice of Elsa perfectly for how the writers were trying to portray her. And yes, the "Show Yourself" scene is one of the most beautifully animated sequences I've ever seen. The song is also one of the best that Disney has written.

Tbh I think I might actually prefer the Frozen 2 soundtrack to its predecessor but they're both great and were written by the same team so I'd say that just serves as another reason as to why the franchise is so great and successful.
 
If your opinions have not changed at all in 5 years, then you have not adequately examined them to adjust your point of view for nuances.

Your understanding of the world is basic and flawed. You know almost nothing beyond surface level knowledge about anything, and you knew even less 5 years ago. If your opinions have remained unchanged in that time, then you bring nothing useful to a debate. The first opinions that you should question are your own, not those of someone who disagrees with you.
After revisiting this take I'm actually really on the fence on this and have some question. Is this just a broad blanket statement for everything? Like my views on abortion haven't changed in 5 years and I still stand by what I believe. Like does this mean that my view on the topic is flawed. I don't know what to think about this. Is my opinion even relevant if it hasn't changed in 5 years. Like even if its the "woke/popular opinion." If this statement is your opinion and it doesn't change in 5 years does your statement still hold true? After revisiting this I disagree with this heavily.

EDIT: originally I was super on board with this because of the message it portrayed. It pushed people to actively change they're opinions and constantly learn about things. However, I think its just too broad of a statement and needs to be worded differently in order for me to agree with it again
 
Last edited:

tcr

sage of six tabs
is a Tiering Contributoris a Tutor Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Live Chat Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
After revisiting this take I'm actually really on the fence on this and have some question. Is this just a broad blanket statement for everything? Like my views on abortion haven't changed in 5 years and I still stand by what I believe. Like does this mean that my view on the topic is flawed. I don't know what to think about this. Is my opinion even relevant if it hasn't changed in 5 years. Like even if its the "woke/popular opinion." If this statement is your opinion and it doesn't change in 5 years does your statement still hold true? After revisiting this I disagree with this heavily.

EDIT: originally I was super on board with this because of the message it portrayed. It pushed people to actively change they're opinions and constantly learn about things. However, I think its just too broad of a statement and needs to be worded differently in order for me to agree with it again
it literally just means think about your own stance and others once in a while.

If you think you still know the exact same amount of information that pertains to abortion now as you did 5 years ago then you probably haven't adequately tried to adjust your stance. Abortion isn't really one of those things that's just so black and white, so if there hasn't been a single thing to make you question your stance, regardless of where you are, then you're probably entrenched in the opinion.

You can still hold the same views in some sort of blanket statement world but no you havent adequately assessed your opinion if you don't know more knowledge at least
 
it literally just means think about your own stance and others once in a while.

If you think you still know the exact same amount of information that pertains to abortion now as you did 5 years ago then you probably haven't adequately tried to adjust your stance. Abortion isn't really one of those things that's just so black and white, so if there hasn't been a single thing to make you question your stance, regardless of where you are, then you're probably entrenched in the opinion.

You can still hold the same views in some sort of blanket statement world but no you haven't adequately assessed your opinion if you don't know more knowledge at least
I know a lot more about abortion than I did 5 years ago and my opinion still stands and yes I agree its not a black and white topic. If your curious I still think abortion should be legal up until the embryo develops into a fetus which is around 8 weeks. Despite knowing a lot more about abortion now than I did when I was 15 I still stand by this stance and I think its justifiable.

Regardless thanks for the input and dumbing it down to question your opinion more than you question others. It makes it much more digestible and a much more agreeable blanket statement.
 

Many

Ehehehehh
is a Tiering Contributor
Here's something a little less "political": Frozen is the best animated feature-length film to have ever been produced by Walt Disney Company. In terms of music, characters, plot, voice-acting, animation, and use of the "Disney formula," it is superior to all other animated films produced by Disney.

Please note that this does not mean that other Disney films are bad - The Lion King is easily a close second and tbh I could see them tying for various reasons (I think Frozen's soundtrack is the best one that Disney has ever produced, by TLK has a more consistent progression of story and plot development, though I think Frozen teaches a more relatable and memorable lesson). I simply believe that Frozen is the best animated film that Disney has ever produced and if you were to compare it side-by-side with any other animated Disney film, it would always rank higher in my books.

The plot is easy to follow and not overly convoluted, the main character (Anna) is extremely likable and relatable, Elsa is one of the most memorable Disney characters to have ever been created, the plot "villain" twist is well-timed and successful, the message is sweet and was not really seen before in Disney (at least not explicitly as it was portrayed in Frozen), the comedic relief is also memorable and actually helps progress the plot instead of just dragging it on, and the soundtrack is easily the catchiest and most powerful collection of music that Disney has ever produced. There's a reason "Let it Go" still manages to receive tens of thousands of views every day on YouTube (it just hit 2 billion a few days ago, actually).

Many people only hate Frozen because of how much of a success it was and the few issues it has are easily overshadowed by the dozens of successes and positive-traits that the film possesses. It's the movie that pulled Disney out of the commercial and creative slump that it had been experiencing during the early to mid-2000s and helped remind people of what Disney was truly capable of. Its success both in and out of the box office is just a small testament to the massive economic, social, cultural, and personal impact that this film has had around the world.

Lilo and Stitch is the best Disney film. It is much better than Frozen (which imo isnt even a top tier Disney movie) and here is a post showing how Lilo and Stitch is superior in every way.

1) Themes- both Frozen and Lilo and Stitch are explorations of family, and both revolve around a pair of sisters. They are obviously not completely comparable because Elsa and Anna are both adults while Lilo is a child. But the way sisterhood is tackled in Lilo and Stitch is far more in depth. Nani and Lilo have a complicated relationship that includes a lot of fighting and bickering, because Nani is forced to be both her mother and sister, but they both love each other very deeply and realize that they only have each other. This little broken family is further tested when Stitch is introduced. Stitch on the outside is a monster, but is also very lonely and looking for a family. Lilo recognizes this and tries to be the big sister to Stitch in a way parallel to Nani is to Lilo. Its this kind of thematic parallel that adds so much more depth to this film that most other Disney films.

In contrast, there is nothing wrong with Frozen's themes, but they simply extend to "family should love each other no matter what" without much of an exploration what it actually means to be family. Anna and Elsa don't have much of a relationship (for understandable reasons), but its because of this that the film doesn't have as much emotional weight as it tries to.

2) Plot- Lilo and Stitch has one of the most original plots in any film I've ever seen. As said earlier, it's a parallel concept of two sisters struggling to make their broken family survive, while the character Stitch is also a broken alien looking for a family. The film tackles a lot of everyday struggles- Nani trying to find a job in order so that Lilo isnt taken away, Lilo trying to make Stitch more kind. This is juxtaposed seamlessly with some really fun action and comedy sequences as the aliens try to capture Stitch, serving to lighten up the heavy emotional parts of the film. Lilo and Stitch more slice-of-life than a big overarching quest like most Disney films and this is where the beauty of the movie is.

Frozen has a pretty compelling quest where Anna tries to rescue, and in typical quest fashion, meets some quirky characters along the way. It also has a great plot twist towards the end. But while Frozen has a good plot, it has nothing on the sheer creativity of many other Disney movies.

3) Characters- the characters in Lilo and Stitch are incredibly human, even the alien ones. Lilo acts exactly how an actual child her age would act. She's loud, hyper, illogical, and she often throws tantrums. But she is also intensely imaginative, clever, and has a huge heart. Nani is no Disney princess- she has too much of a temper- but she's much more real than most of Disney's female characters. You get such an in-depth look at her struggles as she tries to balance taking care of Lilo with trying to maintain her job and everything. Then you have Stitch, who is simply iconic and really doesn't need an explanation. The side characters of Jumba, Pleakley, Gantu, and Cobra Bubbles are all hilarious in their own unique ways.

In contrast, Anna and Elsa are fairly unremarkable characters. Anna is really nice and friendly, which is great but not particularly memorable. Elsa does have this big internal struggle but her flaws are entirely external (her powers) so her character arc isnt as compelling as it appears. There are a few nice comic relief side characters but they hardly have any actual depth too.

4) Humor- To me, Lilo and Stitch is the 2nd funniest Disney movie behind the Emperor's New Groove, which is incomparably funny. While the film is primarily focused on some very serious relationship drama, it is filled with these charming, wacky moments throughout. Lilo herself is hilarious- the weird things she does like taking pictures of the fat American tourists, or designating her doll Pudge the controller of the weather are fantastic moments. Stitch's antics of course are great, and so are everything the alien characters get up to (the whole thing about mosquitoes is one of the best running jokes in Disney films period).

As far as I can remember, Frozen's humor is really nothing special. Just your typical cute characters like Olaf and Sven doing goofy stuff but it came across to me as a bit forced. There's also that musical number with the trolls which was probably trying to be funny, but I suppose it's much harder to get through if you're not a little kid.

5) Animation- Lilo and Stitch's animation is much simpler than a lot of Disney films from its era, but it is executed much better. The backgrounds are all watercolor, which gives the film a uniquely light, breezy texture. The color palette is such an eye-pleasing combo of blues, greens, and yellow-brown that really brings out the Hawaiian setting. The characters are animated superbly, keeping the imperfections while exaggerating certain quirks in a charming way (see Stitch's various facial expressions). Bonus points for Nani actually being a decent representation of a woman rather than this idealized body image.

There is absolutely nothing remarkable about Frozen's animation. Like most of the Disney 3D films, it has no advantage over the lightness and fluidity of 2D animation, and the character designs are so much worse. The animations for Anna and Elsa are these Barbie-like caricatures of human that you see in all the 3D Disney films.

6) Soundtrack- Probably a tie here. Frozen has one great song. Let It Go is definitely a stunning, powerful ballad. The other featured songs are just your typical, very cute Disney songs tailored for children but still decent. The overall soundscape of the movie though from what I remember was quite cinematic and definitely fit the Norse landscape.

Lilo and Stitch's soundtrack is fairly different than most Disney films- there's no huge musical numbers, but it also has one great song- Hawaiian Rollercoaster Ride- that fits well with the cultural backdrop of the film. Lilo is a big fan of Elvis, so a lot of his songs are used in a pretty charming way and help create the more slice-of-life tone in the movie.

7) Cultural Impact- Frozen is a solid exploration/twist on Norse fairytales. This is not new at all, but it does execute well. To its credit, it does take a lot of authentic inspiration from Norse culture and mythology, with the clothing, creatures, etc. However, fairytales like this weren't particularly groundbreaking for Disney movies or the audience at the time.

Lilo and Stitch also appears to be a pretty authentic take on Hawaiian culture. You see a diverse society that's trying to keep up with cultural traditions like hula, while simultaneously try to keep up with modern economy. There is actually some explorations of the effects of tourist culture on Hawaii as well. The representation of non-white characters in a non-traditional family is also pretty notable for a film made 18 years ago.






...I have too much time in quarantine
 

Adamant Zoroark

catchy catchphrase
is a Contributor to Smogon
All of the Bernie Bros saying they won't vote for Joe Biden never truly cared about progress. To be more specific, to them, nobody but Bernie Sanders would change this country enough. If you're willing to let this country burn for four more years under Trump just because the guy the Democrats nominated "wouldn't change enough," then you're not being progressive, and if you're going to let your salt blind you to how much damage Trump can do with four more years (read: judiciary so regressive that your grandchildren will be in college before it gets fixed), then you were never progressive.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top